Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28056; 1 Jan 92 22:44 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19513 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 1 Jan 1992 20:55:08 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31590 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 1 Jan 1992 20:54:51 -0600 Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1992 20:54:51 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201020254.AA31590@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: Telecom Archives Listing - January, 1992 Attached here is a listing of the files available in the Telecom Archives as of January 1, 1992. The main directory is itemized below, along with one of the sub-directories dealing with security issues. Other directories in the listing below include tables of country codes for international dialing; Canadian area code and prefix assignments, and other topics. The archives is accessible using anonymous ftp, or an email/ftp server. The archives are stored at lcs.mit.edu, and anonymous ftp works like this: ftp lcs.mit.edu login anonymous give name@site.domain as password cd telecom-archives Instructions for using email/ftp servers vary. Consult the administrator of each server for details. Here is the main directory: total 3719 drwxrwxr-x 15 telecom telecom 5632 Jan 1 03:59 ./ drwxrwxr-x 24 root wheel 1024 Jan 1 01:03 ../ dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Mar 2 1991 1981-86.volumes.1-5/ dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Mar 2 1991 1987.volumes.6-7/ dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Mar 2 1991 1988.volume.8/ dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Oct 27 02:43 1989.volume.9/ dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Oct 27 10:26 1990.volume.10/ dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Jan 1 03:34 1991.volume.11/ dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Jan 1 03:30 1992.volume.12/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 663 Jan 27 1991 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 1991 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 1991 apple.data.pcs.petition -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 18238 Nov 9 1990 area.214-903.split -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 34767 Nov 23 02:35 areacode.guide -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 9861 Nov 23 02:34 areacode.program.in.c -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 21348 Nov 23 02:35 areacode.script -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 8734 Dec 13 21:19 att-reach.out-calculator -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 21206 Nov 18 20:37 breaux.bill.call.blocking -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 61504 Jul 30 1990 caller-id-legal-decision -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 4569 Apr 14 1991 caller-id-specs.bellcore -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 6807 Dec 13 21:20 caller.id.specs -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 39449 Dec 14 1990 cellular.carrier.codes -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 16188 Mar 14 1991 cellular.fraud.abernathy -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 2755 Mar 14 1991 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 1991 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 dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Dec 27 02:32 country.codes/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 11267 Feb 25 1990 cpid-ani.developments -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 436 Mar 16 1991 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 29980 Oct 29 23:51 docket.87-215 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 13622 Aug 18 21:42 e-mail.system.survey -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 1991 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 8234 Sep 26 16:59 exploring.950-1288 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 19836 Nov 20 1990 fax.products.for.pc -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 24706 Oct 29 23:42 fcc.modem.tax.action -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 24825 Oct 13 16:39 frequently.asked.question -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 14105 Nov 24 1990 genie.star-service -rw-r--r-- 1 map telecom 117273 Dec 31 16:17 glossary.acronyms -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 43101 Jan 27 1991 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 5443 Nov 15 00:16 history.of.area.splits -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 2337 Jan 27 1990 history.of.digest -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 27984 Nov 23 04:30 history.of.teletype -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 53628 Dec 6 01:30 house.of.reps.bill.3515 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 32625 Mar 29 1990 how.numbers.are.assigned -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 31520 Aug 11 01:49 how.phones.work -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 15302 Jan 20 1991 how.to.post.msgs.here -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 54041 Dec 13 21:21 hr.3515.federal.law -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-rw-rw- 1 ptownson telecom 0 Jan 1 03:59 index-telecom.archives -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 1861 Sep 20 23:15 index-telecom.security -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 343 Jan 20 1991 index-tymnet.info -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 568541 Jan 1 03:42 index-vol.9-10-11.subj.Z -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 936 Mar 3 1991 intro.to.archives -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 12896 Nov 20 1990 isdn.pc.adapter-hayes -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 10590 Aug 11 01:50 lata.names-numbers.table -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 12961 Aug 18 21:42 lightning.surge.protect -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 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 29973 Aug 11 01:58 monitor.soviet.xmissions -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 34805 Jul 30 00:57 npa.301-410.split -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 2795 Aug 3 16:09 npa.510.sed.script -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 45105 Mar 2 1991 npa.800-carriers.assigned -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 30091 Jul 23 19:27 npa.800.carrier.list -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 13779 Sep 19 1990 npa.800.prefixes -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 45109 Mar 2 1991 npa.800.revised -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 35934 Dec 13 21:23 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 1991 npa.900.how.assigned dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Dec 27 02:39 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 1991 occ.10xxx.list.updated -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 7714 Jul 23 19:26 occ.10xxx.new.revision -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 60707 Aug 18 21:44 pager.bin.uqx -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 13079 Aug 22 01:34 pager.ixo.example -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 11489 Sep 29 20:07 phone.home-usa -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 28922 Aug 11 01:49 phone.patches -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 38772 Aug 1 1989 pizza.auto.nmbr.id -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 14189 May 6 1991 radio-phone.interfere.1 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 11696 May 6 1991 radio-phone.interfere.2 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 8452 May 6 1991 radio-phone.interfere.3 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 17950 Jan 14 1990 rotenberg.privacy.speech -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 4184 Jul 27 23:58 sprint.long-dist.rates -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 20526 Jun 11 1991 st.louis.phone.outage -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 0 Jan 1 03:34 telecom-recent -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 610 Sep 5 01:00 telecom-recent.read.first drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Sep 20 23:17 telecom.security.issues/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 21831 Jan 20 1991 telsat-canada-report -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 11752 Aug 1 1989 telstar.txt -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 18138 Sep 29 19:58 toll-free.tolled.list drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Dec 10 1990 tymnet.information/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 26614 May 29 1990 unitel-canada.ld.service -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 427 Sep 20 22:59 usa.direct.service drwxrwxr-x 2 wais wais 512 Dec 9 14:59 wais/ -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 Here is the directory for security-related files: total 1025 drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Sep 20 23:15 ./ drwxrwxr-x 12 telecom telecom 5632 Sep 20 23:14 ../ -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 24515 Sep 3 02:06 atm-bank.fraud -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 6144 Mar 14 1991 cellular.fraud.abernathy -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 2755 Mar 14 1991 cellular.fraud.prevention -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 1990 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 1990 ecpa.1986 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 97987 Aug 12 1990 ecpa.1986.federal.laws -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 21918 Dec 2 1990 illinois.computer.laws -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 0 Sep 20 23:15 index-telecom.security -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 1990 len.rose-legion.of.doom -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 2516 Jun 14 01:03 len.rose.in.prison -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 184494 Jun 22 22:04 len.rose.indictment-1 -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 192078 Jun 22 22:05 len.rose.indictment-2 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 67099 Nov 4 1990 telecom.usa.call.block-1 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 31995 Nov 20 1990 telecom.usa.call.block-2 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 10833 Nov 20 1990 telecom.usa.call.block-3 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 14821 Sep 12 1990 war.on.computer.crime Past issues of TELECOM Digest are located in the directories labled by year and volume number, and packed in groups of fifty issues within those directories. The most recent issues of the Digest are in the telecom-recent file where they are automatically uploaded each time an issue comes out. Every fiftieth issue, the telecom-recent file is moved into permanent storage in the directories mentioned above. The huge file in the main directory entitled 'index-vol.9-10-11.subj.Z' is a 24,939 line file containing the name of each article and its author which appeared in the Digest from April, 1989 through December, 1991. You should take this file back to your site and uncompress it (make sure you have *lots* of space and your sysadmin's okay). Then you use grep -i to search the file for authors, subjects and file group numbers. With this information at hand, you would then go back to the archives to pull the desired block of issues (groups of fifty). I am hoping -- but have no specific date yet -- to have the Telecom Archives available via a wais server within a month or two. More details when available. Enjoy brousing through the archives, and happy new year! Patrick Townson TELECOM Moderator   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29413; 1 Jan 92 23:36 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23372 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 1 Jan 1992 21:43:29 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20290 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 1 Jan 1992 21:43:10 -0600 Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1992 21:43:10 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201020343.AA20290@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #1 TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Jan 92 21:43:05 CST Volume 12 : Issue 1 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Digest Accelerated Index - Subjects and Authors (TELECOM Moderator) A Very Courteous SW Bell Rep (Stephanie da Silva) IBT and Caller-ID (Mark E. Anderson) Re: Modem Prices (Allyn Lai) Re: Phone Company Humor (John G. Dobnick) Re: Phone Company Humor (Peter da Silva) Re: Phone Company Humor (Steve Forrette) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Roy M. Silvernail) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Ed Greenberg) Re: How Do I Connect Two Lines Together at Home? (Steve Forrette) Re: "Minimum Charge" for Unsuccessful LD Calls from Bell Canada? (M Brader) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1992 03:45:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Digest Accelerated Index - Subjects and Authors The accelerated index for TELECOM Digest subjects and authors, volumes 9,10,11 is now ready. This index covers all issues of the Digest from about April, 1989 through the present time. All of Volume 11 has been updated into the index as of January 1. This index -- it is called an 'accelerated index' simply because it points to other index files in the telecom archives, is 24,939 lines long, and is stored in compressed format at the archives where you can obtain a copy. You will need to take a copy back to your site before you uncompress it ... don't uncompress it at the archives, heh! heh! It is huge. Over 24,000 subject headers and author names from the past three years of the Digest. Maybe someday I will get it finished up and it will include volumes 1 through 8 as well, but for now three year's worth ought to be adequate for most of you. You can search the index using 'grep -i' for subject strings, author names and volume/issue numbers (to see what all was within a block of fifty issues). For further help with the index itself, once you have it back at your site and uncompressed -- be sure you have LOTS of space on your disk for it! -- then read the helpful hints at the start of the file usings grep -i "Intro". Read the man pages for 'grep' to learn some sophisticated ways to search the index. Have fun with it, and enjoy! Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) Subject: A Very Courteous SW Bell Rep Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1992 20:44:32 GMT And now for something completely different: a new topic. Actually, it was the thread on wrong numbers that made me decide to subscribe to a few CLASS features -- Call Return and Call Block. I called up my local Southwestern Bell representative and told her I wanted Call Return installed on our voice line. She was surprised that I requested it since it's only been available in this area for about a month now and asked me how I had heard about it. I told her I'd known about these features for a quite a while and then told her that what I really wanted was Caller*ID. That didn't faze her and she said that while SW Bell wasn't currently offering it, she could still see both sides of the controversy. We then got into a discussion of the various CLASS features and she told me about one I'd never heard of -- ComCall which turns all the phones and extensions in your house into an intercom system of sorts. I asked her to mail me some brochures which I've received -- they call the features "Star Power." (Woo!) The representative was also concerned if I was having problems with an abusive caller and I told her that I wasn't having any trouble currently, but I have had problems with such matters in the past which is why I wanted the features (and no, I'm not talking about the Allstate bozos). As we were about to end the conversation, she asked if I wanted the features turned on that afternoon. That took me aback, since I was expecting "a week from next Tuesday" sort of thing. I said "Fine", and sure enough, they were working as of 4 the next morning when I remembered to try them out (don't ask me what I was doing up so early!!) Just now, as I was typing in this letter, I received a long distance phone call from my father-in-law in Honolulu. While we were talking, I got Call Waited by a wrong number. This brings a couple of questions to mind. If I had used Call Return, what would have happened? Would I have gotten Honolulu (does it only work in my local calling area?) or would I have gotten the wrong number person, or none of the above? Stephanie da Silva Taronga Park * Houston, Texas arielle@taronga.com 568-0480 568-1032 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jan 92 15:58:18 EST From: mea@ihlpl.att.com (Mark E Anderson) Subject: IBT and Caller-ID Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories As of Monday December 30, I noticed that Illinois Bell has turned on caller ID. We have ISDN at work and I noticed that the outside numbers are now being displayed on my phone. It is a lot of fun suprising callers with "Hello " when I recognize their number. I haven't done any real testing but I know that we aren't receiving the numbers from everyone in our LATA as of now. A curious thing is happening at my home though. As of December 27, I have been receiving an abnormal amount of blank calls on my home answering machine. I received 3 on Friday December 27, 3 on Monday December 30, 3 on New Year's Eve, and so far one today. My machine time stamps these calls and they all occur about one hour apart within a three hour period during the day while I am at work. I was sick Monday and answered one of these calls. I heard nothing for about ten seconds and then dial tone. What I was wondering is it possible that IBT is generating these calls to get people to subscribe to Caller-ID? There is no way I would ever pay $6.50 a month for this service. I wonder if these blank calls will stop once I subscribe. Has anyone else experienced this? Mark Anderson [Moderator's Note: I don't think IBT needs to stoop to the 'marketing practices' you describe in order to sell Caller-ID. The latest word on this from IBT earlier this week was they had already signed up several thousand subscribers to Caller-ID within the first month of taking orders for the service. *67 has been working here since 12-1-91. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Allyn@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: Modem Prices Date: Tue, 31 Dec 91 22:00:38 PST > Would anyone happen to have a list of standard prices for all > varieties of modems? I'd like to buy a 9600 Baud modem, if the price > is right, else I'll live with an MNP and v.42 bis 2400. Also, what ^^^^ > have 1200 baud modems dropped to? And 300? > And what are the fastest modems going for? Thanks in advance.. I'm not sure where you live but out here in the San Francisco Bay Area you can get 2400 baud modems for as cheap as $38.95 (Fry's Electronics). I suppose it's still true that you get what you pay for but I am still amazed at the wide range of prices for modems. You can pay anywhere from $38.95 to $200 for a 2400 baud modem. I guess you get a few more features (e.g. MNP compression) and maybe better noise immunity (e.g. Mom picks up the extension, realizes you're online, quickly hangs up, you don't loose connection (-;). Any comments? Allyn Lai allyn@cup.portal.com [Moderator's Note: I don't think 300/1200 baud modems have any value at all any longer. I've given away a couple of each in the past few months. They're great, of course, for beginning/novice netters. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jan 92 00:14:10 -0600 From: John G Dobnick Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor After reading Andrew Green's article on Phone Company Humor, I scanned our white pages for such entries. Apparently Wisconsin Bell is much to serious to engage in such tomfoolery -- no entries, no cross references, no nothing, in the "red pages", the "white pages", or the "blue pages". (White listings are residential, red are commercial, and blue are government. A veritable rainbow of listings.) However, I did stumble upon an unusual listing. The following entry was in the red (commercial) section of our Milwaukee Metroplan directory (AC 414): Primal Center of Denver 323 S Pearl Denver Colo ........... 303 778-8105 Denver? Colorado? Are such out-of-area listings common in the "white pages"? John G Dobnick Computing Services Division @ University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu ATTnet: (414) 229-5727 UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd [Moderator's Note: "Foreign directory listings" are very common. Any business can purchase a white (or yellow) pages listing in the directory of any city they want. We have a lot of those in the Chicago book. PAT] ------------------------------ From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Reply-To: peter@ficc (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1992 22:40:01 GMT In article acg@hermes.dlogics.com writes: > rumor had it at the time that no one at the > printers' had noticed any of it until the books hit the street. Since the Houston Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages had covers like that for several years running, I kind of doubt it. I wish now I'd kept those covers ... it never occurred to me they'd stop publishing them. Sigh. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Dec 91 21:40:06 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Here's my message for the "telecom humor" thread. While not intended to be jokes, these tidbits are amusing as they fall into the "just how stupid can telco be" catagory. (I've mentioned some of these before, so please ignore if it's old news). 1. While trying to select PINs for unresricted and one-number calling cards, my US West rep suggested: "Why not make the PINs the same - that way they will be easier to remember!" 2. I was testing my calling card from home, dialing 0+ some number, and wasn't getting the ka-bong. When repair service found out that I was trying to use my own calling card from home, she said that "Well, that's the problem. Why would you want to bill to the calling card that's for the same line you're calling from?" I countered that I was just testing, and in any event it could not possibly know it was me, since I hadn't yet entered the card number. She said "It knows!" I again countered, and she agreed, that it would be perfectly valid for her to be at my house, and want to dial 0+ and enter her number, and she said "Well, that would work, since it wouldn't be billed to your line." Again, I said "But how can it know who's dialing the 0+, even before the ka-bong and calling card number is entered?" "It KNOWS sir!" 3. And the best one is from Cellular One of Sacramento, when asked why 10XXX dialing wasn't available for long distance carrier selection when calling from a cellular phone: "We use microwaves between the cell sites, and they are incompatible with 10XXX dialing." I challenge anyone to beat this one! Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits From: cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 92 10:08:05 CST Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) writes: > In country music, from the late 50's, Don Gibson had a hit with > "Call me at Lonesome Number One". The lyric, which I can't quote > exactly, talked about: That's one of my dad's favorites ... "Had my number changed today, although I hated to But every time the phone would ring, they'd want to speak to you..." The hook line was "Just call LOnesome 7 7 203". Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Date: Wed, 01 Jan 92 23:15:07 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) "These are the days of miracle and wonder this is a Long Distance Call The way the camera follows us in slo-mo the way we look to us all" -Paul Simon Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Dec 91 20:55:31 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: How Do I Connect Two Lines Together at Home? In-Reply-To: Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article Steve Chafe writes: > Does anyone know how to connect two phone lines together so that I can > make a three way conversation using the two lines I have? Is there a > circuit I could build that would allow me to do this? What I used to do in high school was take my handy Radio Shack two-line switchbox and jam both buttons down at the same time until they locked. This was on the first model they came out with, before it had a "conference" feature built in. (I had actually discovered my first "undocumented feature!") The sound quality was not excellent -- I could hear both parties just fine, but the two remote parties sounded distant to each other. Since I had conference calling on both lines, I could amaze my friends by getting five of us on the line all at once. To release one of the calls, I first had to isolate that line by pressing the red HOLD button in the middle. That would place both lines on hold. Then, I would select the line I wanted by pressing its button, then flash to release one leg of that conference call, then jam the other line button down while holding the first one down. This was necessary since the first one would try to pop up when you selected the second, as the box was not designed to have both selected at once. You had to be quite careful at this, as if you did not do it right, both buttons would release when you let up on the pressure, and all legs of the call would be dropped! So, the trick was to hold the two line buttons down with approximately equal pressure using two fingers from one hand, and hold the HOLD button down with a finger from the other hand, then release the two line buttons. If they stayed down, then you were set. If you had done it wrong (unequal pressure), the line buttons would pop up, but both lines would be on hold since you had the hold button down as well. Then you were free to try it again. Real problems erupted when my friend jammed both lines down while both lines were idle. We were just on our way out, so my folks were left to fend for themselves. The workings (and existence) of the box in my room were unknown to them. Someone called my number, and my line rang normally, but theirs also rang, but with a slighly "sick" ring, as the full voltage was not getting through the box. When they answered, it would answer my line, but also cause their line to go off-hook, so they would hear dialtone, with my caller being connected as well, but through the "weak" link, so their voice could not be heard over the dialtone. Also, my caller would hear just a weak dialtone once the ringing stopped. So, my parents would get dialtone whenever they answered their ringing phone. They quite reasonably considered this an "out of order" condition, but of course knew just who to ask as to the cause. It didn't take me long to find the root of the problem, and of course I was instructed to do "experiments" only on my own line! Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1992 15:11:00 -0500 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: "Minimum Charge" for Unsuccessful LD Calls from Bell Canada? Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada > Several of the one minute tolls are marked > "minimum charge" which suggests that Bell knows they didn't complete. No; Bell Canada simply has a minimum charge for long-distance calls. I remember when I lived in Waterloo some years ago and worked out that a one-minute call to Guelph, with the discounts for the cheapest time of day, would cost only six cents, or two cents less than it cost to mail a letter. But when I tried it, it showed up on the bill as a 15-cent minimum charge. Phooey. According to the directory issued in April 1991, the minimum charge is now at 34 cents. To see if it had gone up since then, I just phoned the Bell operator and asked what it is now; the operator didn't believe there was such a thing! So I named an exchange not far outside our local calling area, and she said the rate was 34 cents for the first two minutes and then nine cents a minute. Bell charges by the minute, so there is clearly a 34-cent minimum even if the operator doesn't know it! (And as I say, the directory confirms it.) Incidentally, this means that Bell Canada can now beat Canada Post on price, as domestic postage is just now going up to 42 cents. Even with 15% sales tax on the phone call and only 7% on the postage stamp, the minimum-charge phone call can win. Mark Brader SoftQuad Inc., Toronto utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #1 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20054; 3 Jan 92 3:38 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14811 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 3 Jan 1992 01:27:37 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10224 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 3 Jan 1992 01:27:12 -0600 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 01:27:12 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201030727.AA10224@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #2 TELECOM Digest Fri, 3 Jan 92 01:26:53 CST Volume 12 : Issue 2 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Phone Company Humor (Barry Mishkind) Re: Phone Company Humor (James Hartman) Re: Phone Company Humor (drinnan@evax.gdc.com) Re: Phone Company Humor (Mark Walsh) Re: Phone Company Humor (Tony Harminc) Re: Phone Company Humor (Colin Tuttle) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (David E. A. Wilson) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Edward Floden) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Rob Slade) Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request (David G. Lewis) Re: A Very Courteous SW Bell Rep (Andy Sherman) Re: Life on Hold: Unhappy Inbound Campers (Jon Krueger) Re: Telecaroling (Carl Moore) Re: BWI Airport Payphones (Carl Moore) Re: Weird AT&T Rates (Scott Hinckley) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: barry@coyote.datalog.com (Barry Mishkind) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 03:34:04 GMT acg@HERMES.DLOGICS.COM writes: > Well, as I type this, it's only New Year's Eve, but I'm submitting > this as a new topic for 1992. "Phone Company Humor" is NOT an > oxymoron; the (previously) monolithic phone company does have human > beings working for it, after all, and it looks like we could all use a One of my friends in England received a call from the ILR (Independent Local Radio) station asking what she had done to get the very first listing in the telephone directory. Janet didn't know what they were talking about, so they explained how everyone thought up these strange names to be first or last in the directory ( Mr. Z. ZZZZZZZyck, for example, or AAAAAAA-AAA-A Auto rentals). Well, my friend was still unable to understand the situation, but she did as asked, and opened the telephone book to find that she was, indeed, the _very_ first entry, "0'Neill, T.J." ...etc. And that was the way it stayed all year! Barry Mishkind barry@coyote.datalog.com [Modertor's Note: Your message arrived here with a zero (0) instead of the letter /O/ in O'Neill's name, and I assume the zero is the reason it sorted to the head of the list, even before the business known as 'A' or 'AAA', etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Phone Company Humor From: unkaphaed!phaedrus@moe.rice.edu (James Hartman, Sysop) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 92 00:11:22 GMT Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy acg@HERMES.DLOGICS.COM writes: [story about the humorous things added into the cover of the phone book] I recall the phone books from the late 70's (mostly the yellow pages) where the cover art had LOTS of little silly things drawn in -- including a rocket taking off, a guy on horseback, and aliens landing. These were on the Houston directories, and since Houston went to two books (A-L/M-Z), when the old books were about to be thrown away, you could have TWO copies of the art, one to keep and one to send to your favorite relative. They did this for a few years, as I recall, but the last one wasn't very well done, and it sort of ended. phaedrus@unkaphaed.UUCP (James Hartman, Sysop) Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, (713) 943-2728 ------------------------------ From: drinnan@evax.gdc.com Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Date: 2 Jan 92 10:58:07 GMT Organization: General DataComm, Middlebury CT In article , acg@HERMES.DLOGICS.COM writes: > Well, that's all I can come up with at the moment. Gee, I wonder if > there might be any other stories out there! :-) Back around 1984 or so when I lived in Tampa, FL, I came across what may've been the result of some telephone-book preparer's humor ... a page heading towards the back of the yellow pages read "WINE - WOMEN". Cute. :-) dw!d [Moderator's Note: Now and then people in a position to do so slip rude things into print, either for revenge or other reasons of their own. About fifteen years ago, a very disgruntled employee in the classified ads department of the {Chicago Tribune} saw a help-wanted ad come through from a former employer of his, and he used his computer access to append a little line at the bottom of the ad, where many employers put the little remark 'equal opportunity, m/f' or similar. He changed it to read 'equal opportunity, m/f and the m/f stands for mother fu---rs'. A teeny, tiny little ad in small print in the classifieds of the Sunday paper, buried among a couple thousand other ads. But the Tribune got a few hundred calls because of it, and of course they went back and audited every work station in the place, hunting down the errant ad-taker until they found him and fired him. I guess the company which ran the help wanted ad was a little shocked also. Naturally, since their ad had an 'error' in it, the paper ran it free the next day. :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 13:44:58 PST From: optilink!walsh@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Walsh) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor A friend of mine went to Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, CA, and lived in a room which was in a big house in which many students lived. The house was owned and lived in by a nice lady who got tired of all of the racket on her phone, so she got a second phone line for the students. After a few hassles about who's name it was listed under, she had the listing changed to "OTHERS, THE." I could never forget it! Cheers -- Mark -- KC6RKZ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 92 19:50:28 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Phone Company Humour My favourite funny thing in the Toronto Yellow Pages is in the index: under "Nuts and Bolts" it says "see Bolts and Nuts". Tony H. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Date: 2 Jan 92 18:29:10 CST (Thu) From: ctuttle@taronga.com (Colin Tuttle) This is in response to Andrew Green's posting about phone company humor. I remember quite well the humorous yellow pages covers in Houston during the early '70s. It was a drawing of Houston and as Mr. Green mentioned it had all sorts of strange things on it such as a cat and kittens crossing the freeway with all the cars stopping, a Spanish Galleon in the ship channel. There were tons of items in there. A popular topic of conversation was the yellow pages and all the strange things in the drawing. The humor was so subtle that most people didn't notice anything strange until it was pointed out to them. It wasn't well publicized until one of the television stations picked up on it and had the artist on TV talking about it. I remember the station made a big deal of the new phone books coming out, and how there would be more strange items. There was also a bit of an uproar when SW Bell stopped using the drawing and went with a large Bell logo on the cover. I don't recall the explanation or the reason, but then SW Bell never needed a reason for much of anything. I do remember after the humorous pictures ended we started receiving more phone book covers to put over the new ugly cover. ------------------------------ From: david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1992 06:10:52 GMT Two more songs from the last decade (give or take a few years): Ring Ring by De La Soul (I cannot recall the number they use) The Picture Phone by Rupert Hine (the problems a video phone can cause) David Wilson (042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jan 92 15:34:04 CST From: edward@pro-ren.cts.com (Edward Floden) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Organization: The Get-a-Life Foundation for Chronic Trekism I know that you decreed an ending to this nonsense, but no one mentioned _my_ favorite telephone lyric: If the phone doesn't ring You'll know that it's me I'll be out in the eye of the storm If the phone doesn't ring You know that I'll be Where someone can make me feel warm -- Jimmy Buffett, "If the Phone Doesn't Ring, It's Me", _Last Mango in Paris_, MCA Records, 1985. Internet: edward@pro-ren.cts.com | TechRen User Group UUCP: crash!pro-ren!edward | ProLine: edward@pro-ren ------------------------------ From: rslade@cue.bc.ca (Rob Slade) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Organization: Computer Using Educators of B.C., Canada Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 05:31:32 GMT A few years ago, I was working for the Government Telecommunications Agency, which advises all (Canadian) Federal government offices on telephone and telecom matters, as well as coordinating the long distance net. Most federal offices in the greater Vancouver area are on the "666" exchange; no one else is. You can imagine the jokes we have to contend with. While I was there, the number "666-6666" was assigned. (I forget which office got it.) The number was immediately swamped with calls: so many that "nearby" numbers no longer functioned properly. (No, it was not an old electromagnetic switch: out of deference to the manufacturer I will not name it, but it was one of the most advanced at the time, and is now widely and happily used all over the world.) 666-6666 was immediately taken out of service. It is now listed in the "numbers" data base with a note saying that it is never to be assigned again. Vancouver p1@arkham.wimsey.bc.ca Institute for Robert_Slade@mtsg.sfu.ca Research into CyberStore User (Datapac 3020 8530 1030) Security Canada V7K 2G6 [Moderator's Note: A couple years ago we had a thread here in the Digest discussing the ignorance surrounding '666' and the various places the prefix was in use throughout the USA and Canada. We had an article about a man who was hounded to death by fanatics because his number ended in -0666. And here in Chicago, there are some people who flatly refuse to accept service on the MONroe exchange. Someone pointed out that in some major city, the Great Satan, the Internal Revenue Service had their centrex on the 666 exchange in that town. PAT] ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1992 14:23:29 GMT In article peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes: >> New England Telephone has proposed a $35 installation fee and a >> monthly fee of $8 a month for the basic 960-character-per-second >> residential service. Users would also have to pay a fee each time they >> accessed the network, and there would be far higher charges to use a >> faster data system and other features of the network. > In other words, you'd have to pay a premium to actually use *less* > bandwidth on the phone system (that is, a 2400 baud POTS call uses a > 64 KB channel or a dedicated line (in the local area), where a 9600 > baud ISDN connection only uses a 9.6 KB channel. Sounds like Touch > Tone fees all over again. Not exactly. I believe the article is referring to 9.6kbps packet switched on the D channel in addition to the 64kbps B channel. In other words, you're getting the regular POTS equivalent service (B channel) plus the D channel packet for the $8/month plus connection charges. The second B channel would cost more. The 2400 baud POTS call (POTS w/modem) uses an analog line card. The 9.6kbps ISDN connection uses part of a protocol handler and leaves the ISDN line card available for other use. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning ------------------------------ From: andys@ulysses.att.com Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 09:45:57 EST Subject: Re: A Very Courteous SW Bell Rep Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Murray Hill, NJ In article arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) writes: > Just now, as I was typing in this letter, I received a long distance > phone call from my father-in-law in Honolulu. While we were talking, > I got Call Waited by a wrong number. This brings a couple of > questions to mind. If I had used Call Return, what would have > happened? Would I have gotten Honolulu (does it only work in my local > calling area?) or would I have gotten the wrong number person, or none > of the above? CLASS features only work for intra-LATA calls from exchanges equipped with SS7. As for the call waiting call, I'm pretty sure it would be the last call received for purposes of Call Return, Call Block, or Call Trace. As for Caller ID, there is at this time no definitive standard as to how to get information to the CID modem when a call-waiting call comes in. An announcement of Northern Telecom's prototype appeared in the Digest last year, but Bellcore is still working out a standard from among the competing kludges. (I've been told it's an ugly problem with ugly solutions.) 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: Tue, 31 Dec 1991 21:22:49 -0800 Subject: Re: Life on Hold: Unhappy Inbound Campers Reply-To: jpk@Ingres.COM Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501 From: jpk@ingres.com (Jon Krueger) Doctor Math writes: > Since "they" generally get ANI delivered in real-time, > perhaps they should allow you to flag your account to only allow > certain transactions (if any at all) with the auto-attendant IF the > ANI information matches their database ... granted, it could be very > inconvenient, but it would be hard to beat for "privacy enhancement". And who would be responsible for my loss of privacy due to ANI spoofing? And what would my recourse be in such a case? It's simply bad design to trust a public network to authenticate private parties who connect to it via their own equipment. If you want to enhance privacy, there are plenty of ways around. Start with having "them" call you back at the trusted number. Claiming I'm calling from the number is one thing, answering the phone that rings when you call it is another. Jon Krueger jpk@ingres.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 10:29:00 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Telecaroling Unless you have a speaker setup, the caroling can only be heard by the person receiving the call, and little or none by others near the receiving end. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 10:35:24 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: BWI Airport Payphones Several years ago, I saw pay phones at BWI on: 850 and/or 859 for Baltimore metro service (that's the local exchange in the area which includes BWI, and is going into 410 area). 621 for Washington metro service (stays in area 301). ------------------------------ From: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com (Scott Hinckley) Subject: Re: Weird AT&T Rates Date: 2 Jan 92 19:19:21 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com In grout!mark@uunet.uu.net (Mark Oberg) writes: > In article ronnie@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (Ron > Schnell) writes: >> I also found out that the rate to call Massachusetts is more expensive >> for the first minute than for each additional minute. I asked the rep > I assume that you meant to say "less expensive" from the > context of the paragraph. If so, the reason might be marketing rather > than any corporate sympathy for the plight of fax users. MCI has had > the very interesting habit of quoting first minute rates that are > lower than the additional minute rate for quite some time now. Mark, When have you been quoted lower first minute charges by MCI?. I have been using MCI for five years now and have never had a case where that was true. All my minutes cost the same (there was a time when the first minute was HIGHER, but that stopped a couple of years a go). I just called MCI customer service and was unable to find a case where the first minute was less expensive, so I asked for a supervisor. The supervisor was unaware of any such case. If there is such a case would you be so kind as to provide me with the area and prefix of the calling and called numbers so that I can pursue this with said supervisor? Thank you, scott@hsvaic.boeing.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #2 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21256; 3 Jan 92 4:03 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05295 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 3 Jan 1992 02:08:43 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22280 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 3 Jan 1992 02:08:15 -0600 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 02:08:15 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201030808.AA22280@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #3 TELECOM Digest Fri, 3 Jan 92 02:08:09 CST Volume 12 : Issue 3 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Telephone Number Format (Toby Nixon) Re: Telephone Number Format (Bob Denny) Re: Telephone Number Format (Carl Moore) Re: Telephone Company Employees (Mickey Ferguson) Re: Telephone Museums (Mickey Ferguson) Re: Rail Phone (William Moss) Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? (Scott Hinckley) Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? (Winston L. Sorfleet) Re: "Minimum Charge" for Unsuccessful LD Calls from Bell Canada? (P Sleggs) Re: Adjacent Area Codes (Carl Moore) Contel Service Isn't Bad Compared to Others (Rick Rodman) The Best and the Worst (John Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Telephone Number Format Date: 2 Jan 92 11:37:08 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , lotus!rlaferla!robertl@ uunet.uu.net (Robert La Ferla) writes: > Can someone please explain what the new format for telephones is all > about? What implications does it have for foreign telephone numbers? > For example: > (800) 222-1212 > is now > +1 800 222-1212 First of all, you should never see an 800 number in this format, because 800 numbers are not generally dialable from overseas!! The "+" is the international standard syntax to indicate that what follows is the "country code". "1" is the country code for North America. See my phone numbers below. When specifying an international number, the standard (CCITT Recommendation E.123) says to start with the "+", append the country code, a space, the city code if any, a space, and then the local number, inserting spaces if necessary (hyphens may be used by national option). When specifying a national number (what people within the same country would call), you leave off the country code, and you may enclose the city code in parentheses (e.g., "(404) 840-9200") to indicate that that portion of the number is optional (if you're already within that area). 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 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: denny@dakota.alisa.com (Bob Denny) Subject: Re: Telephone Number Format Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1992 22:44:41 GMT Organization: Alisa Systems, Inc. In lotus!rlaferla!robertl@uunet.uu.net (Robert La Ferla) writes: > Can someone please explain what the new format for telephones is all > about? What implications does it have for foreign telephone numbers? > For example: > (800) 222-1212 > is now > +1 800 222-1212 Is it? I have seen variations of this international number description format, depending on where the dashes are or are not. Where are dashes supposed to be? And what is the definitive reference for this format? Robert B. Denny voice: (818) 792-9474 Alisa Systems, Inc. fax: (818) 792-4068 Pasadena, CA (denny@alisa.com, ..uunet!alisa.com!denny) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 9:40:49 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Telephone Number Format I don't know what is "new" about the format "+1 xxx xxx-xxxx". That leading 1 is the country code for the U.S. and Canada and many points in the Caribbean Sea area, and the +1 should be included when giving a number to people from outside country code 1. It is just coincidence that the leading 1 is also used (within country code 1) to indicate either "toll call" or "what follows is an area code". Whether toll-free numbers can be reached from abroad is another matter; a business would normally give a local non-toll-free number for people to use when calling from abroad. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 14:47:39 PST From: fergusom@scrvm1.vnet.ibm.com (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: Re: Telephone Company Employees Organization: Rolm Systems Dave Levenson writes: > In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John > Higdon) writes: >> However, on those occasions when I must deal with the residence >> department (for my home) or the standard business office, a trick is >> used which has proven quite effective. Just select "0" at every >> prompt. Two or three "0"s later, you will either be speaking to a >> live person or will be comfortably waiting in an ACD queue. > What also works is to remain silent when prompted to enter touch tone > digits. These systems generally don't know whether the caller is > touch-tone-equipped or not. If the first prompt is met with silence, > it should be designed to assume that tone-dial equipment is not > available, and should attempt to connect you with a human. An interesting feature of J.C. Penney National Bank's credit card info number is that if you don't have tone-dial, it can still work for you. What it does is voice recognition. You speak the digit of your choice and it figures out which digit you said. I had tried exactly your suggestion of not entering anything, hoping to get connected to a real operator, and instead got this. (Though I was annoyed at the time, I thought it was a pretty good idea.) Mickey Ferguson Rolm Systems FergusoM@scrvm2.vnet.ibm.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 14:55:34 PST From: fergusom@scrvm1.vnet.ibm.com (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: Re: Telephone Museums Organization: Rolm Systems Nigel Allen writes: > If you are going to be in a different city around Christmas, you may > want to find out from the local telephone company, tourism bureau or > chapter of the Telephone Pioneers of America whether there is a > telephone museum in the community that you are visiting. I will put in my plug for one of the finest museums in the world -- the Deutsches (spelling?) Museum in Munich, Germany. It has a very large display of the history of telecommunications. For that matter, it has excellent displays for LOTS of other technical topics. Truly one of the great museums! Mickey Ferguson Rolm Systems FergusoM@scrvm2.vnet.ibm.com ------------------------------ From: william@bnr.ca (William Moss) Subject: Re: Rail Phone Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1992 18:31:26 -0500 Organization: Bell-Northern Research I took a VIA train from Montreal to Ottawa a few years back, and every coach car had one cellular pay phone in it. I don't remember the rates (if they were even posted), but I do know that I used my Mastercard, and it never showed up on my bill. The carrier was CANTEL. The reception was fairly good (much better than an Airphone(tm)), but it did pass through some noisy pockets. The rail line from Ottawa to Montreal is never more than about ten miles from the expressway, which is fully covered, I believe, by both cellular carriers. That expressway (417), by the way, has solar powered emergency cellular phones every few miles along the road. I believe that Bell Cellular is the carrier for those. William G. Moss disclaimer: not the views of BNR or NT Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa +1 613 763 8108 WILLIAM@BNR.CA ------------------------------ From: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com (Scott Hinckley) Subject: Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? Date: 2 Jan 92 17:21:42 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com Organization: I try not to In aboritz@harry.hourgls.fidonet.org (Alan Boritz) writes: > You won't see ISDN in the consumer market in your lifetime. > Unfortunately, though, you may not see wireless cable become a similar > contender in your lifetime, either. MMDS is not doing well these days > as conventional cable penetrates more markets. The MMDS industry may Wow, talk about pessimistic! ISDN is going into business use here in Huntsville, AL next month (actually, it is already in use, but that is when a big ISDN conference will let everyone know what they can use it for). According to the SCB employee I talked to (been there since mechanical switches), ISDN for home use should be available (though not advertised) within a few years at most. Wireless cable is doing quite well here. We have three(!) cable companies (Wireless, Cable Alabama, and Comcast). Due to the rate of new construction the wire-cable companies are quite a bit behind in their installations. I live up on Green 'Mountain' and neither of the wire based cable-companies have plans to run their cable there. (Currently about 100 homes up there, almost all of which are VERY nice homes) Everyone I know up there would subscribe if wire-cable were available, they are mostly new homes with built-in cable wireing. (I miss my CNN. The wireless cable company is in the process of raising their tower, and we will not be LOS until they have done so. We are on the back side of the crest of the mountain, the front side recieves just fine.) scott@hsvaic.boeing.com ------------------------------ From: Winston (W.L.) Sorfleet Subject: Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? Reply-To: sorflet@bnr.ca Organization: Bell-Northern Research Date: Thu 2 Jan 1992 00:00:00 GMT In article , aboritz@harry.hourgls. fidonet.org (A lan Boritz) writes: > In an article george@brooks.ICS.UCI. > EDU writes: >> I'm presently investigating investment in a wireless cable company. >> One of the drawbacks is I won't see any return on that investment for >> five or six years (FCC takes onee year to process application, takes a >> year to get a station on-line, and three or four to recoup costs). By >> that time I wonder if ISDN will be a long way off, and of course >> provide a superior conduit for video into the home. Anyone know, or >> have an idea as to find out? > You won't see ISDN in the consumer market in your lifetime. I don't agree with this statement. National ISDN-1, which is supposed to be deployed in February, establishes standards for BRI ISDN which the switch vendors (Northern Telecom, AT&T, etc.) and terminal equipment vendors all meet. For their part, the telcos have committed to making ISDN services available to customers. It is true that residential users probably cannot afford the $600 for the ISDN terminal + $150 for the Network Termination + $40 / month for the ISDN services, but these prices will hopefully decrease once the third-party manufacturers start to compete (ISDN line cards cost about $200 as opposed to $10 for POTS). Certainly, business customers can and do afford to pay the costs for ISDN in return for the high data bandwidth. Video into the home is probably a long way away for ISDN. BRI and PRI both provide only 64 Kbps channels, not nearly enough for anything but sampled video stills. ISDN cannot compete with cable video until they get broadband ISDN working, who knows when that will be. Winston Sorfleet Bell-Northern Research, Dept. 7D34 sorflet@bnr.ca Opinions expressed are purely personal and do not represent Northern Telecom or Bell-Northern Research in any way. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: "Minimum Charge" for Unsuccessful LD Calls from Bell Canada? From: peters@beltrix.guild.org (Peter Sleggs) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1992 20:22:20 -0500 Organization: Bellatrix Systems Corp., Mississauga, ONT Canada Charlie.Mingo@p0.f70.n109.z1.FidoNet.Org (Charlie Mingo) writes: > My sister who lives in Toronto believes that Bell Canada has begun > charging tolls for incomplete call attempts (busy or no answer), as > numerous one minute charges have been appearing on her bill after no > call was completed. Several of the one minute tolls are marked > "minimum charge" which suggests that Bell knows they didn't complete. > (The calls are from Toronto to Ottawa, Kingston and Halifax.) > I had thought that any "legitimate" LD company would look for > answer supervision before starting the clock, and that such practices > were confined to sleazy AOS's. > Does anyone know if Bell Canada has started doing things like this? I dont believe so, as I have not seen this for my calls. The minimum charge is shown where there is a short call at a discount rate that falls BELOW the minimum charge Bell has set for that destination. I have many of these charges on the Fax line as most calls are < 1 minute. If Bell tried to do this I would expect the complaints to cause all hell to break loose when the CRTC hears of this. (not even considering the fuss that would be made by those who want alternative LD services!) peter peters@beltrix.guild.org or torag!beltrix!peters ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 11:09:16 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Adjacent Area Codes When 410 is fully cut over in Maryland, 301 will no longer touch 302, but 301 will still touch 304 (W.Va.). It touches one exchange in 412 at the northwestern corner of the state. But that part of Maryland stays in 301 instead of going into 410. In the archive file history.of.area.splits, I included the following because I noticed an N0X area code in a state or province having more than one area code; let me add some comments in parentheses: 704/919 North Carolina (notice that 704 does not now touch Virginia, which split from 703 to 703/804 in 1973). 402/308 Nebraska (I received messages suggesting that there was never such a split, and now you have called to my attention that 308 touches 307). ------------------------------ From: virtech!rickr@uunet.UU.NET (Rick Rodman) Subject: Contel Service Isn't Bad, Compared to Others Date: Wed, 1 Jan 92 21:43:19 EST Well, Bob Woodruff called me from Contel/GTE and did understand 950, 10xxx and ISDN. It appears that the DC/Md access was fixed some time ago. Sure enough, you can dial 10xxx-1-301 ... or 10xxx-1-202 ... and it goes on the selected carrier. Also, 10333-0-301 + no longer connects me to AT&T as it did in 1988, but to Sprint as it should. I should have known that in this wonderful new telecom world of ours the only thing that doesn't change is the fact that everything is changing all the time. What's more, Contel/GTE is offering ISDN in the Dulles area, but demand for it in the Manassas area is weak. ("Weak"? "Demand" is too strong a term to use around ISDN. How about "request"? "Wondering"?) So, in sum, Contel/GTE isn't all that bad and does have some good people working for them. I shall count my blessings as John suggests that I don't have Pac*Bell. After all, we have direct dial and touch-tone out here. Contel installed a SuperNode last year, whereas Pac*Bell purchases retired equipment from Burkina Faso. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jan 92 19:16 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: The Best and the Worst I have come up with examples of what I believe to be the least responsive and the most responsive in the telecommunications field. Least Responsive: US Sprint and its billing department. Earlier last year, I had many hundreds of dollars in bogus calls on my bill. Since the amount was so high, I received threatening letters from Sprint telling me to pay immediately or else. After discussing the matter with Sprint's business office, I received subsequent bills with even more bogus charges and demands to pay the back charges. It took months to straighten this all out, including hours of my time on the phone with Sprint. Recently, out of the blue (but probably related to that Sprint T1 fiasco) I started being billed for an 800 number that did not exist. At first someone at the Sprint billing office tried to tell me that the fifty dollars was a "cancellation charge" and was due and payable. When I told her that hell would freeze first, she agreed to cancel the charge (how gracious!). The next month, I received another bill wanting both the previous charge AND another charge. This whole matter is still up in the air. Most Responsive: GTE Mobilnet. The other day, I replaced my truck phone with a newer model. I bought the phone, programmed it myself to my existing Mobilnet number and then faxed a request to have my ESN changed. The fax went out at 4:20 PM. Just for laughs, I tried my new phone at 4:38 PM. It worked (and the old one no longer did). Eighteen minutes (or possibly less) to register a brand new cellular phone is not too shabby. 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 temperature in Hell, Michigan was in the middle to upper twenties yesterday. Pay your bills, John! :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #3 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23260; 3 Jan 92 4:53 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08352 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 3 Jan 1992 02:38:50 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24684 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 3 Jan 1992 02:38:29 -0600 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 02:38:29 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201030838.AA24684@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #4 TELECOM Digest Fri, 3 Jan 92 02:38:17 CST Volume 12 : Issue 4 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Mail - Canadian Rates to Include Monthly Minimum Gouge (D. Leibold) Telemarketing (Suspicions Confirmed Dept.) (WSJ via Norm deCarteret) ITT3100 1.3 Problem (R. Patrick MacKinnon) Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? (Michael K. Minakami) Dialing Changes (was Area Code 206 Changes) (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 02 Jan 92 21:55:00 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: AT&T Mail - Canadian Rates to Include Monthly Minimum Gouge I got this notice in the AT&T Mail tonight ... looks like monthly minimum mania has hit the north now, among other price "adjustments". Please note that the following refers to AT&T Mail based in Canada, and not elsewhere. ------- Date: Fri Jan 3 00:00:10 GMT 1992 From: CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE Phone: +1 800 567 4671 Fax-Phone: +1 416 490 3633 Subject: AT&T Mail Price Change Announcement To: David Leibold Content-Length: 8606 Dear Valued Customer, Several important changes to the rate structure for AT&T Mail will take effect on February 1, 1992. These changes will provide you with consistent global messaging pricing, clearly defined and value-oriented. This new structure will be especially effective in significantly reducing the cost of sending larger files while maintaining attractive rates for shorter messages. Furthermore, surcharges such as Gateway400 and COD will be eliminated. The information below details these price changes. If you have any questions, please contact your Account Representative or a Customer Assistance Representative at 1-800-567-4671. We value your business and are committed to serving your global messaging needs with quality service at the most economical rates possible. PRICE SCHEDULE - CANADA * Prices are effective February 1, 1992, exclusive of any taxes and subject to change without prior notification. * All prices are listed in Canadian Dollars. * All prices shown are per addressee. Addressing information is not counted as part of the message length. DELIVERY OPTIONS Electronic Delivery MESSAGE LENGTH: Price Up to 1000 character $ .58 Up to 2000 character $ .95 Up to 3000 character $ 1.10 Each additional 1000 characters (over 3000) $ .06 PAPER DELIVERY: STANDARD DELIVERY is first class mail delivery. Delivery is available to Canada, all 50 United States, Guam, Mexico, Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands. Message Length 1 - 2500 characters $ 2.60 each additional 2500 characters (over 2500) $ .58 PRIORITY DELIVERY is overnight delivery via courier. Message Length 1 - 2500 characters $ 8.60 each additional 2500 characters (over 2500) $ .58 URGENT DELIVERY is same day delivery via courier. Message Length 1 - 2500 characters $29.00 each additional 2500 characters (over 2500) $ .58 TELEX DELIVERY (No additional electronic delivery charges apply.) Canada $ 1.45 Canada (TWX) $ 1.54 International (Price varies by destination country) VARIABLE (No change from Jan. 1, 1991 prices) Collect on Delivery (Electronic) NO SURCHARGE MAIlFAX DELIVERY (No additional delivery charges apply.) Domestic Price First half page* $ .60 Additional half pages* $ .44 International (Price varies by destination country) VARIABLE (No change from Jan. 1, 1991 prices) Nonurgent 10% Discount (Nonurgent MailFAX messages will be delivered within 24hours.) OTHER DELIVERY OPTIONS Delivery Confirmation and Return Receipt Requests $ .30 MESSAGE CREATION Off-Line NO CHARGE (Users of AT&T Mail Access PLUS, PMX Software, UNIX, or X.400 Premises Systems.) On-Line** Up to 1000 characters $ .23 Up to 2000 characters $ .46 Up to 3000 characters $ .69 each additional 1000 characters (over 3000) $ .12 MESSAGE RETRIEVAL Electronic Message NO CHARGE MailTALK (Voice Retrieval) Outside the U.S. dial 303-368-2577 $ .58/minute (plus International Long Distance charges) In the U.S. dial 1-800-MAIL222 $ .58/minute SERVICE ACCESS Domestic Access NO CHARGE International Dial Access Charges and Packet Access Charges. VARIABLE INTERNATIONAL SURCHARGES*** Surcharges waived until further notice Up to 3000 characters To be determined Over 3000 characters To be determined * 1,500 characters to a half page. ** These fees are charged each time a message is created or edited on-line, or uploaded from a PC using a terminal emulation package, then sent from the on-line mode, regardless of the number of addresses. These charges are in addition to delivery charges. *** These charges will be in addition to the electronic delivery charges and will be assessed per addressee. GATEWAY400 SERVICE Gateway400 Service has no surcharges. Note that messages sent through Gateway400 are expanded based on X.400 Standards. The length of the message billed may be greater than what is indicated on the content-length line of the message. FORMS/FILES USER OPTION Price Forms/Files User Fee (Includes permanent $11.00 storage of 30 storage units**** Storage (Permanent storage is available only to Forms/Files Users) Additional Storage Units* $ .35/month (applies when average storage used is greater than the allowance provided with Forms/Files User Fee.) SHARED FOLDERS Users sending messages to Shared Folders are charged for electronic delivery. The owner may upload items to a Shared Folder at no charge. Access is the reading or handling of message text. Each user pays for items accessed unless the folder owner sponsors the shared folder and pays for all access. Message Length 1 - 401 characters $ .35 401 - 7500 characters $ .50 each additional 7500 characters (over 7500) $ .50 Shared Storage Units**** $ 1.75 (Applies to messages in a shared folder and shared address lists.) **** A Storage Unit is 7500 characters or less for each message saved in a folder and address list, based on the average number of units during the month. The folder itself counts as one storage unit. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Logos and Signatures (For paper and MailFAX deliveries. Fee charged per logo or signature scanned or modified. Limit of 3 per mailbox.) Price Logo Scanning Fee $230.00 Signature Scanning Fee $115.00 SUBSCRIBER FEES Service Fee, monthly (per mailbox) $ 3.45 Minimum Usage Billing, monthly (per invoice) $ 29.00 Directory Entry Fee, yearly $ 14.00 (Provides off-net user an entry in the on-line directory. Service fee does not apply.) SPECIAL BILLING Subaccount Attachment NO CHARGE (Summarizes UNIX Systems subaccount activity for the current billing period.) Project Code Attachment NO CHARGE (Charges are sorted and subtotalled by project codes which are supplied by customers.) Note: Any undeliverable messages, except TELEX messages, will be charged to users who set their accounts to auto-forward or set their incoming messages to MailFAX, Gateway400, or other surcharged delivery destinations. Auto-forwarding to a Mailbox or a UNIX system does not result in additional charges. DOCUMENTATION Price Service User's Guide $25.00 Additional Registration Form***** FREE MailTALK User's Kit***** $ 2.50 Command Card***** $ 2.50 3780/3770 Interface Guide $ 9.00 UNIX Administrator's $ 2.50 UNIX Reference Card****** $ 2.50 UNIX User's Guide****** $ 3.00 ***** These items are included in the Welcome Kit. ****** These items are included in the UNIX Kit. AT&T MAIL SOFTWARE AT&T Mail Access PLUS Ver. 2.04 $140.00 AT&T Mail Access PLUS Ver. 2.2 $225.00 AT&T Mail Access III Ver. 1.3.3 $140.00 AT&T Mail Access PLUS for Windows Ver. 2.2 $275.00 AT&T Mail Access PLUS Upgrade Ver. 2.04 - 2.2 $125.00 --------- dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca djcl@zooid.guild.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 08:11:46 EST From: Norm deCarteret Subject: Telemarketing (Suspicions Confirmed Dept.) Source: WSJ, 1/2/92, pg 1, Michael Miller Title: "That Sales Pitch Interrupting Dinner is by a Real Con Man" "Prisoners man the phones for telemarketing firms, and use their old skills" "Kim Britt, prisoner 38112 at the Omaha Correctional Center, has permission to make a phone call ... to ask Mark Parrish, a farm contractor in Ohio ... 'Mark, how you doing? How's the weather out there in Ohio? Mark, I was wondering, do you need any LaGrange 70 welding rods? Mark, this rod will make you a professional! Normally it would run about $156, but we have it on special tonight'. Mr. Britt was given 8 to 12 years for pushing drugs but his sales skills aren't getting rusty. For the past four years he has been selling hardware over the phone for a Nebraska telemarketing company. "Unbeknown to most consumers, a growing number of the disembodied voices who call during dinner with a sales spiel or survey are prisoners. Besides Nebraska, 15 other states have set up telemarketing centers where inmates dial or receive business calls" ... for organizations like: - Consumer Research Surveys & Super Value Stores (Shakopee MN womens prison) - Midwest Medical (medium security prison in Lino Lakes MN) - Trans World Airlines (CA reform school, take overload reservation calls) - Best Western & Super 8 Motels (in AZ and SD, also reservation overload?) - TGS Marketing Inc (SD; they've hired 2 dozen inmates after their release) The article mentions the flap about a former inmate who ran up thousands in charges on other peoples credit cards while working for TWA. TGS' Jim Braun said TGS screens inmates to eliminate those convicted of fraud but otherwise doesn't care what they were in prison for. TGS pays inmates the same 17.5% commission other telemarketers get. The prison gets $1.25/hour from the inmates, plus 5% of their wages for a state fund for crime victims. "It doesn't really make any difference to me", says Mr. Parrish. He was surprised to learn that TGS employs prisoners but not particularly upset. "Telemarketers are aggravating", he says. "It's no worse if they're in prison." ------------------------------ From: rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (R. Patrick MacKinnon) Subject: ITT3100 1.3 Problem Date: 2 Jan 92 14:09:39 GMT Organization: University of Western Ontario I have a very strange problem with an ITT3100 1.3 that has escaped all attempts to rectify it. A person on a call on B2 (DIB EXT257 INTR PRIM) that was transferred from a SUB20 with DSS used as an attendant position. The call itself is from the outside, coming in as a ground start equiv, on a dual port trunk i/f card. While on the call, the lamp on B2 will extinguish, and the lamp on B1 (FEAT HOLD) will come on, but the call will still be intact. However, the attendant, seeing her X257 appearance on the DSS extinguish, now sends another call to the set, which rings, even though the user has no way of holding the first call to get to the second, without hanging up completely, and re-answering. (This of course drops the initial call.) This is happening to two sets, both SUB10s, on different shelves. I have never seen it happen, but have no reason to doubt the users. The power supplies both check out as do all levels in the control shelf as well as in all three station/trunk modules. The common services csard was replaced on spec., but with no success. A cold start didn't help either, and the diagnostics show no anomolies in the system. If you have experience on an ITT3100, helpful suggestions would be very welcome. Thanks. rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (R. Patrick MacKinnon) The Western Business School BBS -- London, Ontario ------------------------------ From: minakami@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Michael K. Minakami) Subject: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 04:57:52 GMT I have some 8khz mulaw sound samples that I got off of a Sun SparcStation and have been trying to play them over a T1 line through a voice response unit. When I listen to it over a phone, voice sounds nasal and music sounds equally distorted. The most interesting phenomenon I've come across so far is that a sample of Yaz's "I before E except after C", which should say "You can see the difference," comes out as "You can sue the difference." (There's one for the legal dept. :) Whether or not /i/ turn into /u/ seems to depend on context, as it happens quite often but not all the time (though for a given sample it will consistently happen in the same place.) I've tried playing the samples when both connected to an Ameritech Central Office Simulator and when connected to a live T1 line, and both yied the same strange results. I also had a brief chance to play with a telephony card hooked up to an analog line, and it worked fine. This leads me to suspect some digital filtering, or maybe a difference in D/A conversion, but so far I haven't been able to isolate the problem. Any suggestions as to what's going on would be greatly appreciated! Michael Minakami ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 10:12:15 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Dialing Changes (was Area Code 206 Changes) The elimination of 1-xxx-xxxx in some areas and the addition (in some other areas) of leading 1 (just before area code) has been done where the distinction between area code and prefix is being lost. (0+ calls within such areas are now permitted or required to use 0 + area code + seven digits.) So far, this has been done in areas which were running out of prefixes, so that the prefixes in such areas could generalize from NNX to NXX; the alternative is to split such areas immediately. Such new dialing instructions can also accommodate area codes of form NXX (not just N0X/N1X). When such dialing instructions start appearing solely for the coming of NXX area codes, I'd appreciate hearing about it; when that starts happening, what happens to the policy of "no N0X/N1X prefixes unless NNX runs out"? (Notice that the first batch of NNX area codes will be of form NN0, raising the possibility that some areas could keep 1-xxx-xxxx by disallowing prefixes of form NN0; but this would not be possible if the Mexican numbers became reachable as 52x-xxx-xxxx.) > In the past, all area codes were of the form N0X or N1X, and all > prefixes were of the form NXX. The comment about area codes is still current (for the next 3 1/2 years at most?), but the comment about prefixes should have used NNX instead of NXX. If you notice the "history.of.area.splits" file in the archives, the first programming for N0X/N1X prefixes was in area 213 in 1973. That file also has the direct-dialing instructions for those areas which have programmed for N0X/N1X prefixes: either use 7D for all intra-NPA calls or use 1+NPA+7D for all toll calls. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #4 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13974; 5 Jan 92 0:29 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10695 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 4 Jan 1992 22:41:04 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05925 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 4 Jan 1992 22:40:49 -0600 Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1992 22:40:49 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201050440.AA05925@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #5 TELECOM Digest Sat, 4 Jan 92 22:40:46 CST Volume 12 : Issue 5 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Western Union Camp Car Outfits (Jim Haynes) Something Nice From GTE! (Rob Hansen) 5ESS Question - (Dr. Art St. George) Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. (Douglas W. Martin) Searching For Cordless Telephone II (ctII) Information (Harn-Jier Lin) Answering Machines With Video Cameras (David Niebuhr) 0 + NPA + 7D Did Not Work (Carl Moore) Tariffs For 900 Service (Jim Leone) One Plus Dialing on 800 Calls (David Niebuhr) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim Haynes Subject: Western Union Camp Car Outfits Date: 3 Jan 92 06:11:56 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz The following article appeared in {Western Union Technical Review} for October, 1961, Volume 15, Number 4, Copyright 1961 by the Western Union Telegraph Company, which was formerly in the telegraph business. The End of an Era by W. E. Crippen, Division Supervisor of Lines, Oakland Area "Editorial Note" - While there are no Western Union Camp Car complete outfits remaining in the United States there are some material cars still in service. There is, however, one camp car complete outfit north of the Border in the Canadian Maritime provinces where Western union maintains pole lines along the Canadian National R.R. Here the country is sparsely settled and suitable boarding accommodations difficult to find. In 1960 the last of the Western Union owned railway camp car outfits in the United States was sold by the Pacific Division to a junk dealer in Portland, Oregon. Thus an era covering almost half a century came to an end, the era of the Western union owned railway camp car outfits. The very important part these outfits played in the growth of The Western Union Telegraph Company is little known today. Only the "graybeards" who regarded them as a way of life during the era just passed are familiar with the contribution camp car outfits have made, and whenever they get together they recall the interesting events and incidents that had their origin in and around these outfits. Prior to 1914, "line gangs," as they were called, were housed either in hotels or in railroad owned boxcar outfits that were equipped with such bare necessities as double-deck bunks, pot-bellied stoves, wash bowls, oil lamps, and other appointments in keeping with the time. By 1914, many of the original pole lines were in need of repair because of deterioration or because the ever increasing wire load had become too great for the old pole lines to carry. Thus was undertaken the beginning of a heavy reconstruction program that was to last until the latter part of the 1920's and the start of the depression. The program reached its peak between 1925 and 1930. At the start of this program, The Western Union Telegraph Company foresaw the benefits that could be derived from having the line gangs housed in outfits that could be set out at any location at any time or that could be moved to emergency areas quickly, at a much lower cost than if they were housed in hotels, some of which might be long distances from the jobsites. It was decided to place many of these outfits in operation and, by purchasing the necessary cars where available and equipping them in railroad shops, to place them in operation as fast as they could be made available. This arrangement proved to be neither practical nor economical. In order to correct this situation, a camp car shop was established at Chattanooga, Tennessee as a headquarters for all outfit remodeling, maintenance, and supplies. This shop flourished and was busy continually until about 1930, when it entered upon a decline in activity that continued until a few years ago when the servicing of outfits was no longer required. (The camp car shop was then converted into a shop for manufacturing and assembling equipment to meet other and present day requirements.) By the end of 1914, twelve such outfits had been placed in service. These represented a great improvement over the earlier railroad bunk cars. They were lighted with individual Coleman gasoline lamps and were equipped with hot water and shower bath facilities. A hand- operated pressure pump, located behind the kitchen stove, supplied the water pressure for the wash basins, shower baths, and kitchen. (The first rule of the water system in those days was that anyone desiring a shower must first pump the water pressure up to sixty pounds. As the cooks were required to pump their own water for kitchen use, they were the ones who saw to it that everyone pumped his own water.) As the processing of these outfit units progressed, many improvements were made in equipment. For example, the individual Coleman gasoline lamps were replaced with a series of lights that had their fuel supplied from a centralized pressure tank. [Photograph, titled "Pullman Coach", shows exterior of a car sitting on railroad tracks. Lettering above the windows reads "Western Union Telegraph Co." Lettering below the windows reads "Camp Car" and something else I can't make out.] At the peak of the heavy reconstruction period, between 1925 and 1930, there were about 120 of these outfits scattered throughout the United States. By that time, the type of railroad cars used and the arrangement of the associated equipment had been fairly well standardized. These later models consisted of two Pullman cars about seventy feet in length (one sleeping car and one dining car), two boxcars (one tool car and one material car), and a steel tank car (water car). In fact, No. 10 recently sold at Portland consisted of two Pullman coaches, two boxcars, one tank car, and associated equipment. [Photograph, titled "Sleeping Quarters", taken down the center aisle of a sleeping car, shows upper and lower bunks on both sides.] The sleeping car was partitioned into three sections or rooms. The foreman had small private quarters at the end of the car, equipped with bed, lockers, chairs, desk, and wash basin. Adjacent to this room was the men's dormitory, which was equipped with two rows of double-deck bunks that would accommodate sixteen men. These two sections covered a little more than half the coach. The remaining section was used as the men's recreation room and for locker space. [Photograph, titled "Dining Room", shows a long table with six chairs on each side (and probably more too close to the camera to show). Handwritten on the photo is "The Western Union Telegraph Co. Chattanooga Works Dining Room of 18 Man Camp Car Outfit" There are steam radiators under the windows on both sides.] The second coach or dining car had living quarters to accommodate the man and his wife who were the cooks, a shower room and wash room for the men, and the dining room and kitchen. [Photograph, titled "Tool Car" shows a box car, lettered "Western Union Telegraph Co. W.U.T.X. 3550; and "Tool Car" near the door.] The tool car housed the tools, Delco light plant and battery bank, coal bin, icebox, and storage space for vegetables. The Delco plant furnished power for the operation of all lights. The electrical system was 32 volts d-c. The automatic water pressure pump supplied water pressure for the dining car only. The tank car (water car) which carried the water supply was adjacent to the tool car. Water was carried from the tank to two auxiliary "possum belly" tanks located under the dining car; from these it was pumped out by the automatic pump as required. [Photograph, titled "Tank Car" shows a tank car with lettering "Western Union W.U.T.X. 4416 Water Car"] In the early days, the outfit cooks consisted of two men, a "Bull Cook" and a "Flunky." This arrangement was not a reliable one, especially if the outfit happened to be located near a bootlegger or a saloon and the cooks happened to be fond of drink. By 1918 a more dependable arrangement had been found; and man and his wife were being hired as cooks for each outfit. By 1943, Republic Pictures rented one of these outfits at Cedar City, Utah for use in portraying an early-day passenger train. It "starred" in the film "in Old Oklahoma" and "co-starred" John Wayne and Martha Scott. The studio repainted the exterior of the coaches with water colors for the filming and paid the expenses of the Western Union crew at a local hotel while the cars were in use. The is one of the favorite reminiscences of the men who used to work in the gangs, along with other such highly personal remembrances as the time a gang foreman tried to make homemade elderberry wine secretly and it foamed out of his locker because he did not allow for expansion in the container during fermentation. There were several contributing factors that forced the discon- tinuance of the use of this last representative outfit of the camp car era. The reduction in the size of line crews from the original sixteen men to an average of about eight made the operation of an outfit more expensive than hotel accommodations would have been. Because western railroads had discontinued the use of their own camp car outfits wherever possible and had removed storage tracks in a majority of the small towns, it became necessary for Western Union to construct temporary spur tracks for the outfit at a cost of about $700.00 per location. Also, the repair parts for the Delco lighting, the water pressure system, the Arcola heating system, and the coal-burning cook stove were no longer available from any source. At the end, the outfit was kept in operation for several years for the sole purpose of handling projects located in the mountain and desert regions of the Pacific Division where hotel accommodations are few. With the sale of outfit No. 10, the graybeards mourn the passing of an era that began in the days when the line gangs were paid their earnings in gold coins sent to the foreman by way of American Railway Express and has ended in these days when line crews are paid by machine-punched checks. ---------------- haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet [Moderator's Note: Bravo! ... and thank you for sending along this wonderful bit of nostalgia. And from an old magazine which is a piece of nostalgia in itself. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hansen@inference.com (Rob Hansen) Subject: Something Nice From GTE! Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 23:09:20 PDT I never expected to think a positive thought about GTE in my life! I lived under their tyrannical rule for six years, escaping three years ago into the not-much-better-but-hey-at-least-it's-not-GTE world of Pacific Bell. Well, about two months ago, I got a piece of what looked like junk mail from GTE California. It was not a customized/tailored letter; rather it appeared to be a mass mailing to pseudo random addresses. The letter said, effectively, "If you were ever a lifeline customer, you may be eligible for a refund of $8 or more. Call us if you want." So I called. They took my old GTE number, my new address, and said they'd research it and mail me a check if warranted. In today's mail was a check from GTE for $115.27 !!! No letter, just the check and the stub. Since I haven't been a customer of theirs for three + years, you can imagine my surprise. Merry Christmas from GTE of all the unlikely colourless bureaucracies ... Rob hansen@inference.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1992 14:46 MST From: "DOV - DR. ART ST. GEORGE" Subject: 5ESS Question Has anyone upgraded from a 5ESS switch release #5 to #7? If so, what costs (other than the obvious bucks) and tradeoffs are there in doing so? What advice do you have? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 12:17:07 PST From: martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) Subject: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. To avoid stupid flames, let me first say that although discussing obscenity, I find the concept of telephone pornography disgusting. When you don't know who will be calling, arguments regarding "freedom of speech" are, in my opinion, out the window. Anyway, now to my questions: It seems that in most area codes, numbers which spell seven-letter obsceneties are routed to intercept recordings. Examples of such numbers are: 382-5968 or 277-4653. I wonder, has somebody at the phone company figured out a list of numbers that will not be assigned, or were such numbers originally given out and then disconnected due to prank calls. How large is the list of numbers which are unassigned because of what they spell? On a related topic, most of the (900) numbers that deal with phone sex etc, seem to be in the 303 or 844 exchanges. Are these exchanges assigned to a particular carrier, do they cover a particular geographic area, or what? Also, does anyone know what is the most expensive minimum charge for a (900) call? The most expensive call I've heard about is: "Talk to two (description omitted) girls at the same time! It's only $5.00 per minute with a little ten-minute minimum!". Are there any numbers costing more than $50? Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil ------------------------------ From: Harn-Jier Lin Subject: Searching For Cordless Telephone II (ctII) Information Organization: Illinois Institute of Technology / Academic Computing Center Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 22:18:50 GMT I was thinking to buy a cordless telephone II which apply digital transmission technology. But my problem is I have no idea who manufacture this kind of product in the U.S. and what's the function in the product. I appreciate any information and if I somebody also insterested in this and I have sufficient information. I would to send the information to whoever also insterested. Thanks in advance. Harn-Jier Lin Please reply me by e-mail at demohjl@iitmax.iit.edu. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 08:17:33 -0500 From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) Subject: Answering Machines With Video Cameras There was an article on the radio this morning that said that AT&T is coming out with an answering machine with a color screen and minature video camera and will sell for just under $2,000. Does anyone know anything about this? Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 10:17:18 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: 0 + NPA + 7D Did Not Work I am just back from Ohio, where I made some calls from pay phones to the time of day service back in Philadelphia at 215-846-1212. >From some UTS phones (United Telephone System?), I could not get 0-215-846-1212 to work, and I had to use 10288 in front of this (to call via AT&T). ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 14:24:02 EST From: jim@canisius.edu (Jim Leone) Subject: Tariffs For 900 Service Patrick, Besides the local library (here in Buffalo), is there any on-line source which gives the FCC 900 tariffs? I have never seen it and my local NY Telephone representative says it's a large 25 volume set. Is this information available with anonymous ftp? Thanks. Jim Leone Internet: leone@klaatu.cs.canisius.edu Bitnet: leone@canisius ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 08:23:21 -0500 From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) Subject: One Plus Dialing I've noticed in my telephone book that whenever an 800 number is given the directions are to "Dial 1+" then 800-XXX-XXXX. My area code (516) doesn't require 1+800 for anything and shouldn't for quite some time so I'm curious as to why these instructions are given in the first place. Could it be that it's to get subscribers conditioned for that far-off day when 1+ will be necessary? Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #5 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17901; 5 Jan 92 2:18 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05734 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 00:31:36 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08863 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 00:31:19 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 00:31:19 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201050631.AA08863@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #6 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Jan 92 00:31:12 CST Volume 12 : Issue 6 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Email Between AT&T Easylink and the Internet (Alan Toscano) Compression Bridges Ethernet-Ethernet (John Stigall) Who Picked Exchange Names? (Douglas W. Martin) Questions About Calling Remote Areas (Douglas W. Martin) I Want to Locate a Magazine: "Telecom Gear" (Gary Sarff) American Express and ANI (John Higdon) AT&T Mail "Monthly Usage Minimum" Suspended (Fred Linton) USADirect and Poland Update: Now There IS a Number) (Fred Linton) Is the NYC Phonebook Online Somewhere? (Florian Gutzwiller) AT&T VoiceMark Service (Steve M. Kile) Problem With PAC*TEL Cordless Phone (drollinger@elde.epfl.ch) Help With Novatel PTR800a Handheld Programming (Douglas Scott Reuben) Jolson on the Phone (was Telecom's Greatest Hits) (Bill Higgins) Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as Second Digit? (Gary Deol) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wu/O=ALAN_TOSCANO/DD.ELN=62306750@mhs.attmail.com Date: Fri Jan 3 15:51:56 GMT 1992 Subject: Email Between AT&T Easylink and the Internet AT&T EasyLink Services operates two public electronic mail services. The larger of the two, EasyLink Instant Mail Service (IMS), was acquired about a year ago from Western Union Corporation. The other is the AT&T Mail Service. While these systems will likely be merged together sometime in the future, they remain distinct for now, connected via an X.400 link. Through this link, and some rather bizarre syntax, I believe it is generally possible for Internet users to address mail to EasyLink IMS mailboxes, and for IMS users to address Internet users. (Undoubtedly, there will be some mailers which choke on the necessary syntax.) EasyLink mailboxes are assigned an eight-digit EasyLink Number (ELN) which always begins with the digits "62." For example, my IMS mailbox's ELN is 62-306-750. To address an EasyLink IMS mailbox: To: wu/O=RECIPIENT_NAME/DD.ELN=62nnnnnn@mhs.attmail.com In this example, RECIPIENT_NAME would be replaced with an appropriate name. Use underscore ("_") characters in place of spaces. The value of the "/O=" (organization) entry will be used by IMS for an attention line. It is required, but is not significant in message routing. Rather, the required /DD.ELN specification will determine the routing on the IMS system. In a real-life example, my mailbox may be addressed as: To: wu/O=ALAN_TOSCANO/DD.ELN=62306750@mhs.attmail.com Note: All IMS mailboxes have an associated ELN, but *not all* ELNs have associated IMS mailboxes. Sometimes they represent mailboxes on other systems linked to IMS via X.400. In this special case, you will probably be unable to successfully address the ELN from the Internet. Addressing the Internet from EasyLink IMS is somewhat more complicated. Owing to its Telex heritage, EasyLink converts all alphabetic characters in addresses to uppercase -- unless they're preceded by a bang ("!"). To include an actual bang in an address, you must type it twice. Here's the address format which I used to submit this article from EasyLink IMS to : PTS IPM SUBJECT EMAIL BETWEEN AT&T EASYLINK AND THE INTERNET PRIMARY COUNTRY US ADMD ATTMAIL ORG UUCP DDA ID-INTERNET!!EECS.NWU.EDU!!!T!E!L!E!C!O!M END+ (Modify the SUBJECT and DDA lines as appropriate for each message.) While IMS has on-line documentation for X.400 addressing in general, there is NO ON-LINE DOCUMENTATION for sending mail specifically to the Internet. Therefore, I would suggest that Internet users provide an appropriate return address, formatted as above, within the body of their letter, whenever they first write to an IMS user. If an IMS user will be writing to a particular Internet address frequently, the recipient's X.400 address may be stored on-line as a Redilist. A Alan Toscano Voice: +1 713 236 6616 AT&T Mail: atoscano CIS: 73300,217 ELN: 62306750 ------------------------------ From: stigall@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (john stigall) Subject: Compression Bridges Ethernet-Ethernet Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 21:11:37 GMT Hello, I need help finding info on compression bridges for a link to a far remote site via four-wire modems. What I have found so far is the Cryptall 3000 series compression bridge for $7900 list each. Has anyone had experience with these bridges? I am looking for other alternatives as well ... we want to run multiple protocols over the link and hopefully compression will give us greater throughput than routers. Ideas? Thanks in advance. The opinions expressed are entirely my own, not my employers. John Stigall - Indiana University Computing Services Network stigall@ucs.indiana.edu > Ham Radio: N9LKL@K9IU.IN.USA.NOAM < ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 14:02:53 PST From: martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) Subject: Who Picked Exchange Names? When telephone exchanges had names, who was given the responsibility or honor of picking the names? I grew up in Cleveland, Oh, where a few names made sense, but most did not. In the downtown area we had: Tower (originally assigned to offices in the Terminal Tower, Cleveland's tallest building), Prospect, Superior, and Main: named after streets, etc. However, most exchange names meant nothing; e.g. Evergreen, Cherry, Redwood, Henderson, etc. If your number was in the 382 exchange, why not use Evergreen? But who assigned the names to the various prefixes? And who was "Henderson" named after? In Cleveland, we also had Utah and Tuxedo (both 88x) I am using Cleveland exchanges only because they are familiar to me, but my question is general: who had the authority to assign the names? Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil [Moderator's Note: Since in those days AT&T was the parent of all the Bell Companies and coordinated everything else they did, I assume some person or department at AT&T thought them up ... whoever it was, they had a vivid imagination! :) Consider these from Chicago's past: INTerocean, PALisaides, OPEra, AVEnue, FINancial, HAymarket-1, UPTown, EDGewater, LOngbeach-1, MIDway, NORmal and MUseum-4, to name a few I liked. Then there was also INDependence, HYDe Park and ROGers Park; DANube, VICtory, CANal, and CALumet. And maybe a couple dozen more. In the thirty-two years I've had phone service, I went from my first number which was EAStgate to GRAceland to ESTebrook to WHItehall to RAVenswood to HYDe Park to DElaware-7 to SUPerior to LAKeview, to the number I've had for fifteen years on the SHEldrake exchange. (When I was young, and in my prime I used to change telephone numbers all the time -- and apartments.) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 16:45:03 PST From: martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) Subject: Questions About Calling Remote Areas I am looking for information about calling remote areas of the US and Canada. Several months ago, there was some discussion in this digest about new area codes such as (820) which would be used for places that are now undialable. Where are the undialable points in the US and Canada? Are these operated as toll stations or something else? I would be interested in compiling a list of toll stations and undialable points that are still around. On a related topic, there must be large, remote areas served by a single CO, or even a single exchange. Does anyone know what COs serve the largest geographic area, e.g. central Nevada, Eastern Alaska, etc? When I was last in Alaska, I remember a forty-fifty-page phone book that covered almost the whole length of the Richardson Highway, from neer Greeley or Delta, all the way south to Valdez. As I recall, there weren't many exchanges for this whole region. Any information about similar large areas served by a single CO or a single exchange would be appreciated. Thanks, Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil [Moderator's Note: There are still hundreds of toll stations around. About two years ago, John Covert favored us with an article here listing several of the more unusually-named ones. Perhaps he will write us again soon. The manual exchanges are all gone -- I guess! -- but the last time a newspaper reported 'the final one cut over' (I think it was Bryant Pond), it was only a few months and another one was found which was being converted. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gsarff@control.Spies.COM (Gary Sarff) Subject: I Want to Locate a Magazine: "Telecom Gear" Organization: Spies in the wire, (408) 867-7400 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 15:42:46 -0800 I had a question regarding equipment and was referred to a publication called "Telecom Gear". I am not familiar with this publication and would like to know any information regarding contacting them, address or phone number, just city and state, whatever anyone has. Thanks. [Moderator's Note: I believe Telecom Gear is part of Harry Newton's organization in New York City. Try 1-800-LIBRARY. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 92 10:47 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: American Express and ANI I have finally unravelled a minor mystery. After a recent extended trip, American Express was apparently having recession jitters and became concerned that my payment was a week late. Never mind that I have been a good account for years and years. Anyway, the "collector" called my mother (!?!) and asked to speak to me. For various reasons, I have requested that my mother not act as a directory service and to simply tell people that are looking for me that they have reached the wrong number. It is not as if I am hiding; my number is listed. But I do not feel that idiots going down the phone listings need to be given any special help. The collector became very annoyed and said that this was the number that I had given to them and demanded to know how I could be reached. She told him that my number was listed and he could look it up. He responded that he was calling from (some out-of-state city; I forget which) and he would appreciate being given my number. Mom's answer: "I'm not directory assistance", and hung up. Apparently, Amex sprung for the fifty cents because a message was left on my machine. When I finally talked to someone, I was told that my mother's number was the one they had on their records. We corrected that and I gave them a piece of my mind over their collection tactics. Yesterday, I got a call from Amex over another matter (charge dispute). The call came in on my private line. Then it hit me: Amex apparently enters the number you are calling from as your official phone of record when the rep sees fit. Yes, I had called Amex from my mother's phone some months before to complain about some bogus Compu$erve charges. And when I returned "Mr. Collector's" call last month, I used my private line. So here is a word to the wise: if you call American Express, be sure to make it clear that the phone you are using is NOT your personal telephone if such is the case. Otherwise your girl/boy friend, employer, barber, or modem may receive calls meant for you. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: fejlinton@attmail.com Date: Sat Jan 4 14:34:10 EST 1992 Subject: AT&T Mail "Monthly Usage Minimum" Suspended From my latest AT&T Mail bill: PLEASE NOTE, IN RESPONSE TO FEEDBACK FROM OUR CUSTOMERS WE HAVE DECIDED TO SUSPEND THE RECENTLY ANNOUNCED NEW MONTHLY MINIMUM CHARGES ON AT&T MAIL. LOOK FOR AN UPCOMING ANNOUNCEMENT ON NEW BILLING CHOICES NEXT MONTH. Fred ------------------------------ From: fejlinton@attmail.com Date: Sat Jan 4 14:43:44 EST 1992 Subject: USADirect and Poland Update: Now There IS a Number The USADirect situation from Poland has changed since my report of December. According to a USADirect ad in the inflight magazine my recent trip to New Mexico showed me, one can now reach USADirect by dialing 010 480 0111 from selected phones in Warsaw, and 0 [new dial tone] 010 480 0111 outside Warsaw. Fred ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 92 20:51:38 GMT+0100 From: flog@pizza.open.ch (Florian Gutzwiller) Subject: Is the NYC Phonebook Online Somewhere? I am seeking a way to find out a postal address of somebody in NYC that has a secret phone number only. The Swiss operator no longer gets address information from the NYC operator. Is there a way accessing an electronic edition of the NYC phone book, or could anybody look someone up for me in the printed one ;-). Thanks, Florian ------------------------------ From: Steve_M_Kile@cup.portal.com Subject: AT&T VoiceMark Service Date: Sat, 4 Jan 92 07:49:16 PST Several weeks ago I was able to use the AT&T VoiceMark service from my home (612-888-XXXX) however today I was not able to do so. Has the number changed (800-576-MARK) or has the service been discontinued? Do any other carriers offer a similar service? Thanks. Steve Kile steve_m_kile@cup.portal.com stevek@netcom.com steve@biomed.vware.mn.org ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1992 16:24:48 +0000 From: DROLLINGER@elde.epfl.ch Subject: Problem With PAC*TEL Cordless Phone Dear TD readers! On my last visit to the United States, I bought a GREAT Technologies (Model CS8001) cordless phone (Manufactured for PAC*TEL Products by GREAT Technologies). I used it once in a motel and it worked. It uses an AC 120V/60Hz/4W --> DC 9V 200mA power converter. Back in Switzerland, I had to buy a new power converter, because we operate on 220V/50Hz. Although the phone works well, it produces an annoying buzzer-like sound which is more or less loud depending on the location. I tried it out with three different power converters, yes, I even tried it with a 9V E-Block-type battery and on different locations, but it always sounds like an amplified power-converter- sound, even without the phone-line connected to it. Does anybody know where this sound comes from, as there should really be no noise when operated with a battery (at least this sounds logical) or has anybody else had problems with this particular cordless phone? The noise is really that loud that normal operation is impossible. There is a help-line (1-800-426-2372), but 800 numbers can not be dialed from outside the US of course. Thanks for any help and suggestions. ------------------------------ Date: 4-JAN-1992 06:32:43.40 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Help With Novatel PTR800a Handheld Programming Just got myself a Novatel PTR800A handheld ... NICE phone (and a great price of only $98!), but it doesn't seem to conform to the standard Novatel programming methods which the bag phones use, ie, FUNC + LOCK + 1, then #259 to enter program mode. Anyhow, anyone know how to enter the programming mode in this one? Any help would be appreciated! Thanks in advance, Doug ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1992 8:31:29 -0600 (CST) From: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) Subject: Jolson on the Phone (was Telecom's Greatest Hits) Patrick, I can't *believe* the vast and erudite readership of TELECOM Digest failed to mention "Hello, My Baby," a big hit for Al Jolson in the Twenties. It's purely about telephony. I can only recall the chorus. Hello, my baby, hello, my honey Hello, my ragtime gal Send me a kiss by wire Honey, my heart's on fire If you refuse me, honey, you'll lose me Then you'll be left alone So, honey, telephone And tell me I'm your own ... It's a good song for practicing your Jolson imitation in the shower ... take it from me ... though nothing can really beat "Toot-Toot-Tootsie, Goodbye." Bill Higgins (have ukulele, will travel) Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Bitnet: HIGGINS@FNALB.BITNET ------------------------------ Subject: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? From: garyd@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Gary Deol) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 92 17:05:34 MST Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems, Edmonton, AB, Canada Does anybody know why the middle number in a area-code is always a zero or one? Things that make you say Hmmmmmmmm :^) Gary Deol garyd@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca Edmonton Remote Systems: Serving Northern Alberta since 1982 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #6 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20669; 5 Jan 92 3:12 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31615 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 01:28:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22278 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 01:28:08 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 01:28:08 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201050728.AA22278@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #7 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Jan 92 01:28:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 7 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Son of Telesphere Pays 21.4 Million to Chairman (WSJ via John Nagle) Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana (John R. Levine) GTE Sells Their Share in Sprint to United Telecom (John R. Levine) Motorola Transportable Information Wanted (TELECOM Moderator) Question Not Answered by 800/900 Thread (Thomas Lapp) USA Today's 800 Turned 900 Number (Jack Decker) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nagle@netcom.COM (John Nagle) Subject: Son of Telesphere Pays $21.4 Million to Chairman Date: 4 Jan 92 19:31:05 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) [Moderator's Note: This was posted in comp.org.eff.talk and I thought you might be interested. PAT] ------------------- Remember Telesphere, the defunct AOS from hell? Well, they're back, in a new incarnation. And it doesn't look good. {Wall Street Journal} article, Jan 3, p. A8, starts off with "New Credit Line is used for Payment to Chairman". "International Telecharge Inc. of Dallas said it lined up a new, $21.4 million credit line, backed by accounts receivable, and drew down all of it partly to make a payment to its chairman." "The provider of long-distance services said the financing is backed by its accounts and former accounts of Telesphere Communications, Inc., whose assets it bought last year." International Telecharge is headed by Ronald J. Haan of Haan Ventures, Inc. He gets a royalty of 10% of the net operating revenue from Telesphere's customer base, says the WSJ, with a minimum of $500,000 a month. The credit line was used to make a $17.4 million prepayment on these royalties. If you're a creditor of Telesphere, having your lawyers take a very close look at these transactions might be worthwhile. John Nagle ------------------------------ Subject: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 0:29:15 EST From: John R. Levine On Dec 31, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission unanimously rejected an Indiana Bell Proposal for Caller-ID, citing privacy concerns. Bell proposed an unblockable offering at $7.50/month. They suggested Bell offer Call Trace and implied that they would approve C-ID so long as it was provided with free per-line blocking. Bell said they were disappointed, claimed that C-ID would not be valuable if blockable, and wasn't sure whether they'd submit a modified proposal. On Friday, state Rep. Phyllis Pond, R-New Haven, submitted a bill to override the IURC decision, making the familiar referencs to obscene phone calls, and saying: "Just because I own a phone does not mean that I should be a target for unsolicited sales pitches. Those who would pay to install the Caller ID feature on their phone lines are probably the ones who are receiving these nuisance phone calls." Her bill would forbid per-line and maybe per-call C-ID. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Subject: GTE Sells Their Share in Sprint to United Telecom Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 0:37:36 EST From: John R. Levine United Telecom will finally buy the last 19.9% of Sprint from GTE for $530M on January 31, barring unexpected regulatory snags. United will pay $250M then, the rest on July 1, and will borrow money to finance the sale. Once the sale is complete, United will change their name to Sprint. The sale was planned for quite a while but the price and terms hadn't been set. United already operates Sprint, so no day-to-day changes are expected. GTE is also selling their Sylvania unit to concentrate on cellular and local exchange service. GTE is now the largest local exchange carrier in the country, bigger than any of the baby bells. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1992 23:34:29 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Motorola Transportable Information Wanted I now have an older (1987) Motorola transportable cellular phone to replace the bag phone I had which expired on me the day before New Year's Eve. I got this phone second hand from someone who replaced it with a new phone in his car. He had very scanty information about it -- no user manual, etc -- but he was able to get a couple pages of basic programming details; how to put in your number, your carrier identification code, etc. I got the phone working and assigned to my account on Cellular One to replace the bag phone, but I sure would like some additional details. For example: What values should be in the 'station class mark', the access overload class', and the 'group ID'? The 'group ID' should not be confused with the Carrier ID, which for Cellular One/Chicago is 00001. The person who aided me in getting the phone programmed said for the time being to use '6 or 14 for portable/personal, and 12 for standalone mobile'. I am not sure of the difference. He said 'use zero and the last digit of the phone number for the access overload class', so I put in 04, but I am not sure what it means or why I put it there. For the group ID he had me put in 10, yet on my Radio Shack handheld and on the old bag phone this had a value of 15. What is the difference, and which should I use now? Does this have to do with using all 832 channels? In fact, *does* this unit get all 832 channels? For the 'initial paging channel' I put in 333 because it is my understanding the 'B' carriers start at 334 and work up while the 'A' carriers start at 333 and work down. Right or wrong? Then there was one with no documentation whatsoever: Program item 10 gets set for 'options' (unexplained) and the binary amount 011100 was there by factory default, so I left it. But what does it mean? What are the options available? The little documentation I got also had program item 11 which called for 'factory setting of 000', and someone had written on the docs to make this 110 instead ... but I don't even get item 11 on this phone; it cycles from 10 back around to 1. Any ideas on items 10-11 and the 'options' allowed in each would be appreciated, particularly why I cannot get 11. Next, I'd like to know about the pin out which connects the battery and the radio. It is a 25 pin connector, just like on a modem or terminal, but I am sure the pins are not for the same purpose. Is there any way to read what's in the radio via my terminal/modem? Finally, and this is perhaps the most important of all, this radio is the type that after X programming attempts, it locks up until it gets completely reset. Since you can't (as far as I know) do that from the keyboard in the head, I assume you have to do something to the pins which connect the battery and the radio. For example, in the Radio Shack CT-301 handheld, shorting one of the pins to ground allows a keyboard entry called 'Local / Test Mode' not available when the battery is installed normally (without the pin shorted to ground). This local, or test mode allows all sorts of changes including zeroing out the counters, etc. Is this possible on the Motorola so I don't have to send it away for help? The handset says this model is TLN-2777-A and the user-programmable features are done by , 0, security code twice, *. 'Control' is the black button on the side which also regulates the volume. The phone was originally a promotional item from GTE Mobilenet apparently since it says that on the handset, although the main unit says it is a Motorola. Any help appreciated. A spare technical manual and user manual sent to me would be very nice. Patrick Townson PO Box 1570 Chicago, IL 60690-1570 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 91 17:29:21 EST From: Thomas Lapp Subject: Question Not Answered by 800/900 Thread I've read all the postings with interest on the 800/900 free/not free thread, but could not find anything related to the one question which came to mind while reading. In earlier Digests, I have learned that 900 service can be purchased by anyone wanting to pay the fees for setup, minimum use, etc. The 900 folks charge me $xxx/minute, and I advertise $xxx+profit/minute rate so I make some money. The question that I would have is that since a switch error was made for the {USA Today} number, does that mean that the newspaper was still charged the same rate for those calls that came in via 800, or is that just billable profit to the newspaper? Since 800 service is a lot cheaper to get than 900 service (as an IP, not a user), it would seem that if that was the case, then the idea of direct billing for use of IP would result in much lower costs than the rates advertised even if AT&T billed the newspaper at daytime inward WATS rates. The actual story of how the billing was done and who was charged what would certainly make an interesting story to read. In answer to a possible question, yes, I did call the number with the expectation that it MIGHT not be billed to me, but probably would be. I used the services, and expect to pay for it. tom internet : thomas%mvac23@udel.edu Location : Newark, DE, USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jan 92 22:36:29 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: USA Today's 800 Turned 900 Number Pat, it's apparent to me that you are not swayed by public opinion, and indeed there may be some justification for the thought that those who kept repeatedly dialing the {USA Today} number should be charged for it, except that this nagging thought keeps hitting me. If one has phone service and takes all possible precautions to prevent dialing of extra-charge numbers, why should a charge be allowed simply because a technical mistake is made? You're looking at just one side of the picture, which is that those who kept taking advantage of a technical flaw to get something that they knew full well they should have been paying for should have in fact been required to pay. I suggest that perhaps you should consider the other side of this. Forget for a moment the person who knows full well that he made the calls from his home phone, in the hope that he would not get charged. Let's consider the owner of a phone (be it residential, business, COCOT or whatever) who has taken the reasonable and prudent steps to make sure that "900" number charges are not billed to his phone ... in particular, he has had 900 number blocking placed on his phone line. Now a charge for a 900 call shows up on his bill. I get the feeling that under such circumstances you'd have no sympathy, you'd say he should pay it and go after whoever made the call. I don't buy it. If the phone company undertakes to offer a 900 blocking service, and a 900 call gets through anyway, and it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the OWNER of the phone knowingly took some action to circumvent the call blocking, then he or she should be off the hook. In other words ... let's say that I am having a party and I don't quite trust some of my friends. So, I put my valuables in a safe deposit box, lock up the good silverware, and call the phone company to have 900/976 blocking put on my phone. I may even pay a "service order" charge to have this done in some areas. Now, the point is that by accepting my order, the phone company has undertaken to provide a certain service ... namely, to prevent certain types of extraordinarily expensive calls from being made from my phone. Now a TELECOM Digest reader happens to attend my party and, unknown to me, amuses himself by calling {USA Today's} 800 number, after which I get a bill for 900 number calls. Since I have (in this hypothetical situation) 900 blocking, I really cannot by any stretch of the imagination see where I should be responsible for such a call. What strikes me as really screwy about this is that you have the telephone companies and AT&T, who have millions of dollars worth of computerized equipment that SHOULD be able to correctly route and bill calls, and you're telling the guy who may have nothing more than a $9.95 cheapie phone that HE has to keep track of every single number dialed because the phone company might be charging for calls to an 800 number. I don't buy it. Personally, I don't think any phone company should EVER be allowed to charge for calls to an 800 number for ANY reason, because just about everybody in North America associates "800" with "free call." And the fact that it took someone a month to find and fix the problem is absurd. Pat, suppose you left home for a month's vacation, and after a day or two you got a call from a neighbor saying "You must have left your front door unlocked. I see people going in and walking off with your property from time to time." And you basically said "well, I'm gone for a month, I'll take care of it when I get back." And in the meantime, someone spread the word that someone at your home was giving things away to the poor, all they needed to do was come and take whatever they needed ... so that some who took from you were aware that they were taking something they shouldn't, but others were not (remember that some were saying the {USA Today} number was a demo line). Now if I were the police captain called (after you got back) to sort out the mess, I'd first of all want to know why on earth you didn't take some action to protect your property before the month was up! And I certainly wouldn't bring charges against those who took your property thinking that it was being given away, especially if they brought it back. The problem in this scenario is that there's no police captian to demand to know why AT&T (or whoever was responsible for this fiasco) didn't do something about it before a month went by ... in effect, the phone companies get to play judge and jury here, and that's wrong. And in the second place, those folks who are getting billed have nothing to give back. And besides all of that, I have to agree with the person who said that you were abusing your authority as Moderator by saying you'd send letters to AT&T and {USA Today}. I don't know ... either you've never been victimized by having calls appear on your bill with no idea where they came from, or you have but for some reason you don't empathize with others who might be suffering through that. The bottom line: I agree that those who called the {USA Today} number knowing full well that they were taking something they should be paying for did something they shouldn't have. But as the old saying goes, two wrongs do not make a right. It is also wrong, and dangerous precedent in my opinion, to allow a telephone company to take a call that was dialed as a "free" call, using an access code known throughout North America and firmly planted in many minds, computers, PBX's, COCOT's, toll restrictors and other equipment as being the code for a "free" call, and then convert it to toll after the fact ... and then to allow the situation to continue unabated for a month or more. By the way, I'm not arguing this because I got stuck for a call ... I sort of figured something like this might happen and since fighting with the phone company over a billing dispute is NOT one of my favorite things to do, I didn't try the number. But you know, I have to wonder ... if the phone companies are so incompetent that they can't fix something like this in less than a month, why do those readers who favor local measured service seem to think that the phone companies are capable of always producing an accurate bill for local calls, particularly when they're not required to itemize them, and the customer therefore has no way of checking them? Well, Pat, I don't know if I've convinced you of anything (I doubt it) but please at least add my voice to those who feel that these calls should be written off. I won't lose a penny if they aren't, but I think we may all lose if whoever allowed this to happen gets away with collecting for it and profiting from their mistake. Jack Decker : jack@myamiga.mixcom.com : FidoNet 1:154/8 [Moderator's Note: There you go, Jack. As you requested, I've added your voice to the discussion. The thread *really does* have to be closed now. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #7 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22945; 5 Jan 92 4:06 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22071 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 02:21:30 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06338 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 02:21:16 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 02:21:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201050821.AA06338@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #8 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Jan 92 02:21:10 CST Volume 12 : Issue 8 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Lawsuit Claims SW Bell Operated Unauthorized Repair Center (Colin Tuttle) Open Systems Forum Announcement (Wayne McDilda) CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (was Very Courteous Rep) (Dell Ellison) Re: Call 1-900-SOMEONE (Carl Moore) Re: Telephone Company Employees (Andy Brager) Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request (Peter da Silva) Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: The Best and The Worst (Bill Berbenich) Re: ANI in NJ (Chuck H. Chapman) Re: Area Code Splits and our Phone System (Ron Newman) Re: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? (Gil Kloepfer Jr.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Lawsuit Claims SW Bell Operated Unauthorized Repair Center Date: 3 Jan 92 21:28:02 CST (Fri) From: ctuttle@taronga.com (Colin Tuttle) There was an article in the Friday January 3, 1992 {Daily Oklahoman}, page 11 entitled "Texas Firm Sues Bell" written by staff writer Bob Vandewater. The story is about a firm who is suing Southwestern Bell for $60 million. Here is a transcription of part of the article: (Dodds is Chuck Dodds, president Circuit Repair Technology Inc. of Brownwood, TX) Dodds said the suit stems from his firm's 1989 purchase from the phone company of telecommunications circuit repair equipment that was among the assets of Integrated Circuit Technologies, Inc., an alleged former Bell affiliate in Oklahoma City during the mid 1980's. "As an inducement to purchase the equipment, Circuit Repair Technology alleges it was promised substantial repair business from Southwestern Bell by high-ranking Southwestern Bell officials in Oklahoma," he said. "We purchased equipment from Southwestern Bell in good faith and were promised that we would have the business that the internal group planned to handle, and we didn't get it." Dodds said. "It appears we may have been the unwitting participant in a possible Southwestern Bell coverup." he said. Dodds said Bell in late 1986 asked the federal judge who presided over the 1984 breakup of the AT&T/Bell System to lift a restriction against the company becoming involved in the electronic repair business. But he said, "This waiver request was made nearly a full year after the Oklahoma City Southwestern Bell repair facility was in operation." "The waiver request was never approved," he said. However, "in early 1987 the Oklahoma City repair organization was secretly disbanded and all of its assets stored," including those later sold to Circuit Repair, Dodds said. "I'm not saying Southwestern Bell violated provisions" and restrictions of the AT&T/Bell System breakup order, he said. But he said, "there is no doubt in my mind that Southwestern Bell had some very strong incentives to dispose of that Oklahoma City operation." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1992 23:49 CST From: "Wayne McDilda Subject: Open Systems Forum Announcement Announcing.... == OPEN SYSTEMS FORUM == January 14-16, 1992 Stouffer Arboretum Hotel, Austin Texas Exhibits $10 (Complimentary Tickets Available) 1-Day Conference $75 3-Day Conference $150 (includes lunch, special events) Some topics to be addressed: POSIX Electronic Benefits Transfer X.400 GNMP Client Server Computer X.500 IGOSS Security ISDN OSI Transition Planning SONET LANs & WANs Email & Directory Services ASN.1 FIPS OSE Components X/Open For registration information call Debi Christenbury @ (512) 475-4725 Department of Information Resources FAX (512) 475-4759 The purpose of the forum is to present and examine Open Systems topics of interest to managers and technical staff, and to present the Texas phased plan for migration to Open Systems. Topics to be covered include: open system technologies, strategic planning, the business case for open systems and benefits, application and data migration strategies, training issues, distributed architectures, local and wide area networking, ISDN, SONET, messaging handling systems, directory services, open system environment standards to include: Applications Portability Profile, Industry Government Open Systems Specification, Government Network Management Profile and Federal Information Processing Standards; X/Open Portability Guide and Common Applications Environment; Open Management Interoperability Point, multimedia systems. Each morning there will be a joint session for all attendees, in the afternoons separate seminar sessions (Management / Computing Environment / Database and Transaction Processing / Local & Wide Area Networking) will be available, and on Tuesday and Wednesday nights special events are scheduled. The three day registration fee is $150.00. One day is $75.00. Several payments methods are available. Please call Debi Christenbury @ (512) 475-4725 to register or ask for a registration form to be FAXed to your location. The forum is from Tuesday January 14 through Thursday January 16, at the Stouffer's Hotel in Austin, Texas. Stouffer's phone is (512) 343-2626 and it is located at the intersection of US Hwy 183 and the Capitol of Texas Hwy (Loop 360). As an added bonus the OMNICOM Training Week has been moved to Austin to coincide with the DIR forum. Please call 1-800-OMNICOM for information or registration. Special prices have been prearranged for state employees. ------------------------------ From: ellisond@rtsg.mot.com (Dell H. Ellison) Subject: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (was Very Courteous Rep) Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 16:37:08 GMT andys@ulysses.att.com writes: > CLASS features only work for intra-LATA calls from exchanges equipped > with SS7. As for the call waiting call, I'm pretty sure it would be > ... Are you sure? I think the CLASS features will work for inter-LATA calls as long as they have SS7 all the way along the path. Besides, I would think that all the switch would need, so that it could do the Call Return, would be the phone number. And it definitely should have that. Dell H. Ellison ...!uunet!mcdchg!motcid!ellisond Motorola, Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 10:41:03 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Call 1-900-SOMEONE The AT&T Voicemark system (800-562-MARK --> 800-562-6275) only makes it optional to provide your name when sending messages. You get billed for the calls (on bank statement if Visa or Master Card is used) or on your phone bill. Please don't use this information to make unwelcome calls. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 08:34:14 GMT From: andyb@wndrsvr.UCSD.EDU (Andy Brager) Subject: Re: Telephone Company Employees Organization: Wonder Server - Public Access for SoCal In article dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > [ regarding automated-attendants at telco customer-service numbers] > What also works is to remain silent when prompted to enter touch tone > digits. These systems generally don't know whether the caller is > touch-tone-equipped or not. If the first prompt is met with silence, > it should be designed to assume that tone-dial equipment is not > available, and should attempt to connect you with a human. That no longer works with my bank's 24 hour service. If you stay silent, they connect you to another system which will accept voice input. You find yourself yelling ZERO ZERO ZERO at the phone ... Andy cerritos.edu!wndrsvr!andyb <=========> andyb@stb.info.com ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 15:00:49 GMT deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) writes: > Not exactly. I believe the article is referring to 9.6kbps packet > switched on the D channel in addition to the 64kbps B channel. Why can't you use the B channel for data? > In other words, you're getting the regular POTS equivalent service (B > channel) plus the D channel packet for the $8/month plus connection > charges. Yeah, but you're still paying more for using less hardware and bandwidth when you pay those connection charges. > The second B channel would cost more. So you're getting 50% (approx) of an ISDN as well. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request Date: 3 Jan 92 22:03:21 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes ... > In other words, you'd have to pay a premium to actually use *less* > bandwidth on the phone system (that is, a 2400 baud POTS call uses a > 64 KB channel or a dedicated line (in the local area), where a 9600 > baud ISDN connection only uses a 9.6 KB channel. Sounds like Touch > Tone fees all over again. Here's what they asked for: You pay $5/month to make your line digital (ISDN) instead of analog. Then if you want D-channel packet (9.6 nominal throughput), it's another monthly charge (around $8.50) plus per-packet usage (about $.60/kilosegment). That's not unreasonable, since it is an additional service (access to X.25), and X.25 without ISDN is pathetically expensive in the US. BUT what goes wrong is the circuit-mode charge. They want to charge 8c/minute for calls WITHIN the same switch, 16c/minute outside the switch, for the 64 kbps data service. That's because you specified a data bearer service for the call. And you pay over $20/month for the right to make/receive such calls. The trick -- which I advise everyone to use -- is to make the call while your TE or TA says "bearer service = 3.1 kHz audio" but then actually send data. Since the network is all 64 kbps digital anyway, it'll work! But you lose the low-order bit (due to bit-robbed signaling and no B8ZS on voice T1) so you get only 56 kbps throughput, using 7/8 coding. (That's also called V.110/56kbps rate adaptation.) Some of us have spoken to NET in quite clear terms about our opinion of their tariff, and we're going to keep talking. Their proposed rates are preposterous, aimed only at Centrex users (who don't pay any usage charges for intra-Centrex calls). >> The phone company also notes that ISDN data converters >> cost $700 or more and are incompatible with existing answering >> machines and other phones. > The network has to be in place for the economy of scale to exist for > cheap convertors. There is no reason an ISDN convertor should cost any > more than a 2400 baud modem (currently, about $70 external) given the > existing chip sets and reasonable FAB run sizes. The telco has no say here; ISDN terminal equipment and adapters are competitively-provided. They're quite costly today as low-volume items. That'll limit ISDN to people who really can use it. But if you have a workstation (or high-powered PC) at home and want to do serious remote computing (say, using X Window System), ISDN is a good bet even now. (So long as you don't pay the 16c/minute!) PS -- "ISDN In Perspective" is just now in print, so the Moderator's review copy should be showing up one of these weeks. Fred R. Goldstein voice: +1 508 486 7388 goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Best and The Worst Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 12:05:22 GMT From: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich) Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu In article John Higdon wrote about least and most responsive telcom organizations. John, for all the bad experiences that I have personally had with the BOC PacBell and all of the tales of horror that you have told about Pac*Tel management policy, from your view of someone who has to deal with PacBell on a regular basis, I thought I'd submit MY entry for Most Responsive. It's really a paradox. I can't figure it out. Most Responsive: PacTel Cellular in Atlanta. There hasn't been a single occasion where I have called either the business office or my major accounts rep and NOT hung up the phone satisfied and happy. Every dealing I have had with these folks has been of the highest quality. They have even bent the rules for me a few times, but in all fairness to PacTel here, I won't say how or why they bent the rules. I don't want them to get swamped with calls from TC Digest readers wanting the same thing. :-) They have removed roaming charges on my bill when those roaming charges were simply the result of me activating the Transparent Call Forwarding in a roamer city -- no calls, just the *31-SEND (I think it's *31, I may be wrong off-hand). My impression is that PacTel just swallowed the charges on these. Good staff and good management, IMHO. Maybe it's a left-coast, right- coast thing? BTW, four months and counting until the 404/706 split on May 3. There will be a four-month permissive dialing period, which ends on August 3. A telecom-oriented friend and I were speculating not that long ago about how many new 706'ers will get wrong numbers intended for Mexico. Which brings to mind the question: when was 706 last used as an area code for part of Mexico? Hasta la vista, Bill ------------------------------ From: cchapman@matd.gatech.edu (Chuck H. Chapman) Subject: Re: ANI in NJ Date: 3 Jan 92 17:53:58 GMT In donm@pnet01.cts.com (Don Maslin) writes: > Dialing 958 in the 619 area produces nothing but silence. In the 404 area code it gives the "We're sorry. You're number can't be completed as dialed" message. Charles H. Chapman (GTRI/MATD) (404) 528-7588 Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,ut-ngp}!gatech!matd!cchapman Internet: cchapman@matd.gatech.edu ------------------------------ Organization: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc. Subject: Re: Area Code Splits and our Phone System Date: Fri, 03 Jan 92 18:00:24 EST From: Ron Newman In article , spencer@phoenix. Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun) writes: > The phone system here at P.U. is a Centrex (at least I suppose so, > that's what everybody calls our phone book, "The Centrex" so it sounds > plausible. I'm ignorant when it comes to phone systems) ... from what > I've been able to figure out from reading the learned opinions > expressed here, whether an area code can be dialed or not depends on > whether the people responsible for maintaining our phone system have > programmed the system to accept it. I've never understood this ... why is it necessary for a PBX or Centrex to know anything at all about valid and invalid area codes and office codes? Why can't they just pass everything on to the phone company and let them screen out invalid numbers? Ron Newman rnewman@bbn.com [Moderator's Note: The reason is because what telco considers valid might still be unwanted by the system proprietor, ie 900 calls; the use of certain long distance carriers, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 19:14:54 -0600 From: "Gil Kloepfer Jr." Subject: Re: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? Organization: Southwest Systems Development Labs, Houston, TX In article minakami@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Michael K. Minakami) writes: > I have some 8khz mulaw sound samples that I got off of a Sun > SparcStation and have been trying to play them over a T1 line through > a voice response unit. When I listen to it over a phone, voice sounds > nasal and music sounds equally distorted. If you look at the data sheet for the Am79C30A (it's a ISDN Digital Subscriber Controller chip by AMD, and is used in the SPARCstation to do the sound), there is a programmable filter register which is probably set to some non-standard values in the SUN driver. Since I haven't gotten the chip yet to play with, I don't know too much about the effects of setting the filter to different values, but this register's setting sounds like it could be the problem. Gil Kloepfer, Jr. gil@limbic.ssdl.com ...!ames!limbic!gil Southwest Systems Development Labs (Div of ICUS) Houston, Texas ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #8 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25049; 5 Jan 92 5:04 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25610 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 03:10:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32161 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 03:10:12 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 03:10:12 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201050910.AA32161@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #9 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Jan 92 03:09:16 CST Volume 12 : Issue 9 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Phone Company Humor (Kath Mullholand) Re: Phone Company Humor (Joel Lessenberry) Re: Phone Company Humor (David W. Barts) Re: Phone Company Humor (Barry Mishkind) Re: Phone Company Humor (Doug Faunt) Re: Phone Company Humor (Jack Decker) Re: Phone Company Humor (Charlie Lear) National Lampoon Subscription Ad (was Phone Company Humor) (Rich Greenberg) Phone Book Trivia (was Phone Company Humor) (Bill Berbenich) Intercept Recordings (was Phone Company Humor) (Jon Cereghino) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Bob Miller) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Steve Dillinger) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 8:31:14 -0500 (EST) From: K_MULLHOLAND@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Kath Mullholand, UNH Telecom, 862-1031) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor In the Jan 3 issue, ctuttle@taronga.com (Colin Tuttle) writes: > There was also a bit of an uproar when SW Bell stopped using the > drawing and went with a large Bell logo on the cover. I don't recall > the explanation or the reason, ... I remember when New England Telephone used to have very scenic or creative covers as well -- not as clever as the ones described, but one that stands out in my mind was Norman Rockwell's (I think!) telephone "chain", which shows one pair of people talking, then to the right of them, a member of the first pair and a new person, and so one for about forty pictures, until eventually the last person is talking to the "other half" of the first pair. The paintings showed people in a wide variety of dress and using many different types of phones. The reason New England Telephone dropped these covers was divestiture. They felt that their subscribers were confused about the breakup, and saw the phone book as one way to clearly associate themselves with NYNEX and as a Bell Company. Until this year, each book has had the NYNEX logo and some very boring graphics. This year, they're using the cover to advertise the yellow pages, using category headings that look like they've been torn out of the book, and on top of all these scraps of paper are three torn pieces of yellow cardboard containing the logos of NYNEX, New England Telephone, and the area covered by the book. The independent phone companies don't seem to have the same identity problems. The GTE and TDS books I've seen still have local scenery on the covers. Kath Mullholand UNH, Durham, NH ------------------------------ From: joel@cfctech.cfc.com (Joel Lessenberry) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Organization: Chrysler Financial Corp., Southfield, MI Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 13:55:01 GMT In article unkaphaed!phaedrus@moe. rice.edu (James Hartman, Sysop) writes: > acg@HERMES.DLOGICS.COM writes: [story about the humorous things added into the cover of the phone book] The phone book here in Macomb Co. (Yellow Pages) has a listing of "LOVE" Yes you find everything else in the yellow pages, why not LOVE?" The next entry, interestingly enough, is for lubricants ... Joel Lessenberry, Distributed Systems | +1 313 948 3342 joel@cfctech.UUCP | Chrysler Financial Corp. joel%cfctech.uucp@mailgw.cc.umich.edu | MIS, Technical Services {sharkey|mailrus}!cfctech!joel | 2777 Franklin, Sfld, MI [Moderator's Note: Now watch it ... this is not the alt.telecom.sex forum, you know. :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 10:20:41 -0800 From: David W. Barts Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor In Telecom Digest Volume 12, Issue 2, Message 5 of 15, TONY@MCGILL1. BITNET (Tony Harminc) writes: > My favourite funny thing in the Toronto Yellow Pages is in the index: > under "Nuts and Bolts" it says "see Bolts and Nuts". It says the same thing in the Seattle Yellow Pages Index. Either this is an unintentional result of software (or phone company policy), or perhaps the same wiseguy is somehow involved in producing the Yellow Pages in many North American cities. In the category of "most stupid cross reference," we have the following: XANTH COMPUTER CORP ----------- See Xanth Corporation And the very next line is -- you guessed it: XANTH CORPORATION 14100 NE 20th Bellevue -- 643-9697 David Barts N5JRN UW Civil Engineering, FX-10 davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu Seattle, WA 98195 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor From: barry@coyote.datalog.com (Barry Mishkind) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 92 15:44:55 MST Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ At one radio station, I installed a transmitter phone, a not uncommon action. However, I found out that the telco would charge us not to list "XXXX Transmitter" in the phone book. And, the last thing I needed when dealing with an outage was a bunch of kids calling and asking when their favorite rock song would be on the air. Eventually, I had it listed under "STATION, R." ... and very few calls ever came in ! > [Moderator's Note: Your message arrived here with a zero (0) instead of > the letter /O/ in O'Neill's name, and I assume the zero is the reason > it sorted to the head of the list, even before the business known as > 'A' or 'AAA', etc. PAT] Yes, that is exactly correct. Sorry I didn't point it out more clearly. Barry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 15:38:34 -0800 From: Doug Faunt N6TQS 415-688-8269 Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor There was an Hewlett Packard corporate telephone book a few years back that got pulled the day after it was released because there was a bogus obscene entry. I don't know if I still have my copy, but they sure tried to get them back from everyone. Also, I was working at KPFA the other afternoon, and got a call from someone who didn't know that he'd called the studio line, or what the station was or where it was. He'd called from Massachusetts because he'd gotten a record for Christmas by "Negativeland" and it had the 'phone number on it somewhere. doug ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 92 11:46:16 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor In a message dated 1 Jan 92 06:14:10 GMT, jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick) writes: > However, I did stumble upon an unusual listing. The following entry > was in the red (commercial) section of our Milwaukee Metroplan > directory (AC 414): > Primal Center of Denver > 323 S Pearl Denver Colo ........... 303 778-8105 > Denver? Colorado? > Are such out-of-area listings common in the "white pages"? As the Moderator notes, this may be a legitimate listing. However, as I've mentioned before in the Digest, I know the guy who owns what may be the nation's smallest telephone company, the Northern Telephone Company of Wawina, Minnesota. Their white pages (actually, I should say PAGE, since the listing for the entire exchange only occupies about half a page) are included in the US West phone book for Grand Rapids, Minnesota. Anyway, when the July, 1991 directory came out, the following listing was found right in the middle of the Wawina listings: DDPL EMPLOYEES' CREDIT UNION ------------ 303 337-8493 Since my friend had no knowledge of where this listing came from or why it was in the middle of the listings for his phone exchange, he contacted U.S. West and was informed that they routinely include bogus listings in the directory so that anyone who copies the listings from the directory can be prosecuted for copyright violation. The header of the Wawina section does bear a small print notice that states "(C) U S West Direct 1991" (There is really a small c in a circle but I can't show that here so I used (C) instead). All of this had my friend a bit miffed, since I don't think he had ever assigned a copyright on his listings to U S West, and in any case he wasn't real excited about seeing an area code 303 listing (and a bogus one at that) in the middle of his local exchange lists. In case anyone is wondering, there are only 38 separate numbers that begin with the Wawina 488- prefix listed in the white pages (I did not check for duplicates listed under more than one name, so there may be fewer unique numbers) and three of those are for the Northern Telephone Company. Also, one is the post office which has since been shut down. I'm also aware that there's one pay phone on the exchange, located inside the Township Hall. I realize there are smaller EXCHANGES around (we have a couple here in Northern Michigan that only have around 20 customers) but all of them are owned by phone companies that have more than one exchange. Northern Telephone Company operates ONLY the Wawina exchange, and apparently the rates are lower than those of the surrounding U S West communities, but the exchange is still step-by-step (no long distance access to anyone other than AT&T unless you dial using 1+950 or 0+950 to reach a carrier's 950 access number, or use a 1-800 access number). If the owner is ever required to modernize the exchange, I'm not sure if he could do it, although knowing him he'd probably find a small used ESS somewhere and put it in. He also collects old phone equipment and has a veritable museum of old phones in the basement of his home, many of which are connected to a working step-by-step exchange in his basement (that one is his "toy", it's not connected to the one that serves Wawina). It's a very interesting system up there in the North Woods of Minnesota! Jack Decker : jack@myamiga.mixcom.com : FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Organization: The Cave MegaBBS, Public Access Usenet, Wellington, NZ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 17:02:21 +1300 From: clear@cavebbs.gen.nz (Charlie Lear) In article Mark Walsh writes: > students. After a few hassles about who's name it was listed under, > she had the listing changed to "OTHERS, THE." Pat Cain, who posts here frequently, had a major hassle when getting a dedicated line for his bulletin board. They wouldn't accept Sideways BBS as a valid residential listing. So now he gets billed as Mr. B.B.S. Sideways. Oh, and the directory listing? "Sideways B.B.S.", of course... Charlie "The Bear" Lear | clear@cavebbs.gen.nz | Kawasaki Z750GT DoD#0221 Fax +64 4 564-5307 The Cave MegaBBS +64 4 5643429 V22b | PO Box 2009, Wellington, New Zealand ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Jan 92 10:11:20 PST From: RICHG@SMAUG.LA.LOCUS.COM Subject: National Lampoon Subscription Ad (was Phone Company Humor) Here is a subscription ad from National Lampoon Magazine's 2/92 issue that I thought the Digest readers would get a chuckle out of. (Typos probably mine.) Headline (large type): Subscribe to the National Lampoon and call anywhere in the U.S. for FREE. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ Picture of a college phone-booth stuffing stunt on left, Block of text on right, Text: Reach out and touch someone. It's not just a slick ad slogan, its the foundation for a healthy emotional life. And we at the National Lampoon realize that life in America in what's almost the twenty-first century can get a mite lonely sometimes. That's why we are making this unprecedented subscription offer. It works like this. Subscribe to the National Lampoon, America's favorite humor magazine for one, two, or three years. After you subscribe and we verify your order, you'll be able to make a free call anywhere in the U.S. Just clip the mailing label off the magazine and have your account number at hand. Lift up your phone receiver and dial 1-800 followed by seven numbers of your choice. If you get a recording telling you that number is not in service at this time, don't dispair. Just dial 1-800 again and try another seven digits. Odds are in a few short seconds you'll be enjoying your free call. Footing in large type: National Lampoon. We'll help you reach out - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ How you touch is your own business. Disclaimer: The above writings are the ramblings of one human being and have nothing what-so-ever to do with Locus Computing Corp. Rich Greenberg, richg@locus.com Tinseltown, USA 310-337-5904 Located in Inglewood, CA which is a small city completely contained within Los Angeles. ------------------------------ Subject: Phone Book Trivia (was Phone Company Humor) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 17:40:47 GMT From: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich) Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu It's Friday, it's after 5:00, and traffic is snarled up pretty bad where I am headed on this misty, rainy evening. So I figured I'd look into the new Atlanta phone books, released last month, and see what kind of inane trivia I could come up with. From the business book - First: A ------------------------------------------------ 872-xxxx Last: ZYOTIC ZOOM A FINESSE EXECUTIVE REFERRAL SERVICE 200 26th St NW ----------- 876-xxxx [Trivia note: Both companies served by same central office!] Residential book - First: A Craig Senft DC 12 Executive Park Dr NE --------- 633-xxxx also - A Herbert Rivers atty - (at three locations) [Apparently these men both have the first initial of 'A', but their listings are made as though 'A' is the last name.] Last: Zzapp L C 2733 Woodland Ter SE Smyr -------------- 434-xxxx Total pages of listings: Residential - 2121; Business (including government listings) - 663 (632 business, 31 government). The books are dated December 1991, are correct through August 13, 1991 and are copyrighted by BellSouth Advertising & Publishing Corporation, 1992. They come out in two volumes, one business and the other the residential listings. There are two Yellow Pages volumes published concurrently by BAPCO, divided alphabetically there is the A-L book and the M-Z book. The yellow pages are officially known as _The_Real_ Yellow_Pages_ (tm). Bill Berbenich, School of EE, DSP Lab Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 92 00:05:29 PST From: cereghin@netcom.com (Jon Cereghino) Subject: Intercept Recordings (was Phone Company Humor) Several years ago, I misdialed a call through a local Number 5 Crossbar (5XB) and got an intercept recording that qualifies for telco humor: "We're sorry, but we have a problem." "We're sorry, but we have a problem." "We're sorry, but we have a problem..." A few weeks later the recording added the phrase "completing your call as dialed ..." (etc.) Jon Cereghino cereghin@netcom.com "The trouble on your circuit is leaving our central office just fine." C-Message Weighting BBS (408) 377-7441 2400 8N1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 12:25:18 PST From: Bob Miller Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits I expected someone else to post the following, but have not noticed it. Echo Valley Two Six Eight Oh Nine I used to call that number all the time ... Maybe someone can put a title and artist to the song. Bob Miller - Digital Equipment of Canada - Toronto ------------------------------ From: dill@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Slave Driver) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1992 04:41:27 GMT Back several years ago a friend of mine put the telephone call section of 'The Wall' through a decoder and found the tones were MF. I remember them being KP, the country code for England and then START (there should be something else in there, no? like an inward #?) You can also hear the 2600 wink. We recorded these tones and played them over a line we stumbled on to and they worked. My nomination for 'best' has to be Frank and the Phunny Phone Call, by far. If you haven't heard it, it is some guy named Frank Blue Boxing around the US to various operators and others with some very funny results ... (yeah, yeah, I know it's illegal, loosen up...) Steve Dillinger :: ramoth.cso.uiuc.edu University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign ------------------------------ From: The Unknown User Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Date: 5 Jan 92 07:48:09 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Open Access Computing I must have missed part of this discussion. Surely someone has mentioned 867-5309? unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #9 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07060; 5 Jan 92 14:19 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19980 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 12:32:53 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06145 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 12:32:38 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 12:32:38 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201051832.AA06145@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #10 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Jan 92 12:32:07 CST Volume 12 : Issue 10 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. (John Higdon) Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. (Floyd Davidson) Re: IBT and Caller-ID (Jim Castleberry) Re: IBT and Caller-ID (Earl R. Hall) Re: Call Trace on Usage Basis in Florida (Andy Brager) Re: "Minimum Charge" for Unsuccessful LD Calls from Bell Canada? (J Decker) Re: Weird AT&T Rates (Mark Oberg) Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request (Peter da Silva) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 4 Jan 92 23:48 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) writes: > On a related topic, most of the (900) numbers that deal with > phone sex etc, seem to be in the 303 or 844 exchanges. Yes and no. The three Pac*Bell 900 exchanges are 303 ("harmful matter"), 844 (recorded general audience), and 505 (live talk, general audience). If you are hearing "porn" on 844, it is a violation of Pac*Bell policies and eventually the operator of the service will get busted. Pac*Bell regularly polices the services by calling them (and actually paying for the call!) and checking out the program. > Are these exchanges assigned to a particular carrier, do they cover > a particular geographic area, or what? 900 prefixes are assigned to carriers and are 'area non-specific'. In other words, for carriers other than Pac*Bell, you have no way of knowing where the machine is that is handling your call. There are service centers in major cities all over the country. Pac*Bell 900 numbers terminate in certain wire centers in each California LATA. For instance, in the San Francisco LATA, all Pac*Bell 900 services are located in the general area of the financial district (served out of the Bush/Pine CO). > Also, does anyone know what is the most > expensive minimum charge for a (900) call? The most expensive call > I've heard about is: "Talk to two (description omitted) girls at the > same time! It's only $5.00 per minute with a little ten-minute > minimum!". Are there any numbers costing more than $50? With other carriers, the sky is the limit. With Pac*Bell, there is a MAXIMUM charge of $20 per call. This means that if the caller is on past the time where he has run up a $20 cost, it is to the IPs benefit to cut him off; Pac*Bell will not remit more than $20 for the call. Bash 900 while you can. Many of the avant garde are looking to escape the tyranny of 900 regulations and enter the brave new world of "direct billing". While many of you believe that the only sleaze is on the part of the providers themselves, the truth is that carriers, including Pac*Bell, have not hesitated to rip off providers. The Telesphere case is legendary and there are others, including the almighty AT&T who are playing games aplenty with providers. AT&T has actually claimed to one provider that his calls for one month were 100% uncollectable! When this service was placed on an alternative billing system, uncollectables ran less than 15%. Most carriers pull this nonsense and then offer the provider nothing in terms of accounting or detail. Many legitimate providers have had it up to here with the ultra-sleazy tactics of the most-holy telephone carriers and will soon take their business elsewhere. The end of 900 service may not be far off. But its disappearance will not be the result of government edicts, IEC righteousness, or even public pressure. It will go away because the information industry is tired of being taken to the cleaners by the nation's telephone companies. If those companies want to get into the information business, then they can have the 900 numbers all to themselves. The REAL information industry will have moved on. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: John, I believe that 900-999 is used for the really raunchy sex stuff from Telesphere. Is that correct? PAT] ------------------------------ From: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 06:52:21 GMT In article martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) writes: > To avoid stupid flames, let me first say that although discussing > obscenity, I find the concept of telephone pornography disgusting. > When you don't know who will be calling, arguments regarding "freedom > of speech" are, in my opinion, out the window. Anyway, now to my > questions: > It seems that in most area codes, numbers which spell seven-letter > obsceneties are routed to intercept recordings. > Examples of such numbers are: 382-5968 or 277-4653. I wonder, has > somebody at the phone company figured out a list of numbers that will "The phone company" does not exist as any single entity. There are many many of them, and all are different. > not be assigned, or were such numbers originally given out and then > disconnected due to prank calls. How large is the list of numbers > which are unassigned because of what they spell? My only experience in this area came about just the other day. And it would suggest that the list is very very small. At least in this one case. I offer no opinion on this, just the facts ... (grins and giggles ...) Alascom just recently installed an earth station at some kind of a new community that I understand is more or less a religious commune, named Dry Creek. (Located half way from Fairbanks to the Canadian border.) There is no way to tell just how long this will last, but at the moment the telephone number for the Alascom ES in Dry Creek, AK is ... 907-323-3825. I'm not sure who the local phone company there is. Floyd L. Davidson floyd@ims.alaska.edu Salcha, Alaska ------------------------------ From: jc@joker.mil.ufl.edu (Jim Castleberry) Subject: Re: IBT and Caller-ID Organization: Machine Intelligence Lab, University of Florida Date: Fri, 3 Jan 92 04:42:59 GMT In article mea@ihlpl.att.com (Mark E Anderson) writes: > As of Monday December 30, I noticed that Illinois Bell has turned on > caller ID. > A curious thing is happening at my home though. As of December 27, I > have been receiving an abnormal amount of blank calls on my home > answering machine. > What I was wondering is it possible that IBT is generating these calls > to get people to subscribe to Caller-ID? There is no way I would ever > pay $6.50 a month for this service. I wonder if these blank calls > will stop once I subscribe. Has anyone else experienced this? Yes. A few months ago Southern Bell started pre-selling the fancy services, just before they were actually available, and ran a barrage of TV ads. At the same time I started getting at least one or two such calls every day. When the ads stopped a couple of weeks later so did the calls. I'm not much for conspiracy theory so I dismissed it at the time. Maybe overzealous sales staff working on commission? > [Moderator's Note: I don't think IBT needs to stoop to the 'marketing > practices' you describe in order to sell Caller-ID. The latest word on > this from IBT earlier this week was they had already signed up several > thousand subscribers to Caller-ID within the first month of taking > orders for the service. *67 has been working here since 12-1-91. PAT] What does *67 sound like? We're supposed to have it here, but when I tried it the dial tone just beeped three times and went back to the constant tone. Then (without hanging) up I dialed that alarm company's 800 CID number that was posted a while back and they still knew my number. Sounds like it didn't work, huh? Jim Castleberry [Moderator's Note: That is exactly what *67 is supposed to do: Beep three times and go back to the dial tone. This indicates that for that one call, your ID is blocked from the called party. It is NOT blocked from either your CO or the called CO ... merely the end subscriber. It sounds just like the three beeps you get when you prepend *70 to cancel call-waiting for the duration of the call, and like *70, you need not wait for the beeps and fresh dial tone to continue dialing; you need not put in a pause with auto-dialers, etc ... just shove all the digits out; the switch will keep up with them. For folks with a default condition of blocking, the same works in reverse. But with either blocking by default or blocking call by call, you can NOT block your ID on a call to an 800 number (called party pays charges, thus gets billing detail), nor on calls to 911 or various administrative lines at the telco, and there are other exceptions. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 00:13:57 PST From: Earl R. Hall Subject: Re: IBT and Caller-ID mea@ihlpl.att.com (Mark E Anderson) writes: > A curious thing is happening at my home though. As of December 27, I > have been receiving an abnormal amount of blank calls on my home > answering machine. I received 3 on Friday December 27, 3 on Monday > December 30, 3 on New Year's Eve, and so far one today. I also experienced about the same thing. I don't have the exact number and times, but got a number of blank calls during the evenings near the end of December. I wonder if it means they're working on turning on Caller-ID on my local switch (Chicago-Kildare). It doesn't seem to be on yet, since I get a recording if I try to disable it with a *67. And that brings up another point. I think it's pretty stupid that I get a recording ("When dialing a long-distance number, ...") if I punch in *67. You'd think that they'd at least have the courtesy to give me another dial tone! I'm going to soon grow tired of the message, and stop trying to use it. Then, when the feature is finally turned on, they'll start transmitting my phone number when I don't want them to. Ah, progress! Earl Hall | +1 312 685 9735 (home) | via PeaceNet: | GEnie: ERHALL Chicago IL | +1 708 437 9300 (work) | erhall@igc.org | CIS: 72746,3244 [Moderator's Note: There is definitly a programming error there somewhere. CO-wise, I am 'next door' to you in Rogers Park. We are now equipped coming and going, both ways with Caller-ID and blocking. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1992 08:13:14 GMT From: andyb%wndrsvr@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (Andy Brager) Subject: Re: Call Trace on Usage Basis in Florida Organization: Wonder Server - Public Access for SoCal Dave.Leibold@f524.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) writes: >> ... ANI provides the billing number of the calling line. Whenever >> you dial a 440- or 930- number, your telephone number is provided >> to the >> business you have called. This service is not Caller ID >> Service and therefore the Caller ID blocking codes will not apply >> in these instances. I'd like to know what happens if I call one of those numbers from here in Southern California (GTE). Do they get my number or not? Andy cerritos.edu!wndrsvr!andyb andyb@stb.info.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jan 92 11:46:47 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: "Minimum Charge" for Unsuccessful LD Calls From Bell Canada? In a message dated 1 Jan 92 20:11:00 GMT, msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) writes: > Incidentally, this means that Bell Canada can now beat Canada Post on > price, as domestic postage is just now going up to 42 cents. Even > with 15% sales tax on the phone call and only 7% on the postage > stamp, the minimum-charge phone call can win. Since you mentioned this minimum charge, I have to ask this ... a couple of years ago I read that Unitel in Canada was offering what amounted to alternate long distance service similar to what U.S. carriers used to offer (that is, you dial a local access number, then wait for a second tone and key in an account number and number you wish to call), except that at the time it couldn't be used for voice transmissions because Bell Canada and the other Canadian telephone companies have a legal monopoly on voice long distance service. So they actually had to install equipment to break the connection if it appeared that a voice connection were taking place (I think it broke the connection after 60 seconds of no carrier tone, but I'm not sure about that). Obviously, it was used for low-cost FAX connections (that is how they promoted it, as a FAX network) and computer modem connections (and probably also for the occasional _short_ voice call, even though that was supposedly illegal). Rates were something like 30% lower than Bell Canada, and I suspect that there was no "minimum charge", since FAX transmissions are typically short-duration. I'm just curious as to whether that service is still offered, and whether the legal monopoly on Canadian voice traffic still exists. Jack Decker : jack@myamiga.mixcom.com : FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ From: grout!mark@uunet.uu.net (Mark Oberg) Subject: Re: Weird AT&T Rates Date: 4 Jan 92 18:15:46 GMT Organization: Grout, Beltsville, MD In article scott@hsvaic.boeing.com writes: > In grout!mark@uunet.uu.net (Mark > Oberg) writes: >> [....] the reason might be marketing rather >> than any corporate sympathy for the plight of fax users. MCI has had >> the very interesting habit of quoting first minute rates that are >> lower than the additional minute rate for quite some time now. > When have you been quoted lower first minute charges by MCI?. I > have been using MCI for five years now and have never had a case where > that was true. All my minutes cost the same (there was a time when the > first minute was HIGHER, but that stopped a couple of years a go). > I just called MCI customer service and was unable to find a case > where the first minute was less expensive, so I asked for a > supervisor. The supervisor was unaware of any such case. > If there is such a case would you be so kind as to provide me with > the area and prefix of the calling and called numbers so that I can > pursue this with said supervisor? I replied to your email in more detail, but will also reply here for the benefit of others who may be curious as to the answer. In March 1991, I did a telephone survey of long distance carriers in which I asked for rate information by mileage band, first minute charge and additional minute charge for calls originating in the Baltimore, MD LATA and billed at "standard" Dial-1 rates. MCI's rate quoted at that time was lower for the first minute and higher for additional minutes. All of the carriers called initially insisted on quoting a rate for a specific call between two NPA/NXX's or quoting on the basis of some "special dialing plan", but I was interested in the Standard rate by mileage bands and my observation is based on the information given to me at that time. Rates and rate structures may have changed since that time. It was not my intent to quote other carriers rates in my original reply but rather to illustrate the possibility of a low first minute rate being used for marketing reasons rather than to benefit a certain class of users (fax users, in the case presented). Disclaimer: These observations and opinions are my own. I do not speak for NATel, Inc. Mark Oberg NATel, Inc. | UUCP: wb3ffv!grout!mark Voice: (410)964-0505 | Internet: mark%grout@wb3ffv.ampr.org BBS: (301)596-6450 | Fidonet: 1:109/506 ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 16:03:27 GMT You're still paying more for using less resources than a TB3000 and POTS. You're also getting less service (I've run PEP up to 14000 bps before compression, and the theoretical limit over POTS is 21204 bps (512 channels at 7 bauds with 6 bits/baud less the 300 baud back channel), though the most I've heard of in practice is around 18000). As for the economy of scale argument: it's the phone company's actions that are keeping the demand for the ISDN hardware down... they can't abrogate all responsibility. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #10 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08455; 5 Jan 92 15:10 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14538 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 13:26:19 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14413 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 13:26:05 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 13:26:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201051926.AA14413@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #11 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Jan 92 13:25:56 CST Volume 12 : Issue 11 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Special Issue; New Archives File (TELECOM Moderator) Re: Jolson on the Phone (was Telecom's Greatest Hits) (Peter da Silva) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Dave Levenson) Re: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (was Very Courteous Rep) (D. Lewis) Re: Area Code Splits and our Phone System (John Higdon) Re: Questions About Calling Remote Areas (Floyd Davidson) 10th Anniversary of the MFJ (David Gast) Contacting Other MINITEL Users (mainly US) (D Parsons) First Transatlantic Telephone Call (Newsday via Dave Niebuhr) Book Review: ISDN In Perspective (Bob Frankston) Re: American Express and ANI (Randy Jarrett) Re: Phone Company Humor (Stephanie da Silva) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 12:44:22 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administriva: Special Issue; New Archives File Jim Haynes sent along a really nice article from the {Western Union Technical Review} of April, 1961 on the history of the stock ticker. It is too long for a regular issue of the Digest, and will be coming to you as a special mailing this afternoon. I think you will enjoy it. David Leibold has prepared a file for the Telecom Archives detailing the 404/706 area code split in Georgia. This will be available in the Telecom Archives sometime Sunday evening or early Monday. You may wish to pick up a copy for your files. Corrections and comments should be directed to Dave. The Telecom Archives is accessible using anonymous ftp: lcs.mit.edu. PAT ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Jolson on the Phone (was Telecom's Greatest Hits) Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 16:25:06 GMT HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: > Patrick, I can't *believe* the vast and erudite readership of TELECOM > Digest failed to mention "Hello, My Baby," a big hit for Al Jolson in > the Twenties. Also found in the Golden Jubilee 24 Karat Collection: A Salute to Chuck Jones from Warner Home Video. In "One Froggy Evening" we meet a frog who sings such hits of the period ... but only under certain circumstances. A cartoon classic. For more cartoon telephony, there's always the wonderful service Bugs gets from phone- and mail-order services. You see him talking on the phone and 30 seconds later a female Tasmanian Devil is delivered by plane. And anyone catch the number for ACME? Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Date: 5 Jan 92 14:14:48 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA Does anybody remember 'Ring-Ring' by ABBA (probably from about ten years ago)? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (was Very Courteous Rep) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 17:43:46 GMT In article ellisond@rtsg.mot.com (Dell H. Ellison) writes: > andys@ulysses.att.com writes: >> CLASS features only work for intra-LATA calls from exchanges equipped >> with SS7.... > Are you sure? I think the CLASS features will work for inter-LATA > calls as long as they have SS7 all the way along the path. Presumably, but considering there is nowhere in North America where any inter-LATA call will have SS7 all the way along the path (except for some trials), we can't say for sure, now can we? The missing link is the LEC-IXC interconnection. Specifications exist for SS7 carrier interconnection, tariffs have been drawn up, and trials are underway, but it's not in commercial deployment anywhere yet. > Besides, I would think that all the switch would need, so that it > could do the Call Return, would be the phone number. And it > definitely should have that. Only if SS7 connectivity exists. With MF signaling connectivity between the LEC and IXC, the calling party number stops at the LEC side of the LEC-IXC interface. Billing number is sent across, but this is not necessarily the same number as calling party number (and is handled differently in SS7). Neither billing number nor calling party number is sent out of the IXC network to the LEC via MF signaling. So the terminating switch will only have the calling party number if the call is carried SS7 all the way. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 09:44 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Area Code Splits and our Phone System Ron Newman writes: > I've never understood this ... why is it necessary for a PBX or > Centrex to know anything at all about valid and invalid area codes and > office codes? Why can't they just pass everything on to the phone > company and let them screen out invalid numbers? Here is the explanation. A PBX with ARS (automatic route selection) looks at the area code and prefix to decide which route to take. Many routes can be available: local, intraLATA WATS, intrastate WATS, various flavors of international, FX circuits, etc. Here in 408, we have two LATAs. As yet there are many unassigned prefixes which end up getting assigned constantly. If the prefix ends up being local, it goes on a local trunk. If toll within the LATA it would go on intraLATA WATS; and if out of the LATA, it would go on a dedicated IEC trunk. I do not know where the prefix will end up until it appears on a regularly supplied list from Pac*Bell, shows up in the front of the directory, or is actually assigned (surprise!). I cannot just "pass it on to the phone company" as you suggest, since there are three possible routes for it to go. Hence, any prefix that is unknown to the PBX in question will not be processed. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: Questions About Calling Remote Areas Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 07:36:50 GMT In article martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) writes: > On a related topic, there must be large, remote areas served by a > single CO, or even a single exchange. Does anyone know what COs serve > the largest geographic area, e.g. central Nevada, Eastern Alaska, etc? > When I was last in Alaska, I remember a forty-fifty-page phone book > that covered almost the whole length of the Richardson Highway, from > near Greeley or Delta, all the way south to Valdez. As I recall, > there weren't many exchanges for this whole region. Any information > about similar large areas served by a single CO or a single exchange > would be appreciated. Hmmm. Perhaps you got the wrong impression, or you last traveled the Rich Highway a long time ago. There are relatively few exchanges along that route, but each community is served by one single unique exchange. There are exactly as many "CO's" as there are communities. The majority of them are owned by two separate companies: Copper Valley Telco (I think it is called) and what used to be Telephone Utilities and is now PTI Communications (owned by Pacific Telecom). (My home is at Mile Post 326 on the Richardson Highway, and the original Richardson Trail is in the back yard. At one time there was an open wire pole line using "O" carrier going down the road here, but it was on the opposite side of the current road way. I do have some of the wire and a few not very unique glass insulators from that pole line.) Floyd L. Davidson floyd@ims.alaska.edu Salcha, Alaska ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 00:34:52 -0800 From: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) Subject: 10th Anniversary of the MFJ Before all the wrong information starts flying again, I thought I would take a moment to mention a few facts. 1. The MFJ stands for Modified Final Judgement. 2. The (unmodified) Final Judgement was the 1956 consent which AT&T settled with the Justice Department in 1956. (Many DoJ lawyers felt that the settlement was a political payoff by Ike. They were extremely happy when the anti-trust suit was filed.) 3. Judge Green did not listen to all the evidence and then make a ruling. 4. The DoJ and AT&T settled out of court and presented their settlement to Judge Green for approval. That is, the basic terms of the settle- ment were negotiated out of court and Judge Greene approved them. In particular, AT&T did not have to divest itself of Western Electric or Bell Labs, one of the original goals of the 1956 case and this case. 5. At the same time the DoJ attornies and the AT&T attornies were in several different courts, filing all sorts of papers at the same time. For exmple, the judge who approved the FJ had to hand jurisdiction for the MFJ to Judge Greene. 6. This decision was announced the same day that the DoJ dropped the anti-trust case against IBM. There is lots of interesting information about the participants and the ploys that went on before this decision was announced. The FCC had also made some decisions independently of the DoJ anti-trust suit. One book which I found interesting (and cheap, it only cost $1.98 as a close out) was The Deal of Century. So please, before the flame wars erupt, don't blame or praise Judge Greene for what he did not do. For example, don't say "Judge Greene broke up AT&T", say "Judge Greene approved the negotiated settlement." David Gast P.S. Wanna bet the Justice Thomas never discussed this either? ------------------------------ From: dfp10@csc.albany.edu (D Parsons) Subject: Contacting Other MINITEL Users (Mainly US) Organization: State University of New York at Albany Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 11:23:58 GMT I have just started to use the US software for MINITEL and am having some trouble locating addresses in France. I would like to reach Philippe Garnerin, head of computer services for the French Communicable Disease Network run by the Ministry of Health and INSERM, Paris. I would like to hook onto this disease reporting system and watch it in operation. I cannot even contact my daughter (Clare Parsons, (1) 40 67 79 05 who is apparantly using the terminal at 5 r Chalgrin 16e, 75 PARIS)!! Help will be appreciated (I do not find the New York office helpful!) Thanks, Don ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 12:19:25 -0500 (EST) From: NIEBUHR@BNLCL6.BNL.GOV (Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093) Subject: First Transatlantic Telephone Call I read an article in today's {Newsday} (Jan. 5, 1992) concerning transatlantic telephone communications and thought I'd pass it on to the readers of the Digest. "It had always been an occasion when His Honor, the mayor of New York spoke with his conferee, the lord mayor of London. But the occasion 65 years ago Tuesday was special. For the first time, each was in his own city when they talked. That day, Jan. 7, 1927, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company inaugurated transatlantic telephone service. The mayour of New York, the popular, dapper but crooked Jimmy Walker, offered the "compliments of the City of New York to you and to the people of London." Later, he commented that it was "just like talking to Albany." From New York, a call went via wire to Rocky Point, Long Island, where a short-wave station sent it to a receiving station at Wroughton, England, for forwarding by wire to London. The reverse route used a transmitter at Rugby, England, and a receiver at Houghton, Me. Of the 31 calls made during the 9 1/2 hours the circuit operated the first day, several dealt with business, including one transferring a million pounds. In 1956, a telephone cable supplemented the radio transmissions, and today satellites help handle the half million transatlantic calls made on an average business day." Another receiving site (but owned by RCA) was established at Riverhead, New York about 15 miles east of Rocky Point and is now abandoned even though a few of the old towers are still standing. Today, part of the Rocky Point site is owned by New York State and the other part was owned by the defunct Peerless Photo Company. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: Subject: Book Review: ISDN In Perspective Date: 5 Jan 1992 10:19 -0400 My purchased copy arrived Friday. It should be required reading for participating in ISDN discussions. Or at least highly recommended. It is a very good example of a book that makes a complex technical topic accessible to those who are technical but not specialists in a given area. In particular, it is a good source of information for computer people attempting to understand the telecommunication systems as it attempts to come to terms with the transition from POTS to computers. I'm about 2/3 of the way through at the moment and will digest it a bit before making more detailed comments on ISDN. There are some nice capabilities in ISDN but, as the book points out, lots of political decisions and compromises for history. Focusing on rate is a key for starting to taking advantage of ISDN as a WAN (Wide Area Network). It is not clear, however, whether ISDN is the infrastructure for the WANs of the future. Thanks to Fred for writing the book. Now about the garish covers and what seems to be laser printer typography that gives the book the quaint look of a newspaper from the 1800's ... ------------------------------ From: wa4mei!rsj@gatech.edu (Randy Jarrett) Subject: Re: American Express and ANI Organization: Amateur Radio Gateway WA4MEI, Chamblee, GA Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 18:49:38 GMT In john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Yesterday, I got a call from Amex over another matter (charge > dispute). The call came in on my private line. Then it hit me: Amex > apparently enters the number you are calling from as your official > phone of record when the rep sees fit. Yes, I had called Amex from my > mother's phone some months before to complain about some bogus > Compu$erve charges. And when I returned "Mr. Collector's" call last > month, I used my private line. > So here is a word to the wise: if you call American Express, be sure > to make it clear that the phone you are using is NOT your personal > telephone if such is the case. Otherwise your girl/boy friend, > employer, barber, or modem may receive calls meant for you. AMEX has been using ANI for years to keep track of the number that you call them from. Several years ago they used this information to answer the phone with your name ( Hello Mr. xx ..) and because this upset so many people they discontinued answering the phone this way but your account information still pops up when you call from a number that they have marked as yours. There are many other companies that use this information the same way. Some of them keep a history of the numbers that you call from and others only keep the one that you give them as your residence and the last one that you called from. Partial change of subject. It is amazing the amount of interest that various "public protection groups" have in the use of CID for residences without seeming to have any knowledge of ANI in the business place. It couldn't be that these groups are somehow guided by business or others to be quiet about their use of this information could it? Randy Jarrett WA4MEI UUCP ...!{emory,gatech}!wa4mei!rsj | MAIL: P.O. Box 941217 PHONE +1 404 822 4073 | Atlanta, GA 30341-0217 ------------------------------ From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 18:44:52 GMT In article , clear@cavebbs.gen.nz (Charlie Lear) writes: > They wouldn't accept Sideways BBS as a valid residential listing. > So now he gets billed as Mr. B.B.S. Sideways. > Oh, and the directory listing? "Sideways B.B.S.", of course... One of our BBS lines is listed in the directory as "Taronga da Silva." I wanted it listed as "Igor Stravinsky," but Peter was talking to the people at the phone company at the time, so logic prevailed that time ... Stephanie da Silva Taronga Park * Houston, Texas arielle@taronga.com 568-0480 568-1032 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #11 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10852; 5 Jan 92 16:26 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03147 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 14:41:41 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30068 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 14:41:27 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 14:41:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201052041.AA30068@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: Western Union History of the Stock Ticker This piece was sent to the Digest over the weekend by Jim Haynes and I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. PAT From: Jim Haynes Subject: Stock Ticker History Date: 4 Jan 92 06:59:46 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz The following article was originally printed in {The Western Union Technical Review}, April, 1961, Vol 15, No. 2. Copyright 1961 by The Western Union Telegraph Company, formerly a leading manufacturer of chads. Telegraph History Some Early Days of Western Union's Stock Ticker Service 1871-1910 by Charles R. Tilghman [noted as deceased as of the time of publication] The Western Union Telegraph Company had been established only 15 years when Charlie Tilghman was a "stock" messenger in Cincinnati, Ohio. The story, as he tells it briefly, of early developments in Western Union's ticker service is a story also of his own resourceful rise to the position of General Superintendent of Ticker Services. -------------- About 1871 or '72 when I was a stock messenger in the Cincinnati office, the Gold and Stock quotations were received by Morse from New York and copied on manifold sheets and each boy had ten or twelve subscribers to deliver reports to every fifteen minutes. Gold was at a premium and was bought and sold like stocks, so we had the name of Gold and Stock Telegraph Company. [Photo of etching titled "E. A. Calahan's 1867 stock ticker introduced by the Gold and Stock Telegraph Co. required three line wires."] One day, our 'boss' told us boys that they would not need us any more as they were going to send out the reports on electric printing machines. In a few days the equipment for a small ticker plant was received, including a dial transmitter with letters and numerals in a circle, an arrow or pointer pivoting in the center. The turning of a small crank operated a make-and-break contact point and also revolved the arrow, stopping it directly over the character desired. The operator pressed a telegraph key with his left hand to close the press circuit and print the character. Six tickers were received. They were Edison's invention with type and press magnets of six ohms and required a large amount of current to work them. There was a ratchet wheel on the type wheel shaft. An arm, extending from the type magnet and working perpendicularly into this ratchet wheel revolved the type shaft and the two type wheels at the end of it. I took a great interest in the machine, helped to set one up on a short circuit in our office and commenced to practice working the transmitter. In a short time, one machine was put in the First National Bank and two wires were run from our office to connect it. The bankers, brokers, and business men were invited to see the new wonder of printing by electricity. A crowd came and I operated the transmitter, sending out stock quotations. It created quite a lot of excitement and talk. Soon the Company had several subscribers signed up and a ticker plant started -- I was the operator. This Edison ticker became known as the Universal ticker. We operated these tickers ten years before we ever had a voltmeter or an ammeter or anything to tell us how much current was on our lines. When we added tickers, we added a few more cells and took them off when we cut out tickers. We had to judge the adjustments of relays and ticker by feeling the pull with our fingers. Bunsen and Callaud Batteries This was the start of ticker service in Ohio, and Cincinnati was the only town that had them. We used bichromate of potash and sulphuric acid solution in a porous cup set inside a circular zinc and a stick of carbon immersed in the solution. The zinc and porous cup were put in a glass of water diluted with a small amount of acid. This made a strong battery of very low internal resistance but expensive to maintain. The company was using Callaud or blue vitriol batteries on the Morse wire and had twelve thousand cells in Cincinnati. The officials at Chicago were urging me to use the Callaud for ticker service, but I objected, saying it was too slow and had too much internal resistance for ticker work. The fight went on for some time. We did not have any dynamos or motors of any kind in the Cincinnati office at that time and had no more room for Callaud batteries. Finally, I got the idea I could use Edison light current to operate the tickers. I went to the Edison company, explained what I wanted to do, and asked them to run a special wire into our office and let me see what I could do with it. They ran in a single wire from their positive side of a three-wire system. We had no resistance lamps so I used Edison light bulbs and the small resistance boxes we had. The Edison current worked the tickers fine and, to make a long story short, I worked the entire ticker plant, local and main circuits, with this current. This was in 1880. When I started the first long distance ticker circuit, Cincinnati to Columbus, Ohio, 125 miles away, I required both polarities to operate the polar relay in Columbus; therefore the Edison company ran in a negative lead with no additional charge. I also used Edison current to work self-winding clock circuits. Later I put it on the main switchboard in the Cincinnati operating room and worked about fifty single lines and several duplex. To do this it was necessary to buy Edison lamps and make a lamp board above the switchboard. As I could spend five dollars without additional authority, my city foreman made the boards and I bought five dollars worth of lamps and receptacles at a time. It was necessary to take off two copper battery strips that ran across back of the board and then run wires from the lamp receptacles to the small disks. After this was completed and a reserve lead from Edison company secured, we eliminated three thousand cells of Callaud batteries and the acid ticker batteries, making a saving of over $3000 per annum. The Edison company had taken out their meter and given us a flat rate of twenty-five dollars per month. I wrote to Mr. G. B. Scott, Superintendent at New York, and asked him to have a piano key transmitter made with a motor to work on 110-volt D.C. After a lot of correspondence, they sent me a transmitter and motor for 110 D.C. and told me to be very careful not to let it burn up and be sure to let him know how it worked as it was the first one ever made to use Edison current. Self-Winding Tickers The self-winding ticker was invented by Mr. George B. Scott, Superintendent of the Gold and Stock Telegraph Company in New York, and Mr. W. P. Phelps of the Philadelphia Local Telegraph Company. Mr. Phelps invented the automatic shift from letters to figures and vice versa by changing the polarity on the second or winding wire. This was a great improvement over all other styles of printer at that time. They were first called the Scott-Phelps ticker. In 1903, Mr. J. C. Barclay, then Assistant General Manager, wanted to change the ticker and make it smaller. He called Mr. Jay R. Page from Chicago to New York for suggestions on the change; and, with Mr. Scott, they decided to put the escapement magnet and adjustment screws inside the ticker frame. After this change the ticker was called the Scott-Phelps- Barclay-Page ticker. My first experience with these tickers came when Mr. Barclay transferred me from Cincinnati, where I was Assistant Superintendent of the seventh district of the Central Division by appointment of Col. Clowry, to New York, May 1, 1904, [Photo titled "Later model of Calahan ticker now in Western Union Museum, New York."] and made me general inspector of ticker service in all divisions. Up to this time, I had never even seen these tickers working for they had not been put into service in the west, and I knew not a thing about them. Yet the very first thing Mr. Barclay asked me to do was to make these two-wire tickers with four pairs of magnets in them work a long distance on one wire. A single underground wire from the ticker plant under the stock exchange to the repair shop in the Supply Department on Franklin Street was assigned for the test. I started to connect up the relays and tickers and then go down and make the connections on the ticker panel at Broad Street. At the end of the third day, when I went down to our office and told Mr. Barclay that I had the tickers working on one wire but not completed, he said in a very cross voice, "Oh, what takes you so long; hurry up." I later learned that electricians and ticker men had worked for two months and spent two thousand dollars trying to work the tickers from New York to Boston and had given up, saying it was impossible. Long Distance Service I understood the quadruplex and that night I thought of using the quad neutral relay to work the repeat and next morning I connected one up before market opened and received the full market all day O.K. on my fourth day of testing. I took the day's tape down to Mr. Barclay, who looked it over and said, "Let's go in and show President Clowry." Mr. Barclay told the president, "Now we have a one-wire long distance ticker and we can put tickers all over the country." That was the start. The next week, Mr. Barclay said, "Now, Tilghman, put up a long distance stock ticker in Philadelphia." When I went over to Philadelphia, the other inventor of the ticker, Mr. Phelps, said, "Mr. Tilghman, I will do everything I can to help you and would like to see it work, but it cannot be done. The ticker that will work from New York to Philadelphia does not exist; there is no such machine." It was much harder to work over the ninety miles to Philadelphia because of the induction from other wires. I found that when the operator in New York would strike the repeat key thus taking the current off the line for a fraction of a second, the induction from other lines would cause the polar relay in Philadelphia to jump ahead two or three characters. I went back to New York and bridged the break of the repeat relay with adjustable rheostat, leaving just enough current on the line to hold the polar and type wheel on the character the operator was holding; then adjusted my neutral relay in Philadelphia so that it would break away over the light current and repeat the character. Finally, we got it to work so that the keyboard operator in Philadelphia sent from tape of the New York ticker. [Photo titled "Thomas A. Edison's two-wire "Universal" ticker, much improved, was used for many years."] [This appears identical, as well as I remember, to a ticker I saw in operation in a Western Union office, circa 1950.] Then Barclay said, "Now go on to Baltimore and Washington." This was some task and required repeaters in the line. The installation took time and Mr. Barclay sent Mr. William Finn over to help me in order to hurry up the job. Mr. Finn certainly was a very fine man to work with and gave me some good advice about the use of condensers. It was finally accomplished and we worked to Washington, later extending the circuit to Richmond, Virginia. And so the long distance service spread. In 1905, I went all over New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana securing subscribers for stocks and baseball. One year, I secured $29,000 worth of service before baseball opened. In February 1910, Mr. Barclay left the company and Mr. Atherton, a splendid man with a very kind disposition and big heart, took his place. I was transferred from General Inspector to Mr. Atherton's staff. That summer, Mr. Kitton and I had our first vacation. I had been in the service forty one years. Mr. Atherton died the next year and I went into the office of Mr. Yorke, a perfectly splendid man to work for; fair, and just to all. I was with him all during the war; and, while in his office, was given charge of the ticker repair shop. One day, Mr. Yorke spoke of the "alphabet ticker", meaning the Scott-Phelps-Barclay-Page ticker, and wanted to know if I couldn't give it a shorter name. He didn't like all those names. I replied, "Yes, we can call it the self-winding ticker". He said to do it and drop all those names. So it has been the self-winding ticker ever since. Mr. Yorke changed my title to General Supervisor of Ticker Service. I remained with him until Mr. Titley came and was made Vice President of the Plant Department, when I was transferred to his office. He was another grand man and it was a great pleasure and honor to be associated with him. The Western Union Co. had thousands of Burry tickers for which they were paying the Stock Quotation Tel. Co. $3.00 per month rental which totalled approximately $35,000 per annum. These tickers cost $32.00 each to manufacture. At the same time Western Union had a large stock of their own tickers in the Supply Department and the Superintendent of Supplies asked for authority to sell or destroy them. He said they would never be used and took up too much room. Later he asked if he could get rid of 100 a month until they were all gone. I said, no, we would use them to replace the Burry tickers and save the rental. The Burrys were not so fast as the self-winding tickers and would get way behind on active markets. The first town I changed was Washington, then Baltimore, Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, and many more. Boston was using 350 Burry tickers and Chicago 750. They also used the Worisching ticker that was owned by the Stock Quotation Co. It was years before we got all these rental tickers out of our service. Superintendent Scott used two polar relays to work each self-winding ticker circuit. He said we could not possibly work with one on account of the spark on the points. These relays were 135 ohms each. This made a great load on the transmitter and great retardation in the local circuit; also created lots of sparking on the break wheel of transmitter which was revolved in oil to keep from sparking and burning. I told Mr. Scott I had put in new self-winding plant in Washington using only one polar relay on each circuit and it was working all right. There was no sparking on relay points. [Photo titled "Messrs. Scott, Phelps, Barclay and Page all contributed to "Self-Winding" ticker design." shows a ticker under a glass bell jar, and printing on the base "Quotation furnished by Western Union Telegraph apply to local manager"] The Big Blow Out The old stock ticker plant in the basement of the stock exchange was operated from a storage battery plant of 150 ampere hours cells and 350 volts, positive and negative. From these batteries there were two large size copper wires run around three sides of the ticker room. Smaller wires were connected with the larger wires and run direct to the points of the polar relays on the ticker circuit panels. The only fuse was one connected in each battery wire in the battery room. One day in September 1910 there was a short circuit on one of the stock circuits that blew out the fuse, splitting the fuse block in pieces. This cut off the entire stock ticker service in New York and all over the country for the Morse operators in the Western Union operating room were sending in all directions from the ticker tape. This blow out made some blow up! General Manager Brooks came hurrying into Mr. Athern's office and asked him to send me down to Broad Street to see what was the matter. Up to this time I had nothing to do with this New York plant as Supt. George B. Scott was in direct charge of it. I went down, investigated, came right back and made my report. Mr. Athern and Mr. Brooks both said for me to go back and take charge; do anything, order anything you need, only fix it so it will never happen again. I ordered material and started the work with six or ten men immediately after market closed each day, and worked till 9:00 or 10:00 P.M. I had a fuse put in each battery wire and through a resistance lamp to every ticker circuit panel. I found every circuit in the plant had positive pole connected to unison so the entire load of about 75 or 80 amperes was on one battery lead. When I asked why they did not put half the load on negative, they said "Why you must be crazy, the tickers would not work." Well, I had it done nevertheless -- and the tickers operated just as before. -------------- haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14012; 5 Jan 92 18:17 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17353 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 16:31:17 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20279 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jan 1992 16:31:02 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 16:31:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201052231.AA20279@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #12 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Jan 92 16:30:41 CST Volume 12 : Issue 12 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The Original North American Numbering Plan (David Leibold) Re: Area Code Splits and our Phone System (Andy Sherman) Re: Call Trace on Usage Basis in Florida (John Higdon) Re: AT&T VoiceMark Service (Alan Toscano) Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. (David Lesher) Re: AT&T Echo to the UK (Really Satellite Circuits) (David Lesher) Re: USA Today's 800 Turned 900 Number (Peter da Silva) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (David Leibold) Re: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (was Very Courteous Rep) (A Sherman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 05 Jan 92 15:11:24 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: The Original North American Numbering Plan In the {Bell System Technical Journal} in 1952, the original numbering plan for area codes in North America was described. Many codes have been assigned since that time, but here is what the Bell System started with. Area codes with a middle digit of 0 were originally assigned when the area code would cover an entire state or province. Area codes with a middle digit of 1 were used when two or more area codes were required within a state or province. This was intended to help out long distance operators when working with area codes and states/provinces. That rule had to be broken by the mid-50s as new area codes were required, ie. when it was no longer possible to follow this rule. Facts of note: * The BSTJ article describing the numbering plan and its implentation was written by W.H.Nunn. * Operator toll dialing was the predecessor to customer-dialed calls; some tricky dialing seqeuences were involved in some calls, although the numbering plan areas began to take effect in the system, simplifying call completion for operators and eventually provided the customer with an easily-understood dialing method. * The first customer-dialed long distance call in the U.S. was completed 10 November 1951 by Mayor M Leslie Denning of Morristown, NJ to Mayor Frank P Osborn of Alameda, CA. It was reported that the call was dialed with ten digits (area code + number, presumably) and that the connection was made in eighteen seconds. * In 1943, the first #4 toll crossbar switching system was placed into service. Without further ado ... here is the original area code setup from 1952: 201 New Jersey (Newark, entire state) 202 Washington DC 203 Connecticut (New Haven) 204 Manitoba (Winnipeg) 205 Alabama (Mobile, Birmingham, Montgomery) 206 Washington (state) 207 Maine (Bangor, Portland) 208 Idaho (Boise) 212 New York City 213 Los Angeles area 214 Northeast Texas (Dallas, Waco) 215 Philadelphia area 216 Northeast Ohio (Cleveland, Canton) 217 Central Illinois (Peoria, Champaign, Springfield) 218 North and West Minnesota (St Cloud, Duluth) 219 North Indiana (South Bend) 301 Maryland (Baltimore) 302 Delaware 303 Colorado (Denver) 304 West Virginia (Charleston, Huntington, Clarksburg) 305 Florida (Miami, Jacksonville) 306 Saskatchewan (Regina, Saskatoon) 307 Wyoming (Casper, Cheyenne) 312 Chicago area 313 Detroit area 314 East Missouri (St Louis, Moberly, Cape Girardeau) 315 Central New York (Syracuse, Elmira) 316 Southern Kansas (Wichita, Dodge City) 317 Central Indiana (Indianapolis, Terre Haute) 319 East Idaho (Waterloo) 401 Rhode Island (Providence) 402 Nebraska (entire state) 403 Alberta (Calgary, Edmonton) 404 Georgia (Atlanta, Augusta) 405 Oklahoma (Tulsa, Oklahoma City) 406 Montana (Helena) 412 Pittsburgh area 413 Massacheusetts except Boston area (Springfield) 414 Southeast Wisconsin (Milwaukee, Madison, Appleton) 415 Northwest California (San Francisco, Oakland) 416 Central and southwest Ontario (Toronto, Hamilton, London, Windsor) 417 Southwest Missouri (Joplin) 418 Eastern Quebec (Quebec City) 419 Northwest Ohio (Toledo, Mansfield) 501 Arkansas (Little Rock) 502 Kentucky (Lexington, Louisville) 503 Oregon (Portland) 504 Louisiana (New Orleans) 505 New Mexico (Albuquerque, Roswell) 512 South Texas (San Angelo, San Antonio, Austin) 513 Southwest Ohio (Cincinnati, Dayton) 514 Western Quebec (Montreal) 515 Central Iowa (Des Moines, Ottumwa, Fort Dodge, Mason City) 516 Long Island, NY 517 Northeast Michigan (Saginaw, Lansing) 518 East New York (Albany, Kingston) 601 Mississippi (Jackson) 602 Arizona (Phoenix, Tucson) 603 New Hampshire (Concord) 604 British Columbia (Vancouver) 605 South Dakota (Pierre) 612 Southeast Minnesota (Minneapolis, Mankato) 613 Northern and eastern Ontario (Ottawa) 614 Southeast Ohio (Columbus) 616 Western & Peninsula Michigan (Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Petoskey, Escanaba) 617 Boston area 618 South Illinois (Centralia) 701 North Dakota (Fargo, Bismarck) 702 Nevada (Reno) 703 Virginia (Richmond, Roanoke, Norfolk) 704 North Carolina (Charlotte) 712 West Iowa 713 Southeast Texas (Houston) 714 Southeast California (San Diego) 715 North Wisconsin (Stevens Point) 716 West New York (Buffalo, Rochester) 717 East Pennsylvania (Harrisburg, Scranton) 801 Utah (Salt Lake City) 802 Vermont (White River Junction) 803 South Carolina (Columbia) 812 South Indiana (Evansville) 814 West Pennsylvania (Altoona, Kane) 815 North and West Illinois (Rockford) 816 Northwest Missouri (Kansas City) 901 Tennessee (Memphis, Nashville, Chattanooga, Knoxville) 902 New Brunswick, Nova Scotia 913 Northern Kansas (Hays, Salina) 914 South New York (Monticello) 915 Northwest Texas (Amarillo, Wichita Falls, Cisco, El Paso) 916 Northeast California (Sacramento, Redding) [Moderator's Note: Astute readers will notice the absence of Hawaii (808) and Alaska (907) as well as the Carribean area (809). The United States territories of Hawaii and Alaska did not acquire statehood for several more years. And David did not mention a couple other early rules for area codes: They were to never end with two zeroes, nor were there to be two one's, ie 711, 811, etc. 'Area codes' of the style X10 were reserved for AT&T's Typewriter Exchange (TWX) service. Also, prefixes were rarely duplicated in adjoining area codes. This was to be avoided in order to allow 'convenience dialing' between communities nearby one another, but in different area codes; ie. prefixes used in 312 would not show up in 815 or 219. PAT] ------------------------------ From: andys@ulysses.att.com Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 14:17:18 EST Subject: Re: Area Code Splits and our Phone System Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Murray Hill, NJ In article rnewman@BBN.COM (Ron Newman) writes: > In article , spencer@phoenix. > I've never understood this ... why is it necessary for a PBX or > Centrex to know anything at all about valid and invalid area codes and > office codes? Why can't they just pass everything on to the phone > company and let them screen out invalid numbers? > [Moderator's Note: The reason is because what telco considers valid > might still be unwanted by the system proprietor, ie 900 calls; the > use of certain long distance carriers, etc. PAT] There is also the matter of least-cost routing features. You might use different carriers or different trunk groups depending upon the area code being called. 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, 5 Jan 92 12:27 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Call Trace on Usage Basis in Florida andyb%wndrsvr@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (Andy Brager) writes: > I'd like to know what happens if I call one of those numbers from here > in Southern California (GTE). Do they get my number or not? They get the number from any FGD-compliant office. For all practical purposes, the state of California is 100% FGD-compliant. Ergo, the answer to your question is, yes, they get your number. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: atoscano@taronga.com (Alan Toscano) Subject: Re: AT&T VoiceMark Service Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 20:40:23 GMT In article Steve_M_Kile@cup.portal.com writes: > Several weeks ago I was able to use the AT&T VoiceMark service from my > home (612-888-XXXX) however today I was not able to do so. Has the > number changed (800-576-MARK) or has the service been discontinued? > Do any other carriers offer a similar service? Thanks. The correct number is 800 562-6275 (-MARK). The service was renamed a few months ago. It's now called AT&T Message Service. I'm told that people were confusing AT&T VoiceMark with AT&T Voice Mail Service. You may call 800 662-2588 to request a wallet card with the service's phone number. A Alan Toscano Internet/Taronga Park BBS: atoscano@taronga.com P O Box 741982 AT&T Mail: atoscano ELN: 62306750 Houston, TX CIS: 73300,217 Telex: +23 156232556 772741982 USA Work: +1 713 236 6616 Home: +1 713 993 9560 ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 16:20:57 EST Reply-To: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex > Examples of such numbers are: 382-5968 or 277-4653. I wonder, has > somebody at the phone company figured out a list of numbers that > will ... Strange you should mention that. For many years, the owner of a classical music station in a major market had one of those numbers. He was not known for his pleasant demeanor and the staff would sometimes mutter about how appropriate the assignment was. The chief engineer of another classical station elsewhere had "TWINKLE" for a home phone. Signs in the station said things like: This is the FM OFF THE AIR alarm. Pushing this button silences the alarm. It does NOT restore the transmitter to the air. This outrage must NOT be allowed to continue. If you can not get it up - TWINKLE ASAP! Luckily, I got someone in the know to explain it to me ;_] wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: AT&T Echo to the UK (Really Satellite Circuits) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 16:33:13 EST Reply-To: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex > And, yes, *every* carrier still has satellite circuits for international > calling and places like Alaska and Hawaii. (Floyd from Alascom can > correct me if I'm wrong about Alaska. I believe that Alascom is the > only IXC there.) There are some places where a satellite is the only > way to get there. Well, to Georgetown Guyana there are 12 or maybe 24 circuits to the rest of the hemisphere. These are via an old Cable & Wireless tropo-scatter system that sounds like Floyd's White Alice. It goes up to Port of Spain, and then {I guess} hops up the island chain from there. Note that along that route are some places in the 809, and others in their own country codes. So if you call from the US, whose switch decides how to get your call there? A Martinque to Georgetown call might be interesting. I hear that all traffic from Fort de France goes via Paris! Georgetown also has an earth station that I was told goes to Britain. There is no cable anywhere. (Overland? - forget it....) wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: USA Today's 800 Turned 900 Number Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 13:30:50 CST From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) The Moderator brought up the question of mislabelled goods. The law states that if you offer a product at some price you have to sell it at that price, even if it was a mistake in labelling. This is intended to prevent bait-and-switch tactics. Yes, this means if a company advertises a $5.00 item in the paper for $.50 they have to honor that advertisement. I don't know the legal status of a separate disclaimer (such as a notice posted in the store that the $.50 price was an error), but I suspect that in that case you'd be pushing your luck to get the $.50 price. On the other hand, if you find a $80 handbag in a 50% off bin with a $60 sale tag, you can get it for $40 (as I did on one occasion ... they didn't give me 50% off the sale price, though, and they immediately removed the bogus 50% off label). In this case, I think it unreasonable for the newspaper to suffer a loss due to AT&T's programming error. I think it unreasonable for people to benefit from AT&T's error, either ... they were told that this was a mistake (that is, there was a notice). On the other hand, I think that AT&T is making a mistake to go after them: in the long term making the status of 800 numbers questionable has the potential of losing them a lot of business. It doesn't look like it's hurt them, this time, but it was a poor decision: the potential downside was *way* more than any benefit they accrued. This was an honest mistake, but it sets the precedent for a whole new category of bait-and-switch type operations. And some of the people running 800 services are less than ethical themselves. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Jan 92 15:06:38 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits One obscure candidate for phone songs would be one by a group called Toronto; this band was active in the early 1980's and had a lead vocalist named Holly Woods (weird but true). One of their early songs belted out the refrain "please call 272-5035". I don't know if this was actually tied to a band promotion or not (416-272 was an exchange in Mississauga, Cooksville to be exact). dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca djcl@zooid.guild.org ------------------------------ From: andys@ulysses.att.com Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 14:07:20 EST Subject: Re: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (was Very Courteous Rep) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Murray Hill, NJ In article ellisond@rtsg.mot.com (Dell H. Ellison) writes: > That I wrote: >> CLASS features only work for intra-LATA calls from exchanges equipped >> with SS7. As for the call waiting call, I'm pretty sure it would be > Are you sure? I think the CLASS features will work for inter-LATA > calls as long as they have SS7 all the way along the path. There is no standard and, more importantly, no tariff or regulatory enablement for the delivery of CLASS related data through and inter-LATA connection. Yes, duelling SS7 handoffs *could* do it, but it is not yet allowed. I should know. I have an ISDN phone on my desk with a pretty LCD display that gives CNID. I *only* get CID from numbers in SS7 end offices in my New Jersey LATA. All other calls come in as incoming call. > Besides, I would think that all the switch would need, so that it > could do the Call Return, would be the phone number. And it > definitely should have that. I believe that the calling phone number is not routinely delivered to the terminating switch on an inter-LATA call. Since the information is not needed there to complete the call, and is not needed there to rate and bill the call (which is done either by the IXC or the originating end office), then it is not passed across the IXC network. Calling numbers are only routinely delivered to terminating offices for interLATA calls. ANI to 800/900 numbers is a different story. That is a special feature of the particular service being offered by the IXC, and I think it may require a special connection between the IXC's POP and the end customer. Inter-LATA CLASS features have received some discussion, but will require action by both the FCC and Bellcore to implement. 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! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #12 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17884; 7 Jan 92 1:44 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05035 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 6 Jan 1992 23:54:33 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29488 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 6 Jan 1992 23:54:17 -0600 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 23:54:17 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201070554.AA29488@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #13 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Jan 92 23:54:11 CST Volume 12 : Issue 13 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: IBT and Caller-ID (Ed Greenberg) Re: IBT and Caller-ID (Steve Forrette) Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. (Ed Greenberg) Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. (Chip Olson) Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. (Toby Nixon) Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. (Stan Brown) Re: Phone Company Humor (Andrew M. Dunn) Re: Phone Company Humor (Allen Gwinn) Re: Phone Company Humor (Mikel Manitius) Re: Phone Company Humor (Susan B Huntsman ) Re: American Express and ANI (Ed Greenberg) Re: American Express and ANI (Michael Nolan) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Tom Perrine) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Maxime Taksar) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 15:52:19 PST From: edg@netcom.netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: IBT and Caller-ID Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) In article is written: > constant tone. Then (without hanging) up I dialed that alarm > company's 800 CID number that was posted a while back and they still > knew my number. Sounds like it didn't work, huh? The 800 number receives ANI, which is transmitted despite your *67. ANI is not Caller ID. Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 07:24:05 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: IBT and Caller-ID Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA > [Moderator's Note: That is exactly what *67 is supposed to do: Beep > three times and go back to the dial tone. It sounds just like the > three beeps you get when you prepend *70 to cancel call-waiting for > the duration of the call, and like *70, you need not wait for the > beeps and fresh dial tone to continue dialing; you need not put in a > pause with auto-dialers, etc ... just shove all the digits out; the > switch will keep up with them. This brings up a complaint I have with DMS-100's: It has been my experience that you cannot dial over the stuttering on a DMS-100 (it works fine on 1AESS and 5ESS). Also, the stuttering is the busy-signal tone pair, not the dialtone sound that the ESS switches use. When dialing with a modem and using *70, you definately must put in a comma, or the first digits of the phone number will be lost. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: Another little thing to watch for is when using both features -- number ID blocking and suspend call waiting -- on the same call, do *67 first. We've found you can insert either one first and the other second getting three beeps after each, but I'm told the way it is programmed in some exchanges requires *67 to be first if you expect it to work properly. Make some test calls to see how it works on your switch before doing any 'serious calling'. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 00:00:11 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) In article martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) writes: > It seems that in most area codes, numbers which spell seven-letter > obsceneties are routed to intercept recordings. > Examples of such numbers are: 382-5968 or 277-4653. I wonder, has Perhaps your telco did something with the 5000 group in the 382 area, but who really knows for sure. Etak, Inc., in Menlo Park CA has a main number that is 328-ETAK. Never mind that it also spells FAT-ETAK, and perhaps fat something else. It was amusing once, but no longer. > On a related topic, most of the (900) numbers that deal with phone > sex etc, seem to be in the 303 or 844 exchanges. Are these exchanges > assigned to a particular carrier, do they cover a particular > geographic area, or what? 900-303 and 844 numbers belong to Pacific > Bell and are indeed reserved for adult programming. 900-303 and 844 numbers belong to Pacific Bell and are indeed reserved for adult programming. Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. From: olson1@husc8.harvard.edu (Chip Olson) Date: 6 Jan 92 10:20:42 EST Organization: Spam-On-A-Rope Inc. In the immortal words of martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) in comp.dcom.telecom: > It seems that in most area codes, numbers which spell seven-letter > obsceneties are routed to intercept recordings. > Examples of such numbers are: 382-5968 or 277-4653. I wonder, has > somebody at the phone company figured out a list of numbers that will > not be assigned, or were such numbers originally given out and then > disconnected due to prank calls. Well, a friend of mine awhile back requested, and got, the number 739-9636. When I mentioned what his number spelled to a mutual friend, she got this evil look in her eye, dialed his number and said in a stereotypically ditzy voice, "Do you know your phone number spells SEXY MEN? " and hung up. Chip Olson olson1@husc.harvard.edu | ceolson@ldbvax.lotus.com | ceo@gnu.ai.mit.edu ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. Date: 6 Jan 92 16:01:19 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) writes: > It seems that in most area codes, numbers which spell seven-letter > obsceneties are routed to intercept recordings. > Examples of such numbers are: 382-5968 or 277-4653. Just out of curiousity, I decided to try both of these numbers, in the 404 area code. They both rang through to real human beings! I asked them to excuse the ring (as though I had called a wrong number); they didn't get upset or anything. I wonder if these folks even know what their numbers spell? 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 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 10:51:30 -0500 From: brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan Brown) Subject: Re: Obscene Phone Numbers, 900 Calls, etc. Organization: Oak Road Systems, Cleveland Ohio USA In article martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) writes: > It seems that in most area codes, numbers which spell seven-letter > obsceneties are routed to intercept recordings. > Examples of such numbers are: 382-5968 or 277-4653. Here in Cleveland, a member of a club I used to belong to had the phone number xxx-3825. He used to tell people that his phone number was xxx-(youknowtheword). I don't know whether he was assigned that number at random or asked for it. Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA brown@ncoast.org ------------------------------ From: mongrel!amdunn@uunet.uu.net (Andrew M. Dunn) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada Date: Sun, 05 Jan 1992 23:16:24 GMT In article Doug Faunt N6TQS 415-688-8269 writes: > There was an Hewlett Packard corporate telephone book a few years back > that got pulled the day after it was released because there was a > bogus obscene entry. I don't know if I still have my copy, but they > sure tried to get them back from everyone. Back when I used to work for Northern Telecom, we had that problem all the time with the internal phone directory. See, all you had to do to put in an entry was fill in the blue card in the front of the directory book, fake a manager's initial on it, and send it in through the internal mail. It then got published in the book. (what, me? no, of _course_ I never sent any in) :-> There were some good entries in the book, too. Folks like Dueck, Dahf E. Hunt, Mike Nasium, Jim Poo, Winnie T. Rahbeet, Rodger Street, E. C. and, of course, many people under their nickname as well as their real name (often, they wouldn't believe us ... we'd have to show them the directory). Last I checked, some of these things had been in there for years, and I'm told are still there. Nobody gets removed from the book unless they quit, are fired or get laid off ... and these "people" will never be in _that_ category! Andy Dunn (amdunn@mongrel.uucp) ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 07:56 CST From: allen@sulaco.lonestar.org (Allen Gwinn) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Back in the early 80's, a "friend" of mine was dating a girl whose mother worked for Southwestern Bell. He managed to get a residential entry into the phonebook as "PHUCHURSELV, MAHBELLE". There was also a guy that lived out in Irving (a suburb of Dallas, kinda like Ft. Worth) with the following name: Wolfeschlagelsteinhausenberger-Haupfsted, Herbert. I forget whether it took two or three lines to list him. His telephone number was xxx-3825, so we assumed that it was a joke. [Moderator's Note: Check out the entries for various labor unions and you'll see several two and three line things such as 'Amalgamated Union of Blah, Blah and Blah-de-dah, Local X, Y and Z.' PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 14:02:34 EST From: mikel@aaahq05.aaa.com (Mikel Manitius) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Organization: American Automobile Association, Heathrow, FL > [...] he contacted U.S. West and was informed that they routinely > include bogus listings in the directory so that anyone who copies the > listings from the directory can be prosecuted for copyright violation. An old cartographer's trick is to add or rename insignificant landmarks on a map to keep track of copyright violations ... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 16:43:00 -0700 From: nha2308@dsachg1.dsac.dla.mil (Susan B Huntsman ) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor There were in this country two very large monopolies. The larger of the two had the following record: The Vietnam War, Watergate, double-digit inflation, fuel and energy shortages, bankrupt airlines and the 8-cent postcard. The second was responsible for such things as the transistor, the solar cell, lasers, synthetic crystals, high fidelity stereo recording, sound motion pictures, radio astronomy, negative feedback, magnetic tape, magnetic "bubbles", electronic switching systems microwave radio and TV relay systems, information theory, the first electrical digital computer, and the first communications satellite. Guess which one got to tell the other how to run the telephone business? Susan Huntsman, DSAC-H Ogden (801) 399-6517 AV 790-0517 nha2308@dsachg1.dsac.dla.mil [Moderator's Note: Very clever, Susan ... but you are forgetting that federal judges always know what's best for us, the unwashed masses, as they set about the business of saving us from ourselves. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: American Express and ANI Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 00:17:40 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) I noticed that calling American Express from a phone other than my own would invariably result in the question "is your home number still ..." where the number specified was the number I had placed in their records. Seems like a reasonable way to handle the information. Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ From: nolan@tssi.com (Michael Nolan) Subject: Re: American Express and ANI Reply-To: nolan@tssi.com Organization: Tailored Software Services, Inc. Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 16:51:38 GMT wa4mei!rsj@gatech.edu (Randy Jarrett) writes: > In john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) > writes: >> So here is a word to the wise: if you call American Express, be sure >> to make it clear that the phone you are using is NOT your personal >> telephone if such is the case. Otherwise your girl/boy friend, >> employer, barber, or modem may receive calls meant for you. Doesn't bother me, because an answering machine is the only thing that answers inbound calls on my private business line. If Amex wants to listen to a five minute message on where to play chess in Nebraska, that's OK by me. > Partial change of subject. It is amazing the amount of interest that > various "public protection groups" have in the use of CID for > residences without seeming to have any knowledge of ANI in the > business place. It couldn't be that these groups are somehow guided > by business or others to be quiet about their use of this information > could it? Seems to me like there is a fundamental difference here, in that ANI (as I understand it) is on 800 numbers, where the paying party generally will find out the phone number eventually, so it's mostly a matter of timing. I suspect mostly what's happening is that the 'public protection groups' have discovered that they can't bamboozle the business world as easily as they can the typical non-technologically competent person. As much as I value my own privacy, I find that most of the arguments against CID are specious or can be overcome with minor changes to the way it works. Any business with more than one line knows that CID won't be much help as a marketing tool to businesses, because you don't necessarily want to call the number that a call came from, and in some cases either you can't or (as above) it won't do you any good. Michael Nolan, nolan@tssi.com Tailored Software Services, Inc. Lincoln, Nebraska (402) 423-1490 manager of the huskers mailing list: huskers-request@tssi.com for details ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 12:33:24 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Organization: Cal State Long Beach It's hard to believe that Spike Jones didn't do *something* on this subject (how could he resist using the phone as a musical instrument?). Any fanatics out there that could check his 'catalog' ? Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: tep@tots.Logicon.COM (Tom Perrine) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Date: 6 Jan 92 20:58:57 GMT Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California In article wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer) writes: > Mojo Nixon had a song last year in which he implored Elvis to call him > at 619-239-KING. When I called, it was usually busy (of course), but > when I did get through, it was an answering machine asking if I was > Elvis, or had seen Elvis. I got a 30 second chance to leave a > message. I don't know if it is still up and running, though. 239-KING is now (this morning) a recording of "Happy Birthday" to Elvis. It repeats once, then hangs up. 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: Mon, 6 Jan 92 07:18:02 -0800 From: mmt@latour.berkeley.edu (Maxime Taksar) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits In article , wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer) writes: > Mojo Nixon had a song last year in which he implored Elvis to call him > at 619-239-KING. When I called, it was usually busy (of course), but > when I did get through, it was an answering machine asking if I was > Elvis, or had seen Elvis. I got a 30 second chance to leave a > message. I don't know if it is still up and running, though. It *is* indeed still running. Probably gives him really good publicity, as it's been modernized to accept fax as well as voice messages. (Doesn't seem to be very busy, so possibly it's no longer just an answering machine on a POTS line). Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS mmt@Berkeley.EDU ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #13 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09956; 7 Jan 92 23:13 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06047 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 7 Jan 1992 21:10:59 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18012 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 7 Jan 1992 21:10:22 -0600 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 21:10:22 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201080310.AA18012@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #14 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Jan 92 21:10:11 CST Volume 12 : Issue 14 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (was Very Courteous Rep) (D. Lewis) Re: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (Macy Hallock) Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? (Fred Goldstein) Re: Area Code Splits and our Phone System (Bob Frankston) Adjacent Area Codes Off by a Digit (Carl Moore) Re: The Original North American Numbering Plan (Ron Newman) Re: USA Today's 800 Turned 900 Number (David Lesher) Re: Problem With PAC*TEL Cordless Phone (Bjorn Ahlen) Re: The Best and The Worst (Bob Denny) Re: Compression Bridges Ethernet-Ethernet (Barton F. Bruce) Re: AT&T VoiceMark Service (Carl Moore) Re: Book Review: ISDN In Perspective (Bob Frankston) Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: 10th Anniversary of the MFJ (Bruce Klopfenstein) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls (was Very Courteous Rep) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 18:05:34 GMT To amplify and clarify Andy's and my earlier comments ... In article andys@ulysses.att.com writes: > There is no standard and, more importantly, no tariff or regulatory > enablement for the delivery of CLASS related data through and > inter-LATA connection. Yes, duelling SS7 handoffs *could* do it, but > it is not yet allowed. Actually, there are tariffs (I believe BellSouth and Southwestern Bell have filed tariffs) and standards (Bellcore TR-905, TA-962, and probably some others, as well as ANSI Committee T1 standards of which the numbers currently escape me); however, technically things are still being trialed and from a legal, regulatory, and business standpoint there are still open issues to be resolved. > I believe that the calling phone number is not routinely delivered to > the terminating switch on an inter-LATA call. Since the information > is not needed there to complete the call, and is not needed there to > rate and bill the call (which is done either by the IXC or the > originating end office), then it is not passed across the IXC network. In some cases it is passed across the IXC network, but is not passed out of the IXC network. The Committee T1 SS7 specification allows the Calling Party Number parameter in SS7 to be labeled "Calling Party Number" or "Billing Number". The IXC can presumably carry the billing number (received via EAMF signaling from the originating LEC) across the network, but not pass it out of the network. > Calling numbers are only routinely delivered to terminating offices > for interLATA calls. Add "with SS7 signaling". > ANI to 800/900 numbers is a different story. That is a special > feature of the particular service being offered by the IXC, and I > think it may require a special connection between the IXC's POP and > the end customer. It requires a direct connection of one form or another. The AT&T INFO-2 (TM) service uses an ISDN PRI connection. MCI and US Sprint also offer the service over PRI, and one or the other make it available via some sort of in-band signaling on a non-ISDN direct connect T1. > Inter-LATA CLASS features have received some discussion, but will > require action by both the FCC and Bellcore to implement. And by ANSI T1, although I believe these standards have been published. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning > What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking! Ditto. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 22:48 EST From: fmsys!macy@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu (Macy Hallock) Subject: Re: CLASS Features on Inter-LATA Calls In article Andy Sherman writes: > I believe that the calling phone number is not routinely delivered to > the terminating switch on an inter-LATA call. That's true for most existing systems. With the advent of the newest pre-SS7 schemes, there was a provision for the delivery of the calling number to the distant switch. The missing key here is the supplemental information. SS7 provides for more that calling number info, there is class of service information, too e.g. blocking information. SS7 machines always receive the calling number, if the distant switch can provide it. Whether the number is delivered to ISDN or CNID subscribers is a function of the Class of Service on both the orginating and terminating lines. My points here are: - There are many central office signalling schemes that make calling number info available to the terminating switch. That does not mean that a subscriber's services will be given that info. - SS7 has provisions to control who and when the calling number information will be presented to a subscriber's terminal. These provisions were not found in previous central office signalling systems, since the calling number was provided for telco internal call processing purposes, not subscriber use. Perhaps someone more familiar with SS7 will elaborate. > ANI to 800/900 numbers is a different story. That is a special > feature of the particular service being offered by the IXC, and I > think it may require a special connection between the IXC's POP and > the end customer. Not really. Generally speaking, a customer with any real volume of IXC business will have a T1 type connection to the IXC. Depending on the IXC, calling number info can be delivered by conventional MF ANI tone sending, ISDN type common channel signalling or even in band DTMF!! At least one IXC is working on using CNID type signalling. Not quite sure what they have in mind, though. AT&T is perhaps the least flexible in this. In their INFO-2 service, they will only use ISDN (done the AT&T way, BTW) for this purpose. Works great, though ... once you get it installed. Regards, Macy M Hallock Jr N8OBG 216.725.4764 macy@fmsystm.uucp macy@fmsystm.ncoast.org [No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you] ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? Date: 6 Jan 92 21:44:07 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , garyd@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Gary Deol) writes ... > Does anybody know why the middle number in a area-code is always a > zero or one? Things that make you say Hmmmmmmmm :^) Simple. Because in the 1950's era numbering plan, that was the way to tell an area code (ten digit call) from a local prefix (seven digit call). And that era is already half over; the other half (area codes without a 1/0 in the middle) will be over in about three years. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice: +1 508 486 7388 ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Area Code Splits and our Phone System Date: 5 Jan 1992 18:33 -0400 Of course, it would be nice if there were a way the PBX could automatically interrogate a remote database when it was confused. But that would require that the PBX act like a computer. And even IBM gave up doing that. But considering how often it takes years to update the PBX tables and how cheap it would be for a PBX supplier to provide the data remotely and even charge for it (and not involve the local Telco at all!), I'll chalk it up to one more example of technological intertia. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 12:16:50 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Adjacent Area Codes Off by a Digit There are some pairs of area codes which are adjacent and off by just one digit. I have already discussed 301/302 (to go away when 410 is fully cut over), 308/307, and 704/703 (gone before I was old enough to remember, if it ever existed). Others I have come up with: These are off by just one click: 602 (Arizona) / 702 (Nevada) 501 (Arkansas) / 601 (Mississippi) Went away in 1965 split of 305/904: 305 (Florida) / 205 (Alabama) 405 (Oklahoma) / 505 (New Mexico); I listed 405/918 as a possible early split, and notice that 918 does NOT touch 505. 217 (Illinois) / 317 (Indiana) Off by more than one click: 309 (Illinois) / 319 (Iowa) 601 (Mississippi) / 901 (Tennessee); if there was a 901/615 split, it did not take this border away. 704 (North Carolina) / 404 (Georgia); if there was a 704/919 split, it did not take this border away, but the 404/706 split would apparently set up a 706/704 border. 503 (Oregon) / 509 (Washington state) 219 (Indiana) / 419 (Ohio) 308 (Nebraska) / 303 (Colorado); apparently part or all of this border remains after 303/719 split I do NOT believe these touch: 812 (Indiana) / 815 (Illinois) 717 (Pennsylvania) / 716 (New York) 608 (Wisconsin) / 708 (Illinois) ------------------------------ Organization: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc. Subject: Re: The Original North American Numbering Plan Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 22:27:47 EST From: Ron Newman In article , DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA writes: > Without further ado ... here is the original area code setup from 1952: > 319 East Idaho (Waterloo) That should be "East Iowa" ! > 515 Central Iowa (Des Moines, Ottumwa, Fort Dodge, Mason City) > 712 West Iowa Any idea why a sparsely populated rural place like Iowa rated three area codes? I've never understood how Iowa got three when much bigger places like Alberta, British Columbia, Montana, and Arizona still need only one each. Ron Newman rnewman@bbn.com ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: USA Today's 800 Turned 900 Number Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 19:39:59 EST Reply-To: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex I have a separate question about this mess. Given that it can't be that difficult to prove that you dialed 800, not 900 [two methods come to mind at once -- beat on the local LEC to pull their call detail records, and/or refer the LEC to someone with active 900 blocking getting charged] number; does AT&T have an FCC tariff in place to charge for making an 800 call? If not, won't they [even in this anti-regulation adminstration] have a hard time collecting? wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu ------------------------------ From: bjorn@eab.retix.com (Bjorn Ahlen) Subject: Re: Problem With PAC*TEL Cordless Phone Organization: Retix, Santa Monica CA Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 04:06:32 GMT In article DROLLINGER@elde.epfl.ch writes: > On my last visit to the United States, I bought a GREAT Technologies > (Model CS8001) cordless phone (Manufactured for PAC*TEL Products by > GREAT Technologies). I used it once in a motel and it worked. It uses > Although the phone works well, it produces an > annoying buzzer-like sound which is more or less loud depending on the > location. I tried it out with three different power converters, yes, I > even tried it with a 9V E-Block-type battery and on different > locations, but it always sounds like an amplified power-converter- > sound, even without the phone-line connected to it. > Does anybody know where this sound comes from, as there should really > be no noise when operated with a battery (at least this sounds > logical) or has anybody else had problems with this particular > cordless phone? The noise is really that loud that normal operation is > impossible. I had the same problem in my house with a SW Bell top-rated FF1725. Two things helped significantly: 1. A ferrite core on the cable to the phone jack. I used a cheap Radio Shack snap-on ferrite which is normally used to stop RF noise on power cables. My humble speculation is that much of the noise comes in via the phone lines, a phenomenal antenna for the 49 MHz used by most cordless phones. 2. Reorienting the base unit antenna. After much experimenting I found that for my setup a horizontal East-West orientation worked best, this in spite of usually holding the handset vertically. Bjorn Ahlen bjorn@eab.retix.com ------------------------------ From: denny@dakota.alisa.com (Bob Denny) Subject: Re: The Best and The Worst Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 05:27:30 GMT Organization: Alisa Systems, Inc. In bill@eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich) wrote about liking Pac*Tel Cellular in Atlanta. I use LA Cellular, the A system in LA, and Pac*Tel is the B system. In Atlanta, Pac*Tel is the A system. So if you are an A system subscriber, you lose in Atlanta if you want to roam. At least this was the situation a year or so ago. Dumb. Robert B. Denny voice: (818) 792-9474 Alisa Systems, Inc. fax: (818) 792-4068 Pasadena, CA (denny@alisa.com, ..uunet!alisa.com!denny) ------------------------------ From: bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) Subject: Re: Compression Bridges Ethernet-Ethernet Date: 6 Jan 92 05:40:54 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , stigall@bronze.ucs. indiana.edu (john stigall) writes: > I need help finding info on compression bridges for a link to a far > remote site via four-wire modems. What I have found so far is the > Cryptall 3000 series compression bridge for $7900 list each. Has Microcom also makes compression bridges, and the cost less. The Cryptall ones will compress even on a full T1 line. The Microcom ones don't have enough steam to compress as much at T1 as they can at lower speeds. Microcom sells that software and cards and you can supply some ratty old PC to use them in. They have a 2x and a 4x compression card (its the serial line card), and a bridge can be made that is 1 enet to several remote sites -- you just add more of the compressing serial line cards. BUT, why are you using four-wire modems in this day and age? If it is FAR, it probably is interlata, and virtually ALL interlata circuits are actually DIGITAL. Only the tail circuits change. In many areas DDS-II or more generically BDS type 56kb tail ckts (or occasionally even 64kb ones!) can be had at about the same price as an analog one. No modem needed. Just a CSU/DSU. If all you were planning on was 4 x compression on 9.6, go digital and use the really inexpensive NAT bridges that don't compress but that do cost less than $2000 per end. Used at 56kb, that will be better than a 4 x compression running 9.6. Of course 4 x on 56kb is even nicer. A good CSU/DSU (many are NOT good ...) and NAT will cost *LESS* than the Microcom compressing bridge kit with no PC. Add the PC and the Microcom costs even MORE. I better not elaborate more or this won't get published ... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 10:12:08 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: AT&T VoiceMark Service 800-576-MARK? I had 800-562-6275 (MARK) for AT&T VoiceMark. ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Book Review: ISDN In Perspective Date: 6 Jan 1992 10:57 -0400 I forget to include the ISBN info: 0-201-50016-7 Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Massachusetts DPU Ponders ISDN Request Date: 6 Jan 92 21:55:05 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > You're still paying more for using less resources than a TB3000 and > POTS. You're also getting less service (I've run PEP up to 14000 bps > before compression, and the theoretical limit over POTS is 21204 bps > (512 channels at 7 bauds with 6 bits/baud less the 300 baud back > channel), though the most I've heard of in practice is around 18000). Huh? 18000 is less than 64000. How is ISDN's 64000 bps less than POTS? ISDN's D-channel packet data service _is_ slower than a 'blazer, but it is available 24 hours a day without tying up a channel. It lets your host be "on line" for things like receiving mail, or low-speed (backgroun) ftps. D channel packet is no speed demon for interactive use, but that's where the B channel comes in. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: bgsuvax!klopfens@cis.ohio-state.edu (Bruce Klopfenstein) Subject: Re: 10th Anniversary of the MFJ Date: 6 Jan 92 22:28:42 GMT Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh. I still have not found a copy of Judge Greene's July 1991 forced decision allowing telcos into information services. Where can I get a copy? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #14 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13394; 8 Jan 92 0:39 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11154 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 7 Jan 1992 22:26:03 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32026 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 7 Jan 1992 22:25:26 -0600 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 22:25:26 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201080425.AA32026@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #15 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Jan 92 22:25:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 15 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Email Between AT&T Easylink and the Internet (H. Peter Anvin) Re: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? (Michael Salmon) Re: American Express and ANI (Mike Neary) Re: Rate Table For 900 Numbers (Paul S. Sawyer) Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? (Dell Ellison) Re: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana (Bill Nickless) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Jim Rees) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Jerry K. Wagner) Re: Voice Mail and TDD: Rolm (Mickey Ferguson) Re: Phone Company Humor (Tad Cook) Re: Phone Company Humor (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Who Picked Exchange Names? (Doug Faunt) NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language (Douglas W. Martin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP) Subject: Re: Email Between AT&T Easylink and the Internet Reply-To: hpa@nwu.edu Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 02:25:49 GMT In article of comp.dcom.telecom, wu/O=ALAN_TOSCANO/DD.ELN=62306750@mhs.attmail.com writes: > Addressing the Internet from EasyLink IMS is somewhat more > complicated. Owing to its Telex heritage, EasyLink converts all > alphabetic characters in addresses to uppercase -- unless they're > preceded by a bang ("!"). To include an actual bang in an address, you > must type it twice. Here's the address format which I used to submit > this article from EasyLink IMS to : [...extracted line...] > DDA ID-INTERNET!!EECS.NWU.EDU!!!T!E!L!E!C!O!M This is really not necessary. According to the appropriate RFC's, the Internet and all other system using RFC-compliant addressing should ignore case in the address. There are some non-compliant systems (notably IBM RS/6000 machines -- funny since IBM mainframes are the biggest of the troublemakers that forced this rule), but delta.eecs.nwu.edu is not. Sending mail to HPA@EECS.NWU.EDU reached my account there (hpa@eecs.nwu.edu) fine. Therefore you could simplify this to: DDA ID-INTERNET!!EECS.NWU.EDU!!TELECOM ... without any loss. hpa INTERNET: hpa@nwu.edu TALK: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu BITNET: HPA@NUACC HAM RADIO: N9ITP, SM4TKN FIDONET: 1:115/989.4 NeXTMAIL: hpa@lenny.acns.nwu.edu IRC: Xorbon X.400: /BAD=FATAL_ERROR/ERR=LINE_OVERFLOW ------------------------------ From: etxmesa@eos.ericsson.se (Michael Salmon) Subject: Re: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? Reply-To: etxmesa@eos.ericsson.se (Michael Salmon) Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 12:11:01 GMT In article , Michael K. Minakami writes: > I have some 8khz mulaw sound samples that I got off of a Sun > SparcStation and have been trying to play them over a T1 line through > a voice response unit. When I listen to it over a phone, voice sounds > nasal and music sounds equally distorted. The most interesting > phenomenon I've come across so far is that a sample of Yaz's "I before > E except after C", which should say "You can see the difference," > comes out as "You can sue the difference." (There's one for the legal > dept. :) Whether or not /i/ turn into /u/ seems to depend on context, > as it happens quite often but not all the time (though for a given > sample it will consistently happen in the same place.) I am not very familiar with the U.S. system so perhaps you can consider this just my $.01's worth, however I thought that you used A-law rather than mu-law; I don't remember the details of the differences but I think that they are both logarithmic laws but with different slopes. Perhaps someone else can give more expert information. Michael Salmon #include Ericsson Telecom AB Stockholm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 09:58:15 PST From: MNeary.El_Segundo@xerox.com Subject: Re: American Express and ANI Reply-To: MNeary.El_Segundo@xerox.com No need to give your name ... I always howl with laughter whenever the crime-solver shows on TV give out their tip hotline number (800 or 900 of course) with the reassurance that there's "no need to give your name". It's carefully worded *not* to actually say that the call is anonymous. Friends think I've gone bonkers until I explain. "Can they afford to trace every call? That must be expensive!" Mike ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Rate Table For 900 Numbers Date: 7 Jan 92 14:29:13 EST (Tue) From: unhtel!paul@senex.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer) Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services In article GC.SUL@Forsythe.Stanford. EDU (Sullivan) writes: > Is there a vendor that keeps track of rates for 900 number service? > If others are interested, let me know, in the absence of a canned > ready-made rate table perhaps one could be built. I wish it were that simple. At first, they seemed to be priced by "exchange", but now each number can have a different rate, so such a table would be large, to start with. As far as I know, the rates can also change at any time, so such a table would have to carry effective dates, and be updated frequently. Also, the billed duration often does not match the SMDR duration (and our PBX, like many, does not receive/make use of answer supervision) so we wait for the LEC billing tapes and rebill these calls. This is one case where the caller often has a better idea of the cost of a call than they do for "normal" calls, so billing an "average" price per minute or per call, although recovering our costs, would not be fair and would not go undetected. As you said, if anyone has a better way, many of us would be interested. Maybe a special "time and charges" data link ...? Paul S. Sawyer - University of New Hampshire CIS - paul@unhtel.unh.edu Telecommunications and Network Services - VOX: +1 603 862 3262 Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523 - FAX: +1 603 862 2030 ------------------------------ From: ellisond@rtsg.mot.com (Dell H. Ellison) Subject: Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 22:11:59 GMT garyd@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Gary Deol) writes: > Does anybody know why the middle number in a area-code is always a > zero or one? Things that make you say Hmmmmmmmm :^) Yes. To differentiate between the area-code and the office code. (The office code is the first three digits of a seven digit number.) The office codes used to have the middle number be any number, EXCEPT zero or one. That way the switch could easily tell the difference. This is not true anymore. You now see office codes that are not restricted in this way. Dell H. Ellison ...!uunet!mcdchg!motcid!ellisond Motorola, Inc. ------------------------------ From: nickless@antares.mcs.anl.gov (Bill Nickless) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 18:13:42 -0600 Subject: Re: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana Quoting John R. Levine: > Bell said they were dissapointed; claimed that C-ID would not be > valuable if blockable, and wasn't sure whether they'd submit a > modified proposal. I find it quite strange that Illinois Bell and Michigan Bell found the service valuable enough to offer, but somehow another Ameritech subsidiary in a neighboring state doesn't. But, of course, Ill. Bell and Mi. Bell also weren't sure if blockable CID would be valuable either. Hmmmm ... Bill Nickless +1 708 972 7390 ------------------------------ From: rees@dabo.citi.umich.edu () Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Tue, 7 Jan 92 17:27:17 GMT In article , tep@tots.Logicon.COM (Tom Perrine) writes: > 239-KING is now (this morning) a recording of "Happy Birthday" to > Elvis. It repeats once, then hangs up. Right now it's a series of beeps that sound almost like a busy signal, followed by some very slow modem tones (300 baud?). If anyone can decode them, I'd be curious to know what it is. That number is +1 619 239 5464. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 92 09:15:54 -0500 Reply-To: jkw@Kodak.COM From: jkw@Kodak.COM (Jerry K. Wagner) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits In TELECOM Digest V12 #13, Jeff Sicherman writes: > It's hard to believe that Spike Jones didn't do *something* on this > subject (how could he resist using the phone as a musical instrument?). > Any fanatics out there that could check his 'catalog' ? Spike Jones did a recording called (something like) "My New Year's Resolution." One verse of it contains the following by Doodles Weaver: "I resolve not to tell a corny joke." Ring-Ring (phone ringing in time with the music) "Hello! What's that? The church burned down? Holy Smoke!" Also, in the song "Chloe," the phone rings at least twice and one side of the conversation can be heard on the recording. Person who answered phone: "Hello! You don't say! You don't say!" Other person listening: "Who was that?" Person who answered phone: "He didn't say!" Jerry Wagner ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 16:35:24 PST From: fergusom@scrvm1.vnet.ibm.com (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: Re: Voice Mail and TDD: Rolm Organization: Rolm Systems In TELECOM Digest V11 #1026 Item 4, Curtis E. Reid writes: > Recently last month, Rolm announced that it is provided TDD capability > to its Voice Mail system. > Who is the best source of contact at Rolm to inquire about the Voice > Mail and the TDD capability? Anyone with any questions about this should contact Mark Bonine of Rolm Company at (408) 764-8050. He should be able to handle any questions one might have. (He doesn't have Internet mail access right now, so if you want to ask via e-mail, feel free to send your questions to me and I will forward them on to him.) Mickey Ferguson Rolm Systems FergusoM@scrvm2.vnet.ibm.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor From: tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook) Date: 6 Jan 92 01:21:40 GMT In article Mark Walsh writes: > After a few hassles about who's name it was listed under, > she had the listing changed to "OTHERS, THE." The Seattle phone book has a listing for "WART, THE". This belongs to my longtime friend Andrew Friedman. When we were about 13, for some reason Andy told his friends that from then on he wanted to be addressed as "The Wart." He even had business cards printed that said nothing but "The Wart." He took great joy in ceremoniously presenting these to people, saying nothing, and then walking away. The name stuck, and annually for the past 27 years we have looked forward to his yearly party, "The Wart Feast." Barry Mishkind (barry@coyote.datalog.com) writes: > Well, my friend was still unable to understand the situation, but she > did as asked, and opened the telephone book to find that she was, > indeed, the _very_ first entry, "0'Neill, T.J." ...etc. And that was > the way it stayed all year! A couple of years ago I convinced US West to list my ham radio call letters in the residential listings. It wasn't easy. I had to convince them that I had a roommate named KT7H. I thought it would be funny to see it listed between the commercial broadcast stations KSTW and KTZZ. The telco was very suspicious that I was trying to get a business listing on a residential line. When the phone book came out though, it was the first year (1990) that the Seattle directory had separate residential and business listings in the white pages. So KT7H showed up between IGNAC KSHENSKY and CHU SHANE KU instead. Later that year US West called me and told me that there had been an administrative decision not to allow numbers to be mixed with names in the residential listings. I guess they had some standard software that used a limited character set for the residential listings, although businesses could still get listings such as AAAAAAAA-1 INSURANCE. They said they had a similar problem with a guy who wanted his name listed with an exclamation point. I kept looking for any exceptions that they had made for anyone else, but they would not budge on this. One thing that occurred to me was that there is a tribe in Africa that uses the exclamation point in the English written form of their names, to note the 'click' sound common in their language. Alas, I could not find anyone listed like this in the Seattle directory. Otherwise I would have used this as an example where they were making an exception, so why couldn't I have my listing too? Since the numerical characters were not part of the range of permissible characters in their system, this presented special problems for directory assistance. I know that when my out of town ham friends tried to find the number for KT7H, they couldn't. Yet it was right there in the directory for one year. I know this seems weird, and it is. But hams are funny about their calls. Tad Cook | Phone: 206-527-4089 | MCI Mail: 3288544 Seattle, WA | Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 3288544@mcimail.com | USENET: tad@ssc.wa.com or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 23:29:16 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article nha2308@dsachg1.dsac.dla.mil (Susan B Huntsman ) writes: > There were in this country two very large monopolies. The larger of > the two had the following record: The Vietnam War, Watergate, > double-digit inflation, fuel and energy shortages, bankrupt airlines > and the 8-cent postcard. > The second was responsible for such things as the transistor, the > solar cell, lasers, synthetic crystals, high fidelity stereo > recording, sound motion pictures, radio astronomy, negative feedback, > magnetic tape, magnetic "bubbles", electronic switching systems > microwave radio and TV relay systems, information theory, the first > electrical digital computer, and the first communications satellite. > Guess which one got to tell the other how to run the telephone > business? > [Moderator's Note: Very clever, Susan ... but you are forgetting that > federal judges always know what's best for us, the unwashed masses, as > they set about the business of saving us from ourselves. :) PAT] You (and others) are welcome to your political opinions, whether I agree with them or not. I'm even willing to listen to them, sometimes ad nauseum, when there is at least a peripheral relationship to an aspect of telecom. Personally, I think when you start passing through posts like this that you are starting to abrogate your responsibilities as Moderator and turn the Digest into a soapbox for one political philosophy or another with no light shed on aspects of telecom. There are plenty of other forums on the nets for this kind of stuff. Get back to your job, PAT, please, or take a leave of absence and reflect on what the job ought to be. Jeff Sicherman [Moderator's Note: I take it you didn't like the joke. Maybe you are correct. Perhaps I'll just cease publication for awhile, allowing the readers to spend the time reading more Socially Responsible newsgroups and Digests instead of this little journal. I'll have you know if I sold the Digest at the checkout line in supermarkets I could get 75 cents per issue easily. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 09:10:43 -0800 From: Doug Faunt Subject: Re: Who Picked Exchange Names? Has anyone built a file of exchange names? I din't see anything in the archives that was obviously that. In Columbia, SC, our telephone number was 36765, and then it was ALpine3-6765. The "new" exchange in town was POplar. This was in the 50's. We also had a two-party line, shared with my grandmother, who lived next door, and that must have lasted into the 60's. [Moderator's Note: We do not have such a file in the archives. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 92 07:27:25 PST From: martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) Subject: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language By now my fascination with intercept recordings and with calling remote places is well documented. On a whim I called Baker Lake, NWT 819-793-1234 and got an intercept recording in some Eskimo language. I've kept it for possible future use on my answering machine. Does anyone know any even more isolated places with interesting recordings? Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #15 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14957; 8 Jan 92 1:29 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10437 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 7 Jan 1992 23:37:38 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05843 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 7 Jan 1992 23:37:13 -0600 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 23:37:13 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201080537.AA05843@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #16 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Jan 92 23:37:11 CST Volume 12 : Issue 16 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Panasonic TP-500 Information Wanted (Bob Denny) Device Wanted to Screen Junk Calls (Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.) Device Wanted to Bridge ISDN Interface Pair (Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.) Party Lines: Two, Four, Eight-Party Semi-Selective Ringing (J. Cereghino) I Wasn't Billed For USA Today 800 Call, Were You? (David Ptasnik) Caller ID Device Wanted That Dials Back to Callers (Loran N. Yourk) HOLD Device Wanted For Residential Line (Don Maslin) Where Can I Find 1-2V 25kohm Amplified Speaker For Modem Card? (S Hinckley) PBS Documentary "Empire of the Air" (Allen Pellnat) How Do I Hook Up a Starset? (Scott Hinckley) Re: T1 on Fiber? (Alan Boritz) GSM and SPC Voice Compression (Mike Weal) Job Opening in Telecom (FRASER@ccl2.eng.ohio-state.edu) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: denny@dakota.alisa.com (Bob Denny) Subject: Panasonic TP-500 Information Wanted Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 05:35:34 GMT Organization: Alisa Systems, Inc. I have a Panasonic TP-500 cell-tel phone. On the whole, I like it a lot, especially for the price I paid and the 3W on battery (great for LA power wars). I have a couple of questions: (1) How can I program it? The store reps said that it requires an external box. Is this true? If so, it's the first "modern" phone I have heard of needs a box. (2) How can I attach a hands-free microphone without buying an entire fixed mount kit? (3) From day one, the phone has had an annoying habit of going BZZZZT in your ear during a conversation. It occurs far more often in the crowded LA area than in rural areas. The person on the other end hears a 1/2 s. interruption but no buzz or other noise. I can hear the T/R relay in it click at the tail end of the buzz burst. What is this? Is it a design flaw or can it be adjusted out? If you have any answers, please email me at denny@alisa.com. If anyone else wants to have these answers, let me know by email as well. Thanks in advance. Robert B. Denny voice: (818) 792-9474 Alisa Systems, Inc. fax: (818) 792-4068 Pasadena, CA (denny@alisa.com, ..uunet!alisa.com!denny) ------------------------------ From: isus!hoyt@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.) Subject: Device Wanted to Screen Junk Calls Organization: International Society of Unified Science Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 00:27:44 GMT I would like a cheap device that connects to the phone line that answers with "If this is a junk call, please press 1, Personal, 2 etc. Use your imagination about what happens if you press 1 :-). Hoyt A. Stearns jr.| hoyt@isus.org 4131 E. Cannon Dr. | Phoenix, AZ. 85028 | voice _______USA_________|_602_996_1717__ ------------------------------ From: isus!hoyt@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.) Subject: Device Wanted to Bridge ISDN Interface Pair Organization: International Society of Unified Science Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 00:25:02 GMT Is there a commercial device available which can bridge an ISDN U interface pair (2B1Q), and separate out the two signal directions (and possibly analyze the data)? If not, I have sketched out some designs -- is there much of a market for such a thing? (I sure could have used one whilst working at GTE, but couldn't find one.) Hoyt A. Stearns jr.| hoyt@isus.org 4131 E. Cannon Dr. | Phoenix, AZ. 85028 | voice _______USA_________|_602_996_1717__ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 01:17:37 PST From: cereghin@netcom.netcom.com (Jon Cereghino) Subject: Party Lines: Two, Four, and Eight-Party Semi-Selective Ringing rlatham@mailbox.frwdc.rtsg.mot.com asked about how party lines work. I'm going to give an explanation as I understand. My intent is to explain things at a level most everyone can follow. Don't be insulted. There are three types of party lines in the former Bell System: two-party, four-party, and eight-party semi-selective ringing. Two-party lines have customers attached to the central office (C.O.) as if they are extensions of the same number. Both parties are connected to, and dial calls from, the same physical pair. Ringers, however, are wired differently. The two parties are called tip-party and ring-party. The ring party, for example, is sent ringing battery by the central office across the ring conductor and the central office ground. A local ground must be run from the telephone company protector to the telephone set to complete the circuit. So, party lines require three-conductor inside wire if the bell is to ring. With two-party service, it's possible to have automatic number identification (ANI). A high resistance to ground is added to one party's phone and the C.O. bills that party whenever it "sees" that ground while a billable call is being dialed. How can you tell if your exchange has ANI? If an operator asks what number you're calling from after you dial long distance, it doesn't. Most of us have single-party service which uses bridged ringing: the bells are connected across the tip and ring conductors and no ground is required at the phone. Four-party takes this scheme and builds on it. There are two tip- and two ring-parties. Two different ringing battery frequencies are produced by the C.O. for each side of the pair. I don't recall frequencies, but say one tip-party is on the tip side at 30 hertz ringing and the other at 60 hertz. The ringers are frequency- selective and only ring for "their" correct frequency. If everything works right, bells only ring at the dialed location. Eight-party semi-selective is just as it sounds. Take a four party and double the number of tip and ring parties. There are four tip- and four ring-parties. Now, for every ringing frequency we send out from the C.O., we ring two customers' bells. In order for customers to tell who the call is for, the C.O. sends short rings or long rings to identify which party the call is for. That's where the name semi-selective comes from! It has a funny effect on people: they stop everything for a few seconds when the phone rings until they can identify whether the ring is short or long. Jon Cereghino cereghin@netcom.com C-Message Weighting BBS (408) 377-7441 2400 8N1 via PSTN... ------------------------------ From: David Ptasnik Subject: I Wasn't Billed For USA Today 800 Call, Were You? Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 9:05:24 PDT I thoroughly searched my November and December bills, and I as not billed for several calls to the {USA Today} number on any of the lines from which I tried it. I don't believe I've read of anyone else who made the calls but did not get billed. Did anyone else in US West or greater Seattle territory also dodge this bullet? I do not have AT&T as my primary carrier, perhaps this made the difference. Makes one suspect that AT&T *asked* local Bells to bill 800 calls as 900's and that some did not comply. Also, has anyone yet been told that the charges would not be removed? Without arguing the merits of the actions of our Moderator, has anyone been told by AT&T or a local telco that "We are aware of your scheming ways, and we will never credit you for these calls!!!!!!" I have not seen or heard an official pronouncement yet from AT&T or a regional. Has there been one put out that I missed, or are they chosing to deal with the issue on a case by case basis? Enquiring minds want to know. Dave davep@u.washington.edu [Moderator's Note: I can state with assurance -- unfortunatly! -- that Illinois Bell charged for the calls. They appeared in Section 2 (Long Distance Calls) of my December bill entitled '700/900 Calls'. I got by for only a few dollars, which I paid. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 12:12:11 EST From: lyourk@ihlpm.att.com (Loran N Yourk) Subject: Caller ID Device Wanted That Dials Back to Callers Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Now that I can subscribe to CID, I would like to find a stand alone (or even one built into a phone) CID box which would store numbers and have buttons which would dial the currently displayed number. The only units I have seen are the three AT&T models which store numbers along with date and time called. AT&T also has a phone which has the CID box built in along with buttons dedicated to the various CLASS features but it doesn't allow the automatic dialing of any number on the display. Are there any other units which will allow the automatic dialing of stored numbers? What other boxes are available and what features do they have? With all the various interpretations of the NANP dialing plan (1 + prefix/no prefix or dial area code/don't dial area code) the box might have to be flexible to accommodate for the variations. Loran Yourk lyourk@ihlpm.att.com Disclaimer: These are not the opinions of AT&T [Moderator's Note: Is there any truth to the rumor that customers who subscribe both to Caller-ID and telco voicemail (by whatever name) will someday soon get the calling number 'voice-stamped' on messages in their mailbox along with the time and date as at present? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 92 22:45:50 PST From: donm@pnet01.cts.com (Don Maslin) Subject: HOLD Device Wanted For Residential Line Many of the newer residential use telephones, being sold by AT&T Phone Store and others, are now coming equipped with a HOLD button which functions in the same manner as on multi-line instruments. Recollection suggests that stand-alone HOLD devices were marketed several years ago which were actuated by going on-hook momentarily and then hanging up, and the device was released when any instrument went off-hook (or some similar mode of actuation and release.) Does recollection serve me correctly? If so, are such devices presently available? From whom, and at what price? Thanks for the help. UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!donm ARPA: crash!pnet01!donm@nosc.mil INET: donm@pnet01.cts.com [Moderator's Note: I think Radio Shack has what you are seeking. PAT] ------------------------------ From: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com (Scott Hinckley) Subject: Where Can I Find 1-2V 25kohm Amplified Speaker For Modem Card? Date: 6 Jan 92 19:29:07 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com The subject line pretty much says it all. I need a speaker capable of handling 1-2V high impedance (25kohm) input that has an internal amplifier. This is what my voice-mail card needs for me to monitor call and modem progress. scott@hsvaic.boeing.com ------------------------------ From: agp@cci632.cci.com (Allen Pellnat) Subject: PBS Documentary "Empire of the Air" Organization: Computer Consoles Incorporated Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1992 18:22:36 GMT There will be an airing of a PBS documentary that should be of interest to many readers of comp.dcom.telecom and the various amateur radio groups. It is titled "Empire of the Air". Subtitled: "The Men Who Made Radio". It is a biographical study of Lee DeForest, E.H. Armstrong and David Sarnoff and how they developed "wireless telegraph" into the broadcasting and electronics industies we know today. I am presently about a third of the way through the companion book of the same title by Tom Lewis, published by Harper Collins Publishers at $25.00. One of the most fascinating personal and corporate biographies I've ever read. It touches on the involvement of government in R&D and the lone inventor versus the R&D sweatshop as well as the personalities of the three and how they influenced each other and the fledgling industry. Locally here in Rochester it is scheduled for 9:00 PM, January 29th on WXXI, Channel 21. Look for it in your local listings. While I'm at it I'll drum once for my own local tie-in to this book and documentary, the Antique Wireless Association. The dust cover of the book is a reproduction of the cover of December 1926 "Radio Broadcast" magazine and several of the photos included in the book are from the AWA collection. Many of the equipment pieces that will be shown in the TV version are from the AWA collection. If any readers are interested in more information about the AWA, (a bargain at $10.00 per year membership), they may drop me an e-mail response to this posting. ------------------------------ From: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com (Scott Hinckley) Subject: How Do I Hook up a Starset? Date: 6 Jan 92 21:38:47 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com I have inherited (with a box of misc-elctronic junk a friend gave me) a hands-free headset called a Starset. This consits of a small unit that clips over your ear which has an earpiece and a speaking tube. There is a wire coming out of it that ends in a 2-prong (tip/sleeve on each prong) plug. What do I need to plug it into to make it work? scott@hscaic.boeing.com ------------------------------ Date: 06 Jan 92 19:26:21 EST From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: T1 on Fiber? grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) writes: > In article S_ZIEGLER@iravcl.ira.uka.de > writes: >> Recently I talked with an AT&T rep (for T1 service) about T1. Somehow >> we were talking about the 'wire'. And he mentioned that the wire would >> be FIBER. Well, 1.5Mbps and FIBER that does not sound reasonable, >> because fiber is very EXPENSIVE. > Fibre is not EXPENSIVE. > Fibre is CHEAP - to repeat - FIBRE IS CHEAP. But it's INFERIOR service. The City of New York got into a battle with New York Telephone on that issue in '87. A bunch of circuits were ordered for a City-owned building in lower Manhattan. NY Tel couldn't (or wouldn't) locate pairs (or duct space for a new service entrance), so they pulled in fiber. NY Tel asked where to plug in the power for their mux, and my former boss politely told them where to put the plug. :) >> So, is this true? Do they install some type of 'NETWORK TERMINATOR' at >> the customers premises, or how do they handle this? > They install a fibre transceiver at the customer premises in the same > way that they would have installed a transciever for copper cable. > The only real difference is that the fibre transceiver is CHEAPER than > the copper transceiver Conventional telephone service on copper facilities are self-powered, so there is no need for a power supply at the subscriber's drop. Providing continuous power for mux equipment isn't cheap, so a customer who wants the same reliable service as one served by copper facilities has to spend more to get the same thing that everyone else gets as part of the basic service. So the tariff'd services telco provides on fiber facilities SHOULD be cheaper for its customers, since it's something of LESSER value than what customers are provided with COPPER facilities. Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Subject: GSM and SPC Voice Compression From: mweal@questor.wimsey.bc.ca (Mike Weal) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 23:04:39 PST Organization: Questor - Free Internet/Usenet*Vancouver*BC::+1 604 681 0670 I have been looking for information on realtime voice compression, in particular GSM and SPC. My understanding is that SPC is a European standard, and GSM is a compression technique used by AT&T. Could anyone help find a full description of these compression techniques. Thanks, Mike Weal (mweal@questor.wimsey.bc.ca) The QUESTOR Project: Free Public Access to Usenet & Internet in Vancouver, BC, Canada. BBS: +1 604 681 0670 FAX: +1 604 682 6659 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 92 09:17 EDT From: FRASER@ccl2.eng.ohio-state.edu Subject: Job Opening in Telecom Job opening: Director, International Center for Telecommunications Management ICTM at the University of Nebraska at Omaha has begun a national search for a new director. The ideal candidate will have experience in international telecommunications management, economics, or policy with expertise in one or more geographic ares, i.e., Asia-Pacific Rim, Africa, Europe, etc. Position requires a doctorate for tenure track faculty appointment in one of the departments of the College of Business Administration. Ideal candidate will possess a broad knowledge of the telecommunications industry with experience in research, obtaining funding for research, administering research projects, and outstanding administrative and interpersonal skills. Initial closing date: January 15, 1991. Send resume/cv to Mr. Tom Livingston, Asst. Dean, College of Business Administration, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE 68182. Telephone: 402/554-2675 Telefax: 402/554-3747 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #16 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21751; 9 Jan 92 2:23 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09515 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Jan 1992 00:25:38 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01036 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 9 Jan 1992 00:25:16 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 00:25:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201090625.AA01036@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #17 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Jan 92 00:25:09 CST Volume 12 : Issue 17 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago (Don Kimberlin via Alan Boritz) America's Future (John Higdon) Are 950 Numbers Dying Off? (Emmanuel Goldstein) Sprint Along the Towpath (Gordon Grant) Autodialing a Digital Phone (Kevin P. Kleinfelter) Digital Cellular Telephony (Anindadeb Vijaykumar Dasgupta) Information Age Media Bites (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) Dialed as 800, Billed For 900 (Paul S. Sawyer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 06 Jan 92 19:27:23 EST From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago I thought TELECOM Digest readers might like this entertaining piece about Western Union's time service, from the FidoNet FCC conference (not distributed as a newsgroup), submitted by Don Kimberlin. Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com The year: 1962 The place: Fort Lauderdale, FL - a time when "Miami" was still a separate market, and people listened to local radio. However, no network affiliates in Ft. Lauderdale, only Miami. The prelude: I was CE of a 10 kW AM and a 33 kW FM in Ft. Lauderdale. I'd be bothered when I drove to Miami and ran out of range of my own station, finding my watch was a couple of minutes off, and have to set it. Then, I'd get back to Ft. Lauderdale and have to set it again. But, nothing ever clicked. The scene: We used WUTCo clocks, but never really joined a network program, so the jocks never griped about the clocks. One day, I get a "pink letter" in the mail from the FCC Monitoring Station about 12 miles west of Ft. Lauderdale, citing us for violating Section 73-whatever-it-is - "Transmitting False Signals," stating they had observed our announcements of time that was two minutes off. I of course tune in WWV, and by golly our WUTCO clocks _are_ two minutes off. Now, the mystery of my watch comes clear! The action: I call WUTCo at Ft. Lauderdale. That's a whole `nother story. Suffice it to day WUTCo's rules for people that answered the phone seemed to require they did not answer for 189 rings, then be 125 years old and be totally uncommunicative. The Dialogue: (after 189 rings for 20 minutes): "Hullo?" "Is that Western Union?" "Yup." "My clocks seem to be two minutes slow here." "You'll have to talk to the Wire Chief." (long silence) "Well, may I speak to the Wire Chief, please?" "He's not here." "When will he be back?" "Never." (To reduce the time for this typically painful exchange with WUTCo, I'll revert to summary mode.) It finally ensued that I learned the magic of WUTCo clocks was that each local area had a "Master Clock" that ran like an old schoolhouse clock with a punched paper tape to ring the bells -- except that a WUTCo local master clock had only one set of holes at the top of the hour. When it ran past the holes, it send a two-second pulse down a local telegraph loop that had all the clocks wired in series like teleprinters. Receiving this current pulse would operate the solenoid in the clocks that pulled their second and minute hands up to the top of the hour, in some models illuminating a red light while the pulse was on. The operation was that in each local area, it was the distinct "job" of the Wire Chief to be there at noon daily, to get a "click" on the sounder of one national wire, and set their local Master Clock to the once-a-day time from the national "click." At Fort Lauderdale, the Wire Chief had been promoted out of town _two_years_ previously, so it was nobody's job to set the local Master Clock. Well, I had my answer for the FCC. "Dear FCC: I have investigated the source of false signals you observed and found they were caused by erroneous information supplied by the Western Union Telegraph Company's failure to maintain its tariffed Clock Service. Since Western Union personnel have told me they do not intend to correct the error in their tariffed service, we have instituted measures to obtain correct time from WWV. There should not be a recurrence of the false signals." Well, it took about two days for the phone calls to start -- from inside every crack and crevice of Western Union, from Upper Saddle River to Hudson Street to Washington to Atlanta to Jacksonville to Miami. A hundred or so insects came out of the WUTCo woodwork: "Mr. Kimberlin? This is ______ from Western Union. Why didn'tn you call me about the problem with your clocks?" "Where did you emerge from? Who are you? How the h--- would I ever even know you existed?" "Well, that's all beside the point now. I want you to know that _I_ have taken personal steps to see that your clocks will function perfectly from now on. If you _ever_ have _any_ problem with _anything_ at Western Union, I want you to call me personally. Here's my unlisted direct in-dial number at my desk." I collected a huge list of names and numbers, and it seemed from that day on that I never failed to get responsive service from WUTCo after that. The story actually has a point: It doesn't matter if it's telegraph, phone, electric, gas, water, sewer or bus company. If you take the time to find out what they are really selling, and you can couch your complaint in the terms of that tariffed deal with the public, you can make it stick if you have to ... and from then on, you'll have a whole different relationship with them. They _will_ know your name and they'll _want_ to make you happy the next time you call ... kinda like the famous joke about the Quaker with the mule! (I have only used this trick three times in 34 years -- on WUTCo, Southern Bell, and GTE of Florida -- buit it sure works! If some BBS users and sysops would learn enough to use it, they'd find a whole new relation with the Phoneco. They're doing a bit of that in Missouri now, and finding out how easy it is to overcome the stonewalls most people scream at and lose to. -!- WM v2.00/91-0073 ! Origin: AET BBS - (704) 545-7076, 84,000+ Files (6300 megs)(1:379/16) [Moderator's Note: We had WU clock service for many years. Fortunatly, I was able to grab two clocks when they discontinued the service in the middle sixties; and I have both clocks running in my house, without the setting circuit, of course. I knew where there were a dozen more, but within days of WUTCO discontinuing the service the clocks were ripped off by collectors (like me!) ... (: I'll mention more about this in a couple days if someone reminds me. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 22:46 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: America's Future From an organization that calls itself the "United States Telephone Association" comes, on a national scale, the old blather about "America's future is too important to be put on hold". On KGO today during the afternoon drive was a spot that told a heart-warming story about how a deaf woman could "talk" daily with her son on the telephone with the aid of [what I assume was] TDD equipment. "This service could be offered by your local phone company, but there are some in Congress ... [blah, blah, blah]" Now it appears that the RBOCs have banded together to spread the gospel of "Total Telco Control" by taking a page from Pacific Telesis and spreading the garbage nationwide. The spot made sure that we, the listeners, were left with the impression that only the telcos could provide the service mentioned in this touching story and that meanies in the Congress were standing in the way. It also concluded with that stupid line about the spot NOT being paid for by ratepayer money. (Why do I have such a hard time believing that money is taken out of stockholder dividends for this campaign?) The telcos are going for the gold, and they mean business! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: emmanuel@well.sf.ca.us (Emmanuel Goldstein) Subject: Are 950 Numbers Dying Off? Date: 7 Jan 92 08:38:41 GMT One of the better deals offered by long distance companies over the years has been the 950 service. This allows customers to use a long distance company of their choice from any touch tone phone as if they were calling from their homes, i.e. no surcharges. Over time, however, I've noticed that it's becoming increasingly difficult to get such services and that those that do exist seem to be dying off. Just yesterday, I talked to a US Sprint representative who told me that instead of using my seven digit authorization code with no surcharge, I would now have to use a 14 digit code and pay a 75 cent surcharge for every call! My days with Sprint have reached an end. Does anyone know why this is happening and what can be done to stop it? 950 service could be quite a money-maker if the idiots only marketed it properly. I was making a great deal of LOCAL calls over Sprint and actually saving over the New York Telephone rate from payphones. Instead of dropping a quarter into a phone to tell a friend I was meeting them someplace or to check messages on my voice mail, I would dial 950-1033, enter my code, dial the number, and pay about 13 cents for a one minute call. Not to mention all of the long distance calls I was also able to make. Now I'm expected to pay a huge surcharge for the same service. What is the rationalization for a surcharge when you're not doing anything above or beyond what the service is designed for in the first place? I'd be interested to know how many companies still actively offer 950 service. I know that MCI discontinued their 950-1986 service a while ago and that their 950-1022 number carries a surcharge. Allnet's 950-1044 didn't have a surcharge last I checked but their rates seemed much higher than other 950 numbers. Cable and Wireless still offers a good deal at 950-0223 and Metromedia (formerly ITT) has the only 950 number that allows you to use the same code from anywhere in the country at 950-0488. However, with each of those two companies, you have to put up quite a fight to get the service. I let Sprint know exactly why I wasn't doing business with them anymore and I intend to spend lots of money on those companies that still offer 950 service. Perhaps more of us can do the same. emmanuel@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ From: gg@jet.uk (gordon grant) Subject: Sprint Along The Towpath Message-ID: <1992Jan7.090636.18812@jet.uk> Organization: Joint European Torus Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 09:06:36 GMT On BBC radio last night the programme 'The Financial World Tonight' reported that US Telecommunication company Sprint had signed a deal with British Waterways the organisation which controls the canal system in the UK. The agreemant will allow Sprint the lay underground cables along the towpaths besides all the canals in the UK. A spokesman for Sprint said that the towpaths were a friendly enviroment for cables. He went on to say that in the US Sprint had installed 23000 miles of cable and had challenged AT&T Dominance of the market by providing a superior service and being responsive to customers needs. It would do the same in the UK with this investment of 200 million UKP. gg@jet.uk Gordon Grant Jet Abingdon OX14 3EA UK Voice +44 235 528822 x4822 Fax +44 235 464404 Disclaimer: Please note that the above is a personal view and should not be construed as an official comment from the JET project. ------------------------------ From: msa3b!kevin@gatech.edu (Kevin P. Kleinfelter) Subject: Autodialing a Digital Phone Date: 7 Jan 92 15:17:49 GMT Organization: Dun and Bradstreet Software, Inc., Atlanta, GA We've got an AT&T System 85 PBX. We've got digital phone sets hooked to it. We've got hundreds of customer service reps who need to call our clients. We'd like to have either their PC or a central computer autodial the call. If we had analog phone sets, I'd just plug the phone set into a cheap autodial modem, and plug the modem into the wall. AT&T can sell us a new digital phone set, with a modem built into it, but the cost is prohibitive. I thought of building a Y connector, to have a rep's handset and a modem wired in parallel, and then plug that into the phone (since the handset HAS to be analog). I don't know if this would work due to voltage, current, etc. I though of having one modem on a central computer, dial the call and transfer the call to the rep's extension. This is unreliable because the time to place a call (before it can be transferred) is variable, I can't get enough feedback from the modem, and it is possible for someone ELSE to call the rep before I can get the call transferred. Since we're talking about hundreds of reps, I'd like to find a way to have a modem (or a few modems) do the dialing, instead of a modem for each rep, so I'd like to find some way to make this work. Any suggestions? Kevin Kleinfelter @ DBS, Inc (404) 239-2347 ...gatech!nanovx!msa3b!kevin Dun&Bradstreet Software, 3445 Peachtree Rd, NE, Atlanta GA 30326-1276 WARNING: I have been advised that email to kevin@msa3b.UUCP may bounce. It looks like email will have to go via 'gatech' because that is well-known. ------------------------------ From: dasgua@rpi.edu (Anindadeb Vijaykumar Dasgupta) Subject: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY Date: 7 Jan 92 18:08:34 GMT I read somewhere that in most large cities cellular carriers are switching to digital systems due to saturation of existing cells. I couldn't tell what the advantages of this would be: With analog transmission, each equipment would need 4 KHz. while with 8 bit PCM, 64 Kbps would be needed, which would surely translate to a higher frequency than 8 KHz. This definitely does not free up any bandwidth. Are these carriers using source coding? Won't that make the cellular phones more expensive/bulky? I am not a telecom person and maybe I am missing the point here. Could someone explain the advantages of digital over analog (other than improvement in voice quality, if any) in cellular systems? Thanks in advance. Aninda DasGupta (aninda@networks.ecse.rpi.edu) ------------------------------ Subject: Information Age Media Bites From: stapleton@misvax.mis.arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) Date: 7 Jan 1992 11:39 MST Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department I'll be teaching a course this coming semester on "Issues for the Information Age," and I am looking for interesting media bites (in the range of a minute or two) to use as conversation starters in the various segments of the course. The course will cover issues like privacy, mass-marketing databases, government and other surveillance, national security, man-machine "relations," etc. Ideas thus far include: * "Wopper" in "War Games" (on technological dependence & risk) * Robert Redford playing with the Bell System in "Three Days of the Condor" * HAL and Dave Bowman in "2001" * Doomsday device from "Dr. Strangelove" (and the "Doomsday gap!") I'd greatly appreciate other suggestions from this forum, bearing in mind that the Information Age is so much a telecommunications issue -- the ideal "bite" would be short and sweet, and ideally humorous ... something to spark the imagination (and this would include very dated clips ... I really want to use a scene from Spencer & Tracy's "Desk Set," with the giant computer with the acre of blinking lights and spinning tapes ... too fun!). Thanks for your help! Ross stapleton@mis.arizona.edu, stapleton@arizmis.bitnet ------------------------------ Subject: Dialed as 800, Billed For 900 Date: 7 Jan 92 14:48:25 EST (Tue) From: unhtel!paul@senex.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer) Well, we just got hit with it ... our LEC bill "as a service to AT&T" is billing us for calls (back to October) to 900-555-5555 (USA Today). While we do NOT block 900- calls, the SMDR records clearly show the calls to have been dialed as 800-555-5555. Since we do not require authorization codes on 800- (once thought to be "free") calls, we cannot really bill individuals for these ... Should we send a flyer to campus saying: "Since AT&T is now converting some calls dialed as 800- calls to 900- calls and billing for them, we now will have to request an authorization code on 800- calls, and will bill you accordingly. We suggest you listen carefully to all 800- calls you make to catch any hints of charges."? (1/2 :-) Paul S. Sawyer - University of New Hampshire CIS - paul@unhtel.unh.edu Telecommunications and Network Services - VOX: +1 603 862 3262 Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523 - FAX: +1 603 862 2030 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #17 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24970; 9 Jan 92 3:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04247 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Jan 1992 01:33:00 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05806 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 9 Jan 1992 01:32:13 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 01:32:13 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201090732.AA05806@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #18 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Jan 92 01:32:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 18 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Kurt Guntheroth) Canadian Caller-ID Specs (Bob Fillmore) 'Mother-in-Law' Field (was Caller-ID Chip Spec Sheet Humor) (Ralph Hyre) Re: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana (Peter da Silva) Re: Caller ID Device Wanted That Dials Back to Callers (R. Kevin Oberman) Re: Caller ID Device Wanted That Dials Back to Callers (Bob Miller) Name Stamped Voice Mail (David Ptasnik) CCITT Recommendation E.124 (Nigel Roberts) Re: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? (Clifton Koch) Re: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? (David Lemson) Re: T1 on Fiber? (David G. Lewis) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) Subject: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Reply-To: kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 16:27:54 GMT I now understand that ANI is not Caller ID, and that 'blocking' caller ID may not have the desired effect when you call a business. Would someone in the know please concisely explain: * What, exactly, is "Caller ID", as technical people describe it? * What, exactly, is ANI? * What are the differences between these two things that determine whether or not a properly equipped receiver can get your phone number, especially in places that (1) don't currently offer Caller ID (2) offer blocking of one kind or another? * Does the answer vary depending on exchange, and is there a way I can find out how my exchange is configured? ------------------------------ From: fillmore@emr1.emr.ca (Bob Fillmore 992-2832) Subject: Canadian Caller-ID Specs Organization: Dept. of Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 21:05:28 GMT I have been following the progress of the Caller-ID feature, and recently I bought a demodulator device (from Rochelle) and started writing a program to process the Caller-ID data. I compared a hex dump of the data to the spec published in the Bellcore documents and posted to this group recently. The message formats are quite different, with the only the preamble (hex 55) and checksum appearing to be the same. I am now assuming that there is a different standard in Canada for the Caller-ID message format. Does anyone have documentation, or know where to get it, for the Canadian spec? Any help is much appreciated. Bob Fillmore, Systems Software & Communications email: fillmore@emr.ca Information Technology Branch, BIX: bfillmore Energy, Mines, & Resources Canada Voice: (613) 992-2832 588 Booth St., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0E4 FAX: (613) 996-2953 ------------------------------ From: rhyre@cinoss1.ATT.COM (Ralph W. Hyre) Subject: 'Mother-in-Law' Field (was Caller-ID Chip Spec Sheet Humor) Date: 7 Jan 92 21:34:57 GMT Reply-To: rhyre@cinoss1.ATT.COM (Ralph W. Hyre) Organization: AT&T OSS Development, Cincinnati In article peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 1051, Message 12 of 12 > lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein) writes: >> But when you look at the sample data message shown for the extra 109 bits >> ... because it says "MOTHER IN LAW"! [Isn't this a data field description? MOTHER IN LAW is 14 bytes in ASCII. A dialed number (234) 567 8901 is 10 characters, which is easier to fit, even at 10 bits/char.] > ... It could be the CB/vanity plate craze of > the 21st century. With only 109 bits (why 109? What's the character > set?), you'll have to think carefully: "IN 4 THE MONEY", ... My impression was that these bits were for delivery of the CALLED number. With Ringmate/Distinctive Ring and other features, the you can have many different numbers terminating on one line. 'Mother in law' describes a typical application perfectly: Imagine you are fulfulling the 'husband' role in your home: Call for: 555-1313 (your mother in law, who is staying with you for a few days.) From: 555-1212 (your wife, who is calling from work to check on her) [this suggests that you don't want to answer it, as the call is not for you.] disclaimer: I haven't looked at the REAL CLID spec from Bellcore, but I do have the Motorola data sheet. This is all a WAG, but if I have come up with a new service idea, please let me know :-! Ralph W. Hyre, Jr. E-mail: rhyre@cinoss1.att.com Snail: Box 85, Milford OH 45150-0085 Phone: +1 513 629 7288 Radio: N3FGW ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 09:54:07 GMT > Bell said they were dissapointed; claimed that C-ID would not be > valuable if blockable, and wasn't sure whether they'd submit a > modified proposal. As a would-be customer of CLID, I would *prefer* a CLID system that offered blocking and block-blocking to one with no blocking. But, of course, Ma Bell still hasn't learned to listen to her customers. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: Caller ID Device Wanted That Dials Back to Callers Date: 8 Jan 92 16:44:50 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Is there any truth to the rumor that customers who > subscribe both to Caller-ID and telco voicemail (by whatever name) > will someday soon get the calling number 'voice-stamped' on messages > in their mailbox along with the time and date as at present? PAT] We have our own 5ESS and an Octel voice mail system. All messages from internal phones are stamped with the number of the caller. All others are stamped "from an outside caller". If you block the number when calling (*67), you still get a stamp of "from an outside caller", even though it isn't. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: oberman1@llnl.gov (510) 422-6955 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 07:38:36 PST From: Bob Miller Subject: Re: Caller ID Device Wanted That Dials Back to Callers Loran N. Yourk writes: > Now that I can subscribe to CID, I would like to find a stand alone > (or even one built into a phone) CID box which would store numberrs and > have buttons which would dial the currently displayed number. Northern Telecom has a 'Maestro' phone which stores the numbers that have called and allows you to redial them. They are also have a new phone which will display the name of the caller when that service becomes available (I assume this is the contents of the 109 bit field which was discussed here a short while back), I don't remember off hand what this phone is called. Both phones are on sale in phone stores in Toronto, with 'Communications Canada' stickers on them, I don't know if they are FCC approved of if Northern intends to market them in the U.S. What I would like to see in a phone: - Associate a phone number with a name (and set of attributes) - Have a relay on the ringer to disable the 1'st ring - Attributes include: My name for caller - eg. first name of friend, MOM, Teleslease Action to take on incoming call - Close relay and enable ring (this would be for close friends and mom who would only call if there was an emergency late at night) - Close relay if in accept mode - Ignore call - let ring - Pass call to answering machine Alternate phone numbers for same person - Optional integration with answering machine, possible costomized message on answering machine depending on caller - Accept/Deny call mode. This would be activated by a button with visual indicator when in deny mode. Mode would also automatically be set depending on time of day, etc. What do you want to bet that Japan Inc. will beat North America by mass marketing at a reasonable price point a real phone? P.S. I forgot to mention a serious flaw in the Maestro phone if you have an answering machine or answer the call on another phone. It will not record the number of a called party if the call was answered. I think that this is corrected in their new phone. Bob Miller / Digital Equipment of Canada Ltd. Views expressed are mine, Digital rarely listens to me. ------------------------------ From: David Ptasnik Subject: Name Stamped Voice Mail Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 8:39:39 PDT > [Moderator's Note: Is there any truth to the rumor that customers who > subscribe both to Caller-ID and telco voicemail (by whatever name) > will someday soon get the calling number 'voice-stamped' on messages > in their mailbox along with the time and date as at present? PAT] I suspect that the rumor is true. The University of Washington is primarily a Centrex environment. We have our own Octel voice mail system. US West passes the calling party number as well as the called party number to our voice mail system. It then tells the recipient of a message the name of the person leaving the message, if the person leaving the message has voice mail and is using their personal line. As Centrex is essentially just a microcosm of the telco, I feel very confident in saying that they could do the same thing if they wanted to. Particularly when you consider that US West uses an Octel system for their voice mail. If they think it will make more money, they will almost certainly implement it. One real advantage to this feature is the ability to record messages and replies to messages and have them delivered directly into a person's voice mail box. Often I don't need to talk to someone to reply to their questions, leaving a message is sufficient. By sending a recording straight to their box I avoid having to deal with their receptionists, or even the ring delay before their box answers. Dave davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 04:25:11 PST From: Nigel Roberts 08-Jan-1992 1322 Subject: CCITT Recommendation E.124 I recently obtained copies of the CCITT E series Recommendations (Blue Book) in order to do some research into a complaint I have about the British cellular telephone systems, Cellnet and Vodafone. (Regular readers of the Digest may remember my original posting). At this point I'd like to offer a big thank-you to the Telecom readers who put me on the right track, and I will report back if I have any success or if there are any further developments. However, while reading through the Recommendations (light bed-time reading :-) I came across E.124 and I thought it would be of interest to a number of readers: "Recommendation E.124 DISCOURAGEMENT OF FRIVOLOUS INTERNATIONAL CALLING TO UNASSIGNED OR VACANT NUMBERS ANSWERED BY RECORDED ANNOUNCEMENTS WITHOUT CHARGE. 1. Preamble It sometimes happens that there is a severe outbreak of international calling to telephone numbers that answer with recorded announcements without charge. It seems that some subscribers make such calls merely for free amusement. Frivoulous calling can occur unnoticed by an Administration unless it is deliberately looked for, and serious degradation of quality of service can result. This Recommendation concerns prevention and abatement of frivolous international calling " (Sections 2, 3 and 4 go on to deal with Monitoring, Prevention and Abatement). Now I wonder who'd do such a thing? Nigel Roberts +44 206 396610 / +49 69 6672-1018 FAX +44 206 393148 ------------------------------ From: koch@rtsg.mot.com (Clifton Koch) Subject: Re: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 23:57:11 GMT minakami@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Michael K. Minakami) writes: > I have some 8khz mulaw sound samples that I got off of a Sun > SparcStation and have been trying to play them over a T1 line through > a voice response unit. When I listen to it over a phone, voice sounds > nasal and music sounds equally distorted. The most interesting I'm not sure what you mean by a voice response unit. Are you sure it is expanding the Mu-law companded data before the D-A conversion? It sounds as though it is trying to reproduce the companded information directly. CVK .. [uunet | mcdchg | gatech]!motcid!koch ------------------------------ From: lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson) Subject: Re: Playing Digitized Sound Over T1 == Distorted Sound? Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 05:57:25 GMT etxmesa@eos.ericsson.se (Michael Salmon) writes: > I am not very familiar with the U.S. system so perhaps you can > consider this just my $.01's worth, however I thought that you used > A-law rather than mu-law; I don't remember the details of the > differences but I think that they are both logarithmic laws but with > different slopes. Perhaps someone else can give more expert > information. In the U.S. we do definitely use mu-law. You use A-law in most European countries. David Lemson (217) 244-1205 University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson NeXTMail accepted (but use ASCII for quicker response) BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: T1 on Fiber? Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 13:59:20 GMT In article 72446.461@CompuServe.COM (Alan Boritz) writes: > grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) writes: >> In article S_ZIEGLER@iravcl.ira.uka.de >> writes: >>> Recently I talked with an AT&T rep (for T1 service) about T1. Somehow >>> we were talking about the 'wire'. And he mentioned that the wire would >>> be FIBER. Well, 1.5Mbps and FIBER that does not sound reasonable, >>> because fiber is very EXPENSIVE. >> Fibre is not EXPENSIVE. >> Fibre is CHEAP - to repeat - FIBRE IS CHEAP. > But it's INFERIOR service. The City of New York got into a battle > with New York Telephone on that issue in '87. A bunch of circuits > were ordered for a City-owned building in lower Manhattan. NY Tel > couldn't (or wouldn't) locate pairs (or duct space for a new service > entrance), so they pulled in fiber. NY Tel asked where to plug in the > power for their mux, and my former boss politely told them where to > put the plug. :) > Conventional telephone service on copper facilities are self-powered, > so there is no need for a power supply at the subscriber's drop. > Providing continuous power for mux equipment isn't cheap, so a > customer who wants the same reliable service as one served by copper > facilities has to spend more to get the same thing that everyone else > gets as part of the basic service. So the tariff'd services telco > provides on fiber facilities SHOULD be cheaper for its customers, > since it's something of LESSER value than what customers are provided > with COPPER facilities. If, however, you look at the entire range of parameters that make up "quality of service" instead of just whether the telco or the subscriber provides the power, you might get a different answer. For example: fiber has bit error rates in the range of 10^-11, compared to between 10^-3 and 10^-7 for copper. Fiber supports automatic protection switching (although most LECs don't, particularly if they're putting a single DS1 on fiber, which they wouldn't do anyway...), copper doesn't. Teleport Communications Group (disclaimer: where I used to work) cites BERs of 10^-11 and availability of 99.999+% for its customers, all of whom are provided service via fiber. I believe the standards for copper T1s are 10^-6 BER and availability of 99.9%. The TCG availability figures include loss of customer-provided power (although it was a contractual arrangement between TCG and the customer for the customer to provide UPS power, and in particularly critical arrangements, TCG would provide battery backup). Overall, I would strongly question the blanket statement that "services provided on fiber facilities ... are of lesser value than (those) provided on copper facilities." I would restate it to sat say something more like "services provided on fiber facilities may require a different commitment to support the service on the part of the customer, which the customer may be unwilling to support if the benefits of fiber are not sufficient." David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #18 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18952; 10 Jan 92 2:49 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29276 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 10 Jan 1992 00:48:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01500 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 10 Jan 1992 00:47:56 -0600 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 00:47:56 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201100647.AA01500@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #19 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Jan 92 00:47:51 CST Volume 12 : Issue 19 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Honda 800 Line Flooded by Caller (Sanford Sherizen, RISKS via Thomas Lapp) Rotary Callers Go Home! (Larry Rachman) GTE Sells its Last Part of Sprint (Dave Leibold) Cellular Prices Go Up (Dave Leibold) AT&T Drops The Ball? (John Higdon) Interesting Advertisement (John R. Levine) Repeat Dialing Question (Doug Thackery) Trying to Locate "PCN/PCS" Expert Russel Neuman (J. Butz) Need NPA Exchange Lists for 216 and 619 (Douglas W. Martin) Emulation Software Wanted for IBM-PC (cmdsold@usachvm1.bitnet) Help Identify This Network (Rick Honaker) PC Based PBX (Ken Jongsma) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 19:14:57 EST From: Thomas Lapp Subject: Honda 800 Line Flooded by Caller [Moderator's Note: Thanks also to Dave Leibold and others for submitting this to the Digest. PAT] -------------- Sanford Sherizen, in a recent issue of the RISKS Digest, discusses a {Boston Globe} report of a disgruntled Honda owner flooding several 800 phone lines. I have his permission to repost this along with a followup that he is also submitting to the RISKS Digest. He would be interested in answers to the questions he poses. +++++ begin forwarded text ++++++ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 92 21:57 GMT From: Sanford Sherizen <0003965782@mcimail.com> Subject: Customer Clogs Honda 800 number {The Boston Globe} (December 30, 1991) reported that a disgruntled Honda owner called its "Better Business Bureau Information Line" toll-free customer relations number so many times that he clogged the line. He did the same to other 800 numbers used primarily by Honda employees and dealers. In both cases, he presumably used an automatic redialing mechanism (Daemon Dialer). He then began tying up a Honda facsimile number by transmitting muti-page letters during a four-day period. American Honda Motor Co. says that it was forced to ask AT&T to step in and block the calls which allegedly came from a Holliston, Mass. home. However, AT&T security said that it also had to block any calls to the Honda numbers for the entire 508 area code, which covers west and north of Boston. Attempts to reach the Holliston complainer was not possible since his phone is unlisted! I seem to remember that a televangelist's number was tied up in a similar fashion a few years ago and there has been rumours of political candidates' phones being plugged by their competition. How common is this form of destructive behavior? It will be interesting to see whether AT&T does some form of call or line blocking on this individual. How can phones be made open except for certain parties who overstep bounds? When are there too many calls and when is the line crossed into harassment? Is this a case where caller ID would have "proven" harassment? Under what conditions is someone no longer allowed "phone rights?" Was the Los Angeles judge's denial of telephone use by Ian Mitnick to prevent him from connecting to a computer in any way related in a legal sense to this present incident? Good story to end 1991. The year of ousted regimes, stalled economies, and phone disorders. Sort of an updated version of Sex, Lies, and Videotapes, to be called Lex, Slides, and Telegaps. Sanford Sherizen, Data Security Systems, Inc., Natick, MA 01760 +++++++++++ End of Forwarded Text ++++++ I told Sanford that since it was an 800 number, it was certainly possible for the people owning the 800 number to determine the caller's phone number through ANI. Sanford also suggested that I send along the following followup to his original posting. +++++++++++ Begin Forwarded Text +++++++++ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 01:56 GMT From: Sanford Sherizen <0003965782@mcimail.com> Subject: Customer Clogs Honda 800 Number (Cont.) There is more about this incident. According to the TAB, a very good local newspaper in this area, Daniel Gregory has been charged with telephone harassment after he made at least 100 phone calls in one day and faxed a 14-foot computer banner saying "Dan Gregory is unhappy with his Honda." Gregory admitted making the calls. "It could have been as many as 100 in one day," he said last week. "MAYBE I OVERDID IT. BUT EVEN IF THAT WAS THE CASE, SO LA DE DA." (Emphasis added by me to highlight why the U.S. is in decline) He made a comment about the long fax. "A roll of fax paper is $12 at Staples (office store). We're talking about a multi-million dollar company getting mad because I use a lot of fax paper?" While this story has received some coverage around the U.S., it has been treated as if it is a funny story. Some form of man-bites-Honda. The fact is, however, that this incident shows a vulnerability of technology. Is this phone clogging almost a virus-type phenomenon? Can it be possible on a larger scale? Say someone doesn't like their boss, the Internal Revenue, their ex-spouse, a political candidate, a computer network, or some other party. Then "la-de-da" is the right response. For all we know, Gregory may run for national office on the La De Da Platform. Oops, sorry, I think that political platform is already taken by at least one other candidate for president. Sanford Sherizen, Data Security Systems, Inc., Natick, MA 01760 USA ++++++ End of forwarded text ++++++ tom internet : mvac23!thomas@udel.edu or thomas%mvac23@udel.edu (home) : 4398613@mcimail.com (work) OSI : C=US/A=MCI/S=LAPP/D=ID=4398613 uucp : {ucbvax,mcvax,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas Location : Newark, DE, USA ------------------------------ Date: 07 Jan 92 19:57:04 EST From: Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Rotary Callers Go Home! Well, it was bound to happen eventually. I called Casio, at 800-762-1241, and got the following recording: "Thank you for calling the Casio Referral Hotline. If you are calling from a touchtone telephone, press one now. If you are calling from a rotary dial telephone, please call back on a touchtone telephone. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ And if you don't have one, tough luck! (I guess). Larry Rachman, WA2BUX reply to 1644801@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 22:50:57 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f126.n480.z89.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Subject: GTE Sells Its Last Part of Sprint GTE until now held onto a 19.9% share of US Sprint, the number three long distance carrier. That 19.9% has now been sold to United Telecommunications for $530 million, with expected closing of the first $250 million 31st January 1992 and the balance in cash 1st July 1992. United Telecom will then adopt Sprint's name. In the USA, GTE remains as the largest non-RBOC local telco while being the number two cellular service provider. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f126.n480.z89.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 22:43:53 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f126.n480.z89.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Subject: Cellular Prices Go Up Bell Canada and Cantel will be raising their cellular rates soon. The average increase will be on the order of 7-9% according to {The Toronto Star}. Some customers will reportedly experience a 20% increase. The increases generally affect the access rates such as Bell's $24.95 to $124.95 (increasing to $29.95 to $139.95) or Cantel's $24.95 access rate (going to $29.95). Bell has a "Lifeline" rate of $9.95 which will not be changed (though this might involve higher connect time charges). Both cellular carriers are offering long-term contracts which would allow customers to keep the current rates, but the catches with these are three-year contract periods and high cancellation penalties (up to $400 reported). Bell Cellular's price hike takes effect 1st Feb 1992; Cantel raises its rates on 1st March 1992. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f126.n480.z89.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 16:56 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: AT&T Drops The Ball? Early today I complained to AT&T about the abysmal connections to the Hawaiian islands. As has been discussed here before, there is a delay that is variable even during the same call; there are varying levels of background hiss; the audio is distorted; and below a certain threshold, the audio is actually chopped off. What finally set me off was that I happened to have occasion to use a client's ComSystems (it never occurred to me to use my own for calls to the islands!) service. Each and every call of about ten was clear, noiseless, without annoying transmission delays, etc., etc. Sure enough, using my own account with ComSystems, the calls are perfect. So far, AT&T has not seen fit to respond to my complaints. Fortunately, I have ComSystems to fall back on. But it is really sad when the quality leader is aced by a second-string industry player. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Subject: Interesting Advertisement Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 21:23:11 EST From: John R. Levine I noticed this quarter-page display ad in the {Air Travel Journal}, a free newspaper distributed at Logan airport in Boston. Roughly reproduced: Caribbean Bound? Cellular telephone service is available on St. Maarten, St. Barths, Anguilla, etc. --- on land or sea! Bring your own and dial "0" for instant "credit card" roaming. Phones available for rent or purchase. If you would like to receive our rates and terms by mail or fax, call 617-566-8613. E. CARIBBEAN CELLULAR ST. MAARTEN, 011 5995-22100 I'll call them in the morning and have them fax me the info, you never know when it might be useful. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: thackery@rtsg.mot.com (Doug Thackery) Subject: Repeat Dialing Question Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 16:53:31 GMT My question is, does repeat dialing allow people to "camp on" a dialed number and stack up in the order that they dialed, causing people without it to be blocked from ever seizing that line? I guess radio contests would be a possible application, but in my case it has been trying to access the number of a Cineplex Odeon theater to get shows and times. I used to be able to get through by manually dialing. It might have taken eight times or so but at least I was usually able to get through. Now I can't at all. Is it possible that people with repeat dialing are stacked up on this number thus making it impossible for me to get through? Currently repeat dialing is not available in my area so if this proves to be the case then I am s.o.l. until it becomes available. doug [Moderator's Note: I think it only checks every few seconds to see if the called line has become available (especially if the called party is on another switch somewhere) as opposed to instantly knowing the status of the called line. Therefore, a 'free lance' dialer -- someone manually trying to get in -- could catch the line during a period of a few seconds when it is free and seize control. I don't think the service is truly 'camp-on' in a technical sense, but rather, just a Demon Dialer like thing in the CO. People with repeat dial, try this experiment: Dial yourself, and of course, get a busy signal. Pass it all to *66 or whatever repeat dial is in your exchange. The system will respond saying 'the line is busy, if it is free in the next 30 minutes you will be notified with a special ring ...' Hang up. In a few seconds, you'll get the special ring, but when you pick up, after a few seconds of silence, you'll get the message 'the number you were trying to call *was* free, but it has become busy again ... ' Well of course it became busy again in that short interval, since you picked up to answer the ringback! This will continue for thirty minutes, or until you use *86 to cancel your 'repeat dialing request'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbutz@homxa.att.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 92 08:39 EST Subject: Trying to Locate "PCN/PCS" Expert Russel Neuman I read with great interest a commentary from the Sunday {New York Times}, Week in Review section on PCN/PCS. The article mentions W. Russel Neuman, from MIT, who presented his visions of personal communications networks to the FCC. Does anyone know if he can be reached on the net, also might anyone know if a transcript of the FCC hearing is available (in particular W. Russel Neuman's talk)? J. Butz jbutz@homxa.att.com 908 949 5302 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 92 11:53:51 PST From: martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) Subject: Need NPA Exchange Lists For 216 and 619 About a year ago, there was a mention in this Digest that in addition to exchange lists for NPA-809 and the Canadian area codes, lists were available for U.S. area codes. I need lists for area code 216 (Cleveland Oh) and 619 (San Diego Ca). How might I obtain these lists? Thanks, Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil [Moderator's Note: These lists are not in the Archives simply because there are so many, and space is somewhat limited. I'm turning your request over to Dave Leibold and Carl Moore, both of whom have very extensive lists of area codes and associated prefixes. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue Jan 7 16:59:24 1992 From: CMDSOLD@USACHVM1.BITNET Reply-To: CMDSOLD@USACHVM1.BITNET Subject: Emulation Software Wanted for IBM-PC I am finding information about a emulation software for the IBM-PC. I need a resident software lower than 120 Kb in RAM memory for SDLC remote communication between a IBM-PC and a HOST IBM 4381. Do you have any information about this? Do you have where I can find it? Please send me electronic mail to: CMDSOLD@USACHVM1.BITNET. (I'm not in this list) Thanks in advance. Luis R. Valdivia P. ------------------------------ From: rickh@gnh-starport.cts.com (Rick Honaker) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 92 05:43:41 (EST) Subject: Help Identify This Network When I dial the system (the phone number escapes me, I am calling from work) answers and offers no identification at all, nor does it prompt for a logon. I have used Telenet and Tymnet before and this doesn't look (to me) like either. It's command prompt is a * (instead of the familiar Telenet @). It reacts to commands like, SET (to set different parameters, i.e. SET 1,1 would set parameter 1 to the value of 1), PAR will show the value of all the parameters (I think there are 12-15 of them) CALL will attempt a connect of some sort but I have no clue as to the address snytax. STA will return the current status of the particular node. All of these examples are just my theories, if anyone has seen a system resembling one like this please lend a hand. Please! Rick Honaker InterNet : rickh@gnh-starport.cts.com UUCP : crash!gnh-starport!rickh ARPA : crash!gnh-starport!rickh@nosc.mil [Moderator's Note: It sounds suspiciously like some dialect of whatever Sprintnet/Telenet uses. Your local telco's net, perhaps? Illinois Bell has a packet network with the same characteristics you are describing. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: PC Based PBX Date: Tue, 7 Jan 92 20:55:04 EST From: Ken Jongsma It seems to me that several people have asked about PC based PBX systems. I just came across the following in {Communications Week} and thought it might be of interest: Start-up PCBX Systems Inc. has developed what it is calling the first PBX to run on a personal computer. The PCBX is a PC card that can give any telephone set full PBX functionality, said the Woodland Hills, California company. The card can be plugged into any IBM compatible PC and handle up to 16 trunks and 48 lines. The system can choose long distance carriers, provide Direct Inward Dial service, specify calling restrictions and provide full call management. Each board, which supports 4 trunks and 12 lines, costs $1800. The system, which can support four boards, is available now. I know nothing more about this ... Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org Smiths Industries jongsma@benzie.si.com Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115,1041@compuserve.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #19 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10530; 11 Jan 92 2:37 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17861 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 10 Jan 1992 23:51:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20467 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 10 Jan 1992 23:50:58 -0600 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 23:50:58 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201110550.AA20467@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #20 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Jan 92 23:50:54 CST Volume 12 : Issue 20 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Those Are REAL Phone Numbers! (Jack Winslade) RFC822 Address Case Sensitivity (Stephen B. Kutzer) Unidentified Telecom Equipment (Scott Dorsey) 900 Number Advertisements and Charges (Michael Rosen) MCI Calling Card from Canada (David Ash) Need Phone Service (Michael J. Logsdon) Inexpensive Voicemail System Needed For 100 + Users (Sissy Kelly) VME Fax Modem Hardware? (Dean Neumann-Grant) Part 68 FAQ (kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil) Baby Bells Hit New Low (David Niebuhr) Mu-Law Versus A-Law (Joseph Chiu) Modem/Fax/Voicemail/Sound Blaster Wanted (Saad Husain) Data-Under-Voice Hardware Wanted (Jean Renard Ward) Re: Telecom Humor (Gary Segal) Selling TELECOM Digest (was Phone Humor) (Robert L. McMillin) I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex (was Phone Humor) (Michael Nolan) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 16:21:38 cst From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Those Are REAL Phone Numbers! Reply-To: jack.winslade@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha I've been following the various messages about 555-xxxx and Klondike-5 and all of that, but this morning I was thumbing through the December 1991 issue of the {National Lampoon} (yeah, I admit to being a regular reader and an infrequent contributor for 20 years ;-) and I noticed what appear to be real numbers in one of their comic strips. One panel of Kyle Baker's _Petty_And_Vindictive_Funnies_ contains a panel showing four faces with the caption 'Four people who deserve to get laid and their phone numbers' and four phone numbers, one in 818 AC and the others in 212 AC. 'Dana 212-673-xxxx, Bill 212-976-xxxx, Bob 212-645-xxxx, Marcia 818-954-xxxx' I am assuming 212-976 is an 'information' prefix, but I KNOW that 645 is a real Midtown Manhattan prefix with real dialable numbers and I believe 673 is as well. I dunno about the 818-954 prefix. Now I know NatLamp has done some borderline stuff, but I am very curious as to where those numbers came from. ;-) (Not curious enough to dial them, though.) Remember that this is not the world's straightest publication. I can ALMOST see them publishing some real numbers just to see who will call them. (Remember, these are the guys who published a parody of the famous floating Volkswagen ad that featured Ted Kennedy.) Good day! JSW Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.5 DRBBS, Omaha. Farewell to Admiral Grace (200:5010/666.0) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Jan 92 13:39:16 EST From: "Stephen B. Kutzer" Subject: RFC822 Address Case Sensitivity In TELECOM Digest V12 #15 hpa@nwu.edu wrote: > This is really not necessary. According to the appropriate RFC's, the > Internet and all other system using RFC-compliant addressing should > ignore case in the address ... This is not quite true. According to RFC822, the userid portion should maintain case sensitivity, while the hostid portion is case insensitive. Most systems won't care one way or the other, but the odd gateway (such as the SoftSwitch SMTP gateway) might, so it's best to preserve the case to the left of the '@' synmbol. >From RFC822 section 3.4.7: 3.4.7. CASE INDEPENDENCE Except as noted, alphabetic strings may be represented in any combination of upper and lower case. The only syntactic units which requires preservation of case information are: - text - qtext - dtext - ctext - quoted-pair *----emphasis---> - local-part, except "Postmaster" When matching any other syntactic unit, case is to be ignored. For example, the field-names "From", "FROM", "from", and even "FroM" are semantically equal and should all be treated ident- ically. When generating these units, any mix of upper and lower case alphabetic characters may be used. The case shown in this specification is suggested for message-creating processes. Note: The reserved local-part address unit, "Postmaster", is an exception. When the value "Postmaster" is being interpreted, it must be accepted in any mixture of case, including "POSTMASTER", and "postmaster". Stephen B. Kutzer 703-769-2900 I-NET, Inc. cotrcsbk@sea04vm.navsea.navy.mil ------------------------------ From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Unidentified Telecom Equipment Organization: NASA Langley Research Center Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 00:07:29 GMT I find myself the proud possessor of an _Atlantic Research Corporation_ brand "control signal generator." It's a small box whose cover opens to expose a dial, provision for a handset, and various switches to place it on-hook, select two or four-wire line, lights marked E and M, and three buttons. I presume this is used to simulate an exchange on a trunk line for testing. I got it to tear the hybrid out, but upon investigating it I find that it's not that great a hybrid, and it looks like it might make an interesting telephone. Does anyone have any documentation on such a device? scott ------------------------------ From: Michael.Rosen@samba.acs.unc.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: 900 Number Advertisements and Charges Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 01:00:31 GMT Seeing as I was sitting in front of the TV today (I got my wisdom teeth out today ..:( ), I happened upon Geraldo on the tube. At one point in the show, possibly the end, a 900 number was put up on the screen for the show that stated that the call cost "only $1 dollar." It did not say $1 per minute, just $1 dollar. Is this deceptive advertisting? Surely they are not going to charge only $1 dollar for this call. Years ago, when I was a kid, I called a 900 number that let you listen in on the NASA astronauts communications that had been announced as being a .50 cent call on the local tv news. I told this to a friend and he went ahead and made the call, leaving the phone off the hook for a long time ... after all, it was supposed to be .50, let's get the most out of it -- that was our thinking. Of course, the bill came later ... Mike ------------------------------ From: ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (David Ash) Subject: MCI Calling Card From Canada Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 02:26:21 GMT When using my MCI calling card from Canada to the U.S. recently for an evening call, the call was identified on my bill as being from "Originating City, North America". i.e. the billing system appeared not to know it was from Canada. When the charge for use of the calling card was deducted, it appears to reflect this -- the charge was about 15 cents a minute, a typical domestic U.S. rate. However, I have also used the calling card from Canada to the U.S. and had the call billed as being from "Ontario, Canada". In this case the billing system apparently knew the call was from Canada and charged the appropriately higher international rate of about 40 cents a minute. Obviously there's a big difference between 15 and 40 cents a minute for the exact same service. Does anyone know what gives here? 40 cents a minute is the standard evening rate for U.S.-Canada traffic, so I have no "right" to the lower rate, but all the same it would be nice to know if there's any way to tap into the 15 cent rate. Does the originating Canadian city matter? David W. Ash ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu HOME: (415) 497-1629 WORK: (415) 725-3859 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 23:51:31 -0500 From: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael J. Logsdon) Subject: Need Phone Service Reply-To: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu Here in Ohio Bell-land, our building manager is being denied residence telephone service. It seems that his roommate moved out with a $200 balance on the roommate's bill, which was in the roommate's name. Our manager cannot get service because he lived there and had access to the phone. Now, we can't reach him in case of a building breakdown. Does anyone have a suggestion as to how, as his employer, we can help resolve this problem for a VERY GOOD employee? Mike Logsdon am339@cleveland.freenet.edu 216-831-2213 [Moderator's Note: Perhaps telco would accept your personal guarentee in lieu of a deposit. Or, what about simply paying off the old bill, with the understanding telco will no longer associate the former poor payment record with the present manager and his account? PAT] ------------------------------ From: sissy_k@npri6.npri.com (Sissy Kelly) Subject: Inexpensive Voicemail System Needed for 100 + Users Date: 9 Jan 92 16:49:28 GMT Organization: NPRI, Alexandria VA I am looking for an inexpensive voice mail system that would support at least 100 users. We currently have a Meridian SL-1 system. I am open to all suggestions. Please send me any information you have. Thank you. Sissy sissy_k@npri.com ------------------------------ From: dean@tgivan.wimsey.bc.ca (Dean Neumann-Grant) Subject: VME Fax Modem Hardware Wanted Date: 9 Jan 92 18:14:45 GMT Reply-To: dean@tgivan.wimsey.bc.ca Organization: TGI Technologies Ltd. I'm looking for information on VME based modems and/or fax hardware and would appreciate ANY input, even just a company name, on where I might find these. Can anyone give me any leads? Thanks. Dean Neumann-Grant TGI Technologies Ltd Vancouver, British Columbia Canada ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 01:11:11 EST From: kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil Subject: Part 68 FAQ I hope this isn't too FAQ, but ... Is there a copy of Part 68 lying around (anon ftp) somewhere? Has anyone gone through Part 68 in a small business environment? Is it a big deal? I'd like to approve a small device (handful of parts) for attachment to Mama Belle (from Fr. for "beautiful mother") and wonder what I might look forward to without a big gun attorney and a Part 68 Department. I'll summarize e-mails, or post here if you think we'd all like to know. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 07:24:09 -0500 From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) Subject: Baby Bells Hit New Low The Baby Bells and the United States Telephone Association have descended to the pits with an ad in yesterday's papers. The ad set a scenario of a group of doctors in Upstate New York operating on a little child for a rare blood disease. The doctors were supervised by a physician in New York City, over a hundred miles away. The thrust was for letting the Baby Bells and USTA into the information providing services and that lives could be lost if they aren't allowed to enter that arena. The ad urged readers to contact their Representatives and Senators and demand that they approve legislation letting them into the information services. I always knew that the BB's were low-lifes but this is going too far. It's o.k. to try to generate demand for something but to go about it in this way s***s. Dave [Moderator's Note: Is the United States Telephone Association the same as (or what used to be called) the United States Independent Telephone Association? (Sometimes known as USITA). ^^^^^^^^^^^ PAT] ------------------------------ From: josephc@cco.caltech.edu (Joseph Chiu) Subject: Mu-Law Versus A-Law Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 05:17:57 GMT etxmesa@eos.ericsson.se (Michael Salmon) writes: > I am not very familiar with the U.S. system so perhaps you can > consider this just my $.01's worth, however I thought that you used > A-law rather than mu-law; I don't remember the details of the > differences but I think that they are both logarithmic laws but with > different slopes. Perhaps someone else can give more expert > information. > From Transmission Systems for Communications, 5th ed. (Bell Labs, 1982): While the mu-law has found acceptance in the North American and Japanese digital networks, the standard compression law in Europe (CEPT) is the A-law... While we're on the topic of mu-law, can someone send me the conversion table between "raw" value and it's mu-law value in binary? I still have not figured out how the binary representation works. Joseph Chiu, Dept. of Computer Science, P-NP non-equivalence project, Caltech. 1-57 California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91126. (818) 449-5457 ------------------------------ From: husain@rtsg.mot.com (Saad Husain) Subject: Modem/Fax/Voicemail/Sound Blaster Wanted Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 19:07:40 GMT I am in the market for a Voicemail and Soundblaster Pro. I would also like to upgrade my modem into a fax(s/r). The ideal solution would be if there was one card which support all of the obove options. Has anyone developed a card with these features and (if not why not! ;-))? Is it possible to hook up the soundblaster to the modem to answer/decode/digitize and playback? Am I presenting my questions properly? Thanks. Motorola Inc, N349 | Saad Husain (708) 632-3259 1501 West Shure Drive | Electronic: saad.husain@seg12.rtsg.mot.com Arlington Hghts, IL 60004 | Disclaimer: The above is all mine. ------------------------------ From: Jean_Renard_Ward@frankston.std.com Date: Thu 9 Jan 1992 10:51 -0500 Subject: Data-Under-Voice Hardware Wanted Who is aware of hardware products (and related software products) that support simultaneous transmission of data and voice on either a dial-up telephone line, or on a low-data-rate (the lower the better) communications line that I could connect to the serial port on a PC? Any help would be appreciated. Jean Renard Ward ------------------------------ From: segal@rtsg.mot.com (Gary Segal) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 00:04:14 GMT The Moderator appends: > [Moderator's Note: I take it you didn't like the joke. Maybe you are > correct. Perhaps I'll just cease publication for awhile, allowing the > readers to spend the time reading more Socially Responsible newsgroups > and Digests instead of this little journal. I'll have you know if I > sold the Digest at the checkout line in supermarkets I could get 75 > cents per issue easily. PAT] But only if you had headlines like "AT&T employes aliens as operators!" or "Navy discovers ways to use telephone to cure cancer!" or even "Dialing for dollars: how your phone number can be used to win the lottery!" :-) Gary Segal Motorola Inc. segal@oscar.rtsg.mot.com Cellular Infrastructure Division ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 02:46:58 PST From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Selling TELECOM Digest (was Phone Company Humor) Our Fearless Moderator writes: > I'll have you know if I sold the Digest at the checkout line in > supermarkets I could get 75 cents per issue easily. True, but you'd have to change the lead story to "I Called Elvis Direct -- And You Can Too!", along with "ISDN: Network of the Future or Tool of the Devil?", "Your Exchange Number Rules Your Fate", and "Joan Collins' Telephone Diet -- Lose 10 Pounds In A Week". Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com ------------------------------ From: nolan@tssi.com (Michael Nolan) Subject: I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex (was: Phone Company Humor) Reply-To: nolan@tssi.com Organization: Tailored Software Services, Inc. Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 15:36:16 GMT ... but only if you had headlines like: I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex 911 Staffed by Monsters 106 Year Old Woman Runs 1-900 Sex Phone for Seniors Lose 10 Pounds in a Week By Phone 5 Cent Pay Phone Located in Manhattan Do Cellular Phones Cause Cancer? But seriously folks, let's not reactive the 'I Hate PAT' fan club. I didn't read the original post (comparing the two monopolies), but enjoyed it when I read it in the followup. There, now my secret is out -- I don't read EVERY post in comp.dcom.telecom. (I'm *so* ashamed!) Everybody take a deep breath, then lighten up, OK? Michael Nolan, nolan@tssi.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #20 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10648; 11 Jan 92 2:39 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27015 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Jan 1992 00:44:49 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13265 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 11 Jan 1992 00:44:11 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 00:44:11 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201110644.AA13265@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #21 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Jan 92 00:44:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 21 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Rolf Meier) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Ron Dippold) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Dan J. Declerck) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (John McHarry) Re: How Do I Connect Two Lines Together at Home? (Richard Tilley) Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language (Floyd Davidson) Re: Email Between AT&T Easylink and the Internet (William J. Carpenter) Re: HOLD Device Wanted For Residential Line (Don Maslin) Re: T1 on Fiber? (Peter da Silva) Re: America's Future (Allen Gwinn) Re: America's Future (John R. Levine) Re: AT&T Drops the Ball (Eric Florack) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: meier@Software.Mitel.COM (Rolf Meier) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 12:11:03 -0500 Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article dasgua@rpi.edu (Anindadeb Vijaykumar Dasgupta) writes: > With analog transmission, each equipment would need 4 KHz. while with > 8 bit PCM, 64 Kbps would be needed, which would surely translate to a > higher frequency than 8 KHz. This definitely does not free up any > bandwidth. Are these carriers using source coding? Won't that make > the cellular phones more expensive/bulky? > I am not a telecom person and maybe I am missing the point here. > Could someone explain the advantages of digital over analog (other > than improvement in voice quality, if any) in cellular systems? You raise a good question. The simple answer is that there probably won't be any improvements in audio quality with digital cellular, and the improvement in spectral efficiency is only due to some special compression techniques. First, the existing analog cellular system (AMPS) has assigned 30 kHz of bandwidth per voice channel. This is somewhat more than necessary, and in fact Motorola has proposed a Narrowband version of AMPS that would be spectrally more efficient by a factor of three, with little compromise in voice quality. The main proposal for digital cellular, also known as IS-54, also claims an improvement of three times in spectral efficiency. However, this is achieved mostly through low bit rate voice encoding at 8 kb/sec. This will result in poorer voice quality than standard 64 kb/sec PCM, as well as echo problems due to the extra delay of an 8 kb codec. In the long term, digital phones should be cheaper and lighter, however, as VLSI components are employed. Rolf Meier Mitel Corporation ------------------------------ From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 19:26:43 GMT dasgua@rpi.edu (Anindadeb Vijaykumar Dasgupta) writes: > I read somewhere that in most large cities cellular carriers are > switching to digital systems due to saturation of existing cells. They're moving towards it, as fast as they can. > I couldn't tell what the advantages of this would be: > With analog transmission, each equipment would need 4 KHz. while with > 8 bit PCM, 64 Kbps would be needed, which would surely translate to a > higher frequency than 8 KHz. This definitely does not free up any > bandwidth. Are these carriers using source coding? Won't that make > the cellular phones more expensive/bulky? Okay, you're assuming that the analog phone is much more efficient in bandwidth than it actually is. In actuality, each phone completely occupies a 30 KHz channel, and each phone is transmitting at thre watts for marginal quality. And it still sounds bad. With digital encoding done correctly (so you can use Viterbi decoding), you need much less power to get your data through (you're just looking for on-off instead of a FM sound waveform). In addition, if you're using CDMA, CDMA doesn't require that you divide up your bandwidth into bandwith wasting 30 KHz chunks. Intead, each phone uses exactly as much bandwidth as it needs. More phones just mean more "noise" (not noise heard by the user, but as in signal to noise ...) For example, if you had 50 users that needed computers, then the analog analagous way to do it would be to buy two mainframes, and let only one user at a time use each computer, even if all they needed to do was simple word processing. The CDMA way would be to buy one computer that was 20 times more powerful and give each user a terminal, so they only use as much of the computer power as they need, and everyone can use it at once. Even better, we use active power control (something we can do because it's digital). The mobile and cell channel elements transmit with only as much power they need. If you're close to the cell, you don't need much power. As you get farther away, it slowly boosts power. Finally, with digital we can (and do) use a variable rate vocoder. In this way CDMA makes use of the Voice Activity Factor of conversation: either of the parties involved is not saying something about 60% of the time. (Interestingly, even when we force the vocodoer to use a maximum rate of half its top rate, it still sounds better than my analog phone). What it works out to is that while an analog phone transmits at three watts, and the cell-site power requirements are truly horrible, CDMA phones transmit in the milliwatt range, and the entire cell site transmits with only as much power as a couple of the radios in the analog cell. Bottom line: We have an officially capacity tested (tests observed by the major companies in the industry) CDMA system in the field that gives a capacity improvement of 10 to 30 times (depending on conditions) over an AMPS system, with better voice quality, better handoffs, and less dropped calls. Efficient use of resources is the key (plus a lot of geniuses in the theory department, and then ignoring those who claimed we couldn't do it). One further advantage: The digital medium is a lot more flexible. When an AMPS phone has to transmit control information, the voice blanks out. With CDMA, we can just vocode at half the normal rate and send the control information in the other half of the frame. Result: undetectable loss of voice quality instead of complete loss of voice. In addition, we can divide the channel between different data sources, so you could send voice and data (from a modem, perhaps) on the same channel. What we can do is limited only by the messages we can think up to send back and forth. Another voice quality advantage: because it's a digital vocoder, rather than sending the analog waveform out, we can more easily do a lot more filtering on it. For example, continuous background noises (such as a car engine or the wind) can be severely reduced. There are further advantages, but that should be enough. ------------------------------ From: motcid!declrckd@uunet.uu.net (Dan J. Declerck) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 20:25:17 GMT The modulation techniques are not PCM, for European Digital Cellular (known as GSM) it is GMSK. This standard allows for up to 8 users to share a single channel by Time Division Multiplex (TDM) methods. Each channel is 200 KHz wide. For DAMPS (The U.S. standard) I believe it's QPSK. This standard is also TDM and has 3 timeslots. Each channel is the same width as analog. > I am not a telecom person and maybe I am missing the point here. > Could someone explain the advantages of digital over analog (other > than improvement in voice quality, if any) in cellular systems? When you fit more users on one channel, you get more call density per given (allocated) spectrum, thus more potential revenues. Also, there are added features with digital cellular, easier to do encryption, expanded services like short message pages, limited ISDN (European) services, high speed fax, etc ... The drawbacks are the cost of the subscriber equipment. Digital Cellular usually requires Power Amplifiers with short ramp-up and ramp-down times, DSP's or Custom IC's to do channel and speech encoding, etc. As with any technology, over time, the costs reduce, and the size goes down. The first Radio telephones and Cellular phones were briefcases, now they are less than 8 oz and fit in your pocket. Where do you think we'll be in five years? Dan DeClerck dand%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com ------------------------------ From: m21198%mwunix@linus.mitre.org (John McHarry) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: The MITRE Corporation Date: 9 Jan 92 14:45:54 GMT There are competing digital systems, but they all use low bit rate encoding, like vocoders. What really makes the phones more expensive/bulky is that the digital phones must all be dual-mode. Conversion will come cell by cell and system by system, so you will still have to speak AMPS for many years to come. John McHarry (McHarry@MITRE.org) ------------------------------ From: tilley@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Richard Tilley) Subject: Re: How Do I Connect Two Lines Together at Home? Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 06:38:40 GMT A suitable bookstore would have a book with the circut. I think a 1:1 transformer is the main ingredient. Less hassle to get a two line phone with the "Conference feature". Most will have it. Around $100. ------------------------------ From: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 06:50:42 GMT In article martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) writes: > By now my fascination with intercept recordings and with calling > remote places is well documented. On a whim I called Baker Lake, NWT > 819-793-1234 and got an intercept recording in some Eskimo language. > I've kept it for possible future use on my answering machine. Does > anyone know any even more isolated places with interesting recordings? That seems to be a very strange recording! Some of us here have our own translators for such things as Yupik or Inupiat. My cohort at at work tonight got his translator on line (she is from Tuktoyaktuk in the Canadian Arctic) and called that line a couple times to listen to it. His translator says that sounds like "Eastern Arctic", which would be a variation of Inupiat Eskimo. But she also says it doesn't have anything to do with the telephone, but sounds like a snip of something intended to be part of a news broadcast on the radio! Floyd L. Davidson floyd@ims.alaska.edu Salcha, Alaska ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 23:55:51 GMT From: news@cbnewsh.att.com Subject: Re: Email Between AT&T Easylink and the Internet Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories >> DDA ID-INTERNET!!EECS.NWU.EDU!!!T!E!L!E!C!O!M > This is really not necessary. According to the appropriate > RFC's, the Internet and all other system using RFC-compliant > addressing should ignore case in the address. Almost true. RFC-822 says to ignore case in the address, except for the "local-part"; ie, "TELECOM" in the above example. Although many system go the extra step of providing case-independence for the whole address for received mail, it is not guaranteed. (There's another exception: if the local-part is "postmaster", case isn't significant.) Bill William_J_Carpenter@ATT.COM or (908) 576-2932 attmail!bill or att!pegasus!billc AT&T Bell Labs / AT&T EasyLink Services LZ 1E-207 ------------------------------ From: donm@pnet01.cts.com (Don Maslin) Subject: Re: HOLD Device Wanted For Residential Line Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1992 20:16:04 GMT donm@pnet01.cts.com (Don Maslin) writes: > Recollection suggests that stand-alone HOLD devices were marketed > several years ago which were actuated by going on-hook momentarily and > then hanging up, and the device was released when any instrument went > off-hook (or some similar mode of actuation and release.) > Does recollection serve me correctly? If so, are such devices > presently available? From whom, and at what price? > [Moderator's Note: I think Radio Shack has what you are seeking. PAT] I thought so also until I checked. ;-> UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!donm ARPA: crash!pnet01!donm@nosc.mil INET: donm@pnet01.cts.com [Moderator's Note: Our local RS has (or had) a thing like the two-line controller they used to sell but with one of the keys for holding either or both lines. I thought they were still available. PAT] ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: T1 on Fiber? Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 13:06:14 GMT You missed another point in favor of fibre: Fibre doesn't conduct electricity. Cuts down the sources of surges from lightning strikes. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ From: allen@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG (Allen Gwinn) Subject: Re: America's Future Organization: sulaco Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 13:01:09 GMT In article John Higdon writes: > This service could be offered by your local phone company, but there > are some in Congress ... [blah, blah, blah]" Now it appears that the > RBOCs have banded together to spread the gospel of "Total Telco > Control" by taking a page from Pacific Telesis and spreading the > garbage nationwide. I've seen the same thing somewhere (I think it was in Dallas). Yes, this is a real interesting chain of events. I don't know what kind of chance they have at affecting any real change doing this (probably not too good). But if enough people write newspapers and television stations and attach evidence of inaccuracies in their claims, then the whole thing is liable to backfire on them. Don't you think? Allen Gwinn (allen@sulaco.lonestar.org) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: America's Future Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 9 Jan 92 11:16:08 EST (Thu) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) In yesterday's {Boston Globe} there is a full page back of the section ad in the same disinformation campaign. This one shows a sick baby in a house in a remote area, and tells lies about how remote diagnosis would be possible except the congress wants to make it illegal. It looks like it's time to make the RBOCs divest their telephone business; they're clearly not fit to run it themselves. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 06:57:58 PST From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com Subject: Re: AT&T Drops The Ball In-Reply-To: <199201100647.AA01500@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon in #19: > As has been discussed here before, there is a delay > that is variable even during the same call; there are varying levels > of background hiss; the audio is distorted; and below a certain > threshold, the audio is actually chopped off. Not unusual of late. Now, imagine trying to run 2400 or 9600 baud through that connection. :-p > So far, AT&T has not seen fit to respond to my complaints. Fortunately, > I have ComSystems to fall back on. But it is really sad when the > quality leader is aced by a second-string industry player.<< That's been that way for some time ... particularly to the Islands, though I've noted similar problems to the UK, as well as stateside connections. Our POTS hookups with several GT-NET nodes out there have been running via other carriers for some months because of this problem with AT&T lack of quality and seeming lack of concern over the problem. Your comments show quite clearly that quality is a perception thing, as much as it is a tangable. Given the outages of service we've all seen with AT&T, and the high-handed manner they deal with their customers in, even AFTER deregulation, not to mention the wet-string connections we've been seeing all over the planet of late ... your calling AT&T a quality leader is a subjective comment at best. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #21 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13173; 11 Jan 92 3:16 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07925 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Jan 1992 01:24:01 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29202 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 11 Jan 1992 01:23:22 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 01:23:22 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201110723.AA29202@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #22 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Jan 92 01:23:13 CST Volume 12 : Issue 22 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (William Sohl) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Lars Poulsen) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Joe Konstan) Re: ANI in NJ (and Other Telco Test Lines) (William Clare Stewart) International ANI is Here? (Peter Clitherow) Re: Canadian Caller*ID Specs (Tony Harminc) Re: Canadian Caller-ID Specs (Derek Andrew) Re: Caller ID Device Wanted That Dials Back to Callers (Dave Levenson) Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com (24411-sohl) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 14:40:24 GMT Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Reply-To: whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com (24411-sohl,william h) Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ In article kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) writes: > I now understand that ANI is not Caller ID, and that 'blocking' caller > ID may not have the desired effect when you call a business. > Would someone in the know please concisely explain: > * What, exactly, is "Caller ID", as technical people describe it? Caller ID is a telephone service whereby the called customer (the one who's phone is ringing) has a display device that displays the telephone number of the telephone where the call is originating from. Caller ID requires ANI (Automatic Number Identification) to be able to deliver the calling party's number to the called party's display device. > * What, exactly, is ANI? Automatic Number Identification is the inclusion of the calling party's telephone number in the routing and call setup messaging which takes place in order for the call to be established. If a "caller ID blocking" is invoked by the calling party, then (I believe) the calling party's number (using ANI) is still sent, but the additional info that the calling party does NOT want his/her number displayed to the called party is also included in the call setup messageing. The end office (the telephone switching office) of the called party then recognizes that caller ID blocking is in effect for that call and the calling party's number is NOT then displayed to the called party. I'm not 100% certain, but I belive that call blocking is ONLY involved in Intra-LATA (possibly Intra-State) calls. That is because (In my understanding) that state regulations of caller ID services do NOT apply to Interstate nor possibly Intra-state (but Inter-LATA) calls. Those situations (tariffs) are controlled by the FCC which I belive has not prohibited any aspect of caller ID. > * Does the answer vary depending on exchange, and is there a way I > can find out how my exchange is configured? Caller ID services require an end-to-end capability using an electronic signaling network and protocol called Signaling System 7 (SS7). If either the originating or the terminating office does NOT have that capability, then there is no way for the ANI information to be passed from the originating end to the terminating end. I'd say that the simplest way to determine if your local exchange has caller ID capability would be to ask the telephone company if the service is currently available to you at your current telephone number. Standard Disclaimer - Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!taichi!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ From: lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Organization: CMC (a Rockwell Company), Santa Barbara, California, USA Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 18:20:44 GMT Caller ID is a tarrifed service from the Local Exchange Carrier (LEC) which delivers the "calling number" in-band on the audio path between the first two rings (using FSK "modem" encoding). The number provided is defined to be the directory number of the station originating the call. ANI, as used in this context, refers to the delivery of the billing number associated with a call passed from an LEC to an InterExchange Carrier (IEC or "Long Distance Carrier"). This number is sometimes provided in-band using MF ("touch tone") signalling, but usually passed out-of-band on the common carrier signalling system (SS#6 or SS#7). Some IECs have tarriffed on-line delivery of this service to the receiving customer by various means for those large customers that have private ("bypass") access facilities to the IEC. For most residential service, the directory number and the billing number will be the same. Even when they are not, it is common for the Central Office switch (CO) to be misconfigured to deliver the directory number instead of the billing number. (Example: I have two lines to my home, which are billed together. I still had to ask MCI to consolidate the bills.) For business service of more than a couple lines, it is in the interest of both the customer and the LEC that the billing number be correctly configured for each line, and any errors will likely be corrected soon. For customers with an PBX equipped for automatic route selection, the directory number "should" be the number leading to the main switchboard, while the billing number is likely to be the number of an outbound-only trunk group. As the subscriber interfaces go digital, I would expect PBXs to increasingly be attached to ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) Primary Rate Interface (PRI - the ISDN version of "T1" lines carry 23 voice channels and one X25-like data channel) which will allow the PBX to identify the actual calling station in the directory number field of the call request record. The LEC is obligated to provide the billing number to the IEC; otherwise the IEC would be unable to get paid for the call. Since there has not in the past been any regulation prohibiting the delivery of this information to bypass customers, they have started selling it. If anyone tried to stop that now, they would complain loudly about interference with their business. The LECs are subject to local regulation, and when regulators tell them to block delivery of the number, they must block it, even if they have it and COULD deliver it. When a caller requests Caller-ID blocking, the information is still delivered from the calling CO to the receiving CO, but it is tagged with a flag that informs the receiving CO that blocking was requested. It is conceivable that an interstate call might be delivered to a state that does not allow or require blocking, and the number might be displayed despite the blocking request. The fact that this is unresolved is one of the reasons that C-ID currently may not be delivered across LATA boundaries. The relationship between LEC subscriber loop pair, directory number and billing number is programmed on a per-line basis. All COs deliver billing number to IECs. The capability to deliver calling directory number to the destination CO along with the billing number depends on the software features of the CO. It is fairly certain that any CO that offers "custom calling features" can be configured to deliver both numbers. The capability to deliver calling numbers to the called subscriber requires FSK modulators on the subscriber line cards; such hardware is unlikely to be installed in switches more than two years old, unless and until the LEC is ready to start selling C-ID service. Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer CMC Rockwell lars@CMC.COM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 13:55:59 PST From: konstan@elmer-fudd.cs.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Caller ID is a service by which the phone number of a caller is delivered to the recipient (presently between the first and second rings) if: a) the recipient is a subscriber to the service b) the caller, recipient, and path in-between support passing this information (i.e. Signalling System 7). This is currently not available for long distance carried over IXC's. c) the caller does not (or is unable to) block display of the number. It is often referred to as Calling Line ID or Calling Number ID since it never identifies the CALLER, only the phone (or trunk) used to place the call. Automatic Number Identification is a service that all local phone companies provide to the long distance services where the billing number for a phone call is passed along with the requested destination. Nominally, this is to allow the IXC to bill you for the calls. Many (all?) long distance carriers sell this information (in real-time or delayed in billing statements) to their 800 and 900 customers. Our Moderator consistently maintains that 800-number customers have a right to this information since they are paying for the call. Personally, I don't see that as being the case -- indeed when other companies pay for you to get information about their product (either with business reply mail, free shuttle busses, etc.) they are not provided with any specific information about you unless you provide it. The argument is even less compelling for 900-number customers who generally do not pay for the call. Nonetheless, you should assume that any 800 or 900 number you call gets your calling number passed to them. If your area (entire local phone company area) doesn't provide caller-ID then nobody will get caller ID from your phone. If your local switch is not running SS#7 then nobody will get caller ID from your phone. The only time you can prevent ANI is if you are on a service without direct distance dialing (i.e., all long distance calls must be made by going through operators) and I don't think we have to worry about that. Caller ID blocking never affects ANI, 911 service, etc. Joe Konstan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 14:10:10 EST From: wcs@erebus.att.com (William Clare Stewart) Subject: Re: ANI in NJ (and Other Telco Test Lines) In article Dave Levenson writes: > Dial 958 in Northern New Jersey. You get a verbal readback of the > number you're calling from. This did not work a few months ago; does > anybody know exactly when NJ Bell turned this on? This works in 908 (Central/Western NJ) - interesting. I haven't been able to try it in 201, since our Centrex wants a 1 + 10-digits to dial numbers with area codes, and 1-201-958-1000 and 1-201-958-# both failed. My normal method here at work is to dial the NJ Bell operator, and say "Telephone repair - which extension am I dialing from?" Works every time :-) Bill Stewart +1-908-949-0705 erebus.att.com!wcs AT&T Bell Labs 4M312 Holmdel NJ ------------------------------ From: pc@ALEX.ims.bellcore.com (Peter Clitherow) Subject: International ANI is Here? Reply-To: Organization: Bellcore - IMS, Morristown, NJ Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 19:31:01 GMT An article in today's {New York Times} said: "...a small start-up company, International Discount Telecomm- unications, has found a way to allow callers abroad to telephone the United States at the same low rates Americans pay to call overseas. When a customer calls the company, he lets the phone ring once and hangs up. The black box is programmed to call back the customer's number and patch in the second American telephone line. The customer now has an American dial tone, ..." This implies that ANI can be delievered internationally, does it not? I never heard anything announced about this. Are there CCITT specs for this? peter clitherow, pc@bellcore.com, (201) 829-5162, DQID: H07692 bellcore, 445 south street, room 2f-085, morristown, nj 07962 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 01:22:45 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Canadian Caller*ID Specs > Does anyone have documentation, or know where to get it, for the > Canadian spec? I guess it's time for the semi-annual post on this (actually last posted on April 30 91): Here is the official place to get Bell Canada's version of Call Display technical disclosure information: Bell Canada Director - Switched Network Services 220 Laurier Avenue West Ottawa, Ontario K1G 3J4 +1 613 781-3655 The document is "Call Management Service (CMS) Terminal-to-Network Interface", Interface Disclosure ID - 0001, November 1989. (The document number may give you a clue as to how long this service has been running :-)) I was not charged for this document, but Bell does reserve the right to charge for it in future. It is only 18 pages so it seems unlikely they would charge a lot. They are required to disclose this information to anyone, so any charge would be administrative only -- i.e. they cannot sell the information. Phone and find out. Please note that it is incorrect to call this "the Canadian Caller*ID standard". This document describes only what is being implemented by Bell Canada in its service areas. Other Canadian telephone companies may well implement something quite different, though it isn't too likely. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: andrew@jester.USask.ca (Derek Andrew) Subject: Re: Canadian Caller-ID Specs Reply-To: andrew@jester.USask.ca Organization: University of Saskatchewan Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 00:28:56 -0700 In the wee hours of Thursday morning, a change was made to the way Call Display is delivered. A call to repair service has suggested that this change was Canada-wide to bring us into line with the way that other phone companies deliver the data. Prior to the change, there was a string of digits like 010203043065551212 where: 01 is the month 02 is the day 03 is the hour 04 is the minute 306 is the area code 5551212 is the number. After the change, for numbers within the city, I see a string of digits like 01020304 followed by hex 3 and 7, the followed by the seven digit number. Phones such as the Maestro and other call display displayers used to provide the area code but now do not. Since Canada does not yet have Call Display delivered across provincial borders, I have no news on out of area code numbers. Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0 Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808, 52 11 23N 106 48 48W ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Caller ID Device Wanted That Dials Back to Callers Date: 9 Jan 92 18:48:26 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , lyourk@ihlpm.att.com (Loran N Yourk) writes: > Now that I can subscribe to CID, I would like to find a stand alone > (or even one built into a phone) CID box which would store numbers and > have buttons which would dial the currently displayed number. Northern Telecom offers a telephone set called Maestro. It has a built-in Caller*ID display, and a 'return call' button that does exactly what you want. I haven't tried using this phone, so I don't know how it handles dialing the home area code when it is displayed as part of the calling number. The phone also has a 'call in absence' indicator that lights when it rings, and is extinguished when it is answered. If the light is lit, a call came while you were out. If the call was intra-Lata, you may have got the calling number, and a single button will return the call. I've seen this set offered ratail for about $150 in a high-priced electronics shop in Short Hills, NJ. It was also in the Hello Direct catalog, I think. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 [Moderator's Note: Thanks also to andrew@jester.USask.ca (Derek Andrew) for providing almost identical information. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jan 92 18:36:57 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options Bell Canada is starting an eight-month trial of new local service features as reported by the {Toronto Star}. Currently it is undergoing a technical trial; if successful, a marketing trial will begin in the fall. The new features include: * Find-Me: with a single phone number, you can be reached at up to three different locations. A Personal Communications Services operator will maintain a schedule of where to direct calls during certain hours (say, work, home or another location). * Follow-Me: calls can be diverted from your normal line to the line you are currently at; this can be used if there is a disruption in the Find-Me calling schedule. * Call Message: used as an answering service. * Caller Announce: a voice caller ID service; when a call is answered, the central office will send along a voice callout of the number calling. This is a Caller ID service without the need for add-on displays. While there is a trial of 1000 residential and business subscribers, such features will have to be approved by the CRTC before it is made available to the general populace. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #22 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12868; 11 Jan 92 21:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31788 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Jan 1992 19:50:39 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26983 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 11 Jan 1992 19:50:20 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 19:50:20 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201120150.AA26983@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #23 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Jan 92 19:50:16 CST Volume 12 : Issue 23 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Craig Ibbotson) Re: Honda 800 Line Flooded by Caller (Michael Ho) Re: Repeat Dialing Question (Arnette P. Baker) Re: Device Wanted to Screen Junk Calls (David Ptasnik) Re: PC Based PBX (Stephen Friedl) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Alan L. Varney) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ibbotson@rtsg.mot.com (Craig Ibbotson) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 21:23:47 GMT dasgua@rpi.edu (Anindadeb Vijaykumar Dasgupta) writes: > I read somewhere that in most large cities cellular carriers are > switching to digital systems due to saturation of existing cells. I > couldn't tell what the advantages of this would be: > With analog transmission, each equipment would need 4 KHz. while with > 8 bit PCM, 64 Kbps would be needed, which would surely translate to a > higher frequency than 8 KHz. This definitely does not free up any > bandwidth. Are these carriers using source coding? Won't that make > the cellular phones more expensive/bulky? > I am not a telecom person and maybe I am missing the point here. > Could someone explain the advantages of digital over analog (other > than improvement in voice quality, if any) in cellular systems? There are currently two digital cellular proposals. One is TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access) and the other is CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access). TDMA divides the existing 30kHz radio channels into six time slots, yielding three equivalent voice channels. TDMA proponents say this will offer a 3.7 time capacity of existing analog systems. CDMA is a spread-spectrum technology which calls for a channel bandwidth of 1.25 MHz. The entire bandwidth is reused in every cell site, and is shared by a number of customers with different codes. Proponents say it will offer a 20X capacity increase. The main advantages of digital cellular (regardless of technology) are capacity increase and the introduction of data services. It is going to be very interesting to see what happens in the digital cellular market. TDMA was the initial technology of choice, picked over FDMA after lengthy trials here in the US. After TDMA was chosen, however, a company called Qualcomm met with some of the larger cellular vendors and convinced them that CDMA could greatly increase their capacity and provide some additional features. Both technologies are in market trials now, and the initial indications are that both work. The problem here is that different vendors are aligning themselves with different technologies. LA Cellular is promising a cellular system using Ericsson TDMA technology sometime this year. PACTEL and one of the vendors in New York are heavily involved in CDMA. A third technology has been introduced by Motorola, called N-AMPS. N-AMPS stands for Narrowband Amps, and is a "digitally enhanced" analog system. It increases capacity by using 10kHz radio channels instead of 30 kHz radio channels, using the existing analog technology. It also has a digital sub-audio channel which allows data to be sent to the mobile. This technology is intended as a bridge between an analog and digital system. I believe all Motorola mobile and portable cellular phones now shipping are dual mode AMPS/NAMPS. All of these technologies have their pluses and minuses. TDMA is the basis for GSM, which is in commercial service in Europe, so it is a proven player. NAMPS is in commercial service in Japan, and can be used with Micro-TAC LITE sized phones (the other technologies cannot be used with portables at this time). CDMA promises the biggest capacity increase and possibly higher quality handoffs. The big problem I see is that CDMA and TDMA are incompatible; the standards currently call for all mobiles to be dual mode (digitial/analog), but there is no thought at this time for a mobile to support both TDMA and CDMA. For example, if you are an LA Cellular TDMA user and attempt to roam in a CDMA system, you will not be able to use the digital system (you should always be able to go back to standard AMPS service, however, no matter where you are). This has also made it very difficult for manufacturers. Ericsson and Northern Telecom are firmly behind TDMA. Motorola and AT&T are developing CDMA, TDMA and NAMPS. Hughes is pushing E-TDMA, a second generation TDMA system which uses a half-rate vocoder to get an eight-fold increase over today's analog capacities. And Qualcomm is pushing CDMA. One thing should be noted about digital cellular. Everyone is hot about anything digital nowadays. When cellular goes digital, however, you will not see a quality improvement like that from LP records to compact discs. I quote the editor of Cellular Business: "Cellular's digital technology is another beast altogether. It might sound better. But chances are good that the customer won't even notice a difference, except that some manufacturers phones might be bigger. And initially, they might be bulkier, too." (Cellular Business, "Moving Into Digital", supplement to October 1991 issue). Craig Ibbotson, Motorola, Inc. ...uunet!motcid!ibbotsonc Cellular Infrastructure Division, Radio Telephone Systems Group ------------------------------ From: ho@hoss.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) Subject: Re: Honda 800 Line Flooded by Caller Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 07:07:37 GMT I have no way of knowing whether this is related to the Honda guy, but someone just submitted a forged post to alt.binaries.pictures (crossposted to all the smut groups) claiming that some 800 number is a "free sex line" and asking everyone to please call it. I wonder who the target of this is. Michael Ho | UNTIL JAN. 20, sysmgrs willing: Internet:ho@hoss.unl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 11:25:44 EST From: kityss@ihlpf.att.com (Arnette P Baker) Subject: Re: Repeat Dialing Question Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories >> My question is, does repeat dialing allow people to "camp on" a dialed >> number and stack up in the order that they dialed, causing people >> without it to be blocked from ever seizing that line? > Moderator's Note: I think it only checks every few seconds to see if > the called line has become available (especially if the called party > is on another switch somewhere) as opposed to instantly knowing the > status of the called line. Therefore, a 'free lance' dialer -- someone > manually trying to get in -- could catch the line during a period of a > few seconds when it is free and seize control. I don't think the > service is truly 'camp-on' in a technical sense, but rather, just a > Demon Dialer like thing in the CO. I am not sure of whether Doug`s inability to reach his movie line is due to Repeat Dialing (Automatic Recall/Callback) users, but I thought I would clarify Pat`s description. There are two modes of operation for a switch to determine the "busy/idle" status of a repeat dialed party. Some newer switches actually "queue" the camp on requests for a given line in a FIFO order. This queue list is then used to send a "party free" SS7 message to the originating switch if the line becomes idle. Only one queue entry is given "party free" notification at a time. This mode of operation is referred to as "Terminating Scanning" and does NOT tie up network resources as a war dialer does. The other mode of operation is "Originating Scanning". This method is usable by every switch that offers Repeat Dialing. In this case the originating switch does send a "query" SS7 message every few seconds/minutes (decided by the Telco) to determine if the camped-on party is idle. Although this method does tie up network resources, it is not as detrimental as a war dialer, since the query messages are SS7 signalling messages and do not use voice circuits. My personal guess is that Doug's increase in busy signal could be due to Repeat Dial users (since people may now camp-on and eventually complete a call rather than giving up after five to ten busy signals); however as Pat correctly pointed out -- there is some minimum window during which direct dial calls can get through. I hope this is useful information. Arnette Baker kityss@ihlpf.att.com ------------------------------ From: David Ptasnik Subject: Re: Device Wanted to Screen Junk Calls Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 8:48:34 PDT isus!hoyt@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.) wrote: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 16, Message 2 of 13 > I would like a cheap device that connects to the phone line that > answers with "If this is a junk call, please press 1, Personal, 2 etc. > Use your imagination about what happens if you press 1 :-). From a previous edition of TELECOM Digest: bhouser@d2com.intel.com (Brad Houser/SC9-43/765-0494) wrote: I received the Heartland America Catalog last month, and they list a product that intrigues me. It says you can add the power of a PBX and Voice mail to your existing phone system. It's features include: Add up to five inside extensions (on their own loops) to the outside line; Works with standard one or two line phones, faxes, modems; Needs an answering machine to simulate "voice mail"; Routes calls (caller enters a number from 1-5); Works as an intercom; Adds "hold" to any phone. Heartland Customer service couldn't help me with my questions, but they gave me the name of the manufacturer: Areanex Technology Inc (408-257-5880). They have the system (Model ACR105) on that line. Areanex calls it the "Phone Director" as the answering machine OGM plays the message: "Thank you for calling, press 1 for Joe, 2 for Chris, ... or stay on the line to leave a message". If the call is not redirected by the caller (or they don't have DTMF) the phone is answered by Line 0, which is the answering machine line. Otherwise, one of the other lines can be individually rung. (You can still use it without the answering machine and telemarketers won't know how to reach you, but then neither will your friends for a while.) Hold is obtained by hitting #, (## if you made the call) and then an extension can be dialed. It answers after one ring, and then the caller hears a much different ring. I have ordered the product with a 30-day money back guarantee, but I will have to wait about another week or so. I don't work for either company, but so I don't get asked to send the address, here it is: Heartland America 6978 Shady Oak Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3453 1-800-229-2901 Fax: (612)943-4096 I will post a followup with my impressions after using the device. Brad Houser | Deus Ex | Intel California Technology Development, SC9-43| 408-765-0494 | Machina! | 2250 Mission College Blvd. | bhouser@sc9.intel.com | Santa Clara, CA 95052 | ------------------------------ From: friedl@mtndew.Tustin.CA.US (Stephen Friedl) Subject: Re: PC Based PBX Date: 10 Jan 92 16:44:28 GMT Organization: Steve's Personal machine / Tustin, CA Ken Jongsma reports the following from {Communications Week}: > Start-up PCBX Systems Inc. has developed what it is calling the first > PBX to run on a personal computer. The PCBX is a PC card that can give > any telephone set full PBX functionality, said the Woodland Hills, > California company. Directory assistance for Woodland Hills, CA (area code 818) doesn't know about these folks, so anybody knowing how to find them is encouraged to fill the rest of us in. Stephen Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA 3b2-kind-of-guy | uunet!mtndew!friedl | +1 714 544 6561 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 21:35:24 CST From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) writes: > I now understand that ANI is not Caller ID, and that 'blocking' caller > ID may not have the desired effect when you call a business. > Would someone in the know please concisely explain: I believe I did this about a year ago (so you could check the archives) but, to answer your questions briefly: > * What, exactly, is "Caller ID", as technical people describe it? This phrase is NOT technically defined, but refers generally to the capability to present the Telephone Number of the Caller to the Called party, prior to answer. Bellcore TR-TSY-000030 & 000031 describe the basic technique for signaling over individual T/R pairs between ring cycles, while other documents (not all Bellcore) specify the capability of blocking the display of a Caller's number, the use of the number in various other CLASS features (Auto Callback, Customer Orig. Trace, Selective Call Forwarding/Rejection, etc.), signaling over an RS-232 channel (instead of the T/R pair) for groups of lines, interactions with various capabilities such as Voice Mail providers, etc. > * What, exactly, is ANI? ANI is strictly Automatic Number Identification, describing the hardware used in SxS, etc. to provide the Billing Number to the Automatic Message Accounting (AMA) Switches for use in charging for Toll calls, and later to various Operator systems. Without ANI, Operators had to ask you for YOUR number before Toll calls (even 1+ calls) would complete. ANI has evolved to refer to methods of transmitting a Billing Number during call setup, and even to the digits of the Billing Number. The basic method is called CAMA (Centralized AMA), using MF to transmit an "I" digit followed by a seven-digit Billing Number. The receiving Switch would determine the NPA from the incoming trunk and record the Billing Number and duration of the call. The "I" indicated Coin Phone, POTS, Hotel, ANI failure, etc. This mechanism allowed one Central Switch to make call record for many SxS switches, with only the ANI hardware needed at those switches. CAMA is seldom transmitted more than one switch beyond the originating switch, for several reasons, one being that answer supervision is not possible after transmitting the Billing Number. (The receiving switch does supervision.) To allow various InterLATA Carriers to do their own billing (or monitor the billing of the LECs for the Carrier), the industry developed a scheme for sending information to the IC using MF signaling. In general, it is: KP-0ZZ-XXX-ST followed by KP-II-10_digit_Billing_#-ST KP-Called_#-ST and is called FG-D (Feature Group D) signaling. (See Bellcore LSSGR.) This Billing Number is also referred to as ANI. The CAMA "I" was replaced with "II", indicating the "class" of caller (Coin, etc.) in more detail. > What are the differences between these two things that determine whether > or not a properly equipped receiver can get your phone number, especially > in places that (1) don't currently offer Caller ID (2) offer blocking of > one kind or another? "Caller ID" may be blocked if so provisioned by the LEC. Note that the number is delivered to each Switch where SS7 circuits are used, but the "Private" indication goes with the number. This allows such features as CO Trace or Auto Callback to use the number, even if it was "blocked". Billing Number information cannot be "blocked" (would allow free calls!), and there is no protocol standard for marking the Billing Number "Private". > Does the answer vary depending on exchange, and is there a way I can find > out how my exchange is configured? The exchange has little to do with it: If the call uses an InterLATA Carrier, they can get the Billing Number; if the call uses SS7-all-the-way, the terminating Switch (and any intermediate carrier) gets the Calling Number. I know of no way to determine this information without looking at TELCo or IC private information. (Don't ask -- I won't give it out or even bother to check!) One difference to keep in mind: The Billing Number is the telephone PAYING for the call, which is not always the original Caller's telephone number. "Caller ID" attempts to track the originator of the call. Al Varney, not-officially-speaking-for-anyone ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #23 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16948; 12 Jan 92 0:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08798 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Jan 1992 22:21:22 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28099 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 11 Jan 1992 22:21:02 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 22:21:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201120421.AA28099@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #24 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Jan 92 21:21:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 24 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Autodialing a Digital Phone (Patton M. Turner) Re: Dialed as 800, Billed For 900 (Paul S. Sawyer) Re: Information Age Media Bytes (Don Lewis) Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language (Brian Prenovost) Re: Call Return Has Its Problems (S. Spencer Sun) Re: HOLD Device Wanted For Residential Line (Jack Winslade) Re: HOLD Device Wanted For Residential Line (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (John Higdon) Re: Who Picked Exchange Names? (unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Steve Forrette) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Dell H. Ellison) Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 09:49:43 CST From: Patton M. Turner Subject: Re: Autodialing a Digital Phone msa3b!kevin@gatech.edu (Kevin P. Kleinfelter) writes: > We've got an AT&T System 85 PBX. We've got digital phone sets hooked > to it. We've got hundreds of customer service reps who need to call > our clients. We'd like to have either their PC or a central computer > autodial the call.... > I thought of building a Y connector, to have a rep's handset and a > modem wired in parallel, and then plug that into the phone (since the > handset HAS to be analog). I don't know if this would work due to > voltage, current, etc. This works for radio station phone patches moderately well. Use a 600 ohm transformer to couple the modem and transmitter. To eliminate hum (the main problem with this arrangement) prehaps you could use the A-A1 leads of your modem (if so equiped) to operate a relay to disconnect the transformer except when dialing. For ruggedness the connection should be made inside the phone, IMHO. Otherwise you can just cut the handset cord, crimp on two RJ-11's and insert a splitter. Pat Turner pturner@eng.auburn.edu KB4GRZ @ K4RY.AL.USA ------------------------------ From: paul@unhtel.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer) Subject: Re: Dialed as 800, Billed For 900 Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 15:50:04 GMT In article unhtel!paul@senex.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer) writes: > Well, we just got hit with it ... our LEC bill "as a service to AT&T" > is billing us for calls (back to October) to 900-555-5555 (USA Today). To be fair, I just got word that AT&T has agreed to credit these calls on our bill. We did not have very many of these after all, especially compared to some of you who reported here. The price of 800-calling is eternal vigilance! Paul S. Sawyer - University of New Hampshire CIS - paul@unhtel.unh.edu Telecommunications and Network Services - VOX: +1 603 862 3262 Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523 - FAX: +1 603 862 2030 ------------------------------ From: lewis@ssigv.UUCP (Don Lewis) Subject: Re: Information Age Media Bites Organization: Silicon Systems, Nevada City CA Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 01:02:06 GMT In article stapleton@misvax.mis. arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) writes: > I'll be teaching a course this coming semester on "Issues for the > Information Age," and I am looking for interesting media bites (in the > range of a minute or two) to use as conversation starters in the > various segments of the course. The course will cover issues like > privacy, mass-marketing databases, government and other surveillance, > national security, man-machine "relations," etc. The phone company revealing its grand plan to James Coburn's character in "The President's Analyst". Don "Truck" Lewis Phone: +1 916 265-3211 Silicon Systems Internet: (under contruction) FAX: +1 916 265-2931 138 New Mohawk Road UUCP: {uunet,tektronix!gvgpsa.gvg.tek.com}!ssigv!lewis Nevada City, CA 95959 ------------------------------ From: briandp944@tampa.relay.ucm.org Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1992 10:40:30 CST Subject: Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language In TELECOM Digest V12 #15, Doug Martin writes: > By now my fascination with intercept recordings and with calling remote > places is well documented [...eskimo recording...] Does anyone know > any even more isolated places with interesting recordings? Well, I lived in Minneapolis for 20 years, and I consider that pretty Isolated. Anyway, when I was living there one of my phreaker friends stumbled upon a group of consecutive numbers that NW Bell must have been using for intercept recordings. One was out of order, another number changed, but the most interesting one was the 'coin needed for this call'. Well, I imagine you can see what was coming next, I went right to my phone, and forwarded my number to the 'coin needed' recording. Then, I went to another phone and tried to call my phone. Sure enough, "The call you have placed requires a coin deposit." So, now with the trap set, I dialed the Operator, and asked if she might be able to help me complete my call, as I had no slot to deposit a coin into! Bahaha!! Brian Prenovost ------------------------------ From: spencer@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun) Subject: Re: Call Return Has Its Problems Organization: Princeton Class of '94 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 01:12:13 GMT In article , TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET (Tony Harminc) writes: [The Moderator uses Call return for wrong numbers] >> What's funny though are the ones who lie about it; claim they did >> not call, and have 'no idea' why I am calling them. :) [Mr. Harminc suggests a "PBX-related" situation] > [Moderator's Note: I'm not as dumb as I look, Tony. A call at midnight > with a two year old child on the other end saying 'da da da' then a > voice in the background screaming 'hang up the phone and get back in > bed you little 'bas---d' followed by a receiver going on hook most > likely did not originate from the Widget Corporation's PBX. PAT] Ah, but if you heard such a conversation, and are presumably quick of mind, even at midnight, then you could figure out what was going on and would hardly need to use return call anyway, right? :-) S. Spencer Sun - WWIVnet #1 @6913 - 609-258-8647 - USR DS v.32bis ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jan 92 11:45:24 cst From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Re: HOLD Device Wanted For Residential Line Reply-To: jack.winslade@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha I still have (somewhere) a genuine AT&T or {something} Bell (can't remember which -- this was in the era that AT&T and Bell still meant more or less the same) white box that did just that. We used it at our old house (ca. '83 or so) but never installed it at the new place. It would sense the hook flash and place a resistance on the pair, thus allowing the sub to go on hook and pick up the call on another extension. If I remember correctly, a series of beeps after the hook flash indicated a successful hold. My wife NEVER used it. ('..could you hang this up as soon as I pick up in the bedroom ...') I kept forgetting it was there and did the same thing most of the time. The times I did use it, it worked fine. It would always release the line should the holding current drop, either when an extension picked up, or when loop current would be interrupted, such as if the far end hung up. Good day! JSW Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.5 DRBBS, Omaha. Farewell to Admiral Grace (200:5010/666.0) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 23:31:09 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: HOLD Device Wanted For Residential Line Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article donm@pnet01.cts.com (Don Maslin) writes: > donm@pnet01.cts.com (Don Maslin) writes: >> Recollection suggests that stand-alone HOLD devices were marketed >> several years ago which were actuated by going on-hook momentarily and >> then hanging up, and the device was released when any instrument went >> off-hook (or some similar mode of actuation and release.) >> [Moderator's Note: I think Radio Shack has what you are seeking. PAT] > I thought so also until I checked. ;-> Officially discontinued but may still be a few around at a steep discount. Last was $19 or so. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 09:46 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM> writes: > "Thank you for calling the Casio Referral Hotline. If you are calling > from a touchtone telephone, press one now. If you are calling from a > rotary dial telephone, please call back on a touchtone telephone. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > And if you don't have one, tough luck! (I guess). I am surprised that it has taken this long. Tone signaling is SO superior to rotary that it is nothing short of amazing that it has taken nearly twenty years to become the dominant dialing method. Consider that the CD has been around for about eight years and has all but decimated the LP, which was king for the previous thirty-five years. Since 1987, my personal answering machine has REQUIRED DTMF input to be of any service to the caller. First, I cannot imagine that I would want to talk to anyone using a rotary phone :-), and second, no junk calling machines are smart enough (yet) to enter the required DTMF digit to "break through". Remember, you do not have to have DTMF service to own a phone capable of DTMF. In fact, are there any areas left that do not have DTMF telephone service available? I mean, really, if Pac*Bell now considers it to be part of standard telephone service ... John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: The Unknown User Subject: Re: Who Picked Exchange Names? Date: 11 Jan 92 09:46:44 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Open Access Computing In article faunt@cisco.com (Doug Faunt) writes: > Has anyone built a file of exchange names? I din't see anything in > the archives that was obviously that. I'd like to know WHY there were exchange names in the first place. Remembering a word (or the first two letters of it) and five numbers seems harder to remember than seven numbers. Was the exchange concept the reason there are letters on the numbers at all? Also, when did people switch to ###-#### instead? (The most recent example in the media of exchanges I can think of is some movie I didn't see called Transylvania 6-5000.) unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu [Moderator's Note: The exchange name concept is the only reason there are letters on the dial. You may think it is harder to remember 2-L / 5-D than 7-D, but that's because of your age and the fact you don't recall anything about the old way. When ANC (all number calling) started getting phased in in the early sixties, people were outraged at having to 'learn and remember' two more digits. A group called the ADDL (Anti-Digit-Dialing League) in Berkeley, CA held several protest demonstrations trying to convince telco to abandon ANC for the old method. There was no clean cutover. New prefixes as of about 1961-62 were ANC, with no significance to the numbers. New customers on existing prefixes about the same time began getting assigned the ANC version of the same number, ie, a new customer on the SHEldrake exchange was told by the business office his new number would be 743-xxxx. For about fifteen years thereafter, the phone directories had a mix of both 2-L / 5-D and 7-D. As old customers dropped out, their listings went with them. Finally about 1975 or so, remaining numbers with letters in the book were converted to all numbers. Any manual exchanges which were cut after about 1960-61 simply used ANC, with no exchange name ever part of the scene. The change from 3-L / 4-D occurred here in 1948, but it was an abrupt switchover; one year the phone books simply started showing 2-L and the numerical equivilent of the third /L/. The words made better sense originally since the words were neaalways the community name, ie Transylvania. Everyone knew where the community was located when one said 'Transylvania'; 872 would have been difficult for most people in those days to match with the place. Why is my town known as 872 and your town is known as 763 when we really know its name is Podunk? But either the Podunk-ites or the citizens of Rodneyville got to use their name, not both. Of course in larger cities, 244 (CHIcago) would quickly run out, and it was the need for a huge number of prefixes with a growing assortment of unwieldy names which finally led the Bell System to kill that scheme in lieu of 7-D, just as the more recent dearth of possible three digit numbers with 0/1 in the middle led to the area code numbering plan change we will have soon. People also got confused, dialing 'HP' for HYDe Park and "H0" (as in zero) for HOLlycourt, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 03:22:50 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article it was written: > Even better, we use active power control (something we can do because > it's digital). The mobile and cell channel elements transmit with > only as much power they need. If you're close to the cell, you don't > need much power. As you get farther away, it slowly boosts power. Just the way AMPS works today. > What it works out to is that while an analog phone transmits at three > watts, and the cell-site power requirements are truly horrible, CDMA > phones transmit in the milliwatt range, and the entire cell site > transmits with only as much power as a couple of the radios in the > analog cell. Again, not always. The remote AMPS transmits only at the necessary level. In fact, my handheld is always operating in the "milliwatt range." > In addition, we can divide the channel between different data sources, > so you could send voice and data (from a modem, perhaps) on the same > channel. What we can do is limited only by the messages we can think > up to send back and forth. What advantage is this going to be to the individual subscriber? Answer: the same advantage that individual subscribers get from ISDN: nothing! The carriers will undoubtedly price the data services at outrageous prices. Take a look at what 56/64Kbps data calls cost: many times the cost of a "voice" call, with the only difference being the way the call is tagged. But of course the users with data transmission needs will have even less choice than with ISDN, as the traditional modems, etc., are unlikely to work well over the vocoder. A user with a 2400 baud dialup or 9600 baud fax need will have to pay whatever rate the carrier sets for these services, as they will not operate properly over the voice channel. And the user has to pay for more-expensive equipment to do this, at least initially. Now, if the carrier wishes to give me a new phone at no charge to me (which in crowded markets such as LA and NYC would allow them to quickly recover its cost by tripling their concurrent call capacity) that has a serial port whose usage is charged for reasonably, I might consider digital ... Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com, I do not speak for my employer. ------------------------------ From: ellisond@rtsg.mot.com (Dell H. Ellison) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 14:45:35 GMT Bob Miller writes: > Echo Valley Two Six Eight Oh Nine > I used to call that number all the time > Maybe someone can put a title and artist to the song. Your favorite group: The Partridge Family. Dell H. Ellison ...!uunet!mcdchg!motcid!ellisond Motorola, Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 16:42:51 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Telecom's Greatest Hits I don't recall seeing this one yet (and my home machine has been down today): Don't Hang Up (by the Orlons? c. 1963, and it might be from Philadelphia.) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #24 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24258; 12 Jan 92 3:09 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01345 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 01:22:10 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06464 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 01:21:37 -0600 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 01:21:37 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201120721.AA06464@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #25 TELECOM Digest Sun, 12 Jan 92 01:21:21 CST Volume 12 : Issue 25 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago (Andrew Klossner) Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago (Jim Rees) Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago (Rich Greenberg) Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago (Paul W. Schleck) Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago (TELECOM Moderator) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 10:33:21 PST Subject: Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon > [Moderator's Note: We had WU clock service for many years. > Fortunatly, I was able to grab two clocks when they > discontinued the service in the middle sixties; and I have both > clocks running in my house, without the setting circuit, of > course. I knew where there were a dozen more, but within days > of WUTCO discontinuing the service the clocks were ripped off > by collectors (like me!) ... (: I'll mention more about this > in a couple days if someone reminds me. PAT]" It's been a couple days. Here's a reminder. Sounds like a good story. -=- Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) [Moderator's Note: See the final article in this issue. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rees@dabo.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 01:52:02 GMT The story about Western Union clock service has prompted me to write in. I have one of those clocks too. I also have in my home a couple of Unix machines that are on the Internet. Just for a hack, I ran a line from DTR on a spare RS-232 port into a simple transistor switch driving a relay, and ran the contacts of the relay to my Western Union clock (which is normally synchronized by a pulse from a quartz clock circuit I built). Then I wrote a simple program to pulse DTR at the top of the hour. So I now have what I believe to be the only Western Union clock in the world that is synchronized by time pulses directly traceable to the Bureau of Standards. The pulse comes from my Apollo dn330, which derives its time via xntp from a Sun at the University of Michigan, which gets its time from Merit, which gets its time from WWV (somehow, although I'm not sure how). Can anyone top this? ------------------------------ From: richg@locus.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago Organization: Locus Computing Corp, Los Angeles Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 19:16:38 GMT > dozen more, but within days of WUTCO discontinuing the service the > clocks were ripped off by collectors (like me!) ... (: I'll mention > more about this in a couple days if someone reminds me. PAT] Please consider yourself reminded. Happy Friday. :-) Disclaimer: The above writings are the ramblings of one human being and have nothing what-so-ever to do with Locus Computing Corp. ---> Rich Greenberg, richg@locus.com TinsleTown, USA 310-337-5904 Located in Inglewood, Ca, a small city completely contained within Los Angeles ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jan 92 22:04:00 CST From: ACM005@zeus.unomaha.edu Subject: Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago In 72446.461@CompuServe.COM (Alan Boritz) writes: > I thought TELECOM Digest readers might like this entertaining piece > about Western Union's time service, from the FidoNet FCC conference > (not distributed as a newsgroup), submitted by Don Kimberlin. Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com > [excellent story about fighting bureaucratic idiocy at WU deleted] > [Moderator's Note: We had WU clock service for many years. Fortunatly, > I was able to grab two clocks when they discontinued the service in > the middle sixties; and I have both clocks running in my house, > without the setting circuit, of course. I knew where there were a > dozen more, but within days of WUTCO discontinuing the service the > clocks were ripped off by collectors (like me!) ... (: I'll mention > more about this in a couple days if someone reminds me. PAT] Please do, Pat. I recall this thread being quite fascinating the last time it came up (about a year ago). As a matter of fact, I did some research and hunted down a fairly good-looking brown square wall model for myself at an Omaha antique store. The dealer had two of them, the other one still unsold after a year, despite my giving his phone number out to several interested parties on the net. If someone is interested, please send me E-mail and I will give you his phone number. A word of warning, however. I would like to remain on good terms with this dealer, so I would like to limit calls to him to SERIOUS inquiries only. He is unlikely to sell his remaining example for less than $150, probably more if he has to package it up and mail it to you, so don't waste his time if you don't intend to fork over that much cash. Would someone happen to have a schematic, or at least a good working knowledge of the clock's innards? I'm still poking around inside of it figuring out how to wind the damn thing ... :-) Paul W. Schleck ACM005@zeus.unomaha.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 00:39:47 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago Actually, the Western Union clock service has been gone for more than a quarter-century. It was unavailable to new subscribers after about 1963 and totally gone by about 1965. No one less than 30 years of age would remember seeing them in operation. We've covered the way they operated in past issues; look in the archives if you are interested in more details. The idea was the Naval Observatory Master Clock in Washington, DC sent out a pulse every day which jerked the hands on the local master clock (the one in the telegraph office) around to the correct time, and the local master clocks would in turn pulse every hour on the hour to set the local clocks in buildings around town. Sometimes they would synchronize a sub-master clock instead, which in turn snyched the ones under it, etc. The service -- like almost everything else of Western Union's -- was great for the earlier years of this century. There was no such thing as a digital clock with quartz accuracy until about twenty years ago. Another consideration was the lack of AC power. Many towns, including Chicago used direct current from Edison for many years. Electric clocks do not run very well on direct current. They need alternating current at sixty cycles to perform properly. Even in our 'battery operated' analog clocks today, the battery does not run the clock; it simply runs the motor which winds the spring which pushes the escapement. In the 1900 - 1960 era, a city the size of Chicago had hundreds or maybe thousands of Western Union clocks. They ran with long life batteries which wound the mainspring once an hour or so, and the setting circuit (telegraph pulse) kept them accurate. Every government office, every radio station, every school had them. Generally in large institutional settings (schools, government offices) a sub-master clock was used to calibrate the individual clocks in each classroom. Attachments to the clocks made it possible to ring bells at certain times, etc. Western Union charged $1 (ONE DOLLAR) per clock/month for the service, and gave the clocks away free as part of the deal. You returned the clock if you gave up the service or got the service cut off for failure to pay the bill. There were several models and styles of clocks, ranging from rather plain brown metal cases with 10, 12 or 14 inch dials to clocks in handsome wooden cases which did cost more to rent. Some had sweep- second hands; others did not. The most ornate model was a very large grandfather clock -- six feet tall with an attractive pendulum in a very handsome oak case -- with Western Union works inside it. It was not uncommon for shopkeepers to put a WU clock in the window as a courtesy to passers-by; Bell Telephone switchboards used a special version built into a timestamp machine to correctly stamp the time on long distance toll tickets; and WGN radio in Chicago had a unique application in their studio clock: instead of the red light which flashed for a second once each hour as the clock got synched from the master, they had a relay tied up there which sounded a little chirp which went over the air every hour on the hour. The station used that chirp with their station-ID for about forty years. The Western Union headquarters building in Chicago had several dozen clocks in the offices, as well as the lobby, the public telegraph office on the first floor, etc. One day WU announced the clock service was being discontinued, but the memo said 'subscribers who have the clocks are welcome to keep them ... but there will no longer be a time signal sent out after '. Poof! All of a sudden the clocks disappeared in one fell swoop from the WU building and new electric wall clocks were hanging in their place. The WU executives no doubt ripped them all off and took them home, etc. Elsewhere in town, the clocks were around, but growing fewer in numbers for a few years, then eventually disappearing altogether. Generally a clock enthusiast or antique dealer would see one and convince the owner to sell it or if possible, talk him into giving it away. By 1970 or so, a WU clock in an office was a rare sight. If you were a clock collector and you found a source that had not yet been picked clean, you kept it to yourself, and arranged to get them out as soon as you could before the next guy beat you to it. Of course you had to wheel and deal with the owner the best you could. If you found a place where they did not anticipate the future antique value of the clock, you were in luck. The Chicago Temple Building had six clocks if my memory is correct; one in the lobby by the elevators with a fourteen inch dial that I have operating in my living room today sans setting circuit of course; two backstage in the auditorium (stage left where the organist could see it and stage right by a room where program participants would wait before entering the stage); one in the WNIB radio broadcasting booth on the second floor of the auditorium; one in an office on the second floor and a beautiful grandfather clock in what they called the Parlor on the third floor where receptions were held, brunches, etc. As our former President Carter said, I had lust in my heart for that one. When the one in the lobby stopped running because the battery ran down, I convinced the building manager 'it was probably broken' and if he *gave* it to me I'd get him a new electric wall clock from a store nearby. The deal was done that day and the $19.95 electric clock is still hanging there today! A couple days later I was brousing around backstage and in the organ pipe chambers thinking of a way to get the two clocks back there (a step ladder was needed) but the manager told me he caught hell from the Trustees for giving me the clock in the lobby, so I couldn't have the ones backstage ... odd that he said that, because two weeks later I was back there again and both of them were gone! :) There were other clocks in the building, but they were in the private offices and the answering service. I didn't have the nerve to ask for the grandfather clock ... :) ... in fact I only saw two of the grandfather clocks ever; in addition to the one in the Chicago Temple third floor parlor, one was in the office at Telegraph Federal Savings and Loan (the old WU telegraph employees credit union) on Jackson Street, and some employee working there heisted that one when the S & L merged with another bank sometime around 1969. The Chicago Board of Education had bunches of clocks in their office building on LaSalle Street. They all walked away with the exception of the one in the Board of Ed cafeteria which I managed to get. It was a wall clock in a large wooden case; someone had painted the case an ugly institutional green and it took me a couple months to sand the case and get the paint off, then restore the original finish. I am using that clock today (again, less the setting circuit) on the wall in front of me here at my terminal. A friend of a friend who worked for WU for almost forty years -- in the clock service yet! -- got me a couple more which were stashed in the basement supply room at the Western Union HQ building, and he also got me three spare sets of works without cases or dials to keep as spares when/if mine broke down. Unfortunatly, I sold those clocks and the spare works. I wish now I had kept them a few years. There were four or five clocks at Orchestra Hall. I was told I could have precisely *one* that was backstage by the dressing rooms if I took it during the month the Hall was closed for repairs, but the day I went down there, some guy from Illinois Bell was there working on a circuit to radio station WFMT; he had already taken all the clocks down and had them sitting in the back of his truck ... and he had the nerve to tell me he *bought* them from the Symphony! :< Sure he did! I told my contact about it later on and he was flabbergasted. Luckily, I had not 'paid' for mine yet ... and I won't say how payment was to have been tendered, just that it hadn't been yet! I got two other clocks from Pixley and Ehler's Cafeterias (Van Buren Street and Wells/Madison) when they closed. P&E's was a chain of restaurants as common in the 1950-75 period as McDonald's is today, with five or six in the downtown area alone. I got the one in the lobby of the Monroe Theatre (an 'adult' and 'art film' place) downtown when the building was closed and torn down in 1968. But I cleaned them all up and gave them away to friends, or sold them. Now I have only two left, both running in my house. The workmanship? The best ... both (in fact almost all WU clocks) were manufactured by the "Self Winding Clock Company" of New York City. Mine were manufactured in 1910 and 1917 ... both run very well, and seldom need calibration even today. When I took the one down from the wall at the Chicago Temple a pencilled inscription on the wall behind it said it had been installed by 'J. Brady' in (I think) May, 1930 ... and 35-36 years later it was running perfectly, probably with little or no maintainence over the years except for the batteries. I have mine running from a DC three-volt, one amp power supply, and my 'setting circuit' is a nine-volt battery taped under my desk wired through a doorbell button which I press on cue from the talking clock every month or two when I happen to think about it and call the Naval Observatory on 202-653-1800. When WU offered clock service, sometimes subscribers would not pay the bill, and a clock technician would go out to reclaim the instrument. Sometimes the subscriber would refuse to give the clock up ... the tech would go to the phone terminal box in the basement where the setting circuit came into the building, and open the pair. Then he would put a load on the circuit to the delinquent subscriber, and leave it there for a few minutes. That tug-of-war between the setting circuit and the clock escapement would soon cause the clock to stop running completely ... and the tech would tell the subscriber 'you might as well give me the clock back now because I've stopped it from running at all ... :). Of course *all* the clocks on that circuit would stop running so the tech had to go around one by one and restart the good subscribers while leaving the delinquent guy shut down. Between the clocks, the public telegraph offices and their many other services, Western Union was a grand part of the American heritage for over a century ... their slow death in the past few years has been a real pity to all of us who remember their heyday. And the public telegraph offices were interesting places also, but that is a story for another day. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #25 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25950; 12 Jan 92 3:41 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20985 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 01:55:26 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16860 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 01:55:01 -0600 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 01:55:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201120755.AA16860@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #26 TELECOM Digest Sun, 12 Jan 92 01:54:50 CST Volume 12 : Issue 26 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Dave Levenson) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (John Nagle) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Jim Rees) Re: Data-Under-Voice Hardware Wanted (Patton M. Turner) Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? (Michael Gersten) Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (Steve Forrette) Re: PC Based PBX (Jeff Sicherman) Re: International ANI is Here? (David G. Lewis) Re: International ANI is Here? (Bob Frankston) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dave@westmark.WESTMARK.COM (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Date: 11 Jan 92 15:34:56 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , dasgua@rpi.edu (Anindadeb Vijaykumar Dasgupta) writes: > I read somewhere that in most large cities cellular carriers are > switching to digital systems due to saturation of existing cells. I > couldn't tell what the advantages of this would be: There's a lot of confustion over this claim. Right now, in most cities, the analog cellular systems are being upgraded to use digital switching and transmission within the cellular network. This means that time-division switching and multiplexing is being implemented within the cell site and central office equipment. They are still analog narrow-band FM between the cell sites and the mobile telephone sets. The service-providers are talking about 'digital' but it's only their internal network that sees it. In the next few years, digital radio links between cell sites and mobile phones will be introduced. This will be phased in, so as not to render obsolete the installed base of approximately six million analog mobile telephones. The first batch of digital mobile sets will be 'dual-mode' sets, to remain compatible with the analog systems, but take advantage of digital transmission as it becomes available. What is gained by going digital on the 'air link'? A time-division-multiple-access (TDMA) standard permits three compressed digital voice channels to occupy the spectrum used by a single FM analog voice channel. The users of these channels will get a better signal-to-noise ratio than users of analog FM channels under impaired RF conditions. Mobile and portable data devices will get far lower data error rates. (But high-speed analog modems won't work correctly in the presence of the compression being used.) Digital control channels will permit more features -- sort of like 'ISDN to the car'! A little farther into the future, a code-division-multiple-access (CDMA) standard will allow even greater spectrum efficiency, with the same advantages gained by using digital speech coding. > Are these carriers using source coding? Won't that make > the cellular phones more expensive/bulky? It does add complexity to the mobile telephone. But adding complexity to electronics, these days, doesn't necessarily add bulk. The telephone set manufacturers are already developing chip sets that implement digital voice coding and other functions, so the user probably won't notice an increase in size or weight. Price? Too soon to tell, I think. The improvements in signal quality, and new features can probably be 'sold' by someone whose market research discovers how much the traffic will bear. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 18:30:36 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) > In the long term, digital phones should be cheaper and lighter, > however, as VLSI components are employed. In the Motorola MicroTAC, the battery is over half the weight. Further VLSI integration won't shrink the package that much. Actually, the coils and filters probably weigh more than the semiconductors already. Look at the Philips/Signetics chip set, for example. It's down to 12 shrink surface-mount packages. Progress will have to come from reducing power consumption. John Nagle ------------------------------ From: rees@paris.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 22:05:10 GMT In article , rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes: [ concerning the Qualcomm CDMA system... ] > Even better, we use active power control (something we can do because > it's digital). The mobile and cell channel elements transmit with > only as much power they need. Analog systems do this too. Maybe not as well, but they do. > Finally, with digital we can (and do) use a variable rate vocoder. In > this way CDMA makes use of the Voice Activity Factor of conversation: > either of the parties involved is not saying something about 60% of > the time. Analog phones are also capable of doing this, but it usually sounds bad enough that most systems don't enable the feature. > (Interestingly, even when we force the vocodoer to use a > maximum rate of half its top rate, it still sounds better than my > analog phone). I understand the top rate is 9600 bps. I find it hard to believe that half of this sounds very good, and would like to hear a demo. > In addition, we can divide the channel between different data sources, > so you could send voice and data (from a modem, perhaps) on the same > channel. I hope you are making provisions for direct access to the bits, although at 9600 bps it won't be very useful. Certainly running an analog modem over one of these is going to lose big. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 17:09:58 CST From: Patton M. Turner Subject: Re: Data-Under-Voice Hardware Wanted Jean Renard Ward writes: > Who is aware of hardware products (and related software products) that > support simultaneous transmission of data and voice on either a > dial-up telephone line, or on a low-data-rate (the lower the better) > communications line that I could connect to the serial port on a PC? Micom makes a multiplexor that they claim will multiplex voice, FAX, LAN, and data at speeds from 9.6K to 56/64 Kbps. Other than getting some product literature, I don't know anything about it, but it should work on a switched digital line. For info and a compressed voice demonstration call 1-800-642-6687 (1-800-932-DVNS in Canada) or (805) 583-8600. Pat Turner pturner@eng.auburn.edu KB4GRZ @ K4RY.AL.USA ------------------------------ From: michael@stb.info.com (Michael Gersten) Subject: Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? Organization: STB BBS, La, Ca, 310 397 3137 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 02:30:39 GMT I have a question on ISDN. As I understand it, a local loop under STM is a 192K line, divided by time into two 64K channels, one 16K channel, and 48K of overhead. 8K of this overhead is just timing to keep the bits straight. Now, I also understand that ATM ISDN is based on 48 byte packets plus five byte headers (53 bytes total). And that ATM is the way of the future, i.e., all the telephone company equipment is working ATM, and your STM calls turn into ATM on the way. My question is: Why does the phone company only offer STM to the home, which forces a line to be used (and payment made, hmm ... I think I answered this one) even when nothing is being sent? Why not have the home line just be a 192K ATM feed, and put a rate limiter of 64K on it? Michael Gersten michael@stb.info.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 02:32:14 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article Dave Leibold writes: > Bell Canada and Cantel will be raising their cellular rates soon. > Bell has a "Lifeline" rate of > $9.95 which will not be changed (though this might involve higher > connect time charges). Now let me get this straight: A "lifeline" rate for cellular? Now I've heard everything! Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 19:16:20 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: PC Based PBX Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article friedl@mtndew.Tustin.CA.US (Stephen Friedl) writes: > Ken Jongsma reports the following from {Communications Week}: >> Start-up PCBX Systems Inc. has developed what it is calling the first >> PBX to run on a personal computer. The PCBX is a PC card that can give >> any telephone set full PBX functionality, said the Woodland Hills, >> California company. > Directory assistance for Woodland Hills, CA (area code 818) doesn't > know about these folks, so anybody knowing how to find them is > encouraged to fill the rest of us in. >Stephen Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA ^^^^^^^^^^ Not surprising; you should have tried closer to home, lost closer: PCBX Systems, Inc 3730 S. Susan Street Santa Ana, CA 92704 800-755-PCBX TEL: (714) 668-1180 FAX: (714) 668-0215 BTW, I talked to them on Thursday and while I'm not knowledgeable enough on telecom hardware issues in general and PBX systems in particular, it was an interesting conversation and the engineer-type I spoke to was very friendly and forthcoming. Without any real details, I got the impression it was not a completely mature product in its present form. API documentation may be sketchy. Only POTS-type phones are supported (they are negotiating for some feature phone [BLF, etc.]) add-ins and capabilities. He couldn't (or wouldn't and couldn't say) give any information about installed base. The card is an eight-bit long card (pictured in the promo material they sent me) but they *strongly* recommend an AT-class computer in order to provide the necessary perfomance to support some of the cards features via the CPU - especially if you're planning to have the cpmputer do anything else. I didn't get any info on multitasking or Windows compatibility of the interfaces. It has a 50-pin connector that a special cable is plugged into that mates with a 50-pin (25-pair?) connector on a type-66 block [I'm culling this from memory, not notes, so please forgive any errors] for mating to trunk and station lines. The card itself supports four trunks and 12 sets. The specs chart indicates 16 trunks total and 48 stations but I'm not clear on how multiple cards are mated for that configuration. A 'future' line specifies 32 trunks and 96 stations, but that would pretty max out any IBm chassis so I don't know if they are planning a higher capacity card for that. A little drawing in the fact sheet shows (block diagram) FAX, voice mail, auto-attendent, music, paging interfaces but the discussion led me to believe that these are supported through external connections via the 66 block (don't know if it occupies line positions or uses 'extra' pairs in the cable unused by the trunk and station sets). SMDR is supported through software interfaces to the board. Trunk line support currently for loop start only; specs indicate ground start in the future. There is a long list of PBX-type features which I won't attempt to list here. The price is expensive for a key system replacement but seems inexpensive for a PBX (I'm not a reseller or very knowledgeable about the market as a whole so that's just impression). The have an 'Unauthorized Dealer' Evaluation/Demo Kit which is above twice the Authorized Dealer wholesale price. [PAT, I hesitate to report the prices, lest this look too much like an ad for them]. The cover letter implies LAN support but I couldn't find anything specific in the fact sheet and the rep didn't mention anything so I tend to think it's just the fact that it can share the computer with a network interface that provides an opportunity. There was no mention of packages software for it that does this now. I mentioned the existance of 10baseT hub cards that occupy AT chassis slots and he seemed interested in the possibilities; maybe some cheap router/WAN applications? Finally, as I understand from the guy I talked to, it's not strictly a 'start-up'. I'm a little vague remembering exactly what he said, but I got the impression it was reorganized either financially, technically, or both from a previous attempt that didn't make it anywhere very fast. If anybody gets a more accurate impression or significant details that I have overlooked, I would be interested myself in a further followup. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: International ANI is Here? Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 15:47:52 GMT In article writes: >An article in today's {New York Times} said: > "...a small start-up company, International Discount Telecomm- > unications, has found a way to allow callers abroad to telephone the > United States at the same low rates Americans pay to call overseas. > When a customer calls the company, he lets the phone ring once and > hangs up. The black box is programmed to call back the customer's > number and patch in the second American telephone line. The customer > now has an American dial tone, ..." > This implies that ANI can be delievered internationally, does it not? > I never heard anything announced about this. Are there CCITT specs > for this? I read the same article and tried to figure out the implementation; I came up with the following hypotheses: 1. The CCITT specification for SS7 (Integrated Services Digital Network User Part, Q.761-766) does include Calling Party Number. AT&T offers INFO-2 service (billing number delivery over PRI) for International 800 calls. Theoretically, it is possible that the callers are calling an I-800 number (using the national-specific prefix for called-party-paid calls) and the billing number is getting delivered to the called party. I don't think that's the way it's working, though. 2. The brute force approach, which is what I am guessing is being used, is that there are a large number of lines on the USA side of the operation, each with an individual dialable number, and each overseas customer dials a different number to access the service. One "black box" hangs off each line, and has programmed into it the dialback number for that customer. My reasoning that the second approach is being used is based on several factors. First, I don't know how widely supported delivery of calling party number/billing number to I800 is (in terms of how many countries support it). Second, similar CPN/BN issues arise as have been discussed here before -- is the BN a dialable number, and is it the same as the CPN for a given customer? For primarily business customers, the answer would be "no" a disturbingly large proportion of the time. Third, the black box description implies to me a box hanging off a single line, and if you were using a PRI, you'd have one box with one or more T1 ports instead of many boxes, each hanging off one line. Note, however, that this is all my personal conjecture based on limited information. Don't go trying this at home ... (I don't know what AT&T's policy with regard to this service is, so don't go interpreting my conjectures as favorable/unfavorable views of the service. Technical clarifications (and of course, conjectures) are all I'm willing to go into ...) David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: International ANI is Here? Date: Sat 11 Jan 1992 13:12 -0500 The article on this service explained that it is much less general than it seems. A ring on a given number activates equipment to dialback to a predetermined number and then present it with dialtone which could be used to call out to anywhere in the world. Simple and clever. The PTT's probably consider it impolite (to put it mildly). A good demonstration of the difficulties of local regulations in an interconnected world. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #26 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02183; 13 Jan 92 0:07 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20061 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 21:51:30 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20985 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 21:51:15 -0600 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 21:51:15 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201130351.AA20985@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #27 TELECOM Digest Sun, 12 Jan 92 21:51:13 CST Volume 12 : Issue 27 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T Drops The Ball? (John Higdon) Re: Who Picked Exchange Names? (David Lesher) Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? (David G. Lewis) Re: PC Based PBX (Peter da Silva) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Malcolm Slaney) Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language (Michael Rosen) Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language (Cliff Stoll) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home (Larry Rachman) Re: Problem with Procomm; Help Needed (Louie Crew) Re: Those Are REAL Phone Numbers! (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Phone Company Humour (Giles D. Malet) I Got Cancer by Phone (was I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex (John Stanley) Re: I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex (was Phone Company Humor) (Jim Rees) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 04:30 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: AT&T Drops The Ball? Last week, I wrote about miserable sounding phone calls to the Hawaiian Islands and that such had been reported to AT&T. On Friday, a gentleman called "explaining" the reason for the connections sounding the way they did (but not anything about fixing it). His explanation was predictable: it is the nature of satelite connections. Why satelite connections? Supposedly it is because AT&T runs out of fiber circuits during peak periods. I am going to tell you that this is the poorest "customer resolution" that I have ever experienced from AT&T. First, what he said was probably bunk. Second, his workaround was laughable. I indicated that such connections were unacceptable and that another carrier would have to be found. "Oh, that is not necessary. If you get on one of those circuits [about 100% chance] simply hang up and dial '00' and ask for credit and to be put through on a better circuit." Now if I can get my Telebit to say, "Operator ..." A much more plausable explanation (and one that actually explains what I hear) was offered by a fellow Digest reader. Apparently, in order to cram the most into the least (the way of the 1990's), AT&T is using a form of data packet compression. Part of a packet can be deleted to shed load during congestion and the packet is organized so that the least significant bits of information on all voice samples can be truncated. And, of course, packet data transmission introduces end-to-end propagation delays that sound very much like satelite. While the packet contains time information, allowing for a constant delay, this can be upset if the load becomes very high. This would cause the effect that I heard of a varying propagation delay during the course of a call. And since AT&T would not want to waste any precious bits denoting silence, it uses silence deletion (contrary to the impression conveyed in its ads -- or do they only apply to "continental USA"?) that makes some voicemail systems look good. While AT&T is very proud of this whole system, they can drop it into the Pacific Ocean for all I care. So erase that question mark from the subject line. AT&T HAS dropped the ball. Their service to the Islands is crummy and there are no plans to do anything about it. After hearing this "frame-relay" transmission technique, I am rather leary of squashed and mashed digital anything. And it certainly would be nice if AT&T gave the straight poop to its customers (like it used to). But then, nothing is what it used to be. And given the way Sprint and MCI have been hustling and performing on their dedicated T1 services as of late (as opposed to AT&T -- some customers will be switching soon!), I guess it is time to become open minded again and admit that there is more than one long distance company. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: Who Picked Exchange Names? Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 9:32:10 EST Reply-To: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex Others said: > I'd like to know WHY there were exchange names in the first place. > [Moderator's Note: The exchange name concept is the only reason there > are letters on the dial. If there WERE letters. The "metropolitan" dial was used in cities, but initially, many rural dials were all number. wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 18:14:57 GMT In article michael@stb.info.com (Michael Gersten) writes: > I have a question on ISDN. > As I understand it, a local loop under STM is a 192K line, divided by > time into two 64K channels, one 16K channel, and 48K of overhead. 8K > of this overhead is just timing to keep the bits straight. Actually, ANSI-standard U-interface DSL (Digital Subscriber Line) is 160k -- 2 64k B channels, one 16k D channel, and 16k overhead. AT&T T-interface DSL is 192k; I'm not sure about anyone else's T-interface (or if there's an NI-1 spec for T-interface). > Now, I also understand that ATM ISDN is based on 48 byte packets plus > five byte headers (53 bytes total). And that ATM is the way of the > future, i.e., all the telephone company equipment is working ATM, and > your STM calls turn into ATM on the way. Whether it's the "way of the future" is still an object of considerable discussion in the technical community; as to "all the telephone company equipment working ATM", it's most certainly not. The only ATM equipment deployed is some very limited lab and field trials. Emphasis on very limited. The only thing turned into ATM is ATM trial traffic. > My question is: Why does the phone company only offer STM to the home, > which forces a line to be used (and payment made, hmm ... I think I > answered this one) even when nothing is being sent? Why not have the > home line just be a 192K ATM feed, and put a rate limiter of 64K on > it? Because there is no ATM in deployment yet. Furthermore, when an ISDN line is idle, the 160k is just idle signals cooking back and forth between the switch and terminal/TA plus the occasional maintenance message ("Hey, you still there?" "Yep, sure am.") None of this is billed. There's a large amount of discussion about if and when ATM will be "ubiquitous". The ambitious techie types like to talk about ATM everywhere in the world out to the subscriber interface. More reality-drivin types tend to talk more about "hybrid networks", with ATM switches, STM switches at various signal rates, and various subscriber interfaces applied as appropriate. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: PC Based PBX Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 15:35:40 GMT My question (as always) is: do they provide interface specs on the card to you can write your own drivers, or do the "specs" consist of a working MS-DOS program with no source? When you buy a PC card, demand specs. Take it up as high as you can. If they don't *have* specs available, get another card: they probably developed the hardware and software together and it's a mass of kludges. Not directly telecom related, but doing my part to fight low-quality hardware. Besides, you might want to interact with some other card to provide an interface they never thought of. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 16:33:25 -0800 From: Malcolm Slaney Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA In article John Higdon writes: > I am surprised that it has taken this long. Tone signaling is SO > superior to rotary that it is nothing short of amazing that it has > taken nearly twenty years to become the dominant dialing method. Ummm ... one of the lessons that I've had to learn once I got out of school and into the real world is that the Joe Average Consumer doesn't necessarily beat a path to the most technologically wonderful products. I bet my grandparents never made more than a couple of calls a day. I'm sure they never thought it was worth the effort to change their phones or switch their service with Illinois Bell. (That's assuming that they even knew the difference that tone dialing would make.) I wonder what the average number of calls per day is for the average residential phone? Malcolm ------------------------------ From: Michael.Rosen@samba.acs.unc.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 23:44:27 GMT It wasn't mentioned, but there *is* an English message right after the Eskimo one. Mike ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 17:12:13 -0800 From: usenet@agate.Berkeley.EDU (USENET Administrator) Subject: Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language From: stoll@ocf.berkeley.edu (Cliff Stoll) Subject: Re: NWT Intercept Recordings in Eskimo Language Date: 13 Jan 1992 01:12:12 GMT Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility Doug Martin called Baker Lake, Northwest Territories, Canada and heard an intercept recording in an Eskimo dialect. Oh, I spent a couple weeks in Rankin Inlet, NWT -- not far from Baker Lake. Only way in or out of town was a weekly DC-3 airplane; only communications was longwave radiotelephone. Purpose of trip: the July 1972 eclipse. Wonderful people. Made several telephone calls over the years: it was always a delight to talk over the radiotelephone from the south 48. "Rankin go ahead," the operator would say whenever the half-duplex circuit was changed. Alas, the Anik satellite has taken the thrill out of the phone calls; it even works during solar minimum. I have a copy of the telephone book to Rankin Inlet, circa 1972. One mimeographed page. There were 350 people in the settlement ... Cliff Stoll [Moderator's Note: Many/most of the radiotelephone calls to that area years ago were routed through a privately owned radio station in Alma, Quebec under contract to the telcos. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jan 92 21:17:50 EST From: Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home In a recent issue of Telecom, John Higdon john@zygot.ati.com writes: >> rotary dial telephone, please call back on a touchtone telephone. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > I am surprised that it has taken this long. Tone signaling is SO > superior to rotary that it is nothing short of amazing that it has > taken nearly twenty years to become the dominant dialing method. What holds it back is, in part, the premium charged. On this side of the rock, we pay a buck and change for doing NYNEX the favor of reducing their register holding time. I think its a bargain, but I have friends who refuse to pay it on principle. (Of course, they also have tone-to-rotary converting PBXs, so they are DTMF-capable). The issue is also one of inertia. There are still many people who view the phone as '... you pick it up and dial, and thats all I want to know about it.' > Since 1987, my personal answering machine has REQUIRED DTMF input to > be of any service to the caller. First, I cannot imagine that I would > want to talk to anyone using a rotary phone I can only think of one person in my case, but I really can't leave her out -- she's my mother! When I got my pager, I bought her a switchable tone-rotary phone from Radio Shack, which was a tough thing for an old Western Electric die-hard like myself to do. I've offered to pay the fifteen bucks a year or so, but she's not interested -- her rotary phones work just fine (And I'd have to buy her a bunch of tone phones to make the change worthwhile.) > telephone service available? I mean, really, if Pac*Bell now considers > it to be part of standard telephone service ... Were it that NYNEX felt the same way ... but then again, you guys just got the extra charge for DTMF merged into your monthly rate anyway, as I recall. When NYNEX eventually makes the transition, my mother (and billions of other mothers like her) will probably say something to the effect of 'That's nice, but my phones work just fine -- why would I want to replace them.' They'll have to make rotary stop working altogether to take care of the last stragglers. And where will that leave my 235G three-slot rotary coin phone? I'll have to go shopping for a rotary-to- tone converter! Larry Rachman, WA2BUX reply to 1644801@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Louie Crew) Subject: Re: Problem with Procomm; Help Needed Date: 11 Jan 92 15:44:18 GMT Reply-To: lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu Organization: H.R.H.Q. Lutibelle Enterprises I experience a related problem when I try to use Alt-F6 to review the material that PROCOMM has saved. On most occasions, I see the material again in the same format it had the first time I saw it. But in nn, as when reading the two messages posted currently in this group, Alt-F6 garbles them with no indication of the line endings I saw when I read the messages with nn itself. Since I don't want to save every screen I see, is there a better solution than a screen dump for this problem? For example, might I change the set up on our newsfeeder program, nn, so that it will transmit the lf's that PROCOMM expects for the Alt-F6 function? Thank you in advance. Louie Crew, Assoc. Prof., Academic Foundations Dept., Rutgers U./NWK 07102 lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu 201-485-4503 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 18:28:40 PST From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Those Are REAL Phone Numbers! 818-954 is connected to a Burbank exchange. ------------------------------ From: shrdlu!gdm@uunet.uu.net (Giles D Malet) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humour Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 04:33:07 GMT Reply-To: Giles D Malet While living in London (UK) a few years ago, I noticed an entry in the 'phone book for a certain "Zaphod Beeblebrox", complete with number and residential address. He lives! I never did get round to calling it ... I wonder if it's still there? gdm@shrdlu.UUCP Waterloo, Canada +1 519 725 5720 ------------------------------ From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) Subject: I Got Cancer by Phone (was I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex) Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 05:35:41 GMT In article nolan@tssi.com writes: > ... but only if you had headlines like: > Do Cellular Phones Cause Cancer? This isn't really as phunny as it sounds. Here in Corvallis, the US West Cellular people wanted to put cellular antennas on top of a water tower on top of a hill in a certain neighborhood. Some of the people in this neighborhood became quite active in opposing these antennas, for fear of the effects of radiation on them and their offspring. They even canvassed the surrounding neighborhood getting petitions signed. When they showed up at my door, I had a hard time keeping myself from asking this guy if he had electrical power in his cave. The city had two votes on it. The first was a vote to determine if this was an appropriate usage and fell within certain planning guidelines (it did). The second was a vote to allow US West to put the antennas up (they can't). ------------------------------ From: rees@paris.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex (was: Phone Company Humor) Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 20:38:17 GMT In article , nolan@tssi.com (Michael Nolan) writes: > ... but only if you had headlines like: > I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex My favorite tabloid, the {Weekly World News}, is full of ads for phone fortune-telling services. The most enterprising don't even use human operators, they have a touch-tone driven machine that tells you "... WHAT YOUR NAME TELLS ME. The letters in your name have vibrations and reflected progressions. The _first_letter_ of your name ... the _last_letter_ ... the _vowels_ ... _consonants_ ... THEY ALL HAVE MEANING AND TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT YOURSELF." Only $120 per hour. Caller must be 18 years old. [Moderator's Note: {Weekly World News} is my favorite newspaper also. Do you like reading Ed Anger's column and Dear Dottie? :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #27 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04893; 13 Jan 92 1:45 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22153 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 23:37:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21608 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 23:36:57 -0600 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 23:36:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201130536.AA21608@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #28 TELECOM Digest Sun, 12 Jan 92 23:36:53 CST Volume 12 : Issue 28 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (David G. Lewis) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (John Higdon) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Andrew M. Dunn) Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low (David Niebuhr) Re: I Wasn't Billed For USA Today 800 Call, Were You? (Ken Jongsma) Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival (Russ Nelson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 16:54:38 GMT I would just like to qualify some points in the recent articles explaining Caller*ID (tm?) and ANI. whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com (24411-sohl) writes: > Caller ID requires ANI (Automatic Number Identification) to be able to > deliver the calling party's number to the called party's display > device. Not exactly. More properly, Caller ID requires end-to-end SS7 connectivity between the originating end office and the terminating end office, to enable the Calling Party Number to be carried between the two offices. It also requires the Calling Party Number Deliver feature to be activated in the terminating end office, globally and for the called line. > Automatic Number Identification is the inclusion of the calling > party's telephone number in the routing and call setup messaging which > takes place in order for the call to be established. ANI is the function of an Equal Access End Office (EAEO) or Access Tandem (AT) delivering the Billing Number of the originating line to an Interexchange Carrier switch via FGC or FGD trunks. (It is also the function of sending the BN to a CAMA system, OSPS, or E911 PSAP, but that's not relevant to this discussion ... nor is the fact that ANI is "Automatic" Number Identification as opposed to ONI, or "Operator" Number Identification. More trivia for the telecom edition of Trivial Pursuit ...) The inclusion of the calling party's number in the routing and call setup messaging is a function of the SS7 ISUP protocol. (Calling Party Number is an optional parameter of the ISUP Initial Address Message (IAM).) > If a "caller ID blocking" is invoked by the calling party, then (I > believe) the calling party's number (using ANI) is still sent, Correct that CPN is sent; not using ANI, though -- using SS7. ANI is always used to deliver Billing Number to the IXC, regardless of any per-line or per-call blocking requested by the caller. > but the additional info that the calling party does NOT want his/her > number displayed to the called party is also included in the call > setup messageing. Specifically, the Calling Party Number parameter in the IAM has the Presentation Indicator field set to "Presentation Restricted". But you probably don't care. > The end office (the telephone switching office) of the called party > then recognizes that caller ID blocking is in effect for that call and > the calling party's number is NOT then displayed to the called party. > I'm not 100% certain, but I belive that call blocking is ONLY involved > in Intra-LATA (possibly Intra-State) calls. That is because (In my > understanding) that state regulations of caller ID services do NOT > apply to Interstate nor possibly Intra-state (but Inter-LATA) calls. > Those situations (tariffs) are controlled by the FCC which I belive > has not prohibited any aspect of caller ID. Blocking is currently only supported on intra-LATA calls because Caller ID is currently only supported on intra-LATA calls. The FCC has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding a proposed regulation that per-call blocking must be supported for all interstate calls. This would imply that all LECs would have to recognize *67 and pass the CPN Presentation Restricted indicator to the IXCs (one SS7 Network Interconnect is deployed), that all IXCs would have to honor the Presentation Restricted indicator (not deliver CPN to directly connected egress customers, carry the indicator through the IXC network, and deliver it to the terminating LEC), and that all LECs would have to honor the Presentation Restricted indicator, at least for interstate traffic. > If either the originating or the terminating office does NOT > have (SS7) capability, then there is no way for the ANI information to > be passed from the originating end to the terminating end. Add any intermediate tandem offices; in addition, even if all *offices* support SS7, if any particular *trunk* a call traverses is not SS7 signaled, the information will not get passed to the terminating office. This is why Caller ID is not currently supported inter-LATA; even though the big three IXCs are at or close to 100% SS7, and some LECs are at or close to 100% SS7, the network interconnection is not yet deployed. (I'm only going to include comments of Lars' that I'm going to comment on; everything else he said I agree with ...) lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) writes: > ANI, as used in this context, refers to the delivery of the billing > number associated with a call passed from an LEC to an InterExchange > Carrier (IEC or "Long Distance Carrier"). This number is sometimes > provided in-band using MF ("touch tone") signalling, but usually > passed out-of-band on the common carrier signalling system (SS#6 or > SS#7). Currently, all LEC-IXC signaling uses Equal Access MF (EAMF) signaling. SS7 Network Interconnect is only in trials. The big three IXCs all use SS7; I think the only place CCIS6 is used is as a backup signaling network in AT&T. > As the subscriber interfaces go digital, I would expect PBXs to > increasingly be attached to ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) > Primary Rate Interface (PRI -- the ISDN version of "T1" lines carry 23 > voice channels and one X25-like data channel) which will allow the PBX > to identify the actual calling station in the directory number field > of the call request record. Just a side note; I belive ISDN PRI is part of Bellcore's National ISDN 2. I think sending Station ID to the network is part of NI-2; if it's not, it should be (sorry, had to inject one opinion -- all AT&T products support SID to the network ...) > It is conceivable that an interstate call might be delivered to a > state that does not allow or require blocking, and the number might be > displayed despite the blocking request. The fact that this is > unresolved is one of the reasons that C-ID currently may not be > delivered across LATA boundaries. See my comment above on the FCC NPR. (Side note -- wasn't there someone a while ago posting "this week at the FCC" summaries? Whatever happened to that?) > It is fairly certain that any CO that offers "custom calling > features" can be configured to deliver both numbers. Different LECs refer to different packages as "custom calling features". The "original" custom calling features were call forwarding, call waiting, and three-way calling. The "new" package (referred to as CLASS (SM) by Bellcore) are Caller ID, Return Call, Call Trace, and the other services that use calling number ID in one way or another. If a CO supports CLASS, it generally can support the entire package. David G Lewis !att!houxa!deej AT&T Bell Laboratories Switching and ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 01:56 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI konstan@elmer-fudd.cs.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > Our Moderator consistently maintains that 800-number customers have a > right to this information since they are paying for the call. > The argument is even less compelling for 900-number customers who > generally do not pay for the call. But 900 service providers DO pay for the call. If you call a 900 number, the cost of the transport of the call is deducted from any remittance passed to the provider. If you wiggle out of the charges ("the devel made me do it", etc.), the IP is still stuck for the transport charges incurred by your call. In a previous article, I mentioned that AT&T claimed to one provider that his calls for the month were one hundred percent uncollectable. What I did not mention was that as a result, AT&T presented this outfit with a horrendous bill -- the cost of transporting all of the 900 calls for the month. When you call a 900 number, the service provider is extending you credit for the cost of the call itself plus the program charge. The sum of these two charges makes up the advertised cost of the service. If the 900 service provider is extending you credit, he certainly has the right to know who you are. A number of 900 providers actually block calls from specific numbers that have proven time and time again to be deadbeats from which charges are uncollectable. I agree with Pat on this one: if you have some reason that you do not want someone at the other end of an 800 or 900 number call to know your number -- don't call. It is the customer of the 800 service (or even 900 service) that is paying for the call and he has a right to know who is running up his bill. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 22:26:21 GMT In article konstan@elmer-fudd.cs. berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > Nominally, this is to allow the IXC to bill you for the > calls. Many (all?) long distance carriers sell this information (in > real-time or delayed in billing statements) to their 800 and 900 > customers. > Our Moderator consistently maintains that 800-number customers have a > right to this information since they are paying for the call. I agree with our esteemed Moderator. Consider the fact that the 800 number exists to answer your call whenever you call it, and that the company owning it pays a time-measured rate for the call. Consider somebody who abuses the number. Perhaps they call consistently and hold the line, or do something else to run up massive charges. And consider that, in your scenario, this is completely anonymous. What would you, as the company with the 800 number, do? You'd have to cancel your 800 service. Remember the case reported here in the Digest (I think) last week where somebody tried to get revenge on a company by faxing them long faxes and tying up their phones? What if they really were anonymous. You could cost somebody thousands (even tens of thousands) of dollars, and they couldn't even _identify_ you! > Personally, I don't see that as being the case -- indeed when other > companies pay for you to get information about their product (either > with business reply mail, free shuttle busses, etc.) they are not > provided with any specific information about you unless you provide > it. It's much easier to handle abuse with business reply mail. AND it usually costs far less to the business. The 'cost terrorist' in the scenario above would have to send thousands of business reply cards (IF he could get his hands on them, which, since they're a printed and distributed entity, is unlikely) to cost the company much money. > The argument is even less compelling for 900-number customers who > generally do not pay for the call. Here I agree. > The only time you can prevent ANI is if you are on a > service without direct distance dialing (i.e., all long distance calls > must be made by going through operators) and I don't think we have to > worry about that. No, because in those scenarios, all long distance calls through an operator prompt them to ask 'Your number please?' which they key in, and the ANI proceeds from that point onwards. But _local_ calls don't have ANI in this scenario. Andy Dunn (amdunn@mongrel.uucp) ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn) [Moderator's Note: However Andy, I would refer you to John Higdon's message in this issue. 900 operators *do* pay for the call in the sense they are extending credit to you, the caller until you pay your phone bill and telco in turn remits to them. As someone who provides an extension of credit, they are also entitled to know who you are. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 08:28:59 -0500 From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) Subject: Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low In niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) I wrote: > The ad set a scenario of a group of doctors in Upstate New York > operating on a little child for a rare blood disease. The doctors > were supervised by a physician in New York City, over a hundred miles > away. > The thrust was for letting the Baby Bells and USTA into the > information providing services and that lives could be lost if they > aren't allowed to enter that arena. PAT asks: > [Moderator's Note: Is the United States Telephone Association the same > as (or what used to be called) the United States Independent Telephone > Association? (Sometimes known as USITA). ^^^^^^^^^^^ PAT] The sponsors were the RBOCs and the United States Telephone Association, representing over 1,100 local telcos. I have no idea as to whether or not USTA and USITA are the same. Anyone have ideas? Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: ken@wybbs.mi.org (Ken Jongsma) Subject: Re: I Wasn't Billed For USA Today 800 Call, Were You? Organization: Consultants Connection Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 03:29:54 GMT Two calls I made to the {USA Today} 800 number in October showed up on my January Michigan Bell bill. Although the amounts weren't large, I wanted to follow up on it. I first called Michigan Bell and asked the business office rep if she had copies of the actual CAMA tapes for October. She said that all she had were the billing records, and wasn't sure she could get the CAMA records. When I explained why I wanted them, she said that AT&T received the CAMA tapes and then sent Michigan Bell a tape with billing data on it. So, the changing of the billing records from an 800 call to what showed up was most likely on the AT&T side. I then called AT&T. After explaining that I was knew the difference 800 and 900 calls, I asked why the billing records showed 900 when I knew I dialed 800. She asked if I had reached a live person and been put on hold. I said no, and asked what difference that would have made. She said that there was a way for 800 calls to be reversed billed as a 900 call! I said that that most certainly did not happen, she gave up and said that AT&T would waive 900 billing the first time and I let it go at that. I really would like to know more about this reverse 900 business though. Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org Smiths Industries jongsma@benzie.si.com Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115,1041@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) Subject: Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? Organization: Crynwr Software, guest account at Clarkson Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 03:32:12 GMT In article michael@stb.info.com (Michael Gersten) writes: > As I understand it, a local loop under STM is a 192K line, divided by > time into two 64K channels, one 16K channel, and 48K of overhead. 8K > of this overhead is just timing to keep the bits straight. You don't understand it. The local loop is 160 Kbps (80 Kbaud). That's 2*64K B-channels + 16K D-channel + 4K M-channel + 12K framing. The B-channels can be either circuit-switched aka stream (like a TCP connection), or packet-switched (like a UDP connetion). The D channel is always packet-switched. It is used for call connect/disconnect/etc, and optionally for data. The M-channel carries status information and commands between the switch (LT) and the NT-1. It is not available for any other purpose (although you could do some way cool things with it vis-a-vis network management, but we'll have to wait for the 5E12 release for anything *that* neat). russ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #28 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07970; 13 Jan 92 2:40 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19127 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Jan 1992 00:14:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23791 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 13 Jan 1992 00:14:09 -0600 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 00:14:09 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201130614.AA23791@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #29 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Jan 92 00:14:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 29 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? (Bob Ackley) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Wilson Mohr) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Bernard Rupe) Re: Information Age Media Bites (Mike Butts) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Ronald T. Crocker) Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (Andrew M. Dunn) Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (Toby Nixon) Re: International ANI is Here? (Toby Nixon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 07 Jan 92 01:16:29 cst From: Bob.Ackley@ivgate.omahug.org (Bob Ackley) Subject: Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? Reply-To: bob.ackley@ivgate.omahug.org In a message of <03 Jan 92 17:05:34>, Gary Deol (11:30102/2) writes: > Does anybody know why the middle number in a area-code is always a > zero or one? Things that make you say Hmmmmmmmm :^) I believe it's to differentiate the area code numbers from the exchange prefixes (none of which contain a zero or one as the second digit). My dad retired from Pacific Bell in 1976. Way back when direct dial long distance first came around (late fifties?), in our area (Oakland CA) one did not have to dial '1' before the area code to get long distance. The equipment would recognize a 0/1 in the second position as an area code and automatically handle the call as long distance. I think that's the way dad explained it to me, of course that was 30+ years ago and memory fades. msged 1.99S ZTC Bob's Soapbox, Plattsmouth Ne (1:285/2.7) ------------------------------ From: mohr@rtsg.mot.com (Wilson Mohr) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 18:25:35 GMT dasgua@rpi.edu (Anindadeb Vijaykumar Dasgupta) writes: > I read somewhere that in most large cities cellular carriers are > switching to digital systems due to saturation of existing cells. I > couldn't tell what the advantages of this would be: > With analog transmission, each equipment would need 4 KHz. Yes, but it is transmitted via FM requiring at *least* 8Khz of bandwidth. In reality, with guardbands, channel spacing is 30Khz. This is to accomodate overhead information. (i.e channel, power, signal strength readings, etc.) It is actually designed for a peak deviation of 12Khz and 3Khz guardbands. Let me babble. Analog transmissions require more bandwidth to transmit in order to maintain integrity of the intelligence signal. If this is allowed to "splash" adjacent frequencies, the combined result will be degrade the intelligence signal. There is no way to recover from this except by retransmission (What? I can't hear you!). The beauty of digital is to be able to do this at a lower level than the user and faster. (CRC, and various other forms of data transmission error recovery schemes.) Couple this with data encryption and compression techniques and the required bandwidth drops *significantly*. As required bandwidth drops per intelligence signal, the system capacity increases! However, as you point out, this requires more technology in the subscriber unit and this unit needs to be analog capable just in case you want to go to Timbuktu which hasn't installed a digital infrastructure. So, yes the size and power requirements of the new phones will increase by a factor yet unknown. No problem. Wilson Mohr - Motorola CIG !uunet!motcid!mohr ------------------------------ From: rupe@rtsg.mot.com (Bernard Rupe) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 15:10:04 GMT dasgua@rpi.edu (Anindadeb Vijaykumar Dasgupta) writes: > I read somewhere that in most large cities cellular carriers are > switching to digital systems due to saturation of existing cells. I > couldn't tell what the advantages of this would be: No carriers in the US have a digital system up yet. In fact, the standard is still up in the air, with both TDMA (time division) and CDMA (code division) being talked about. A standard on TDMA is essentially complete. There is, however, a NAMPS (narrow band AMPS) system in operation in Las Vegas. NAMPS uses compression to squeeze three voice channels (10KHz each) into the band one used to occupy (30KHz). This system was developed by Motorola to provide a bridge between current technology and the digital technology of the future (it also costs much less). > With analog transmission, each equipment would need 4 KHz. while with > 8 bit PCM, 64 Kbps would be needed, which would surely translate to a > higher frequency than 8 KHz. This definitely does not free up any > bandwidth. Are these carriers using source coding? Won't that make > the cellular phones more expensive/bulky? In AMPS (current system) each channel uses FM and 30 KHz. TDMA uses digital compression so that three (or possibly more) channels fit into the 30 KHz. CDMA uses a spread spectrum technique to expand capacity 10 or even 20 times current. Trials with both are going on as you read this. The price of the new phones may very well go up. In the case of NAMPS, the phones don't have to be more bulky. Motorola's new MicroTac Lite (7.7 oz) has the added NAMPS capability. In the case of the digital technologies, the answer is yes the phones need to be much more bulky. This is another reason why Motorola introduced NAMPS. > I am not a telecom person and maybe I am missing the point here. > Could someone explain the advantages of digital over analog (other > than improvement in voice quality, if any) in cellular systems? The voice quality should be about the same. The main advantage is that digital signals are much more resistant to noise, so greater range can be obtained and interference can be minimized. Bernie Rupe 1501 W. Shure Drive Room 1315 Motorola, Inc. Arlington Heights, IL 60004 Cellular Infrastructure Group +1 708 632 2814 rupe@rtsg.mot.com ------------------------------ From: mbutts@mentorg.com (Mike Butts) Subject: Re: Information Age Media Bites Organization: Mentor Graphics Corporation Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 18:37:57 GMT You definitely want to look at the film "The President's Analyst", from about 1967. It is in video, though only at the stores with the more obscure titles. It's a satire on 60's spy movies, where spies from CIA, KGB and MI5 all end up pursuing the same mysterious enemy, who plans to take over the world, and turns out to be 'TPC' (The Phone Company). They end up defending the world by playing on everyone's hate of the phone company. I won't spoil the rest, but the send-ups are done in perfect 60's Bell System style. Mike Butts, Research Engineer 503-685-1302(fax:7985) mike_butts@mentorg.com KC7IT ...!uunet!mntgfx!mike_butts Mentor Graphics Corporation, 8005 SW Boeckman Road, Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 Any opinions are my own, and aren't necessarily shared by Mentor Graphics Corp. ------------------------------ From: crocker@rtsg.mot.com (Ronald T. Crocker) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 17:23:04 GMT In article kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) writes: > I now understand that ANI is not Caller ID, and that 'blocking' caller > ID may not have the desired effect when you call a business. > Would someone in the know please concisely explain: > What, exactly, is "Caller ID", as technical people describe it? Caller ID is a signal, send by the class 5 office to your phone, that contains some information vis a vis the party calling you. This information is sent between the first and second power ringing bursts for normal analog loops. (The behavior is slightly different for ISDN). If the calling party blocks the delivery of their number, then you won't see it. The delivery of this signal is dependent on your line being provisioned to deliver the signal. It is an agreement between the service provider (LEC) and the consumer of the service, much like call waiting or 3-way calling. > * What, exactly, is ANI? ANI stands for Automatic Number Identification. This is part of the internal signalling among switches in the phone network. Currently, this number is passed from the originating switch to the terminating switch via intermediate switches. Consider Feature Group D (FG D) signalling, used between a LEC and IEC. In this signalling, both the dialed number (the destination) and the ANI for the calling number (sometimes referred to as the billing number) are passed to the IEC. In any case, since ANI is used for internal telephone business, you can't block it when you call. In the SS7 network, the STP can use ANI for Global Title Translation, basically a database lookup to determine the best place to route a call. In the AT&T 800 services, the ANI can be used as decision data for call routing. In addition, AT&T 800 subscribers are offered the opportunity to have the ANI of the caller delivered to them. Earlier discussions in this group have discussed the use of ANI by American Express. > What are the differences between these two things that determine whether > or not a properly equipped receiver can get your phone number, especially > in places that (1) don't currently offer Caller ID (2) offer blocking of > one kind or another? The answer depends on what type of service you have. If you have a "network" service (e.g. 800), you probably will be able to get ANI delivery. You have no control over this as a caller. For caller ID, if you have entered the appropriate service agreement with the service provider, then CID numbers will be delivered. I'm not exactly sure what happens when you call from a non-CID area to a CID area. My understanding of the service is that ANI is converted to CID by the end office, and sent down your loop if you have the service. Since ANI is sent by all (ok, almost all) offices, your number will probably show up on a CID box if you don't (or can't) block the delivery. Your mileage may vary. Call the service provider for better information, unless someone from NTI or AT&T can give specifics for their switches. > Does the answer vary depending on exchange, and is there a way I can > find out how my exchange is configured? I would call the service provider in your area to find this out. In Illinois, IBT has just started offering CID, and has a 800 hotline for finding out when your exchange will offer CID (side note: this service uses the ANI of the calling line to determine which switch the call is from and approximately when it will have the CID service). Ron Crocker Motorola Radio-Telephone Systems Group, Cellular Infrastructure Group (708) 632-4752 [FAX: (708) 632-4430] crocker@mot.com or uunet!motcid!crocker ------------------------------ From: mongrel!amdunn@uunet.uu.net (Andrew M. Dunn) Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 02:23:46 GMT In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In article Dave Leibold writes: >> Bell Canada and Cantel will be raising their cellular rates soon. >> Bell has a "Lifeline" rate of > Now let me get this straight: A "lifeline" rate for cellular? Now > I've heard everything! What's wrong with that? The idea is that you can have very basic cellular service in your car, for emergencies/accidents/attacks or anything else that might otherwise require you to leave your car and walk ten miles to the nearest farmhouse. The territory Bell Cellular covers includes a lot of isolated roads and highways which are especially desolate and treacherous in the winter. So having emergency contact via cellular makes perfect sense to me. Andy Dunn (amdunn@mongrel.uucp) ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn) ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up Date: 12 Jan 92 23:56:39 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: >> Bell Canada and Cantel will be raising their cellular rates soon. >> Bell has a "Lifeline" rate of >> $9.95 which will not be changed (though this might involve higher >> connect time charges). > Now let me get this straight: A "lifeline" rate for cellular? Now > I've heard everything! Hey, if it was available here, I'd get it for both my wife's and my cellular phones. We have them only for "emergency" use -- in case we break down on the highway, or need to let the babysitter know we're going to be delayed (and don't want to stop and use a payphone). At most, I use 5-10 minutes of airtime per month on my phone, and most months she has NONE on hers. We're paying about $22 per month for that (which is on Hayes' corporate discount; it _had_ ben $36), plus $0.36 per minute. I'd gladly pay $0.60 or more per minute, in exchange for only having to pay $10 per month. In this day and age, with so many criminals on the road, I definitely believe that a cellular phone is a MUST for anyone that does an appreciable amount of driving, particularly for women travelling alone. There are just too many nuts out there to flag down a motorist or walk for help if you break down. I feel a lot more comfortable with my wife driving on the interstates around Atlanta knowing that if the van breaks down she can just sit there with the doors locked until the police come. [Now, if I can just get to the point where I trust the police ...] 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 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: International ANI is Here? Date: 12 Jan 92 23:35:19 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , pc@ALEX.ims.bellcore.com (Peter Clitherow) writes: > ...a small start-up company, International Discount Telecomm- > unications, has found a way to allow callers abroad to telephone the > United States at the same low rates Americans pay to call overseas. > When a customer calls the company, he lets the phone ring once and > hangs up. The black box is programmed to call back the customer's > number and patch in the second American telephone line. The customer > now has an American dial tone, ... > This implies that ANI can be delievered internationally, does it not? > I never heard anything announced about this. Are there CCITT specs > for this? It doesn't necessarily imply international ANI. If you assume that the service requires pre-subscription, it could very well be implemented with DID trunks, like a voicemail or paging system. Each subscriber would be given their own number to dial for access into the system, instead of their being one number that everybody calls. The system would know who called when it got the DID information from the central office. What's REALLY tricky about this is that the service gets the DID information (which numbers was dialed) BEFORE going off hook -- there is no answer supervision, so the overseas party is NOT charged for the call. All the services does is look up the DID number in a database, and call back at the stored number for that subscriber, similar to call-back security systems. One problem I can see is people accidentally (or intentionally, for that matter!) calling these DID circuits. The subscriber is going to get a "call-back" and a US dial tone, even though THEY didn't place the call. That could get pretty expensive pretty fast! 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 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #29 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09308; 13 Jan 92 3:04 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24822 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Jan 1992 01:17:57 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28521 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 13 Jan 1992 01:17:41 -0600 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 01:17:41 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201130717.AA28521@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #30 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Jan 92 01:17:33 CST Volume 12 : Issue 30 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson International Discount Telecommunications (Charlie Mingo) Telephone Service and Power Failures (Dave Levenson) Whose Idea Was it to Charge For 800-555-5555? (John R. Levine) AT&T Calling-Card Advertisement (Carl Moore) I Want a Device That Can Detect Customized Ringing (Cameron Elliot) Answering Machine Belts (John R. Hall) Global Paging at Hand? (Dave Leibold) MCI Card With Voice Features (Dave Leibold) Multiple Calls on One Access to Sprint 800 877 8000 (Steve Elias) Panasonic Answering Machine (Where Has My Cuckoo Flown Away To?) Question - Pause Lengths For Fax/Modem Credit Card Calls? (tony) Help Needed With ACS Headset (Roger Clark Swann) Zip + 6? (Bob Frankston) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Charlie.Mingo@p0.f70.n109.z1.FidoNet.Org (Charlie Mingo) Date: 10 Jan 92 14:19:26 Subject: International Discount Telecommunications There already has been some mention of this in the Digest, but I thought a fuller account might be interesting.] REVERSING RATES FOR OVERSEAS CALLERS (IF NOT THE ACTUAL CHARGES) By Anthony Ramirez, {The New York Times}, January 9, 1992 at D1 International Discount Telecommunications, based in a former funeral parlor in the Bronx, is a tiny start up company that hopes it has a very big idea: allowing callers abroad to telephone the United States at the same low rates Americans pay to call overseas. The company's 35-year-old founder, Howard Jonas, is as straightforward as the company's name. An energetic entrepreneur who also runs a larger company that publishes brochures for hotels, Mr. Jonas believes he has stumbled on a kind of telecommunications jujitsu, using the weight and strength of the phone companies against them. Calls from foreign countries into the United States are far more expensive -- often double or triple the price -- than calls from this country to foreign lands. That is mainly because nearly all the world's telephone companies are state-owned monopolies, charging prices for international calls that are far higher than the actual costs. Take, for example, a call from the United States -- where AT&T competes against MCI and US Sprint -- to Italy, with only one state carrier. The link to Italy might cost $5; the same call in the opposite direction, Italy to the United States, would cost more than $18. Mr. Jonas has found a way to give overseas callers an American phone line, letting them make the $18 call at the $5 American rate. "We are hoping that if this service takes off," says Mr. Jonas, "that our company will be responsible for breaking up the monopoly that national carriers have on international calls and in the process save people billions and billions of dollars." At present, the year-and-a-half-old International Discount Telecommunications has less than $300,000 in annual revenue and only 150 customers. But some of them are Fortune 500 companies. And while little known in this country, the company has elicited coverage in newspapers and on television in Europe, where long distance rates are especially high. The company's method would be familiar to any college student phoning long distance to his parents: the student rings once, hangs up and then has the parents call back on their nickel. For $250 a month, International Discount Telecommunications' customers buy access to two telephone lines and a black box of electronics. The box contains an automatic dialer and a device that makes conference calls possible. When a customer in, say, Bonn calls the company, he lets the ring once and hangs up. The black box is programmed to call back the customer's number in Germany and patch in the second American telephone line. The German customer now has an American dial tone, a circuit he can use to call anywhere in the United States or, indeed, the world. Through International Discount, the customer pays AT&T or another carrier the usual long-distance charges. A Savings of $10.42 On a 10-minute call, during peak American business hours, the company calculates that a German customer would pay $7.18 to an American long distance carrier instead of $17.60 to Deutsche Bundespost Telekom, the state-run German phone carrier. The American Telephone and Telegraph Company and other American carriers offer international discount plans for their customers travelling abroad. AT&T customers can dial operators in the United States, who then complete their calls. But the discounts are relatively modest compared with the 75 percent, or more, available through International Discount. The success of Mr. Jonas' company depends, of course, on foreign long distance rates' remaining high. Some major European phone companies, like those of France and Germany, have recently trimmed their charges, although their rates are still higher than those from the United States. And even though Mr. Jonas has a patent pending for his black box, others could presumable build something similar. The Federal Communications Commission, which has jurisdiction over long-distance phone calls, does not have any specific comment on International Discount Telecommunications. "What they are doing has not been ruled on here," said William J. Kirsch, the FCC's deputy assistant bureau chief for international policy. An $8,000 Shock Mr Jonas got the discount-telephone idea when he sent his hotel-brochure sales staff to open an office in Israel. They needed to keep in touch with American customers. Mr. Jonas, figuring that the typical salesman's phone bill might triple to about $1,000 a month, was shocked when the bill came back in the $8,000 range. One day, in the autumn of 1989, Mr. Jonas realized that if he could figure out a way to always call from the cheaper America-to-Europe direction, he could cut his bills. At first he hired a special secretary to answer the phones and patch together a conference call, placing several callers on the same line. Then a computer-literate friend of Mr. Jonas said he could do the same thing with a $50 automatic telephone dialler and some other equipment. After a few months of tinkering, Mr. Jonas came up with a working device the size of a small telephone directory which cost him about $1,200. Covert Clientele Perhaps not surprisingly, International Discount Telecommunications has had a difficult time recruiting customers. Potential foreign users are fearful of offending their national phone companies, because they presumably could cut off their service or otherwise make life difficult. Even current customers are quite wary. One telecommunications manager at a major corporation with overseas branches, insisting on anonymity, said he feared that the national phone company would learn about his arrangement with International Discount Telecommunications. "You gotta understand my position," the executive said, The national phone company "would be very angry." [I was wondering if a US company with overseas branches could do this "in house" using PBX's on both ends?] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Telephone Service and Power Failures Date: 10 Jan 92 02:08:06 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA For most of my life, I have been aware of the reliability of telephone service. When the power failed, and all the lights went out, we could still place and receive telephone calls. Sometimes we dialed by candle light! More recently, we have gone to multi-line equipment that required local power to operate. Even though our familiar tip and ring interface continued to work, the local instruments, behind the electronic key telephone system, were either dead, or hard-wired to one CO line for the duration of the power outage. Last weekend, the local power failed for four hours. No weather, no obvious explanation, just quiet darkness. The UPS on the computer system shut down after 45 minutes. The other UPS on the telephone system shut down after two hours. Two telephone sets continued to operate; they were connected by the power-fail transfer relay in the key telephone system to the first two CO lines. But after three hours, we had a new and different experience: No dial tone! No battery. Just an apparent open circuit on tip and ring -- on four of the six CO lines here. (The other two continued to work normally.) The two lines that continued to work are the two that have metallic facillities (loaded loops) all the way to the CO. The other four lines come from the SLC-something buried under the street a couple of blocks away. Apparently the remote terminal of the multiplexer system requires local power, and had about three hours of battery available. I would have expected that a metallic circuit would feed CO battery to the remote terminal. There are a bunch of T1 circuits to the CO, so why now a few power pairs? I asked a friend who works on subscriber loop multiplexer equipment at Bell Labs. She claims that eight-hour batteries are offered with the remote terminal equipment, but that the telcos sometimes buy cheaper power equipment with less capacity. Apparently NJ Bell did this in our case. I suppose I needn't bother equipping the CPE here with more than a few hours of battery backup, right? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Subject: Whose Idea Was it to Charge For 800-555-5555? Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 11:25:39 EST From: John R. Levine While poking through the archives the other day, I found this quote from our esteemed, nay, infallible Moderator from Oct 12th: > Regarding the {USA Today} news/entertainment line on 800-555-5555, I > spoke two days ago with Mr. Blake in the newspaper's corporate offices > in Virginia. ... He did stress that people calling the number would not > be charged for using the service, and asked that the 800 number not be > 'abused'. PAT Has anyone told {USA Today} about the enormous ill-will that AT&T is generating on their behalf? Even though I have no reason to believe that the paper has done anything the least bit inappropriate, I'd be reluctant to deal with them if their suppliers or sobcontractors are this far out of control. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 12:51:09 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: AT&T Calling-Card Advertisement I just saw this posted above an AT&T coin phone: No charge for AT&T calling card, and you don't need a home phone or credit card to have one. Call 800-551-3131 ext. 968. Sample credit card displayed; the only comment I have is that I see a non-areacode where the cards from the Baby Bells have had home phone number + four digit number. The number displayed is 836-000-6780-1111, the name shown is T. Brown, and it also says International Number 891253-836-000-6780-3, Auth Code 50. (And I am NOT suggesting that anyone test this number!) ------------------------------ From: cam@celtech.com (Cameron Elliot) Subject: I Want a Device That Can Detect Customized Ringing Date: 9 Jan 92 20:50:07 GMT Organization: Cellular Technical Services, Seattle, WA I want to be able to route incoming calls at home to multiple devices, ie a modem, a fax, a dialogic, my answering machine. By using US-Wests Custom Ringing(TM) feature. I need a box that can output RS-232 codes, and my system can respond, or a box that has multiple RJ-45 jacks, and each distinct ring could be passed through to a certain jack. Any information is appreciated. Thanks. Cameron Elliott 206-860-1521 cam@ctsx.cts.celtech.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Jan 92 14:03:00 EST From: jhall@ihlpm.att.com (John R Hall) Subject: Answering Machine Belts Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories I'm looking for a place where I can buy an answering machine belt. The specific model is an AT&T 2100, but I'm more than willing to sort through assorted sizes of belts. Thanks, John R. Hall jhall@ihlpm.att.com ------------------------------ Date: hu, 09 Jan 92 18:46:44 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: Global Paging at Hand? A picture from the Associated Press shows a new "Message Card" developed by SkyTel Corp. It is a credit-card style pager (not quite that thin, but rather small) that can be signalled with numeric readout. Coverage is said to be all of North America and parts of Asia. NEC was also part of the development of the Message Card. Almost the first page heard around the world ... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jan 92 18:33:35 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: MCI Card With Voice Features Reuters reports that MCI has a new calling card which also allows for access to various recorded message features (weather, news, voice mail). This is accessed via a toll-free number then a security code. Cost for the voice services is USD$0.49/minute, with conference calling and messaging at an additional charge. ------------------------------ Subject: Multiple Calls on One Access to Sprint 800 877 8000 Date: Thu, 09 Jan 92 16:59:37 PST From: eli@cisco.com On my latest Sprint bill, they charged me an access charge for every call I made during a single connect to their 800 number. I could swear that it used to be billed such that only one access charge was charged per call to the 800, when one used the # sign to start a new call. Did their billing method change? Still waiting for my Metromedia/ITT calling card ... eli ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 01:26:26 PST From: Nigel Roberts 10-Jan-1992 1020 Subject: Panasonic Answering Machine (Where Has My Cuckoo Flown Away To?) I've a couple of questions about my Panasonic answering machine (KX-2445BE). There's an undocumented command (prog #22) which enable two-way recording without the tell-tale beep. I've been using this for some time. There's another undocumented command (prog #11 /prog #12) which I discovered, and I can't for the life of me see what it does. The only thing it _appears_ to do is to display an "A" in the LCD when #11 is pressed and a "b" when #22 is pressed. (Default state is "A"). This is driving me up the wall wondering what it does. Any ideas? Finally, the synthesised voice and cuckoo quit working recently. It's probably a hardware failure of the voice synthesiser chip, but just in case, before I take the machine in for repair, does any one know how to do a reset of the microprocessor? (I tried powering the machine off for a few hours, and the machine reset to defaults, but neither the woman's voice nor the cuckoo came back). Nigel Roberts +44 206 396610 / +49 69 6672-1018 FAX +44 206 393148 ------------------------------ From: disk!tony@uunet.uu.net (tony) Subject: Question - Pause Lengths for Fax/Modem Credit Card Calls? Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 08:04:28 GMT I sometimes need to bill fax or modem calls to a credit card. The pause length between the phone number and the tone requesting your credit card number seems to vary a lot. Sometimes the call goes through okay, other times I can hear an operator's voice through my fax or PC speaker. How many seconds are you supposed to have your machines wait before you enter the credit card number? Any help you can be will probably please a lot of phone operators (as I don't even hear them half the time if I have a radio on or if I'm talking to someone in the room). tony@disk.UUCP uunet!Coplex.Com!disk!Tony.Safina ------------------------------ From: bcsaic!ssc-vax!clark@cs.washington.edu (Roger Clark Swann) Subject: Help Needed With ACS Headset Date: 9 Jan 92 04:52:59 GMT Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics I just acquired an ACS Communications, Inc. brand headset, Modular model MP. However, no manuals. I see that there are banks of dip switches, on the under side of the unit. What are these for? How should they be set? Roger Swann | email: clark@ssc-vax.boeing.com @ | fax: 206-773-1249 The Boeing Company | voice: 206-773-5491 ------------------------------ From: Subject: Zip + 6? Date: Fri 10 Jan 1992 09:41 -0500 As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office heard about checksums or other techniques to reduce errors? [Moderator's Note: Have you really heard something saying the present zip code (five digits plus four optional) is being increased by two more optional digits? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #30 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12700; 13 Jan 92 4:26 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29029 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Jan 1992 02:03:21 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26385 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 13 Jan 1992 02:02:49 -0600 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 02:02:49 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201130802.AA26385@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #31 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Jan 92 02:02:43 CST Volume 12 : Issue 31 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson State of Ohio Feature Group B and D (Bill Warner) Phone Calls to Hawaii (Was AT&T Drops The Ball?) (Joel Upchurch) Radio Links for Rural Telephone (Paul Cook) Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (Colin Tuttle) What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (David Rabson) Determining if a Call Was Answered (Malcolm Dunnett) Phone Device Wanted Which Lights Up When Extension in Use (Suzy Mercer) Country Code 809? (Jim Rees) Not Yet in Service Message (Carl Moore) Phone Number Verification (Steven A. Rubin) AT&T Mail in Canada Delays Minimum Monthly Charge (Dave Leibold) FAQ List Update Forthcoming (Dave Leibold) Radio Shack Two Line Box With Conference Wanted (Al Berg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: WARNER%DEC1@MPS.OHIO-STATE.EDU Subject: State of Ohio Feature Group B and D Date: 10 Jan 92 13:08:13 EST Organization: The Ohio Data Network Speaking of Feature Group D access (10OHI) to carriers, here at the State of Ohio we are considering providing free dialing to many State Agencies throughout the State using Feature Group D. We have done something similiar with Feature Group B access (950-1OHI). In this case we use it to connect the Lottery ticket agencies' hand held scanner box they use to track instant ticket inventories back to their central computer. (This is in the neighborhood of three million minutes of long distance a month.) Usually this is because the agent will connect to the computer scan a ticket or two and then wait on a customer and get back to scanning tickets after a delay. This has saved the State of Ohio a significant amount of money versus using an 800 number. The box is programmed to automatically dial the number so the "unusualness" of the number is no problem. It dials: 950-1OHI waits for the Ohio switch "Bong" and then dials the extension to call. (Only two extensions in the State support this, so there really is no reason to try it! Thanks.) We considered allowing general access to State of Ohio network this way. But there is a big disadvantage. Once you have dialed 950-1OHI you are switched to our long distance switch. This is fine if you are using tones to dial. You just dial the extension you desire. But there are still a lot of pulse only phones in the world and to provide them access would require some sort of operator or voice recognition system. This would greatly increase the cost and complexity of the service. But if you use Feature Group D (10OHI) access, the person dialing the number just dials 10OHI followed by the number. This is detected at the local switch. Then the number the person dials is sent to the long distance switch from the local switch. So it doesn't matter if the phone sent the number to the local switch with tones or pulses. To contact a state agency someone would dial: 10OHI . (644 is our carrier code.) One of the exchanges we have is 466, and our extension numbers are last five digits of the number, so numbers could be 10OHIOVAXS# or 10OHIOPUCO# if an agency desired. These calls would not cost the caller anything; the receiving agency would pay for the call. The biggest difficulty might be getting the general (non telecom) public to use such a "weird" phone number. If enough agencies sign on to such a system we might be able to publicize this as a "Call Ohio" numbering scheme or something. It might be best for a user interface reasons to require the caller to enter the full long distance number including area code (even though we would ignore it.) William "Bill" Warner, III (N8HJP) WARNER@OHIO.GOV Ohio Data Network WARNER@OHSTPY (Bitnet) 65 E State St, Suite 810 +1 614 466 6683 (Voice) Columbus, OH 43215 +1 614 466 8159 (FAX) ------------------------------ From: joel@peora.sdc.ccur.com (Joel Upchurch) Subject: Phone Calls to Hawaii (Was AT&T Drops The Ball?) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 20:05:49 GMT Organization: Upchurch Computer Consulting, Orlando FL In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Early today I complained to AT&T about the abysmal connections to the > Hawaiian islands. As has been discussed here before, there is a delay > that is variable even during the same call; there are varying levels > of background hiss; the audio is distorted; and below a certain > threshold, the audio is actually chopped off. > What finally set me off was that I happened to have occasion to use a > client's ComSystems (it never occurred to me to use my own for calls > to the islands!) service. Each and every call of about ten was clear, > noiseless, without annoying transmission delays, etc., etc. Sure > enough, using my own account with ComSystems, the calls are perfect. I call Hawaii a lot from here in Florida. I'm talking about several hours a month. The voice quality usually doesn't bother me, but the delay because of the satellite relay is very annoying. Does anyone know if a long distance service that would give me a surface connection from Florida to Hawaii? And how would their rates compare to AT&T's Reach Out America Plan rates? Joel Upchurch/Upchurch Computer Consulting/718 Galsworthy/Orlando, FL 32809 joel@peora.ccur.com {uiucuxc,hoptoad,petsd,ucf-cs}!peora!joel (407) 859-0982 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 23:38 GMT From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: Radio Links for Rural Telephone I received a brochure on a new product from Connect Systems Inc, a manufacturer of radio/telephone interface boxes. They make a popular line of simplex autopatches, which allow you to access a phone line from a two-way VHF radio. The new product is the model RT8 Rural Telephone System. It consists of two boxes. One hooks between a telephone line and the mic/speaker connections on two-way VHF radios, and the other box for the remote end (also hooked to radios) supplies battery and ringing to a telephone. The idea is that instead of using a conventional phone patch with a radio to make calls, this system uses radio to provide the link between a phone line and anything at the remote end that would normally hook to a phone line (PBX, key system, fax machine, etc). What I can't figure out is, would this be legal in the USA, and how would it be licensed? I know that the FCC authorizes the BETRS service which uses UHF radio to provide phone service to remote areas. Several lines are multiplexed, and low power point-to-point UHF radios make the connection. I think it is used on telco frequencies only in very sparsely populated areas. But would it really be legal to provide telephone service in a rural area using conventional Land Mobile or Public Safety radio channels and these devices? I called the manufacturer (Connect Systems Inc, #113, 2064 Eastman Ave, Ventura, CA 93003 - 800-545-1349/805-642-7184) and they didn't seem to know anything about regulatory requirements. Someone there suggested that this was being made for third world markets. Paul Cook 206-881-7000 Proctor & Associates MCI Mail 399-1080 15050 NE 36th St. fax: 206-885-3282 Redmond, WA 98052-5317 3991080@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Subject: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM Date: 10 Jan 92 22:09:31 CST (Fri) From: ctuttle@taronga.com (Colin Tuttle) I have a curious problem with my telephone every night at 12:02 A.M. I know it is at 12:02 A.M. because the phone next to the bed is a Magnavox clock radio/telephone combination. Anyway back to the problem. Every morning at 12:02 I get a little chirp, or a belltap on the phone. The phone has the "added feature" of belltap so you do hear when someone hangs up the phone. Some might call it a bug, but I'm sure the Magnavox engineers put this on the phone as a convenience item, and a reason to buy their model rather than Sony's. Now my question is why does the phone do this every night at 12:02 A.M.? Is the phone company testing the line in some way, and is my phone detecting the changes in voltage? Does the phone company do routine testing nightly and does the computer check phones at the same time each night? I've never had any problems if I am on the phone at 12:02 A.M ... the call continues ... I imagine if it is a test by the phone company it doesn't perform the test if the line is in use. It's not been a problem, and it's not annoying, it is just more of a curiosity than anything. Does anyone have any other solution to this? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 11:59:35 GMT From: davidra Subject: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? Esteemed Moderator! Have you ever wondered what the purpose is of the person-to-person call? Some years ago, when operators placed all long-distance calls, which in any case were moderately expensive, it may have made sense when trying to call a particularly hard-to-reach person. Now that one can dial a coast-to-coast call one's self in the U.S. and be out no more than 15c or 16c for reaching the wrong person, it seems a little antiquated. It is also open to abuse if a caller makes a person-to- person collect call for a code-name (who won't ever be in) in order to pass on a message. British Telecom also apparently wondered what the use was of person-to-person calls. The set-up charge for a person-to-person call outside Europe is about #5.80 (US $10.45), which they will charge the calling party whether or not the call goes through (according to their rates book). I think the figure is about two pounds for person-to-person calls within the U.K. I can only speculate that they hope to make a few quid off those ignorant of the charges. Home (Canada) Direct charges all collect calls at person-to-person rates, but I think that has to do with accounting. Can you discern any continuing reason for the person-to-person service, outside, perhaps, of non-dialable countries and exchanges? Yours faithfully, David Rabson davidra%dionysos.thphys@prg.ox.ac.uk [Moderator's Note: It is just a historical artifact here; a thing which was a useful service at one point but has no useful purpose now except to enhance fraud calls as you pointed out. I'm surprised the telcos still keep offering the service. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Malcolm Dunnett Subject: Determining if a Call Was Answered Date: 11 Jan 92 09:56:56 -0800 Organization: Malaspina College We have a Northern Telecom SL/1 switch. I'm using the Call Detail Recorder port to record outgoing call information, which we use for internal accounting. There is a problem with this, in that the switch can't determine exactly when a call is answered, or if it's answered at all, therefore the length of calls on our reports often varies from that reported on the bills, and we log calls that aren't answered at all (since we can't tell we just assume that any call that was "off hook" for more than x seconds got through). In the overall scheme of things these errors are trivial, but I find it annoying that in this age of ANI and other high tech "miracles" the equipment can't even tell if the call was answered. The central office obviously knows since we don't get billed for calls that aren't completed. Are there any PBXs which can do this? Is the problem in our equipment? The central office? Our lines? (I believe we just have a number of analog trunks, would a digital trunk help?) or should I just resign myself to the fact that an "educated guess" is the best we'll ever do. Malcolm Dunnett Malaspina College 900 Fifth Street Nanaimo, B.C. CANADA Tel: (604) 755-8738 V9R 5S5 ------------------------------ From: suzy@midway.uchicago.edu (Suzy Mercer) Subject: Phone Device Wanted Which Lights Up When Extension in Use Reply-To: suzy@midway.uchicago.edu Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1992 11:48:04 GMT Can someone help me? I seem to recall seeing in some electronics catalog a device one can place on a telephone that would light up (or something) when someone else on the line had picked up an extension. (Basically, I need to know if, when *I* am on the phone, someone else picks up an extension to listen to my conversation. I am divorced and have a teenager in the family -- see my problem?) I know Radio Shack sells a device, but that needs to be placed on the extension (where it can be seen and disabled -- not an option in this case). Can anyone steer me in the right direction? Suzy [Moderator's Note: We've covered this many times in the past, and perhaps one or more readers will send you the several reply messages and schematics, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rees@paris.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Country Code 809? Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 16:26:22 GMT I just noticed that my local (Ann Arbor, Mi) phone book lists the country code for "Caribbean Islands" in the international section as 809. I think they're confused. For Cuba, it says, "see Guantanamo Bay." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 92 15:36:15 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Not Yet in Service Message I got an intercept message saying the number I reached had been changed, and that the new number might not be in service yet? ------------------------------ From: sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Steven A Rubin) Subject: Phone Number Verification Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1992 21:45:06 GMT A while ago someone posted the possible numbers to call that would connect you to a computer generated voice that would read back the phone number from which you are calling. 811 used to work here, but has been stripped out of most of the CO's in and around Baltimore. I recall trying a suggested number that was a 1+ area code which did indeed work, but can't seem to find it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 01:59:03 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: AT&T Mail in Canada Delays Minimum Monthly Charge It looks like the proposed monthly minimum for Canadian AT&T Mail subscribers will be delayed a bit as the accompanying notice indicates. Again, this will not affect subscribers in other countries. Date: Wed Jan 8 10:42:39 GMT 1992 From: CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE Phone: +1 800 567 4671 Fax-Phone: +1 416 490 3633 Subject: Minimum Monthly Fee To: David Leibold Content-Length: 481 Dear Valued Customer, AT&T EasyLink Services - Canada would like to make the transition to our new AT&T Mail price structure as smooth and as simple as possible. Therefore, the minimum monthly fee of $29.00 per invoice will not be implemented until April 1, 1992 at the earliest. If you have questions regarding any AT&T EasyLink service, please call your Account Executive or the Canadian Customer Assistance Centre at 1-800-567-4671 or send a free message to !cndahelp. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 01:50:14 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: FAQ List Update Forthcoming A new version of TELECOM Digest's Frequently Asked Questions list is ready. A substantial amount of upgrading was done to the list, including a summary of questions used, new questions, upgrading answers to existing ones, and a more international approach to subjects. [Moderator's Note: Look for this in the Telecom Archives later this week as time permits. Watch the directory there to see the file with a new date instead of the older 'frequent.asked.questions'. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 15:17:46 -0500 From: "Albert M. Berg" Organization: NETLAN Inc. Subject: Radio Shack Two Line Box With Conference Wanted I have been trying to locate one of RS's two line controllers with the conference feature as well. They have disappeared from the catalog and the store personnel seem to have had the memory of this device electronically removed from their minds. Any information on a similar device available elsewhere would be appreciated. Al Berg - NETLAN - NYC ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #31 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08010; 14 Jan 92 2:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03582 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 00:31:02 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24125 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 00:30:31 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 00:30:31 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201140630.AA24125@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #32 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Jan 92 00:30:28 CST Volume 12 : Issue 32 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson US West Blows It (Sort Of) (David W. Barts) T1 on Fiber Revisited (Darwei Kung) Mu-law, A-law (Charles Hoequist) Cellular and Caller ID and Answering Machines (David E. Sheafer) Caller ID in (x) USSR (Kirill V. Tchashchin) Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois (TELECOM Moderator) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 13:03:52 -0800 From: David W. Barts Subject: US West Blows It (Sort Of) Early this morning, as of 1:55 AM, LD calls dialed within western Washington were still going through when dialed as 1 + 7 digits from the EMerson CO in north Seattle. By 1:59 AM, calls dialed as 1 + 7D resulted in reorder and it was necessary to dial 1 + 206 + 7D in order to get connected. However, the error recording that one gets when an intra-NPA LD call attempt is made by just dialing the seven digits (with no 1 or 1 + 206) is still unchanged as of ten minutes ago (it is now 12:45 PM on Sunday): " We're sorry, you must first dial a 1 when calling this number. Please hang up, and try your call again." The in the quote is just a single beep, not the normal tri-tone that most error recordings are preceded with. As permissive dialing has worked officially for about six months and unofficially for several months longer than that, one would think that this recording would have been replaced with one instructing the caller to use 1 + 206 dialing many months ago. As of 12:35 on Sunday, 1 + 7D call attempts still resulted in reorder. One would think that US West could (and would) have caused 1 + 7D to route to a recording telling the caller to dial 1 + 206 instead, as the first N0X/N1X exchange code is not due to be assigned until sometime this spring. All of this gives me the impression that US West's sloppiness is going to result in a lot of unnecessary service calls that could have been avoided if they had planned the cutover a little better. ... < five hours later > ... Well, it is five hours after I composed the first part of this message to the Digest about US West "blowing it", and I guess I'm going to have to partially retract what I said. Dialing either 7D or 1 + 7D now gets one routed to the same recording: " I'm sorry ... if you are making a Long Distance or Operator Assisted call, you must first dial a 1 or 0, plus the area code and then the number. Please try your call again." But this is not the end of the weirdness. Before one gets connected to the recorded message, one hears a ringing tone (usually for two or three rings). The first time I got the recording, I definitely heard a radio or TV in the background before the recording "answered" the call. The next time, I heard the click of a receiver being picked up (even though the ringing continued). So I said "Hello?!?", and a surprised voice answered through the ringing "Hello?". At that point the recording came on, the background noise went away, and I was unable to speak to the other party anymore. Now, it is far from unusual to hear a ring signal for a few rings before being connected to an error recording, but this is the first time I have ever been aware of other parties on the line with me while the ring signal is present. I have two theories at this point: 1. US West is still getting bugs worked out after the cutover, and this is one of them. 2. The feature has always been there, its just that it usually doesn't manifest itself because the chance of two callers causing the same message to invoked at the same time is small. However, it is happening often right now because there are lots of misdialed LD calls today. David Barts N5JRN UW Civil Engineering, FX-10 davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu Seattle, WA 98195 ------------------------------ From: kung@max.u.washington.edu Subject: T1 on Fiber Revisited Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 21:57:58 GMT Putting a single T1 on fiber is a very costly venture. Usually, fiber hubbing requires at least five to ten T1 circuits before it becomes cost effective to think about migrating from copper spans to fiber spans. For POTS (plain old telephone services), more likely, the fiber terminates at a digital MUX and then feed into a subscriber loop carrier system, which may require three to five T1 spans to support anywhere from one to several hundred voice circuits. In any case, the break even cost for such configuration will require a large number of voice circuit subscribers to switch at the same time. To justify a installation of an T1 to T3 fiber MUX in a subscriber loop with only one projected POTS line is not easy even within the telco. High Cap Digital Data service (T1 or T3 rates) is a much better reason to put a mux in a local loop. Power issue is a very interesting factor in operations. Most battery back up systems will last up to four or six hours. What if the power can't be restored in time? Well, most telco provide trucks with diesel generators to keep certain locations alive. But the number of available mobile power plants is limited. Downtime is unavoidable during a major disaster. 99.999% availablity guarentee holds only for small metropolitan based telephone company. Any telco with large area of coverage will have to confront the power issue with fiber based services. Darwei Kung ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jan 92 12:59:00 EST From: Charles (C.A.) Hoequist Subject: Mu-law, A-law Several queries about aspects of mu-law and A-law coding have come in recent issues of the Digest, so I thought I'd throw in some general information: As has been pointed out, mu-law coding is used in Japan and the USA, A-law in Europe (don't ask me how this distribution came about; I have heard the claim that mu-law was foisted on Japan after WWII, but I frankly doubt that digital coding schemes were on anyone's list of reforms for Japan in 1945 :) ). Why have mu/A - law at all? For voice signals, it is not feasible to predict amplitude distributions across sources (talkers). Therefore, coding schemes want (among other goals) to have relatively constant ratios of full-load sinewave power to quantizing-distortion power (S/D ratios). The best bet for this is logarithmic compression: F(x) = log(x), x being the digitized sample value. Problem: log x diverges for low-amplitude values of x. A-law and mu-law are both modifications of straight logarithmic transformations to keep low-level signals honest. mu-law is defined as: F(x) = x ((ln(1 + mu(|x|)) / ln(1 + mu) ), -1 =< x =< 1 A-law is: F(x) = x ( A|x| / (1 + lnA ) ), 0 =< |x| =< 1/A F(x) = x ( (1 + lnA|x|) / (1 + ln A) ), 1/A =< |x| =< 1 Unreadable ASCII equations aside, this means that A-law is actually logarithmic for |x| > 1/A, and linear for |x| < 1/A. mu-law, on the other hand, warps the entire range of the transformation, approaching a linear function for small x, and approaching a log function for large x. Thus, A-law has a flatter S/D value for |x| between 1/A and and 1 but is worse on low-level signals. In implementation, both are done by piece-wise approximations. For mu-law (the only one I'm familiar with), the coding range is broken into 16 distinguishable segments (with those on each side of 0 being the same, so there are only 15 different segments). The usual way of coding an eight-bit value is one sign bit, three bits for the segment, and four bits for the 'step' within the segment. What gets tricky is that the implementation does _not_ prescribe segment size (= what input signal range gets coded into a given segment) or even whether segments are symmetric around 0, among other things. It is therefore not feasible to send anyone 'the' table for converting digitized values to mu-law, though the overwhelming majority of applications do go with one set of defaults (segments are centered on zero, segment ranges are powers of two). There. Doubtless the right balance of length (too much) and comprehensibility (too little) ;) Charles Hoequist |Internet: hoequist@bnr.ca BNR Inc. | 919-991-8642 PO Box 13478, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3478 ------------------------------ From: David E. Sheafer Reply-To: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu Subject: Cellular and Caller ID and Answering Machines Date: 11 Jan 92 16:11:01 GMT Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA On my cellular telephone (model Nynex-832plus made by audiovax) there is a "data" jack for using a fax or modem. This jack is the same standard as a phone jack, and my question is could either a Caller-ID box or an answering machine work sucessfully (sic) with this jack. I am curious as to whether the information needed for Caller-ID is sent over cellular networks, and the second problem is that the answering machine or Caller-ID box would have to be battery operated or use the power from the jack. Any thoughts or information would be appreciated. David E. Sheafer internet: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu or uucp: samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b GEnie: D.SHEAFER Cleveland Freenet: ap345 ------------------------------ From: kirill@newsbytes.msk.su (Kirill V. Tchashchin) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 23:33:28 +0200 (MSK) Organization: Newsbytes News Network / Moscow Bureau Subject: Caller ID in (x) USSR Is there anybody interested in knowing the fact that Caller-ID devices are well known and used in those telecom woods called the +7 phone area (formerly called USSR)? Most of phone exchanges here do support the feature. They were developed by the KGB specs (it's not exactly true :) and Caller-ID is available to anyone who cares to spend 3000 rubles (ca US$30 now) to buy a full digital phone from anyone of a BIG number of private producers or do-it-yourself for 300-500 roubles (US$3-5). And nobody cares yet about all those privacy issues here. And phone exchanges are reportedly overloaded by those Caller-ID users. They have those abilities but not enough to satisfy the demand :-) :-). The CLID phones are popular stuff in big cities and almost not used in smaller ones. And (I'm also not sure) those weird phone exchanges do support the features like call blocking as well. And Soviet, Russian and whatever legislators may come here, all of them do not even know the problem. So you all Caller-ID fans must know that even rotary-only dialed twenty year old exchanges do the trick here. That's how we live here, in Moscow, Russia. Remaining yours sincerely, Kirill Tchashchin, Moscow bureau, Newsbytes News Network GEnie: NB.MOW ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 14:59:51 CST Caller ID became available throughout northern Illinois via our three telephone companies Illinois Bell, Centel and GTE as of January 1, 1992. About 75 percent of northern Illinois (a higher percentage of 312/708 and a somewhat lower percentage of 815) is now identifiable to called parties in the same area. About 10,000 orders had been received by Illinois Bell as of January 9, the day my service was activated. The only people who actually got turned on the first week in January were those whose orders were in the system by mid-December, at which point 2800 subscribers were already signed up. I called in my order the day after Christmas and the backlog at that point was about two weeks in filling orders, with the earliest possible date for me being January 9, which was in fact the day my caller-ID started working. Apparently Illinois Bell did not realize the large number of interested people who would sign up, because they only had a couple people entering orders at first. They have started to catch up on the backlog now and subscribers are getting turned on within about a week of ordering caller-ID. Centel has a smaller subscriber base (just a couple of suburban towns and a small area of Chicago's northwest side) than Illinois Bell, but they report the same land-office type response to caller-ID, with new users going on line daily. Display boxes are in very short supply here. Montgomery Ward ran a full page ad in the papers on Thursday offering the AT&T display unit (no phone, just display holding ten numbers) for $74.99. They also offered a telephone with display unit from Bell South for $89.99 and a much fancier phone with display unit from AT&T for $129.99. I had held off getting a display unit until I saw one I liked at a nice price; but by late afternoon Thursday *every unit* was sold out in the local Ward's store on Addison Street. We finally found a Ward's in Niles, IL (a nearby suburb) with a couple of the Bell South and AT&T phones. The display only units were long gone. Supposedly each Wards' store got a dozen of the $74.99 display units ... The Bell South phone with caller-ID display also has a 30 number speed dial thing built in, plus the ability to call back whatever number is on the display screen. This unit stores 30 incoming calls with the time of day and date on each. It also has a neat feature which displays the word 'message' on the screen with the number *if* you have telco voicemail on your line and *if* the calling party stayed on line at least through connection with voicemail. The unit has to be 'programmed' with your own area code when you first plug it in (the phone line -- the display runs on batteries which were included and last over a year in normal use). This causes the unit to give a seven digit display on home area code numbers and a ten digit display on calls from other areas. Here in Chicago, we get caller-ID from 312 and 708, plus the portions of 815 which are within this LATA. The unit displays the word 'outside' for calls from other areas, and the word 'private' in the cases where the caller has blocked ID. It prints the word 'error' if the number was transmitted by the sending phone office but somehow lost in transit. It prints 'duplicate' for more than one call from the same number before the memory is cleared. The time and date are sent from the telco. Our system uses the standard *67 + number for blocking on a call by call basis as desired. In addition, the subscriber to caller-ID can turn off reception of numbers if desired with *85, and turn on the reception with *65, although I cannot imagine why the person paying to receive the information would want to turn off delivery. Callers to 911, 800/900 numbers or telco administrative lines (business office, repair service, directory enquiries, etc) cannot block delivery of their number. I had caller-ID installed on both my lines; but I get by with only one display unit by using a Radio Shack Automatic Two-Line Controller on the front end. The first ring wakes up the controller and switches the display unit to the ringing line in time to get the transmission which is sent about a half-second after the first ring ends. When caller-ID is combined with automatic call-back of last call received (*66) and call screening (*60), the subscriber is able to gain almost total control over the use of their phone ... imagine what a novel idea: being able to choose who will call you, who you will speak with, and when! Caller-ID also works just fine with my special distinctive ringing number (which comes in on my first line), although it does not display the number of people calling my 800 number, even though I get that information on the bill each month. And contrary to the recent article in Telecom Privacy which stated that 'only drug dealers and police will subscribe to caller-ID, (other than evil old big-business, of course), I am not a dealer or a police officer -- just someone who appreciates having my privacy and my right to use the phone at my convenience. One of the reasons caller-ID may be getting such a favorable response from the public here (based on the number of subscribers during the first month and the difficulty in obtaining display boxes) may be due to the favorable review of caller-ID by both of the major papers here. The Triibune and the Sun-Times both editorialized on how useful the service would be, and the positive influence it would have on restoring privacy and control of phone calls to the called party. I agree. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #32 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10728; 14 Jan 92 3:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13726 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 01:31:54 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05177 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 01:31:26 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 01:31:26 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201140731.AA05177@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #33 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Jan 92 01:31:22 CST Volume 12 : Issue 33 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson SWBell vs. Squirrels (Will Martin) Modeling IN Architectures (Anders Lundkvist) More on No-Surcharge Calling Cards (Douglas Scott Reuben) Open Mouth (A) Insert Foot (B) (Jon Cereghino) Footers on Intercept Recordings (Jon Cereghino) Less Service From the BOC (Doctor Math) PICs From RBOC Payphones (Doctor Math) Device to Call In on One Line and Dial Out on Another (amadeus@flex.com) Two Wires Become Four; GTE Won't Explain (Andrew Klossner) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 8:14:58 CST From: Will Martin Subject: SWBell vs. Squirrels A strange telephonic event happened this past weekend and I thought I'd write it up for Telecom: The telephone had been operating normally, and I received a [telemarketing] call on it Saturday morning about 11 AM. When we next picked up the phone in the afternoon, there was no dial tone. Instead there was a strange hollow sound, a bit of hum, and the vague indications of crosstalk -- faint sounds of dial pulses, the overtones of voices, etc. The neighbors reported no problems with their phones. When they called us, they heard ring indication, but we heard nothing. We had no voltage to give sidetone either; when we picked up two different phones on that line on different floors, we could not talk to each other over the connection. So I then began to disconnect various phones to see if the trouble was one of them being broken and off-hook or otherwise at fault. Nothing I did changed the situation. I left the hardwired rotaries in place and went next door to call repair service. Luckily they had touch-tone service and I was able to wade thru the menus and leave a report. (No human ever came on the line; this was Saturday evening.) Then, late Saturday night, we had dial tone again. We called time and temp to verify that it was working, and it was. It was too late to ask anyone to call us and I don't know the current ringback (anybody out there know what ringback is for 314-351-xxxx?). I re-plugged in the modulars I had disconnected. Sunday morning, no dial tone again. Then, the phone rang! It was a lady from Repair. While we conversed, the line went dead. I held on and she reappeared. She said she had "reset our line" a couple times (I'm not sure just what that meant -- any explanations?) and eventually wrote up a ticket and dispatched a repair person. She took line measurements with my modular phones plugged in and disconnected, and recommended that I unhook those while the repair was in progress. We had dial tone again at that time, and my wife called her mother and was conversing when the line went dead again. Now here is the most interesting aspect: based on my previous experience with the earlier call, my wife did not hang up but just held on the handset and listened. After a minute or so, her mother reappeared on the line. She had hung up and *re-dialed* and gotten thru, while my wife held the phone off-hook! The repair person with truck showed up and climbed the pole in the alley and rang us from there. He then examined the line between the pole and the house; he never came in to check from the demarc (we have the old carbon block type buried up in the joists in the basement ceiling behind some wretched nailed-on ceiling tiles). He noticed some suspicious points in the aerial-drop cable and decided to replace it. When he cut it down, he found the bad section -- the squirrels had chewed away the insulation on a four-inch section and it was bare to the weather, with a break in one side of the line that made and broke when it flexed in the wind! We talked -- he lived only a few blocks away and had grown up playing in the yard next door. He strung cable, I chopped some branches from interfering bushes and trees with a pole pruner to free snags. He replaced two old taped splices with new plastic-block splice devices, and all our phone service was restored to normal. What I suspect happened when that call came in when my wife held the phone off-hook was that the then-open line registered in the CO as being on-hook; the ringing voltage was enough to bridge the gap and restore the connection, maybe thru water instead of copper [it was damp at the time]. So that acted like the phone being picked up, and to the CO is was as if the handset had been picked up immediately. Then that continuity would hold up until the cable swayed again and the connection parted. That seem logical? I suspect the sounds I heard during the no-dial-tone periods were caused by stray currents between the one continuous side and ground, picking up hum and crosstalk by induction. What is amazing to me is that this happened during good weather over the weekend and didn't wait until the snow and ice that is being predicted for today and tonight here in St. Louis! I salvaged the old cable sections -- that stuff is *tough*. I couldn't cut it with tinsnips except half-way at a time, and then flexing it to break the reinforcing wire. I expect the squirrels had good sharp teeth after working them on that stuff for a while. I wonder if it happened to ring while one was gnawing away and gave him a mouthful of 90 Volts...? :-) Regards, Will wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil OR wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 13:49:52 +0100 From: alu@lulea.trab.se Subject: Modeling IN Architectures Within Telia Research, the research company of the Swedish PTT, Televerket, we are about to initiate some work items on modeling and simulation of IN architectures. The core question is: How is an IN architecture description best transformed into an executable model suitable for simulation where different properties of an IN architecture can be studied? Related issues and topics to cover could be: - Given the chosen transformation methodology, how easy is it to transform a specification into a model? - How expensive is it to execute the model? - Which properties of an architecture specification can be studied in the model? (Performance, signaling levels, blocking,...) - How well does the model correspond to the specification? - To what extent is the behaviour of the model the same as the behaviour of a "real" implementation of the specification? We would like to get in contact with people, projects and companies with ongoing activities within this area. If you are working with this or you know of someone else doing so, please respond to: Telia Research Anders Lundkvist e-mail : alu@lulea.trab.se Aurorum 6 S-951 75 LULEA SWEDEN Phone : + 46 920 754 00 Direct: + 46 920 754 75 Fax : + 46 920 754 90 ------------------------------ Date: 13-JAN-1992 00:43:04.31 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: More on No-Surcharge Calling Cards About a month or two ago, I posted a request for any information on LD companies which offer a "no-surcharge" calling card as an alternative to my AT&T card, which chages $.80 per call in addition to toll. (Although the surcharge is waived for Reach Out America customers in many areas who subscribe to the "Calling Card" option.) I was told to investigate Comm*Systems and Cable & Wireless, yet both initially told me they offered no such feature. After checking with them in greater detail, this is what I found: - Comm*Systems has a 950 access, but it is only to be used from ONE location (yeah, right! ;) ), and will only be offered to their "1+" customers. It is only available in Western states, to wit: California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and perhaps New Mexico, Arizona (can't recall the chart they sent me). So it only makes sense if you will use the 950 number out west (which I would), AND if you have 1+ from them, which I don't, so Comm*Systems won't work for me. - Cable & Wireless has a nationwide 950 number (available in most major markets nationwide, I believe it is 950-0223), yet in order to be able to use it without a surcharge you must subscribe to their WATS package for outbound dialing. We have four 800 (inbound) numbers with them, but this is not "good enough", and they require that you use their out-WATS to get the special card. They also have a "standard" travel service, but the rates a quite high for this, and after a few minutes it is cheaper to pay the surcharge with AT&T, Sprint, MCI, et. al ... Allnet also has a "no fee" calling card, but they charge a lot per minute (something like $.37 or so), so again, its not much of a money saver. So are there any other services out there I should investigate? (If anyone wants more specific details about the info C&W or Comm*Systems sent to me, let me know, and I'll quote rates, qualifications, etc.) Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 00:15:16 PST From: cereghin@netcom.netcom.com (Jon Cereghino) Subject: Open Mouth (A) Insert Foot (B) Re: Party lines I have received several thoughtful notes about how the Bell System DID NOT use frequency-selective ringing on party lines. I stand corrected. Some telcos outside of the Bell System did use this method. Jon Cereghino Internet: cereghin@netcom.com Post Office Box 1132, Mountain View, CA 94042-1132 or C-Message Weighting BBS +1 408 377 7441 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 00:36:25 PST From: cereghin@netcom.netcom.com (Jon Cereghino) Subject: Footers on Intercept Recordings Many of the intercept recordings that I reach have footers that include an area code and some other digits. For example: The number you have dialed cannot be reached from your calling area 408 2T Your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check the number and dial again or call your attendant to help you. 213 2C M I suppose this tells someone how far the call progressed before being connected to the remnant-of-an-intercept-operator. Can any of you offer more specifics? Jon Cereghino Internet: cereghin@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 01:02:00 EST Organization: Department of Redundancy Department Subject: Less Service From the BOC Effective December 31st, 1991, my BOC closed their downtown Payment Center, claming it was part of an effort to "make paying your bill more convenient". Apparently a survey has shown that "the majority" of customers would rather pay their bills at their local area bank, so the telco now has arrangements with four banks here in the area so that bills may be paid through these banks. But there's a catch: If you don't bank with any of these four banks, you will be required to pay a "transaction fee" of $0.50. Not to mention that a record of the payment may take days to be entered into the BOC billing system. Somehow I don't think that having to go farther and pay extra for something to get done more slowly is "more convenient". There is no reasonable argument to suggest that their payment center was underutilized; I sometimes had to wait in line 20 or 30 minutes to pay my bill. Another side effect is that there is no longer a lobby for the stacks of local phone books free for the taking, nor is there any access to the out-of-area directories that used to be free for the browsing (yes, I know, the Library is across the street). Needless to say, I am not impressed ... but since I'm not one of "the majority", the BOC could care less. If this sounds like whining, that's because it is; I somehow keep getting charged more for less service. The month before they announced they were going to close the Payment Center, I got bill inserts telling me how convenient it would be for them to EFT my payments right out of my bank account. Uhh, convenient for me, that is, since I would "Never Write Another Check!" I think not. ------------------------------ Subject: PICs From RBOC Payphones From: drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 92 00:36:11 EST Organization: Department of Redundancy Department I have found that local RBOC payphones (Indiana Bell here) don't respond properly to any of the various 10XXX codes. That is, dialing 10XXX +1 + 700-555-4141 always results in the message, "You have reached the AT&T Long Distance Network. Thank you for using AT&T. This message will not be repeated." I have verified this on phones in more than one CO. I also found it to be the case in the next RBOC to the south (Cincinnati Bell) whilst on Christmas vacation. I have tried on more than one occasion to explain the situation to repair and various supervisory Operator positions to no avail. So my question is: Exactly how does this violate Equal Access and/or the MFJ, and where can I get the text so that it can be quoted in my letters to the FCC, FTC, and the aforementioned RBOCs? Such letter will also point out that it would be unwise to let the RBOCs provide information services given their track record, citing this situation as a specific example. Thanks, all. I've been meaning to get on this one for awhile. [Moderator's Note: It does NOT violate Equal Access. The catch is your 1+ dialing ... at this time the only companies with the ability to collect or refund coins deposited in the phone are the local telco and AT&T. *All* long distance calls from payphones requiring coin deposit are sent to AT&T. Now had you zero-plussed your call, implying you would need operator assistance (credit card, collect, third number type call) then your 10xxx instructions would have been observed, even if it did result in some OCCs responding with re-order or intercept to your attempt to call their (non-existent) operator service. That is provided of course the 10xxx you chose was providing service to the exchange you were calling from. Not every 10xxx serves every place. So save your letter writing. The RBOC is doing nothing wrong. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 17:28:29 -0500 From: amadeus@flex.com Subject: Device to Call In on One Line and Dial Out on Another Organization: Flex Plus BBS -- Honolulu, Hawaii I wish to create a device that will connect to both of the phone lines in my house and allow me to call in on one of the lines and then dial out on another from a remote location. I would rather purchase the device if it's available somewhere, but I have yet to find it. Radio Shack's divertor device, which allows you to call forward a call using two lines, seems to be very close to what I want and could be inexpensively modified to do what I want. Would anyone have some ideas on how to change this device to suit my needs? Thanks for any help. amadeus@flex.com [Moderator's Note: Responders, please share the mods with all of us. PAT] ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain Date: 13 Jan 92 18:11:35 GMT Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon I'm building a new house and it's time for me to plan my signal wiring. I'm served by GTE Northwest in Tigard Oregon, exchange 503-620. I called them and was sent their booklet "Customer Installed Premises Wiring Guide." There's a picture of how to wire the "customer provided wire junction," where the four conductors in my internal wiring attach to four screws. I'm no expert on telecom wiring and I thought, once and for all, to find out why I'm supposed to run four wires when the telco puts only two into my house. One phone call and several transfers later, I found out that GTE has no mechanism for answering this sort of question. Their policy is that my choices are to do it myself or hire them to wire my house. They have no staff to answer questions for people who aren't paying money to the repair profit center. I talked to a supervisor who explained all this to me, but I persisted, and she agreed to dig up a repair person to give me a call. He called, answered my question, and told me "Don't hesitate to call if you have any other questions." But he wasn't allowed to give me a direct-dial number to him. I explained my problem, and he suggested that I follow the same procedure each time I had a question. Sigh. The social issue: this seems penny wise and pound foolish. The reliability of the network decreases if people like me can't get technical answers and have to wire based on "best guess." The technical issue: the answer I got boils down to redundancy -- if one of the two signal conductors breaks in my internal cable, I can repair it by selecting one of the two spares. But, if this is the case, why are all four connectors brought out to the RJ11 jack? I'd be grateful for a technical answer. Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) [Moderator's Note: All four are brought there because some subscribers might want to have two lines from the beginning. eg 2 X 2 = 4. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #33 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21368; 14 Jan 92 23:21 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11383 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 21:23:53 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18162 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 21:23:15 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 21:23:15 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201150323.AA18162@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #34 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Jan 92 21:23:11 CST Volume 12 : Issue 34 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson History of the Telephone Show on TV (Jonathan Welch) Hayes V-Series Smartmodem 9600 For Sale, X.25 (David E Levinson) Automatic FMR Test Between Linx and Nynex (Seng-Poh Lee) "Call Me" Cards and International Calling (Michael Ho) Cellular Phone For Quadriplegic (Ken Weaverling) NT Vantage System Question (David Leibold) Metro One Has Follow-Me w/o Their Knowing It (Gabe M. Wiener) Where Can One *Buy* The White Pages? (Gil Kloepfer Jr.) Addition to SWBT 411 Service (Bob Izenberg) Working Assets Long Distance Company (Glenn F. Leavell) Motorola Cellular Phone Test Mode Commands (John R. Covert) ISDN Article in {Infoworld} (Robert L. McMillin) NT Meridian v. Norstar (C. Kenny Lin) Eastern Caribbean Cellular (John R. Levine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan_Welch Subject: History of the Telephone Show on TV Date: 13 Jan 92 19:03:08 GMT I just saw a little blurb that a show about the history of the telephone will be on The Discovery Channel on Tuesday, 9:30 pm EST. [Moderator's Note: I am sorry this message arrived to late to be included at least a day earlier. Perhaps people who see the show will be so kind to send reviews. PAT] ------------------------------ From: delg9059@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (David E Levinson) Subject: Hayes V-Series Smartmodem 9600 For Sale, X.25 Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 02:33:34 GMT For sale: Hayes V-Series Smartmodem 9600. Has X.25 packet switching, V.42 and MNP-5. Best offer. Hayes to Mac (DIN-8) cable, new. $10 if you buy the modem. David E. Levinson Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign internet: levinson@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu BITNET:AXPBDEL@UICVMC ------------------------------ From: splee@gnu.ai.mit.edu Subject: Automatic FMR Test between Linx and Nynex Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 22:00:45 EST With the recent cellular link up between Linx (Connecticut B carrier) and Nynex in NYC, I decided to try their automatic FMR while in the City recently. This new arrangement was supposed to allow me to roam in the NY Metro area and receive calls dialed to my CT number automatically, with no action on my part. So, while I was in NYC, I dialed my handheld direct from my car phone. After one ring, I heard a recording that said 'Locating Linx customer'. After a short pause, ringing continued and my phone rang. I didn't pick up, but I wonder if I was charged for the call. Evidently, my home service knew I was in an adjoining area, but still needed to locate me. Thats strange as Linx only has automatic FMR with the Metro NY area. I could understand it if they also had an arrangement with the Boston area. Normally, if I call my phone and it's off, I get about four rings and then get the standard 'user has left vehicle' message. When I got home, I tried calling the roaming port in NYC, and entered my phone number again. Despite my phone being on, it couldn't find me in CT. I suppose if I was a Nynex customer and was in CT, that would have worked, but it didn't work this way. Strange arrangement ... Seng-Poh Lee ------------------------------ From: ho@hoss.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) Subject: "Call Me" Cards and International Calling Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 03:57:29 GMT Do those billed-number-only "Call Me" telephone cards work from outside the U.S., and if so, does the dialed-number restriction still hold? The one I have lists no "International Number" as most cards do, but it's issued by a local telco. I will soon be moving into Pac*Bell territory, at which time I can get a genuine AT&T "Call Me" card ... will that change the situation? Michael Ho | UNTIL JAN. 20, sysmgrs willing: Internet:ho@hoss.unl.edu ------------------------------ From: weave@chopin.udel.edu (Ken Weaverling) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 23:29:58 EST Subject: Cellular Phone For Quadriplegic My girl friend is a quadriplegic. She has very limited use of her hands, and needs a wheelchair to get around. Despite all of this, she is able to drive in an adapted van. She would like to get a cellular phone for emergency purposes. There have been times when her van has broken down, or gotten a flat, and she gets stranded. One time, it was even life threatening. Her entire electrical system failed, so she couldn't operate the automatic door to get out and had a close call due to the heat buildup in an enclosed vehicle on a hot summer day. We went to a few local cellular phone stores, and didn't get very encouraging information. All the phones have push buttons that take a bit of effort to push, which is impossible for her to do. I seem to remember reading about a "voice activated" phone, but no one around here knows about them, and I wonder if it is more of a gimmick than it is useful. (For instance, if you have to push a button to "activate" the phone, she is out of luck.) Ideally, she needs a phone that is battery operated, so it won't fail if her van's electrical system dies. It should also have buttons that are very easy to push else something that is truly voice activated. If possible, it would be ideal if a portable phone could be hooked up to her motorized wheelchair. If that is possible, would the phone still be able to operate from within an enclosed vehicle? (I would attach the aerial somewhere on her wheelchair.) And finally, if anyone can think of a way for us to get her insurance to pay for the phone, we'd both be very grateful. Luckily, she had extended disability insurance at the time of her auto accident several years ago. They generally will pay for things needed for medical purposes, though I admit getting a car phone is pushing it (we already asked, but haven't pushed the issue yet). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 00:02:06 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: NT Vantage System Question I've played around with a Vantage key-type PBX system a bit. They have a port for SMDR, but it doesn't seem to be able to send data in a reliable stream. That is, it will tend to shut off and go into something of a command mode. Only flipping a couple of DIP switches simultaneously will get the SMDR rolling again with call data. Any ideas on how to keep the SMDR rolling merrily along, or is this tendency going to remain a built-in feature? Keeping a constant SMDR would be helpful in call accounting applications. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca djcl@zooid.guild.org ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Metro One Has Follow-Me w/o Their Knowing It Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 05:42:13 GMT Here's an odd one. The other day I was sitting on an Amtrak train passing through Springfield, MA when my portable phone rang. I answered it, and it was someone calling my NEW YORK number. Metro One (they're calling themselves Cellular One this week) has never announced Follow Me beyond the NYC tri-state area, and when I called customer service they flatly denied that Follow Me was installed, yet two people managed to reach me in Springfield by dialing my NY number. Any thoughts, folks? Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ From: gil@limbic.ssdl.com (Gil Kloepfer Jr.) Subject: Where Can One *Buy* the White Pages? Organization: Southwest Systems Development Labs, Houston, TX Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 22:47:29 GMT If this is in some kind of an archive, please direct me there. My neighbor is looking to find a source for the entire US white pages directory in machine-readable form. I'd like to know if there is a single-source for such information, or does one have to go to each RBOC and private phone company to get the info. She says that money is no object ... (wish I had those problems :-) Thanks in advance for any information you can provide. Gil Kloepfer, Jr. gil@limbic.ssdl.com ...!ames!limbic!gil [Moderator's Note: You might mention to her that Compuserve offers an on line national white pages directory which allows cross-reference and wild-card searching. It carries a surcharge. GO PHONES on CIS. I suppose that would be adequate for some users, maybe in her case also, depending on the volume of usage anticipated. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg) Subject: Addition to SWBT 411 Service Organization: The Fortress of Ultimate Dorkiness Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 19:01:28 GMT Now hear this recording after getting the phone number: "This number can be automatically dialed for an additional charge of 30 cents." Bob DOMAIN-WISE: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us BANG-WISE: ...cs.utexas.edu!dogface!bei ------------------------------ From: glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu (Glenn F. Leavell) Subject: Working Assets Long Distance Company Organization: University of Georgia Economics Department Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 20:40:29 GMT Has anyone had any experience with (or heard of) Working Assets long distance? I recently saw an ad for their services in the magazine {Utne Reader}. They claim to donate 1% of your phone bill to such special interest groups as Amnesty International, the ACLU, and Planned Parenthood. Also, the ad states that calls to corporate and political leaders are free of charge. Any information would be appreciated. Glenn F. Leavell Systems Administrator glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu 404-542-3488 University of Georgia Economics Department. 147 Brooks Hall. Athens, GA 30602 [Moderator's Note: We've touched on it here a few times with mixed responses from readers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 13:23:29 PST From: John R. Covert 14-Jan-1992 1552 Subject: Motorola Cellular Phone Test Mode Commands Most Motorola Cellular telephones have a "Test Mode" which is entered in various ways. Most commonly, it involves shorting some contacts while the phone is being powered up. When this is done, the phone initially comes up in normal operating mode but with a status display showing current channel (the control channel until a call is in progress and then the voice channel), received signal strength (as a three digit number) and then various other status bits. Pressing a "#" while in status display mode terminates normal operation and puts the phone into test mode, in which there are a number of commands as documented in the test manual. These are usually two digit commands, occasionally with an argument. The list of test commands is prefaced by the note that "all commands are not documented". One command that was documented in older versions of the manual, "67", is no longer documented, although it may still work in most phones. The "67" command displays a three digit number representing the current battery level in those phones still supporting it. Does anyone have a list of other potentially useful undocumented commands? A particularly useful command would be a command to display the contents of various RAM locations. That command, coupled with knowledge of which RAM location is assigned to the "Received System ID" would be most useful when trying to figure out what system you have just roamed into. Obviously, if you know the system IDs of all systems in the area you can guess which one you are currently in by setting the phone to "Preferred System ID" mode and trying each possible system ID -- but if you enter an unfamiliar area it would be nice to be able to find out the system ID without trying all the possibilities. Please copy me when/if you reply to the list -- I've not been able to keep up with the high volume of information on this unDigest of late. john [Moderator's Note: The way I always tell what system I have roamed into is by dialing *711 or *611 and asking. Those calls are free. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 18:11:06 PST From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: ISDN Article in {Infoworld} This week's issue of {Infoworld} contains a special section on ISDN entitled "ISDN: Under construction". The article mainly says that while ISDN has promised a lot, few of these promises have been kept because of disagreements on standards, the lack of a 'killer application' that would make ISDN necessary, poor innovation on the part of the carriers, connectivity problems (ISDN is rarely installed outside of major metropolitan areas), and regulatory problems that include a lack of direction from the FCC. Other reasons cited for ISDN's poor acceptance are the political battles fought between telephone and data bureaucracies who often have dissimilar attitudes and goals, poor cost/benefit calculations that fail to find "intangible costs such as organizational savings and traditional return on investment", poor technical understanding of the services offered, and inadequate planning. Sidebars in the article discuss ISDN use at the State of Delaware, at Garban, Ltd., and at the Wentworth Co., Inc. Also in a sidebar is an article discussing US West's ISDN deployment plans -- which include dropping the moniker "ISDN" in favor of "PC Phone Service", and providing widely available, affordable (at $97/month?) ISDN services. Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 16:49:36 -0500 (EST) From: "C. Kenny Lin" Subject: NT Meridian v. Norstar I've been assigned by my company to look for a new phone system to replace our old key system (a Panasonic, that was piggybacked via a tangled web of wires). These are some of my requirements: > 300 system-wide speed dial codes. Support for voice mail and automated attendents. I thought I wasn't asking for much until I started shopping and had salespeople visiting, etc. Appearently, almost all key systems can't handle > 200 speed dial codes, a REAL surprise. I then turned to the PBX marketplace, where I found Northern Telecom's Meridian 1 Option 11 fit the bill. Then, I was introduced to a Northern Telecom Norstar hybrid/key system that can do the job via an add-on software package (with a dedicated PC). I guess what I'm asking for is general comments from y'all about your experiences (good and bad) with these two systems or Northern Telecom in general. Pointers to other or sources would help. Please E-mail to me directly. I'll post a summary if the volume warrants. Much thanks. C. Kenny Lin cl1x+@andrew.cmu.edu (this is not for the school -- I'm away on some contract work). ------------------------------ Subject: Eastern Caribbean Cellular Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 20:56:57 EST From: John R. Levine I had Eastern Caribbean Cellular fax me their rate card. They are apparently both the A and B carrier for the Netherlands Antilles. There are two rates, the K rates for permanent customers, and the L rates for roamers. The K rate is $25 setup, $27/month plus calls, the L rate is $5/day that you use it plus calls. To be set up as a roamer, either dial "0" when you get there or call ahead to +599 5 24100, their cellular operator. Have your Amex, Discover, Master Card, or Visa handy. For incoming calls to phones without a local number, one calls the roamer port, +599 5 7ROAM, then at the tone the local ten digit number. They are the A and B system in St. Maarten/St. Martin. Other "boatphone" locations are the A system in Antigua, Grenada, St. Kitts, St. Lucia, St. Thomas, and Tortola, and the B system in Martinique and Guadeloupe. Visitors to French islands including St. Martin may also request a French number from France Telecom. I am amazed that the French seem to use the AMPS system in the French Antilles, I'd expect them to use whatever they use in France. Sample rates, per minute in dollars follow. No charge for busy or no answer, call forwarding and three-way no extra charge. K rate L rate St. Martin/St. Maarten 1.00 1.50 St Barts, Saba, Aruba, Curacao 1.60 2.00 Continental U.S. 3.00 4.00 Canada 3.50 4.50 W. Europe, Bermuda, Bahamas 6.00 7.00 E. Europe, S. America 7.25 8.00 Incoming calls 1.00 1.60 Incoming collect 6.40 9.00 USA Direct (dial 872) 1.40 1.60 Calls to 0, 611 (customer service), 911 (police), 155 (Saba marine operator) are free. I didn't realize it was possible to assign a number to an AMPS phone that isn't in the 10-digit NANP format, but evidently it is, because these people's numbers are all +599 5 XXXXX. For more info, call 617-566-8613 or +599 5 22100. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #34 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24128; 15 Jan 92 0:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04906 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 22:31:14 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14646 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 22:30:13 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 22:30:13 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201150430.AA14646@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #35 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Jan 92 22:30:12 CST Volume 12 : Issue 35 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Hacking the CFS-200 to Connect Two Lines (Greg Darnell) Device to Call in on One Line and Dial Out on Another (Tad Cook) Report: 8th Chaos Computer Congress (Klaus Brunnstein via Eric Florack) CCITT Standards and Recommendations (Will Wong) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 12:15 MST From: gnd@idaho.amdahl.com (Greg Darnell) Subject: Hacking the CFS-200 to Connect Two Lines I bought the Radio Shack CFS-200 call forwarding system recently because the closeout price ($30) was too good to pass up. I had a use for it that it could handle, although not exactly in an elegant way. It is intended to be programmed with a forwarding number so that when line one rings, it picks up line two, dials the forwarding number, then connects the calls if line two gets an answer. What I wanted to do was remotely take advantage of a line with cheaper outgoing calling rates; this can be done by calling line two to reprogram the forwarding number, then calling line one, but for each call this gets awkward, for multiple users it is not practical, and you almost need a dedicated line one that nobody else calls to keep other people from getting forwarded to the number you wanted to call. What I really wanted was to be able to call the box, enter a password, and have it pick up the other line and give me just the dial tone on that line. I didn't want to design my own box because I'm not comfortable enough with the analog electronics involved, so I decided to hack the CFS-200, where everything is converted nicely to a digital signal I can understand. My objective was to do this with a minimum amount of added hardware and also allow return of the CFS-200 to its original working condition without too much trouble. WARNING: the following modifications will render the original forwarding function of the CFS-200 inoperative, void your warranty, and maybe not even work! I take no responsibility for any consequences of your using this information. Theory: when you call in on line two to reprogram the forwarding number, if line one subsequently rings then the calls will be connected if the password has been entered correctly. I decided to take advantage of this mode for the hack by creating a new ring detect signal which is active when line two is off-hook and line one is on-hook. Line one ring detect can't simply be tied active or the CFS-200 will always be trying to forward. Pins 22 and 21 of IC5 (the microprocessor) control the relays to pick up line one and two, respectively. Using a 4x2-input nand gate 74LS00, I invert the signal from pin 22 and then AND it with pin 21's signal to give us the active low RING1 signal. This is connected to pin 16 of IC5 and the trace to the original logic must be cut. (You could probably add additional logic here to OR the signals together and allow the original CFS-200 function to work). With these modifications, now when you call line two and enter the password, the box will give an extra three beeps and connect you to line one. Unfortunately, if the number you are to dial contains a 0, you will be immediately be disconnected since the CFS-200 uses 0 to mean disconnect. To get around this, I decided to invert the low-order output bit of the touch-tone decoder, which will then map 0 to * and vice-versa (among others) so you can now dial the number. This causes the password entered via the keypad to be permuted to a different number via telephone, but the mapping is trivial. Again I use a NAND gate to invert the output of IC4 pin 11, cut the trace from IC4 pin 11 to diode D9, and connect the output of the NAND gate to D9. A more elegant solution that wouldn't interfere with the mapping so much would be to XOR that bit with (line one AND line two active) but I wanted to keep the hardware to a minimum. To summarize, with the following being the pins of the 74LS00: 1 & 2 -> IC4-pin11 14 -> IC7-pin14 (+5V) 3 -> D9 13 &12 -> IC5-pin22 (relay 1 control) 4,5,6 -> unused 11 -> pin10 of this chip 7 -> IC7-pin7 (ground) 9 -> IC5-pin21 (relay 2 control) 8 -> IC5-pin16 (line 1 ring, active low) and cut traces near IC5-pin 16 and IC4-pin 11. You must also remember to remap your passwords as follows: CFS keypad : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 * # via phone : D 3 2 5 4 7 6 9 8 * 0 A (A & D found on few phones) so that the password 207 entered via keypad would be entered as 3*6 via telephone. Also, during a call longer than the timeout period (3 or 10 minutes), you now hit 0 to prolong the call rather than *; and when a call is completed you may hit * rather than 0 to hang up both lines immediately. Remember, though, that this remapping has NO effect on the number you dial through the box, since it's the exchange that is decoding that, not the CFS-200 (although you will get a beep for each 0 in the number you dial). I hope that this modification might be useful to someone else, or be the catalyst for other fun modifications based on this box. I would be happy to discuss further details, ideas and options if anyone is interested. Greg Darnell Amdahl Corporation INTERNET: gnd@idaho.amdahl.com UUCP:{ames,decwrl,sun,uunet}!amdahl!tetons!gnd (208) 356-8915 ------------------------------ Subject: Device to Call In On One Line and Dial Out on Another From: tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook) Date: 14 Jan 92 17:53:15 GMT amadeus@flex.com writes: > I wish to create a device that will connect to both of the phone lines > in my house and allow me to call in on one of the lines and then dial > out on another from a remote location. You should be careful that whatever device you use offers some security. Otherwise anyone stumbling across this could help themselves to your wonderful Free Long Distance service. Proctor & Associates has a new product, the 46300 Secured System Access Line (SSAL) that can do this. After it answers the incoming line, it requires that you dial a security code, programmable by the user, up to 14 digits long. Different security codes can be assigned to perform different functions. Then the SSAL will either cut you through to the outgoing line, or it can hang up and dial you back (at different dial-back numbers for different security codes), or it can ring into another device that requires ringing voltage, such as a modem or maintenance port on a PBX. When performing dial-back, it can do that on the incoming line, or on a separate outgoing line to prevent various hacker games. It is available with an optional voice repeater amplifier, and has "hacker alarms" to let you know when someone is playing with it. Here is their address: Proctor and Associates 15050 NE 36th St. Redmond, WA 98052-5317 Ph: 206-881-7000 Fax: 206-885-3282 net: 3991080@mcimail.com Tad Cook | Phone: 206-527-4089 | MCI Mail: 3288544 Seattle, WA | Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 3288544@mcimail.com | USENET: tad@ssc.wa.com or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 06:33:50 PST From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com Subject: Report: 8th Chaos Computer Congress The following message was copied from RISKS-L. Of particular interest to TELECOM reader will be where the writer speaks of HACKTIC. That such gatherings are becoming more sparsely populated is a positive step. But is it, perhaps, time for people such as the UN , or perhaps the ITU, to invoke sanctions against countries that allow such groups to thrive? ( Comments are my own ... I don't expect anyone else to have the guts to agree with me.) (Grin) -=-=-=--=-=-= Date: 9 Jan 92 16:37 +0100 From: Klaus Brunnstein Subject: Chaos Congress 91 Report Report: 8th Chaos Computer Congress On occasion of the 10th anniversary of its foundation, Chaos Computer Club (CCC) organised its 8th Congress in Hamburg (Dec.27-29, 1991). To more than 400 participants (largest participation ever, with growing number of students rather than teen-age scholars), a rich diversity of PC and network related themes was offered, with significantly less sessions than before devoted to critical themes, such as phreaking, hacking or malware construction. Changes in the European hacker scene became evident as only few people from Netherlands (see: Hacktick) and Italy had come to this former hackers' Mecca. Consequently, Congress news are only documented in German. As CCC's founding members develop in age and experience, reflection of CCC's role and growing diversity (and sometimes visible alienity between leading members) of opinions indicates that teen-age CCC may produce less spectacular events than ever before. This year's dominating theme covered presentations of communication techniques for PCs, Ataris, Amigas and Unix, the development of a local net (mousenet.txt: 6.9 kByte) as well as description of regional (e.g. CCC's ZERBERUS; zerberus.txt: 3.9 kByte) and international networks (internet.txt: 5.4 kBytes), including a survey (netzwerk.txt: 53.9 kByte). In comparison, CCC'90 documents are more detailed on architectures while sessions and demonstrations in CCC'91 (in "Hacker Center" and other rooms) were more concerned with practical navigation in such nets. Phreaking was covered by the Dutch group HACKTIC which updated its CCC'90 presentation of how to "minimize expenditures for telephone conversations" by using "blue" boxes (simulating specific sounds used in phone systems to transmit switching commands) and "red" boxes (using telecom-internal commands for testing purposes), and describing available software and recent events. Detailed information on phreaking methods in specific countries and bugs in some telecom systems were discussed (phreaking.txt: 7.3 kByte). More information (in Dutch) was available, including charts of electronic circuits, in several volumes of Dutch "HACKTIC: Tidschrift voor Techno-Anarchisten" (=news for techno-anarchists). Remark #1: recent events (e.g. "Gulf hacks") and material presen- ted on Chaos Congress '91 indicate that Netherland emerges as a new European center of malicious attacks on systems and networks. Among other potentially harmful information, HACKTIC #14/15 publishes code of computer viruses (a BAT-virus which does not work properly; "world's shortest virus" of 110 bytes, a primitive non-resident virus significantly longer than the shortest resident Bulgarian virus: 94 Bytes). While many errors in the analysis show that the authors lack deeper insigth into malware technologies (which may change), their criminal energy in publishing such code evidently is related to the fact that Netherland has no adequate computer crime legislation. In contrast, the advent of German computer crime legislation (1989) may be one reason for CCC's less devotion to potentially harmful themes. Remark #2: While few Netherland universities devote research and teaching to in/security, Delft university at least offers introductory courses into data protection (an issue of large public interest in NL) and security. Professors Herschberg and Aalders also analyse the "robustness" of networks and systems, in the sense that students may try to access connected systems if the adressed organisations agree. According to Prof. Aalders (in a recent telephone conversation), they never encourage students to attack systems but they also do not punish students who report on such attacks which they undertook on their own. (Herschberg and Alpers deliberately have no email connection.) Different from recent years, a seminar on Computer viruses (presented by Morton Swimmer of Virus Test Center, Univ. Hamburg) as deliberately devoted to disseminate non-destructive information (avoiding any presentation of virus programming). A survey of legal aspects of inadequate software quality (including viruses and program errors) was presented by lawyer Freiherr von Gravenreuth (fehlvir.txt: 5.6 kByte). Some public attention was drawn to the fact that the "city-call" telephone system radio-transmits information essentially as ASCII. A demonstration proved that such transmitted texts may easily be intercepted, analysed and even manipulated on a PC. CCC publicly warned that "profiles" of such texts (and those adressed) may easily be collected, and asked Telecom to inform users about this insecurity (radioarm.txt: 1.6 kByte); German Telecom did not follow this advice. Besides discussions of emerging voice mailboxes (voicebox.txt: 2.8 kBytes), an interesting session presented a C64-based chipcard analysis systems (chipcard.txt: 3.3 kBytes). Two students have built a simple mechanism to analyse (from systematic IO analysis) the protocol of a German telephone card communicating with the public telephone box; they described, in some detail (including an elctronmicroscopic photo) the architecture and the system behaviour, including 100 bytes of communication data stored (for each call, for 80 days!) in a central German Telecom computer. Asked for legal implications of their work, they argued that they just wanted to understand this technology, and they were not aware of any legal constraint. They have not analysed possibilities to reload the telephone account (which is generally possible, due to the architecture), and they didnot analyse architectures or procedures of other chipcards (bank cards etc). Following CCC's (10-year old charta), essential discussions were devoted to social themes. The "Feminine computer handling" workshop deliberately excluded men (about 25 women participating), to avoid last year's experience of male dominancy in related discussions (femin.txt: 4.2 kBytes). A session (mainly attended by informatics students) was devoted to "Informatics and Ethics" (ethik.txt: 3.7 kByte), introducing the international state-of-discussion, and discussing the value of professional standards in the German case. A discussion about "techno-terrorism" became somewhat symptomatic for CCC's actual state. While external participants (von Gravenreuth, Brunnstein) were invited to this theme, CCC-internal controversies presented the panel discussion under the technical title "definition questions". While one fraction (Wernery, Wieckmann/terror.txt: 7.2 kByte) wanted to discuss possibilities, examples and dangers of techno-terrorism openly, others (CCC "ol'man" Wau Holland) wanted to generally define "terrorism" somehow academically, and some undertook to describe "government repression" as some sort of terrorism. In the controversial debate (wau_ter.txt: 9.7 kByte), few examples of technoterrorism (WANK worm, development of virus techniques for economic competition and warfare) were given. More texts are available on: new German games in Multi-User Domain/Cyberspace (mud.txt: 3.8 kByte), and Wernery's "Btx documentation" (btx.txt: 6.2 kByte); not all topics have been reported. All German texts are available from the author (in self-extracting file: ccc91.exe, about 90 kByte), or from CCC (e-mail: SYSOP@CHAOS-HH.ZER, fax: +49-40-4917689). ------------------------------ From: wwong@wimsey.bc.ca (Will Wong) Subject: CCITT Standards and Recommendations Organization: BC News and Mail Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 21:28:37 GMT I would like to get ahold of the CCITT standards and recommendations (either through purchasing the books, borrowing, begging, etc.) Does anyone have any idea where I can go? Thanks in advance! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #35 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02533; 15 Jan 92 1:11 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24428 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 23:23:56 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14871 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 14 Jan 1992 23:23:26 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 23:23:26 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201150523.AA14871@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #36 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Jan 92 23:23:10 CST Volume 12 : Issue 36 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (David Niebuhr) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Peter da Silva) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Steve Thornton) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (John Rice) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Jim Rees) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Gabe M. Wiener) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Roy Smith) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Jack Decker) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Peter da Silva) Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (David W. Barts) Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (John Rice) Re: Voice Under Data Modem (Larry Rachman) Re: Problem With Procomm; Help Needed (Ed Greenberg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 07:35:08 -0500 From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! In malcolm@apple.com (Malcolm Slaney) writes: > I wonder what the average number of calls per day is for the average > residential phone? My average is about two or three calls per day. Adding in the kids, it goes up to about six. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 14:44:07 GMT 74066.2004@CompuServe.COM (Larry Rachman) writes: > And where will that leave my 235G three-slot rotary coin phone? I'll > have to go shopping for a rotary-to-tone converter! You will probably be able to buy them as surplus from the phone company by then, if you're willing to provide the undoubtedly weird electrical environment they expect. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 10:11:06 EST From: Steve Thornton Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! > I wonder what the average number of calls per day is for the average > residential phone? I make about five calls per week max, sometimes none at all. Of course, some of those calls are hour-and-a-half modem calls! I imagine there are a lot more infrequent callers out there than is normally imagined here, though not many of us subscribe to this Digest. Steve Thornton / Harvard University Library / +1 617 495 3724 netwrk@harvarda.bitnet / netwrk@harvarda.harvard.edu ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 16:41:50 GMT In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM> writes: > Remember, you do not have to have DTMF service to own a phone capable > of DTMF. In fact, are there any areas left that do not have DTMF > telephone service available? I mean, really, if Pac*Bell now considers > it to be part of standard telephone service ... Pac*Bell may consider DTMF to be "part of standard telephone service", but *AMERITECH* (and others) still consider it to be a "premium" service and charge accordingly. Since any switch manufactured in the last ten years was built with DTMF integrated, the hardware costs to provide DTMF over ROTARY are insignificant (especially with customers now providing their own instruments). Makes you wonder, doesn't it. John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ From: rees@paris.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 23:20:12 GMT In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > I am surprised that it has taken this long. Tone signaling is SO > superior to rotary that it is nothing short of amazing that it has > taken nearly twenty years to become the dominant dialing method. I don't find it surprising at all. Our local phone company charges a premium of about 25% for tone service. If they didn't charge the premium, rotary phones would have disappeared long ago. I happen to like rotary phones. Only one of my phone lines has tone service on it, and of the nine phones I have on-line, only two are even equipped to produce tones. There is just something satisfying about the quiet whir of a well-oiled rotary dial. All my phones were manufactured by either Western Electric or Automatic Electric, of course (although I'd love to get a nice Kellogg some time). ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 05:12:40 GMT In article Larry Rachman <74066.2004@ CompuServe.COM> writes: > "Thank you for calling the Casio Referral Hotline. If you are calling > from a touchtone telephone, press one now. If you are calling from a > rotary dial telephone, please call back on a touchtone telephone. If they were smart, they'd say "if you are calling from a rotary dial telephone, please hold the line," and then transfer you to product information about the Casio Data-Bank watch with the built-in DTMF telephone dialer! Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 10:47:59 EST From: Roy Smith Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: Public Health Research Institute (New York) John Higdon writes: > I am surprised that it has taken this long. Tone signaling is SO > superior to rotary that it is nothing short of amazing that it has > taken nearly twenty years to become the dominant dialing method. In my own case, there are two reasons why I still have pulse dialing in my home. First, I'll be damned if I'm going to pay telco one blessed cent for touch tone service. Maybe I'm being pig-headed, but that's the way it is. I can twirl a dial just fine, thank you, and I don't make so many phone calls that the few extra seconds per call are such a problem. The most common calls I make are via modem, and then my auto-dialer does the twirling for me. Second, I've got (that I can count offhand) 6 telephone instruments (connected to three different lines, and that doesn't count the ones burried in a closet, or the modem). Most of them are $12 pieces of junk. OK, one's a $100 Panasonic piece of junk that has an answering machine built in. But, one is a good old Western Electric dial phone. I paid good money for that phone, and I expect it to outlast me, all the electronic gizmos I own, the building I live in, and probably the switch that serves my exchange. Why should I throw it out just because it clicks instead of beeps? And, before you protest that my Panasonic is a quality instrument and not a piece of junk, ask youself it if meets the true tests of telephone quality. If you knock it off the table, does the floor sustain more damage than the telephone? Will it still be in essentially good working condition when your grandchildren are grown up? Does it ring, or does it make some pathetic chirp/warble/feeping noise? roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 16:26:23 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! In a message dated 10 Jan 92 17:46:00 GMT, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > I am surprised that it has taken this long. Tone signaling is SO > superior to rotary that it is nothing short of amazing that it has > taken nearly twenty years to become the dominant dialing method. > Consider that the CD has been around for about eight years and has all > but decimated the LP, which was king for the previous thirty-five years. The reason is VERY simple, John. In many areas of the country they still charge extra for Touch Tone. In Michigan Bell territory, the charge is $2.43 per month for a residence, and $2.50 per month for a business. I refuse on principle to pay the phone company $2.43 per month to obtain a service that costs them LESS money to provide. What I do have on my line is a tone-to-pulse converter, which lets me use "real" Touch-Tone phones, but unfortunately is not smart enough to recognize that post-dialed digits (digits dialed after the phone number) should be left alone (that is, NOT converted to pulse). However, for those rare situations where I actually need to send REAL Touch-Tones, I have ONE phone that has a tone-pulse switch that is not connected to the converter. When I think of what I have to go through just because my phone company and state legislature aren't enlightened enough to offer free touch tone, it angers me ... but I feel better knowing that I am saving nearly $30 per year by NOT having Touch Tone. Since the converter cost me only $8.00 at an electronics swap meet (actually it was a ham radio affair, but I'm not a ham, I just went to look for electronic and computer goodies), I feel a lot better. > Remember, you do not have to have DTMF service to own a phone > capable of DTMF. In fact, are there any areas left that do not have > DTMF telephone serviceavailable? I mean, really, if Pac*Bell now > considers it to be part of standard telephone service ... There are MANY exchanges in Upper Michigan that still use the old Step-by-Step switches (primarily Michigan Bell areas ... it appears many of the independents have converted to digital already!). And Michigan Bell never, ever offers Touch-Tone on a Step-by-Step exchange (which is only fair, I think, since you really don't gain any dialing speed if the phone company is doing a tone-to-pulse conversion). Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 [Moderator's Note: Regretfully some of Jack's message was lost or damaged in the mail to me. The truncated version above is what I was able to recover from the mess which arrived. Sorry, Jack. PAT] ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 14:37:58 GMT malcolm@apple.com (Malcolm Slaney) writes: > Ummm ... one of the lessons that I've had to learn once I got out of > school and into the real world is that the Joe Average Consumer > doesn't necessarily beat a path to the most technologically wonderful > products. This is true, but in this case tone signalling is cheaper for TPC as well. The point is: (1) why does TPC continue to charge extra for tone? Which leads to (2) why so many people have pulse-only phones (or aren't technically sophisticated enough to know they chan switch their tone/pulse phones to tone after placing the call). > I bet my grandparents never made more than a couple of calls a day. Apart from calls I make in my line of work (system support), I only make a couple of calls a day ... at most. > I'm sure they never thought it was worth the effort to > change their phones or switch their service with Illinois Bell. They shouldn't have *had* to switch their service: Illinois Bell should be extending tone to everyone simply because it's cheaper for them to do so ... and eventually charging extra for pulse. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 09:28:52 -0800 From: David W. Barts Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM ctuttle@taronga.com (Colin Tuttle) writes: > ... Every morning at 12:02 I get a little chirp, or a belltap on the > phone. The phone has the "added feature" of belltap so you do hear > when someone hangs up the phone. Some might call it a bug, but I'm > sure the Magnavox engineers put this on the phone as a convenience > item, and a reason to buy their model rather than Sony's. Alas, this is not the case. Bell tap is a bug, not a feature. The Magnavox engineers left this "feature" in to minimize cost. Actually, they probably weren't Magnavox engineers at all but engineers at the (probably Taiwanese or S. Korean) firm that manufactured the set for Magnavox. Properly-built ringers only sound in the presence of a true AC ring signal, but certain cheaply-built electronic ringers will give brief false rings on the leading edge of a DC voltage. > Now my question is why does the phone do this every night at 12:02 > A.M.? Is the phone company testing the line in some way, and is my > phone detecting the changes in voltage? Does the phone company do > routine testing nightly and does the computer check phones at the same > time each night? This is known as an ALIT (Automatic Line Insulation Test), performed by the phone company in the wee hours of the morning to detect faults in the twisted pair serving your home. ALIT involves placing a DC voltage of about 100v across the pair and measuring the leakage current. This subject has been discussed in this Digest extensively in the past. David Barts N5JRN UW Civil Engineering, FX-10 davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu Seattle, WA 98195 ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 17:09:34 GMT In article , ctuttle@taronga.com (Colin Tuttle) writes: > I have a curious problem with my telephone every night at 12:02 A.M. > I know it is at 12:02 A.M. because the phone next to the bed is a > Magnavox clock radio/telephone combination. > Anyway back to the problem. Every morning at 12:02 I get a little > chirp, or a belltap on the phone. The phone has the "added feature" > of belltap so you do hear when someone hangs up the phone. Some might > call it a bug, but I'm sure the Magnavox engineers put this on the > phone as a convenience item, and a reason to buy their model rather > than Sony's. This is most likely the result of Automated Subscriber Loop testing conducted by the TELCO. This is done as a preventative maintainence routine, to locate cable problems before they deteriorate to the point of causing subscriber troble. In performing the test, the line is disconnected from the switch and connected to a measurement head. When the test is completed (about 1 second), the line is re-connected to the switch. When the re-connection takes place, the initial -48v battery connection can cause some phones to belltap. John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jan 92 11:21:46 EST From: Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Voice Under Data Modem In a recent issue, Jean_Renard_Ward@frankston.std.com writes: > Who is aware of hardware products (and related software products) that > support simultaneous transmission of data and voice on either a Contact Coherent Communications, in Hauppauge, New York. They make at least two version of what you're looking for. One is a 300 baud full-duplex unit, and another is 1200 baud half duplex (I think.) The product was discussed in a recent issue of QST magazine, in an article about remote operation of amateur radio stations. Lawrence Rachman, WA2BUX reply to 1644801@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 21:15:53 PST From: edg@netcom.netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Problem with Procomm; Help Needed Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) I believe that NN is sending cursor addressing commands, rather than carriage returns and linefeeds. Procomm doesn't know what to do with such codes later, so displays the text, but no formatting information. Call it a bug or a feature, but you will have to reread the info again from the newsreader. Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #36 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06047; 15 Jan 92 1:57 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03847 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Jan 1992 00:10:18 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30227 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 15 Jan 1992 00:09:55 -0600 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 00:09:55 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201150609.AA30227@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #37 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Jan 92 00:09:51 CST Volume 12 : Issue 37 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Bill Berbenich) Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (David Ash) Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Steve Forrette) Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Carl Moore) Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Joel B. Levin) Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (David G. Lewis) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Nancy J. Airey) Re: Phone Humor (Steven Leikeim) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 14:16:37 GMT From: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich) Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu I use Person-to-Person about once a month. It is really handy in certain circumstances. Imagine having to call a stateside corporation's main switchboard, asking for a person or people who work in a far-flung location (in my case an oil platform) to which the switchboard will connect you, then once onto the oil rig's phone you have to wait a minute or two until the individual can make it to the office where the cellular (or is it some other kind?) phone is. No matter when you call, you must go through this time-consuming (about five minutes, usually) process. Calling schedules don't work in this application, I have found, because the phone is sometimes busy at the rig. That's why _I_ use person-to-person. It works out to be cheaper. Once in a while, if it looks like the conversation will be any length of time at all, one of us will hang up and call the other right back at direct dialed rates. That's often a pain in the neck to do, though. Bottom line: If you have to reach someone via long distance and that individual is usually "away" but available to come to a phone when they know they have a call or if that call has to be switched manually to Helenback, then Person-to-Person might be the best way to go. Aside question: I'm guessing that oil rigs (at least in the Gulf of Mexico) use cellular primarily. Is that so? If not, what do they use -- radio telephone? I think the switchboard tries radio first and if that doesn't work they ring through on cellular. Sometimes the switchboard puts me on hold for what seems like quite a while, apparently while they make the connection (and the IXC operator stays with me -- (s)he's nice like that :-). Do any Digest/c.d.t readers call to rigs a lot? That might make for a nice submission here -- Oil Rig Telecommunications. In any event, my connections have always been full duplex; that's why I suspect cellular is the method used. Bill Berbenich, School of EE, DSP Lab Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu ------------------------------ From: ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (David Ash) Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 21:05:52 GMT In article davidra%dionysos.thphys@ prg.oxford.ac.uk (davidra) writes: > Can you discern any continuing reason for the person-to-person > service, outside, perhaps, of non-dialable countries and exchanges? Two possible purposes for person-to-person: 1. It serves a useful purpose in concert with a collect call. If the person who will be answering the phone is not someone you know (and therefore is likely to refuse the charges) person-to-person will force the operator to get the person you want to talk to before asking whether to accept the charges. 2. It may slightly increase the importance with which the called party, if it's a business, deals with the call. I worked for a company where person-to-person calls were announced on the intercom as "David Ash, long distance, line 1". Whether the person paged in this manner was more likely to actually take the call is debatable, but it might have made a bit of difference. Obviously (2) is questionable grounds in itself for maintaining the service, but (1) is a legitimate use for person-to-person that I still find useful from time to time. I hope the telcos don't abandon the service. David W. Ash ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu HOME: (415) 497-1629 WORK: (415) 725-3859 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 20:06:39 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article David Rabson writes: > Have you ever wondered what the purpose is of the person-to-person > call? > [Moderator's Note: It is just a historical artifact here; a thing > which was a useful service at one point but has no useful purpose now > except to enhance fraud calls as you pointed out. I'm surprised the > telcos still keep offering the service. PAT] Here are a few more for the antiquated list: Time-and-charges: This service allows you to receive the length and cost of a call immediately after call termination via an operator callback. The surcharge is currently $2.50. For the call I just priced, the per-minute evening rate is $.15, so it would cost almost 17 minutes of talk time just for this service. Since you can quite easily time the call yourself and get the rate quickly from the operator (that is, if you are using AT&T), this seems quite silly (or "really stupid", to use the operator's words!) Here's something that may be of interest to others: The direct-dial evening rate from 206 to 213 quoted by AT&T is 14 cents for the first minute, and 15 cents for additional minutes. So, here's the proof of the "first minute lower than additional minutes" myth that was going around last month. Last year, a semi-telephony-interested friend and I were fooling around, and we were discussing days of Mother past. (His father and uncle have worked for RBOCs for many years each, so he grew up listening to long stories of technical telco issues from an insider's point of view. Every time I visit with him at his parent's or uncle's house, he rolls his eyes when I start up a telco conversation. But I really enjoy being able to have technical discussions with folks that really know what's going on. His father even refers to the voice part of a call as "the message".) Anyway, we decided to place our first time-and-charges call. The amusement we got from it was well worth the cost: We placed it with 0+, and got "AT&T, your billing?" Our response was concise: "Time and charges please". There was a delay that was slightly longer than usual, then an almost angry "Thank you for using AT&T" from the operator. My friend conjectured that she had to spend time to locate the key on the terminal, whose position was one of the few not known by heart. It was really funny that she seemed angry for us wanting to do this. After the call completed, we got a prompt callback from a different operator. She identified herself as an AT&T operator and said she was calling back for a time-and-charges call. Her tone of voice was terribly unsure and insecure: She really sounded like she believed this to be a mistake, and that she had reached a party that would know nothing of the call. I assured her that she had reached the right person, and got the report. Sprint and MCI don't offer this service (of course), and ComSystems had never heard of it (my experience has shown that their operators have also never heard of Equal Access or 10XXX dialing -- so much for training! :-( ) Another antiquated service is third-number billing, although this one is still used quite a bit. There are a lot of people who just cannot deal with a "newfangled" calling card, and will always place occasional away-from-home calls in this manner. Telco will have to continue to provide this service despite the fraud that results. Another person I know got several third-number billing calls on their bill. When they disputed, the originating number turned out to be from a residential line in the same city. Talk about stupid people! So, they ended up paying for the calls anyway, and at operator- assisted rates. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 12:53:58 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? I am not sure what abuse you are talking about. I read long ago that the person-to-person rate will apply even if you agree to talk to an alternate person or extension. [Moderator's Note: *IF* you agree to talk. Unfortunatly there is much fraud by people who call person-to-person to (in an example) "Clark Wilson, Extension 830" in order to deliver a free message to the other end saying 'meet me at Clark and Wilson St. at 8:30 PM'. The called party refuses the charges (why not? the message has been delivered ...) and the caller refuses to speak with anyone else ... both parties then disconnect and the unwitting operator was the vehicle for the fraud. And with the new automated system where you record your 'name' on request and it is played out automatically to the called party, the phreaks stealing service in this way don't even bother with a thin veil of cow manure: They just say whatever they want to say in the few seconds alloted for 'recording their name'. It gets played to the called party who refuses charges or claims the called person is not there. Petty theft by petty people. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Joel B. Levin" Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 09:04:51 EST davidra wrote: > Can you discern any continuing reason for the person-to-person > service, outside, perhaps, of non-dialable countries and exchanges? > [Moderator's Note: It is just a historical artifact here; a thing > which was a useful service at one point but has no useful purpose now > except to enhance fraud calls as you pointed out. I'm surprised the > telcos still keep offering the service. PAT] I believe it still allows one to leave a message of the form "Please call operator 32 in Boston" so that when the person returns the call can be completed at the caller's expense. JBL nets: levin@bbn.com | BBN Communications or: ...!bbn!levin | M/S 20/7A POTS: +1 617 873 3463 | 150 Cambridge Park Drive FAX: +1 617 873 8202 | Cambridge, MA 02140 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 15:24:33 EST From: kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? Not so! Person-to-person still does have a use. Yesterday I got a call: "AT&T calling Person-to-Person for JOHN SMITH of MIKE COMPANY." I said "This is John Smith, but I don't recognize that company" to wit, the calling party chimed in with "Mike Company in Viet Nam." I said "Sorry wrong number" and hung up. Cost to calling party: $0.00! If they had dialed direct, it would have been billed. (Incidentally, I got the exact same call two minutes later on my modem's line! He must have been calling every J. Smith in our book!) 73 ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 14:45:55 GMT In article crocker@rtsg.mot.com (Ronald T. Crocker) writes: > Caller ID is a signal, send by the class 5 office to your phone, that > contains some information vis a vis the party calling you. This > information is sent between the first and second power ringing bursts > for normal analog loops. (The behavior is slightly different for > ISDN). With this statement, I nominate Mr. Crocker for the Understatement of the Year award ;-) > ANI stands for Automatic Number Identification. This is part of the > internal signalling among switches in the phone network. Currently, > this number is passed from the originating switch to the terminating > switch via intermediate switches. Not exactly. Where an end office has local AMA capability, ANI is not used at all for direct-dialed non-911 intra-LATA calls. When ANI is used, it generally is only used to pass the Billing Number from point A directly to point B, where point B is an IXC switch, OSPS, E911 PSAP, or CAMA switch. ANI is not used for end-to-end delivery of a Billing Number. > For caller ID, if you have entered the appropriate service agreement > with the service provider, then CID numbers will be delivered. I'm not > exactly sure what happens when you call from a non-CID area to a CID > area. My understanding of the service is that ANI is converted to CID > by the end office, and sent down your loop if you have the service. Nope. Calling Party Number Delivery uses *only* the Calling Party Number parameter from the SS7 IAM. There is no interworking with ANI. And since ANI is not used to send BN to the terminating switch, it wouldn't add much hit rate to the service anyway. IXC number-delivery services such as AT&T's INFO-2 (TM) do interwork Billing Number and Calling Party Number delivery; provisioning options can be set so that if one is unavailable, the other is sent. > Since ANI is sent by all (ok, almost all) offices, your number will > probably show up on a CID box if you don't (or can't) block the > delivery. Your number will only show up on a CID box if the call is signaled SS7 all the way; currently (1/13/92) that means an intra-LATA call with the trunk from the originating office to the terminating office, and to and from any intermediate tandem offices, are SS7 signaled. How will you know if this is the case? Good question ... David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 10:34:03 EST From: jean@hrcca.att.com (Nancy J Airey) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com (24411-sohl,william h) writes: > Caller ID requires ANI (Automatic Number Identification) to be able to > deliver the calling party's number to the called party's display > device. Not true. >> * What, exactly, is ANI? > Automatic Number Identification is the inclusion of the calling > party's telephone number in the routing and call setup messaging which > takes place in order for the call to be established. Not true. ANI passes the BTN (Billing telephone number) using in-band signaling -- the "old" CAMA (Centralized Automatic Message Accounting) signaling. In most cases the ANI (BTN) is the same as the DN (Directory Number) but not always. You cannot "block" ANI. You must have network connections using CAMA trunks to pass ANI. Note: E911 uses ANI, not CLID (Caller Line Identification). CLID requires SS7 connections between offices. CLID is always passed between offices when the SS7 connections are in place, the function of display relates to the blocking feature. Even if the number is blocked, if you have certain features (such as Automatic recall -- or call back, whichever your company calls it) or other CLASS features such as Screen List Editing -- you can call the number back, or put it on a "special" list. If you ask for your list to "playback" you are not told the number, but simply that that list position is a "private" number. Hope this helps. att!hrcca!jean ------------------------------ From: steven@enel.ucalgary.ca (Steven Leikeim) Subject: Re: Telecom Humor Organization: ECE Department, U. of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 05:27:24 GMT Seen in the comics section, {Calgary Herald}, 11 Jan 92. The comic strip is "Dilbert". Distributed by United Feature Syndicate, Inc. First pane: Phone rings Second pane: Dilbert listening on phone. Caller: "Hello! This is a long distance company with vague promises of unverifiable savings if you switch to us." Third pane: Caller: "Is this an inconvenient time for you?" Dilbert: "No." Caller: "Oh, then we'll call back later." Steven Leikeim University of Calgary Department of Electrical Engineering Internet: steven@enel.ucalgary.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #37 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10948; 15 Jan 92 2:52 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28092 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Jan 1992 01:08:56 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01270 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 15 Jan 1992 01:08:33 -0600 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 01:08:33 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201150708.AA01270@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #38 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Jan 92 01:08:13 CST Volume 12 : Issue 38 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Zip + 6? (Mitt Simpson) Re: Zip + 6? (Jiro Nakamura) Re: Zip + 6? (Bob Frankston) Re: Zip + 6? (Linc Madison) Re: Zip + 6? (tanner@ki4pv.compu.com) Re: Zip + 6? (S. Spencer Sun) Re: Zip + 6? (Rich Greenberg) Re: Zip + 6? (Gary Morris) Re: Zip + 6? (kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil) Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? (James Barrett) Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Tim Gorman) Re: International Discount Telecommunications (Peter da Silva) Re: I Got Cancer by Phone (was I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex) (C Moore) Re: Dialed as 800, Billed For 900 (Carl Moore) Re: Radio Links for Rural Telephone (kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 09:51:22 EST From: Matt Simpson Subject: Re: Zip + 6? There has been some discussion about adding two more digits to the zip code, and whether the Postal Service has considered adding checksums. My understanding, from meetings with the university mail service folks here, is that the Postal Service intends, in the near future, to add the last two digits of the street number to the bar-coded zip code. They do not plan to require the customer to print an 11-digit zip code on the envelope. The extra two digits will be only in the bar-code. Those customers that do their own bar-coding to save a few cents per envelope will probably be offered an additional incentive to bar-code the extra two digits. I assume it will be left up to their software designers whether to expand the zip-code field in their databases to 11 digits, or whether to simply extract the extra two digits from the address field. Considering checksums, the current bar-code format for five and nine-digit zip-codes does include a check digit. The bar-code on an envelope contains six or ten characters (of five bars each), plus a start and stop bar, making 52 bars for a nine-digit zip code. Since this extra digit is not part of the zip code as assigned by the post-office, its value is somewhat limited. I assume it is used to detect scan errors when the bar code is being read. But it doesn't prevent data-entry errors entering a zip-code into a data-base, as it would if it was a permanent part of the zip-code. Apparently the Postal Service's solution to this problem is to provide additional incentives to large mailers to "clean up" their data bases; to be eligible for certain discounts, you must have processed your data base with "certified" software which uses databases provide by the Postal Service to eliminate erroneous addresses. ------------------------------ From: jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) Subject: Re: Zip + 6? Organization: Shaman Consulting Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 15:21:30 GMT In article Bob_Frankston@frankston. std.com writes: > [Moderator's Note: Have you really heard something saying the present > zip code (five digits plus four optional) is being increased by two > more optional digits? PAT] Oh yeah. I read about this one. Apparently what they want to do is to not only specify the general area of the receiver, but the *exact* location. Zip + 4 + 2 would let them do that. What the USPS would like to do in the long run is to have just a single number for everyone. They'd punch it into their database and come up with your current address. Hey! It'd be like in The Cuckoo's Egg: Jiro Nakamura Zip 14850-4947-23-93-3492 Wouldn't that be convenient? :-) I *would* like a universal phone number though. ;-! Jiro Nakamura jiro@shaman.com The Shaman Group +1 607 277-1440 Voice/Fax/Data ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com Subject: Re: Zip + 6? Date: Mon 13 Jan 1992 13:02 -0500 Oops -- the Moderator was appropriately puzzled by this message. It was a followup to a discussion in the Risks Digest. Autoreply capabilities in email and/or phone systems are often more powerful than one expects -- the eyes might focus on one window while the system is on another. To be honest, I'm too fluent in typing and my brain is too trusting -- it will send a message to my fingers and then go on to the next task. So this isn't as much a risk of technology as a risk in any open loop system. [Moderator's Note: Honestly, this is the first time I've ever gotten such a volume of replies (you are seeing a sampling of them in this issue) as a result of someone's group selection error! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 03:20:01 PST From: linc@tongue1.Berkeley.EDU (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Zip + 6? Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Bob_Frankston@frankston. std.com writes: > As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office heard about > checksums or other techniques to reduce errors? > [Moderator's Note: Have you really heard something saying the present > zip code (five digits plus four optional) is being increased by two > more optional digits? PAT] Well, to answer both your questions: (1) All POSTNET barcodes have checksums, whether you're using five, nine or eleven-digit, ZIP Codes. It's a simple 10's complement. Note that all POSTNET barcodes begin and end with a throwaway "tall" bar. (2) Yes, 11-digit ZIP Codes are already in use. The extra two digits on top of your existing nine digits identify the specific MAILBOX to deliver to. Many nine-digit ZIPs are specific, like my very own 94701-2811, but most cover an enormous geographic territory -- the entirety of one side of one block of a street in many instances! ( ;-P ) In those cases, the additional two digits sort the mail into the order of the delivery route. So if you get any mail with 62 bars across the bottom instead of the usual 52 or 32, now you know why. Expect to see it only on VERY large volume mailers, though. Of course, the Postal Service will have to make do with 11 digits or risk exceeding the CCITT recommendation for national numbers ... ;-> (My source for the info on ZIP + 6 is SYNEX Software in Brooklyn, NY 11215-4502 (sorry, they don't list the ZIP + 6) who are at MacWorld Expo this week. They make a product for the Mac that does not only POSTNET but also UPC, ISBN, CODE 39, CODE 25, and various other barcodes I've never even heard of. They also make a product just for doing envelopes and mailing labels.) By the way, just in the last few months, the USPS relaxed the rules on placement of the barcodes on the envelope, so you'll start seeing more of them with the barcodes in the address block itself instead of in the lower right corner. Linc Madison == 94701-2811@USPS == Linc@Tongue1.Berkeley.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 08:03 EST From: tanner@ki4pv.compu.com Subject: Re: Zip + 6? Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand > As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office > heard about checksums or other techniques to reduce errors? Yes, though perhaps not as strong as you would like. On bar codes, besides the expected five, nine, or eleven digits, a trailing digit is added as a check digit. Value is 10 - (sum of other digits % 10), with the special case that 10 is of course 0. > [Moderator's Note: Have you really heard something saying the present > zip code (five digits plus four optional) is being increased by two > more optional digits? PAT] Not exactly. There will be two more digits, but they won't be exactly optional. The last two digits are intended to be included in bar-codes only, and are the last two digits of the house number. These digits probably won't be required for cases where the zip + 4 is unique. My home PO box is unique, for instance, in zip + 4. The post office says that they anticipate requiring the added digits (and bar-codes) for maximum discount no sooner than late 1993. And, yes, I'm the one who gets to be sure that our church software can generate the bar-codes on the mailing labels. I should be most interested in hearing what other folks are doing about the fact that the most common printers can't generate a bar that is quite long enough in a single print pass. Are you just firing all eight pins and hoping no one will notice the missing thousandths of an inch, or are you making two passes? If the latter, how is the alignment? {bikini.cis.ufl.edu allegra uunet!cdin-1}!ki4pv!tanner ------------------------------ From: spencer@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun) Subject: Re: Zip + 6? Organization: Princeton Class of '94 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 19:40:36 GMT In article , Bob_Frankston@frankston. std.com writes: > As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office heard about > checksums or other techniques to reduce errors? > [Moderator's Note: Have you really heard something saying the present > zip code (five digits plus four optional) is being increased by two > more optional digits? PAT] In a {USA Today} study, in which 1000 letters were sent, ZIP + 4 letters actually took LONGER to arrive (the percentage of five-digit coded letters arriving on time was larger than the percentage of nine-digit coded letters arriving on time, where "on time" means the number of days promised by USPS -- one day locally, two days within 600 miles, three days outside of 600 miles in the continental US.) I think 75% arrived on time, 20% one day late and the rest more than that. (Some got lost) ... the study included purposely misaddressed letters, house numbers that were off by one, ZIP codes that were off by one, etc. S. Spencer Sun - WWIVnet #1 @6913 - 609-258-8647 - USR DS v.32bis ------------------------------ From: Rich Greenberg Subject: Re: Zip + 6? Organization: Locus Computing Corp, Los Angeles Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 22:17:42 GMT In article Bob_Frankston@frankston. std.com writes: > As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office heard about > checksums or other techniques to reduce errors? When the zip + 4 number is bar-coded on the envelope, there is an extra digit which is a modulo-10 checksum. Disclaimer: The above writings are the ramblings of one human being and have nothing what-so-ever to do with Locus Computing Corp. ---> Rich Greenberg, richg@locus.com TinsleTown, USA 310-337-5904 Located in Inglewood, Ca, a small city completely contained within Los Angeles ------------------------------ From: telesoft!garym@uunet.uu.net (Gary Morris) Subject: Re: Zip + 6? Reply-To: garym@uunet.uu.net Organization: TeleSoft, San Diego, CA, USA Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 00:05:30 GMT In Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com writes: > As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office heard about > checksums or other techniques to reduce errors? The optical scanners also check that the city/state goes with the zip code. When mail is barcoded there is a check digit in the barcode. > [Moderator's Note: Have you really heard something saying the present > zip code (five digits plus four optional) is being increased by two > more optional digits? PAT] Yes, and I just confirmed that Zip + 6 is being worked on with my commericial account rep at the USPS. They're going to try to get more information on it. GaryM -- Gary Morris Internet: garym@telesoft.com KK6YB UUCP: ucsd!telesoft!garym TeleSoft, San Diego, CA Phone: +1 619-457-2700 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 00:32:31 EST From: kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil Subject: Re: Zip + 6? USPS DOES use checksums in ZIP+4. Add up all of the digits and subtract from the next highest multiple of ten (or use 0 if the sum is a multiple of ten). The "remainder"/checksum is the last digit in the POSTNET bar-code (the 1/4"Hx2 or 3"W one at the bottom right of the envelope). The ZIP+4 itself does not, though, carry any intrinsic checksum or error detection/correction, to my knowledge. ------------------------------ From: barrett@cloudgen1.gatech.edu (James Barrett) Subject: Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? Organization: Georgia Tech College of Computing Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 12:38:31 GMT Bob.Ackley@ivgate.omahug.org (Bob Ackley) writes: > In a message of <03 Jan 92 17:05:34>, Gary Deol (11:30102/2) writes: >> Does anybody know why the middle number in a area-code is always a >> zero or one? Things that make you say Hmmmmmmmm :^) > I believe it's to differentiate the area code numbers from the > exchange prefixes (none of which contain a zero or one as the second > digit). Since this is no longer true (my phone number is (404) 814-xxxx), is there any movement towards allowing more area codes? James C. Barrett (barrett@cc.gatech.edu) Georgia Tech College of Computing [Moderator's Note: Yes there is. By 1995 (maybe 1994) new area codes will look like prefixes used to look; that is, they will NOT have zero or one as the second digit. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jan 92 08:55:30 EST From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered Malcolm Dunnett writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #31: > In the overall scheme of things these errors are trivial, but I find it > annoying that in this age of ANI and other high tech "miracles" the > equipment can't even tell if the call was answered. The central office > obviously knows since we don't get billed for calls that aren't completed. > Are there any PBXs which can do this? Is the problem in our equipment? I suspect the problem is that although you have what are called "PBX trunks", they are really a line side service on the central office switch. Answer supervision is not provided on the line side of the CO, primarily because the loop must be "supervised" at all times to detect off/on-hook conditions. If you want answer supervision for correctly tracking call details, you will need to contact the local telephone company to see about Direct Out Dial (DOD) service. This service should be provided from the trunk side of the central office and allow passing of call supervision states. This will probably require different equipment in your PBX, at the very least different software options. This service may also have some limitations on the dialing patterns you can use because of the limitations of the call registers on the trunk side versus the line side, usually this has to do with the length of the digit stream. Tim Gorman - SWBT * opinions are my own, any resemblence to official policy is coincidence* ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: International Discount Telecommunications Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 14:49:23 GMT You could set this up pretty easily with a PC and a couple of modems. The only part that's not off the shelf is establishing the conference call under computer control (unless you want to spring for an IBM clone and a Watson board: the "PC" above can be a surplus Commodore-64 or equivalent: your Nintendo certainly has enough CPU power to handle the job). Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 11:42:04 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: I Got Cancer by Phone (was I Got Pregnant Through Phone Sex) I don't know if this is going beyond telecom, but I did hear an item a while back about health concerns caused by nearby high-tension power lines. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 11:43:35 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Dialed as 800, Billed For 900 I think I made one call to 800-555-5555 from a pay phone. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 15:21:46 EST From: kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil Subject: Re: Radio Links for Rural Telephone Part 90 does (used to?) authorize licensees on the special emergency (?) (class PS, I think) service. These frequencies are usually used for Medical, SAR, and School buses, but are authorized to connect remote areas with nearby centers of population. The frequencies around 155.175 MHz on 15 KHz channels are available. Licensees can have one transmitter in the remote area and one in the center of population. If anybody really wants it, I'll see if I can get the quote from FCC 90.??? 73 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #38 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13681; 15 Jan 92 3:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21713 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Jan 1992 01:46:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31043 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 15 Jan 1992 01:45:56 -0600 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 01:45:56 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201150745.AA31043@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #39 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Jan 92 01:45:50 CST Volume 12 : Issue 39 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Rolf Meier) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Dave Levenson) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Jim Hutchison) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Ron Dippold) Re: Multiple Calls on One Access to Sprint 800 877 8000 (Steve Forrette) Re: Question - Pause Lengths for Fax/Modem Credit Card Calls? (A Burnstine) Re: Question - Pause Lengths for Fax/Modem Credit Card Calls? (Toby Nixon) Re: Question - Pause Lengths for Fax/Modem Credit Card Calls? (B. Campbell) Re: Who Picked Exchange Names? (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: meier@Software.Mitel.COM (Rolf Meier) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 09:21:37 -0500 Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes: > Bottom line: We have an officially capacity tested (tests observed by > the major companies in the industry) CDMA system in the field that > gives a capacity improvement of 10 to 30 times (depending on > conditions) over an AMPS system, with better voice quality, better > handoffs, and less dropped calls. [CDMA sales pitch deleted] Readers should be made aware that Qualcomm's CDMA proposal is not likely to become a national digital standard for cellular. It will be a TDMA system as outlined in IS-54. In my personal opinion, Qualcomm's claims are designed more to raise the price of Qualcomm shares than actual capacity advantages over TDMA. Rolf Meier Mitel Corporation ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Date: 12 Jan 92 22:00:57 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , m21198%mwunix@linus.mitre. org (John McHarry) writes: > Conversion will come cell by cell and system by system, so you will > still have to speak AMPS for many years to come. In some of the systems being deployed today, conversion from AMPS to TDMA will come channel-by-channel within the existing cells. You'll still want dual-mode mobiles for a few years, but the digital mode can be introduced in gradual way, as digital-mode mobiles become gradually more common among the users. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: hutch@qualcomm.com (Jim Hutchison) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Qualcomm Incorporated Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 21:04:56 GMT In ibbotson@rtsg.mot.com (Craig Ibbotson) writes: > TDMA proponents say this will offer a 3.7 time capacity of existing > analog systems. Proponents say it will offer a 20X capacity increase. > The main advantages of digital cellular (regardless of technology) are > capacity increase and the introduction of data services. At a CTIA meeting, the presented improvement was 10x under conditions (noise) in which a regular AMPS call would be unbearable, and 30x under favorable conditions. The 10x was "proven" by doing field experiments and injecting noise at the cell. All observed by third parties (I'm not at liberty to list relationships, please contact Qualcomm if you want "names" of observers). Has the 3.7x number for TDMA been proven in the field with third party observers? If so, what noise conditions? Speed tests? > It is going to be very interesting to see what happens in the digital > cellular market. TDMA was the initial technology of choice, picked > over FDMA after lengthy trials here in the US. After TDMA was chosen, > however, a company called Qualcomm met with some of the larger > cellular vendors and convinced them that CDMA could greatly increase > their capacity and provide some additional features. Both > technologies are in market trials now, and the initial indications are > that both work. Lengthy trials? Uh, field capacity tests? I heard that TDMA had gone through "lock down" where vendor equipment is tested against a standard, but nothing about lengthy field tests. I'm speaking in terms of something like the New Jersey/Chicago tests that were done with AMPS. > TDMA is the basis for GSM, which is in commercial service in Europe, > so it is a proven player. A thing, which is a basis for another thing, is not proven merely because it's progeny is proven. Jim Hutchison {dcdwest,ucbvax}!ucsd!qualcomm!hutch or hutch@qualcomm.com Disclaimer: I am not an official spokesman for Qualcomm ------------------------------ From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 23:48:12 GMT stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In article it was written: >> Even better, we use active power control (something we can do because >> it's digital). The mobile and cell channel elements transmit with >> only as much power they need. If you're close to the cell, you don't >> need much power. As you get farther away, it slowly boosts power. > Just the way AMPS works today. Not exactly. I've worked enough with AMPS to be familiar with the AMPS power control methods. There are significant differences in the way it happens in AMPS and in CDMA which significantly affect the overall power consumption, voice quality, and reaction to areas with bad coverage. I wish I could go into this further without giving the lawyers a heart attack. >> In addition, we can divide the channel between different data sources, >> so you could send voice and data (from a modem, perhaps) on the same >> channel. What we can do is limited only by the messages we can think >> up to send back and forth. > What advantage is this going to be to the individual subscriber? > Answer: the same advantage that individual subscribers get from ISDN: > nothing! The carriers will undoubtedly price the data services at Yep, that's up to the carriers. The possibilities are there, however. If they price it too outrageously, you can always switch the phone to AMPS and use your trusty CellBlazer. > A user with a 2400 baud dialup or 9600 baud fax need will have to pay > whatever rate the carrier sets for these services, as they will not > operate properly over the voice channel. And the user has to pay for > more-expensive equipment to do this, at least initially. Hey, it's a status symbol! Only a half-smiley on that. What we need is a way to make it obvious from the outside of the car that you've got one of these ... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 19:32:06 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Multiple Calls on One Access to Sprint 800 877 8000 Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article Eli writes: > On my latest Sprint bill, they charged me an access charge for every > call I made during a single connect to their 800 number. I could > swear that it used to be billed such that only one access charge was > charged per call to the 800, when one used the # sign to start a new > call. > Did their billing method change? To the best of my knowledge, all of the three major carriers have billed this way always. The advantage they tout is that if the hotel you are in charges for calling card calls, that the hotel will charge you only once. As a practical matter, it is because they have no way of doing otherwise. I'm sure it's not out of the goodness of their hearts! (Maybe they should just charge the calling card surcharge in multiples of how many times the # key is hit! :-) ) > Still waiting for my Metromedia/ITT calling card ... I got mine last week. Pretty normal, except there's one thing I noticed: The ka-bong prompt for your calling card number is only a decaying dialtone sound -- there's no 50ms of the # tone. At first I wondered how many people this would affect that have tone-to-pulse converters on their lines that require the # to shut off. Then, I realized that the ka-bong sounds only after you key in the desired called number after a different prompt tone. Then I got to thinking: This is the same procedure that Sprint uses for their FON-cards: the first thing you hear is a non-standard tone to prompt you for the called number. It's probably not much of an issue these days, but I'd imagine that it was a problem with Sprint five or six years ago when stuff like tone-to-pulse was still around somewhat. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 14:10 GMT From: Alan Burnstine <0003749269@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Question - Pause Lengths for Fax/Modem Credit Card Calls? > I sometimes need to bill fax or modem calls to a credit card. The > pause length between the phone number and the tone requesting your > credit card number seems to vary a lot. Sometimes the call goes > through okay, other times I can hear an operator's voice through my > fax or PC speaker. How many seconds are you supposed to have your > machines wait before you enter the credit card number? Any help you > can be will probably please a lot of phone operators (as I don't even > hear them half the time if I have a radio on or if I'm talking to > someone in the room). I don't know about other company calling cards, but on the MCI card, the tone/pause between the dialed number and the calling card number is a courtesy. I never wait for the tone, I simply dial my called-to number and my calling card number together. The only exception is on international calls where I insert a "#" between the dialed number and the card number. Note: the "0" that the card instructions say to use before the area code on your dialed number is also a courtesy to make the card work like other company cards. It is not required, although 01 is required for international calling. Note 2: The pause between the Access number and the dialed number is critical, I find five seconds is about right. (Seven when calling from the PBX at work.) I have not tested the pause times on the "NEW" MCI card yet, although I do have one already. Alan Burnstine MCI Telecommunications MCI-Mail 374-9269 "Standard Disclaimers Apply" ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Question - Pause Lengths for Fax/Modem Credit Card Calls? Date: 13 Jan 92 22:28:05 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , disk!tony@uunet.uu.net (tony) writes: > I sometimes need to bill fax or modem calls to a credit card. The > pause length between the phone number and the tone requesting your > credit card number seems to vary a lot. Sometimes the call goes > through okay, other times I can hear an operator's voice through my > fax or PC speaker. How many seconds are you supposed to have your > machines wait before you enter the credit card number? Any help you > can be will probably please a lot of phone operators (as I don't even > hear them half the time if I have a radio on or if I'm talking to > someone in the room). The amount of time after you dial until you get the credit card prompt (bong) tone, and the amount of time between the bong tone and when the operator comes on the line, is variable; you can't assume a fixed duration. The "@" (Wait for Quiet Answer) dial modifier in Hayes modems will usually "trigger" on a bong tone. You insert it between the phone number and your credit card number; it listens for the tone, followed by five seconds of silence, then proceeds with the rest of the dial string (dialing your card number). Two problems can occur: the modem can't recognize the bong tone, or, more likely, the operator comes on sooner than five seconds. For these eventualities, I have a script that turns on the modem speaker, and waits for an on the keyboard between dialing the phone number and the card number. You COULD try to figure out, by trial and error, how many commas to insert between the phone number and card number, but that's a pain in the neck. Hayes has defined a new dial modifier, "$", which will specifically wait for the BONG tone and continue dialing immediately afterwards (rather than waiting for five seconds of silence), but I don't think this is implemented in any current products (it's coming, though!) 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 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) Subject: Re: Question - Pause Lengths for Fax/Modem Credit Card Calls? Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 16:45:25 GMT In disk!tony@uunet.uu.net (tony) writes: > I sometimes need to bill fax or modem calls to a credit card. The > pause length between the phone number and the tone requesting your > credit card number seems to vary a lot. Sometimes the call goes > through okay, other times I can hear an operator's voice through my > fax or PC speaker. How many seconds are you supposed to have your > machines wait before you enter the credit card number? Any help you > can be will probably please a lot of phone operators (as I don't even > hear them half the time if I have a radio on or if I'm talking to > someone in the room). I usually use six commas between the phone number and the credit card number and it works ok. ATDT1028805551212,,,,,,99999999999999 This dialing sequence also gets me to AT&T so that my modem will work properly :-). Bill INTERNET: bill@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Software UUCP: ...!thebes!camco!bill 6641 East Mercer Way uunet!camco!bill Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 12:06:32 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Who Picked Exchange Names? Perhaps the question about letters on the dial and why there were exchange names could be made into an FAQ. It was in 1966, not 1975, that Wilmington (Delaware) and vicinity stopped using 2L + 7D in its telephone directory. Apparently the Moderator's note refers only to Chicago? Exchange names don't always refer to place names; for example, there was Wilmington x-xxxx (before direct-dial?) becoming OLympia x-xxxx, eventually 65x-xxxx, in area code 302. As you probably know, many recent advertisements make use of the letters, which are still on the dial, to make their telephone numbers easier to remember. Other reasons for the change to 7D (from 2L+5D) were to: Make more prefixes available (some of which are difficult or impossible to get exchange names for.) Eliminate the confusion between 0 and O (you will still notice some intercept recordings using "oh" where zero is intended) and between 1 and I. Speed up directory assistance (I recall it got changed from "information" but don't recall when), so those operators don't have to spell out unfamiliar exchange names. [Moderator's Note: I can only speak with some authority about Chicago. We began seeing 7-D in the book in the early sixties; but the mixture continued until sometime in the early/middle seventies. The number recitations here (both directory and in intercept messages) use 'oh' instead of 'zero' with the exception that two trailing zeros are pronounced 'hundred' and three trailing zeros are pronounced 'thousand'. In the few instances of someone with a number like xxx-0000 however the nice lady says 'oh! oh! oh! oh!' like she is all excited about something going on. :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #39 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06881; 16 Jan 92 3:16 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25158 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Jan 1992 01:15:56 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26584 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 16 Jan 1992 01:15:37 -0600 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 01:15:37 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201160715.AA26584@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #40 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Jan 92 01:14:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 40 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Country Code 809? (Dan Proskauer) Re: Country Code 809? (David Leibold) Re: Canadian Caller-ID Specs (Marcus Leech) Re: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana (John Goggan) Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois (John McHarry) Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois (David Lesher) Caller*ID/Fax/Modem/Answering Machine (Dave Levenson) 800 and 900 ANI (Jerry Leichter) CID/ANI Blocking (David Ptasnik) Re: International ANI is Here? (Dave Levenson) Re: AT&T Calling-Card Advertisement (Phydeaux) Re: Panasonic Answering Machine (Where Has My Cuckoo Flown Away) (J. Hritz) Re: MCI Card With Voice Features (Bill Huttig) Re: MCI Card With Voice Features (Sean E. Williams) Re: MCI Card With Voice Features (Charles McGuinness) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dcp@dale.ICD.Teradyne.COM (Dan Proskauer) Subject: Re: Country Code 809? Date: 13 Jan 92 19:33:06 GMT Organization: Teradyne Inc., ICD, Boston MA In article , rees@paris.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes: > I just noticed that my local (Ann Arbor, Mi) phone book lists the > country code for "Caribbean Islands" in the international section as > 809. I think they're confused. > For Cuba, it says, "see Guantanamo Bay." The area code for the "Caribbean Islands" is 809. As one who frequently calls there, I know that 1-809-xxx-xxxx works just fine from the U.S. (probably Canada and Mexico too, but I don't know). I have no idea what would happen if you tried 011-809- ... I've never seen a three digit country code and have no idea what one would use for a city code, perhaps 011-80-9-xxx-xxxx actually works. It's not worth it to me to find out for sure. Dan Proskauer -- MS: H71 | Internet: dcp@icd.teradyne.com Teradyne Inc. | 321 Harrison Ave. | Voice: (617) 422-2641 Boston, Ma. 02118 | Fax: (617) 422-2837 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 23:56:20 EST From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA Subject: Re: Country Code 809? In cruising through various phone books around the world, there does seem to be plenty of confusion regarding what codes to use for the Caribbean ... 809 is listed as a country code in many places even though it is more correctly +1 809. Even within North America, 809 can get listed as a country code rather than an NPA in some sources. There are no known country codes beginning with 80, however, so it is conceivable that there are a few countries using 809 as a hack code to mean +1 809. Switzerland had some bizarre codes used to reach Caribbean countries, though. They seem to require +500 809 to have the same effect as +1 809 even though +500 is used for Falkland Islands already. There are also noises about a separate country code soon to be in effect for Trinidad and Tobago (+296) though no official word on if or when that will take effect. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jan 92 11:56:00 EST From: Marcus (M.D.) Leech Subject: Re: Canadian Caller-ID Specs In article , is written: > I have been following the progress of the Caller-ID feature, and > recently I bought a demodulator device (from Rochelle) and started > writing a program to process the Caller-ID data. I compared a hex > dump of the data to the spec published in the Bellcore documents and > posted to this group recently. The message formats are quite > different, with the only the preamble (hex 55) and checksum appearing > to be the same. I am now assuming that there is a different standard > in Canada for the Caller-ID message format. > Does anyone have documentation, or know where to get it, for the > Canadian spec? Some parts of the U.S. use "single-message" format, others use the "multiple-message" format. Bell Canada uses the the "multiple-message" format. Many of the units sold in the USA only understand the "single-message" format. Both formats are described in the Bellcore pubs (TR-TSY-0003{0,1}, I think). Marcus Leech, 4Y11 Bell-Northern Research |opinions expressed mleech@bnr.ca P.O. Box 3511, Stn. C |are my own, and not ml@ve3mdl.ampr.org Ottawa, ON, CAN K1Y 4H7 |necessarily BNRs ------------------------------ Organization: Central Michigan University Date: Monday, 13 Jan 1992 19:56:06 EST From: John Goggan <34II5MT@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> Subject: Re: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana Why is it that Caller-ID was rejected in Indiana, yet various portions of it do have "last caller call-back" features -- which ARE (according to the "confused sounding" operator I spoke with) NOT blockable. Anyone with the service can instantly call the last number back -- granted, it's not really the SAME as Caller-ID (because your number isn't given to them), but they can still call you right back -- which is sometimes not a good thing, especially since I make a lot of calls from work or friends house and I don't want them calling me back. I just don't see how that is "ok" but Caller-ID is not ... John Goggan [34II5MT@CMUVM.csv.cmich.edu.] [Moderator's Note: The difference is just a matter of degree, I guess. With Caller-ID you are saying 'I want to specifically know the number of the phone used to call me' while with Call-Back you are saying only that you wish to complete the connection the other party attempted to establish (and presumably he wants to talk to you also, or he would not have called.) I guess it is just how they choose to interpret the purpose of the one versus the official purpose of the other. PAT] ------------------------------ From: m21198%mwunix@linus.mitre.org (John McHarry) Subject: Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois Organization: The MITRE Corporation Date: 14 Jan 92 13:10:25 GMT PAT noted that caller ID in Northern Illinois works across both Illinois Bell and Centel territories within the LATA. How are they passing the information? Do they share an SS7 network, or have a gateway, or use some other means? Any idea what the billing arrangements are? John McHarry (McHarry@MITRE.org) [Moderator's Note: There is a gateway through the central office known as 'Chicago-Newcastle'. There is both an Illinois Bell 'Newcastle CO' and a Centel 'Newcastle CO'. In case you are not already confused, the Chicago-Newcastle office has both 312 exchanges and 708 exchanges wired from it. IBT/Newcastle <--> Centel/Newcastle is a local, untimed call. I think they just absorb each other's local traffic coming and going, and I suppose that includes the peripheral features. I'm not sure what they do about calls from Centel which go to other IBT points outside the Newcastle office and vice-versa. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 0:12:28 EST Reply-To: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex > Our system uses the standard *67 + number for blocking on a call by > call basis as desired. In addition, the subscriber to caller-ID can > turn off reception of numbers if desired with *85, and turn on the > reception with *65, although I cannot imagine why the person paying to > receive the information would want to turn off delivery. Why? Because IBT is charging you PER CALL, for getting CNID. This is in addition to the monthly charges. wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu [Moderator's Note: This is true, but since you have no way of telling who will ring your phone next, do you want to risk having delivery turned off on the very call where it might really matter? PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Caller*ID/Fax/Modem/Answering Machine Date: 16 Jan 92 00:19:39 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA A product called Dallas Fax caught my eye in Computer Shopper for January 1992. On page 548, they show an 8-bit PC-compatible card which includes, for an advertised price of $149, all of: Caller*ID 9600bps fax 2400bps modem with V.42bis compression/error-correction Answering machine/voice mail. I have no connection with these folks; and I have not bought the product. I thought it might interest a few of the readers of this Digest. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 09:39:44 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: 800 and 900 ANI In the interest of careful reasoning: 1. Does a 900 provider extend you credit? Well, sort of -- but there's an intermediary in the telco, which acts as billing agent. The argument that the 900 provider has the right to know who its callers are in order to do billing is only legitimate when it actually DOES billing. That is, all this argument requires is that when the telco flags a call as uncollectible, it pass along to the 900 provider the identifying information it has. If the call was collected by the telco, the 900 provider has no inherent need or right to know who the caller was. 2. It may be true that it's easier to run up large 800 costs than to run up huge costs with business reply envelopes and such, but the difference, in this age of cheap copiers, isn't THAT great. It's probably illegal to mail duplicates of business reply envelopes -- but then again it's illegal to harass a business by repeated abusive calling of its 800 number. Let me propose a general moral principle to keep in mind when thinking about such issues: A law or regulation should not unduly inconvenience the good because some might be bad. This principle has to give way when the bad become TOO abusive, but one must always strive to minimize the inconvenience to the good. Just because some people are shoplifters doesn't mean we should all accept a search at the door; but since there ARE many shoplifters, we should be willing to accept the various fairly non-intrusive "check tag" mechanisms. Jerry ------------------------------ From: David Ptasnik Subject: CID/ANI Blocking Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 14:28:42 PDT Andy Dunn posted: > I agree with our esteemed Moderator. Consider the fact that the 800 > number exists to answer your call whenever you call it, and that the > company owning it pays a time-measured rate for the call. > Remember the case reported here in the Digest (I think) last week > where somebody tried to get revenge on a company by faxing them long > faxes and tying up their phones? What if they really were anonymous. I want to be able to block ANI from my phone. Let the person receiving the call have the option of refusing a call from any blocked number, or of blocking calls from my number. The person receiving the calls does not need to know my number in either case. > [Moderator's Note: However Andy, I would refer you to John Higdon's > message in this issue. 900 operators *do* pay for the call in the > sense they are extending credit to you, the caller until you pay your > phone bill and telco in turn remits to them. As someone who provides > an extension of credit, they are also entitled to know who you are. PAT] They should have the option of refusing the call if you chose not to identify yourself. They might want to take the call, and give the caller the option of billing to a credit card, but they could know in advance whether the ANI was being blocked from the calling party. Dave davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: International ANI is Here? Date: 12 Jan 92 22:11:49 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , pc@ALEX.ims.bellcore.com (Peter Clitherow) writes: > When a customer calls the company, he lets the phone ring once and > hangs up. The black box is programmed to call back the customer's > This implies that ANI can be delievered internationally, does it not? > I never heard anything announced about this. Are there CCITT specs > for this? No. The company uses DID and assigns a different number to each subscriber. It identifies the calling subscriber by knowing which number the subscriber dialed. It then dials back the number of the subscriber who 'owns' the number which was rung. If the single ring came from somewhere else, somebody wastes a trans-Atlantic call back. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 08:58:25 PST From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: Re: AT&T Calling-Card Advertisement > I just saw this posted above an AT&T coin phone: > No charge for AT&T calling card, and you don't need a home phone or > credit card to have one. Call 800-551-3131 ext. 968. > Sample credit card displayed; the only comment I have is that I see a > non-areacode where the cards from the Baby Bells have had home phone I've had one of these for years. First three digits are 677. reb -- *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* reb@ingres.com or reb%ingres.com@lll-winken.llnl.GOV ICBM: 41.55N 87.40W h:828 South May Street Chicago, IL 60607 312-733-3090 w:reb Ingres 10255 West Higgins Road Suite 500 Rosemont, IL 60018 708-803-9500 ------------------------------ From: jih@ox.com (John I. Hritz) Subject: Re: Panasonic Answering Machine (Where Has My Cuckoo Flown Away To?) Date: 13 Jan 92 21:21:39 GMT Organization: OTA Limited Partnership, Ann Arbor MI 48104 USA In article roberts@frocky.enet.dec.com (Nigel Roberts 10-Jan-1992 1020) writes: > There's an undocumented command (prog #22) which enable two-way > recording without the tell-tale beep. I've been using this for some > time. There's another undocumented command (prog #11 /prog #12) which I have a Panasonic answering machine, but am unsure of what (prog #22) means. Could you elaborate. > Finally, the synthesised voice and cuckoo quit working recently. It's > probably a hardware failure of the voice synthesiser chip, but just in > case, before I take the machine in for repair, does any one know how > to do a reset of the microprocessor? (I tried powering the machine off The voice stamp and cuckoo are not enabled when the clock needs to be set. It generally takes a long power failure for the CMOS to lose its memory. Try setting your personal ID code and the date/time. That should clear up the problem. John Hritz, jih@ox.com O.T.A. Limited Partnership 101 N. Main, Suite 410 Ann Arbor, MI 48103 (313) 930-1888 ------------------------------ From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) Subject: Re: MCI Card With Voice Features Date: 13 Jan 92 19:14:25 GMT Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL In article DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA writes: > Reuters reports that MCI has a new calling card which also allows for > access to various recorded message features (weather, news, voice It is not really a new card ... It is the Teleconnect/TELECOM*USA card with the MCI logo on it. Bill ------------------------------ From: sew7490@ultb.rit.edu (S.E. Williams ) Subject: Re: MCI Card With Voice Features Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 03:32:43 GMT In article DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA writes: > Reuters reports that MCI has a new calling card which also allows for > access to various recorded message features (weather, news, voice > mail). This is accessed via a toll-free number then a security code. Earlier today I stupidly caused myself to be put under the suspicion of MCI's Fraud Department, and they disconnected my card. When I called to have my card reactivated, they said I was too late -- a new card was already placed in the mail. The rep went on to describe the features of the new card to me. I'll will report when I receive it. Sean E. Williams sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu Rochester Institute of Technology Telecommunications Technology (ITFT) [Moderator's Note: What did you do to get them itchy? Were you hacking at something? :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Charles McGuinness Subject: Re: MCI Card With Voice Features Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 17:31:05 EST In Vol 12 Issue 30, DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA comments: > Reuters reports that MCI has a new calling card which also allows for > access to various recorded message features (weather, news, voice mail). This would probably be from their take-over of Telecom*USA, which has had these features for a while. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #40 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08033; 16 Jan 92 3:58 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02482 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Jan 1992 02:03:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17253 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 16 Jan 1992 02:03:13 -0600 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 02:03:13 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201160803.AA17253@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #41 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Jan 92 02:03:06 CST Volume 12 : Issue 41 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Joe Talbot) Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Vance Shipley) Re: Phone Number Verification (Andrew White) Re: Phone Number Verification (Alec D. Isaacson) Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low (Dave Levenson) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (John Pasik) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Gabe M. Wiener) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Stephanie da Silva) Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain (Ed Greenberg) Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain (Eric W. Douglas) Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain (kiser@tecnet1.jcte.mil) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe Talbot) Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered Date: 13 Jan 92 20:17:35 GMT Organization: ATI, High desert research center, Victorville, Ca In article , dunnett@mala.bc.ca (Malcolm Dunnett) writes: > Are there any PBXs which can do this? Is the problem in our equipment? > The central office? Our lines? (I believe we just have a number of > analog trunks, would a digital trunk help?) or should I just resign > myself to the fact that an "educated guess" is the best we'll ever do. The PBX isn't the problem here. In North America "modern" CO switches don't pass answer supervision back to the subscriber. (On older switches it was sent back to the sub in the form of reversed polarity). This would solve lots of problems with COCOTS, long distance companies, modems, voice forwarding systems and even teleslime automatic calling machines, but alas ... If you would consider directly connecting with a long distance carrier, various signalling arrangements could pass the supervision to you, E&M is probably the easiest way. One of my clients has T-1 access and use of E&M would be a possibility for them, and would cause the SMDR to be correct, allow trunk to trunk transfers, forwarding and even make the timer on the display phones accurate. In Japan, reverse polarity supervision is universal (even on the newest switches) and is used extensively by pay phones and even key systems (that show you the rate charged for the call in real time!). joe@mojave.ati.com Slow mail: P.O. box 1750, Helendale California 92342 Phone: (619) 243-5500 Fax (619) 952-1030 ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 01:06:38 GMT In article Malcolm Dunnett writes: > Are there any PBXs which can do this? Is the problem in our equipment? > The central office? Our lines? (I believe we just have a number of > analog trunks, would a digital trunk help?) or should I just resign > myself to the fact that an "educated guess" is the best we'll ever do. The problem is NOT your choice of PBX, in fact for this application there are probably none better! The problem is either that you are not receiving answer supervision signals from your telephone company or that your PBX is not expecting them. If you have analog (ground or loop start) CO lines than you are not receiving answer supervision signals from the CO. Only a few LEC's in the U.S. are currently providing answer supervision on analog facilities, and only if you order and pay for it. If you have digital lines (T-1) however the signaling should be there. You are in lucky to be dealing with BC-Tel instead of Bell Canada as I am. T-1 access is quite common in BC where as there is NO T-1 access in Bell Canada-land! If you do have T-1 your PBX may not be configured to expect answer supervision. Changing the route type from "CO" to "TIE" will change the way CDR processing handles this. Northern Telecom SL-1 PBX's do handle answer supervision signaling with respect to Call Detail Recording. I work for a CDR vendor and have done this on many switches and seen it work reliably. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ From: awhite@widget.seas.upenn.edu (Andrew White) Subject: Re: Phone Number Verification Date: 13 Jan 92 22:41:40 GMT Organization: University of Pennsylvania In article sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Steven A Rubin) writes: > A while ago someone posted the possible numbers to call that would > connect you to a computer generated voice that would read back the > phone number from which you are calling. Try 410-xxx-xxxx where xxx-xxxx is any valid phone number. (eg, 222-2222). This works in both the 314 (St.Louis, MO) and 215 (Philadelphia, PA) area. Andrew White awhite@seas.upenn.edu ------------------------------ Organization: Miami University - Academic Computer Service Date: Wednesday, 15 Jan 1992 23:03:02 EST From: AI4CPHYW@MIAMIU.BITNET Subject: Re: Phone Number Verification In article , sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Steven A Rubin) says: > A while ago someone posted the possible numbers to call that would > connect you to a computer generated voice that would read back the > phone number from which you are calling. Here in good ol' Oxford, Ohio (25 mi north of Cincinnati) GTE (a sorry excuse for a dial tone provider, in my opinion) is our local TELCO and if you dial 311 you get a voice readout of the extension you are calling from. Alec D. Isaacson AI4CPHYW @ miamiu.acs.muohio.edu isaacson @ rogue.acs.muohio.edu (NeXt Mail) Miami University, Oxford, OH ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low Date: 13 Jan 92 21:05:46 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA PAT asks: > [Moderator's Note: Is the United States Telephone Association the same > as (or what used to be called) the United States Independent Telephone > Association? (Sometimes known as USITA). ^^^^^^^^^^^ PAT] Yes, they are. When divestiture came, the former-AT&T subsidiaries were essentially independent, so they asked to join USITA, so USITA became USTA. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. [Moderator's Note: Isn't that the pits! USITA was founded many years ago to defend and protect the independent telcos from Ted Vail's AT&T. Now they seem to be best of friends with AT&T, fighting the new common enemy of them all spelled C-A-B-L-E. What a change! PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low Date: 14 Jan 92 23:03:50 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) writes: > The sponsors were the RBOCs and the United States Telephone > Association, representing over 1,100 local telcos. I have no idea as > to whether or not USTA and USITA are the same. Anyone have ideas? USITA chaged its name to USTA at the time of the AT&T Divestiture. At that point, all of the telephone companies were considered 'independent' and the newly-liberated 'Baby Bells' were invided to join the organization. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: pasik@rtsg.mot.com (John Pasik) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 00:44:26 GMT john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM> writes: >> "Thank you for calling the Casio Referral Hotline. If you are calling >> from a touchtone telephone, press one now. If you are calling from a >> rotary dial telephone, please call back on a touchtone telephone. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> And if you don't have one, tough luck! (I guess). > I am surprised that it has taken this long. Tone signaling is SO ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > superior to rotary that it is nothing short of amazing that it has ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > taken nearly twenty years to become the dominant dialing method. > Consider that the CD has been around for about eight years and has all > but decimated the LP, which was king for the previous thirty-five > years. Yes, it is superior. For both the user *and* the phone service provider. I refuse to pay Ma Bell extra per month for a "feature" that is now standard on all CO switches (which speeds call routing, simplifies call processing, and reduces un-billable call set-up time). These are benefits to the phone company as well as I. Why should I pay to make *their* life easier? I'll continue to use dial-pulse until ILL BELL rescinds the DTMF surcharge. John Pasik- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group 1501 Shure Dr. Arlington Hts. Ill ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Organization: Columbia University Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 05:41:56 GMT In article roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) writes: > And, before you protest that my Panasonic is a quality > instrument and not a piece of junk, ask youself it if meets the true > tests of telephone quality. If you knock it off the table, does the > floor sustain more damage than the telephone? Will it still be in > essentially good working condition when your grandchildren are grown > up? Does it ring, or does it make some pathetic chirp/warble/feeping > noise? Speaking of such, does anyone still manufacture real telephones anymore? "Real telephones" are defined as what the 2500 set used to be (as opposed to the current piece of junk that AT&T calls the 2500 set ... with a horrible electronic ringer, touch-tones that don't sustain, and construction that would break if you breathed on it). Does anyone still make a good, well-built 2500 set with a proper handset, a real keypad, and a good, loud *MECHANICAL* ringer? I have some 2500 sets that are 15+ years old and they still work as well today as they did 15 years ago (well, I admit to cleaning the contacts on the DTMF pad every few years). Does anyone still produce this venerable phone in an unadulterated form? I sure liked it when AT&T rented phones and also sold the same models. They built 'em like tanks so they wouldn't ever have to fix 'em. Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ [Moderator's Note: AT&T still leases phones. I have a two-line turn button set from them on lease. PAT] ------------------------------ From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 08:49:42 GMT In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > I cannot imagine that I would want to talk to anyone using a rotary > phone ... in fact, are there any areas left that do not have DTMF > telephone service available? A few days ago I was talking to my father-in-law who recently moved to Honolulu. He was quite enamored over the fact that the number for the condo that he's renting is xxx-0001 (the first number in the exchange). So I started telling him why the phone company always gives out numbers to residences that have 0s and 1s in them and told him if he looked at the buttons on the phone, he'd be able to see that all the numbers except for 0 and 1 have letters on them. He then told me there were no letters at all on the *dial*. That's when I remembered the phones they used in those condos. When we were visiting Honolulu (and staying in the same condominiums) the only phones in the rooms were these ancient black monstrosities. On top of that, there was no touch tone service available, either. I remember being very frustrated trying to call some BBSs back in Houston with a laptop a friend of ours had lent us (I admit it, I'm a BBS junkie). We couldn't use our Sprint card because it required a touch tone phone. So what we ended up doing was buying a cheap $10 phone that had a switch that let one use either pulse or touch tone, calling out with pulse, and switching over to tone before connecting with Sprint. It was an incredible hassle and I'm still not sure if it was worth the effort. Stephanie da Silva Taronga Park * Houston, Texas arielle@taronga.com 568-0480 568-1032 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 09:48:08 PST From: edg@netcom.netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) You only need two conductors, but inside wiring is traditionally four-wire to allow for second lines. Also, when Trimline and Princess phones were powered from transformers, those were sometimes run from the basement on the second pair. A techie like you should consider wiring three pair to each drop. You might also consider wiring the house with another three pair for eventual data, or even with a four pair for 10-Base-T ethernet. :-) Seriously, if I were wiring a house, I'd wire two four pair circuits to each room, down to a central point. I'd terminate them all with RJ-45's on both ends. You can run RJ-11 phone circuits on them just fine, but can also run RS-232 data, and other twisted pair wiring schemes. Your house will (hopefully) stand for 100 years. Wanna bet what they'll be using for appliances then? Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 09:54:54 PST From: ericd@caticsuf.CSUFresno.EDU (Eric W. Douglas) Subject: Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) writes: > I'm building a new house and it's time for me to plan my signal > wiring. I'm served by GTE Northwest in Tigard Oregon, exchange > 503-620. I called them and was sent their booklet "Customer Installed > Premises Wiring Guide." There's a picture of how to wire the > "customer provided wire junction," where the four conductors in my > internal wiring attach to four screws. I'm no expert on telecom > wiring and I thought, once and for all, to find out why I'm supposed > to run four wires when the telco puts only two into my house. > [Moderator's Note: All four are brought there because some > subscribers might want to have two lines from the beginning. > eg 2 X 2 = 4. PAT] A while back, when AT&T was wiring houses with three conductor wiring, they used to have the hard wiring set using the third conductor for the ring line. Why, I don't know, maybe it was easier for them to spot trouble with inside wiring this way. Today, we *all* use four conductor wiring to insure that we're future expandable. If I were building a new house, I'd run three or four pair wiring to each jack. (Buts that's me, and I'm big on computers and LAN's, and hey, ISDN is coming) If you wired your house with single pair (two conductor) wiring, 1) I doubt the telco would hook you up, and 2) As a prospective buyer for your house a few years down the road, I'd be awfully upset at having to break out my fishtape and coveralls to rewire for a few more lines. At 0.06 for two-conductor 22 AWG wiring, and ~0.09 for four-conductor 24 AWG wiring, it makes a lot of sense just to do it right the first time. Eric W. Douglas Technojock +1 209 897 5785 I'net: ericd@caticsuf.csufresno.edu ericd@csufres.csufresno.edu AppleLink: STUDIO.D Compuserve: 76170,1472 AOL: EWDOUGLAS ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 15:29:08 EST From: kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil Subject: Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain Not only is two-wire useful for running a second pair (as I have done), some equipment still is equipped with the Exclusion Key arrangement (I don't remember the exact name). When that equipment comes off hook, it shorts out Yellow to Black. Other equipment is supposed to recognize this and not allow itself to go offline. Both my modem and my answering machine support this protocol: if my modem is off-hook (i.e., on-line) my answering machine will not come off-hook! Very useful! Of course, when I wired up another line on my Yellow/Black, I had to snip the outside pair going to the answering machine or else everytime I picked up the phone on the answering machine (integral unit) it would short out the modem's line ;^( 73 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #41 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23557; 17 Jan 92 2:35 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14561 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 17 Jan 1992 00:12:46 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05380 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 17 Jan 1992 00:12:27 -0600 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 00:12:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201170612.AA05380@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #42 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 Jan 92 00:12:17 CST Volume 12 : Issue 42 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low (Rich Greenberg) Re: Radio Shack Two Line Box With Conference Wanted (Michael Rosen) Re: Footers on Intercept Recordings (Tom Gray) Re: Footers on Intercept Recordings (Carl Moore) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Jim Hutchison) Re: SWBell vs. Squirrels (Anthony E. Siegman) Re: SWBell vs. Squirrels (S. Spencer Sun) Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (Steve Forrette) Re: PC Based PBX (Rich Greenberg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: richg@locus.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low Organization: Locus Computing Corp, Los Angeles Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 00:08:48 GMT As most readers of TELECOM Digest know by now, TPC has been placing ads to try to convince the public that they should be able to provide additional services etc. Today, the worm has turned. In today's (1/14/92) {LA Times} on the back page of section 1 is an ad that refutes the Bell's claims. The top half is a drawing of a crowd looking at a wall with a sign showing: [bell logo] MONOPOLY IS COMPETITION The headline of the text part is "BIG BROTHER IS ALIVE AND WELL", followed by alternating paragraphs labeled "Double Speak:" giving the Bell version and "Plain Speak:" giving the "true" version as the sponsors of the ad see it. The sponsors are: American Newspaper Publishers Assn. Consumer Federation of America Electronic Publishing Group Graphic Communications International Union Io Publishing National Cable Television Assn. National Newspaper Assn. Toward Utility Rate Normalization (a consumer group) Weatherline inc. They give an number for furthur information: 800-547-7482. Disclaimer: The above writings are the ramblings of one human being and have nothing what-so-ever to do with Locus Computing Corp. ---> Rich Greenberg, richg@locus.com TinsleTown, USA 310-337-5904 Located in Inglewood, Ca, a small city completely contained within Los Angeles ------------------------------ From: Michael.Rosen@samba.acs.unc.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: Radio Shack Two Line Box With Conference Wanted Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 05:48:24 GMT Well, I guess I can kill two birds with one stone here ... J&R Music World (1-800-221-8180) has a few devices on page 63 of their current catalog, under Telephone Accessories. The first is the Recoton T-73 Two-Line Console: "Allows a single line phone to work as a two-line phone. Switch back & forth between lines. Hold with red & green LED's $19.95." I don't know if it does conference or not, it is not mentioned. Now, for our friend with the line tap problem: Spy Shop 5060 Phone Guard: "Telephone Tap detector. Checks line when receiver is lifted. If detected the privacy light goes out and the phone is muted. Mode 2 scans for wireless microphones. Mode 3 actually turns off Taps & Tape recorders (ss 5060) $149.95." TT Systems PD1 Privacy Device: "Lets you know if conversation is being overheard on an extension phone. Features LED indicator (TT PD1) $14.95." I can't find my 47th St. Photo catalog right now, so I don't know if they sell similar devices for better prices or not ... Mike ------------------------------ From: grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) Subject: Re: Footers on Intercept Recordings Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 07:38:33 -0500 Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article cereghin@netcom.netcom.com (Jon Cereghino) writes: > Many of the intercept recordings that I reach have footers that > include an area code and some other digits. For example: > The number you have dialed cannot be reached from your calling area > 408 2T Your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check the > number and dial again or call your attendant to help you. 213 2C M These footers or identifiers identify the office in which the call was terminated and the type of intercept recording received. 408 2T- San Jose 4wire tandem - T recording 213 2C (2132 was Los Angles No.2) M intercpt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 10:45:19 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Footers on Intercept Recordings I don't know what the letters and numbers after the area code mean. On long distance calls which cannot be completed as dialed, I get intercepted with a message from 215 if I am calling from Delaware and 703 when calling from a public phone in Maryland. ------------------------------ From: hutch@qualcomm.com (Jim Hutchison) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Qualcomm Incorporated Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 21:04:56 GMT In ibbotson@rtsg.mot.com (Craig Ibbotson) writes: > [...] TDMA proponents say this will offer a 3.7 time capacity of > existing analog systems. > [...] Proponents say it will offer a 20X capacity increase. The > main advantages of digital cellular (regardless of technology) are > capacity increase and the introduction of data services. At a CTIA meeting, the presented improvement was 10x under conditions (noise) in which a regular AMPS call would be unbearable, and 30x under favorable conditions. The 10x was "proven" by doing field experiments and injecting noise at the cell. All observed by third parties (I'm not at liberty to list relationships, please contact Qualcomm if you want "names" of observers). Has the 3.7x number for TDMA been proven in the field with third party observers? If so, what noise conditions? Speed tests? > It is going to be very interesting to see what happens in the digital > cellular market. TDMA was the initial technology of choice, picked > over FDMA after lengthy trials here in the US. After TDMA was chosen, > however, a company called Qualcomm met with some of the larger > cellular vendors and convinced them that CDMA could greatly increase > their capacity and provide some additional features. Both > technologies are in market trials now, and the initial indications are > that both work. Lengthy trials? Uh, field capacity tests? I heard that TDMA had gone through "lock down" where vendor equipment is tested against a standard, but nothing about lengthy field tests. I'm speaking in terms of something like the New Jersey/Chicago tests that were done with AMPS. > [...] TDMA is the basis for GSM, which is in commercial service in > Europe, so it is a proven player. A thing, which is a basis for another thing, is not proven merely because it's progeny is proven. Jim Hutchison {dcdwest,ucbvax}!ucsd!qualcomm!hutch or hutch@qualcomm.com Disclaimer: I am not an official spokesman for Qualcomm ------------------------------ From: siegman@EE.Stanford.EDU (Anthony E. Siegman) Subject: Re: SWBell vs. Squirrels Organization: Stanford University Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 01:47:09 GMT > I salvaged the old cable sections -- that stuff is *tough*. I > couldn't cut it with tinsnips except half-way at a time, and then > flexing it to break the reinforcing wire. My brother, a Pac Tel lineman, a few years ago gave me some sections of the fiber optic cable he had been installing to build up the "Ring of Fire" fiber loop around the central section of San Francisco. The cable was maybe a cm in diameter, flat ribbons each containing 8 (?) parallel fibers in the center, embedded in a rubber-cement-like insulation (as I remember) and a plastic outer casing with very reinforcing wires imbedded in it all around the perimeter. I wanted to show it to my EE class in lasers, as an example of optical communications in the real world. Those wires were similarly the toughest wires I've ever encountered. I totally ruined the cutting edges of two good pairs of nippers, and a couple of hacksaw blades, trying to cut a 30 cm section to pass around in class. ------------------------------ From: spencer@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun) Subject: Re: SWBell vs. Squirrels Organization: Princeton Class of '94 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 19:45:45 GMT In article , wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL (Will Martin) writes: > [interesting story about phone troubles and squirrels chewing cables] > I salvaged the old cable sections -- that stuff is *tough*. I couldn't > cut it with tinsnips except half-way at a time, and then flexing it to > break the reinforcing wire. I expect the squirrels had good sharp > teeth after working them on that stuff for a while. I wonder if it > happened to ring while one was gnawing away and gave him a mouthful of > 90 Volts...? :-) If so, I wonder if the squirrel is going to post to c.d.t. and gripe about how the cables are unsafe and should be modified so they don't shock when you bite them. :-) S. Spencer Sun - WWIVnet #1 @6913 - 609-258-8647 - USR DS v.32bis ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: ISDN: Estimate of Arrival? Date: 13 Jan 92 21:28:44 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , michael@stb.info.com (Michael Gersten) writes... > I have a question on ISDN. > Now, I also understand that ATM ISDN is based on 48 byte packets plus > five byte headers (53 bytes total). And that ATM is the way of the > future, i.e., all the telephone company equipment is working ATM, and > your STM calls turn into ATM on the way. Here's the error. ATM is coming, but it won't necessarily replace STM. The STM networks are likely to stay around, up to 2 Mbps or so (T1/E1), for the foreseeable future. If you want a 64 kbps (eg., telephone) call, it'll probably go STM. > My question is: Why does the phone company only offer STM to the home, > which forces a line to be used (and payment made, hmm ... I think I > answered this one) even when nothing is being sent? Why not have the > home line just be a 192K ATM feed, and put a rate limiter of 64K on > it? ATM is aimed at really high speeds. To send voice via ATM, you need to take 48 PCM samples and fill a cell, _then_ send the cell. (This gets worse with ADPCM.) That takes six ms. Then figure out the time to transmit the cell, which at narrowband speeds would add more ms. Delay is impairment in voice, so it's not a superior service to STM. Besides, ATM is likely to cost more, at least for a while. Where ATM shines is for high-speed applications like data and television. If you need a 50 Mbps connection, ATM is likely to be the way to go. That's the growth area. But it won't replace STM, at least not for a long time. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 19:17:01 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article Toby Nixon writes: > In article , stevef@wrq.com (Steve > Forrette) writes: >> Now let me get this straight: A "lifeline" rate for cellular? Now >> I've heard everything! > Hey, if it was available here, I'd get it for both my wife's and my > cellular phones. We have them only for "emergency" use -- in case we > break down on the highway, or need to let the babysitter know we're > going to be delayed (and don't want to stop and use a payphone). At > most, I use 5-10 minutes of airtime per month on my phone, and most > months she has NONE on hers. We're paying about $22 per month for > that (which is on Hayes' corporate discount; it _had_ ben $36), plus > $0.36 per minute. I'd gladly pay $0.60 or more per minute, in > exchange for only having to pay $10 per month. The concept of a "low volume" user is something I'd definately agree with. In fact, I think it would be in the cellular companies' best interest to provide this. Since maintaining the account in the computer costs virtually nothing to provide, even a $5 or $10 a month charge is almost all profit. And I think they would get a lot of people to sign up for this if they offered it. But we all know that cellular carriers don't always behave in ways that make sense. Look at what they've done in the past: most used to charge several dollars a month for custom calling features, which then cost extra to use per minute! The effect was that they were denying occasional users from paying the extra airtime because they didn't want to pay the monthly. Most have finally figured out that it's better for the carrier to give away the custom calling features' availability, and just charge by the minute. My disagreement comes from providing the low monthly rate as a "Lifeline" service. The term "Lifeline" implies that the service is being provided at a price less than the cost to provide, at government mandate, and paid for (read "subsidized") by a special tax on the regular customers. This I totally disagree with. I do not believe that cellular is such a necessity of life that people below the poverty line and on government assistance (more or less the eligibility requirements in most area for receiving landline Lifeline telephone service) should be provided this at a very reduced cost because it is deemed a basic right as a member of society. Doesn't landline Lifeline also provide the first basic instrument as well in many areas? Should the regular cellular ratepayers also buy the cellphones for the cellular Lifeline customers? If people are so bad off that they qualify for government assistance, do they really need to be driving on remote country roads? Do they need to have the luxury of a car if they need assistance for basic things like food and rent? I think not. Will we have a Lifeline rate for cable TV next? Taxes are already at outrageous on cellular service as it is. Looking at my Cellular One bill, I see that I am taxed at 18.5% (eightteen point five!)! Now you want to add yet another tax on this? Considering that I've already paid almost 50% tax on the income that I'm using to pay the cellular 18.5% tax, I'm already "taxed out," as they say. Now if the original poster was using the LifeLine term just to refer to a low-monthly, high-airtime class-of-service that the cellular provides as a profit-making product, then I'm all for it. This reminds me of something else: I think someone posted a year or two back that there was some semi-rural carrier that offered a $9.95/month account. Anyone in the U.S. could sign up for this service, and then just roam in their home area for those "emergency" calls. And since true emergency calls to 911 are generally free anyway, this could provide a very inexpensive service to those who need one for safety. And I'm sure you wouldn't mind paying the $2 daily fee and $.75/minute or so to call AAA if your car broke down, either. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com, I do not speak for my employer. ------------------------------ From: richg@locus.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: PC Based PBX Organization: Locus Computing Corp, Los Angeles Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 01:11:47 GMT In article sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes: > Trunk line support currently for loop start only; specs indicate > ground start in the future. This has nothing to do with the original topic, Jeff's post just reminded me of something I have been wondering about ... Would someone more knowledgeable than I on the subject please give us a brief description of what loop start and ground start are? I have seen the terms before but don't know the meaning. Disclaimer: The above writings are the ramblings of one human being and have nothing what-so-ever to do with Locus Computing Corp. ---> Rich Greenberg, richg@locus.com TinsleTown, USA 310-337-5904 Located in Inglewood, Ca, a small city completely contained within Los Angeles ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #42 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26658; 17 Jan 92 4:20 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14692 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 17 Jan 1992 01:24:19 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30230 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 17 Jan 1992 01:23:57 -0600 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 01:23:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201170723.AA30230@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #43 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 Jan 92 01:23:55 CST Volume 12 : Issue 43 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Repeat Dialing Question (S. Spencer Sun) Re: America's Future (Jack Decker) Re: PC Based PBX (Dave Levenson) Re: Panasonic Answering Machine (Andrew Morely) Re: Mu-law, A-law (Clifton Koch) Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago (Gabe M. Wiener) Re: PICs From RBOC Payphones (Eric Florack) Re: PICs From RBOC Payphones (Stephen Tihor) Re: Need Phone Service (Nigel Allen) Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (John Higdon) Re: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options (P. da Silva) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Dave Pascoe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: spencer@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun) Subject: Re: Repeat Dialing Question Organization: Princeton Class of '94 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 19:34:01 GMT On a more or less unrelated subject, I have been told by someone who generally knows what he's talking about that when you are auto-dialing a number, you are required (by law? telco policy? I have no idea) to wait 30 seconds between attempts, ostensibly because if everyone did this it would cause great wear and tear. The reason sounds plausible (if he's pulling my leg, it's only working because I usually trust him and I don't know much about the actual technology of phones) although I can't see how they would enforce it ... S. Spencer Sun - WWIVnet #1 @6913 - 609-258-8647 - USR DS v.32bis Clockwork Orange (Princeton Ultimate) [Moderator's Note: If such a rule were to be enforced, it would be quite easy to simply deny dial tone to the caller for thirty seconds at a time. That would solve the problem, no? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 16:26:01 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: America's Future In a message dated 9 Jan 92 16:16:08 GMT, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > In yesterday's {Boston Globe} there is a full page back of the section > ad in the same disinformation campaign. This one shows a sick baby in > a house in a remote area, and tells lies about how remote diagnosis > would be possible except the congress wants to make it illegal. > It looks like it's time to make the RBOCs divest their telephone > business; they're clearly not fit to run it themselves. I wonder if an official complaint to the federal Department of Justice regarding false and misleading advertising would be helpful. For various reasons, I would think the feds might be interested in outright lies in ads designed to influence public opinion. Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: PC Based PBX Date: 14 Jan 92 22:52:36 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > Not directly telecom related, but doing my part to fight low-quality > hardware. Besides, you might want to interact with some other card to > provide an interface they never thought of. Like maybe a UNIX driver and API? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: abm88@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Morley A.B.) Subject: Re: Panasonic Answering Machine (Where Has My Cuckoo Flown Away To?) Date: 14 Jan 92 15:28:04 GMT Organization: University of Southampton, England > I've a couple of questions about my Panasonic answering machine > (KX-2445BE). > There's an undocumented command ... (prog #11 /prog #12) Yes, I've noticed this and wondered but I've also noticed: PROG-HASH-5 then any digits and PROG-HASH-7 (the code for setting number of rings) accepts 5, 6 or 7 as parameters as well as the documented values 0 to 4. I can tell the machine accepts them as it bleeps (which it doesn't do if I key 8 or 9) but what they do I can't tell. Andrew Morley - Flossie | abm88@uk.ac.soton.ecs ... abm88@ecs.soton.uk.ac | University Of Southampton, UK. ------------------------------ From: koch@rtsg.mot.com (Clifton Koch) Subject: Re: Mu-law, A-law Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 15:25:56 GMT HOEQUIST@BNR.CA (C.A.) writes: > Several queries about aspects of mu-law and A-law coding have come in > recent issues of the Digest, so I thought I'd throw in some general > information: > As has been pointed out, mu-law coding is used in Japan and the USA, > A-law in Europe (don't ask me how this distribution came about; I have > heard the claim that mu-law was foisted on Japan after WWII, but I > frankly doubt that digital coding schemes were on anyone's list of > reforms for Japan in 1945 :) ). > Why have mu/A - law at all? Good explanation, but you didn't quite answer a question a lot of people probably have. Why have compression at all? The digital format used by Telco's is 8 bit PCM at 8 Khz. In linear format, this doesn't yield a good enough S/N ratio (48 dB max on a really good, with really poor low signal level performance due to quantization error). So the A/D conversion on a linear scale is a 13 bit number (12 bits plus sign). This will fairly easily yield > 60 dB S/N, which is acceptable. But the transmission medium is still only 8 bits, which is where the Mu/A-law compression comes in. Mu-law is found primarily on T1 systems (24 channel), and A-law on E1 systems (30 channel). I don't know of any exceptions off the top of my head. I've never heard a good explanation of why there are two different systems in use. Cliff Koch Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Division [uunet | mcdchg | gatech]!motcid!koch ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Re: Western Union's Time Was Up Years Ago Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 05:31:30 GMT In article telecom (TELECOM Moderator) writes: > Between the clocks, the public telegraph offices and their many other > services, Western Union was a grand part of the American heritage for > over a century ... their slow death in the past few years has been a > real pity to all of us who remember their heyday. Pat, does there exist an authoritative book on the history of WU? If not, have you ever considered doing one? Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ [Moderator's Note: I've thought about it, but I'm still trying to write another book 'Crime and Punishment in 21st Century America' and getting very little accomplished. Unfortunatly, feeding myself and my family has become critical. Writing books and editing Digests will be taking a back seat before long if the recession gets worse. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1992 0837:22 PST From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com Subject: Re: PICs From RBOC Payphones With all due respect, Pat: > So my question is: Exactly how does this violate Equal Access and/or > the MFJ, and where can I get the text so that it can be quoted in my > letters to the FCC, FTC, and the aforementioned RBOCs? Such letter > will also point out that it would be unwise to let the RBOCs provide > information services given their track record, citing this situation > as a specific example. > [Moderator's Note: It does NOT violate Equal Access. The catch is your > 1+ dialing ... at this time the only companies with the ability to > collect or refund coins deposited in the phone are the local telco and > AT&T. *All* long distance calls from payphones requiring coin deposit > are sent to AT&T. Now had you zero-plussed your call, implying you > would need operator assistance (credit card, collect, third number > type call) then your 10xxx instructions would have been observed, even > if it did result in some OCCs responding with re-order or intercept to > your attempt to call their (non-existent) operator service. That is > provided of course the 10xxx you chose was providing service to the > exchange you were calling from. Not every 10xxx serves every place. > So save your letter writing. The RBOC is doing nothing wrong. PAT]<< I beg to differ. While you are correct, tha they are obeying the /letter/ of the law, they aer certainly not following the iNTENT of the law. The whole idea of equal access was to allow you to go through whatever LD company you choose. /REGARDLESS OF THE POINT OF ORIGIN/. While AT&T can be accessed from ANY local's phone, by law, that same law does not provide for any LD company being acessed from every phone. (Before you start tuning up about 950-xxxx access, allow me to remind you that the biggest part of the public does not know about 950-xxxx access, and thinks the only way to cross-link to another network is 1-0-xxx-0-.) It is very strong, say I, that none may abide the odor thereof. And by the way; I feel it unwise to allow RBOC's or ANY carrier, for that matter, to provide Information services; their purvue should be limited to the role of carrier, and should never enter the role of provider. (My opinions are my own. Nobody else is crazy enough to voice them in public ... most politicaly INcorrect ... you see.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 01:50 EST From: Stephen Tihor Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones I am afriad PAt that you are flat our wrong about what the phone comapny should be doing with a 10XXX code fmero a pay station for a carrier which can not support the service required. In the situation described the local switch SEEMS to be rerouting the call to ATT since only they offer coin service. The alternative and I believe the correct one would be to route to an intercept recording of the form: SIT the carrier you have requested does not offer that service. If they are feeling nice perhaps they could even list the XXX codes that do support it: 10288. Would you like to see the local monopoly selectively overriding you specified choice of carrier to their choice when your carrier can;t provide the service? Example: you have MCI as your DIAL 1 carrier (or just happen to be dialing them 10XXX to take advantage of a special We're All Friends Deal that gives 2 minutes free all over the earth. The LEC notices that you are call Outer Belize via MCI and knows that they do not offer that service so they choose to slam this single call to AT&T or even the Outer Belize Connection, Inc. at $2000 per minute. By your logic, despite the LEC ignoring your dialing instructions you are still liable for the $4000 bill that you expect to cost $0. The logical possiblities are (a) a badly programmed switch (b) an old switch which is hard to program right and easy to get to ignore 10XXX or (c) the long distance companies in question ALL chose the splash the calls via AT&T. Option C seems unlikely for a revenue call but for special numbers like 700 and 800 is just barely possible. [Moderator's Note: Whatever ... all the rules thus far say pay phones should route long distance calls to AT&T which require coins to be deposited. Your examples are a little bit silly since 'a call you expected to cost $0' would still cost $0 since you would probably just hang up the receiver rather than deposit the $4000. Private phones do follow the 10xxx instructions given by the caller ... and so do genuine telco payphones *except for calls requiring coins*. Eventually that will be dealt with also, I suppose. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1992 04:20:18 -0500 From: Nigel.Allen@f438.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Nigel Allen) Subject: Re: Need Phone Service Organization: FidoNet node 1:250/438, Echo Beach, Toronto In , am339@cleveland.freenet.edu (Michael J. Logsdon) said a building manager is being denied service by Ohio Bell because a former roommate didn't pay his phone bill. A call or letter to the Ohio Public Utilities Commission would probably be a good idea. I do not think that Ohio Bell is acting legally. In general, telephone companies do not have the right to hold a third party liable for a subscriber's phone bill. In this case, the contract for service was between Ohio Bell and the former roommate, and presumably the building manager did not guarantee or co-sign the application for service. A telephone company, as a common carrier, does not have the right to pick and choose its customers. It cannot refuse to provide service to an apartment simply because a former occupant of the apartment didn't pay his bill. (Whether a phone company has the right to require a deposit from residents of "risky" areas is a question I won't try to answer.) The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications (CRTC) dealt specifically with a similar matter several years ago when the British Columbia Telephone Company tried to collect a phone bill from the subscriber's roommate. The CRTC issued a written decision (as formal as a decision dealing with a rate case) ordering B.C. Tel to stop. I suspect that telephone company credit and collection practices are more of a barrier to telephone service for the poor than monthly rates. Nigel Allen nigel.allen@f438.n250.z1.fidonet.org INTERNET: Nigel.Allen@f438.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 00:17 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? bill@eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich) writes: > No matter when you call, you must go through this time-consuming > (about five minutes, usually) process. Calling schedules don't work > in this application, I have found, because the phone is sometimes busy > at the rig. Having rarely used Person-to-Person, I have a question. Just how long will an operator wait for the requested party to come to the phone? Five minutes? Ten minutes? A couple of hours? What is the record for having an operator wait for the call recipient to finally pick up the phone? 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 rule a few years ago was the operator was to not wait longer than three minutes, and could deny the connection or disconnect at any time prior to that if it became apparent a message had been passed or an attempt to pass a message without payment was in progress. PAT] ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 13:46:49 GMT In article DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA writes: > * Caller Announce: a voice caller ID service; when a call is answered, > the central office will send along a voice callout of the number > calling. This is a Caller ID service without the need for add-on > displays. This is cute, but it'll add an extra delay in answering the phone (and increase the chance that the guy at the other end will hang up). Since they save the last number anyway for call-blocking, why can't they make something like this for after the fact (i.e., you dial *something and it tells you who last called). I wouldn't mind paying a per-call charge for *that*, either. It's not like the charge for C-ID delivery, since you have to ask for the number each time. Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ From: pascoe%rocky.dnet@gte.com (Dave Pascoe) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Date: 15 Jan 92 17:41:02 GMT Organization: GTE/SCSD In article meier@Software.Mitel.COM (Rolf Meier) writes: > Readers should be made aware that Qualcomm's CDMA proposal is not > likely to become a national digital standard for cellular. It will be > a TDMA system as outlined in IS-54. Ah, but Qualcomm may very well be able to make CDMA a *second* standard. And that's what I understand is in the works. Dave Pascoe pascoe@rocky.gte.com GTE Gov't. Systems/SCSD (617) 455-5704 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #43 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28731; 17 Jan 92 5:23 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29189 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 17 Jan 1992 02:07:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23111 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 17 Jan 1992 02:07:12 -0600 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 02:07:12 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201170807.AA23111@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #44 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 Jan 92 02:06:54 CST Volume 12 : Issue 44 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson EFF Opens Washington Office (Gerard Van der Leun) Customer Account Security (John Higdon) *67 Doesn't Work (Kevin A. Mitchell) Reporter Seeks Information on 800 Billed as 900 (Rob Boudrie) ISDN Question (Keith A. Schauer) What Did the Operators Know? (Will Martin) Help with Job Descriptions Please (Lewis M. Dreblow) Progress? (John Higdon) Continuously Variable Slope Delta Modulation (Lee C. Erickson) Non-PacBell Intra-Lata Calls (Curtis Galloway) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 15:05:30 -0500 From: van@eff.org (Gerard Van der Leun) Subject: EFF Opens Washington Office BERMAN TO HEAD NEW EFF WASHINGTON OFFICE The Electronic Frontier Foundation today announced the opening of a permanent office in Washington D.C. and named Jerry Berman, former head of the ACLU Information Technology Project, to direct its operations. In announcing the move, EFF President Mitchell Kapor said, " The creation of the Washington office and the appointment of Jerry Berman demonstrates our commitment to build a national organization. It will give the EFF the ability to effectively advocate policies that will reflect the public's interest in the creation of new computer and communications technologies." Jerry Berman, incoming Director of the EFF Washington Office, stated that, "Our goal is to be the public's voice in Washington on these issues, and to help create policies that will maximize both civil liberties and competitiveness in the new social environments created by digital media." "The EFF," Berman continued, " is hard at work developing initiatives that will ensure that all present and future 'electronic highways', from the telephone network to the National Research and Education Network, enhance First and Fourth Amendment rights, encourage new entrepreneurial activity, and are open and accessible to all segments of society." Jerry Berman was until December 1991 director of the ACLU Information Technology Project. Previously he was the ACLU's Chief Legislative Counsel in Washington, D.C. During his career, Mr. Berman has played a major role in the drafting and enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (warrants for national security wiretapping); the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (warrant requirements for new voice, data, video electronic communications); and the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988. Over the last two years, he has spearheaded efforts to establish public access rights to electronic public information. For more information contact: Jerry Berman, Director Gerard Van der Leun Electronic Frontier Foundation EFF 666 Pennsylvania Avenue,Suite 303 155 Second Street Washington, DC 20003 Cambridge, MA 02141 Telephone: (202) 544-9237 Phone:(617) 864-0665 FAX: (202) 547-5481 FAX: (617) 864-0866 Email: jberman@eff.org Email: van@eff.org Update on EFF Activities The EFF, through its headquarters in Cambridge and its newly opened office in Washington, is currently advocating that: *Congress establish an "open telecommunications platform" featuring "Personal ISDN"; *the open platform be created with legislative safeguards that ensure a level playing field for all those competing in the information services market; *the NREN serve as a "testbed" for new voice, data, and video services that will eventually be offered over our National Public Network; *electronic bulletin boards be afforded the same First Amendment protections enjoyed by other media; *citizens who use computers for communications purposes be afforded the full protection of the Fourth Amendment; *an Electronic Freedom of Information Act be passed that will grant citizens access to the electronic version of public information consistent with the public's right to know; and that *technical means be mandated to insure the privacy of personal communications carried over cellular and other radio-based communications systems. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is also a co-sponsor (along with the Consumer Federation of American and the ACLU) and the principal coordinator of the Communications Policy Forum, which is designed to explore the means for achieving the communications goals of consumer organizations. Over 28 consumer groups, from the OMB Watch to the NAACP participate in forum activities. The Communications Policy Forum is funded by foundations as well as a diverse group of computer and communications firms. The Electronic Frontier Foundation The Electronic Frontier Foundation, with offices in Cambridge and Washington, was established a year and a half ago by Mitchell Kapor, who started the Lotus Development Corporation, and John Perry Barlow. In addition to funding from Kapor, EFF has been heavily supported by Steve Wozniak and other pioneers of the computer community. EFF board members include, in addition to Kapor, Barlow, and Berman, Steve Wozniak, John Gilmore, Steward Brand, Ester Dyson, and Dave Farber. Jerry Berman Prior to joining the American Civil Liberties Union, Mr. Berman was Associate General Counsel for the Center for Community Change in Washington, D.C., and Associate Counsel at the law firm of Covington and Burling. Mr. Berman received his BA, MA, and LLB at the University of California, Berkeley. He graduated with honors, was elected to Phi Beta Kappa and served as an editor of the California Law Review at Boalt Law School. Mr. Berman has authored two recent policy papers. With Mitchell Kapor, he has co-authored "Building the Open Road: The NREN as a Test Bed for the National Public Network, to be published in Building Information Infrastructure (B. Kahin, Ed. McGraw Hill 1992). He also wrote a policy paper on "The Right to Know: Public Access to Electronic Information" in Newberg, Paula ed. New Directions in Telecommunications Policy Vol.II (Duke University Press 1989). Mr. Berman has written a number of law review and other articles on civil liberties for journals such as Harvard Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Law Review, California Law Review, Detroit Journal of Urban Law, Software Law Journal, New Republic, Democracy, Nation, and is co-author with Morton Halperin of The Lawless State: The Abuses of the Intelligence Agencies (Penguin 1976). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 20:07 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Customer Account Security Some time back we brought up the topic of customer account security. It seems that some (including I) were annoyed at the ease with which unauthorized people were able to get information and even make changes on telephone accounts. That appears to be a thing of the past. I needed the balance on one of my business accounts and was too lazy to go to the mailbox to get the bill. (The mailbox is at the post office before you start in on that!) I called the business office, gave my name and my company name and asked for the balance on the number in question. "I'll have to call you back with that information", was the response. When she called back, she asked for my password. When I gave it to her she read off my balance. Good show! The very slight inconvenience was well worth the knowledge that just anyone cannot just call in and snoop around in my telco accounts. This is sure a change from procedures just a short time ago. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: kam@dlogics.dlogics.COM (Kevin A. Mitchell) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 11:18:43 CST Subject: *67 Doesn't Work Hmmm. I just tried *67 on my phone, and I got " We're sorry, your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check your instruction manual or call the business office." This is from the 708-452 exchange in the west 'burbs. Kevin A. Mitchell (312) 266-4485 Datalogics, Inc Internet: kam@dlogics.UUCP 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!kam Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: Rob Boudrie Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 11:09:39 EST Subject: Reporter Seeks Information on 800 Billed as 900 Adam Gaffin, a reporter for the {Middlesex News} (covers suburbs west of Boston, MA) called me this morning to discuss the 800/900 mixup with the USA today number, and the incorrect billings sent out by AT&T (to date, I haven't heard of ANYONE getting an acknlowedgement from AT&T that this actually happened -- a news story might break their wall of silence). Adam would like to hear from persons who were recipients of these factually incorrect bills. He is particularly interested in hearing from persons in the Eastern Massachusetts area, as he is working on a story on this mixup and wants to give it a "local flavor" by discussing the multiple local individuals who recieved bills for 900 calls they never made (at least to a 900 number). Adam's number and address is : adamg@world.std.com +1 508 626 3968 [Moderator's Note: Mr. Gaffin is a regular contributor in this group, and I'm glad to post this request on his behalf. PAT] ------------------------------ From: keith@balrog.dseg.ti.com (Keith A. Schauer) Subject: ISDN Question Organization: Texas Instruments Information Technology Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 16:21:19 GMT I have only been following USENET for a short time and feel this is probably the right place to post this. Please correct me if wrong. I am responsible for designing a customer-contractor network for data sharing. Our customer (government) has indicated that they are getting a Basic Rate Interface (BRI) in the near future. I am assuming this is thru FTS-2000. This customer would like us to use this as our WAN transport, instead of MILNET whichhe considers to be too slow (only 56K vs 2x64). Questions: Being a commercial entity, not part of FTS-2000, is this possible? Can the FTS-2000 BRI interface off network? I would like to use a bridge technology, if possible (vs protocol routed). Whatwould this type of connection look like to me? What type of interconnect hardware is available for 802.3 -- ISDN? Would I need a BRI to my site, or couldI just get a leased line to my nearest central office (FTS or otherwise)? With this type of service, can it be arranged for the computers to force a call setup & connect vs 'dedicated' access. How is billing handled? Thanks alot for any information you can shed. Any good sources for me to start boning up on? Regards, Keith Schauer Texas Instruments Dallas, TX The opinions expressed are mine, all mine ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 12:16:16 CST From: Will Martin Subject: What Did the Operators Know? In recent issues of Telecom, there have been several comments similar to this one: > From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) > Without ANI, Operators had to ask you for YOUR number before Toll calls > (even 1+ calls) would complete. Also, I recall that in our old Centrex system in a previous location, we had to type in the four digits of our own extension numbers when making a toll-type call. I suppose that this is really rare now, with the calling number being identified to the telco equipment without any need for the caller to provide that information in any form. What I'm wondering about is just how much DID the operators know about the calling number when they asked for it. Was it possible to lie about it (or key in the wrong extension) and have that other number be billed for the call? Did the operators know only the exchange you were calling from, so that if you were calling from 765-4321 and they asked the number and you said "755-8217", they *knew* you were lying? (Assuming "755" was a valid local exchange, too, of course.) Or didn't they even know that much about the calling number? If they could identify the exchange, in the same example as above, if you said the number you were at was "765-1234" or some other different set of last four digits in that same exchange (but a valid phone number in any case), could they tell you were lying about the number? What if you gave them an unassigned number -- did they have something to tell them right away, or to check while the call was in progress, that this was an unbillable-to number? What did the operators do if they knew, or if they suspected, that you were telling them a false number? Did they just say "The call cannot be completed" and hang up on you, or did they have some method to identify the line for fraud-investigation purposes, or did they tell you that the number you gave could not be correct, or what? In the Centrex situation I mentioned, how on earth could the automated equipment *not* know what extension was dialling the call? What purpose was served by forcing the user to key in the extension? Was it just crude software or was the dialing extension really unidentifiable? It sort of strikes me that we went through a cycle in telephone-line identifiability over the history of the telephone. Early installations had cord boards and a separate jack for each line, and there was no question about which phone you were calling from -- as soon as you picked up the phone, the light on the board came on and the telco operator KNEW who you were. Then, as mechanical automated equipment came in, there was a period where they had to trust the caller to identify themselves. Now, with more sophisticated electronic equipment, the equipment knows just what line is doing what and there is no need for "trust" anymore ... maybe, at some future date, with the concept of a telephone number following an individual rather than a line, we will move back to a mode in which the caller is somehow identified but the line being used is unimportant and not logged? Regards, Will [Moderator's Note: They knew the exchange, but not the last four digits in most cases. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Lewis M. Dreblow" Subject: Help With Job Descriptions Please Date: 15 Jan 92 07:20:31 -0600 Organization: Muskingum College Good morning netters. We are installing for the first time a new PBX. Having worked with a consultant in the RFP process and now in the process of letting the bids, we are now working on the staff requirements. Would other netters share a copy of whatever job descriptions they have in place for both data and telephone management with me. Experiences that other sites have with staffing requirements would be most insightful. Thanks in advance. I will accept postings or direct Email. Lewis Dreblow - DREBLOW@VAX.MUSKINGUM.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 15:09 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Progress? Well, it has been five months since my venerable crossbar was "upgraded" to 5ESS. What do I have to show for it? 1. No CLASS features 2. No ISDN 3. No message center What I do have is noticably inferior audio quality. Certainly worth waiting for, wasn't it? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 14:08:22 EST Organization: InnovaSystems, Inc. Reply-To: alee!erickson@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM From: alee!erickson@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM (Lee C. Erickson) Subject: Continuously Variable Slope Delta Modulation Could anyone provide me with detailed information (or references to it) concerning the filtering used in "Continuously Variable Slope Delta" (CVSD) modulation? Lee Erickson uucp: erickson@alee.UUCP ..!gvlv2!alee!erickson WS3J ..!cbmvax!alee!erickson internet: erickson%alee@gvl.unisys.com usmail: 720 Raynham Rd., Collegeville PA 19426 ------------------------------ From: Curtis Galloway Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 16:48:12 PST Subject: Non-PacBell Intra-Lata Calls Thanks to all those who responded to my earlier query about how to avoid using Pacific Bell for intra-lata calls. The easiest solution for me was to use my MCI calling card for calls during the evening and night/weekend rate periods. For calls over about 5 minutes, the lower rates make up for the calling card surcharge. The point is about to be moot, though: the dial-up system I'm calling is about to get an access number that's in my local calling zone. Curtis Galloway The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. uunet!sco!curtisg -or- curtisg@sco.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #44 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27358; 20 Jan 92 1:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02588 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:38:32 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07801 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:38:03 -0600 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:38:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201200538.AA07801@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #45 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Jan 92 20:29:45 CST Volume 12 : Issue 45 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations (Monty Solomon) Re: Eastern Caribbean Cellular (Roy Smith) Re: Phone Company Humour (Michael G. Katzmann) Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (John Rice) Re: Cellular Phone For Quadriplegic (Warren Tucker) Re: Where Can One *Buy* the White Pages? (David Ash) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Ron Dippold) Re: Radio Links for Rural Telephone (Julian Macassey) Re: Job Opening in Telecom (Julian Macassey) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 92 23:37:34 HST From: roscom!monty@uunet.UU.NET (Monty Solomon) Subject: Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations wwong@wimsey.bc.ca (Will Wong) wrote: > I would like to get ahold of the CCITT standards and recommendations > (either through purchasing the books, borrowing, begging, etc.) Does > anyone have any idea where I can go? They are available online via anonymous FTP from bruno.cs.colorado.edu and by E-Mail from infosrv@bruno.cs.colorado.edu. Monty roscom!monty@bu.edu ------------------------------ From: roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Subject: Re: Eastern Caribbean Cellular Organization: Public Health Research Institute (New York) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 14:14:00 GMT John R. Levine writes: > They are the A and B system in St. Maarten/St. Martin. Other "boatphone" > locations are the A system in Antigua, Grenada, St. Kitts, St. Lucia, St. > Thomas, and Tortola Odd. We chartered a boat last year (March 1991) that happened to have a boatphone on it. After I got over my general revulsion (we be on vacation, mon, we no *want* de telephone!) I decided to play with it just to see what would happen. The directions basically said to dial 0 to register for service. All I ever got was a "no cell" message. This was in St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Grenada. Was the phone (and/or the antenna) just broken? Actually, it's a good thing it didn't work; one of our party was a lawyer who kept threatening to check in with her office. She never bothered to do so at the various times we were on land, so maybe she was just joking. At least I hope she was just joking. I used to think the real test of if you've been on vacation long enough was that you could no longer remember what day of the week it is. Now I realize it's when you stop missing usenet and start wondering just what was so wonderful about it in the first place. How long is it going to be before I charter a boat that not only has a cell phone on it, but a modem and terminal too? I hope never! roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA ------------------------------ From: vk2bea!michael@uunet.uu.net (Michael G. Katzmann) Subject: Re: Phone Company Humour Date: 15 Jan 92 18:23:33 GMT Reply-To: vk2bea!michael@uunet.uu.net (Michael G. Katzmann) Organization: Broadcast Sports Technology, Crofton. Maryland. In article Giles D Malet writes: > While living in London (UK) a few years ago, I noticed an entry in the > 'phone book for a certain "Zaphod Beeblebrox", complete with number > and residential address. He lives! He also has a listing in the Sydney (Australia) White Pages, as does his mate Ford Prefect. Michael Katzmann Broadcast Sports Technology Inc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Crofton, Maryland. U.S.A Amteur Radio Stations: NV3Z / VK2BEA / G4NYV opel!vk2bea!michael@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 19:09:21 GMT In article , davidb@zeus.ce.washington. edu (David W. Barts) writes: > This is known as an ALIT (Automatic Line Insulation Test), performed > by the phone company in the wee hours of the morning to detect faults > in the twisted pair serving your home. ALIT involves placing a DC > voltage of about 100v across the pair and measuring the leakage > current. This subject has been discussed in this Digest extensively > in the past. Actually ALIT is an old system, not much used these days. Current automated Line test systems typically do the testing at 10V or so. John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 14:36 EST From: wht@n4hgf.Mt-Park.GA.US (Warren Tucker) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone For Quadriplegic Organization: Tuckerware/Amateur Radio Station N4HGF In article Ken Weaverling wrote: > My girl friend is a quadriplegic. She has very limited use of her > hands, and needs a wheelchair to get around. Despite all of this, she > is able to drive in an adapted van. I am also a quad and used to drive until chronic sudden blood pressure problems talked me out of it. What level of injury has she? I am a C6/C7 (no hand motor control but good biceps and wrists and mediocre triceps). > We went to a few local cellular phone stores, and didn't get very > encouraging information. All the phones have push buttons that take a > bit of effort to push, which is impossible for her to do. Does she use "typing sticks" (straps over the hand with a rubber-tipped dowel attached)? If so, perhaps you might velcro one to the phone to use to press buttons. I use my typing sticks for typing, but also for many other tasks. They make it possible to use the strength of my biceps and wrist muscles to press more resistent buttons. If she is a C5 (no wrist motor control), this may not be as satisfactory. > If possible, it would be ideal if a portable phone could be hooked up > to her motorized wheelchair. If that is possible, would the phone > still be able to operate from within an enclosed vehicle? (I would > attach the aerial somewhere on her wheelchair.) It should be straightforward to use the batteries on her chair provided the batteries are lead-acid storage batteries, which most are. Practical wheelchair power systems are 24VDC with a pair of series-connected deep-discharge marine storage batteries. The power system is completely isolated from the frame and other metallic parts of the chair. If you find your situation to match that, just connect the phone power across ONE of the batteries and away you go, but read on. I don't have to tell you your girlfriend's wheelchair is a vital and expensive link to her mobility and safety. Some serious warnings and cautions are in order. I would not hesitate to do what I am recommending, but I have twenty years of experience in these disciplines (land mobile radio, power systems and the like). I would like to think my experience would assist me in proceeding cautiously. I cannot assess your situation and urge you to find a thoroughly stable and experienced individual to help you if you lack complete confidence. 1. Prior to installation, make careful voltage checks with a voltohmmeter for potentials between each battery terminal and the wheelchair frame. They SHOULD be completely isolated. 2. a. Securely ground the radio to the frame. b. Place the antenna as far away from the joystick and associated control electronics as possible. My first attempt to use a 7-watt 144-Mhz amateur radio portable from the wheelchair was a real education. I had the chair turned on at the time with the radio in a ripstock bag hanging off one arm of the chair, the antenna near the cable connecting the joystick to the electronics box underneath the seat. When I keyed the transmitter, the chair went into FULL SPEED FORWARD TRAVEL!! Surely RF was travelling through the cable and being rectified by the joystick input circuitry. Fortunately nothing but a scare came from the experience. Reorienting the radio solved that problem, but I still fear being near some automobile with a hundred watt land mobile radio and having a repeat performance one day. Perhaps the 2-watt 800 MHz phone will not cause the same problem, but who knows? It's a good idea to switch off the chair before using a radio/phone. The phone transmits bursts of RF automatically when receiving an incoming call, so you can never know when an event might arise. Also note that you cannot be sure power is removed from all chair circuitry when the chair is switched off. The switch on the joystick may for instance merely break the connection between the joystick and the control. While you are around to help, try transmitting in varying proximity to different sizes of metal objects. 3. Provide a switch to completely remove primary power from the radio. Surely the phone's control head power switch does not remove full power from all parts of the phone. You don't want the radio on when starting or stopping the chair's battery charger. If the lady uses home health care attendents, you probably need to overly stress the importance of this to them. While many "nursing assistants" are quite capable, my experience is most of them are semi-trainable and forgetful. > And finally, if anyone can think of a way for us to get her insurance > to pay for the phone, we'd both be very grateful. Luckily, she had > extended disability insurance at the time of her auto accident several > years ago. They generally will pay for things needed for medical > purposes, though I admit getting a car phone is pushing it (we already > asked, but haven't pushed the issue yet). Good luck ;-), but perhaps her doctor would be willing to "prescribe" one (for safety). It was my experience that insurance companies are more willing to grant unusual requests at the beginning of the disability but Much Less So as time passes. Don't count on it now. What about the deals some vendors offer for reduced rate or free phones in return for a year's service or so. Others in this group are much more likely to be able to advised you on this. Good luck. Even though each case and each individual is different I know almost exactly where you are. I am a data communications engineer (programmer) also with experience in telephone and radio up to the early 80's level. I have been in this frustrating condition for about five years and have made several applications of technology. If I can help in any way, please contact me. Warren Tucker, TuckerWare gatech!n4hgf!wht or wht@n4hgf.Mt-Park.GA.US ------------------------------ From: ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (David Ash) Subject: Re: Where Can One *Buy* the White Pages? Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 19:50:27 GMT In article gil@limbic.ssdl.com (Gil Kloepfer Jr.) writes: > [Moderator's Note: You might mention to her that Compuserve offers an > on line national white pages directory which allows cross-reference > and wild-card searching. It carries a surcharge. GO PHONES on CIS. I > suppose that would be adequate for some users, maybe in her case also, > depending on the volume of usage anticipated. PAT] My experience having played with this file a bit is that it contains entries only if both of the following conditions are met: 1. It is a *residential*, not a *business*, phone. 2. The person has a listed phone number *including*address*. Obviously CompuServe is right not to list folks with unlisted phone numbers, but people who choose to list their phone numbers but not their addresses in the white pages are deleted from the CompuServe file. David W. Ash ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu HOME: (415) 497-1629 WORK: (415) 725-3859 ------------------------------ From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 20:53:33 GMT meier@Software.Mitel.COM (Rolf Meier) writes: > In my personal opinion, Qualcomm's claims are designed more to raise > the price of Qualcomm shares than actual capacity advantages over > TDMA. Please, we invited all the major carriers and phone companies and some manufacturers here to observe our formal system tests in November and went through large-scale capacity testing with actual CDMA mobiles in cars and vans in the field and multiple CDMA cells. An actual working CDMA system. The results were presented to the CTIA. If you'd like to raise doubts with our capacity tests, you're going to have to do far better than that. What you'll have to do if you want to dispute CDMA's capacity over TDMA is let us know the results of all the similar formal capacity tests with actual mobiles and cells which have no doubt been performed for TDMA. ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Radio Links for Rural Telephone Date: 15 Jan 92 19:14:46 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article 0003991080@mcimail.com (Proctor & Associates) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 31, Message 3 of 13 > The new product is the model RT8 Rural Telephone System. It consists > of two boxes. > What I can't figure out is, would this be legal in the USA, and how > would it be licensed? > But would it really be legal to provide telephone service in a rural > area using conventional Land Mobile or Public Safety radio channels > and these devices? > I called the manufacturer (Connect Systems Inc, #113, 2064 Eastman > Ave, Ventura, CA 93003 - 800-545-1349/805-642-7184) and they didn't > seem to know anything about regulatory requirements. Someone there > suggested that this was being made for third world markets. Yes, in the third world, such arrangements are actually installed by the government monopoly telcos. When I was in Pakistan last year I amused myself by listening to these devices. They are found randomly on the VHF bands there. Some of these are in the middle of the Amateur Two-Meter band. The US Govt (Embassy and Consulate) use 4 freqs in the 160 Mhz range in Pakistan. These are simplex base, mobile, walki-talkie units. In Peshawar two of these freqs are unusable because there are a couple of rural telco links on them. If you want to know where the local CO is, look for a veritable forest of Yagi Antennas (VHF High Band) pointing to every direction of the compass. You are then looking at the roof of the Central Office. The audio quality of some of these units leaves much to be desired. But if it is a choice between some phone and no phone -- it is worth choosing. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Job Opening in Telecom Date: 15 Jan 92 18:47:18 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article FRASER@ccl2.eng.ohio-state. edu writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 16, Message 13 of 13 > Job opening: Director, International Center for Telecommunications > Management > ICTM at the University of Nebraska at Omaha has begun a national > search for a new director. > Position requires a doctorate for tenure track > faculty appointment in one of the departments of the College of > Business Administration. I couldn't think of a better candidate than John Higdon. But then reading that he is supposed to have a doctorate (In telecom??), I suppose these people would find him unqualified. They are probably looking for the sort of person who writes the usual content free drivel in mags like "Telephony". A great pity. Someone like Higdon could have a positive effect on the industry from such a position. But I guess from the job description they are looking for a toady -- something John has never been guilty of. 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 V12 #45 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27540; 20 Jan 92 1:28 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08964 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:40:38 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03020 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:40:17 -0600 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:40:17 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201200540.AA03020@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #46 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Jan 92 22:05:03 CST Volume 12 : Issue 46 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? (Nelson Bolyard) Re: Motorola Cellular Phone Test Mode Commands (Steve Forrette) Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (John R. Levine) Re: State of Ohio Feature Group B and D (Jack Decker) Re: History of the Telephone Show on TV (William J. Carpenter) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Dave Strieter) Re: Phone Number Verification (Linc Madison) Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (Maxime Taksar) Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain (Michael H. Riddle, Esq.) Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Mark Terribile) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nelson@bolyard.wpd.sgi.com Subject: Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? Reply-To: nelson@sgi.sgi.com Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 21:36:18 GMT Our esteemed Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Yes there is. By 1995 (maybe 1994) new area codes > will look like prefixes used to look; that is, they will NOT have zero > or one as the second digit. PAT] As has been mentioned in previous Digests, there are parts of the country where the leading "1" digit is still used to mean "long distance" or "toll call", rather than "ten digit number follows" as it means in parts of California (e.g. in the 415 area code, but not 408). Seems to me that when area codes and exchange numbers cannot be distinguished by value (e.g. N0X vs NXX), then the switch must have some way of distinguishing them. The only two ways that come to mind are the "1 means area code follows" scheme now widely in use, and the "timeout after seven digits are dialed" method, which seems fraught with peril. I doubt if the timeout method is likely to be adopted. So, I conclude that if what PAT wrote is true, then it follows that the whole nation must be converted to the "1 means area code follows" scheme by "1995 (maybe 1994)". Does anyone know if indeed there exists a plan for such a conversion? Will 408 (where leading 1 is never required) and 517 (where leading 1 means toll call -- last time I checked) soon be converting? Nelson Bolyard nelson@sgi.COM {decwrl,sun}!sgi!whizzer!nelson Disclaimer: Views expressed herein do not represent the views of my employer. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 13:40:24 pst From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phone Test Mode Commands Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article John Covert writes: > A particularly useful command would be a command to display the > contents of various RAM locations. That command, coupled with > knowledge of which RAM location is assigned to the "Received System > ID" would be most useful when trying to figure out what system you > have just roamed into. > Obviously, if you know the system IDs of all systems in the area you > can guess which one you are currently in by setting the phone to > "Preferred System ID" mode and trying each possible system ID -- but > if you enter an unfamiliar area it would be nice to be able to find > out the system ID without trying all the possibilities. It would be nice if the cellular carriers would set up some special number you could call at no charge, standardized in North America, that would tell you the system you're on, the roamer port number, and the roaming charges. A simple non-interactive recording would do. Also, I must praise my recently-aquired Oki 900 portable. It's one of the smallest units on the market, and has enough bells and whistles to keep the most involved TELECOM Digest reader happy! One of these is RCL # #, which displayes the current System ID you're on. It is very clear - the display reads SystemID: xxxxxx. It has all sorts of stuff like this that are available in regular user mode, with no "Test mode" passwords, etc., and are clearly documented in the user manual. I bought it based on a review that appeared here about a year ago - it had more detail than I'm giving here. I wish all of them were made like this: The phone obviously knows what the current system id is, and it would cost nothing to add the feature to display it. But as with many "consumer" products, they are made for the least common denominator of consumers. Why can't the people who don't want to know what the system id is just ignore it, so that those who do can have access to the information? All in all, highly recommended. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 15 Jan 92 14:16:07 EST (Wed) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) There are apparently two ways to call someone who is on a ship at sea, the old manual VLF system and the spiffy new satellite system. VLF calls are all person-to-person through the operator, while satellite calls are direct dial. Despite the hefty operator surcharge, for most people it's cheaper to call person-to-person via VLF because you don't start to pay until the person you want to talk to comes to the phone. On a large ship, it could easily take ten minutes to find someone, and with the satellite system, that could be $20 or $30 of talk time. I suppose you could call, say who you wanted, hang up, and call back in 15 minutes, but this is a perfect example of what person-to-person calling was intended for in the first place. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 16:22:14 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: State of Ohio Feature Group B and D In message dated 10 Jan 92 18:08:13 GMT, WARNER%DEC1@MPS.OHIO-STATE.EDU writes: > Speaking of Feature Group D access (10OHI) to carriers, here at the > State of Ohio we are considering providing free dialing to many State > Agencies throughout the State using Feature Group D. > To contact a state agency someone would dial: 10OHI extension number>. (644 is our carrier code.) One of the exchanges > we have is 466, and our extension numbers are last five digits of the > number, so numbers could be 10OHIOVAXS# or 10OHIOPUCO# if an agency > desired. These calls would not cost the caller anything; the > receiving agency would pay for the call. > The biggest difficulty might be getting the general (non telecom) > public to use such a "weird" phone number. If enough agencies sign on > to such a system we might be able to publicize this as a "Call Ohio" > numbering scheme or something. > It might be best for a user interface reasons to require the caller to > enter the full long distance number including area code (even though > we would ignore it.) Yes, that would be better because some people might mistake your access code for that of a regular long distance carrier. I would suggest using the normal number OR perhaps better yet (and perhaps more technically feasible), use 1-700-seven digit number. The reason I suggest using 1-700 is because in this way, the local phone companies will not get confused and present you with billing information based on where it thinks the call went, or (worse yet) pick off an intra-LATA call and handle it themselves (they probably shouldn't do this anyway, but you never know what an independent telco might do). 1-700 is reserved for use by the long distance carrier as they see fit; the only "reserved" number is 1-700-555-4141 which should return a voice recoding identifying the carrier (in your case, you could say something like "You have reached the Ohio State Government. Please dial your call using 1-700- plus the seven telephone number to reach the Ohio Government Agency of your choice." Whatever you do, don't tell the general public to dial "OH" or "OHIO"; you'll surely have people dialing "04" (ZERO-H) or "0410" (ZERO-H-ONE-ZERO)! You'll just have to make sure that Ohio government agencies aren't assigned the same exchange prefix in two different area codes (otherwise you might have conflicting numbers in the system). The other advantage to doing this is that you leave yourself open for the possibility of acting as your own long distance carrier for state agencies. State agencies could be presubscribed to 10OHI as their LD carrier, and any long distance calls they make would go to your switch. You could then have a pretty sophisticated least-cost routing setup, that would use your own lines for calls within Ohio and hand interstate calls off to an interstate LD carrier (I'll bet MCI or Sprint would fight for that business!). Of course, you'd be responsible for billing back LD usage to the individual government agencies, but remember, you don't have to do this for all agencies right away, until you're comfortable with the idea. Your switch would have to be programmed to process 1-700 calls from all callers, but restrict 1+NPA calls (calls to any area code OTHER THAN 700) only from pre-authorized state phones (any decent switch should be capable of maintaining such a database ... after all, many of the smaller LD carriers won't let you place a 10XXX call over their system unless you've been pre-authorized). I have a question for you. Does Ohio prohibit mandatory measured service, allow it, or has no decision been made yet? I know some states (e.g. Maine and Oregon) have banned it completely, but I'm wondering if any states closer to home have. Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 23:22:18 GMT From: news@cbnewsh.att.com Subject: Re: History of the Telephone Show on TV Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories > I just saw a little blurb that a show about the history of > the telephone will be on The Discovery Channel on Tuesday, > 9:30 pm EST. > [Moderator's Note: I am sorry this message arrived to late to be > included at least a day earlier. Perhaps people who see the show > will be so kind to send reviews. PAT] This was one episode of a British series called "The Secret Life of Machines". Each 30 minute episode describes for laymen how some common machine works. They also cover the technological evolution of the thing in question. For the telephone episode, they showed several old telegraph machines and discussed how that worked. They segued to Bell experimenting with telegraph stuff when he decided to try transmitting voice. Lots of ancient phones briefly featured. Some discussion of various microphone and speaker technologies, including a pretty good practical demo using carbon granules in a jar lid. They spent a reasonable amount of time showing and describing stepper relays and mentioned the enormous maintainance. Finished, naturally, with lots of humming electronics. The material is very accessible, but if you're already sort of tuned in to telephony, you probably didn't miss any new material. After all, it is only a half-hour show. FYI, other shows in this series that I've seen include the vacuum cleaner and the car (the impression I got was that there were 2-3 shows covering cars). If you missed it, wait to see if it comes around again. I saw them last year some time. Bill William_J_Carpenter@ATT.COM or (908) 576-2932 attmail!bill or att!pegasus!billc AT&T Bell Labs / AT&T EasyLink Services LZ 1E-207 ------------------------------ From: strieterd@gtephx.UUCP (Dave Strieter) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 21:42:06 GMT Several Digest readers have commented that it is cheaper for the telco to provide DTMF than rotary pulse dialing, but I fail to understand how they come to that conclusion. I can't speak for the 5ESS or DMS-100, but on the GTD-5 dial pulses are counted by software which monitors the output of an opto-coupler device connected to each line, whereas DTMF tones must be decoded by a more-expensive circuit which feeds the decoded digits to the software. How does "more expensive" = "costs less"? Dave Strieter, AG Communication Systems, POB 52179, Phoenix AZ 85072-2179 *** These are not my employer's opinions. They're my opinions, not my advice. UUCP:..!{ncar!noao!asuvax | uunet!samsung!romed!asuvax | att}!gtephx!strieterd Internet: gtephx!strieterd@asuvax.eas.asu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 03:18:09 PST From: linc@tongue1.Berkeley.EDU (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Phone Number Verification Organization: University of California, Berkeley Andrew White (awhite@seas.upenn.edu) in : [ regarding numbers to have voice ANI read-back ] > Try 410-xxx-xxxx where xxx-xxxx is any valid phone number. (eg, > 222-2222). This works in both the 314 (St.Louis, MO) and 215 > (Philadelphia, PA) area. No, it doesn't. It now will connect you either to an intercept recording or to a very confused person in northern/eastern Maryland. The 410 area code is now in use for Baltimore and about half the state of Maryland. Linc Madison == Linc@Tongue1.Berkeley.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 05:12:55 -0800 From: mmt@latour.berkeley.edu (Maxime Taksar) Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > Dave Leibold writes: >> Bell Canada and Cantel will be raising their cellular rates soon. >> Bell has a "Lifeline" rate of >> $9.95 which will not be changed (though this might involve higher >> connect time charges). > Now let me get this straight: A "lifeline" rate for cellular? Now > I've heard everything! And why not? I have seen quite a few disabled people who carry a cellular phone with them. When one is bound to a wheelchair, this method of communication is, I'm sure, very much a "lifeline". Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS mmt@Berkeley.EDU ------------------------------ From: bc335@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael H. Riddle, Esq.) Subject: Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain Reply-To: bc335@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael H. Riddle, Esq.) Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 13:20:24 GMT In a previous article, edg@netcom.netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) says: > Seriously, if I were wiring a house, I'd wire two four pair circuits > to each room, down to a central point. I'd terminate them all with > RJ-45's on both ends. You can run RJ-11 phone circuits on them just > fine, but can also run RS-232 data, and other twisted pair wiring > schemes. Your house will (hopefully) stand for 100 years. Wanna bet > what they'll be using for appliances then? I don't know if Ed Greenberg is prescient, or if "great minds think alike." Of course, compared with what I'm about to describe, Ed does engage in a little "overkill." Not that it's a bad idea. Wire is cheap to put in at installation, but terrible (in labor costs) once the walls are up! (Hmm, on second thought, I'm about to say that US West is a "great mind"!) Anyway, a couple of months ago I received one of those glossy, four-color inserts with my phone bill. One of the nice-things-to-know it told me was that the standard for new residential construction here in US West (Omaha) territory is exactly what Mr. Greeberg suggested: eight wires (four-pair) from each location back to a central point. At the time I didn't feel like seeing who establishes what standards really apply, and I guess I still don't care that much. IMHO, give me dial tone at the demarc and let me worry about what comes next. But I remarked to myself at the time that The Phone Company must be seeing more and more multiple line installations and/or residential PBXes if they were heading off future problems with an eight-wire requirement. <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>> mike.riddle@inns.omahug.org | Nebraska Inns of Court bc335@cleveland.freenet.edu | +1 402 593 1192 (Data/Fax) Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet | V.32/V.42bis / G3 Fax ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 01:15:30 -0500 From: mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony In article rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes: > Bottom line: We have an officially capacity tested (tests observed by > the major companies in the industry) CDMA system in the field that > gives a capacity improvement of 10 to 30 times (depending on > conditions) over an AMPS system, with better voice quality, better > handoffs, and less dropped calls. Would someone like to explain how CDMA works? I understand that it spreads the signal across a huge bandwidth in a way that allows the receiver to select 1 of N signals ... but how? A CDMA primer, anyone? (This man's opinions are his own.) From mole-end Mark Terribile uunet!mole-end, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #46 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27567; 20 Jan 92 1:30 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08796 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:43:00 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09920 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:42:32 -0600 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:42:32 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201200542.AA09920@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #47 TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Jan 92 00:30:07 CST Volume 12 : Issue 47 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: CID/ANI Blocking (Derek Andrew) Re: CID/ANI Blocking (David G. Lewis) Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois (David G. Lewis) CLID - Split the Debate (Derek Andrew) Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois (John R. Hall) Re: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana (Arthur L. Rubin) Caller-ID Area Code in Toronto (Bob Miller) CLID on a PBX (Randall C. Gellens) Automatic Number Callback (Bruce Albrecht) Re: Panasonic Answering Machine (Nigel Roberts) Re: Addition to SWBT 411 Service (Paul Hutmacher) Re: Less Service From the BOC (Keith McNeill) Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Andy Sherman) Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Malcolm Dunnett) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: andrew@herald.USask.ca (Derek Andrew) Subject: Re: CID/ANI Blocking Reply-To: andrew@herald.USask.ca Organization: University of Saskatchewan Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 01:27:26 -0700 > From article , by davep@u.washington. edu (David Ptasnik): > Andy Dunn posted: >> I agree with our esteemed Moderator. Consider the fact that the 800 >> number exists to answer your call whenever you call it, and that the >> company owning it pays a time-measured rate for the call. >> Remember the case reported here in the Digest (I think) last week >> where somebody tried to get revenge on a company by faxing them long >> faxes and tying up their phones? What if they really were anonymous. > I want to be able to block ANI from my phone. Let the person > receiving the call have the option of refusing a call from any blocked > number, or of blocking calls from my number. The person receiving the > calls does not need to know my number in either case. >> [Moderator's Note: However Andy, I would refer you to John Higdon's >> message in this issue. 900 operators *do* pay for the call in the >> sense they are extending credit to you, the caller until you pay your >> phone bill and telco in turn remits to them. As someone who provides >> an extension of credit, they are also entitled to know who you are. PAT] > They should have the option of refusing the call if you chose not to > identify yourself. They might want to take the call, and give the > caller the option of billing to a credit card, but they could know in > advance whether the ANI was being blocked from the calling party. The do have the option of accepting your call if you do not want to be identified. If you go to a pay phone, your call will be rejected! If they want to accept your call anyway, they could provide an 800 number. The funny thing here is if you are going to provide a credit card number, then you are identifying yourself all over again. It is not the act of providing your telephone number which causes you to lose your privacy, but as soon as they know your name (who you are) then your privacy is forfeit. Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0 Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808, 52 11 23N 106 48 48W ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: CID/ANI Blocking Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 14:52:18 GMT In article davep@u.washington.edu (David Ptasnik) writes: > I want to be able to block ANI from my phone. Let the person > receiving the call have the option of refusing a call from any blocked > number, or of blocking calls from my number. The person receiving the > calls does not need to know my number in either case. Correction: You want to be able to block delivery of billing number to the called party from your phone. A service that would enable you to block ANI would probably be in contravention of half a hundred FCC regulations, PSC regulations, and telco tariffs. Plus, of course, if you block delivery of BN to the 800 called party, the 800 called party will never have your BN to refuse reception of calls from that BN ... David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 14:41:37 GMT In article m21198%mwunix@linus.mitre.org (John McHarry) writes: > PAT noted that caller ID in Northern Illinois works across both > Illinois Bell and Centel territories within the LATA. How are they > passing the information? Do they share an SS7 network, or have a > gateway, or use some other means? Any idea what the billing > arrangements are? > [Moderator's Note: There is a gateway through the central office > known as 'Chicago-Newcastle'. There is both an Illinois Bell > 'Newcastle CO' and a Centel 'Newcastle CO'. I'm still confused. IBT and Centel presumably share the Newcastle building. How is traffic, particularly signaling traffic, gatewayed in this building? Do Centel and IBT share a switch, and all IBT-Centel traffic is tandemed through this switch, with this switch being a signaling point on both IBT's and Centel's SS7 networks? (Sounds incredibly inefficient, btw.) Is there a gateway STP or gateway STP pair? Is there a shared STP or STP pair? Help? David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning [Moderator's Note: Well actually no, they don't share the same building. Centel's "Newcastle CO" is on Minor Street in Des Plaines, IL, while IBT's CO of the same name is in Chicago ... but they have some neat ways of wiring things. I'm not certain how they handle it. Since the 312/708 and Centel/IBT boundary line (within Chicago) is ragged at best in some places (like in the middle of a block and running down the alley between houses) I know there is a lot of Centel stuff wired through the IBT Newcastle office. Very bizarre. PAT] ------------------------------ From: andrew@herald.USask.ca (Derek Andrew) Subject: CLID - Split the Debate Reply-To: andrew@herald.USask.ca Organization: University of Saskatchewan Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 01:21:20 -0700 Calling line ID is a double edged sword. I have heard arguments supporting it as enhancing privacy and control of the telephone, and arguments condemning it as an invasion of privacy. I propose we separate the issues of residential versus commercial CLID. I suggest that CLID on a residential line is good because it gives the owner of the line control and enhances privacy by identifying the source of the call. I can first try to identify the source of obnoxious calls without involving the authorities. I would like to hear of any cases where anyone would disagree that I should know who is calling me at home. The problem of invasion of privacy occurs when businesses supposedly collect information about me when I call them. The anonymity of the telephone in dealing with businesses is lost, and this is what seems to upset everyone. The fact that this could have been accomplished on 800 numbers for years is irrelevant to this discussion. If CLID was tarrifed such that it could only be offered to residences, would the benefits of CLID outweigh the remaining concerns? Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0 Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808, 52 11 23N 106 48 48W [Moderator's Note: Please continue this debate in any event in the Telecom-Priv area (telecom-priv@pica.army.mil). Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 13:03:29 EST From: jhall@ihlpm.att.com (John R Hall) Subject: Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories The first 300 numbers delivered per month are included in the $6.50/month fee. Each additional number delivered costs two cents. John ------------------------------ From: "a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com"@BIIVAX.DP.BECKMAN.COM Subject: Re: Caller-ID Rejected in Indiana Message-ID: Date: 16 Jan 92 16:10:40 GMT Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc. In the Moderator comments: > [Moderator's Note: The difference is just a matter of degree, I guess. > With Caller-ID you are saying 'I want to specifically know the number > of the phone used to call me' while with Call-Back you are saying only > that you wish to complete the connection the other party attempted to > establish (and presumably he wants to talk to you also, or he would > not have called.) I guess it is just how they choose to interpret the > purpose of the one versus the official purpose of the other. PAT] But, doesn't the number called appear on your bill (if it isn't local)? Arthur L. Rubin 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer. [Moderator's Note: Yes it does. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 08:55:59 PST From: Bob Miller Subject: Caller-ID Area Code in Toronto I noticed a change to how Caller-ID is displayed in Toronto 416.787 exchange. Since the introduction of the service only local calls were displayed and did not give an area code, long distance calls displayed "LONG DISTANCE". I noticed a call last night that included the area code '416-xxx-xxxx'. I have yet to receive a long distance call to see how it is displayed. Bob Miller / Digital Equipment of Canada Ltd. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 07:54 GMT From: Randall C Gellens <0005000102@mcimail.com> Subject: CLID on a PBX As I understand it, ANI has been around for some time, and delivers the calling (or billing) number to inter-exchange carriers for all calls, and end users for 911, 800, and 900 numbers, through out-of-band signalling, I think. Calling-Line ID (CLID), on the other hand, delivers the calling number to end subscribers between the first and second rings. So, my question is: can PBX systems get CLID, or ANI on normal (non-911, 800, 900) calls? Many thanks, Randy ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 12:31:51 CST From: bruce@zuhause.MN.ORG (Bruce Albrecht) Subject: Automatic Number Callback I don't have it, and I suspect that I couldn't get it anyway, since my exchange "Can't provide call waiting disable because the equipment can't provide it", but it would have been useful yesterday. Some girl left a message on my answering machine to the effect of "You left your underwear here last night." I think it would have been rather amusing to freak her out by calling back and telling her I'd be over in a few minutes to pick it up! bruce@zuhause.mn.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 05:43:57 PST From: Nigel Roberts Subject: Re: Panasonic Answering Machine jih@ox.com (John I. Hritz) wrote: > I have a Panasonic answering machine, but am unsure of what > (prog #22) means. Could you elaborate. Press the PROGRAM button and hold it until the light comes on. Now type #22 on the keypad. Press the MEMORY button to store and the machine should beep once. This procedure (for the documented command PROG #21) can be found in the manual. > The voice stamp and cuckoo are not enabled when the clock needs to > be set. It generally takes a long power failure for the CMOS to lose > its memory. Try setting your personal ID code and the date/time. > That should clear up the problem. I'll try this. Thanks. Nigel Roberts +44 206 396610 / +49 69 6672-1018 FAX +44 206 393148 ------------------------------ From: paul@xcluud.sccsi.com (Paul Hutmacher) Subject: Re: Addition to SWBT 411 Service Organization: Greater Montrose UFO Appreciation Society & Data Haven Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 12:48:16 GMT In article bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg) writes: > Now hear this recording after getting the phone number: > "This number can be automatically dialed for an additional charge of > 30 cents." Furthermore, you'd better listen sharp to the number the first time since they no longer repeat it. I had to call back and ask for the number again and insist upon a credit for the first call. As usual SWB offered credit without a stir. Paul Hutmacher -/- paul@xcluud.sccsi.com -/- Houston, Texas ------------------------------ From: eplrx7!mcneill@uunet.uu.net (Keith McNeill) Subject: Re: Less Service From the BOC Organization: DuPont Engineering Physics Laboratory Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 15:05:06 GMT >From article , by drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math): > Effective December 31st, 1991, my BOC closed their downtown Payment > Center, claming it was part of an effort to "make paying your bill > more convenient". Apparently a survey has shown that "the majority" of > customers would rather pay their bills at their local area bank, so > the telco now has arrangements with four banks here in the area so > that bills may be paid through these banks. > But there's a catch: If you don't bank with any of these four banks, > you will be required to pay a "transaction fee" of $0.50. Not to > mention that a record of the payment may take days to be entered into > the BOC billing system. Somehow I don't think that having to go It may not take days. A friend's phone service was disconnected because he didn't pay his phone bill for awhile. He went to a local bank and paid the balance of the bill. His phone service was back on by the time he got home (1/2 hour). The phone company is Diamond State Telephone of Delaware. Keith McNeill | Du Pont Company mcneill@eplrx7.es.duPont.com | Engineering Physics Laboratory (302) 695-9353/7395 | P.O. Box 80357 | Wilmington, Delaware 19880-0357 ------------------------------ From: andys@ulysses.att.com Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 10:14:42 EST Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Murray Hill, NJ In article joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe Talbot) wrote: > The PBX isn't the problem here. In North America "modern" CO switches > don't pass answer supervision back to the subscriber. (On older > switches it was sent back to the sub in the form > of reversed polarity). This would solve lots of problems with COCOTS, > long distance companies, modems, voice forwarding systems and even > teleslime automatic calling machines, but alas ... Wouldn't reverse polarity make it impossible for me to talk to my home answering machine and office voice mail from a line-powered phone? As I recall, DTMF generators don't work under reverse polarity ... 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: dunnett@mala.bc.ca (Malcolm Dunnett) Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered Date: 16 Jan 92 08:36:05 -0800 Organization: Malaspina College In article , joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe Talbot) writes: > In Japan, reverse polarity supervision is universal (even on the > newest switches) and is used extensively by pay phones and even key > systems (that show you the rate charged for the call in real time!). I did a little digging into the SL/1 doc set after I posted the original question, and I noticed that they mentioned a different software package for the CDR called the "Japan" software. This variant made specific reference to answer supervision. I guess the above response explains why. As a followup question: Answer supervision seems like a valuable feature for a number of reasons. The impression I'm getting is that it has been "designed out" of modern CO equipment. Is there a good reason for this? Malcolm Dunnett Malaspina College 900 Fifth Street Nanaimo, B.C. CANADA Tel: (604)755-8738 V9R 5S5 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #47 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27640; 20 Jan 92 1:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23898 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:45:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01302 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:44:51 -0600 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 23:44:51 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201200544.AA01302@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #48 TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Jan 92 04:03:23 CST Volume 12 : Issue 48 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (William Moss) Re: NT Vantage System Question (Vance Shipley) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Kurt Guntheroth) Re: AT&T Calling-Card Advertisement (John Perkins) Re: T1 on Fiber Revisited (Bud Couch) Re: Mu-law, A-law (Bud Couch) Re: Phone Number Verification (Carl Moore) Re: Phone Number Verification (Ramona Skinner) Re: Reporter Seeks Information on 800 Billed as 900 (Bob Frankston) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: william@bnr.ca (William Moss) Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 23:35:51 -0500 Organization: Bell-Northern Research In article , stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In article Dave Leibold writes: >> Bell Canada and Cantel will be raising their cellular rates soon. >> Bell has a "Lifeline" rate of >> $9.95 which will not be changed (though this might involve higher >> connect time charges). > Now let me get this straight: A "lifeline" rate for cellular? Now > I've heard everything! From what I understand from having spoken wuth some Bell Cellular reps, the 'lifeline' rate provides you with a cellular number and unlimited access to free cellular calls ('*' calls, such as 911, *CAA (for towing, etc)), but high per minute charges for all billable calls. (In other words, whatever you do, don't answer the phone, because it will cost you -- somewhere near 95 cents a minute) The idea is to provide security on the road for commuters and others who may not want to leave their car in case of an on-road emergency. I have no connection with the marketing aspects of BCE's mobile radio interests, and offer this information based on a conversation I had recently with a sales rep. William G. Moss disclaimer: not the views of BNR or NT Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa +1 613 763 8108 WILLIAM@BNR.CA ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: NT Vantage System Question Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 16:20:06 GMT In article DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA writes: > I've played around with a Vantage key-type PBX system a bit. They have > a port for SMDR, but it doesn't seem to be able to send data in a > reliable stream. That is, it will tend to shut off and go into > something of a command mode. Only flipping a couple of DIP switches > simultaneously will get the SMDR rolling again with call data. > Any ideas on how to keep the SMDR rolling merrily along, or is this > tendency going to remain a built-in feature? Keeping a constant SMDR > would be helpful in call accounting applications. You should disconnect the transmit data wire that would send characters INTO the Vantage. Any character received will put the system into command mode. Try using a cable that uses only pins 3 + 7. Short 4 to 5 at the Vantage end, also 6 to 20. This will remove any control signal problems. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ From: kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Reply-To: kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 16:50:23 GMT Many thanks to all the knowledgeable respondents on this question. (Alan L Varney, Joe Konstan, Jon Baker, Lars Poulsen, Ronald T. Crocker, Samuel W. Ho, david.g.lewis) Here is a concise summary of the responses. 1. What is Caller ID? Caller ID is a tariffed service from the Local Exchange Carrier (LEC) which delivers the "calling number" in-band on the audio path between the first two rings using FSK (bell 202 modem) encoding. The number provided is defined to be the directory number of the station originating the call. (Lars Poulsen) Information is sent between the first and second power ringing bursts for normal analog loops. The behavior is slightly different for ISDN. (Ronald T. Crocker) Bellcore TR-TSY-000030 & 000031 describe the basic technique for signaling over individual T/R pairs between ring cycles. (Alan L Varney) The capability to deliver calling numbers to the called subscriber requires FSK modulators on the subscriber line cards; such hardware is unlikely to be installed in switches more than two years old, unless and until the LEC is ready to start selling C-ID service. (Lars Poulsen) 1a. More on Caller ID Caller ID relies on an underlying service called CND (calling number delivery). CND requires an end-to-end SS7 connection. SS7 is transmitted out-of-band, not over trunks but over distinct (geographically or logically) digital signalling links. The SS7 data is sent from the originating CO to a STP (signalling transfer point). The STP network quickly determines if the call can be completed, and if so, sends messages to all intervening CO's to build the path. Also, the originating dialed number is sent to the terminating CO. This information is ALWAYS sent for EVERY call sent over SS7 trunks, regardless of the presence of call-blocking or any other feature. (Jon Baker) Currently, all the IEC networks are SS7-connected. Many LEC networks are also SS7-connected. However, the IEC-LEC interface for SS7 is still being worked on. As a result, the current connection uses EAMF [Equal Access MF "touch tone" in-band signalling] and passes the billing number to the IEC, and nothing except the destination number to the terminating LEC. (Samuel W. Ho) [This is why only intra-LATA calls have currently got caller ID] 2. What is ANI? ANI, as used in this context, refers to the delivery of the billing number associated with a call passed from an LEC to an InterExchange Carrier (IEC or "Long Distance Carrier"). This number is sometimes provided in-band using MF ("touch tone") signalling, but usually [see below] is passed out-of-band on the common carrier signalling system (SS6 or SS7). (Lars Poulsen) Currently, all LEC-IEC signaling uses Equal Access MF (EAMF) signaling. SS7 Network Interconnect is only in trials. The big three IECs all use SS7; I think the only place CCIS6 is used is as a backup signaling network in AT&T. (david.g.lewis) For most residential service, the directory number and the billing number will be the same. Even when they are not, it is common for the Central Office switch (CO) to be misconfigured to deliver the directory number instead of the billing number. ANI, being transmitted in-band over trunks, is not available to residential customers. (Jon Baker) Some IECs have tariffed on-line delivery of this service to the receiving customer by various means for those large customers that have private ("bypass") access facilities to the IEC. (Lars Poulsen) The LEC is obligated to provide the billing number to the IEC; otherwise the IEC would be unable to get paid for the call. Since there has not in the past been any regulation prohibiting the delivery of this information to bypass customers, they have started selling it. (Lars Poulsen) 2a More on ANI In an SS7 network, Billing Number and Calling number are both passed to the terminating office, along with a few other bits, such as the Presentation Restricted bit. In a non-SS7 network, the Billing number is passed as far as whatever toll switch rates the call. Subscribers to IEC 800 service can request that the billing number be forwarded to them. All the major carriers can do this by sending additional data over an ISDN PRI. Some carriers (not AT&T) can also do so by sending in-band data over a T1 trunk. Billing number delivery is available from any Equal Access area, regardless of SS7 implementation, as pre-SS7 systems still need the billing number for billing, obviously. The only exceptions would be certain rural areas that still use operator number identification and party lines of more than two parties. (Samuel W. Ho) 3. What determines whether a properly equipped receiver can get my calling phone number? If your area (entire local phone company area) doesn't provide caller-ID then nobody will get caller ID from your phone. If your local switch is not running SS7 then nobody will get caller ID from your phone. The only time you can prevent ANI is if you are on a service without direct distance dialing (i.e., all long distance calls must be made by going through operators) and I don't think we have to worry about that. Caller ID blocking never affects ANI, 911 service, etc. (Joe Konstan) If the call uses an InterLATA Carrier, they can get the Billing Number; if the call uses SS7-all-the-way, the terminating Switch (and any intermediate carrier) gets the Calling Number. (Alan L Varney) A "network" service (e.g. 800), probably will be able to get ANI delivery. You have no control over this as a caller. (Ronald T. Crocker) 4. Interesting Note on pending FCC action Blocking is currently only supported on intra-LATA calls because Caller ID is currently only supported on intra-LATA calls. The FCC has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding a proposed regulation that per-call blocking must be supported for all interstate calls. This would imply that all LECs would have to recognize *67 and pass the CPN Presentation Restricted indicator to the IECs (one SS7 Network Interconnect is deployed), that all IECs would have to honor the Presentation Restricted indicator (not deliver CPN to directly connected egress customers, carry the indicator through the IEC network, and deliver it to the terminating LEC), and that all LECs would have to honor the Presentation Restricted indicator, at least for interstate traffic. (david.g.lewis) Thank you all for making me wise. ------------------------------ From: john@bert.rosemount.com (John Perkins) Subject: Re: AT&T Calling-Card Advertisement Organization: Rosemount, Inc. Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 17:44:36 GMT In article reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) writes: >> I just saw this posted above an AT&T coin phone: >> No charge for AT&T calling card, and you don't need a home phone or >> credit card to have one. Call 800-551-3131 ext. 968. >> Sample credit card displayed; the only comment I have is that I see a >> non-areacode where the cards from the Baby Bells have had home phone > I've had one of these for years. First three digits are 677. I had one in 1968. First three digits were 114. They referred to it as an "unkeyed" credit card. They appeared reluctant to give it to me at first, but finally did after requiring a $150 deposit, which was eventually refunded with 6% interest. I used it for calling the U.S. from all over Europe, which was much cheaper than using the local post offices. John ------------------------------ From: kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net () Subject: Re: T1 on Fiber Revisited Organization: Kentrox Industries, Inc. Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 19:40:12 GMT In article kung@max.u.washington.edu writes: > Putting a single T1 on fiber is a very costly venture. Usually, fiber It all depends on future expansion in the geographic area. If there are plans to extend T3 into the area in the near future, the cost of laying the fiber is really not an issue. It then becomes a matter of the electronics cost. For about $3500 (list price [and who pays list? :-)]) a pair of ADC Fiber-to-T1 converters can be installed on either end. When it is time to upgrade, they are replaced by the FT3 and are availible for re-use at another installation. For a telco, this may be an economical solution to a specific problem. $3500 may sound like a lot of money, but compared to the installation of new cable and repeater housings, and considering future expansion, it can be significantly cheaper. Re-use allows this cost to amortized over several applications as well. > In any case, the break even cost for such configuration will require a > large number of voice circuit subscribers to switch at the same time. You seem to imply that the "voice circuit subscribers" have to make a conscious choice on this. Nay, nay, my friend. When the telco decides to move your circuit from 17 kft of H88 loaded pair to a SLC-96, no one ever asks for your approval. Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS applies ------------------------------ From: kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net () Subject: Re: Mu-law, A-law Organization: Kentrox Industries, Inc. Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 20:19:41 GMT In article HOEQUIST@BNR.CA (C.A.) writes: > mu-law is defined as: > F(x) = x ((ln(1 + mu(|x|)) / ln(1 + mu) ), -1 =< x =< 1 > Unreadable ASCII equations aside, this means that A-law is actually > In implementation, both are done by piece-wise approximations. For > mu-law (the only one I'm familiar with), the coding range is broken > into 16 distinguishable segments (with those on each side of 0 being > the same, so there are only 15 different segments). The usual way of > coding an eight-bit value is one sign bit, three bits for the segment, > and four bits for the 'step' within the segment. Which brings to mind an interesting story which is probably not public knowlege, but I think that it was long enough ago that the "statute of limitations" has passed anyway. ;-) In 1970, when I joined Lenkurt Electric, later GTE Lenkurt, now defunct, the company was working on an end-to-end compatible system for the then new WECO D2 channel bank. This was the 9002A channel bank. I was working on the channel cards for the system, so I can't give any real technical specifics, but the only information available on Mu-law encoding was your "unreadable ASCII equations", so the codec was designed on that basis. 9002A to 9002A testing worked fine, but 9002A to D2 revealed some problems with the implementation. Much midnight oil later, it was discovered that the D2 used a piece-wise approximation, whereas the 9002A actually conformed to the equation! Needless to say, a crash program was instituted to design a piece-wise codec, but in the meantime, some deliberate "degradation" was introduced to assure end-to-end compatiblity. Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS applies ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 10:26:22 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Phone Number Verification > Try 410-xxx-xxxx where xxx-xxxx is any valid phone number. (eg, > 222-2222). This works in both the 314 (St.Louis, MO) and 215 > (Philadelphia, PA) area. Apparently both 215 and 314 have required 1+ for long distance calls, but 215 is now changing 1+7D to 7D for long distance calls within it, in preparation for N0X/N1X prefixes. 410, by the way, is the new area code in eastern Maryland. There was a note in this digest a little while ago about someone using 410 + something out in area 619 in California, and he was wondering what happens now that "410 + something" reaches Maryland. ------------------------------ From: rcs@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (Skinner Ramona) Subject: Re: Phone Number Verification Organization: Johns Hopkins University Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 19:04:51 GMT In article sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Steven A Rubin) writes: > Try 410-xxx-xxxx where xxx-xxxx is any valid phone number. (eg, > 222-2222). This works in both the 314 (St.Louis, MO) and 215 > (Philadelphia, PA) area. FYI. 410 is a newly assigned area code for regions in Maryland. ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com Subject: Re: Reporter Seeks Information on 800 Billed as 900 Date: Fri 17 Jan 1992 11:27 -0500 Nak. It's also worth finding out who did NOT get charged. I'm in Eastern Mass and have not seen such charges and my default carrier is ATT. (Yes, I did try the 800 number). ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #48 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23439; 19 Jan 92 23:02 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17581 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 21:11:10 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19428 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 21:10:43 -0600 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 21:10:43 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201200310.AA19428@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #49 TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Jan 92 21:10:34 CST Volume 12 : Issue 49 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Bob Clements) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (John Macdonald) Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (John Higdon) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Julian Macassey) Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Peter da Silva) Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Alan M. Gallatin) Re: Zip + 6? (Marc Veeneman) Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Michael Bender) Re: US West Blows It (Sort Of) (John Hall) Re: Phone Number Verification (Charlie Mingo) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 17:33:09 EST From: clements@BBN.COM Responding to the comments about the LD carriers providing your phone number to the recipient of a call to an 800/900 number (but omitting most of the quotations to save space): John Higdon summarizes: > I agree with Pat on this one: if you have some reason that you do not > want someone at the other end of an 800 or 900 number call to know > your number -- don't call. It is the customer of the 800 service (or > even 900 service) that is paying for the call and he has a right to > know who is running up his bill. It's hard to disagree with this. But at the same time, it would be a lot more honest if the 800/900 providers of the world would _tell_ the public that calling them would result in giving away the caller's phone number. Have you ever seen that stated in the fine print of any 800 or 900 number advertisement? I sure haven't. Maybe we need a regulation that requires disclosure of a POTS number, with CLID blocking honored, along with every 800 number that is advertised. That way the caller could make the choice. But at least there should be honest disclosure of the way things work. It's not clear how to implement that idea in the 900 case, but I never call 900 numbers so that doesn't bother me as much. Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com ------------------------------ From: eci386!jmm@uunet.uu.net (John Macdonald) Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI Organization: Elegant Communications Inc. Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 17:14:16 -0500 In article John Higdon writes: > I agree with Pat on this one: if you have some reason that you do not > want someone at the other end of an 800 or 900 number call to know > your number -- don't call. It is the customer of the 800 service (or > even 900 service) that is paying for the call and he has a right to > know who is running up his bill. I on the other hand disagree. The customer who is paying for the call should have the right to specify whether he cares who is calling. If they are willing to accept and pay for anonymous calls, then such calls should be permitted. If the called party is not willing to accept anonymous calls, then someone attempting to call them using a service that specifies blocking should simply be informed that their call cannot be completed as dialed and why. Then they can choose to either call again turning off the blocking or to not call depending upon how they rate the relative importance of completing the call and protecting their anonymity. There is not likely to be many places willing to accept and pay for anonymous calls, but there are certainly some. Possibly there are too few to justify the cost of providing intercepts in such cases. However, there are many 800 service providers who do not get to see caller information until their monthly billing -- all they find out from the current scheme is who they have already wasted money on, accepting anonymous calls is not much worse unless you get a malicious attacker as in the Honda case discussed here recently. Certainly, this open mechanism of letting the market decide -- caller can choose whether or not to block, callee can choose whether or not to accept blocked calls -- would be far better than having the telco legal tariffs specify for everyone the subset of alternatives that they must live with. (This applies both to the 800/900 ANI discussion as well as to the similar ongoing arguments about Caller ID - it is especially applicable for the Caller ID debates.) The only objection is that if people are not forced to provide their ID, it makes it much harder for telcos to sell CID and ANI to business customers. John Macdonald jmm@eci386 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 15:31 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI On Jan 16 at 17:33, apple!BBN.COM!clements writes: > Maybe we need a regulation that requires disclosure of a POTS > number, with CLID blocking honored, along with every 800 number > that is advertised. That way the caller could make the choice. But where is it written that a business or individual MUST provide an anonymous way to reach it or him? Why can I NOT decide that the only way to reach me is via a method that reveals the caller's number? The caller still has a choice: he can call, or he can not call. No one has a god-given right to call me anonymously. That the limitations of technology has made this traditionally possible is irrelavent. > But at least there should be honest disclosure of the way things > work. I have no problem with disclosure, but this falls squarely in the domain of users' responsibility. So the numbers of people who call my number are made known to me. Would you require that I answer the phone with, "I know your number now"? By then it is too late. Would you require a warning with the advertisement? I don't advertise it. Would you require the DA operator to warn you when you get the number there? My number is not listed. Over time the public will become aware of the capabilities of 800 service. If some gung-ho "public protection" groups would care to mount a campain to educate the public, I will applaud. But the burden of educating the public is not and should not be on the shoulders of those paying good money for the services. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Date: 17 Jan 92 02:41:28 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes: > Speaking of such, does anyone still manufacture real telephones > anymore? "Real telephones" are defined as what the 2500 set used to > be (as opposed to the current piece of junk that AT&T calls the 2500 > set ... with a horrible electronic ringer, touch-tones that don't > sustain, and construction that would break if you breathed on it). > Does anyone still make a good, well-built 2500 set with a proper > handset, a real keypad, and a good, loud *MECHANICAL* ringer? Yes, several companies still make real 2500 and 500 sets. A couple of U.S. manufacturers are ITT (Alcatel) and Comdial (Stromberg Carlson). Northern Telecom may still be making them. There is also a Korean clone (Cheezy quality) that appears under various names such as Premier and Vodavi. These phones are 100% compatable with old AT&T (Western Electric) phones and parts are completely intechangeable. By the way, these phones can often be picked up at swap meets and garage sales for $1-3. Buy even the broken ones and you can canabalise for repairs. You can also buy all the parts seperatly from telco distributors. The telco distributors also sell these phones for $25 to $30 each. And yes, you can buy the parts to convert old non modular sets to fully modular. Long live the 2500, nothing tougher, nothing sounds better, nothing else works on all loops. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 03:48:12 GMT I'm sure you can still get 2500-quality sets from some military contractor. You need a left handed blivet wrench to install them, they use industrial style din-5 connectors, and cost $10,000 (plus $500 for navy grey instead of olive drab). :-> Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ From: alan@acpub.duke.edu (Alan M. Gallatin) Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? Date: 16 Jan 92 22:42:50 GMT Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C. In article bill@eedsp.gatech.edu writes: > That's why _I_ use person-to-person. It works out to be cheaper. > Once in a while, if it looks like the conversation will be any length > of time at all, one of us will hang up and call the other right back > at direct dialed rates. That's often a pain in the neck to do, > though. It's also a waste of time!! Although person-to-person rates are considerably higher than direct station rates, the entire premium is in the form of a surcharge and/or increased first minute charge. In *EVERY* case I've tried, additional minutes are the same whether you dial direct or use the most expensive operator assisted services. So, once you've begun the paid part of a person-to-person conversation, the best thing to do is just keep talking until you're done. Of course, the other solution is to never accept the p-to-p call and simply use it as a cue to call right back (making the call p-to-p *AND* collect is a good way to ensure you never have to pay for the call!!!) ALAN M. GALLATIN Internet: alan@acpub.duke.edu Duke University School of Law alan@student.law.duke.edu Home: +1 919 493 8903 GEnie: A. GALLATIN ------------------------------ From: marcal!marc@mcdchg.chg.mcd.mot.com (Marc Veeneman) Subject: Re: Zip + 6? Organization: Marcal Systems Corporation Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 22:22:12 GMT spencer@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun) writes: > In a {USA Today} study, in which 1000 letters were sent, ZIP + 4 > letters actually took LONGER to arrive (the percentage of five-digit > coded letters arriving on time was larger than the percentage of > nine-digit coded letters arriving on time, where "on time" means the > number of days promised by USPS -- one day locally, two days within > 600 miles, three days outside of 600 miles in the continental US.) > I think 75% arrived on time, 20% one day late and the rest more than > that. (Some got lost) ... the study included purposely misaddressed > letters, house numbers that were off by one, ZIP codes that were off > by one, etc. We had a similar experience. Our first ZIP + 4 Address Block Barcode mailing backfired. Mail which has been successfully delivered for many years was returned from all over the US. Our client then gave us instructions: They WILL be LAST to use ZIP + 4 and barcoding, and then only under threat from the US Government or its agencies. Marc Veeneman Marcal Systems Corporation Cary, Illinois U.S.A. [Moderator's Note: I've successfully received letters addressed to me with the only notation on the front of the envelope being '60690-1570'. No name, no box number ... nothing but the nine-digit zip. And yet, that took a couple days longer than it should. The above zip is unique to my box ... it couldn't have been any easier. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 17:38:11 PST From: Michael.Bender@Eng.Sun.COM (W7EGX) Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered In article Malcolm Dunnett writes: >> Are there any PBXs which can do this? > The problem is NOT your choice of PBX, in fact for this application > there are probably none better! The problem is either that you are > not receiving answer supervision signals from your telephone company > or that your PBX is not expecting them. If you have analog (ground or > loop start) CO lines than you are not receiving answer supervision > signals from the CO. Only a few LEC's in the U.S. are currently > providing answer supervision on analog facilities, and only if you > order and pay for it. I'm in Pac*Bell land (415-863) and I seem to get answer supervision in the form of battery reversal on my regular POTS lines for many but not all calls. I haven't done enough investigation to determine what type of calls give me answer supervision and what type don't. Why would this be? I'm told that I'm served by a 5ESS. I don't think that there is a technical reason that I can't get supervision on every call, and I don't understand why I would have to be charged extra for what probably amounts to changing a configuration parameter in the software on the switch. mike bender 415-336-6353 bender@oobleck.eng.sun.com ------------------------------ From: jhall@amc.com (John Hall) Subject: Re: US West Blows It (Sort Of) Organization: Applied Microsystems, Redmond, WA Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 21:19:05 GMT In article davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu (David W. Barts) writes: > Dialing either 7D or 1 + 7D now gets one routed to the same recording: > " I'm sorry ... if you are making a Long Distance or Operator > Assisted call, you must first dial a 1 or 0, plus the area code and > then the number. Please try your call again." > But this is not the end of the weirdness. Before one gets connected > to the recorded message, one hears a ringing tone (usually for two or > three rings). The first time I got the recording, I definitely heard > a radio or TV in the background before the recording "answered" the > call. The next time, I heard the click of a receiver being picked up > (even though the ringing continued). So I said "Hello?!?", and a > surprised voice answered through the ringing "Hello?". At that point > the recording came on, the background noise went away, and I was > unable to speak to the other party anymore. You'll really love this. I've been getting calls from the recording! I came home last night and I had about thirty calls on my answering machine. Each one was the message above! Most of them cut off early, I assume as the caller hung up. I guess when someone makes a call which should result in the recording, the call actually was getting placed to someone who is rung, may or may not answer, then both parties get the priviledge of hearing the message. I hope they get the bugs fixed, or I may call their service dept and play the tape for them ... the whole tape! John Hall jhall@amc.com ------------------------------ From: Charlie.Mingo@p0.f70.n109.z1.FidoNet.Org (Charlie Mingo) Date: 16 Jan 92 17:04:04 Subject: Re: Phone Number Verification awhite@widget.seas.upenn.edu (Andrew White) writes: > In article sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu > (Steven A Rubin) writes: >> A while ago someone posted the possible numbers to call that would >> connect you to a computer generated voice that would read back the >> phone number from which you are calling. > Try 410-xxx-xxxx where xxx-xxxx is any valid phone number. (eg, > 222-2222). This works in both the 314 (St.Louis, MO) and 215 > (Philadelphia, PA) area. 410 is a perfectly valid area code for Eastern Maryland. I tried 410/222-2222 as you suggested, and heard: You have reached a non-working number for the Anne Arundel County Government. For assistance, please dial 222-7000. Anne Arundel County is Southeast of the Washington Metro area, along the Chesapeake. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #49 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24880; 19 Jan 92 23:56 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23366 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 22:13:11 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28703 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 22:12:38 -0600 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 22:12:38 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199201200412.AA28703@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #50 TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Jan 92 22:12:16 CST Volume 12 : Issue 50 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Phone Number Verification (Stan Brown) Re: Zip + 6? (Jack Decker) Re: America's Future (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Dave Levenson) Re: PC Based PBX (Peter da Silva) Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low (Tom Streeter) Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low (John Higdon) Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (Bob Frankston) Re: Radio Shack Two Line Box With Conference Wanted (Dave Cantor) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 17:33:38 -0500 From: brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan Brown) Subject: Re: Phone Number Verification Organization: Oak Road Systems, Cleveland Ohio USA In article awhite@widget.seas.upenn.edu (Andrew White) writes: > In article sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu > (Steven A Rubin) writes: >> A while ago someone posted the possible numbers to call that would >> connect you to a computer generated voice that would read back the >> phone number from which you are calling. > Try 410-xxx-xxxx where xxx-xxxx is any valid phone number. (eg, > 222-2222). This works in both the 314 (St.Louis, MO) and 215 > (Philadelphia, PA) area. How can this be? I asked myself. 410 is a valid area code (Eastern Maryland). Sure enough, when I tried this (calling from 216 371-xxxx to 410 371-xxxx) I got the three-tone intercept with "You must first dial a 1 when calling this number." Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA brown@ncoast.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 16:33:58 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: Zip + 6? In message dated 10 Jan 92 14:41:00 GMT, Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com writes: > As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office heard about > checksums or other techniques to reduce errors? And Pat (the Moderator) comments: > [Moderator's Note: Have you really heard something saying the present > zip code (five digits plus four optional) is being increased by two > more optional digits? PAT] YES! Contact the National Address Information Center, United States Postal Service, 6060 Primacy Pky Ste 101, Memphis TN 38188-0001, telephone 1-800-238-3150 and ask for a copy of "Bar Code Update" (which includes the "Barcoding Update Addendum" from Postal Bulletin 21788 dated 5-2-91). The 11 digit bar code is called the "Advanced Bar Code" (ABC). The update has this to say about the ABC: "In general, for residence addresses, it is implemented by appending the ZIP + 4 code with the two least significant digits (last two digits) of the house number which is referred to as the delivery point. The resultant code is the "C PRIME" or "C' Field" comprised of eleven digits plus the correction character and framing bars to make up the 62-Bar Field. In the case of single digit house numbers, the proper ABC add-on is produced by adding a zero in front of the house number..." The update gives additional examples, exceptions, etc. BTW, if any programmers would like a BASIC (Microsoft IBM QBASIC/QuickBASIC) routine to print bar codes (actually, to calculate the sequence of long/short bars to be printed for any postal code -- the codes to print the actual long and short bars must be placed in string variables, since they vary from printer to printer), I have one here. I realize that this may not be of much use to the 'C' programmers out there, but I think some mailing list programs are still being written in BASIC! :-) (Sorry this isn't more telecom-related, but I'm just replying to Pat's question, and I DID give an 800 number up there somewhere! Just to make this a little more on topic, I'll wonder aloud if the increasing use of FAX machines is putting any serious dent into the post office's business). Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 02:34:08 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: America's Future Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com (Jack Decker) writes: > In a message dated 9 Jan 92 16:16:08 GMT, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us > (John R. Levine) writes: >> In yesterday's {Boston Globe} there is a full page back of the section >> ad in the same disinformation campaign. This one shows a sick baby in >> a house in a remote area, and tells lies about how remote diagnosis >> would be possible except the congress wants to make it illegal. >> It looks like it's time to make the RBOCs divest their telephone >> business; they're clearly not fit to run it themselves. > I wonder if an official complaint to the federal Department of Justice > regarding false and misleading advertising would be helpful. For > various reasons, I would think the feds might be interested in > outright lies in ads designed to influence public opinion. This is not advertising. They are not soliciting business for a product/service offering. This is politics and they are exercising their freedom of speech in a way they are well able to afford off our rate backs. If we start making deception in politics into a crime, we are going to need a hell of a lot more jails, judges, and juries ... The only legal issue that would seem to be here is whether the ads are being paid for out of the operating expense rate-base or out of corporate profits (thus affecting only stockholders) and that would be a matter for the PUC's, not the Justice Dept or even the FTC. I don't think the FCC has much jurisdiction in these areas over the RBOC's. It's just some of that 'read my tips (and rings)' good-old American political propogandizing. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered Date: 17 Jan 92 12:35:06 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe Talbot) writes: [regarding far-end supervision] > The PBX isn't the problem here. In North America "modern" CO switches > don't pass answer supervision back to the subscriber. (On older In most 'modern' CO switches in use in North America, answer supervision is available as an extra-cost tariffed service. Most PBX owners don't buy it. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: PC Based PBX Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 14:30:37 GMT In article dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > In article , peter@taronga.com (Peter da > Silva) writes: >> Not directly telecom related, but doing my part to fight low-quality >> hardware. Besides, you might want to interact with some other card to >> provide an interface they never thought of. > Like maybe a UNIX driver and API? Maybe. The thought *had* crossed my mind. Or, for an application like this where you want real-time response, how about a QNX, OS/9000, etc ... interface? Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1. ------------------------------ From: streeter@cs.unca.edu (Tom Streeter) Subject: Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 17:06:22 GMT In article richg@locus.com (Rich Greenberg) writes: [description of ad decrying phone company involvement in other info services deleted] > The sponsors are: American Newspaper Publishers Assn. > Consumer Federation of America > Electronic Publishing Group > Graphic Communications International Union > Io Publishing > National Cable Television Assn. > National Newspaper Assn. > Toward Utility Rate Normalization (a consumer group) > Weatherline inc. > > They give an number for further information: 800-547-7482. I'm teaching a media economics class, and I thought it might be interesting to have some information sent (I've never outgrown show-and-tell after all this time). I wasn't prepared for what I heard, but I would encourage you to call just to hear the pitch (and the way it's delivered). I'd not encountered anything quite this sophisticated, and I'd be interested in knowing how common this is. The call is answered electronically. There was little detectable noise (just a bit of hiss -- not much), and a very pleasant female voice thanks you for calling "1-800-54-PRIVACY" (sic). She then launches into a spiel about how the phone companies are essentially evil, and we, as right-thinking citizens, should do everything possible to stop this (non-specific) evil. I should note, for the record, that the word 'evil' is not used -- just my editorial comment. There comes a point that 'she' asks to mail me an 'action kit.' This is the part that interested me so much. It asks for your name, but gives no sort of cue to signal you to speak. It obviously detects a period of silence, because it then goes on to ask for your mailing address, affiliation, and such things. I found the lack of cues a little bit odd, be cause I *knew* I was talking to a machine, and I'm used to having those machines 'act' a certain way. The pitch ended with a homily on how they really didn't *have* to ask me all those questions because the evil phone company had ways to access all sorts of information, but they (identified by nothing more than 1 - 800-54-PRIVACY), being pure, wouldn't want to do such a thing. In illustrating how *much* info could be collected, the machine assured me that the phone comapny could collect more information on me than the IRS. The it asked me if I opposed these actions of the phone comapny (which actions? what company?) and whether or not Congress should put a stop to such things (again, without being specific). In retrospect, the pitch was standard interest-group hysteria (written pretty well, though), and I could see someone coming away from the presentation disturbed about 'phone comapnies.' On the other hand, I wonder if someone who wuld be susceptible to such a pitch would be the type of person who would respond well to the technical sophistication of the experience. Now I just called a few minutes ago and haven't had time to think this all the way out, but it seems that the approach taken by this group could actually scare people off. The voice asks a question and then falls silent waiting for an answer (I didn't try not answering to see what sort of prompts I'd get). It seems to me that the sort of person who gets nervous talking to an answering machine might *really* hate this. Much of the appeal of the whole pitch is predicated on fearing technology, yet the pitch itself might be wrapped up in a scary experience. I'd be interested in gettings others' comments on this, and will be happy to summarize if there's interest. I'd also be interested in knowing if the system being employed is common, or whether it's a new wrinkle. I'm very familiar with menu-driven systems, but this is the first time I've had experience with one that integrates voice responses. That may say more about me than anything else ... Thanks. Tom Streeter | streeter@cs.unca.edu Dept. of Mass Communication | 704-251-6227 University of North Carolina at Asheville | Opinions expressed here are Asheville, NC 28804 | mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 01:38 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low richg@locus.com (Rich Greenberg) writes: > Today, the worm has turned. In today's (1/14/92) {LA Times} on the > back page of section 1 is an ad that refutes the Bell's claims. The {LA Times} has lashed out before. But in this last Sunday's {San Francisco Examiner} (what we Chronicle subscribers get on Sunday), there was a full page article complete with sidebar talking up the wonders and glories that will come about when the Bells finally crank up and get their way. The article described a Pacific Telesis demo tape which sounds as though it might be a replay of all the futuristic stuff we heard about in the fifties: video phones, on-line shopping, airline booking, etc., etc. The author distainfully referred to the "high visibility campain" by newspapers, cable companies, and others who would be adversely affected by the new services to get legislators to "undo the recent court actions". But, the author explains, the Bells will ultimately prevail. The article had the flavor of an advertisement for Pacific Telesis. It praised the "forward looking approach" of the company and said that the telephone company arm (Pacific Bell) was perfectly suited to the "high tech area" that it served because it was so progressive and advanced [suppressed vomiting]. Among the wonderous services to come our way: delayed fax, e-mail, and pagers that give weather reports. "Why some day, Pacific Bell will make it possible for a business man to have his office e-mail forwarded to a hotel fax machine when he is out of town." [Gee, Mr. Wizard, I can already do that with a .forward in my directory, but it does not sound really impressive to the masses.] The only explanation I can come up with for a newspaper to give this kind of free advertising to the enemy is that a deal is in the works, or has been concluded. I am speaking of the sort of deal that would involve the newspaper in actually providing the raw information under contract to the operating company, who in turn resells it via some means to the end-users. An arrangement such as this effectively shuts out all other comers and guarantees the lock of the RBOC on the industry. For those of you who do not know, the Examiner is a Hearst publication. But now, back to the planet Earth. Checking with my sources, the wonderfully advanced and well-positioned Pacific Bell will be offering CLASS services MAYBE in May of this year. ISDN? No dates. But little Susie getting a brain transplant via videophone? Why, that's just around the corner IF you browbeat your Congressman into "letting it happen". John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up Date: Fri 17 Jan 1992 11:21 -0500 Perhaps we have it backwards. Maybe lifeline service should only be for cellular phones and not wired phones except in areas where there are sufficient free pairs. After all, it costs a lot to bring wires out to a site and to provide sufficient line cards in the CO. (What is the cost of a line card (commercial pricing) vs a cellular phone (consumer pricing?)) Of course, if someone actually uses the phone, then the economics change. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 08:35:20 PST From: Dave Cantor 17-Jan-1992 1131 Subject: Re: Radio Shack Two Line Box With Conference Wanted In TELECOM Digest 12:42, Michael Rosen writes: > J&R Music World (1-800-221-8180) has a few devices on page 63 of their > current catalog, under Telephone Accessories. > The first is the Recoton T-73 Two-Line Console: "Allows a single line > phone to work as a two-line phone. Switch back & forth between lines. > Hold with red & green LED's $19.95." I don't know if it does > conference or not, it is not mentioned. I called J & R today. The person who answered the phone found that item in the catalog, but, alas, it is discontinued, and they don't have any in stock. Dave C. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #50 *****************************