Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15204; 26 Oct 92 0:43 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09998 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:07:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12900 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:06:55 -0600 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:06:55 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210260406.AA12900@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #801 TELECOM Digest Sun, 25 Oct 92 22:07:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 801 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Craig Heim) Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Jim Rees) Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Gregory Youngblood) Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Jack Faley) Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Maxime Taksar) Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Jeff Bennington) Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Steve Forrette) Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (John Boteler) Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed (Alan L. Varney) Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed (Kenneth A. Becker) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cheim@lectroid.sw.stratus.com (Craig Heim) Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone Date: 25 Oct 92 13:38:51 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer Inc. In article , rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes: > In article , cheim@lectroid.sw. > stratus.com (Craig Heim) writes: >> There are actually two "Nationwide Negative Files" ... > Why is this system so lame? It's clear that the right way to do this > is a data base that maps [ESN, phone no] pairs to billing info. This > data base would be queried on every call attempt. The ESN should > obviously never be transmitted in the clear. You are assuming that the verification service can get the billing info and that it can hold the call for pre-call validation. That hasn't been possible until recently. The IS-41 standard has just recently evolved far enough to implement. There have been some extremely successful trials using pre-call validation with IS-41 over X.25 to the verification services that have virtually eliminated Tumbling Fraud in a local area. Nationwide is still an issue. OK, that takes care of Tumbling Fraud. Here's the Cellular Fraud problem of the 1990s: CLONING. How do you handle a bandit who has programmed his phone to the ESN and MIN of a valid subscriber? Interesting problem isn't it? Comments? > My understanding of the Negative File is that every call (or at least > the first call, which is all you need with a tumbler) is assumed valid > unless the ESN is on the negative list. > The current system is so obviously prone to fraud (tumblers, ESN > theft, etc) that it borders on negligence on the part of the service > providers. > I suspect the answer is that it's cheaper for the service providers to > bill honest customers for fraud losses than for them to provide the > proper level of security. As an honest customer, I resent having to > pay for the service provider's negligence. I'm with you. The cost of cellular fraud is definitely a major factor in the cost of cellular service to the honest customer. Although we are not responsible for fraudulent calls (tumblers and cloners), we end up paying for it with higher monthly service bills. Craig R. Heim |Stratus Computer, Inc. |My opinions are my own, Software Engineer |55 Fairbanks Blvd. |not necessarily are cheim@lectroid.sw.stratus.com |Marlboro, MA 01752-1298 |they Stratus's. ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone Date: 25 Oct 1992 16:20:52 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu In article , APD104@PSUVM.PSU.EDU writes: > The thief either knows what he's doing, or he doesn't... If he does, > he'll attempt to re-program the NAM (numeric assignment module), which > contains the ESN and SID; both of which have to be altered to mask the > true source of the fone ... Actually, the ESN is not part of the NAM and is not trivially changed (like the NAM is). In some phones it's nearly impossible to change, in others it's as simple as burning a PROM, but I've never seen a phone where you could change it from the front panel. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone From: srcsip!tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com (Gregory Youngblood) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 16:55:11 CDT Organization: TCS Consulting Services rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes: > In article , cheim@lectroid.sw. > stratus.com (Craig Heim) writes: >> There are actually two "Nationwide Negative Files" ... > Why is this system so lame? It's clear that the right way to do this > is a data base that maps [ESN, phone no] pairs to billing info. This > data base would be queried on every call attempt. The ESN should > obviously never be transmitted in the clear. > My understanding of the Negative File is that every call (or at least > the first call, which is all you need with a tumbler) is assumed valid > unless the ESN is on the negative list. > The current system is so obviously prone to fraud (tumblers, ESN > theft, etc) that it borders on negligence on the part of the service > providers. > I suspect the answer is that it's cheaper for the service providers to > bill honest customers for fraud losses than for them to provide the > proper level of security. As an honest customer, I resent having to > pay for the service provider's negligence. First, phone numbers can change faster than anything else, so why bother tracking the phone number of stolen phones? Only the ESN is "unchangable". Cellular phone companies are a service provider. If the calls were not permitted to take place (roamers) until after the phone had cleared, then the call would have timed out and the customer would have been inconvencienced. There is a fine line drawn between security and customer convenience. Customer convenience must and will always play a more important role than security, at least until the small amount of fradulent calls that do go out cost the carrier more than inconvenienced customers. Since each phone only has in theory, one esn, then a single database of equipment is all that is needed. Using the two clearing houses (GTEIS and EDS or APEX) which have a link to each other as well as to all the cellular carriers taht use them is sufficient to block the calls. Stolen phones are blocked, period. The only way to unblock an esn listed as stolen is to have the carrier that reported it stolen to clear that esn. This helps avoid anyone else just clearing the esn,and using the phone. When phones are taken and atttmpeted to be activated elsewhere, the esn is checked. If stolen, then the phone has a good likelyhood of being recovered. This is based on my understanding of the systems from working with them at the cellular system level. As to mapping pairs of ESNs to phone numbers, another reason that would be difficult is for the multiple phone number phones, which can have up to eight phone numbers on some phones, with one single ESN. What's to stop having the database pairs updated with a new phone number for that ESN after the phone is stolen. That is all that it would take if pairs were matched, as you can not have a single ESN to single phone number without annoying a LOT of people, myself included. Every effort is made by the carriers to stop fraudulent calls. I myself have written programs to run through call records pullnig calling patterns attempting to skip-trace a phone and track it. The system isn't 100 % full proof, and it works from the stand point that most of the poeple are not going to have access to the specialized equipment needed to catch esns or reprogram or retransmit phone esns, AND that most people are not going to have access to anything to allow them to tumble ESNs. To prevent tumbling ESNs, software now looks at patterns. If the pattern is suspiscious, it blocks the calls from that ESN. It makes things annoying sometimes with a valid phone has a suspisious pattern, but that occasional inconvenience is worth the added protection. Just as in computers and computer networks, houses, cars and any type of security system, it is not 100% efficient. It strives to be as thorough as possible while still maintaining a level of convenience to those that are forced to use it. It has been seen in the past that the most secure systems are the most inconvenient to use. Cellular carriers strive to make the cellular phone the most convenient way to communicate. If it were not convenient and easy, people would be less likely to use it, and cellular carriers would lose money. From my viewpoint, that is the what I see happening. I hope as things move to more digital systems things will be more secure. Until then, the security measures used now work as well as can be expected, with a minimum amount of delays. Greg TCS Consulting Services P.O. Box 600008 St. Paul, MN 55106-0008 ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta ..!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta ------------------------------ From: johnf@cislabs.pitt.edu (Jack Faley) Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone Date: 25 Oct 92 23:24:16 GMT Organization: Sb My parents' cellular phone was stolen out of their car in front of their house. They didn't realize it was gone until the morning at which time they called it in and had the service terminated. During the night they used the phone to call about ten people which we got a list of from our cellular company. We turned this into the police hoping they would get some leads from the numbers and get the phone back. The police did nothing at all. I got a copy of the list and decided to use CNA to find out the people who were called. As it turns out CNA was no longer available. I don't have reason to use it much so I'm not sure when it happened but I'm in the 412 area code and I think the CNA also served 814. Does anyone know what happened to it? Or how I can find out who owns the numbers called without calling them up asking them then getting hung up on? Thanks, johnf@cislabs.pitt.edu or johnf@vm2.cis.pitt.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 11:47:49 -0700 From: mmt@redbrick.com (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS) Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting In article , PAT writes: > [Moderator's Note: You do NOT have to 'get rid of call waiting'. All > you have to do is suspend call waiting for the duration of the call on > which you would rather not be disturbed. The idea seems to be that for > most users, if they are there when the phone rings they want to get > the call rather than have it go to voicemail. If you are on the phone > when a call comes in, obviously you are there. So telco presumes that > you want the new call. They do not send it to voicemail since possibly > you are delayed in getting off the first call (within three rings) or > trying to find a logical break so you can put the first call on hold, > etc. If you do NOT want the disturbance of a second call, then > indicate this by inserting *70 before dialing the first call or > flashing the hook and inserting it at some point in the first incoming > call. The *70 will trigger the busy condition needed to force newly > arriving calls to forward to voicemail. PAT] I think, however, that the difficulty lies in the fact that here in Pac*Bell land, one can only cancel call waiting when one originates the call (unless one has three-way calling). If one *receives* a call that is important, and one wants subsequent callers to be put through to voicemail, then one has a problem. Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS mmt@RedBrick.COM [Moderator's Note: When this has come up in the past here, several readers pointed out that some telcos extend a flash dial tone even if there is no three-way calling on the line and this dial tone can be used for apparently only one purpose: to dial *70. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jgb@mcm.com (Jeff Bennington) Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting Reply-To: jgb@mcm.com (Jeff Bennington) Organization: Mellon Capital Management Corp., San Francisco Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 19:04:27 GMT In article leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) writes: > [Moderator's Note: You do NOT have to 'get rid of call waiting'. All [stuff deleted] > call. The *70 will trigger the busy condition needed to force newly > arriving calls to forward to voicemail. PAT] Pat, You goofed! I just checked with Pacific Bell's Message Center, and they state that disabling call waiting will NOT cause subsequent calls to be forwarded to voice mail. Instead, callers will get a busy signal. Stupid programming on PacBell's part! I like what GTE Mobilnet has done out here. If I ignore the call waiting tone for a few beeps, callers WILL be forwarded to my cellular voice mail. Jeff Bennington Mellon Capital Management Corp, San Francisco CA jgb@mcm.com [Moderator's Note: I didn't goof! IBT sells voicemail (they took it over from Ameritech as of this past weekend) two ways: transfer on no answer and/or transfer on busy. You can have it either/both ways. Of course there has to be a 'true busy' condition; call-waiting will not provide this without the *70 provision. IBT does not offer the arrangement GTE Mobilnet does, with transfer out of call waiting after a few rings, however Ameritech Mobile does. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 18:04:54 GMT > [Moderator's Note: You install suspspend call waiting on a > call you receive by flashing the hook, dialing *67 and getting dropped > back into the call which was in progress automatically in places which > offer that feature. Pat, it's *70 for cancel call waiting. *67 is for toggling the Caller ID blocking option. You are going to get the wrath of the CPSR for this misinformation. After all, someone might have read your message, not having previously known about cancel call waiting, and tried it on their line with per-line blocking, thus turning delivery ON for their call. They will innocently call a random business to test their cancel call waiting, but since their number is delivered, they will soon be deluged with so many telemarketing calls that their CO is overloaded such that 911 no longer works, which of course will cause someone to die as a result of not getting aide in a timely manner, and they will end up filing a lawsuit against YOU for being the original source of this misinformation. Be careful! Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: You are correct. I knew the difference and this got past my proofreading somehow. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler) Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 07:55:21 GMT > [Moderator's Note: You do NOT have to 'get rid of call waiting'. Speak for yourself. Call*Waiting is a hateful, Communist plot unleashed on us to destroy our hearing and amplify our daily nervous stress levels. :? > As somebody pointed out to me by E-mail, there are two varieties of > Call-forward-on-busy... o Call Forward-No Answer: forwards after n rings. o Call Forward-Busy: forwards if called line is busy. PS: "Cattle mutilations are up." bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler) [Moderator's Note: Clever retort! When IBT took over voicemail from Ameritech as of this past weekend, the first thing they did was change the system around a lot. We have a new voicemail system; new phone numbers to call for messages, etc. An interesting aspect of the new system is that when calling for messages *from your own phone* you no longer have to identify yourself with a user ID number. It knows who you are. You need merely enter a password. When calling from another phone you need to enter the user ID as well. An additional security feature on the new system (which by the way was reduced in cost from 10.95 per month to 5.95 per month) is the 'security log' feature. If you turn this on for your account, you are required to recite your name and time of day whenever you call in. Then it plays the recording of you (or whoever) saying this same thing on your previous call. If you do not hear *your voice* on the log record, then you know someone has been tampering with your mailbox. You may not know *who*, but you at least know someone has been there and you can change the password, etc. We also get live operator assistance for problems with voicemail by touching the zero key anytime while online with voicemail. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 09:26:42 CDT From: varney@ihlpk.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) writes: > In article Ron cc.edu> writes: >> My company is in search of a low cost DC to DC convertor that will >> take -48VDC from the central office battery feed and convert it to a >> regulated +12VDC at around 1 Amp, plus or minus 1/2 Amp. > That's going to take something like 1/4 amp from the phone line. > (Ignoring conversion losses.) If there is any wire distance getting > to the CO or PBX, there will be a significant voltage drop there. > I doubt the local telco would appreciate this. True. But assuming Ron is building something for a CO environment, he could contact: AT&T Microelectronics 800-372-2447 (800-553-2448 from Canada) Send email if you need a valid non-800 number. Al Varney ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 12:50:29 EDT From: kab@hotstone.att.com (Kenneth A Becker) Subject: Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed Organization: AT&T In article , richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) writes: > In article Ron cc.edu> writes: >> My company is in search of a low cost DC to DC convertor that will >> take -48VDC from the central office battery feed and convert it to a >> regulated +12VDC at around 1 Amp, plus or minus 1/2 Amp. > That's going to take something like 1/4 amp from the phone line. > (Ignoring conversion losses.) If there is any wire distance getting > to the CO or PBX, there will be a significant voltage drop there. > I doubt the local telco would appreciate this. I have already followed up to Mr. Greenberg by email, but I couldn't let this one lie. Yep, you get -48 through some terminating resistors from the CO; however, what Mr. Greenberg was talking about was Central Office power. As I'm sure the readers of this group know, CO power in the US tends to be distributed as -48 DC, from extra-large batery banks. Strandard practice at this time is to run DC-DC convertes with isolation between input and output to generate +5, +12, or anything else one might desire. Check the latest issue of EE Times; they have a catalog from AT&T's board-mounted power division, as well as ads in the main paper for other people such as Vicor. Ken Becker kab@hotstone.att.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #801 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16565; 26 Oct 92 1:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09402 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:45:34 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13754 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:45:11 -0600 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:45:11 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210260445.AA13754@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #802 TELECOM Digest Sun, 25 Oct 92 22:45:10 CST Volume 12 : Issue 802 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Alan L. Varney) Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Steve Forrette) Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Laird Broadfield) Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Pat Turner) Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Scot Wilcoxon) Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (L. Broadfield) Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Maria Panizo) Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Paul Schauble) Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (S. Forrette) Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? (Jack Decker) Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? (Steve Forrette) Re: A Few Questions About N11 Codes (Backon@vms.huji.ac.il) Re: A Few Questions About N11 Codes (Tom Hofmann) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 09:14:22 CDT From: varney@ihlpk.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes: > In article , eli@cisco.com writes: >> andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) wrote: >>> First off, AT&T has had *some* optical fiber in the network for some >>> time. But the particular medium of digital transmission should matter >>> not one whit for how to do echo cancellation. The propagation delays >>> are the same for all terrestrial links. >> This cannot be correct. Propagation delay depends on media type. The >> signal propagation speed in fiber is slower than that in coax cable, >> for example. It must be different for pure copper wire, also. > But I agree, that the medium has no effect on echo cancellation. Just a comment to re-focus the discussion: The propagation delays for terrestrial links may vary between media types. However, the delay observed on a given circuit for two different calls will far exceed the media-specific delay. Adding or removing a couple of multiplexers into the end-to-end circuit can change the delay by several bit-times (at 64Kbps). This is why echo cancellation has to re-adapt to changing circuit conditions -- and why such technology is expensive and difficult to do "right". As in much of telephony, the "right" thing to do varies with the technology, application and time frame. For such things as echo cancellation, it's a constant battle to "do your best" with a moving target. When you introduce modems into the picture, it's almost impossible to be "right" all the time. The modem folks are going to tinker with their stuff to make it work over the facilities they think represent reality. And the transmission/switching folks are going to tinker with echo cancellation using CPE (including modems) that they think represent reality. But each is using the previous level of technology of the other -- it's no wonder that when the cutting-edges meet, there's likely to be a mis-match. This is very similar to electronic countermeasures in warfare; each side is trying to counteract the worst the other side presents. That's not to say that (IMHO) AT&T hasn't spent a LOT of time and money in building the best echo cancellation products possible to match the needs of our network, so that CPE vendors (and their customers) won't have to modify THEIR equipment to get good performance. But there will always be areas for improvement. Echo cancellation is so important to AT&T that it has funded entire generations of DSP research, development and deployment, instead of buying other's technology. Maybe someone for AT&T Micro-electronics could give a better description of the state of the art? Al Varney -- my opinion only. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 17:56:02 GMT In article rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes: > In article , eli@cisco.com writes: >> andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) wrote: >> This cannot be correct. Propagation delay depends on media type. The >> signal propagation speed in fiber is slower than that in coax cable, >> for example. It must be different for pure copper wire, also. > Huh? Did they just repeal the speed of light? Where did you hear > this? The oft-quoted speed of light of 186,000 mps is in a vacuum. Any other transmission medium will slow it down. Air does so to a small degree, water more so, etc. I believe that electricity propagates at about 2/3 c in normal wire. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison Date: 25 Oct 92 21:27:44 GMT In rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes: > In article , eli@cisco.com writes: >> andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) wrote: >>> First off, AT&T has had *some* optical fiber in the network for some >>> time. But the particular medium of digital transmission should matter >>> not one whit for how to do echo cancellation. The propagation delays >>> are the same for all terrestrial links. >> This cannot be correct. Propagation delay depends on media type. The >> signal propagation speed in fiber is slower than that in coax cable, >> for example. It must be different for pure copper wire, also. > Huh? Did they just repeal the speed of light? Where did you hear > this? As Pat noted, the bends in the fiber can affect the length of the path (the little photons bonk off the walls.) BUT! FAR MORE IMPORTANT: Let's remember that the figure 186,xxx mi/sec is defined as "the speed of light in a vaccuum". The speed of light in a vacuum remains the same, the speed of propagation of an electrical signal varies all over the place with media, interference, (maybe frequency too, I can't recall.) (Ditto the speed of "light" too, of course.) Vague memory says that the speed of an Ethernet signal in thick coax is 0.83c, but I could be mis-remembering. Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 17:40 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison > Huh? Did they just repeal the speed of light? Where did you hear > this? > [Moderator's Note: While the 'speed of light' is approximatly 186,000 > miles per second -- about seven times around the earth in a second I > guess -- I think that depends on it going in a straight line without > any bends, curves, etc in its path. Don't things like that cause it > (light) to slow down a little? Certainly the fiber bends and twists > along its path a little from time to time. Might that matter? PAT] The speed of light (or other frequencies of electromagnetic radiation) varies from material to material. 186,000 mi/sec holds for free space. Light travels much slower in other mediums such as glass or water. This is why light bends as it passes through a prism. When refering to optics the term index of refraction is usually used. The index of refraction is the ratio of the velocity of light in free space to its velocity in a particular medium. From my earlier post the index of refraction for quartz glass is 1.45 this means light travels 1/1.45 of its free space velocity or 128,280 miles/second in quartz glass. The index of refraction varies with wavelength as well as material. This causes the "rainbow" of colors from a prism. In mutimode fiber the light takes longer to arrive at the other end due to a lot of internal bouncing arround. This may be what Pat is refering to, though outside plant fiber is single rather then multi- mode. Helical structures are sometimes used to slow down a "wavefront" such as in a traveling wave tube (TWT). Coax and waveguide also slow down electromagnetic waves. The term used here is velocity factor, with is the percent of free space velocity for waves in that medium. Unlike coaxial cables, velocity in waveguides is dependant on frequency. Circular waveguides can really slow down waves as the WG is cut for the lowest frequency, but is operated over three bands. From my last posting: Medium Velocity Factor *Velocity, miles/second Fiber .670 128,280 Coax (7/8" rigid) .997 185,440 Microwave 1 186,000 Ethernet / "CB" Coax .66 122,760 *Free space velocity is assumed to be 186,000. It's actually a little higher. Thanks to Peter Schow and the other person who recommended "Digital Telephony", a copy has been ordered. My reply to ya'll bounced. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: sewilco@fieldday.mn.org (Scot Wilcoxon) Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 02:32:45 GMT > [Moderator's Note: While the 'speed of light' is approximatly 186,000 > miles per second ... ... in a perfect vacuum is the limit. Actual speed differs in various materials. Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@fieldday.mn.org voice: +1 612-825-2607 [Moderator's Note: I received several more responses in this 'speed of light' thread. The ones included in this issue are typical. Due to the large backlog of stuff on hand, I'll skip the others, but thanks to the several users who responded. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? Date: 25 Oct 92 21:16:28 GMT In stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In article tnixon@hayes.com (Toby > Nixon) writes: >> What I'm think of is having three or four-pair twisted pair cable run >> from each room separately (not daisy-chained the way they normally do >> it) to a punch-down block in some central location, so we can hook >> things together anyway we want. Is that a good idea? Do you have any >> other advice for us? Thanks in advance. > I think some would advocate more than just four pairs. 10BaseT will > take four pairs all by itself, so if you want to plan for that in the > future, you will need more than four pairs. Errrrmm, clarification: 10BaseT *uses* only two of the pairs. It is possible to make a "splitter" to pull off the other two pairs, and even to position them in a second jack in the position of the first two, so as to give yourself 2 10BaseT jacks from one 8position jack. Some signals may cause more or less interference with the first 10BaseT run. That said, I would heartily recommend running at *least* two separate four-pair to each j-box (note: not each room, who says there's only one outlet per room?) If I were constructing, I would run three four-pair, or two four-pair and a run of zipcord (speaker-level audio, or...) and I would look into the cost of running some variety of coax (although I'm not sure what I'd use it for; possibly video feed.) Don't forget to plan for audio and video distribution, and remember to leave pair available for remote-control repeaters. Whoever suggested conduit, I'd agree with that, but it's a hefty cost, no? If I did have conduit put in, I'd favor 3/4", and *require* that pull-string be left in all runs. Blowing works fine, if you're working with an empty conduit. Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ Date: 25 Oct 1992 15:34:09 +0000 (GMT) From: panizo@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu (Maria Panizo) Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? Organization: Texas Christian University In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > I think some would advocate more than just four pairs. 10BaseT will > take four pairs all by itself, so if you want to plan for that in the > future, you will need more than four pairs. 10BaseT only requires two pairs. But I would agree with you and advocate just about as many as you can pull without hurting yourself! MP ------------------------------ From: pls@cibecue.az05.bull.com (Paul Schauble) Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? Organization: Bull HN Information Systems, Inc., Phoenix Product Division Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 21:33:20 GMT With the punchdown blocks, what's the appropriate technique to take one incoming pair and connect it to the many pairs goint out to each room? Also, is that available a list of mail order sources for the punchdown blocks, jacks, &c? ++PLS ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 17:14:02 GMT In article mmt@redbrick.com (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS) writes: > I beg to differ. *My* 10BaseT that I've been working with only uses > two pair. I certainly agree with you that one would want more than > just four pair running around a house, but two pair *should* be > sufficient for Ethernet. > (Or is there some other 10baseT that requires more than two pairs?) The 10BaseT I have on my desk at work uses RJ45 connectors and eight conductor wire. I just assumed that all were used. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 16:43:57 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? > Today, I returned home from work, and for the third time in a two > months, had no dial tone on my voice line. ... [stuff deleted] ... > Do I call the PUC? By all means, or better yet, take the text of your message and edit it into a letter and SEND it to the PUC. I would, at a minimum, state that you want a) credit for the time you were without service, b) an explanation of the cause of the problem, and c) the name and number of an NET manager that will take responsibility for seeing that the problem is corrected, and whom you can call directly should the problem recur. One tip: Be exceedingly polite. The PUC people are on your side (unless you manage to alienate them), so the tone of your letter should be "Can you help me with this? I'd really appreciate it if you could help me obtain the following ..." rather than the type of letter you might wish to write to NET right about now. > Should I politely decline to pay for service not recieved? Can they > cut off my line (more than usual) if I don't pay for time I don't get > a dial tone? You should ask for a service credit. If you just take it upon yourself to not pay, they could disconnect your service. Of course, you might conceivably get the PUC to decide they were wrong to do so in your case, but you'd still be without service for a time. Better to get the PUC working on it from the start, and let THEM fight with NET for you ... they have a LOT more clout, and I can assure you that NET won't disconnect THEIR phones! ;-) Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 03:55:19 GMT In article adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes: > Today, I returned home from work, and for the third time in a two > months, had no dial tone on my voice line. > What are my options? The service stinks, the business office doesn't > want to cut a rebate (even for days I am without service) > Do I call the PUC? Definately! I can hardly believe that they will not give credit for days when you didn't have service. Every telco I've dealt with had a policy that if service went unrestored for 24 hours after you reported it, that they would give you pro rata credit for each day you were without service. I would imagine that this is just not policy, but in the tariffs per the PUCs insistance. Complain loudly to the NET executive offices and the PUC. Also, you should make it clear that you are not only upset about getting the run-around as far as your billing credit, but that the delay in getting your service restored speaks of a much larger problem that must be addressed. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il Subject: Re: A Few Questions About N11 Codes Date: 25 Oct 92 20:03:18 GMT Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem In article , rkc@maestro.bellcore.com (Ramakrishna Chamarthy) writes: > Can someone please answer a few questions about N11 codes? > What service does each of the N11 codes represent? Have all of them > (services and the associated codes) been identified/defined? > I know that (only in US, I suppose): > 411 - Directory Inquiry service > 911 - Emergency Attention/Help (in life threatening situations) service > What about other countries? What type of services (I am more interested > in this) and what are the codes? Are they same countrywide/continentwide > (e.g., Europe?)? In Israel, police emergency is 100, fire department is 102, ambulance service is 101, and directory assistance is 144. If you have a modem you can access directory assistance yourself by logging in to 133 (it's only one message unit vs. three for using operator assisted directory inquiry and one can be *online* for eight minutes before getting cut off). By the way, a CD-ROM disk containing all Israeli phone numbers is expected to be out by January with an end user price of $100. Josh backon@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL ------------------------------ From: wtho@ciba-geigy.ch (Tom Hofmann) Subject: Re: A Few Questions About N11 Codes Organization: Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Basel, Switzerland Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 07:29:47 GMT rkc@maestro.bellcore.com (Ramakrishna Chamarthy) writes: > What about other countries? What type of services (I am more interested > in this) and what are the codes? Are they same countrywide/continentwide > (e.g., Europe?)? 112 is/will be the emergency number in all countries of the European Community. Tom ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #802 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03266; 26 Oct 92 10:51 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17932 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Oct 1992 08:01:37 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14437 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Oct 1992 08:01:11 -0600 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 08:01:11 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210261401.AA14437@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #803 TELECOM Digest Mon, 26 Oct 92 08:01:15 CST Volume 12 : Issue 803 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Eat Here and Get Gas (Paul Robinson) Re: Eat Here and Get Gas (Tom Coradeschi) Re: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches (Ben Harrell) Re: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches (John Higdon) Re: Modem Question (William D. Bauserman) Re: Modem Question (Dave Levenson) Re: Length of Phone Numbers in Europe (Juha Veijalainen) Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface (Amanda Walker) Re: Cellullar Internationally? (Henry Mensch) Caller-ID and Ring-ID (was Identa-Ring Decoding box) (Paul Robinson) Re: PC-Based Voicemail Systems (Timothy E. Buchanan) Re: Please Explain "Crossed Lines" (Steve Forrette) Re: Call-Advice (was College Phone System AGAIN!) (Jeff Dubin) Re: Pilot Frequency (Bruce Oltman) University Telephone Service - Correction (Robert D. Smith) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: fcw@telecom.ti.com From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 16:26:17 EDT Subject: Re: Eat Here and Get Gas In article 9@eecs.nwu.edu, FZC@CU.NIH.GOV () writes: > Obviously they aren't giving these phones away and taking a loss on > them, considering the competition in gas stations, I don't think they > can raise something else to cover the difference. This implies that > the kickbacks the cellular companies are paying for subscribers are so > lucrative that the gas station can pay the full cost of the phone. The way it works here in Dallas is that the phone is "free" when you sign a commitment for a year or two of service. The "provider" of the phone also hits you with their own contract that says you owe them 400 bucks if you cancel your contract with the cellular carrier before six months. I bought my phone from a franchised dealer, who explained that the carrier kicks back the 400 bucks to the phone seller after providing six months of service. I haven't seen gas stations that "give away" phones around here, but there's a computer store and a strip joint that do. Fred Wedemeier pho: 214-575-6556 fax: 214-575-6567 timsg: fcw inet: fcw@pioneer.telecom.ti.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 12:19:39 EDT From: Tom Coradeschi Subject: Re: Eat Here and Get Gas Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ Paul Robinson writes: > In Bethesda, MD, at the corner of East/West Highway and Wisconsin > Avenue, a place is selling cellular phone tie ins. If you drove over > there, you would say that you don't understand how, when the only > things on that corner are a post office, a police station, a building > for rent and a Chevron gasoline station. > In front of one of these places is a sign: > "Free Cellular phone with any brake job." > Obviously they aren't giving these phones away and taking a loss on > them, considering the competition in gas stations, I don't think they > can raise something else to cover the difference. This implies that > the kickbacks the cellular companies are paying for subscribers are so > lucrative that the gas station can pay the full cost of the phone. I suspect that what you're really getting into is: "Free Cellular phone with any brake job*" Then MUCH lower, and MUCH smaller: "*Cellular phone batteries (not included): $99." There's an ad running in one of the local papers advertising bag phones for $1.99, which uses just such a technique. tom coradeschi <+> tcora@pica.army.mil [Moderator's Note: Well, if you plan to use the phone only in the car and/or have a wide variety of batteries and battery-eliminators in your possession from previous cell phones, you might actually be able to take them up on that offer and avoid having to purchase the $99 batteries from them. They probably would not like that! PAT] ------------------------------ From: bharrell@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Ben Harrell) Subject: Re: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches Organization: North Carolina State University Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 23:40:00 GMT kph@cisco.com writes: > Pac*Bell offers a custom calling feature called "Intercom-Plus" which > lets you dial *51, *52, or *53 and hang up, giving a distinctive > ring-back so that you can use your phone to talk to somebody at > another station. > Yesterday, I called up Pac*Bell to order this service, and they told > me that it wasn't offered in my service area. This surprised me, since > I knew that I was served by a 5E switch, and I thought that 5E > switches supported all features that 1A switches supported. > Does anybody know why this is? It seems strange that a software feature on 1A > switches wouldn't be on 5E switches. This feature is provided in software feature package NTXF82AA, available since 1991, for the DMS-100(tm) switch, and is called the Single Line Variety Package. It may be that P*B has chose not to purchase it for its switches yet. Ben Harrell cmebh01@nt.com or bharrell@catt.ncsu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 18:23 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Re: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article kph@cisco.com writes: > Does anybody know why this is? It seems strange that a software feature on 1A > switches wouldn't be on 5E switches. Was no one listening a year ago when I screamed bloody murder about this? There are MANY ways a 5E appears to be "dumbed down" from a 1A, but when I spoke about it on the Digest, all the whoopie-whiz "digital at any price" people came out of the woodwork to tell me how wonderful the AT&T 5ESS was. Once again, people, the 5ESS is OK if you really need ISDN, but it cannot, user-feature-wise, hold a candle to the 1A. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: 25 Oct 92 21:01:00 UT From: WILLIAM.D.BAUSERMAN@gte.sprint.com Subject: Re: Modem Question brownc@cs.colostate.edu writes: > lights labeled: ERR, CTS, DCD, RD, TD, LB, PWR with one switch labeled: > LLB & RLB ... I am not familiar with your exact modem but my guess would be that the LLB stands for "Local LoopBack" and RLB stands for "Remote LoopBack" with the LB light indicating a "LoopBack" mode. The loopback modes are quite simple -- the "local" mode forces your modem to "loopback" all data it receives and not pass it to the pc for interpretation. The "remote" mode is similar but usually indicates the remote end is looped and to expect to get back what it sends. I also doubt that your modem is a "network stuff" modem -- why would it have a phone and a line jack if it was? william.d.bauserman@gte.sprint.com ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Modem Question Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 12:20:36 GMT In article , PJJ125@URIACC.URI.EDU (Tony Pelliccio) writes: > In reference to brownc@cs.colostate.edu's question about the modem he > has ... Lets see ... CTS is clear to send, I suspect ERR is error > obvious, but LB ... hmmmm... couldn't tell you what that one is. I LB, in most communications equipment, means loop-back. It probably indicates a test-mode selected by the local DTE or by the remote DCE. 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: FNAHA!JVE@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 25 OCT 92 08:30 Subject: Re: Length of Phone Numbers in Europe Garrett.Wollman@UVM.EDU (Garrett Wollman) wrote: > I can remember when I was in Finland, that this was quite common. In < some lines deleted > > Helsinki's main switchboard was (9x) 191 1; but extension 1234 was 191 > 1234. In the other populated areas, area codes were 9xx and local Overall length for phone numbers in Finland is ten digit. Usually area codes are three digits long (prefix 9 + area number), but Helsinki area has a two digit code, 90. Thus in Helsinki you see phone numbers from four to eight digits long. Shorter ones are usually reserved for large organizations, like the University, and the longer ones are 'normal' phone numbers and extensions. > remember being surprised that to get an international operator > required dialing 92022. And there were always street maps of the > local area in the front of the phone books. Local telco services have normally three digit numbers, starting with 0. International services are provided by the state owned PTL, thus the numbers are handled like long distance calls -- they start with 9. This same scheme is used to access mobile phones, pagers etc. Mobile phone networks have prefixes like 949, 950, long distance pagers 948 and so on. As I said, local services (and emergency services) now have prefix '0'. This is going to change soon, because the long distance prefix is going to be internationalized, that is, '9' -prefix is history. This also means, that ALL emergency, local service, and long distance numbers are going to be changed. For example, emergency number '000' is changed to '112' next january. Not having fixed length numbers creates problems sometimes. I read in a newspaper some months ago that a hotel in southern Finland was given a eight digit number. So far so good, but they had a three digit area code. 8+3 is 11, maximum length for phone numbers is 10, and they found out they had a number that no one, expect the locals, could call! Juha Veijalainen 4ge system analyst Unisys Finland phone +358 0 452 8426, fax +358 0 452 8400 Internet mail: JVE%FNAHA@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com ** Mielipiteet omiani ** Opinions are PERSONAL, facts are suspect ------------------------------ From: amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker) Subject: Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 18:35:47 -0500 Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation Reply-To: amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker) In article , rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes: > In the 'deep dark distant past', the Bell Standard for Domestic Inside > Wiring, was three wires (Red, Green and Yellow). Funny you should mention this. I have discovered that the house I just moved into is wired this way. Darned annoying when you have two lines. Luckily, the NI is just below my bedroom window, so I can use the second line while I figure out how to rewire the house without upsetting my landlord :). On a related note, I also discovered that only about half of the three-prong outlets were actually grounded. Amanda Walker ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 11:53:44 -0700 Subject: Re: Cellullar Internationally? Reply-To: henry@ads.com dand%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com (Dan DeClerck) wrote: > Your best bet would probably be to rent a phone at the airport, but > the price may be prohibitive. Some of the airlines (British Airways does, at least) offer cell phone rental at the phenomenal price of UKL10/day or so ... # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / ------------------------------ From: Tdarcos@f120.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Tdarcos) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 14:30:14 -0500 Subject: Caller-ID and Ring-ID (Was Identa-Ring Decoding Box) Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM In Telecom Digest 12-786, zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) said the following: > sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Steven A Rubin) writes: >> I currently have a phone line with two different numbers, with >> distinctive ringing letting me determine which number the person >> is calling on. [material deleted] The problem (more like a >> frustration) is that the box takes three rings to determine where >> to send the call. Is there a device that can do the > routing on >> less rings yet still be reliable? > I was just thinking that the Caller-ID technology could be used > for this purpose, if it sent the *called* number instead of the > calling number. Of course, you couldn't have both at once, but it > would allow you to answer in 1.5 rings. Who sez? You *could* do both; they are two separate technologies. If you had your own PBX that had caller ID on its trunk lines, you *would* get both. If you have a DID trunk, the telephone company sends, as DTMF (Touch tone) or as a pulse dial code, the last three or last four digits (depending on how many extensions you have) of the called telephone number. It could, at that point, then send the burst of data as a Caller-ID packet. Whether the switch can use it is another thing. Whether the switch your calls come from can provide it is still another. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These (uninformed) opinions are mine alone, nobody else (is stupid enough to be) responsible for them. ------------------------------ From: buchanan@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (BUCHANAN TIMOTHY E) Subject: Re: PC-Based Voicemail Systems Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:50:43 GMT mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) writes: > Does anybody know of a fax/modem voice mail card that incorporates > 14.4K modem speed as well? I've heard of ZyXEL -- supposedly they > have a new upgrade that has voice mail added to their fax/modem. Can > anyone attest to the quality of this brand of fax/modems? I have the Supra V32bis fax/modem which has 14.4K fax and modem speeds. I haven't used the Fax side yet, but the modem works great under DOS and Unix. They now offer a Caller-ID upgrade and a rom that monitors for Fax ring tones, and a voice-mail upgrade is in the works. Timothy ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Please Explain "Crossed Lines" Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 03:48:03 GMT In my case, it was exactly as Pat desribed: someone else had my line on their secondary pair. In this instance, it was a second line at my parents' house that I had installed for my use when I visited. During the time when my "phantom" calls were made, there had not even been a phone plugged into that line, so there was nobody to hear the other person, no unusual ringing, etc. What disappointed me was that when Pacific Bell located the spurious jumper, they just removed it and reported this fact to me. They made no effort to identify where it went so that the proper people could be billed for their calls. Devious or not, the other people should rightfully expect to pay for their calls, even if it was their honest mistake. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 19:59:07 EDT From: Jeff Dubin Subject: Re: Call-Advice (was College Phone System AGAIN!) Great system ... if your modem is external. Jeff Dubin jd2859a@american.edu jdubin@world.std.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 17:44:49 CDT From: oltman@green.rtsg.mot.com (Bruce Oltman) Subject: Re: Pilot Frequency Good story Pat. 25 years ago I was the engineer at WHPK that built the radio which monitored WMAQ. It was a classic five-tube superhet with my own "solid state" voltage comparator/latch on the AGC line. Another infamous kludge was the remote FM transmitter on/off control. We sent 100 VDC common mode over the leased audio pair from Mitchell Tower to Pierce where the transmitter was located. Remember Chuck Metalitz? [Moderator's Note: I only vaguely recall the name; I don't know anything about him. I do seem to recall that WHPK replaced an older AM station called WUCB which was transmitted on carrier current to the various campus buildings. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ROBERT SMITH Subject: University Telephone Service - Correction Date: 25 Oct 92 18:21:43 GMT Reply-To: ROBERT SMITH Organization: Stakeholder Relations, NCR Corp in Dayton,OH kupiec@hp800.lasalle.edu (Bob Kupiec) writes: > Everything was fine until I returned for the fall semester. They > decided to consolidate the two switches into one NCR switch. So far > there has been nothing but trouble. ^^^ I'm sorry to hear about the difficulties you have been experiencing with the telephone service at LaSalle University. I was wondering if you really meant an _NCR_ switch. NCR is now part of AT&T -- essentially the computer division of AT&T. NCR does not make PBX switches. Anyway, I just wanted to clear up a possible misunderstanding. Bob Smith E-mail => Robert.D.Smith@daytonoh.ncr.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #803 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01729; 27 Oct 92 2:11 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01736 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:09:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24641 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:08:56 -0600 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:08:56 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210270608.AA24641@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #804 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:09:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 804 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The Freeway Call Box and Cellular Hacking Threads Meet (Joseph E. Baker) Phreaking Roadside Emergency Phones (Jim Haynes) More About Highway Callboxes (Marty Brenneis) Somebody Gets Access to Freeway Callbox Codes, Runs up Bill (David Lesher) Speaking of Scams (Scot Mcintosh) Re: Stolen Cell Phone (apd104@psuvm.psu.edu) Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Paul Schauble) Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Keith Smith) Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) (David Lesher) Data Drop Incident Through a ROLM PBX (David Leibold) 900 Number Bills From "Credit Collection Center" (John Nagle) Interest Group on X.400/X.500 (Thomas K. Hinders) 700 Numbers From Overseas (Juergen Ziegler) "Gotta Go (TM)" (Lauren Weinstein) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 09:01:46 PDT From: jeb@jupiter.risc.rockwell.com (Joseph E. Baker) Subject: The Freeway Call Box and Cellular Hacking Threads Meet This article has a few obvious errors, but it is easy enough to figure out what really happened: From the Friday, October 23, {Los Angeles Times}: ``Hacker Taps Into Freeway Call Box - 11,733 Times'' by Jeffrey A. Perlman, Times Staff Writer Santa Ana - An enterprising hacker reached out and touched someone 11,733 times in August -- from a freeway emergency call box in Orange County. A computer that monitors the county's emergency call boxes attributed 25,875 minutes of calls to the mysterious caller who telephoned people in countries across the gobe, according to a staff report prepared for the Orange County Transportation Authority. "This is well over the average of roughly ten calls per call box," the report noted. About 1,150 bright yellow call boxes have been placed along Orange County's freeways to connect stranded motorists to the California Highway Patrol. But the caller charged all his calls to a single box on the shoulder of the Orange (57) Freeway. The hacker apparently matched the individual electronic serial number for the call box to its telephone number. It took an investigation by the transit authority, and three cellular communications firms to unravel the mystery, the report stated. Officials with the transit authority's emergency call box program were not available to comment on the cost of the phone calls or to say how they would be paid. But the report assured that "action has been taken to correct this problem. It should be noted that this is the first incident of this type in the five-year history of the program." -End of article Joe Baker jeb@risc.rockwell.com or jbaker@igc.org ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Subject: Phreaking Roadside Emergency Phones Date: 26 Oct 1992 07:08:10 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz An article in the {Sunday San Francisco Examiner} reports "A telephone thief tapped into an emergency telephone along a freeway, resulting in 11,733 illegal calls before officials discovered the tampering ..." "This is well over the average of roughly ten calls per month per box" ;-) Officials speculate the person who cracked the system sold the secret to others. haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 22:59:50 PPE From: droid@kerner.com (Marty the Droid) Subject: More About Highway Callboxes There is an article in the {SF Chronicle} about a person who tepped into a cellular callbox and rang up several thousand worth of calls before being caught. The article is not technical enough to say if this was a physical or wireless break-in to the system. Apparently the callboxes are std cellphones that dial a specific number and ID themselves to the party that answers. They don't have any special class of service in the system to prevent this type of fraud. Attn cellular switch programmers: Why not have a class of service that works like a ringdown. Then when the ESN & MIN combo of a callbox comes in it gets connected to the proper dispatch point and nowhere else. Marty 'The Droid' Brenneis ...!uupsi!kerner!droid Industrial Magician droid@kerner.com (415)258-2105 ~~~ KAE7616 - 462.700 - 162.2 ~~~ KC6YYP [Moderator's Note: Ameritech Mobile offers just such a class of service: You go off hook (press send, actually) and it starts ringing someplace. The tone pad on the phone is of no value at all. Some companies doing messenger service, etc have the phones programmed that way for their delivery personnel to call the office and be called. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Somebody Gets Access to Freeway Callbox Codes, Runs up Bill Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 11:45:48 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex Clarinet reports that someone got the ESN et. al. from a Left Coast solar-powered freeway call box and ran up 11,733 calls totaling 25,875 minutes of time. Now, since the account was supposedly restricted to calling only specific Calif. Highway Patrol numbers, there's a ruckus going on regarding who has to eat the calls. I read carefully, but did not see Integretel mentioned in the story ;_] wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu [Moderator's Note: That is a scandalous and libelous remark about America's best loved alternate carrier! I loved it though! :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: psm@nosc.mil (Scot Mcintosh) Subject: Speaking of Scams ... Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 17:28:53 GMT I've encountered an interesting tack taken by a scamster. I own an apartment building which uses a telephone line for the entry system. Naturally, considering what it's used for, I don't have a long-distance carrier for it. One month, lo and behold, I find a $5+ charge for switching to MCI. Upon calling the Pac Bell business office and explaining the situation, I'm told that this is a not-so-infrequent occurrence these days. According to the Pac Bell rep, some salespeople are resorting to creating fictitious 'orders' for service on lines that have no designated long-distance carriers. I don't know how accurate this explanation is, but the charge WAS there, and I sure didn't order it. Scot McIntosh Internet: psm%helios.nosc.mil@nosc.mil UUCP: {ihnp4,akgua,decvax,decwest,ucbvax}!sdscvax!nosc!psm [Moderator's Note: Do you think Integratel brokers MCI long distance as well as running a few 'special' services? :) PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: Penn State University Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 00:04:56 EST From: APD104@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone For those of you who mailed me for info on the above company, and anyone else i nterested on a whole lotta telco/netwerking/telecom stuff, write to the followi ng address or call and ask for their catalog: Specialized Products Company 17 Hampshire Drive, Suite 17 Hudson, NH 03051 800.527.5018 603.880.0150 ------------------------------ From: pls@cibecue.az05.bull.com (Paul Schauble) Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone Organization: Bull HN Information Systems, Inc., Phoenix Product Division Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 23:34:03 GMT In article cheim@lectroid.sw.stratus. com (Craig Heim) writes: > OK, that takes care of Tumbling Fraud. Here's the Cellular Fraud > problem of the 1990s: CLONING. How do you handle a bandit who has > programmed his phone to the ESN and MIN of a valid subscriber? > Interesting problem isn't it? Kerberos? [Moderator's Note: I wish you would elaborate a little further on this and how you think Kerberos could be implemented in cellular phones. I suspect it would be (almost) totally foolproof. How would you do it? How would the legitimate user get his 'ticket' each time? PAT] ------------------------------ From: keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith) Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 20:16:24 GMT In article johnf@cislabs.pitt.edu (Jack Faley) writes: > it? Or how I can find out who owns the numbers called without calling > them up asking them then getting hung up on? Most public libraries have a cross-reference directory. Try there. (Oh yea, the LIBRARY!) On a different thread, Why are we always trying to find INVALID ESN's? Why not instead maintain a database of *VALID* ESN's instead, and look them up at the top of a call, ALSO ... It would seem to me the way to handle this security would be to use an ESN, and a SOFT key that could be programmed into the phone. The cell company could do a lookup similar to a computer password file. If the phone is stolen flag the ESN. If someone is "tumbling" or forging an ESN they would also have to come up with the "key" number which could be changed at will by the subscriber, or cell company? If one wanted to roam one could tell their local celco, and it could be added to a national list. So tell me, where is my reasoning flawed? Keith Smith uunet!ksmith!keith 5719 Archer Rd. Digital Designs BBS 1-919-423-4216 Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201 Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ... [Moderator's Note: Your scheme is only flawed in the sense that there are presumably many, many more valid ESN's than invalid ones and a list of good numbers would be large and very difficult to manage. I think the likelyhood of a legitimate caller being inconvenienced by not being on the list is greater than the likelyhood of a legitimate caller being inconvenienced by being on the negative list, and although fraud is a serious problem, so is good customer relations. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 18:49:35 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex > [Moderator's Note: There are a bunch of internationally based phone > services in New Jersey advertised to people all over the world. > The services directed to Americans are located in the Netherland > Antilles and one is in Georgetown, Guyana. I'm totally incredulous re: this statement. I've been to Guyana, and he's no Jack ... ooops - wrong quote. I spent 30+ days in Georgetown two years ago, and have returned since. The phone service there is as bad as Havana, and far worse than, say, Poland was. I regularly got local calls abandoned, likely due to the lack of interoffice trunkage. If you called back several times, something in the switch got too warm, I guess, as dial tone would never break. You went away for a while, and it would work again. A very knowlegable source told me he'd counted 5000 poles in the city in danger of collapse. (This in a country that is 99&44/100% trees - BIG ones!) I fixed several subscriber sets while I was there, mostly out of boredom. The older ones were British, and appeared to be similar to "300" series Western equipment. The newer stuff was Soviet, and was absolute garbage. The case plastic cracked everywhere, so the hookswitches never functioned. International, you ask? There is no cable anywhere -- heck, there are no ROADS anywhere. A over-the-horizon tropo-scatter station links Georgetown to Port of Spain, Trinidad. It has 12 circuits, I think - maybe 24. There is a small Geosat dish owned by Cable & Wireless, but I'm not sure it works. The ONLY reliable service in the county was an Inmarisat dish and phone owned by an ex-Texas oilman. He used it to Fax reports back to Houston. (Don't even ask about the postal service ...) Even if you had some magic trunkage to the real world, any kind of recorded schlock would need power to run it. For the rest of my life, I'll always think of Guyana whenever I hear a generator start ;_] Rotating line power is the norm -- I don't call them rotating backouts, because time_off >>>> time_on. As a local said to me one night in the bar, "It's not QUITE the end of the world ... [swig] ... but you can SEE it from here, mon." Now, I'm not normally one to call PAT a liar, but where DID you read about this, sir, the Weakly World News ;-? wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu [Moderator's Note: I saw the same advertisement twice in recent weeks; once in the {Advocate} and once in {Windy City Times}, a little paper here in Chicago. I will spare you some of the lewdness in the text of the ads, but the essence was that gay men were invited to call a free 'International Party Line' -- no charge except for the phone call itself to 011-592-2 (something) ... that reads Georgetown, Guyana in my AT&T guidebook. Curiously, the same ad with the same wording had appeared in the past on several occassions in the {Advocate} using a number in the Netherland Antilles ... with city code 6 (011-599-6) and I thought something was fishy there when the AT&T International Operating Center told me that '6' went to Bonaire. My book says '7' is that city, but AT&T said '6' went there also. Like yourself, I was a bit astounded to see such a service operating in Guyana, but if you consider the state of the government operated phone system there, I am not surprised the government of Guyana wants to tip the balance due on settlements with the USA in their favor, and that would surely happen with a few hundred (thousand, whatever) guys calling there every day to chat with compatriots from around the globe. The Netherland Antilles ad quit running about the time the one in Guyana started. It might be the same people operated it in N.A. then moved it for some reason. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 18:52:52 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Data Drop Incident Through a ROLM PBX Given a few postings about ROLM switches lately, this was something that came up at York with the campus phone switch ... this came from a local campus mailing list as indicated in the headers below. (begin contents of posting ...) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:46:43 -0400 Reply-To: Eriks Rugelis Sender: "Discussion on Academic Computing at York University" From: Eriks Rugelis Subject: Re: Dumped from VM1 Taylor Roberts writes: > Further to the recent airing of mild complaints about VM1, ten > minutes ago I was unceremoniously disconnected after having typed a > huge message. When I called right back, logged on, and began my > message again, the same thing happened! The telephone system at the Keele campus consists of four Rolm 9751 switches. Each switch has dual CPU's for redundancy (one active, one standby). Each night, between 1AM and 3AM the CPU's exchange their active/standby roles to ensure that both CPU's are fully functional at all times. This switch-over is transparent to voice calls but causes DCM connections to be dropped. Dialin to VTAM and IPNET is routed through the Rolm on DCM's and hence is subject to CPU switch-over induced session drops. Yesterday morning, between 10:00 and 10:30, a CPU switch-over took place on one of the 9751's. This caused all DCM connections through that switch to be dropped. If you re-dialed immediately, it is possible that you could have been dropped again for the same reason. Eriks Rugelis Network Operations (end of forwarded post... courtesy dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca) ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: 900 Number Bills From "Credit Collection Center" Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 04:55:58 GMT If you have recently received a notice from "Credit Collection Center" of Miami FL requesting payment of 900 number charges, and you believe the charges to be bogus, please get in touch with me. Thank you. John Nagle nagle@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 92 10:03:07-0800 From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com Subject: Interest Group on X.400/X.500 Does anyone know of an interest group covering the topics of X.400 and/or X.500? Thomas K Hinders Martin Marietta Computing Standards 4795 Meadow Wood Lane Chantilly, VA 22021 703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 13:24 MEZ From: Juergen Ziegler Subject: 700 Numbers From Overseas Hi TD readers, I am a regular reader of TD, therfore I am familliar with 700 numbers. Well, the idea of a lifetime and personal telephone number is great, but the way this is accomplished in the USA does not make sense to me. Basically I do criticize the fact, that there are different 700 number spaces for the different IECs. For you guys in the USA this is not much of a problem, since you enjoy 10xxx dialing, but such dialing is not available from overseas. So calls to 700 numbers can not be completed as regular international telephone calls. To call such numbers you need a calling card from AT&T, MCI, SPRINT, ... and use their expensive "USA DIRECT"-like services. As a result the majority of international customers can not call 700 numbers, since they do not have such calling cards. I find this very STUPID!!! It took quite a long time to make inter- national dialing as easy as today. Now, the country with the world's most advanced telecommunications infrastruture creates this odd system. Why??? Why was the 700 number space not used like the 800/900 number space? Or why are not free are codes assigned for those services. So that "700" service from AT&T could be 720, from MCI 730, from SPRINT 730, ... I hope the current situation will be revised ASAP, so that callers from overseas will be able to call a "700" number as easy as calling any other regular telephone number. Juergen UK84@ibm3090.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de [Moderator's Note: You are missing the point, Juergen. 700 numbers are intended as internal arrangements in the USA. This is much the same thing with 800 numbers, although not exclusively. 700/800 are for use inside the USA by callers within the USA. Most people with 800 numbers do not wish to pay for overseas calls; I assume most people with 700 numbers have specialized interests in those numbers also. All 700 numbers can be reached via their regular ten digit equivilent, and people with 800 numbers who wish to pay for international traffic get the equivilent of an inwats line originating in the country they wish to receive calls from. I don't complain because some company in Germany receives toll free calls on the (German) equivilent of 800 -- something we here in the USA cannot dial internationally. I assume if they want USA callers they will put in an 800 number here as we know it and can use it. Every country has certain telephone codes for its own internal use; the USA has 700, 800 and 900. Why do you think it is 'stupid'? If you wish to bypass network arrangements and use a service like 'USA Direct' to get into the USA and then call outbound to a 700/800 number, suit yourself. Of course it will cost more. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 21:33 PST From: lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: "Gotta Go (TM)" Greetings. I stumbled across an amusing ad in today's {L.A. Times}. The graphic shows a little box plugged into a phone via a pair of modular connectors. The device, called the "Gotta Go (TM)", has a single button on the top and requires a nine volt battery. What's all this for? The whole point is simply to simulate the "click" of call waiting (well, 1A call waiting, anyway) to the party at the other end, so you can claim you "gotta go" to another call when you want to get rid of them. All this high tech for $14.95! Good old P.T. Barnum knew what he was talking about! --Lauren-- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #804 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03066; 27 Oct 92 2:55 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24923 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:49:52 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29574 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:49:35 -0600 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:49:35 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210270649.AA29574@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #805 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:49:40 CST Volume 12 : Issue 805 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake? (Bill Pfeiffer) Re: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake? (Mikel Manitius) Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Brent Capps) Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Tony L. Hansen) Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (L. Broadfield) Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Doug Rorem) Re: PictureTel Video Conference Experience (Thomas Lapp) Re: Picturetel Video Conference Experience (Mark Morrissey) Re: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again< (Bill Campbell) Re: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again< (Mike Riddle) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill.Pfeiffer@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer) Subject: Re: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 03:51:27 -0500 (CDT) In a recent TELECOM Digest, eesnyder@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Eric E. Snyder) writes: > What prevents a near-by party with a cordless phone from dialing out > using my base unit and making charges on my phone line? > Any pointers to how security is maintained would be appreciated. > [Moderator's Note: Many years ago, the only protection against this > problem was distance. There was only one frequency in use; I think it > was around 1730 KC. People could even tune in cordless phones on > regular AM radios if the tuning dial was warped a little. As more > folks got cordless phones, the distance between them disappeared, and > the solution was to go to 46-49 megs with ten channels, the assumption > being it was unlikely any two nearby cordless users would have units > on the same channel (the phones were packaged and sold randomly on the > different frequencies). Now there is something like an ID code -- a > sort of ESN for cordless phones -- that is passed between the base and > the remote and must be satisfied before the two will talk to each > other at all. There are thousands of code combinations; these > plus the choice of ten frequencies make the theft of phone service via > cordless phone a lot more difficult although still not impossible. PAT] Here is a brief history of how cordless phones and security evolved. First of the breed were strange units which looked like desk phones, with a *LONG* telescoping whip on the rear of the unit (about three feet). These units used a 49mhz FM signal from phone to base, and a 27mhz AM signal from base to phone. The 27 mhz signal sat between channel 3 and 4 on CB, so the noise and bleedover was horrendous on the receive end of the cordless, but almost inaudible on the distant end. (Pat should remember these, he had one). The next incarnation was the 'one piece' style we are familiar with today, but much larger and heavier. These beauties used the same 49mhz fm from handset to base, but replaced the 'CB' channel with one of five channels from 1630khz to 17xxkhz, also narrow band fm. These frequencies were in a guard band between standard broadcast, and the low marine band. The 1.7 mhz signal was fed 'carrier current' into the power line while the 49.* mhz was received via the whip on the base. The handset had a ferrite loopstick in it, similar th that found in pocket AM radios (for receiving the 1.7 signal) and a short whip (to send the 49 signal to the base). However, the atmospheric noise created by thousands of phones operating on the 1.7mhz band, caused this spectrum to get crowded, and interfere with some navigational beacons which shared the spectrum. Next came the 49-46 mhz units in common use today. In time, five extra channels were added to both the 49 (handset to base) and 46 (base to handset) channels. Now, in an ever increasing attempt to outwit crowded frequencies, the new 900mhz units have appeared. One good point about the old 1.7mhz units was that since the portable's receive antenna was internal, the unit could receive a ringing signal, at full range, without having the antenna extended. However, it was vulnerable to many stray ringing signals from nearby bases, on the same power line as ones house, causing annoying false rings :-( *** SECURITY *** The original 'desk model' phones and the early 'one piece' phones used something called a 'guard tone' to verify authenticity. Basically a simple high-pitched whistle was superimposed over the conversation audio. The base had a small chip in it (LM566) which would detect the tone and open the line. One of several tones were pre-set in the portable, and the base was adjustable. If no tone was heard by the base, or the tone was of the wrong pitch, the unit would not open the line. This tone was sufficiently above the 300-3000hz response of the phone circuit so it could easily be filtered out prior to injection into the line. However there was a high degree of repetition on guard tones, so there was still a lot of security holes. Also, the existence of that tone, made DTMF (touch-tone) dialing impossible. The phones pulse dialed by interrupting the guard tone and pulsing the line relay in the base. Finally, with the advent of inexpensive digital chips, the phones started to be equipped with 'digital security codes'. In this scheme, a short data burst is sent to the base just as the portable is switched to the 'talk' mode. Another burst is sent as the portable is switched off. If the portable and base's bit stream did not match, no connection would be made. In most of these units, a set of dip switches on the base AND portable could be set to any of a couple hundred combinations. (While there are theoretically thousands of combinations, practical limitations of the inexpensive chips and dip-switches, usually kept these choices to about 200-250) Interesting side benefit, besides better audio and the ability to tone dial, was the fact that in many cases the base would not instantly hang up if signal was lost momentarily due to range limits. Often the base needs that 'hang up' signal to disconnect. So, if you are out in your yard and you accidentally step out of range for a moment, you will not lose your call. Also, in some units, the 'ring' signal sent to the portable to signal an incoming call, is also digital, thereby reducing the annoying habit of earlier phones to respond to ringing from a neighbors cordless base. Another common form of security is an interlock which prohibits the base from picking up the line *at all* if the portable is resting on it's charger contacts. There is probably more to add, but I won't drone on any longer. Hope this helps. William Pfeiffer Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal To subscribe, send e-mail to rrb@airwaves.chi.il.us [Moderator's Note: Bill is correct about me having an early cordless phone. My first one was about 1967-68, but honestly Bill, I do not remember it operating on Channel 3-A of Citizen's Band. (27.995 mz). It was as described: a typical 500 set with a rotary dial, but totally different insides than a desk phone, obviously. I know its receiving ability was far better than its transmission ability: I could walk a good block away from home with it and if a call came in, the remote unit (the piece you carried around which looked like a 500 set) would chirp, but it could not make the trip back to the base. I'd go off hook to answer; the base would continue sending those signals to make it chirp, thinking there was no answer. I'm sure this one was in the range of 1700-1730 kc. And it was expensive! I think I paid about $400 for the unit ... they were considered really hot items! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 10:27:08 EDT From: mikel%aaahq05@uunet.UU.NET (Mikel Manitius) Subject: Re: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake? > What prevents a near-by party with a cordless phone from dialing out > using my base unit and making charges on my phone line? In addition to the security codes PAT mentioned, many new models will not provide access over the air at all if the handset is in the cradle. Mikel Manitius mikel@aaa.com ------------------------------ From: bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps) Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc. Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 20:25:05 GMT In article shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu writes: > In article ndallen@nyx.cs.du.edu wrote: >> I wonder whether someone at Zimbabwe University turns the fax machine >> off after 5 p.m. to save electricity, assuming that nobody else in the > Perhaps not to save electricity, but to save the (expensive) fax > machine. Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction Dept.: they're trying to save _paper_, not the fax machine. Slimey fax paper is real hard to come by in Zimbabwe. > Besides the big carriers, are there any private operators who provide > store-fwd fax services ? Yep -- my company does (shameless plug!) Brent Capps bcapps@agora.rain.com (gay stuff) bcapps@atlastele.com (telecom stuff) ------------------------------ From: hansen@pegasus.ATT.COM (t.l.hansen) Date: 26 Oct 1992 23:09 EDT Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted hansen@pegasus.att.com (Tony L Hansen) wrote: >>> The "Subject:"-line asks it all -- if there are any fax-transmission >>> store-and-forward services (doing for FAX what MCI's Messenger and >>> AT&T's voice-store-and-forward do for voice), how do I find them? >> Call AT&T EasyLink Services (1-800-624-3672) and ask about their Enhanced >> Fax service. It does exactly what you want. > this number doesn't work from the sf bay area ... Drat! The number is usually advertised as 1-800-MAIL-672. I mistranslated the L into a 3 instead of a 5. So make that 1-800-624-5672. Sorry for the mistake. Tony Hansen hansen@pegasus.att.com, tony@attmail.com att!pegasus!hansen, attmail!tony [Moderator's Note: Henry Mensch also wrote to say the original message was in error. Sorry I did not catch it either. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? Date: 26 Oct 92 21:06:08 GMT In pls@cibecue.az05.bull.com (Paul Schauble) writes: > With the punchdown blocks, what's the appropriate technique to take > one incoming pair and connect it to the many pairs goint out to each > room? The classic "66" block, while it's not "recommended" prceedure, will take several conductors into the same clip, sometimes as many as six. (Reliability descends as an exponential function of the number of wires.) While this is not SOP, it *is* such a common practice that much of the resistance to 110 blocks is from installers who like to do this (and can't on 110s.) Closer to correct is to use both sides of a 66M for one pair, and use bridge clips, thus getting you one "in" and three "outs" on each row (rather than an in and an out on each side of each row.) Genuine, according to the bible, is to use a 66B block, which is one in and three (five?) outs as supplied. > Also, is that available a list of mail order sources for the punchdown > blocks, jacks, &c? The usual Jensen, Specialized, and Black Box will mail them to anyone, and charge an arm and a leg, Anixter will happily set up a will-call, check-on-delivery account for anyone (but it helps if you know what you want, although they do have catalogs), and Graybar ditto (but it's like battling the Justice Department to get a catalog from them.) Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ From: rorem@bert.eecs.uic.edu (Doug Rorem) Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 04:39:47 GMT In article tnixon@hayes.com (Toby Nixon) writes: > What I'm think of is having three or four-pair twisted pair cable run > from each room separately (not daisy-chained the way they normally do > it) to a punch-down block in some central location, so we can hook > things together anyway we want. Is that a good idea? Do you have any > other advice for us? Thanks in advance. You might consider using 'smart house' wiring. I saw a demo house wired using this in Algonquin, IL (far NW Chicago suburb). They used connectors from Molex which included : a duplex electrical outlet with 6 pins on each outlet (for appliance control), and a video/telephone connector set the size of a duplex outlet stacked above. The latter consists of a video in and out jack and an RJ45 (8 conductor) jack. I don't know what the pin assignments are for the telephone jack, i.e. whether it's for multiline, ISDN, etc ... I believe AMP makes stuff for this 'smart house' standard also. Molex' address is: Molex Incorporated 2222 Wellington Ct. Lisle, IL 60532 (708)-969-4550 voice (708)-969-1352 fax Doug Rorem (I have no connection with Molex or AMP) University of Illinois at Chicago rorem@bert.eecs.uic.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 18:24:32 EDT From: Thomas Lapp Subject: Re: PictureTel Video Conference Experience bhouser@sc9.intel.com (Brad Houser) writes: > I had the pleasure/frustration of using Picturetel Video Conferencing > last week. I've been using PictureTel's equipment most of the summer for both point-to-point (two points) and multipoint (more than two). Let me see if I can add to what Brad has said without repeating him! I was told that the cost for a unit is about $60,000 which isn't too bad. We have several portable systems which contain one monitor and uses picture-within-picture for the near-end camera. In addition to a document camera, you can get a second camera on tripod. The control box controls tilt, pan, and zoom on either camera (and with point-to-point mode, you can also control the FAR END camera). The controls have two columns -- one for what is shown at the near end, the other what is sent to far end. Brad talks about a 1/4 second delay, although I've noticed it appears to be longer than that -- closer to one or two seconds round trip. This results in people interrupting each other a lot. > The video is much lower quality than regular video, but then > again it is being digitized (and compressed?) to squeeze over the > phone lines. The video "repaints" anything that moved. A co-worker who used it for the first time a few weeks ago described it as a "Max Headroom*" type of effect. Brad mentions the requirement of dialing two numbers. I'm not sure of the reason for this either, unless it is truly half-duplex transmission. The 1-700 telephone numbers are switched 56K bps circuits. According to the PictureTel menu's, in theory you can connect at up to 384Kbps (obviously via leased line only at this point). For more than two locations, one has to go through a "video conference bridge" where everyone calls one location and are all switched together for the conference. The location generating audio becomes the far-end to all other sites. We noticed that going through a video bridge degrades picture quality a little more than just point-to-point. I must admit that I'm one of those "gadget types" as well as having some professional experience with both radio and TV, so it took me a number of meetings before I could stop going ga-ga over the technology and actually participate in the actual meeting content :-) * - apologies to readers outside the USA and UK who may not have seen this short-lived TV series and may not know the name. tom internet : mvac23!thomas@udel.edu or thomas%mvac23@udel.edu (home) : lapp@cdhub1.dnet.dupont.com (work) OSI : C=US/A=MCI/S=LAPP/D=ID=4398613 uucp : {ucbvax,mcvax,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas Location : Newark, DE, USA ------------------------------ From: markm@salem.intel.com (Mark Morrissey) Subject: Re: Picturetel Video Conference Experience Date: 26 Oct 92 17:08:38 GMT In bhouser@sc9.intel.com (Brad Houser) writes: > I would be interested in learning more about the technology. Does > anyone know where I can find more info? I would send email to Mark Abel (my boss) who is the manager of the ADL CSC Communications group in ASTG. We are looking at research potential with them. I am not sure what can be said outside of our group, however, as the non-disclosure is pretty restrictive. Mark Morrissey markm@ashland.intel.com Senior Engineer Architecture Development Lab Intel Corp., Portland, OR. (503) 696-2068 #include ------------------------------ From: bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again< Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 07:17:34 GMT In fleckens@plains.NoDak.edu (Clint Fleckenstein) writes: > Is there a source of information regarding this, or is it just one of > those 'send this sick kid postcards' things that gets posted > everywhere? I'd like to put this to rest for once and for all. My cynical, paranoid side asks, is a "cry wolf" ploy to get people to ignore a real attempt to get this kind of tax through? After all the FBI wants us to pay to make it easy for them to stick their nose in our traffic. 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: Tue, 27 Oct 92 07:36:30 CST From: Mike.Riddle@ivgate.omahug.org (Mike Riddle) Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again< Reply-To: mike.riddle%inns@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE In a previous message, fleckens@plains.NoDak.edu (Clint Fleckenstein)) writes: > Well, here's the scoop. Local users are posting new posts, as part of > Docket 89-79 "Open Network Architecture Basic Service Element > Pricing". These posts once again purport a charge to Extended Service > Providers on a per minute basis, which, of course, would then be > passed on to the consumer, etc, etc, etc. > I've been on the net for almost six years, and have seen this kind of > crap come up again and again. This guy supposedly cites sources, but > I haven't seen this anywhere else. The poster says he got the info > from a network somewhere. What's the deal? I remain skeptical ... how > do I prove/disprove this? > Is there a source of information regarding this, or is it just one of > those 'send this sick kid postcards' things that gets posted > everywhere? I'd like to put this to rest for once and for all. Well, I think I'm the "guy" that managed to get the 89-79 business started on many of the BBSes. But I'm not particularly amused that the BBS crowd only *now* managed to find out, when I've been trying to get response started for over a year. Especially since the reopened comment period closed for new submissions Sept. 30, and closes for replies Oct. 30th. But in *all* of my comments, I've been careful to include docket numbers and dates. Anyone who wants to check it out and form their own conclusions is welcome to check out the Federal Register for July 11, 1991, and then refer to the documents cited. In fact, if you *don't* refer to the actual documents, you will completely miss what I consider to be the particularly odious aspects of the ESP access charge rulings. During the comment and appleal period, I've made available in electronic form copies of all the pertinent FCC documents, and I've also been the moderator of GEnie's *FCC RoundTable, which was set up especially to air the issues. I've still got all the files online at the BBS I operate, available to first-time callers. 1-402-593-1192. Unfortunately, I'm still one-hopped from the big cable in the sky, so you can't ftp from me. I don't know whether any ftp sites ever picked up any of this. You might try ftp.eff.org, since they were at least looking into the issue. Or if you have a GEnie account, the RoundTable is still up at page 1175, *FCC. (In addition to the "standard disclaimer," let me state that I'm an independent contractor and do *not* speak for GEnie or omahug.org or anyone else but myself.) <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>> mike.riddle@inns.omahug.org Nebraska Inns of Court bc335@cleveland.freenet.edu +1 402 593 1192 (Data) Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet 3/12/24/9600 V.32/V.42bis Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.3 (1:285/27.0) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #805 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04986; 27 Oct 92 4:06 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03402 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 01:49:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28238 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 01:49:03 -0600 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 01:49:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210270749.AA28238@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #806 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 Oct 92 01:49:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 806 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Non-Critical, Real-Real-Cheap International Bandwidth Wanted (H. Shrikumar) Blocking International Calling (Sean Donelan) Traffic Engineering References Wanted (Anthony J. Lisotta) Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco): Can it Work? (Joel M. Snyder) Information Needed About Willcon Satellite (Arlindo Ribeiro) Radio Modems (Patrick E. Meyer) Illinois Bell Fixes Pay Phone At Last (Andrew C. Green) Charge-by-Use Policy? (Alasdair Grant) Async Access to Client-Server Database: Please Help! (John Casavant) ATI2400etc. V.42bis/MNP5 Trouble (G. Steve Arnold) Contel Becomes GTE (John Higdon) Call Forwarding + Caller ID = ? (Paul Barnett) NYTel Phones Disable Keypad (Steve Kass) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 21:27:04 -0400 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) Subject: Non-Critical, Real-Real-Cheap International Bandwidth Wanted Typical telephone demand calls are geared to give service within some rather tight service constraints. Normally you'd expect even an international connection within 30 seconds to a minute. Matter of fact (some IXCs, I believe, would charge you for letting the remote phone ring for longer than 45 seconds, since it ties up trunks.) I wonder if there exist any plans that one could use to buy very very LOW PRIORITY BANDWIDTH ... which for want of a better word I'd call "request bandwidth" (as different from demand bandwidth). My intended application (bulk file transfer) would not mind having to wait for even half an hour or more for a call requested to materialize and would not mind calls getting dropped several times. Also I could conceivably sign up for calls at designated hours or even precise times. I'd wish to call one particular international number and transfer bulk data, my protocol can error-correct and checkpoint and thus recover easily from repeated line drops. I wonder if I could buy any unused bandwidth lying with one of the international carriers or the IRCs, at a much cheaper price ... and in return I don't tread on any existing traffic by being willing to wait for the call indefinitely (perhaps they'll call me back to avoid tying up the LEC-IXC trunk) and/or by calling/being-called whenever they have empty slots in their international lines, and by being willing to drop the connection whenever they need the bandwidth. (BTW, does someone know what % of the bandwidth on international trunks goes unused, by time of day and/or traffic patters?) To help you understand, this is sort of analogous to the ridiculously cheap tickets you can get on airlines if you give up lots of privilages, since this kind of price structure helps with airline planning and market. (Of course, I do realise that the telecom industry is very different from the airline industry.) I dont really think I have heard of any such service plan ... but you never know till you've asked :-) I'd appreciate any pointers that may or may not lead to anything that I could use. The alternative I am working on currently is to make an arrangement to ride on some existing leased line that crosses the ocean. I would share a proportional cost of the line with the original leasee, in exchange for allowing me to send my bursts of data during his silent minutes. shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in) ------------------------------ From: sean@cobra.dra.com Subject: Blocking international calling Date: 26 Oct 92 09:44:02 CDT Organization: Data Ressearch Associates, Inc. I have a need to set up a POTS line without the ability to make international calls, but still allow domestic long distance. AT&T told me they can block all long distance service, but not just international calls. I thought I had read of carriers blocking pay phones from making international calls. Is there some magic phrase the customer service people would understand to block international calls on a line? Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100 [Moderator's Note: What you probably read about is AT&T's illegal practice of red-lining certain neighborhoods and areas of major cities by prohibiting the use of their own calling card (both the standard calling card and the Universal Card) on calls to certain other countries. As a practical matter, there is no other way to place an international call from a payphone unless you want to drop several dozen coins in the box every few minutes if no one is available to authorize a third number billing for you. So AT&T does not prohibit international calls to certain countries from certain neighborhoods from payphones, they just made it extremely inconvenient. The reason AT&T takes this stance is because of their ignorant belief that people from those countries are likely to cheat on payment. If you are trying to call Israel, Jordan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, or most other middle-east countries, and you are calling from some area AT&T thinks is very transient and full of immigrants, then they refuse to handle the call on a calling card from a payphone. Many times it is simply left up to the operator handling the call whether or not to accept a calling card as payment to those points. If your voice has an accent, or the number you are calling from is in the wrong part of town, then you are refused a connection. Is this illegal? Yes. AT&T has gotten sued about it, but you know how that goes. If you complain loud enough and long enough, perhaps to the FCC, then a flunky at AT&T calls and tells you it was all a terrible mistake by 'an operator who had not been trained', and they give you a couple of $5 long distance gift certificates to smooth things over. But the technical considerations quoted to you were correct: either you block all long distance calling, or none at all in most cases. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lisotta@nas.nasa.gov (Anthony J. Lisotta) Subject: Traffic Engineering References Wanted Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation Facility NASA Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 14:52:04 GMT Reply-To: lisotta@nas.nasa.gov (Anthony J. Lisotta) I am in the process of doing capacity planning for a future upgrade of our network. However, I have had problems finding good reference materials on _DATA_ Traffic Engineering/Analysis. Every book and article I have seen so far have been dealing with VOICE traffic analysis. Are the methods the same for data as voice, and if not, does anyone know of some good references on DATA Traffic Engineering ? Please respond directly to me and I will post a summary. Thanks in advance. Anthony (Tony) Lisotta Network Development Engineer lisotta@nas.nasa.gov NASA/CSC Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation 415-604-4634 NASA Ames Research Center ------------------------------ Subject: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work? From: jms@carat.arizona.edu (A virtually vegetal non-entity) Date: 26 Oct 1992 23:46 MST Reply-To: jms@Arizona.EDU Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department - Mosaic Group In a recent trip to Geneva, I came across a rather attractive telephone laying in the street (actually, it was just outside the office of the phone company, leaving me to believe it had literally "fallen off a truck"). Naturally, I retrieved the phone and brought it home. Now: can I use it? Unclear. It has an RJ-11 on its back, and the handset uses the standard "small" RJ (does this one have a number) that I'm used to on all my other phones. However, when I plug it in, I get dead silence. Any advice? The phone has "Tritel Ronco" written on the handset. Aside from the usual ten number push buttons (arranged in two rows), it also has an asterisk, octothorpe (#), "H", "D", large dot, and double up-arrow buttons. On the back is a simple switch with "IMP" (presumably pulse dial) and "FO" (touch tone?) positions. Can any of our Swiss readers assist? Joel M Snyder, 1103 E Spring Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719 Phone: 602.882.4094 (voice) .4095 (FAX) .4093 (data) BITNET: jms@Arizona Internet: jms@arizona.edu SPAN: 47541::telcom::jms ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 11:48 From: SOLOYOLLA@orion.cpqd.ansp.br Subject: Information Needed Ahout Willcon Satellite Hello! Does anybody know about the Willcon Satellite receiver? I need some information such as how can I tune a channel and other features. Thanks a lot. Arlindo Ribeiro de Loyolla Filho. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 13:36:29 CDT From: patrick%8461.span@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov (Patrick E. Meyer) Subject: Radio Modems Can anyone please suggest companies that I can contact about radio modems. Thanks in advance, Patrick email: patrick%8461.span@fedex.msfc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 10:18:10 CDT From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Illinois Bell Fixes Pay Phone At Last A followup note to my complaint about six months elapsing after my first complaint about a downtown pay phone being out of order: This morning I found that Illinois Bell has suddenly fixed it. A bright blue sticker on the outside of the pedestal weather shield proclaims "Genuine Illinois Bell Telephone!", and inside is a completely new phone with a new number of (312) 332-8405. In deference to the traffic noise, it comes equipped with a "LOUD" button to boost the handset volume. Better late than never, I suppose! Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) Subject: Charge-by-Use Policy? Organization: U of Cambridge, England Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 13:34:58 GMT Is it likely that the amount of data sent will be incorporated into charging for B-ISDN? I notice that phone companies are still charging fixed rates for international calls no matter how much silence there is, but there will surely be a lot more demand for charge-by-use when bursty data services are introduced. And what about users of private ATM networks (where the charging may be in 'funny money', but still useful for internal resource control)? I know people talk of B-ISDN like electricity, but is it the case that once you switch on a piece of equipment of a certain rated amperage, you will be charged at a fixed rate even if it has a varying consumption? Hope this makes sense. ------------------------------ From: casavant@elmer.orl.mmc.com (John Casavant) Subject: Async Access to Client-Server Database: Please Help! Organization: Martin Marietta Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 21:08:41 GMT Is it possible to "dial into" a Unix server that is on the internet from a remote PC workstation running a Windows 3.1 front-end? The PC would access a Sybase database and queries would return data over the async connection. I know we could get a leased line, but I'm trying to work a solution that would use a 14.4 or 19.2 modem. :) We are running FTP's TCP/IP with eithernet connections on our local workstations. I know there "has to be a way". John Casavant ------------------------------ From: sarnold@andy.bgsu.edu (G. Steve Arnold) Subject: ATI2400etc. V.42bis/MNP5 Trouble Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh. Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 21:11:56 GMT Ok, here's the deal. I've had an ATI 2400etc. (v.42bis/MNP5) modem for almost two years and have just recently had an oppotunity to use the v.42bis and MNP5 features. My problem is that I can't seem to get the silly thing to transfer a text file appreciably faster than in asynchronous mode (no hard. compression). In standard mode, I'll pull in about 230 cps (235 on a good day, 220 on a bad day). In MNP5 mode, though, I've only seen 235cps no matter what I've done (transferring a text file) and with v.42bis only 266 cps (text file.) Am I doing everything I should be doing? Screen updates are noticibly faster, but they are quite bursty (not smooth), which can be expected. I've set my DTE speed (comm. software) to 9600bps and mysetup string is AT &F2 &C1 &B1 S7=100 S11=50 ^M. I played with this all night last night and couldn't get anywhere near the 400cps people have reported under MNP or 550cps with v.42bis. Is there anything else I can do that I'm missing? I realize the line noise is an issue (this explains some of the sluggish burstiness) and that the modem may be falling back to 1200 carrier to preserve the line integrity (I can't tell -- internal modem) but it seems that something is amiss. I've tried xmodem,ymodem-g and zmodem transfers (oddly, xmodem only chunks through at about 128cps, but I never use it so it isn't optimized in any sense of the word ...) Anyone got any ideas or experience with this sort of thing? I'm gonna try again tonight and see if I can get it. P.S. It appears I may be confused about something. Is v.32bis a protocol INHERENT to 14.4bps modems? i.e., is it wrong to say that v.32bis is a protocol which is a subset (in some sense) of the v.42bis protocol? and thus available on non-14.4 modems? or is v.32bis simply the way 14.4 modems work, even though v.42bis may provide better throughput. I guess what I want clarified is the relationship between v.42bis and v.32bis. Just curious ... Thanks, G. Steve Arnold Dept. Math and Stats. BGSU sarnold@andy.bgsu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 02:01 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Contel Becomes GTE Contel bill insert: Proposed Plan Filed to Merge Contel of California with GTE California On September 14, 1992, GTE Filed with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) its plan to merge Contel of California with GTE California. If approved by the CPUC, the merger could be implemented as early as January 1, 1994. On March 13, 1991, the CPUC on an interim basis approved the merger of GTE Corporation and Contel Corporation provided their respective California sibsidiaries continue to operate separately until the CPUC grants final approval for the merger. Under the proposed plan, GTE believes that the merged company would realize savings from greater efficiencies and elimination of redundant functions. GTE California proposes to pass along to customers of the merged companies a permanent $8.2 million reduction in costs in 1994 and an additional reduction of $3.6 million in 1995. GTE proposes that the reductions would initially be in the form of an approximate one percent credit on the charge for basic telephone service. GTE believes that customers may receive additional benefits if the merged company's earning rise above the benchmark rate of return level established for GTE California in the CPUC's incentive regulation decision. Any earnings above the benchmark are shared equally between the company's customers and shareholders. Under the merger plan, GTE California will establish a division headquarters in Victorville, site of the current headquarters for Contel of California, and maintain a presence in all communities currently served by Contel of California. GTE California serves approximately 3.1 million customers in 330 communities, mostly in southern California. Contel of California serves approximately 312,000 customers in California. *** end quote *** I do not know who might believe this self-serving nonsense from GTE California, but one look at the way the GTE/Contel merger has been going across the country reveals that the above is pure fantasy. GTE does not even maintain a presence in Palm Springs, the center of its "eleventh LATA" black-hole empire. And as we know, GTE is in the process of pulling its entire business office presence out of the entire state of California. High desert Contel customers will, over the coming year, be relieved of their very community-oriented local telco, employing friends and neighbors. It its place they will get a pile of 800 numbers so that they can talk to people with southern accents who will not know the difference between Victorville and victimize. Regardless of the lies being told to Contel customers, the new GTE customers will be lucky to find a grocery store that has a telephone bill collection agreement, let alone a business office. Contel California has traditionally been a progressive and responsive operation. Within its small scope, it has provided telephone service to rural customers that is second to none. It is a sad and unfitting end to have it now swallowed up by the most evil of empires. It will also be most interesting to watch the service go to hell in the process. I will undoubtedly be reporting on this in the coming year. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: barnett@convex.com (Paul Barnett) Subject: Call Forwarding + Caller ID = ? Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 15:39:27 GMT Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA Has anyone had experience with the eventual results if a person at 555-1111 calls 555-2222, which is set to forward to 555-3333? Would a caller ID display at 555-2222 show anything (assuming the SW Bell method of ringing the phone once), and would the caller ID display at 555-3333 show 555-1111 or 555-2222? Is all of this dependent on the switch that does the call forwarding? Specifically, I have my mobile number set to forward to my house after three rings, and I give my mobile number to my friends. Would caller ID be useful under these circumstances? Paul Barnett Internet: barnett@convex.com Convex Computer Corp. Office: 214-497-4846 Richardson, TX Mobile/Home: 214-236-8438 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 13:50 EST From: SKASS@drew.drew.edu Subject: NYTel Phones Disable Keypad Last night I tried six times to check my voice mail from four different NY Tel payphones near 2nd Ave and 4th St in Manhattan. I've never had any trouble there before, but this time, after calling and connecting, I was never able to get through entering my mailbox number, password and commands before the keypad was disabled (four times) or I was disconnected (twice). AT&T was kind enough to give me credit for the calls, but I don't really see how it was their fault. I called 611 and reported the problem, but I have to wonder what's up. I've never seen a BOC phone disable the keypad before. Any ideas? Or should I just buy my own tone generator and forget about it? Steve Kass, Dept of Math and CS skass@drew.drew.edu Drew University, Madison NJ 07940 201-514-1187 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #806 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15877; 28 Oct 92 3:17 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09728 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 28 Oct 1992 01:07:11 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15274 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 28 Oct 1992 01:06:56 -0600 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1992 01:06:56 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210280706.AA15274@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #807 TELECOM Digest Wed, 28 Oct 92 01:07:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 807 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Use of Kerberos for Cellular Phone Protection? (Paul Robinson) Information Wanted on Antique Danish Phone (Jeff Garber) Who is Marsha? (Jeff Garber) California Call Box Experience (Brian Gordon) "Call Home" Special Case For Calling Cards? (Will Martin) Phase-Locking the World (Steve Warwick) UK Dialtone Competition? (Charles A. Hoequist) Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) (David Lesher) Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) (Carl Moore) Are CCITT Standards Available on CD ROM? (Ton Koelman) Telephone Quotations (Ed Campbell) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDARCOS@ATTMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 17:43:18 EST Subject: Use of Kerberos for Cellular Phone Protection? The following message is cross posted to Info-Vax and to TELECOM Digest in the hopes that we may be able to find an answer to an important topic. In a message in TELECOM Digest Vol 12, No. 804, from pls@cibecue@az05.bull.com (Paul Schauble) who quotes the following: > Craig Heim writes: >> Here's the Cellular Fraud problem of the 1990s: CLONING. >> How do you handle a bandit who has programed his phone >> to the ESN and MIN of a valid subscriber? > Kerberos? The Moderator of TELECOM Digest wanted to know how Kerberos could be implemented in cellular phones: > I suspect it would be (almost) foolproof. How would you do it? How > would the legitimate user get his 'ticket' each time? I have asked the Info-Vax group the question 'What is Kerberos?' and gotten some answers but I still don't quite understand it. But I do want to pass on to them the question that the Moderator of TELECOM Digest asked: > How would / could you implement Kerberos for use on cellular phones? This is getting to the point that it is off-topic for info-vax, so please respond to me (and/or) to telecom. To TELECOM Digest, I ask Pat, what is Kerberos and what is a 'ticket'? Info Vax subscribers who get this message are asked to offer suggestions to me at TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM and/or to telecom@eecs.nwu.edu in order that anyone who has ideas on how to implement Kerberos on a Cellular phone could be attempted. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These (uninformed) opinions are mine alone; no one else is (stupid enough to be) responsible for them. [Moderator's Note: Kerberos is a rather sophisticated (IMHO) method of security. I know that, for example, in order for me to do maintainence work on the Telecom Archives -- which is in the public directory at lcs.mit.edu -- it is necessary for me to rlogin to a work station at MIT, obtain a 'ticket' from the 'ticket granting ticket' which is then recognized by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu for a short amount of time of read/write privileges on that machine by myself. I am not sure how it works. A job called 'nfsauth mintaka' runs in the background all the time I am working there. I can't just rlogin on mintaka; I have no account there, nor can anyone write to the public directory there using ftp. But when I get my 'ticket punched', I can go to the archives and edit or write all the files I want -- for that limited amount of time. I've spent long sessions there and had my 'ticket run out of time', and this necessitated cd'ing back to the work station and asking for another ticket. I've been told to only ask for a ticket from my login shell; not from (for example) a shell I call while within Emacs or elsewhere; for to do so makes the 'ticket granting ticket' very unhappy and very flaky. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 04:17 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: Information Wanted on Antique Danish Phone Last weekend I aquired a phone from a Danish antique store. Maybe a Scandanavian phone enthusiast can tell me what it is I've got. The lady at the shop said she thought the phones (there were 3 of them) were from the 1940's. By looking at the outside of it, I thought that sounded about right. My phone is Ivory in color (the other two at the shop were black) and it has stamped on the bottom 211.251 M. 51. F-1, and there's a letter T with a circle around it. The underside of the handset says KRISTIAN KIRKS TELEFONFABRIKER A/S. The phone is very heavy. It's styled like a normal desk phone, except there is no dial. It has a lever where the dial would normally be. This lever rests facing left, and you push it to the right with your thumb, then it springs back to the left. This, I assume, is to signal the operator. This phone also has cloth handset and line cords (one of the three in the shop had a coiled handset cord, instead of cloth). So far so good, except ... there's a plug on the end of the line cord (it has four vertical prongs arranged in a sort of circle, and a horizontal prong in the middle). That makes me think that either Denmark used the plug-in method long before we did, or someone stuck the plug on the end later (all three phones in the shop had the plug). It doesn't look like an add-on to me, and the plastic on the outside of the plug matches the color of the phone exactly. After I got the thing home, I unscrewed the receiver and microphone covers. Underneath I found neither of them hardwired in. They are the pop-out type that touch the contacts when they are placed in the handset. Also after I got it home, I noticed two little studs protruding from the bottom of the phone along a track where they can slide. This seems to be a ringer adjustment, as I can see the gongs on either side of the track inside. I don't know why there are two studs. Moving one causes the other to move the same distance and the same direction (maybe there was some kind of lever attatched to the studs?). So what I want to know is how old is this phone? Is it an older phone and did the Danish have advanced ideas in phone manufacturing, or is it a newer phone (1970's?) designed to work in rural areas where there is no dial service and no common battery, and signalling the operator with the manual lever is necessary? If it helps, there is a little "window frame" on the front for a phone number card to be inserted, and the card has the handwritten phone number of HusGy 103. MrFone@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 04:18 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: Who is Marsha? Last week I had a meeting with some salesmen from Octel because my company is shopping around for a new voicemail system and I happen to like Aspen (we currently have Wang DVX :( ). I had mentioned something about Jane Barbe to one of them, and he said that their new systems feature Marsha instead of Jane, but Jane was still available if we really preferred her. So who is this Marsha? Unfortunately we will not be getting Aspen at all because they can't integrate with our crappy Merlin II phone system (neither could Wang or ANYONE else that we've talked to so far, but we'll try AT&T since they have voicemail and they make this crappy Merlin II.) MrFone@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 12:27:20 PST From: Brian.Gordon@Eng.Sun.COM (Brian Gordon) Subject: California Call Box Experience Last Friday evening, I had the joy of a blowout on I-280 in the San Jose area of Northern California, and rolled to a stop just a hundred yards or so past one of the relatively new "call box" cellular phones. I walked back and picked up the receiver (no obvious mechanical trip involved). It started ringing -- four rings, followed by a higher pitched ring, answered reasonably quickly by a female voice, "California Highway Patrol". I explained my problem and asked if she could call Triple-A, which she could. Since the call box was on one side of an overpass (Wolfe Road) and my car was on the other (i.e. I had walked back under the overpass to reach the box), I explained that my car was on the side of the road just past the Wolfe Road overcrossing. She replied that she had my location as "past Lawrence Expressway" -- which is a mile or two further down the road. Unfortunately, she said that she had to report that as the location to the Auto Club. I asked, half in jest, if she would also tell them that when they couldn't find me there, to look back at Wolfe Road where I was. She was not real amused. Since her estimate was that it would be less than 30 minutes until the truck arrived, I went back to the car and listened to the radio, read, etc. for 45 minutes, and then returned to the call box. The second use was a bit different: Lift handset. Dial-tone Four low pitched rings Six high pitched rings Recording: "This is the CHP. All operators are busy, and your call will be routed to the next available operator." Five high pitched rings click/silence Dial-tone Four low pitched rings Six high pitched rings Recording: "This is the CHP. All operators are busy, and your call will be routed to the next available operator." Five high pitched rings click/silence Dial-tone Four low pitched rings Six high pitched rings Recording: "This is the CHP. All operators are busy, and your call will be routed to the next available operator." 5 high pitched rings click/silence After 20 minutes of this, it got boring, but the truck did appear. As I had suspected, he had been wandering around in the area for quite a while, and had had difficulty finding me, since I was a couple of miles away from where he had been sent. Had I known the problems ahead, it would have been faster and easier to walk the mile or so up the ramp and to a phone booth in a local shopping center, reported an accurate location direcvtly to the Auto Club, and been able to get back to them in a reasonable manner if things went poorly. The only advantage to the call box was that I could keep within sight of the car while waiting. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 9:52:48 CST From: Will Martin Subject: "Call Home" Special Case For Calling Cards? Since I haven't been traveling lately due to reduced budgets, it's been a while since we last used a telco calling card or the calling-card feature of our AT&T Universal card. However, my wife was away this past weekend and used the Universal card to call me at home. It had been so long that both of us had forgotten about the need for a PIN when using the card that way, and she didn't know the PIN. She was able to get it from the Universal card service people by calling the 800 number and giving personal data that identified her (my mother's maiden name -- appropriate since she was away at a genealogical conference! :-). This caused me to think again about something I had long felt would be a good idea -- that calling-card calls to one certain number (most probably the owner's home number, but let's make it a single number specifiable by the card-holder in writing, and changeable only on a limited basis with some day's leadtime, such as by sending in a written paper form only) would be put through *without* a PIN being needed. This would have several benefits: 1) "Shoulder surfing" and similar types of calling-card fraud would be reduced. If one could call home with a calling card without keying in or speaking the PIN, someone surreptitiously discovering the card number would still not have the PIN, and thus have no way to use it for the usual types of international calling and the like which constitutes most such abuse. I would venture to guess that a large percentage, maybe more than half, of calls made with a calling card from places like airports and bus terminals, where such fraud is rampant, are calls from an individual to their home number. (Does anyone have any hard statistics on this?) All those calls would be of no value to the "shoulder surfer", since they could not find out the PIN. Of course, other calls would still be vulnerable to this technique, but at least it would be an improvement. 2) Giving a calling card without a PIN to children, friends, or relatives would let them call home only, and yet the card would not be available for abuse by them, their friends, or people who might steal it from them. In the case of a credit card which also has a calling card feature, like the AT&T Universal card, not knowing the PIN would limit the possible abuse of the card, at least preventing it from being used to get cash advances. This would eliminate the problems (previously discussed on Telecom) of the "call home" special calling card which was *supposed* to only be usable to call the home number, but which could be used to call other numbers if the user was clever and found workarounds like using the # to make subsequent calls on Airfone, etc. 3) It would eliminate problems like the one my wife encountered from not knowing the PIN, and reduce the open-vulnerability of PINs, which most people end up writing down because they cannot remember the half-dozen or more PINs they end up with, when all the different cards they might have are totaled up. If you don't need the PIN to call home, and you normally don't use the card in ways where PINs are required, you probably will not carry it written down with you. (After all, you can call home PINless and have someone there tell you what it is! :-) Sure, this is limited. Some people will say "I want to be able to call my spouse's office number too" or other such extensions. I don't think such enlargements of the scope of PINless calling would be a good idea. It would be a special-purpose feature with this one limited application, and adding more numbers would cause problems with the telco database which would be needed to implement this. (I'm envisioning a single added field to the card-validation database, which the software would check -- that field would contain the PINless-callable number. Calls to that number without a PIN would go through; calls to any other number without a PIN would be rejected, or a PIN prompted for. Do the people on the list who know about this software and database feel this is feasible?) If this feature was adopted, the scope for abuse of a lost calling card without a PIN printed (or written! :-) on it will be limited. If the calling-card number is not the same as the home (or other PINless-callable) number, the finder or thief wouldn't even know what number could be called without a PIN. If the card was one of the old style which used the home number, they could make harassing or annoyance calls to that number using the calling card, but the legitimate card holder could stop that quickly by calling to have the card number deactivated entirely, which would be the normal action in any case if a card is lost or stolen. I had been thinking that instituting this feature would also require that the card issuer be less willing to give out the PIN via a phone call, as they did for my wife, but perhaps this restriction would not be necessary, if enough personal data is asked for to absolutely identify the person calling as legitimate. (Regarding item #2 above, the ID data would have to be able to exclude family members and identify the exact individuals who are authorized to know the PIN, so simple stuff like "mother's maiden name" would not suffice. Something more elaborate would be needed...) Perhaps a long distance company which is maintaining its own private database, like the AT&T one which contains the Universal card pseudo-numbers, could set this up on its own as a service to its patrons, and this would serve as a phased introduction of this to the entire calling-card universe? If anyone out there works for such a firm and wants to put this in as a suggestion and make some money off the idea, feel free to do so! (Or maybe this already exists in some fashion and I don't know about it? Details, please, if so!) Regards, Will wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil OR wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil ------------------------------ From: warwick@optilink.com (Steve Warwick) Subject: Phase-Locking the World Date: 27 Oct 92 19:26:26 GMT Organization: DSC/Optilink Access Products Please excuse me for getting this off my chest, but I can't stand it anymore! How come the local, long distance telephone companies, broadband digital service providers and other carriers of digital signals can't get together and develop a single precision source for timing distribution??? I mean really, wouldn't synchronous systems be a little easier to design if you could get some agreement on what you're synchronised to???? Thanks for that moment of disgruntlment. s. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 09:54:00 +0000 From: "Charles (C.A.) Hoequist" Subject: UK Dialtone Competition? A query for the telecommies in the UK: my manager last week insisted that he had been told by reliable sources that competition for local service is allowed in the UK, and not just by Mercury, but by a lot of small local companies. Can this be? I lived in the UK 1986-88 and never saw anything of the sort, but up-to-date information would be appreciated. Is there a choice of local dialtone providers? If not, is there legislation for such in the Commons, or any other move that would provoke my manager's belief? Thanks for any info. Charles Hoequist |Internet: hoequist@bnr.ca BNR Inc. | 919-991-8642 PO Box 13478, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3478 ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 17:36:48 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex Pat commented about my Guyana posting. Just want to add a few clean-up facts. First, Bonaire is part of the Netherland Antilles, so I'm not surprised re: a city code change. (FWIW, the physical distance between Curacao and Georgetown is small. The time gap is about 60-75 years ...) The phone system in Guyana was just sold to a private firm, A.T.I. or A.N.I. or such. They were based on Trinidad, I believe, but it might have been elsewhere in the islands. I can not understand how anyone hopes to profit on calls with a connection percentage in the 5-10% range. Remember the very limited trunkage into the country ... wb8foz@scl.cwru.edu [Moderator's Note: Least we forget, Georgetown was the headquarters for a few years for the infamous Jim Jones, of People's Temple in San Fransisco whose 900+ sheep/followers died in what came to be known as the "Kool-Aid Kommunion" -- grape drink laced with cyanide -- in the jungle of Guyana. The Reverend Mr. Jones was Commissioner of Public Housing in San Fransisco: the only place in the USA where politicians are so eager to prove how broad-minded and liberal they are that they would install an insane person like that in public office, then close their eyes to his activities rather than risk being thought of as racist or homophobic! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 11:29:37 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) The Netherlands Antilles number was +599-6868. How long are numbers under +599-7? ------------------------------ From: koelman@stc.nato.int (Ton Koelman) Subject: Are CCITT Standards Available on CD ROM? Reply-To: koelman@stc.nato.int Organization: SHAPE Technical Centre, NL Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 11:16:46 GMT Are any of the ISO and/or CCITT standards available on CD-ROM? Ton Koelman e-mail: koelman@stc.nato.int (NeXT Mail Welcome!) SHAPE Technical Centre, P.O. Box 174, 2501 CD The Hague The Netherlands (voice: 31-70-3142429, fax: 31-70-3142111) ------------------------------ From: ecampbel@metz.une.edu.au (Ed Campbell) Subject: Telephone Quotations Date: 27 Oct 92 23:13:35 GMT Do you know of any quotes concerning the telephone, that you are willing to share , eg "Do you know who I've always depended on?. Not strangers, not friends. The telephone. That's my best friend" - Marilyn Munroe. If I get any replies I will summarise. Ed. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #807 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04761; 29 Oct 92 2:05 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01244 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 00:01:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10627 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 00:01:01 -0600 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 00:01:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210290601.AA10627@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #808 TELECOM Digest Thu, 29 Oct 92 00:01:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 808 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson HoHoCon '92 : Updated Announcement (dFx International Digest) Newspaper Wins Use of '511' Telephone Number (Wash. Post via P. Robinson) Statistics on Unlisted Telephone Numbers and Demographics (Bill Paterson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dfx@nuchat.sccsi.com (dFx International Digest) Subject: HoHoCon '92 : Updated Announcement Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc. Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 05:05:20 GMT [Updated Announcement - October 27, 1992] dFx International Digest and cDc - Cult Of The Dead Cow proudly present : The Third Annual X M A S C O N AKA H 0 H 0 C O N "WE KAN'T BE ST0PPED!" Who: All Hackers, Journalists, Security Personnel, Federal Agents, Lawyers, Authors and Other Interested Parties. Where: Allen Park Inn 2121 Allen Parkway Houston, Texas 77019 U.S.A. Tel: (800) 231-6310 Hou: (713) 521-9321 Fax: (713) 521-9321, Ext. 350 When: Friday December 18 through Sunday December 20, 1992 HoJo's Says NoNo To HoHo ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HAY!^@!*%!$1#&! We beat our own record! This year, thanks to one certain person's complete stupidity and ignorance, we managed to get kicked out of our first chosen hotel four months in advance. Needless to say, this caused some serious confusion for those who called to make reservations and were told the conference had been canceled. Well ... it hasn't been. The story is long, but if you wish to read exactly what happened, check out CuD 4.45. The conference dates are still the same, but the hotel has changed since what was originally reported in the first update, which made it's way throughout Usenet and numerous other places, including CuD 4.40. If you haven't heard about the new location, please make a note of the information listed above. What Exactly Is HoHoCon? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HoHoCon is something you have to experience to truly understand. It is the largest annual gathering of those in, related to, or wishing to know more about the computer underground (or those just looking for another excuse to party). Attendees generally include some of the most notable members of the "hacking/telecom" community, journalists, authors, security professionals, lawyers, and a host of others. Last year's speakers ranged from Bruce Sterling to Chris Goggans and Scot Chasin of Comsec/LoD. The conference is also one of the very few that is completely open to the public and we encourage anyone who is interested to attend. Or, as Jim Thomas put it in CuD 4.45: "For the past few years, a conference called "XmasCon" (or HoHoCon) has been held in Texas in December. As reported previously (CuD #4.40), it will be held again this year from 18-21 December. For those unfamiliar with it, XmasCon is a national meeting of curious computer aficionados, journalists, scholars, computer professionals, and others, who meet for three days and do what people do at other conferences: Discuss common interests and relax." Hotel Information ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Allen Park Inn is located along Buffalo Bayou and is approximately three minutes away from downtown Houston. The HoHoCon group room rates are $49.00 plus tax (15%) per night, your choice of either single or double. As usual, when making reservations you will need to tell the hotel you are with the HoHoCon Conference to receive the group rate. Unlike our previously chosen joke of a hotel, the Allen Park Inn is not situated next to an airport and this may cause a small inconvenience for those of you who will be flying to the conference. The hotel is centrally located so you can fly in to either Intercontinental or Hobby airport but we are recommending Hobby as it is 15 miles closer and much easier to get to from the hotel. Here's where it may get a little confusing: If you arrive at Hobby, you will need to take the Downtown Hyatt Airport Shuttle to the Hyatt, which departs every 30 minutes and will cost you $6.00. When you get to the Hyatt, get out of the shuttle with your luggage (for those who may not of figured that out yet) and use any of the nearby payphones to call the Allen Park Inn (521-9321) and tell them you need a ride. It's just like calling Mom when you need a ride home from glee club! The hotel shuttle will be around shortly to pick you up and take you to the aforementioned elite meeting place, and that ride is free. If all this is too much for you, you can always take a cab directly to the hotel which will run you about $20. If you arrive at Intercontinental, you will need to board the Airport Express bus and take it to the Downtown Hyatt ($9). Once there, just follow the same instructions listed above. We are in the process of trying to get the hotel to provide constant airport transportation during the conference, but they've yet to give us a definite answer. It is quite possible that we will have our own shuttle to bus people between the airports and hotel, so if you'd prefer a faster and more direct method of transportation, it would be helpful to mail and let us know what time you'll be arriving and at what airport. This will give us a chance to coordinate things more efficiently. Check-in is 3:00 p.m. and check-out is 12:00 noon. Earlier check-in is available if there are unoccupied rooms ready. Free local calls are provided, so bring dem 'puterz. I don't know if cable is free also, so those who wish to rekindle the memories of yesteryear may want to bring their screwdrivers. The hotel has both 24 hour room service, and a 24 hour restaurant, The Nashville Room. Call it a wacky coincidence, but the hotel bar is called the ATI room and like most of Houston's similar establishments, closes at 2 a.m. Good thing Tony still works at Spec's ... This time around, the hotel is placing the conference guests in the rooms surrounding the courtyard/pool area. We are once again encouraging people to make their reservations as soon as possible for two reasons -- first, we were told that if you wait too long and the courtyard rooms are all taken, there is a chance that you'll be situated at the complete opposite end of the hotel, which isn't so bad if you don't mind walking all that way back and forth outside in December. Secondly, there is no other hotel exactly next door to this one (the closest is about five minutes away or so), so if for some odd reason all the rooms get rented, you'll get to do some nifty traveling every night. Directions ~~~~~~~~~~ For those of you who will be driving to the conference, the following is a list of directions on how to get to the hotel from most of Houston's major freeways that bring traffic in from out of town: I-45 North or South: Exit Allen Parkway on the inside (left side) of the freeway. Take the Studemont/Montrose exit off Allen Parkway, then make a u-turn at the bridge and head back towards downtown. The hotel will be on the right hand side. 290: Take 290 to 610 South, then take I-10 East towards downtown. Exit Studemont. Right on Studemont, left on Allen Parkway. The hotel will be on the right hand side. I-10 West: Exit Studemont. Right on Studemont, left on Allen Parkway. The hotel will be on the right hand side. I-10 East: Take I-10 East to I-45 South and follow the same directions from I-45 listed above. I-59 North or South: Take I-59 to I-45 North and follow the same directions from I-45 listed above. Call the hotel if these aren't complete enough or if you need additional information. Conference Details ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HoHoCon will last three days, with the actual conference being held on Saturday, December 19 in the Hermitage Room, starting at 11:00 a.m. and continuing until 5 p.m. or earlier depending on the number of speakers. We are still in the planning stages at the moment, primarily due to time lost in finding a new hotel and getting contracts signed. We have a number of speakers confirmed (yes, Goggans will be speaking again) and will try to finalize the list and include it in the next update. We are definitely still looking for people to speak and welcome diverse topics (except for "The wonders and joys of ANSI, and how it changed my life"). If you're interested in rattling away, please contact us as soon as possible and let us know who you are, who you represent (if anyone), the topic you wish to speak on, a rough estimate of how long you will need, and whether or not you will be needing any audio-visual aids. We would like to have people bring interesting items and videos again this year. If you have anything you think people would enjoy having the chance to see, please let us know ahead of time, and tell us if you will need any help getting it to the conference. If all else fails, just bring it to the con and give it to us when you arrive. We will also include a list of items and videos that will be present in a future update. If anyone requires any additional information, needs to ask any questions, wants to RSVP, or would like to be added to the mailing list to receive the HoHoCon updates, you may mail us at: dfx@nuchat.sccsi.com drunkfux@freeside.com drunkfux@ashpool.freeside.com 359@7354 (WWIV Net) or via sluggo mail at: Freeside Data Network Attn: HoHoCon/dFx 11504 Hughes Road Suite 124 Houston, Texas 77089 We also have a VMB which includes all the conference information and is probably the fastest way to get updated reports. The number is: 713-866-4884 You may also download any of the conference announcements and related materials by calling 713-492-2783 and using the username "unix", which is unpassworded. The files will be in the "hohocon" directory. Type "biscuit" if you wish to gain an account on the system. You can find us there too. Conference information and updates will most likely also be found in most computer underground related publications, including CuD, Informatik, NIA, Mondo 2000, 2600, Phrack, World View, etc. We completely encourage people to use, reprint, and distribute any information in this file. Stupid Ending Statement To Make Us Look Good ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HoHoCon '92 will be a priceless learning experience for professionals (yeah, right) and gives journalists a chance to gather information and ideas direct from the source. It is also one of the very few times when all the members of the computer underground can come together for a realistic purpose. We urge people not to miss out on an event of this caliber, which doesn't happen very often. If you've ever wanted to meet some of the most famous people from the hacking community, this may be your one and only chance. Don't wait to read about it in all the magazines and then wish you had been there, make your plans to attend now! Be a part of what we hope to be our largest and greatest conference ever. Remember, to make your reservations, call (800) 231-6310 and tell them you're with HoHoCon. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1992 18:17:34 EST Subject: Newspaper Wins Use of '511' Telephone Number Newspaper Wins Use of '511' {Information Services Venture Gets Number} {Washington Post, Oct 28, Pg G1} By Cindy Skrzycki, Washington Post Staff Writer In West Palm Beach, Fla., when you call 911, you get police and emergency services. When you call 411, you get the phone company and directory assistance. Soon, when you call 511, you will get the local newspaper, the Palm Beach Post, the paper's parent company said yesterday. Callers dialing the three-digit code will zip by the newspaper's switchboard and tap directly into a database of electronic information services such as sports scores, stock quotes, political speeches, weather reports and, eventually, classified advertising. The use of 511 by the {Palm Beach Post}, which is owned by Cox Enterprises Inc., in Atlanta, is the first time a non-telephone company has been granted commercial use of a three-digit phone number. In this case, Cox Enterprises will pay Southern Bell, a subsidiary of BellSouth Corp. that serves the West Palm Beach area, for the use of the number and the billing services that the phone company will provide. The two-year experimental service that cox hopes to inaugurate in West Palm Beach in a few months is expected to open the door to similar deals in which the nation's regional telephone companies would work with competitors such as newspapers. In many cases, newspapers now offer news, sports scores and other information by phone, but readers must dial a regular seven-digit number or a 900-number. The use of a three-digit number by a commercial enterprise other than a phone company also is a victory of sorts for media companies and other information services providers. They are worried that their role in the emerging market for new information services will be stymied by the phone companies and their control over local telephone networks. Phone companies also are expected to offer enhanced directory services to 411 callers, providing information far beyond simple telephone numbers. "We hope to become a gateway of information to the local community," said James McKnight, vice president of telecommunications for Cox Newspapers, a division of Cox Enterprises. "This will be easy to dial, easy to remember, at a modest fixed price. We think it puts us on a more equal footing" with the phone company, he said. McKnight said Cox has requested that it be allowed to offer a similar service in the 12 markets where it has 17 newspapers. Similarly, The Washington Post Co. has had discussions with Bell Atlantic Corp. about offering enhanced electronic information services that would allow callers to use a three-digit number. said Elizabeth Loker, vice president of systems and engineering for The Post. Bell Atlantic said it has more requests for three-digit codes than the number of such codes available. The company is contemplating letting a variety of customers use a single three-digit code; callers would then reach an electronic menu that would offer them a choice of information providers. BellSouth said it was considering using a lottery system to assign the codes. Until now, the use of three-digit numbers has been confined largely to 911, 411 and 611, the last number sometimes used as a quick way to reach phone companies for repairs. But demand for the three-digit codes has grown with the advent of information services such as those Cox plans to offer. Since three-digit numbers in the world of telephones are a finite resource -- the only ones widely available are 211, 311, 511, 611, 711 and 811 -- the Federal Communications Commission has gotten into the act and is considering whether phone companies should have to offer what it calls "abbreviated dialing arrangements" to their customers. In the meantime, the FCC's general counsel told BellSouth to go ahead with its deal with Cox. The Florida Public Service Commission ruled on Oct. 20 that Southern Bell had to make available the same system it uses for 411, giving the newspaper the technical underpinnings for its new service. McKnight said the newspaper will pay $25,000 to the phone company to get the service up and running. Then the paper will pay ten cents for every call up to five minutes long, and two cents per minute after that. Callers, who will be able to order information either over the phone or by facsimile, probably will be charged 25 to 50 cents a call. "We want it to be a flat-rate call to the consumer," McKnight said. "Not like this 900-stuff where you get a bill for $25 and you don't know how or why." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 09:23:32 EST From: Bill Paterson Subject: Statistics on Unlisted Telephone Numbers and Demographics Dear TELECOM Readers: The University of Kentucky Survey Research Center is compiling information on Kentucky unlisted phone numbers and associated demographics. We are interested in the trends in Kentucky versus the national trends with unlisted numbers and their demographics. Does anyone know where such national information may be found? Bill Paterson University of Kentucky Survey Research Center 403 Breckinridge Hall University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0056 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #808 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21971; 29 Oct 92 11:00 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25403 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:37:45 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29565 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:37:28 -0600 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:37:28 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210291337.AA29565@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #809 TELECOM Digest Thu, 29 Oct 92 07:37:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 809 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Hayes Press Release: Hayes Participation in TRIP '92 (Toby Nixon) Caller ID in Washington State (US West) (Larry Gilbert) Very Weird Telephone Problem (David Fiedler) ISDN in Irving, Texas (R. Steven Rainwater) Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? (Adam Shostack) Can I Have My Cake And Eat It Too? (Arthur L. Shapiro) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Toby Nixon Subject: Hayes Press Release: Hayes Participation in TRIP '92 Date: 28 Oct 92 16:21:06 EDT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA Notice: The following Hayes press release is provided for news and information purposes only and is not intended to be construed as a commercial advertisement or solicitation. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE H-2792 HAYES TO HOST OPEN HOUSE DURING TRANSCONTINENTAL ISDN PROJECT 1992 Atlanta, GA, 28 October 1992 -- Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. will join more than 70 organizations throughout the country who are participating in the TRanscontinental ISDN Project 1992 (TRIP '92) during the week of 16 - 20 November. TRIP '92 is the nationwide celebration that will launch the beginning National Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN). Hayes Microcomputer Products will be offering the world's first Online Open House ISDN Bulletin Board System for ISDN from its World Headquarters in Norcross, Georgia. A second Open House will be held in Pacific Bell's Executive Communications Center in San Francisco at 370 Third Street. Presentations at the San Francisco site will be held twice daily at 9 a.m. and again at 10:30 a.m., each lasting approximately 1 1/2 hours. Reservations may be made by calling 415/904-9987. Another Open House that Hayes is supporting will be held at the offices of Sumeria, Inc., a division of IDG, publishers of Macworld magazine, located at 329 Bryant Street. Presentations about Sumeria's work on publication of electronic magazines will be held daily at 2 p.m., and will last approximately one hour. Reservations may be made by calling 415/904-0833. Additional Hayes demonstration sites include Comdex in Las Vegas in Hayes booth #4143 of the North Hall, as well as at Bellcore in Lisle, IL. Kicking off TRIP '92 on Monday, 16 November, the first call will be made over the National ISDN network from the TRIP '92 headquarters in Reston, Virginia, just outside of Washington, D.C., to sites in Chicago, IL, Huntsville, AL, and Pasadena, CA. At the same time, more than 70 ISDN user companies and organizations, with approximately 150 locations in 26 states, four Canadian provinces, parts of Europe, Asia and Australia, will open their doors to the public to showcase their ISDN applications. TRIP '92 is being sponsored jointly by the North American ISDN Users Forum (NIU) and the Corporation for Open Systems (COS). Hayes Microcomputer Products is a member of the North American ISDN Users Forum, an organization established in 1988 under the auspices of the National Institute for Standards and Technology. The forum provides users of ISDN technology the opportunity to influence developing ISDN technology to reflect their needs. The Corporation for Open Systems, through its ISDN Executive Council, is working to accelerate the implementation, deployment and usage of ISDN products and services. Its members represent ISDN users, computer and telephone equipment manufacturers, telephone service providers, and manufacturers of telecommunications switches. ISDN technology offers simultaneous voice, video, data, graphics and signaling over a single telephone line. Although the service has been available locally in many areas, with the advent of National ISDN, customers in some areas will now be able to connect over the long distance network. Best known as the leader in microcomputer modems, Hayes develops, supplies and supports computer communications equipment and software for personal computers and computer communications networks. The company distributes its products in over 60 countries through a global network of authorized distributors, dealers, mass merchants, VARs, systems integrators and original equipment manufacturers. ### For further editorial information, please contact: Beth McElveen/Peggy Ballard Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. Direct Dial: BMcElveen- 404/840-6816, PBallard - 404/840-6812 Fax: 404/441-1238 MCI Mail: PBallard For additional product information and upgrades, customers should contact Hayes Customer Service: Telephone Online with Hayes BBS 404/441-1617 (U.S.) 800/US HAYES (U.S. and Canada) 519/746-5000 (Canada) 404/HI MODEM (U.S. and Canada) 081-848-1858 (U.K.) 404/729-6525 (U.S. - Atlanta ISDN Users) 852-887-1037 (H.K.) 081-569-1774 (U.K.) 852-887-7590 (H.K.) Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 401243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: irving@well.sf.ca.us (Larry Gilbert) Subject: Caller ID in Washington State (US West) Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1992 07:02:58 GMT I just got a notice with yesterday's phone bill about US West's Caller ID plans. I am including most of the text of it below. Two things about it struck me as being unusual: (1) It states that subscribers will be able to see callers' *names* as well as their numbers. I have never heard of this feature associated with Caller ID before; is it unique? (2) The Per-Line Blocking option seems a bit steeply priced, and I'm disappointed that it isn't offered to unlisted customers "by default". Is it in line with other phone companies' per-line blocking offers? Except for the line blocking, no mention is made of prices. Grr. (excerpt follows) U S WEST(R) Communications is pleased to announce it has filed a request with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission to offer several new telecommunication services effective December 17, 1992, to our residential and small business customers. These new services include: * CALLER ID: Shows the name and telephone number of who's calling on a small display unit attached to your phone. * CONTINUOUS REDIAL: Redials a busy number for you, then alerts you when it's free. * CALL REJECTION: Automatically blocks calls from unwanted callers. * SELECTIVE CALL FORWARDING: Forwards just the calls you choose to another number. * PRIORITY CALL: Identifies your important callers with a special ring. * LAST CALL RETURN: Automatically dials the number of your last incoming call unless the calling party's number is blocked. * CALL TRACE: Forwards the telephone number of an [sic] harassing caller to the U S WEST Security Center. If these new services are approved by the Commission, we will provide you with further information, including prices for the individual services, before they become available in your area. U S WEST Communications currently plans to offer these services in Seattle, Olympia, Tacoma, Bremerton and Vancouver in early 1993. Other locations are yet to be determined. If Caller ID becomes available, the name and telephone number associated with the telephone line you are calling from (calling number) will be shown each time you call someone who has the service, EVEN IF THE CALLING NUMBER IS A NON-LISTED OR NON-PUBLISHED TELEPHONE NUMBER. Because there may be occasions when you do not want your calling number displayed, U S WEST will also be providing the following options, without a *monthly* charge, to block the display of your calling name and number: * PER CALL BLOCKING: Allows you the flexibility to choose when you want to display your calling number and when you want your number to remain private. Just dial *67 to block the display of your calling name and number for an individual call only. This service is free and will be applied to your line automatically. * PER LINE BLOCKING: If you don't want the flexibility of Per Call Blocking, you may wish to choose per line blocking. This service automatically blocks the display of the calling name and number you are using for all calls placed from that line. If approved, there will be a one-time charge of $8.00 (residence) / $13.00 (business) to receive this service. THIS CHARGE WILL BE WAIVED FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS FOLLOWING THE INTRODUCTION OF CALLER ID IN YOUR AREA. You will need to contact the company to request per line blocking once the service becomes available. NON-PUBLISHED AND UNLISTED CUSTOMERS PLEASE NOTE: If you wish to block display of your calling name and number, you must decide which blocking option you prefer. If you wish to receive per line blocking, you must contact the company once the service is available. As stated earlier, there is no monthly charge for either per call blocking or per line blocking. Larry Gilbert : irving@well.sf.ca.us or better yet larry@bigtime.wa.com ------------------------------ From: david@infopro.com (David Fiedler) Subject: Very Weird Telephone Problem Organization: InfoPro Systems: Writers, Consultants, and Dragons Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 08:27:17 GMT Well, I've been making telephone calls for a long time but this one takes the cake. The MCI network department never heard anything like it so I'm hoping someone here can explain it. My wife and I had just returned home from visiting my sister, who lives in another area code in California (well, she doesn't exactly live in an area code, but you know what I mean). The phone rang, and there was nobody there. This happens sometimes, so we didn't think too much about it. Then it rang again. My wife thought it might be my sister calling, to see if we got home safely, but there was nobody there again. The phone rang a third time. This time it *was* my sister on the line, but it was a very bad connection, as if she was in Argentina or something. I asked her if she had called me the previous two times, and she said, "No, I just got home. And anyway, you just called *me*". We determined that we had *each* heard the phone ring, and picked it up, and found ourselves connected to each other! This was pretty wild, but we eventually said goodbye and hung up. And it happened *again*. My wife then talked to my sister for awhile, and then she gave me the phone to say goodbye, but there was nobody there. So I called her back to say goodbye properly, and noticed this connection was much louder, as it usually sounds when you call someone. But wait, there's more. While we were on the phone, a call came in on my second line (we have a mini-PBX with rollover to the second line). At the same time, she was notified via her Call Waiting that another call was coming in. You guessed it, we each picked up our other line, and it was us again! Now, I can see how maybe her cordless phone went crazy and dialed me. But my cordless phone going crazy and dialing her at the same time? And repeatedly? So our phones both ring simultaneously? This was so weird that the MCI customer service lady actually suggested exorcism. I wasn't about to admit to her that my wife and I had already looked in the mirror to make sure we weren't already dead, or something ... is this a pre-Halloween prank, or what? David Fiedler UUCP:{netcomsv,utoday}!infopro!david AIR: N3717R Internet: david@infopro.com or david@utoday.com USMail:InfoPro Systems, PO Box 220 Rescue CA 95672 Phone:916/677-5870 FAX:-5873 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 11:15:23 CST From: ncc@ncc.jvnc.net (R. Steven Rainwater) Reply-To: srainwater@ncc.com Subject: ISDN in Irving, Texas Our company is planning on developing some software that will take advantage of ISDN BRI services. To this end we asked GTE to install two ISDN BRI lines at our office. We were pleasantly suprised at the rates: $17 per line vs. about $40 per line for our standard analog voice lines. Anyway, GTE told us that we were the first "official" installation they had done since they had gotten their tariff approved. I tend to believe them. Our problem is that the manuals for our Terminal Adapters (UDS TA120s) indicated that all one had to do is plug them into the ISDN's RJ45s jack to use them. For whatever reason GTE did not install RJ45 jacks for the lines. In fact, when we called and requested that they did this, they claimed that they did not know how to wire them as none of their technicians had yet been trained to do anything beyond run the wires to the wiring block. They also suggested (but didn't know for sure, of course) that we might need some sort of power supply to "power the BRI service at our end". I have no idea what this might mean. Can anyone direct me to information on how we can get from the two wires on our wiring block to an RJ45 jack and perhaps offer an explanation of what this power supply is that we "might" need? Hopefully, the terminal adapter can provided whatever power might be needed to the line. Also, one additional problem has come up with GTE. The manual for the terminal adapter indicates that the device needs to be programmed with two numbers; a Terminal Endpoint Identifier (TEI), and a Service Profile Identifier (SPID). We are told to get these numbers from the phone company but, once again, GTE claims they have no knowledge of these things. I've gotten numbers for several higher up GTE people and will keep plugging away at this one, but, in the meantime, does anyone know of a way to determine these two numbers from my end? We are on an AT&T 5ESS switch, if that makes any difference. steve@ncc.com ------------------------------ From: adam@sparkle.uucp (Adam Shostack) Subject: Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 06:51:22 GMT In article Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com (Jack Decker) writes: >> Today, I returned home from work, and for the third time in a two >> months, had no dial tone on my voice line. >> Do I call the PUC? > By all means, or better yet, take the text of your message and edit it > into a letter and SEND it to the PUC. I would, at a minimum, state > that you want a) credit for the time you were without service, b) an > explanation of the cause of the problem, and c) the name and number of > an NET manager that will take responsibility for seeing that the > problem is corrected, and whom you can call directly should the > problem recur. Thanks to the six or eight people who suggested the same thing in mail. With the mention of the PUC, NET agreed to give me a months credit, and I have a name in case of future problems. Thanks folks! Adam Shostack adam@das.harvard.edu ------------------------------ From: MPA15C!ARTHUR@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 29 OCT 92 17:59 Subject: Can I Have My Cake And Eat It Too? I've had a lot of trouble with my wife picking up the kitchen phone (built into an answering machine) when I am using a modem in the computer room, with predictably miserable results. A visit to RadioSchlock resulted in a nifty little gismo with which I'm sure most Telecom readers are familiar, which deactivates the phone plugged into said gismo when any downstream phones are in use. As the modem is downstream from the kitchen phone now plugged into this little device, my disconnection syndrome seems to have been happily remedied. Sometimes it WOULD be nice to use the kitchen phone when a downstream phone has been picked up for voice usage, but I'll live with that problem. Maybe I'll wire a gismo-bypass switch someday. The question involves one unexpected effect clearly related to the installation of said gismo: I can't retrieve the answering machine's messages remotely. I punch in the touchtone sequence and it does precisely nothing. Today I took out the gismo, and as expected successfully retrieved my messages. Obvious questions: why, and can I do anything about it? Are there more complicated gismos that would let me retrieve messages (and perhaps even have a inbuilt bypass button to solve that first minor nuisance)? I can't intellectually deduce the cause -- am I perhaps on some hairy edge of a critical voltage window with the current drop of that device pushing me too far? TIA. Arthur L. Shapiro ARTHUR%MPA15C@TRENGA.TREDYDEV.UNISYS.COM Software Engineering Unisys Corporation Speaking as a civilian, rather than for Mission Viejo, CA Unisys, unless this box is checked: [ ] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #809 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23737; 29 Oct 92 11:47 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10829 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 08:00:14 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30192 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:59:56 -0600 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:59:56 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210291359.AA30192@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #810 TELECOM Digest Thu, 29 Oct 92 08:00:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 810 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson CFP: CSAM93 Computer Congress (ae56@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de) Call Waiting and GTED(Jack Decker) Hayes Press Release: Prices Reduced on ISDN Products (Toby Nixon) Test Recording RA 2 Channel 4 (Gerald Ruderman) Pet Peeve - Intercept Messages (David Bonney) CLASS Features vs. FX Lines (Eliot Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ae56@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de Subject: CFP: CSAM93 Computer Congress Organization: University of Karlsruhe, Germany Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 12:06:54 GMT ******* FIRST ANNOUNCEMENT AND CALL FOR SESSIONS AND PAPERS ************ INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND APPLIED MATHEMATICS 19-23 JULY 1993 ST. PETERSBURG, RUSSIA Organized by Center of Modern Communications, University of St. Petersburg. THE AIMS of the Congress are to provide a forum to explore common interests and interplay across disciplines, and to bring to practicing researchers recent advances and the state of the art in all areas of computer science, scientific computing, software engineering, applied and computational mathematics. The official language of the Congress is English and only papers submitted in English will be considered. THE TOPICS highlighted by the Congress include, but are not limited to: Programming Languages; Numerical Analysis; Differential Equations; Inverse Problems; Fluid Dynamics; Quantum and Statistical Mechanics; Applied Probability and Statistics; Theory of Computing; Scientific Computation; Parallel Processing; Supercomputing; Optimization and Operations Research; Software Engineering and Compiler Construction; Symbolic Computation; CASE Tools; Fuzzy Systems; Databases; Networks; Neural Nets; Artificial Intelligence; Expert Systems; Computer Graphics; Computer Vision and Image Processing; Data Security; Simulation and Modelling; Electromagnetics and Semiconductors; Medicine and Biology; Mathematical Education; Dynamical Systems; Economics and Management; Environmental Science; Manufacturing Systems; Material Science; MINISYMPOSIA PROPOSAL: The Program Committee invites you, as a potential organizer, to submit a proposal for a minisymposium. A minisymposium is a session of three to six speakers focusing on a single topic. The organizers should submit the title(s) of the session(s) they propose to the Program Committee as soon as possible. Minisymposium organizers are responsible for the scientific quality of papers in their sessions, consequently all papers invited by organizers are automatically accepted. CONTRIBUTED PAPERS/POSTER PRESENTATIONS: The program will also include contributed paper sessions (20 - minute presentation), posters, and industrial exhibits. Authors are invited to submit to the CSAM'93 Program Committee a one page abstract and indicate if they prefer an oral or poster session. Authors may suggest the title(s) of appropriate session(s) for their paper. Manuscripts of papers presented at the Congress will be published as CSAM'93 Proceedings after the Congress. A volume containing all abstract of the accepted papers and description of all minisymposia including titles and speakers known by May 1, 1993, will be available to the participants at the Congress. Late papers and sessions, if accepted, may be presented at the Congress and will be listed in the Supplementum to the final program. DEADLINES: Minisymposium proposals: As soon as possible; Early submissions due: February 1, 1993; Normal submissions due: May 1, 1993; Late submissions: After May 1, 1993. EXHIBITOR INFORMATION: Booths and tables will be available to companies wishing to display their products and/or services. Send inquires for further information, proposals for minisymposia, and two copies of the abstract to: Dr. Sergey S. Voitenko Director, Center of Modern Communications, University of St. Petersburg 14th Line 29 199178 St. Petersburg Russia e-mail: serge@spfac.lgu.spb.su Outside of Ex-USSR and Eastern Europe proposals for minisymposia and abstracts can be also send to Dimitri Shiriaev. e-mail: dima@iamk4508.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de FORM OF INTENTION Name: Affiliation: Address: Check as appropriate: I plan to attend CSAM'93 and to : - organize a Session/Group of Sessions - contribute a 20 min lecture - present a poster - present a computer demonstration Provisional title(s) of contributed session(s)/paper: Although I have not yet decided to attend I wish to - stay on the mailing list Date: Signature: Please mail this form to Dimitri Shiriaev e-mail: dima@iamk4508.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de Subject: CSAM93 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 07:46:02 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Call Waiting and GTE A message that appeared in comp.bbs.waffle a few days ago had some rather sharp words about users who call BBS's while having Call Waiting enabled (one BBS even went so far as to delete the accounts of callers who got knocked offline by call waiting tones! Why someone would be THAT hard-nosed I can't imagine, but they actually said that you could use that excuse ONCE and then your account would be wiped out!). I sent a message in response pointing out that folks living in GTE-land (in Michigan, at least) may not have much of a choice, at least not without spending extra money, and thought that readers of the Digest might be interested in this as well (I've expanded upon my original message a bit here). Let me explain. I called to inquire about the basics of getting service established at a location in GTE territory. One of the optional services that I inquired about is distinctive ringing (GTE has another name for the service which I forget offhand, but it's the service where you can have two different phone numbers coming in on the same line, each with its own ring pattern). The bad news was that one additional distinctive ring number was $6.00 per month. The GOOD news(?) was that for only $6.95 per month, I could get a features package that would not only include distinctive ringing, but also call forwarding, three-way calling, speed calling and, you guessed it, call waiting. Of course, you had to take the package as tariffed, meaning you couldn't exclude call waiting. But that's not all. It seems that in the land of the Great Telephone Experiment, CANCEL Call Waiting is a separate feature that incurs a separate monthly charge! And, of course, CCW only works if YOU placed the call, which would be deadly in my situation because I often RECEIVE modem calls after midnight. I told the rep that I wished they'd just give you a list of available features and let you pick the ones you want, and charge you by number of features picked. I said that in this case, I would not want call waiting but I might well consider that package if Touch Tone were substituted for call waiting (they get $2.00 per month for Touch Tone in GTE land!). The rep seemed sympathetic and said that many people had expressed to her that they did NOT want call waiting on their lines, but that she could only offer the package as it was tariffed. So you see the problem ... if you think you want distinctive ringing, it seems kind of silly not to pay the additional 95 cents a month that gives you call forwarding and three-way calling, yet if you do that, you are stuck will call waiting whether you want it or not. If I thought it would do any good, I'd write to GTE and ask that they consider NOT bundling call waiting with any other feature package, unless it can be omitted. I don't know if they do this in any other states, but I was rather surprised to find that they do it here in Michigan. The only good thing that can be said about GTE North is that the last I heard, their rates for basic service were a bit lower than Michigan Bell's (I hope that is still true!). And in Michigan, their service is really not all that bad in many areas (except that they do still try to use crappy "subscriber carrier" to provide service in some areas instead of installing more lines, but I think maybe they are learning that this is NOT the way to go in this day of fax machines and modems!). I really do wish that telephone companies would offer optional extra features the way some pizza places offer toppings ... you can get, say, four extra toppings (features) for a special price, but YOU get to pick the features. The current method (having a different price for every feature) is illogical and confusing. I will grant that perhaps there are some features that are so costly to provide that they warrant special pricing, but those should be the exception, rather than the rule. Because I can't get the package that I really want without paying individual prices for everything, I'll probably wind up just going with Plain Old Telephone Service and GTE won't get ANY extra money from me. While this saddens me not in the least, it would seem that if the phone companies want to maximize their profits they would consider giving customers what they want, or at very least an option package that does NOT include call waiting. Good grief, I know a lot of folks who DON'T have modems or fax machines and who STILL would not have call waiting on their line because they hate having their calls interrupted (I even had a Michigan Bell executive confide to me once that he wouldn't have it on HIS residence line, because he felt that it was "rude"). And, for crying out loud, ANY decent option package ought to include Touch Tone (in those areas where they still charge extra for it)! After all, you know that if call waiting is available on a switch, that switch has got to support Touch Tone as well! Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Hayes Press Release: Prices Reduced on ISDN Products Date: 28 Oct 92 16:20:17 EDT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA Notice: The following Hayes press release is provided for news and information purposes only and is not intended to be construed as a commercial advertisement or solicitation. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE H-2692 HAYES LOWERS PRICES ON ISDN PRODUCTS Atlanta, GA, 28 October 1992 -- Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. today announced a 25 per cent price reduction for both Hayes ISDN System Adapter and Hayes ISDN PC Adapter to US$1199 and CDN$1499. Hayes ISDN System Adapter is an external multimedia adapter with superior voice and data capabilities that supports both AT&T and Northern Telecom ISDN switches and fully implements Hayes Standard AT Command Set for ISDN and Hayes AutoStream. This product comes packaged with both a Macintosh and DOS configuration program, as well as Hayes ISDN Tool, a connection tool for use with Macintosh Communications Toolbox, and provides Caller ID for data communications. Hayes ISDN PC Adapter is an internal terminal adapter which provides the installed base of IBM PCs, ISA/EISA and compatible computers with ISDN functionality. The ISDN PC Adapter has high-performance data capabilities and is well designed to support both asynchronous and network applications. Included with this product is Hayes SoftPhone, a voice call management application for MS-DOS systems that provides multiple phone books, call logging, interactive call screening and sound cues, allowing your PC workstation to become an enhanced feature phone. Hayes also announced that support for National ISDN-1 (NI-1) will be provided as an upgrade to both the ISDN System Adapter and ISDN PC Adapter. The NI-1 upgrade for Hayes ISDN System Adapter can be ordered through Hayes Customer Service in March 1993, and for the ISDN PC Adapter in May 1993, for a cost of US$75 and CDN$95 each. There are over 30 applications now available for use with these ISDN terminal adapters. With a large number of vendors supporting Hayes Standard AT Command Set, many existing data applications can be transferred to this new digital platform. Many LAN applications can also take advantage of ISDN via Hayes ISDNBIOS and a third party application which provides a NETBIOS interface on the ISDN PC Adapter. Some of the applications currently available include remote LAN access, image desktop conferencing, remote database access using Caller ID, and leased line replacement. A third ISDN product, Hayes ISDN Extender, a telecommunications network interface module for NeXT computers which supports both ISDN and analog data communications, has an estimated retail price of US$349 and CDN$400. The ISDN Extender and peripherals are currently available through Value-added Resellers and Dealers who sell NeXT computers. Best known as the leader in microcomputer modems, Hayes develops, supplies and supports computer communications equipment and software for personal computers and computer communications networks. The company distributes its products in over 60 countries through a global network of authorized distributors, dealers, mass merchants, VARs, systems integrators and original equipment manufacturers. ### For further editorial information, please contact: Beth McElveen/Peggy Ballard Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. Direct Dial: BMcElveen - 404/840-6816, PBallard - 404/840-6812 Fax: 404/441-1238 MCI Mail: PBallard For additional product information and upgrades, or for the names of participating resellers and dealers, customers should contact Hayes Customer Service: Telephone Online with Hayes BBS 404/441-1617 (U.S.) 800/US HAYES (U.S. and Canada) 519/746-5000 (Canada) 404/HI MODEM (U.S. and Canada) 081-848-1858 (U.K.) 404/729-6525 (U.S. - Atlanta ISDN Users) 852-887-1037 (H.K.) 081-569-1774 (U.K.) 852-887-7590 (H.K.) Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 401243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ruderman) Subject: Test Recording RA 2 Channel 4 Organization: Rational Systems, Inc. Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 10:30:08 GMT Last Sunday evening I was in a hotel room in New York City. This hotel uses AT&T as their default carrier. I dialed 8+0+ my home phone as part of a calling card call. Instead of the bond it rang and I heard "This is a test recording on RA 2 channel 4." This happened two more times before a call went through. Anyone know what this was about? Gerald Ruderman geraldr@ratsys.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 06:39 GMT From: David Bonney <0004224552@mcimail.com> Subject: Pet Peeve - Intercept Messages Reply-to: d.bonney@ieee.org In , John Higdon writes: > ... Instead of being connected to the distant > modem there was a recording: "We're sorry. Your long distance service > has been temporarily discontinued. Please call customer service for > assistance. 48-8-70" ... Which leads me to one of my pet peeves: Why oh why don't they ever tell us >what number< to call for customer service?? For the telecom literate, it's merely annoying to have to look up the number for the (hopefully correct) customer service center. But that assumes that 1) we haven't been slammed, and/or 2) we 'recognize' the recording and can thus take appropriate action. But not everyone reads (or understands?) TELECOM Digest. :-) My prayers go out to those not in-the-know when they get a recording telling them to call 'customer service' for assistance. [ A Telecommunications Professional Now Unemployed In Westford MA ] dab [ No Employer, No Disclaimer. Just My Own Thoughts. ] [ Inquiries To Or Telephone +1 (508) 692-4194 ] ------------------------------ From: elmo@netcom.com (Eliot Moore) Subject: CLASS Features vs. FX Lines Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 08:20:43 GMT Pacific Bell has informed me I cannot order "Priority Ringing" service (wherein the phone rings differently for "priority" designated callers) on foreign exchange lines. The lines in question are all Pacific Bell and all SS7-enabled on ESS #1A CO's. Is there a technical limitation to support their position? If not, is there any way to pursue installation of features conveniently "not tariffed for foreign exchange service"? Regards, Eliot Moore - elmo@netcom.com, POB 1431 Santa Monica CA 90406 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #810 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21112; 30 Oct 92 2:04 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21266 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 23:51:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30787 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 23:50:57 -0600 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 23:50:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210300550.AA30787@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #811 TELECOM Digest Thu, 29 Oct 92 23:51:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 811 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telecom and Cellular Report From India (Shrikumar) Computerized Sales Call "Locked" my Line (Martin Soques) FBI Finds No Basis For Prosecution in Case of Transmitting Device (N Allen) Presidential Info Available via Sprint FONCard (Joseph Bergstein) Presidential Straw Poll (Phydeaux) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 01:02:07 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Telecom and Cellular Report From India Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India In article dand%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com wrote: >> Specifically, are other countries following the technology used here >> in the US? Will there be atime when I can take my cellular phone to >> Europe and use it with out a hitch? GSM was developed as Euro-standard to allow people to cruise acroos Europe using the same Cell-phone. I believe there is also an effort in Europe for automated/comuterised or aural information channels which broadcast reports on road conditions. At least I think there is a german system, and maybe there are some efforts towards an Euro-standard. I'd like to know more about this. > TACS, ETACS, NMT 450 NMT 900, to name a few. Most of Europe is > embarking on a new standard, GSM, which is entirely digital. Europe is > the first area where fully digital cellular is in general use. And now soon in India too, GSM will be spoken ... (I append at the end of the article, a summary of some telecom scenario developments in India, which I promised to PAT several months ago ...) > The US standards are AMPS (most popular) NAMPS (narrowband AMPS), USDC > (TDMA based digital cellular) and the new CDMA. These standards are > completely incompatible with any of the European standards, So, Technically, how different in principle, besides detail, is USDC from GSM? Would it be difficult to have a all nation cell phone unit? I believe some digital encryption is available on some GSM providers in Europe, and it is only link level encryption for the radio hop, and not end-to-end (thats difficult anyway). I have been told that "to learn details of the crypto-system would not be easy". My guess is it must be fixed key crypto-system essentially a substitution/permutation cypher, most likely not with any chaining, no feedback. , and the key being tied to the equivalent to the ESN in ROM. These are guesses but I'd like to know whats really there. [After I had written the above para, a message from PhilKarn indicates that this is indeed the case for the US Cellular Digital with encryption. Someone know is it similar in Europe on GSM?] I don't think there are, at least I not aware of, any Bellcore CCITT standards for encryption on telephones that use two key schemes, even weak ones. Time there was one, IMHO ! Esp. end-to-end encryption. Ok ... now for news on India ... [While we are comparing emergency numbers, let me mention that 100 is police, 101 fire and 102 ambulance, in all places in India, This is pretty close to Israel. Also, besides Israel, I have not seen a number for Ambulance separately.] Under IMF pressure or otherwise, the Indian Telecom structure has also started worshipping "privatisation" in "value-added services". But deregulation is not what this going to be for sure ... since all services are tightly licensed and regulated ... so they'd behave more like the LECs and not like the more competitive IXCs. Sometime back, there was a proposal to split up long distance telecom into regional corporations, the word meaning they would be govt undertakings but functionally independant, at least to the extent that political ministers would not have as much a free say in the day to day working. This would not have brought in any competition worth the name (no self serving bureaucrazy would ever wrought that on itself) but it was said by some that this was modelled after the Divestiture. (IMHO, I fail to see the analogy). But this would have surely brought in a greater responsiveness to the user community, greater efficiency and cost conciousness, less frauds/corruption and better services. But this proposal is now in the cold freezer. The devolution of the phone service in the four major metropolis, (now run by MTNL, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, Metro Telephone Corp Ltd) and the similar formation of a corporation out of the erstwhile Overseas Communication Service, OCS, into VSNL, Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd, Overseas Communcation Corp Ltd, which handles all International traffic did bring in these improvement along with pay hikes for the staff. Even a government corporation is better than a government department directly run by a ministry. {The are, due to history, several parallels between the structure, the bureaucrazy, problems, (except currently I gather BT is pretty good) between the British system and that in India. In fact when I read the pithy words of Bernard Levin in his column in {London Times} I was wondering if he not was talking about India :-) } Ok ... now about cellular coming to India ... The DoT, The Department of Telecommunications, floated tenders asking for bidders for running cellular and radio-paging services in cities in India. Most bidders were consortia or tie-ups between major internation big-names and Indian companies, and some industrial houses. For cellular, GSM was mandated as the standard. (There was little debate, the decision was handed down.) Some 30 significant bids were under consideration, in which many of the International bidders were participants in more than one consortium, at least one with and one without a government agency itself being one of the partners. Finally the decisions have been made. In Bombay, one of the operators is going to be a consortium of Millicom Inc's Mauritian operator, Emtel, with Bharat Telecom Ltd., and Compagnie Generale des Eaux of France. Apparently, a major criterion was the amount of foreign exchange the company could conjure up with the best terms. I believe the price of a subscription is going to be enormous, close to Rs 100K surely more, (which is close to $4000 !) plus proportionally steep air time charges. Customers are expected only to be large corporate accounts. These operations are funded entirely by private capital, and no cross subsidy is expected to happen into the normal phone service. Meantime I caught a release from Philips (the dutch company, with an Indian arm) that they were investing significantly in GSM in India. Philips has been a late entrant into the main line telecom field in India, having slept for a long while when others like Motorola were scrambling for paging and cellular, but has lately been very active and is talking about manufacturing pagers and such. Radio Paging has seen very similar developments ... Motorola was one of the major players, bidding for all cities up with more than one partner. They were quite eager to educate, help and even do most of the homework for anybody and his dog with money to bid for the Paging Service tender. In all some 19 companies have been shortlisted, with criterea similar to that for cellular. Other services such as E-mail, and Voice Mail are also likely to be talked about soon, with an exercise of a similar nature in "licensing" being undertaken by the DoT now. However, for these services, the format is not the form of a tender or license but what is being referred to as a "franchise" ... but the meaning of the word franchise of a govt run monopoly is not very clear to me, mildly amusing would be a better statement of my emotions. It is very likely that some E-mail services under this scheme would come up in India "sometime" during the coming year. (There already are several who claim to have started, but I havnot begun counting them yet.) Meantime, I must mention that MTNL, the govt corp that runs the phones in the metros has been running a pilot paging service in Bombay already (which is priced just too high) and VSNL, the govt corp responsible for all international traffic, and probably the most progressive, has been running a small but (I gather) good Email service based on X.400 reaching Delhi, Bombay and Madras. But their current charter lets them carry traffic between India and International Destinations only. So I can send X.400 E-mail from Bombay or Delhi to the US, but not yet from Bombay to Delhi. An X.25 public network, now christened I-NET, has finally, after a wait of some 6 years, brought PSDNs to reach 8 cities in India. Current capacity is very small ... only 160 X.25 ports, some 500 X.28 leased, and some 700 X.28 dial up subscribers, most of whom are not generating any significant traffic yet. BUt major capacity expansion and hopefully much needed improvement of quality is expected soon. Besides these, there is also expected to be some very serious companies, who would also be entering this field providing telecom, database, information and E-mail services outside the gambit of the regulated services, ie. regardless of the legal/ political structure I outlined above. These may be outside the letter of the law, but it is quite likely that one of them might turn out to be more successful and keen a competitor and would survive too. Also the record of the govt to actually implement its laws in this context has lately not been very good. But they are all likely to be "high profit" value-added services, and would not contribute significantly to basic telecom infrastructure. Interesting to note that as Cable TV spreads in urban India, there is a clutter of co-ax cables, most of them happily radiating into the ether too over most streets, reminiscent of pictures of America before FDM in the Lenkurt Demodulator (No I am not that old, I love browsing thru old books in the library ;) the Min in charge of TV sees its as DoTs problem for enforcing the law about monopoly on wires across the street ... while the DoT could not care less, since this was TV, right ... not telephones !! ;-) So almost the entire cable TV operations out there are technically illegal ... but work just as finely. There could be fairly interesting changes in the choices in telecom services in India, very possibly. However, how much of a net improvement that will result in remains to be seen. In particular, as long as the phones system has its problems, tho in the major cities it is indeed very workable and nice, the last mile for most services will be insurmountable. And unless the reach of these services is wide, to carry them beyond the metros into the deep industrial areas, the real problems may not be solved. Wait and watch! In a different context, Our Moderator notes .... [ ... newspapers in Spain have ads for a Tarot practitioner. The services directed to Americans are located in the Netherland Antilles and one is in Georgetown, Guyana. [This was contested by someone -- shri] Those guys make a profit on their free services by getting kickbacks from the international long distance carriers and the [PTTs] .... ] In the last several months, each Sunday edition of the {Times of India} has carried an ad for a tarot reading service out of London. I had guessed correctly that this was how they worked, assuming there was nothing dubious about them (like the 800 number not credit card chat lines ;) So, if BT is encouraging tarot readings to be read on the line from London to India, then often are the international trunks to India very idle? If so, then I get back to the question I asked before ... would not BT like to let me use the Fallow bandwidth? shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in ) "Of course, these are my *OPINIONS* !!" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 08:44:44 CST From: msoques@dvorak.amd.com (Martin Soques) Subject: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Greetings! Last night, I received a computerized sales/sleeze call which essentially "locked" my line and prevented me from getting a dial tone no matter what I did with my switch hook. I found this disturbing since I could not hang up on this unsolicited call. Is this legal? The pitch was somewhat long but did not reveal the identity of the calling party (the call had pauses/beeps to leave my name, address, and phone number). Insights, opinions and similar experiences from the comp.dcom.telecom community would be appreciated. Thanks! snail: Martin P. Soques Opinions are my own ... P. O. Box 17341 E-mail: msoques@mozart.AMD.COM Austin, TX 78760 phone: (512) 462-4834 [Moderator's Note: You did not hang up *long enough*. Had you stayed off the line for maybe 20-30 seconds the sales robot would have gotten cut off. But each time you disconnected for a few seconds then went back off hook again, you reset the connection in the switch and forced it to start timing out again. That is the important thing to remember about getting any unwanted caller off your line: Hang up and remain on hook for at least long enough for the CO to get around to pulling the plug on the caller, as it were. Sometimes it will happen sooner than 20-30 seconds, but don't be hasty! If you are too hasty, you lose, and get to start all over! :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: FBI Finds No Basis For Prosecution in Case of Transmitting Device Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 21:15:05 EST Here is a press release from the U.S. Department of Justice. FBI Finds No Basis For Prosecution in Case of Transmitting Device Found in Va. Capitol Building Contact: Elizabeth Smith of the U.S. Department of Justice, 202-514-2007 RICHMOND, Oct. 29 -- Richard Cullen, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, announced today that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has concluded its investigation into events surrounding the transmitting device found in the office of the governor's chief of staff. Cullen has concluded that there is no basis for federal prosecution. The device was discovered in the afternoon of Aug. 20 and was reported to the FBI on the following day. Robert Satkowski, special agent in charge of the Richmond field office of the FBI, stated that upon examination by the FBI, the transmitting device had no battery, was turned off, and the antenna was broken. Further, the device was of a type manufactured without any serial number or other identifying markings and was distributed to a large number of sales outlets across the nation. Accordingly, it is not traceable to a particular buyer. The device cost between $300 and $600. ------------------------------ From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1992 17:11:47 -0500 Subject: Presidential Info Available via Sprint FONCard Per the following press release from Sprint, Campaign updates can now be obtained by using a Sprint FONCARD: For Immediate Release LATEST PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN INFORMATION AVAILABLE THROUGH SPRINT'S FONCARD(sm) KANSAS CITY, Mo., Oct. 15, 1992 -- People who can't wait for the newspaper for the latest presidential campaign information -- or who don't have access to radio or television -- can use their Sprint FONCARDs(sm) to access the new Sprint Presidential Campaign Coverage hotline. Sprint's political hotline offers the latest information from such sources as CNN, Associated Press, United Press International and the television networks. Other available information comes from political polls -- often conducted by the news services immediately after the presidential debates. The political hotline is part of Sprint's Special Events Hotline, which recently provided similar news for the Winter Olympics. Sprint plans similar hotlines for upcoming events. Sprint's Information Line, also part of Sprint's FONCARD service, includes the latest information on such other subjects as world news, weather, sports, finance and soap operas. FONCARD Information Line is updated daily and Sprint's Special Events Hotline is updated within about an hour of special events. For example, Thursday's presidential debate will end at 10:30 Eastern time; FONCARD customers can have a thorough roundup of news by about 11:30. The Presidential Campaign Coverage hotline can be accessed by: * dialing Sprint's FONCARD 800 number, 800-877-8000 * dialing "#36" at the first tone * dialing a 14-digit FONCARD number * dialing a choice, such as"4" for Sprint's Presidential Campaign Coverage hotline. Calls to the Information Line are 75 cents per minute of use. "People are more tuned into this campaign than any other in recent years," said Tom Weigman, Sprint's Chief Marketing Officer. "Sprint's FONCARD Information Line provides immediate access to campaign news from any phone, anytime, anywhere." Other features of the FONCARD include Sprint QuickConference(R) for three-way calling without operator assistance, Message Delivery, and FONCARDs based on customers' home phone numbers. Sprint is a diversified international telecommunications company with $9 billion in annual revenues and the United States' only nationwide all-digital, fiber-optic network. Its divisions provide global long distance voice, data and video products and services, and local telephone services to more than four million subscriber lines in 17 states. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 23:19:59 PST From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: Presidential Straw Poll [Moderator's Note: To close this issue of the Digest, a little bit of fun in a diversion very appropriate during the five days ahead of us. Please be my guest: participate in the voting! PAT] ------------ Announcing a Usenet-wide United States Presidential straw poll! Anyone who reads this message is eligible to cast his vote for President of the United States in this poll. You do *not* need to be a citizen of the U.S. to participate! To cast your ballot, send mail to reb@ingres.com with the word 'vote' and the name of the candidate you wish to vote for in the subject line. Do *not* include any other text in your message. Here is an example of what your ballot might look like: To: reb@ingres.com Subject: Vote Jerry Garcia The poll will be open from now through 12:00 midnight Pacific Daylight Time on October 30, 1992. Rules: - Only one ballot per person will be counted. (The last to arrive). - Ballots without the word 'vote' in the subject line will NOT be counted. - Your ballot *must* have the name of the candidate you wish to vote for somewhere in the *subject* line. As a reminder, the following are the major candidates who are running. Pick one of them, or one of your own! Party Candidate ----------- --------- Republican: Bush Democrat: Clinton Libertarian: Marrou Independent: Perot Other: Please note that the results will be disclosed ONLY as a final tally, and will not be displayed by voter. Remember, voting will end on October 30, 1992. The results will be posted shortly thereafter. Happy voting, reb [Moderator's Note: All readers have 24 hours to get their votes in. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #811 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21884; 30 Oct 92 2:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02073 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:16:59 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01235 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:16:42 -0600 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:16:42 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210300616.AA01235@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: Autovon: The DoD Phone Company Here is a submission received recently which was too large for inclusion in a regular issue of the Digest. It is being filed in the Telecom Archives for further reference also. PAT Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 18:24:43 EDT From: Tom Coradeschi Subject: Autovon: The DoD Phone Company Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ From: CHIPS_EDITOR@nctamslant.navy.mil (NARDAC NORFOLK) Newsgroups: dod.general Subject: CHIPS ON-LINE OCT 92 Date: 19 Oct 92 15:00:00 GMT Autovon: The DoD Phone Company By Peter B. Mersky Editor's Note: An article on the DoD phone company in Chips? I'm sure some computer purists are scratching their heads and wondering if I've lost mine. However, when Alexander Graham Bell said, "Come here, Watson. I need you." What he meant was, "Hook up your modem and dial my BBS." Obviously, hoping Watson could get a clear circuit. Corny? You're right -- now that I have your attention ... Anyone who has served in the military or who has worked in a DoD office since the early 1960s has had experiences with the military's long-distance phone system, universally called Autovon. Usually, these encounters involve frustration, long connection waits, frequent cutoffs (referred to as being preempted) and occasionally poor reception. The only saving grace of the Autovon system was that it was free. Right? Well, not really. Autovon's notoriety grew as its coverage expanded. But, just where did Autovon come from? I wasn't surprised that nobody has ever researched Autovon's history. It's like writing about the Q-tip. We take such a mundane, everyday tool for granted and never think about its heritage or development. There's very little specific recorded history on Autovon's birth. The story is part of a corporate memory, currently residing with members of the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), formerly the Defense Communications Agency. DISA manages DoD's primary communications worldwide. Autovon had its beginnings with the Army's Switch Communications Automatic Network (SCAN), a three-switch system developed for their own use. (A switch is a basic unit of an overall network and is usually an individual telephone system.) At this time, each service strung up its own private networks according to requirements. Logistics bases would work circuits between themselves. Quartermaster sections had circuits to their counterparts throughout the country. Sometimes, one service would let another service use a few of its circuits to call a base, if the sister service had an ongoing need. At the height of the Cold War, DoD began looking for a common-user, long- distance telephone system that would survive enemy attack and still give command and control capabilities to appropriate levels of the government and the military. DoD selected the Army's SCAN as the basis for a worldwide communications link, eventually listing SCAN as a DoD resource in 1963 and renaming it the Automatic Voice Network (Autovon). By the mid 1970s, Autovon had been deployed in the European and Pacific theaters. Jim Sage, Chief of DISA's Voice Network Operations Directorate, likened Autovon's structure to the public phone system. In your system at home, you dial 1, then a ten-digit number. You actually dial into a local system which then switches you into a long-distance network, passing your call along until it reaches its destination. "We did essentially the same thing with Autovon. Post-camp stations had a small system that served all the users on the installation. If you want to call downtown, dial 9, then the number. If you want to call long distance, your local phone system can be connected to the DoD long-distance system, Autovon, by various methods. This is the Autovon long-distance network; it doesn't give you local service. It can be compared roughly to AT&T, MCI or SPRINT long-distance telephone networks." Autovon had some features that public service telephones lacked. Above all, it was a military communications network. The Joint Chiefs wanted their command and control capability in a crisis or war. They wanted their phone system to be able to survive enemy attack -- even if its human users didn't -- so they buried some of the Autovon switches underground. To further ensure survivability, the system was so interconnected that the loss of a few switches wouldn't affect the overall network. Robustness was the watchword. Another feature of Autovon was multi-level precedence preemption (MLPP). There are various degrees of importance regarding military phone calls: flash override, flash, immediate, priority and routine. People who might be calling from one finance center to another to check on a serviceman's pay record would be classified as routine users. However, someone directing troop movements or high-level security matters where decisions must get through, has flash override capability. When Autovon is saturated with calls, if the supporting trunklines are tied up, selected users with higher precedence will get their calls through by using MLPP. As the far-ranging Autovon network grew, it became obvious that its ancient analog technology was out of date. Digital technology had made tremendous strides, and DoD wanted to incorporate these advances into its long-distance phone system. By the mid-1970s, planning was underway to replace Autovon. The new system was called the Defense Switched Network (DSN). The replacement cost was high, and the move to DSN couldn't occur overnight. There were many switches involved in building and deploying DSN, while phasing Autovon out and maintaining operational standards. DSN deployment continued through the early 1980s, mainly in the European and Pacific theaters. However, the archaic Autovon was growing old and more difficult to maintain in CONUS. The solution was what Jim Sage called "a technological shot in the arm." The Defense Commercial Telecommunications Network (DCTN) included some of DSN's advances as well as the new capability of video-teleconferencing. DCTN interconnected with Autovon via a variety of circuit arrangements, including one- and two-way links. DISA expanded DCTN throughout the late 1980s. AT&T, the prime contractor for DCTN, as well as the original Autovon system, agreed to take out many of the old analog switches and replace them with new No. 5 Electronic Switching Systems at no cost to the government. DISA could also take out more switches and further reduce the communication system's cost. From 1988 to 1991, DISA claims to have saved $49 million in modernizing the Autovon-DSN-DCTN system. A common misconception is that DSN service allows free long-distance calls. In fact, DoD's overall annual budget for long-distance communication is $289 million worldwide. This amount doesn't reflect the fact that much of the hardware is already bought and paid for. Much of the money goes toward financing the cost for individual post/camp/station access and backbone trunking. When a user in Norfolk calls another office, say in California, the cost of that call is part of the overall budget and expense of communications. Household phone consumers pay two rates for their services: a flat rate for local service and a call-by-call rate for long distance service. The military setup is basically the same, with a little variation. DoD offices pay a flat rate for the local lines -- the numbers you call by first dialing 9 -- and a user fee for DSN lines. However, the Navy, and the rest of the military, tailors its individual phone service to the local budget and requirements of the particular military base. Using a shopping list supplied by DISA, a particular base may select two or three overseas lines, ten transcontinental hookups and a similar number of local lines. Each of the hookups is charged at a particular rate and makes up that office's annual communications budget. Thus, each military installation has a specific number of DSN lines based on the available funds in its budget. DISA uses a "P" (for percentage) factor to describe the success or failure rate of connections on DSN. Usually, the desired rate is P-10. That is, for every 100 calls within a geographic area (referred to as a theater), 10 are blocked. Considering how many DSN calls are being made at any one time, it's easy to see why we have so many failures, one of the most frustrating and time-consuming aspects of DSN. P-10 is included in the linkage between the originator and destination. For instance you want to call California from your office in Virginia, there may be only 10 DSN lines available from your base, which block three out of every 100 calls. After getting onto one of those 10 local DSN lines, you must now get across the backbone network, which will block four out of every 100 calls, to the funnel of, perhaps, another 10 lines, at your destination, which, in turn, will block three out of every 100 calls. At any stage along the road, your call could fail to complete. Adding up the numbers of blocked calls (3+4+3), you arrive at the P-10 factor. To further confuse things, some areas may enjoy a P-0! In November 1991, Norfolk had an overall P-47 rating for DSN access. However, during the same timeframe, NAS Alameda was rated at P-0, no trouble getting onto the DSN. In some cases, a rating of P-60 is not uncommon. The current top five high-blocking DCTN (Navy) Access Areas are NAS Moffett Field, NAVSTA San Diego, NAS Lemoore, MCAS El Toro and NAS Oceana. The P- factors for these areas range from 48 to 65. Funding will probably not allow the necessary increase in circuits to relieve the congestion. OK, so that may explain some of the difficulty in using DSN, but what about the cost? Again, the military pays a flat rate for DSN service. Thus, the more you use DSN, the cheaper each call is. If your base pays $1,000 a month for a DSN line, and you make only two calls, then each call is $500! Hardly economical. But, if you make 1,000 calls on the same circuit each month, the individual cost is only $1. What about using commercial service when the DSN is uncooperative? While it might not seem at first that substituting commercial calls for DSN is wasteful, particularly on routine matters, it is. Consider the office worker in Norfolk who decides to check on his buddy in California, just a short five-minute DSN call to see how he's doing. It's not uncommon for every one of the DSN circuits of a particular base to be busy. But, perhaps one is open at the time the yeoman places his call to his friend. At the same moment, another worker in another office has official business to negotiate. He picks up the phone, but the vacant line is now carrying the yeoman's personal call. The second worker can't get through. He dials repeatedly, his frustration and sense of urgency rising with each rapid busy signal. Finally, he gets permission from his boss to use commercial service. Now, that $10 commercial call, probably made at the top mid-day rate, becomes an added expense that might have been saved. Of course, the usual reaction is that commercial calls are figured into the operating budget, right along with DSN service. True, but in these times of drastic budget cuts, it is well to consider how commercial calls can eat so far into the budget that there may come a time where the base commander tells his office heads, "Hey! I don't have any money for outside long-distance calls. Tell your folks to use DSN." Even with purely official calls, the DSN system is periodically saturated. Each November, AT&T notes a huge increase in the number of calls coming into the Arlington area. All over the world, sailors know that this is the time when the advancement test scores are released. Detailers and counselors are deluged with frantic inquiries about the caller's success or failure in making E-5 or E-6. (For the Air Force, this busy time is in August, and the place is Texas.) In some respects, the military, beset with budgetary crunches and operational concerns, isn't worried about easing the plight of the harried DSN consumer. Remember, the system was always intended as a command and control network for high level government and DoD officials. Its use as a daily communications service for office workers was secondary. Jim Sage talked about discussions between DISA and DoD. "We try to lean on the military users. We tell them, 'Look, your circuits are overloaded, and your people are angry.' We argue with them a lot. But the real story is simple: DoD is saying that they only have so much money. 'DISA,' they say, 'you may be 100 percent right, but not only do we not have the money, but the money we thought we had has been cut again.' " "When the Navy in Norfolk says it can't afford the same services any more, we ask, 'Well, what can you afford?' We try to tailor the service, but usually end up taking out some of the circuits or services. And it's going to get worse. In DoD's defense, they're getting the best bang for their buck. When the DSN lines are saturated during a busy day, they're getting their money's worth. And if a crisis arises, those authorized precedence will be able to get through by pre-empting calls of lesser importance." Will the service get better? What are the problems now? As in other areas of current military concern, economics play a large part in defining DSN in the 1990s and beyond. DISA monitors traffic along its existing lines, much like those people on the side of a busy thoroughfare who count cars during the rush hour. An internal program monitors DSN switches, samples call flow and tells system engineers what's happening. If the number of calls rises dramatically in a particular area, DISA adds more trunk lines, although not immediately. Outside the metropolitan Washington area, near Leesburg, Virginia, in the small town called Dranesville, AT&T maintains a modern network control center dedicated to monitoring CONUS DSN operations. One of the minor phenomena of Autovon and DSN is the so called high and dry connections. This abortive call occurs when, after getting on the DSN, and dialing your destination, the connection is completed but all you hear is ... nothing, dead air. People usually hang up and try again. Eventually, they manage to complete their connection. What they don't realize is that the bad connection -- in reality, the bad circuit, much like a floppy disk's bad sector -- is still there. Someone else will encounter it; maybe even the original caller if the system is busy enough. DISA strongly recommends that consumers call the Dranesville control center and report a bad connection. The DSN number to Dranesville is 550-1611. While DISA and DoD have realized substantial savings in the last 15 years -- $94 million, in fact -- that money doesn't go back into the DoD phone system. A JCS recent study revealed that with an extra annual $10 million, DISA could offer every CONUS military base a P-capability. But DoD has other places to spend that money. As we head toward the turn of the century, DSN will continue evolving into the planned integrated network its designers envisioned. Voice and data services will combine into one network for local and long-haul transmissions, called the Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN). Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Mr. Jim Sage; LTC Stephen Kubiak, USA; LT Carlene Wilson, USN; and Ms. Beverly Sampson of DISA; and CDR John Howard and Mr. Ron Olson of NCTC's Network Validation Department for their help. About the Author: Mersky is the assistant editor of Approach, the Naval Aviation Safety Review. He has written or coauthored several books on Navy and Marine Corps aviation. Mersky is a commander in the Naval Reserve. He can be reached at Commercial (804) 444-7758 or DSN 564-7758. ----------------------------- This article may be reproduced and redistributed as long as the content remains the same as the original.   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24216; 30 Oct 92 3:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05621 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 01:13:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03444 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 01:13:07 -0600 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 01:13:07 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210300713.AA03444@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #812 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 Oct 92 01:13:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 812 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada and Private Information (Alayne McGregor) Help With LC Loss Detection on Telenova 1 (Andy Rubin) Data Communications Interface (James Bruce Christian) Need PT&T Contact in Fiji (Pushpendra Mohta) SRI Seeks "Phreaks" for New Study (J. Philip Miller) Datapac Customer Service (g5100035@nickel.laurentian.ca) Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Keith Lofstrom) MAYA 9600 Baud Modem: Manual Wanted (Mark Schuldenfrei) Phone Directory on CD (Ken Jongsma) MFS Datanet Announces City-to-City LAN Speed Net (Shrikumar) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 18:24:18 -0400 From: mcgregoa@cognos.com (Alayne McGregor) Subject: Bell Canada and Private Information The Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunications Commission (the government agency that regulates telecommunications in Canada) is currently investigating changes in the tariffs regarding Automatic Dialing and Answering Devices (i.e. computer-generated junk calls). To do this, it has asked Bell Canada for some background information on the number of users of restricted ADADs that it currently serves. Bell Canada has been rather loath to disclose this information, perhaps because of the CRTC's recently-announced long-distance competition decision. Bell Canada finally responded October 21. I quote: "At the end of September 1992, the Company's billing records showed that there were 20 Restricted ADAD users registered with the Company using a total of # central-office lines. # Provided in confidence to the Commission. Pursuant to Section 350 and 358 of the _Railway Act_ the Company provides this response in confidence. Disclosure of the service specific data would assist the Company's existing and potential competitors in developing more effective business strategies thereby causing the Company specific direct harm." I shall leave it to Nigel Allen to explain the history that leads to the Railway Act governing telecommunications in Canada. I confess myself somewhat baffled how Unitel would get any competitive advantage knowing how many lines Bell has sold to ADAD owners. Alayne McGregor alayne@ve3pak.ocunix.on.ca mcgregoa@cognos.com [Moderator's Note: It might be that Bell has heard that Unitel would like to set up a service especially for ADAD owners, with special and very competitive pricing. Perhaps Bell is also thinking about some service changes/additions/rate changes involving ADAD owners and they do not want to tip their hand, thinking Unitel will pull it off first. I know on a few occassions someone has asked Illinois Bell how many subscribers they have to one service or another; or how many lines go from point A to point B; or even a seemingly innocuous question such as how many people (a) call the business office each day; (b) use calling cards at payphones, etc. IBT's answer is its none of your business. Competitors would love to know how to properly staff their AOS operations; the most profitable places for pay phones, etc. IBT says competitors can find out the hard way ... this might be the same stance Bell Canada is taking with Unitel: let them figure *everything* out for themselves and hopefully screw up in the process. PAT] ------------------------------ From: arubin@Apple.COM (Android Rubin) Subject: Help With LC Loss Detection on Telenova 1 Date: 29 Oct 92 23:33:42 GMT Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA I have an old Telenova 1 PBX. This system was also sold by Wang. Telenova is out of business and Wang doesn't support the product anymore. I'm hoping someone who reads comp.dcom.telecom either has experience with this switch, or knows someone who might know someone who might ... Anyway, my specific problem is that I'm having trouble setting up a PIU to detect loss of loop current from a CO line. It seems to be a software configuration issue, as the activity LED on the COIU flashes when the telco drops loop after the remote caller hangs up. I'm also interested in any information about the DTMF signalling that takes place when using the VMESG voicemail option. I'm interested in using my dialogics D41/D card as a voicemail system with this PBX. About six months ago I tracked down a nice fellow who used to work for Telenova in Los Gatos, CA. His new company had purchased the rights to use the design of the switch, and was re-writing the firmware to have the switch act as a cellular phone forwarder. I've since lost contact with him (Tom Smith), so if you're out there, Tom, please drop me a line. Any help will be greatly appreciated. I'm willing to hire a consultant to do the necessary work, if I can find one with experience on this particular switch. Andy arubin@apple.com ------------------------------ From: jchristi@zeus.calpoly.edu (James Bruce Christian) Subject: Data Communications Interface Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:44:49 GMT Greetings! Recently, I ran across three brand new Norstar Meridian Data Communications interfaces model DC1D. As far as I can conclude from the manuals they are 2400 Baud modems designed to be used with the Norstar system. Can anyone tell me what they are worth? Possibly any other useful information? Thanks! Jim Christian jchristi@nyx.calpoly.edu ------------------------------ From: pushp@nic.cerf.net (Pushpendra Mohta) Subject: Need PT&T Contact in Fiji Date: 30 Oct 92 01:20:13 GMT Organization: CERFnet CERFnet is trying to provide Internet access next March to an eight week US research project in Fiji using a 56Kbps leased line. Two of the big three US IEC's don't provide service to Fiji, and the one that can is unable to find the PT&T contact in Fiji to provide pricing for Fiji half of the link! (Our researcher contact down in Fiji is currently unreachable.) Can someone point us in the right direction? Seems to me that this should all be published and public knowledge. Email replies will be appreciated. Regards, Pushpendra Mohta pushp@cerf.net +1 619 455 3908 Director of Engineering pushp@sdsc.bitnet +1 800 876 2373 CERFNet ------------------------------ From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) Subject: SRI Seeks "Phreaks" for New Study Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 11:11:30 CST [Moderator's Note: Mr. Miller passed this along from a recent issue of our companion publication, {Computer Undergroud Digest} with a suggestion that perhaps not all TELECOM Digest readers had seen it. PAT] Forwarded message: Date: 20 Oct 1992 18:00:41 -0800 From: "Stuart Hauser" Subject: SRI Seeks "Phreaks" for New Study A team working with Donn Parker at the SRI is gathering information about the perceived vulnerabilities (and related topics) of the software and control systems of the public switched telephone and data networks from the perspective of the hacker community and other knowledgeable sources. It is an extension of prior research that Donn has been carrying on over the past 20 years into the vulnerabilities of end-user computer systems, also from the perspective of hackers. Like the other projects, this is a pure research study. Our objective is to gather our information through face-to-face, telephone and keyboard interviews of members of the hacker community and its observers in the next two to four weeks. We are not attempting to identify and collect information on criminal activities, but rather on what folks know or hear about the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of the PSTN/PDNs. Below is a more complete brief on our interests. Stuart Hauser ------------------ Information Sheet for Participants in SRI's Study of the Public Switched Telephone Network October 1992 SRI International is conducting a study of the security aspects of voice and data communications networks, referred to as "Cyberspace" by some. Specifically, we are looking at the security of the public switched telephone networks and public data networks (PSTN/PDN) from the perspective of the vulnerability of the network management and control software residing in the switching systems and the computers that manage them. This study is part of SRI's ongoing research into information and communications systems worldwide and how they are viewed by the international "hacker" community. We are seeking the views of many experts-including what we have called "good hackers" for many years-on a number of issues relating to the security and vulnerability of the PSTN/PDNs, and on the international "malicious cracker" community. We know that the security of the software that controls the PSTN/PDNs is as important to most hackers as it is to everyone else who is interested in exploring Cyberspace. Consequently, we believe that the good hackers are as interested as we are in helping us and other PSTN/PDN stakeholders understand what the really malicious crackers might see as the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of these networks, what new technologies -- including the use of human engineering techniques -- they might be planning to use to gain access, and what they might be planning to do next. This study is being led and conducted by Donn B. Parker, who has been conducting this type of research for SRI International and its clients for the past 20 years, and is well known throughout both the good hacker and malicious cracker communities. As in the case of the prior field research of this kind, Mr. Parker and his associates will be gathering information through face-to-face interviews of the members of the hacker community in the United States, Canada, Europe, and several other countries. SRI International is a research and consulting organization that is not owned by any business or government agency; we are not in the law enforcement or criminal investigation business. This is a pure research project to determine the vulnerability and security of the software that manages and controls the PSTN/PDNs. Our interests are very much the same as were those for earlier projects in which our interests were focused on the vulnerability and security of the now widely used computer information systems. We do not work with law enforcement agencies to collect information on any individual or group and we will not reveal the names of our information sources unless the sources ask us to do so. A summary of our findings will be sent to you on request after the study has been completed. By working together in this way, SRI and cooperating information professionals can help protect the major highways of Cyberspace for our respective uses and interests. Donn B. Parker dparker@sri.com (415) 859-2378 -------------------- J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617 [362-2694(FAX)] ------------------------------ From: g5100035@nickel.laurentian.ca Subject: Datapac Customer Service Organization: Laurentian University Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 16:42:53 GMT I would like to open an account with Datapac but unfortunately their customer service number is not listed in the 705 area. I tried directory assistance and the operator was so misinformed that she told me to call the 300 bps and ask them. I wonder if somebody could give me the number reachable from here. Thanks. [Moderator's Note: Boy, is that operator behind the times! Anyone should know these days you would want to call the 2400 bps instead! PAT] ------------------------------ From: keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) Subject: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level Organization: KLIC Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 17:44:53 GMT Around here, a two-ended private line (no switching) costs $6 per month, and is hard copper wires (direct ohmic connection) from end to end. I have been contemplating getting such a line over to a friend's house to experiment with. It appears that I can get a pretty high bit rate through such a line if I drive enough signal at the transmit end and am willing to take a 60dB gain loss through the system -- however, I'm not sure how much signal I am allowed on a private line. According to the book "Subscriber Loop Signaling and Transmission Handbook" by Reeve (IEEE Press, 1992), Part 68 of the FCC rules limits the metallic voltage level to -15dBV / 8KHz in the 300KHz and above region, for terminal equipment connected to the the telephone network, which consists of the "Public Switched Telephone Network and certain private lines". On the other hand, an acquaintance who is a data services sales type for a nearby telephone company assures me that you can shove anything you want through a hard copper line, up to 50 volts or so -- "after all, you can put ring voltage through it". But then, he's a sales type, and for the wrong company at that. I suspect the "certain private lines" that are limited by part 68 are lines that are signal-processed in some way, or otherwise couple to services that could be affected by the high frequencies/signal levels. Hard copper lines may not have these restrictions. Of course, what I can REALLY get away with is what my local telco lets me get away with, but I thought I would find out what other people have managed to do in their areas. Any wire wizards out there who can shed some light? Keith Lofstrom keithl@klic.rain.com Voice (503)-520-1993 ------------------------------ From: schuldy@progress.COM (Mark Schuldenfrei) Subject: MAYA 9600 Baud Modem: Manual Wanted Organization: Progress Software Corp. Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 16:51:37 GMT A friend of mine (with no news access) has a MAYA 9600 Baud modem (v.32/v.42) which he bought used. He is having handshaking problems with the unit, which came without a manual. Sadly, MAYA has gone out of business, so there is no way to order one. Would any of you be able to supply him with a copy, or some help with resolving his comm. problems? The name is Mike Bergman, and he can be reached at a shared account: AUGMENT.ENG@AppleLink.Apple.COM Any replies sent to me will be forwarded, but it's best to contact him directly. Thanks. Mark Schuldenfrei (schuldy@progress.com) [I'm just showin' you my opinions: this ain't a gift] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 11:14:48 EST From: Ken Jongsma Reply-To: jongsma@esseye.si.com Subject: Phone Directory on CD In the current {PC Week} there was a small blurb for the following: Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70 million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses. DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at (800)325-0800. I was a bit surprised to see DAK selling this. One usually associates DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the listings are a bit out of date? Kenneth R Jongsma jongsma@esseye.si.com Smiths Industries 73115,1041@compuserve.com Grand Rapids, Michigan +1 616 241 7702 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Oct 92 00:55:55 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: MFS Datanet Announces City-to-City LAN Speed Net Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India Hi, Excerpted from comp.newprod ... -- shri MFS DATANET ANNOUNCES FIRST NATIONAL SERVICE FOR HIGH-SPEED INTERCONNECTION OF LANS AND CUSTOM NETWORKS OAKBROOK TERRACE, IL, October 5, 1992 -- MFS Datanet, Inc., .. announced the first .. network designed to interconnect ... Local Area Networks (LANs) at native LAN speeds. MFS Datanet said that its new national High-speed LAN Interconnect (HLI) service supports Ethernet, Token Ring, FDDI, .... [in] December 1992. ... Addition to metro LAN interconnection services introduced in August 1991. Accessing MFS Datanet's HLI services can be a simple as plugging into a LAN wall jack connected to MFSCC's fully secured point of presence in the customer's building. ... [End all CSU/DSU & T1 variations? -- shri] In addition to native LAN rates of 4, 10, 16, and 100 Mbs, MFS Datanet also offers fractional data rates ... [What about burst data ... also I strained to find words like ATM, but found nothing specific -- shri] "Coupled with the September 17, 1992 decision by the FCC mandating interconnection between local exchange carrier and competitive access provider networks, it means that customers on or off our network, big or small, can take advantage of our services. MFSCC subsidiaries include MFS, Inc., the nation's largest Competitive Access Provider; MFS Network Technologies, Inc., a major ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?? -- shri communications systems integrator and facility manager; and MFS Datanet, Inc., which develops and markets advanced data communications services. [Could someone drop a line on what this FCC mandate is ... ? -- shri] shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #812 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07600; 30 Oct 92 10:18 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21318 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 07:47:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23770 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 07:47:07 -0600 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 07:47:07 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199210301347.AA23770@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #813 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 Oct 92 07:47:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 813 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: T-1 For Datacomm (David G. Lewis) Re: T-1 For Datacomm (Hans-Gabriel Ridder) Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Terry Kennedy) Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Lars Poulsen) Re: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work? (David Hyams) Re: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work? (Thomas Schreiber) Re: What is Van Eck Phreaking? (Andrew Emmerson) Re: What is Van Eck Phreaking? (Jon Luckey) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: T-1 For Datacomm Organization: AT&T Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 13:38:48 GMT In article kentrox!myron@uunet.UU.NET (Myron Hattig) writes: > In article vances@ltg.uucp wrote: >> If I have a Cisco (for example) router connected to another router >> somewhere with a T-1 circuit is it one serial stream at 1.54Mbs or is >> it broken into 24 channels? I would guess that if they supported the >> 24-Channel arrangement they would also have an option to have one >> stream. I quess the question is then; does datacom commonly use T-1 >> in a 24 channel arrangement? > A Data Service Unit (DSU) is used to pass data over a T1 line. A DSU > can have one or more Data Ports. Each Data Port could be connected to > a different source of data (e.g. a LAN through a router). A DSU must > be configured so the data coming from the data port is mapped into > some combination of the 24 channels. The Data Port port rates are > either multiples of 56Kbps or 64Kbps which is a single DSO channel > rate at 1.544Mbps. Terminology clarification/correction. All a DSU does is take a data stream in some (usually user-settable) format and convert it to a telco-compatible format, such as DDS. The function that Myron is describing is actually a combined DSU and DS1 multiplexer. The DSU portion turns the data streams (e.g. V.35 or RS-232) into DS0 signals, and the DS1 mux portion muxes those 24 DS0s into a DS1. > (64kbs of data x 24) + (8kbps framing/signaling/fdl bits) = 1.544 Mbps. Or, 24 DS0s x 8 data bits per frame per DS0 = 192 data bits/frame, + 1 framing bit per frame = 193 bits/frame, x 8000 frames/second = 1.544 Mb/s. > The maximum port rate on a Data Port is (64kbs x 24) = 1.536 Mbps. Alternately, 192 data bits/frame x 8000 frames/second = 1.536 Mb/s. > The data coming into the data port is copied into the first available > bit of the first available channel mapped to that data port. > This allows data from more than one data port or even voice data from > a PBX to be mapped into different channels of the same T1 line. Many > of these applications require a point to point connection or > Fractional T1 because it is required for the Data Ports on each end of > the T1 or FT1 to be the same type of data and bandwidth. Again, this is the DS1 mux function. > Direct answers to your questions above: > If you send serial data at 1.544Mbps it is not T1 because the framing, > signalling, and Facility Datalink bits are not transmitted. Well ... it depends on how fast and loose you want to play with terminology. If by T1 you mean a digital signal comprised of 24 distinct constituent 64kb/s signals, you're correct. But if by T1 you mean DS1, you're not correct because a DS1 is *by definition* a digital signal at the rate of 1.544 Mb/s. The fact that a lot of applications happen to form that digital signal by multiplexing and framing 24 individual DS0s is happy coincidence. That's one reason I personally try to avoid the term T1. A DS1 is a digital signal (meeting certain standards on level, pulse shape, and so on) at 1.544 Mb/s. A channelized DS1 is a DS1 with 24 explicit DS0s, and some sort of framing, either D4/SF or ESF. An unframed DS1 is a DS1 with no explicit framing, and a full 1.544 Mb/s available for user data. > No device can connect to a T1 service without these overhead bits. If the T1 is what I would call a channelized DS1, you're correct. However, not all T1 service is channelized. Some carriers offer unframed DS1 service. If your DS1 is to be used for 24 DS0s, it's in your best interest to have a channelized DS1, because performance monitoring is enhanced (particularly with ESF framing). But if you just need a fat pipe, an unframed DS1 is what you want. > By the way, a Channel Service Unit (CSU) just retransmits the data > portion of a T1 signal after striping the received framing bits. Well, not quite. A CSU is, in its raw form, a DS1 repeater in a customer premises box. Of course, these days it's a lot more complex, and has nifty performance-monitoring features and ESF Facilities Data Link communications functions and other good stuff. It doesn't strip any framing bits, though (aside from manipulating, for example, the ESF FDL and Cyclic Redundancy Check bits). > The FCC requires a CSU to be between Customer Premise Equipement > (CPE) and the Network to provide the correct T1 signal into the > Network. This requirement prevents CPE from taking down the Network. Again, not quite. Telcos require a CSU at the termination of a metallic DS1 so that the transmitted signal can reach the first repeater, as well as providing the neat functions above. The CSU *is* CPE, though. The actual demarcation (Network Interface) is usually an RJ48 jack or a DSX panel. Companies that provide DS1 over fiber optic systems may require a CSU for loopback, ESF PM, and other functions, but it's not technically required if the customer equipment is sufficiently close to the FOT. When I worked at Teleport, we never required a CSU; we handed off service on a RJ48X smart jack or a DSX-1. (Not requiring a CSU was one selling point, although it didn't endear us to companies like, well, ADC Kentrox ...) > In regards to an earlier comment, if an application did not need > framing bits, it would not be going over a Public Network and would > not need a CSU. Also not quite; unframed DS1s can go over a public network, and if they do, may need a CSU. However, it would have to be a CSU that supports unframed DS1s, and I don't know who makes these. > A Digital something? Cross Connect something? (DACS) Digital Access and Crossconnect System. > must have framing because its purpose in life is to rearrange or > cross connect the 24 DS0 channels. The DACS must have framing bits to > determine where the DSO channels are. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ From: Hans Ridder Subject: Re: T-1 For Datacomm Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 18:07:20 GMT In article kentrox!myron@uunet.UU.NET (Myron Hattig) writes: > By the way, a Channel Service Unit (CSU) just retransmits the data > portion of a T1 signal after striping the received framing bits. Er, I hate to take on a guy from Kentrox, but I don't think this is correct. How could the DSU/MUX/PBX pick out the channels without the framing bit? The only thing I'm aware of that a CSU does is terminate the spanned power (if used,) and "enforce" the ones-density requirement. (And possibly transmit keep-alives if the DSU dies, I forget, it's been awhile.) > A Digital something? Cross Connect something? (DACS) must have framing > because its purpose in life is to rearrange or cross connect the 24 > DS0 channels. The DACS must have framing bits to determine where the > DSO channels are. In my experience this is correct. If you have a T1 span which does not go through a DACS, you can use the whole 1.544Mbps for data. If there's a DACS, the best you can get is 1.534Mbps. Also in my experience, most of the telco folks will *not* be able to tell you if you need framing (or even who is supposed to provide clocking!) I just tried it and used it if it worked. Hans-Gabriel Ridder DECwest Engineering Bellevue, Washington, USA ------------------------------ From: Terry Kennedy Subject: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff Organization: St. Peter's College, US Date: 30 Oct 92 04:45:14 EST Organization: St. Peter's College, US In article , merlyn@reed.edu (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: > There's no need for ".com.nl" and ".com.au" and ".com.uk". The > top-level domains of com, org, edu, mil, net, and gov were clearly > intended from the beginning to be international in scope. It was the > silly PTTs that started deciding that they weren't going to let the > Americans have the root nameservers for *their* commercial domains > that created the country codes. I beg to differ. The Internet hostmaster at NIC.DDN.MIL is responsible for all registration services for MILNET hosts, and for some services for US non-MILNET hosts. The hostmaster is not responsible for non-US non- MILNET hosts, nor for certain registration functions for US non-MILNET hosts, such as the user directory (see recent postings here regarding the Internet White Pages for exactly what functions the NIC performs). Thus, there needs to be a registration authority for the non-us domains. > In fact, ".us" is merely a hack so that the small UUCP systems and > one-man shops could get a domain in the early days, and is targeted to > go away as soon as everyone there has migrated to the com or org > domain. (Most small shops are starting out in com now, rather than > even considering .us.) Please look at the US-DOMAIN.TXT file, available from NIC.DDN.MIL and some other servers. It says (in part): ... [Jan 1992] ... Because many computers in the United States are already registered in the COM, EDU, and other top level domains, relatively few computers are currently registered in the US domain. However the US Domain is beginning to grow. It is expected than many more computers of all types and belonging to all sizes of organizations will be registered in the US Domain. Large organizations or companies are also encouraged to register in the US Domain. > Sigh. So much bickering. So much misinformation. Sorry, no smiley. Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing terry@spcvxa.bitnet St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA terry@spcvxa.spc.edu +1 201 915 9381 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Oct 92 03:39:43 PDT From: lars@CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA Thanks for your "clarifying notes" on X.400. Others have already commented on your minor misunderstandings of Internet mail transfer agents, so I won't belabor those; they weren't important from a user perspective. But your posting illustrates quite well the dark side of X.400, and confirms my point about the user-unfriendlyness of X.400: - X.400 was developed by a committee with total disregard for the practical useability of the system by the end user. - X.400 will not be practical until there is a global X.500 directory seamlessly interconnected. At that time a whole new generation of user agents will have to be written to take advantage of the directory facilities. - If and when the global directory actually becomes workable (and it is still not clear that it will scale well) such enhanced user agents can equally well be written for RFC821/RFC822 mailers. The Internet Domain Name System is in fact a first demonstration of a distributed directory. It works fairly well, but only because it was designed to be strictly hierarchically structured. The replication agents required to synchronize the more ambitious X.500 direstory systems will require a lot of traffic to maintain. X.500 directory protocols are of a complexity level similar to SQL. I have heard knowledgeable people suggest that it is in fact harder to implement an X.500 engine capable of performing the searches described in your examples than to build an SQL engine. And then it has to be able to synchronize retrievals from multiple servers that may have different record formats. Throughout the Internet Protocol Suite there is an emphasis on making the protocols simple enough to implement reliably. It is no accident that the Internet is growing by 15% per month in every measure: - number of hosts - number of users - traffic volume - number of networks reachable from the national backbone. As the business world discovers the Internet (and they are learning fast; almost every month there are tutorial articles in {Datamation}, {MacWeek}, etc) this growth will acellerate. Senator Albert Gore from Tennesee has repeatedly sponsored legislation that will eventually turn the major research networks sponsored by the U.S. government into a "National Data Highway System". I expect that this will be a cornerstone in a Clinton/Gore industrial policy program. Once the "acceptable use policy" restrictions are lifted from the NREN backbone, RFC822 mail will truly be the lingua franca of public and private electronic mail systems from FIDOnet to UUCP mail. Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer Internet E-mail: lars@CMC.COM CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l Telephone: +1-805-968-4262 Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083 TeleFAX: +1-805-968-8256 ------------------------------ From: dhyams@autelca.ascom.ch (David Hyams) Subject: Re: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work? Organization: Ascom Autelca AG, Guemligen, Switzerland Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 08:16:38 GMT jms@carat.arizona.edu (A virtually vegetal non-entity) writes: > Any advice? I've asked around and it seems that it will probably work, but you'll have to do something about the cabling first. The problem is that the connection cable has four wires in it, only two of which are used for carrying the phone signals. Needless to say, the Swiss and Americans can't agree which of these wires are used to carry the signals. If I remember correctly, the US uses the inner two, while the Swiss use the outer two (although I'm not 100% sure ...) You'll have to remove the plug and have a play with the wiring until the phone starts working. > Aside from the usual ten number push buttons (arranged in two rows), > it also has an asterisk, octothorpe (#), "H", "D", large dot, and > double up-arrow buttons. The 'H' button is for 'HOLD', 'D' is for 'DATA', 'large dot' is a recall button (I think), while the double up-arrow is last number redial. BTW, do american phones have these buttons, and if so, how are they marked? Are there any international standards for these things? > On the back is a simple switch with "IMP" (presumably pulse dial) > and "FO" (touch tone?) positions. Correct. > Can any of our Swiss readers assist? Well, I'm not Swiss but I do live here -- is that ok? David Hyams Bern, Switzerland ------------------------------ From: tschreib@autelca.ascom.ch (Thomas Schreiber) Subject: Re: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work? Reply-To: tschreib@autelca.ascom.ch Organization: Ascom Autelca AG, Switzerland Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 10:37:59 GMT In article 4@eecs.nwu.edu, jms@carat.arizona.edu (A virtually vegetal non-entity) writes: > Now: can I use it? Unclear. It has an RJ-11 on its back, and the > handset uses the standard "small" RJ (does this one have a number) > that I'm used to on all my other phones. However, when I plug it in, > I get dead silence. The problem is, that the Swiss wiring of a RJ-11 is not the same as in the US (as elsewhere in the world I think). I'm not a specialist in wiring phones at all, but as I know, the two wires with the colours blue and white are the phone line. I think in the US they are supposed to be in the middle of the four pins of a RJ-11. > Any advice? The phone has "Tritel Ronco" written on the handset. > Aside from the usual ten number push buttons (arranged in two rows), > it also has an asterisk, octothorpe (#), "H", "D", large dot, and > double up-arrow buttons. On the back is a simple switch with "IMP" > (presumably pulse dial) and "FO" (touch tone?) positions. Can any of > our Swiss readers assist? IMP means pulse dialing, FO is touch tone. I'm not quite shure about the special buttons for the Tritel Ronco. But I have a phone out of the same product family. The features for those buttons are there: "H" means Hold. This holds the line for 20 seconds. It can be used if you want to move to another phone in another room, or so. You just can push this button and put the handset back. After 20 seconds the line will be disconnected. "D" means Data Mode. This is used to transmit the identification code to a mailbox or so (touch tone). Just try it; I hope it works and you enjoy this nice little Swiss phone. Thomas Schreiber AV-FES4.5 / Ascom Autelca AG / CH-3073 Guemligen / Switzerland Email : tschreib@autelca.ascom.ch Voice: +41-31-999-6793 FAX: +41-31-999-6582 X:400: G=Thomas / S=Schreiber / OU=Autelca / O=Ascom / P=EUnet / A=Arcom / C=ch ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Oct 92 08:12 GMT From: Andrew Emmerson Subject: Re: What is Van Eck Phreaking? Reply-To: aemmerson@cix.compulink.co.uk It is the act of reading the screen of a computer VDU screen from a distance, e.g. from outside someone else's premises. It involves tuning into higher-rate harmonics of the VDU's line frequency with a TV tuner, then re-inserting syncs to stabilise the image. So called because a Dutchman named van Eck wrote a paper on the subject in the course of his duties in the Dutch PTT Laboratories. It is not phreaking as we know it; ELINT or electronic eavesdropping would be a better description. Andy Emmerson G8PTH/G9BUP +44 604 844130 voice, +44 604 821647 fax ------------------------------ From: luckey@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Jon Luckey) Subject: Re: What is Van Eck Phreaking? Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:26:38 GMT 10u6579@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au writes: > Just a quick query. Can someone explain to me what is Van Eck > phreaking? Well, I wouldn't have put the term 'phreaking' in there, but Van Eck is a method of reading what's on a CRT (monitor) screen remotely by tuning in on the RF noise caused by CRT drive circuitry. Basically it duplicates what appears on the CRT by listening to radio noise of the electronics. There is a goverment specification called Tempest, which deals with making computer systems that are resistant to being spied on in this manner. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #813 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29902; 2 Nov 92 2:01 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11991 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 21:26:11 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11007 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 21:25:57 -0600 Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 21:25:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211020325.AA11007@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #816 TELECOM Digest Sun, 1 Nov 92 21:26:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 816 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Todd Lawrence) Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Macy Hallock) Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Paul Houle) Re: Use of Kerberos for Cellular Phone Protection? (Craig R. Watkins) Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem (Barton F. Bruce) Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) (Gerald Ruderman) Re: Radio Modems (Steve Schear) Re: Autovon: The Dod Phone Company (David Leibold) Re: Non-Critical, Real-Real-Cheap International Bandwidth (H. Hallikainen) Re: Phone Directory on CD (Steve Rothman) Re: Need PT&T Contact in Fiji (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line From: todd@valinor.mythical.com (Todd Lawrence) Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 20:54:12 CST Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems msoques@dvorak.amd.com (Martin Soques) writes: > Greetings! Last night, I received a computerized sales/sleeze call > which essentially "locked" my line and prevented me from getting a > dial tone no matter what I did with my switch hook. I found this > disturbing since I could not hang up on this unsolicited call. Is > [Moderator's Note: You did not hang up *long enough*. Had you stayed > off the line for maybe 20-30 seconds the sales robot would have gotten > cut off. But each time you disconnected for a few seconds then went Just a quick note, (and judging from the poster's address of Austin, this really wouldn't apply to him). Keeping the switchook closed for an extended period of time will disconnect you regardless of the callers switchook condition in an ESS or Crossbar environment, however in a Step by Step system, if the calling party is served by the same CO (same prefix), the calling party will be unable to disconnect no matter how long you leave the switchook closed ... (there are a few SxS still out there!) Todd Lawrence Internet: todd@valinor.mythical.com uucp: uunet!valinor!todd ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 18:17 EST From: fmsys!macy@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu (Macy Hallock) Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level Organization: The Matrix In article is written: > Around here, a two-ended private line (no switching) costs $6 per > month, and is hard copper wires (direct ohmic connection) from end to > end. I have been contemplating getting such a line over to a friend's > house to experiment with. That's an extraordinarily cheap rate in today's telco tariff climate. Most "special service" circuits have seen substantial rate hikes in the last few years. Around here, a similar circuit has gone from $7.50/mo in 1984 to $60.00/mo. I have noted that the rate took its most substantial increase about the same time the telco's started aggressively marketing Centrex. I wonder if the intent was to protect Centrex against off-premise stations off PBX systems ...? > It appears that I can get a pretty high bit rate through such a line > if I drive enough signal at the transmit end and am willing to take a > 60dB gain loss through the system -- however, I'm not sure how much > signal I am allowed on a private line. You are correct. Depending on several variables, you can do this several ways. The cheapest way: if the pairs are not loaded (likely if you are less than 5000 cable feet from the C.O.) you can use a two wire line driver by RAD, Patton Electronics or Black Box. This will get you up to 38,400 bps async, depending on the distance. Be sure you get the two wire model. Consider adding additional lightning protection, while you are at it. Cost: about $145 each end. There are better quality two wire high speed line drivers, but the are "oddballs" to most datacom houses. You might be able to pick up a pair of ARK or Gandalf "LDM" limited distance modems to do this from a surplus house. Be sure you get two wire units. Cost: Whatever you can bargain. Next cheapest: use a pair of inexpensive V.32bis modems with a leased line option in the software. This will get you 14,400bps, more if you can use compression. The interface rate for RS-232 will most likely be 19,200 or 38,400. This will work with both loaded and unloaded cable pairs, BTW. Cost: about $300 each end. Another way: again for unloaded cable ... get a pair of UDS or other 56kbps CSU/DSU's. These will run at 64kbps or 56kbps at sync or async on a four wire metallic circuit. Cost: about $700 each end. V.35 or RS232 interface available. These are all solutions that can be done yourself (I have). Macy Hallock +1.216.723.3000 Fax +1.216.723.3000 macy@fmsystm.ncoast.org F M Systems, Inc. 150 Highland Drive Medina, OH USA macy@fmsystm.uucp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 23:18:48 MST From: houle@jupiter.nmt.edu (Paul Houle) Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone Organization: New Mexico Tech > [Moderator's Note: I wish you would elaborate a little further on this > and how you think Kerberos could be implemented in cellular phones. I > suspect it would be (almost) totally foolproof. How would you do it? > How would the legitimate user get his 'ticket' each time? PAT] The fundamental problem with cell phone security is that all call information is sent "in the clear". Presumably with a properly configured scanner and computer, a person could intercept the ESN and other information that is sent out every time a person uses his cellular phone and eventually accumulate a rather long list of valid numbers to use at will. If the phreaker uses every number only once, it would be difficult to catch him, although if the cellphone people were about as ruthless as Bell was with the blue boxers, it might be able to catch some of them (using traffic analysis or tapping lines and having radiolocation cars ready to scramble). With a serious modification in the design of the phones, public key cryptography technology could be applied here. A private key that is stored in a ROM on the cellular phone could be used to sign random test messages sent by the cellular base. The base could verify the signature with a copy of the public key. The public key could then be sent in the clear, and it would do little good to would-be cellular hackers. The same technology could even be used to encrypt the voice if it is sent digitally, which would provide real security (at last!) to radio communications. The only way that this system could be beat would be (a) combinational attack (which could be made arbitrarily difficult by using long keys), (b) copying the private key from somebody's phone (which presumably would require the phreaker to actually take physical possession of the phone and to tamper with it), or (c) acquisition of codes at the site where the phones are made. (b) looks like it could be a real problem. I go buy a phone with false I.D. and sell copies of the private key to hundreds of people, then disappear when the bill comes. ------------------------------ From: Craig R. Watkins Subject: Re: Use of Kerberos for Cellular Phone Protection? Date: 01 Nov 92 15:21:26 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. In article , FZC@CU.NIH.GOV writes: > To TELECOM Digest, I ask Pat, what is Kerberos and what is a 'ticket'? Kerberos is an authentication system used to authenticate entities to each other on a network. To even go into its design goals might take more space than we should bother with here and you don't want to hear it from me, anyway. You might want to start out with the paper /pub/kerberos/doc/usenix.txt (or usenix.PS) on aeneas.mit.edu. Also see techplan.txt and other documents in that directory for more information. A ticket is a credential which you hand to another entity to prove to them that you are who you say you are. Very basically this is done by encrypting information with a key that is shared by the two interested parties or by the parties and a third trusted party (so that this trust can be conveyed to others). (See? I'm almost ready to write a few more pages (poorly) explaining this -- see the papers I referenced above instead.) >> How would / could you implement Kerberos for use on cellular phones? One might argue that something as sophisticated as Kerberos does not need to be implemented for authentication for cellular phones. All one would need to do is to "share a secret" with your cellular provider. You would program an encryption key into your phone (eg a 64-bit number) which you would also tell your cellular provider. Your cellular provider might send you a "challenge" which you would encrypt with your key and send back to the provider. The provider would do the same and be able to verify that you are who you say you are. This is "private key encryption." When done correctly, it is computationally unreasonable to deduce your private key from monitoring this exchange. One might also argue that Kerberos' extension of trust methods might be able to expand to be used between cellular providers to authenticate roamers. Another option would be to use "public key encryption" where each party has one public key (which is published to the world) and one private key (which is known only to its owner). An advantage here is that only the cellular phone needs to know the private key; the phone could compute both the private and public key and then only display the public key for the user to provide to the cellular company. The rest would be similar to a private key method. Basically, there are fairly well understood technologies for implementing more reliable authentication than we have now. Craig R. Watkins crw@icf.hrb.com HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311 ------------------------------ From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. Date: 01 Nov 92 14:49:55 EDT In article , david@infopro.com (David Fiedler) writes: > The phone rang a third time. This time it *was* my sister on the > line, but it was a very bad connection, as if she was in Argentina or > something. I asked her if she had called me the previous two times, > and she said, "No, I just got home. And anyway, you just called *me*". > We determined that we had *each* heard the phone ring, and picked it > up, and found ourselves connected to each other! Any relatives that might play cute games conferencing both you together and at the same time hoping to hear something of interest as they listened in? > This was so weird that the MCI customer service lady actually > suggested exorcism. I wasn't about to admit to her that my wife and I > had already looked in the mirror to make sure we weren't already dead, If this is the case, although it could be some other 'being' causing the connection to be setup, it could be also be just one of you at either end not being fully aware of 'other' abilities, and exorcism would then hardly be appropriate. This is the wrong news group for that sort of thing, though. I would be very curious to see what does or does not show up on phone bills. ------------------------------ From: GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ruderman) Subject: Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) Organization: Rational Systems, Inc. Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 00:09:56 GMT In article David Lesher writes: >> [Moderator's Note: There are a bunch of internationally based phone >> services in New Jersey advertised to people all over the world. >> The services directed to Americans are located in the Netherland >> Antilles and one is in Georgetown, Guyana. > I spent 30+ days in Georgetown two years ago, and have returned since. > The phone service there is as bad as Havana, and far worse than, say, > Poland was. I regularly got local calls abandoned, likely due to the > lack of interoffice trunkage. If you called back several times, I'm making this up as I go along. IOW I don't know what I am talking about. If I wanted to set up a scam I could do the following: Find a country with very bad telephone service. Make a deal with them to get a good percentage from incoming international calls to a certain range of numbers. Go to the neighboring country that provides the connection to the outside world for phone service. Make a deal with the PTT there to have calls to these numbers fed not to the country they are directed to, but to my operation. Advertise, etc and count the money. So a customer calls the number, it gets to someplace with great phone service. The call does not get forwarded to the destination country. My "operators" do whatever. The customer gets a bill for internation calls and someone else does the collection for me. Passes it along to the PTT in the target etc. The beauty is complaints. The customers have to direct them to a country with (or is it without) phone service from hell. "Its not my fault you can't all the Kamchatka PTT." Warning: I do not advocate doing this, but if you do please tell me how it goes. Gerald Ruderman geraldr@ratsys.com ------------------------------ From: schear@cylink.COM (Steve Schear) Subject: Re: Radio Modems Organization: Cylink Corp. Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 22:35:54 GMT In article patrick%8461.span@Fedex. Msfc.Nasa.Gov (Patrick E. Meyer) writes: > Can anyone please suggest companies that I can contact about radio > modems. Cylink manufacturers a family of Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum radio modems. Operating in the 902-928 MHZ ISM band they provide full-duplex, point-to-point unlicensed links of up to ten miles (line-of-sight) at data rate of 64-256 kbps. If you'd like more info, drop me a line. Steve Schear N7ZEZ Cylink, Inc. 310 N. Mary Ave. Sunnyvale CA 94086 (408) 735-6690; FAX -6645 e-mail: schear@cylink.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 21:43:25 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Re: Autovon: The Dod Phone Company Besides the noteworthy history of Autovon recently posted as a Digest special issue, the archives also contain an excerpt from an Autovon phone book under the file name "autovon.instructions". This is supplemental to the information in the recent posting and also contains details on what the various "flash" priorities do and who can use them. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Non-Critical, Real-Real-Cheap International Bandwidth Wanted Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 07:10:45 GMT It seems that for this application, a voice circuit is overkill. Do international carriers offer packet data transmission on a "space available" basis? It seems that if there is room for "one more phone call" on a circuit, there's room for 64 kbps of data that could be divided among various users on a space available basis. Each packet sent by a user could include a "priority" code that would determine who gets to go and who gets to wait. Higher priority codes would cost more per bit. In such a system, the highest priority would probably go to voice calls. If the circuit is not fully loaded with voice, then the various data users could put their data on the circuit, on a space available, priority code basis. Those of us that just need to get the data there sometime (not right now) would get lower rates since our use could be preempted by a higher priority code. This is how I envision internet working (though I don't really know anything about how it does work). It would seem that highest priority is given to interactive data use (telnet), then, perhaps, ftp, then mail, then news. It's cost effective to keep the circuits loaded, yet does not slow down high priority traffic. Just some thoughts ... Harold ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 09:43:53 EST From: rothman@tegra.com (Steve Rothman) Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD > Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70 > million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses. Do these new telephone listing CD-ROMs contain addresses, as well as names and phone numbers? Can they be searched by phone number (and address, if contained), or just by name? Steve Rothman ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 11:49:53 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Need PT&T Contact in Fiji This may end up coming across as a joke, but: Wasn't it AT&T that had the ad about someone being connected erroneously to Fiji? Apparently, that (fictional) connection was not via the carrier running the ad. Does that advertiser consider real-life connections to Fiji? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #816 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29939; 2 Nov 92 2:02 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05930 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 19:32:48 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07737 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 19:32:35 -0600 Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 19:32:35 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211020132.AA07737@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #814 TELECOM Digest Sun, 1 Nov 92 19:32:38 CST Volume 12 : Issue 814 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson ISDN and Stuff (root@sanger.chem.nd.edu) Recommendations on ISDN System For Office (Thomas B. Clark III) Re: ISDN in Irving, Texas (Bob Blackshaw) Digital Spread Spectrum Cordless Phone (Howard Gayle) Popfone Applies For Portable Phone Net in Canada (David Leibold) Bell Atlantic to Cut 4,000 Jobs (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) V2.2bis Line Monitor? (J. R. Pendleton) When Were Round Plugs and Jacks Invented? (Jim Haynes) Latest from Japan: Cordless Home PBXs (Jim Gottlieb) Calling Card Fraud (Steve Kass) Straw Poll Results! Guess Who Won the Election! (Phydeaux) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 14:42:45 -0500 From: Doctor Math Subject: ISDN and Stuff The rumors are true: the University where I work is getting a new phone system. I actually got to talk to a local RBOC representative about it, so I found out the following: We're getting a nice shiny new DMS-100 and new Northern Telecom phones. This DMS-100 will presumably have a fiber connection to the #5ESS which is "downtown". The phones are hybrid: analog voice path, digital signalling between the phone and the switch; analog devices (read: FAX machine) require a special line card which provides a POTS connection. The DMS-100 will have ISDN capability, and the switch that serves the town around the University will be made ISDN capable. Thus, with enough CPE, it will be possible to make ISDN calls from my house to the University. Great, I'm so excited ... now the hard part. Let't suppose that I want to set up a low-bandwidth Internet connection between here and my house. My options are: 1. Get a fast modem (under $300) and set up a SLIP connection on an UNmeasured residential line. Since the call isn't measured, I can just leave the connection up all the time. 2. Get an ISDN line ($???) and an ISDN adaptor ($1200 from Hayes). Since ISDN service IS measured, try to use it as little as possible. Obviously, the ISDN route will cost lots more. According to the rep, ISDN service is supposed to be attractively priced to people who wish to use it to replace some sort of four-wire leased-line service. Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly charge, why would I want ISDN? Why is it that current analog lines are either "unmeasured" (residential) or "measured" (business), yet most ISDN is measured regardless of who's using it (and charged at a higher rate if it's for data)? Finally, a request: does anyone maintain some sort of ISDN availability information? Not RBOC hype ("We plan to have ISDN in 94% of our state by the year 1997."), but real price and availability information? I am curious to see how much the various RBOCs are charging for ISDN and how available it is becoming in various places around the country. I'll even maintain a price chart for the TELECOM Digest if people are interested. ------------------------------ From: tclark@med.unc.edu (Thomas B. Clark III) Subject: Recommendations on ISDN System For Office Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 17:49:50 GMT My department at University of North Carolina is looking toward buying a new office telephone system. The university now has a digital switch and can provide us with ISDN service. We will need about 40 extensions and 15 or so trunk lines, 10 of which will be dedicated to individuals. We would like to interface with the university's voice mail system, and to have it turn on message lights on the telephones. We would also like to interface with a dictation system. We need toll call accounting and restriction. The university's telecom department keeps proposing outdated analog systems that we have no interest in. Does anybody have suggestions for systems that we might look at? E-mail to me, and if there is a significant number of responses I will forward a summary to the Moderator. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) Subject: Re: ISDN in Irving, Texas Organization: Corporation for Open Systems Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 14:23:34 GMT In ncc@ncc.jvnc.net (R. Steven Rainwater) writes: > Our company is planning on developing some software that will take > advantage of ISDN BRI services. To this end we asked GTE to install > two ISDN BRI lines at our office. We were pleasantly suprised at the > rates: $17 per line vs. about $40 per line for our standard analog [ some deletions] > Can anyone direct me to information on how we can get from the two > wires on our wiring block to an RJ45 jack and perhaps offer an > explanation of what this power supply is that we "might" need? > Hopefully, the terminal adapter can provided whatever power might be > needed to the line. What you need in addition to your terminal adapters is a network interface device (NT1 in ISDN parlance). The two wire line from GTE is the U interface, an echo-cancelling 80 kbaud line using the 2B1Q line encoding. Your adapter devices have an S/T interface, which is four wire 192 kbits full duplex 2B+D interface. This is why you need the NT1 device which converts between the two different protocols on the U and S/T interfaces. As to power, the NT1 will most likely have some instructions. Under ISDN, the telco no longer is required to provide the 48 volts as in analog service. This is to prepare for the days when we go fibre (damned hard to push DC down a piece of glass :-) ) > Also, one additional problem has come up with GTE. The manual for the > terminal adapter indicates that the device needs to be programmed with > two numbers; a Terminal Endpoint Identifier (TEI), and a Service > Profile Identifier (SPID). We are told to get these numbers from the > phone company but, once again, GTE claims they have no knowledge of > these things. I've gotten numbers for several higher up GTE people > and will keep plugging away at this one, but, in the meantime, does > anyone know of a way to determine these two numbers from my end? We > are on an AT&T 5ESS switch, if that makes any difference. No, you get the TEI and SPID from the switch at initialization time. You need to get hold of Bellcore Publication SR-NWT-001953 which covers all of the CPE requirements for National ISDN-1, the ISDN service that is going in all over the U.S. The AT&T 5ESS should not make any difference since that is what National ISDN-1 is all about. The three major switch manufacturers have agreed to implement the same interface. Bob ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 08:15:56 PST From: howard@hal.com (Howard Gayle) Subject: Digital Spread Spectrum Cordless Phone Reply-To: howard@hal.com A short article in "The Consumer Electronics Edge" (Nov. 1992, p. 5) describes the Escort 9000 cordless phone from Cincinnati Microwave. It's said to use "digital spread spectrum technology" in the 902-928 MHz band to give greater range and more privacy. The price is given as "about $350" and the availability as "early next year." The address of Cincinnati Microwave is 5200 Fields-Ertel Rd., Cincinnati, OH 45249, USA. Phone +1 513 489 5400. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 19:06:15 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Popfone Applies For Portable Phone Net in Canada There are plans by the Canadian Department of Communications to award licenses for portable cordless phone networks. {The Toronto Star} reports that the Popfone consortium will apply for a license. Popfone consists of Call-Net (long distance company), Maclean Hunter (cable, pager operator), Charles Sirois (who at least a few months ago was Teleglobe Canada chief) and others. Popfone hopes to franchise out base stations to such businesses as corner stores and major attractions. Unlike a cellular network, there won't be end-to-end ownership of facilities with Popfone. This is presumably the CT2 cordless phone standard, described as being somewhere between a pager and a cell phone. There are hopes that four million such phones could be in operation within five years, compared to the present one million cellular subscribers. Such phones are intended for operation within 100 metres of a base station, as opposed to the wide coverage on a cellular system. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 17:32:31 EST Subject: Bell Atlantic to Cut 4,000 Jobs Business Digest, October 30, 1992, {Washington Post}, Page F2 Bell Atlantic Chairman Raymond W. Smith told securities analysts in New York that the company would cut 4,000 jobs by the end of this year, in addition to the 3,200 that were eliminated last year. Smith said Bell Atlantic will cut costs by $225 million in the next few years. --- AT&T will invest $402 million in TPC-5, the first transpacific fiber-optic system using optical amplifiers. The $1.12 billion TPC-5 network will be a 15,500 mile loop that links the mainland United States with Hawaii, Guam and Japan. --- The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, which supporters say will open the way for mass marketing of digital recording equipment for home stereo systems, was signed into law by President Bush. --- Legislation that regulates the use of 900-number calling services and makes it harder to intercept calls made on cellular telephones with special scanning equipment was signed by President Bush. ------------------------------ From: jerryp@key.amdahl.com (J. R. Pendleton) Subject: V2.2bis Line Monitor Help Needed Date: 01 Nov 92 19:17:57 GMT Organization: Employer not involved in this. I have a problem where I have a number of phone lines coming into what could be called a concentrator (eight in, one out). The incoming lines are 2400 bps standard modems. I would like the capability to monitor traffic both directions. I need to monitor the telephone line rather than the RS-232 out of the modems. I envision a inductive pickup, that I could clamp onto the telco lines, some sort of modem that will demodulate both sides and some sort of data capture scope. Does such a critter exist? If so, could one of the kind readers give me a pointer to such a device, or am I out of luck and have to build one? Many thanks. Jerry Pendleton J. R. Pendleton, who does not speak for Key Computer Labs or Amdahl Inc. uucp: jerryp@key.amdahl.com Voice : (510)623-2146 Amateur : KC6RTO ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Subject: When Were Round Plugs and Jacks Invented? Date: 1 Nov 1992 08:31:08 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz I was just looking at an old telegraphy book dated 1903 -- of course it may be older and just reprinted or revised at that date. I was surprised to see no round plugs and jacks in there. I thought they were in use by that date. By "round" I mean the familiar 1/4-inch diameter "phone" plug that is still in use today. What were shown in the book included: The old kind of switchboard where a tapered plug with an insulated handle is stuck into a hole between two pieces of metal to connect them together. A two-conductor plug and cord which looked like it could be inserted in place of the solid tapered plug in the above kind of switchboard. Flat plugs with cords, to be put into a clip jack. The plug has two flat blades of metal with an insulator between them, forming a sandwich. The jack has a fixed contact and an arched spring contact. More than one plug can be put into the jack at a time, resulting in the plug circuits being connected in series. haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ From: jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Latest from Japan: Cordless Home PBXs Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 10:07:35 GMT Cordless telephones have long been popular in Japan. The small size and poor construction of Japanese residences leads to few transmission problems. Most are rated at only ten meters, but this is usually sufficient. The limited space also leads to many functions being crammed into one small unit. Cordless Telephone/Answering Machines are quite common. The main unit is a telephone, an answering machine, and the base unit for the cordless handset. All in a box that is smaller than a 2500 set. Manufacturers here have lately been adding a new twist. In addition to the one cordless handset that it comes with, many new models can be equipped with three or four cordless telephones. The base ('parent phone' in Japanese) can call to any of the 'child phones', and any of the child phones can call either the base or another of the 'child' handsets. Each handset has its own charger base. This basically creates a wireless PBX for the home and I have been seeing them in an increasing number of residences. Japanese children don't normally have their own phone lines, so the single-line nature of this product suits it perfectly to the Japanese family. The price for the PBX / base unit / telephone / answering machine and first cordless unit is about USD$400-500. Each additional cordless unit is USD$120-160. Jim Gottlieb InfoConnections, Tokyo, Japan In Japan: Fax: +81 3 3865 9424 Voice Mail: +81 3 3865 3548 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 23:04 EST From: SKASS@drew.drew.edu Subject: Calling Card Fraud Well, after years of using my AT&T calling card in high-risk areas, I became a victim of calling card fraud. AT&T cancelled my card (but didn't call me to say so) because of suspected fraud after seeing calls to Bangladesh and the UK. I haven't seen the bill yet; maybe there were many. I had never called those places. What I think happened is that when I was trying vainly to call voice mail from a phone that NYTel had rigged to disable the keypad, the several tries, together with my having to read my number aloud to AT&T operators to retry and to get credit, let someone get ahold of my number. I'm going to let AT&T know that NYTel policy -- and AT&T's of having me read the number aloud - probably contributed to the number getting stolen. I'm very careful about punching it in fast with the keypad covered, in general. Within this story, yet one more example of AT&T's left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. The operator at 00 said the card was denied and that I would have to call the business office tomorrow. A call to 1-800-222-0300, however, answered my question on the spot this evening. AT&T was actually very helpful, and says they will annul the fraudulent charges once I get my bill. I'm glad they acted so quickly to cancel the card, though a call to me would have been in order [the terms and conditions of the card do say they can cancel without notice]. Another card had already been issued and mailed, which I should have within days. I hope it spells something easy to remember, too. Steve Kass/ Dept of Math and CS/ Drew U/ Madison NJ 07940 skass@drew.drew.edu 201-514-1187 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 11:50:30 PST From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: Straw Poll Results! Guess Who Won the Election! Well, the Usenet Straw Poll is over and the results are below. Only a few people attempted to vote multiple times and their votes were disqualified. There were over 2000 votes cast. I believe I got enough of a cross-section of the Usenet community by announcing this on a number of different groups. I doubt, however, that the results below are representative of the voting population of the United States. Beyond this, I think the results speak for themselves. A hearty "Thank you!" to those who participated, and to those in the US, don't forget to vote on Tuesday! reb Vote tally for candidates receiving more than one vote: 858 BILL CLINTON 470 ANDRE MARROU 401 H.ROSS PEROT 226 GEORGE BUSH 58 JAMES "KIBO" PARRY 26 LASZLO NEMETH 17 CTHULHU 16 NOBODY/NONE OF THE ABOVE 15 JIM HENDERSON 13 FRANK ZAPPA 12 HOWARD STERN 11 TED FABER 7 BO GRITZ 5 JERRY BROWN 5 JERRY GARCIA 4 RON DANIELS 3 DAVE BARRY 3 RALPH NADER 3 REN & STIMPY 2 HUNTER S THOMPSON 2 CHARLES MANSON 2 TIM CLINKENPEEL 2 TSONGAS The following each received one vote: ADAM JANIN AL GORE ANDROMEDA GALAXY ANN RICHARDS BILL 'N OPUS BILL MOYERS BOBBY HEENAN CALVIN (OF CALVIN AND HOBBES) CHAD ANDREW HANKIN FOR PRESIDENT COKIE ROBERTS (NPR) DANIELS DAVID LETTERMAN EDDIE LAWSON ELIZABETH DOLE ELVIRA FOR PRESIDENT ELVIS PRESLEY ERNEST BORGNINE/ERIC ESTRADA FBI SPECIAL AGENT DALE COOPER GEORGE WILL/P.J. O'ROURKE J.R. "BOB" DOBBS KERMIT THE MAYOR OF ROCHESTER GARY STOLLMAN GEORGE CLINTON GORE VIDAL HEMP HILLARY HOWARD PHILLIPS IDI AMIN JACK HERER JESSE JACKSON JIM MORRISON LARRY AGRAN LEADER KIBO LENORA FULANI LEVON HELM LONNIE SMITH MICKEY MOUSE! MIKHAIL GORBACHEV MISS TREE PARKER MR. BEAN NOAM CHOMSKY PAT PAULSEN PHIL LESH PETER GARRETT (AUTRALIAN ENVIRONMENTALIST) PICKARD / RIKER PRES-JAMES STOCKDALE, VP-QUAYLE REAGAN/NIXON RICHARD STALLMAN ROBERT "BALD EAGLE" ANGELINO STANLEY OWSLEY THAT HEAD EWOK IN RETURN OF THE JEDI THOMAS JEFFERSON TOD JOHNSON TOM PETERS UPDATES WILLIAM GATES ZIPPY THE PINHEAD ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #814 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29955; 2 Nov 92 2:02 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20412 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:52:39 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11702 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:52:18 -0600 Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:52:18 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211020252.AA11702@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #815 TELECOM Digest Sun, 1 Nov 92 19:32:38 CST Volume 12 : Issue 814 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson ISDN and Stuff (root@sanger.chem.nd.edu) Recommendations on ISDN System For Office (Thomas B. Clark III) Re: ISDN in Irving, Texas (Bob Blackshaw) Digital Spread Spectrum Cordless Phone (Howard Gayle) Popfone Applies For Portable Phone Net in Canada (David Leibold) Bell Atlantic to Cut 4,000 Jobs (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) V2.2bis Line Monitor? (J. R. Pendleton) When Were Round Plugs and Jacks Invented? (Jim Haynes) Latest from Japan: Cordless Home PBXs (Jim Gottlieb) Calling Card Fraud (Steve Kass) Straw Poll Results! Guess Who Won the Election! (Phydeaux) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 14:42:45 -0500 From: Doctor Math Subject: ISDN and Stuff The rumors are true: the University where I work is getting a new phone system. I actually got to talk to a local RBOC representative about it, so I found out the following: We're getting a nice shiny new DMS-100 and new Northern Telecom phones. This DMS-100 will presumably have a fiber connection to the #5ESS which is "downtown". The phones are hybrid: analog voice path, digital signalling between the phone and the switch; analog devices (read: FAX machine) require a special line card which provides a POTS connection. The DMS-100 will have ISDN capability, and the switch that serves the town around the University will be made ISDN capable. Thus, with enough CPE, it will be possible to make ISDN calls from my house to the University. Great, I'm so excited ... now the hard part. Let't suppose that I want to set up a low-bandwidth Internet connection between here and my house. My options are: 1. Get a fast modem (under $300) and set up a SLIP connection on an UNmeasured residential line. Since the call isn't measured, I can just leave the connection up all the time. 2. Get an ISDN line ($???) and an ISDN adaptor ($1200 from Hayes). Since ISDN service IS measured, try to use it as little as possible. Obviously, the ISDN route will cost lots more. According to the rep, ISDN service is supposed to be attractively priced to people who wish to use it to replace some sort of four-wire leased-line service. Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly charge, why would I want ISDN? Why is it that current analog lines are either "unmeasured" (residential) or "measured" (business), yet most ISDN is measured regardless of who's using it (and charged at a higher rate if it's for data)? Finally, a request: does anyone maintain some sort of ISDN availability information? Not RBOC hype ("We plan to have ISDN in 94% of our state by the year 1997."), but real price and availability information? I am curious to see how much the various RBOCs are charging for ISDN and how available it is becoming in various places around the country. I'll even maintain a price chart for the TELECOM Digest if people are interested. ------------------------------ From: tclark@med.unc.edu (Thomas B. Clark III) Subject: Recommendations on ISDN System For Office Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 17:49:50 GMT My department at University of North Carolina is looking toward buying a new office telephone system. The university now has a digital switch and can provide us with ISDN service. We will need about 40 extensions and 15 or so trunk lines, 10 of which will be dedicated to individuals. We would like to interface with the university's voice mail system, and to have it turn on message lights on the telephones. We would also like to interface with a dictation system. We need toll call accounting and restriction. The university's telecom department keeps proposing outdated analog systems that we have no interest in. Does anybody have suggestions for systems that we might look at? E-mail to me, and if there is a significant number of responses I will forward a summary to the Moderator. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) Subject: Re: ISDN in Irving, Texas Organization: Corporation for Open Systems Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 14:23:34 GMT In ncc@ncc.jvnc.net (R. Steven Rainwater) writes: > Our company is planning on developing some software that will take > advantage of ISDN BRI services. To this end we asked GTE to install > two ISDN BRI lines at our office. We were pleasantly suprised at the > rates: $17 per line vs. about $40 per line for our standard analog [ some deletions] > Can anyone direct me to information on how we can get from the two > wires on our wiring block to an RJ45 jack and perhaps offer an > explanation of what this power supply is that we "might" need? > Hopefully, the terminal adapter can provided whatever power might be > needed to the line. What you need in addition to your terminal adapters is a network interface device (NT1 in ISDN parlance). The two wire line from GTE is the U interface, an echo-cancelling 80 kbaud line using the 2B1Q line encoding. Your adapter devices have an S/T interface, which is four wire 192 kbits full duplex 2B+D interface. This is why you need the NT1 device which converts between the two different protocols on the U and S/T interfaces. As to power, the NT1 will most likely have some instructions. Under ISDN, the telco no longer is required to provide the 48 volts as in analog service. This is to prepare for the days when we go fibre (damned hard to push DC down a piece of glass :-) ) > Also, one additional problem has come up with GTE. The manual for the > terminal adapter indicates that the device needs to be programmed with > two numbers; a Terminal Endpoint Identifier (TEI), and a Service > Profile Identifier (SPID). We are told to get these numbers from the > phone company but, once again, GTE claims they have no knowledge of > these things. I've gotten numbers for several higher up GTE people > and will keep plugging away at this one, but, in the meantime, does > anyone know of a way to determine these two numbers from my end? We > are on an AT&T 5ESS switch, if that makes any difference. No, you get the TEI and SPID from the switch at initialization time. You need to get hold of Bellcore Publication SR-NWT-001953 which covers all of the CPE requirements for National ISDN-1, the ISDN service that is going in all over the U.S. The AT&T 5ESS should not make any difference since that is what National ISDN-1 is all about. The three major switch manufacturers have agreed to implement the same interface. Bob ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 08:15:56 PST From: howard@hal.com (Howard Gayle) Subject: Digital Spread Spectrum Cordless Phone Reply-To: howard@hal.com A short article in "The Consumer Electronics Edge" (Nov. 1992, p. 5) describes the Escort 9000 cordless phone from Cincinnati Microwave. It's said to use "digital spread spectrum technology" in the 902-928 MHz band to give greater range and more privacy. The price is given as "about $350" and the availability as "early next year." The address of Cincinnati Microwave is 5200 Fields-Ertel Rd., Cincinnati, OH 45249, USA. Phone +1 513 489 5400. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 19:06:15 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Popfone Applies For Portable Phone Net in Canada There are plans by the Canadian Department of Communications to award licenses for portable cordless phone networks. {The Toronto Star} reports that the Popfone consortium will apply for a license. Popfone consists of Call-Net (long distance company), Maclean Hunter (cable, pager operator), Charles Sirois (who at least a few months ago was Teleglobe Canada chief) and others. Popfone hopes to franchise out base stations to such businesses as corner stores and major attractions. Unlike a cellular network, there won't be end-to-end ownership of facilities with Popfone. This is presumably the CT2 cordless phone standard, described as being somewhere between a pager and a cell phone. There are hopes that four million such phones could be in operation within five years, compared to the present one million cellular subscribers. Such phones are intended for operation within 100 metres of a base station, as opposed to the wide coverage on a cellular system. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 17:32:31 EST Subject: Bell Atlantic to Cut 4,000 Jobs Business Digest, October 30, 1992, {Washington Post}, Page F2 Bell Atlantic Chairman Raymond W. Smith told securities analysts in New York that the company would cut 4,000 jobs by the end of this year, in addition to the 3,200 that were eliminated last year. Smith said Bell Atlantic will cut costs by $225 million in the next few years. --- AT&T will invest $402 million in TPC-5, the first transpacific fiber-optic system using optical amplifiers. The $1.12 billion TPC-5 network will be a 15,500 mile loop that links the mainland United States with Hawaii, Guam and Japan. --- The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, which supporters say will open the way for mass marketing of digital recording equipment for home stereo systems, was signed into law by President Bush. --- Legislation that regulates the use of 900-number calling services and makes it harder to intercept calls made on cellular telephones with special scanning equipment was signed by President Bush. ------------------------------ From: jerryp@key.amdahl.com (J. R. Pendleton) Subject: V2.2bis Line Monitor Help Needed Date: 01 Nov 92 19:17:57 GMT Organization: Employer not involved in this. I have a problem where I have a number of phone lines coming into what could be called a concentrator (eight in, one out). The incoming lines are 2400 bps standard modems. I would like the capability to monitor traffic both directions. I need to monitor the telephone line rather than the RS-232 out of the modems. I envision a inductive pickup, that I could clamp onto the telco lines, some sort of modem that will demodulate both sides and some sort of data capture scope. Does such a critter exist? If so, could one of the kind readers give me a pointer to such a device, or am I out of luck and have to build one? Many thanks. Jerry Pendleton J. R. Pendleton, who does not speak for Key Computer Labs or Amdahl Inc. uucp: jerryp@key.amdahl.com Voice : (510)623-2146 Amateur : KC6RTO ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Subject: When Were Round Plugs and Jacks Invented? Date: 1 Nov 1992 08:31:08 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz I was just looking at an old telegraphy book dated 1903 -- of course it may be older and just reprinted or revised at that date. I was surprised to see no round plugs and jacks in there. I thought they were in use by that date. By "round" I mean the familiar 1/4-inch diameter "phone" plug that is still in use today. What were shown in the book included: The old kind of switchboard where a tapered plug with an insulated handle is stuck into a hole between two pieces of metal to connect them together. A two-conductor plug and cord which looked like it could be inserted in place of the solid tapered plug in the above kind of switchboard. Flat plugs with cords, to be put into a clip jack. The plug has two flat blades of metal with an insulator between them, forming a sandwich. The jack has a fixed contact and an arched spring contact. More than one plug can be put into the jack at a time, resulting in the plug circuits being connected in series. haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ From: jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Latest from Japan: Cordless Home PBXs Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 10:07:35 GMT Cordless telephones have long been popular in Japan. The small size and poor construction of Japanese residences leads to few transmission problems. Most are rated at only ten meters, but this is usually sufficient. The limited space also leads to many functions being crammed into one small unit. Cordless Telephone/Answering Machines are quite common. The main unit is a telephone, an answering machine, and the base unit for the cordless handset. All in a box that is smaller than a 2500 set. Manufacturers here have lately been adding a new twist. In addition to the one cordless handset that it comes with, many new models can be equipped with three or four cordless telephones. The base ('parent phone' in Japanese) can call to any of the 'child phones', and any of the child phones can call either the base or another of the 'child' handsets. Each handset has its own charger base. This basically creates a wireless PBX for the home and I have been seeing them in an increasing number of residences. Japanese children don't normally have their own phone lines, so the single-line nature of this product suits it perfectly to the Japanese family. The price for the PBX / base unit / telephone / answering machine and first cordless unit is about USD$400-500. Each additional cordless unit is USD$120-160. Jim Gottlieb InfoConnections, Tokyo, Japan In Japan: Fax: +81 3 3865 9424 Voice Mail: +81 3 3865 3548 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 23:04 EST From: SKASS@drew.drew.edu Subject: Calling Card Fraud Well, after years of using my AT&T calling card in high-risk areas, I became a victim of calling card fraud. AT&T cancelled my card (but didn't call me to say so) because of suspected fraud after seeing calls to Bangladesh and the UK. I haven't seen the bill yet; maybe there were many. I had never called those places. What I think happened is that when I was trying vainly to call voice mail from a phone that NYTel had rigged to disable the keypad, the several tries, together with my having to read my number aloud to AT&T operators to retry and to get credit, let someone get ahold of my number. I'm going to let AT&T know that NYTel policy -- and AT&T's of having me read the number aloud - probably contributed to the number getting stolen. I'm very careful about punching it in fast with the keypad covered, in general. Within this story, yet one more example of AT&T's left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. The operator at 00 said the card was denied and that I would have to call the business office tomorrow. A call to 1-800-222-0300, however, answered my question on the spot this evening. AT&T was actually very helpful, and says they will annul the fraudulent charges once I get my bill. I'm glad they acted so quickly to cancel the card, though a call to me would have been in order [the terms and conditions of the card do say they can cancel without notice]. Another card had already been issued and mailed, which I should have within days. I hope it spells something easy to remember, too. Steve Kass/ Dept of Math and CS/ Drew U/ Madison NJ 07940 skass@drew.drew.edu 201-514-1187 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 11:50:30 PST From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: Straw Poll Results! Guess Who Won the Election! Well, the Usenet Straw Poll is over and the results are below. Only a few people attempted to vote multiple times and their votes were disqualified. There were over 2000 votes cast. I believe I got enough of a cross-section of the Usenet community by announcing this on a number of different groups. I doubt, however, that the results below are representative of the voting population of the United States. Beyond this, I think the results speak for themselves. A hearty "Thank you!" to those who participated, and to those in the US, don't forget to vote on Tuesday! reb Vote tally for candidates receiving more than one vote: 858 BILL CLINTON 470 ANDRE MARROU 401 H.ROSS PEROT 226 GEORGE BUSH 58 JAMES "KIBO" PARRY 26 LASZLO NEMETH 17 CTHULHU 16 NOBODY/NONE OF THE ABOVE 15 JIM HENDERSON 13 FRANK ZAPPA 12 HOWARD STERN 11 TED FABER 7 BO GRITZ 5 JERRY BROWN 5 JERRY GARCIA 4 RON DANIELS 3 DAVE BARRY 3 RALPH NADER 3 REN & STIMPY 2 HUNTER S THOMPSON 2 CHARLES MANSON 2 TIM CLINKENPEEL 2 TSONGAS The following each received one vote: ADAM JANIN AL GORE ANDROMEDA GALAXY ANN RICHARDS BILL 'N OPUS BILL MOYERS BOBBY HEENAN CALVIN (OF CALVIN AND HOBBES) CHAD ANDREW HANKIN FOR PRESIDENT COKIE ROBERTS (NPR) DANIELS DAVID LETTERMAN EDDIE LAWSON ELIZABETH DOLE ELVIRA FOR PRESIDENT ELVIS PRESLEY ERNEST BORGNINE/ERIC ESTRADA FBI SPECIAL AGENT DALE COOPER GEORGE WILL/P.J. O'ROURKE J.R. "BOB" DOBBS KERMIT THE MAYOR OF ROCHESTER GARY STOLLMAN GEORGE CLINTON GORE VIDAL HEMP HILLARY HOWARD PHILLIPS IDI AMIN JACK HERER JESSE JACKSON JIM MORRISON LARRY AGRAN LEADER KIBO LENORA FULANI LEVON HELM LONNIE SMITH MICKEY MOUSE! MIKHAIL GORBACHEV MISS TREE PARKER MR. BEAN NOAM CHOMSKY PAT PAULSEN PHIL LESH PETER GARRETT (AUTRALIAN ENVIRONMENTALIST) PICKARD / RIKER PRES-JAMES STOCKDALE, VP-QUAYLE REAGAN/NIXON RICHARD STALLMAN ROBERT "BALD EAGLE" ANGELINO STANLEY OWSLEY THAT HEAD EWOK IN RETURN OF THE JEDI THOMAS JEFFERSON TOD JOHNSON TOM PETERS UPDATES WILLIAM GATES ZIPPY THE PINHEAD ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #814 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29973; 2 Nov 92 2:03 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08298 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:49:29 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21053 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:49:14 -0600 Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:49:14 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211020249.AA21053@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #815 TELECOM Digest Sun, 1 Nov 92 20:49:20 CST Volume 12 : Issue 815 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: T-1 For Datacomm (Hans-Gabriel Ridder) Re: T-1 For Datacomm (Kenneth A. Becker) Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Carl P. Zwanzig) Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Hans-Gabriel Ridder) Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Scott Dorsey) Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona (Joachim Koenig) Re: CLASS Features vs. FX Lines (John Higdon) Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Paul S. Sawyer) Re: Last GTE Cord Board Removed (John R. Levine) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Brian J. Catlin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ridder@zowie.zso.dec.com (Hans) Subject: Re: T-1 For Datacomm Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:22:46 GMT In article deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) writes: > A channelized DS1 is a DS1 with 24 explicit DS0s, and some sort of > framing, either D4/SF or ESF. OK. > However, not all T1 service is channelized. Some carriers offer > unframed DS1 service. If your DS1 is to be used for 24 DS0s, it's in > your best interest to have a channelized DS1, because performance > monitoring is enhanced (particularly with ESF framing). You seem to be saying here that if I want 24 DS0's, I don't *necessarily* need framing (or "channelized DS1," in your words,) only that it's in my "best interest." If this is so, I can't see how any equipment could pick out the 24 channels without framing ... (In other words, I think this is wrong.) Hans-Gabriel Ridder DECwest Engineering, Bellevue, Washington, USA Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer, honest. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 22:08:43 EST From: kab@hotstone.att.com (Kenneth A Becker) Subject: Re: T-1 For Datacomm Organization: AT&T In article , Hans Ridder writes: > In article kentrox!myron@uunet.UU.NET > (Myron Hattig) writes: > In my experience this is correct. If you have a T1 span which does > not go through a DACS, you can use the whole 1.544Mbps for data. If > there's a DACS, the best you can get is 1.534Mbps. Also in my > experience, most of the telco folks will *not* be able to tell you if > you need framing (or even who is supposed to provide clocking!) I > just tried it and used it if it worked. Umm ... speaking as a real, live DACS II hardware design junkie, I have to state that the product from AT&T does handle clear DS1. It's one of our selling points! What you put in is what you get out, so long as your bit rate doesn't get out of kilter. As a previous poster pointed out, you don't get the error detection and such like when you don't run ESF, D4, or CEPT DS1. However, you pays your money and you take your chances. One point, though: DS1 has this requirement on the maximum number of zeroes present being 15 or less so it doesn't lose bit synchronization. If you can assure yourself that your data streams meet that requirement, then you're off and running. If you can't, then maybe you should go back to thinking about D4 or ESF with B8ZS line coding so you can at least get 64 kb/s on the individual channels. Ken Becker kab@hotstone.att.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 09:53:40 -0500 From: Carl P. Zwanzig Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level Organization: The Midnite Group In article is written: > Around here, a two-ended private line (no switching) costs $6 per > month, and is hard copper wires (direct ohmic connection) from end to > end. I have been contemplating getting such a line over to a friend's > house to experiment with. > It appears that I can get a pretty high bit rate through such a line > if I drive enough signal at the transmit end and am willing to take a > 60dB gain loss through the system -- however, I'm not sure how much > signal I am allowed on a private line. > I suspect the "certain private lines" that are limited by part 68 are > lines that are signal-processed in some way, or otherwise couple to > services that could be affected by the high frequencies/signal levels. > Hard copper lines may not have these restrictions. In C&P land, there used to be a circuit type referred to as a "BA" line. This was solid copper, and was intended for the old bipolar DC burgler alarms. If I remember correctly, they were tarriffed for up to 30bps switched DC only, although we had a couple hundred running 300bps FSK modems. They were good for the modems up to about ten miles, after that we had to go to a "real" line (type "FD" (Foreign Data?)). There was no restriction on voltage levels under normal ringing voltages, but remember what they're tarriffed for. These codes are from the circuit numbers, so ordering them may require other codes. As usual, Your Mileage May Vary (!tm) Carl Zwanzig zbang@access.digex.com ------------------------------ From: ridder@zowie.zso.dec.com (Hans) Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:04:55 GMT In article keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes: > It appears that I can get a pretty high bit rate through such a line > if I drive enough signal at the transmit end and am willing to take a > 60dB gain loss through the system -- however, I'm not sure how much > signal I am allowed on a private line. > According to the book "Subscriber Loop Signaling and Transmission > Handbook" by Reeve (IEEE Press, 1992), Part 68 of the FCC rules limits > the metallic voltage level to -15dBV / 8KHz in the 300KHz and above > region, for terminal equipment connected to the the telephone network, > which consists of the "Public Switched Telephone Network and certain > private lines". The DDS spec. (AT&T PUB 62310 {Digital Data System Channel Interface Specification}) mentions 0dBm (into a 135 ohm termination) for the 9.6K speed, and 6dBm for the other speeds. There are also a couple of pages of pulse shaping requirements. It says the lower level for the 9.6K speed "is necessary to ensure crosstalk compatibility with other existing loop transmission systems." So apparently, there are limits which depend on frequency and risetime. > On the other hand, an acquaintance who is a data services sales type > for a nearby telephone company assures me that you can shove anything > you want through a hard copper line, up to 50 volts or so -- "after > all, you can put ring voltage through it". But then, he's a sales > type, and for the wrong company at that. Yes, but the ring voltage is a low-frequency sinusoidal waveform -- the least likely to cause crosstalk. If you could shove anything you wanted down the wire, we'd all have 10Mbps Ethernet coming down the wire to our house, right? Modems would be alot cheaper too. Obviously there must be *some* limits. > I suspect the "certain private lines" that are limited by part 68 are > lines that are signal-processed in some way, or otherwise couple to > services that could be affected by the high frequencies/signal levels. > Hard copper lines may not have these restrictions. From my understanding, what they're concerned about is crosstalk with *any* other lines. Fast risetimes (like square waves) are a primary contributor to crosstalk. DDS and T1 equipment apparently have restrictions on the pulse shape and amplitude to prevent just such a problem. Unfortunatly, the specs. for those services only tell you what the limits are, and that those limits are selected to prevent interference with "other services." Great, huh? > Of course, what I can REALLY get away with is what my local telco lets > me get away with, but I thought I would find out what other people > have managed to do in their areas. It's likely you could do all sorts of rude things, and it might take them quite a while to track the complaints down to you. But then again, they might get to your door in couple of days. :-0 > Any wire wizards out there who can shed some light? Not me! Sorry I don't have a hard reference. Let us know if you find one. Hans-Gabriel Ridder DECwest Engineering, Bellevue, Washington, USA Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer, honest. ------------------------------ From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level Date: 01 Nov 1992 15:07:11 GMT Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm In article keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes: > Around here, a two-ended private line (no switching) costs $6 per > month, and is hard copper wires (direct ohmic connection) from end to > end. I have been contemplating getting such a line over to a friend's > house to experiment with. Well, on a 48F circuit, it depends a lot on where your line is routed. First of all, you can expect response out to 20KC without too much trouble, but if you go much higher than that, you'll run into problems. I've managed to run an STL circuit for an FM station over a 48F line, just running the channels seperately. If I run the composite signal (with 38 Kc bandwidth) through the thing, the reponse drops off badly around 30 Kc, and what's worse the group delay is terrible. If you can stand the group delay, you can probably re-equalize the thing to get higher frequencies. The higher the frequency, the more crosstalk you'll induce into other lines. So if you want to crank 100V at 25C through the line, you should be okay. But if you are going to 10KC you want to read the specs carefully, and don't go over the 0 dB mark. Above 10 KC it doesn't matter much; if the stuff leaks into adjacent pairs nobody will care much (unless it's a T-1 line or it's another one of your pairs). You can do some amazing stuff over some 48F circuits. On other ones, you can hardly get a voice through. You aren't paying much, but what you save in money you lose in line-line consistancy. It's a great thing for experimentors, though! scott ------------------------------ Organization: Universitaet des Saarlandes From: joachim@ee.uni-sb.de (& Koenig) Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona Date: 01 Nov 92 12:49:38 GMT bill@phoenix.az.stratus.com (Bill Everts) writes: > This is probably a typical question, but if you don't want me to know > who you are, why the &*^# are you dialing my phone number? Harry calls his wife in the evening: "Darling, I'm still in the office and have a lot of work to do. I'll come home late today". His wife: "Oh, Harry, you're not, you are with Mrs ....." Hopefully, the number of divorces will in- or decrease. Joachim email: joachim@ee.uni-sb.de University of Saarland, Germany, Europe phone: +49 681 3023043 fax: 2678 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: CLASS Features vs. FX Lines Date: 01 Nov 92 17:49:33 PST (Sun) From: john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon) elmo@netcom.com (Eliot Moore) writes: > If not, is there any way to pursue installation of features conveniently > "not tariffed for foreign exchange service"? The whole matter of FX, if not a dead horse already, will be put out to pasture soon. Telcos have long been working to eliminate FX, so you will not find much sympathy about having your particular wish list considered WRT special features on FX. For instance, there is certainly no technical matter involved, but you CANNOT order FX with any unmeasured service any longer in Pac*Bell territory. To accomplish this dream of an "FX-free" world, telcos now have at their collective disposals the matter of "virtual service". VS is available in areas that have SS7 connectivity. It enables a telco to literally assign any number desired to any pair by typing in a few commands. In the past, if you wanted a 408/976 number, you had to have your installation within the local serving area of the Space Park CO, located in Santa Clara since that is where the serving 1AESS switch happened to be. This is no longer the case and you can now have your 976 equipment located anywhere in the toll district. Telcos will now attempt to make FX more and more unattractive. Remember, your telco would like to be paid for each and every connection that is put up. FX circuits work counter to this principle. John Higdon (hiding out in the desert) ------------------------------ From: paul@unhtel.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer) Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services, Durham, NH Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:03:41 GMT In article doug@cc.ysu.edu (Doug Sewell) writes: > telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: >> On my personal phone bill this month, I got a page in the long >> distance section from an outfit called "Integratel" with some collect >> calls made to me -- or so they claim. > $2/minute collect call? This sounds familiar. > While I can assume that PAT isn't a regular user of the various dial- > up-and-chat and similar services, I stumbled across an ad for one > yesterday. It had a 1-800 number and didn't require a credit card. > The fine print said that the call would be billed as a $2/minute > collect call from some innocuous-sounding firm. > I guess this is the latest idea of the dial-a-porn and dial-a-friend > services for separating people from their money. Is there a list of these 800-collect scams? The only ones we have seen so far claim to be "Collect from ENTERTAIN, KS, 913 338 1574" and they do not seem to be actual collect calls, just a bill record for a call someone here may have made. Since we do not accept collect calls (at least on the PBX lines tagged on the bill), since many of the calls ocurred when there would have been NO PBX OPERATOR on duty to even answer such a collect call (if it were really incoming), and since there does not seem to be such a place as Entertain, Kansas, (unless Overland Park recently changed its name), we have always got credit from the LEC. Even so, if someone has a list of the 800- numbers which translate to "collect" calls, it would be useful. We might even block these numbers, since they are at least operating questionably, if not fraudulently. Thanks. 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 [Moderator's Note: I don't know of any such list. Anyway, the numbers change constantly and such a list would never be up to date. Vigilence is the keyword here: telecom managers should always be alert to the various and sundry ways those schlock outfits have of pushing through charges. In the early days of 900/976, I guess it never occurred to the sex-by-phone purveyors that sooner or later a large segment of their customer base would have phones blocked from calling them. But as the technology for keeping ahead of the schlock firms improves, so do the techniques they use to get their calls through. Here is another one for you to think about: Try 702-333-8444. This number is blocked by MCI/Sprint/others. *They* won't complete the call, and advise callers to dial in via 10288-1-702-etc ... AT&T and the local telco in Nevada both willingly handle the incoming calls. I wonder why Sprint/MCI/etc are wary of it? For an example of this, try calling the above via 10222-plus or 10333-plus. Supposedly the calls are (as the recorded announcement says) 'free of all 900 charges; you only pay for the toll ...' if that's so, then howcome MCI/Sprint won't connect to the number? PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Last GTE Cord Board Removed Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 01 Nov 92 01:04:23 EST (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > The first commercial telephone cord board was placed in service in New > Haven, Conn., in January 1878, creating the first exchange. The first cord board was in Bridgeport. New Haven had the distinction of the first telephone directory. In the late 1970s, the local Connecticut phone books had fancy covers commemorating the centennials of these two events. I believe that SNET, the current local telco for most of Connecticut is a corporate descendant of the original Bridgeport and New Haven phone companies. Pre-breakup, SNET was minority owned by AT&T and was considered an AT&T affiliate. Now they're considered to be an independent, though they have a lot more AT&T equipment than other independents. GTE headquarters are in Stamford, and as far as I can tell have never had anything to do with telephony in Connecticut, other than perhaps selling them some light bulbs. Probably just as well. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: bc338569@longs.lance.colostate.edu (Brian J. Catlin) Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 06:11:55 GMT In message Mr. Soques writes: > Greetings! Last night, I received a computerized sales/sleeze call > which essentially "locked" my line and prevented me from getting a > dial tone no matter what I did with my switch hook. I found this > disturbing since I could not hang up on this unsolicited call. Is > this legal? The pitch was somewhat long but did not reveal the > identity of the calling party (the call had pauses/beeps to leave my > name, address, and phone number). One problem that pops up in my mind is, what if you have an emergency and have to call ambulance/police/fire? 20-30 seconds can be the difference between life and death. If they say that this amount of time won't hurt, then why are answering machines and modems not allowed on party lines? My modem hangs up immediately when anyone else on the line picks up their phone. Older answering machines typically hang up after about a minute and newer ones can sense when the other person hangs up and then they quickly release the line. I would hate for this 20-30 seconds to mean someone's life. But it looks like this may have to happen before something changes. Please feel free to e-mail flames, random bursts of laughter, etc. B. J. Catlin [Moderator's Note: Well you are right of course that 20-30 seconds can mean life or death under some conditions. But the current telco technology is such that if the man wants his phone line back (more or less) immediatly, he will need to disconnect and wait about that period of time for the CO to get rid of the other party who is hanging on the line. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #815 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00919; 2 Nov 92 2:52 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16929 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 22:20:14 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17420 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 22:19:57 -0600 Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 22:19:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211020419.AA17420@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #817 TELECOM Digest Sun, 1 Nov 92 22:20:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 817 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cellular Reception Equipment Banned by Congress (RISKS, via Monty Solomon) Cheap Voice Mail (Luigi Semenzato) Voice-Operated Phone? (John R. Gersh) "Call Home" Special Case For Calling Cards? (Kris Harris) Virtual Reality (Lori A. Tracewell) Information on Telecommuting Requested (Gerry Santoro) Tone to Pulse Convertor (Jack Decker) Need Basic Book(s) on Telecom Hardware (James D. Murray) Telephone Phreaks (Daniel Drucker) Seeking Modem Information (Thomas K. Hinders) Phone Records: Public or Private? (Steven A. Rubin) The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Pat Turner) Quick Questions (Rich Padula) Spain Tax Counters (Georg Holderied) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 02:03:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellular Reception Equipment Banned by Congress Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.88 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 17:56:46 GMT From: Robert.Allen@eng.sun.com (Robert Allen) Subject: Cellular Reception Equipment Banned by Congress For some time, since the Electronics Communications Privacy Act was passed, it is been a Federal crime in the U.S. to listen to communications carried out over cellular telephone. Only a handful of people have been prosecuted, mostly cases where someone has taped a politician talking about things (sometimes illegal things) over a cellphone and passed the tape on to the media. More recently, manufacture and import of devices capable of receiving cellular transmissions have been banned by the FCC. Naturally this has resulted in a run on radios which are 800MHz capable, or which can be easily modified to to be so capable. The reason the ban on both listening and making equipment capable of listening is that the cellular phone lobby wants to be able to assure their potential customers of privacy. Comments about facist government aside, the risks should be obvious: if people assume that a medium is secure, when in fact it is not only NOT secure, but is rather heavily monitored, they are likely to say things they don't mean, or which shouldn't be (literally) broadcast. Currently the police use cellphones extensively, as do drug dealers. Court cases have stated that cordless phones (the type which talk to the base-set in your house) are *not* protected under the ECPA, and may be legally monitored, although there is reportedly a law in CA which makes it illegal to do so. In at least one case police have monitored communications on a cordless phone, with a readily available scanner, and have used evidence so gathered to prosecute an individual for drug related crimes. Another interesting note is that the law specifically prohibits "scanning receivers" which are, or may be made, cellular capable. How this affects test equipment, non scanning receivers, other cellphones, etc., remains to be interpreted by a court. Here is the partial text of the law. Robert Allen, rja@sun.com Article 2202 of alt.radio.scanner: From: walsh@optilink.UUCP (Mark Walsh) Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner Subject: Section 408, was "Scanner Bill" Date: 21 Oct 92 17:24:33 GMT SEC. 408. INTERCEPTION OF CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS. (a) AMENDMENT -- Section 302 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 USC 302) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: "(d)(1) Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall prescribe and make effective regulations denying equipment authorization (under part 15 if title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any other part of that title) any scanning receiver that is capable of -- "(A) receiving transmissions in the frequencies allocated to the domestic cellular radio telecommunications service, "(B) being readily altered by the user to receive transmissions in such frequencies, or "(C) being equipped with decoders that convert digital cellular transmissions to analog voice audio. "(2) Beginning one year after the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (1), no receiver having the capabilities described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), as such capabilities are defined in such regulations, shall be manufactured in the United States or imported for use in the United States." Mark Walsh (walsh@optilink) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh ------------------------------ From: luigi@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Luigi Semenzato) Subject: Cheap Voice Mail Date: 01 Nov 1992 19:38:22 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley We have a few Sparc IPC workstations, made by Sun Microsystems, in our office, with disk space to spare. They have audio in-out hardware. The A/D and D/A conversions are both 8 bit @ 8 KHz, I believe. The quality is certainly sufficient for voice mail purposes, and it would be fun to have such a system, but only if it can be done cheaply. I am trying to find out how to attach these machines to the telephone line. The audio in/out interface to the machine is very simple: two jacks, one for a microphone, the other for an earphone or small speaker. Someone recently posted a simple circuit to handle the speaker part (audio out), consisting of an impedance-matching transformer and capacitors to cut off the DC component from the line. What about the microphone (audio in)? The harder part is detecting the ring, and doing the equivalent of lifting the receiver and hanging up (including detecting that the other party has hung up). I believe the only non-audio signals I can easily get in and out of the workstation are two lines on the RS-232 connector, one is the Carrier Detect, I think, the other Data Terminal Ready, and I can set one and read the status of the other in software. The DTR line could drive a small relay. Everything else can be done in software, including producing tones and interpreting them. Any suggestions? Is there some product on the market that could be used for this? If so, I would hope it to be cheaper than an answering machine, since it implements only a small subset of its capabilities (but it's a much smaller market, I know, I know). Thanks, Luigi ------------------------------ From: gersh@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (John R. Gersh) Subject: Voice-Operated Phone Organization: Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 19:52:27 GMT Is there such a thing as a voice-operated telephone dialer for home use? I'm trying to help my father, whose vision has deteriorated to the point where he cannot easily use a phone. Dialing is not the problem; he can "touch-type" on the keypad well enough. The problem is in looking up numbers. As somone with impaired vision, he's got free use of directory assistance, but that's not always convenient. He'd also typically have to remember the number long enough to dial it. (Is dial-it-for-you-too DA, where available, also free to the vision impaired?) A speed dialer feature helps, of course, but if it stored enough different numbers to be helpful, it would be too hard to remember the code for each one. What would be ideal is a voice-operated dialer like top-of-the-line auto cellular installations advertise. Can one get this feature in an ordinary phone? Any recommendations? John Gersh gersh@aplpy.jhuapl.edu The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Johns Hopkins Rd., Laurel, MD 20723 (301) 953-5503 ------------------------------ From: kah005@acad.drake.edu Subject: "Call Home" Special Case For Calling Cards? Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 02:38:37 GMT With regards to calling home on a calling card without a PIN, it sounds like you need a personal 800 number to me. Any major IXC will offer one. I have a personal 800 number from a company called INS (Iowa Networking Services) It was free to activate, and there is no monthly charge. The rates are comprable to standard long-distance rates. A call to the business office will get your routing number changes for no charge (although Cable & Wilerless still has the best system. With INS, you must call during business hours, as the system is not automatic) The only catch is the routing number must terminate in Iowa. If anyone is interested, INS can be reached at (515) 225-1111. Kris Harris - PO BOX 2410 - Des Moines, Iowa 50311-0410 - (515) 254-2117 Standard disclaimers apply. I am not in any way connected to INS. ------------------------------ From: ltracewe@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Lori A Tracewell) Subject: Virtual Reality Organization: The Ohio State University Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:46:52 GMT I am working on research in virtual reality. I am looking for theories and recent research. Thanks, Rex Robbins ------------------------------ Organization: Penn State University Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 16:08:36 EDT From: Gerry Santoro - CAC/PSU Subject: Information on Telecommuting Requested I am working with a colleague to develop a conference presentation on 'telecommuting and the workplace.' Our hope is to describe telecommuting and the ways in which it influences, or is influenced by, such factors as office/workspace design, workplace ergonomics, work group strategies, and so on. I am interested in any references to journal/periodical articles or book chapters dealing with any of the above subjects. Please email them to me rather than posting them. If anyone is interested please let me know and I will mail the completed list to those who wish. gerry santoro academic computing/speech communication penn state university ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 16:44:19 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Tone to Pulse Convertor First, I want to thank everyone who sent me info abot the 1ESS switch. The conclusion was that the 1ESS cannot handle distinctive ringing, though the 1AESS can. Unfortunately, Sault Ste. Marie is stuck with the 1ESS until the third quarter of '94. Now, I have a situation that mabe someone can help me with. I need to get hold of one tone-to-pulse convertor ... that is, something that you can plug a telephone device that dials using tone dialing into, and have it come out the other end as dial pulses. I know that these things used to be plentiful back before "Equal Access" (it was often a feature of the type of dialer that would dial a carrier's local access number using pulse dialing, then switch to tone to outpulse the account number and number called) but you can't seem to find them now, at least not at any decent price (actually, I haven't seen one lately at ANY price). What I'm really hoping to find is perhaps something like a memory dialer that has this function, but where the memory is shot or something. If you have a device that will do the tone to pulse properly, I don't care if any of the other features work. In other words, I'm looking for something inexpensive or, as the birds say, cheap! :-) If you have something like this lying around in your junk box, and would like to get rid of it, or if you know a place where such a device can be purchased inexpensively, please let me know. Thanks, Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 08:03:18 GMT From: add@sciences.sdsu.edu (James D. Murray) Subject: Need Basic Book(s) on Telecom Hardware Organization: San Diego State University, College of Sciences I am looking for a standard book or reference work on telephone equipment and associated hardware. Topics would include telephone handsets, wiring, punch blocks, connectors (RJ11, Centronics, etc.), line signals and voltage levels, etc. There doen't seem to be a FAQ associated with this newsgroup which would have information on such a reference. I've been doing quite a bit of wiring lately for people's phone systems and although I have no training as such, everything I've done so far seems to be working. I'd now like to find out all the terminology and how all the hardware works from my handset to the phone company computer. Please drop me a line via email on the titles of such reference works. Also, if there are any good online docs about this subject that are accurate I'd like them emailed to me or at least their BBS/FTP location mentioned. Thanks very much. James D. Murray add@sciences.sdsu.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Telephone Phreaks From: mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET (Daniel Drucker) Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 20:34:54 EST Organization: Mertwig Does anyone know if a person's physical cable pair can be discovered by a hacker illicitly logged into COSMOS or MIZAR? Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is? (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.) Daniel Max P. Drucker HAM CALLSIGN PENDING Xyzzy@mertwig.UUCP (or try mertwig!xyzzy@jaflrn.uucp) ------------------------------ Date: 01 Nov 92 10:49:39-0800 From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com Subject: Seeking Modem Information I have inherited two modems with no docs etc. They are 8 bit PC card type; the boxes were labeled Fast Link 9600 baud. On the modems is Telebit and the date 1985, they have S/N of 015330064 and 65. Does anyone have any information on this type modem? Thanks in advance, Thomas K Hinders Martin Marietta Computing Standards 4795 Meadow Wood Lane Chantilly, VA 22021 703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f) ------------------------------ From: sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Steven A Rubin) Subject: Phone Records: Public or Private? Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 09:00:48 -0500 I am trying to find out if the customer records the RBOCs keep on what exchanges customers call is public record. Also, are long distance records public? [Moderator's Note: No sir, they are not! They are proprietary records of the telco, released only to the customer or by subpoena to law enforcement agencies, etc. Local telcos are required to exchange data for billing purposes with the long distance carriers, and this applies even if your phone number is non-published. But other than for billing and/or investigative purposes *no one* is to get records of your calls. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 13:28 EST From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? Reply-To: turner@Dixie.COM I recently received a newsletter from Telos. Telos, as some may know, is a prominent manufacturer of DSP hybrids for the broadcast industry. Anyway, in the newsletter, Telos writes: "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas. The 'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these difficult line conditions." I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami. Is this correct? Who tied them in Dallas? It should be noted that Telos equipiment is unlikely to be deployed in rural areas due to it's high cost. Personaly I think one of the worst systems I have encountered is in Hickory, NC (Centel). Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:39:03 -0500 From: gt1588a@prism.gatech.edu (Rich Padula) Subject: Quick Questions Fellow TELECOM Digesters: I have three quick questions. 1) I want Caller-ID into my PC off the serial port. I'm a DIY kinda guy, and I recall someone doing this, but I can't find the info. I got a sample of Motorola's Caller-ID chip, but I would like to siphon power from the serial port to run it. Any ideas where I can find these posts or who authored them? 2) Which carrier can you recommend for commercial 800 service? I would also like to get real-time ANI or DNIS(?) if possible. Is this difficult? 3) On an unrelated note, a friend of mine wants to program and design a message forwarding system (kind of like AT&T's Voice Mark maybe?) to record and deliver voice messages. I told him I didn't think it would be too useful (and especially not money-making) because of answering machines, beepers, etc. He was unconvinced. So, I ask everybody for opinions, facts, stories, and experiences about such systems. Please respond in e-mail to: gt1588a@hydra.gatech.edu. I will gladly summarize for the mutual benefit of myself and others. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: tuttle@drsmbx.drs.ch (Georg Holderied) Subject: Spain Tax Counters Date: 01 Nov 92 16:14:34 GMT Organization: Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen (SRG) Can anybody tell me, how taxing information is transmitted to phone sets in Spain? (i.e. in Switzerland there are 12 KHz-Tones that advance the tax-displays.) Is the tax information always present on subscriber lines, or does it have to be ordered separately? Thanks for any information on this subject. George ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #817 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22042; 3 Nov 92 2:09 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10248 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:35:20 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18612 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:35:04 -0600 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:35:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211030535.AA18612@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #818 TELECOM Digest Mon, 2 Nov 92 23:35:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 818 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson WindowPhone Personal Call Manager (Caller-ID) (Kathy Sharp) Cell Phones to Cut DWI Requested by State Police (Dave Niebuhr) Encrypted Email (Mike Riddle) HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Euee S. Jang) Armored Phone (Andrew M. Boardman) Airfone -- Phooey (Jim Rees) Some Questions on Public Data Networks (kondared@mace.cc.purdue.edu) Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (Shrikumar) Clear-Tel? (Gabe M. Wiener) Phone Woes Resolved (Dan Lanciani) 410 Full Cutover (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gtephx!sharpk@ihlpa.att.com Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 16:35:07 MST From: sharpk@gtephx.UUCP (Kathy Sharp) Subject: WindowPhone Personal Call Manager (Caller-ID) Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:34:35 GMT Contact: 1-800-424-8559 SUMMARY: WindowPhone (TM) Group of AG Communication Systems introduces version 1.2 of its personal call management system for PCs. PHOENIX, Arizona -- AG Communication Systems Corporation has announced availability of WindowPhone (TM) Version 1.2, an innovative personal call management system that further enhances user productivity with phone book import and export capabilities, a button for quick access to other software programs, a last number redial function and left/right mouse button support. The new version is available for immediate delivery through MicroWarehouse, Inc., Power Up Software Corporation and The Programmer's Shop. Current owners of WindowPhone will receive 1.2 at no charge. WindowPhone 1.2 allows data in other programs to be imported into any of its three phone books. The new version also allows database information in WindowPhone to be exported into other software applications. A new function called "Launcher" has been added, giving users quick access to other Windows and DOS applications with just one click. Version 1.2 also includes a redial function which provides automatic recall of the last number dialed. After selecting an entry in the call log, phone book or unanswered calls window, users can immediately access the caller's database, delete the entry or initiate automatic dialing to the caller without having to move around the screen. "We designed WindowPhone 1.2 with the enhancements our customers have been asking for, offering users greater flexibility and increased productivity. With these upgrades available at the same list price, WindowPhone is an inexpensive, sophisticated call management tool for home or office applications," says Roger Heldt, WindowPhone general manager. WindowPhone links the PC and telephone using advanced teleconnection features and provides many unique benefits with or without the availability of Caller ID service. It maintains a complete log of all incoming and outgoing call activity--by time, date and duration--when the PC is on or off. With Caller ID service, WindowPhone identifies a caller by name in a pop-up window on the PC screen, providing instant access to detailed caller information. Even without Caller ID, WindowPhone automatically logs all outgoing calls from any extension on the line; maintains thousands of phone book entries complete with caller notes, photos, and auto-dial phone number listings; blocks outgoing calls to selected prefixes or numbers; and much more. WindowPhone is both a software (requires Microsoft (R) Windows 3.0 or higher) and hardware (8-bit Industry Standard Architecture card) product, which allows it to provide a unique arsenal of call management features without requiring additional peripherals, such as a modem, or occupying system serial port addresses. WindowPhone, which lists for $295, is available for immediate delivery by contacting any of these distributors: MicroWarehouse at 1-800-367-7080, Power Up Software at 1-800-851-2917 and The Programmer's Shop at 1-800-421-8006. A joint venture of AT&T and GTE, AG Communication Systems provides a wide range of products and services, including hardware and software design, systems engineering and systems integration. The Phoenix-based company has earned more than 3,000 patents and is a leading developer and manufacturer of advanced telecommunication products. WindowPhone is a trademark of AG Communication Systems Corporation. Windows is a trademark of Microsoft Corporation. All other trademarks referenced here are the proprietary service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective manufacturers. Kathy Sharp Voice: (602) 581-4797 FAX: (602) 581-4574 AG Communication Systems, PO Box 52179, Phoenix AZ 85072-2179 UUCP: ...!{ncar!noao!enuucp | att}!gtephx!sharpk Internet: gtephx!sharpk@enuucp.eas.asu.edu (AG = AT&T + GTE) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 15:35:36 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Cell Phones to Cut DWI Requested by State Police A letter to the editor in today's {Newsday} (11/02/92) by a New York State Police Captain requested the use of cell and land-line phones for reporting drunk and/or dangerous drivers. The article reads: "Regarding the letter by Dorothy Enright ["Put Car Phone to Good Use," Oct. 19]: "The Division of State Police has invited the public to assist the police in DWI enforcement by establishing the *DWI (numerically, it's *394). By dialing that number the public may report persons who aer suspected of operating vehicles under the influence of alcohol or drugs. If the area of the reported violation is customarily patrolled by a local police agency, the agency having the enarest available patrol will be notified and asked to respond and investigate. "This effort is backed up by a toll-free telephone land-line, 1-800-CURB-DWI (1-800-287-2394). Although the system is intended primarily for reporting suspected intoxicated drivers, the reckless and erratic operators described by Enright constitute a hazard that the state police wish to be informed of." Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 06:50:02 CST From: Mike.Riddle@ivgate.omahug.org (Mike Riddle) Subject: Encrypted Email Reply-To: mike.riddle%inns@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE Greetings: With the release of PGP2.0 "Pretty Good Privacy," there has been an increase in discussion about usefulness and legality of encrypted email, in a number of newsgroups. Some of these have referred to "PEM," which I believe stands for "Privacy Enhanced Mail." I don't have a full newsfeed, but can arrange to get additional groups. Can someone point me to the right newsgroups and/or RFCs so I can research PEM a bit better? Thanks for your help. Email replies cheerfully accepted. Mike <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>> mike.riddle@inns.omahug.org | Nebraska Inns of Court bc335@cleveland.freenet.edu | +1 402 593 1192 (Data) Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet | 3/12/24/9600 V.32/V.42bis Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.3 (1:285/27.0) ------------------------------ From: jang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Euee S. Jang) Subject: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! Organization: UB Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 02:13:53 GMT Hi. I am a graduate student at Suny at Buffalo. I am about to start the experimentation on JPEG. But I have no program or tool for JPEG. Because it is an important part of my research, it would be helpful if you send some information how I can reach it. Thank you for reading. Erik e-mail: jang@acsu.buffalo.edu Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering State University of New York at Buffalo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:21:17 EST From: andrew m. boardman Subject: Armored Phone I need a wall-mountable telephone for indoors use that's fairly theft- and vandalism-proof. Who sells this kind of stuff? andrew amb@cs.columbia.edu ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Airfone -- Phooey Date: 2 Nov 1992 22:58:57 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Last night I was actually on a plane that had Airfones and I needed to make a call. The stupid thing just sat there emiting DTMF tones and never gave me a dial tone. And why is there no RJ-11 jack on it? Where am I supposed to plug in my modem? I'm not impressed. On the other hand, I am impressed with the new AT&T Public Phone 2000. (PAT -- there are some in the lobby of the Palmer House). Makes the old green-screen Public Phone Plus look archaic. Sure would be nice if they would put an X server and slip/ppp driver in them. VT-100s went out with bell-bottoms (or was it platform shoes). It also would be nice if AT&T would install some of these in train stations. I don't spend that much time at airports, but given Amtrak's on-time record, I do spend a lot of time in train stations. ------------------------------ Organization: Purdue University Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1992 22:47:00 EST From: KONDARED@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU Subject: Some Questions on Public Data Networks I have some questions on Public data networks. Any response would be greatly appreciated. * Value added networks of common carriers (like AT&T) never cross paths with their voice networks. ie traffic on one never uses the other network. Am I right? * Public data networks (common carrier VANs, Tymnet, Telnet etc) are not as extensive as plain old telephone networks. ie if someone in some remote place in say Oklahama wants a data connection, most probably he will not get it. Is this right? * Internet, Bitnet 'et. al.' do not use any public data network - they have their own infrastructure which is not shared with anyone. Is this right? * Common carrier offerings like Frame Relay, SMDS do not use their plain old voice infrastructure. I'm wrong. Right? If you think this is too trivial reply by mail. I will summarize. Thanks. Sashidhar BITNET: kondared@purccvm INTERNET: kondared@mace.cc.purdue.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 00:51:26 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India In article root@sanger.chem.nd.edu wrote: > Question: Why is it that current analog lines are either "unmeasured" > (residential) or "measured" (business), yet most ISDN is measured regardless > of who's using it (and charged at a higher rate if it's for data)? Finally, Guess its got to do with history, back before Mr. Strowger started getting ripped off, and back when the Sheriff's wife had to ask Louise to call up the Bates Motel ... it would have been a real chore for Louise to meter calls. Also, the equipment was all installed and business was not sure. So it was simpler to charge flat rate and amortise the cost of operations over the user base. Besides they'd have wanted to encourage more usage, phones being new. So the phone company then got stuck with it. They'd like to but I don't think they can change now! But now, no one needs to be enouraged to use the phone any more, and since more money in revenue would be welcome, its logical that they would try to move to measured service -- always gets more money for the effort. So any new service today will try to ignore exact analogous parallels in other services, when it comes to billing. So business is always metered, ISDN will be so. My guess and < $0.02 worth. Incidentally, in India the MTNL (Government undertaking, LEC) has recently began a very unpopular policy of charging local calls on a five minute basis, each five minutes amounts to a new call. They could not have implemented it before they got these fancy stored program exchanges, so that's one nice thing about strowgers and crossbars :-) They are hated for this, but they are a monopoly ... so it will stick, at least for a while maybe a long while. BTW, local calls have always been sort-of metered in India, you are allowed some 200 calls free per month. The phone service is quite congested so I think this is fair. But what is terrible about this new rule is the simple fact that in any office a phone is shared between a bunch of guys, and it always takes a while to get transfered from the switchboard/PBX to the correct phone and then to ask for the right person ... and this eats into the five minutes. Funny, MTNL does not apply this rule for calls from a public phone. I heard that some PTTs in Europe have always had metered local calls, or at least that it was so planned ... is that true? shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in ) ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Clear-Tel? Organization: Columbia University Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 04:38:53 GMT I went to a reunion at my high school the other day, and at one point I went to make a call from the same old NY Tel payphone that was there when I was a student there. Anyway, I banged in my credit card #, and got a message saying, "I'm sorry, but AT&T does not allow other carriers on their cards." Puzzled, I tried again, using my New York Tel calling card, and got "Thank you for using Clear-Tel." Now WAIT A SEC! I've heard of AOS's on COCOT's, but these were plain vanilla NY Tel payphones. Why would a local call be processed by anyone *other* than New York Tel? Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 02:09:15 EST From: ddl@das.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) Subject: Phone Woes Resolved A while back I described an odd problem with one-way audio dropouts on calls after about midnight. After nine months, the problem was finally fixed. The details are slightly amusing: the repair supervisor (or whatever she really was) eventually told me that she couldn't do anything more (because they had "locked horns" with the transmission technicians), that there was nobody else I could talk to about the problem, and that it would take a long time (much longer than the eight weeks we had been communicating) before there could possibly be progress (because NET's staff is very small and their systems complicated). I took this (especially the part about not talking to anybody else) to be a good cue to move on to the DPU. Intending merely to get a good target name for a written explanation, I spoke to a helpful person there. He was interested enough to take down some of the specifics and initiate a trouble report. I wasn't really expecting much, but _that very night_, in addition to the dropouts, there were many loud clicks and pops (starting as soon as the ringing was heard). The next night, the dropout problem (and, of course, the clicks and pops) was gone and it has not come back. A few days later, a NET representative called to say that a technician was checking my line because it wasn't 100% up to standards. (And the polarity of my line was reversed in the process ...) I told him I was happy to be rid of the dropouts but he didn't know exactly what had been done about that. Later, the helpful person from the DPU checked back with me. I thanked him for the almost unbelievable response time. He mentioned that he wasn't entirely happy with the explanation he received from NET ("a switching problem") but as long as it worked ... So there you have my testimonial to the effectiveness of the DPU. I don't think I would have believed it without first hand experience. I still don't believe that it was worth NET's effort to put me off for so long over a problem that could be fixed so quickly. Dan Lanciani ddl@harvard.* ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:13:34 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: 410 Full Cutover 410 should now be fully cut over. In Delaware yesterday, I tried a 0+ call via AT&T to my office (278-xxxx) using area 301, and it got a recording telling me to use 410. This was between 9 and 9:30 AM Eastern Standard Time. On Saturday, I heard an announcement of this on WTOP (1500-AM) radio (Washington, DC) and the announcer flubbed; he said 310 where 301 was intended. [Moderator's Note: I dialed an out of service number in 301 Monday morning and the intercept message which came back said the number dialed, *410* - etc, was not in service. So apparently calls to 410 dialed as 301 are still going through from some places. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #818 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24433; 3 Nov 92 3:07 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12414 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 01:10:08 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02553 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 01:09:55 -0600 Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 01:09:55 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211030709.AA02553@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #819 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Nov 92 01:09:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 819 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? (Jeff Wasilko) Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? (Joe Konstan) Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Maxime Taksar) Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (John Higdon) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Steve Forrette) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Phillip J. Birmingham) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Shrikumar) Re: Phone Directory on CD (Bryan Lockwood) Re: Phone Directory on CD (Ken Jongsma) Re: Cheap Voice Mail (Tony Harminc) Re: Radio Modems (John Gilbert) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko) Subject: Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 22:21:13 EST Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div. Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com Steven A Rubin wrote: > I am trying to find out if the customer records the RBOCs keep on what > exchanges customers call is public record. Also, are long distance > records public? > [Moderator's Note: No sir, they are not! They are proprietary records > of the telco, released only to the customer or by subpoena to law > enforcement agencies, etc. Local telcos are required to exchange data > for billing purposes with the long distance carriers, and this applies > even if your phone number is non-published. But other than for billing > and/or investigative purposes *no one* is to get records of your > calls. PAT] Well, not exactly. I had a bad experience with an agent of the local operating company (SNET). I've been meaning to write it up, but never had the time. Here goes: A woman called our Publisher claiming to be a VP for SNET (the LOC). She said that she spoke with me on Friday and that besides being out-and out rude, I told her we were running a kiddie-porn ring when she asked what business we were in!!!! So, she threatened to have all of our lines cut off, and make us 'go thru hell' to get things turned back on. She also kept calling and harrasing our office manager and our receptionist. The harrasment went on for three days before I was able to talk to the woman ... We found out that she's some kind of telemarketer in a different division of a SNET agent company (i.e., she didn't work for SNET). The president of this company said she had no reason to talk to me, but the outbound call log showed numerous calls to our number. She also pulled our line records (she knew how many and what kind of trunks we had), wven though she shouldn't have had access to them. She also knew our calling patterns, including our totals for our SNET and AT&T/MCI bills. As it turns out, I was at happy hour with the publisher at the time she said I talked to her, so I had an alibi ... No one has any idea why she decided to torment me. The president of the company promised me an explanation (and a written apology) the day after I spoke with him. SNET also was supposed to look into it. I never got an explanation. The president of the telemarketing firm never called me and won't return my calls. SNET brushed it off, even when I protested about the woman getting unathorized access to our call records. SNET says their agents need to 'better serve customers'. I asked if there was any way to block agents' access, but they said no. They didn't seem concerned about the woman impersonating a VP of SNET. I wish I had the time to pursue this -- she caused be an awful lot of grief over this. I ended up just chalking it up to a slightly deranged woman. Telemarketers are scum. Jeff Jeff's Oasis at Home. Jeff can also be reached at work at: jwasilko@airage.com [Moderator's Note: I love it when presidents of companies won't take my phone calls; I treat it like a challenge, and often times I wind up calling them *at home* in the evening. If corporate records show their wife as an officer of the corporation, then I just make my demands on the wife. Don't you think that doesn't get them on the phone after the wife rips hubby apart for trying to hide from me. One night I called a guy's home and he just happened to answer the phone himself. I told him what I wanted and his reply was to call him at the office during the day. "But sir," I told him, "you don't accept business calls during the day at your office. You have your secretary give me the brush off. *If* I call tomorrow -- I may just place you with an attorney instead -- I'll expect you to talk to me, understand?" If you really want that telemarketer's skin, start getting *real pushy* with the president until he at least takes your call and deals with it in a satisfactory way. If necessary, pull his corporate records, get the name of his attorney from that and talk to his attorney. That'll put him on notice that you mean business. It works for me! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joe Konstan Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:33:31 CST Subject: Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? Steven A. Rubin asked: > I am trying to find out if the customer records the RBOCs keep on what > exchanges customers call is public record. Also, are long distance > records public? And our Esteemed Moderator (tm) replied: > [Moderator's Note: No sir, they are not! They are proprietary records > of the telco, released only to the customer or by subpoena to law > enforcement agencies, etc. Local telcos are required to exchange data > for billing purposes with the long distance carriers, and this applies > even if your phone number is non-published. But other than for billing > and/or investigative purposes *no one* is to get records of your > calls. PAT] Didn't we have a discussion about this some six months ago. I thought that the upshot was that LONG DISTANCE call records had to be disclosed by your long distance company to any other long distance companies to "help them effectively compete" for your business. At the time, this was in relation to mailings from Sprint or MCI about how an individual could save money (given their known calling patterns) by switching. Today, though, in the era of 800- calls that become collect at dollars per minute, I'd be surprised if these same long distance companies weren't getting this information and selling it or mailing lists based on it. Joe Konstan konstan@cs.umn.edu [Moderator's Note: I do not think other LD companies can get your call records, name, address or phone number for any reason other than billing purposes, at least not legally. Telemarketing contractors could be considered agents in a limited sense when telco hires them to solicit your business; they get the records they need but the assumption is they do not abuse them. Note key word: assumption. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:58:13 -0800 From: mmt@redbrick.com (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS) Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges In article , PAT writes: > Here is another one for you to think about: Try 702-333-8444. This > number is blocked by MCI/Sprint/others. *They* won't complete the > call, and advise callers to dial in via 10288-1-702-etc ... AT&T and > the local telco in Nevada both willingly handle the incoming calls. I > wonder why Sprint/MCI/etc are wary of it? For an example of this, try > calling the above via 10222-plus or 10333-plus. Supposedly the calls > are (as the recorded announcement says) 'free of all 900 charges; you > only pay for the toll ...' if that's so, then howcome MCI/Sprint won't > connect to the number? PAT] Sprint and MCI *do* complete the call! Pay close attention here: the recording you reach from *both* Sprint and MCI is identical. I suspect that trying this with any carrier other than AT&T will give you the same result (as will calling through the LEC). It's just that AT&T completes the call differently. (And you really will only have to pay the LD charges). Why is this? Because the actual, local number merely reaches the recording (which probably doesn't supervise). However, if you call through AT&T, then AT&T doesn't route the call to the actual local number, but rather to the service you're trying to reach. Why would AT&T do this? Because it's in the interest of both them and the service provider (who, BTW, is not necessarily sleazy). AT&T runs dedicated lines from the target area to the provider's POP. The provider gets a kick-back for (either all or just the ones going over the dedicated trunks ... I don't remember) the calls made to the service in question. As I understand it, it's very difficult to convince AT&T to install this class of service. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong). Also, the name of the service slips my mind. Anyone from AT&T have the official name? Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS mmt@RedBrick.COM ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges Date: 2 Nov 92 22:16:30 PST (Mon) From: john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon) They (MCI/Sprint) ARE connecting to the number. The number has some answering machines on it that tell you to redial the call with '10288' so that the call will be routed via AT&T. It is AT&T that is NOT carrying the call (at least not to the number you dialed). By pre-arrangement with the IP, AT&T intercepts that seven-digit number in area 702 and routes it over a special span connected to the Lo-Ad communications center in Reno. Then AT&T splits the proceeds with the IP. In other words, for consideration of the "attractive nuisance" in Nevada that encourages calls, AT&T gives a piece of the action to the machine's keeper. This scheme depends on a heavy volume of traffic, and of course, having the calls carried via AT&T. While normal LD rates apply, the volume of calls makes it worthwhile for AT&T to cut the IP in. The "intercept" that you thought was coming from MCI or Sprint was actually a barker message provided by the IP so that the caller would reroute his call over AT&T. John Higdon (hiding out in the desert) ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 03:35:19 GMT In article bc338569@longs.lance. colostate.edu (Brian J. Catlin) writes: > If they say that this amount of time won't hurt, then why are > answering machines and modems not allowed on party lines? The reason that answering machines and modems aren't allowed on party lines is that the phones that telco provides for party line use have special ringers that will ring only when the proper polarity/ground combination is present. Regular modems and answering machines will answer calls for any party on the party line instead of ones for a specific party. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: birmingh@fnalf.fnal.gov Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Date: 2 Nov 92 14:58:03 -0600 Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab In article , todd@valinor.mythical.com (Todd Lawrence) writes: > msoques@dvorak.amd.com (Martin Soques) writes: >> Greetings! Last night, I received a computerized sales/sleeze call >> which essentially "locked" my line and prevented me from getting a >> dial tone no matter what I did with my switch hook. I found this >> disturbing since I could not hang up on this unsolicited call. Is >> [Moderator's Note: You did not hang up *long enough*. Had you stayed >> off the line for maybe 20-30 seconds the sales robot would have gotten >> cut off. But each time you disconnected for a few seconds then went I should point out that several years ago (when I lived in Nashville) I received a computerized call that would *call back* when I hung up on it. I finally managed to convince them they were wasting their time by leaving interesting noises (screams, toilet flushes) in the place where they wanted you to state your address. I also seem to remember suggesting that I would find the number of the company president and disrupt *his* dinner to tell him what I thought of his machine. BTW, it is hilarious to come home and find out that your answering machine has picked up in one of these calls. Phillip J. Birmingham birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough... [Moderator's Note: Do it! Start calling the president of the company at home during his dinner. If he has the nerve to object, then tell him you are going to sue him if his machine(s) ever call you again for any reason. Don't forget to dial *67 before calling him. It is none of Mister Hotshot's business what your home phone number is. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 01:13:44 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India In article todd@valinor.mythical.com wrote: > Just a quick note, (and judging from the poster's address of Austin, this > really wouldn't apply to him). Keeping the switchook closed for an extended > period of time will disconnect you regardless of the callers switchook > condition in an ESS or Crossbar environment, however in a Step by Step > system, if the calling party is served by the same CO (same prefix), the > calling party will be unable to disconnect no matter how long you leave the > switchook closed ... (there are a few SxS still out there!) Wasn't it the other way ... if my memory is not flakey, it was the crossbar that could be disconnected only by the caller. Something to do with the holding current being related to the callers loop current flowing thru the holding relay contacts. Or maybe I am all muddled up.... my crumbling-page-books are in India, so I cannot hop up to them and verify. shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in ) [Moderator's Note: I had crossbar service for years. It seems to me it would also drop the caller eventually, but a minute or more was about the time it took. I know with crossbar the called party had a lot longer time to hang up one phone (like in the john) and go to another (like in the bedroom with a stop for a glass of water in the kitchen) without getting cut off; but eventually you would lose it. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD From: system@coldbox.cojones.com (Bryan Lockwood) Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 16:23:08 AST Organization: The Generation Gap Ken Jongsma writes: > In the current {PC Week} there was a small blurb for the following: > Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70 > million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses. > DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at > (800)325-0800. > I was a bit surprised to see DAK selling this. One usually associates > DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the listings are a bit out of > date? Au contraire. DAK has been working very hard to sell these things. I get a flyer about every other month. DAK seems to be working quite hard to bring CD-ROM prices down into the realm of affordability for the common man. Bryan Lockwood system@cojones.com 1@501 (WWIVnet) ------------------------------ From: jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD Reply-To: gps-request@esseye.si.com Organization: Smiths Industries Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 15:29:20 GMT In jongsma@swdev.si.com (Ken Jongsma) writes: > In the current {PC Week} there was a small blurb for the following: > Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70 > million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses. > DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at > (800)325-0800. Since I submitted this, I have seen a copy of the DAK catalog that features this CD-ROM directory. Deciphering Drew Kaplan's flowery prose is not easy, but I have a few additional details: - Three disks are shipped: Eastern US Residential, Western US Residential and Entire US Business. - All three disks include names, addreses, zip codes and phone numbers. - Only *listed* numbers are included. - Residential searches allowed by name, limited by city or state. - Business searches by category, addresses, street names, states, zip codes, area codes or phone numbers. - "Hits" on either disk can be saved to disk in groups of 25 or less. - The price is $129 + $6 shipping, but the note indicates a CD-ROM drive purchase is required. One of the product photographs shows the producer of the disk set is Digital Directory Assistance, Inc. at +1 617 639-2900. Ken Jongsma Smiths Industries jongsma@esseye.si.com Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115.1041@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 00:01:19 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Cheap Voice Mail luigi@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Luigi Semenzato) wrote: > We have a few Sparc IPC workstations, made by Sun Microsystems, in our > office, with disk space to spare. They have audio in-out hardware. > The A/D and D/A conversions are both 8 bit @ 8 KHz, I believe. The > quality is certainly sufficient for voice mail purposes, and it would > be fun to have such a system, but only if it can be done cheaply. If you send me one of those underused Sparcstations, I will send you a working answering machine by return mail. This would appear to satisfy your need for cheap voicemail, and my need for a cheap workstation, with minimal fuss and maximum fun. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: Radio Modems Organization: Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:09:08 GMT In article patrick%8461.span@Fedex. Msfc.Nasa.Gov (Patrick E. Meyer) writes: > Can anyone please suggest companies that I can contact about radio > modems. Motorola also offers a variety of radio modems. We offer low power/low cost UHF radio modem links for private systems, mobile data terminals, mobile radio PCs, RF modem (rx only) on an industry standard RAM card, portable terminals and modems with nationwide service on the ARDIS network, "Altair" wireless ethernet and cellular data modems. Motorola Team Sales can be reached at 1-800-367-2346. Ask to speak to Cindy at X4213 or Gay at X4215. John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #819 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13310; 4 Nov 92 1:03 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07852 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 23:00:27 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12460 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 23:00:12 -0600 Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 23:00:12 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211040500.AA12460@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #820 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Nov 92 23:00:15 CST Volume 12 : Issue 820 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (John Schmidt) Re: Telephone Phreaks (Tim Tyler) Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Henry Mensch) Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas (Ron Jarrell) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (David Lesher) Re: ISDN and Stuff (Maxime Taksar) Want to Know the Address of Pactel (Cellular Mobile Co.) (Hanwook Jung) Low Noise Cordless Phone Info Wanted (Steven L. Johnson) Career Opportunities in Digital Wireless Comm. Tech at ITRI (Nirwan Ansari) Disconnection and Steppers (Stephen H. Lichter) Non-Intuitive (Monty Solomon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1992 21:54:03 GMT In article ridder@zowie.zso.dec.com (Hans) writes: > It's likely you could do all sorts of rude things, and it might take > them quite a while to track the complaints down to you. But then > again, they might get to your door in couple of days. :-0 Year ago, I drove a dry pair with some program audio at the radio station I worked for. The level was not bad (maybe +8 dBm peak), but, I accidentally drove the pair unbalanced. Since I was sending identifiable audio, the phones lit up as everyone in the neigborhood now heard our station on their phone. We had someone from the CO break in on one of the calls (since the lines were now all busy) to ask what we were doing. Apparently they got a lot of calls too. So, it's important to keep those lines balanced! Back on the subject (private lines), I have an old Bell Systems Technical Reference Publication 41004 from October 1973. It discusses voiceband circuits under Tariff FCC 260. The circuits are identified as 2001, 3001 and 3002 circuits. We have generally used 3002 circuits. Some of the specs it outlines for all these circuits are: 600 ohm termination, maximum data signal power of 0 dBm over 3 second average, +13 dBm peak, receive level of -16 dBm at 1004 Hz. Above voiceband, 3995 to 4005 Hz was to be at least 18 dB below maximum allowed in band signal (possibly to protect carrier of analog mux systems?), 10 to 25 KHz was to be less than -16 dBm, 10KHz to 25 KHz was to be less than -24 dBm, 25 KHz to 40 KHz was to be less than -36 dBm, and above 40 KHz, -50 dBm. In local areas, these circuits would often just be dry pairs. They could, however, be multiplexed, bringing in the frequency limitations. I've also got some Pacific Bell private line rates from 1988. They vary from $15.22 per month for a 1001 half duplex circuit to $33.49 for a 2001 full duplex circuit. Finally, all this stuff is pretty out of date. Is Bellcore where we'd now go to find out all these specs? Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@pan.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1992 01:49:05 EST From: JOHN SCHMIDT Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth and Signal Level Telco tariffs and technical standards have specific limits on signal levels and baud rates, to prevent crosstalk into other services. If you rented a "dry pair" from them which was simply a piece of JK wire from point to point, with no connection to their multi-pair cables, they really didn't care what you put in it. (but then, why didn't you run your own wire?) (probably because I recall the installation charge was something like $10, and the monthly rental $.50, cheaper to pay them than anyone else, and they would fix it free when someone set the file cabinet on it and squashed it.) Anyway, we once wanted to run some 50ma current loop teletype circuits on telco pair at 300 baud, and were told that those circuits were limited to 75? baud. The 125VDC or so in an unbalanced loop would cause too much crosstalk at 300 baud. 20ma I think was OK up to 300 baud. (Maybe some old-timer who set up teletype circuits, which are, of course, some of the first data communications circuits, can remember the exact limits.) Anyway, if you ever landed across one of those circuits, you never complained about ringing voltage anymore! very painful! "Program" circuits are limited to +8 dbm, as measured on a "VU" meter (+18dbm peak), although I have run much hotter levels in unamplified loops without "detection" (read 'complaint'). In fact, for some years in the late '60s, we connected a program circuit here to the 70volt 20 watt output of a PA amplifier, and had a 12" speaker with only a line to voicecoil transformer running off the other end, two buildings away, loud enough to be uncomfortable when the amplifier was turned up, without any noticable crosstalk. And to this day I have an intercom circuit between our studios on the third floor and the rear door to the building running on a pair in the (now owned by Adelphi, used to be Telco's) riser cable here, "microphone" level when listening, 70volt audio when talking. It's been here about 20 years, and no one has ever complained. The trick to this is to keep everything well balanced. A little bit of unbalance, and you'll get crosstalk up the gazoo ... DISCLAIMER: DON'T BLAME ME IF YOU TRY THIS ON YOUR OWN AND THE PAIR MELTS, OR THE REPAIRPERSON GETS ZAPPED AND WANTS TO SUE... ;-( . John H. Schmidt, P.E. Internet: schmidt@auvax1.adelphi.edu Technical Director, WBAU Phone--Days (212)456-4218 Adelphi University Evenings (516)877-6400 Garden City, New York 11530 Fax-------------(212)456-2424 ------------------------------ From: tim@ais.org (Tim Tyler) Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks Organization: UMCC Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 02:50:54 GMT In article mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET (Daniel Drucker) writes: > Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is? > (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.) Secure Telephone Unit III Tim Tyler Internet: tim@ais.org MCI Mail: 442-5735 P.O. Box 443 C$erve: 72571,1005 DDN: Tyler@Dockmaster.ncsc.mil Ypsilanti MI Packet: KA8VIR @KA8UNZ.#SEMI.MI.USA.NA 48197 ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 22:06:42 -0800 Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey Reply-To: henry@ads.com rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) wrote: > Last night I was actually on a plane that had Airfones and I needed > to make a call. The stupid thing just sat there emiting DTMF tones > and never gave me a dial tone. And why is there no RJ-11 jack on it? > Where am I supposed to plug in my modem? I'm not impressed. Is anyone happy with these things? I've never gotten one to work to my satisfaction ... # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / ------------------------------ From: jarrell@vtserf.cc.vt.edu (Ron Jarrell) Subject: Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas Date: 3 Nov 92 06:48:03 GMT Organization: Virginia Tech (VPI & SU) Actually, according to the account rep I spoke with when getting my Easy Reach 700 number, sometime next year they intend to have things in place so that you will be able to reach the Easy Reach numbers from international locations, and forward to them as well. Plus other miscellaneous stuff like information services; weather, stocks, sports scores, etc. Ron Jarrell Virginia Tech Computing Center jarrell@vtserf.cc.vt.edu ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:53:27 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex > I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami. Is this correct? NOPE! Miami is Bell South Territory. aka BS. I fought for 2.5 years trying to get a pair quiet enough so that my Microcom MNP modem would not give up and just hang up. Even wrote to the PSC. I'd call BS Repair on the FUBAR pair, they could not hear me, and they'd STILL claim it was fixed within 30 minutes. BS is still under investigation for a multi-million fraud case re: repair. Seems that if a problem exists longer than 24 hours, the PSC must be notified in the yearly report, and the sub gets a refund. Guess what. Virtually EVERY ticket got 'kicked' before 23.9 hours. At long last, a fired supervisor spilled the beans to the PSC and the press. When I last talked to my contact in state goverment, they were still turning over rocks on the case ... Oh, I also visited the guy who bought my house. Turns out he's a VAX sysmjr [poor .astard ;-] and yep, he had the same line noise! But relief is at hand ... Andrew shredded that piece of trunkage into multi-color spaghetti :-} In short - the only thing I miss about BS and Miami is my great old '255-RTFM' assignment :_} wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 10:15:53 -0800 From: mmt@redbrick.com (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS) Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff In article , root@sanger.chem.nd.edu (Doctor Math) writes: [example of ISDN costing quite a bit more than a high-speed modem over POTS for an internet link deleted] > Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology > approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up > line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly > charge, why would I want ISDN? [Further questions that I'm not really qualified to answer deleted.] Modem technology will never get near the speed of an ISDN B channel. I think that the theortical limit for a modem over a POTS line is somewhere in the 25-30Kbps range (someone please remind me how fast a Shannon modem is). This isn't even half of what an ISDN B channel is. Why would you want ISDN? Because, theoretically, many people and businesses will eventually have it. I'll venture to suggest the Fax machine analogy. A Fax is to SnailMail as ISDN is to POTS. If ISDN does become as popular as it's supposed to, ISDN CPE will cost *much* less, just as most technologies go down in cost as market and competition for it increase. Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS mmt@RedBrick.COM ------------------------------ From: hjung@acsu.buffalo.edu (Hanwook Jung) Subject: Re: Want to Know the Address of Pactel (Cellular Mobile Co.) Organization: UB Date: Tue, 03 Oct 1992 19:34:15 GMT Does anybody know the address of Pactel Co. (cellular mobile communication company)? Please send email the address directly to me. Thanks in advance. H. Jung email address : hjung@beatrix.eng.buffalo.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 22:23:31 -0500 From: Steven L. Johnson Subject: Low Noise Cordless Phone Info Wanted I'm looking to replace an older low end cordless phone with something that has less hum and noise. Slightly more range would be nice also. I am wondering how the newer 902/928 MHz phones (digital or analog) compare with the more popular 46/49 MHz ones. I'm interested in comparisons or recommendations on the different noise reduction methods that the phones use. Specifically the Panasonic KX-T9000 looks interesting, but is it really noticably better than the best of the 46/49 MHz flavor? Pointers to previous discussions (telecom-archives, etc) gratefully accepted. Steve steve@johnson.jvnc.net ------------------------------ From: ang@hertz.njit.edu (Nirwan Ansari) Subject: Career Opportunities in Digital Wireless Comm. Tech at ITRI Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J. Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 16:05:09 GMT This is a posting for Dr. C. H. Lu. Please REPLY and forward ALL INQUIRIES to: Dr. Chung H. Lu Communications Technology Division CCL/ITRI, M00B, Bldg. 14 195 Sec. 4, Chung-Hsing Rd. Chutung, Hsinchu 310 Taiwan Fax: 886-35-82-0204 Phone: 886-35-91-7587 e-mail: lu@lu.ccl.itri.org.tw Career Opportunities in Digital Wireless Communications Technology Computer and Communications Research Laboratories of the Industrial Technology Research Institute (CCL/ITRI) has ongoing projects in the areas of wireless communications, including personal communications and wireless data communications. Current emphases are TDMA wireless digital telephone, CDMA technology, and spread spectrum technology (SST) RF Modem. CCL is the leading industrial research organization in computer and communications in Taiwan. We are strategically located next to the Hsinchu Science Based Industrial Park. Chiao Tung University and Ching Hwa University are only minutes away. If you would like to be a major contributor to the emerging wireless communications technology and burgeoning wireless communications industry in Taiwan, CCL has a position for you. Openings for senior engineers/researchers and managerial positions in the following areas of expertise are available: High level design definition and development, system and software design for wireless communications systems, protocol analysis and implementation, RF system analysis and design, RF circuit design, channel coding and communications signal processing. Advanced degree and extensive relevant experiences in digital communications are required. Demonstrable project leadership is a plus. Interested professional please send a full resume and relevant supporting materials to: Dr. Chung H. Lu Communications Technology Division CCL/ITRI, M00B, Bldg. 14 195 Sec. 4, Chung-Hsing Rd. Chutung, Hsinchu 310 Taiwan Fax: 886-35-82-0204 Phone: 886-35-91-7587 e-mail: lu@lu.ccl.itri.org.tw ------------------------------ From: GLORIA.C.VALLE@gte.sprint.com Date: 3 Nov 92 02:38:00 UT Subject: Disconnection and Steppers Sometime before we replaced our step switches to electrnic we had work orders that had us convert the connector's to a timed disconnect. That means when a called party hanges up after a set time the ground on the C lead is removed and the called party is free and has dial tone again. It has been years so I really don't remember the amount of time, but it was not very long. These were done in GTE California, but I'm sure our other companies as well as many others had done the convert. It was standard practice to do this on a equipment as it was added. Steven H. Lichter GTE Calif COEI Mad Dog (Steven) Sysop: Apple Elite II -- an Ogg-Net BBS UUCP: steven@alchemy.UUCP (714) 359-5338 1200-2400 bps 8N1 ------------------------------ From: Monty Solomon Subject: Non-Intuitive Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 4:30:03 EST [Moderator's Note: Monty passed along this next message from where it originally appeared in the rec.humor.funny newsgroup. PAT] From: ggr@acci.com.au (Greg Rose) Subject: Non-Intuitive Keywords: smirk All I wanted to do was find out the temperature predicted for tomorrow. But I'd missed the television weather report. So I looked up the telephone directory. The index mentioned "recorded information services". Great, turn to page whatever. "Recorded information service numbers all start with 0055 [this is Australia we're talking about]. The services themselves are listed under 'D' for 'double-oh-double-five'". Great. Turn to the 'D' section, and look towards the end of the 0055 list for 'Weather', but it isn't there. So I started at the beginning. Fortuitous, that. The weather service is listed under 'A', for "Ask the Weather". You really do have to ask it, and nicely, too! It reads out a list of places, and when you hear the one you want, you must say "yes please", for it to go into the detail. I love intuitive ways to use things. Now I know why. Greg Rose ggr@acci.com.au ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #820 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17692; 4 Nov 92 3:16 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07031 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 01:15:49 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19961 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 01:15:27 -0600 Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 01:15:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211040715.AA19961@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #821 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Nov 92 01:15:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 821 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (P. Knoppers) Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (Richard Cox) Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas (Holger Reusch) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Richard Cox) Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Jack Adams) Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (John R. Levine) Re: PP 2000 -- Phooey (John R. Levine) Re: Phone Directory on CD (Paul Robinson) Re: Phone Directory on CD (Philip Gladstone) Bandwidth on Demand Specification Wanted (Jim Edwards) Re: Tone Converters (Steven H. Lichter) Migrating the Internet: Internet Course (via Internet) (Peter Roosen-Runge) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: knop@dutecag.et.tudelft.nl (Peter Knoppers) Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1992 14:08:08 GMT shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu writes: > I heard that some PTTs in Europe have always had metered local calls, > or at least that it was so planned ... is that true? I'll add one data-point to this discussion ... In the Netherlands local phone calls have been metered since as long as I can remember (over 25 years). Local calls of any duration used to cost one unit. With the proliferation of modems this simple tariff became too expensive for the phone company. Local calls during office-hours now cost one unit per five minutes (or a part thereof). At other times you get ten minutes per unit. Each unit adds DFL 0.15 (about US $ 0.08) to the phone bill and this rate has not been changed in a looooooong time. Peter Knoppers - knop@duteca.et.tudelft.nl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 12:02 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu said: >> each five minutes amounts to a new call. They could not have implemented >> it before they got these fancy stored program exchanges, so that's one >> nice thing about strowgers and crossbars :-) and asks: >> I heard that some PTTs in Europe have always had metered local calls, >> or at least that it was so planned ... is that true? In the UK all calls are metered by time, local or not: with the exception of one city (Kingston upon Hull -- Hull for short) where local calls are untimed. The arrangement here (apart from in Hull) is that a "new call" is registered every "time unit" -- which varies from *57.5 seconds* in the morning to three minutes forty seconds in the evening and (also at weekends.) We are somewhat envious of the tariffs enjoyed in the USA ! Richard Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 222 747111 Fax: +44 222 711111 VoiceMail: +44 399 870101 E-mail: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception? PAT] ------------------------------ From: holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Holger Reusch (Dipl. Gerhard + Joe)) Subject: Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 16:23:13 GMT In an article by Juergen Ziegler , our beloved Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: You are missing the point, Juergen. 700 numbers are > intended as internal arrangements in the USA. This is much the same > thing with 800 numbers, although not exclusively. 700/800 are for use > inside the USA by callers within the USA. > I don't complain because some company in Germany receives toll free > calls on the (German) equivilent of 800 -- something we here in the > USA cannot dial internationally. I assume if they want USA callers > they will put in an 800 number here as we know it and can use it. > Every country has certain telephone codes for its own internal use; > the USA has 700, 800 and 900. Why do you think it is 'stupid'? If > you wish to bypass network arrangements and use a service like 'USA > Direct' to get into the USA and then call outbound to a 700/800 > number, suit yourself. Of course it will cost more. PAT] Unfortunately, for many items like software, books, etc., ordering from US companies is the only possible (or affordable) way to get them. Certain companies only publish their 1-800 number. What is a European supposed to do if the only phone number known to him is a toll-free number in the US? Being told that this is an "internal arrangement" which he is not supposed to use is rather frustrating. If companies would publish their regular numbers in addition to toll-free numbers everything would be fine. But, not aware of the 700/800 problem, they don't do it. Cynics here call it bloody Americo-centrism, but IMHO that's exaggerated. We Europeans don't complain because we want to phone toll-free, we complain because we *need* internationally accessible numbers in the US and current arrangements don't offer that. The concept of getting everything you need from a national supplier just doesn't work for smaller countries. I don't mind paying for 700/800 numbers, all I want is to be able to call them at all. Holger Reusch Technical University of Vienna, Austria <-+--- No kangaroos here, Dept. for Real-Time Systems | sorry! holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at [Moderator's Note: Cynics in Europe can call it whatever they like; I read some papers from the UK and other places in Europe which carry advertisements for companies in Europe. *They* do the same thing; I have seen their ads with only '0800' numbers and the like. Shall I now devote several issues of this Digest to complain about 'European centrism' because I can't call them on their nickle? Your complaint should be directed to companies which advertise in media read around the world while failing to include telephone numbers which can be dialed internationally. Maybe a lot of those companies simply are not soliciting business from other countries for reasons of their own, possibly involving customs taxes, copyright problems, etc. Or maybe their advertising copy writers are simply stupid. In either case, why blame telco for omissions by merchants in their advertising? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 12:02 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk Commenting on a message from birmingh@fnalf.fnal.gov, PAT said: >> [Moderator's Note: Do it! Start calling the president of the company at >> home during his dinner. If he has the nerve to object, then tell him you >> are going to sue him if his machines ever call you again for any reason. >> Don't forget to dial *67 before calling him. >> It is none of Mister Hotshot's business what your home phone number is. Logic error here, I'm afraid. If he doesn't know what your home phone number is, just how is he to make sure that his machines never call it? Richard Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 222 747111 Fax: +44 222 711111 VoiceMail: +44 399 870101 E-mail: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA [Moderator's Note: Good point. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:17:06 GMT In article , jang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Euee S. Jang) writes: > Hi. I am a graduate student at Suny at Buffalo. I am about to start > the experimentation on JPEG. But I have no program or tool for JPEG. ^^^^----(SOFT?) In case you didn't know, SOFT is an acronym for Spell Out First Time! For those like me who have some problems with unexpanded acronyms, could we all make a point of employing SOFT wherever possible? I'd like to help Euee, but for the life of me, my context sensitive parser is having a hell of a time with JPEG! Oh well, with the big Five Zero approaching, the loss of a few synapses is inevitable! Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 3 Nov 92 22:05:04 EST (Tue) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) JPEG has very little to do with telecom. It's a scheme for compressing digitized photographs. There is an informal group that has written a high-quality free JPEG compressor and decompressor in very portable C. See their periodic posting in the usenet group comp.compilers for details. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: Thanks for clarifying that, John. I honestly did not know what it was either. :( PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: PP 2000 -- Phooey Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 3 Nov 92 22:40:52 EST (Tue) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > On the other hand, I am impressed with the new AT&T Public Phone 2000. I'm not. I was at JFK airport last week and having a few minutes to kill, I tried to call my computer at home and check my mail using a PP2000. After tediously working through their "user friendly" menu, I set it to 2400 bps, called in, modems shook hands, then nothing, no characters, no nothing. Didn't work at 1200 bps, either. Nobody else has any trouble calling in here. What gives? Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 10:18 GMT From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD In TELECOM Digest 12-819, Ken Jongsma writes: > In jongsma@swdev.si.com (Ken Jongsma) > writes: >> In the current {PC Week} there was a small blurb for the following: >> Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70 >> million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses. >> DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at >> (800)325-0800. > Since I submitted this, I have seen a copy of the DAK catalog that > features this CD-ROM directory. Deciphering Drew Kaplan's flowery > prose is not easy, but I have a few additional details: > - Three disks are shipped: Eastern US Residential, Western US Residential > and Entire US Business. > - All three disks include names, addreses, zip codes and phone numbers. > - Only *listed* numbers are included. I think I know why they are selling a telephone directory disk. About two years ago the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that plain alphabetical listings, i.e. telephone white pages, because the work can all be done automatically, lack the "minimum spark of creativity" which is necessary for copyright protection. This means that telephone white pages are no longer copyrightable material. This decision effectively overturns the 1920s case of _Pacific Telephone v. Leon_ which was one of the landmark cases in copyright law: that even if the telephone company wasn't making a directory, you couldn't use their data without their permission. This may be why the CD Rom is being sold this way; because the original data is not subject to copyright, once they either get the tape of directory information or scan phone books or city directories, they can use the information any way they want to (subject to any contract requirements, of course.) Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 09:26:38 -0500 From: philip@cgin.cto.citicorp.com (Philip Gladstone) Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD Organization: Citibank jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) writes: > One of the product photographs shows the producer of the disk set is > Digital Directory Assistance, Inc. at +1 617 639-2900. This disk sounds very like the one produced by ProCD INC. Their phone number is +1 617 631 9200 (note similarity to one given above). They list the disk for $349, with qty 300 at $70. They call the three disk set the 'ProPhone National Edition'. It appears that (some of) the data is gained by scanning in phone books. The data can be up to 18 months old. Philip ------------------------------ From: jime@countach.telcom.tek.com (Jim Edwards) Subject: Bandwidth on Demand Specification Wanted Date: 3 Nov 92 18:08:11 GMT Reply-To: jime@countach.telcom.tek.com (Jime Edwards) Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR. Does anybody know where I can get a copy of the Bandwidth On Demand (BOND) specification? Thanks. Jim Edwards jime@countach.telcom.tek.com ------------------------------ From: GLORIA.C.VALLE@gte.sprint.com Date: 3 Nov 92 02:46:00 UT Subject: Re: Tone Converters Jack Decker wrote: > Now, I have a situation that maybe someone can help me with. I need > to get hold of one tone-to-pulse convertor ... that is, something that > you can plug a telephone device that dials using tone dialing into, > and have it come out the other end as dial pulses. We have some converters laying around from the old days of step. They require 48 volts to run. If you have that you are more then welcome to them for the cost of the postage. Teltone also made some for line voltage so maybe someone has some of those. Steven H. Lichter GTE Calif COEI ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 14:25:00 EDT Reply-To: Peter Roosen-Runge From: Peter Roosen-Runge Subject: Migrating the Internet: Internet Course (via Internet) Here's a workshop you can attend without leaving your office (or home) - it may be of interest to those on this list who haven't yet had a chance to explore Internet services and resources. ........... Peter Roosen-Runge Navigating the Internet: An Interactive Workshop November 16, 1992 through December 11, 1992 "Navigating the Internet: An Interactive Workshop" is intended for new or infrequent users of the network of networks called the Internet. it is designed to give an overview of several operating systems used on the Internet and to give examples of the resources available over the Internet. The only requirement is that the user have access to the Internet and can read basic e-mail. UNIX, VMS, and VM will be the primary operating systems covered in the workshop. Participants will be sent instructions by e-mail. A BITNET listserv provided by the University at Buffalo will be used for interactive answering of questions and solving problems with additional help by e-mail. Instructor Richard J. Smith. Assistant Director of Technical Services University of Southwestern Louisiana VMS & VM adaption by Jim Gerland Systems Consultant University at Buffalo Guest lecturer Dr. Chris Tomer University of Pittsburgh Contributions by Peter Scott, Charles W. Bailey Jr. and other will be included. Week 1 Internet Mail -- Instructions on how to use basic e-mail UNIX, VMS, VM basics -- how to create, read, edit, copy, and move files in UNIX, VMS, VM. User information -- How to find addresses with WHOIS, how to finger users, finding files with Archie, and printing basics. -------------------- Thanksgiving Break (USA) November 25-29, 1992 -------------------- Week 2 Ftp -- File transfer Protocol will be explained with instruction on how to ftp a document. Ftp -- Explanation and instructions on how to ftp pertinent Requests for Comments (RFC). Reading a file in ftp. Ftp -- Instructions on how and where to get Internet reference guides, an electronic book, a Supreme Court decision, and several PC games. Instructions on how to subscribe to electronic journals. Instructions on ftping a directory of electronic journals. Reading news. Week 3 Telnet -- Telnet will be explained with instructions on how to get to several OPACs. Capturing a file. Telnet -- Explanation and instructions on getting to and exploring CARL. Telnet -- Explanation and instructions on getting to and exploring Freenet. Telnet -- Using the ERIC database. Evaluation Registration Fee: free AUTOMATED REGISTRATION (Preferred) To register for "Navigating the Internet: an Interactive Workshop" send the following e-mail message (NO SUBJECT HEADING) to: listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu In the body of the e-mail message send: sub navigate yourfirstname yourlastname (If the above instructions are unfamiliar to you, ask for assistance from your computer center.) E-MAIL REGISTRATION Send e-mail requesting registration to: rs@usl.edu U.S. POST REGISTRATION Richard J. Smith Dupre Library 302 St. Mary Blvd. University of Southwestern Louisiana Lafayette, LA 70503 Include your name and e-mail address PHONE REGISTRATION Richard J. Smith (318) 231-6399 Posted on PACS-L and NETTRAIN Richard J. Smith Assistant Director for Technical Service University of Southwestern Louisiana Lafayette, LA 70503 (318) 231-6399 rs@usl.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #821 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01033; 4 Nov 92 7:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01616 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 05:43:00 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25863 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 05:42:42 -0600 Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 05:42:42 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211041142.AA25863@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #822 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Nov 92 05:42:40 CST Volume 12 : Issue 822 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Risks Of Cellular Speech (Dave King, RISKS Digest via Monty Solomon) Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (PGN, RISKS Digest via Monty Solomon) AT&T Takes Away my Call Manager (Craig R. Watkins) Northern Telecom Voicemail (Meridian Mail) (Aninda V. Dasgupta) Northern Telecom Email Address Wanted (Scott Matthews) Silent Caller From Different Numbers (Mike Honeycutt) Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona (Alan Boritz) Splits This Month (Carl Moore) Fax Back From DTMF Selection? (SHAPIN Telco Handling of Cable Cut (Dan Mongrain) Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Alistair Grant) Do Tell! (Rich Greenberg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 19:30:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Risks Of Cellular Speech Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.89 Date: 02 Nov 92 12:00:22 EST From: Dave King <71270.450@compuserve.com> Subject: Risks Of Cellular Speech [The following was distributed here at work by our security folks. I was surprised at the degree to which cellular traffic has apparently become public speech. But then, perhaps my surprise is just a reflection of my naivete. I'm not sure how Canada's laws compare to ours, but given how difficult it must be to catch someone at this, I can't imagine things are much different here in the 'States. (But then if it's so difficult, how'd they do the study???) Dave] ------------- Two Bell Canada security managers shared some startling data with us recently. In a three-month study of the Metro Toronto area earlier this summer, Bell found that 80 percent of all cellular telephone traffic is monitored by third parties. Even more eye-opening is the fact that 60 percent of monitored calls are taped for closer scrutiny and culling of marketable information. The chance of being monitored and taped is even higher in rural areas, where air traffic is lighter. Scanners cost as little as $200, and are sold in virtually every shopping mall in Toronto. Marketable information includes the obvious -- mergers, take-overs, market and product plans, but the listeners are also looking for voice/phonemail access codes and passwords. The digitized tones are translated into numbers quite easily. "Phone phreaks", the telecommunications equivalent of computer hackers, use these numbers to break into voicemail systems. One misuse which is growing in frequency is the setting up of "pirate" voicemail boxes, often by organized crime. Pirated boxes give them the ability to disseminate information on drug deals, as one example, with little or no risk of detection. We ask you to be extremely cautious when using your personal or business cellular phone. Do not discuss confidential business matters, and avoid calling in for phonemail messages via your cellular phone. David L. King, IBM SE Region Information & Telecomm Systems Services Department CAY, Mail Drop D072, 10401 Fernwood Road, Bethesda MD 20817 301 571-4349 [TELECOM Modertor's Note: None of this comes as any surprise to readers here, though. We might disagree on the exact percentage of cellular calls which are intercepted, but the percentage is high. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 19:33:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.89 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 9:49:24 PST From: "Peter G. Neumann" Subject: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues An article by John Flinn on the front page of the {San Francisco Examiner}, Sunday, 1 November 1992, listed several cases of inadvertent or advertent eavesdropping, in the midst of a fine story on the problems in general. * A supposedly private conference call among SF Mayor Jordan, real-estate magnate Walter Shorenstein, and several others discussing the then not public withdrawal of George Shinn from the effort to save the SF Giants was BROADCAST on a TV frequency. * A 23-minute conversation allegedly between Princess Diana and a man who called her ``my darling Squidge'' was taped by a retired bank manager in Oxford, and transcribed in The Sun. (The woman allegedly referred to the Royal Family as ``this ****ing family''.) After discussing privacy laws, legalities, and realities, Flinn notes that at Scanners Unlimited in San Carlos, CA, "about a quarter of the customers are interested in telephone eavesdropping." [TELECOM Moderator's Note: Part of the above article got obliterated somehow in getting here. One of PGN's examples above had to be omitted in this copying. Someone ought to tell the local politicians here in Chicago about how easy it is to hear them and their mistresses using city-owned cars and city-owned cellular phones in their free time at night around the city. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Craig R. Watkins Subject: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager Date: 3 Nov 92 09:20:57 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. Call Manager is a (free) service of AT&T that allows you to touch tone in an account code (of the form 15xx where you make up xx) where you would normally dial a calling card number when you place a 0+ call. Your bill then gets itemized and totaled by account code. I've been using it at home for years. This weekend I noticed that it was only enabled on my primary line; other lines got a message about it not being available when I entered the account code. It took a few days and a bunch of phone calls to get to the right people and get it turned back on, but that's just a war story and I won't bore you with the details. My conclusion is that while AT&T used to have Call Manager enabled on ALL lines, they recently have started disabling it from lines that haven't "signed up" for this free service. I'm guessing that I never signed up my other lines. Even though they are all under the same billing number and I have been using Call Manager on them for years, and I have been provided with consolodated billing for the lines together, AT&T saw need to disable them. Within the last month or two I received a mailing from AT&T that told me that I had subscribed to Call Manager and if I wanted to discontinue this free service I should return the enclosed card, otherwise do nothing. I wonder if they are thinking about starting to charge for this service or they have something else up their sleave? If you think you have Call Manager, you should check. If you have problems with Call Manager on your residential lines, call AT&T Residential Customer Service at 800-222-0300. It's OK if they transfer you to a supervisor or to THEIR Special Services Desk, but don't let them transfer you to the special Call Manager Center (800-972-1152) because that is for business lines only (on the other hand, if you are calling about business lines, call THAT number). Craig R. Watkins crw@icf.hrb.com HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:14:54 EST From: add@philabs.Philips.Com (Aninda V. Dasgupta) Subject: Northern Telecom Voicemail (Meridian Mail) I have written some code that "talks" to a Meridian Mail Voicemail system and tries to determine if a user has phone messages. If so, the program sends e-mail (electronic mail) to the subscriber, notifying him/her of messages. Our campus has an SL-1, with a Meridian Mail (MM) module. The bare-bones options on our SL-1 line-cards require us to lift up our handsets to determine if new voicemail messages exist. Although I have a "Call Indicator" box (made by AG Communications, Pheonix, AZ - a neat and handy little box) to notify me of calls that I didn't answer, most of my colleagues are less fortunate. Therefore I wrote these programs. The programs exist on two platforms, PC and Sun workstations. The PC uses a COM (asynchronous serial) port to connect to the MM. It also sits on our campus Ethernet so that it can send email. The program pretends to be a dumb VT320 terminal and periodically logs into the MM module and sends appropriate "Function Keys" to make it display "Find Users" screens under the "User Administration" menu. The program then saves all screens displayed in a file and logs out of the MM module. It then processes the saved file to determine which user might have new messages and sends email to the user. The version on the Sun uses TCP/IP and Telnet. The MM module is connected to a Terminal Server box via Serial lines. The Terminal server sits on our campus Ethernet and the Sun box "talks" to the Terminal server on the Telnet port. The rest of the program is similar to the one described above for the PC. If anyone is interested in more details of these programs, please send me email (do not use the telswitch-nt mailing list, I am not a subscriber.) Although I won't be able to give you complete source code, I can give you sufficient details to go build your own programs (quite simple actually.) My main gripe against Meridian Mail is that it gives me no way to get to the digitized-voice files that store phone messages. All I need to do is read the size of each file for a user and determine if the file is a new one or an old one that has been played before. The SL-1 can easily determine how many old and how many new messages a user has, but, using the terminal interface on the Mail module, I can't do the same. That really is a shame. Additionally I wish I could download the message files and play them on my Sparcstation. Presumably, the files are eight-bit PCM encoded, no? Also, is there a back-door, a magic sequence of key-presses, that exits out of the program that gives all those menus (starting with the "main menu" ) and gives me some sort of a prompt or command line? I guess even if there was one, NT wouldn't tell me, right? Does anyone on these mailing lists know anybody within Northern Telecom who can give me some technical information? I find going through the local telco (that resells NT equipment) representative very time consuming and half the time they don't know what I am talking about. I have tried calling NT directly, but they won't talk to me; keep saying that I should go to NYNEX. I am surprised that NT does not have better technical support. By the way, I am no "phreak", I am doing all this with full knowledge of our campus phone admin :-) Any information, hint, idea, comment, question, etc. is most welcome. Remember, contact me directly or through the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup. I do not subscribe to the telswitch-nt mailing list. Cheerios, Aninda DasGupta (add@philabs.philips.com) Ph:(914)945-6071 Fax:(914)945-6552 Philips Labs\n 345 Scarborough Rd\n Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510 ------------------------------ From: hsm@sei.cmu.edu (Scott Matthews) Subject: Northern Telecomm Organization: The Software Engineering Institute Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 20:56:04 GMT Does anybody have any internet hosts (email addresses) for Northern Telecom? Thanks, scott ------------------------------ From: Mike Honeycutt Subject: Silent Caller From Different Numbers Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 00:45:59 GMT We are having a (minor) problem. A student complained about receiving frequent phone calls where the person does not say anything. The call can last up to a minute then the caller hangs-up. This pattern is repeated several times a week (weekdays only) and occurs between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. We have received no other complaints (the phone numbers in our dorms are basically sequential) so I've ruled-out a "deamon dialer". Now the twist: Southern Bell monitored the calls and reported they were coming from *various* state agencies within 100 miles of Asheville! Although this raised my eyebrows, Southern Bell seemed even less interested in the problem and has put it on a back burner. Before my imagination gets the best of me and I start writing the sequel to "The Cuckoo's Egg", can anyone offer a logical explanation for these events. I will summarize (unless you request anonymity). Thanks, Mike Honeycutt UNC Asheville Computer Ctr. honeycutt@unca.edu [Moderator's Note: Ask the student if they have a (former) friend/lover working for the state in a position where their work would take them around to various state offices; i.e. an auditor, a telecommunications or computer technician employed by the state, etc. Have they had any sort of personal problems with a person like this? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 03 Nov 92 21:25:21 EST From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona joachim@ee.uni-sb.de (& Koenig) writes: > Harry calls his wife in the evening: > "Darling, I'm still in the office and have a lot of work to do. I'll > come home late today". > His wife: > "Oh, Harry, you're not, you are with Mrs ....." > Hopefully, the number of divorces will in- or decrease. IN-crease in this case. But don't worry, she's better off without him. An adulterer stupid enough to call his wife from his girlfriend's Caller-ID equipped phone can't possibly make a good husband or father. ;) Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com [Moderator's Note: It is not his 'girlfriends Caller-ID equipped phone', it is *his* phone at home equipped that way that ratted on him. His only option would be to press *67, and I'm afraid that would make the wife suspicious also. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 9:44:08 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Splits This Month The history.of.area.splits file has 512/210 taking place last Sunday (Nov. 1) and 714/909 as coming on Nov. 14. Both of these are the beginning of the permissive dialing. ------------------------------ From: tshapin@beckman.com (Ted Shapin) Subject: Fax Back From DTMF Selection? Date: 3 Nov 92 22:24:32 PDT Organization: Beckman Instruments, Fullerton, CA I am looking for recommendations for a fax back system which will use audio response and DTMF tones to select a stored fax document that will then be transmitted to the caller's fax machine. ------------------------------ From: dmongrai@gandalf.ca (Dan Mongrain) Subject: Telco Handling of Cable Cut Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd. Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 14:31:05 GMT A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing through a cable. A voice-over indicates that even if a line goes down in their network, calls will be rerouted so that they are not lost or even noticed by the parties at each end. Is this true? I always thought that voice switches used circuit switching, which means that is a call is interrupted, it has to be re-established manually. I agree there are redundant trunks to by-pass the cut cable but always thought that there were no automatic rerouting. Please enlighten me. Dan Mongrain dmongrai@bach.gandalf.ca ------------------------------ Date: 03 Nov 92 23:42:09 EST From: Alistair Grant <100032.525@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Help Needed With DTMF Tones Hello, I would like your help please. I am trying to make a automatic phone dialer, I have the tones: | 1209 1336 1477 ---------------------------- 697 | 1 2 3 770 | 4 5 6 852 | 7 8 9 941 | * 0 # I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the corresponding number but when I put it to the phone nothing happens. Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second. If you can shed any light on the subject that would be cool. Thanks - Alistair GRANT ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:30:25 PST From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Do Tell! Todays {Los Angeles Times} (10/3/1992) had an ad a few pages into the first section that I thought would give a few chuckles to the other readers of the TELECOM Digest. (Especially a certain gentleman who likes cows ((-: ) Its a big ad, about the size of a piece of legal paper (13" x 8.5"). Mostly black with large white type: Does Your Phone System Go Out More Than You Do? The text block at the bottom is a pitch for CentraNet(r) service from our old friends from GTE. Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - richg@hatch.socal.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #822 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18982; 6 Nov 92 2:01 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30231 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:54:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19733 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:54:03 -0600 Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:54:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211060554.AA19733@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #823 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Nov 92 23:54:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 823 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T to Buy McCaw Cellular for $3.8 Billion (USA Today via Paul Robinson) Two Articles on MCI (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) Australian Phone Numbers to Become Eight Digits (David E. A. Wilson) $20,000 Settlement in Telemarketing Scam (Nigel Allen) A Question on Gbps Services (Lim Chin Keng) Music On Call? (Jerry Leichter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 18:34:41 EST Subject: AT&T to Buy McCaw Cellular For $3.8 Billion Two views of the same story: Nov 5, 1992 [Page 1, USA Today] AT&T has $4 billion cellular phone deal on the line By John Schneidawind, USA TODAY AT&T and the USA's No. 1 cellular phone company are joining hands to form a nationwide wireless phone network. AT&T said Wednesday it wants to spend almost $4 billion to acquire a 33% stake in McCaw Communications. The deal could hasten the day when we use pocket-sized cellular phones anywhere in the world. On the way to consumers: - Better cellular service. Now, you usually have to change cellular numbers in each city you visit. In the future, you could take along your phone -- and number. "Think of the possibility of having one phone number and the phone that travels with you," says Craig McCaw, chief executive if NcCaw, which has 2.1 million customers in more than 100 cities. - Cheaper service. Cellular rates have been falling, but still average $69 monthly. McCaw would use AT&T's money to pay down McCaw's $5 billion debt. "We have to drive our expenses down so we can afford to operate at prices the average consumer can consider," he says. Says Robert Morris, an analyst at Goldman Sachs: "AT&T would get back into the local phone business with the technology of tomorrow." For now, the McCaw family keeps voting control, but AT&T has an option to gain control over seven years. "We're dating now -- we're not getting married yet," says AT&T's CEO Robert Allen. The deal, first reported by USA TODAY's Dan Dorfman, is the largest that has been announced this year. [ Page B12, {The Washington Post} ] AT&T Seeks Stake in McCaw Cellular Deal May Spur National Mobile Phone System By Cindy Skrzycki, Washington Post Staff Writer AT&T, the nation's largest long-distance company, yesterday announced that it is negotiating a $3.8 billion strategic alliance with McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., the nation's largest cellular telephone company. The proposed alliance gives AT&T immediate access to one of the fastest-growing markets in the telecommunications industry -- wireless phone technology. McCaw, considered an innovative leader in the cellular industry with 2.1 million cellular subscribers, would be able to tap into AT&T's formidable national marketing, distribution and research capabilities to advance its goal of establishing a nationwide cellular network. "Over the last 20 years I have entered into dozens of strategic alliances," said Craig McCaw, chairman and chief executive of McCaw. "None have ever made more sense to me." "McCaw, who currently controls the $1.3 billion company, called McCaw and AT&T "natural allies" with a "common vision." He added that one possible benefit of the alliance could be cheaper cellular service. The two companies said they envision bringing to market more quickly new advances such as a single nationwide telephone number for each wireless telephone user and a portable handset that works everywhere and is programmable. Prior to yesterday's announcement, McCaw had been moving in this direction with alliances with other companies, such as Oracle Corp. and International Business Machines Corp. The proposed deal gives AT&T a 33 percent interest in McCaw and an option to eventually acquire voting control of the company. AT&T paid $100 million for the option and would pay another $600 million if it exercised it. The proposed deal would return to American hands the 22 percent stake that British Telecommunications PLC has held in McCaw since 1989. AT&T will pay the British firm $1.8 billion, or $49 a share. Similarly, AT&T will pay McCaw $2 billion for new McCaw shares valued at $42 each. British Telecom yesterday cited "the regulatory constraints of foreign ownership" as one reason it was selling its stake for a profit. The average price paid by AT&T for its stock would be $45 a share. AT&T, already a supplier of cellular equipment and handsets, enters the cellular market at a time of great ferment over what the next generation of wireless telephony will be. Currently, three companies, none of which are in the cellular industry, have experimental licenses from the Federal Communications Commission to develop and test new "personal communications" products. Before the breakup of the Bell System monopoly in 1984, AT&T was a fledgling player in cellular service but got out of the business at the time of the breakup. Bell Laboratories developed the concept of cellular phone service in 1947, and its scientists came up with the first experimental system in 1962. AT&T also made cellular handsets but left that business in the 1980s only to reenter it last year. Robert Allen, chairman and chief executive of AT&T, said the alliance announced yesterday supports growth of its long-distance business and its desire to expand wireless services. It also puts AT&T in direct competition with some of the seven regional "Baby Bell" companies that it used to own. AT&T made major strides in expanding wireless services with its $7.48 billion acquisition of NCR Corp in the fall of 1991. The deal involving McCaw, if approved by regulatory agencies and the boards of the companies, comes as another long-distance carrier, Sprint, is attempting a merger with Centel Corp., another major cellular company. "I think it's awesome," said Michael Elling, a telecommunications analyst with the brokerage Oppenheimer & Co. in New York. In addition to giving McCaw nationwide marketing muscle, he noted, AT&T has the technology to help crack down on the widespread problem of tampering with cellular equipment to get free calls. Elling said McCaw will have more incentives to persuade customers to stay loyal, rather than switch to other cellular carriers, by offering discounts and other calling services of AT&T. Trading in the shares of both companies was halted before the announcement, and didn't resume before the stock market closed yesterday. Before the halt, McCaw's shares were down $2.12 1/2 to $26.75, wile AT&T was down 62 1/2 cents at $42.75. Analyst Alfred J. Humphries with Hanifen Imhoff Inc. said there was some concern over the $5.3 billion debt that McCaw is carrying from its purchase of LIN Broadcasting Corp., another cellular carrier. Proceeds from the deal would be used to pay down that debt. AT&T's Allen, expressing confidence in McCaw, noted that the proposed alliance does not pose "any risks we are particularly concerned about." However, Herschel Shosteck, a telecommunications consultant in Silver Spring, suggested that AT&T paid too much for the privelege of entering the cellular market with McCaw, particularly since the promise of the personal communications market is unclear. -------- Staff writer Mark Potts contributed to this article. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 20:03:18 EST Subject: Two Articles on MCI Two articles on MCI from the November 5, 1992, {Washington Post} [Article 1, Digest, Page B13] MCI and 46 global telecommunications firms signed a construction and maintenance agreement for TPC-5, a 15,525 mile, $1.3 billion fiber-optic network intended to link Japan, Guam and the United States by late 1995. [Article 2, Page B12] [Photo: a face, lower left profile; next to it a black diamond in white the words "The MCI 100 Day Report"] [Photo Caption: A scene from an MCI television commercial above, and the logo from its newspaper ad campaign] MCI's Ads to Drive You Mad New Campaign another of the 'What Is It?' Variety By Paul Farhi and Cindy Skrzycki, Washington Post Staff Writers Sinister sounding music swells on the sound track. Grainy, shadowy black-and-white images flicker on the screen. "This can't go on," intones an anxious male voice. Then up comes the Kennedy-style slogan, "If not us, who? If not now, when?" All of which may have left viewers who saw this jagged imagery on TV Tuesday night with a question of their own: Huh? Shot in a style that even Fellini might have deemed obtuse, the bizarre 30-second drama is part of a new $10 million ad campaign from MCI Communications Corp., the Washington-based long-distance phone company. The commercials are MCI's way of telling small and medium-sized businesses that they will soon be able to switch their 800 number from their existing provider to MCI. If that message didn't quite come across loud and clear in the commercials that began airing Tuesday, MCI and its ad agency say that's intentional. Just as Infiniti tantalized car buyers with commercials featuring trees and rocks but no cars, MCI ads are "teasers" -- in effect, commercials for a forthcoming series of commercials. In MCI's case, none of this weeks commercials actually describes the benefits of switching to its 800 service. Instead, the ads attempt to play off the themes of the presidential campaign, with vague references to MCI's "agenda for change" and its plan "for the first 100 days." In one especially strange spot that aired during the election returns on the networks, two business executives are seen guffawing, snorting and generally carrying on about ... well, it's not entirely clear what's so funny. "This is a campaign that will evolve," promised Ron Berger, the creative director at MCI's ad agency, Messner Vetere Berger McNamee Schmetter of New York, which conceived of and shot the ads in one month. "We're trying to get people to sit up on Election Night and look at things and be provoked by them." Berger, whose agency also produces ads for Volvo and Coppertone, said MCI's commercials have to be provocative and challenging to compete with giant rival AT&T. In the fierce and seemingly never-ending ad wars among long-distance companies, AT&T spends about $2.5 billion on its marketing -- roughly twice MCI's outlay. Unless you need an 800 number, the ads don't necessarily have to make sense. The campaign, after all, takes a mass-market approach to reaching a narrow group of consumers: business customers -- or at least those people who are the "influencers" within a company about telecommunications decisions, said Timothy Price, president of MCI's newly formed business services division. The company estimates that small and medium-sized businesses spend some $18 billion a year for all kinds of telecommunications services. But are extreme close-ups of somber-faced business executives any way to capture a market? To MCI's credit, few people seemed to have missed its new ads; on the other hand, not everyone loved them. That the ads generated word of mouth around the office water cooler is proof that MCI "broke through" on some level, said Jay Chiat, chairman of ad agency Chiat/Day/Mojo Inc. Chiat, whose agency created the equally dark "Lemmings" spot for Apple Computer Inc. in 1986, said the first reaction among a group he was watching TV with was: " 'What's going on?' People forget that advertising is a redundant thing. If you are intrigued, you will keep looking at it, trying to figure out what the message is. "You don't have to like advertising but you do have to be provoked by it." But Bob Garfield, who reviews ads for Advertising Age magazine, found MCI's spots "so grossly melodramatic for the situation at hand as to be laughable ... You'd think the guys in the spot were discussing the pros and cons of ethnic cleansing, not how cheaply you can dial Memphis." ------------------------------ From: David E A Wilson Subject: Australian Phone Numbers to Become Eight Digits Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 03:01:16 GMT [Seen on last night's television news and in today's {Sydney Morning Herald}.] Austel (Australia's Telecommunications regulatory body) has announced its plans to renumber all of Australia's 15 million telephone numbers. The current plan with 54 area codes containing five to seven digit numbers will be replaced with four area codes with eight digit numbers. Tasmania and Victoria will share 03 (currently allocated to Melbourne), New South Wales will use 02 (currently Sydney), Queensland will use 07 (Brisbane) and the Northern Territory, Western Australia and South Australia will use 08 (Adelaide). Capital city numbers will add the digit 9 to the front while regional numbers will add the current area code (without the leading zero). For instance: (02) 893 9182 -> (02) 9893 9182 (042) 21 3802 -> (02) 4221 3802 The changes will start in Sydney, most rural areas of NSW and parts of SE Queensland in 1994. Melbourne will follow in 1995, NT, Adelaide and the rest of Queensland and NSW will follow in 1996, Perth and Tasmania in 1997 and Canberra in 1998. Austel's chairman Mr Robin Davey said the changes were necessary because the country was fast running out of numbers (especially in Sydney and Queensland Gold Coast). Only 13% of the 96 million numbers the current scheme allows are currently in use but it was not feasible to use numbers from less-populous areas in the cities because it would destroy the geographic mapping that people like in telephone numbers. In addition, the international access code will change from 0011 to 006 and in a move to free up the 00 prefix for international access the 008 code will change to 180 and 0055 will become 190. David Wilson +61 42 213802 voice, +61 42 213262 fax Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: $20,000 Settlement in Telemarketing Scam Case Organization: NDA Here is a press release from the Attorney General of Virginia. Terry Applauds Ruling in Case of Deceptive Funds Solicitation Contact: David A. Parsons of the Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, 804-786-3518 RICHMOND, Va., Nov. 4 -- Attorney General Mary Sue Terry today applauded a Henrico County Circuit Court's ruling that a Florida company used deceptive tactics when it solicited money in Virginia for children to visit a traveling "museum" to learn about the dangers of drugs. In his ruling, Circuit Judge L.A. Harris ordered the company -- Community Benefit Services Inc. (CBS) -- to pay $20,000 to Virginia for distribution to legitimate charities. The attorney general filed suit against CBS and its owners on May 8, 1991. CBS is a for-profit corporation that owned a tractor-trailer that housed an exhibit to discourage drug abuse. The trailer traveled around the country and made half-day stops in parking lots where the public could walk through the exhibit. It visited about a half-dozen locations across the state, including Henrico, in 1990. A two-day trial was held in September, 1992. "Obviously, the public is very interested in programs that educate children about drugs," Terry said. "These people took advantage of that in order to try and make a fast buck." The attorney general's suit alleged that CBS telephoned Virginians from its Florida office and led them to believe that it was a local Virginia charity. It also used local, Virginia return addresses that it rented from private mail box services. CBS asked donors to send money so it could invite deserving local children to tour the trailer, which it called the Children's Traveling Museum. The suit alleged that many Virginians assumed that CBS was a not-for-profit organization and that their payments were tax deductible. CBS did not disclose during much of its operation in Virginia that it was, in fact, a for-profit corporation and that donations to it were not tax deductible. The suit also alleged that CBS did not effectively distribute tickets to local children. In the Richmond area, only one school received any tickets, and its tickets arrived after the school year ended. Other tickets were sent to a Roanoke for-profit company, which left them on its retail customer counter to be ignored or taken by anyone, regardless of age or need. In its ruling, the court held that: "Defendants did employ in the solicitation or collection of contributions devices, schemes, or artifices which allowed them to obtain monetary contributions through material misrepresentations and misleading information." The court ruled that CBS and its owners should pay back $20,000, which is the majority of the company's take from Virginia. When collected, the state will distribute the money to legitimate charities under the supervision of the court. The court also ruled that, in any future solicitations, CBS must first register with the Virginia Division of Consumer Affairs, disclose its location and that of its telephone solicitors, and disclose that it is a for-profit business. The case was investigated by the Virginia Division of Consumer Affairs. ------------ Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ From: lck@solomon.technet.sg (Lim Chin Keng) Subject: A Question on Gbps Services Organization: National University of Singapore Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 11:32:14 GMT Can anyone help me with information on Giga bps services in North America and Europe. In particular I need to know whether there is such a service and what is it used for. Any information on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Lim Chin Keng - Singapore Telecom Internet : lck@solomon.technet.sg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:16:54 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: Music On Call? I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering machine: Several minutes of music. There was no voiceover anywhere in the message, or before or after it -- just music. The sound was of surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the background. The music was symphonic; I didn't place the piece, but would guess Debussy as the composer. (Definitely NOT the schlock you typically get for music-on-hold.) Nothing like this has happened before or since. Any guesses? Jerry [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #823 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25890; 6 Nov 92 3:41 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05895 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:32:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20249 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:32:03 -0600 Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:32:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211060732.AA20249@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #825 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Nov 92 01:32:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 825 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Alleged Phone Harasser Arrested While Paying $18,000 Bill (R. Gellens) Phone Service in the Great White North (John J. Butz) Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment? (H. Shrikumar) AT&T to Play Big on the Airwaves (H. Shrikumar) Firm Unveils First 'Personal Communicator' (Paul Robinson) Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number (Ken Jongsma) NET Using Junk Calls to Sell Answering Service (Bob Clements) PAM: Pulse Amplitude Modulation Questions (M. Iqbal) DS1 For Multiple Dial in Data Lines? (Harold Hallikainen) Sync. Serial I/O Driver-z8530/vxworks (Murad Mirza) Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together (Randolph J. Herber) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 06 NOV 92 01:57 Subject: Alleged Phone Harasser Arrested While Paying $18,000 Bill The {L.A. Times} reported in its Saturday, October 24, 1992 Orange County Edition (I'm a little behind -- I'll probably find out who won the Presidency someday next week) that a man wanted in Denver for allegedly making several thousand harassing calls was arrested after trying to pay his $18,000 bill at an Irvine, California cellular telephone office. Among his alleged victims are a city councilwoman, a police detecive, and a gay and lesbian suicide prevention hot line, which was forced to shut down for a while because of his flood of calls. The Times reported that he is alleged to have been making these calls for at least ten years, and was arrested seven times before. It said he had a lot of money available to him, and made harassing phone calls to anyone he didn't like. The man, David George Neuman, was said to live in a motor home with nine dogs and twelve cellular phones which he used to allegedly make the calls. He was arrested in Denver, but set free by accident, and has eluded police up to now. He was arrested because police allerted cellular phone companies nationwide, and the Irvine company (no name given) called police and said he was coming in to pay his bill. Other cellular companies have been asked not to give him service. The story did not say why he used cellular phones to make his calls. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com A Series System Software if mail bounces, forward to Unisys Mission Viejo, CA rgellens@mcimail.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:36:58 EST From: jbutz@hogpa.ho.att.com (John J Butz +1 908 949 5302) Subject: Phone Service in the Great White North I hear that Canadian phone service underwent/is going through a divestiture, similar to the one AT&T experienced. Could anyone write to me and explain the current situation, the major players, the regulators, recent deals, etc. Perhaps there are good articles in newspapers or trade journals that explain the current Canadian telephony environment? If I get sufficient replies, I will post them here for your reading pleasure. J "Hoser" Butz ER700 Sys Eng jbutz@hogpa.att.com AT&T - BL ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 07:48:04 -0500 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) Subject: Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment? Hello world, Who are the major players in CT2 equipments and in CT2 phones? I believe CT2 was either born in UK or was at least first implemented/ pilot tested there. So are some UK manufactures the big names? European Manufacturers? Americans? Japanese? and even any Taiwanese/Korean (probably not yet)? Are the major Cellular manufacturers also into CT2? What's their policy/strategy on CT2? How is the Illinois/Ameritech CT2 trials ... how are they going? How is response? Whose equipment do they use? What about user's phones? Is CT2 faring well on the other side of the big pond? If I assert that the only CT2 trials in the world have been in London and Illinois will someone here contradict me ? :-) Japan seems to be a potential user, perhaps more than US cities, given geographical size and population densities. Any CT2 in Japan? Any other part of the world? Also, whose standard is CT2? What is CCITTs position on it (or is it them all along ?) Inquiring minds want to know, I will also be grateful for any pointers to magazine/journal/trade rag reports on these questions. If there is interest, I could summarise them for the telecom archives. shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 07:48:04 -0500 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) Subject: ATT to Play Big on the Airwaves Just heard on NPR this morning ... ATT bought a 30% state in McCaw, the Cellular King, for $3.8 bn. ATT aims big in being a major player in Nationwide Cellular and phone services. The morning edition said this brings ATT in direct competition with the RBOCs, many of which have themselves entered Cellular market and are competitors of McCaw. (Given that the RBOCs now bill for Sprint and MCI, so are we seeing a gradual breakup of the close symbiosis between Ma and baby bells ? -- shri). There were indications of new services on a nationwide cellular network ... with buzz words like palmtop, one number anywhere, even on the road etc. thrown in. McCaw himself chimed in to say that this opens up possibilities of one number referring to a person anywhere -- in his home in CA or driving down the road in NYC. (not direct quote). A mention was made that now ATT had bought NCR last year, and with McCaw's cellular and the Bell Labs research, the above aims are in hand. (Although buying NCR is not the same as buying HP when it comes to palmtops ... are we going to have pocket Towers and 88K unix machines ?? :-) :-) I think I should go and grab a nice mnemonic 700 number from ATT :-) shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in) ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 20:02:22 EST Subject: Firm Unveils 1st 'Personal Communicator' Firm Unveils 1st 'Personal Communicator' {Device Combines Fax, Phone and Computer} {Washington Post} November 4, 1992, Page F1 Photo: Man cradling a thin phone handset in on his left shoulder, coiled cord runs down to a device that looks like an Etch-a-Sketch with an antenna for a portable cellular phone. He is holding the device with his left hand, in his right is what looks like an ordinary 19c stick ball-point pen, but could be a stylus. Caption for photo: EO's communicator can send and receive text-based messages and documents. By Bart Ziegler Associated Press NEW YORK, Nov. 3 - A small California startup company backed by AT&T unveiled the first "personal communicator" Monday, a handheld device that combines the capabilities of a pager, phone, fax, computer and electronic organizer. Users of the device from EO Inc. can send and receive text-based messages and documents, send and receive faxes and organize information such as their appointments. With other software, the machine could provide functions normally performed on portable computers. The device, scheduled to be available in the second quarter of next year, will be priced from $1,999 to $3,299, depending on options. With a $799 attachment, users can send and recieve cellular phone calls as well as documents while on the road. Without this attachment, the machine must be hooked up to a standard phone line to communicate, though it cannot provide voice calls this way. While other companies have discussed their interest in making such devices, and Apple Computer Inc. has shown a prototype called Newton, EO is the first to announce firm plans and pricing. The EO device weighs from 2.2 pounds to 4 pounds, depending on the model, making them smaller and lighter than most portable computers sold today. The base model is about 11 inches long, 7 inches wide and less than one inch high, while the more expensive version is a bit bigger. EO machines do not have keyboards. Instead, users write on large screens with a special pen. The machines contain special software from another startup company, GO Corp. of Foster City, Calif., that can "recognize" neatly printed handwriting and perform commands. For example, users can tap on a certain part of the screen with the pen and call up a phone list. The machine also can store handwritten notes or letters, and can even turn the handwriting into typed text for storage. These notes or letters later could be sent as a fax to a computer user or to a conventional fax machine. Through the cellular connection, users can send and receive electronic mail messages and documents while on the road. The E-Mail capability is provided through AT&T's Easylink service. To exchange information, the device also can be attached to a standard International Business Machines Corp.-compatible personal computer. The EO device contains a microphone and speaker, so that users can attach voice memos to computerized documents. The EO machine uses a special microprocessor developed by AT&T. This computer chip, which acts as EO's "brain," doesn't use as much power as the microprocessors found in desktop PCs. The EO can run for as long as four hours before its batteries must be recharged. ------------------------------ From: jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) Subject: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:12:16 -0500 (EST) From the "What can we do to squeeze some more revenue from the peasants?" department: In the monthly Michigan Bell billing insert, there is a large article that gushes about how Michigan Bell will allow you to pick a "personalized" telephone number. The cost is only $38!! They conclude by stating that your customer service rep will be more than willing to help you. The article is written to imply that this is some great new feature, cleverly failing to mention that Michigan Bell had been offering this new "service" for free up until Oct 5th of this year. Also in the same newletter is an article about the "Scan Phone" that someone had mentioned in a previous Digest. In the Detroit area, you can rent a phone with a built-in credit card reader and barcode reader. Michigan Bell provides a large book of barcodes associated with Kroger groceries, a bill paying service and 15 other vendors of various products. For $11.95 per month, you can use the phone to "shop" from the catalog or pay bills. Outside 313, you have to pay the long distance charges. The phone doubles as a caller ID display. Another example of a supposedly local phone company getting involved in something they know very little about, instead of concentrating on provided higher capacity, lower cost local service. Ken Jongsma Smiths Industries jongsma@esseye.si.com Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115.1041@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Subject: NET Using Junk Calls to Sell Answering Service Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 09:22:22 -0500 From: clements@BBN.COM Here's a slightly amusing junk call story. I have repeatedly sent in the cards to New England Tel that put you on the list of people who do not want automated junk calls. Of course, they don't care about that, or the fact that lines are unlisted. I got a (non-automated) junk call from New England Tel the other evening, on an unlisted number. When I heard that they were trying to sell their new phone answering service, I decided to actually tell them what I thought of it. Rough transcript: : Have you heard about our wonderful new phone answering service? : Yes. Would you answer a couple questions about it? : Sure. : How do I use it to screen out junk calls? : You mean like this one? [Yes, she said that.] I don't know. : Where's the blinking light so I can see if there are any calls when I walk in. : There isn't one. : Sounds pretty useless. Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com ------------------------------ From: iqbal@omaha.eel.ufl.edu (M.Iqbal) Subject: PAM: Pulse Amplitude Modulation Questions Organization: University of Florida Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 22:30:35 GMT Hi, I have been thinking on the pulse amplitude modulation lately a lot. I made up following two diagrams that I have not seen in any communication book. I appreciate if somebody can comment on it. 1) The following is natural sampling PAM diagram that I made with a LPF and an impulse train. What I have seen in almost every communication book is a pulse train at the mixer. However, I modeled pulse train with an impulse train and a LPF. The LPF acts as a short-time integrator. I think that in doing so one can understand flat-topped PAM better which is shown in the figure of #2. Switch Analog(message) ----------(X)-----------> PAM with natural sampling Signal input | |---------- | | | > | < <--- resistor ------- < | LPF | | ------- | | --- | GND Impluse train--------| The time constant of the LPF is small enough so that LPF capacitor discharges before next impulse arrives. During the time capacitor is charged, the output follows input as the switch in on. 2) All I did here is moved the LPF in the output branch from the input branch. Since LPF transfer function is similar to an integrator, any product of the impulse and the analog-message siganal will be held. Thus we will have sample and hold circuitry in the output branch. ------- Analog(message) ----------(X)------| LPF |----> Flat-topped PAM Signal input | ------- | | | | Impluse train--------| Any comment will be appreciated. I have skipped math as it is very hard to put in ASCII the summation signs and other symbols. Please email your reply. Thanks, iqbal@sioux.eel.ufl.edu University of Florida ------------------------------ From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1992 02:04:51 GMT In a discussion today, the idea came up of using a single DS1 or T1 line to handle incoming calls to a BBS type system instead of 24 individual phone lines and 24 modems driving 24 serial ports. It seems that we should be able to have a single DS1 line driving a single interface board in the computer that would sort out all the data (figure out which user is on which line and is in which time slot, etc.). This would compare favorably to all that extra hardware. To the outside world, though, it would look just like 24 dial in modems, except, perhaps, people whoe have ISDN or switched 56 lines could dial in at that rate instead of some rate limited by a modem. Anyone doing this? Harold ------------------------------ From: murad@mars.dgrc.doc.ca (Murad Mirza) Subject: Sync. Serial I/O Driver-z8530/vxworks Reply-To: murad@mars.dgrc.doc.ca Organization: Communication Research Centre Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:47:05 GMT Hi, We are looking for source code, or pointers to help us implement a byte synchronous serial I/O driver for the z8530 on vxworks. BUT ... we will more than happy to receive ANY code for Unix driver that does byte synchronous I/O on ANY USART that we could use as a template. I am asking for Unix sources, as vxworks seems/claims to be very Unix-ish. Please reply by email as I don't read all these groups on a regular basis. Thanks in advance. Murad Mirza Communication Research Center/DOC ------------------------------ From: root@yclept.chi.il.us (Root) Subject: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together Date: 6 Nov 92 03:10:59 GMT Organization: Leptons, Quarks and Bosons, Winfield, IL 60190-1412 A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco connections so that the machines could be used as copiers. Also, she wants to connect a fax modem equipped PC to a fax machine so that the fax machine could be used both as a scanner and as a printer. She would like a small and inexpensive piece of euipment with two modular telephone jacks with just enough "smarts" to supply a dial tone and appropriate ringing signals. The smarts could be a person listening on a speaker and using buttons to generate the signals at the proper time. Can some one tell me where such equipment can be obtained from and give me company names, addresses and telephone numbers. Estimates of price would also be useful. I used to be a frequent reader of this news group and needed to drop it because of the volume of messages. I will monitor the group for a few messages in case the answer is posted here. E-mail answers would be prefered. Randolph J. Herber, (Trademarks belong to their respective owners.) @ home: {att|eponym|mcdchg|obdient|uunet!tellab5|wheaton}!yclept!rjh rjh@yclept.chi.il.us ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #825 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29199; 6 Nov 92 4:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15746 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:42:42 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03705 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:42:28 -0600 Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:42:28 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211060642.AA03705@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #824 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Nov 92 00:42:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 824 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T and McCaw: Press Release via AT&T TODAY (Ed Hopper) Cellular Advice Sought (Jerry Leichter) Cellular Phones Free? (Joseph Bergstein) Cellular Scam (Randy Gellens) Define the A and B Carriers (Randy Gellens) Telephones in Hull (was Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering) (Nigel Allen) UK: Hull, Local Charges (John Walsh) AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates (Paul Robinson) The MCI 100 Day Report #1 (Paul Robinson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ehopper@attmail.com Date: 5 Nov 92 21:36:20 GMT Subject: AT&T and McCaw: Press Release via AT&T TODAY (11-4-92) Wednesday, November 4, 1992 -- 4:00 p.m. EST AT&T NEGOTIATING STRATEGIC ALLIANCE WITH MCCAW TO EXPAND WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS IN NORTH AMERICA AT&T and McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc., today announced they are negotiating a strategic alliance that will involve broad marketing and technological cooperation in wireless communications. Under the proposed agreement, AT&T will make a $2 billion investment in new McCaw shares for 19% ownership of the cellular services company. AT&T also will purchase British Telecom's shares in McCaw and purchase an option from McCaw that would eventually allow AT&T to acquire voting control of the company. The entire investment is valued at about $3.8 billion. "I am excited about the prospect of this alliance," said AT&T Chairman Bob Allen. "It would stimulate more growth in our long- distance business and propel us into the fastest-growing segment of our industry. We respect the value of an entrepreneurial company like McCaw and its importance in pioneering new ideas and bringing them to fruition. We intend to take full advantage of that entrepreneurial spirit as we work with them to speed the day when people can communicate anytime from anywhere. "We are committed," Allen said, "to working with the whole industry to accelerate growth, add new services and serve customers even better." Wireless communications is the fastest-growing segment of the telecommunications industry, expanding at a rate of 30% to 40% a year. It includes cellular telephones, paging and mobile data services. AT&T has always maintained leadership positions in wireless communications, starting with its pioneering of mobile radio research in the '20s and '30s. Today, AT&T Network Systems is the largest domestic provider of wireless network equipment; AT&T Consumer Products is establishing a growing presence in cellular telephones and wireless products for consumers; NCR, an AT&T subsidiary, is a competitive force in wireless LANs and other data products; and AT&T EasyLink's global messaging services can be delivered via wireless. In the agreement being negotiated, AT&T would grant McCaw a long-term license to use the AT&T brand name in marketing wireless services in North America. McCaw would also gain access to AT&T's marketing, sales, customer service and distribution channels, as well as the research and development capabilities of AT&T Bell Laboratories. "American companies are frequently criticized for being too short-term focused and concerned only with the next quarterly earnings report," said Vic Pelson, president of AT&T's Communications Services Group. "This alliance with McCaw reflects a commitment to the long-term health of AT&T. We strongly believe that it's necessary for AT&T to have a major position in wireless markets and technologies in the future if we are to remain the world's leading communications company." McCaw Cellular is the largest cellular service provider in the U.S. and is developing and marketing a range of wireless communications services, including a cellular network that spans the continent and is capable of transmitting voice and data communications. McCaw Cellular owns a 52% interest in LIN BROADCASTING Co., which is engaged in cellular telephone operations, television broadcasting and specialty publishing. It also has a 32% stake in American Mobile Satellite Corporation, which is developing a satellite-based communications network to provide personal communications services to remote areas of North America now out of reach of terrestrial communications systems, and a 51% stake in Claircom, Inc., a joint venture with Hughes Network System, which is licensed to provide telephone service to commercial and private aircraft. McCaw Cellular is the nation's fifth-largest paging service provider. The alliance with McCaw will help speed the development of the first seamless wireless communications network to operate nationwide. A conservative prediction is that 15% to 20% of Americans will use wireless services by the year 2000. The telecommunications provider who can serve their needs with complete satisfaction has much to gain. That's true not only on the consumer side, but in business, where competition in wireless is heating up. "Our potential alliance would provide McCaw Cellular with added resources to take advantage of the wealth of emerging business opportunities in wireless communications, enabling us to accomplish more for our employees, shareholders and customers," said McCaw Cellular's CEO Craig McCaw. "The alliance would bring U.S. businesses and an increasingly broad base of consumers a whole new level of products and services, increasing productivity across a range of industries and helping America compete in the global marketplace." As part of the alliance, AT&T would purchase 47 million newly issued shares of McCaw's common stock at $42 per share. British Telecom, which owns 35.8 million shares of McCaw's Class A and Class B stock, would sell its interest to AT&T for $49 per share. The sale is subject to approval by BT's Board of Directors. BT currently is represented on McCaw Cellular's Board of Directors and has other shareowner rights. AT&T's purchase of BT's shares would bring the average price per share paid by AT&T for new McCaw and existing BT shares to $45, giving AT&T about 33% ownership of McCaw Cellular. AT&T would receive the right to designate three members of McCaw's Board of Directors, with McCaw's management team staying in place and remaining independent. The proposed transaction also would enable AT&T to purchase an option from the controlling shareholders of McCaw Cellular to acquire voting control. AT&T would pay $100 million for the option, and an additional $600 million, if the option is exercised. This option would give AT&T a majority of seats on the board. "The importance of this alliance to AT&T lies in its contribution to our overall vision as a corporation," said Allen. "That vision is to be the world's best at bringing people together and giving them easy access to the information and services they want -- anytime, anywhere. And it certainly means being a leader in cellular services." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:09:29 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: Cellular Advice Sought My sister is a surgery resident in San Francisco (and with the kind of work she does -- heart surgery, trauma unit, etc. -- I sincerely hope none of you meet her on the job). These days, she's essentially on beeper call 24 hours a day, seven days a week -- the beeper is forever at her side, and at all hours of the night and day she has to be able to reach a phone quickly. So ... a cellular phone seems like the answer. Overall picture of usage: - A couple of outgoing calls a day, mainly fairly short, but some might be long. - Few if any incoming calls. (She'll keep the beeper -- the doctors have developed a simple code they pass in the beeper message to indicate just how urgent a particular call is.) - Excellent coverage all over the Bay Area a must. - She jogs, so wants something she can carry with her, the smaller and lighter the better. I'm seeking recommendations (and warnings) about the best choice of carrier, phones, and the best place to find a recommended phone at a decent price. (She's been wondering why the newspaper ads in the New York Times list phones at prices that are hundreds of dollars better than what's being offered in her area. I explained the California policy on service contract tie-ins.) Question: She can't be the only one who wants to keep her beeper along with her cellphone. Does anyone make a combined beeper/cellphone? Seems like an obvious product ... Jerry ------------------------------ From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 18:47:41 -0500 Subject: Cellular Phones Free? They're really giving them away! From an ad in a recent sports section of {The Washington Post} A Cellular Phone Free To The First 4,000 At Rosecroft Raceway (horse racing near Washington D.C.). "The first 4,000 people through Rosecroft's doors tonight get a certificate good for a free cellular telephone, redeemable at Lite Cellular Sales and Service. Requires one time $35 activation fee, and one year minimum service agreement. Installation extra. ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 06 NOV 92 01:58 Subject: Cellular Scam The {L.A. Times} reported that a "hacker" probably sold the serial and phone number combination for a freeway call box to a ring which used it to make 11,733 calls charged to the one phone. The calls totalled 25,875 minuted and cost about $1600. Officials from L.A. Cellular, which provides the airtime, and GTE Cellular, which maintains the phones, investigated. (The rate was so low because the county gets a special rate on airtime for call boxes.) The article has some interesting quotes. "That's not legally allowable, and it's not an easy thing to do," said Dana McClure, who analyzes phone calls for the county. "Most people don't know how to do it, but there are some." The article states that 'Everyone involved with the call box system is confident that the problem has been solved, but officials are mum as to how they have blocked potential cellular banditry.' "I don't think we can tell you what we did to fix it because we don't want it to happen again," a county sokesman said with a laugh. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com A Series System Software if mail bounces, forward to Unisys Mission Viejo, CA rgellens@mcimail.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 06 NOV 92 01:58 Subject: Define the A and B Carriers Each cellular area has two carriers, the A and the B carrier. Is the A carrier always the LEC? When people refer to the "landline carrier," is this the same as the LEC? Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com A Series System Software if mail bounces, forward to Unisys Mission Viejo, CA rgellens@mcimail.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself [Moderator's Note: The A carrier is the NON-landline carrier in the area; the B carrier is the landline or wireline carrier; it is the local telco, or usually some subsidiary of the same parent as the local telco, as is the case with Ameritech Mobile here. The A carrier is often known as 'Cellular One', which is a name used by a variety of carriers on the A side; the carriers buy the right to the name much like fast food places buy the right to use the name 'McDonalds'. The carriers jump sides continually. For example, Southwestern Bell is the B carrier (and local telco) in St. Louis. There they use the name 'Southwestern Bell Mobility' (I think) for their cellular service. In Chicago, which is outside their telco marketing area, the same company shows up on the A side as Cellular One of Chicago. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Telephones in Hull (was Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 4:39:20 EST In Volume 12, Issue 821, mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk (Richard Cox) writes: > In the UK all calls are metered by time, local or not: with the > exception of one city (Kingston upon Hull -- Hull for short) where > local calls are untimed. And our Moderator asks: > [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception? PAT] Different ownership is the answer. The telephone system in Kingston-upon-Hull is run by Kingston Communications, a company which is owned by the City of Kingston-upon-Hull. (The telephone service there used to be operated by the city directly, but I think the decision to run it as a separate company came in response to various controls imposed on municipal governments by the central British government.) In the rest of the U.K., the franchised local carrier is British Telecommunications PLC, which used to be known as British Telecom and now likes to be known simply as BT. Around the turn of the century, a number of British city governments ran their own telephone companies. Most of these were eventually purchased by the National Telephone Company or by the post office (which eventually acquired the National Telephone Company). Even before these acquisitions, the post office was involved in telecommunications through its telegraph network. I am not sure why Kingston-upon-Hull stayed in the phone business whle other cities sold their telephone departments. Hull has slightly different dialing than the rest of Britain. In Hull, you dial two-digit numbers beginning with 9 for the operator, or for the business office or for repair service ("faults reporting"). From a BT phone in the rest of Britain, you dial three-digit numbers beginning with 1 for the operator or for repair service. Hull has done some other innovative things that I can't think of right now. If your local library has British phone books (probably on microfiche), check the introductory section of the Hull directory for more information about the city and its telephone service. The most obvious difference between Hull and the rest of the United Kingdom is in the older-style phone booths. Recently-installed phone booths are metal and plastic, but in the days when the post office ran the phone suystem in the UK, the standard phone booth (or "call box") was made of cast iron and was painted red, to match the post office's street letter boxes ("pillar boxes"). But in Hull, because the phones there weren't run by the post office, the cast-iron phone booths were painted white. A proper discussion of British pay phones would deal with Button A and Button B, but I will leave that to someone else. In practice, an increasing number of British pay phones work with stored-value cards or credit cards rather than coins. Nigel Allen nigel.allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:09:24 EST From: lmcjnwh@noah.ericsson.se (John Walsh) Subject: UK: Hull, Local Charges Hi, I remember a couple of years ago while I was staying near Hull being told that BT (British Telecom) does not have a monopoly over ALL of the UK. Apparently the area around Hull has (since the advent of telephony) had it's own local telco, and the locals pride themselves on having a much better service than the rest of the country. Local calls incur a fixed charge as far as I remember... Sorry, no hard facts! John Walsh ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 17:35:21 EST Subject: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates I found the following advertisement, "buried" on page A9 on today's (November 4) {Washington Post}. I suspect what it means is that AT&T wants to eliminate holiday discounts. Has anyone else heard about the following? Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM Any opinions are mine alone and no one else is responsible for them. --- NOTICE TO AT&T LONG DISTANCE CUSTOMERS On November 2, 1992, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the Federal Communications Commission to reduce the number of Special Rate Occasions (occasions when special lower rates apply to Evening and Night/Weekend Dial Station calls) from ten (10) Evenings and nine (9) Night/Weekends to zero (0), and to reduce the number of Floating Holidays (those holidays over and above the regular ten (10) federal holidays) from four (4) to zero (0). These changes are scheduled to become effective on November 16, 1992, and will apply to both general and commercial long distance schedules. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 18:20:06 EST Subject: The MCI 100 Day Report #1 MCI is running an ad; it appears on page A-16 of the Nov. 4 {Washington Post}. It mentions the 800 number portability option, "For the first time you, not AT&T, will own your 800 number." (Funny how it neglects to mention that MCI {also} will no longer own the 800 numbers.) This advertisment has a marker on it, "The MCI 100 Day Report, #1", so I assume there will be 99 more ads, one every day I guess. It also seems to make a veiled reference to the Clinton Election (opportunity or disaster depending on your point of view) by saying "Meanwhile, whether you see today as riding out the bad times, or tuning up for the good times ..." It also mentions when 800 number portability takes effect: early 1993. [Moderator's Note: The same ad appeared in the Chicago papers on Thursday, November 5. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #824 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29359; 6 Nov 92 4:54 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22508 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:39:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31670 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:39:27 -0600 Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:39:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211060839.AA31670@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #826 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Nov 92 02:39:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 826 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Jack Adams) Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Bill Sohl) Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Terry Houser) Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Arthur Rubin) Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (J. Macassey) Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (John Levine) Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (Martin Baines) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (John Rice) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (John Higdon) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (David Cornutt) Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Brian G. Gordon) Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Kenneth Crudup) Re: Caller-ID Approved in Arizona (Alan Boritz) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:14:02 GMT In article , Alistair Grant <100032.525@ CompuServe.COM> writes: > I would like your help please. I am trying to make a automatic > phone dialer, I have the tones: > | 1209 1336 1477 > ---------------------------- > 697 | 1 2 3 > 770 | 4 5 6 > 852 | 7 8 9 > 941 | * 0 # > I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the > ^^^^^^^-Herein lies your problem. > Can you tell me what is going wrong? If you're serious about this, you need to check out ALL the requirements as published by ANSI, EIA, TIA, and Bellcore. I'd start with SR-TSV-002275, "BOC Notes on the LEC networks -1990." Also, the FCCs part 68 registration would be a nice idea ;^)! BTW, with Dual Tone Multi Frequency (DTMF),the tones are both present, they're not averaged! Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET (22501-sohl) Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:16:13 GMT In article Alistair Grant <100032.525@ CompuServe.COM> writes: > I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the > corresponding number but when I put it to the phone nothing happens. > Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of > a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second. If you can shed any light > on the subject that would be cool. The DTMF detection equipment looks for BOTH tones, not an average of the two. There are audio filters that detect the individual tones and I'd guess the "average" of the tones being created by your program does not actually consist of the individual tones themselves. The duration of your tone also seems a bit longer than necessary. If you ever listen to the outpulsing of any auto dial phone you'll here an entire ten digit number outpulsed in about two seconds. You could probaby shorten the 0.5 second tone length to about 0.2 or 0.15 seconds. Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's. Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!dancer!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:48:23 CST > I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the > corresponding number but when I put it to the phone nothing happens. > Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of > a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second. If you can shed any light > on the subject that would be cool. Sorry. It doesn't work like that. Sending a tone at Freq A and a tone at Freb B is NOT the same as sending a single tone at a frequency equal to the average of A and B. The only real way to prove that is to mathematically represent the signals, or to look at them on an oscilloscope, but the following example may illustrate the point. The 3 tone is 1477 and 697 Hz. The average would be 1072Hz. The * Tone is 1209 and 941 Hz. The average would be 1075 Hz. There is only a 3Hz difference between 1072 and 1075, which would make distinguishing the 0 and 3 almost impossible (allowing for tolerances). However, since sending two tones is not the same as sending the average of the two tones, there is no problem. If you want to reproduce the DTMF tones, you'll have to generate both tones and add the signals. Brett (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:58:34 PST From: Brad Houser/SC9-43/765-0494 Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones The touch tones use what is called DTMF which I think stands for Dual Tone Modulated Frequencies. The key word is Dual. Averaging two frequencies does just that, sends a single frequency tone half way in between. You need a way to send each of the two tones. Brad Houser bhouser@sc9.intel.com +1-408-765-0494 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 5 Nov 92 16:25:23 GMT Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) I assume you looked up the frequencies -- I haven't checked them ... but what do you mean by "average" of the tones. Both tones have to be broadcast simultaneously. The spacing SHOULD be adequate, but I think you might need to shorten the tone. My modem will send 10 tones/second and the phone system will handle it correctly, but I don't know the on/off ratio. Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer. My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything important. ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) Date: 6 Nov 92 04:49:11 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk writes: > In the UK all calls are metered by time, local or not: with the > exception of one city (Kingston upon Hull -- Hull for short) where > local calls are untimed. > [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception? PAT] Hull has and has allways had a private phone company. Subscribers in Hull never had the displeasure of being treated with contempt by the General Post Office and then being badgered by British Telecom. Hull subscribers usually get good service and good equipment. By the way, Hull had itemised billing before British Telecom offered it. Yes, free enterprise telcos do work and have survived in some corners of Europe. Of course, governments have recently "discovered" privatisation and customers in Europe are beginning to enjoy the kind of service that the U.S. had in the sixties. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@WA6FWI.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 5 Nov 92 12:43:29 EST (Thu) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception? PAT] Because for some historical reason it has its own phone company independent of British Telecom. Maybe some reader in the UK can explain the history of it. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: And in fact in an issue of the Digest earlier today we did have such a history lesson. PAT] ------------------------------ From: martin.baines@uk.Sun.COM (Martin Baines) Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) Date: 5 Nov 1992 15:50:25 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd Reply-To: martin.baines@uk.Sun.COM > [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception? PAT] Due to historic accident Hull has always had a separate Telephone Company from the rest of the UK: basically in the early days of telephony the original legistation allowed local councils to authorise/run local phone services as well as the Post Office. Hull was the only place that did this, that didn't hand the phone operations over to the Post Office. Hence Hull now has a different telephone company (Kingston Communications) from the rest of the UK providing local loop connection. They offer complete equal access to BT and Mercury for long distance and a choice of different local tarrifs, one of which is "free" local calling. There is still the option of metered local calls as well. Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager, Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK Phone: +44 223 420421 Fax: +44 223 420257 JANET: Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun Other UK: Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk Internet: Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com X.400: g=martin s=baines prmd=sunir admd=mci c=us ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 04:22:11 GMT In article , rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP writes: > I recently received a newsletter from Telos. Telos, as some may > know, is a prominent manufacturer of DSP hybrids for the broadcast > industry. Anyway, in the newsletter, Telos writes: > "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US > exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas. The > 'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these > difficult line conditions." > I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami. Is this correct? > Who tied them in Dallas? Actually, you have it backwards. GTE is the LEC in Dallas (but not Ft. Worth). Bell South is the LEC in Miami. Don't know about Miami, but I make fairly regular calls into the DFW area and haven't noticed any significant noise problems (voice or data). John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? Date: 6 Nov 92 00:44:42 PST (Fri) From: john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon) David Lesher writes: > BS is still under investigation for a multi-million fraud case re: > repair. Seems that if a problem exists longer than 24 hours, the PSC > must be notified in the yearly report, and the sub gets a refund. > Guess what. Virtually EVERY ticket got 'kicked' before 23.9 hours. This is exactly what GTE California has done to EVERY SINGLE trouble report that I have ever submitted. Spot checking with friends and associates reveals similar experience. You report trouble to repair and when there has been nothing done, you call back. You are told that the problem has been corrected. When you complain that it certainly has not, another ticket is opened. Using this sleazy trick, GTE manages to maintain better looking repair resolution records with the PUC. > At long last, a fired supervisor spilled the beans to the PSC and the > press. When I last talked to my contact in state goverment, they were > still turning over rocks on the case ... GTE employees are usually too busy toting the company line, blaming customers for all the company's deficiencies. Look how much flack I have taken on this forum from GTE-types for merely relating experiences and observations. Rather than fix the problems, it is easier to just attempt to discredit me. From the "GTE Definitions Handbook" by Yours Truly: Smart Park-- n. A place where GTE has actually installed enough facilities to provide real telephone service. No real service is generally provided, however. John Higdon (hiding out in the desert) ------------------------------ From: cornutt@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (David Cornutt) Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? Organization: NASA/MSFC Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:22:16 GMT rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP writes: > "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US > exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas. The > 'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these > difficult line conditions." I don't know about Dallas, but I lived in Ft. Lauderdale from 1983-88, and never had any major hassles with the phone service. (Power is another matter ... :-(. At the time I lived there, I believe that they had a mix of Xbar and 1AESS equipment. Trunkage seemed to be sufficient for day-to-day use; blockage was uncommon. > I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami. Is this correct? BellSouth (under the name Southern Bell) is the LEC in South FL. As far as I know, there is no GTE anywhere in Florida. David Cornutt, New Technology Inc., Huntsville, AL (205) 461-4517 (cornutt@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov; some insane route applies) "The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of my employer, not necessarily mine, and probably not necessary." [Moderator's Note: Oh my goodness yes, there is plenty of GTE in the stateof Florida. We've had many articles submitted here in the past about the company there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: briang@Sun.COM (Brian Gordon) Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey Date: 5 Nov 92 17:09:31 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca. In article henry@ads.com writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 820, Message 4 of 12 > rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) wrote: >> Last night I was actually on a plane that had Airfones and I needed >> to make a call. The stupid thing just sat there emiting DTMF tones >> and never gave me a dial tone. And why is there no RJ-11 jack on it? >> Where am I supposed to plug in my modem? I'm not impressed. > Is anyone happy with these things? I've never gotten one to work to > my satisfaction ... It must be the luck of the draw. I'm two for two with them. In both cases I just needed to call home and report that I was coming in on a different flight, so the calls were short and not particularly "quality demanding", but they were fine for their purpose. At their price, I certainly wouldn't contemplate a _long_ call. Brian G. Gordon briang@Sun.COM briang@netcom.COM B.GORDON2 on GENie 70243,3012 on CompuServe BGordon on AOL ------------------------------ From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup) Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey Organization: Open Software Foundation Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:09:54 GMT rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) wrote: > Last night I was actually on a plane that had Airfones and I needed > to make a call. The stupid thing just sat there emiting DTMF tones > and never gave me a dial tone. And why is there no RJ-11 jack on it? > Where am I supposed to plug in my modem? I'm not impressed. In article henry@ads.com writes: > Is anyone happy with these things? I've never gotten one to work to > my satisfaction ... You guys are joking, (esp. Rees), right? "No dial tone"? Didja read the instructions? You get no call completion 'till the phone knows whom to charge. (Cell phones don't have dial tone either). "No RJ11 jack (for modem)" - the bandwith ain't good enough to let you use one, from the specs I've read here. Besides, I used one to arrange a way from the airport a couple of months ago. You *don't* want to get chatty unless you are say, Bill Gates plotting the destruction of a competitor (or having someone else pay for it). 10 minutes = $2 setup charge + 10 * $2/min = $22 ... imagine reading mail for a half hour or so. I've got no connection with Airphone, just that I found the service workable, if expensive, and actally better than expected. Kenny Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142 +1 617 621 7306 kenny@osf.osf.org OSF has nothing to do with this post. ------------------------------ Date: 05 Nov 92 19:48:07 EST From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona 72446.461@CompuServe.COM (Alan Boritz) writes: >> His wife: >> "Oh, Harry, you're not, you are with Mrs ....." > [Moderator's Note: It is not his 'girlfriends Caller-ID equipped > phone', it is *his* phone at home equipped that way that ratted on > him. His only option would be to press *67, and I'm afraid that would > make the wife suspicious also. PAT] That option is not available here in North Jersey. However, I don't think it would make the wife suspicious if it were. She's probably used to his fooling around and already assumed he was lying. ;) Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com [Moderator's Note: I am reminded of how children forty years ago liked to listen to the VHF radio and spy on the mobile phones of that era. I think the service was called AMPS. There were only a few channels or frequencies in use, and a tiny bit of knob twisting on the old tube style VHF tunable recievers would hear them all. Making a call involved passing the number verbally to an operator; naughty children would write the number down 'for later reference'. Man driving on expressway calls his wife, "sorry honey, I'll be working late at the office". Then he immediatly makes another call and the children note that number as well. Man says, "Hi baby! I ditched the old Battle-Ax; I am on the road now and will be at your place in 20 minutes." Naughty children think about the wonderful fun to be had by causing some hate and discontent in the world: first, a check with name and address service on the destination phone number, then a call to the wife on the first phone number: "Lady, we heard your husband on the car phone; he isn't working late at the office, he is meeting his girl friend at xxxxx Street." (Silence ... ) The wife finally speaks up and says she will go there to confront her philandering husband at his new "office" ... Hysterical gales of laughter as the naughty children disconnect the call and fantasize about Battle-Ax confronting hubby and his mistress, contemplating if she will crack him on the head with a frying pan as he wonders how she found out about the mistress, let alone where to find them in their hideaway. Other times, the children would hear the number passed to the operator and hastily dial it themselves, causing the mobile AMPS operator and her customer to get busied out. 'With luck', a guy might never be able to get through to whoever he was calling; the line would be busy each time he tried. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #826 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14348; 8 Nov 92 23:51 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18537 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:35:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03902 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:35:03 -0600 Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:35:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211090335.AA03902@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #827 TELECOM Digest Sun, 8 Nov 92 21:35:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 827 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson ITU Goes Electronic Again (muszynsk@tne01.tele.nokia.fi) Some Questions on Public Data Networks (Sashidhar Kondared via L. Poulsen) Question Regarding Telephone Party Lines (John V. Jaskolski) Is the AT&T International Rate Schedule Online? (Carl Karcher) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: muszynsk@tne01.tele.nokia.fi Subject: ITU Goes Electronic Again Organization: Nokia Telecommunications. Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 15:19:57 GMT **** WELCOME TO THE TELEDOC AUTO-ANSWERING MAILBOX (TAM) **** TELEDOC is an electronic document distribution service of the International Telecommunication Union in Geneva, Switzerland. For help on TELEDOC Auto-Answering Mailbox (TAM) commands, send a message with the line HELP in the message body. NEWS FLASH: Summaries of CCITT Recommendations are being added to the ITU Document Store. Send the command LIST CCITT/REC to see the Recommendation Series groups now available. A new TAM help file is also available (send the command HELP). REPLY TO COMMAND => HELP TAM replied on October 29, 1992 at 11:19 AM local time in Geneva. TAM Help is attached in the next message body part. ********************* END COVER MESSAGE ********************* Start of body part 2 TELEDOC AUTO-ANSWERING MAILBOX (TAM) HELP LAST REVISION: October 8, 1992 ** INTRODUCTION ** TELEDOC is an electronic document distribution service of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). The ITU is a United Nations agency based in Geneva, Switzerland. It consists organizationally of five permanent organs: the General Secretariat, the International Frequency Registration Board (IFRB), the International Radio Consultative Committee (CCIR), the International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee (CCITT) and the Telecommunications Development Bureau (BDT). ITU documents are stored in a database called the ITU Document Store. The ITU Document Store organizes ITU documents into hierarchical groups. Each group can contain additional groups and/or documents. Remote access to the ITU Document Store is planned via: - electronic mail (auto-answering mailbox) - interactive VT interface (planned for early 93) - Internet FTP (planned for early 93) This document describes the electronic mail access, the Teledoc Auto-Answering Mailbox (TAM). ** TELEDOC AUTO-ANSWERING MAILBOX (TAM) ** The Teledoc Auto-Answering Mailbox (TAM) is an X.400 "robot" electronic mailbox at ITU headquarters. The electronic mail address of the TAM is: (X.400) S=teledoc; P=itu; A=arcom; C=ch or -- (Internet) teledoc@itu.arcom.ch Electronic mail sent to the TAM should only contain simple commands described below. When the TAM receives a message, it scans it for these commands which it interprets and processes. It then constructs and mails back a reply. For example, you can ask the TAM to send help (HELP), a list of groups and/or documents in the ITU Document Store (LIST) or an actual document (GET). Here is a sample message to the TAM: ----------------------------------------- To: S=teledoc;P=itu;A=arcom;C=ch (X.400) or teledoc@itu.arcom.ch (Internet) FROM: (NAME) SUBJECT: (IGNORED) HELP LIST LIST CCITT LIST CCITT/REC LIST CCIR LIST IFRB LIST BDT LIST TIES GET 1449 The above message to the TAM asks to: 1. Send a help file; 2. Send a list of groups and/or documents at the root level of the ITU Document Store; 3. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the CCITT Group (CCITT); 4. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the CCITT Recommendations group (CCITT/REC); 5. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the CCIR Group (CCIR); 6. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the IFRB Group (IFRB); 7. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the BDT Group (BDT); 8. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the Telecom Information Exchange Services Group (TIES); 9. Send the document that has the Unique Permanent Identifier (UPI) of 1449. ** GETTING STARTED ** 1. Find out how the electronic mail system you use in your organization or company can access the TAM via either the X.400 or Internet mail address listed above. Alternatively, you can access the TAM via various major email service providers (see below). 2. Send a test message (TEST or HELP) to the TAM. If you receive a reply then you have established that your message has reached the TAM and that it can also reach you. 3. Decide which group of documents in the ITU Document Store you are interested in. Send a mail message requesting a list (LIST) of groups and/or documents in that group. 4. After you receive a list of available documents and groups, send a mail message to list (LIST) other sub-groups or get (GET) the document you want. The TAM will send to you the list or document requested. ** TELEDOC AUTO-ANSWERING MAILBOX COMMANDS ** TAM commands consist of a command word followed, in some cases, by an argument. Commands and arguments can be specified in upper, lower or mixed case. Every line of your mail message to the TAM should contain a valid command. Only commands contained in the mail message are interpreted. All other lines and the mail subject field are ignored (you can use the subject field to document your request for your own needs). Up to 50 lines per message will be processed by the TAM. Each valid command currently generates a separate mail reply. START This optional command tells the TAM to begin processing commands after this line. If this command is present, any text in the mail message before this command is ignored. TEST This command is used to test that the TAM can receive mail from your electronic mail system and can also respond back to your mail system. The TAM will acknowledge your message and send a help file. Typically, if you have not received a reply within 48 hours, there is a connectivity problem between your electronic mail system and the TAM. HELP This command sends the latest help file listing and explaining the commands understood by the TAM. LIST This command returns a list of groups and/or documents in the specified group. The path to a group is defined by its location relative from the top of the ITU Document Store. For example: LIST LIST CCITT LIST CCITT/REC LIST CCITT/REC/F LIST CCIR LIST IFRB LIST BDT LIST TIES The first example of the LIST command above returns a list of groups and/or documents at the root level of the ITU Document Store. GET When the TAM sends a list of documents and/or groups, it provides a Unique Permanent Identifier (UPI) code for every document in each available format. The UPI is the code used to retrieve the document that you want. For example: GET 1449 GET 1453 You should only retrieve documents in formats that can be handled by your electronic mail system (see ENCODE below). ENCODE Most mail systems can handle ASCII documents attached to mail messages but may have difficulties with non-ASCII (i.e., "binary") formats such as word processing and graphics files. With the ENCODE command, you can request the TAM to encode non-ASCII files into the UUENCODE format which is ASCII. To decode the UUENCODED file back into its original binary format, you need a utility program called UUDECODE. This program is widely available in different computing environments. Enter this command in your mail message before any GET commands retrieving binary formats if your mail system can only support ASCII formats. For example: ENCODE GET 2314 GET 2315 Internet (SMTP) mail does not typically support binary attachments to mail messages. Therefore, if the TAM is replying to Internet mail, the ENCODE command is automatically applied. HUMAN Since the TAM is a "robot", it may not understand exactly what you are trying to say to it. If you type the command HUMAN followed by any message, the TAM will STOP processing commands and automatically forward your incoming mail message to a human operator at the ITU. For example: HUMAN I am having a problem locating a document concerning XXXX. Could you please tell me where it is available? Thank you, Bill END This optional command tells the TAM to ignore the rest of the mail message. This command is only required if your mail message contains text after your commands you want the TAM to ignore (e.g., your signature). ** IF YOU HAVE PROBLEMS ** There are problems sometimes with international mail connections just as there are problems sometimes with long distance telephone calls. The electronic mail circuits between the TAM and your mail system can fail or be temporarily unavailable. In this case, email can be delayed or not delivered. So, the first advice if you have a problem is to try again. The TAM will only reply to valid commands. If the argument to a LIST command or GET command cannot be interpreted then you should receive an error message explaining why. If the TAM cannot process any commands in your mail message, it will return a message saying so and send back the help file. If you have no problems retrieving ASCII documents but difficulties with non-ASCII formats, your mail system or the mail gateways to your system may not support binary messages. In this case, try using the ENCODE command. If you have problems that you can't resolve, you can use the HUMAN command and then enter your written description of the problem in the mail message. The TAM forwards messages containing the HUMAN command to an ITU help desk. If you wish to make a suggestion on how the service can be improved, please contact: Mr. Robert Shaw TELEDOC Project Coordinator Information Services Department International Telecommunication Union Place des Nations 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland TEL: +41 22 730 5338/5554 FAX: +41 22 730 5337 X.400: G=robert; S=shaw; A=arcom; P=itu; C=ch Internet: shaw@itu.arcom.ch ** ACCESS TO TAM FROM EMAIL SERVICE PROVIDERS ** If you do not have direct access to either X.400 or Internet mail, many major email service providers (e.g., MCI, Compuserve) provide gateway facilities and can access the TAM. ACCESS FROM MCI: MCI users can access the TAM through MCI's facilities for access to other mail systems (EMS). TAM can be accessed through either MCI's X.400 or Internet gateways. X.400 responses appear faster and more reliable. ACCESS FROM MCI MAIL VIA X.400: 1. At COMMAND, type CREATE 2. At TO, type TELEDOC followed by EMS in parentheses. For example, TO: TELEDOC (EMS) 3. At the prompt EMS: type ARCOM. For example, EMS: ARCOM 4. At MBX: type PR=ITU. For example, MBX: PR=ITU 5. At the next MBX: type return to end addressing 6. Complete as usual ACCESS FROM MCI MAIL VIA INTERNET: 1. At COMMAND, type CREATE 2. At TO, type TELEDOC followed by EMS in parentheses. For example, TO: TELEDOC (EMS) 3. At the prompt EMS: type INTERNET. For example, EMS: INTERNET 4. At MBX: type TELEDOC@ITU.ARCOM.CH. For example, MBX: TELEDOC@ITU.ARCOM.CH 5. At the next MBX: type return to end addressing 6. Complete as usual ACCESS FROM COMPUSERVE Compuserve mail users can access the TAM through Compuserve's Internet mail gateway facility. ACCESS FROM COMPUSERVE MAIL VIA INTERNET: 1. Choose COMPOSE a new message, edit the message with TAM commands, then choose SEND 2. At SEND TO (NAME OR USER ID), type INTERNET:TELEDOC@ITU.ARCOM.CH For example, Send to (Name or User ID): INTERNET:TELEDOC@ITU.ARCOM.CH 3. At SUBJECT, type any text (TAM ignores subject fields) 4. Complete as usual ** END HELP FILE ** ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:15:57 PST From: lars@CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Some Questions on Public Data Networks Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA [Moderator's Note: The original of this message was in issue 818 of TELECOM Digest on Monday, November 2. It then circulated in comp.dcom. telecom over the November 2-4 period. Apparently Sahsidhar is so busy cross posting to various newsgroups that he does not bother reading his articles later. PAT] In article <92307.085325KONDARED@PURCCVM.BITNET> (appearing in comp.dcom.isdn) Sashidhar Kondared (?) writes: > I have some questions on Public data networks for which comp.dcom.telecom > may be more approriate, but its moderator doesn't seem to think so. I think > someone on this group can easily clarify my doubts with out any reference to > secondary info sources. Any response would be greatly appreciated. I am surprised that PAT would discourage this; I am cc'ing TELECOM on this response, in the hope that he may reconsider. > * Value added networks of common carriers (like AT&T) never cross paths > with their voice networks. ie traffic on one never use the other network. > Am I right? I think you are wrong. SprintNet, ACCUNET and their cousins are using cicuits provisioned in the same way that customers' leased lines would be provisioned. This means that these circuits typically will be sharing multiplexed trunks with interoffice trunks from the voice network. I.e. a handful of 56 kbps data circuits may be multiplexed together to form a T1 circuit. (That same T1 may also be carrying some 56kbps lines from the SS7 network supporting the voice network.) Likewise, a number of voice trunks from your local toll access switch to the next toll switch down the road may be multiplexed together on a T1. These two T1's may be multiplexed together on a T3 fiber, along with some T1's that were sold that way. > * Public data networks (common carrier VANs, Tymnet, Telnet etc) are not > as extensive as plain old telephone networks. ie if someone in some > remote place in say oklahama wants a data connection , most probably he > will not get it. Is this right? Yes, and no. Plain old telephone service is available just about everywhere, because it is the government's policy that it should be. On the other hand, no carrier is required to offer data service unless they think they can make money on it. But some form of data service is available just about anywhere. Certainly, if you can get telephone service, you can dial up a modem connection. If you can get a leased voice-grade line (and I think you can get that almost anywhere, although you may have to pay for laying the wire, if there isn't a wire already) you can set up a leased dataline with modems. The value added carrier will typically offer you service at their point of presence, and if you can get your data there, you can use the service. Mostly, in metropolitan areas, I think they prefer to sell the service at your premise, and THEY lease the access line; this lets them earn a profit on the access line, and in principle cuts down on the fingerpointing. > * Internet, Bitnet 'et. al.' do not use any public data network - > they have their own infrastructure which is not shared with anyone. > Is this right? "There is no network called Internet". The Internet is a loose connection of networks that use the same protocol stack. Each of the "member" networks is separately provisioned. Most links are leased digital data service lines, from 56kbps all the way up ... NSFnet's backbone consists of 45Mbps (T3) links provisioned by MCI. Some links out near the edges are dial-up links using asynch V.32bis modems (see footnote). So these networks "have their own infrastructure" in the sense that they see some private lines, but the actual "wire" between cities is likely to be part of a phone company fiber. > * Common carrier offerings like Frame Relay, SMDS do not use their plain > old voice infrastructure. I'am wrong. Right? Frame relay networks are generally built in a similar fashion as the above mentioned X.25 networks. SMDS is intended to be a more streamlined pipe for data into the higher levels of the ISDN hierachy. SMDS uses phone numbers as data link addresses. Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer Internet E-mail: lars@CMC.COM CNC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l Telephone: +1-805-968-4262 Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083 TeleFAX: +1-805-968-8256 Footnote: My company just announced the NetHopper; a low-cost dial-up IP router, which will connect your local ethernet to the Internet by automatically dialing up a modem connection when there is traffic. [Moderator's Mote: You are correct Lars. I did use his message although it was around for a couple days in the queue with a few hundred other submissions waiting for attention. I wish people would take the time to *read* each issue -- or at least scan it -- before writing to me saying their article was not used. This gentleman has since posted a summary of responses received. I will run it in the next issue of the Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jasko@park.bu.edu (John V. Jaskolski) Subject: Question Regarding Telephone PARTY LINES Date: 8 Nov 92 15:39:55 GMT Reply-To: John_Jaskolski@park.bu.edu Organization: Boston University Dept. of Cognitive and Neural Systems I am interested in building or acquiring telephone bridges for party lines. This would be a device that allows multiple callers to call in and be "bridged" together so as to be able to all talk together at the same time. Ideally, the system would have several numbers with any number of lines able to be dynamically allocated to a given party line number. For example, five people might call in on line one (and be talking together), seven people might be talking on line two, etc. At another time 50 people might be on line one with the teleconferencing system dynamically allocating the lines to each number as needed. What I am looking for is ANY INFORMATION WHATSOEVER: chips that might be used, schematics, textbooks, vendors, whatever. These systems are also called Group Bridging Service (GBS) systems and if purchased comercially they are expensive. Information regarding vendors will also be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much, John V. Jaskolski, IMC Internet: jasko@cns.bu.edu International Marketing Corp. Bitnet: jasko%kenmore AT BUACCA IMC of America UUCP: {harvard,uunet}!bu.edu!bucasb!jasko ------------------------------ From: karcher@jevex.waisman.wisc.edu Subject: Is the AT&T International Rate Schedule Online? Organization: Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison Date: 8 NOV 92 10:58:36 CDT Does anyone know if the current AT&T international rate schedule is available online somewhere? I have it in hardcopy format but it doesn't scan very well. Please reply via email as I don't read this group regularly. Thanks. Carl Karcher Internet: KARCHER@WAISMAN.WISC.EDU Waisman Center Bitnet: KARCHER@WISCMACC University of Wisconsin-Madison PSTnet: (608) 263-5896 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #827 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16014; 9 Nov 92 0:51 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24950 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:50:33 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00429 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:50:15 -0600 Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:50:15 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211090450.AA00429@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #828 TELECOM Digest Sun, 8 Nov 92 22:50:20 CST Volume 12 : Issue 828 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Public Data Neworks: Replies 'Summary' (kondared@mace.cc.purdue.edu) Compuserve/MCI Email (Alfredo E. Cotroneo) Alcatel Kirk Delta Phone Help Needed (Jack Adams) NT Meridian Key System For Sale (acct069@carroll1.cc.edu) Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment (TELECOM Moderator) New 900 Number Scam - Credit Collection/Telecompute/West Penn (John Nagle) Odd Survey (Rob Knauerhase) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Organization: Purdue University Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 15:54:46 EST From: KONDARED@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU Subject: Public Data Neworks: Replies 'Summary' Here is the most comprehensive reply to my earlier posting regarding public data networks. I got several replies saying that the same infrastructure is used for several services (voice, Data and all the new services) and that is the key to new service offerings like Frame Relay, SMDS etc. Got two replies which specifically answered all the questions, but Lars' reply is most comprehensive, and covers all the points in the other replies. Sashi BITNET: kondared@purccvm INTERNET: kondared@mace.cc.purdue.edu [Moderator's Note: It turns out that all Sashi sent for a 'summary' was the one message from Lars Poulsen which I ran in the last issue of the Digest. (I had not read this 'summary' before announcing in the last issue I would run it in the next issue.) So I have truncated his message at this point rather than reprint the message from Lars all over again. Please, when sending articles to telecom, allow time for them to arrive and be used. In my haste to accomodate Sashi earlier this evening -- until going back through my own archives and finding the original message *was* used, I printed Lars' reply first. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 08 Nov 92 06:19:24 EST From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <100020.1013@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Compuserve/MCI Email Our Association has subscribed to CompuServe (CSI) in order (mainly) to have Internet access. Another use of the CSI account is to forward mail to US addresses. Mail is edited in Milano, Italy, and uploaded via modem to Compuserve via an Infonet node in Milano. CSI assures almost next day US mail delivery in the US at a very competitive cost (more or less the cost of an Airmail stamp from Italy, that's one or two days delivery versus ten or more days from Milano). Another use we make of the CSI account is to forward mail to MCI users. CSI does charge quite a lot for mail gated to MCI (ca. US$ 1, per message). Access to MCI from CSI's Internet gateway (INTERNET: user@mci.com) is blocked by CSI, so we have to use the CSI to MCI direct gateway at a higher price. Although expensive, sometime we also use CSI to MCI mail for urgent and important messages. At an extra cost and for any kind of destination, CSI also notify us of delivery/receipt of messages. This is an option that sometimes we also use. Recently we suspected that all mail previously sent to at least one MCI's address was not delivered by CSI, and we were NOT been advised (no message returned as undeliverable). Since we were indeed charged for all CSI to MCI mail delivery, we assumed that all of these messages were indeed delivered on time to MCI, but apparently they were not. About a month ago we filed a request to CSI customer Service, but no reply has been received so far, except a series of "we are sorry for the delay in answering you, we are investigating the matter" like messages. The content of some of these messages consisted of a "Notice of usage of HF frequencies" by our SW Station. These notifications usually try to avoid interferences between broadcasters when a seasonal HF frequency changes is due. A few weeks ago one station who was the receipient of one of such notifications started interfering heavily with our station. After a few notes of complain from us (sent via fax!), they stated that they have not received our notifications sent via CSI->MCI. If it really proves that messages were not delivered by CSI, what would be the responsability of CompuServe or MCI? Would it be possible to obtain any compensation for what the losss of this mail caused, and is still causing? Again, probably if the messages would have been carried thru Internet, there would be no guarantee they would be delivered/received (?), but since this is a direct CSI->MCI gateway (and service charged) I must assume that delivery must be guaranteed by both CSI and MCI. I know the US has a tradition in service and satisfaction -- something we are still missing overhere in Europe, I am afraid. But still it seems that we are at a standstill with CSI. Any help/hint/suggestion in this matter from the US readers will be greatly appreciated. Is there any federal body I should also contact at this regard? Do not forget that we are based in Milano, Italy, and are not a US company. Please email directly to: 100020.1013@CompuServe.com, and I will summarize if there is interest. Thank you. Alfredo E. Cotroneo President NEXUS-International Broadcasting Association PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy NEXUS-IBA is a non profit-Association chartered according to the Italian law and operates IRRS-Shortwave on Shortwave to Europe. [Moderator's Note: Actually, the fault may very well be with MCI Mail. They routinely dump huge amounts of mail from the Internet undelivered. The sender may or may not get notice of non-delivery, depending on the way things occured. Consider this Digest for example: I have several dozen subscribers who receive their copies via MCI Mail -- or at least they are supposed to. About once every two weeks, I get back notice that they did NOT deliver one or more issues. As often as not, I find out when several subscribers from MCI Mail write me at the same time and say one or more issues never arrived. Their complaint is that a single address in the envelope is bad; someone quit subscribing to MCI Mail but never told me to remove their name. The mail gets there, MCI sees one bad address and dumps it all. Maybe the Reston gateway sends it back to me, maybe not. I suspect MCI does not always give it back to Reston, otherwise I'd get a mailer daemon from there. MCI Mail has never seen any need apparently to follow Internet mail standards which provide for handling multiple addressees with one bad address in the midst of it. Naturally, I have to then remail the missing issues. It is quite a nuisance that MCI Mail seems unwilling to correct. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Alcatel Kirk Delta Phone Help Needed Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 15:34:05 GMT Hi, My cousin in Denmark sent me a very lovely Alcatel Kirk Delta telephone with repertory and a number of other features. Unfortunately, the explanation of some of the settings of the feature switches is in Danish and I'm too embaressed (not knowing Danish all that well) to call them and ask for an interpretation. Among the things I would like to know about the settings of the switches is: How do I set it for DTMF dialing? What ringer tone patterns are available? Etc. The glossy user guide is in Danish, but contains very meaningful information (i.e., it tells how to make and answer calls, use the repetory features, etc.) I would like some kind soul who might have an English version to mail me a copy or I could e-mail the relevant Danish phrases for translation. In case all this fails, I can always just fool around with the switches and hope for the best. Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: Ron Subject: NT Meridian Key System For Sale Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 12:04:11 CST I've got a Northern Telecom "meridian" Key Telephone System for sale. It's a box about 15" x 24" x 3.5". It's got a software cartridge that allows a capacity of 6x16 lines. 6 in, and 16 out. The warranty expired in Jan of 1991. As far as I know it's functional. This is just the Key System Unit. No stations or other software is available. The unit is also missing documentation. I'm unsure of the unit's worth, so I'll accept the best offer over what I paid for it that I receive via e-mail by Nov. 20th, and work out the details from there. Ron | Lightning Systems, INC. acct069@carroll1.cc.edu | (414) 363-4282 62megs | 14.4k HST/V.32bis ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment Date: November 8, 1992 (Sun) 18:25:00 CST Here is a place Ron could sell his old system, and you might have stuff for them also. I received this Fax message over the weekend: United Telephone - Northwest (A Sprint Company) CASH FOR USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER EQUIPMENT! ============================================== United Telephone (a Sprint Company) is interested in purchasing your USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER equipment. -- ALL models and manufacturers wanted! -- Parts or complete systems -- Large or Small! -- Offers quoted within three days! -- WE PAY SHIPPING! PHONE: 503-387-9195 FAX: 503-386-0185 QUESTIONS? PLEASE CALL OR FAX So anyone with old equipment they don't want might consider this as one way of getting rid of it -- and help Sprint upgrade their service at the same time, yuk, yuk! PAT ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: New 900 Number Scam - Credit Collection/Telecompute/West Penn Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:51:49 GMT I've uncovered what appears to be a new 900-number scam. I received a collection letter which reads as follows: "Credit Collection Center P.O. Box 610894 Miami, FL. 33261-0894 305-945-8441 Creditor: West Penn Audio Number: 900-420-4747 Amount: $5.00 ... "The amount(s) listed in the above statement are charges incurred as a result of your use of (900) telecommunications services offered by the above creditor(s). These services were originally billed to you by your local phone company on behalf of the creditor(s) and appeared on the (900) section of your phone bill. At your request, your local phone company removed the charge(s). The telephone company has referred these disputed charges back to the "900 Information Provider". Do not contact your local phone company since they can no longer be of assistance. The amounts listed above have been placed for immediate collection and we intend to collect" [This last in boldface.] "PROTECT YOUR CREDIT. PLEASE REMIT PAYMENT WITHIN 10 (number partially crossed out with crosshatching) DAYS RECEIPT OF NOTICE TO AVOID FURTHER ACTION". "If your telephone service has been activated with the last four months call this office." Credit Collection Center 1-305-945-8441 ------------------ This seemed a bit strange, for while I have some 900 charges, I've never asked the local telco (Pac Bell) to cancel any of them. So I called the "Credit Collection Center" and reached a "Mr. Grant", who refused to discuss any adjustment, refused to tell me who "West Penn Audio" was, told me that if I didn't pay, something would be placed on my credit report, and hung up. A second call reached a different person, who said she was unable to give me the date of the call or tell me who West Penn Audio was, but did tell me that the date of the supposed chargeback transaction was March 9, 1992. So I decided to check this out. Pac Bell's local billing office was quite cooperative, proiding me with copies of the bills for the period of interest (no sign of any call to the indicated 900 number) and a letter stating I had never requested such an adjustment. AT&T billing was similarly cooperative, providing copies of bills from their end, and the information that the 900 number was now defunct, but had been in use from 12/1/91 to 3/31/92 under the name "Info on Region A", by Telecompute Corp, 1275 K Street NW. STE ,G-9, Washington, DC 20005. Calling Telecompute (202-789-1111) reached a Mr. Paul Besic, who told me that Telecompute was a service provider for other 900 services; they didn't provide content, just the technical end. He said "they didn't use collection agencies" and didn't remember West Penn Audio, but said he would check and get back to me by the end of the day. He didn't. Following up the West Penn Audio thread led, via the Pensylvania Secretary of State's office, to West Penn Audio Inc, 747 South Avenue, Pittsburgh PA 15221. This is a Pittsburgh-area dating service. I reached a Mr. Richard Caldwell at 412-366-4848, who confirmed that they used Credit Collection Center of Miami FL and Telecompute Corp. of Washington DC. He identified the 900 number indicated as a "Numerology Hotline" (I vaguely remember calling something like this once, and I do have proper bills for 900 charges to some wierd numbers. But not for this one.) He was polite, and told me they no longer used Telecompute because of problems in the past. Caldwell said they send Credit Collection a tape, and Credit Collection does the rest. But he didn't seem clear on where the data comes from. I didn't ask for an adjustment; by now I was reasonably convinced I'd found a scam. Further checking produced the expected: Credit Collection Center of Miami FL isn't a member of the Better Business Bureau or the Chamber of Commerce, but they are at least a valid Florida corporation located at 13499 Biscayne Blvd, Suite #208, Miami FL 33181. West Penn Audio isn't a member of the Pittsburgh Better Business Bureau, but they are a valid Pensylvania corporation. Telecompute just seems to be in the middle. (Any relation to Telesphere, the bankrupt 900-service provider and Alternate Operator Service for high-priced payphones and motels? Don't know yet. Anyone have info?) I posted a previous message to TELECOM Digest, asking simply if anyone else had received a similar letter. Two people have thus far responded reporting similar letters, with one referencing the same phone number and dollar amount. Very suspicious. I wonder how many they sent out. Generating large numbers of phony bills for small amounts is an old scam, and this seems to be a new variation. What is going on, I suspect, is that this Credit Collection outfit is buying lists of people who at some time called some 900 numbers, and then sending them bills for small amounts for some arbitrary 900 number, figuring few people will check their bills. I'm filing a complaint with the Dade County (FL) office of consumer protection. (305-375-4222 or 305-375-4178). If you have received a similar letter, please BOTH call them and E-mail or post that information. These guys can probably be shut down with a little work. John Nagle [Moderator's Note: While it is possible the outfit in Miami might be very sleazy, I doubt there is anything sinister about this. There are collection agencies which handle unpaid charges to 900/976 services after they were returned uncollectible by telco. I suspect someone (maybe the middleman mentioned above) got some billing tapes mixed up somehow. Either he did not want to 'fess up when you called, or maybe the numerology consultants were the ones to bungle their work. I don't think the collection agency is involved in it; they just agreed to try and collect a bunch of five dollar charges for the numerology people. If enough people like yourself have raised stinks with the collection agency, by now the agency may well have packed up the whole load of accounts and sent them back to their client saying they were not interested in handling so many disputed claims, etc. I know the attornies I work with *used to* represent a certain nameless telco in the pager business. Telco's records were so bad, and the disputes by customers so plentiful we dumped them as a client. The Miami agency may have done the same with the numerology people by now. And yes, 900 services can bill you direct and place you in collection if they wish, although not many bother with it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Knauerhase Subject: Odd Survey Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:33:11 CST This afternoon, I got a call from an overly-friendly man named John something, who worked for Chilton Research. He asked if I'd take part in a survey of long-distance for the household. I asked what it was for, and he said "marketing research." He mispronounced my name, and if this phone was associated with me as listed in the phone book. I said yes. He then asked if I still had MCI as my primary LD carrier, to which I replied yes. At this point, I asked if his company was engaged by MCI, and he said no. He then interrupted (trying to get back on the script, I imagine) and said that they were checking to make sure people's long-distance carriers has not been changed without their knowledge; there is a number to call to make sure who is your LD company. I said "You mean 700-555-4141" (like a good telecom geek) and he said (in a surprised tone) "Yes. Can you call that toll-free number, double-check that it says MCI, then I will call you back and make sure?" I said that I was sure I had MCI as of my last bill, and that I highly doubted I'd been slammed since then (a week ago). He said "You'd be surprised -- we've found many people who were changed without perm- ission in the past couple days." So I agreed to call, and did, and got the MCI message. He called back, and I told him that yes, it was still MCI. He asked how long I had had MCI, and I said "around two years"; he then launched into a short "thank you" script and that was the end of the call. Afterwards, though, I began to wonder: - if Chilton isn't hired by MCI, why do they care that I haven't been slammed? Or did MCI commission the survey and instruct the people not to portray themselves as MCI employees? - was he perhaps going to try to sell me some other company if things had gone differently? - my name and number are listed in the phone book, but how did he know that I had MCI? I assume that IBT wouldn't release that info unless perhaps they commissioned the survey, and he said that MCI wasn't the originator. Has anyone heard of this company, or heard of this type of survey? I don't suspect anything fishy; however, the purposes of such a survey aren't clear to me and the man who called didn't seem to know anything beyond the prepared spiel he had. Rob Knauerhase University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign knauer@cs.uiuc.edu Dept. of Computer Science, Gigabit Study Group ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #828 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17534; 9 Nov 92 1:45 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22716 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:31:15 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26064 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:30:59 -0600 Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:30:59 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211090530.AA26064@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #829 TELECOM Digest Sun, 8 Nov 92 23:31:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 829 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Wanted: Advice on 56kbps Line/Products (William Petrisko) CallerID in Area Code 516 (Dave Niebuhr) Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Kamran Husain) Phone Harassment (a New Solution?) (Luigi Semenzato) ISDN From Intel PC Computers (Steve Davidson) Computer Dialed Calls (Ray Normandeau) BC Tel Pay Numbers (RISKS Digest via Leonard Erickson) Leased Line Modems (Jonathan Roy) OSC Goes Multilingual (Nigel Allen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Wanted: Advice on 56kbps Line/Products From: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu (William Petrisko) Date: 8 Nov 92 03:07:02 MST Reply-To: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson I was recently given the opportunity to supervise the move of a small alarm company with offices in two different cities. Currently, the computers on both ends are connected with a leased 9600 baud line and a set of async stat muxes. Since they have to order a new line because of the move, they felt this would be a good time to upgrade a lot of equipment. I need advice on setting up the new system. They will be ordering a 56kbps leased line for the new locations. Questions: What type of termination is at both ends of the 56kbps leased line? (Is it similar to the 2-pair 9600 data leased line?) The capability of running voice (off premise extensions, essentially) must be included in the equipment that is purchased. Two lines minimum, four to six lines would be great. It should be capable of emulating a standard phone line (ie: not additional equipment needed on the pbx side ... SLT extension in one end, phone in the other. Please let me know if I am hoping for too much here.) Suggestions on equipment to purchase/vendors to call? Cost? I have seen LAN bridges that will link an ethernet across a 56kbps channel, but none that will link arcnet. The OS they are using (QNX 2.15) can only use their own propriatary arcnet cards. Does a LAN bridge exist that can handle arcnet? Convert it to a more widely-used standard? If link via arcnet isn't possible (or too expensive), it will have to be done using serial lines. In case it isn't obvious, the same piece of equipment will need to handle both the voice and data. Apologies for the hastiness in preparing my questions. FYI, this project has a deadline for completion for Feb 1, 1993. Please send your suggestions/experiences via e-mail. I will summarize if necessary. Thanks. bill petrisko petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu aka n7lwo ..!uunet!4gen!warlok!gargle!omnisec!thumper!bill ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 07:51:35 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: CallerID in Area Code 516 NYTel subscribers in the 516 area code (Nassau and Suffolk Counties on Long Island) are now able to subscribe to CallerID effective Nov. 1. The actuation of this service will be effective on November 16, however. When I called NYTel on Monday (11/1), the sales rep didn't metion the blocking options (per-call or per-line) and I'm assuming that she and the others figured that a recent bill insert explained it all and therefore they didn't have to mention it at the time of the order (I wonder how many people read these things). The monthly cost is $6.50 (US) if no other PhoneSmart(tm) options are used. I have Call Return and that with CID will be $8.50 (US) per month with per call blocking (free) and Call Trace ($1.50 (US) per use). The signup fee after the first six months of availability will be $16.00 (US) if a subscription is done then. Two free switchings of blocking will be allowed and there is a fee after that although I can't recall what it costs. A few questions now come to mind that I hope the readers of the Digest who have CID can answer: 1. Is the monthly cost reasonable both for the CID alone and also with one option? 2. Which is really the better blocking - per-call or per-line? 3. My oldest daughter and her husband have a cell phone on the A side; will their number be displayed on the ID box? 4. I played with the call block feature (*67 for me) and tried to dial through the stutter tone which left me with a dead line (absolutely nothing but silence. Waiting until after the stutter had completed, I was able to complete the call. Is this normal? Could this have been because I was calling a known non-working number (my former second line which had to be given up due to a massive cut in pay)? Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: khx@se44.wg2.waii.com (Kamran Husain) Subject: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Date: 8 Nov 92 19:55:26 GMT Reply-To: khx@se44.wg2.waii.com This applies to comunications, so bear with me please. Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of operation has rendered most home security systems useless. (I don't have the exact number of houses hit so far, and the cops here are understandably close mouthed about it.) Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back. My house was hit day before yesterday but we stayed indoors and used a mobile phone (luckily!! inside the house!) to call the sheriff. No theft, but scared us witless when the both our regular POTS phones were dead. Also, we found on later examination that our cable TV coax was cut. (Why cable???) This brings me to the questions: a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter for those people who do not have mobile phones? b) Any recommendations on such devices out there? c) Why were cable connections cut? Do some monitoring stations use cable coax for communications back to the head node for purposes other than cable TV channel $$$ monitoring? d) How can I hide the phone connections at my house or make the snipping a less than trivial process? I would appreciate any advice. Thanks, Kamran Husain khx@se44.wg2.waii.com ------------------------------ From: luigi@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Luigi Semenzato) Subject: Phone Harassment (a New Solution?) Date: 8 Nov 1992 01:43:44 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley This must have come up so many times that I am almost ashamed to ask (but, as you see, I am doing it anyhow). My friend George has been receiving a very large number of harassing telephone calls. The caller never says anything, but if George speaks to him, he (let's assume it's a he) will not hang up -- so it is not likely to be some piece of machinery with a glitch. He gets several calls a day, in the evening, mostly at times that seem to coincide with TV commercials (on the hour and the 1/2 hour). The calls typically start at eight and stop around midnight, but sometimes they go on longer. He has called Pacific Bell, who has offered to change his number for free -- but that's a nuisance. He has also called the local police. They will handle the matter at one condition: George must log all calls (day and time) for a week. With this information, the police will contact PacBell and find the calling number. In the end, George does not get to know who is calling, but presumably the police will warn the offender. This area (Oakland, CA) does not offer call ID, but there is another service that comes in handy: selective call forwarding. It costs 3.50 a months, and the subscriber can request that certain numbers be forwarded to any number of the subscriber's choice. It also works this way: the subscriber may call the operator and say: `I'd like to forward all calls from the person who just called to xxx-xxxx', where xxx-xxxx is some disconnected number. The subscriber does not get to know who called -- that's confidential (even though in this circumstance he would have the full right to know) -- but nonetheless, the harasser is now virtually neutralized. To George, having the police warn this person, or cutting him off with the selective forwarding, is all the same; neither as satisfactory as knowing who the person is -- not for revenge, but out of a compelling curiosity, as he suspects it may be someone he knows. Can anybody suggest other options? Thanks, Luigi [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell will put a trap on a line to catch the person involved, but only on one condition: you must first give them a written okay to turn their evidence over to the police and agree to prosecute the offender ... no exceptions. IBT won't get in the middle of it; it could be a total stranger, some sick person or perhaps someone you know -- a relative or a 'friend'. IBT won't do a trap and play detective for you just to satisfy your curiosity. Niether is it possible to 'tell the operator to forward the last call you received to a non-working number ...' or other such shenanigans. You can have Call Screening here if desired, (*60 in many areas) and have the last call received added to the reject list whether or not you know the number of the caller. After such a call is received, you must immediatly dial *60 #01# to add the number. I have found Call Screening to be the most workable solution for me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevedav@netcom.com (Steve Davidson) Subject: ISDN From Intel PC Computers Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 02:09:16 GMT Is there a newsgroup for ISDN questions? Can anyone direct me to information regarding how I might get ISDN capability on an Intel PC? Steve Davidson Email: steved@cfcl.com Phone: 415-355-6535 [Moderator's Note: There is comp.dcom.isdn, although such commentaries are welcome here also in the general discusison. Perhaps a Digest reader will have an answer for you. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Computer Dialed Calls From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 8 Nov 92 21:21:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) This was really for a NYC BBS but others in other cities may like to see this. Updated November 4, 1992. They got me again this afternoon using the 540-4400 number. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ===================== Computer Dialers Got You By The Calls? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ by Raymond B. Normandeau Normandeau Newswire - No matter where you are from the Nassau border to the Hudson River you may have gotten a computer dialed call telling you that you may be eligible for a fabulous prize. If you have not gotten such a call yet, cheer-up, you probably will. The recorded message is played to you extremely fast. You may have won a life-time supply of amphetatmines so that you too may start a similar business. Have you gotten computer dialed calls from "Hopping Harry". Maybe calls mentioning Reno Nevada? Have these calls told you to call a 540-???? number? Do you think that maybe the recorded messages failed to tell you the price of the call? Did the recording mention "Five-Four-Oh" several times? If the recording said "The call is billed at Five-Four-Oh" they meant that you are billed $5.40. You WERE paying attention weren't you? Those are the bargain calls, the sky is the limit. Was an address speed spoke so fast that "slow you" missed it? If you have multiple phone lines and have been lucky enough to be the recipient of multiple calls you may like to go pick up your multiple prizes in person. You may have been told to call 540-4400, 540-0100, 540-9900 or another 540-nnnn number. Now ... back to that address. Sneaky us, taped one of those calls and played back the address. Would you like to visit the office where the calls came from? Are you Hopping Mad? Here is the address: Eagleton Group Inc. 717 East Jericho Turnpike #213 Huntington Station, NY 11746 If the recording tells you that you must call within "n" minutes and you want to get more information by phone without paying a hefty fee for the call, then dial 718-830-8781 which is a Queens tie line to the Huntington Station address. You will only be charged for a regular local call. So now you have it. You can pay them a visit! You may have to speak to them real slowly like. They don't hear as fast as they talk. However, no matter how slowly you tell them that you want no more calls from them, they won't stop calling you - ever. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 10:30:54 PDT From: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson) Subject: BC Tel Pay Numbers The following appeared in RISKS Digest 13.89. It appears to indicate that BC Tel is doing something *really* stupid. Anybody got any further info? ------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 11:07:31 PST From: rslade@sfu.ca Subject: Pay-per-call-back-verify Padgett Peterson was telling me about his recent success in getting a BBS set up with one of the new modems with a "Caller-ID" feature. I think this is going to be a feature that a lot of sysops are going to want. It happened that just last week I had a request to look into a security problem for a local sysop. He is concerned with security and misuse of his board, and so he has installed a call-back-verify system to check out callers. If he can't call back and get a confirmed phone number, they don't get an account. Many sysops use this to avoid having to "voice verify" each and every caller. Most call back verify systems have an option that will prevent the system from returning long distance calls. Obviously, this will also apply to "900" pay-per-call numbers. Padgett reminds me that recently there was a scam in New York wherein pager wearers were "paged" by "540" pay-per-minute calls. The problem in Vancouver is that BC Tel has recently started up pay-per-call numbers, but they do not yet have identifiable prefixes. Therefore, ankies have been calling various BBSes that have call-back-verify, and leaving these pay-per-call numbers. The sysop who talked to me had lost about $50 in the last month, and this has only just started. Vancouver Inst. for Research into User Security, Canada V7K 2G6 604-526-3676 Robert_Slade@sfu.ca ROBERTS@decus.ca rslade@cue.bc.ca p1@CyberStore.ca ------- uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson Internet: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org [Moderator's Note: Well, that's the price he is going to pay for not wanting to personally verify his users. I know a couple BBS sysops who take the trouble to at least call each user once. Having users who know that you know who they are helps keep boards in nice condition. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ninja@halcyon.com (Jonathan Roy) Subject: Leased Line Modems Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 04:26:02 GMT Where can I find info on CSU/DSU modems? We will need to purchase two in a few months to establish a 57.6Kbps link over a dedicated (leased) line. I've been unable to find info anywhere on Usenet ... Thanks for any information you care to pass on. If one of the dcom FAQs deals with this, please direct me there. Also, are there any magazines that deal with this sort of hardware? Thanks again. Jonathan Roy, Vice President, Free Access Foundation. GEnie: J.ROY18 Mail faf@halcyon.com for information, or FTP to halcyon.com: /pub/faf/ Internet: ninja@halcyon.com ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: OSC Goes Multilingual Organization: NDA U.S. Justice Department signs up with AT&T Language Line Services Here is a press release from the U.S. Department of Justice, which indicates that an office within the department is now using the services of AT&T Language Line Services. DOJ Office on Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices Becomes Multilingual Contact: Obern Rainey of the Department of Justice, 202-514-2007 WASHINGTON, Nov. 6 -- The U.S. Department of Justice announced today that the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) can now communicate with victims of discrimination in more than 140 languages. With the assistance of AT&T Language Line Services, OSC has gained access to languages as varied as Haitian Creole, Laotian or Slovak, for example. Because OSC handles cases involving discrimination based on national origin or citizenship status, many seeking OSC's assistance speak languages other than English. As a result, becoming multi-lingual will make OSC more accessible to the public. Special Counsel William Ho-Gonzalez praised the new development. "Removal of the language barrier is a significant development that will enhance OSC's enforcement efforts. We expect that many people who were deterred from contacting OSC because they did not speak English will now feel free to inform us when they have been subjected to discriminatory employment practices." OSC said that when a person who does not speak English calls, he or she will be transferred to an interpreter who will take information on the complaint. Interpreters are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. OSC was created by Congress in 1987 to enforce the anti- discrimination provision of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Since its inception, OSC has received over 2,500 charges. For additional information about IRCA's anti-discrimination provision write or call: Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices P.O. Box 65490 Washington, D.C. 20035-5490 1-800-255-7688 (toll free) (202) 653-8121 (metropolitan D.C. area) TDD 1-800-237-2515 (toll free) (202) 296-0168 (metropolitan D.C. area) Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #829 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18836; 9 Nov 92 2:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16994 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:20:07 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01317 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:19:49 -0600 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:19:49 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211090619.AA01317@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #830 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Nov 92 00:19:50 CST Volume 12 : Issue 830 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson News Summaries (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) Cordless Phone Newbie Questions (Elizabeth Schwartz) Questions About Personal 800 Numbers and Cheap Long Distance (D Bernholdt) What's a T1? (John C. Fowler) Listings Wanted of CLLIs by Area Code/Exchange (Cliff Sharp) Re: Cellular Advice Sought (Henry Mensch) Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (T. Govindaraj) Writers Wanted for Telecomm Magazine (Bill Rayl) California PUC Sets Limits on Reseller Wholesale Rate (RCR via L Donnelly) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1992 20:37:21 EST Subject: News Summaries Summary of Newsworthy Items of Note {Washington Post}, 11/6: Business Digest. Page B2. 1. Time Warner will be the third organization filing a suit over the cable re-regulation bill, citing a First Amendment violation in "special burdens on cable companies' ability to supply programming". 2. "The Justice Department said it would not defend a provision of the new cable television law that requires cable operators to reserve" one third of channel capacity for local broadcast stations. Page B1. 3. Article titled "New Player on the Cellular Circuit" discusses AT&T's buying McCaw Cellular, which is AT&T's first involvement in cellular in ten years. I think there is a snipe by the Post at Pat's home telco: "AT&T's entry into cellular service would make it a provider of a different kind of local service that is growing at a breathless clip -- though this isn't quite the same thing as resurrecting Illinois Bell or any of the other Bell Telephone companies." (I didn't know Illinois Bell was dead; if it isn't dead, why would it need to be resurrected?) Cellular wants to grab more radio spectrum and AT&T may help it do that, by giving a "vote of confidence" in the future of wireless. It could also knock down legal and regulatory barriers over what is a local and what is a long-distance company and who can offer what services. AT&T sells 42% of the 90 metropolitan area's cellular equipment anyway, making it a major supplier. In some cases, AT&T may actually be competing against companies it used to own. Having "AT&T" as a brand of Cellular Phone service may bring back thoughts of the old national "Bell System". Ronald Stowe, President of (Pacific Bell's holding company) Pacific Telesis, said "They are in a position of constructing their old monopoly with wireless instead of copper." AT&T is painstakingly making an effort to be sure that people are aware it is not going into local phone service. John Zeglin, AT&T's General Counsel points out that "Some people are mistakenly believing that mobile services substitute for the local exchange." An ex-FCC executive agreed that cellular is not a competitor to cheap basic phone service. Local Telcos can't do long distance, so if AT&T gets away with this, they want to be able to offer long distance too. They think they can compete with AT&T on long distance. (Like fun.) Some whining by the flack for Bell Atlantic. MCI may have to go into Cellular since Sprint is also buying Centel. MCI used to own some cellular properties. It sold them to McCaw in 1986. 4. "They're Wacky, They're Zany, They're an Ad?" is the title of an article describing Bell Atlantic's new ad which is being test marketed. This ad is a 30-minute infomercial, not using the standard talk show or demonstration, but using a situation comedy. You might be watching the show for ten minutes before you realize it's a commercial for Bell Atlantic Call Waiting. The commercial was filmed at CBS Television Studios in Los Angeles, and is titled "The Ringers." The main characters are "befuddled dad Ralph, his wife Rhonda, their wacky kids Ronnie and Rachel, and that lovable ol' rascal, Uncle Norman." The ad was written and produced by Sam Denoff ("That Girl" and "The Dick Van Dyke Show") and Marc Sheffler (the 1989 "Chicken Soup.") The show will air in Baltimore and some other places on five stations. WNUV-TV Channel 54, an independent, will run the show during prime time. Bell Atlantic plans to clearly mark the show as a paid announcement. Bell Atlantic won't say what it spent, but it is supposedly comparable to two-30 second commercials, which puts the cost in the six-figure range. If the commercial clicks, other markets it will run in include Washington, Philadelphia, Richmond, Norfolk and Charleston WV. They might make additional "episodes" if this succeeds. Page B3. 5. "Court Voids Syndication Rules In Major Victory for Networks" tells how a Chicago Federal Appeals court vacated the Financial Interest and Syndication rules which prevent networks from competing with studios on sales of reruns to other media. This also prevented networks from merging with studios. A separate action in Los Angeles is expected to vacate a related consent decree which had the same effect. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM This (excessively) opinionated (and probably inaccurate) summary is my (incompetent) fault alone; no one else (is stupid enough to be) responsible for it. ------------------------------ From: betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) Subject: Cordless Phone Newbie Questions Organization: University of Massachusetts at Boston Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1992 05:11:41 GMT I thought I was a rather techie person, but I just picked up my first cordless phone and am I confused! A few questions: 1) What's the range on these things? This is a Sony SPP-75, if it matters. 2) What's the "auto security code system" for? Does that keep my phone from ringing when someone else's does? From hearing someone else's call? 3) What's the relationship between the security codes and ten channels? 4) Is this thing supposed to be left in the base or can I bring it outside and wait for it to ring? Does it have to stand up in the base? 5) The manual mentions computers and interference. Will the phone interfere with the computer, or vice versa? If I get a second line, the phone could have the opportunity to interfere with the modem. 6) Finally is this a particularly good or bad phone? As you can probably tell, I bought this on a whim during a big sale and didn't get to talk to the salespeople. There's a 30-day return, though. Thanks very much for any advice! Probably best to answer by email and I'll summarize if there's interest ... I suppose the experienced techs on this channel don't want to read about Sony buttons. Thanks, Betsy System Administrator Internet: betsys@cs.umb.edu MACS Dept, UMass/Boston BITNET:ESCHWARTZ%UMBSKY.DNET@NS.UMB.EDU 100 Morrissy Blvd Boston, MA 02125-3393 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 13:23:23 EST From: bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Subject: Questions About Personal 800 Numbers and Cheap Long Distance It looks increasingly like my wife and I will be taking jobs at different ends of the continent for a while (the well known two-body problem in science these days). Consequently, I'd like to ask a few questions about LD telephone service, which we'll be using a lot of ... Is there any type of LD service that is likely to be cheaper than AT&T Reach Out America or the equivalent from other carriers? I know I can compare among the different carrier's ROA-like plans, but I want to know if there might be something better which I hadn't heard of. One or both of us were to get 800 numbers, is this likely to be cheaper than somthing like ROA, or is it just a way of changing who pays for the call? Also for 800 numbers, does the cost vary with time of day, as it does for standard LD service? If so, is the time of the call determined in the originator's time zone or the recipient's? (If I live in WA and she lives in NY and she calls my 800 number at midnight (9pm my time) would it be "night" or "evening" rate?) Finally, who offers good personal-800 service? Washington (state) and New York (state) are likely to be the two endpoints, if that matters. If you reply by email, I will summarize for the group. Thanks in advance. David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 12:22:14 -0700 From: John C. Fowler Subject: What's a T1? I've seen the abbreviation 'T1' or 'T-1' here in the Digest many times over the past few years, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone define exactly what a T1 was. From context, I have guessed that it is a direct link to the local telephone company for high-speed data purposes, or a direct link to a long distance company for the purpose of bypassing the local telephone company. But I'm not certain either of those definitions is correct or tells the whole story. So, could someone please summarize what a T1 is and why anybody would want one? Thanks. John C. Fowler, fowlerc@boulder.colorado.edu (or 3513813@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ Subject: Listing Wanted of CLLIs by Area Code/Exchange Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 15:45:05 CST From: Cliff Sharp I'm looking for an _accurate_listing of CLLIs by areacode/exchange, and the only intelligent sounding being I've reached at the phone company says they're proprietary and she can't send them out. The end output of this will be a program (carefully researched) which will allow the user to add "SET EXCH=Ill Dearborn" to his environment and then let him/her get an accurate listing of how much it costs to call 708-928 or whatever. Cliff Sharp | clifto@indep1.chi.il.us OR clifto@indep1.uucp WA9PDM | Use whichever one works ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 14:01:24 -0800 Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought Reply-To: henry@ads.com Jerry Leichter wrote: > My sister is a surgery resident in San Francisco (and with the kind of > work she does -- heart surgery, trauma unit, etc. -- I sincerely hope > none of you meet her on the job). These days, she's essentially on > beeper call 24 hours a day, seven days a week -- the beeper is forever > at her side, and at all hours of the night and day she has to be able > to reach a phone quickly. So ... a cellular phone seems like the > answer. It seems appropriate to remind that cellphones aren't particularly private or secure ... which is probably an issue when discussing patients and their particulars. # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / # for information on the league for programming freedom, # write to lpf@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ From: tg@chmsr.gatech.edu (T. Govindaraj) Subject: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number Date: 8 Nov 92 20:39:05 GMT Reply-To: tg@chmsr.gatech.edu (T. Govindaraj) Organization: Center for Human-Machine Systems Research - Georgia Tech Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since my wife and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for occasional calls. In fact, I got it so she can use it to call for help if her car breaks down or if she needs directions for some place. Is anybody using this option? Only one telephone can be used at the same time. I understand that if a call is in progress and the second phone attempts to make a call, the first call will continue as usual and the other second won't be able to make a connection. (This is OK with me.) As for receiving calls, apparently it depends (I don't quite know on what!). The agent from whom we bought our original phone (and established the connection) said that she would sell me a phone for approximately $200 more than the price she would charge if I establish a new connection. Any ideas where I could buy a phone at a better price? The C2+ installer suggested a place called Recellular with an 800 number. He suggested the Motorola Flip Phone, Classic, or Ultra Classic. (We now have a Panasonic EB3500. A lighter, but not too expensive will be nice.) Any comments, ideas, suggestions concerning the two-phone-one-number option, places to buy a phone, etc. will be appreciated. Thank you. T. Govindaraj +1 404 894 3873 tg@chmsr.gatech.edu,NeXTmail welcome. Member, League for Programming Freedom (write lpf@uunet.uu.net) School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology 765 Ferst Drive, ISyE-0205, Atlanta, GA 30332-0205. [Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared this with the cellular company? Most do NOT allow two or more phones to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about. An analogy would be two landline customers sharing the same wire pair and expecting telco to figure out who to bill for which calls. Most cellular systems will only validate one ESN per line. Even using it the way you describe it, you could never call *each other* on the other's cell phone. Why not just get two numbers; that is what everyone else does. There are inexpensive calling packages for casual users like your wife and yourself, and there can be a single master bill generated each month covering both lines. PAT] ------------------------------ From: brayl@nyx.cs.du.edu (Bill Rayl) Subject: Writers Wanted For Telecomm Magazine Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 01:21:12 GMT Have you ever read a computer columnist's article and thought you could do as good or better a job of writing? Well, here's your chance! Pegasus Press of Ann Arbor, MI is looking for columnists and reviewers for CONNECT magazine. Covering the major commercial online services, Internet/Usenet and smaller Bulletin Board System networks, CONNECT focuses on telecommunications from a user-oriented perspective. User-oriented means that people who know how to get a modem connected to their personal computer should be able to understand and follow every article in the magazine. CONNECT will show them month after month how to get the most from the pay services they're using. These include CompuServe, Delphi, America Online, Prodigy and GEnie. CONNECT may also introduce them to "free" networks like FidoNet. CONNECT will also review new telecommunications products, and deal with complicated subjects in a clear, easy-to-undersand manner. If you like getting into the guts of products, and can talk about them in a manner that doesn't put all your non-tech friends to sleep, then this could be for you! So, if you've ever wanted to see your name in print, please request a Writer's Guide for CONNECT magazine by emailing Patricia Snyder-Rayl at 70007,4640 on CIS, or UNICORNPUB on GEnie and Delphi, and at brayl@nyx.du.edu on Internet. Or, via US mail, contact Pegasus Press at 3487 Braeburn Circle, Ann Arbor, MI 48108 or call (313) 973-8825 (voice) or (313) 973-9137 (24hr BBS). ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 08:29:08 CST From: Leroy.Donnelly@ivgate.omahug.org (Leroy Donnelly) Subject: California PUC Sets Limit on Reseller Wholesale Rate Reply-To: leroy.donnelly%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha From the November 9, 1992 issue of RCR (Radio Communications Report) by Bill Maguire VIEWPOINT The California Public Utilities commission is going to drive cellular carriers in the state batty. The CPUC, in an effort to foster competition, recently voted unanimously to set limits on wholesale rates charged to resellers, and to let the resellers construct and operate their own switches. Needless to say, the carriers aren't pleased. Pacific Telesis Group, McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., US West Inc. and GTE Corp. reportedly have all filed petitions to overturn the CPUC's decision. However, the petitions likely will only temporarily delay the decision from taking effect. It would be difficult to accuse the California commission of being too hasty in making its decision: It came after four years of study, and numerous hours of hearings and filings. It seems the CPUC has been bent on maximizing competition among the state's cellular providers; it's unlikely to change its collective mind. The resellers say the decision is a major victory for them and consumers, and it would appear they're right. They claim basic charges for cellular service will drop drastically -- as much as $18 a month and 12 cents a minute. Not bad. I may have finally found a reason to move to California. Current charges levied by the carriers are running about $45 a month and 45 cents a minute during peak times. The trick, if you will, is in the switch. If the decision takes effect, resellers in California will be able to construct their own cellular switches and connect directly into the local and long-distance telephone network. By doing so, they become mini- carriers within themselves, able to buy large blocks of phone numbers at substantially lower costs. David Nelson, president of the California Resellers Association and vice president of Cellular Sales Inc., a reseller based in Glendale, Calif., said he could buy a block of 10,000 numbers for about $1.10 each if CPUC's decision is upheld, instead of the $32 he currently spends to buy numbers piecemeal. Nelson noted that additional costs will include leasing phone lines, but nevertheless, the customer will benefit. Cellular carriers say not so. They believe the commission's decision ultimately will hurt the customer because carriers won't have incentive to invest in improved technologies. "If the decision stands, California telecommunications infrastructure will fall behind those of other states and a more flexible regulatory approach," said Mark Hamilton, executive vice president of external affairs at McCaw Cellular. McCaw feels the rate-of-return approach adopted in the decision discourages capital investment by carriers and is unworkable in an environment where competing cellar carriers have different costs structures. Nevertheless, cellular carriers throughout the rest of the country should take heed of what's going on at the California PUC. In typical trendsetting California fashion, the outcome of the CPUC decision will have a far-reaching impact on the rest of the country. Other state commissions looking to regulate rates and stimulate competition will be watching closely, if not already taking notes. Commissions at both the state and federal levels are aggressively looking for ways to encourage competition. In this case, what's good for consumers in California may be good for consumers elsewhere. Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1 DRBBS (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #830 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20651; 9 Nov 92 3:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27821 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:24:22 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31578 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:24:04 -0600 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:24:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211090724.AA31578@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #831 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Nov 92 01:24:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 831 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: ISDN and Stuff (Bob Blackshaw) Re: ISDN and Stuff (Barton F. Bruce) Re: ISDN and Stuff (James Hanlon) Re: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates (Mark Schuldenfrei) Re: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates (Andy Finkenstadt) Re: Telco Handling of Cable Cut (Jack Adams) Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) Re: Telephone Phreaks (Todd Lawrence) Re: Telephone Phreaks (John Gilbert) Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers (Kenneth Crudup) Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers (Max J. Rochlin) Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers (Mike Morris) Re: Splits This Month (Troy Frericks) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff Organization: Corporation for Open Systems Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 14:29:49 GMT In mmt@redbrick.com (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS) writes: > In article , root@sanger.chem.nd.edu > (Doctor Math) writes: >> Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology >> approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up >> line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly >> charge, why would I want ISDN? > Modem technology will never get near the speed of an ISDN B channel. > I think that the theortical limit for a modem over a POTS line is > somewhere in the 25-30Kbps range (someone please remind me how fast a > Shannon modem is). This isn't even half of what an ISDN B channel is. Also, although none of the terminal adaptor manufacturers seem to have thought about it yet, there is no reason why they could not implement V.42bis in an ISDN TA. This would nearly double the 64 kbit/s rate. In the trials at U of WV, from reports that I have heard, users at home accessing the LAN over a single B-channel are quite happy with the speed. Bob ------------------------------ From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. Date: 8 Nov 92 22:31:50 EDT Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , root@sanger.chem.nd.edu (Doctor Math) writes: > Since ISDN service IS measured, try to use it as little as possible. Is it measured for voice as well as data calls? Not that the phone company should be allowed to care, but they do try to rip you off for data. If voice is free, many products will still let you send data in voice mode but only using 56kb rather than 64kb. Check out the Digiboard mac layer ethernet bridges. One at the central site can support two (or when they activate that second BRI port four) remote similar bridges. > Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology The simple answer is that the telcos want dollars and YOU probably didn't show up and testify at utility commission hearings when telco was slipping through their latest tricks. ------------------------------ From: tcubed@ddsw1.mcs.com (James Hanlon) Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:33:30 GMT Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL mmt@redbrick.com (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS) writes: > In article , root@sanger.chem.nd.edu > (Doctor Math) writes: >> Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology >> approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up >> line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly >> charge, why would I want ISDN? A classic question. > Modem technology will never get near the speed of an ISDN B channel. > I think that the theortical limit for a modem over a POTS line is > somewhere in the 25-30Kbps range (someone please remind me how fast a > Shannon modem is). This isn't even half of what an ISDN B channel is. > Why would you want ISDN? Because, theoretically, many people and > businesses will eventually have it. I'll venture to suggest the Fax > machine analogy. A Fax is to SnailMail as ISDN is to POTS. If ISDN > does become as popular as it's supposed to, ISDN CPE will cost *much* > less, just as most technologies go down in cost as market and > competition for it increase. The gentleman's problem is not if, when, and will; it's here and now, he has what he wants, good enough is good enough, and at a fraction of the cost to boot. He'd be well advised to hang on to his POTS lifeline. 10kbps is fine for character i/o, and is available for $100 US for DOS boxes. B-channel won't be 100 bucks for years. Why wait? There is a chicken-and-egg aspect to market predictions -- the fiber guys have been predicting the end of copper for years. Jim Hanlon tcubed@ddsw1.mcs.com ------------------------------ From: schuldy@progress.COM (Mark Schuldenfrei) Subject: Re: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates Organization: Progress Software Corp. Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 16:11:46 GMT Paul Robinson quoted the following article from his local paper, (and, it was in the {Boston Globe}, as well) > NOTICE TO AT&T LONG DISTANCE CUSTOMERS > On November 2, 1992, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the Federal > Communications Commission to reduce the number of Special Rate > Occasions (occasions when special lower rates apply to Evening and > Night/Weekend Dial Station calls) from ten (10) Evenings and nine (9) > Night/Weekends to zero (0), and to reduce the number of Floating > Holidays (those holidays over and above the regular ten (10) federal > holidays) from four (4) to zero (0). > These changes are scheduled to become effective on November 16, 1992, > and will apply to both general and commercial long distance schedules. I called AT&T Customer service (+1 800 CALL ATT). I was told that AT&T had run a number of "specials" in the last year, where they offered Reach Out America rates to all customers who used AT&T on certain dates. In order to do this, they filed a tariff. In order to stop doing this promotion, they must file a tariff. I made the comparison to a supermarket having to file a tariff to run a special on beef, and another to stop running the special. The representative on the phone felt that was remarkably apt. She said that, at this time, they had no intention of changing the overall tariff structure for AT&T customers. As always, I am not a spokesman for anybody's company, and reserve the right to be either wrong, or lied to ... but it made sense to me. Mark Schuldenfrei (schuldy@progress.com) [I'm just showin' you my opinions: this ain't a gift] ------------------------------ From: andy@homebase.vistachrome.com (Andy Finkenstadt) Subject: Re: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates Reply-To: andy@homebase.vistachrome.com Organization: Vista-Chrome Incorporated Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 18:26:42 GMT According to an AT&T 800-222-0300 supervisor this has nothing to do with holiday rates. It has to do with special deals that AT&T set up previously for "Call home for less today" for a geographic area or nationwide. AT&T had a Florida day recently, for example. The Tele-Sales Rep I talked with expressed the concern that AT&T has, since the advertisement should not have been released, was not created by AT&T, and was in fact "just" a news article. She said that it had shown up in both the {Washington Post} and the {Chicago Tribune} and that the phones were ringing off the hooks by concerned consumers. She encouraged me to get the word out and then asked if all my long distance needs were serviced by AT&T. I told her yes. (And indeed, they are.) Andrew Finkenstadt, Vista-Chrome, Inc., Homes & Land Publishing Corporation GEnie Unix RoundTable Manager, andy@vistachrome.com, andy@genie.geis.com. Send mail to ora-request@vistachrome.com to join Unix, CASE, and Desktop Oracle RDBMS Database discussions. ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: Telco Handling of Cable Cut Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 13:44:08 GMT In article , dmongrai@gandalf.ca (Dan Mongrain) writes: > A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing through a > cable. A voice-over indicates that even if a line goes down in their > network, calls will be rerouted so that they are not lost or even > noticed by the parties at each end. Is this true? Not quite. Calls in the stable ("talking") state will be lost. However, call attempts (or recall attempts) will be routed around the cause of failure. Of course in a xx second program, the fine points of all of this can not be adequately discussed. The point they are trying to make is that Bell Canada provides dependable service without a lot of techno-babble. BTW, this rests on the assumption that the company has full circuit *AND* facilities diversity (geographically diverse routes between network nodes). Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 15:30:20 CST > A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing through a > cable. A voice-over indicates that even if a line goes down in their > network, calls will be rerouted so that they are not lost or even > noticed by the parties at each end. Is this true? > I always thought that voice switches used circuit switching, which > means that is a call is interrupted, it has to be re-established > manually. I agree there are redundant trunks to by-pass the cut cable > but always thought that there were no automatic rerouting. It depends on what kind of multiplexing equipment they use. In general, the switches will not dynamically reroute a call should a trunk fail. That is, if a switch has multiple paths available, and one fails, your call will be lost, but the next call will be routed over a path that is still functioning. On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of the switch. In this case, the end-to-end path from one switch to another has not been lost, and your connection will stay up (as far as the switch and you know nothing ever happened). The multiplexor will instead send that channel over an alternate path. As one example, imagine a loop of, say, three COs connected by a loop of fiber, each portion of the loop (i.e. from CO A to CO B, B to C, and C to A) having capacity for 24 voice trunks (much smaller than actual value, of course, but it will work for an example). Then imagine that the telco only uses 50% of the bandwidth (12 trunks from A to B, B to C, and C to A). Now, if the fiber from A to B is lost, the 12 A-to-B trunks can be rerouted over the spare bandwidth on th C-to-A and B-to-C fibers. If this is done by the fiber multiplexing equipment, all you will notice is a bit of noise as the change to the alternate path is made. Some real-world implementations are done as loops, but there are other topolgies also, and newer equipment, can do a lot of fancy re-routing. Brett (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks From: todd@valinor.mythical.com (Todd Lawrence) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 18:18:27 CST Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET (Daniel Drucker) writes: > Does anyone know if a person's physical cable pair can be discovered by > a hacker illicitly logged into COSMOS or MIZAR? Daniel, It is entirely possible for a "Hacker" to find your actual cable pair, pole#, horiz/vertical termination points on the frame ... etc ... illegally using COSMOS or LMOS. Todd Lawrence LOD Communications Internet: todd@valinor.mythical.com uucp: uunet!valinor!todd ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks Organization: Motorola Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:38:33 GMT > In article mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET > (Daniel Drucker) writes: >> Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is? >> (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.) When I dial this I get: WELCOME TO AT&T INFORMATION ACCESS SERVICE Please Sign-on: What is this service used for? John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com [Moderator's Note: It is a network server, a lot like Telenet's data network. You 'sign on' to various other systems such as ATT Mail. Actually, I dial into it at 9600 baud, although 2400 is okay. We have discussed this before, and interested parties might want to check out the file in the Telecom Archives discussing it. Check the directory in the archives for '950.1288'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup) Subject: Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers Organization: Open Software Foundation Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:27:36 GMT In article Mike Honeycutt writes: > A student complained about receiving frequent phone calls where the > person does not say anything. The call can last up to a minute then > the caller hangs-up. This pattern is repeated several times a week > (weekdays only) and occurs between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. > Before [...] I start writing the sequel to "The Cuckoo's Egg", can anyone > offer a logical explanation for these events. Sure can. His number is a misprint of a legit fax number that state offices would have a need to call often. Kenny Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142 +1 617 621 7306 kenny@osf.osf.org OSF has nothing to do with this post. ------------------------------ From: max@queernet.org (Max J. Rochlin) Subject: Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 01:59:37 GMT Organization: QueerNet In article Mike Honeycutt writes: > We are having a (minor) problem. > A student complained about receiving frequent phone calls where the > person does not say anything. The call can last up to a minute then > the caller hangs-up. This pattern is repeated several times a week > (weekdays only) and occurs between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. We have > received no other complaints (the phone numbers in our dorms are > basically sequential) so I've ruled-out a "deamon dialer". > Now the twist: > Southern Bell monitored the calls and reported they were coming from > *various* state agencies within 100 miles of Asheville! Although this > raised my eyebrows, Southern Bell seemed even less interested in the > problem and has put it on a back burner. Your problem sounds like someone mis-typed the students number in a list and people (or other systems) are trying to connect a computer. You might want to add a modem to the student's line and put it in answer mode and wait for a connection. Once you connect you can try to find out who called by asking them (via a terminal or computer) who they are and where they got this phone number from. max@queernet.org | Max J. Rochlin ------------------------------ From: morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Mike Morris) Subject: Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 11:41:39 GMT Somebody probably published a modem number in a state info flyer and got a couple digits transposed. Your student is the innocent victim. Have him plug a autoanswer modem into the line and a terminal (to play host system) and see who calls. The same thing happened to a friend, only it was fax machines that called at all hours of the day and night. Mike Morris WA6ILQ PO Box 1130 Arcadia, CA. 91077 818-447-7052 evenings All opinions must be my own since nobody pays me enough to be their mouthpiece ... ------------------------------ From: mcrware!!troyf@uunet.UU.NET (Troy Frericks) Subject: Re: Splits This Month Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 14:24:28 GMT In article < telecom12.822.8@eecs.nwu.edu> Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) writes: > The history.of.area.splits file has 512/210 taking place last Sunday > (Nov. 1) and 714/909 as coming on Nov. 14. Both of these are the > beginning of the permissive dialing. Anybody keeping track? How many area codes are left (unused)? Troy Frericks Internet: troyf@MICROWARE.COM Microware Systems Corporation UUCP: uunet!mcrware!troyf 1900 NW 114th St Phone: (515)224-1929 Des Moines, IA 50325-7077 Fax: (515)224-1352 [Moderator's Note: There are just a couple left under the old numbering format; several hundred are available using the new scheme set to begin in a year or so. The old scheme, which called for a zero or one as the second digit and zero through nine as the third digit -- but never two zeros or two ones, ie 600 or 611 and with x10 held out until the bitter end -- is about exhausted. Does anyone know if they will cut the new scheme in earlier than planned (it was set for 1995) or will the telcos just have to make do with what they have until then? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #831 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22157; 9 Nov 92 4:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01333 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:55:42 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17993 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:55:27 -0600 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:55:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211090755.AA17993@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #832 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Nov 92 01:55:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 832 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together (Paul Cook) Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together (1012breuckma@vmsf) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Greg T. Stovall) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (George Rapp) Re: Phone Directory on CD (Mike Berger) Re: Phone Directory on CD (Todd Lawrence) Re: Phone Directory on CD (Bob Clements) Re: Music On Call? (Steve Forrette) Re: Music On Call? (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) Re: Music On Call? (Dan D. Grove) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Ray Jones) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Brian Gordon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 20:24 GMT From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together Randolph J. Herber, rjh@yclept.chi.il.us writes: > A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco > connections so that the machines could be used as copiers. Also, she > wants to connect a fax modem equipped PC to a fax machine so that the > fax machine could be used both as a scanner and as a printer. > She would like a small and inexpensive piece of euipment with two > modular telephone jacks with just enough "smarts" to supply a dial > tone and appropriate ringing signals. The smarts could be a person > listening on a speaker and using buttons to generate the signals at > the proper time. Proctor and Associates makes the 49200 Phone Demo II. It sells for $259.95, and gives you real dialtone, ringback tone and ringing via two RJ-11 jacks ... a miniature Central Office in a box. There is also a basic four-line version, and a fancier four-line version that emulates CENTREX and Caller-ID. Contact Proctor via one of the addresses below. 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 ------------------------------ From: 1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu Subject: Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together Date: 8 Nov 1992 02:05:28 GMT Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services Reply-To: 1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu In article , root@yclept.chi.il.us (Root) writes: > A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco > connections so that the machines could be used as copiers. The fax machines that I've used can all copy documents, using just the one unit. Usually you just put in the document, the same as you would to fax it, and then press the 'send' key without entering any number. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 07:07:00 +0000 From: Greg (G.T.) Stovall Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? turner@dixie.com writes: > I recently received a newsletter from Telos. Telos, as some may > know, is a prominent manufacturer of DSP hybrids for the broadcast > industry. Anyway, in the newsletter, Telos writes: > "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US > exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas. The > 'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these > difficult line conditions." > I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami. Is this correct? > Who tied them in Dallas? Dallas is served by Southwestern Bell. Some of the outlying areas (like Plano, etc.) are served by GTE. I personally have never had any problems in all the years I have lived here, but a friend of mine had some problems with one of the SWB offices having a line "too hot" (the signal was being clipped), which really screwed up his modem transmissions to work. Strangely enough, it only affected communications between his home and work. He could dial every other place without problem, and I had no problem dialing into the same work modem from my home ... Gregory T. Stovall Bell-Northern Research Richardson, Texas, USA (214) 684-7009 My opinions are not necessarily endorsed by BNR. ------------------------------ From: edsr!gwr@uunet.UU.NET (George Rapp) Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? Reply-To: edsr!gwr@uunet.UU.NET Organization: EDS Research Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 00:16:30 GMT In article 9@eecs.nwu.edu, rice@ttd.teradyne.com () writes: >> I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami. Is this correct? >> Who tied them in Dallas? > Actually, you have it backwards. GTE is the LEC in Dallas (but not Ft. > Worth). Bell South is the LEC in Miami. Actually, there are two LECs serving area code 214. GTE is the LEC for some of the bigger suburbs (largest ones: Garland, Plano, Carrollton, and Irving), but the LEC for city of Dallas and the rest of 214 (and all of Fort Worth, to the best of my knowledge) is Southwestern Bell. Based on the population of the cities, I'd say that SWBT holds the majority of the business. The observation about line conditions could thus apply to both companies, or to just one, depending on the source and destination of the test calls, or how they ran the tests. Apart from the occasional noisy connection, I've never had a problem with line quality from either home (GTE turf) or work (SWBT). One possible reason for a degradation of quality in this area might be adverse soil conditions that affect underground cables. (Most of the houses I have seen in the area do not have basements, and there are a lot of foundation problems, because of shifting soil. Geology is not my strong suit, so please don't ask me to elaborate. 8^) George Rapp Electronic Data Systems Corporation EDS Research 7171 Forest Lane, C212 Dallas, Texas 75230 214/661-6478 (UUCP: uunet!edsr!midearthmail!gwr) (Internet: gwr@edsr.eds.com or edsr!gwr@uunet.uu.net) The above is the sole responsibility of the author, and is not in any way connected to EDS. ------------------------------ From: berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu (Mike Berger) Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:06:54 GMT system@coldbox.cojones.com (Bryan Lockwood) writes: > Ken Jongsma writes: >> Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70 >> million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses. >> DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at >> (800)325-0800. >> I was a bit surprised to see DAK selling this. One usually associates >> DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the listings are a bit out of >> date? > Au contraire. DAK has been working very hard to sell these things. I > get a flyer about every other month. DAK seems to be working quite > hard to bring CD-ROM prices down into the realm of affordability for > the common man. Are you sure this is the very latest version? Mike Berger Internet berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD From: todd@valinor.mythical.com (Todd Lawrence) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 18:06:16 CST Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems According to the documentation supplied with the particular ads I have seen pertaining to the telephone listing, CD-ROM quotes that the software to access the telephone database is supplied on the disc itself and apparently the data is encrypted. It further goes on to say the you CANNOT access a record given the phone number. Todd Lawrence Internet: todd@valinor.mythical.com uucp: uunet!valinor!todd ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 10:33:54 -0500 From: clements@BBN.COM [Re: questions about the Phone Directory on CD from DAK] I've been meaning to answer this from home, where I could get the details right by checking the disks, but I keep forgetting. So this answer is being composed at work, from memory, and may have some errors in the details. First I'll say that, like many, I'm uneasy about having all the phone directories easily and cheaply available to every telemarketer with a PC. But that battle has been lost. So, with some distaste, I decided to order these CDs and see what was on them and whether I could find some old lost friends, like the ad says. I'll try to answer the questions that have been posted. jongsma@swdev.si.com (Ken Jongsma) writes: > One usually associates DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the > listings are a bit out of date? I was wondering about this, too. The CD labels say "Winter 1991" which, I think, is the winter at the BEGINNING of 1991. That is supported by the presence of some business listings for small companies in this area that fell victim to the recession. And as philip@cgin.cto.citicorp.com (Philip Gladstone) says, the listings seem to be somewhat older than the date on the label. So yes, I think these are old stock being sold off cheap. rothman@tegra.com (Steve Rothman) writes: > Do these new telephone listing CD-ROMs contain addresses, as well as > names and phone numbers? Can they be searched by phone number (and > address, if contained), or just by name? Yes, they contain name, phone number and address. The BUSINESS disk also contains a code for the category of the business. The BUSINESS disk can be searched by any of the fields, and the search can be limited to particular areas, and can be set to exclude certain areas. The example in the manual is to search NYC but exclude addresses with "Bronx" in them. You can search by phone number. I looked at the block of 7500 DID numbers for my work address, to see how many had published listings, for example. The RESIDENTIAL disks have a more limited user interface. You can only search by name, though you can limit the search to a particular state or area code or phone exchange. But they're always sorted by name. So you can't search by phone number but you can limit it to the exchange and then visually scan through a thousand listings. Not too great. Now how good is the data? There are an amazing number of errors and omissions. Some examples: I was wondering whether my old address and numbers would be listed or my new ones, since I moved at the end of "Winter 1991". The answer is that neither was listed. I'm not on the disk at all, even though I had three listed lines at the old house and one at the new house. My parents in Wisconsin are listed by name and address but the phone number is missing. (Many listings are like that.) But their phone number has been listed and unchanged for over 25 years. There are lots of impossible numbers listed. For example, on the business disk (which can be searched by phone number) a few are listed in area code 911! And a dozen or so are listed in area code 710 (the strange secret area code we discussed here a while back). But looking at those listings, they are obviously typos or scanning errors, since they are geographically in a few specific places with similar area codes and are completely ordinary small businesses. In the search of our DID numbers mentioned above, I found a bunch of errors: [Background: You have to know that before the 617/508 split most (but not all) of the 617-87x exchanges were in Framingham MA, which is now in 508. 617-873 did not exist until it was created for us, in Cambridge, which stayed in 617.] Now on the business disk there are a number of 617-873 listings which claim to be in Framingham. So not only are they typos for some other 87x-nnnn but they are in the wrong area code for Framingham. On the other hand, there are some listings shown in 508-873, too, and that exchange doesn't exist at all. In general, I've found a pretty poor percentage of the people and companies that I've looked for. I was surprised to see a large number of business listings on my completely residential street. Must be a lot of basement/garage shops. I'm not implying that these are errors, though. They're probably real. So I'd say these disks are not worth their price to an individual. They're probably just fine for a telemarketer who doesn't really care if all the numbers are correct and just wants to be right most of the time when he/she says "Good evening Mr. Smith. How are you today?" Sigh ... Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Music On Call? Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:05:06 GMT In article leichter@lrw.com (Jerry Leichter) writes: > I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering > machine: Several minutes of music. There was no voiceover anywhere in > the message, or before or after it -- just music. The sound was of > surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct > electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the > background. One possibility is that it WAS music on hold from somewhere. Something that could easily happen is that someone calls from a business and decides to not leave a message. Instead of hanging up, they accidentally place you on hold or perhaps (on Centrex) don't hold down the hookswitch long enough and flash instead of disconnect, which would also place you on hold. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu Subject: Re: Music On Call? Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:19:41 CST > I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering > machine: Several minutes of music. There was no voiceover anywhere in > the message, or before or after it -- just music. The sound was of > surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct > electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the > background. > The music was symphonic; I didn't place the piece, but would guess > Debussy as the composer. (Definitely NOT the schlock you typically > get for music-on-hold.) > [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called > your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing > music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off. PAT] Another possibility is that it was generated by music-on-hold, but not by someone deliberately placing you on hold to leave you a long message. On many PBXs, to initiate a three-way call or transfer a call, you FLASH and then dial another number. This places the original call on hold temporarily, and many PBXs will play music-on-hold to the caller that has been placed on hold. In your case, what may have happened is that the caller decided he didn't want to leave a message on your answering machine, but he had another call to make, so he hung-up briefly and then dialed the next number. If his hang-up wasn't long enough, it would be interpreted as a FLASH by the switch, which would place you on hold. After he dialed the number, the switch would patiently keep you on hold until he completed the three-way conference or transfer. Of course, he never did this, as it was his intention to hang-up on your machine, and was unaware that it was on hold. Thus, you got hold music (which was recorded by your machine) for the entire duration of his second call. (What would happen when he hung-up his second call depends on the model of switch that his company has). Brett (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 08:52:50 CST From: dgrove@cs.rice.edu (Dan D Grove) Subject: Re: Music On Call? Organization: Rice University, Houston Having had this happen a number of times at Rice, here's what may have happened: someone placed a call to this phone, let it ring until the answering machine picked up, then flashed and made another call. The caller generally means to hang up in this case -- flashing on our ROLM system places the caller on hold, resulting in symphonic music being left on the answering machine. In our case, the quality is quite good. I suspect that this may be what happened in this case. Dan Grove Rice University Phone: (713) 524-6571 Dept. of Computer Science Fax: (713) 285-5136 Houston, TX 77251-1892 ------------------------------ From: rayj@Celestial.COM (Ray Jones) Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1992 17:46:26 GMT In birmingh@fnalf.fnal.gov writes, quoting others: > I should point out that several years ago (when I lived in > Nashville) I received a computerized call that would *call back* when > I hung up on it. I finally managed to convince them they were wasting > their time by leaving interesting noises (screams, toilet flushes) in > the place where they wanted you to state your address. I also seem to > remember suggesting that I would find the number of the company > president and disrupt *his* dinner to tell him what I thought of his > machine. I too had this problem several years ago in San Jose, CA. I waited and left my phone number and address. They called the next day and I set up an appointment -- but -- insisted that they come to my house at 5 PM on Friday. That time assured that the salesman would spend at least two hours on the freeway. When the salesman did show (late as expected), I told him I was NOT interested in his product (solar hot water heater) I just wanted them to get my name OFF the call list. You take my time -- I take yours. Onager Systems Ray A. Jones 18710 NE 59th Ct. UUCP .....uunet!camco!onager!ray # 2053 ...ray@onager.Celestial.COM Redmond, WA 98052 206-885-3568 ------------------------------ From: briang@Sun.COM (Brian Gordon) Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Date: 8 Nov 92 17:18:19 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca. Commenting on a message from birmingh@fnalf.fnal.gov, PAT said: >> [Moderator's Note: Do it! Start calling the president of the company at >> home during his dinner. If he has the nerve to object, then tell him you >> are going to sue him if his machines ever call you again for any reason. >> Don't forget to dial *67 before calling him. >> It is none of Mister Hotshot's business what your home phone number is. > Logic error here, I'm afraid. If he doesn't know what your home phone > number is, just how is he to make sure that his machines never call it? > [Moderator's Note: Good point. PAT] Gee, I thought that _was_ the point. The only way to keep from being harassed (by you) would be for him (i.e. his company) to stop harassing _everyone_. Brian G. Gordon briang@Sun.COM briang@netcom.COM B.GORDON2 on GENie 70243,3012 on CompuServe BGordon on AOL ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #832 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22774; 9 Nov 92 4:40 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27798 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 02:20:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27176 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 02:20:06 -0600 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 02:20:06 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211090820.AA27176@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #833 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Nov 92 02:20:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 833 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? (Barton F. Bruce) Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? (Steve Forrette) Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? (Rob Warnock) Re: Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment? (Brendan Jones) Re: Armored Phone (Mike Morris) Re: Armored Phone (Dave Levenson) Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Wayne Geiser & Paul Robinson) Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager (Steve Forrette) Re: Do Tell! (John Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. Date: 8 Nov 92 03:19:50 EDT In article , hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > In a discussion today, the idea came up of using a single DS1 > or T1 line to handle incoming calls to a BBS type system instead of 24 If your BBS was the size of, say, Compuserve, you might look at products from Primary Access. They will take up to 20 T1s per rack and you get out a bunch of x.25 lines with LOTS of individual sessions on each. Each card has two DSP chips and emulates two modems. The price you pay could be for low speed modems, and when you need higher speed, you pay more and load in code for faster modems. Primary Access can do ISDN and Voice games with the same hardware - but what they currently offer as products I havn't followed. They can connect also to FG-B and FG-D trunks. I would assume when you dial 950-1ATT this is the sort of hardware that would be there, NOT a rack of conventional modems, but don't know for sure. Your PC speak to an x.25 line? There are terminal servers and protocol translator boxes that convert x.25 to LAT or TCP/IP terminal sessions on ethernet. If your PC can't use an x.25 connection, can you telnet to it? These are VERY expensive, and a pile of $325 ZyXEL U-1496E modems will prove much more affordable. You may be where T1 access is cheap. Here it is a total ripoff - priced way more than 24 1MBs and sold as a slightly cheaper way of getting DID trunks. But all DID services are kept very high priced to protect the way overpriced Centrex telco peddles as: "Saves you from using expensive DID trunks" - talk about honesty in advertising ... ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:30:54 GMT In article hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > In a discussion today, the idea came up of using a single DS1 > or T1 line to handle incoming calls to a BBS type system instead of 24 > individual phone lines and 24 modems driving 24 serial ports. It > seems that we should be able to have a single DS1 line driving a > single interface board in the computer that would sort out all the > data (figure out which user is on which line and is in which time > slot, etc.). This would compare favorably to all that extra hardware. Keep in mind that once you sort out the datastream into the 24 channels, that the raw data is not the "data" that you're expecting for the BBS, but rather the digital representation of the analog modem signal that the caller is sending. You have to unmodulate that somehow, either by breaking the T1 into individual channels that have modems on them, or with some really fancy software and DSPs. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 05:12:22 -0800 From: rpw3@rigden.wpd.sgi.com (Rob Warnock) Subject: Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? Reply-To: rpw3@sgi.com (Rob Warnock) Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA Dialogics (and others, I'm sure) makes just a card that connects to a T1. It plugs into a PC (ISA) bus. A friend of mine uses them to run a telephone answering service, complete with DTMF-input/voice-response on each of the 24 channels (one T1 per PC -- he has quite a few T1's coming in). Of course, that just gets you the 24 channels connected to your computer's bus. You'd still need 24 modems or 24 DSP chips or a *really* fast CPU to do "the modem stuff" on the 24 PCM bit streams ... Rob Warnock, MS-9U/510 rpw3@sgi.com (415)390-1673 Silicon Graphics, Inc., 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd., Mountain View, CA 94043 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment? Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 16:04:12 +1000 From: brendan@otc.otca.oz.au In TELECOM Digest Volume 12, Issue 825, shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) wrote: > Who are the major players in CT2 equipments and in CT2 phones? The major players are in the UK, such as GPT (GEC Plessey Telecommunications), Orbitel and Ferranti. However, Motorola also makes CT2 equipment in the USA and Shaye makes CT2 equipment in Hong Kong. > I believe CT2 was either born in UK. Correct. It came out of the UK DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) initiative on "phones on the move" in 1987, or thereabouts. > Are the major Cellular manufacturers also into CT2? Not that I know of. Most consider CT2 to be irrelevant, I think. > Is CT2 faring well on the other side of the big pond? Much more is happening outside of the "big pond" than in it (USA != World :-) > If I assert that the only CT2 trials in the world have been in London > and Illinois will someone here contradict me ? :-) Someone will! Three countries that I know of have *commercial* services, they are: Singapore Hong Kong Netherlands Major pilot systems (pre-commercial) are also operating in: United Kingdom (Manchester) France (Paris) Germany (not sure where) A major pilot system will shortly be up and running here in Australia. I've been involved in R&D for one of the Hong Kong operators (there are two, with a third coming along), which went commercial earlier this year. It's been a roaring success over there, the total market size is over 30,000 customers now (compared with about 1000 customers all up in the UK the first time around). > Any CT2 in Japan? Not that I know of. > Also, whose standard is CT2? Originally it belonged to the DTI in the UK (MPT 1375) but it's being migrated across to ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) as an interim standard I-ETS 300-131, the final version (Release 2) of which is expected to be set in concrete by May/June next year. > What is CCITTs position on it (or is it them all along ?) It's not really their business. CCITT is only worried about communications networks that cross national borders. However, the work of ETSI is sort of a market/industry based standards group that acts as a regional preparation for input into CCITT for any issues that are relevant to it. ETSI falls under the umbrella of the European Commission. > I will also be grateful for any pointers to magazine/journal/trade rag > reports on these questions. A number of useful journals which can keep one up to date in this fascinating area include: "Mobile Europe" "Pan European Mobile Communications" "Telecommunications International" Cheers, Brendan Jones ACSnet: brendan@otc.otca.oz.au R&D Contractor UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan Network Access R&D Phone: (02)287-3128 Fax: (02)287-3299 |||| OTC || Snail: GPO Box 7000, Sydney 2001, AUSTRALIA ------------------------------ From: morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Mike Morris) Subject: Re: Armored Phone Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 11:35:38 GMT amb@cs.columbia.edu (andrew m. boardman) writes: > I need a wall-mountable telephone for indoors use that's fairly theft- > and vandalism-proof. Who sells this kind of stuff? I am posting this rather than replying thru email as others may be interested in what I found today. Allen Tel sells armored phones. Their products are available through Greybar Electric who has outlets in several major cities. Ask for "Freeway Phones". If you need some, and don't mind spending more money that they are worth, The local freeway authorities just swapped out > 2000 freeway phones for solar-powered cellphones. A local surplus outlet is selling off the old ones for $65 or so. They are basically a bright yellow alluminum housed 500 phone that does not have a dial (blank panel) or a bell. Adding a bell is no problem, but adding a dial will require metal work (or ordering out a new front panel from Allen Tel). Today I discovered that an acquaintance has a dozen old grey WeCo rotary units which will probably go much cheaper ... if you are interested email me for more info. Mike Morris WA6ILQ PO Box 1130 Arcadia, CA. 91077 | All opinions must be my own since nobody pays 818-447-7052 evenings | me enough to be their mouthpiece... ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Armored Phone Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 04:38:25 GMT In article , amb@cs.columbia.edu (andrew m. boardman) writes: > I need a wall-mountable telephone for indoors use that's fairly theft- > and vandalism-proof. Who sells this kind of stuff? GaiTronics offers ruggedized telephone enclosures. Have a look at coin telephones. You can probably disable the coin part of it, and still have a vandal-resistant housing. 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: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:37 GMT From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone WITH MOTION = Forwarded Message = Date: Thu Nov 05, 1992 2:11 pm GMT From: Wayne Geiser EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414 MBX: geiser@roadrunner.pictel.com Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone WITH MOTION > In an ad on page A47 of the Nov. 4 {Washington Post} is an > advertisement for AT&T's Videophone. > The ad claims "{available now}. Just plug it in, turn it on, and > dial. Full {color} with motion. No special wiring or separate > costs." > The last I've heard of for video on a phone line was a {still} > picture in {black and white}. This one's got me stumped, as I haven't > the foggiest idea how they can do {color} on a standard POTS line. > And supposedly with motion too? I'm just a lowly telephone operations > supervisor and sometime computer programmer, I can't see how they can > do this in such a small bandwidth. > The phone number for information is 1-800-437-9504. > If their product is even close to what they promise, Picturetel and > a few others should be scared excrementless. > Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM > Any opinions are mine alone. Firstly, let me put my disclaimer right up front. I'm not a video, audio, compression, network, or telephone expert (although I've learned more than I thought I ever wanted to since joining PictureTel :-)). My background is mostly in compilers, but am currently working on UI-type stuff. It is my understanding, from speaking with the people here who ARE experts in some of this stuff that color does not add all that much to the data transmission. That is, you don't get a whole lot of bandwidth back if you switch from color to B&W. The AT&T phone that was announced last year (or was it early this year?) was B&W with "motion." The "motion" turned out to be something on the order of a couple of frames per second. Definitely not a threat to PictureTel, CLI, Video Telecom, etc's business! I suspect that this newest variant is much the same speed. Try to find an AT&T store with one of these. Even under the best of conditions (little motion, plain background, etc) it will be of noticably poor quality because of the data limitations of the transmission line. To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per second. Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of animation stills they use in cartooning. Supposedly, one cannot tell the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video. What about audio? Full Duplex? Half Duplex? I suspect theirs is HALF. Ours if FULL (i.e., both sides of a video conference can speak and be heard at the same time). It's hard to do, that's why I expect they didn't. Bottom Line: We're not concerned about AT&T's product line. In fact, getting the public aware of the technology is good. Having them used to TWO frames per second simply makes our product look all that much better when they come to see it. :-) Wayne Geiser ("Drivel King") Voice: (508) 977-8253 PictureTel Corporation FAX: (508) 532-6893 One Corporation Way Internet: geiser@pictel.com Peabody, MA 01960 CIS: 70313,3615 ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 08:19:11 GMT In article CRW@icf.hrb.com (Craig R. Watkins) writes: > Call Manager is a (free) service of AT&T that allows you to touch tone > in an account code (of the form 15xx where you make up xx) where you > would normally dial a calling card number when you place a 0+ call. > Your bill then gets itemized and totaled by account code. I ran into a similar problem with Call Manager on my secondary lines as well. From what I was able to determine, there is some systematic problem with multiple lines which are consolidated billed: adding the feature to the primary line does not automatically pick up secondary lines (most optional features such as calling plans do this automatically), and entering individual orders for Call Manager for each secondary line doesn't work either. It took me over 30 calls and over a month to get the problem resolved on my lines. (After a certain point, it became sort of a mission to see if I could get through to the right people at AT&T -- I knew that there must be *someone* who knew what was going on!) In the end, they got special instructions to use this "neat new service" called AT&T Mail to send a message to someone to add my secondary numbers into the Call Manager database manually. As Craig said, don't let them tell you to call the Call Manager office, as it's only for business service. Also, Long Lines Repair is of no help either. The reason this was done was for fraud control purposes, which mostly affected businesses. Since the old default was that it was enabled on all lines, customers which blocked 1+ but allowed 0+ (such as hotels, etc.) could get stuck for a 1+ call by clever people who dialed it as 0+ then entered a 15xx format PIN. To be safe, they now disable it for everyone except those that specifically request it. Residence subscribers can request it over the phone (but you will need to have special action taken if you have more than one line that's billed together). Business customers must fill out and sign a form and send it back before they will enable it. As an aside, I got the royal run-around in trying to get this problem fixed. Nobody seemed to know what was going on, and the assumption was always that I just wasn't dialing the calls correctly. One rep tried to tell me that since Call Manager is a free feature, that AT&T didn't place as high a priority on fixing customer problems with it as they do with other features. I countered that I used to have a similar feature with US Sprint which cost me $5/month, but worked when I wanted it to, and that perhaps another long distance company would better serve my needs if AT&T didn't feel this feature was a "high priority." This changed her tune in a hurry, and suddenly my problem was quite important to them! It is unfortunate that things like this happen, but it would not force me to switch carriers, as I've had similar problems with Sprint in the past. In my opinion, all of the IXC's are going to have the "big company" customer service problems, so I have to choose based on overall quality of service and price. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Do Tell! Date: 8 Nov 92 23:36:21 PST (Sun) From: john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon) richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) wrote: > The text block at the bottom is a pitch for CentraNet(r) service from > our old friends from GTE. I find the ad for "CentraNet" and the concept of Centrex from GTE highly amusing on two fronts. First and formost is the fact that one has major difficulty adding so much as two trunks to a PBX in an industrial park in Long Beach. So how is it that GTE can deliver 50, 60 or 200 lines of Centrex when it cannot even deliver two more business lines to a phone-starved enterprise in the middle of a major city? This is either a case of advertising when there is in reality no product to deliver OR -- GTE is withholding service from its regulated side so that it will have sufficient facilities on its unregulated side where the profits are higher. It is one of the two -- both of which are disgusting. (In the Long Beach case there simply are no facilities.) A second, minor amusement is the fact that ISDN is not available on a GTD-5, GTE's CO switch of choice in many areas. This means that "CentraNet" is the weeniest form of Centrex: all features are simple codes and hookswitch flashes. There are no display features or direct single key activated functions, unless there is some type of proprietary phone only available from GTE. (Speed dial from the phone does not count.) Pac*Bell and most other LECs using NT DMS or AT&T 5ESS offer ISDN features on Centrex, allowing the use of standard ISDN feature phones, something not possible in any way on a GTD-5. (Centrex itself has only been available for the last couple of years on the GTD-5.) An interesting point comes to mind here. Here in Contel country, the switches are all DMS and 5ESS. This means that it is technically possible for ISDN to be offered. If this had been originally a GTE area (as it soon WILL be), the dreaded GTD-5 switches would have been installed everywhere in the high desert area, precluding even the possibility of any ISDN offering in the forseeable future. John Higdon (hiding out in the desert) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #833 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29575; 9 Nov 92 21:49 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25508 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:16:19 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28716 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:16:00 -0600 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:16:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211100116.AA28716@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #834 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Nov 92 19:16:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 834 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Steve Forrette) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Paul Barnett) Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number (John Goggan) Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number (Rob Boudrie) Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (Frank Vance) Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (Rob Warnock) Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (John Rice) Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Dave Levenson) Re: Splits This Month (Carl Moore) Re: Splits This Month (Steve Forrette) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:59:11 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Ptasnik Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems khx@se44.wg2.waii.com (Kamran Husain) wrote: > Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of > operation has rendered most home security systems useless. (I don't > Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks > snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the > owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then > walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the > weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is > drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified > since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back. > a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC > power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done > on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter > for those people who do not have mobile phones? The phone company provides the means in our area to deal with this threat. You have the option of having the phone company put a ping on your line every few minutes. You can actually hear the tone if you have a test set monitoring the line. The alarm system must then give back an appropriate tone. This process is interrupted by the line being in use on a normal call, without sending out an alarm. If the line is cut, or if power fails to the alarm (and it's battery backup runs out), then the absence of this signalling notifies the alarm company. What happens then is between you and your alarm monitoring company. I suppose that a REALLY clever burglar could just tie up the line with a call to a recording or some such, but most burglars probably just cut the line. Here in the Seattle/US West area it is a fairly pricey option at about $8.00 a month. Is this extra level of security worth another $100/year to you? Will you have to pay the monitoring company more, or have different equipment installed? You're on your own for those answers. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:20:28 GMT In article khx@se44.wg2.waii.com writes: > Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks > snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the > owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then > walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the > weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is > drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified > since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back. Ademco is a manufacturer of alarm system equipment that makes a line of wireless alarm monitoring equipment to supplement the regular dialup alarm systems. Other manufacturers may make similar equipment, but I don't know. Here's what I know about the Ademco system: An alarm monitoring company in your area must have the base station transmitters for the system. You then subscribe to the radio monitoring in addition to the regular monitoring with the same company. They install one of two types of radio systems to your current alarm system. There is a one-way system and a two-way system. The one-way system sends an immediate signal upon an alarm condition, and a "keep-alive" signal every minute or so. If a house was hit as you describe above and the alarm was triggered, the alarm company would know right away. The radio unit usually is hooked up to the bell output of the alarm, so when the alarm company gets the radio signal, they don't have detailed information such as which zone, etc., was triggered. Under normal situations, the regular landline dialup mechanism will deliver this information in the normal manner shortly after the radio signal is received. If the radio alarm is not followed by a landline dialup, this is a good indication to the alarm company that the line was cut. Also, the phone line is usually connected to the radio unit as well. If the phone line goes dead (such as it would if cut), the radio unit signals this event immediately to the alarm company. Power outages can be signaled, but are not usually done so because of the number of false alarms this would cause. Imagine how many systems would try to dial up if there was a regional power outage. But in your case, the alarm company would know immediately that the phone line was cut, and with the company I've dealt with, this would result in an immediate police dispatch for investigation. If this was followed by an actual alarm condition, this would be further indication that all was not well at the ranch. If the alarm and radio unit is totally disabled, the alarm company still knows of this within a few minutes when it does not receive the keep-alive transmissions. The two-way unit is similar, but can also receive messages from the alarm company. Instead of sending periodic keep-alive messages, it responds to polls from the alarm company base station. If your unit does not respond to a poll, then the alarm company knows something is wrong. As with the one-way unit, phone line cuts and alarm conditions are transmitted immediately. Both of these systems are capable of using multiple frequencies for redundancy. In the case I'm familiar with, the alarm company maintained several base stations throughout the area, with the goal that at least two or three are within range of every customer. This way, if one of the base stations stops working, each subscriber's radio will switch over to one of the other transmitters on a different frequency. I'm sure Ademco could give you a reference to an alarm company in your area that offers this service. As far as I could tell, there was no way for someone to defeat the system by just cutting wires, etc. Even cutting the antenna to the radio simultaneously with the power and phone will not defeat it, as the silence from your residence will alert the alarm company to trouble within a couple of minutes. Plus, it would be really difficult to get to the radio unit simultaneously with the power and phone, without triggering an alarm condition a few seconds prior in the process. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: barnett@convex.com (Paul Barnett) Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:57:29 GMT Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA In khx@se44.wg2.waii.com (Kamran Husain) writes: > a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC > power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done > on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter > for those people who do not have mobile phones? Posted for a friend: send mail to gsk@procyon.cdev.com for more info ... I have information from a company called CELLULAR ALARM PRODUCTS, LTD. which may be what you are looking for. The company offers a cellular phone backup to the landline connection to your alarm monitoring service. In the event the landline is cut, a trouble alarm can be sent via cellular phone. For more information, I would contact the company at the following address. CCellular Alarm Products 2575 Southwell Suite 104 Dallas, Texas 75229 (214) 620-0156 (800) 752-9719 FAX (214) 620-7205 Paul Barnett Internet: barnett@convex.com Convex Computer Corp. Office: 214-497-4846 Richardson, TX Mobile/Home: 214-236-8438 ------------------------------ Organization: Central Michigan University Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:03:53 EST From: John Goggan <34II5MT@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> Subject: Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number Actually, getting a personalized number from Michigan Bell was not free up until Oct. 5th. At least, it wasn't two years ago when I requested my personalized number for my BBS and they charged me about $30. I do agree with you though -- they did write that up as if it were a "brand new feature" that they had added, while in reality it has been around for over five years. John Goggan ------------------------------ From: rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) Subject: Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:09:15 GMT In article jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) writes: > In the monthly Michigan Bell billing insert, there is a large article > that gushes about how Michigan Bell will allow you to pick a > "personalized" telephone number. The cost is only $38!! They conclude > by stating that your customer service rep will be more than willing to > help you. New England Telephone is reputed to be planning this (according to one of my operatives). They are preparing for this by withholding "good" numbers that are likely to be requested ( -xx00, -x000, etc.). It is expected that this will be a monthly charge once a "requested" number has been assigned. ------------------------------ From: Frank Vance Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech Date: 9 Nov 92 19:46:52 GMT Organization: Western Geophysical, Div. of Western Atlas Int'l, Houston, TX I for one have been quite disappointed in the way the entire cellular privacy issue has been handled by the cellular providers and the US government. 1. First of all, why did the various cellular providers make promises of "safe and secure communications" when they knew anybody with a little money could buy a receiver to listen in? 2. Why, instead of fixing the technical deficiencies in their product do they go sniveling to Congress to make it illegal to listen (as if they are ever going to be able to enforce it)? 3. Why in the world did our government accept the snivelling and pass the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, instead of telling the cellular providers to go fix their own problems? Most agencies of the government understand the problem well enough. That is why a great many of them have implemented digital scrambling on their own radio systems. Who actually believes that just because it is illegal to listen to cellular telephone conversations that people are not going to do it? Especially those for whom it is not "recreation", but a method of gathering information to be used to commit fraud or some other illicit money-making. IMO, the cellular companies should come clean on the privacy issue with their customers and potental customers. They should also spend their money on developing true solutions to the problem instead of lobbying to develop and pass unenforcable regulations. But I am afraid this is just another example of our society's inability to understand that the government can not fix every injustice, much less every annoyance, and that we (individually and corporately) need to take more personal responsibility to fix them ourselves. Frank Vance +1.713.963.2426 Western Geophysical fvance@airgun.wg.waii.com 10001 Richmond Avenue Fax: +1.713.963.2758 Houston, TX 77042 USA ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 04:51:41 -0800 From: rpw3@rigden.wpd.sgi.com (Rob Warnock) Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech Reply-To: rpw3@sgi.com (Rob Warnock) Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA monty@proponent.com (Monty Solomon) writes: > Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.89 > From: Dave King <71270.450@compuserve.com> > Bell Canada ... found that 80 percent of all cellular telephone > traffic is monitored by third parties. Even more eye-opening is the > fact that 60 percent of monitored calls are taped... See the attached retraction found in RISKS DIGEST 14.01. --Rob ======= attachment ======================= Date: 03 Nov 92 16:47:58 EST From: Dave King <71270.450@compuserve.com> Subject: Risks Of Cellular Speech I must apologize to the list. I have been informed that we cannot confirm the percentage figures that were mentioned in the note that I quoted in the item that I posted yesterday concerning a study of the monitoring of cellular traffic in Toronto, Canada. David L. King, IBM Southeast Region I&TSS, Mail Drop D072, 10401 Fernwood Road Bethesda, Maryland 20817, (301) 571-4349 ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 20:17:45 GMT In article , vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) writes: > In article , jang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Euee > S. Jang) writes: >> Hi. I am a graduate student at Suny at Buffalo. I am about to start >> the experimentation on JPEG. But I have no program or tool for JPEG. > ^^^^----(SOFT?) > In case you didn't know, SOFT is an acronym for Spell Out First Time! Whatever .... Meanwhile his query is in the wrong newsgroup. JPEG is a graphics compression algorithm and his query would be better answered in any one of the graphics newsgroups (alt.binaries.pictures.misc, etc). John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:32:13 GMT In article , johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > JPEG has very little to do with telecom. It's a scheme for > compressing digitized photographs. There is an informal group that ... While John is correct, JPEG does turn up in some interesting telecom-related contexts. According to some of my informally-received information, the AT&T model 2500 video phone uses JPEG in real time to compress video for transmission between sets. As an aside ... why in the world did they use that model number? Is it possible that someone at AT&T didn't know it had been used once before, for a product that once had what might be called 'significant market penetration'? 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, 9 Nov 92 14:42:19 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Splits This Month The archive file history.of.area.splits is designed to help in cases such as this. It does not deal with 610 and 710, which don't seem to be available as geographic area codes, and we notice that N00 and N11 are not used as such either, although 200 thru 600 are available as a last resort. Of the other N0X/N1X codes, only 910 has not been announced or actually put into use yet. January 1, 1995 is the latest deadline (the original one was July 1, 1995) for switches to be ready for NXX-form area codes. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Splits This Month Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:42:56 GMT In article mcrware!!troyf@uunet.UU.NET (Troy Frericks) writes: > Anybody keeping track? How many area codes are left (unused)? > [Moderator's Note: There are just a couple left under the old > numbering format; several hundred are available using the new scheme > set to begin in a year or so. I feel really sorry for the people in the area where the first "new scheme" area code is implemeted. Can you imagine the number of people that will not be able to call them because of COCOTs, PBXs, etc., that will reject the call because the second digit isn't a 0 or 1? Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: I feel sorry for anyone who gets victimized by an idiot, which is how a lot of PBX and COCOT administrators could be defined, although not all by any means. About ten years ago I regularly used a ROLM PBX here which could not seem to understand that a zero or one was permissible as the second digit in a seven digit local number. I kept turning in trouble reports, using the approved method of doing so, to tell the people involved that (among others) 518 was a perfectly valid prefix in the 708 area. All my reports went into the circular file I suspect; nothing was ever changed. Finally I dealt with this problem by changing *my phone number* in the company records to 708-518-xxxx which was a number I used to use occassionally. Since I only went to see these people whenever they called me with a problem of one sort or another, that meant there would soon be some hassles that might bring about a fix to the phone system. Sure enough about three days later, they are calling me from a pay phone in the lobby of the building. I gave them a stall and told them I would have to 'check my files, and could they call me back in about ten minutes.' I knew that would tick them off, having to go back to the lobby pay phone again; so I did it twice more, each time telling them to give me another ten or fifteen minutes to 'research my records'. When I went by a couple days later, I was told the Vice President - Operations had gone to see the Telecom Manager with fire shooting out of his nostrils. Presto! For the past few years now, I've been taking care of that PBX system myself on a part time basis, spending a few hours each week making requested changes in service and reconciling telco billings. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #834 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01959; 9 Nov 92 22:40 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21580 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:11:44 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12935 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:11:27 -0600 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:11:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211100211.AA12935@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #835 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Nov 92 20:11:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 835 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: UK Dialtone Competition? (Bryan Montgomery) Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona (Hans Mulder) Re: Northern Telecomm (Ben Harrell) Re: Fax Back From DTMF Selection? (Steve Elias) Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth (Alan Boritz) Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas (Gordon Grant) Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together (Mike Gordon) Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Joe Smooth) Re: Phone Service in the Great White North (Tony Harminc) Re: Voice-Operated Phone (William Petrisko) Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem (Norman R. Tiedemann) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 11:40:00 GMT From: monty@vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: UK Dialtone Competition? Charles (C.A.) Hoequist wrote: > A query for the telecommies in the UK: my manager last week insisted > that he had been told by reliable sources that competition for local > service is allowed in the UK, and not just by Mercury, but by a lot of > small local companies. > Can this be? I lived in the UK 1986-88 and never saw anything of the > sort, but up-to-date information would be appreciated. Is there a > choice of local dialtone providers? If not, is there legislation for > such in the Commons, or any other move that would provoke my manager's > belief? This is only in very recent times, and I believe that Mercury has very little interest in local residential dial-tone (business is a bit different). The main rivals are the CATV companies that have won licences in certain areas. A recent report by the Independent Television Commission stated a 500% rise in installed lines over the last year. This is caused by an increase in operators providing 'phone service and the areas receiving cable. There are currently 61,158 residential and 11,523 buisness lines (as of Oct 1). this shouldn't be taken as a definitive split due to the areas where service is currently available. On a personal note, NYNEX have been installing CATV and POTS in my local area for the last 15 months solid, involving many miles of pavement (sidewalk) being laid with conduit. And also posing a serious rival to DSB (Direct Satellite broadcast). Bryan Montgomery (Production Engineer) Tel : +44 (705) / (0705) 486363 Extn 8593 Mail Point 32/21 Fax : +44 (705) / (0705) 664431 IBM Havant Tie : 721 - 8593 Havant Internet : Monty@Vnet.IBM.com Hampshire, PO9 1SA VNET : BRYANM at HVTVM4 Great Britain ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:15:08 +0100 From: hansm@cs.kun.nl (Hans Mulder) Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona In the Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: It is not his 'girlfriends Caller-ID equipped > phone', it is *his* phone at home equipped that way that ratted on > him. His only option would be to press *67, and I'm afraid that would > make the wife suspicious also. PAT] But he *did* press *67. Unfortunately, his girlfriend's phone had per line blocking and the *67 unblocked it. How could he have known? HansM ------------------------------ From: bharrell@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Ben Harrell) Subject: Re: Northern Telecomm Reply-To: cmebh01@nt.com (Ben Harrell) Organization: Computers and Technologies Theme Program-NCSU-NC Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:10:26 GMT hsm@sei.cmu.edu (Scott Matthews) writes: > Does anybody have any internet hosts (email addresses) for Northern > Telecom? To my knowledge, all of our hosts are secure. Without an ID and password, you would not be able to log on to one of them. Ben Harrell cmebh01@nt.com or bharrell@catt.ncsu.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Fax Back From DTMF Selection? Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 09:59:20 PST From: Steve Elias Please see my replies in comp.dcom.fax, comp.dcom.patents, or call Brooktrout for product information. 617 449 4100 / faxback 617 449 9010. Anyone with pointers to other vendors, please post or email. eli ------------------------------ Date: 09 Nov 92 19:47:50 EST From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth schmidt@auvax1.adelphi.edu (JOHN SCHMIDT) writes: > Telco tariffs and technical standards have specific limits on signal > levels and baud rates, to prevent crosstalk into other services. > "Program" circuits are limited to +8 dbm, as measured on a "VU" meter > (+18dbm peak), although I have run much hotter levels in unamplified > loops without "detection" (read 'complaint'). > in the late '60s, we connected a program circuit here to the 70volt 20 > watt output of a PA amplifier, and had a 12" speaker with only a line AT&T, NY Tel, and just about every other telco in the US use *0 dBm* as their nominal level transmission standard, NOT +8. That's a hell of an example to set for a public radio station at an educational institution: know your standards ... and ignore them. Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: gg@jet.uk (Gordon Grant) Subject: Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas Organization: Joint European Torus Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:35:35 GMT In an article by Holger Reusch (Dipl. Gerhard + Joe) our esteemed Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: Cynics in Europe can call it whatever they like; I > read some papers from the UK and other places in Europe which carry > advertisements for companies in Europe. *They* do the same thing; I > have seen their ads with only '0800' numbers and the like. Shall I > now devote several issues of this Digest to complain about 'European > centrism' because I can't call them on their nickle? Your complaint > should be directed to companies which advertise in media read around > the world while failing to include telephone numbers which can be > dialed internationally. Maybe a lot of those companies simply are not > soliciting business from other countries for reasons of their own, > possibly involving customs taxes, copyright problems, etc. Or maybe > their advertising copy writers are simply stupid. In either case, why > blame telco for omissions by merchants in their advertising? PAT] Come off it Pat. 0800 and numbers mixes several issues in one big cocktail that is not to everyone's taste. Telcos all over world should be able to offer better more flexible products to their customers. An 0800 number combines: A non-geographical based number where the call can be automatically routed to regional centre based on the location of the caller. A fine service but I don't see why the customer should not define default destination for calls from areas or countries without a region centre. An incoming call barring service, where the recipient declines calls from certains numbers or groups of numbers. Again a useful service we all expect from a telco. Defines a "non-standard" payment method, in this case all who can connect to the number get the call paid for by the recipient. Such a rigid product may have been acceptable twenty years ago, but today it seems to retained more for the benefit of the telco than either their customers or service user. Why are these service "the same the whole world over"? Is it international agreement or disagreement? gg@jet.uk Gordon Grant Jet Abingdon OX14 3EA UK Fidonet: (2:253/170) Voice +44 235 464792 Fax +44 235 464404 [Moderator's Note: Everything you described above is available in the USA on 800 numbers. And there are international 800 numbers; that is, 800 numbers for people in the USA to use which terminate in Europe or some other international point. Likewise, there are 0800 (or other code per country) which in fact terminate in the USA. A business in the USA which desires to have reverse-charge calls to it from an international point can quite easily ask AT&T to arrange it for them with the telecom administration in the desired country. A business in London which solicits customers from the USA need only ask British Telecom to set it up with AT&T; then presently an 800 number in the USA on a certain prefix which is intended for such international arrangements will be up and connected for them. The simple fact is that many/most(?) businesses in the USA -- particularly in areas of high tech -- are not in a position to deal directly with customers in other countries due to taxes, customs regulations, restrictive laws pertaining to the export of certain technology, etc. You do not do any favors for anyone by rigging up a call into a gateway in the USA which then goes outbound to someone's 800 number here. You force them to pay for a call they otherwise would not pay for (had it been dialed in a straight-forward way from the other country). On the other hand, if a business in the USA has an 0800 (or whatever) number in another country, by all means use it if you wish ... they *want* you to call them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mwgordon@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Gordon) Subject: Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:30:39 GMT In article root@yclept.chi.il.us (Root) writes: > A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco > connections so that the machines could be used as copiers. Also, she > wants to connect a fax modem equipped PC to a fax machine so that the > fax machine could be used both as a scanner and as a printer. > She would like a small and inexpensive piece of euipment with two > modular telephone jacks with just enough "smarts" to supply a dial > tone and appropriate ringing signals. I just saw this in the Tiger Software Catalog. (Sorry, its at work, so I don't have the phone number. It should be available at 1-800-555-1212.) The device is called Fax Scanner and it connects any fax machine with any fax modem to allow the fax machine to be used as a scanner and a printer. Because it says 'any' fax and fax modem, I'm sure that the connection is via the telephone line connections. Since there was not any mention of special software (other than the usual fax modem software) I assume that it provides the usual dial tone, ringing and talk battery. I have never actually seen this item work, so my info is just what I read from the ad and speculated. If anyone out there has this device, maybe they'd like to tell us how it works. It could have some widespread use as the "telco line simulator" that everyone here has been looking for. I believe the price was $90. (Don't qoute me on that.) Mike Gordon N9LOI 99681084@uwwvax.uww.edu ------------------------------ From: Joe Smooth Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:20:35 GMT I'm sure exactly what you mean, but DTMF stands for Dual Tone, Multi-Frequency, meaning that there are going to be two tones at once (and at two different frequencies). For example. if you hit a '1' key on the telephone, you would really be hearing a 697hz and 1209hz tones simultaneously. In your project, are both of the tones playing at the SAME time? If not, it will not trigger anything on the telephone. Just for information, the DTMF telephone tones are as follows: 1 - 697/1209Hz 2 - 697/1336Hz 3 - 697/1477Hz A - 697/1633Hz 4 - 770/1209Hz 5 - 770/1336Hz 6 - 770/1477Hz B - 770/1633Hz 7 - 852/1209Hz 8 - 852/1336Hz 9 - 852/1477Hz C - 852/1633Hz * - 941/1209Hz 0 - 941/1336Hz # - 941/1477Hz D - 941/1633Hz -------------- -------------- I hope that helped out a bit. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 13:10:51 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Phone Service in the Great White North jbutz@hogpa.ho.att.com (John J Butz) wrote: > I hear that Canadian phone service underwent/is going through a > divestiture, similar to the one AT&T experienced. In a word -- no. There is no divestiture or breakup of any of the Canadian telcos planned or even talked about, no matter how much some of us might wish it. In fact Bell Canada (the largest of the telcos) has recently increased its power and influence over telecom even in the (large) parts of the country it doesn't operate in. What has happened recently -- and what you are probably confusing with divestiture -- is that long distance competition has been approved, with essentially no restrictions. > Could anyone write to me and explain the current situation, the major > players, the regulators, recent deals, etc. Perhaps there are good > articles in newspapers or trade journals that explain the current > Canadian telephony environment? *Very* briefly, the major players are the existing monopoly telcos (Bell Canada being by far the largest, followed by BC Tel, and ten or so other regional ones), Unitel (owned 40% by Rogers (largest cable system owner in the country and also owner of Cantel -- nationwide cellular system) and 60% by Canadian Pacific (of railway fame)), A consortium headed by BC Rail and Lightel. There are also various resellers sort of hanging around the fringes. Unitel and BCRL/Lightel applied to the CRTC (the federal regulator) for permission to offer competing LD service. Bell and friends opposed this, claiming ingenuously that they were not opposed to competition (ha, ha) but were concerned about the problems of lack of continued subsidization of local rates by LD rates. The CRTC eventually approved the application, and surprised almost everyone by actually encouraging the entry of new, facilities-based carriers into the market. (In practice there are few organisations with installed facilities other than the telcos and Unitel, but as in other countries, all sorts of rights-of-way (electric power corridors, etc.) will doubtless come out of the woodwork.) Bell and friends have appealed the CRTC decision, and have at least one more level of appeal after that, but it is widely thought that the decision will be upheld. The appeal is also widely seen as a delaying tactic. One of the hot topics of the appeal is Bell's contention that it should pay none (!) of the costs of interconnecting its equipment to competitors' networks. In the interim, Unitel is offering a somewhat Mickey Mouse (TM?) service using local seven-digit numbers and access codes. If you are sufficiently interested, the decision itself is available from the CRTC: Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2 (819) 997-0313 Pages more could be written -- if you get any I would like to see them. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu Subject: Re: Voice-Operated Phone Date: 9 Nov 92 03:17:15 MST Reply-To: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson In article , gersh@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (John R. Gersh) writes: > Is there such a thing as a voice-operated telephone dialer for home > use? DAK had a two-line speakerphone with voice-activated auto-dialer quite a long time ago, you might want to call them and ask. I believe it was under $150. 800-DAK-0800, from memory ... might want to verify this thru DA. No idea how well it works, if you've seen "LA Story", you might remember the scene w/Steve Martin and his new voice-dialer. "Dial Mom." "Hello, Domino's Pizza!" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:53:26 EST From: normt@ihlpm.att.com (Norman R Tiedemann) Subject: Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem Organization: AT&T > The phone rang a third time. This time it *was* my sister on the line, > but it was a very bad connection, as if she was in Argentina or > something. I asked her if she had called me the previous two times, > and she said, "No, I just got home. And anyway, you just called *me*". > We determined that we had *each* heard the phone ring, and picked it > up, and found ourselves connected to each other! > or something ... is this a pre-Halloween prank, or what? Halloween Prank is the best explanation. It is possible (not very likely) that something "went wacko" in the phones and set up this bizarre interaction. (Note: "went wacko" and "bizarre" are the official Bell Labs terms for these event. :-)) But, I have listened to a DJ here in Chicago do this exact thing. He calls two people (often same last names), connects them and then listens to the results. Normally, the results are like you described two semi-confused people arguing about who called whom. The reason for the first rings and no one on the line, is the DJ must time the two calls so you both answer about the same time. In your case, you answered but your sister did not yet, so the DJ had to wait until they answered (leaving you in silence) or keep trying both numbers until you were both near enough to the phone to answer at about the same time. Next time this happens, tune in the local "wild and crazy" radio station and check if you hear yourselves. (Or start shouting obsenities.) Norm Tiedemann AT&T Bell Labs IH 2G-429 att!ihlpm!normt 2000 Naperville Rd. normt@ihlpm.att.com Naperville, IL 60566 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #835 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11745; 10 Nov 92 3:44 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24698 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:39:44 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22481 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:39:27 -0600 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:39:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211100739.AA22481@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #836 TELECOM Digest Tue, 10 Nov 92 01:39:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 836 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Low Noise Cordless Phone Info Wanted (Steve Schear) Re: Bandwidth on Demand Specification Wanted (Toby Nixon) Re: Cellular Advice Sought (1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu) Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Dave Levenson) Re: ISDN From Intel PC Computers (Christopher J. Ambler) Re: Telephone Phreaks (Christopher J. Ambler) Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager (Craig R. Watkins) Re: What's a T1? (Jack Adams) Re: Listing Wanted of CLLIs by Area Code/Exchange (Jack Adams) Re: Odd Survey (Dave Lapin) Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (Jack Adams) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Doug Rorem) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Thomas B. Clark III) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: schear@cylink.COM (Steve Schear) Subject: Re: Low Noise Cordless Phone Info Wanted Organization: Cylink Corp. Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 01:43:11 GMT In article Steven L. Johnson writes: > I am wondering how the newer 902/928 MHz phones (digital or analog) > compare with the more popular 46/49 MHz ones. I'm interested in > comparisons or recommendations on the different noise reduction > methods that the phones use. > Specifically the Panasonic KX-T9000 looks interesting, but is it > really noticably better than the best of the 46/49 MHz flavor? The 900 MHz phones should be substantially quieter then the 46/49 MHz variety. This is due to the mainly to this band's relative lack of users, and especially other cordless phones, and the reduced interference from harmonics generated by digital devices (esp. computers). The digital phones will, all other things being equal, be much quieter than the analog units, and probably only slightly more expensive. Of the digital phones the spread-spectrum types should by far be the best (e.g., Escort's), due to their improved noise immunity and power output. Whereas the analog and digital narrow band 900 MHz phones are limited to less than one milli- watt of power output, the spread spectrum units can legally use up to one watt (of course battery life in the hand-held won't permit this). sds ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Bandwidth on Demand Specification Wanted Date: 9 Nov 92 14:20:41 EDT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , jime@countach.telcom. tek.com (Jim Edwards) writes: > Does anybody know where I can get a copy of the Bandwidth On Demand > (BOND) specification? Thanks. The document is now known as "Aggregation of Multiple Independent 56 kbit/s or 64kbit/s Channels into a Synchronized Wideband Connection". Work is being done in Technical Subcommittee TR-41.4 of the Telecommunications Industry Association, under project number PN-3014. The project editor is: Richard T. Beckman Bellcore Room NVC 2X-280 331 Newman Springs Road Red Bank NJ 07701 rbeck@prefect.cc.bellcore.com The document is currently intended for review only among members of the committee, but if you contact Mr. Beckman he might send you a copy, particularly if you promise to give it a thorough technical review and return comments to him. Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 401243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: 1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought Date: 9 Nov 1992 01:51:05 GMT Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services Reply-To: 1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu In article , Jerry Leichter writes: > Question: She can't be the only one who wants to keep her beeper along > with her cellphone. Does anyone make a combined beeper/cellphone? I understand there are cellphones now that will, if you desire, answer a call by themselves and accept a touchtone message that you can retrieve later. You do, then, get charged for one minute of airtime. ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:45:33 GMT In article , henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) writes: [ regarding Airphone service ] > Is anyone happy with these things? I've never gotten one to work to > my satisfaction ... I have received numerous Airphone calls from a business associate who was inflight between the West and East Coasts. The background noise level is high enough to be objectionable, but the voice is recognizable. I'm sure they're using a noise-cancelling microphone on those handsets, but I'm also sure I've heard better ones. 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: cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu (Christopher J. Ambler, Phish) Subject: Re: ISDN From Intel PC Computers Organization: Fantasy, Incorporated: Reality None of Our Business. Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 11:56:43 GMT stevedav@netcom.com (Steve Davidson) recently asked us: > Is there a newsgroup for ISDN questions? Like Pat said, comp.dcom.isdn. > Can anyone direct me to information regarding how I might get ISDN > capability on an Intel PC? Can you be more specific? Do you mean just data? I connect via the RS232 in the back of my telrad set to get 9600BPS packet switch on the D channel, and 19.2 (will be 38.4 with equipment upgrades next week (hurray)) KBPS circuit switch on the B channel. If this is what you mean, then it's that simple! cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu (805) 756-6634/ISDN ------------------------------ From: cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu (Christopher J. Ambler, Phish) Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks Organization: Fantasy, Incorporated: Reality None of Our Business. Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 12:09:14 GMT johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) recently informed us: >> In article mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET >> (Daniel Drucker) writes: >>> Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is? >>> (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.) > When I dial this I get: > WELCOME TO AT&T INFORMATION ACCESS SERVICE I get: (SIT TONES) The long distance company indication for this call is incorrect. Please try your call again or call your long distance company for assistance. I have, and just verified (7005554141) that I have AT&T. I will assume that it's an AT&T number because of the 288 (ATT). Now I'm curious what that recording meant. Anyone? cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu (805) 756-6634/ISDN ------------------------------ From: Craig R. Watkins Subject: Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager Date: 9 Nov 92 09:28:10 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. In article , stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > It took me over 30 calls and over a month to get the problem > resolved on my lines. I noticed it on a Saturday and didn't get very far with it on the weekend (see below) but I did talk to someone on Monday morning that was very interested in solving the problem. She escalated the problem to some problem solving group, but simultaniously put through a "rush order" for new service on my other lines. It was working within 24 hours. She personally called back a few days later to make sure everything was OK. > As Craig said, don't let them tell you to call the Call Manager office, > as it's only for business service. Also, Long Lines Repair is of no > help either. This was my problem during the weekend. Repair would refer me to the Call Manager office which (as a business office, I suppose) is closed on weekends. If I knew to call residential service during the weekend, I might have solved the problem sooner. One amusing part of weekend was when I dialed 00 to get AT&T. 00: AT&T.... Me: Could you give me the number for AT&T Repair? 00: For Call Manager, sir? Me: (a little spooked at this) Uh, um, yes. (thinking there might be a major failure) How did you know? 00: Oh, it's on my screen! OK -- Now I know they have ANI, but this was rediculous! After some more questioning I find out the fact that I HAVE Call Manager was on her screen and she finally admited that when people with Call Manager call repair it usually involves a problem with Call Manager! I should at this point admit that Call Manager is really helpful to me and it is free and it is working again. I'm happy. Craig R. Watkins crw@icf.hrb.com HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311 ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: What's a T1? Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 14:35:54 GMT In article , John C. Fowler writes: > I've seen the abbreviation 'T1' or 'T-1' here in the Digest many times > over the past few years, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone > define exactly what a T1 was. Although many good treatments abound, allow me to offer a "Reader's Digest" version: T1 is a type of digital carrier system which was originally deployed in 1962 to solve a number of problems inherent in congested metropolitan area short haul (less than 50 mile) carrier needs. T-1 (Or T1 as you like) specifies a four wire circuit transmitting signals at 1.544 megabits/second (Mbps). T1 carries its information in the format known as DS1 (Digital Signal 1). DS1 is a member of the hierarchy of digital signals and describes which bits belong to what sublevels of the hierarchy. The signals applied to the cable are digital bi-polar pulses (Alternating + and - ) where the 1s are represented by pulses and 0s are represented by 0 voltage. In metallic systems, this scheme allows for the reduction of DC bias as well as simple single bit error detection. The carrier system is in widespread use with each of its 24 channels (DS0) able to support either support a voice channel or 56kbps/64kbps(clear channel) data. The entire time division multiplex (TDM) hierarchy, generally described as DS levels 0 through 4, extends from an analog voice channel up through 274.176 Mbps with each level time division multiplexing up to the next. To further compound telephoneeze, the DS1 signal (that which is carried by a T1 system) is also referred to as a digroup (DIgital GROUP). Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {FAX} jadams@vixen.bcr.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: Listing Wanted of CLLIs by Area Code/Exchange Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:23:14 GMT In article , Cliff Sharp writes: > I'm looking for an _accurate_listing of CLLIs by areacode/exchange, > and the only intelligent sounding being I've reached at the phone > company says they're proprietary and she can't send them out. While not up proprietary issues, I suspect she is accurate in that statement. > The end output of this will be a program (carefully researched) > which will allow the user to add "SET EXCH=Ill Dearborn" to his > environment and then let him/her get an accurate listing of how much > it costs to call 708-928 or whatever. I'm not sure whether having a complete list of Common Language Location Identifier codes (CLLI) would be of much help in what you are trying to do. If your user is an average telephone subscriber, he/she would have much difficulty abstracting where they are (either calling from or to) from these ten character code names which identify physical locations within the telephone companies. For instance, in a given town, there probably are more than one physical location for the phone company (Chicago and other towns come to mind). More importantly, these locations are often encoded with streets and/or other less widely recognized designators. I suspect that correlating an NPA-NXX with LaSalle Street might be a stretch for the average customer. In addition, not all CLLIs have End Offices in them, a digital radio relay CEV (Controlled Environment Vault) or other type of hut are CLLI designated but have no NPA/NXX associated with them. Moreover, the CLLIs are often assigned to buildings with no networks in them whatsover. Consider the warehouses which hold the spare plug in electronic equipment units, but which bear a CLLI because they contain these Common Language Equipment Identification (CLEI) items. I suspect that a search of your tariffs (publicly available) will be of more value in completing your project as they fully designate all rates, routes, etc. Maybe I'm missing something? Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {FAX jadams@vixen.bcr.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: DNA15A!DLAPIN@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 09 NOV 92 10:41 Subject: Re: Odd Survey Rob Knauerhase asks: > This afternoon, I got a call from an overly-friendly man named John > something, who worked for Chilton Research. He asked if I'd take part ..... > Has anyone heard of this company, or heard of this type of survey? Chilton Research is a part of the Chilton Press outfit (those people who bring you the many auto repair books) that does various surveys. One of the many that you might have seen recently was on Tuesday, November 3 for either ABC or CBS, predicting election results. Chilton Research (at least the part doing the election returns) is located in one of the Philadelphia suburbs (Radnor, PA). Dave Lapin ASN/ECDC (215)648-3508 (net**2 385-3508) internet: dlapin%dna15a@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com [Moderator's Note: I think they are part of the empire in Radnor, PA known as {TV Guide}. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:47:08 GMT In article , rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: >> A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing ... > It depends on what kind of multiplexing equipment they use. In > general, the switches will not dynamically reroute a call should a > trunk fail. That is, if a switch has multiple paths available, and > one fails, your call will be lost, but the next call will be routed > over a path that is still functioning. Correct. > On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of ^^ > multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of > the switch. ^^^ Not true. As soon as the circuit (circuit switched voice call) is lost, supervision on the circuit indicates it has gone idle. I know of no switching system (I could be wrong here) that will automatically reconnect the ends of a failed circuit switched call. Furthermore, I have not experienced voice trunks that are switched through a DCS (Digital Cross Connect System) after the End, Tandem, or Access Tandem machine finishes switching them. There are multiple ways of routing (Hierarchical, Dynamic Non-Hierarchical-DNHR, and Real Time Non-Hierarchical-RTNR), but all of these are accomplished through routing tables contained in the switches themselves. Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {FAX} jadams@vixen.bcr.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: rorem@bert.eecs.uic.edu (Doug Rorem) Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 00:48:53 GMT khx@se44.wg2.waii.com (Kamran Husain) writes: > Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks > snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the > owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then > walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the > weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is > drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified > since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back. Your only options would appear to be using a leased line or radio system to an alarm monitoring company. I know of fire alarm systems which use a metallic leased line (not always available) which when cut cause a 'trouble' indication to the monitoring station. They (the municipality) will roll fire trucks in that instance. I'm sure there are private alarm companies which offer similar services, however the cost (for a leased line) would be high. Your cheapest solution might be to buy a cellular phone and use it as a secondary (or primary) means to notify the alarm company. I'm not sure how many alarm systems offer this as an option, but they should.... Doug Rorem UIC rorem@bert.eecs.uic.edu ------------------------------ From: tclark@med.unc.edu (Thomas B. Clark III) Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:45:21 GMT Concerning the possibility of robbery or burglary after cutting the phone lines ... I removed the cable from the telephone company's nid and dug up the last several feet of it. I drilled through the foundation of the house (underground) and terminated the cable in my crawl space. I then ran one line directly to my alarm dialer and an "emergency phone." The cable then goes back out the foundation and up to the interface device. If anyone cuts my cable, I can still make a call and so can my alarm system. I know this is of questionable propriety, but my safety comes before telephone company regulations. I have been a bit nervous the two times a telephone repair person has been by, but so far they haven't caught on. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #836 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12295; 10 Nov 92 4:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02032 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 02:14:22 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17428 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 02:14:04 -0600 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 02:14:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211100814.AA17428@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #837 TELECOM Digest Tue, 10 Nov 92 02:14:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 837 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Paul Robinson) Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Robert J. Woodhead) Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (James Turner) Re: Risks of Cellular Speech (Paul Robinson) Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (Shrikumar) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Cliff Sharp) Re: Compuserve/MCI Email (Steve Forrette) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Steve Forrette) Re: Personal 800 Numbers (Paul Robinson) Re: Music On Call? (Tom Gray) Re: Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment (Mike Morris) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 18:39:02 EST Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion In an ad on page A47 of the Nov. 4 {Washington Post} is an advertisement for AT&T's Videophone. The ad claims "{available now}. Just plug it in, turn it on, and dial. Full {color} with motion. No special wiring or separate costs." The last I've heard of for video on a phone line was a {still} picture in {black and white}. This one's got me stumped, as I haven't the foggiest idea how they can do {color} on a standard POTS line. And supposedly with motion too? I'm just a lowly telephone operations supervisor and sometime computer programmer, I can't see how they can do this in such a small bandwidth. The phone number for information is 1-800-437-9504. If their product is even close to what they promise, Picturetel and a few others should be scared excrementless. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM Any opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ From: trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:56:49 GMT 0005066432@mcimail.com (Tansin A. Darcos & Company) writes: > To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is > terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per > second. Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of > animation stills they use in cartooning. Supposedly, one cannot tell > the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video. Full motion animation, such as seen in Disney films, is 24 frames per second, the normal rate for films (and, by the way, each frame is usually projected multiple times to reduce apparent flicker). TV is 60 fields per second, interlaced, for a 30 frame/second effective rate. Most non-theatrical animation is twelve or eight (or less) different frames per second, recorded on film at 24 frames per second (so two, three or four sucessive frames are identical, as opposed to full motion animation where every frame is different). A variety of techniques are used to make this look less-jerky; for example, camera moves (pans) are done at 24fps, even though the animated characters are only moving (for example) eight times a second. To give you some perspective, the average 1/2 hour animated show for kids uses between 6,000 and 10,000 sheets of cel material, and as each character is usually on a sheet by him/her/itself, this means that at any time, two or three sheets are needed for a single frame. In full motion animation, 5,000 (10,000 / 2) frames would last less than four minutes; this gives you some idea of the "compression" that those who draw Smurfs for a living can achieve. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): 72447.37@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: turner@HQ.Ileaf.COM (James Turner) Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion Organization: Interleaf, Inc. Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 20:14:02 GMT Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> writes: > To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is > terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per > second. Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of > animation stills they use in cartooning. Supposedly, one cannot tell > the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video. You certainly shouldn't be able to, since commercial video IS 30FPS ... Actually, to be absolutely accurate, NTSC (Never Twice the Same Color... :-) defines two half-frames or "fields", each of which consists of 1/2 the lines (525 in total) on the screen, transmitted in an interleaved manner. So there are really 60 fields transmitted each second. But in terms of full frames, there are only 30. Animation does not use 30FPS (except direct to video animation). They use 24FPS, just like the movie industry. James M. Turner Senior System Engineer Interleaf, Inc (617) 290-0710 turner@HQ.Ileaf.com * uunet!leafusa!turner ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 22:56:37 EST Subject: Re: Risks of Cellular Speech In TELECOM Digest 12-834, Frank Vance wrote: > I for one have been quite disappointed in the way the entire > cellular privacy issue has been handled by the cellular providers and > the U.S. Government I'd like to quote from two books by Robert A. Heinlein. In his last book before he died, "To Sail Beyond The Sunset" there is -- coincidentally -- a telecommunication question asked where someone notices that the video telephones used (in the story) in Kansas City are flat, and the video in Dallas is stereophonic. He asks "Why is Kansas City still using flatties? Dallas phones are all tanks now." To which his mother informs him "Donald, any question that begins with 'Why do they' can usually be answered, 'Money.'" In the second Heinlein book, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," the main character Mannie points out that people always ask for a law to stop other people from doing something that they don't like those people doing. "Nobody ever says, 'Please pass a law to make me stop doing something I know I should stop." So the point is that it's all about money. It's a lot cheaper (and dishonest) to leave cellular phones totally open and make it illegal to listen to them, while causing people to have the (misguided) impression that the medium is secure. Another point is that some agencies of the government DO NOT want telecommunications to *really* have privacy; there are some rumors that NSA monitors *all* overseas calls, or at least all overseas calls to 'sensitive' countries. I am sure NSA, FBI and a few others DO NOT want real security. Also, you might ask the same question about why the members of Congress involved with Mr. Keating of American Savings didn't tell him to fix the problems with his S&L instead of "accepting the sniveling." Call it very effective ahem "campaign contributions." Did the same thing happen in this instance? We'll probably never know unless some Senator's aide does what one did to Ted "Chappaquittick" Kennedy. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are MINE alone and nobody else's ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 23:13:42 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India In article airgun!fvance@uunet.UU.NET wrote: > 2. Why, do they [Cellphone cos] go sniveling to Congress to make it illegal Easier for them than to take on very complicated issues in encryption. > 3. Why in the world did our government accept the snivelling and pass the > Electronic Communications Privacy Act, instead of telling the cellular > providers to go fix their own problems? Most agencies of the government > understand the problem well enough. That is why a great many of them have > implemented digital scrambling on their own radio systems. Perhaps easier for the government to pass a law than to open what is really proving to be a can of worms .. legal status of encryption technology in the context of national and international security. Consistently there has been a desire from all governments not to have too many encrypted messages buzzing around, except what their own military needs. If encryption were to become common, how can law enforecement work? (This takes us right into that controversy, and I hope we dont waste c.d.t bandwidth on this (OK government need to monitor, but what about my privacy, they can misuse ...) unless someone has real news :-) The topic has been beaten and all views possible have been expressed in such groups as comp.risks, sci.crypt and I'm sure many others.) But that still does not convince me why they could not specify and authorise a "weak" encryption system for cellular. Tho' I think I can see it ... how can a govt live up to face the fact that they deliberately wrote into law a system known to be "weak". Also it is not easy to ban export of encryption schemes and yet have to import your phones from Taiwan ... hmm what a bind! No government has ever been technically faulted for administrative laws, and therefore it is easy to see why they's prefer such a step to a slippery technological one. Till said technology comes to be accepted enough. Me thinks so ... shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in ) ------------------------------ From: clifto@indep1.UUCP (Cliff Sharp) Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line Date: 9 Nov 92 19:13:35 GMT >> [Moderator's Note: Well you are right of course that 20-30 seconds >> can mean life or death under some conditions. But the current telco >> technology is such that if the man wants his phone line back (more or >> less) immediatly, he will need to disconnect and wait about that >> period of time for the CO to get rid of the other party who is hanging >> on the line. PAT] I've found that (at least locally) I can get those calls off the line by shorting tip to ring. Not a _nice_ thing to do, but very effective. I figure the total impedance in the runs from the CO to the house should very effectively prevent any real burnout, and so far I've been right (or lucky) about that. Don't know _why_ it works, but it does. Fortunately, I haven't had any such calls in a good long time; it also seems that the local CO shuts those things off no matter what. (My sister had a habit of calling me and going to sleep on the phone, and we were effectively out of service until someone found the phone and replaced the handset; that's what initially led me to experiment.) Cliff Sharp clifto@indep1.chi.il.us OR clifto@indep1.uucp WA9PDM Use whichever one works ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Compuserve/MCI Email Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:38:49 GMT [story about problem with CompuServe-MCI e-mail gateway deleted] > [Moderator's Note: Actually, the fault may very well be with MCI Mail. > They routinely dump huge amounts of mail from the Internet undelivered. > The sender may or may not get notice of non-delivery, depending on the > way things occured. Their complaint is that a single address in the > envelope is bad; someone quit subscribing to MCI Mail but never told > me to remove their name. The mail gets there, MCI sees one bad address > and dumps it all. While we're dumping on e-mail carriers, I've a couple of gripes as well. cc:Mail does exactly what Pat has described above, and as the maintainer of a host-based email system that must talk to a cc:Mail system, I can attest to the frustration of having a message with a large distribution list dumped in its entirety because of a single bad address. (If only the USPS would do this for bulk mail! :-)) CompuServe also has a major problem in my opinion. They don't support multiple line email addresses. This is crucial to get to many addresses on MCI Mail for example. We have a gateway from our host email system to MCI that uses a so-called REMS account. Among other things, this means that it takes a three line address to reach most of our users. Since CompuServe doesn't support more than one line, most of our users can't receive mail from CompuServe users. CompuServe has been aware of this problem for several years now and chooses not to do anything about it. It is really silly when you consider that if one of our users sends a message to a CompuServe user, that the CompuServe user can't even use the REPLY command, because it will reject the multi-line address. It's pretty hard to dispute that this is a bug on CIS's part as far as I can see. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:48:50 GMT In article gstovall@bnr.ca (G.T.) writes: > Dallas is served by Southwestern Bell. Some of the outlying areas > (like Plano, etc.) are served by GTE. I seem to remember a story that appeared in the TELECOM Digest several years ago about the SWB-GTE situation in Texas. There was a large company, Atlantic Richfield I think, that moved a large complex from an area served by SWB to one served by GTE. The GTE service was so inadequate that they had all of their local lines terminate in SWB territory, then piped them into their office in GTE territory via private microwave. GTE got upset about this and sued. The precedent-setting ruling was that this was okay, since the company in question was legitimately paying for the SWB lines in SWB territory, and what they did with them on their side of the demarc (in whatever small space they rented in SWB territory) was their business. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 01:03 GMT From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers AT&T will offer a regular 800 number, for $15 a month plus usage which is, if I'm not mistaken, a flat 31c/Minute. This ties into an ordinary phone number. There is a charge of $30 to install it. Sprint is about the same, except the per minute rate is about the same as dialed direct calls. In the case of both AT&T and Sprint, the number can be listed with 800 Directory; Sprint will take two company names for a single 800 number with no problem; up to four can be put on a number but more than two requires proof those names actually use it, i.e. letterhead submitted to them. MCI has the $5 a month 800 number, but it's a shared number; after someone dials the 800 number, they dial a passcode. The passcode indicates which subscriber to connect to. I had the 800 number service from Mid Atlantic Telecom of Washington, DC for a while. It's $8 a month plus usage which ranges from 16c to 31c per minute depending on distance and time of day. Also, Mid Atlantic does an additional thing that's surprising, the "Caller ID List" or "ANI List", in which included with your bill is a printed listing of the time and date, length of time and calling number of everyone who called your 800 number. MCI also has a standard non-shared 800 number, but it's more expensive. I saw an announcement on here for Cable and Wireless' 800 number which allows the customer to change the destination number on his own. Also, Sprint allows you to have an 800 number route to a specific place depending onthe caller location. So here's your answer: Get Sprint's 800 number. In your area code, have calls to that 800 number routed to the other party; in their area code, have calls to that 800 number routed to you. Or substitute "areas you travel in" for area code. If you're on the West Coast and they are on the East Coast, it's real simple; put calls in the Pacific and Mountain States to direct to them; put Central and Eastern Time Zone calls to you. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: grayt@SOFTWARE.MITEL.COM (Tom Gray) Subject: Re: Music On Call? Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:38:51 -0500 Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article leichter@lrw.com (Jerry Leichter) writes: > I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering > machine: Several minutes of music. There was no voiceover anywhere in > the message, or before or after it -- just music. The sound was of > [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called > your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing > music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off. PAT] A more likely possibility is that you received a call from someone behind a PBX. Hearing your answering machine message, this person attempted to make a new call by depressing the switch hook to get dial tone. He did this so quickly that the off hook was interpreted as a switch hook flash by the PBX. The PBX put you on soft hold while it waited for the user to set up the conference call or what not. You heard, the PBX's MOH signal while the originator blithely went about his business not knowing of the connection to your phone. ------------------------------ From: morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Mike Morris) Subject: Re: Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 07:36:10 GMT telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: > United Telephone - Northwest (A Sprint Company) > CASH FOR USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER EQUIPMENT! > United Telephone (a Sprint Company) is interested in purchasing your > USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER equipment. > So anyone with old equipment they don't want might consider this as > one way of getting rid of it -- and help Sprint upgrade their service > at the same time, yuk, yuk! Hey - a place where I can unload all my 1A, 1A1 and 1A2 equipment! Mike Morris WA6ILQ 818-447-7052 evenings PO Box 1130 Arcadia, CA. 91077 All opinions must be my own since nobody pays me enough to be their mouthpiece... ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #837 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28206; 11 Nov 92 5:07 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23319 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:54:42 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28508 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:54:27 -0600 Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:54:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211110854.AA28508@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #838 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 Nov 92 02:54:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 838 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The Fax Pest (Middlesex News via Adam Gaffin) Re: What's a T1? (Alan L. Varney) Experience With AT&T Language Line (Peter G. Capek) Copper -> Fiber DS1 Cutover Systems (Rob McKaughan) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Bill Petrisko) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: adamg@eff.org (Adam Gaffin) Subject: The Fax Pest Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:08:17 GMT {Middlesex News}, Framingham, Mass., Nov. 10, 1992 "Moroney's World" The faxman calls again Have you been faxed by the Fax Pest? Daniel Gregory, the nationally known fax freak of Holliston, has struck again. This time, he faxed out a pre-election newsletter, "Fax-Line News," to some 5,000 unsuspecting recipients. Some of them are quite teed off. Helen Lemoine of Framingham, for example, was jolted from a deep sleep at 3:32 a.m. on election morning. "When the phone rang at that time of the night, I just jumped a mile high," she said. Lemoine doesn't know Gregory "from a hole in the wall." And although he won't discuss it, Gregory apparently used a computer dialer and mailing list to make the calls and send the faxes, pulling off the fast-growing nuisance crime of the '90s. Hit-and-run junk faxing. You may remember this self-employed fax freak from headlines last winter. The American Honda Motor Co. won a permanent injunction after Gregory bombarded their fax machines with junk, including a 14-foot fax that read "Dan Gregory is not happy with his car." In his election newsletter, Gregory, who is about 31 and single, urged people to vote against state reps Barbara Gray and Barbara Gardner and congressional candidates Ed Markey and Peter Blute. Guess what? All four won. That doesn't annoy him, Gregory said. But when I contacted him yesterday, that did annoy him -- especially when I called him a pest. "I'm no more of a pest than you are dishonest," he replied angrily. Then he told me I was sneaky and underhanded. If you want a full transcript of our conversation, you might want to contact the Fax Pest himself. He recorded it. Gregory also said that if people think he's obnoxious, and if they treated him badly solely on the grounds that he is obnoxious, they would be trampling on his civil rights. "So what if I'm obnoxious? We have civil rights laws ... to protect all kinds of behavior," he said. We also have a federal fax statute which goes into effect Feb. 28, but this is where it gets scary: The new law apparently doesn't protect us against Gregory and people like him. According to Gregory, the law simply requires senders to provide their telephone numbers and time and date of the fax on the cover sheet. Also, senders may not send unsolicited advertising. If he repeatedly calls a certain fax number, then he can be prosecuted under harassment laws. But if he just does a mass faxing, one per household, not even the state Attorney General's office can touch him, he says. "I hope he (the AG) tries to torpedo me because it will show that the people have installed a moron in that office," Gregory boasted. That's the FP for you, making friends wherever he goes. The truth is, people are fed up with junk faxes. My newsroom gets a forest's worth every day, with Congressman Joe Kennedy the biggest offender. When Kennedy gets indigestion, we hear about it in a fax. Gregory received about ten written complaints at his post office box, the only address on the newsletter. He characterized the nastier respondents as hypersensitive and thin-skinned. A Marlboro women said, "I really think you have a helluva nerve ... you don't even have the testicular fortitude to put your return fax number on the fax." A Norfolk engineering company sent Gregory a bill for $75 for "inconvenience to our customers; paper and clerical charges; annoyance factor." An unmarked letter returned Gregory's own newsletter with the word "sick" circled and this note: "Yes, you are sick. Get some help. Stop inundating people's phone lines, you nut." I couldn't have faxed it better myself. Adam Gaffin adamg@eff.org Voice: (508) 626-3968 Putting the Internet on paper! [Moderator's Note: Adam Gaffin is a staff writer for the {Middlesex News} and he shares his gems with the Digest from time to time. Thanks again Adam! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:44:37 CST From: varney@ihlpl.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: What's a T1? Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) writes: > In article , John C. Fowler magellan.colorado.edu> writes: >> I've seen the abbreviation 'T1' or 'T-1' here in the Digest many times >> over the past few years, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone >> define exactly what a T1 was. > Although many good treatments abound, allow me to offer a "Reader's > Digest" version: > T1 is a type of digital carrier system which was originally deployed > in 1962 to solve a number of problems inherent in congested > metropolitan area short haul (less than 50 mile) carrier needs. T-1 > (Or T1 as you like) specifies a four wire circuit transmitting signals > at 1.544 megabits/second (Mbps). T1 carries its information in the > format known as DS1 (Digital Signal 1). Hi, Jack -- Well, you beat me to it! But I was going to offer the "Scientific American" version ... anyway, here's some added details on "T1". While 1962 was the beginnings of T1, the current almost-8-bit PCM encoding wasn't used until the D2 system was deployed. D1 used 7-bit samples and simple framing patterns (alternating 0 & 1). The AT&T D4 digital channel banks were introduced in 1976. I've never seen exact descriptions of the "T1" vs. "DS1" terms, so I'll mention my version of them: T1 refers to a (bidirectional) digital transmission FACILITY operating at a bit rate of 1.544 Mb/s, originally copper, with all the physical/electrical/maintenance interfaces. D4 channel banks (and digital switches, etc.) interface with the T1 facility, but are not part of the facility. DS1 refers to the digital BIT STREAM format at the 1.544 Mb/s rate -- in this case, 24 PCM voice channels (or data). The DS1 stream "flows" through D4's and switches interconnected with T1 facilities. DS1 operates with a "sub-frame" of 193 bits, carrying 24 PCM voice channels, arranged with a framing bit and 8 bits/channel (192 bits). Each sub-frame takes 125 micro-seconds to transmit, yielding 8000 sub-frames/sec. For a given channel, the net rate is 8000 x 8 bits or 64,000 bits/second of sampled voice. The PCM samples are formed by converting the sampled analog voltage to a binary code using non-linear mu=255 companding, better known as "mu-law" encoding. In order to detect where sub-frames begin (so that channels and 8-bit PCM bits can be located), the D4 channel bank organizes the DS1 stream into "Frames" of six sub-frames each and "Superframes" of 12 frames each. (I believe the D1 system first called these "frames", and D4 stayed with the same terminology). Each Superframe thus contains an "A-frame" and a "B-frame". The lone framing bit of each sub-frame is set to 0 or 1 in a way that allows the system to detect "loss of synchronization" with a far-end transmitter. The framing bit for the first and subsequent "odd" sub-frames alternates in a "1 0 1 0 1 0" pattern. The framing bit for even sub-frames follows a "0 0 1 1 1 0" pattern. The resulting bit pattern is {10001101110}. When the "odd" sub-frame pattern isn't consistently detected by the receiver, "sync" has been lost. Sync is restored by forcing the far end to transmit a fixed pattern in the 24 "channel" positions and the full 12-bit framing pattern. Once in sync, only the "odd" sub-frame pattern is checked. The DS1 stream does not have "room" to carry the DC on-hook and off-hook signals of the analog trunks it replaces, so several means have been used to substitute for those signals. The most common is "robbed-bit" or "AB bit" signaling, which uses the lowest bit in each PCM sample of the 6th and 12th frame as an "A" and "B" bit. In many cases, A=1 means off-hook -- B is used in schemes where FX "lines" are provided via T1 and power ringing or such must be signalled. (The 6th and 12th frames are where the framing bit of the "even" sub-frames change from "0" to "1" or "1" to "0".) Since the "even" sub-frame's framing bit isn't needed to maintain sync, it can also be used as a slow-speed data link, at about 4Kb/s. When the D4 bank is used in the SLC(tm)-96 loop carrier system, the data-link is used for both call signaling and alarm/maintenance data. The D4 bank can also be used in a "48-channel" mode (DS1C=3.152Mb/s), and in a paired 96-channel arrangement (DS2=6.312Mb/s). These can be connected to T1C and T2 facilities, respectively. Al Varney ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 01:56:53 EST From: capek@watson.ibm.com Subject: Experience With AT&T Language Line I recently had occasion to use the AT&T Language Line service, and thought readers here might be interested in hearing about it. The service which is offered is that of oral translation between English and any of about 140 other languages. It is implemented by setting up a three-way phone call between the originator (me), an interpreter, and the party to whom I wish to speak, but not until I have had a chance to brief the interpreter as to the nature of the call (e.g., name of called party, background information, how the interpreter should identify the caller on whose behalf he is speaking, etc.) The cost is $3.50/minute for the interpreter, plus the cost of the call if the other party is outside the U.S. I made about six calls in three weeks and was very happy with the service, with one exception. I was calling Czechoslovakia and requested a Czech interpreter. Each time I called, it took no more than a minute or so to get the interpreter on the line with me. The interpreter was identified to me by number, and after about the third call, I was asked if I had a preferred interpreter. I did, and was able to get her if she was available. Getting the same interpreter has the added advantage that it reduces the amount of briefing the caller has to give to the interpreter, assuming he remembers the previous call(s). The one unsatisfactory call involved an interpreter who elected to answer the questions being asked himself, rather than translating them for the remote party. He did this to both ends repeatedly. Since the other "end" was an attorney, this was particularly inappropriate. AT&T was happy to give credit for the call when I complained. I presume the offending interpreter was dropped from the roster. On the other hand, when the Czech-speaking party dictated a short document to be translated, the interpreter asked me if I wished the translation immediately or after the remote party had gotten off the phone, thereby saving me the long distance charges which would have been incurred if I had kept the remote party on the line while I listened to the translation. I was very pleased with this initiative by the interpreter. The interpreters are located throughout the US, although the service is headquartered in Monterey, California. I believe that is, not accidentally, where the US (Navy? Army?) translator's school is located. I believe that some of the other international carriers offer similar services, but I have no experience with them. Peter G. Capek ------------------------------ From: Rob McKaughan Subject: Copper -> Fiber DS1 Cutover Systems Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711 Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 07:54:50 GMT I am working on a student engineering project and would like some information. We are trying to design a device which cuts from a copper based DS1 (T1) system to a fiber based sytem. (We are making the cut over on the copper side of the fiber optic terminal). We want to be able to make this cutover with the system live, and do it transparently. We do not want to have to shut down the circuit to add and remove the cutover device. So far, we see that our problems are: 1) cutting over in less than the 50ms that protection switches cut over in; 2) keeping everything terminated properly while adding and removing the box. So, I've got some questions. If you have any information on this subject, I'd very much appreciate hearing about it. 1> Does anyone know of a system out there that already does this or something very similar to it? 2> Does anyone know any good ways of cutting a DS1 line and immediately terminating it? I'm sure cut-and-terminate devices exist out there. What are some brands? 3> Anyone know of any brands of DS1 line testers (for live circuits)? Thanks! Rob McKaughan Internet: rob@jarthur.claremont.edu Harvey Mudd College UUCP: ..!uunet!jarthur!rob Computer Science System Staff ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems From: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu (William Petrisko) Date: 11 Nov 92 01:11:27 MST Reply-To: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson > Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of > operation has rendered most home security systems useless. (I don't > have the exact number of houses hit so far, and the cops here are > understandably close mouthed about it.) > Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks > snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the > owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then > walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the > weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is > drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified > since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back. Padlock on the breaker box? > My house was hit day before yesterday but we stayed indoors and used a > mobile phone (luckily!! inside the house!) to call the sheriff. No > theft, but scared us witless when the both our regular POTS phones > were dead. Also, we found on later examination that our cable TV coax > was cut. (Why cable???) > This brings me to the questions: > a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC > power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done > on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter > for those people who do not have mobile phones? There are several devices available. I'm not sure where you are located, but most major cities now have several radio-type devices available for installation. Also, there is a cellular interface that automatically backs up your alarm -and- your house line in the event of a line-cut. The only part that might scare you is the price. DEALER pricing on the radio equipment is several hundred dollars (plus whatever the monitoring station wants to rape you every month), the cellular box is $700 COST for dealers. Plus a monthly with the cellular carrier ... > b) Any recommendations on such devices out there? It's been awhile since I've been in the security business, if you really want to know, mail me back and I'll dig up some copies of industry magazines and get back to you. > c) Why were cable connections cut? Do some monitoring stations use > cable coax for communications back to the head node for purposes other > than cable TV channel $$$ monitoring? Yep. While in Tucson, I saw remnants of an alarm-cabletv interface. Apparently, the cable co. was in the alarm business a few years back. Nice idea, having a dedicated-line installed in the house already, guess they couldn't handle it though. > d) How can I hide the phone connections at my house or make the > snipping a less than trivial process? Rebuild the house and don't leave anything outside? ;) Or build some sort of lockable "cage" around the telco protector, adhere it to the wall with non-reversible screws. > I would appreciate any advice. Honestly, a cheap answer to your problem would be a small board (the manufacturer name escapes me) that monitors the phone line voltage, and connect it to the alarm so it trips the siren. It might trick the theives into thinking that *someone* was notified ... besides, it doesn't sound like these theives would stick around after cutting wires and tripping the siren. Another backup-battery in parallel (or just a bigger aH in it's place) might make you feel more secure too. The BEST solution would be the cellular backup AND the line-monitoring board. The cell-phone would back it up, and the line-monitor would trip a zone (silent OR audible) that could notify the alco it was running on the backup line. The only drawback would be cost. If you don't mind me asking, that kind of alarm are you using and who monitors it? Also (being in the business brings this part out), having an alarm is no reason to shortchange the rest of your home's security (deadbolts, solid doors, good locks on windows, lighting, etc.) Hope it helps. bill petrisko petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu aka n7lwo ...!uunet!4gen!warlok!gargle!omnisec!thumper!bill ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #838 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28310; 11 Nov 92 5:12 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20022 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:11:26 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06723 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:11:08 -0600 Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:11:08 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211110911.AA06723@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #839 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 Nov 92 03:11:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 839 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (David G. Lewis) Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (John McHarry) Re: Fax Back From DTMF - Summary (Ted Shapin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:12:13 CST >> On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of ^^ >> multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of >> the switch. ^^^ > Not true. As soon as the circuit (circuit switched voice call) is > lost, supervision on the circuit indicates it has gone idle. I know > of no switching system (I could be wrong here) that will automatically > reconnect the ends of a failed circuit switched call. Furthermore, I > have not experienced voice trunks that are switched through a DCS > (Digital Cross Connect System) after the End, Tandem, or Access Tandem > machine finishes switching them. There are multiple ways of routing > (Hierarchical, Dynamic Non-Hierarchical-DNHR, and Real Time > Non-Hierarchical-RTNR), but all of these are accomplished through > routing tables contained in the switches themselves. > Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 > jadams@vixen.bcr.com kahuna@attmail.com First, let me clarify exactly what I meant. The point I was making is that a switch need not know that anything has happened. As an example, lets assume there is a T1 line connecting Switch A and Switch B (which could be any type of switches -- Local CO, Access Tandems, etc). The switch does not know or care how the T1 gets from Switch A to Switch B. As long as everything that switch A spits out on the T1 gets to switch B, they are happy. If the T1 connecting them goes through equipment that is able to very rapidly reroute the T1 around a failure, then the T1 path between the switches will never actually fail, the switch will not know what happened, and the call will stay up. Equipment to do this DOES exist. I work for a railroad, in the telecommunications department (although not the switched network group), and we have equipment (I can't remember the name - I'll refer to it as a DACS, although that is not really an accurate name) that does this. Basically, a network of DACS is created, with the nodes connected by T1s. Ports are then added to the various nodes (Ports can be voice, data, T1s, etc). You then instruct the system to connect any port to any other port, and it finds available bandwidth in the network and routes the circuit. Should any Network T1 fail, the connections that were routed over that T1 are dynamically, and in real-time, re-routed. Therefore, if we want a T1 trunk group to connect switch A to switch B, we connect the T1 output of switch A to a DACS port, the output of switch B to a DACS port, and instruct the DACS to connect the ports. Bingo -- a T1 trunk group that will stay alive even if the actual transmission medium connecting them fails (because the DACS will reroute it around the failure without the switch noticing). Of course, if there were an active call on the trunk, you would hear silence while the reroute was taking place (so modem calls might be dropped), but the call would stay up (assuming that the DACS was able to reroute the connection, which assumes that sufficient backup bandwidth is available). Note that a connection between a port on Node A and a port on node B need not necessarily be routed over a T1 from Node A to Node B -- it may go via one or more intermediate nodes on its way. Notice here that the DACS is doing no circuit switching. It is simply maintaining a path between the switches (regardless of whether or not the switch is using the data path). (Actually, I have greatly understated the capabilities of this "DACS", and it does do some things such as not wasting bandwidth with Voice T1 channels that are idle, etc, but the general idea is there). NOTE: DACS is not an accurate term here, but its the best one that I can come up with. I an fairly certain that supervision on the trunk will not be lost during the interval that the trunk is being rerouted. If it was, then, of course, the call would be dropped, but there are easy ways around that. (This post is long enough without the details). Do any telephone companies actually use this for voice circuits? I don't know, but my point was that it could be done if they wanted to. Brett (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) (As usual, I speak neither for the university via which I access Usenet nor for my employer.) ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut Organization: AT&T Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:35:53 GMT In article vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) writes: > In article , rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: >>> A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing ... >> ... In >> general, the switches will not dynamically reroute a call should a >> trunk fail. That is, if a switch has multiple paths available, and >> one fails, your call will be lost, but the next call will be routed >> over a path that is still functioning. >> On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of >> multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of >> the switch. > Not true. As soon as the circuit (circuit switched voice call) is > lost, supervision on the circuit indicates it has gone idle. I know > of no switching system (I could be wrong here) that will automatically > reconnect the ends of a failed circuit switched call. Furthermore, I > have not experienced voice trunks that are switched through a DCS > (Digital Cross Connect System) after the End, Tandem, or Access Tandem > machine finishes switching them. There are multiple ways of routing > (Hierarchical, Dynamic Non-Hierarchical-DNHR, and Real Time > Non-Hierarchical-RTNR), but all of these are accomplished through > routing tables contained in the switches themselves. Stepping back a pace: the original post referred to a physical cable failure (namely, a racoon chewing through a cable). If this physical cable is carrying facilities which are 1+1 or 1:N protected by the multiplexers, transmission systems (e.g. fiber optic terminals), or wideband/broadband DCSs, and the protection switch occurs in less than three seconds, the facilities will switch to the protection system before Carrier Group Alarm (CGA) occurs. From the point of view of the switch, the "circuit" is never "lost", and the calls are not cleared. I don't know exactly what you mean by switching "after" the switch "finishes switching" trunks, but it is certainly possible to have interswitch trunks riding on top of protected facilities. Whether or not it's economically justified for voice traffic is a different question. AT&T uses FASTAR (Fast Automatic Restoration), which uses DCSs to control rerouting of facilities; it's not fast enough to avoid CGA, but does succeed in rerouting 100s of DS3s in minutes, which is pretty good. (And I know that's not proprietary cause I saw Frank Ianna talking about it on TV...) (I wonder if a future version of FASTAR which is fast enough to avoid CGA will be called FASTERAR?) When I worked at Teleport, we used 1+1 protection with diverse facilities (route diversity in the majority of cases; conduit diversity where only one route was feasible, and sheath diversity where there was only a single conduit, usually only at building entrances). Any facility failures would cause a roll to the protection fibers in one second or less, which would be detectable as a hit on a data line, possibly detectable as a brief dropout on a voice line, and wouldn't cause any switches to go into CGA. Any equipment rolls we did had the procedures very carefully designed to meet the "three second test" -- you don't cause any hits lasting more than three seconds. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ From: mcharry@mitre.org (John McHarry) Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut Organization: The MITRE Corporation Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:04:50 GMT In vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) writes: >> On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of > ^^ >> multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of >> the switch. ^^^ Some trunking systems implement "protection switching." There is an extra path in parallel with one or more of those actually in use that can be quickly switched in before calls are dropped. Most subscriber carrier systems have this option, including DMS-1U, DMS-1, and even the SLC-96. It was very common in microwave trunking systems to reroute around squalls--remember the connections that got noisier and noisier, then, clunk!, a clear connection? John (McHarry@MITRE.org) ------------------------------ Date: 10 Nov 1992 11:00:44 -0800 (PST) From: Ted Shapin Subject: Re: Fax Back From DTMF - Summary Here is a summary of what I found from my inquiry on a fax back system that will use audio response and DTMF tones to select a stored fax document that will then be transmitted to the caller's fax machine. This is called "fax on demand". Systems can be either "one call" or "call back." With one call you dial from your fax machine and everything is completed in one call. With call back you call from any phone and give the phone number of your fax machine which will then be called back. The latter method is covered by a Brooktrout patent. Some systems will let you leave a voice mail message after you have made your selections. Some systems are expandable to hundreds of phone lines. Some systems allow private fax mailboxes so users can dial in and receive any faxes that have been sent to them and stored in their fax mailbox. Mike Bray says: "Here's something to consider (or not) ... > All the ones I've tried will NOT work with an older group-II > FAX machine. Yes, group-II machines are slow and lame, but > that's no excuse for these services not working with them. > So... if you have a choice, I'd avoid the ones that don't > support group-II (and be sure to tell them why)." Here are the companies I found together with demonstration numbers so you can try them yourself. Mfr: AudioFAX, 2000 Powers Ferry Rd., Marietta, GA 30067 Voice: 404-933-7600 or 800-283-4632 FAX: 404-933-7600 Description: Series 100 -- 2 to 8 ports, Series 300 -- 24 ports, Series 300I rack nounted. Fax on demand, fax store and forward, fax mail. Demo number: 404-618-4555 Mfr: Brooktrout Technology, 144 Gould St., Needham, MA 02192 Voice: 617-449-4100 FAX: 617-449-9009 Description: Product is the FlashFAX automated document delivery system. A small two voice two line system sells for $10,000 and is built into a small PC compatible. Hardware and software for larger systems and other operating systems including Unix, OS/2 and QNX is available. Software toolkit for custom applications. Company supplies OEM systems. This company owns U.S. patent 4,918,722. See the discussion at the end regarding this. Mfr: The Complete PC, 1983 Concourse Dr., San Jose, CA 95131 Voice: 408-434-0145 or 800-229-1753 FAX: 408-434-9701. BBS: 408-434-9703 Description: The Complete Communicator is an add-in board for an IBM compatible PC. Their demo system is for retrieving application notes and must be called from your fax machine. I thought this was the poorest system that I tried. I heard bursts of modem noise and CNG tones mixed in with the voice response. Demo number: 408-434-9749 Mfr: FaxBack, Inc., 15250 N.W. Greenbrier Pkwy., Beaverton, OR 97006-5674 Voice: 800-873-8753 or 503-690-6360 FAX: 503-690-6399 Decription: A FaxBack IV system hardware and software which goes into your own PC and supports two incoming voice lines and two fax lines costs $8400. A multi-language support option which will support up to ten languages is $1500. Intel fax boards and Dialogic voice boards are used. A rack model handles 24 incoming voice and 24 outgoing fax lines simlutaneously. An Intel spin-off. Demo number: 800-329-2225 Mfr: Ibex Technolgies, Inc., 550 Main St., Placerville, CA 95667 Voice: 916-621-4342 FAX: 916-621-2004 Description: Uses GammaLink fax boards and Dialogic voice boards. The boards and software are used with your own 386 PC. A kit for two incoming voice lines and one outgoing fax line is $5600. Multi-language support option. Allows call transfer to a voice system. Each incoming line may start a specific application. An interactive forms option allows a user to mark on a form and fax it. The system does both mark sensing and OCR which can do whatever custom software wants to do with the data. Demo number: 800-289-9998 Mfr: SpectraFAX Corp., 209 S. Airport Rd., Naples, FL. Voice: 813-643-5060 FAX: 813-653-5070 Description: Product name is Special Request. Private and public fax mailboxes. Fax forwarding. Can connect to data on host main frames and LANS. Will work with phone systems such as Rolm. Used by Hewlett Packard. Uses Intel connection coprocessor boards. About $5000 per line. Demo number: 800-289-1329 or 813-643-8720. Mfr: Technology Partners AB, Bjornnasvagen 12, S-113 47 Stockholm Sweden Voice: +46-8 166 600 Fax: +46-8 167 786 Description: - Uses GammaLink Faxboards and NMS voice boards. Up to 16 lines in a chassis. Based on a Basic like script language, which makes it easy to change the voice response tree. For info, send postal address to Lennart Regebro Mfr: Telephone Response Technolgies Voice: 916-784-7777 Description: ProVIDE is an integrated package of application development tools for producing sophisticated multi-line interactive voice response systems. Used and sold by Programmer's Connection. Uses Intel SatisFAXtion board and Dialogic speech card. Two-line system about $1600. Demo number: 216-494-7727 (Programmer's Connection) Ask for documents 5283, 5284. Mfr: Unknown. Distributed by Hello Direct, 5884 Eden Park Pl., San Jose, CA 95138 Voice: 800-444-3556 or 408-972-1990. Description: Robofax $1000. Software and two hardware boards for use with a dedicated IBM compatible PC. Single line only. Mfr: PaperWorks Supplies, P.O. Box 5014, Fremont, CA 94537-9979. (A subsidiary of Xerox.) Voice: 800-962-5343 or 510-651-7199 Description: This is a completely different catagory of product. Voice response and DTMF is not used. Instead, documents are requested by marking boxes on a form which is faxed to the host PC. That PC then faxes the requested documents. The initial form can be received on a fax machine by sending just a blank piece of paper. Introductory price of $250 includes a Complete PC fax card and software. Works with a single phone line. Mfr: Rhetorex, CA Voice: 408-370-0881 Description: Manufacturer of voice boards. Their VARS usually use their voice boards together with Intel fax boards to supply fax on demand systems. Here are quotes from the discussion of U.S. patent 4,918,722 in the comp.patents newsgroup: Abstract: Delivery of binary encoded character data and facsimile encoded data to a specified recipient is controlled rapidly, simply and with versatility, by, e.g., DTMF commands sent by a user. "It looks from the text as if they want to patent any remote retrieval of faxes which can definitely hurt anyone doing software for FaxBack type services or business people trying to retrieve faxes while on the road etc. This patent is being fought by a group called the 'Fax Response Industry Asoociation (FRIA)' Dialogic Corp in Parsippany NJ GammaLink Inc Ibex Technologies Inc. AudioFax FaxBack Inc. Michael A. Shiels mshiels@masnet.uucp MaS Network Software and Consulting mshiels@tmsoftware.ca " "Not quite. Only remote retrieval which is directed at a third phone number. Retrievals done within a single phone call are not covered, and were patented in non-US countries earlier than 1988... /* eli@spdcc.com */ Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA" === end === Ted Shapin Internet: tshapin@beckman.com Beckman Instruments, Inc. Phone: 714/961-3393 2500 Harbor, M/S X-11 FAX: 714/961-3351 Fullerton, CA 92634-3100 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #839 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15189; 12 Nov 92 4:50 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18130 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:12:22 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26765 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:12:02 -0600 Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:12:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211120812.AA26765@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #840 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 Nov 92 02:12:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 840 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cordless Phone Experiences (Russell Kroll) Motorola Alphanumeric Pagers? Any Info? (Paul A. St.Amand) Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (Richard McCombs) South African Telecom (Mark Wuest) Conclusion (Hopefully) of Harassment Case (Luigi Semenzato) World News by Email Wanted (Alfredo Cotroneo) Caller ID and the #5 ESS (Phil Benchoff) What Shows up on OSPS Screen? (Bill Berbenich) Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes (Jim Rees) Voice Line Signalling Jargon (Stephen Davies) Citifone a Flop in New Jersey (Alan Boritz) Confusion in Terms: It Was MTS/IMTS, Not AMPS (Alan Boritz) Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Alan Boritz) Help Wanted With Keyline System (Jack Stephens) Seek Modem Information -- Codex 5208-R (Fred E.J. Linton) Request: Large Format FAX (Richard B. August) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Cordless Phone Experiences From: rkroll@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (Russell Kroll) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 22:56:49 GMT Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX The cordless phone I have here is an AT&T 5500 and you can do some quite interesting things. It will function as a cordless ten channel scanner if you press the right buttons fast. Basically, you hit INTERCM on the remote while hitting OFF at the base at the same time. If you succeed, the INTERCM light will stay on at the remote and it will go off at the base. Now, walk around your house and hit CHAN until you hear something. I can pick up my neighbors and all kinds of stuff. It's fun hearing someone talk and calling their number from another (wired) phone in the house and hearing the call-waiting go . The best part about this kind of scanning is that you don't need any special equipment and your phone will return to normal the next time you use it after hitting (OFF). rkroll@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (Russell Kroll) Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 943-2728 1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis ------------------------------ From: stamandp@ccsua.ctstateu.edu Subject: Motorola Alphanumeric Pagers? Any Info Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science, New Haven, CT Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:01:23 GMT Hello Net, I'm looking for information on a Motorola Advantage Alphanmumeric pager. I've search the newsgroup is this seems to be just about the closest match to post a message to. I'd like some technical specs on sending formatted data to one of these pagers and take advantage (no pun) of any advanced feature that the pager has. Does any one now if tech specs exists and can mere mortals get a hold of them. Thanks, Paul R. St. Amand | DECNET(ctstateu) CCSU::STAMANDP Central Connecticut State University | Internet stamandp@ccsu.ctstateu.edu ITT Hartford, Finance | BITNET stamandp@ctstateu.BITNET DECUS CVLUG | (203) 547 - 4030 (Business) Disclaimer: These comments are mine and do not reflect the administration or policies of Connecticut State University or ITT Hartford. ------------------------------ Subject: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues From: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs KB5SNF) Reply-To: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 20:22:25 CST Organization: The Red Headed League; Lawton, Ok monty@proponent.com (Monty Solomon) writes: > After discussing privacy laws, legalities, and realities, Flinn notes > that at Scanners Unlimited in San Carlos, CA, "about a quarter of the > customers are interested in telephone eavesdropping." I wonder if sales have increased since it will soon be illegal to sell receivers that still include cellular (such as the Icom R100), also I wonder if the new scanners will no longer be easily modifiable to receive cellular? Internet: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org, bo836@cleveland.freenet.edu UUCP: ...!rwsys!ricksys!rick, {backbones}!ricksys.lonestar.org!rick BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm Fidonet: Richard McCombs @ 1:385/6 ------------------------------ From: Mark.Wuest@att.com Subject: South African Telecom Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:53:00 GMT I have a friend who is trying to economically exchange e-mail with someone in Johannesburg, South Africa. He personally uses Compuserve (they have internet access). For some reason, Compuserve in South Africa is quite expensive. MCI Mail can't give a straight answer on how his friend would connect. His friend is pretty net-illiterate. Can people in South Africa e-mail me any ideas? I'll post a summary and let the Moderator decide if it's interesting enough to use up bandwidth. ;-) Mark Wuest *MY* opinions, not AT&T's!! mark.wuest@att.com mdw@cheshire.att.com (NeXT Mail) [Moderator's Note: In this same issue, I've included some comments by Stephen Davies of Capetown on a different topic. Perhaps if he sees this he will correspond with you; or you could contact him. He describes himself as a 'computer-nerd'; might be just your man! PAT] ------------------------------ From: luigi@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Luigi Semenzato) Subject: Conclusion (Hopefully) of Harassment Case Date: 11 Nov 1992 01:47:10 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley The phone harassment case came to a swift and fairly peaceful conclusion over the week-end. For now at least. It turns out that my friend George had been misinformed: with selective call forwarding, he has no way to specify `forward all calls from the number that just called to xxx-xxxx'. He would always have to know the caller's number. This is how it works in this area. However, he had a suspicion about the identity of the harasser, and selectively forwarded THAT number to ITSELF. So whenever that person called she would get a busy line. Moreover, when selective forwarding is enabled, every forwarded call produces a single short ring at the dialed phone. George was then able to verify that a number of calls at the usual TV-commercial intervals were in fact being forwarded. After he was sure, he turned the forwarding off. Next day he called her and told her he had a log of the calls, showing they were all from her number. I don't know the exact details of the conversation, but she kept denying. Apparently she has stopped calling. Luigi ------------------------------ From: A.Cotroneo@it12.bull.it (Alfredo Cotroneo) Subject: World News by Email Wanted Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:30:39 MET I am posting this request on behalf of a radio station in Russia. They would be interested in receiving world news summaries on a daily or hourly basis via e-mail. Since their budget is quite small, they would be interested to know if there is such service available thru USENET/Internet for free, or some organization does make this available at cost. I have checked other LISTS on Internet, but nothing regarding World News was found. Thank you. Please reply directly to: Alfredo E. Cotroneo, NEXUS-IBA, PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy. fax: +39-2-706 38151 / phone +39-2-2666971 or +39-337-297788 email: 100020.1013@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: benchoff@groupw.cns.vt.edu (Phil Benchoff) Subject: Caller ID and the #5 ESS Date: 11 Nov 92 20:23:07 GMT The local phone company (C&P) is about to cut over to a #5 ESS. They will be offering Caller ID as a service. I called the business office today and asked about blocking caller id. Their answer was that there was no way to do that, even if you have an unlisted number. Does anyone know just what the capabilities of the #5 ESS are as far as Caller-ID goes? Is this something that is not available in the software, or just something they won't do? [Moderator's Note: It is just something they won't do; either that or they will do it and you got an ignorant representative. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: What Shows up on OSPS Screen? Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 12:43:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Bill Berbenich Reply-To: bill.berbenich@ee.gatech.edu An article in a recent TELECOM Digest about Call Manager got me to thinking. Just what exactly shows up on the OSPS (operator) console screen when I dial 00 for the AT&T operator? I know that they at least have MY number if it's POTS and I know that they have the number that I have dialed if I 0+ it. So what else? Bill Berbenich, School of EE, DSP Lab Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: gatech!ee!bill.berbenich Internet: bill.berbenich@ee.gatech.edu ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes Date: 11 Nov 1992 18:11:19 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu You would think that cellular providers would be sensitive to the problem of dialing numbers with a 0 or 1 as the second digit, since many cellular prefixes are of this type. But our latest cell phone number is in the 600 prefix, and we've found that we can't roam anywhere, even where our provider has a mutual roaming agreement with the remote provider. The reason? It seems that most cellular providers can't deal with the 600 prefix. I really like Pat's solution to this problem (make the party with the problem call you at your "problem" prefix) but don't think I can implement it in this situation. [Moderator's Note: When you say they 'cannot deal with the 600 prefix' do you mean other carriers refuse to accept it as a valid phone number for purposes of billing roamers, or do you mean they refuse/cannot accept it for the purpose of incoming calls passed along through the local xxx-ROAM number? I'd say the best recourse here is to simply refuse to pay any roaming charges under the circumstances. That is, if you get assessed a charge for roaming when you turn your phone on in their territory yet they won't accept outgoing and/or imcoming calls, then when roaming charges show up on your cellular bill just deduct them and add a note saying 'roaming service unavailable in (place), obviously the bill is in error.' Let the cell carriers squabble among themselves over accepting (or not) the chargeback. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Voice Line Signalling Jargon From: steve@cstat.aztec.co.za Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 13:55:41 SAT Organization: Compustat (Pty) Ltd Hi Pat and esteemed TELECOM Digest readers, Our company is about to install a networking device known as the Micom NetRunner. This box, amongst other things, is able to carry voice traffic. I am a computer-nerd and am ignorant about telecom. Similarly, our PABX supplier (Telkom SA) is/are telecom-nerds (do you get them?) and don't know too much about computers. So we have an understanding gap. The Telkom guys are used to installing PABX tie-lines using two-wire analogue leased lines between the two premises. My NetRunner voice-cards support the following "interfaces": E&M (two or four wire) KTS OPX Would anyone care to define these for me? As I understand things, the NetRunner provides a full-duplex anologue link -- presumably these acronyms are something to do with signalling so that the NetRunner knows that the PABX wants a connection to the remote PABX, and so that the remote NetRunner can alert the remote PABX to the incoming connection (c.f. going off-hook and ringing). Anyhow, I guess I want to know which of these options is most like "copper" ... Thanks for your time, Stephen Davies, Compustat (Pty) Ltd, Cape Town steve%cstat.aztec.co.za@ucthpx.uct.ac.za [Moderator's Note: Purely by coincidence Stephen's mail arrived about the same time as the question from Mark Wuest earlier in this same issue. Perhaps, Stephen, you could answer Mark's question about email in and out of South Africa. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 11 Nov 92 07:15:39 EST From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Citifone a Flop in New Jersey The largest bank in the US doesn't seem to want to keep it's New Jersey customers. Citifone, a service of Citibank, N.A., has a 201 area (New Jersey) access number in Rockaway, New Jersey. Rockaway is a premium toll call from most of Northeast New Jersey, and is more expensive than calling their New York City access number (you can make international calls for less than what it costs from southern New Jersey). They have an 800 access number, but it won't work anywhere in the tri-state area (New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut). I honestly don't understand how Citibank executives can dress and feed themselves without assistance after seeing this nonsense firsthand. Are there any similarly large banking organizations doing anything creative and efficient with customer services without similarly making their customers pay through the nose for their stupid mistakes? Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: 11 Nov 92 07:15:24 EST From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Confusion in Terms: It Was MTS/IMTS, Not AMPS TELECOM Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: I am reminded of how children forty years ago liked > to listen to the VHF radio and spy on the mobile phones of that era. I > think the service was called AMPS. Ack! Shame on you, Pat! AMPS was the grandfather (or second uncle twice removed ;) of what we know today as CELLULAR service. One former boss (who's most striking thoughts about working with Alexander Graham Bell's original notes were that his handwriting was so graceful (no kidding!)) worked on the original AMPS project when he was a scientist at Bell Labs. The contemporary "mobile phone" service forty years ago would have been MTS (which was followed by IMTS and eventually Cellular some years later). BTW, the "children 'spying' on mobile phone conversations" scenario was used very similarly in a paper used to justify mobile telephone subscriber equipment purchases for (former) New York City Mayor Koch, as well as his commissioners (and cook). In retrospect, it sort of reflected characteristic poorly set priorities. Municipal executives worried about a child's pastime, while they let vital communications resources (office telephone and two-way radio systems) deteriorate. But that's a topic for another time ... ;) Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: 11 Nov 92 07:15:55 EST From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number tg@chmsr.gatech.edu (T. Govindaraj) writes: > Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since my wife > and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for occasional > calls...Is anybody using this option? > [Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared > this with the cellular company? Most do NOT allow two or more phones > to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone > and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about. Change "most" to ALL. There should be NO US cellular carriers that will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone number. Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR). But Pat, why are you applying analog logic to a digital problem? ;) Don't forget that a digital switch runs the cellular exchange. Generic switch features can be used to similate two phones bridged on a single line. Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com [Moderator's Note: You are correct that generic switch features can be used for this simulation, however my point was that *provided there has been no tapering with the wire pair between subscriber and CO*, the pair identifies the subscriber regardless of what the subscriber may say to the operator or what tricks he might play on a long distance company, etc. As an absolute recourse against billing fraud and other forms of tomfoolery, once a call has been traced at the CO to your wire pair, it has been traced to you (as the person responsible for the use of your instruments, etc). You can lie about your phone number, you can put improper tones on the line, etc, but the wire pair serves as the absolute identity of who you are, playig the same role as the lectronic erial umber does in cellular. PAT] ------------------------------ From: infmx!jms@uunet.UU.NET (Jack Stephens) Subject: Help With Keyline System Organization: Informix Software, Inc. Date: 11 Nov 92 19:37:32 GMT I'm about to move into a house that is currently outfitted with an older phone system ("key line", I think). It uses older phones and five lighted push buttons connecting to some sort of central trunk. Obviously, my knowledge and information is sketchy. Before I pay PacBell's usurious rates for inside wiring work, I'm trying to gauge how much work it would be to do my own wiring. I've done a fair abount of work on phones in other apartments, but they have all been of the "modularjack to twisted pair" variety. Any and all help would be much appreciaited. Thanks! Jack Stephens jms@informix.com Informix Software ------------------------------ Date: 12-NOV-1992 19:46:27.62 From: Fred E.J. Linton Subject: Seek Modem Information -- Codex 5208-R I've recently acquired a Codex (Motorola) 5208-R modem, vintage 1984, without any accompanying manuals/spec-sheets/etc. Perhaps some kind TELECOM reader can share with me what I need to know to put this modem to good use -- or at least point me to information sources. Many thanks in advance. E-mail replies preferred (spare the Moderator). Fred E.J. Linton Wesleyan U. Math. Dept. 649 Sci. Tower Middletown, CT 06459 E-mail: ( or ) Tel.: + 1 203 776 2210 (home) or + 1 203 347 9411 x2249 (work) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1992 13:37:21 PST From: AUGUST@JPLLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV (Richard B. August) Subject: Request: Large Format FAX We have the need for a large format FAX capability. By "large format" we mean C/D size drawings (C=18x24, D= 24x36). Any assistance is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Richard B. August august@jpllsi.jpl.nasa.gov 76630.335@compuserve.com (818)830-3178 FAX (818)830-3198 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #840 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00333; 13 Nov 92 3:36 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26782 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:03:33 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27800 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:03:08 -0600 Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:03:08 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211130603.AA27800@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #841 TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:03:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 841 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Review of Ameritech Personal Communication Service (Andrew C. Green) New SPARCstation LX Has Built-in ISDN From AT&T (Monty Solomon) RBOC Exit From CPE Market? (Joe Bergstein) No Caller-ID in Texas (George Rapp) "New" Centrex Features (Phydeaux) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 10:57:51 CST From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Review of Ameritech Personal Communication Service You may recall that several months ago, I reported my being signed up for a long-term test of Ameritech's Personal Communication Services. This is essentially a cellular-phone type of network, but uses digital-transmission radio frequencies between the user's portable phone and local transceivers. The idea is to develop a very small cell network (i.e. approximately 1/4 mile per cell) using 10mw digital transceivers for handsets. Ameritech has wired up sections of downtown Chicago, the Lincoln Park residential area to the north, and downtown Arlington Heights in the northwest suburbs. For the record, I'm using "cellular" as a shorthand description, though Ameritech itself does not describe the PCS as such. At the end of September I finally received a call from Ameritech: they had received their latest batch of prototype phones, and was I still interested in joining the test? I said I was. :-) A huge box soon arrived, containing the following items: 1) The PCS phone itself, a flip-style pocket phone. It's 6 1/2" long, 2 1/4" wide and 1 1/4" thick, with a single-segment 4" flexible whip antenna. The literature claims a weight of 6.6 ounces, though with the 3.6-volt battery installed (roughly the size of two AA batteries), it weighs in by my measurements at a porky 7.3 ounces. ;-) 2) A small charging stand for the phone powered by a brick transformer. It includes a recessed port for simultaneous charging of the spare battery (included). 3) A "base station", 9"W by 6 1/2"D by 3"H, which connects to your home phone line and allows the PCS to function at home as a cordless phone. The base station itself also functions as a very nice speakerphone and signalling intercom to the PCS. It's powered by yet another brick transformer and six AA backup batteries. 4) A quantity of instructional documents, including a slick glossy manual for the PCS, an instructional videotape and a map showing the service areas for making calls in downtown Chicago, Lincoln Park and Arlington Heights. Ameritech told me today that they are currently expanding the service area with additional transceivers, though the new boundaries are unclear. A number of immediate observations here: 1) The phone and base station both arrived in retail-quality packaging bearing a "SilverLink" logo, and the base station's packing list mentions an instruction manual that was not found. Apparently they are existing products that have been modified for the PCS test. Ameritech did tell me that the phone was a current model that had been modified with a pager unit. I noticed it also didn't match the unit shown in the videotape, which they said was a non-pager prototype. 2) The host of the instructional video should be beaten with sticks. My wife and I had to really grit our teeth through a variety of awful Star Trek "Beam-me-up-Scotty" jokes and insulting European accents in a segment about international calls before we were done. Anyone who gave up on the videotape halfway through would miss some information at the end. 3) It would be nice if the production-model PCS base station had the phone charging stand built in. This would save quite a bit of space and spaghetti wiring. The phone itself: It operates in two modes: Public (i.e. a cellular phone) and Private (a cordless extension phone). It has a small LCD display and 18 backlit soft-touch buttons covered by the flip-type microphone cover. A rubber-like molding around the perimeter contains Mute/Backlighting and Volume Step-Up/Step-Down buttons. The molding itself is a weird aqua blue color that gives a sort of toy-like look to it ("Hot new PCS colors for Fall: Strawberry and Wild Peach!!!"). Setup options include Pager On/Off and Phone On/Off, the latter for keeping the phone on when the cover is closed, required for ringing the phone from the base station in Private mode. It can store up to 30 frequently-called numbers and five received pages; the numbers are scrolled on its screen and can be dialed automatically off the display. As a side-note, the phone makes a variety of cheerful warbling tones to confirm commands; this apparently is the source of the stupid Star Trek communicator jokes on the videotape. Making a call is more conventional than cellular. You open the phone and press a green button to get a line. The phone apparently "pings" the nearest transceiver (or base station) to get an open line, and once a handshake is established, you get a dial tone. At this point you dial your phone number. I found this tricky; the PCS tries to buffer the digits as you dial, but often tends to drop digits or fire off truncated DTMF tones that are too short to register. Dialing slowly is recommended, though its redial feature can rattle off the tones with no problem. Incoming calls are handled in a sort of indirect fashion. Unlike a typical cellular system, the PCS network has no idea where any particular phone is, and therefore cannot ring it directly. Callers dialing your number are routed to an Ameritech Voicemail box where they are directed (by your own greeting or a company-supplied default) to leave a voice message or to punch in a phone number. Callers leaving voice recordings will trigger a page to your PCS phone with your own number displayed; you then call it and play back your message(s) after entering a seven-digit password. Callers entering DTMF numbers will trigger a page of that number to the PCS. (Any voice message from that same DTMF call is discarded, I found.) In either case, the incoming page number is displayed on the PCS, and (assuming you're within the service area) pressing the green Call button will automatically dial the displayed number for you. As the PCS uses an existing pager network, the performance has been fine throughout the Chicago area, with only one attempted page lost that we know of so far. Call quality with digital transmission is, as you might expect, superb. The phone does suffer from frequent dropouts, however, depending on battery strength and your proximity to the transceiver antenna. Callers tell me that they don't notice dropouts as much as I do; perhaps some software somewhere is filling in short dropouts with interpolated values, although I found it rather distracting at my end. A boost in power from 10mw would be nice, as on one occasion I was standing within 40 feet of an antenna and still getting dropouts. The phone is supposed to generate a warning tone before you blunder out of range and lose a call, but I found in practice that dropouts became so severe at long distances that the warning tone, which I have yet to hear, would be somewhat redundant. So do I like the PCS? Yes. Its small size is a big asset, its digital transmission quality is exceptional (dropouts aside) and secure, and its pager system for incoming calls is an acceptable compromise, as it is not positioned as a competitor to a cellular phone. I see the PCS as a sort of low-end communication device suitable for the occasional caller; in fact the early brochures I received show scenarios such as a lady shopping at our local supermarket and kids at an amusement park. The only snags I can see at the moment are the low power limitations, which presumably can be bumped up if necessary, but primarily the density of transceiver installations required under the current design. Packing antennas and phone lines into infrastructure at the rate of one every quarter-mile or so seems like quite an undertaking to me. I want to add a particular good word for their 800 support line: granted this is a test program, and one should expect the highly-competent support we are getting for this, but it is nevertheless extremely satisfying to have one's call for help answered promptly by people who have all the answers at their fingertips, as opposed to being put on hold by Public Relations salesdroids who can't answer a simple question. This test program is scheduled to continue through the end of next year, and I'll post further developments as they occur. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 08:29:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New SPARCstation LX Has Built-in ISDN From AT&T SMCC INTRODUCES COLOR RISC WORKSTATION PRICED LESS THAN A PC Also Unveils Graphics System, Server Product Based On SPARC/Solaris SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Nov. 10, 1992 -- Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation (SMCC) today introduced the SPARCclassic(TM), a fully loaded workstation that, at $3,995 (quantity 12), is the world's least expensive color RISC system. It is based on the revolutionary new 50 MHz microSPARC(TM) processor designed by SMCC and Texas Instruments, a "workstation on a chip" that is the most highly integrated, low-cost RISC processor ever available. SMCC also unveiled a new accelerated graphics computer called the SPARCstation(TM) LX that features the GXplus accelerator, CD-quality audio, a 424-megabyte internal disk and built-in ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network). ISDN is the global telephone and networking standard that will allow the merger of computer and phone functions. The SPARCstation LX system is the lowest-cost accelerated graphics workstation available, priced at $7,995. These new Sun(TM) workstations deliver 59.1 MIPS, with the SPARCclassic offering industry-leading value at $63 per MIPS. SMCC designed the new workstations to meet users' number-one demand: low-cost color systems that still offer high performance and networking. The new systems will enable millions of users to access client-server technology. The company achieved unparalleled price points through innovations in integration -- in the microSPARC processor, in a new I/O subsystem that reduced seven controller chips to two advanced new ASICs, and in a highly integrated system board. Other methods employed to reduce costs include new TAB (Tape Automated Bonding) processor packaging and a new, low-cost, 15-inch color monitor (1024x768 resolution). Other Sun monitors are also supported. Besides the breakthroughs in cost and integration, SMCC is setting the stage for another important first in the workstation industry -- an innovative pricing model similar to the PC industry. SMCC has given the SPARCclassic workstation non-discountable end user pricing. Unlike a PC, however, the new Sun workstations serve as all-purpose machines. They can run the UNIX(R) as well as DOS and Mac applications; they can connect with a wide range of systems, including IBM mainframes, DEC VAXes and PCs in a Novell(R) network; they have built-in multimedia features such as audio and video; and the SPARCstation LX even includes ISDN. These new systems deliver more performance than `486 PCs, with 59.1 MIPS, 26.4 SPECint92 and 21.0 SPECfp92. The standard features of the SPARCclassic include 16 megabytes of memory, expandable to 96 megabytes, a 207-megabyte internal disk, expandable to 1.0 gigabytes, two SBus slots for add-on boards, support of up to 21 gigabytes of external disk, audio and graphics. The SPARCclassic and SPARCstation LX are the first systems to come bundled with the just-introduced Solaris(R) 2.1 distributed computing environment. This business-ready system software is the highest-performance version ever available and offers many new features such as simplified administration, installation, security and internationalization. These new workstations again demonstrate SMCC's commitment to superior application performance. They include performance features like 10-megabyte/second SCSI and a direct memory access (DMA) controller for fast access found in the high-end SPARCstation 10 family introduced in May. In addition, the systems' optimized I/O architecture supports 16-byte transfers and other performance enhancements designed for optimal results that are far beyond high-end PC capabilities. These versatile new products provide cost-effective solutions for any work environment. Since the SPARCclassic workstation offers PC prices with full color workstation functionality, it is expected to penetrate many existing networked PC markets. The SPARCstation LX workstation gives technical users working in areas like PC CAD a low-cost alternative with maximum performance and expansion. New Server Boosts Workgroup Productivity: Based on the same technology, a low-cost SPARCclassic server is also being offered by SMCC. This versatile workgroup server can be used to increase file sharing throughput, offload printing and communications tasks and support demanding applications such as database or PC-CAD. It comes with built-in Ethernet, a SCSI interface, two serial ports, a parallel port, SBus I/O, memory, and an internal 1-gigabyte preconfigured disk. It's built for networks -- unlike its PC server counterparts. Technology Licensing: Continuing its support of open systems, SMCC is making available all the chips it developed for these new workstations. SMCC has licensed its silicon partners to supply these chips on the general market. Included are the microSPARC processor from Texas Instruments, SBus I/O devices from NCR, ISDN capability from AT&T, and a graphics accelerator available from LSI Logic and Fujitsu Microelectronics. Upgrades, Pricing, Availability: Aggressively priced upgrades are available for all the current low-end desktops such as the SPARCstation ELC and IPC. The fully configured SPARCclassic (207-megabyte disk, 16 megabytes of memory, 15-inch color monitor) is priced at $3,995 (U.S.list/quantity 12) or $4,295 in single quantities. The fully configured SPARCstation LX (424-megabyte disk, 16 megabytes of memory, 16-inch color monitor) is priced at $7,995. Both systems feature a new one-year warranty and will be available in December. SPARCclassic server (1-gigabyte disk, 16 megabytes of memory) is priced at $5,295 and will be available in January 1993. Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation (SMCC), a subsidiary of Sun Microsystems, Inc., is the world's leading supplier of open client-server computing solutions. SMCC has its headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. ### Sun, Sun Microsystems, Sun Microsystems Computer Corp., the Sun logo and Solaris are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. All SPARC trademarks, including the SCD Compliant logo, are trademarks or registered trademarks of SPARC International, Inc. SPARCstation, SPARCclassic and microSPARC are licensed exclusively to Sun Microsystems, Inc. Products bearing SPARC trademarks are based on an architecture developed by Sun Microsystems, Inc. UNIX is a registered trademark of UNIX System Laboratories, Inc. Novell is a registered trademark of Novell, Inc. All other product or service names mentioned herein are trademarks of their respective owners. For reader inquiries, telephone 1-800-821-4643. PR contact: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Carrie Dillon (415) 336-3564 ------------------------------ From: Joe.Bergstein@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 07:23:58 -0500 Subject: RBOC Exit From CPE Market? Has anyone heard either rumors or specific information regarding Bell Atlantic selling their CPE business back to Northern Telecom? (from which they bought a big chunk not too long ago)? Is this a trend? Are other RBOC's getting out of the CPE business? ------------------------------ From: edsr!gwr@uunet.UU.NET (George Rapp) Subject: No Caller-ID in Texas Reply-To: edsr!gwr@uunet.UU.NET Organization: EDS Research Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:59:27 GMT Just heard on the radio that Caller-ID has been officially denied to Texas residential subscribers. It was just a snippet, so no details were provided, but the issue was recently presented to the Texas PUC (Public Utilities Commission), and I assume they made this decision. The major point of contention was not the privacy issue, as it has been in other states, but the Texas state law that prohibits attaching "wiretap" or "trap and trace" devices to phone lines. (From what I understand, a "trap and trace" device is defined as one that is capable of recording the phone number from which a caller is calling. I have no idea why this type of device was ever outlawed. Looks like we have a law that needs changing.) Telemarketers and ACLU privacy fanatics, rejoice -- you win. {grumble, grumble} (I'm not happy about this ... 8^) George Rapp Electronic Data Systems Corporation gwr@edsr.eds.com (EDS Research) The above opinions are mine alone. As far as I know, EDS does not share them. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 12:57:59 PST From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: "New" Centrex features Hi! This morning I woke up to hear my clock-radio spewing out an Illinois Bell Centrex advertisement that announced several "new" features ... call waiting, three-way calling, etc. Welcome to the stone age, IBT! -- *-=#= 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 [Moderator's Note: I think you must be mistaken if you think they referred to these services (ina centrex setting) as 'new'. We've had centrex for a quarter-century here, and ESS in some parts of the city for nearly twenty years. Those features on centrex were common years ago to say the least. Or maybe you heard right and IBT is going crazy in their ad copy again ... it wouldn't be the first time. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #841 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24085; 15 Nov 92 15:20 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27206 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:12:15 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01296 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:11:57 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:11:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211151911.AA01296@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #842 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 13:12:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 842 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson MCI Goes Into PCS (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) More Pay Phone Restrictions (Rob Knauerhase) BCE to Take 20% Stake in Mercury Communications (David Leibold) Help Wanted Setting up Paging (Jeff Bennington) Weird Sales Call (John Higdon) Re: Music on Hold (Phillip Remaker) NBC/IBM to Test Video on Demand (Wasington Post via Paul Robinson) Microsoft/Intel Team up on Video for PCs (Washington Post via P. Robinson) Telephone Headsets and Cordless Headsets (Jeff Bier) How Do I Make a Phone Ring? (Peter L. Rukavina) Sorry For My Slipup (was Cellular Privacy) (H. Shrikumar) Does SS7 Support Early Busy Signal? (Peter Capek) Jacksonville FL: 1 + 10D Within 904, and Semi-Local Calling (D. Leibold) MCI vs Sprint For Residential Service (Rob B.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 02:32:05 EST Subject: MCI Goes Into PCS Article Summary: "MCI Enters Wireless Phone Race" {Washington Post}, Nov 18, Page B1 MCI asked the Federal Communications Commission to license "a consortium of companies" to build and operate a nationwide network? The companies would probably be companies that are already involved in wire: other telcos, cable companies and those already involved in the technology, as well as entrepreneurs. It's suspected the pressure built up on MCI because AT&T is spending $3.8b to buy McCaw Cellular. Both AT&T and McCaw have been independently working on wireless data and telephone service and will probably pool their efforts. Obviously, MCI makes the usual claim that they were working on this beforehand. Another mention that Sprint is merging with Centel. So far there are some 200 applicants for experimental PCS tests. It rementions that three companies got "pioneer preference" as stated earlier. Questions involve who gets to operate, how they will be licensed, and what is the way the country is to be divided. In the consortium, MCI would be minority partner, providng billing and bill collection, technical standards, marketing and network plans, as well as the means used to locate the destination telephone. MCI apparently will provide the brains and the partners the capital, technical capability and local presence; one alleged advantage is "It would enable participants otherwise too small to survive in a national or even regional PCS market to play a significant role in PCS nonetheless," MCI told the FCC (i.e where without MCI's capabilities they couldn't.) Dozens of companies filed comments. "At state are billions of dollars of investment" on a network that could be in operation by 1994. MCI wants the FCC to award three national licenses to consortia after the hearings are held to pick who wins, with the idea that a consortia will need a "national manager." Three guesses as to which company it thinks will get that position (Hint, it's a telephone company with three letters in its name). Wayne Schelle, President of American Personal Communications, the PCS company owned by the Post, is not pleased with that idea. "They are too big and unwieldy. We think they are anti-competitive. This is not like awarding a national license in Costa Rica. We're talking about three million square miles." Questions about the part local telcos will have has lead comments such as Bell Atlantic Corp which wants to have two licenses available to allow the local telephone companies to have at this new system as well. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM "If I or anyone else on this account are caught giving opinions, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of my actions..." ------------------------------ From: Rob Knauerhase Subject: More Pay Phone Restrictions Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 02:19:23 CST FYI (everyone), from a news brief: (CLEVELAND)--Ohio Bell and the City of Cleveland are initiating two new methods to limit the use of public telephones for illegal purposes, such as drug dealing. Ohio Bell will begin working with the city to identify public phones that are being used for illegal purposes. The new methods eventually will be available statewide to other communities served by Ohio Bell. One of the two methods: Restricted Call Access makes it impossible to use coins to complete a call during late evening and early morning hours. Calls can be completed during these hours only by the use of calling cards or other billing arrangements. Customers will continue to have access to information operators, 9-1-1 emergency services, and 800 numbers from the public telephones. I guess since this is a "brief" they decided not to mention the other method; this sounds pretty much the same as was in Chicago (mentioned in past Digests). I wonder if "other billing arrangements" includes the right to third-party billing at $.25 rather than the usual operator-assisted rate. Rob Knauerhase University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign knauer@cs.uiuc.edu Dept. of Computer Science, Gigabit Study Group [Moderator's Note: I think you will find there will be no accomodations at all made by telco where billing arrangements are concerned, and that the normal surcharges will apply on calls from the restricted payphones. Someone raised this point with Illinois Bell, saying IBT would profit from the surcharges made necessary to callers from the restricted phones. IBT took umbrage at that and said there was little to be gained by them; that they were making the restrictions available only because of community demand for same, and that they (telco) were not happy with the arrangement. IBT took a neutral stance on the matter of payphone 'mis-use' (i.e. calls to/from drug dealers) here and finally capitulated to the politicans, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 20:34:16 EST From: David Leibold Subject: BCE to Take 20% Stake in Mercury Communications A deal between BCE (Bell Canada's parent company) and Cable and Wireless (Mercury's owner) means that BCE will pick up a 20% stake in Mercury while Mercury will invest $60 million (CAD$) in BCE Cable (UK) Ltd, a cable television company, according to {The Toronto Star}. Mercury reportedly has 7% of the UK telecom market, and wants to expand its residential services (but didn't say whether this was in terms of local loop, or better long distance access). Cable companies can use phone lines in the UK, thus all the connections between cable and telephone companies. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ From: jgb@mcm.com (Jeff Bennington) Subject: Help Wanted Setting Up Paging Reply-To: jgb@mcm.com (Jeff Bennington) Organization: Mellon Capital Management Corp., San Francisco Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 01:55:37 GMT A consultant friend of mine has an application where he wants to set up a private paging network which will span the continental US. Please reply to this email box. Thanks! Jeff Bennington jgb@mcm.com Mellon Capital Management Corp, San Francisco CA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 08:39 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Weird Sales Call A few days ago during the dinner hour I had the most unusual sales call of all time. Phone rings and when I answer it the person on the other end says, "Jim?" When I indicated that the person must have a wrong number, I waited the usual 500 ms for a reply and then receiving none, hung up the phone. He then immediately calls back and says, "John?" "Speaking" "I got the name wrong; you will have to be a little more patient. This is Jeff Somebodyorother with Somethingorothertronics and I'm calling about some equipment you might be interested in." At that point I interrupted with, "Wait a minute. You call me during the dinner hour, disturb my meal, call me by the wrong name and then tell me to be more patient? I don't know if I am really interested." The person at the other end let out a small, Sardonic chuckle, and then hung up the phone in my ear. Now this is what I call slick salesmanship. Here is my theory: The person was from an antenna components manufacturer. He got wind that I am about to move an AM transmitting facility and called to hawk his wares. It so happens that this particular company does indeed make quality parts and it is highly likely that they may be used in the new project. But this particular salestype has a lot to learn about his presentations and his preliminaries! As it happens, there is another, well-known-in-the-broadcast-biz salescritter whom I will never buy from again. We were buying equipment for a major project for a station in San Francisco and this gentleman called late in the afternoon. I had stepped out and got his message upon my return. Since it was late in the day, I opted to return his call the next morning. When I did so, Mr. Salescritter launched into a lecture on telephone courtesy, lambasting me for not returning his call the day before (at 4:55 PM when I got the message). I told him that I did not think it was really his place to instruct me on "how to be a good customer and polite telephone user." His "retaliation" for my remarks was to call the station owner and tell him what a bad person I was and how I was impossible to work with. The station owner, who has known me for years and years, agreed. His solution to the problem? He cancelled all of the orders with this guy and told him that he would not have to deal with me anymore. And another distributor got the station's business. And who says life is not fair? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Phillip Remaker Subject: Re: Music on Hold Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 08:46:26 PST > I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering > machine: Several minutes of music. There was no voiceover anywhere in > the message, or before or after it -- just music. The sound was of > surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct > electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the > background. > Nothing like this has happened before or since. > Any guesses? > [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called > your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing > music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off. PAT] PAT: This is a classic: Using a POTS line on a PBX: PBX user calls some place and is put on hold. PBX user gives up, hangs up and plcaes another call. User does not hold switchook long enough to disconnect, unwittingly puts the music on hold 'on hold'. PBX user calls you, gets your answering machine, hangs up. The music on hold is 'transferred' to your machine. Two machines are now locked on to each other. If your answerphone is VOX activated, kiss your tape goodbye. Anyway, using that scheme (thinking you hung up when you really didn't), you can imagine how strange stuff gets on your answerphone. Phillip A. Remaker remaker@cisco.com cisco Systems Customer Engineering 800-553-24HR 1525 O'Brien Drive Menlo Park, CA 94025 ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun 15 Nov 1992 02:34:10 EST Subject: NBC/IBM to Test Video on Demand News Summary "Network Nexus: PC Meets Nightly News." {Washington Post}, Nov 10, Page B1 (NBC, IBM are teaming up to test 'Video on Demand' System) See Also: Microsoft & Intel on Video Technology for PCs. NBC and IBM are going to create a system called "NBC Desktop News" using Multimedia technology to produce "news on demand" from a video tape library and view the material on PCs. You won't be able to get it at home but business and large subscribers will be able to call up various news segments including weather reports, stock summaries and some films. It's claimed to be designed for both business and government organizations. They're going to test it with some unnamed corporations in 1993 and hope to make it available publicly by 1994. They will use the NBC news and CNBC cable channels for material, with hourly updates. NBC TV is in third place in the ratings and video competitors are eating its lunch. Capital Cities/ABC is thinking about the same thing. This won't be either Prodigy or HBO as no entertainment or ads are proposed at this time. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are MINE alone. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 02:35:03 EST Subject: Microsoft/Intel Team up on Video for PCs Article Summary {Washington Post}, Nov 10, Page B4 "Microsoft, Intel to Team Up on Video Technology for PCs" See Also: NBC and IBM to test Video on demand. Microsoft and Intel are putting together a combined software and hardware package to allow people to work with video, including editing and retrieving video footage into documents, thus allowing a PC to work in a manner similar to a video player. Apple Computer already has a product, but the market has stayed smalll because the technology isn't always there and it's expensive. 50 companies will announce products that work with theirs. Bill Gates is expected to hold a press conference to announce the software part at $200. The hardware board to go in a PC is from Intel and is around $1,000. For obvious reasons, it's designed to use MS Windows 3.1. Demand remains uncertain, and the product will have to fight it out. Note: The article -- either because the writer thinks it's dead, or because he's never heard of it -- fails to say anything about the Video Toaster that has been out for the Amiga for two years and already does this stuff. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:08:41 PST From: bier@acuson.com (Jeff Bier) Subject: Telephone Headsets and Cordless Headsets I'm seeking recommendations on telephone headsets. I have in mind the kind that replaces the handset on a typical telephone. I'm also curious to know if anyone makes a cordless telephone headset. Thanks, Jeff Bier bier@acuson.com (415) 694-5827 ------------------------------ From: csplr@blaze.trentu.ca (Peter L. Rukavina) Subject: How do I Make a Phone Ring? Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 07:51:07 EST Organization: The Systems Group, Trent University I am assisting a novice theatre director in staging a play. We need to make a stand-alone, not-connected-to-phone line phone ring. I assume this involved a battery, switch and some wires. Which ones and what voltage battery? Peter Rukavina prukavina@trentu.ca The Systems Group Research Project tsg@trentu.ca Champlain College Room D163 Telephone: (705) 748-1297 [Moderator's Note: Perhaps some readers will respond direct to Peter with advice for his project. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 05:15:03 -0500 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) Subject: Sorry For My Slip Up in Cellular Privacy Hi PAT, I seem to have implied and said a statement more stronger than my thoughts about encryption for cellular phones in my post, as I realised when I got this mail from brumba@rtsg.mot.com ... > I think that you jumped in over your head on this one -- there is > encryption available for cellular phones. The biggest drawback is > cost. That is true ... I do know that about existance of the encryption scheme that is included in the IS-54B standard which I have heard governs cellular phones. And if no one else flames me on my mistake, please include this in the digest to correct my error. My apologies. However, my sentiment was directed at the fact that this encryption is not "known for any strength" ... and what amount of security it will provide is yet to be seen to be believed. shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 02:27:17 EST From: capek@watson.ibm.com Subject: Does SS7 Support Early Busy Signal? While trying to make a credit card call to a persistently busy number recently, after typing in the card number for the n-teenth time, I wondered if SS7 protocol would allow the calling exchange to "look ahead" at the called number and inquire if it is (at that instant) busy, before prompting me for the card number. Of course, I might still get a busy if either the line became busy after I keyed in the credit card number, or if the response to the query didn't make it back to the originating exchange in time. The advantage (to me) would be not having to repeatedly pound in the billing. The advantage (small) to the carrier would be not having to do the credit card verification, and perhaps getting the line on which I'm calling free a bit quicker. If the call in question were third party bill, or collect, the savings could be a lot greater. Peter Capek ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 21:11:59 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Jacksonville FL: 1 + 10D Within 904, and Semi-Local Calling I found the June, 1992 Jacksonville, Florida directory on Phonefiche tonight. It's official, that 1 + 904 + number is required within 904 area code (northern Florida), even though that NPA is probably nowhere near saturation with its NNX scheme. All of Florida must now dial 1+area code within the area code, thus it looks like Southern Bell opted for state-wide consistency in dialing, and changing things well in advance of the interchangeable NPA system in North America by January, 1995. Meanwhile, another note in the directory announces the start of a semi-local dialing from Jacksonville to Hilliard at a cost of 25c/call *flat rate*. This was effective 6 August 1992. Perhaps this arrangement is the shape of local dialing to come. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ From: v120q4jf@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Rob B.) Subject: MCI vs Sprint For Residential Service Organization: University at Buffalo Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:52:00 GMT Hi there. I was wondering which you feel is better for residential long distance service. We don't make many calls each month, so I don't care about MCI's and Sprint's calling plans. I just want to know which has better promotions. MCI's friends and family list is a pain because they only give the discount of 20% to phone numbers which have MCI as the primary carrier. MCI also has some thing where they give you ten minutes off the longest call to someone in the calling circle. It's called Free Speech. I thought that I saw something that said Sprint had an automatic discount on your longest call of the month no matter what the phone number is. Does anyone know about any more promotions? I think I should change to Sprint so I get the ten minutes off my longest call regardless of the receipient. v120q4jf@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu v120q4jf@ubvms.bitnet ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #842 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25265; 15 Nov 92 15:49 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21745 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:48:43 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06521 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:48:26 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:48:26 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211151948.AA06521@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #843 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 13:48:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 843 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: No Caller ID in Texas (Guy J. Sherr) Re: No Caller-ID in Texas (Steve Shapiro) Re: No Caller-ID in Texas (John Higdon) Re: No Caller-ID in Texas (Jerry Blackerby) Re: No Caller ID in Texas (Sean Malloy) Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Troy Frericks) Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Bob Sherman) Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Bob Furtaw) Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Joe Bergstein) Re: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes (Jim Rees) Re: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes (Steve Forrette) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 10:29 GMT From: Guy J. Sherr <0004322955@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: No Caller ID in Texas Restrictions on "Trap and Trace" come from a law which does not guarantee privacy under the 9th Amendment, but rather a law relying upon the 4th Amendment, which promises freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. (At least I hope it's the 4th one -- I am not a lawyer.) Anyway, maybe it is outdated. On the other hand, Texas probably still writes search warrants over phone tap orders. This decision may recognize that Texas law enforcement authorities would probably get CNID equipment and then use it. Can you imagine. ------------------------------ From: shapiro@cfsctc.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) Subject: Re: No Caller-ID in Texas Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA Date: 15 NOV 92 07:36:31 EST In article , edsr!gwr@uunet.UU.NET (George Rapp) writes: > Just heard on the radio that Caller-ID has been officially denied to > Texas residential subscribers. It was just a snippet, so no details > were provided, but the issue was recently presented to the Texas PUC > (Public Utilities Commission), and I assume they made this decision. > The major point of contention was not the privacy issue, as it has > been in other states, but the Texas state law that prohibits attaching > "wiretap" or "trap and trace" devices to phone lines. (From what I > understand, a "trap and trace" device is defined as one that is > capable of recording the phone number from which a caller is calling. > I have no idea why this type of device was ever outlawed. Looks like > we have a law that needs changing.) This is nothing new, it has been an ongoing issue for several years. In Austin, there is an organization called the Central Texas SysOps Association which is a group of BBS SysOps and Users. We have been active in a variety of telephone company related issues at the local, state and national level. Anyway, about two years ago we had a meeting in which the guest speaker was from the state Attorney Generals office to discuss the issues surrounding this law. The AG's office is on both sides of the issue. On the one side, this IS state law and must be enforced. On the other side, the AG's office realizes the benefit of being able to know beforehand (or during the call), where the person is calling from (in fact, they would like the capability for their own offices for situations where they need it for official reasons). However, it seems that in Texas, the "right to privacy" seems to be on the person invading YOUR privacy, ie: the person who calls YOU is entitled to privacy rather than YOU being entitled to privacy from unwanted calls. So it goes ... Regards, Steve Shapiro * All views and opinions expressed SKS Computer Consulting, Inc. * are my own and are offered as-is Steve.Shapiro@f440.n101.z1.fidonet.org BBS: (508) 664-6354 N81 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 09:30 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: No Caller-ID in Texas edsr!gwr@uunet.UU.NET (George Rapp) writes: > The major point of contention was not the privacy issue, as it has > been in other states, but the Texas state law that prohibits attaching > "wiretap" or "trap and trace" devices to phone lines. Actually, it probably IS the "privacy" issue, but the activists are simply (successfully) using another law to further the cause. Another state, Pennsylvania, has already beat Texas to the punch on this one with a similar ruling. > Telemarketers and ACLU privacy fanatics, rejoice -- you win. > {grumble, grumble} (I'm not happy about this ... 8^) On a personal note: I have a simple application that requires Caller-ID. It is not available in California at this time. What do I do? I order direct trunks from a long distance carrier, install 800 numbers that provide real-time ANI delivery, and proceed with my application. The ANI delivery gives me, in effect, universal non-blockable Caller-ID. Of course the expense is much higher than Caller-ID would have been, but that just proves my point that denying CPID to residential users merely keeps out of the average user's hands what is available to any business with the money. For some reason, it makes the "privacy" activists very happy to have business customers the only entities than can have caller number delivery. I have never been able to figure this out. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: exujbl@exu.ericsson.se (Jerry Blackerby 214-907-7810) Subject: Re: No Caller-ID in Texas Reply-To: exujbl@exu.ericsson.se Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc. Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 08:59:48 GMT Maybe if people in Texas would find out the phone numbers of the PUC (Public Utility Commission) members and everyone start calling each of them at "odd hours", they might decide there could be a reason to have Caller-ID. Jerry ------------------------------ From: scm3775@tamsun.tamu.edu (Sean Malloy) Subject: Re: No Caller ID in Texas Date: 15 Nov 1992 12:48:05 -0600 Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station According to the Nov 11 {Houston Chronicle}, the PUC in Austin ruled that Caller ID (for residential customers) violates state wiretapping laws. Certain businesses would be allowed to use the service if they can prove that they need the service to "protect their property or if it's necessary for their operations". Southwestern Bell hasn't decided if it will offer the service to commercial customers or not. The law that prevents the adoption of the service predates the development of Caller ID (The No. 5 ESS?) and prevents anyone outside law enforcement and some businesses from using trap-and-trace devices. Legislation has already been drafted that would amend the law to allow the use of Caller ID. Several groups, including the ACLU (Texas) and the Texas Council on Family Violence are happy with the PUC's ruling and want to see it left alone. Southwestern Bell had proposed to offer per-call blocking as well, requiring the customer to dial a *XX code to not transmit the information on a call-by-call basis. The State Office of Public Utility Counsel (sic) and several consumer groups wanted SW Bell to offer per-line blocking, which would allow a customer to automatically prevent the transmission of the number unless they first dialed a *XX code to allow it. One of the commissioners who voted against Caller ID stated that "One of the basic problems with the proposal is that people who pick up their phones to make calls wouldn't necessarily know they were also sending out the number of their phone and the name of the person who pays the bill. I believe we must have further legislative guidance before we can proceed." Thirty-six other states now have Caller-ID. Sean C. Malloy - Texas A&M University - scm@tamu.edu ------------------------------ From: mcrware!!troyf@uunet.UU.NET (Troy Frericks) Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:34:28 GMT In article Alan Boritz <72446.461@ CompuServe.COM> writes: > tg@chmsr.gatech.edu (T. Govindaraj) writes: >> Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since my wife >> and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for occasional >> calls...Is anybody using this option? >> [Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared >> this with the cellular company? Most do NOT allow two or more phones >> to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone >> and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about. > Change "most" to ALL. There should be NO US cellular carriers that > will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone > number. Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC > rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR). Pat, I know it's not right (legal), but I have to throw it out anyway. What about changing the ESN on the second phone to match that of the first one that already has service. I beleave this is how some people with some older Panasonic phones are stealing service -- intercept the ESN as it is broadcast, then burn a PROM, and insert it into their phone. Note you would NOT be able to call each other, or both receive calls. You may not even both be able to place calls at the same time when on the same cell (or same area). Probably could get around that by having one phone on service B, other roam on service A. Food for thought. Disclaimer: Info for educational enrichment only, not to be implemented. Troy Frericks Internet: troyf@MICROWARE.COM Microware Systems Corporation UUCP: uunet!mcrware!troyf 1900 NW 114th St Phone: (515)224-1929 Des Moines, IA 50325-7077 Fax: (515)224-1352 ------------------------------ From: Bob Sherman Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number Date: 15 Nov 1992 10:08:27 -0500 In Alan Boritz <72446.461@Compu Serve.COM> writes: > Change "most" to ALL. There should be NO US cellular carriers that > will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone > number. Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC > rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR). No, I think most is more accurate than all. Bell South in the South Florida (Miami/Ft. Lauderdale) area DOES offer to allow the usage of two phones on the same number. They do charge quite a bit extra for the second phone, which of course must be registered with them in order to work. bsherman@mthvax.cs.miami.edu | bsherman@nyx.cs.du.edu | MCI MAIL:BSHERMAN an764@cleveland.freenet.edu | | ------------------------------ From: furtaw@comm.mot.com (Bob Furtaw) Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number Organization: Motorola Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 00:14:53 GMT In article , tg@chmsr.gatech.edu (T. Govindaraj) wrote: > installer suggested a place called Recellular with an 800 number. He > suggested the Motorola Flip Phone, Classic, or Ultra Classic. (We now > have a Panasonic EB3500. A lighter, but not too expensive will be > nice.) Motorola makes a package that is called the Extended System. It basically copies your Mico-Tac's phone number, when mounted in a pocket, into your permanently mounted car telephone. When in the car, you get all the features of your car phone ... hands free, high power RF PA, car speaker, external car antenna, etc. When removed the number remains the same. One phone number, one bill. As an option, you can get two numbers so you can call the other when the Micro-Tac is not installed. When you get one number, the car phone is essentially dead when the Micro-Tac is removed. > [Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared > this with the cellular company? Most do NOT allow two or more phones > to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone > and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about. An > analogy would be two landline customers sharing the same wire pair and > expecting telco to figure out who to bill for which calls. Most > cellular systems will only validate one ESN per line. Even using it > the way you describe it, you could never call *each other* on the > other's cell phone. Why not just get two numbers; that is what ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Now there's an option. > everyone else does. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There are inexpensive calling packages for casual only becuase they didn't know of availability. Bob Furtaw - W8IL CFI-A/G/I/MEI, CGI-A/I All disclaimers ever written by anybody apply. :-) ------------------------------ From: Joe.Bergstein@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 00:06:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number In msg. on 11/9, T. Govindaraj writes: > Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since > my wife and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for > occasional calls. In fact, I got it so she can use it to call for help if > her car breaks down or if she needs directions for some place. What happens if you're using your phone, and your wife needs to call 911 because of an emergency (accident, fire, personal attack)? Doesn't sound like such a great idea, just to save a few bucks, if someone's safety is at stake. ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes Date: 15 Nov 1992 00:05:06 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu In article , rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes: > You would think that cellular providers would be sensitive to the > problem of dialing numbers with a 0 or 1 as the second digit, since > many cellular prefixes are of this type. But our latest cell phone > number is in the 600 prefix, and we've found that we can't roam > anywhere, even where our provider has a mutual roaming agreement with > the remote provider. > [Moderator's Note: When you say they 'cannot deal with the 600 prefix' > do you mean other carriers refuse to accept it as a valid phone number > for purposes of billing roamers, or do you mean they refuse/cannot > accept it for the purpose of incoming calls passed along through the > local xxx-ROAM number? The former. We haven't tried to get incoming calls while roaming. > I'd say the best recourse here is to simply refuse to pay any > roaming charges under the circumstances. We would do that, but no charges show up on our bill. We are simply unable to make any outgoing calls while roaming, short of contacting every cell service provider in the US, I can't think of any good solution. Looks like we will have to ask our local provider for a different number in a more "normal" prefix. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 01:24:35 GMT In article Jim.Rees@umich.edu writes: > You would think that cellular providers would be sensitive to the > problem of dialing numbers with a 0 or 1 as the second digit, since > many cellular prefixes are of this type. But our latest cell phone > number is in the 600 prefix, and we've found that we can't roam > anywhere, even where our provider has a mutual roaming agreement with > the remote provider. The reason? It seems that most cellular > providers can't deal with the 600 prefix. There may be another explanation. Was the 600 prefix recently put into service by your home cellular carrier? The cellular carriers that have roaming agreements regularly exchange data as to which prefixes they have in their home areas. The other carriers then update their switches with this data. What can happen with new prefixes is that the prefix is turned on, and the other carriers don't program their switches for the new prefix right away, either because they didn't get the data in a timely manner from the home carrier, or because they don't act on the new data quickly enough. Either way, the symptom is that a subscriber who has service on a new prefix in their home area is unable to use the phone for any calls, incoming or outgoing, in another area. Note that this problem is not restricted to any particular prefix, but just to the prefix's "newness." I have a friend that used to be a cellular phone dealer, and this happened serveral times to customers who bought a new phone immediately before going on a trip, and were very disappointed that the phone didn't work in certain roaming areas. But, it could also be a problem specific to x00 prefixes as well. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #843 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26292; 15 Nov 92 16:31 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18698 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:37:26 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21192 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:37:03 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:37:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211152037.AA21192@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #844 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:37:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 844 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Martin McCormick) Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Kenneth A. Becker) Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Jim Rees) Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Wayne Geiser) Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Daniel Drucker) Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Andy Sherman) Re: Cellular Advice Sought (Steve Forrette) Re: Cellular Advice Sought (Troy Frericks) Re: Cellular Advice Sought (Andrew C. Green) Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (Jim Rees) Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (William H. Sohl) Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (Gregory Youngblood) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:54:54 -0600 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu In a previous posting, Wayne Geiser was quoted as saying: > we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per > second. Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of > animation stills they use in cartooning. Supposedly, one cannot tell > the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video. Standard NTSC television is thirty frames per second. There may be a bit of confusion, here, because each video frame is divided into two fields. The odd-numbered lines make up one field and the even lines follow, next. This produces a frame rate of thirty, but a field rate of 60 per second. Each field contains half the 525 scan lines, scanned such that they interlace. This makes the picture flicker less than it would if the entire image was scanned straight through from top to bottom. The video systems used in much of the rest of the world are based on a 50HZ standard and contain 25 frames per second, scanned just like the NTSC frames. Movie projectors which interface to film chains have to do some fancy optical framing with their shutters to match the 24-frame per second film speed with television frame rates. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 13:12:21 EST From: kab@hotstone.att.com (Kenneth A Becker) Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion Organization: AT&T Well, the local AT&T phone store brought their wares to sell and vend to the inhabitants of the building I work in (Yeah, it's an AT&T location). They also brought one of those color videophones. While it wasn't hooked up to a telephone line, you could hit the "self-view" switch. After some 1-2 second dalay, a color picture did appear with very recognizeable faces and such like on it. I tried holding a memo up to it, but it wan't able to reproduce the text, at least not for the short time I tried it. It is definitly not full motion; the picture is jerky (five to ten times a second refresh?). You can tell, however, if the person on the other end is smiling, frowning, or making faces at you very well. The screen is about 4.5" square or thereabouts. As I understand it, there's some really hot digital signal processing and compression/decompression schemes implemented in these phones. Your mileage may vary. Ken Becker kab@hotstone.att.com Opinions expressed here are mine, all mine! ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion Date: 15 Nov 1992 10:46:47 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu In article , Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> writes: > To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is > terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per > second. Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of > animation stills they use in cartooning. Supposedly, one cannot tell > the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video. In the US, broadcast video is 30 fps. Elsewhere it's 25 fps. Cartoon animation is never done at 30 fps, even by Disney. 8 or 12 is typical. Motion pictures usually run at 24 fps. ------------------------------ From: pictel!nail.NoSubdomain.NoDomain!geiser@uunet.UU.NET (Wayne Geiser) Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion Organization: PictureTel Corporation Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:29:14 GMT In article , Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> writes: > = Forwarded Message = > Date: Thu Nov 05, 1992 2:11 pm GMT > From: Wayne Geiser > EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414 > MBX: geiser@roadrunner.pictel.com > Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone WITH MOTION I'm very disappointed with Mr. Robinson. He (or someone else) apparently forwarded this private mail message to this group without my knowledge. I am not ashamed of what I said. However, I feel that it should be placed in perspective. As you undoubtedly all could see from my mail, I have only the vaguest grasp of any of these topics. On past occasions when I've seen interesting discussions in public forums, I've passed the appropriate questions on to those people here who *DO* know all the nitty gritty details. Please do not take any of what I wrote as opinions of my employer, PictureTel. They are my (partially informed) opinions only. If you want more accurate commentary from a PictureTel employee on this subject, you'll have to ask someone other than me. Wayne Geiser ("Drivel King") Voice: (508) 977-8253 PictureTel Corporation FAX: (508) 532-6893 One Corporation Way Internet: geiser@pictel.com Peabody, MA 01960 CIS: 70313,3615 [Moderator's Note: Mr. Geiser, I want to apologize for the unauthorized use of your correspondence in the Digest. I make some assuptions about the material which is sent here; one being that the parties involved have consented to its use. The heavy volume of stuff arriving daily makes personal confirmation by myself difficult. But in any event, all articles appearing in the Digest are deemed to be the personal opinion of the writer, and in no way a reflection on the official policy of the person's employer. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion From: mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET (Daniel Drucker) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 01:36:15 EST Organization: Odd Parity Hacker's Group > To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is > terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per > second. Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of > animation stills they use in cartooning. Supposedly, one cannot tell > the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video. All video is 30fps. Daniel Max P. Drucker ------------------------------ From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 15:00:30 EST On 8 Nov 92 16:37:00 GMT, 0005066432@mcimail.com (Wayne Geiser) was quoted as saying: > To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is > terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per > second. Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of > animation stills they use in cartooning. Supposedly, one cannot tell > the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video. That's because live video *is* 30 frames per second. Standard interlaced video (in the US) consists of 60 fields per second. Each field contains either all the odd numberd lines or all the even numbered lines, hence a full frame is two fields, and you get 30 of them per second. Aren't you glad your video guys gave you such a complete background lecture? :^) Also, the AT&T Video Phone 2500 was never meant to compete with video conferencing systems, like CLIs. (Is that also the market niche that PictureTel is in? I don't recall). The 2500 is a consumer product, aimed at a price that a consumer might actually afford. Andy Sherman Salomon Inc - Unix Systems Support - Rutherford, NJ (201) 896-7018 - andys@sbi.com or asherman@sbi.com "These opinions are mine, all *MINE*. My employer can't have them." ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 11:04:06 GMT In article 1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu writes: > I understand there are cellphones now that will, if you desire, answer > a call by themselves and accept a touchtone message that you can > retrieve later. You do, then, get charged for one minute of airtime. The OKI 900 does this (also private labelled by AT&T). If you enable this mode, it will answer with the standard "beep-beep-beep" that callers would associate with a display pager. If you combine this mode with turning off the ringing volume, this is a handy feature to use when you're in a meeting, expecting a call, and don't want to be disturbed. I find that no-answer transfer to voicemail works better for me, though. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: mcrware!!troyf@uunet.UU.NET (Troy Frericks) Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:46:54 GMT In article 1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu writes: > In article , Jerry Leichter lrw.com> writes: >> Question: She can't be the only one who wants to keep her beeper along >> with her cellphone. Does anyone make a combined beeper/cellphone? > I understand there are cellphones now that will, if you desire, answer > a call by themselves and accept a touchtone message that you can > retrieve later. You do, then, get charged for one minute of airtime. For one, the high end AT&T hand-held cell phone (3710 I believe). Cost is about $500.00. Why not just answer the call though? I don't use the feature. Troy Frericks Internet: troyf@MICROWARE.COM Microware Systems Corporation UUCP: uunet!mcrware!troyf 1900 NW 114th St Phone: (515)224-1929 Des Moines, IA 50325-7077 Fax: (515)224-1352 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 11:25:06 CST From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought Jerry Leichter writes: > Question: She can't be the only one who wants to keep her beeper along > with her cellphone. Does anyone make a combined beeper/cellphone? Uh, Yes and No. This is a perfect description of the Ameritech Personal Communication Services phone that I'm involved in long-term testing of. You may recall that a few months back, I posted a message saying that I had been signed up by Ameritech here in the Chicago area to be a tester of the product (along with several hundred other people) when the prototypes were rolled out. I've now had the phone for about six weeks. It functions exactly as you described; incoming calls are routed to a VoiceMail box which beeps you on the phone with either your own number (if the caller left a voice message) or with another number entered by the caller in your mailbox. You then return the call as you see fit. Unfortunately this is only a test, with severely limited service areas for using the phone for outgoing calls, although the incoming call paging goes through Ameritech's standard pager system and will reach you anywhere. They tell me that similar systems are being tested by other Bell companies around the country, so you might want to see if anything similar is available in San Francisco. I'm working on a report for Telecom on my experiences with this system. Disclaimer: I have no connection to Ameritech; speaking for myself only. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues Date: 15 Nov 1992 09:58:42 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu In article , rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs KB5SNF) writes: > I wonder if sales have increased since it will soon be illegal to sell > receivers that still include cellular (such as the Icom R100), also I > wonder if the new scanners will no longer be easily modifiable to > receive cellular? A local radio shop reports a large increase (about 10x) in the number of scanner sales since the law was passed. They didn't know whether the law would prohibit scanners that don't receive cellular out of the box but can be modified with a simple diode cut. ------------------------------ From: whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) Subject: Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 15:14:37 GMT In article rick@ricksys.lonestar.org writes: > monty@proponent.com (Monty Solomon) writes: >> After discussing privacy laws, legalities, and realities, Flinn notes >> that at Scanners Unlimited in San Carlos, CA, "about a quarter of the >> customers are interested in telephone eavesdropping." > I wonder if sales have increased since it will soon be illegal to sell > receivers that still include cellular (such as the Icom R100), also I > wonder if the new scanners will no longer be easily modifiable to > receive cellular? The new law includes language which states that new scanners must NOT be easily midifiable to receive cellular. So, the law at least dictates that thought, ut it remains to be determined what the FCC will consider the threshold of "easily modified" to be. More importantly, the ability for someone to construct a broadband frequency converter is and always will be relatively easy and that, will still provide those with a desire to listen to cellular, an alternative means to enable their scanner to recieve cellular without any internal modification. For those that might not know what a broadband converter is, it is a simple device that takes a range of frequencies and shifts them by a finite frequency shift to another range. For example, you could build a broadband converter that takes all the frequencies from 700-1000mhz and shifts them to 500-800mhz. By doing that, the cellular frequencies in the 800mhz range come out at 600mhz and can then be idividually derived by any scanner that includes a receive capability that goes up to the 600mhz range. This very subject was initially mentioned by the editor of "Monitoring Times" magazine when the new cellular scanner ban law was sent to the white house. The reality is that there is simply nothing that can be done to ensure that no one is listening to any cellular call that is not encrypted. It is for this very reason that I have emphasised to my family and friends that they should always treat any cellular (or cordless) phone conversation as if it were being broadcast to the public at large and, therefore, they should not divulge anything (e.g. credit card numbers, etc.) when using those type phone calls. Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's. Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!dancer!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues From: srcsip!tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com (Gregory Youngblood) Reply-To: srcsip!tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:45:57 CST Organization: TCS Consulting Services rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs KB5SNF) writes: > monty@proponent.com (Monty Solomon) writes: >> After discussing privacy laws, legalities, and realities, Flinn notes >> that at Scanners Unlimited in San Carlos, CA, "about a quarter of the >> customers are interested in telephone eavesdropping." > I wonder if sales have increased since it will soon be illegal to sell > receivers that still include cellular (such as the Icom R100), also I > wonder if the new scanners will no longer be easily modifiable to > receive cellular? According to the debate raging in alt.privacy, it will be illegal to import or manufacture equipment capable of receiving or easily modified so that it can receive those frequencies used by cellular. Greg TCS Consulting Services P.O. Box 600008 St. Paul, MN 55106-0008 ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta ..!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta zeta%tcscs@idss.nwa.com tcscs!zeta@idss.nwa.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #844 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28172; 15 Nov 92 17:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28015 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 15:27:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29030 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 15:26:57 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 15:26:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211152126.AA29030@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #845 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 15:27:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 845 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Macy Hallock) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Barton F. Bruce) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Steve Forrette) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Mark J. Elkins) Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Jack Adams) Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Ken Stox) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 01:00 EST From: fmsys!macy@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu (Macy Hallock) Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Organization: F M Systems, Inc. Medina, Ohio 44256 USA In article is Kamran Husain writes: > Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of > operation has rendered most home security systems useless. OK, I'll give you the perpective of someone who has been actively involved in the alarm industry for fifteen years. I also have been involved in telecommunications for over twenty years. Combining this knowledge has resulted in some interesting solutions. > Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks > snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the > owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then > walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the > weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is > drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified > since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back. First, not all states require an external power disconnect. However, the same effect can be gained by removing the electric meter ... you should lock the disconnect if you can. This mode of compromise has been performed by "clever" intruders in the past. Our company discovered a similar scenario during a local rash of intrusions several years ago. We ended up catching them in a house, as they had become very bold and decided to ignore a siren that sounded when they cut the phone lines (this was in a rural area). They were very surprised when the sheriff's cars pulled up ... (See item four below for the method that caught them) Once the perpetrators are apprehended, the problem is lessened somewhat. Nonetheless, the general trend is increasing sophistication on the part of many intruders. Generally speaking, the common everyday thief is not using techniques such as these often ... yet. Its wise to consider this when designing a residential security system. When a homeowner decides to cut the cost of a residential system, extra measures such as the ones below are often dropped. Many alarm companies are so sensitive to price competition that they do not propose some type of line/transmission security unless specifically asked to do so. > My house was hit day before yesterday but we stayed indoors and used a > mobile phone (luckily!! inside the house!) to call the sheriff. No > theft, but scared us witless when the both our regular POTS phones > were dead. Very smart move. You may have saved yourselves from physical harm. > Also, we found on later examination that our cable TV coax was cut. > (Why cable???) There are a few areas in which alarm transmission services are avaiable via cable TV. It sounds like the intruders are trying to be thorogh ... or are just plain paranoid. > a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC > power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done > on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter > for those people who do not have mobile phones? There are several alternatives: 1. Cellular transmission. That's what we use for those who want the most effective solution. Its also rather costly. 2. 900 mhz or other type of mid range radio transmission. Ademco, Radionics and others make such systems. They are generally sold only by a few alarm companies. Some of these work reasonably well, but few alarm installers are able to cope with the complexity of properly installing RF transmitters and antennas. If installed well, and favorable propogation/location characteristics are present (with respect to the receiving antenna), many brands work well. Note that many of these systems are unable to warn you of an antenna failure, except by frequent testing. 3. Short range radio transmission (to a neighbor's location) ... also called "buddy system" radio. Uses a low power transmitter to signal a telephone line failure to a nearby receiver, usually in a neighbor's location, which then calls the alarm central station to report the failure. 4. Decoy wiring and good batteries. We often will arrange for a customer's phone lines to enter underground with no appearence on the outside of the customer's premise. A decoy telephone interface box, complete with exposed cable going into the ground is installed, and wired to a tamper alarm circuit in the alarm system. 24 to 48 hour standby power is also installed in the alarm. This method has saved several customers, and has also frightened a couple of telephone repairmen [grin] ... but they were GTE employees and seemed to survive the experience. The telco also don't mess with our customers anymore. They now call us and ask when they see our alarm stickers on a premises. Serves them right for all the RJ31X's they miswired and disconnected on us over the years. 5. Subcarrier telephone connections. In a few areas of the country, telephone companies installed special equipment to allow alarm signalling to occur "under" the regular voice use of a phone line, and was monitored in the central office just like a dedicated leased line (like jewelry stores use). This worked reasonably well, but was more expensive that digital dialers. These methods have had a noticable effect on our customers security. We have far less attempts against our alarm systems now that we did ten years ago. Not so for most of our competitors, it seems (according to casual conversations we've had with law enforcement personnel). The extent we go to secure our communications link (as opposed to most of our competitors) is one of the small differences in our system installations. It does add to the cost of installing a system. Remember, the best alarm benefit is to deter, not capture. Sorry to say, would-be intruders do not leave "Sorry, we missed you" cards on your doorknob when they decide not to break in after looking around. Once they enter or, worse yet, confront you, the chances of a loss or tragedy increase dramatically. (BTW: NEVER, EVER CONFRONT AN INTRUDER. That's how people get hurt or killed. If you hear them coming in, call 911, or better yet, leave quickly.) The theory here is to "harden the target" to an extent that discourages the would be intruder. Unfortunately, you may never know if you actually succeeded. > b) Any recommendations on such devices out there? See above. All work. > c) Why were cable connections cut? Do some monitoring stations use > cable coax for communications back to the head node for purposes other > than cable TV channel $$$ monitoring? Yes, but very few cable companies do it anymore. It seems as though the cable plant designs of years gone by did not accomodate two way operation well. (I'm thinking of Warner's QUBE in Columbus, Ohio) There were some TOCOM based systems that worked better, I'm told. Now that fiber is starting to be deployed by cable operators, this might change. Don't know if the economics will work. > d) How can I hide the phone connections at my house or make the > snipping a less than trivial process? See item four. Remember to examine the "pedestal" terminal the phone company keeps nearby for local connections. It should be either bolted shut with a security bolt, or locked. IMHO, this is a point of failure common to several premises, but the phone company does not take securing these very seriously until they encounter repeated vandalism. Oddly enough, we have not had problems with tampering in these terminals...except by seasoned pros after high value goods. (You don't stop the real pros that easily ... that's why we use cellular for high security.) I could easily write another lengthy article on what we have gone through to obtain telco cooperation in securing residential telephone lines. The telco is not very interested in security. We have to do all the work for them. In alarm systems, like other things, a bit of knowledge and working with an organization of high integrity makes a difference. Try and buy a cheap alarm system, and that's exactly what you might get. Note: I've intentionally not given out names of manufacturers or model numbers in an attempt to be fair ... and non-commercial. All operational descriptions are general in nature. Your milage may vary. Engage common sense before operating. Macy Hallock +1.216.723.3000 Fax +1.216.723.3223 macy@fmsystm.ncoast.org F M Systems, Inc. 150 Highland Drive Medina, OH USA macy@fmsystm.uucp ------------------------------ From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. Date: 15 Nov 92 01:45:01 EDT In article , khx@se44.wg2.waii.com (Kamran Husain) writes: > Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of > operation has rendered most home security systems useless. (I don't > Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks > snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the > a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC Some central stations will accept "I'm OK" calls every 24 hours. Maybe your alarm system can be set to do those more frequently and maybe the central station will accept and ACT if they don't get them. The key here is that the central station MUST notice that you did not call in on time. This should NOT be a manual operation with a printer and a tub of customer cards, but a computerized company that can set limits that will automatically alarm if you don't call in within a designated schedule. Note well that the unit steals your phone line to call in, so if you had a six hour schedule, you want a separate alarm line lest a call of yours be chopped by the alarm dialer. If the alarm company and the cops figure out what is happening, they can be quietly waiting when the crooks return. A local alarm can be raised whenever the phone line is cut. Readily available line monitor cards can do that. Smart burglar would clip a LARGE capacitor across your line to preclude rotary or tone dialing, but NOT cut it. Or could clip a 9 v radio battery across line so your line monitor would see some battery, and then CUT the line beyond the battery. In general, unless they really want YOUR house, they won't be that careful. Use exterior lighting that uses 12 v DC electronic ballasts for 14 - 18 watt flourescents - readily available from Solar supply houses. Normally feed it from a transformer plus rectifier, but when power fails have it switch to a couple of BIG Sears DieHards in parallel that are normally trickle charged. Have some inside lighting powered from it too. You can get MANY hours of light easily that way, and a 14 watt flourescent puts out a LOT of light. Run your alarm off another such battery (but with NO lights to drain it) and the crooks won't wait enough days for it to die out. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 10:52:03 GMT In article davep@cac.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik) writes: > The phone company provides the means in our area to deal with this > threat. You have the option of having the phone company put a ping on > your line every few minutes. You can actually hear the tone if you > have a test set monitoring the line. When I was learning about the radio alarm systems I spoke of in a recent post, I had the opportunity to speak to the chief engineer in charge of it for a major alarm company. Since I was aware that Pacific Bell had trialed the service you describe above and was touting it to customers, I asked why the alarm company didn't use this new service, as it seemed a lot cheaper than installing a network of their own base stations and leased lines from them to HQ. At the time, I think Pacific Bell was charging $1.50 a month or so for this service. The engineer was quite familiar with the Pacific Bell service, and in fact sat on the comittee of alarm company folks that Pacific Bell had commissioned to work on integration issues. He said that the alarm companies had all concluded that they would not use this service, and would rather invest in their own wireless technologies. He said that on more than one occasion in the past, Pacific Bell had gotten them down the path of some new service for alarm monitoring, only to screw the alarm companies once they had gotten far enough to make changing impratical. He was absolutely convinced that if the alarm companies went with this new service, and didn't install their own wireless infrastructure, that as soon as there was enough of an installed base, Pacific Bell would skyrocket the rates, as they had done in the past for other special alarm circuits. This opinion was apparently shared by all of the alarm companies, as I know of none that ever used this service outside of the trials. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com, I do not speak for my employer [Moderator's Note: Speaking of radio alarms, I saw something curious the other day at the local Western Union affiliated currency exchange here. On a shelf in the cashier's cage was a small unit with an antenna on it which looked a lot like a little portable battery operated radio, but it also had a thing inside which looked like a casette tape -- a 'Walkman'-like thing. The odd part was the label on the front: the phrase "Western Union" and that company's logo. At first I thought it was an alarm of some sort, but I don't see how it could have any long-range transmission ability. Maybe it was a receiver of some sort. Any ideas? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:55:51 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Ptasnik Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Several people have asked me about the telco feature that notifies alarm monitoring compaines that your line has been cut, so I called US West to get a few more details:- US West offers the service under the name Scan Alert. Installation is $60.00, monthly is $7.50. Not all alarm companies are able to receive the signalling, but many of the big boys can, including ADT and Sears. The US West office that works with the alarm companies has the number (206) 345-5089. They may be able to help you find the "magic words" to order the service from your local phone company. I did confirm that the service works on existing lines, and notifies the alarm company if your phone line gets cut. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of: Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: mje@posix.co.za Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems Organization: Mark's Machine (Working for Olivetti Africa) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 06:32:59 GMT In petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu (William Petrisko) writes: Here in South Africa there are no cellular services. On my (old) house alarm, I had a telephone dialer (with my paging and office numbers) and a radio link. There is a transmitter in the roof (loft). Almost all alarms in this country are connected in this fasion. Connections by phone are more the exception -- do you trust wires? Most transmitters are single signal varieties. There are alarm 'clearing houses' who receive the signal and then phone/relay the signal to your prefered Reaction Unit (which is big buisness in RSA). Some Reaction Units do have their own recievers. You pay a small installation charge and monthly rental. The cost for alarm and armed response was 95 rand a month, about US $35. Newer transmitters monitor four circuits: 1) Alarm, 2) Forced alarm deactivation (man with gun at you head saying "Switch it off"), 3) Low Power (Battery, not mains :-), 4) Fire detection. >> d) How can I hide the phone connections at my house or make the >> snipping a less than trivial process? In my new house, I needed more lines. In agreement with Telkom, I laid an underground poly-pipe to the distribution poll. All my cables are now underground, but the old wires are in the air (unconnected at both ends). I'm hoping that any criminal activity will cut the obvious overhead wire. > Honestly, a cheap answer to your problem would be a small board (the > manufacturer name escapes me) that monitors the phone line voltage, > and connect it to the alarm so it trips the siren. Are US phone lines _that_ reliable? (Amusing thought of criminal element taking out a major phone trunk -- just to see what happens ...) > Another backup-battery in parallel (or just a bigger aH in it's > place) might make you feel more secure too. Most alarms are 12 volt; got an unused car battery? Olivetti Systems & Networks, Unix Support - Africa UUCP: uunet!olsa99!mje (Mark J. Elkins) mje@olive.co.za (Postmaster) Tel: +27 11 456 3125 ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 13:02:37 GMT In article , dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > In article , johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us > (John R. Levine) writes: > compress video for transmission between sets. > As an aside ... why in the world did they use that <2500> model number? Is > it possible that someone at AT&T didn't know it had been used once > before, for a product that once had what might be called 'significant > market penetration'? Or could it be that some marketeers hope for a repeat performance with the new "2500"? Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: kstox@admips2.Berkeley.EDU (Ken Stox) Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! Reply-To: kstox@admips2.Berkeley.EDU (Ken Stox) Organization: AC Nielsen Co. Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 21:47:55 GMT In article , dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > While John is correct, JPEG does turn up in some interesting > telecom-related contexts. According to some of my informally-received > information, the AT&T model 2500 video phone uses JPEG in real time to > compress video for transmission between sets. > As an aside ... why in the world did they use that model number? Is > it possible that someone at AT&T didn't know it had been used once > before, for a product that once had what might be called 'significant > market penetration'? Were I the guessing sort, I would say that this was quite intentional. Someone believes that this will become as popular as the original 2500 set. NOT! Ken Stox Consultant to A.C. Nielsen kstox@naitc.com #include ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #845 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29915; 15 Nov 92 18:23 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00931 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:23:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00453 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:22:58 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:22:58 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211152222.AA00453@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #846 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 16:23:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 846 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Greg Stovall) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Steve Glaser) Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth (Kenny Adams) Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth (John Higdon) Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Andrew C. Green) Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Jordan Hayes) Re: Personal 800 Numbers (New C&W Pricing) (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Personal 800 Numbers (David H. Close) Re: Personal 800 Numbers (Henry Mensch) Re: Risks of Cellular Speech (David H. Close) Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (Henry Mensch) Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (H. Shrikumar) Re: Cellular Phones Free? (Dwight Johns) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 06:50:00 +0000 From: Greg (G.T.) Stovall Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? In article steve@wrq.com writes: > I seem to remember a story that appeared in the TELECOM Digest several > years ago about the SWB-GTE situation in Texas. There was a large > company, Atlantic Richfield I think, that moved a large complex from > an area served by SWB to one served by GTE. The GTE service was so > inadequate that they had all of their local lines terminate in SWB > territory, then piped them into their office in GTE territory via > private microwave. GTE got upset about this and sued. The > small space they rented in SWB territory) was their business. Hmm. Maybe that explains the microwave array on the roof. When AR vacated their old facility in Richardson (consolidated into the new Plano facility) there were still active microwave links on the roof. I don't know if these were remaining local links for just that building or if AR still rented the roof space for SWB transmissions. Gregory T. Stovall Bell-Northern Research Richardson, Texas, USA (214) 684-7009 My opinions are not necessarily endorsed by BNR. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:13:55 -0500 From: glaser@dsmail.lkg.dec.com stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) described a story with Atlantic Ritchfield buying Southwestern Bell (SWB) lines and using private microwave to send the over to GTE territory. I heard that Burroughs (now Unisys) did the same trick in the LA area back in the 60s for their Pasadena CA plant. On a different, but related front ... In the early 70s, SWB in Houston realized that they had a major mess in their cable plant. They hired phone workers from lots of other Bell companies for a major "document and rewire the city" effort. For about a year it was not unusual to see phone trucks all over town with Mountain Bell / Pacific Bell / Southern Bell / ... logos on them. A college friend that worked for SWB during the summers told me the story. Maybe they just didn't "do" Dallas? :-) Steveg [Moderator's Note: Is that what they meant when they made the movie "DEBBIE Does Dallas"? DEBBIE = Decrepit, Eroded Baby Bell, Inc. Etc. I wish 'they' would do Chicago also. It is a mess here too. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: caadams@atlas.cs.upei.ca (Kenny Adams) Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth Organization: University of Prince Edward Island Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 06:32:24 GMT In article Alan Boritz <72446.461@ CompuServe.COM> writes: > schmidt@auvax1.adelphi.edu (JOHN SCHMIDT) writes: >> Telco tariffs and technical standards have specific limits on signal >> levels and baud rates, to prevent crosstalk into other services. >> "Program" circuits are limited to +8 dbm, as measured on a"VU" meter >> (+18dbm peak), although I have run much hotter levels in unamplified >> loops without "detection" (read 'complaint'). > AT&T, NYTel, and just about every other telco in the US use *0 dBm* > as their nominal level transmission standard, NOT +8. > That's a hell of an example to set for a public radio station at an > educational institution: know your standards ... and ignore them. In Canada the contracts that we (CBC) have with the various telephone companies for program circuits specify 0vu = +8dBm with program peaks to +18 dBm. the signal travels over twisted pairs at this level. it is processed before going into their mux at the co. the contracts have clauses in them restricting the length of +18 dBm tone we may feed on the circuit. in fact we are supposed to ask the carrier for permission to do headroom testing on analogue multiplexed circuits, as the high audio levels could exceed the maximum loading for the mux resulting in the loss of all of the calls on the channel. this is not a problem with digital transmissions or with audio subcarriers on top of our video circuits. we have several hundred program audio circuits with the various telcos. I work for CBC as an electronics maintenance technician in both radio and TV. These are my ramblings and not those of the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. kenny adams charlottetown prince edward island canada caadams@atlas.cs.upei.ca standard disclaimers apply.... ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth Date: 15 Nov 92 01:27:45 PST (Sun) From: john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon) Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> writes: > AT&T, NY Tel, and just about every other telco in the US use *0 dBm* > as their nominal level transmission standard, NOT +8. > That's a hell of an example to set for a public radio station at an > educational institution: know your standards ... and ignore them. Decades ago, I was involved with a small classical station that had its studio in Los Gatos (GTE). We had just moved the programming operation from the transmitter site up on the hill and had 15KHz phone lines installed. From day one, the lines were nothing but trouble. They were muddy. They were unreliable. They had about 50 db loss. If you think GTE is incompetent now, you should have seen it back in the late sixties! Since the studio and the transmitter were "served" out of the same office, it would have seemed a simple matter for GTE to have provided decent circuits. But no. We managed to equalize the muddiness out ourselves. But the worst problem was the incessant "dialing clicks" that could be heard over the loudest fortissimo passages and that would raise one right out of his chair during the pianissimo segments. Our solution was unconventional. We impedance-matched a pair of Dynaco amplifiers to the phone lines at the studio end. Then we drove them at about the ten-watt level. This had the effect of pushing the dial clicks down about thirty decibels, but had the additional effect of leaking symphonic music into a number of telephones in the area. GTE was furious. So were we. It ended up being a standoff (GTE did not disconnect us; we did not go to the PUC) until the station was sold and the new owners bought a 950 MHz link to the studio and also began playing rock music. John Higdon (hiding out in the desert) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:35:17 CST From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) writes: > Is anyone happy with these things? I've never gotten one to work to > my satisfaction ... Happiness is in the eye of the beholder, but I find the process of setting up a call to be a bit counterintuitive at best. I had to read the directions several times to comprehend them, and as a computer programmer I don't feel I'm particularly dense in these matters. If memory serves, you have to wait until a green light stops blinking before swiping your credit card through the handset, THEN you have to wait until the green light goes OUT before dialing. Something like that. As someone else pointed out, you must wait for a collection of beeps and boops to finish, then dial the call; the delay seemed to be due to the phone trying to get an authorization from my AmEx card before proceeding. After following the instructions to the letter and dialing very slowly, it still took two or three attempts before I got through. I chalked up the experience to Early Technology and took comfort in the fact that a few years earlier, I would have had no means of making the call at all. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:18:55 EST From: jordan@imsi.com (Jordan Hayes) Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey Organization: Investment Management Services Inc., NYC Kenny Crudup writes: > "No RJ11 jack (for modem)" - the bandwith ain't good enough to > let you use one, from the specs I've read here. Actually, Peter Honeyman recently put an accoustic coupler onto one at 35,000 feet and got his modem to connect, albeit at 300 baud. He got PPP up and working, but was getting 60 second round trip times from ICMP echo packets ... I guess they were spending all their time getting corrected between the modems ... :-) jordan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:59:32 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Ptasnik Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers (New C&W Pricing) Cable and Wireless has recently changed their 800 pricing. A new option allows no monthly charges and a per minute day rate of $.29. This comes with an ANI calling number printout at the end of the month. Call set up time is pretty long, at least on my number. Probably not suitable for normal business applications. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of: Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers Date: 15 Nov 1992 01:44:05 GMT Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> writes: [ a list of 800 vendors and prices ] Just FYI, "Call Home America" offers unpublished 800 service (real number, no password after connect) for $3.75/month plus usage between 16c and 25c/ minute. Full ANI billing, charged to your credit card. Portable in that you can change the destination number anywhere in the US. IMHO, a terrific deal, cheaper than collect or calling cards (especially if an AOS gets involved), can't be abused like the Call-Me card. Great for college students. CHA is at 800 594 3000. I'm only a satisfied customer. True, they would offer me a rebate for referrals, but only if you knew my account number. Dave Close, dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu, BS'66 Ec ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:12:17 -0800 Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers Reply-To: henry@ads.com Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> wrote: > AT&T will offer a regular 800 number, for $15 a month plus usage which > is, if I'm not mistaken, a flat 31c/Minute. This ties into an > ordinary phone number. There is a charge of $30 to install it. Is this really the personal 800 tariff? I'm using Pac*Bell's personal 800 service and I'm only paying $5/month and $0.25/minute (billed in six-second intervals). The service is actually provided by Sprint; they bill the Sprint $15/month fee on the bill I get for usage, and a credit appears simultaneously. I pay the $5/month to Pac*Bell. This gives you a real 800 number, and not one of those bogus "call this 800 number and then dial this extra code" crapola. I get the listing of callers (with phone number, city, date, time and length of call) in my personal 800 Sprint bill. My only gripe is that my number is either very close to someone else's number, or was recycled too soon, because I get bills with calls that weren't authorized (I know this because I've not given out the number to anyone ... I use it myself for one specific purpose). The total cost of these calls has been less than $0.15 over the past few months, so this isn't a big deal for me ... but it might be for someone else. # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / # for information on the league for programming freedom, # write to lpf@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ From: dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) Subject: Re: Risks of Cellular Speech Date: 15 Nov 1992 01:31:52 GMT Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena FZC@CU.NIH.GOV writes: > Also, you might ask the same question about why the members of > Congress involved with Mr. Keating of American Savings didn't tell him > to fix the problems with his S&L ... Keating was associated with Lincoln Savings which is defunct. American Savings, my employer, is healthy and so profitable that the Fed is trying to renegotiate its contracts. Just thought you ought to know. Dave Close, dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu, BS'66 Ec [Moderator's Note: Tell your employer to watch their backside very closely, and check out the number the feds did on Talman Federal Savings in Chicago. Uncle Sugar talked (then healthy) Talman into taking over all sorts of horribly managed, deeply in debt S&L's over the years, and promised to allow 'goodwill credit' on the books of Talman if they got in trouble as a result of trying to save so many sinking ships. Talman bought Uncle's line of crapola; there are now a dozen S&L's merged into the LaSalle-Talman-Home Federal group; the whole thing is drenched in red ink, and Uncle Sugar, like any good used car salesman has forgotten (or denies making) all those promises. Tell your employers they have been warned to watch out and accept no worthless promises from Uncle. PAT] ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:53:16 -0800 Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech Reply-To: henry@ads.com Frank Vance wrote: > 1. First of all, why did the various cellular providers make promises > of "safe and secure communications" when they knew anybody with a > little money could buy a receiver to listen in? Money. It wouldn't sell if they couldn't say these things, and it was easier to fib than to do anything about it. > 2. Why, instead of fixing the technical deficiencies in their product > do they go sniveling to Congress to make it illegal to listen (as if > they are ever going to be able to enforce it)? Money; it's cheaper to buy Congress than to retrofit every phone in the field. > 3. Why in the world did our government accept the snivelling and pass > the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, instead of telling the > cellular providers to go fix their own problems? They were just doing the job the cellular phone companies paid them to do. Am I being too pessimistic? # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / [Moderator's Note: Pessimistic? Not at all, Henry. The US Congress is just as easily bribed as a judge in Chicago; only the rates are a little higher since the 'territory covered' is greater. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun 15 Nov 92 08:27:10 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India > Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.89 > Date: 02 Nov 92 12:00:22 EST > From: Dave King <71270.450@compuserve.com> > Subject: Risks Of Cellular Speech > [The following was distributed here at work by our security folks. I > Two Bell Canada security managers shared some startling data with us > recently. In a three-month study of the Metro Toronto area earlier > this summer, Bell found that 80 percent of all cellular telephone > traffic is monitored by third parties. Even more eye-opening is the > fact that 60 percent of monitored calls are taped for closer scrutiny Gee now I am beginning to get confused as to which article I saw in RISKS and which in CDT, the only two newsgroups I read! If indeed this was in RISKS, I also remember that the next issue had a retraction saying that "they had not authority to say 80%" or give any such percentage. Someone happened to challenge how this survey could have been conducted at all! shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in ) [Moderator's Note: Yep, and I think the retraction appeared here also about the same time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dsjohns@uswnvg.com (Dwight Johns) Subject: Re: Cellular Phones Free? Date: 15 Nov 92 01:46:09 GMT Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc. Maybe the phone itself is free, but it might say "my first Sony" or "Fisher Price" on the side of it, and I would be willing to bet that you will have to sign up for at least one year of service with whatever cellular carrier is sponsoring the promotion. Nothing is really free ... except that one extra Life Saver in that little roll, that really is free. Dwight Snake Doward Johns dsjohns@uswnvg.uswnvg.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #846 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03817; 15 Nov 92 20:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09893 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:24:03 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16547 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:23:41 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:23:41 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211160023.AA16547@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #847 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:23:40 CST Volume 12 : Issue 847 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Alistair Grant) Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Koos van den Hout) Re: Armored Phone (Joe Bergstein) Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Todd Lawrence) Re: Airfones -- Phooey! (Todd Lawrence) Re: New SPARCstation LX Has Built-in ISDN From AT&T (John Adams) Re: RBOC Exit From CPE Market? (Ben Harrell) Re: Cordless Phone Newbie Question (Bill Pfeiffer) Re: BC Tel Pay Numbers (Andy Sherman) Re: Telephone Phreaks (Daniel Drucker) Re: Telephone Phreaks (Jan Richert) Re: Request: Large Format FAX (Tony Harminc) Re: South African Telecom (Steve Forrette) Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Laird Broadfield) Re: Personal 800 Numbers (Paul Barnett) My Apologies (Paul Robinson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:10:22 EST From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones As far as how fast you have to send them, it depends on where you are. Here I can dial fairly reliably at a 35ms tone rate, Ie. the actual tone lasts 35ms, the spacing is probably the same. Not really sure. In some areas 40ms is the lowest, in others, especially xbar systems, 70ms. Tony PJJ125@URIACC.URI.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 19:27:33 EST From: Alistair Grant <100032.525@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones Hello, The response about DTMF tones was great. Every one says I need both tones, not the average -- ok -- but my physics book says that when two pure frequencies are emitted then the resultant frequency and frequency only is the average. Anyway with just one speaker how do I emulate two tones so as to fool the phone? I have seen watches that dial telephone number; how do they do it? Ta - Alistair GRANT ------------------------------ From: koos!kzdoos.hacktic.nl@kzdoos.hacktic.nl Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 20:17:13 GMT Alistair Grant <100032.525@CompuServe.COM> writes: > phone dialer, I have the tones: I have a program that creates the > average of these tones for the corresponding number Both tones need to be transmitted at the same time with equal loudness (yup, that's two tones ... there goes the PC speaker ...) > Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of > a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second. Mark and Space times (On and Off) need to be of the same length (>=0.5 sec) to be recognized as valid. > If you can shed any light on the subject that would be cool. Cool? Winter is cool. This is autumn ... Grtx. KH Koos van den Hout -----------------------------------------------Sysop --\ Student Computer Science (AKA HIO) BBS Koos z'n Doos (+31-3402-36647) Inter-: koos@kzdoos.hacktic.nl 300..14400 MNP2-5,10,V42bis) net : vandenhout@ruumtc.tcu.ruu.nl Fido: Sysop @ 2:500/101.11012 Surfnet RUUMTC::VANDENHOUT ------------------------------ From: Joe.Bergstein@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 17:12:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Armored Phone amb@cs.columbia.edu (andrew m. boardman) writes: > I need a wall-mountable telephone for indoors use that's fairly theft- > and vandalism-proof. Who sells this kind of stuff? Try CEECO 1580 N.W. 65th Avnue Plantation, Florida 33313 305.587.5430 305.587.5440 Saw this firm's booth at a trade show last year. They specialize in producing steel clad phones for use where vandalism is highly likely. I believe their main market is for phones is *prisons*. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line From: todd@valinor.mythical.com (Todd Lawrence) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:24:03 CST Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems clifto@indep1.UUCP (Cliff Sharp) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: Well you are right of course that 20-30 seconds >> can mean life or death under some conditions. But the current telco >> technology is such that if the man wants his phone line back (more or >> less) immediatly, he will need to disconnect and wait about that >> period of time for the CO to get rid of the other party who is hanging >> on the line. PAT] > I've found that (at least locally) I can get those calls off the > line by shorting tip to ring. Not a _nice_ thing to do, but very > effective. I figure the total impedance in the runs from the CO to > the house should very effectively prevent any real burnout, and so far > I've been right (or lucky) about that. Don't know _why_ it works, but > it does. Just to re-iterate, as Pat originally stated, in an ESS environment, you will recieve your dialtone after closing the switchhook for 30-40 sec's or so (depending on your particular switch/configuration/system load). In a step system you will never get your dialtone back unless the calling party hangs up first (unless an addon (at the CO) disconn- ecting device has been added on your switch -- unfortunately not the case in my hometown growing up!). Also be advised for those of you trying the "shorting ring to tip" trick, doing so as far as I can tell would not cause any damage to the system per say, however on an ESS switch, doing so will cause a "line showering" ("SHWL Etc.." for those who like telco acronyms) error to appear on the local maintenance TTY and if the telco see enough of these they may dispach a repairman out to see if he can determine why. Line showering also indicates partial short conditions or sometimes impedance mismatch situations. Todd Lawrence todd@valinor.mythical.com uunet!valinor!todd ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Airphones -- Phooey! From: todd@valinor.mythical.com (Todd Lawrence) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:24:03 CST Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems Someone referring to the Airphone stated that they were using noise cancelling mikes. Actually to the best of my knowledge none that I have had the opportunity to use seemed to have any kind of active or passive ("hole in the back") noise cancellation schemes however, as a Pilot for USAir, I can give a few facts: 1) The typical noise level in a cabin class aircraft using bypass turbofans (quiet engine, ie.. B757), or even turbojet (noisiest version of commercial jet engine (ie b737-100 series) is quite low. This would not require any noise cancellation at all. 2) The noisier commuter type aircraft, cabin class turboprop such as emb-120 (Brasilia) are not equipped with airphone systems since for the most part trips on such aircraft are of a short duration and installing such a system would be "cost innefective". For the most part, I have been happy enough to use these phones for their intended purpose, to place a call that really can't wait until I get onto the ground. Todd Lawrence todd@valinor.mythical.com uunet!valinor!todd ------------------------------ From: jadams@vixen.cc.bellcore.com (adams,john) Subject: Re: New SPARCstation LX Has Built-in ISDN From AT&T Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 12:48:54 GMT In article , monty@proponent.com (Monty Solomon) writes: > SMCC INTRODUCES COLOR RISC WORKSTATION PRICED LESS THAN A PC > Also Unveils Graphics System, Server Product Based On SPARC/Solaris > SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Nov. 10, 1992 -- Sun Microsystems Computer > Corporation (SMCC) today introduced the SPARCclassic(TM), a fully I'm not sure about other readers / contributors, but I find publishing a full new product / press release in c.d.t. less than acceptable. Patrick, please comment! Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com [Moderator's Note: Well, I am ambivilent about it. You ought to see some of the ones I toss out and don't publish. I've never seen too much harm in it as long as it was clearly a new product announcement rather than a 'news item' ... that is, the sender was clearly shown to be an employee of the company making the announcement. Lord knows I print enough stuff from AT&T on their new products, so it is probably fair to do it for others. If TELECOM Digest were like *some* telecom magazines I could name, the product release would not be printed unless the company bought a big advertising spread from me at the same time, and then it would be printed -- but disguised as news! :) My rule of thumb on them is if they seem interesting to me, I assume others might find it interesting also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bharrell@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Ben Harrell) Subject: Re: RBOC Exit From CPE Market? Reply-To: cmebh01@nt.com (Ben Harrell) Organization: Computers and Technologies Theme Program-NCSU-NC Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:23:22 GMT Joe.Bergstein@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) writes: > Has anyone heard either rumors or specific information regarding Bell > Atlantic selling their CPE business back to Northern Telecom? (from > which they bought a big chunk not too long ago)? > Is this a trend? Are other RBOC's getting out of the CPE business? It's my understanding that this is true. I also understand that NT is considering purchasing some of the other CPE businesses or partnerships it sold or created in the '80s. Mystery to me why ... Ben Harrell cmebh01@nt.com ........... bharrell@catt.ncsu.edu ... ------------------------------ From: wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer) Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Newbie Question Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 10:50:30 -0600 (CST) In a recent TELECOM Digest, betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes: > I just picked up my first cordless phone and am I confused! A few > questions: > 1) What's the range on these things? This is a Sony SPP-75, if it > matters. Range is advertised as 1000 feet, but in 'real world' urban conditions, expect anywhere from 100 - 300 foot 'usable' range. This figure is dependent upon a myriad of conditions from location of base unit, type of building construction, portable battery level and interference from other phones and devices that share the frequencies that the phones use. > 2) What's the "auto security code system" for? Does that keep my phone > from ringing when someone else's does? From hearing someone else's > call? Security codes are used by the phone to make it more unlikely that others can gain access to your line, by using a handset on the same frequency as your unit. Security codes also can be used to keep your portable from ringing when a neighbor's phone is called. They have nothing to do with overhearing or being overheard. > 3) What's the relationship between the security codes and ten > channels? None. Channels are the actual radio frequuencies over which the call is transmitted, security codes are information sent over those channels as described above. > 4) Is this thing supposed to be left in the base or can I bring it > outside and wait for it to ring? Does it have to stand up in the base? No need to keep it in the base, except for charging. However, it is best NOT to keep charging and recharging. Better to use the batteries until the battery-low light comes on. Continued short charges can cause the battery to aquire a short-memory, and begin to lose it's ability to stay charged for a full term. > 5) The manual mentions computers and interference. Will the phone > interfere with the computer, or vice versa? If I get a second line, > the phone could have the opportunity to interfere with the modem. The interference is caused BY the computer's cpu clock, and causes the phone to whistle and whine. The phone will not bother the computer. > 6) Finally is this a particularly good or bad phone? I have heard good things about the Sony. Never owned one. William Pfeiffer Moderator - rec.radio.broadasting - Internet Radio Journal To subscribe, send e-mail to 'journal@airwaves.chi.il.us' ------------------------------ From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Re: BC Tel Pay Numbers Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 15:11:49 EST On 8 Nov 92 17:30:54 GMT, Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson) said: > The problem in Vancouver is that BC Tel has recently started up > pay-per-call numbers, but they do not yet have identifiable prefixes. > Therefore, ankies have been calling various BBSes that have > call-back-verify, and leaving these pay-per-call numbers. The sysop > who talked to me had lost Erickson> about $50 in the last month, and > this has only just started. To which our Esteemed Moderator noted: > [Moderator's Note: Well, that's the price he is going to pay for not > wanting to personally verify his users. I know a couple BBS sysops who > take the trouble to at least call each user once. Having users who > know that you know who they are helps keep boards in nice condition. PAT] Pat, It must be wonderful to be so perfect and smug and sanctimonious. You moan and groan about the upsurge in crime, and about the downsurge in people taking responsibility for their own actions. Yet you consistantly excuse criminals who prey upon an unsuspecting public with tricks such as this and the beeper scam. It's one thing to expect people to know about what a 900 number is. But when the pager scam happened in New York, public awareness of the nature of 540-xxxx numbers was very low, unless you read the seamier ads in the back pages of the {Village Voice}. And Leonard has stated that BC Telecom has *NOT* made their pay-per-call numbers clearly identifiable. So how is somebody to know *before* they call that the call will cost them money? Using ruses to get people to call your pay-per-call line based on their ignorance is fraud, pure and simple. The a**holes who do it deserve the full force of the bunko laws. Your attitude that the only people with the technical sophistication of a contributor to this forum have a right to any consumer protection is insufferable and unsupportable in any but the most dog-eat-dog lassaiz-faire world. Andy Sherman Salomon Inc - Unix Systems Support - Rutherford, NJ (201) 896-7018 - andys@sbi.com or asherman@sbi.com "These opinions are mine, all *MINE*. My employer can't have them." ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks From: mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET (Daniel Drucker) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 21:31:05 EST Organization: Odd Parity Hacker's Group johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) writes: > In article mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET > (Daniel Drucker) writes: >> Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is? >> (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.) > When I dial this I get: > WELCOME TO AT&T INFORMATION ACCESS SERVICE > Please Sign-on: > What is this service used for? > [Moderator's Note: It is a network server, a lot like Telenet's data > network. You 'sign on' to various other systems such as ATT Mail. > Actually, I dial into it at 9600 baud, although 2400 is okay. We have > discussed this before, and interested parties might want to check out > the file in the Telecom Archives discussing it. Check the directory in > the archives for '950.1288'. PAT] How do I get to the Telecom Archives? And what would I say at Please Sign-On: to use ATT Mail? Daniel Max P. Drucker [Moderator's Note: You would respond: 'AT&T Mail'. Actually instead of 'please sign on' it should say 'Where do you wish to be connected?'. The Telecom Archives is accessible using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. When you log in, use name@site as your password, and 'cd telecom-archives'. Would anyone be willing to host the Telecom Archives on a site with a dialup attached so our non-Internet users could participate? PAT] ------------------------------ From: jrichert@krefcom.GUN.de (Jan Richert) Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks Date: 15 Nov 92 15:08:33 GMT Organization: Krefcom UUCP Server, Krefeld, FRG cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu (Christopher J. Ambler, Phish) writes: > Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is? > (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.) > (SIT TONES) The long distance company indication for this call is > incorrect. Please try your call again or call your long distance > company for assistance. That's what I get: "Your international call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check the number and dial again or call your AT&T operator for assistance." Greets, Jan Richert (NIC-ID: JR482) | Internet: jrichert@krefcom.GUN.de Krefeld, FRG | BTX: 02151399843-0001 Voice & FAX: +49 2151 313124 | IRC-Nick: jrichert ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 20:23:46 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Request: Large Format FAX AUGUST@JPLLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV (Richard B. August) wrote: > We have the need for a large format FAX capability. By "large format" > we mean C/D size drawings (C=18x24, D= 24x36). Any assistance is > greatly appreciated. I just saw a Xerox ad yesterday for exactly such a beast. It looks huge -- more like a floor standing whiteprinter or similar. I don't remember the model number, but the ad said something about G3 compatibility. Ask your local Xerox office. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: South African Telecom Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 01:36:26 GMT In article Mark.Wuest@att.com writes: > I have a friend who is trying to economically exchange e-mail with > someone in Johannesburg, South Africa. He personally uses Compuserve > (they have internet access). For some reason, Compuserve in South > Africa is quite expensive. MCI Mail can't give a straight answer on > how his friend would connect. MCI Mail launched a new service earlier this year which gives customers direct dialup access in 27 countries. You dial a local access number (much like dialing into Telenet or Tymnet in the US), request a connection to the MCI computers in the US, and off you go. No account is required with the local PTT, and access is charged at US$.50 per minute and appears on your MCI Mail bill (standard MCI Mail per-messages charges still apply). Access in South Africa is provided in Cape Town, Durban, and Johannesburg. I've sent a detailed announcement to Pat in case he wishes to put in the archives. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: This will be in the archives later this week for interested people along with a few other new files in recent days. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number Organization: "Well, a head on top, an arm on each side, two legs...." Date: 15 Nov 92 01:19:26 GMT In Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe. COM> writes: > Change "most" to ALL. There should be NO US cellular carriers that > will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone > number. Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC > rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR). Wait a minute; this is a *clear* example of [I forget, there's a Latin term for it], where somebody says something that *appears* to follow from something else, but there's actually no relation between the two. "Failure to validate the ESN" has *nothing* to do with a design failure that does not permit more than one valid ESN per number. That would be like saying that if I verify credit card numbers at all, then I cannot allow more than one card to bill to the same account. There is no sensible reason, other than a reluctance to challenge design difficulties, that an entire list of ESNs could not be valid for a single number. The voice path issues, as Alan says later, are just a switching issue. Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ From: barnett@convex.com (Paul Barnett) Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:48:12 GMT Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA In dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) writes: > Just FYI, "Call Home America" offers unpublished 800 service (real > number, no password after connect) for $3.75/month plus usage between > 16c and 25c/ minute. Full ANI billing, charged to your credit card. > Portable in that you can change the destination number anywhere in the > US. It should be noted that the destination number must be changed by calling customer service, and it is promised to take up to ten days (although a recent change precipitated by moving took less than seven days). It isn't something that can be done "on-line" at a moment's notice like AT&T's 700 service. Rates are a bit higher if the call originates and terminates in Texas. > IMHO, a terrific deal, cheaper than collect or calling cards > (especially if an AOS gets involved), can't be abused like the Call-Me > card. Great for college students. There are only two dangers: giving the number to someone that likes to talk on your nickel, and wrong numbers. However, CHA gives credit for wrong numbers, if your 800 number is not published. Paul Barnett Internet: barnett@convex.com Convex Computer Corp. Office: 214-497-4846 Richardson, TX Mobile/Home: 214-236-8438 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 22:34 GMT From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> Subject: My Apologies I would like to apologize publicly for what was something which was a mistake on my part. I have already sent a message to Mr. Geiser about quoting his message to me, and the only reason I did this was to allow someone from Picturetel -- even if not an official spokesperson -- to be able to say why AT&T's product isn't necessarily that good. If it wasn't for the fact I felt they should know about it, I wouldn't have even sent anyone at Picturetel anything about the message in the first place. Had I thought there would be a problem, I would never have forwarded the message. I am used to using other systems where every message sent is public anyway, so I'm not all that used to having mail that is strictly private for me alone, that no one else has seen. This incident will not be repeated. Paul Robinson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #847 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10197; 15 Nov 92 23:18 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14568 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:18:34 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14596 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:18:16 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:18:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211160318.AA14596@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #848 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 21:18:15 CST Volume 12 : Issue 848 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number (Steve Forrette) Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager (Craig R. Watkins) Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (Brian Cooper) Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas (Eric Tholome) Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem (James Hartman) Re: Experience With AT&T Language Line (Brad Dolan) Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (Jack Adams) Re: Music On Call? (Cliff Sharp) Re: Listing of CLLIs (Cliff Sharp) Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Gregory Youngblood) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 10:56:27 GMT >> In the monthly Michigan Bell billing insert, there is a large article >> that gushes about how Michigan Bell will allow you to pick a >> "personalized" telephone number. The cost is only $38!! They conclude >> by stating that your customer service rep will be more than willing to >> help you. > It is expected that this will be a monthly charge once a "requested" number > has been assigned. Pacific Bell started doing this a couple of years ago, charging both a setup fee and a per-month fee. Recently, they did away with this policy. Any customers which were paying monthly fees don't have to pay any more. I recently got an -xx00 assingment without any one-time or monthly fee without any particular hassle. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: Craig R. Watkins Subject: Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager Date: 15 Nov 92 07:26:42 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. In article , CRW@icf.hrb.com (I) write: > Call Manager is a (free) service of AT&T that allows you to touch tone > in an account code (of the form 15xx where you make up xx) where you > would normally dial a calling card number when you place a 0+ call. > Your bill then gets itemized and totaled by account code. In recent literature that I have received from AT&T it seems that the account code can be from one to four digits long (after the 15). I think this has changed since I started using it. I always hit a # after my account code to speed the call along. Craig R. Watkins crw@icf.hrb.com HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311 ------------------------------ From: brc@cseyrie.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Brian Cooper) Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering Reply-To: brc@aber.ac.uk Organization: University College of Wales, Aberystwyth Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:35:52 GMT In article , mandarin@cix.compulink. co.uk (Richard Cox) writes: > shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu said: >> each five minutes amounts to a new call. They could not have implemented >> it before they got these fancy stored program exchanges, so that's one >> nice thing about strowgers and crossbars :-) > and asks: >> I heard that some PTTs in Europe have always had metered local calls, >> or at least that it was so planned ... is that true? > In the UK all calls are metered by time, local or not: with the > exception of one city (Kingston upon Hull -- Hull for short) where > local calls are untimed. > The arrangement here (apart from in Hull) is that a "new call" is > registered every "time unit" -- which varies from *57.5 seconds* in the > morning to three minutes forty seconds in the evening and (also at > weekends.) > We are somewhat envious of the tariffs enjoyed in the USA ! Since British Telecom, which was a state owned monopoly, was denationalised in 1984, the price of local calls has increased sharply whilst the cost of long distance inland calls has fallen. The ratio of most/least expensive calls used to be nine -- it is now down to four. My guess is that under the impact of competition on long distance routes, this ratio will fall further. Perhaps telephone usage tariffs have been a long way from being cost based ever since the legions of "long distance telephone operators" were made redundant by the technology? If anyone has any historical cost data on this subject I would be most interested to hear from them. Brian Cooper, Research Associate, University of Wales, Aberystwyth, UK. Voice +44 970 622419 ------------------------------ From: tholome@bangalore.esf.de (Eric Tholome) Subject: Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas Date: 15 Nov 92 17:10:05 GMT Organization: ESF Headquarters, Berlin, FRG In article , our Moderator notes: > [...] A business in the USA which desires to have reverse-charge > calls to it from an international point can quite easily ask AT&T to > arrange it for them with the telecom administration in the desired > country. Well, I saw an ad a couple of weeks ago from an American company in a French magazine. This ad was indeed customized for France: it was in French, and said that one could get more information by calling them for free. How, you ask? They were listing an 800 number to be called from within the USA, and were also saying that someone calling from France should call collect another listed number. Of course, you could always say that maybe this company didn't want to go through the trouble of arranging a real reverse-charge number from France. But this company was ... AT&T! Well, if AT&T itself doesn't do it, who's going to do it? Pat, are you really sure this is all that simple? Eric Tholome ESF Headquarters Internet: tholome@esf.de Hohenzollerndamm 152 UUCP: tholome@esf.uucp D-1000 Berlin 33 Ph.: +49 30 82 09 03 25 Germany Fax: +49 30 82 09 03 19 [Moderator's Note: Sure it is. All the (country) Direct lines in the USA to foreign countries have 800 (USA style) numbers. Ring the 800 number here and connect with an operator at British Telecom in order to call someplace in the UK on your BT calling card as an example. There are a couple of 800-xxx prefixes specifically tariffed to handle international traffic (so people in the USA can call 800-style to places in other countries). Ditto the other way around. There is an 0800 number in the UK which rings CBS News in New York. I think the USA Direct service which AT&T operates in other countries in at least a few cases relies on 0800 (or whatever) style numbers in the distant place to connect with the AT&T operator in this country. Just because AT&T doesn't use the service in the particular application you mentioned does not mean it is not available. Nor do I know specifically what the arrangement for this is with France. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem From: phaedrus@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (James Hartman, Sysop) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 00:15:49 GMT Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX normt@ihlpm.att.com (Norman R Tiedemann) writes: > Next time this happens, tune in the local "wild and crazy" radio > station and check if you hear yourselves. (Or start shouting > obsenities.) According to recent FCC blurbs, it is illegal for a radio station to broadcast your voice unless you've either been asked and said OK, or if you call as part of an obvious phone-in portion of a program. Follow-ups to rec.radio.broadcasting. phaedrus@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (James Hartman, Sysop) Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 943-2728 1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 8:40:17 EST From: PINE_RIDGE@ORVB.SAIC.COM Subject: Re: Experience With AT&T Language Line Capek writes, "...the service is headquartered in Monterey, CA. I believe that is, not accidentally, where the US (Navy? Army?) translators school is located." The Defense Language Institute, at the Presidio of Monterey, provides language training to students from all service branches and other organizations. I studied there in 1978. It's a neat school and is located in one of the most beautiful places on earth. Brad Dolan N4VHH 700.NUCLEAR 71431.2564@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:37:39 GMT In article , rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: > First, let me clarify exactly what I meant. The point I was making is > that a switch need not know that anything has happened. > Equipment to do this DOES exist. I work for a railroad, in the > telecommunications department (although not the switched network > group), and we have equipment (I can't remember the name - I'll refer > to it as a DACS, although that is not really an accurate name) that > does this. If railroad signaling (I'm a RR wannabe as a hobbyist) is what is carried, it is natural to have protection switching (What the telecom industry calls its schemes to maintain reliable transmission facilities) in place for safety reasons. In the public switched telephone network (PSTN), the consequences of dropping a connection are not as severe. > I an fairly certain that supervision on the trunk will not be lost > during the interval that the trunk is being rerouted. If it was, > then, of course, the call would be dropped, but there are easy ways > around that. (This post is long enough without the details). The previous post (this issue) from Al Varney about signaling on DS1 indicates a very short (less than 125 us) interval needed to maintain supervision. Protection switching operates with switching times of at least two orders of magnitude higher. As such, it is highly unlikely that individual circuit supervision will survive such a switch. Moreover, in current digital facilties (FT3 comes to mind), this protection switching is built in to automatically switch to a spare line when the BER exceeds 10-6(?). > Do any telephone companies actually use this for voice circuits? I > don't know, but my point was that it could be done if they wanted to. Now that we've beaten this to death, I reiterate that I know of NO telephone companies (this doesn't mean that none exist!) that use this approach. BTW, I think DACS is a trademark of AT&T (Before trademarking it stood for Digital Access and Cross-connect system). Any of you Baldrige award winning AT&T transmission folks wanna help out here? Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Music On Call? Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:09:59 CST From: Cliff Sharp In article rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: >> I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering >> machine: Several minutes of music. There was no voiceover anywhere in >> [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called > Another possibility is that it was generated by music-on-hold, but not > by someone deliberately placing you on hold to leave you a long I've also had calls (my machine limits them to 30 seconds) where I'd be treated to several seconds of elevator music followed by "Hello? Hello?" and end-of-message. Someone told me that several companies are using a gadget that basically calls you and says a canned message like "Hello, this is the X corporation. We'd like to discuss something with you; please stay on the line and a representative will be with you shortly.", then music, then somebody appears on the line expecting a human. Their initial message seems to be shorter than my outgoing one, so I never hear that part. Gee, I hope I didn't miss my opportunity to call a $4/minute and listen to a sped-up recording telling me I missed out on winning all those amphetamines ... :-) Cliff Sharp clifto@indep1.chi.il.us OR clifto@indep1.uucp WA9PDM [Moderator's Note: The use of those dialers to pre-connect calls before anyone is ready to talk to you is the height of rudeness. I always disconnect instantly when one of those things calls me. I'll gladly hold for a few seconds *if* you are already talking to me and have a incoming call-waiting. I won't wait when you had no intention of being available immediatly when you dialed. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Listing of CLLIs Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:11:41 CST From: Cliff Sharp In article vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) writes: > I'm not sure whether having a complete list of Common Language > Location Identifier codes (CLLI) would be of much help in what you are > trying to do. If your user is an average telephone subscriber, he/she Actually, I'm cross-referencing one file against another by a common field (not exactly relational database but similar idea); the field could just as well contain ABCDEFGH as CHCGILCA but the latter might come in handy some day. > would have much difficulty abstracting where they are (either calling > from or to) from these ten character code names which identify There was a list (containing some inaccuracies in NPA/NXX/CO name) circulating BBSes around here when 312 split, and it contained eight- letter abbreviations; don't know if it was deliberately letting me mislead myself, but the RBOC person I mentioned them to seemed to accept them as at least fairly close to what I thought they were; cf. CHCGILCA above, listed as one of three CLLIs for the Canal CO. > physical locations within the telephone companies. For instance, in a I was told the other day that they not only identify physical locations, but also are used to identify which switch in a given office the NXX is connected to ... that would be interesting stuff to me if I could pin it down. > given town, there probably are more than one physical location for the > phone company (Chicago and other towns come to mind). More > importantly, these locations are often encoded with streets and/or > other less widely recognized designators. In that (probably inaccurate) list I had, every CO in the City of Chicago began with CHCGIL, and the suburban ones had abbreviations that roughly allowed them to be matched to village names. > I suspect that correlating an NPA-NXX with LaSalle Street might be a > stretch for the average customer. In addition, not all CLLIs have End Ah, but TEYE, in my laBOratory, am not your average customer...! [evil scientist grin] > Offices in them, a digital radio relay CEV (Controlled Environment > Vault) or other type of hut are CLLI designated but have no NPA/NXX > associated with them. Didn't know that! Wonder if that figures in their distance measurements for measured service (I can see where the distance from a CEV wouldn't count on per-minute cellular charges, but ...)? > Moreover, the CLLIs are often assigned to buildings with no networks > in them whatsover. Consider the warehouses which hold the spare plug > in electronic equipment units, but which bear a CLLI because they > contain these Common Language Equipment Identification (CLEI) items. So far, against the list I've had and the list I've maintained by hand from Illinois Bell's MSA-1 list, I've at least managed to identify the COs; with a little luck I might be able to cull the others. > I suspect that a search of your tariffs (publicly available) will be > of more value in completing your project as they fully designate all > rates, routes, etc. I would dearly love that, but (1) some service rep told me that they no longer keep a copy of the Illinois tariffs available for the public (!!! I thought they were required to, and suspect this is stonewalling), (2) The ICC will xerox this tome for me for $0.25/page (probably a few tens of bux I can't afford), and (3) my bad back would keep me from travelling very far or sitting very long to read it anyway. And to top that, my handwriting is bad enough after a few minutes of writer's cramp that even I wouldn't be able to decipher my own scrawl. > Maybe I'm missing something? Right on target so far, thanks. Cliff Sharp clifto@indep1.chi.il.us OR clifto@indep1.uucp WA9PDM [Moderator's Note: The tariffs are available to the public. Go to the 225 West Randolph / 212 West Washington Building downtown. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number From: srcsip!tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com (Gregory Youngblood) Reply-To: srcsip!tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 17:02:46 CST Organization: TCS Consulting Services mcrware!!troyf@uunet.UU.NET (Troy Frericks) writes: >> Change "most" to ALL. There should be NO US cellular carriers that >> will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone >> number. Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC >> rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR). > I know it's not right (legal), but I have to throw it out anyway. > What about changing the ESN on the second phone to match that of the > first one that already has service. I beleave this is how some people > with some older Panasonic phones are stealing service -- intercept the > ESN as it is broadcast, then burn a PROM, and insert it into their > phone. > Note you would NOT be able to call each other, or both receive calls. > You may not even both be able to place calls at the same time when on > the same cell (or same area). Probably could get around that by > having one phone on service B, other roam on service A. Food for > thought. Disclaimer: Info for educational enrichment only, not to be > implemented. Some places are offering such services with a software update in their switch that allows this type (two phones/one number). The only drawback is these are used only locally in the local switches at this time(or at least the time I learned about it), and that when roaming, there was a 'MAIN' phone and a secondary phone. The main phone is the only phone authorized for roaming privileges. Everything is registered, everything is legal. The main phone ESN is reported to remote carriers when roaming. I don't know what switches are supporting this, but from what I understand it is a software update to several switches. Greg TCS Consulting Services P.O. Box 600008 St. Paul, MN 55106-0008 ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta ..!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta zeta%tcscs@idss.nwa.com tcscs!zeta@idss.nwa.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #848 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12847; 16 Nov 92 0:38 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09533 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:14:15 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07754 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:13:58 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:13:58 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211160413.AA07754@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #849 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 22:14:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 849 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? (David Gast) Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Sam Swett) Re: Large Format FAX (Timothy K. Hong) Re: Cellular Scam (Steve Forrette) Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US - Ha! (Tony Pelliccio) Re: PP 2000 -- Phooey (Dave Levenson) Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Cliff Sharp) Re: Please Explain "Crossed Lines" (Cliff Sharp) Re: News Summaries (Steve Forrette) Re: Compuserve/MCI Mail (Darren Ingram) Introduction to a New Subscriber (Tom Goodden) Re: Northern Telecom Email Addresses (Ben Harrell) Looking For Home PBX System (Bill Huttig) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 12:25:35 -0800 From: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) Subject: Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? (Steven A Rubin) sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu wrote and asked about phone records: > I am trying to find out if the customer records the RBOCs keep on what > exchanges customers call is public record. Also, are long distance > records public? It depends what you mean by public record. If you mean, can you typically walk into an RBOC or IXC and ask to see the calling records of someone, then the answer I presume is usually no. If you mean, if you walk in with enough money in your pockets, are the RBOCs and the IXCs able to give you the information, the answer is yes. A program on bounty hunters (that is, people tracking down people who have skipped bail) shows the bounty hunter calling up PacBell or GTE and getting the information necessary to track someone down. I do not believe any money was exchanged. If you want to know if your records are confidential, the answer is definitely no. If you want confidentiality, go to a pay phone and pay with cash or a stored value card where available. While I do not claim to have any knowledge of individual states, the following are the federal rules. (BTW, this information is not new; PAT must have missed it or disregarded. If you want the exact FCC ruling number and the precise section of the ECPA, I would search the archives in late February or March, 1992). The ECPA allows transactional information, as opposed to the content of the calls, to disclosed to any non-governmental organization or person. Government has to get a court order. The FCC has ruled that the IXCs *must* share information transactional information with other IXCs. Their reasoning is that by sharing info, the oligopolies will lower prices. (I don't believe it for a minute). An interesting aside to this conversation is who owns the information when you call an 800 or 900 number? LL Bean, for example, believes that since they pay for the call, they should own the data. Their carrier says that since they carried the call, they should. At dispute is whether the carrier can sell information about who calls LL Bean to LL Bean's competitors. I think that neither of them should have the right to do anything with it since I did not give them permission. So to that end I don't use 800 numbers. > [Moderator's Note: No sir, they are not! They are proprietary records > of the telco, released only to the customer or by subpoena to law > enforcement agencies, etc. ... > But other than for billing and/or investigative purposes *no one* is > to get records of your calls. PAT] Not true according to the ECPA. Read it. Joe Konstan writes: > Didn't we have a discussion about this some six months ago. We did. > that the upshot was that LONG DISTANCE call records had to be > disclosed by your long distance company to any other long distance > companies to "help them effectively compete" for your business. > [Moderator's Note: I do not think other LD companies can get your call > records, name, address or phone number for any reason other than > billing purposes, at least not legally. They are required to be given access by the FCC. The only exception is if you have 25 or more lines. Big business likes it privacy. David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 20:44:31 -0500 (EST) From: Sam Swett Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number > Wait a minute; this is a *clear* example of [I forget, there's a Latin > term for it], where somebody says something that *appears* to follow > from something else, but there's actually no relation between the two. I believe the phrase you're looking for is "non sequitor", meaning "does not follow"... sam (equipped with airbag) ------------------------------ From: TIMOTHY.K.HONG@gte.sprint.com Date: 13 Nov 92 03:59:00 UT Subject: Re: Large Format FAX I just received some information on the Xerox 7124SH Digital Facsimile System. The 7124SH is a scanner/copier/facscimile all rolled into one device. Here is a very brief list of features: o Scan documents for fax and non-fax applications. Documents can be stored, printed, faxed or viewed on the screen (requires PC). o View scanned images or fax received images. o Single or multiple copies of documents up to 24"x36". 100% or 200% enlargements of original. o Multiple methods of sending faxes: menu, DOS prompt or local mode from the Xerox 7124S. o Electronic Outgoing Job Control. Single or batch fax to one or more locations (immediately or delayed). o Incoming faxes can be: - printed on Xerox 7124S (single or multiple) - stored electronically - viewed then printed - saved - re-faxed to another destination o Fax A, B, C or D sizes from Xerox 7124S to a Xerox 7124S. o Fax A, B, C or D sizes from Xerox 7124S to a Standard G3. B, C & D drawings are divided into multiple faxes. o Receive A or B size faxes from Standard G3 (partially supported). Up to 4 A size per phone call. o Other: Compatibility - CCITT Group 3 facsimile Max size input - 24"x36" Image buffer - 4MB Transmission Speed - 9600, 7200, 4800, 2400 bps, with auto fallback. Output - Thermal line print (23.76"x35.3") Resolution - Fine: 203x196 ppi Standard: 203x98 ppi 16 levels of gray scale Media - Direct thermal roll paper (24"x300') Sorry, I don't have any prices. You should probably contact Xerox for more information. I personally like the idea of being able to fax a D size drawing to a standard G3 machine. Hope this was of some help. Timothy Hong (Timothy.K.Hong@GTE.Sprint.Com) GTE Hawaiian Tel - Beyond The Call Usual Disclaimer! Nothing I submit has anything to do with my employer. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Cellular Scam Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:26:43 GMT In article MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA. tredydev.unisys.com writes: > The {L.A. Times} reported that a "hacker" probably sold the serial and > phone number combination for a freeway call box to a ring which used > it to make 11,733 calls charged to the one phone. > "I don't think we can tell you what we did to fix it because we don't > want it to happen again," a county sokesman said with a laugh. The fix is pretty obvious, at least if they fixed it properly: They did what should have been done in the first place -- flag the call box numbers with a special class-of-service that can only call the Highway Patrol numbers. Then even if you spoof your phone to match a call box's MIN and ESN, it won't do you any good. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:14:59 EST From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US - Ha! I lived in North Providence, RI for a bit and was assigned a Pawtucket, RI telephone number since New England Telephone likes to do things like that, break a small town up (only about 4.5 miles long) into three different exchanges that can call each other and a certain amount of RI for the basic rate, but then each has it's own little special calling areas. In any case, the next street over began the next exchange so I got jacked with a Pawtucket number and the absolute WORST telephone service one could ask for. Seems I was at the end of the loop and couldn't even get my modem to connect at 300 baud to a system that was only about two miles away in Providence. I went through three months of sheer hell until I finally due to a rising toll bill, got a foreign exchange. Now the interesting part is that the line from my phone to the Pawtucket CO was the same, but boy did it work better. Yup ... you guessed it, they put all sorts of range extenders, amps, conditioners etc on the line when you're paying for FX service. Also ... NET has this strange way of completing orders here ... they sometimes send TWO techs on different days to fix the same thing. :) ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: PP 2000 -- Phooey Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:35:12 GMT In article , johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: >> On the other hand, I am impressed with the new AT&T Public Phone 2000. > I'm not. I was at JFK airport last week and having a few minutes to > kill, I tried to call my computer at home and check my mail using a > PP2000. After tediously working through their "user friendly" menu, > I set it to 2400 bps, called in, modems shook hands, then nothing, no > characters, no nothing. Didn't work at 1200 bps, either. Nobody else > has any trouble calling in here. What gives? Perhaps the PP2000 you found was, like many other phones at JFK, out of order? I have spent quite a few hours waiting around between flights at EWR, ORD, HOU, and DFW lately, and have never had a problem logging into the Westmark UNIX system from any of them. I've even posted an article to this Digest from one such terminal, in which I described the device. I only wish it could talk at 9600, and that I could find the ~ on its keyboard! 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: Cliff Sharp Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting Date: 15 Nov 92 14:56:25 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Yes, there is a different call waiting signal for ... > with or without three way calling. In Chicago, the distinctive ringing > numbers (you can have two plus the main number) can be programmed at ??? My local (Schiller Park) phone book says "Distinctive Ringing: Lets you designate calls from up to ten numbers for 'special' ringing..." Cliff Sharp clifto@indep1.chi.il.us OR clifto@indep1.uucp [Moderator's Note: The terms get used interchangeably sometimes; I should have used the proper name: Multi-Ring, which is the service which allows a second and/or third actual telephone number to be assigned to a main number and ring with a different cadence. You are correct that Distinctive Ringing is one number with up to ten callers entitled to cause a special ring when they call. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Cliff Sharp Subject: Re: Please Explain "Crossed Lines" Date: 15 Nov 92 16:31:39 GMT In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In my case, it was exactly as Pat desribed: someone else had my line > on their secondary pair. In this instance, it was a second line at my > parents' house that I had installed for my use when I visited. During > the time when my "phantom" calls were made, there had not even been a > phone plugged into that line, so there was nobody to hear the other > person, no unusual ringing, etc. What disappointed me was that when > Pacific Bell located the spurious jumper, they just removed it and > reported this fact to me. They made no effort to identify where it > went so that the proper people could be billed for their calls. > Devious or not, the other people should rightfully expect to pay for > their calls, even if it was their honest mistake. In my case, I ended up several years ago calling the phone co. sheepishly and saying "This sounds crazy, but I think my line is tapped." They sent someone out who found a surreptitious connection down the alley and removed it, then explained to me in great detail what had happened and told me that TelCo Security was being called in. The second time this happened, some years later, the man who came out gave me what sounded very much like a canned answer (something like, "There are no unauthorized connections to your line"). I asked the neighbor across the alley (a TelCo lineman) what that meant, and he laughed and told me that what he said was TelCoEse for "Your line is being tapped, but by a court order." I had no idea who would want to listen to long, boring conversations between hams and/or computer hackers (that last made me think...). Again, years later, I kept picking up the phone and hearing someone hang up the phone, no dial tone. I "invented" a 555 circuit to monitor the line and every time it lit, I picked up the phone and yelled, "I'm gonna get you, you @!%&@!!" and they'd hang up. Finally, upon calling the TelCo, I got someone who went up the pole to the oooooold box there and found that mine was the outermost (easiest to grab) pair, and that linemen were hooking their butt packs to my line with great regularity. He put the pair waaaay back in the box, and I had no battery! Turns out they'd used it so much that the insulation-piercing clips they used scored the wire enough that it broke when moved. Cliff Sharp clifto@indep1.chi.il.us OR clifto@indep1.uucp WA9PDM ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: News Summaries Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:29:42 GMT In article TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM writes: > 3. Article titled "New Player on the Cellular Circuit" discusses > AT&T's buying McCaw Cellular, which is AT&T's first involvement in > cellular in ten years. AT&T sells 42% of the 90 metropolitan area's cellular > equipment anyway, making it a major supplier. Yea, execpt for McCaw Cellular, which has been replacing its AT&T switches with Erricson switches for the past few years! Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 19:27:38 GMT From: newsdesk@dims.demon.co.uk (Darren Ingram Media Services) Subject: Re: Compuserve/MCI Mail In message <199211100814.AA17428@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> is written: > CompuServe also has a major problem in my opinion. They don't support > multiple line email addresses. This is crucial to get to many I have the same problem with Netcom's system, as it continually send back copies of the Satnews biweekly Satellite Newsletter Digest to the listserv (listserv@orbital.demon.co.uk, subscribe satnews your_name ). Darren DIMS (newsdesk mailbox)(newsdesk@dims.demon.co.uk) 184 Brookside Avenue, Whoberley, Coventry CV5 8AD UK Tel:+44 203 717 417/Fax:+44 203 717 418/Tlx 94026650 ------------------------------ Date: 15 Nov 92 12:52:00 EST From: TOM GOODDEN Subject: Introduction to a New Subscriber Greetings to all from a newcomer. Some of you saw and were kind enough to respond to my first unsucdfessful attempt at an introduction. I am Tom Goodden, a graduate student pursuing a Doctorate in Public Administration (DPA) here at George Mason. My dissertation topic is the influence of a nation's political system on its telecommunications development. Hudson, Jussawalla, Snow, and many others have treated the impact of national economics on telecommunications and the reverse. I believe it would be valuable to consider looking at political behavior which tends to open or close society via telecommunications. I am fortunate to be studying under Professors R. Akwule, R.P. Clark, S.M. Lipset, S. Ruth, and L.G. White, who have excellent backgrounds in comparative political systems. I have written to each of 213 operating PTT's world-wide requesting annual reports, statistical summaries of operations, planning documents, and telephone directories of the national capital city. Surprisingly, perhaps, over 40 have thus far responded. I have also a growing data base of ITU, World Bank, NTIA, and other government statistics. I have also extracted from six of the major public telecom journals for the last eight years. As you might guess, the major need is grass roots community level data, especially from rural villages and hamlets. I need to know how many telephones are in the villages? Who has them? How many calls are made per month? For what general purposes, work, family, emergency, government assistance? How much do calls cost per minute? How reliable is service (call completion rates)? How long are waiting periods for telephone installation? Repair? Some may recognize my queries as essentially based on the work of Dean Ahmad Kamal and Professor Ali H. Dessouki, University of Cairo, as reported by Indu Singh (1983). If anyone has interest in this topic, I invite correspondence and would offer such as I might find on U.S. telecommunications in return. I am, T. Goodden@GMUVAX on BITNET, add gmu.edu for INTERNET. Regards. ------------------------------ From: bharrell@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Ben Harrell) Subject: Re: Northern Telecom Email Addresses Reply-To: cmebh01@nt.com (Ben Harrell) Organization: Computers and Technologies Theme Program-NCSU-NC Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 19:06:51 GMT hsm@sei.cmu.edu (Scott Matthews) writes: > Does anybody have any internet hosts (email addresses) for Northern > Telecom? Sorry I misunderstood the question in my previous response. All email addresses at Northern Telecom have the following form: NT_internal_email_account_id@nt.com for direct Internet to Internet email. You can also send email to internal NT email accounts via IBM Mail or IBM Mail's X.400 gateway. In both cases however, the NT employee has to be registered with the appropriate NT MIS gateway administrator to use the external mail connections. If they are the best way to get their address is to ask them to send you a message at your Internet address. If they don't know how to get registered to use the external email gateways, ask them to send me an internal email message and I will forward the information. My internal email address is my name: Ben Harrell Hope this helps more than my first message... :-) Ben Harrell cmebh01@nt.com ........... bharrell@catt.ncsu.edu ... ------------------------------ From: wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) Subject: Looking for Home PBX System Date: 15 Nov 92 19:12:45 GMT Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA I would like to purchase a HOME PBX that has at least three lines. Features wanted: SMDR with Caller ID for inbound calls Flexable numbering Speed Dialing Dialing of extesions and Speed dial (and local) from inbound call Least Cost Routing/Select Outbound line And lots of other things. Any suggestions? Bill ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #849 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15173; 16 Nov 92 1:42 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28284 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 23:11:19 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11263 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 23:11:02 -0600 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 23:11:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199211160511.AA11263@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #850 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:11:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 850 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Equal Access Numbers: How to Find Them (Rick Bronson) E1 vs. T1 Signalling (Michael Peters) At NYNEX, CNID is Coming Before E911 (Joshua E. Muskovitz) Lightning Protection on Telephone Lines (Richard Thomsen) HELP! Need Pointers to Info on Frame Relay, ISDN (Mark Marino) A Telephone Service Call (Mark Boolootian) Panasonic Information Request (Peter Eisch) Ohio Bell to Cripple Pay Phones in Cleveland (Jim Rees) San Jose Mercury Again (John Higdon) A New DMS-100 in Town (Richard D. Mccombs) Cellular Misinformation (Barry Nelson, RISKS via Monty Solomon) Looking for Caller Display Hardware (Dan Gould) Looking for ISDN PC Adapters (Jeff Yu) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rick Bronson Subject: Equal Access Numbers: How to Find Them Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A. Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 04:38:48 GMT Here is something you real phone phreaks will love and will leave others asking "why in the hell would anyone want to do that?". First a few definitions: An Equal Access Number is the number you dial before you dial the long distance number to "override" your normal long distance carrier and select a different carrier. As an example, lets say you had MCI for your 1+ long distance carrier and you wanted to make a call to 1-212-555-1212 using AT&T, you would dial 10288-1-212-555-1212 (10288 is AT&T's Equal Access Number). You would then receive a bill from AT&T for this call. The second thing I need to tell you is (and many of you already know this) that when you dial 1-700-555-4141 a recording tells you which long distance carrier you've selected. If you preface 1-700-555-4141 with say AT&T Equal Access Number (10288-1-700-555-4141) then you will get AT&T's recording regardless of who your long distance carrier is. If you dial 10123-1-700-555-4141 where 10123 is an invalid Equal Access Number then you get a recording from your local phone company saying the Equal Access Number is invalid. Ok, so I plopped a analog to digital converter on to a circuit board which can be read via the parallel port and feed a signal which indicated the level of sound from my modem's speaker into the converter. Then wrote a program to auto-dial all Equal Access Number's from 10000 thru 10999 followed by 1-700-555-4141 then time when some relatively loud sound came on. In this way the program could tell if this was an invalid one (short time) or if it was real (long time) in which case it logged the number to a file. I later dialed these numbers by hand to see what the recording told me. Most of the time it would say "Thank you for selecting XYZ as your long distance carrier" but once it said "you have dialed a private network" and once I got a modem tone so I dialed into it with my computer and it said "Easylink UserID:". What follows is the results of my test which were made from the 414 area code (Milwaukee). Equal Access Number (10-???) NAME 222 MCI[A 223 (800-486-8686) 231 *Datanet/American Sharecom 233 *Cable & Wireless 252 *US Sprint Hospitality 288 AT&T 319 Conquest 333 US Sprint 375 Easylink (2400 Baud) 387 (smn 231) AT&T operator 400 *Datanet/American Sharecom 401 Telecom*USA 432 *LCI (Litel) 444 Allnet 450 *MidAmerica 488 MetroMedia 500 *Schneider 551 Access Plus (800-541-4155) 552 Lake States 555 *ITI Encore 658 *ITI Encore 689 (IAB) 696 *DialMED? (800-533-4245) 707 *Pay per view order line 732 Private network 805 MCI 810 Logicall 835 Telecom*USA 880 One Call 887 (IAB) 888 MCI 898 MCI 954 *Prime Time 999 MetroMedia * Business only I'd really like to try 950-0000 thru 950-9999 but would have to get more sophisticated on what I look for on the modem speaker because just using the time to getting sound would not work. Any ideas? Also, can someone give us the scoop on 950 prefix numbers, I think these are toll-free local numbers, but where do they terminate: in one place per area-code to the local switch? Thanks for your indulgence. Rick Bronson Tel 414-362-2419 Marquette Electronics Inc. FAX 414-362-3010 8200 W. Tower Ave. "The views expressed Milwaukee, WI 53223 are mine alone" Internet: Rick.Bronson@mixcom.com [Moderator's Note: Of course what Mr. Bronson is overlooking is that he only connected with the carriers (or services) which have arrangements *in Milwaukee* to provide long distance calling (or their services). Except for pretty much the 'Big Three', the remainder of the numbers on his list may or may not do anything in other cities or telco territories. We've got a list of these codes in the Telecom Archives (anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu) which covers the entire USA; not all listings work in all places. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mpeters@pax.eunet.ch (MBX Michael Peters) Subject: E1 vs. T1 Signalling Organization: EUnet Login/Mailbox Service Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 05:39:48 GMT I am looking for E1 signalling specifications. If someone knows of an FTP site that has this information (and perhaps how it differs from T1) could they please mail me. TIA (thanks in advance) Michael Peters - FRANKLIN DATACOM mpeters@pax.eunet.ch Voice(in CH): 41 52 213 9347 FDI HQ: V: 1 805 373 8688 Fax: 1 805 373 7373 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 10:06:18 EST From: Joshua E. Muskovitz Subject: At NYNEX, CNID is Coming Before E911 I just got off the phone with by customer rep at NYNEX, to make sure that I get per-line blocking on my residential number here in Kingston, NY. (Kingston gets CNID on Monday.) To their credit, the rep understood everything I said, but pointed out that in this area, at least, we do not have enhanced 911 and so I must dial *67 911 in order for them to be able to find me. She claimed that the delay in setting up E911 ("we've been working on it for three years") is from the post office -- they have to convert all the Rural Route addresses and such to street addresses before an E911 system can be installed. Personally, I don't believe it. Why not simply install it now for the more urban addresses, and update it for those addresses when they are converted? Oh well. At least she offered to send me stickers for my phones. josh. [Moderator's Note: If she told you 'you must dial *67-911 in order for them to find you' then I would question how much she understood about what she was saying. *67 usually toggles the status of CLID delivery, but in any event it *never* affects the 911 display (if there is one; some older 911's don't have it.) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 09:58:58 -0700 From: rgt@beta.lanl.gov (Richard Thomsen) Subject: Lightning Protection on Telephone Lines I live in the mountains, where lightning and my location are synonymous. I have lost telephone equipment several times. Once, about three feet of my telephone cord exploded, separating the wires in the modular cable, and removing the copper in one wire. (It arced to my X-10 controller, which did not do so well with the arc. There was a black spot inside where the circuit board said "F1" should be :-)). A second time, I woke up in the middle of the night to see sparks comming out of the base of my cordless telephone. I unplugged the telephone line, but the thing never worked again. Last summer, I got a modem line protector along with a surge protector for my computer. When I went to use the telephone in it, it did not work. Checking inside, I found that the wires in the modular jack are melted, when it apparently arced to the metal frame. The telephone cord from the wall jack to the protector no longer works, and is burned on both ends. Needless to say, I cannot leave modems, answering machines, cordless telephones, or any other sensitive electronic equipment connected to the lines. But I have not lost anything on the regular electrical system, only when it interfaced to the telephone lines. It seems to be arcing between the telephone lines and the electrical system. The telephones themselves are not hurt, unless they are plugged into the house wiring or touching something that is plugged in. I got some gas discharge tubes from Radio Shack and put them on the telephone line outside (both sides to ground), but that was a few years ago, so they do not seem to have done much good. Last weekend, I wired the telephone ground line outside to the electrical ground outside (the copper rod driven into the ground just under the electricity meter), and I hope that this will help some. Does anyone know where I can get some *good* gas discharge tubes or any other suggestions for protecting my telephone wiring? I live in Contel (now GTE) area, so I am not sure how much good it would do to call them. Other people in my area have come home to find pieces of telephone all over their living room, so this is not an isolated situation up here. I have been thinking of mounting a box outside next to the telephone line, wiring the line to a terminal strip. I would then mount sharp, pointed wires making an air gap to the contacts, hoping that the lightning would arc over that, if the gas discharge tubes could not handle it. I would also put MOVs on it. Also, how do you test gas discharge tubes and/or MOVs to see if they are still good? Any suggestions? Richard Thomsen rgt@lanl.gov ------------------------------ From: omar@osf.org (Mark Marino) Subject: HELP! Need Pointers to Info on Frame Relay, ISDN Organization: Open Software Foundation Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 17:27:51 GMT Hi all, I'm investigating the possibility of supporting remote connections to our network via methods other than FracT1 and DDS2. Unfortunately, I'm not well versed in the other methods. If someone could give me a pointer to a paper, article, or book which describes any one of the following, I'd be forever indebted: * Frame Relay * Switched 56 * ISDN * X.25 Are there any other newsgroups other than those I posted to where this info might be discussed? Please reply via e-mail. Thanks, Mark Marino | omar@osf.org | uunet!osf!omar Open Software Foundation | 11 Cambridge Center | Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------ From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian) Subject: A Telephone Service Call Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:48:00 -0800 (PST) This has passed through several hands and I thought I would pass it on to the folks here. I got a good laugh out of it. Date: 10/30/92 8:59 AM From: Gene Ledbetter Judith, I used to be in Telephone Operations (long ere ever ye knew me), and I KNOW without a doubt that some of your old hands would love to hear the following gospel-true story (which just arrived over the wire from a friend in D.C.): A TELEPHONE SERVICE CALL This story was related by Pat Routledge of Winnepeg, ONT about an unusual telephone service call he handled while living in England. It is common practice in England to signal a telephone subscriber by signaling with 90 volts across one side of the two wire circuit and ground (earth in England). When the subscriber answers the phone, it switches to the two wire circuit for the conversation. This method allows two parties on the same line to be signalled without disturbing each other. This particular subscriber, an elderly lady with several pets called to say that her telephone failed to ring when her friends called and that on the few occasions when it did manage to ring her dog always barked first. Torn between curiosity to see this psychic dog and a realization that standard service techniques might not suffice in this case, Pat proceeded to the scene. Climbing a nearby telephone pole and hooking in his test set, he dialed the subscriber's house. The phone didn't ring. He tried again. The dog barked loudly, followed by a ringing telephone. Climbing down from the pole, Pat found: a. Dog was tied to the telephone system's ground post via an iron chain and collar. b. Dog was receiving 90 volts of signalling current. c. After several jolts, the dog was urinating on ground and barking. d. Wet ground now conducted and phone rang. Which goes to prove that some grounding problems can be passed on. Mark Boolootian booloo@llnl.gov +1 510 423 1948 [Moderator's Note: Oh dear me! This story has been around *so long* -- it has appeared in this Digest at least a half-dozen times over the past ten years. When Jon Solomon used to moderate this Digest several years ago he printed it once or twice; I've used it before also. I guess it makes a good story for the newcomers now and then. :) PAT ------------------------------ From: peter@tahiti.umhc.umn.edu (Peter Eisch) Subject: Panasonic Info Request Organization: University of Minnesota Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 19:16:40 GMT Got my first cell-phone yesterday. It is a used Panasonic. No books came with it or other information. Does anyone have a phone number to any siginificant Panasonic office? peter@tahiti.umhc.umn.edu ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Ohio Bell to Cripple Pay Phones in Cleveland Date: 15 Nov 1992 22:30:41 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu According to a UPI story, Ohio Bell has announced plans to cripple some pay phones in Cleveland. They have already started converting pay phones from tone dial to rotary, and restricting them to outgoing calls only. Now they will also be disallowing coin calls (credit card and collect will still be allowed) at certain hours of the day, and disabling the tone pad after dialing on those phones that still have tone dials. They claim that this will limit the use of pay phones for illegal purposes. [Moderator's Note: Rob K. also wrote about this in the Digest over the weekend in issue 842. I hope you are not blaming Ohio Bell for this situation. I doubt sincerely that telco is doing anything other than reacting to community pressure in the 'war on drugs'. IBT did this about a year ago only after the local politicians, neighborhood block clubs, etc pushed them on it. IBT is neutral on the use of their pay phones as long as the call gets paid for; I suspect OBT is also. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 19:25 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: San Jose Mercury Again The {San Jose Mercury News} is calling again. Now the big guns come out. Tomorrow, I am calling the non-emergency police number and file a police report for harassing phone calls. A rep at Pac*Bell thought that this would be a wonderful plan and suggested that if I could get a number of other people to do the same, things might be set right in a hurry. So how about it, Bay Area folks? If you are tired of the {San Jose Mercury} constantly calling you at the dinner hour, why not "call the cops"? For those of you who think this is a bit drastic, remember that I have already done the following: Repeatedly spoken to the president of the telemarketing firm; Repeatedly spoken to the SJMN telemarketing manager; Repeatedly given them the list of numbers at my residence; Had my attorney write to both; Complained of "harassment" to telco; Faxed net articles bad-mouthing the paper to SJMN management. And after filing my police report, I will make a report to the BBB for good measure. Any other ideas? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 [Moderator's Note: Because you acted so strongly against this originally, I have to wonder if the latest call(s)? were deliberate or made in error by a new person or were due to an error in the software. They surely could not be so willful as to deliberatly start the calls again. Why not make some copies of your earlier correspondence and send them by registered mail or courier to the telemarketing firm and ask them what happened ... did something go wrong in their system, etc, as you can't belive they are *willfully* violating your request. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 06:24:01 -0500 From: bo836@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard D. Mccombs) Subject: A New DMS-100 in Town Reply-To: bo836@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard D. McCombs) Organization: The Redheaded League; Lawton, OK, USA We have a new DMS-100 in town, is there anything in particular I should know? Internet: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org, bo836@cleveland.freenet.edu UUCP: ...!rwsys!ricksys!rick, {backbones}!ricksys.lonestar.org!rick BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm Fidonet: Richard McCombs @ 1:385/6 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 19:11:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellular Misinformation Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 14.03 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:58:48 EST From: "Barry C. Nelson" Subject: Cellular Misinformation The {Boston Globe}, 9 Nov 1992, had a human interest story illustrating some good uses for the ubiquitous cellular phones. In many places you can dial *SP for the State Police, and this had been credited with getting rapid assistance to accident and crime victims, as well as apprehending a dangerous escapee. They mentioned problems with routing 911 calls. What I found more interesting was a discussion about the Coast Guard preparing to adopt *CG as a maritime cellular distress number. A local official was quoted as saying that the existing broadcast channels will remain in operation because anyone nearby will hear you and the CG operates Direction Finding stations to pinpoint your location. Okay ... But then he went on to say that cellular calls "only give you a point to point channel", leading one to the wrong belief that they couldn't DF a cellular user, and that nobody else could listen if they wanted to. BC Nelson P.S.: After a PGN talk at MIT recently, someone in the audience claimed that the FBI has multiple "trunks" attached to the local cellular hub in Boston and they can monitor both sides of a conversation by just typing in your number. Thank goodness that this is a democracy. :-^ [Moderator's Note: If Mr. Nelson got the impression the author was saying 'no one can listen to you because cellular is point to point' then that is his misunderstanding. I wouldn't have come to that conclusion based on the author's statement. Would you, readers? PAT] ------------------------------ From: gould@waterloo.hp.com (Dan Gould) Subject: Looking for Caller Display Hardware Date: 15 Nov 92 19:40:54 GMT Organization: HP Panacom Div Waterloo ON Canada I am looking for a hardware software package to use my Telco's caller display feature with a PC running windows. I would like incoming calls to be announced by a window popping up. I would also like to give the software a list of numbers I know about so that the caller's name will also appear. It should interface to the PC via a serial port if possible. Thank you in advance for any leads you may be able to offer. Dan Gould gould@arris.on.ca ------------------------------ From: esl!jcyu@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Jeff Yu) Subject: Looking for ISDN PC Adapters Date: 15 Nov 92 18:20:48 GMT Organization: ESL Inc., Sunnyvale, CA Hi, I am looking for an ISDN adapter card for an IBM-compatible PC. I am primarily interested in ab Basic Rate Interface (BRI), but Primary Rate Interface (PRI) cards (if any) are also of interest. I would appreciate any direct comments, pointers to {PC Week / Data Commun- ications} /etc. guides, or FTP archives. If this is a FAQ, I would appreciate a pointer to that FAQ list. I would prefer responses by direct e-mail, since I don't follow this newsgraoup regularly (yet). I will post a summary of responses later. Thanks in advance, Jeff Yu Advanced Systems Laboratory jcyu@.esl.com ESL Inc. The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of anyone at all. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #850 ******************************