Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18812; 2 Jan 93 21:03 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18161 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:13:02 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06239 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:12:38 -0600 Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:12:38 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301030112.AA06239@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #1 TELECOM Digest Sat, 2 Jan 93 19:12:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 1 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: What You Should Have Received (TELECOM Moderator) Volume 12 Accelerated Index Now Available (TELECOM Moderator) Yet Another Horrible AOS Story (Chris Petrilli) Computer Directed Call Forwarding (Allan D. Griefer) Another Payphone Mystery? (John Schmidt) Status of Old Bell System Books (Howard C. Berkowitz) More Harassment Questions (Jim Rees) Changes to AT&T International Help Line? (Dave Leibold) Internet/UUCP Dial-up Line in Singapore? (Anto Daryanto) The Ultimate Call Screener (Jeffrey Jonas) Telephony of the Future (Dave Niebuhr) Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services (John Adams) Telecomics (Peanuts 1st Jan 1993) (Dave Leibold) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:32:19 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: What You Should Have Received Several unnumbered items were sent out between the end of Volume 12 which had 928 issues and this, the start of Volume 13 and another year here at TELECOM Digest. 1) A copy of the FAQ. 2) A letter to Usenet comp.dcom.telecom readers about the Digest. 3) An image of the Telecom Archives directory and ftp instructions. 4) An endless supply of Caller-ID messages and replies ... :) (actually, three large files with several messages each in the first two and a single longer message in the third.) If you did not get any of these and feel you must have them, you will find the first three items already in the archives at one place or another; the mailings which went out on January 1-2 will not be put in the archives again (needless duplication). I am not going to put the clean out of Caller-ID messages in the archives either; so if you for some reason did not get Parts 1, 2 and 3 of that, you'll need to annoy me by asking for copies from here. Happy New Year, and welcome to Volume 13 of TELECOM Digest. The Digest was started in 1981 by Jon Solomon, and we'll wrap up twelve years of this in August, 1993. Patrick Townson TELECOM Digest Moderator ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 15:16:38 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Volume 12 Accelerated Index Now Available The Accelerated Index to TELECOM Digest Volume 12 subjects and authors is now available in the Telecom Archives for grabbing via anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. It is called an accelerated index since it points to other large files which contain clusters of back issues (in groups of 50) where the subject or author will be located. A typical entry in the index will look like this: 12/101-150: Article Title Here (First Last Name of Author Here) 12/101-150: Re: Response to Article Here (First Last Name of Author) This would tell you to go to the sub-directory in the archives for Volume 12, and pull the large file named 'vol12.iss101-150'. When you have that file available to you, then use grep or other methods of searching within that file for the desired articles and authors. Author's names are always in (parenthesis) but sometimes were shortened in the header (i.e. John Smith became J. Smith or J Smith) as needed to make it fit on the line in the Digests from which the index was created. Searching for the last name is better than the full name since these variances could cause you to miss some entries. The Accelerated Index is sorted in alphabetical order, with "Re:" ignored where it appears. You can dump it out to a printer if desired, however the file is about 9500 lines in length. All articles with identical names will usually have one without 'Re:' and one or more with 'Re:' on the front. Where titles are identical (since the 'Re:' if it exists is ignored in the alphabetical sort) the sorting then continues by *first* name of author. As an example, "Re: My Life Story" by Adam Smith would appear before "My Life Story" by John Higdon. Depending on the name of the original author, the original article (that is, the one without 'Re:' on the front) may appear anywhere in the cluster of identically-named articles. If you see more than one identical titles and none of them say 'Re:', then it is likely the 'Re:' was somehow overlooked in processing -or- they are two articles with similar material but both are 'original'. Conversely, if you see one or more articles with 'Re:' and no offsetting original article (the one in the bunch without 'Re:' on the front) one of two things is possible: either there was no 'original article', i.e. I screwed up in the original publication or the thread started in Volume 11 and the (Re:)plies got carried over to Volume 12. Some help is available in the use of the Accelerated Index within the index itself: grep -i "Intro:" for several lines of help at the start of the file. A companion file covers volumes 9-10-11 from 1989 through 1991. It is set up the same way, and is in excess of 24,000 lines. I was thinking about merging volume 12 into the earlier index, but there were some problems with that, namely the sorting of entries got very difficult, and anyway, some of you already have the earlier edition. Besides, there are simply too many small sites where a file of some 35,000 lines in total simply could not be handled. Final note: If you are at a UUCP or BBS site, I strongly recommend you seek permission from your system administrator before hauling such big files across the wire; and make sure you have room on your spool for the uncompressed results. Remember, these two index files to subject and author names are in compressed format in the archives. (They have the suffix '.Z' after their name.) You must use binary mode to transfer them via ftp, or else the results will be trashed when you try to uncompress them. I hope these indexes to subjects and authors in TELECOM Digest since April, 1989 will be useful to you. It is strongly recommended you have a good working knowledge of the 'grep -i' command and can be creative in your use of 'grep' for searching for the best results. Let me know how it works for you. Patrick Townson TELECOM Moderator ------------------------------ From: petrilli@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Chris Petrilli) Subject: Yet Another Horrible AOS Story Date: 2 Jan 1993 01:13:16 GMT Organization: Department of Redundency Department Just to increase the enjoyment for the holidays, I thought I'd share my AOS story with everyone. I was on the way from Austin, TX -- where I live -- to Dallas to visit a friend, when I stoped in Garland to make a "routine" call to tell him that I would be there shortly (Garland is 30 minutes or so from where he lives), when I foolishly selected a "generic" pay phone at a Texaco gas station. Sicne both the origination number and the destination number were in the 214 area code, I decided to place the call simply using a quarter (hoping it wasn't long distance). Anyway, I reached the party, and spoke to them for a total of about five seconds before the phone decided that it wanted to eat more of my money ... it asked for something around $2.50 for the "next two minutes." At that point, I dialed the phone number against to use my SWBT phone card, hoping to force it to deal with SWBT ... no go, I get a "bong" and a "Thank you for using ATMT" (note this sounds A LOT like "The Phone Company" AT&T). I then dialed the standard 10288, the whole number, and then receive a bong and the same "ATMT" message. Not even forcing through to AT&T ... I'm not a happy camper. To solve the problem, I ended up driving about a block to a SWBT pay phone that liked what I wanted better ... note that THIS pay phone allowed me to make the full call on a quarter. Chris Petrilli petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu I don't even speak for myself. ------------------------------ From: usenet_interface@almaden.ibm.com Subject: Computer Directed Call Forwarding Date: 2 Jan 93 05:39:21 GMT Organization: IBM Almaden Research Center I'd like to set up a system that forwards a call to a particular party based on a code number that's entered by the caller. In other words, I want to have the caller call a particular number, say the main number for a business after hours and enter a four digit code. the system would then look up that code and forward the call based on that. This would allow us to have people call for emergencies without releasing the home phone numbers of the employees. Any ideas how this might be easily implemented? Opinions are strictly my own, Allan D. Griefer, IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA VNET/BITNET: GRIEFER at ALMADEN Fax: (408)927-4004 Internet: griefer@almaden.ibm.com mcimail: 398-8024 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 00:42:31 EST From: JOHN SCHMIDT Subject: Another Payphone Mystery? I recently visited my Alma Mater, WPI in Worcester, Mass. (A/C 508). When I got there, I wanted to call my mother in Ahmerst Mass. (413-253****). There was a payphone, clearly identified as a New England Telephone phone, near where I parked. The long distance carrier was clearly marked as AT&T. I dropped a quarter in and dialed the number (1+) The response was a beep something like a touchtone followed by "Deposit two dollars please." Thinking this a bit steep, and not hearing the AT&T "boing", I hung up and dialed 1-0-288-413-etc. Same result. Being thoroughly annoyed at this point, I went into a nearby dorm, where I found another identically marked payphone, with a NET credit card phone next to it. I tried the payphone first, same result both ways. I then used my AT&T Master Card in the credit card phone, got the familiar "boing", etc, and placed my call. (The bill on my card, which arrived last week, was 85 cents.) What gives with the payphones? Shouldn't I have gotten AT&T? (I'm pretty sure that Worcester and Amherst are in different LATA's. In any event, isn't $2.00 a pretty steep rate for a direct dial pay call of about 35 miles? I thought charged calls were generally more expensive than cash payphone calls, but then I rarely make long distance(?) payphone calls these days. Any answers welcome. 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: hcb@world.std.com (Howard C Berkowitz) Subject: Status of Old Bell System Books Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 22:14:23 GMT I'm trying to track down the current sources for several references, the copies of which I have available being pre-Bell-breakup. I know some have gone somewhere in AT&T, some in Bellcore, etc. Others (e.g., the BSTJ) may have changed name. Can anyone give me pointers to current titles, ordering sources, and ideally price for: Transmission Systems for Communications Engineering & Operations in the Bell System Notes on the Network Direct Dialing Notes Thanks. ------------------------------ From: rees@dabo.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: More Harassement Questions Date: 2 Jan 1993 20:50:06 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Suppose someone calls me every morning, lets the phone ring once, then hangs up, so that I never actually pick up the phone. Is that still considered harassement? If someone calls and lets the phone ring only once, will Caller-ID still be delivered? I'm asking for a friend. My own ringer is on a timer, so I don't hear it early in the morning. Two of my lines don't even ring at all. [Moderator's Note: Tell your friend that everywhere I know, deliberatly causing the telephone of another person to ring for no purpose other than to harass or annoy is against the law. There need not be any actual conversation. Since Caller-ID is delivered between the first and second rings, it may or may not be delivered on such a call. Here in Chicago, it seems the data is sent immediatly on the end of the first ring, and most of the time when I've gotten 'one-ringers' the number has gotten here before the originating CO had a chance to tell my CO to disconnect the call, etc. I think it would be worth a shot to learn the identity of the caller; your friend might have to wait for a few calls to have the two CO's out of synch with each other just enough to allow your friend's CO to slide the information out to him. Then, he'll need to observe this a few more times just to assure himself that it is a deliberate, calculated activity. Won't the caller be surprised! Actually I think 'return last call received' -- *69 -- might be even more reliable than Caller-ID, because once the caller hits your friend's CO, his number *is* in the buffer, and even if the CO does not get around to sending the ID in time (before the caller breaks the connection), causing the ID not to show up or to show up with errors in it, etc ... he'll still be able to call back. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:18:18 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Changes to AT&T International Help Line? AT&T operated an international calling assistance line at 1 800 874.4000 for some time. Now, it seems that AT&T has changed the number, or at least cut out access from Canada. I don't know whether the line is still active in the U.S. or not. I believe there was a regular telephone number which could be called collect from other countries as well ... anyone have that information handy? Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG [Moderator's Note: Yes, 800-874-4000 is working from the USA. AT&T says people not in the USA should call collect to a 412 number. PAT] ------------------------------ From: anto@dutetvd.tudelft.nl (Anto Daryanto) Subject: Internet/UUCP Dial-up Line in Singapore? Organization: Delft University of Technology Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 09:32:16 GMT Hi, I am now living in Holland but in five weeks I am going back to Indonesia. Here I frequently use Internet access from university for my study, and I know I'll miss it. Does anybody know whether a dial-up line available in Singapore so that I still can use the access to internet? (We don't have an internet access yet in Indonesia). If it exist how can I contact them? Thanks in advance and Happy New Year ... Anto Daryanto Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Telecommunication- and Traffic-Control Systems Group E-Mail: a.daryanto@dutetvd.et.tudelft.nl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 18:16:14 EST From: jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) Subject: The Ultimate Call Screener I recall a story about an author who devised a doorbell that worked as follows: you inserted a $10 bill to ring the bell. If the person home thought it was worth answering the door, you got your money back. How about having only a 900 number? If it's someone to whom you wanted to speak, there would be no charge. All other calls were charged something like $10 for bothering you. (This is assuming that there's such a thing as a variable rate 900 number). Jeffrey Jonas jeffj@panix.com [Moderator's Note: There are carriers like MCI who will deliver 900 service to you without doing the billing on it. They deliver the ANI with the call and you figure out who/how to bill. Even if all you charged was 25-50 cents per call, it would cut down on many of your wrong numbers, sales calls, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 08:39:21 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Telephony of the Future Re: PAT's request for what we think telephony will be future will be like in 2000 or maybe even 2100. I'd like to post my $.02. I think that we will see a much larger proliferation of the cell phone industry; e-mail directly via satellites as opposed to wire and satellites today; the physical size of the hardware in each switch will shrink. Who really can imagine what our children and grandchildren will witness? I can't but I'd sure like to be around to see what happens. As I said, just my $0.02. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Note: I imagine all kinds of things we consider impossible now will be reality. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jadams@vixen.cc.bellcore.com (adams,john) Subject: Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 14:26:07 GMT I hope fellow netters will pick up this discussion, but for the moment, my $.02: In case you suspect that any of the following represents any parties opinions other than my own, allow me to reassure you that these are *MINE*, only *MINE*! I suspect that outside sociological, economic, and political pressures will do more to answer the posed question than mere technology alone. Issues such as the makeup of the future family, ecological issues, the global "shrinking" phenomina and others will sharply influence what types of telecommunication prevail. Will technology alone "make markets"? Evidence abounds that it takes more than shear technical brilliance to make a difference. I suspect that each of us who earns her/his daily bread in this industry needs to sharpen our focus on the other "softer" sciences. At least from my perspective, the softer sciences are indeed *MUCH* harder to master than those we use daily. Will the current industry infrastructure (Don't you just love the way we can beat this politicisms to death :-) ) remain viable by 2010? I sure don't know! But lack of knowledge never stopped me before ;-)! When all else fails, the basic survival instinct is alive and well in most businesses. My only concern is that the Bumbling Baristers of Boondoggleville (aka Washington Beltway Bandits) will somehow seek to call *ALL* the plays in telecommunications in the future. Competition? ... you bet! But let's have some real competition, not the contrived kind we have all witnessed as fashioned by the warring lobbyists on the steps of the Capital. Remember that *NO* business will remain in business without a proper profit to reward those risk takers who provide the fuel of any venture. Profit is not a dirty word! I am convinced that rate of return regulation will die a natural death before the year 2000. While price cap regulation seems to be in vogue with our lawyer friends(?), I'm almost positive that zero regulation (price/cost only) will be in effect by 2010. Jack (John) Adams Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:58:26 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Telecomics (Peanuts 1st Jan 1993) The Peanuts comic appearing today (1st January 1993) featured a telephone conversation between Peppermint Patty and Charlie Brown as follows: Peppermint Patty to Charlie Brown: "Hi, Chuck ... just calling to wish you a Happy New Year ... do you love me, Chuck?" Charlie Brown in reply: "I'm sorry, but your call cannot go through ... please hang up, and do not dial again ..." ... On a loosely related note, the Adam comic that appears in {The Toronto Star} now has a grainier appearance, with digital style contours on the artwork. The era of syndicators faxing those cartoons to newspapers is well underway. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG [Moderator's Note: Some of the cartoonists have even made reference to their use of the fax machine: consider 'Family Circus', where in one episode, by artist/author Bill Keane (whose cartoons deal with his family and himself) the picture is a picture of Keane himself as he draws the cartoon and a caption telling his son Billy to 'hurry up and get this in the fax machine to the Syndicate right away, or it will be too late for the Sunday papers ...' :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #1 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27026; 2 Jan 93 23:48 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11932 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 21:22:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15194 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 21:22:02 -0600 Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 21:22:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301030322.AA15194@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #2 TELECOM Digest Sat, 2 Jan 93 21:22:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 2 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Roger B.A. Klorese) Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (James Borynec) Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Todd Lawrence) Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Dave Ptasnik) Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Hans-Gabriel Ridder) Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (E. Siegman Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (Jon Sreekanth) Re: Anybody Know of LARGE Modem Server Systems? (Tom Benham) Re: Anybody Know of LARGE Modem Server Systems? (Paul Schauble) Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges (Albrecht) Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges (A. Dunn) Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges (Forrette) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 01:59:16 GMT Organization: QueerNet John Higdon : > How soon we forget. Hours after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, I > tried at some length to get though to my home from southern > California. All circuits were busy. Then I tried Sprint. The call > went right through. Discussions right here on the Digest pointed to > the policy of AT&T of purposely restricting incoming access to a > disaster area. I, for one, was very grateful for the fact that AT&T's > policies are not always imitated by the competitors. I am, personally, very grateful that AT&T's policy was as it was. It enabled me to *reach* my loved ones outside the area quickly when I *could* get to a phone and *chose* to contact them, rather than being locked out by my neighbor's Aunt Minnie calling their answering machine to see if the cat was OK. The disaster area residents should be in control of the flow of information and the resources used to achieve it. AT&T made a splendid call on that one. ROGER B.A. KLORESE +1 415 ALL-ARFF rogerk@unpc.QueerNet.ORG {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!sgiblab!unpc!rogerk ------------------------------ From: james@cs.ualberta.ca (James Borynec; AGT Researcher) Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 21:19:40 -0700 On 25 Dec 92 21:26:00 GMT, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) said: > I would have thought that by now AT&T would have stopped its annoying > practice of drastically reducing its capacity on holidays. A number of > AT&T employees have told me that for reasons that are not very clear, > the company has traditionally blocked off a major amount of the > system's capacity on various holidays such as Christmas and Mother's > Day. Network managers, traditionally have two means of controlling high-volume traffic. They can either re-route or they can block. Re-routing is useful if the place they route it to has capacity to spare. Selective Blocking can actually RAISE the number of completed calls by stopping calls that would fail anyway before they chew up any more trunks. Under traditional signalling schemes, a call attempt will aquire available trunks until it either succeeds and is billed or fails and releases the trunks. In the second case, no money comes to the telco. The Telco (AT&T in this case) seeks to avoid the second case, in order to maximize revenue. j.b. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... From: todd@valinor.mythical.com (Todd Lawrence) Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 01:25:01 CST > The Amateur Radio Emergency Service and National Traffic System hold > health and welfare inquiries until the disaster scene is ready to > accept them, placing a much higher priority on real emergency traffic. > I recall hearing a few years ago that AT&T long distance circuits were > setup to limit incoming calls, when necessary, so outgoing calls > always would have circuits available. I have an old (four or five years old) AT&T trunk service/reference guide that has a passage to the effect that upon reaching 60-70% trunk group saturation, 4ESS will return a reorder to all but callers with a priority class of service code. I do not know if this practice is still in effect but I would suspect that something very similar is for exactly the reasons mentioned in the preceding thread. Todd Lawrence LOD! Communications internet : todd@valinor.mythical.com IMF Data Acquisition Group uucp : uunet!valinir!todd ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 10:32:49 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Ptasnik Reply-To: Dave Ptasnik Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... On 25 Dec 92 21:26:00 GMT, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) said: > I would have thought that by now AT&T would have stopped its annoying > practice of drastically reducing its capacity on holidays. A number of > AT&T employees have told me that for reasons that are not very clear, > the company has traditionally blocked off a major amount of the > system's capacity on various holidays such as Christmas and Mother's > Day. This is the real reason you get the "All Circuits Busy" > recording, not because there is an inordinate amount of traffic. > Naturally, there is no trouble calling anyone on Sprint or MCI since > these companies do not engage in this silly ritual of network choking. To which andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) replied: > They also don't have anywhere near the market share, which means their > networks aren't presented with anywhere near the load. I *have* heard > that the OCCs have more headroom, since they have all those trunk > routes in place but lower market share ... > Maybe one of my ex-colleagues will address this issue? From a previous life as an OCC vendor, I'm not at all surprised that MCI and Sprint provide better service on holidays. They have a higher percentage of business customers than AT&T. Business have higher long distance bills, and therefore more incentive to search out low rates. Most residential users (probably no one who reads this list) have very little long distance usage, so rates are not a significant factor in their LD choices. They are more interested in reliablilty and ease of use. AT&T at least provides the perception that they are the best for these. With a higher percentage of business usage, most OCC's have very little traffic on their switches at nights, on weekends, and holidays. The trunks that are busily full during the day sit idle. We used to periodically get directives from our switch manager to sell more residential accounts, and try to busy up the lines at night a little more. We were paying fixed monthly charges on the lines, as well as usage charges. More evening traffic let us better afford the fixed monthlies, as well as helping our rate taper charges (don't mean to be obscure with that term, if you don't know what rate taper on WATS lines was all about, you didn't miss much). Unfortunately finding residential users with long distance bills in excess of, say, $50.00/month was really tough and time consuming. Mangement actually started paying us bonuses for res customers. I think I'm glad again that I'm not doing that any more. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: ridder@zowie.zso.dec.com (Hans) Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:02:22 GMT In article John Higdon writes: > BTW, some AT&T tech called yesterday to tell me that the blocking that > I experienced on Christmas Day was the result of my local telco, not > AT&T. Yeah, right. And just whose recording is "408-2T"? The recording I was getting when trying the big three carriers was "206-2T". It sounded the same on each carrier. Wouldn't that make you think it was an LEC issue? Hans-Gabriel Ridder DECwest Engineering, Bellevue, Washington, USA Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer, honest. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 14:02:56 PST From: Anthony E. Siegman Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works Organization: Stanford University Concerning this issue, let me post the following suggestion once again, because it seems to be a good, workable, practical, effective proposal: Enact legislation requiring that all telemarketing calls come with Caller-ID from a uniquely designated area code prefix, like 600, 700, whatever. No freedom of speech issues are involved; the technical/economic burden on the telemarketer is very modest and affordable; no central data banks are required; and individuals can block or not as they choose, at very low cost, with no effect on the rest of their telephone usage. It's just like marking special advertising inserts in magazines as "Advertising" on each page, so you know what you're getting. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 09:47:24 -0500 From: jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works In article burgoyne@access.digex.com writes: > Simple mechanisms exist to prevent autodialers from reaching you. ... > I assume, therefore, that there is another device out there which > *DOES* identify whether the calling party is human or machine, and can > block all calls from one or the other. I also assume that this is > available for a price that the average person can afford, and is not a > hassle to them to use (i.e., you don't force the caller to go through > a menu or anything just to get to you -- it all happens behind the > scenes). Yes, what _are_ the simple mechanisms? One I can think of is: answer the phone silently. Outbound message gadgets probably wait for the called party to say something ("Hello ") before beginning their spiel. At the expense of confusing some of your human callers, have a box at your end pick up the incoming call, wait silently for voice energy, and then ring you. Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems, Inc. Fax and PC products 5 Walden St #3, Cambridge, MA 02140 (617) 876-8019 jon_sree@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: tbenham@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Tom Benham) Subject: Re: Anybody Know of LARGE Modem Server Systems? Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 03:09:32 GMT vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) writes: > In article mtndew!friedl@uunet.UU.NET > writes: >> I have a customer who may need to set up a huge number of modem >> lines to service incoming calls to his UNIX system, and he wants to >> find a system that already does this rather than roll his own. While >> we could probably do it ourselves for small numbers of lines (say, up >> to 32), these may just not scale up very well to handling several >> hundred modems and serial lines and phone lines. Digiboard has a line of serial concentrators. You might try them. IBM also sells some RS6000 stuff that allows many lines in. Tom ------------------------------ From: pls@cibecue.az05.bull.com (Paul Schauble) Subject: Re: Anybody Know of LARGE Modem Server Systems? Organization: Bull HN Information Systems, Inc., Phoenix Product Division Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 08:13:06 GMT The request for a modem server for lots of modems brings up something I've been wondering about for a long time: Lots of modems means lots of incoming phone lines. First question: At what point does it become cheaper to have an incoming T1 or T3 line and a switch on site? Second question: once you reach this point, the signal path becomes: - incoming DIGITAL signal delivered via Tx carrier - DIGITAL signal deliver to line card. - line card converts signal to ANALOG - ANALOG signal carried via wire pair to modem. - modem (usually) converts signal to DIGITAL - modem feeds DIGITAL signal to DSP to demodulate. This multiple conversion seems silly. Doesn't anyone make a modem that can directly eat the demultiplexed Tx data? Or better, eat the T1 signal directly? ++PLS ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 16:33:02 CST From: bruce@zuhause.MN.ORG (Bruce Albrecht) Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > The Moderator noted: >> discovered that in the two or three seconds the phone was off hook >> (with dial tone) before the autodialer started doing its thing, his >> pocket tone dialer could cut that dial tone and let him call anywhere >> on the store's nickle. Provided he got his digits dialed before the >> autodialer cut in, telco accepted his digits and ignored those from >> the device. > There are auto-dialers available that prevent this. I tried this > trick with the elevator phone in our building. When you take the > phone off-hook, you hear dialtone, then hear it dial the answering > service for the elevator company. As soon as the dialer hears a > touchtone generated from the headset, it hangs up the line. Boy, they > won't let anybody have any phun these days! Wouldn't it be easiest to rig a circuit that disconnects the handset circuitry until the phone had completed the predetermined dial sequence? I suppose, to be safe, it would also need to recognize the dial-tone so that it would cut the handset out if someone left the phone off the hook after disconnect. bruce@zuhause.mn.org ------------------------------ From: Andrew M. Dunn Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 01:52:40 GMT In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > trick with the elevator phone in our building. When you take the > phone off-hook, you hear dialtone, then hear it dial the answering > service for the elevator company. As soon as the dialer hears a > touchtone generated from the headset, it hangs up the line. Boy, they > won't let anybody have any phun these days! Seems to me there'd be a _much_ easier way to do this. Simply add a set of contacts on the autodialer which close after the sequence is dialed (most autodialers work that way anyhow, with some sort of 'end' circuit). Use this to close the outbound voice path. That way, nothing from the mic gets sent until _after_ the number's dialed. Solves the problem quite neatly. Andy Dunn or ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges Date: 2 Jan 1993 01:21:55 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > There are auto-dialers available that prevent this. I tried this > trick with the elevator phone in our building. When you take the > phone off-hook, you hear dialtone, then hear it dial the answering > service for the elevator company. As soon as the dialer hears a > touchtone generated from the headset, it hangs up the line. Boy, they > won't let anybody have any phun these days! > [Moderator's Note: Now that is interesting! I wonder how they do it? > Apparently if the autodialer hears a tone, and *it* did not make the > tone, it disconnects. Is that how it works? PAT] Yes, this is exactly what it does. The reason I was trying to dial out is that I was calling the ANAC number to get the elevator's phone number. Then, I was going to call it when co-workers were in it to conduct the 'elevator survey' that was talked about here a couple of years ago. But, I suspect that if the auto-dialer is smart enough to prevent me manually dialing with a pocket dialer, that it probably blocks incoming calls from reaching the phone as well. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: I've seen elevators with autodialers on their phones but quite a few have a direct ring-down circuit instead. That is, you take it off hook and it immediatly starts ringing the other end of the dedicated wire. In the 77 West Washington Building downtown, (Chicago Temple Building) each elevator has a ring-down phone which rings to the elevator supervisor in the lobby on a multi-line phone with several buttons. Going off hook in the elevator lights a button on his phone; if he goes off hook it rings the elevator phone associated with that line/button. There is an 'extension' phone with many buttons in the elevator machine room on the 21st floor so the building engineer or elevator mechanic can also talk to people in each car. The lobby supervisor can talk to the 21st floor via the building's PBX system. He also has an illuminated panel which tells him where each car happens to be in the shaft at that moment and if it is moving or sitting there, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #2 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29450; 3 Jan 93 0:35 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07753 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 22:14:53 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28980 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 22:14:30 -0600 Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 22:14:30 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301030414.AA28980@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #3 TELECOM Digest Sat, 2 Jan 93 22:14:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 3 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (John R. Levine) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Shrikumar) Re: EasyLink and Internet? (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Easylink and Internet? (Jim Gorak) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Doug Sewell) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Dave Grabowski) Re: Practical Peripherals V42bis Modem (Tom Benham) Re: Practical Peripherals V42bis Modem (Jim Budler) Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? (Bob Yazz) Re: GTE Betting the Bankroll on Wireless (Dave Ptasnik) Re: More Idiocy From GTE (Andy Sherman) Re: How to Prepare For the Startup of an AM Radio Tower Nearby (Nick Sayer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 2 Jan 93 11:36:23 EST (Sat) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > [Zounds! The whole calling card number is on the mag stripe.] I think you will find that historically with telco calling cards there hasn't been a distinction made between a "non-secret" part, the first ten digits, and a "secret" part, the last four. In years past when calling fraud wasn't such an issue, the check code was so simple that the operator could validate it as the call was placed by checking a little cheat sheet. If a calling card number was compromised, the telco would issue an entirely made up number in which the fourth digit was a 1. The only use to date that I have found for the mag stripe on a calling card is in the card reader phones found mostly at airports, which read the whole calling card number and stuff it down the line at the appropriate time as you're making a phone call. These phones are already hard enough to use, and I suspect that if they read ten digits from the card and asked you to enter the other four by hand, nobody would use them at all. If you are concerned about the security of your calling card, leave it at home. Every phone I've ever seen that reads calling cards also lets you punch in the number by hand. Admittedly, then you have to look out for shoulder surfers, but I guess this again proves that there's no free lunch. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 13:22:35 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India In article cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us wrote: > I've been working on a credit card / phone project, and discovered > something that is probably known to many but was news to me: My PIN is > _on_ my calling card! Recorded on Track 2, offset 23 characters after > the SS. In the clear. I believe the bankcard passwords are also often in the clear in the ISO mag stripe. Shudder! Remember having read something to that effect on the net. Could some please deny ... please .. please! Or do the ATMs check with the central computer each time (hope the traffic is encrypted.) shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu) ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: EasyLink and Internet? Date: 2 Jan 1993 16:57:18 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) As far as I can tell you could always send to Internet from EasyLink. In the help files it tells you how. A bit costly I would guess, but if you needed to send a message I guess the cost would not matter. I tried it once when I first got on Internet and it worked fine. I was even able to send one to myself on GTEMail. As time passes more of the systems seem to be linking. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 06:24 GMT From: Jim Gorak <0003735974@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Easylink and Internet? dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu (Donald R. Newcomb) writes: > I have long understood that sending email between EasyLink and > Internet was out of the question. ....(part deleted) > Can anyone tell me there has been a change of policy at EasyLink re. > Internet mail? Can we send to EasyLink? If so, what is the proper > set-up for the address envelope? Can they send to us? What does the > address look like? There are a couple of ways to address e-mail from the Internet to an AT&T Easylink subscriber. I have been using the "Easy" way. I'm not sure that this official but, so far, it has worked every time for me. You need to find out the Easylink subscriber's Easylink number (ELN), i.e. 62925933, which is my Easylink number. the Internet address is: 62925933@eln.attmail.com An Easylink subscriber can send to an Internet address bu using the following format: (i.e. for dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu) IPM PRIMARY COUNTRY US ADMD ATTMAIL ORG UUCP DDA ID-internet(b)dnewcomb(a)whale.st.usm.edu END+ (message text...) " " " " " " (message text...) MMMM Hope this works for you. Regards, Jim Gorak X.400 S=Gorak;DDA:ID=3735974;A=MCI;C=US | Internet 3735974@mcimail.com MCI Jim Gorak / 373-5974 | CompuServe >MCIMAIL:373-5974 Telex 6503735974 "6503735974MCI UW" | Tele-Home +1 414 541 2007 Post 3231 S. Landl Lane #108 | Tele-Work +1 414 792 5580 Milwaukee, WI 53227-4474 USA | Tele-FAX +1 414 792 5598 ------------------------------ From: doug@CC.YSU.EDU (Doug Sewell) Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 14:22:56 GMT say,halim s (ssay@prefect.cc.bellcore.com) wrote: > Does anyone know or could you tell me a reference for this "standard"? > I am sure some address generator software would have this algorithm. Here's the algorithm (about two months ago I translated it into a 4GL language for our DBMS. There was also an article in a recent PC magazine including source code). Your post was pretty well on-the-money. Here's the algorithm (with a disclaimer that I'm working from memory after having glanced briefly at the code last week, and double-checked it against the bar-codes of some bills I have to mail): (1) Coding can be five digits (rare), nine digits (most common) and more to include house codes/street address numbers (this is not very common yet). (2) You have a tall start bar, N+1 sets of five bars (the +1 is a check digit) and a tall stop bar. The tall bars are ones, and the short bars are zeros. The code is self-clocking (that's scanner termin- ology). (3) There will always be two tall bars and three short bars. The bars are numbered 7, 4, 2, 1, and 0 and are summed together (with the means that 0-9 are: 0 - 11000 1 - 00011 2 - 00101 3 - 00110 4 - 01001 5 - 01010 6 - 01100 7 - 10001 8 - 10010 9 - 10100 (4) The check digit is 10 - mod(sum of digits,10). So for 32232-5121 the check-digit is 9 (3+2+2+3+2+5+1+2+1 = 21, 10 - mod(21,10) - 9. For 43218-2210 it's 7, for 50360-0001, it's 5. Doug Sewell, Tech Support, Computer Center, Youngstown State University doug@cc.ysu.edu doug@ysub.bitnet !cc.ysu.edu!doug ------------------------------ From: dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J. Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:05:47 GMT {The New York Times} had a short article with diagram that explained the mysterious barcodes on January 28, 1990. Here's the gist (jist?) of it: Bars are divided into sets of five. Within a set, each bar, left-to-right, represents the numbers 7, 4, 2, 1, and 0. In each set of bars, only two are tall. These two represent the numbers that should be added to get a digit. (By convention, 7 + 4 = 0). The barcode starts and ends with a tall bar. The check digit is the number that would be required so that the sum of all digits plus the check digit is evenly divisible by ten. i.e., if the zip+4 code was 15230-9821 (digits add to 31), the check digit would be 9, because 31+9=40, which is divisible by 10. Dave Kappa Xi Kappa - Over & Above! dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu 9 Sussex Ave., Newark, NJ (car theft capital USA) 70721.2222@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: tbenham@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Tom Benham) Subject: Re: Practical Peripherals V42bis Modem Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 03:02:28 GMT bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler) writes: > I don't sell ZyXELs, but thought I'd throw in my $0.02 to aid in the > discussion of such fancy modems. On the topic of modems. DO any of these modems also support synchronous transmission for HDLC? I was looking at Motorola's line and they apparently have two different lines: one 'Sync-UP' and the other 'FasTalk'. It is not clear to me why there should be two lines of modems. Currently I've got a V.32b+Fax+++ async modem, but it does NOT support synchronous xmit which I need for SDLC connections. Guidance appreciated. Tom ------------------------------ From: jimb@silvlis.com (Jim Budler) Subject: Re: Practical Peripherals V42bis Modem Organization: Silvar-Lisco Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 07:06:10 GMT The PPI modem doesn't currently do Caller-ID. I'm using one right now. It could probably offer it with a firmware change, but it doesn't. Jim Budler jimb@silvlis.com Silvar-Lisco 72415.01200@compuserve.com 703 E. Evelyn Ave. jimb47@netcom.com Sunnyvale, Ca. 94086 +1.408.991.6115 ------------------------------ From: Bob Yazz From: yazz@locus.com (Bob Yazz) Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 21:26:52 GMT John Higdon writes: > But what people do not understand is that those preciously private > telephone numbers will soon be displayed out of state on a wide scale. > It is only other CALIFORNIANS that will not see the number displayed. You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, do you John? The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period. I can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac Bell over this. Sounds like an incentive to switch to a long distance company that does not use SS7. How do you think AT&T might feel about this? Bob Yazz ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1992 11:09:07 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Ptasnik Subject: Re: GTE Betting the Bankroll on Wireless willard!peri@gatech.edu (Leigh Melton) wrote: > GTE is betting the bankroll on wireless systems. It's the number one > priority in Stamford HQ, or so I'm told by a friend who works for GTE. > They apparently feel that wireless is their chance to "dig ATT's > grave" and finally beat Ma Bell at a *different* game, as they never > could using current systems. So far, the wireless PBX seems to be the > item that everyone is drooling over. I love it! The telco with one of the worst basic dial tone reputations in the business is chasing a silly pipe dream. Why can't these guys get a clue and start improving the one thing that is their bread and butter. They should be offering more and more dial tone features for basic service, ISDN at realistic prices with realistic features, Caller ID (at least at the Higdon estate), etc. But NOOOOOOOOO, they have to play games with selling equipment. "Wireless" PBX's will continue to be a very small part of the market for a long time. They still require a ton of wiring (all those little antennas and mux's all over the building). The equipment cost is higher on a per phone basis, so is not practical for large phones with lots of feature keys that sit on desks. Most people don't really want to carry a small personal phone around with them all the time, they leave their offices to avoid phones. Many women's outfits don't have pockets or belts for storing the phones. Because the sets have to be small and light, they tend to be number code intensive for feature activation, customers LOVE codes ;-). Sure cordless is great for some people in some applications. But certainly not most people and most applications. I'm sure AT&T is quaking with fear, and GTE rate payers and stockholders are gibbering with glee. Once again everyday users will see rates go up, and/or slow feature realeases, and/or service degredation to pay for this latest folly. C'mon GTE, get a life. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Re: More Idiocy From GTE Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 16:46:52 EST On 28 Dec 92 15:07:25 GMT, mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) said: > As I'm at a friends house, I decide to put the call on calling card. > 102880+10D. GTE. Huh ...? I know this is intralata but I > told them to use AT&T. They can't override my choice of carrier can > they? Try it again except as 102880 + 7D (713 has gone 1/0 + 10D on > all LD calls but who knows what GTE is doing). GTE. Local exchange carriers look at the whole number before passing it off to an IXC, precisely because of what you tried to do. AT&T is very likely not tariffed to carry that call, so the switch knows better than you do, and routes it via the LEC. However, AT&T issued CIID card should still be good for a GTE carried call. AT&T has reciprocal card verification and billing agreements with virtually every LEC in the country so that your AT&T card is AOS-proof and OCC-proof but not LEC-proof. (That is a feature, not a bug). 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: mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us (Nick Sayer) Subject: Re: How to Prepare For the Startup of an AM Radio Tower Nearby Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'. Date: 03 Jan 1993 02:56:23 UTC jrg@bertha.att.com writes: > Can anyone suggest any measurements, recordings, or other things that > should be done now, before broadcasting starts, that will help if we > need to later complain to the FCC about interference, bad phone noise, > etc.? If there are any firms that specialize in this type of > measurment, their names or numbers would be appreciated. This pushes one of my hot buttons. In the vast majority of cases the interference is the fault of the home electronics equipment designers who failed to adequately shield the equipment from high density RF fields. In all but the tiniest minority of cases the transmitter in question is operating entirely normally, legally, and totally within the norms of modern engineering practice. In many cases it is simply the sight of an antenna that gets the xenophobes working. It is common practice for a new Amateur Radio operator in the neighborhood to put up an antenna without connecting it to a transmitter for a month or two. Invariably a couple RFI complaints come in from the xenophobic community. The solution is to make consumer electronics less susceptable to RFI. The FCC has jurisdiction over susceptability regulation of all home electronics. They have chosen to abrogate that responsibility in favor of letting the manufacturers have their own way. If you suspect that the transmitter is emitting harmonics or other out-of-band emissions, then you can indeed sick the FCC on them. It is incredibly unlikely that a commercial station would put out illegal amounts of spur simply because spurs cost money A) in fines from the FCC and grief from the guy at double the frequency and B) it's wasted energy and therefore wasted money (a 7 kW FM transmitter with a -13 dB spur is putting out 350 watts on that spur. That's 10% waste. Techies: Yes, a -13 dB spur is pretty outrageous, and the math is simplified, but it sort of illustrates the idea). There is one exception: CB stations with (illegal) amplifiers almost always throw out spurs because the operators of those stations don't know how to tune the amp properly. This is NOT the case with Amateur radio stations (yes, Virginia, there is a bloody huge difference) -- for one thing the amps in the Amateur service aren't illegal (Hams can use up to 1500 watts PEP, CBers can use about 5 [I forget the actual number, but it's very tiny]). So what to do? 1. Don't be a xenophobe. If it's not bothering your home electronics, don't throw a tantrum! 2. If it IS causing you trouble, it is PROBABLY because your device is susceptable NOT because the transmitter is doing something wrong. Call the transmitting agency with this attitude and you'll be a lot more likely to get help than if you call 'em up and insist that everything was fine before they came along. Being the cause of RFI and being "at fault" are two entirely different things. 3. Tell the FCC that the consumer electronics industry is entirely incapable of regulating susceptability in consumer electronics, as they have proven quite conclusively. Nick Sayer N6QQQ @ N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest' PGP 2.1 public key on request ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #3 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03908; 3 Jan 93 1:59 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32213 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 23:46:20 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26423 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 23:45:57 -0600 Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 23:45:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301030545.AA26423@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #4 TELECOM Digest Sat, 2 Jan 93 23:46:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 4 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Recent East Coast Storm (Dave Niebuhr) Re: X.25 Switch Vendor Info Please (Tom Benham) Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#) (S. Howard) Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#) (Pelliccio) Re: No Link Between Location and CO? (David Tamkin) Re: DID as Replacement For Caller ID? (John Higdon) Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Martin McCormick) Re: Looking For Small-Handset Cordless Phone (Will Martin) Re: SNET Rate Request (Seng-Poh Lee) Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works) (A. Siegman) Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing? (Gordon Burditt) Re: PRO-34 Wanted (Craig R. Watkins) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 07:57:03 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: The Recent East Coast Storm In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 928 jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) writes: [ report about storm damage in NYC deleted ] > [Moderator's Note: You are correct. Not a word was mentioned here. I > did not see it personally, and no one bothered to write about it. :( > Thanks for bringing it up. PAT] Long Island took a *major* hit. Places like Bayville, located on a peninsula jutting into Long Island Sound, were cut off completely from the mainland of the island for days. The damage there was unbelievable; houses destroyed, roads washed out, electricity out and variable telco service. Ditto Eaton's Neck and Asharoken. Downtown Port Jefferson, located directly on the Sound, was under several feet of water. Docks were washed out and the ferry terminal was severely damaged from the wind and waves. A friend of ours who lives in Nassau County and right on the ocean spent the night on the top floor of her apartment building. Her car had water up to the top of the tires. Downtown Riverhead, located on a small river (anyone who has seen a major river wouldn't call this one a river), had flood waters up to the tops of cars. My wife works there and had to find an alternate route home. Orient Point was cut off from the Island when a causeway became damaged after a barge (whatever that was doing there) hit a bridge on the causeway. Damage: No electricity or telco service (really bad since the only way to get water there is by wells with electric pumps). Orient Point is on the easternmost tip of the North Fork of Long Island. Fire Island, which protects the mainland was breached in two places: One was a 500 foot gap which looks like a new inlet; the other is 100 feet wide. Both are pouring sand and water into the south shore bays and upsetting the salinity levels. This can wipe out what is left of the clamming and fishing industry there. Robert Moses State Park, located on Fire Island, saw the near undercutting of a road in front of a lighthouse which used to have about 100 feet of beach in front of it. Almost 50 homes on Fire Island washed out to sea or were destroyed in place. Some are so cut off that one local township has said: "No more road rebuilding to them. We (the taxpayers) can't afford it." There were one or two lives lost due directly to the storm. Other than that injuries were minimal if at all. During the course of the storm, the winds seemed like they were of hurricane force and probably were in some places. Nassau and Suffolk Counties were declared disaster areas last week thus clearing the way for federal aid. On a sad note, the Nassau County of the American Red Cross has gone broke. It had spent a lot of money last August when Hurricane Andrew struck Florida and the Gulf states. This was money and supplies that they contributed to the relief effort. Red Cross officials said that this storm will take $500,000 (US) of their 1.5 million budget which has nearly been exhausted by this time of the year. How did the storm affect me personally? Not much. I lost electricity for 2 1/2 hours. Telco service was available all of the time. I live 1.5 miles from the Great South Bay to the south and east and never had to worry about flood damage. Some of my wife's colleagues were, though and they had to evacuate. There were a lot of complaints about electricity service from the Long Island Lighting Company for outages. LILCO's way of doing things is to restore service to the greatest area first and then go after the smaller ones. One problem was that just when one area was restored, another would go out. Some days, no one can win. To their credit, I will congratulate LILCO and NYTel for their efficiency and dedication in restoring their respective services. Neither of these utilities is on my Christmas Card list, nor will they ever be. However credit must be given where it is due. I apologize to PAT and others for not reporting in sooner but the holidays got in the way and the storm came just before they did. What an ufortunate occurrance. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Note: Thanks for passing along your very sad note. I guess the storm in Florida late in the summer occupied so much attention and took so many resources the events in California (big fire which went on for a long time destroying many things) and New York early in December were given a short-shrift in the media as well as relief agencies whose funds were dangerously low as a result of the Florida horror. 1992 was a very bad year disaster-wise in the USA with the various events both of nature and the total social breakdown which occurred in Los Angeles in April. Here in Chicago, 1992 was the second most murderous year in our city's history with over 900 murders committed in the city alone. Saddest of all, about 200 of the persons killed were under age 21; about two dozen were small children -- about two youngsters per month are gunned down in our public schools here, usually as a result of their gang-affiliations or lack of same. :( We here in Chicago are fully expecting a major riot ala Los Angeles in the next year or two. With luck (see my tongue in cheek), the New Yorkers and Californians will get their tribulations by fire and flood out of the way early in the new year and thus get the attention and relief assistance they deserve before it all runs out. :( PAT] ------------------------------ From: tbenham@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Tom Benham) Subject: Re: X.25 Switch Vendor Info Please Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 03:14:05 GMT rpw3@rigden.wpd.sgi.com (Rob Warnock) writes: > jchen@ctt.bellcore.com writes: >> A foreign company would like to purchase a few small X.25 switches >> from an US company. I am collecting information for them. > Be aware that X.25 packet switches fall under the COCOM export > controls. You will need an export license, and can't ship at all to > some countries. As Phil Karn said at the time: I don't know about export controls, but IBM sells software that runs on PCs that lets you build an X.25 net. A friend of mine and I were thinking of selling it in the Carribean, but opted for other greener pastures. In addition, you can also build a very expensive X.25 net on an SNA backbone. I know no one in his right mind would want to do this, but it is possible. Tom ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 9:28:24 MST From: Steve Howard Subject: Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#) In article Bob_Frankston@frankston.com writes: >> COCOTs have. People who rent out their homes or condos have similar >> issues with loaning their phones to others. > Things you can currently do: > 1) Ask for a toll restriction. In one place I had to pay a one time > charge. In another there was a monthly charge. (Not altogether > sure about which was which but I think the monthly charger was > Illinois Bell, the other one Southwestern Bell. Other differences > were being able to reach Operator. > Of course a toll restricted phone is of somewhat limited utility but a > lot better than having driving to a payphone for even local calls. > Incoming long-distance calls are of course not restricted. And if you > happen to have a calling card you can even get direct dial rates (from > AT&T at least) if you tell the LD operator (800 numbers can be > dialed) that you are at a toll-restricted phone. A solution that I recommend to some of my clients is to: (1) order selective class of call screening from the LEC (this is toll restriction with 0+ and no 10XXX), (2) Contact an IXC that offers toll-restriction, forced authorization code validation, and commission on 0+ calls, (3) have your line PICed to the carrier found in step 2, and (4) order collect and third party block. Under this scenario, your transient guests can place calls (on which you make commission), you are protected from toll charges, and the owner/authorized persons can make calls at direct dial rates by using their authorization code. Steve Howard Breckenridge Ski Resort steveh@paradise.breck.com Disclaimer = The opinions above do not necessarily represent those of my employer. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 18:38:20 EST From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#) In regards to loaned telephones and blocking access to tolls and 900/976 number, I believe Radio Shack sells a unit for under 100 bucks that completely restricts toll calling. Just allows you to dial straight seven digits, not much else. Tony Pelliccio pjj125 @ uriacc.uri.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 13:20 CST From: dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com (David Tamkin) Subject: Re: No Link Between Location and CO? Organization: Contributor Account at ddsw1, Chicago, Illinois 60657 Randy Gellens wrote in : > When I called to find out what prefixes I could be on and which > switch types, I received some conflicting information. It seems that > I could be served by any of three COs, with 19 prefixes, and a mix of > 1, 1A and 5 ESS switches. Even though the total area served by the > COs is rather large, it appears as though any location within the > total area could be served by any of the three. Anywhere else I've > been, each CO has a defined area it serves. > Is this the case? Why does PacBell do it this way? In Chicago two Illinois Bell CO's are in the same building at 10 S. Canal Street. Although some prefixes are wired from Canal East and some from Canal West, they can appear anywhere in the service area. One company I used to deal with had, in the same office, voice lines on the Canal West 312-648 prefix and data lines on the Canal East 312-715 prefix. The matter of voice vs. data wasn't the issue either, because virtually every voice phone line in Sears Tower is wired from Canal East (312-993 or 312-876, mostly), and AT&T's original Redi- Access node for downtown Chicago was out of Canal West (312-454). Are the three CO's at three different locations? David W. Tamkin Box 59297 Northtown Station, Illinois 60659-0297 dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com CompuServe: 73720,1570 MCI Mail: 426-1818 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 00:49 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: DID as Replacement For Caller ID? TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM writes: > It's still *very* expensive except for people who have the kind of > money that they are willing to spend upwards of three grand to put PBX > capability in their multi-million dollar houses. I never claimed that CNID workarounds would be cheap or even only moderately expensive. Actually, the most practical workaround is an 800 number delivered via direct trunk from a long distance carrier. This is universal, unblockable, and works from anywhere in the country. There are no pending actions before any regulatory body to change the ability of end users from receiving callers' numbers in real time. All it takes is money, something available to businesses and individuals with means. My hat is off to the activists. Once again, they have managed to keep a useful technology out of the hands of the average person, while businesses (you know, those nasty types who will abuse the knowledge of your phone number when you call for inquiry) are using 800 numbers in ever-increasingly creative ways. It sure is a good thing that the activists pay good lip service to the cause by disliking ANI delivery a whole lot! 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 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 04:52:22 -0600 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu The talk about static on AM radios being useful is only the tip of the iceberg. Let's suppose you are blind and you have given your PC something monumental to do such as sort a large amount of data or search for a key word in a huge document. Two things can happen which can drive someone to strong drink. The software may print a running status message, telling you that all is well each time it does something right. Who wants to be told 5,000 times that everything is OK? Some program setups may do their work silently, but one wonders if the machine is sleeping or working. If it takes 30 minutes, for instance to search a huge document for a key word, one doesn't expect to hear anything for a while. If something terrible happens like a crash, the effect sounds the same until 45 minutes, 50 minutes, etc have gone by and you realize that the whole time has been a waste. Hear's the fix. Take a portable AM or FM radio and place it near the computer. Tune around until you find a whine or buzz that suits your ears. It should be possible to find a signal which varies when the computer is doing something and stays relatively monotonous when it is hung up or idling. One doesn't have to have golden ears to be able to tell when it sounds like things have gone sour. This trick has also proved useful when doing long file transfers as it is possible to hear disturbances in the noise from the machine when data are coming in. By using a little common reasoning, one can even get some idea of whether or not there might be a problem with the data stream by listening to the cadence of packets and noting whether they seem to be steady and not halting or ragged. Try it, sometime. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 10:30:02 CST From: Will Martin Subject: Re: Looking For Small-Handset Cordless Phone Thanks to all who responded to my query! Several people suggested answering machines, but I fear these elderly people are anti-answering-machine. (My wife is like that -- she never will leave a message on anybody else's answering machine, either, except my voicemail at work, even though three of our closest friends have answering machines. When she calls them and they do not pick up, I have to take the phone from her and leave the message ... :-) I agree that it is a viable solution, but I don't think its worth trying to force them to change their attitudes at this late date. I did receive valuable pointers to a couple specific models from Panasonic and Motorola which I will follow-up on. The suggestion to modify an ordinary cordless with a handle my aunt can hold sounds good -- that might be the most cost-effective route. Thanks again, and Happy New Year to Telecom'ers worldwide! Regards, Will ------------------------------ From: splee@pd.org (Seng-Poh Lee, Speedy) Subject: Re: SNET Rate Request Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 15:20:44 -0500 (EST) > Needless to say, overall rates are up. To take my home town of > Stamford (in exchange class II) as an example, current residence rates > are: Flat $11.19, Message $7.59, and Select-a-Call $6.00. New rates > (now exchange class III) will be: HCA $15.00, ECA $25.65, and Per Call > $10.00. > It's unclear how the current Flat Rate area (which generally includes > your own town and physically adjacent ones) compares to the new HCA's > and ECA's, though SNET claims that for "most customers" the new ECA is > larger than the current Flat Rate area. Based on the flyer SNET sent me with my bill, it appears that people who need Flat Rate Calling to adjoining exchanges are going to have their bills doubled. HCA appears to only cover your own local exchange, in my case, Cheshire. That means you have to subscribe to ECA to get at least the Flat Calling area you used to have. This means my Flat rate would go from $11.19 to $25.65, just so I can maintain Flat Rate to the adjoining town. Thats more than DOUBLE! While its true that ECA is supposed to give you a wider Flat Rate calling area, SNET has not been to public about just how far an ECA each exchange will get. Seng-Poh Lee ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 13:40:12 PST From: Anthony E. Siegman Subject: Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works) Organization: Stanford University rickie@trickie.ualberta.ca (Richard Nash) writes: > Sorry, but telemarketeers are a virus that require radical steps to > rid ourselves of them. That may be putting it a bit harshly (in a free country, even telemarketers have some rights), but yes, telemarketing requires some legal and social controls; and we (the targets of telemarketing) will just have to keep pushing until we get them. > My proposal is that all telemarketeers are required by law to identify > their intent to the called party's CO which would determine if the > called party wishes to receive solicitation. YES! YES! YES! This would be technically easy and inexpensive to do (just require that any telemarketing call come from a special designated prefix, like 600 or 700, or whatever); it's _all_ that's needed; it's a trivial restraint on the telemarketer's freedom; it gives the recipient full choice, to block or not. We have got to work to get this basic idea recognized and implemented. ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing? Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 00:00:39 GMT > *65 turn on delivery of caller id (if you are subscribed) > *85 turn off delivery of caller id (why would anyone want to do this?) Because some phone companies charge for Caller-ID on a per-number- delivered basis? Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon [Moderator's Note: IBT used to do that, but starting a few months ago they no longer charge for delivery over a certain number. One monthly fee pays for it all. Another oddity IMHO here is that call screening can be turned on with *60 and turned off with *80. This is despite the fact that while within the *60 menu of things to do, one can both add and remove numbers from the repertoire. If you can add or delete whatever you want there, why bother to have a command to turn it off? Perhaps it is because IBT is not marketing Call Screening as a permanent way to get rid of troublesome callers, but merely as a way to avoid certain people at certain times of day; although I cannot imagine be willing to chat with certain numbers on my list regardless of the time of day or occassion. Ditto the feature where you can list certain callers to get the red carpet with special ringing on your end; that too can be turned off, although if your boss is an important person to hear from at 3 PM, why wouldn't he be important at 3 AM? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Craig R. Watkins Subject: Re: PRO-34 Wanted Date: 2 Jan 93 10:42:11 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. In article , wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) writes: > I can't find any Radio Shack PRO-34 Scanners left around here ... if > any one can find one for me I would be gald to pay the $39 + shipping > + misc to receive one. Yesterday I was in Radio Shack for some parts (just let those Radio Shack bashers tell me where else I can get parts on New Year's Day during halftime in the middle of nowhere in Pennsylvania!) and I asked about the PRO-34. It was really $39 -- I saw it on the computer screen. However, the guys behind the counter said it was discontinued about a year ago and anything at a price like that gets snapped up by employees. They claimed that regional folks even get together every-so-often to swap discontinued items between stores (and often they are for employee purchase). They wished me good luck finding one (well, actually, I already have one), so I will wish the same to you. [Moderator's Note: Well I must say it is the finest scanner radio I have ever owned, and I've had several over the years, beginning with the old crystal units twenty or so years ago; and before that I had a tunable VHF receiver which I bought from Radio Shack's predecessor company Allied Radio, circa 1960-65. Allied's HQ was right here in Chicago at Western and Washington Aves. What a grand store that was, and located right across the street from Olson Electronics just in case you needed to stop in there also on the way home. One complaint I have about Radio Shack is how often the staff changes in the store three blocks from my house. All new people there twice around since I bought my CT-301 phone, and three times around since I bought the PRO-34. I've purchased video cameras there also. Thousands of dollars spent in that one store alone; the current bunch of employees has no idea who I am; the people there three years ago used to drop everything to wait on me. I have my PRO-34 earphone jack wired out to a larger communications style speaker pulled from an old speaker-phone. It really sounds great that way. I still use my old Regency H-604 crystal scanner from years ago sometimes also. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #4 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08956; 3 Jan 93 4:12 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27808 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:13:43 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28116 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:13:18 -0600 Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:13:18 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301030813.AA28116@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #5 TELECOM Digest Sun, 3 Jan 93 02:13:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 5 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (TELECOM Moderator) Re: Panasonic KXT-123211 Software (Craig R. Watkins) Re: Email to Genie (Fred Ennis) Re: About a Second Line in My Home (Dave Levenson) Re: ZyXEL Modem Review (Bill Fenner) Re: Sprint 800 Residential (Ray Normandeau) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (David Ash) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Sean Donelan) Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud (Tony Harminc) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 00:45:38 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct The past week has been a barrel of laughs where IBT is concerned with an order to change some service for me. On December 23, IBT was given the following instructions regarding some lines I manage: (There were): Two hunt groups: one beginning xxx-2700 with four lines following. one beginning xxx-7200 with a second line following. Two phones independent of the hunt groups, xxx-7347 and xxx-7296. On 7347, there were various features such as call waiting, three way calling, caller-id, etc. The request: Drop the 2700 hunt group entirely. Add one additional line to the 7200 hunt group making three lines in total there, with the two back lines hunted from 7200. Change the number on the line 7347 to 2700 and retain all the features that 7347 had on it, plus add voicemail from IBT. So I was dropping four of the eight lines and re-arranging the remaining four lines. I was promised the order would be done on Monday, December 28, the day the billing is cut off each month. When I went to check on the work Monday evening, here is what I found: The 7200 hunt group was done correctly. There were now three lines in the group. The numbers following 2700 in that hunt group had been turned off, but with an intercept saying 'being tested for trouble ... try again later.' That intercept recording is still on those lines, now a week later. 7347 had been replaced by 2700, but with none of the features on it (just a straight line; if in use caller got busy signal, etc). No forwarding, no call waiting, etc.) I called Monday night and complained; was told to call the Business Office on Tuesday since 'the order had been written up wrong ...'. Tuesday morning I called the Business Office. There was nothing wrong with the order said the rep; the people who work in the CO have to learn to read better. She assured me it would all be corrected that day. Tuesday night I check the (newly numbered) 2700 line. Still no features on it. I call Repair again as the Business Office suggested, and am told they can do nothing ... call the Business Office on Wednesday morning. Wednesday morning I wake up early and very cranky. I am on the line to the Business Office the minute it opens. I am put on hold, and the rep comes back to assure me, 'they are working on it right now, as we speak ... give them about an hour, call me back if problems.' Somehow I got distracted and did not get a chance to look at those phones or lines Wednesday night. Late Thursday afternoon, New Year's Eve, I go to that location. Now 2700 has all the features -- including call waiting, as witnessed by the fact that *70 responded with the tone bursts -- but they had somehow decided to make 2700 also hunt into 7200 when it was busy!! That I did not want, and I called Repair, 6 PM New Year's Eve. The clerk said no one would be around that evening, but Friday (New Year's Day) there would be someone working in the CO ... again I am assured it will be fixed. New Year's Day, about 10 AM I called Repair. 'Colleen' took my call, put me on hold, and came back to say that 'Arlene' was in the CO working on it ... wait a few minutes and see if it is okay ...'. Sure enough, about fifteen minutes later, 2700 (which is supposed to be stand alone, no hunt group but with lots of features, remember) gives a little ding-ding on the bell. I lift the receiver and hear static on the line ... no dial tone ever comes on, but there is battery present. Well, I figure, I guess it is being worked on. I test the line several minutes later by using it to dial itself, expecting to get a busy signal ... instead it rings, and instead of hunting to the 7200 line as it had been doing, now it hunts to the *second line* in the 7200 hunt group! I call back Repair, bellow loudly and the clerk puts me on hold. She comes back to say 'Arlene' will call me in a few minutes when she finishes talking to another customer. I leave the little office where these phones are located and go downstairs to (a) relieve myself and (b) get hot water for my coffee in that order ... I am on the way back upstairs and hear the phone ringing, but it stops before I get to it. Well, that's no problem, after all, what is Caller-ID for? The display screen shows a number, 312-509-something, and figuring it might be the person in the CO wanting to talk to me, I press the 'Call Back' button on the display unit. It rings and someone answers, 'Repair, Colleen speaking.' I ask did she call me, and she asks 'how did you get my direct number?' ....!!! From here on, it goes downhill ... A few minutes later, another call comes from a woman named 'Debbie' who states she is a repair supervisor in the Irving CO. Her complaint is thus: someone has 'been calling' repair on 'unauthorized numbers' and it had better stop. If I want Repair Service, the number to call is 611 and none other. I told her all I did was press the 'call back' button on the display unit and if she did not want calls on that line then the thing to do would be to block her ID; that would prevent me from calling. After all, what did she think Caller-ID was for? Furthermore, I noted, in the Centel phone book (Centel is another phone company which has a few exchanges on the northwest side of Chicago; they operate from the Chicago-Newcastle CO) it plainly says people using Centel phones who need Illinois Bell repair *cannot* dial 611 (they'll get Centel repair) and *must* dial 509-something to get IBT. Finally, I noted, instead of talking about my calls on 'unauthorized lines' maybe we should talk about how her tech staff on New Year's Day could not get their act together, and whether an appeal to the Chairman's Office on Monday would be in order ... I am put on hold ... a minute or so later, "Colleen" picks up the line to tell me I need to call the Business Office on Monday, since the order 'plainly says' that 2700 is to hunt to the second line in the 7200 hunt group .... I defied her to find me something specific in the order which said that and told her if she could, I'd come over to the CO and buy lunch for her. Back on hold I go ... I am told 'Arlene' will call now if I will hang up. So I hang up. The phone rings a second or two later, again with a number 907-something clearly displayed on the Caller-ID. It is 'Arlene' who wishes to argue with me about whether or not the order called for hunting (as opposed to call-waiting) and where it was to hunt. I told her if it is supposed to hunt, as you claim the order reads, then how come *70 works? The line has call-waiting alright, it just never gets a chance to reach that point since you have it hunting. She finally decides maybe someone transposed the digits 2700 and 7200 somehow and that is how the hunting got installed on 2700. After trying to gain some sympathy from me by telling me how she is there working on New Year's Day on overtime trying to get some jobs finished (and I try to gain her sympathy by telling her some stories from the olden-golden pre-divestiture days of telecom) she agrees to look into it and 'see what can be done'. Finally about 4 PM New Year's Day, after several calls to Repair Service and about an hour in aggregate wasted on the matter, the line is fixed, voicemail works and all the features are present. Four days after the job was due, with numerous calls, the work gets finished. Almost that is ... the xxx-7347 number (and the other discontinued numbers in the original hunt group) still have the 'being tested for trouble' intercept on the line. Obviously, someone did not close out the order. But I could care less about those numbers; they were merely being disconnected with no referral on them anyway. And 'Arlene' claims she still is unable to put a default carrier on the line ... the Business Office will have to write that part of the order all over again. I won't worry about it for now. For now, I'll be content if the software to be used on the computer associated with those lines arrives soon, gets installed and works okay. PAT ------------------------------ From: crw@icf.hrb.com (Craig R. Watkins) Subject: Re: Panasonic KXT-123211 Software Date: 2 Jan 93 15:30:05 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. In article , petrisko@evax2.engr. arizona.edu (William Petrisko) writes: > Does anyone know of PC software available as a front-end to > programming the Panasonic phone system? I would also be interested. > Also (just an annoyance factor) when dialing, it seems that the > touchtone echo is *delayed* until you get to the third or fourth > digit. I believe if you decrease your CO line "Pause Time" (default: 3.5 sec) this may help your problem. I believe the PBX is delaying your tones from your CO line in order to give the CO time to provide dial tone. Craig R. Watkins crw@icf.hrb.com HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Email to Genie From: fred@page6.pinetree.org (Fred Ennis) Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 15:40:31 -0500 Organization: Page 6, Ottawa, Ontario +1 613-729-9451 > it -- with a cover note saying, "Mike, I thought this was some very > interesting stuff and hope you enjoy reading it as much as I did ..." That reminds me of a rather clever practical joke played by Stuart MacLeod, columnist at Thompson News Services in Ottawa. The victim was Geoff Scott, M.P. Members of the press gallery had been sent a book that was the story of the Portugese immigrating to Canada. The book was part English, part Portugese. There was no index, which forms the basis for the gag. Stuart sent the book to Geoff, along with a note supposedly from the author saying "I hope I quoted you correctly each time." This, of course, forced Geoff to read the entire book. Nothing to do with Telecom, but a great practial joke. All the best for the holidays. Fred Ennis, fred@page6.pinetree.org [Moderator's Note: Fred's message is like the late-arriving Christmas card. He sent it December 15; it got here Saturday afternoon! Happy holidays to you too, Fre ... what there is left of them. How I will hate my office more than ever when I have to go in Monday morning! PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: About a Second Line in My Home Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 20:17:23 GMT In article , Ben Black <76672.2564@Compu Serve.COM> writes: > I've ordered a second line in my home for computer use. There is > standard four wire cable in the wall (red/green/yellow/black.) > Can I use the unused pair (yellow/black) for the second line, saving > me the trouble of running a new pair all the way to the network > interface? You can use the second pair in a length of quad station wire for a second line, BUT: expect to find crosstalk between the first and second line. How much crosstalk will depend upon how many feet of quad you use. Voice users probably won't interfere with each other. Modem sounds will probably be faintly audible to voice users of the other line. Ringing will be the most noticable noise that bleeds through. A ring of your voice phone will likely cause a few dropped bits on your modems. I recommend, if at all possible, that you either use a separate piece of cable, or use cable with two or more twisted pairs for multi-line service. 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: fenner@postscript.cs.psu.edu (Bill Fenner) Subject: Re: ZyXEL Modem Review Organization: Penn State Computer Science Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 18:02:51 -0500 In article levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) writes: > Two types of security features. One does dial back, the other works > only with another XyXEL modem. This is wrong. There are two types of security, one which asks for a password, and the other which only works with ZyXELs, which checks against the other modem's supervisory password. Either mode can allow dialback, either to one of 10 numbers based on which password matched, or the "enter-password" mode can also request a number to dial back on. The security is completely transparent to the host connected to the modem, except for the amount of time for the CONNECT message to come back. For example: Remote ZyXEL Host -------- --------- ---------- RING -> <- ATA (negotiate connection) <- PassWord = mypass -> <- Correct CONNECT 38400 -> i.e. the host doesn't see the fact that the connection occurred until the correct password has been entered. Bill ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sprint 800 Residential From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 2 Jan 93 20:30:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) > I'll give it the full six months, but I'm concerned about the number > of wrong numbers. It could be more trouble than it's worth. I know of a business that had AT&T 800 service and discontinued it due to too many wrong numbers. They were getting billed for calls to the number after business hourts when no one ws in the office and there was no modem fax TAD or human to pick up the phone. This is a company with the President and ONE worker. ------------------------------ From: ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (David Ash) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University. Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 05:43:29 GMT In article johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > The only use to date that I have found for the mag stripe on a calling > card is in the card reader phones found mostly at airports, which read > the whole calling card number and stuff it down the line at the > appropriate time as you're making a phone call. On this topic, has anyone ever found any use at all for the mag strips on the calling cards issued by MCI and Sprint? As far as I know, even the card readers which allowing billing to these carriers won't allow the physical use of the card? David W. Ash ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu HOME: (415) 497-1629 WORK: (415) 725-3859 ------------------------------ From: sean@cobra.dra.com Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Date: 3 Jan 93 00:34:25 CST Organization: Data Research Associates, Inc. In article , cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us (gordon hlavenka) writes: > I've been working on a credit card / phone project, and discovered > something that is probably known to many but was news to me: My PIN is > _on_ my calling card! Recorded on Track 2, offset 23 characters after > the SS. In the clear. If you are working on a credit card/phone project a good introduction is "Credit Card Validation and Security" by David Jordan (MCI Corporate Systems Integrity Organization), Telecommunication Journal, Vol.59 (April 1992). Mr. Jordan wrote: "In the United States, several administrations utilize 14-digit card numbers, with the last four digits referred to as the customer PIN. For customer convenience the PIN is printed on these cards. The fraud deterrent capability associated with the use of the PIN in these implementations is negated." Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 00:52:37 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) wrote: [quoting from a leaflet distributed with recent phone bills] > Calling cards can no longer be used as a billing option when placing > long distance calls from payphones in Bell territory to certain > destinations: > + locations in 809 area code(*) (as of October 30, 1992); > + overseas (as of April 13, 1992) unless you call from a Millenium > payphone; > In spite of these restrictions, there are still a number of ways you > can place overseas or 809 calls from payphones: > + use your American Express, Visa, Mastercard or EnRoute card in > Millenium phones (these are the "card swipe" phones); > + place a person-to-person collect call; > + bill your call to a validated third number in Canada or the United > States, or > + place a cash call from a regular payphone. This is getting bizarre. I never carry my calling card because, unlike the various other cards in my wallet, its number is valuable on its own -- without the physical card. This, of course, is because the PIN is printed right on the card, and the number (with PIN) is accepted without the card itself. Now Bell is saying I must carry the card in order to make these calls (a good start), but the PIN is still printed on the card and stored unencrypted on the magstripe. In a previous job I had access to credit card embossing and encoding equipment, and I was tempted to make copies of my calling card on credit card stock with a fake number embossed, but with the correct one on the magstripe. This solves some of the problem, but I concluded that, even though it wouldn't be illegal, I would probably spend a lot of time "helping the police with their enquiries" if I was ever found with such a card. > [Moderator's Note: Well here we go again with the telcos claiming > that 'fraud is everyone's problem ... ' it is NOT everyone's problem; > it is telco's problem. They won't install the technology to eliminate > or help reduce fraud; it is simply easier to discriminate against > large numbers of citizens whose national origin is that of an affected > country. I must say Bell Canada seems to be more open about admitting > what they do; you'll never see AT&T ever put anything in writing about > their illegal and discriminatory practices. Of course I don't know the > law in Canada; maybe Bell Canada is breaking no laws by blocking calls > in this manner. AT&T needs to have the screws turned to them harder > than ever on this issue. PAT] But note that Bell Canada is disallowing such calls to all foreign countries except the United States. They are not picking a small (and troublesome) subset as AT&T seems to have done. I think it would be pretty hard to make a case of discrimination against everyone except American immigrants. Tony Harminc [Moderator's Note: Are you *positive* that if you try to use a Bell Canada card on a call to the UK, Australia or New Zealand it won't go through? Forget what their literature says for a moment and try it. If it does go through on the card, then the very same situation exists in Canada as here: discrimination against what you term a 'troublesome subset' ... although a credit grantor can deny credit to someone who has defrauded or is attempting to defraud them, the credit grantor cannot, under the law, approve a line of credit then selectively refuse to honor that line of credit because there 'might be' fraud committed. If AT&T would put in writing in their published literature such as their 'International Calling Guide' that credit cards cannot be used on international calls to point X, Y and Z then they would have a stronger case in their favor. But in fact, their literature says just the opposite. Look in the guidebook at the little boxes checked off which indicate 'collect/credit card calls accepted to/from this country'. Nearly every country, and certainly all the verbotin places show the AT&T card as being accepted as payment. Nor can the credit grantor deny credit under some scenarios and approve it under other scenarios when the end result would be that a class of customers against whom discrimination is illegal would be the persons primarily or exclusively affected. That is just making an end run around the law, and the courts would rule as such. If AT&T allows white people with a European ethnic background living in Winnetka, IL to call the UK using a calling card as payment, they cannot lawfully refuse to let a Latino person living in the Humboldt Park area of Chicago call Puerto Rico on the same pre-approved calling card plan. AT&T might say they disallow all calls to Puerto Rico on a calling card, but that misses the point. Wealthy people with European ancestry living in Winnetka have private phones and don't need to run out to the corner 7/11 and use the payphone. Poor Latinos and Black people do need to use the payphone. And from the time I take the receiver off the hook on a payphone and proffer some method of approved payment to telco, that phone line is leased to me for my use, just like the phone in someone's home in Winnetka. Bottom line: people from 'certain ethnic backgrounds' living in the inner cities get shafted on credit from (the credit grantor) AT&T. Any other credit card issuer who arbitrarily ruled out certain areas of cities or certain types of purchases when the result was a large class of people was primarily affected would get their knuckles rapped. AT&T deserves no less. VISA and AMEX know how to deal with fraud where their cards are concerned without discriminating against credit worthy customers. Why can't AT&T figure out how it is done? Hopefully they will get slapped around a little on this until they begin obeying the law like Ma and Pa's corner store has to do when they issue credit to their customers. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #5 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04383; 3 Jan 93 12:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14741 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 10:37:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04046 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 10:37:01 -0600 Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 10:37:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301031637.AA04046@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #6 TELECOM Digest Sun, 3 Jan 93 10:37:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 6 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Paul Robinson) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (John R. Levine) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Shrikumar) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Paul Robinson) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Craig R. Watkins) Re: More Idiocy From GTE (Daniel Burstein) Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? (John Higdon) Re: Internet and Easylink (Paul Robinson) Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (Shrikumar) New AnswerCall Features (Joe Bergstein) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 05:05:45 EST Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud In TELECOM Digest 12-928, cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us (gordon hlavenka) writes: > I've been working on a credit card / phone project, and > discovered something that is probably known to many but was > news to me: My PIN is _on_ my calling card! Recorded on > Track 2, offset 23 characters after the SS. In the clear. [Stuff Deleted] > I suppose it could be argued that validating PINs on-line > is a difficult task, but on the other hand my ATM card works > in London and if the PIN is recorded on this card it's > encrypted ... It's not. The interesting thing is that banks operate almost identically the way Internet does for handling TELNET or FTP or E-Mail requests. One computer calls up another computer through several intervening computer systems over the backbone. In the case of Internet, the backbone is supplied by NSF in the U.S. and by the local PTTs in foreign countries. If you look at your card, it will identify the 'backbone' supplier; a name like 'CIRRUS' (owned by Master Card) or 'PLUS' (owned by Visa). These are the two major international ATM networks. This backbone establishes a connection between the bank you are at and the one you have an account with. This bank sends across the card number your card has and sends across the PIN that you type in, along with a statement of what you want it to do (send money, send your balance, etc.) The receiving computer gets this information and then decides what to do with it just as if you were at one of its own machines. Then it will either send back some information (account balance) or an approval (give him the $300) or a denial (sorry, he doesn't have enough) or in worse case, a rejection (refuse his request and eat the card). In short, the local bank simply sends the information you gave it (in encrypted form) back to the issuing bank; the local bank simply follows instructions. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 3 Jan 93 10:55:43 EST (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > Or do the ATMs check with the central computer each time (hope the > traffic is encrypted.) Of course they do. How else could they know whether there was any money in your account? Some early ATMs were standalone or semi-standalone with lists of bad account numbers downloaded into them, so the cards they used either had the PIN on the magstripe or computed the PIN from the account number. These days, all machines are online (they look to the host like 3278 terminals) so there's no need to have the PIN on the card. Whether they encrypt the traffic is a good question. Banks are big believers in security through obscurity so they get very touchy whenever you ask a technical question about their ATMs. I've even been asked to move out of the line of sight when I was standing near an ATM in the bank lobby as they were servicing it. In fairness, I suppose they wanted to be sure I didn't see them dial the combination lock on the ATM's safe. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: But please note there is also something on the card which provides for a so-called 'overnight limit'. I have a Cash Station card connected with CIRRUS. I also have a 'Banking Card' from First National Bank in Chicago which functions as a debit card. It has a Master Card logo on it and can be used wherever credit cards are used, except that it makes a direct debit to my checking account. It is also hooked into CIRRUS. On occassion -- but it is growing more and more rare -- the network will be 'down'. When this is the case, a cash machine will give me up to $100 *because I ask for it*, without any verification. Once the network is back up, the transaction will be processed when the tapes are updated that night. If there is not enough money in the account, and either one party or the other gets paid, rest assured the bank recovers their money first. A Cash Station transaction which itself cannot be cleared later from lack of funds is a Very Bad Thing, and that card will have a hold on it not only until the money gets deposited to clear it but until 'someone' calls the bank collection department to plead their case. First offense, okay; second or third offense (of causing an overdraft because Cash Station was down when you took the money you didn't have) is Bad News. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 02:40:13 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India In article dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu writes: > The barcode starts and ends with a tall bar. The check digit is the > number that would be required so that the sum of all digits plus the Curious enough to hunt for another factoid ... does anyone know what fraction of the entire snail mail in the US is generated by business and how much by Aunt Agatha ? Should give some insight into how much mail the automatic sorters actually can ever benefit from. And if the dreams of USPS to read human handwriting are so important? And if the "tele-sorter" (aha ... that makes it related to TELECOM Digest :-) experiment, where the sorter machines will project image of letters to a sorter clerk via telecom and the clerk punches button from miles away to send the letter to the right bin, is likely to be significant.? Also, Is there a summary of several bar codes ftp-able somewhere ? shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in ) ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 05:09:50 EST Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes In TELECOM Digest 12-928, ssay@prefect.cc.bellcore.com (say,halim s) asks: > I would like to find out the encoding for the ZIP code bars on USPS > mail envelopes. Ask the post office for the circular on bar code. It's a small pamphlet of about 5 pages, and it explains how all of the codes work, as there are two codes; one for ZIP code and one for ZIP+4 code. There is no charge for the pamphlet. If your local Post Office doesn't have it, try a main office in a large city. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone ------------------------------ From: Craig R. Watkins Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Date: 3 Jan 93 10:01:29 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. In article , doug@CC.YSU.EDU (Doug Sewell) writes: > (1) Coding can be five digits (rare), nine digits (most common) and > more to include house codes/street address numbers (this is not > very common yet). There is an eleven digit code which is called the Advanced Bar Code (ABC). It consists of the the ZIP+4 plus the last two digits of the street address, the theory being that it uniquely identifies the destination allowing automatic sorting for the order of delivery. Craig R. Watkins crw@icf.hrb.com HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311 ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Re: More Idiocy From GTE Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 08:24:57 GMT Organization: Panix, NYC In andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) writes: > On 28 Dec 92 15:07:25 GMT, mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles > Mattair) said: >> As I'm at a friends house, I decide to put the call on calling card. >> 102880+10D. GTE. Huh ...? I know this is intralata but I >> told them to use AT&T. They can't override my choice of carrier can >> they? Try it again except as 102880 + 7D (713 has gone 1/0 + 10D on >> all LD calls but who knows what GTE is doing). GTE. > Local exchange carriers look at the whole number before passing it off > to an IXC, precisely because of what you tried to do. AT&T is very > likely not tariffed to carry that call, so the switch knows better > than you do, and routes it via the LEC. However, AT&T issued CIID > card should still be good for a GTE carried call. AT&T has reciprocal > card verification and billing agreements with virtually every LEC in > the country so that your AT&T card is AOS-proof and OCC-proof but not > LEC-proof. (That is a feature, not a bug). There actually is a way around this that usually works. AT&T does, in fact, have a 1-800 dial up number which they implemented after a bit of a fight with the FCC (which is a -very looong- story for another day). If you dial "1-800-CALL-ATT" you can access an ATT "Boing" or even an ATT -human- operator! (Similar schemes also work for most of the other carriers as well. you can -usually- make LOCAL LATA calls when you hook into the systems in this manner. This is quite helpful if you're calling from a coin phone, and your carrier is nice enough not to charge a surcharge ...) dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 00:04 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? Bob Yazz writes: > You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, do you > John? The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period. I > can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac Bell over this. But the PUC cannot order this, just as it cannot prevent any carrier from passing realtime ANI to end users. In SS7, the calling number is ALWAYS transmitted as part of the data packet, although there is a bit that identifies it as a "blocked" number if such is the case. First, why would Pac*Bell even care about blocking if it does not trade in CNID? Second, what the end telco does about the "block bit" is up to the telco in the destination state. The PUC has no jurisdiction in this matter whatsoever. And remember, the PUC has not prohibited CNID. It has just placed what Pac*Bell considers to be unreasonable conditions on its offering. So Pac*Bell does not offer it. But the PUC has no authority to tamper with the SS7 protocol, particularly on interstate calls. Remember, the phone numbers of Californians are appearing right and left at locations both within and outside the state via ANI. Just as the PUC cannot do anything about this it cannot do anything about similar transmission via SS7. The PUC is only concerned about the feature known as "Caller-ID" as offered by LECs to customers in California. All else is outside the PUC's purview. The fact of the matter is that callers from California will have their phone numbers displayed wherever CNID is offered in other states, like it or not. Oddly enough, if a California caller dials *67 before placing a long distance call, the block bit will be set and there is a good chance that the display at the called telephone will say "Private Number" or whatever it is they say for blocked CNID. But most callers will not know this, and Pac*Bell is under no obligation to educate them. Pac*Bell is not offering CNID and therefore not required to meet any of the conditions for that service as mandated by the PUC. > Sounds like an incentive to switch to a long distance company that > does not use SS7. How do you think AT&T might feel about this? Switching to an IEC that does not use SS7 is a temporary reprieve at best; within several years calls will be sent no other way. And remember, there is still ANI. In this area, the Big Three are all using SS7 to Pac*Bell. 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 ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 04:41:10 EST Subject: Re: Internet and Easylink In last year's TELECOM Digest 12-928, a user named dnewcomb@whale.st. usm.edu (Donald R. Newcomb) was overheard discussing "EasyLink and Internet?": > I have long understood that sending email between EasyLink and > Internet was out of the question. It's not; Pat sends us TELECOM Digest to our Easylink Mailbox every day. Easylink autoforwards all of our mail to our fax machine at no charge, so as a result, we get TELECOM Digest delivered to our fax machine automatically and it costs us nothing except fax paper. (It's a plain paper machine, so it's only a couple of cents a page.) Last week I figured out how to send a message FROM an Easylink subscriber TO Internet. I used it in order to subscribe to some Bitnet lists. I'll mention both ways for anyone interested. To send to someone's Easylink address, you must know the *exact* Easylink number. This is an eight-digit number which always begins with 62. Then you have to know the gateway, which is complicated, then the splitting scheme, then the addressee. What you are doing is translating an Internet RFC822 address into a CCITT X.400 address (or back). There are two ways to get to someone's Easylink address. One is via MCI Mail and the other through AT&T Mail. To go through MCI Mail, you'd use the following: g=firstname%s=lastname%dda.eln=62xxxxxx%4356996@MCIMAIL.COM or s=firstname_lastname%dda.eln=62xxxxxx%western_union@MCIMAIL.COM or g=firstname%s=lastname%dda.eln=62xxxxxx%western_union@MCIMAIL.COM All of these are identical; 4356996 is Western Union's gateway account on MCI Mail. This is how Pat sends us the TELECOM Digest. To go through AT&T Easylink (Western Union is a subsidiary of AT&T), you'd use the following: wu/s=firstname_lastname/dda.eln=62xxxxxx@mhs.attmail.com or mhs!wu/g=firstname/s=lastname/dda.eln=62xxxxxx@attmail.com In all of these, the two things which are mandatory are s=name and dda.eln=62xxxxxx, and you can optionally use the g= format for first name. If you want a blank in the middle of the name, you insert an underline _ which is why it is there. To _send_ from Easylink is much harder. It consists of sending an IPM (their name for X.400) message to the ATTMAIL ADMD, with an id of: ID-!i!n!t!e!r!n!e!t!!hostname!!user Where an address of user@hostname is translated into the UUCP style hostname!user. For example, this account becomes: ID-!I!N!T!E!R!N!E!T!!FZC!!CU.NIH.GOV This is required because the ID of "internet" has to be in {lower case} in order for AT&T mail to forward to it. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 02:28:28 -0500 From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India In article siegman@sierra.stanford.edu writes: > proposal: Enact legislation requiring that all telemarketing calls > come with Caller-ID from a uniquely designated area code prefix, like > 600, 700, whatever. No freedom of speech issues are involved; the Oh yes. That is a good idea. Placing the onus on a business to identify themselves to the law is very implmentable as well. Also with just a tiny modification to the CNID concept (no additional cost) instead of a number, the company name would be delivered. In most cases an LCD with alphanumeric display with say only the ITA2 or Baudot char set should not be any more expensive that currently used digit displays. The modems part etc could remain the same, and the phone companies can make some money out of delivering a 12 letter alphanumeric ... enough perhaps (is it?) to have them do the software changes needed to their COs. A couple of days back, I caught the tail end of Bob Beckel (sp?) sitting in for Larry King on CNN. On the show was the small-biz owner who (guess its her) had filed that suit, and one Ray Kolker introduced as a Dialler manufacturer. He was pretty forceful in suggesting that there are better way available in technology today "such as of the type of Caller-ID", which can deal better. I have time and again thought up ideas on similar lines, but each time I am reminded that all these are going to be a "little difficult" to do till SS7 reaches all COs and is nationwide. Is it not the case that a lion's share of telemarketing is across state lines to benefit from the lower IXC rates? Of course, then telemarketeers would simply call from that small state near the Bahamas where the tarot readers used to live :-) Might even be cheaper. (Freely allowing cross talk of ideas between various threads I read in the past year..) their neutral-accented sale-droids could be in the safe vicinity of the Air Command, with all calls piped to the bahamas, and coming in from there right at dinner time, and your CNID box says "International Call". The Phone Company might even encourage this with a discount, like apparently they did in when .. Oh well ... :-) shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in ) ------------------------------ From: Joe.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 01:58:16 -0500 Subject: New AnswerCall Features I thought TELECOM Digest readers might be interested in some new features announced by C&P Telephone for their Answer Call CO based voicemail service. As an Answer Call customer, I received an announcement that there will be a price increase in February from $5.00/month to $6.50/month. The letter included news of the following new features: Optional Busy Greeting: You can have two separate personal greetings -- one to let callers know when you're on the phone, the other to indicate when you're not available to answer. The Optional Busy Greeting will be a standard AnswerCall feature with no additional charge. Reminder Service: You can program Answer Call to call your home number and play a pre-recorded reminder message at a set time that you choose. This option will be introduced on a free trial basis, after which time a small usage charge of $0.15 per activation will apply. Special Delivery Service: Answer call will call you if you're away from home when an urgent message arrives in your AnswerCall mailbox. This service will be free for a limited time after which a $0.35 per activation charge will apply. [Note that the announcement does not clarify what an "urgent" message is, and whether callers will have an option to flag a message as "urgent"]. Although not mentioned in the letter, the price list includes a Pager Notification option at a cost of $3.00 per month for up to 65 activa- tions plus $0.20 per activation over 65. [Note, too that these prices are for residential users only. I believe that these services are available for business users at slightly higher prices]. [Moderator's Note: Answer Call appears to have some additional features not being offered by IBT in their voicemail service, such as the Pager Notification, and reminder service. It sounds nice. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #6 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11576; 4 Jan 93 1:43 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28977 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 23:41:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22131 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 23:41:11 -0600 Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 23:41:11 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301040541.AA22131@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #7 TELECOM Digest Sun, 3 Jan 93 23:41:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 7 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (John Higdon) Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (Thomas Lapp) Re: Additional Phone Charges (Paul Robinson) Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Daniel Burstein) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Dr. Math) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (John R. Levine) Re: Problems with Payphones at WPI (NET/AT&T) (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Another Payphone Mystery? (Dave Levenson) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Ben Cox) Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (George Armhold) Re: Pocket Auto-Dialer? (Lyle Seaman) Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing? (Gordon Burditt) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 09:55 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct On Jan 3 at 2:13, TELECOM Moderator writes: > A few minutes later, another call comes from a woman named 'Debbie' > who states she is a repair supervisor in the Irving CO. Her complaint > is thus: someone has 'been calling' repair on 'unauthorized numbers' > and it had better stop. If I want Repair Service, the number to call > is 611 and none other. Interesting difference in approach. Virtually everytime I call in trouble to Pac*Bell for my service or for others, a call back comes from someone who, upon getting my machine, leaves his/her name and direct telephone number, usually 973-something. When calling this number either the person leaving the message answers or someone else does who promptly puts the repair tech on the line. And then, it is only necessary to give my name, not the number reported for the repair person to immediately pinpoint the repair ticket. All in all, I find Pac*Bell very open about its "internal" numbers. On only one occasion was I invited to call 611 rather than the number that I did. It was explained that it was necessary to do that to open a ticket that could be followed up on by the person to whom I was speaking at the time. Sounds as though IBT may still have a touch of the old Ma Bell left in her. 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: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 11:24:34 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article TELECOM Moderator writes: > The past week has been a barrel of laughs where IBT is concerned with an > order to change some service for me. ... Story deleted ... > For now, I'll be content if the software to be used on the computer > associated with those lines arrives soon, gets installed and works > okay. Aside from the pleasure of the phone company getting hoisted on their own caller-id petard (sp?), this story raised an interesting idea: With the phone companies getting rid of intelligent and experienced (and thus higher paid) people in record numbers (and, if Higdon is to be believed, GTE well ahead of the industry in this strategy) the opportunities for confusion over increasingly more complex and potentially contradictory services with less decreasingly less competent people at the phone company to deal with them would seem to loom large. Perhaps it's time for them to take the lead of some banks and provide some limited sort of ON-LINE (via modem and terminal/PC) access for selected, knowledgeable customers to submit their own work-orders by interacting with an expert system that has access to a database of their current configuration, knowlegde of features and how they interact with each other, and the logic to sort it all out correctly. It would at least eliminate one source of mis-communication or mis-interpretation of both clients wishes and the nature of the modern phone system/network workings. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 13:07:49 EST From: Thomas Lapp Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct > Almost that is ... the xxx-7347 number (and the other discontinued > numbers in the original hunt group) still have the 'being tested for > trouble' intercept on the line. Obviously, someone did not close out > the order. But I could care less about those numbers; they were > merely being disconnected with no referral on them anyway. I know it is 'preaching to the choir' to tell Pat this, but others in situations like this may also want to watch the billing that comes over the next billing period or so to make sure that Billing gets their part right as well. Disconnected lines have been known to continue getting billed well after disconnect date ... thomas%mvac23@udel.edu (home) lapp@cdhub1.dnet.dupont.com (work) [Moderator's Note: Oh, absolutely. You can bet I'll review the next bill very closely before forwarding it on to the person who pays it every month. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 04:54:32 EST Subject: Re: Additional Phone Charges In Telecom Digest 12-928, Jerry Leichter says: > One of my favorites, non-listed phone number (note: NOT > non-published; non-listed IS available from DA, they just have > to leave it off the yearly list they send to the printers) goes > from $1.00/month to $2.00/month. I'd love to see the salaries > for the people who must go through and pull the non-listed > numbers out by hand; nothing else can justify that kind of > charge. (Before you say, well, non-listed numbers generate > more DA calls: DA calls go from 24 to 40 cents, plus they go > from first 5/3 free for residence/business to 3/0 free.) I may have mentioned this before, but the simplest way to get the equivalent of an unlisted number is to ask for the phone to be listed {without address} under your roommate's name of Zyagur Xeanamux. When someone calls asking for him, you know that it's a telemarketer. What, you mean you don't have a roommate by that name? Exactly ... Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 08:13:09 GMT Organization: Panix, NYC Some posters have asked what it meant when they tried making a long distance call and got back the recording "all circuits are busy, 418-25T" (or similar stuff). Well, in the OLD days, your LD call would get pushed along the route until it hit a switch or trunk "somewhere out there" which was busy. BUT, in the new modern age, your call is "held" at the local central office (or, perhaps, a centralized toll/long distance interface) until the entire rest of the path can be set up. Accordingly, if -anything- is wrong -amnywhere- from the office (either one) to your final destination, you will get a LOCALLY GENERATED recording. (Again, this might be at a somewhat distant toll switching station, but it'll be a LOT closer than it used to be). I've had this experience far too many times when calling from my area to places that, for some reason or another, had a partial disruption in trunk service, or had a sudden increase in traffic. For example, after the Florida hurricane, I tried to call some of my co-workers who had been sent down there, and kept getting "all circuits are busy ... 212-XT" with "212" being the area code UP HERE (NYC). As others have pointed out, certain long distance carriers are less likely to be jammed than others, but I'll refer back to them for the details. HOWEVER, that does remind me of some trouble I had fifteen or twenty years ago. From 11:00 pm till about 11:30, it was almost impossible tomake outgoing long distance phone calls from my neighborhood. After a LOT of arguing with NYTel, and finally tracking down some techies who understood their network, we figured out what was happening. The area I lived in was next to a university with lots of residential students. Many of whom would either call home, or other distant locations. Accordingly, the time vs. number of calls equation in this area was very different from that in more traditional localities. College age students, for example, are more likely to be awake at 11:00 pm, are more likely to hold off on making their calls until then, will tend to talk longer (????), etc., etc., etc. I'm sure anyone reading this can easily come up with many other reasons the standard phone queing formulas didn't work. Anyway, once they actually looked at blocked calls, they added a few more outgoing trunk line connections to the toll centers (i.e., they set it up to allow for more LD calls). Take care, dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 12:31:33 -0500 From: Doctor Math Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes say,halim s (ssay@prefect.cc.bellcore.com) wrote: > Does anyone know or could you tell me a reference for this "standard"? > I am sure some address generator software would have this algorithm. I have a postscript implementation of the algorithm; I used it to make a label generator for Avery 5262 label stock. It's a little hacked - for some reason it won't work with the zip code for my grandparents' house ... if there's interest I can submit it to the Digest. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 3 Jan 93 14:01:32 EST (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) Hey, I'm following up my own note. Isn't there a physical law or something to prevent this? > [Moderator's Note: But please note there is also something on the card > which provides for a so-called 'overnight limit'. The $100 when the network is down is a nice feature, but not one that is widely available. Around here, when the network goes down, machines put up the CLOSED sign. That's one of the reasons I have six ATM cards in my wallet from four different banks. Citibank machines in New York City at least used to have a similar feature. For a long time, over a year, someone who clearly had inside information was using an old invalid Citicard to make $100 withdrawals from machines all over the city when the machines were offline while their network nodes were down for maintenance. The maintenance schedule was deliberately erratic and quite secret. Had the guy used the card even once in an on-line machine the card would have been eaten and that would have been that. I never heard whether they managed to catch him. I'd think that it would have been straightforward to set up a sting to catch him in the act. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: I think the banks here which give money on trust when the network is down do have something called a 'negative listing' of cards which should not be honored in that way. Here in the Chicago area, the First National Bank operates the Cash Station computer (as well as their own, of course), so using one of their cards at one of their own machines is a bit different than using their card at a machine which is only on line occassionally, etc. Some machines here seem to only contact the main system once a day during the night. Those machines have a record of whatever the system told them from the night before, and they go by those figures all day. I know when I asked the Devon Bank about this, they specifically stated their cash station was NOT on line all the time. They can deal with their own customers records at all times; they get the rest of the records whenever they do. Clever people have found ways to get some float out of the cash machines over holiday periods, etc, knowing they won't actually see the transaction on their own account for two or three days in the event of a three day weekend. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 15:20:23 EST From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: Problems with Payphones at WPI (NET/AT&T) I think if you read the card on the phone it says that all COIN calls are handled by AT&T and all credit card calls are handled by another company. That really baffles me, I mean, if it's a New England Telephone payphone, with access to AT&T on coin calls, then why use someone else to handle credit card calls? Theory: NET wants to make some bucks ... sooo ... I'll bet if you traced down the company that handles those cc calls it'd come right back to NET. [Moderator's Note: Not so. Payphones do get randomly assigned to various LD carriers, but AT&T is the only LD carrier in a position to collect coins, due to their prior relationship with the Bells. I am told no one else wants the coin business; thus it stays with AT&T. None of the other carriers seem to think it is worth thier time to develop and install the needed equipment. That is the reason you always see AT&T handling the call where coins are concerned even if the default carrier for all other types (credit card, etc) is some other LC company. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Another Payphone Mystery? Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 02:49:29 GMT In article , JOHN SCHMIDT writes: [about a payphone that requested $2.00 in coin for an intra-state toll call, and then allowed the same call to be placed using a calling card for 85 cents.] > I thought charged calls were generally more expensive than cash > payphone calls, but then I rarely make long ... The coin rate is the operator-assisted rate. The calling-card rate is usually less than the operator-assisted rate. Intra-state calls usually cost far more (per mile) than inter-state calls. I'm not sure what carrier you were using, or whether your call crossed a LATA boundary. All of these affect the price. 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, 3 Jan 1993 17:02:33 -0600 Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud From: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Reply-To: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > I think you will find that historically with telco calling cards there > hasn't been a distinction made between a "non-secret" part, the first > ten digits, and a "secret" part, the last four. On my AT&T card, the entire number (including PIN) is stamped on the card in raised digits. Ben Cox thoth@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ From: armhold@dimacs.rutgers.edu (George Armhold) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... Date: 3 Jan 93 23:08:10 GMT Organization: DIMACS @ Rutgers University martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu writes: > Hear's the fix. Take a portable AM or FM radio and place it > near the computer. Tune around until you find a whine or buzz that > suits your ears. It should be possible to find a signal which varies > when the computer is doing something and stays relatively monotonous > when it is hung up or idling. I've often been able to "hear" a computer transfer data. While logged in from home I like to listen to a particular FM radio station that comes in very weakly. When I transfer a screenfull of data (eg ^L in emacs) I can hear a very noticable disturbance in the already weak FM signal. Sounds kind of like driving under a bridge w/ AM radio. This is with an (old) Amiga 1000 and ZyXEL 14.4 modem. Strangely, I never noticed this before with my old Avatex 1200 bps modem (same serial cable.) Hmm, I wonder if the baud rate is the variable here, or if the ZyXEL is not up to spec ... At RU, I worked with Sun 4/110s. They were networked via thin-net coax. I have pretty sensitive ears, and could always hear a high-pitched whine when lots of data went through the wire (opening an xterm, for example.) One thing that was neat about this is that whenever someone logged in to the workstation I was working on I could actually *hear* them log in. Nobody believed me of course. Whenever I tried to show it to someone they thought I was nuts. :-) George Internet: armhold@dimacs.rutgers.edu UUCP: {backbone}!rutgers!dimacs!armhold BITNET: armhold@PISCES.BITNET ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 18:18:11 -0500 (EST) From: Lyle_Seaman@transarc.com Subject: Re: Pocket Auto-Dialer? I too have been waiting for a "pocket databank" which incorporates an auto-dialer. The closest thing to it that I have yet seen is the Psion Series 3 "palmtop", but at $400 it's a bit too functional for my needs. Not too much, though, and the price will probably drop. One notch down from that is the Sharp EL-6260 Dialmaster Pocket Auto Dialer. According to the advertising text it: - Stores up to 450 names [short ones, probably - lws] and numbers - Features 12-character X 2-line display - Tone generator dials numbers - 2 search keys - Secret function - Calling card function - Back-up battery. Listed by J&R Music World at $55. ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing? Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 18:50:53 GMT >>> *65 turn on delivery of caller id (if you are subscribed) >>> *85 turn off delivery of caller id (why would anyone want to do this?) >> Because some phone companies charge for Caller-ID on a per-number- >> delivered basis? >> [Moderator's Note: IBT used to do that, but starting a few months ago >> they no longer charge for delivery over a certain number. One monthly So someone might want to turn it off if they don't normally exceed that number, or they're going on vacation for a good portion of a month and won't exceed the "certain number". (My incoming VOICE calls probably wouldn't exceed that number in a month, whatever it is.) >> fee pays for it all. Another oddity IMHO here is that call screening >> can be turned on with *60 and turned off with *80. This is despite the >> fact that while within the *60 menu of things to do, one can both add >> and remove numbers from the repertoire. If you can add or delete >> whatever you want there, why bother to have a command to turn it off? Individually adding and deleting 10 or 20 numbers takes a lot of time. (I still claim that for this service to replace Caller-ID in getting rid of telemarketers, the list needs to be able to hold 10 or 20 thousand numbers). Can you delete all the numbers and add them back later? This implies an ability to list all the numbers, including ones added with "screen out last caller". Can you do that? If so, the anti-Caller-ID folks will scream about that one. By the way, can you reliably load up your list with a modem or autodialer? In spite of certain modems with voice mail capability, you're not easily going to have voice recognition capability, and you'll have to put up with using blind pauses, "wait for bong", "wait for dial tone", "wait for quiet answer" and such which most modern modems have. Is there some way to load your list starting from an unknown state, again with a modem or autodialer? You can't if the menu items change numbers depending on whether you have numbers in the list, or if the tone sequence varies depending on whether you have numbers programmed (conditional "are you sure" prompts, for example). >> Perhaps it is because IBT is not marketing Call Screening as a >> permanent way to get rid of troublesome callers, but merely as a way >> to avoid certain people at certain times of day; although I cannot >> imagine be willing to chat with certain numbers on my list regardless >> of the time of day or occassion. Ditto the feature where you can list One way it could be used is to screen out somewhat over-enthusiastic callers from, say, your spouse's family except when your spouse is there. Or except when you have time to talk after the kids are asleep. These callers might even like it if it saves them LD charges on "sorry, s/he's not home yet" calls. You don't have to use Call Screening to get rid of telemarketers and other pests; it may not be very effective anyway if they have lots of lines. And not everyone has obscene callers bothering them. >> certain callers to get the red carpet with special ringing on your >> end; that too can be turned off, although if your boss is an important >> person to hear from at 3 PM, why wouldn't he be important at 3 AM? PAT] If you're using the distinctive ring pattern to ring the phone in your workshop (where you don't want to be disturbed except in emergencies), it's not going to be very effective to route calls there unless you're IN your workshop (which you probably won't be at 3AM). So you turn it on and off depending on where you are. By the way, who said the treatment you give callers on the list has to be "red carpet"? It could be just the opposite, as in asking certain deadbeats to pay their bills or contact your lawyer. You could also use a pre-arranged setup that calls from certain people during the day get voice, and calls after hours get the fax machine or modem. This may not be very good for businesses, but it might be for work-in-the-field or work-at-home employees. Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #7 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26055; 5 Jan 93 3:36 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09593 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:39:14 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23979 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:38:46 -0600 Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:38:46 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301050738.AA23979@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #8 TELECOM Digest Tue, 5 Jan 93 01:38:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 8 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson V&H Report January 1993 (David Esan) Worries About Privacy Could Tone Down Success of Caller ID (Boston Globe) Colorado Gets Caller ID (Richard Lucas) CNID on Answering Machines? (David H. Close) Need History/Stories re: Rotary Mechanism (Ken Blackney) Baby Bell Breakups (Paul Gatker) Spread Spectrum Regulations in Europe (Lester Baskin) Voice Mail Options (John Pettitt) Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Glenn F. Leavell) Operator Breaking Cellular Connection (Thomas K. Hinders) SS7 Links Fron CA to NY (Tim Gorman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: V&H Report January 1993 Date: 4 Jan 93 20:26:34 GMT Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY Once a quarter I receive the BellCore V&H tape. Using this information I can total the number of exchanges in each area code. The twenty most populous area codes are listed below. After the written text of this article I have included the count for each of the area codes, one sorted by NPA, the other sorted (in reverse) of the number of exchanges in a given NPA. The tape is dated 15 January 1993. I am not responsible for the information supplied in this tape. Yes, the date is several weeks out. The information will be current as of that date. It is distributed early so that it can loaded by that date. I have not included the following in my counts of exchanges: - NXX's that are not dialable by a standard user (ie nxx's that begin with a 1 or 0). - Mexican exchanges in the 52? series of area codes. I've got them, you can dial them with 011, but they're not really NPAs. - Exchanges that are non-dialable in the 88? series of area codes. I've got those also, but you can't dial them, so I'm not including them. This tape includes information for the new NPA's 909 and 210. 905 in Toronto, and 810 in Detroit have not appeared yet. The fields are: ------------ rank last in October, 1992 213: 736 (1, 7) area code --^^^ ^^^ ^------- number of new exchanges |-------------- total number of exchanges 301: 751 ( 1, 7) 416: 678 ( 6, 4) 206: 642 (11, 7) 604: 582 (20, 13) 512: 703 ( 3, 2) 919: 672 ( 8, 12) 708: 634 (14, 25) 216: 579 (19, 8) 212: 700 ( 4, 3) 215: 660 (10, 11) 713: 627 (13, 10) 503: 574 (18, 3) 313: 680 ( 7, 12) 714: 656 ( 9, 2) 703: 610 (16, 7) 803: 564 (11, xx) 205: 680 ( 5, 4) 602: 644 (12, 9) 403: 605 (15, 1) 303: 563 (11, xx) Of the top 20 we know: 1. 301 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 2. 512 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 3. 212 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split, and the movement of the Bronx to 718. 4. 313 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 6. 416 - split soon to be in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 9. 714 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. Given all of that, the NPA that is largest and is not splitting nor has plans (at this time) to split, is 205 in Alabama. Other NPAs that are candidates for a split include eastern North Carolina (714), Philadelphia (215), and 602 (Arizona). The 3 smallest NPA's were and remain : 906: 117 - Michigan's Upper Peninsula (+1 new exchange) 807: 105 - Western Ontario (No change) 917: 104 - The new NYC NPA (+40 new exchanges) A new statistic that I have added to this report is percentage growth. I have taken the difference between the number of exchanges in January and October, and divided by the number in January and multiplied by 100. In math notation that would be: ((October # - January #)/January #)*100 The top ten are: 917 62.50 (Growth of new NYC NPA) 210 6.47 (Growth of new Texas NPA) 909 5.03 (Growth of new California NPA) 305 4.37 (Western Florida, rapid growth area) 708 4.10 (Chicago Suburbs, rapid growth) 704 3.42 (Western North Carolina) 312 3.41 (Chicago City) 702 3.16 (Nevada) 310 3.05 (Growth of new Los Angeles NPA) 809 2.97 (Growth of the Caribbean) The only NPAs to be in last reports top ten and this reports top ten are: 310, 708 All the NPAs and the number of nxx's in each are listed below: 301: 751 501: 553 201: 442 502: 365 715: 321 814: 268 512: 703 314: 547 412: 441 914: 362 819: 314 315: 266 212: 700 404: 543 614: 432 704: 362 815: 313 806: 264 313: 680 813: 537 515: 431 406: 361 915: 312 309: 263 205: 680 405: 534 407: 420 701: 357 805: 300 709: 261 416: 678 904: 532 402: 418 801: 356 208: 299 608: 254 919: 672 619: 531 601: 417 605: 356 613: 298 509: 251 215: 660 305: 525 415: 414 519: 355 609: 298 603: 243 714: 656 817: 523 410: 414 504: 354 918: 296 901: 232 602: 644 203: 515 818: 411 204: 352 218: 296 308: 210 206: 642 804: 505 210: 411 207: 348 409: 295 417: 206 708: 634 514: 497 617: 408 912: 347 706: 294 707: 197 713: 627 718: 495 907: 401 908: 347 812: 286 802: 181 703: 610 414: 494 616: 400 510: 346 712: 286 506: 179 403: 605 717: 493 716: 398 419: 344 202: 284 607: 176 604: 582 312: 485 516: 394 304: 344 903: 282 719: 174 216: 579 513: 474 508: 389 318: 343 606: 275 307: 169 503: 574 310: 473 316: 376 319: 339 808: 274 401: 139 803: 564 816: 469 219: 373 517: 338 507: 273 413: 133 303: 563 317: 460 213: 373 618: 335 705: 272 302: 127 612: 561 306: 453 217: 370 408: 334 909: 271 906: 117 615: 560 916: 450 418: 367 505: 329 902: 271 807: 105 214: 554 913: 445 209: 367 702: 326 518: 270 917: 104 809: 553 David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 00:25:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Worries About Privacy Could Tone Down Success of CID From the 1/4/93 {Boston Globe} Worries about privacy could tone down success of Caller ID Jonathan Yenkin Associated Press Boston - Caller ID, a phone service touted as an electronic peephole to let customers see who's calling, is making its way around the country. But it may not become a ringing success because of privacy worries. The service, which displays the number and sometimes even the name of the caller, is available in more than 20 states and has won praise for deterring obscene and annoying phone calls. But because of privacy concerns, many states have slapped on restrictions that phone companies fear will undercut the service's value. "At what point does the subscriber say, 'It's not worth it anymore?' I don't know," said Clifton Metcalf, a spokesman for Southern Bell in North Carolina. "We're going to find out." The restrictions imposed by utility regulators allow callers to block their numbers from appearing on a display unit by the phone. This can be done by pressing certain keys when making each call, or, in some states, by having the line blocked off entirely from being decoded by Caller ID. After the state imposed such restrictions in Massachusetts, New England Telephone officials found them so onerous that they initially withdrew their plans to offer the service. Susan Butta, a spokeswoman for New England Telephone, said executives worried the restrictions might make the service harder to sell. They eventually changed their minds and decided to try it. U.S. West Communications, which serves more than a dozen states, decided to include the blocking options in its proposals to utility regulators, not waiting for officials to order them, said Gwen Law, a company project manager. Consumer advocates and civil liberties groups say such restrictions are necessary. In Pennsylvania, the state Supreme Court ruled this year [sic] that Caller ID - without the blocking options - violated the state wiretap law. Critics often point to battered women or undercover police officers as examples of people who need to keep their phone numbers secret. "There are some people for whom the risk of forgetting to block is very great," said Mark Cooper, research director for the Consumer Federation of America. But New Jersey Bell, which pioneered Caller ID in the late 1980s, doesn't offer any blocking, and fewer than 1 percent of customers have complained about phone numbers leaking out, said company spokesman James W. Carrigan. On the other hand, Carrigan said the service has helped deter nuisance calls. About 200,000 New Jersey Bell customers, or 4.6 percent, subscribe to Caller ID. That compares with a 28 percent acceptance rate for Call Waiting, which allows customers to receive more than one call at the same time. But Carrigan insisted customers in his state who don't have Caller ID still benefit, "because the other people don't know whether you have the service, so they won't make that (harassing) call." In some places, phone companies say they are succeeding with the service despite the restrictions. Centel Corp. in Las Vegas, which serves southern Nevada, offers the blocking options and still has more than 10 percent of its customers subscribing. Dianna Fyke, a marketing manager for Centel, said there were some initial fears, but once people get accustomed to the service it becomes "a matter of fact thing." ------------------------------ From: Richard Lucas Subject: Colorado Gets Caller ID Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 21:23:42 MST Caller ID is officially available in Colorado today. My wife finally got through to the business office this evening to order it for us, after busy signals on attempts during the day. While we are normally served by the Loveland business office, our call ended up being answered by the Colorado Springs business office (different area code and LATA). The rep said that calls had been non-stop all day, with virtually every other call involving an order for the Caller ID service. The best gauge of consumer opinion is how they vote with their dollars, not with their words. If Colorado's first-day results can be generalized to other areas, then John Higdon is quite correct that the PUC decision in California gives the voices of a few more weight than the desires of the majority. Rick Lucas (rlucas@bvsd.co.edu) Debate Coach, Fairview HS, Boulder, CO [Moderator's Note: When Caller-ID officially started here in Chicago a couple years ago, telco had a huge number of orders the first few days. It is still one of the more popular services offered by IBT. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) Subject: CNID on Answering Machines? Date: 5 Jan 1993 05:09:00 GMT Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena I find the current discussion of CNID features on modems very interesting. But, being in the market for a new answering machine, I want to know if there are any which store CNID, if received, and play it back when messages are retrieved. Or are there other techniques available? Anybody? Dave Close, dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu, BS'66 Ec ------------------------------ From: Ken.Blackney@noc.ocs.drexel.edu (Ken Blackney) Subject: Need History/Stories re: Rotary Mechanism Date: 4 Jan 93 21:05:28 GMT Organization: Drexel Univ -- Telecom & Networking I am publishing the 93 edition of Drexel University's telephone directory. The cover artwork shows a rotary phone dial and a handset. I would like some stories (more on the fun side than the technical side) of the dial (when it started, how it worked, how many still used, etc) to include in an "About the cover art" section inside the directory. Thanks much, Ken ------------------------------ From: paul@panix.com (Paul Gatker) Subject: Baby Bell Breakups Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:44:06 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC I heard an interesting theory regarding investing in the Baby Bells. The theory was that they could be breaking up ala AT&T, and in so doing, the parts would be much more valuable than the present whole companies. This due to the rapidly exploding telecom revolution. The theory sounds very reasonable to me. Any other info, data, on this? paul@panix.com COMPULITE GRAPHICS Brooklyn NY usa Design & Consultation ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 12:43:11 +0200 (IST) From: baskin lester Subject: Spread Spectrum Regulations in Europe As part of a study at the Graduate School of Business Administration, Tel Aviv University we need information regarding SPREAD SPECTRUM REGULATIONS in EUROPE. Can anyone on this list speak to this subject or point to sources of information or point to an expert in this field? Any assistance in this matter would be much appreciated. Thank you in advance. Please respond directly to me as I am not a member of this list. Lester Baskin Internet: whart01@ccsg.tau.ac.il ------------------------------ From: jpp@StarConn.com (John Pettitt) Subject: Voice Mail Options Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 16:12:47 PST With my startup moving along, I now have an office and since I can't afford or justify a receptionist I am going to get voice mail (horrid as it is I don't have a lot of option). So the question is: Should I get a voice mail card for a PC (Nat Semi has an interesting looking card that does voice/data/fax ($229 in the local Comp USA) or do I go with the Pac Bell offering? Comments suggestions etc, either way most welcome. BTW If you know anybody who has 500K to invest in a software startup let me know :-) (for the legal freaks this is not an offer to sell securities :-) John Pettitt Mail: jpp@StarConn.com CEO, Dolmus Inc. Voice: +1 415 967 UNIX Fax: +1 415 967 8682 ------------------------------ From: glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu (Glenn F. Leavell) Subject: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:20:49 GMT It seems that I've seen discussion on the following topic in the TELECOM Digest before, but I can't remember the answer or find anything relevant in the archive index. My parents live in Mississippi and get their local phone service from South Central Bell. According to my parents, the bells in their phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM. They say that the ping almost always occurs around the same time, but that on certain nights it may not occur until close to midnight. They've called South Central Bell about this, and they were told that the ping was NOT occuring due to anything that the phone company was doing. By calling my parents number, I have not been able to find a way to duplicate the ping myself -- I always end up creating at least one full ring. What is the likely cause of this ping? Is it possible that some individual is doing it as an annoyance, or is it more likely a problem from within the phone system? Thank you. Glenn Leavell University of Georgia glenn@creator.ucns.uga.edu 706-542-5110 University Computing and Networking Services, Athens, GA 30602-1911 ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jan 93 07:40:15-0800 From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com Subject: Operator Breaking Cellular Connection I was watching the movie Patriot Games this past week. In it our hero Harrison Ford (aka Dr Ryan), on his cellular phone, asks the operator to break into his wife's cellular phone connection. The operator tells him this is not possible, he has to wait till she hangs up. Although the cellular connections are not "static" like land-lines it seems to me that SOMEONE could have broken in. Happy New Year to all the Telecom readers. Thomas K Hinders Martin Marietta Computing Standards 4795 Meadow Wood Lane Chantilly, VA 22021 703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f) [Moderator's Note: Most likely some person on the technical staff at the cellular company could have done it by going in on the desired line at the switch, but the telco operator could not do so. It is much like asking the telco operator to cut in on a conversation between two PBX stations. The local PBX operator is the one to ask. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 04 Jan 93 10:32:07 EST From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY John Higdon writes: > Bob Yazz writes: >> You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, do you >> John? The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period. I >> can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac Bell over this. > But the PUC cannot order this, just as it cannot prevent any carrier > from passing realtime ANI to end users. In SS7, the calling number is > ALWAYS transmitted as part of the data packet, although there is a bit > that identifies it as a "blocked" number if such is the case. Actually the PUC could order this and make it stand. The Network Interconnect package needed to allow SS7 interconection between the LEC and the IXC's makes provision for the calling number to be deleted from any IAM message sent to the IXC. This is true in every central office switch type I am aware of. This includes NTI, AT&T, and Ericsson. SWBT policy is that this feature is invoked in all central offices with SS7 interconnection to IXC's until calling number delivery is tariffed and sold in that CO and all subscribers have been fully informed (through bill inserts, etc.) of the impacts they will see. So the PUC could order this be done in PB-land and also require that PB negotiate with the switch vendors to insure the capability is retained from this day forward. Tim Gorman - SWBT *opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence* ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #8 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03854; 5 Jan 93 6:15 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21486 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:20:47 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00519 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:20:09 -0600 Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:20:09 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301050920.AA00519@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #9 TELECOM Digest Tue, 5 Jan 93 03:20:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 9 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cellular Modems (was Cellular RJ-11 Jacks) (Steve Pershing) Motorola Flip Fone Won't Reprogram (Jason Rogers) Part 68 - Just the FAQs (Rob Bailey) [TDR] DISA Yaks to FCC on PCS (Paul Robinson) Cellular One Off-Peak vs SWBMS Off Peak (Mark Earle) AC 215/610 Split (Bob Kupiec) Prepaid Card Phones vs. COCOTs (Peter Capek) Car (*not* Personal) Cell Phone Rcommendations? (Andrew Klossner) Prodigy <> Internet (jdelancy@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil) USA to UK Clear Calls (Richard Spence) Automated Sales Calls (Ray Normandeau) Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery (Tom Lahey) Residential vs Business LD (was All Circuits Are Busy ...) (Peng Hwa) 1A ESS Master Scanner Correction (Alan L. Varney) Reference for "Tragedy of the Commons" Article (Jim Haynes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Cellular Modems (was Cellular RJ-11 Jacks) From: sp@questor.org (Steve Pershing) Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 23:17:40 PST Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: +1 604 681 0670 In article , dsjohns@uswnvg.com (Dwight Johns) writes: > Many of the newer cellular phones out there have (oh, what's a good > politicaly correct term) less than fully functioning RJ-11 jack on > Now my only complaint is that I can't go over 1200 baud on a > cellular connection and that I drop carrier whenever I handoff. ZyXEL's modems are capable of working on a cellular connexion. They have a proprietary "cellular mode" which handles cell hand-offs easily. If you are looking for data on these modems, we have most of their spec sheets scanned in as 300x300dpi TIFF images, which are ZOO-compressed. If you send a message to: mail-server@questor.org with the first lines in the body of text being: help dir files you should get enough info back to get you started. (We also have data sheets on Telebits, and a neat little PC-based EPROM programmer.) Best regards from snowy Vancouver, B.C. (yes! ...SNOWY!) Steve Pershing, SysAdmin The QUESTOR Project FREE access to Environ, Sci, Med, & AIDS news, and more. [also UUCP] on a ZyXEL-1496S v.42bis, v.32bis, v.33, up to 16,800bps. -=- -=- -=- -=- Fones: (+1 604) Data: 681-0670 Telefax: 682-6160 Voice: 682-6659 ------------------------------ Subject: Motorola Flip Fone Won't Reprogram From: jrogers@questor.org (Jason Rogers) Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 23:02:08 PST Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: +1 604 681 0670 Well, I bit the bullet and bought a nice little Beige Motorola flip-fone from a shady fellow at a low price. I wanted one just to be able to take it apart and see the works inside, and to be able to use it for 911 in case of emergencies. It took me about 20 minutes to figure out the lock code, and I was in luck as the factory six-digit security code was still the default. This particular phone seems to be the cheapest flip-fone of the Motorola line. It is gray in color, has a seven-digit green, seven-segment LED display, and has "In Use", "No Svc" and "Roam" indicators. The Touch pad is the usual 12 buttons, with two rows of four control buttons each, labelled: Rcl Sto Clr Snd Pwr Vol Lock End I have had it apart. Nice construction ... all surface mount components, lots of RF ground fingers, etc. I managed to re-program the unit a couple of times by entering the initial programming sequence (STO, #, Security Code entered 2x, RCL). Well, it seems to have stopped there, and won't reprogram any more. Manuals for such phones seem to indicate that there is a finite limit on the reprogramming, and after a number of tries it will have to be reset by a service person. Can anyone tell me how to re-enable reprogramming?? Many thanks in advance. (A tech manual would probably be an asset!) :-) Jason Rogers (jrogers@questor.org) | QUESTOR: Free Dial-in Public Access to Usenet Health, Medical News | | & AIDS forums, and Info on Global Environment at +1 604 681 0670. | [Moderator's Note: By setting a finite number of times the phone can be re-programmed, Motorola is trying to discourage people like yourself from buying phones from other shady characters (did I mean to insert the word 'other' back there?). When you run out of attempts, then you have to take the phone to a dealer, where it shows up on his hot list of stolen phones and he whispers to the guy at the counter to try and stall you while he calls the police from the back room. :) But, as they say, knowledge is power: you can be your own service technician and save yourself the potential for embarassment when the clerks at the cell phone dealership snicker as the police lead you away. If your Motorola phone has a 25 pin connector to the battery, then it is likely that pin 21 is what they call the 'manual test line'. By tying pin 21 low, the phone goes into 'local test mode' and some additional reprogramming can be done, including the resetting of that register which keeps track of how often you have hacked at or tried to phreak with the instrument. As luck would have it, pin 21's neighbor, pin 20 happens to be ground. *Carefully* solder a little wire with a micro-mini push off/on switch in the middle between pins 20-21 (be sure the pins are the same on your unit, of course). Install the battery and clicking the switch on or off should take you in and out of test mode. You'll get a screen display something like this: #??#. You fill in the ?? part. I think register 32 re-initializes the non-volatile memory (sets everything to zeros). DO NOT turn off the phone until the normal display returns. The phone may sit there and do nothing for upwards a minute ... just wait it out. You should be back in business for a few more hacking and phreaking attempts. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 05 Jan 93 01:38:59 EST From: Rob Bailey, WM8S <74007.303@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Part 68 - Just the FAQs This has got to be a FAQ, but I can't find it anywhere. I know I've seen it asked before, but I've never seen an authoritative reply: What certification is REQUIRED before a company can sell a device that is intended to be attached to the public switched service network? I.e., if I was going to build and sell a touch-tone interface or a modem of some sort, would I have to get Part 68 type acceptance certification? Could I just make the device according to part 68 requirements, of do I actually need to pay somebody to prove to the FCC that the device meets those specifications? Do I need to register the device with the FCC? Attach an REN to the device? Who performs such certification (if it's required)? How much is it? How long does it take? Ad nauseum ... isn't there a book somewhere called "How to get a device Part 68 approved" or something? Finally, another question I've seen asked thousands of times: it's completely unreasonable to expect me to pay the fortune the federal government wants for a printed copy of Part 68; is it on-line somewhere free? Has anyone gone through this process that can shed some light? Toby? Rob 74007.303@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 18:41:26 EST Subject: [TDR] DISA Yaks to FCC on PCS "DISA yaks to FCC on PCS" (Gee, I've always wanted to do a 'Variety' style headline. :) ) Article Summary Government Computer News, January 4, 1993, Page 38 This is a summary of an article about a technology you've probably never seen, complained about by an agency you've probably never heard of. In an article titled "Defense agency wants PCS voice services in public domain", author S. A. Marud tells how the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) has jumped into the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) inquiry into the standards to be set on the operation of the startup Personal Communications Services (PCS) industry. PCS is a wireless digital technology which operates at 2 gigahertz. Cellular is analog. Also, one advantage of the service is that a number can be assigned to a person, not to a telephone. Two groups in DISA, the Federal Wireless Services User Forum (FWSUF) and the Interagency Cellular Radio Working Group (ICRWG) were the impetus for filing comments. They want to be certain that PCS supports at least Group 3 / Group 4 Fax, paging, images, and voice and data encrypted with an STU-III device. i.e. that a group 3 fax modem should work the same whether it's plugged into a wall jack or a PCS phone. PCS should also support dialing "0" for Operator and 911 for Emergency. ICRWG wants there to be two nationwide carriers for PCS, or in the alternative, at least one frequency block reserved nationally to one carrier and the rest awarded to local carriers. DISA's concerns on National Security and Emergency Preparedness makes it want certain basic services (Such as area code 710?) to be part of the new system, and that at least voice services to be available through the public switched (read local telco, AT&T, FTS-2000, MCI etc.) network. The systems should be made to be interoperable (meaning the phone you use in Dallas should also work in Kansas City, Chicago, New York and Los Angeles), either from the start or soon after some industry standards can be developed. DISA would also prefer that PCS licenses be issued for large areas if no nationwide carrier(s) are authorized. DISA is worried that PCS may be declared to be "private carriers" which means that the government cannot mandate that they be part of the Telecommunications Priority System (TSP) which allows the government to sieze telephone lines. TSP was invoked by the federal government for more than 4000 circuits and services during Hurricane Andrew. Certain industry groups are watching the rulemaking process on PCS, including the Wireless Information Network Forum (which represents computer and communications companies including Apple, AT&T & IBM), Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) (guess who they represent). CTIA is worried that the FCC might decide that PCS license won't be issued to a cellular operator in the same area. A decision on how the PCS industry is to be structured is expected from the FCC sometime in Fall 1993. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 21:00:45 -0600 From: mearle@cgull.ccsu.edu (Mark Earle) Subject: Cellular One Off-Peak vs SWBMS Off Peak Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, the 'B' carrier for cellular phones in most of Texas, offeres a variety of monthly plans and costs. These seem to be market taylored. For instance, in DFW there isn't a readily accessable off peak plan with zero cents per air minute. In many smaller markets, including Corpus Christi, there is such a plan available. I pay $40/month (plus taxes, $5 for voicemail on 3rd ring/no ans). Cellular One announced via a full page ad, radio spots, and a TV spot, their version of off peak. $40/month 240 minutes "free" additional off peak minutes 9 cents includes 15 "free" peak minutes, additional peak minutes 15 cents. [SWBMS with the above is 40 cents / min peak, no "free" minutes]. Off peak is 8 p.m. local through 7 a.m., plus all day Saturday / Sunday, and four holidays (Easter, 4th July, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and this year, they included New Year's Day.) In some ways the C1 plan looks better, as the peak minutes are cheaper, and really, 240 "free" off peak minutes is a lot of talking. I rarely run up more than 60 or so off peak minutes, and many of those are because at 0.00/min, who cares? I probably won't change carriers now (although I could next month) mainly because of the hassles of changing the number people use to get me. As yet, I'm unsure if the C1 plan includes "features". SWBMS includes CW, CF, 3W, and detailed billing in the above plan. * In DFW and other large market cities, SWBMS offers the zero - peak "Advantage" plan, but only to corporate or group buyers. Sometimes individuals can "push" and get this plan. In Corpus, we can get it simply by agreeing to a 1 year service commitment. mearle@cgull.ccsu.edu 73117.351@compuserve.com Mark Earle 1:160/50 ------------------------------ From: beyonet!olwejo!bob@cs.widener.edu (Bob Kupiec) Subject: AC 215/610 Split Reply-To: olwejo!bob@uunet.UU.NET Organization: Olwejo - Private UNIX System Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 04:35:13 GMT I just heard on the news today that Bell of Pennsylvania will announce an Area Code split in AC 215. Supposedly, in 1994 there will be a split to AC 610 that will separate Philadelphia with its suburbs. Most of Philadelphia will continue with 215 while the suburbs will pick up 610. I knew this would happen soon. Seems like it's here right now! Bob Kupiec, N3MML Internet: kupiec@hp800.lasalle.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 01:40:09 EST From: capek@watson.ibm.com Subject: Prepaid Card Phones vs. COCOTs Reading the discussion here recently about COCOTs and the cost to a premises owner of a LEC coin phone, I wonder if these economics will change when prepaid card access phones become common. I would guess that such phones (common in Europe for years, but only just starting to be available in New York, and nowhere else in the US that I know of) would make it possible for an LEC to provide a card phone which is less subject to vandalism (due to the lack of a coin box) and requires less service (again, no coin box to empty). Does anyone have any facts about this? Peter Capek ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 13:39:40 PST Subject: Car (*not* Personal) Cell Phone Recommendations? Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon There was a time when the only cell phones were hard-wired into a car. My wife wants one of these for the car she's buying: she never wants to take it away from the car, and she wants it to turn on whenever the car is started. She doesn't want to mount a hand-held or drop in a transportable bag phone. Any recommendations? Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 15:48:56 EST From: jdelancy@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil Subject: Prodigy <> Internet About a month or so ago, someone posted that a gateway for Email from Internet to/from Prodigy would probably be in business by Christmas. Anyone have the latest status on that "activation"? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 19:34 GMT From: Richard Spence Subject: USA to UK Clear Calls Reply-To: rspence@cix.compulink.co.uk I know that it is possible to get a 'digital line' to the USA by using a different dialing code from the UK. This results in a full 64kbps line being made available for ISDN terminal to ISDN terminal calls. It must be possible to do the same operation from the USA, but I don't know the code. Does anybody out there know? Just for interest the code from the UK would be 0101 aaa nnnnnn for a 'normal' line and 01001 aaa nnnnnnn for an ISDN line. Thanks, Richard Spence rspence@cix.compulink.co.uk CompuServe: 100112,304 >>>MATRIX version 1.21e ------------------------------ Subject: Automated Sales Calls From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 3 Jan 93 14:18:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Contact Ray Normandeau 718 392-1267 Download this and other "off-beat" items by computer modem from Normandeau Newswire on Invention Factory BBS 212-274-8110 Updated January 3, 1993 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-nnnn 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 540-0100, 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 Forest Hills answering service for 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. We know, we tried! ------------------------------ From: toml@batfish.attmail.com Date: 3 Jan 93 21:46:32 GMT Subject: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery I've recently started getting telecom off the Internet via AT&T mail. (currently my only access to the Internet). I just did a quick calculation and each issue costs me in the range of $2.05!!! While I've found the content to be very educational and worth far in excess of the $2.05 per issue, I'm afraid that my e-mail budget is about to go bust! Does anyone know how I can get an Internet feed via dial-up? (with something less than a $0.95 for the first 3000 characters and .05 per 1000 after that?) I'll keep watching for a couple of more days! Thanks in advance, Tom Lahey - toml!batfish@attmail.com (for now!) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 11:04:34 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Residential vs Business LD (was All Circuits Are Busy...) Dave Ptasnik wrote: > With a higher percentage of business usage, most OCCs have very > litte traffic on their switches at nights, on weekends, and > holidays. The trunks that are busily full during the day sit idle. > We used periodically to get directives from our switch manager > to sell more residential accounts, and try to busy up the lines > at night a little more. I am trying to develop a theory around the facts provided above to argue that there are limits to competition in the long-distance market. (Ok, I know I'm treading on sacred grounds here.) One of my arguments is that for true long-distance competition -- along the line of the USA model -- vs phony LD competition as in UK, there must be a diversity of users: both residential and business. As Dave noted, the residential users typically call in the evenings, when trunks are idle. While Dave notes the difficulty of finding residential users with more than $50 in LD charges, I am finding difficulty obtaining the relevant data to prove the point. I'm still developing the idea so inputs sans flames are welcome. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 16:23:18 CST From: varney@ihlpl.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: 1A ESS Master Scanner Correction Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In response to an article from bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler), I wrote: > If you are MOST curious (i.e., willing to spend money), you > should know that almost all the hardware (and some software, tools, > testing details, etc.) associated with 1/1A ESS(tm) switches is > described at a high level in two special issues of the Bell Labs > Technical Journal (BSTJ), one on the 1 ESS switch, and a later one that > describes the 1A Processor (used in both 1A ESS and 4ESS(tm) switches). > "No. 1 Electronic Switching System", BSTJ, Vol. 43 No. 5, > September 1964, Parts 1 & 2. > "The 1A Processor", BSTJ, Vol. 43 No. 5, February 1977. Terry Kennedy has (rightly) questioned the Volume numbers ... the second reference should be: "The 1A Processor", BSTJ, Vol. 56 No. 2, February 1977. Al Varney -- just MY mistake ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 23:07:06 -0800 Subject: Reference for "Tragedy of the Commons" Article Several people have asked for the reference for the Garret Hardin "Tragedy of the Commons" article that I mentioned in connection with telemarketing. The reference is: {Science Magazine} (Amer Assn for the Advancement of Science) vol 162, p 1243, 13 December 1968 The axe Hardin was grinding in writing the article was population control; but the argument is widely applicable. It goes roughly like this. Suppose there is a meadow which produces enough grass to feed 1000 cows. Suppose it is used in common by 100 farmers, each with 10 cows. Now if a farmer acquires an extra cow he has increased his wealth by 10%, while each of the 1001 cows is affected by a food shortage of only 0.1%. Hence the temptation is overwhelming to stick in an extra cow or two. If only one farmer did this the effect would be practically insignificant; but when all the farmers give in to this temptation all the cows suffer from malnutrition as the meadow becomes seriously overgrazed. [Moderator's Note: This is the essence of what many people tried to explain years ago regards so-called 'victimless crimes'. In some situations the process of victimization is very slow -- so slow as to be almost indiscernable; in fact we see no immediate victim and claim therefore there must not be one. Instead of the personal discipline in our lives needed to make society as a whole function well, each of us says, 'well, this one little thing won't hurt, there are no victims.' After a few months, years or decades, these little (I like to call them termites in our conciousness) pecadillos each of us practice in our lives have eaten away enough of our society that there is a serious erosion we are unable to stop. Bit by bit, piece by piece until it all collapses like a rotting beach house on the ocean hit by the tides day after day. The USA in the 1990's is proof of this. The termites have been feasting for years, and the foundation is almost gone. Yes, I am guilty of this same sloth also. Old I grew too soon and wise too late. :( PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #9 ****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12238; 6 Jan 93 18:36 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21459 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:30:50 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09661 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:30:02 -0600 Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:30:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301062230.AA09661@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #10 TELECOM Digest Wed, 6 Jan 93 16:30:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 10 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson North Carolina Area Code 919 to Split Into 919 and 910 (Bob Goudreau) 800 Number Troubles (Mike McNally) 976 Fraud in Toronto (Tony Harminc) Asia-Pacific Engineering Journal - Call For Papers (Chua Kee Chaing) Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? (lunatix!chelf@ms.uky.edu) UUCP Through Multiple Carriers (Michael Hamilton) Hunt Groups (Rob Boudrie) Does a CNID Device List Exist? (Don Wegeng) A Minor Nit With the Telecom FAQ (Pat Turner) Colorado Gets Caller ID (Tim Gorman) Do-It-Yourself Caller ID (Thomas K. Hinders) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:55:48 -0500 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: North Carolina Area Code 919 to Split Into 919 and 910 David Esan, in the January V&H report, notes: > Other NPAs that are candidates for a split include eastern North > Carolina (714) [sic], Philadelphia (215), and 602 (Arizona). Someone else recently posted an article describing 215's split into 215 and 610. Well, we can now add 919 (which is what Dave *meant* to say above when describing the crowded area code that covers all of eastern and northern North Carolina; 704 covers just the southwestern portion of the state) to the list of splitters. Today's _News_&_Observer_ (Raleigh's daily) announces that a new area code 910 will be created out of 919 later this year. The new area will encompass the northwestern and north-central areas of the state (including the "Triad" area of Greensboro, Winston Salem and High Point), and will cut a diagonal corridor through the middle of the state on its way to the coast, where it will also pick up the entire southeastern portion (including Wilmington and Fayetteville). The 919 code will be reduced to the central and northeastern parts of North Carolina, starting at Sanford and stretching north and east to include the Resarch Triangle (Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill) area all the way to the Outer Banks and the eastern part of the Virginia border. The "permissive dialing" phase (when 910 is first activated, but when 919 will still also work for 910 numbers) will begin November 14th of this year. The cutover will be complete on February 13, 1994, when 910 will be required for all numbers in the new area. The newspaper article notes that "... it is expected that the 910 area code will cause some confusion because it is so similar to 919". (Incidentally, has any area code split ever used a new code so similar to the old one?) Of course, we TELECOM Digest readers know the reason for this, and so does the article, which mentions that "... the 910 area code was the only one available to North Carolina." So that's it folks: all the N10 area codes have now been exhausted, given that the US government is apparently not going to relinquish its secretive 710 code. If there are any other splits within the NANP before the NXX era begins next year, they'll have to burn one of the N11 or N00 codes. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: mcnally@wsl.dec.com (Mike McNally) Subject: 800 Number Troubles Date: 6 Jan 93 19:16:15 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Palo Alto, CA Here's something a little strange, to me anyway. I've been trying all morning to call Equifax and find out how to get a copy of my credit information. I got through once to their robo-phone system, and after about five minutes of menu navigation it just dropped me in the middle of a recorded message. Fine. I tried to call back, however, and got the message "Due to technical difficulties, we cannot complete your call. Please try again later." Hmm. I repeatedly dialed and got the same result. The AT&T operators told me that the number is an MCI number, and they directed me to MCI 800 service (888-1800). There, I was told that the number was indeed working, but that the customer (Equifax) had set up the account such that only 45% of the calls originating rom my area code (415) would succeed. The rest get the "technical difficulties" message. Two separate MCI people told me this same thing. Well gee, I'm a little miffed at this setup; why don't I just get a busy signal? MCI would save themselves a lot of time if they'd do that instead of the clearly bogus message; if I got a busy signal, I would interpret that to mean that my call couldn't get through because the capacity had been exhausted. Alternatively, the message could tell me exactly what's going on: "We're sorry, but you lose; we only accept 45% of the calls from area code 415, and you're in the unlucky 55%." Mike + Software + Digital Equipment + Western Software + mcnally@ McNally + Laborer + Corporation + Laboratory + wsl.dec.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Jan 93 00:56:39 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: 976 Fraud in Toronto This past November, a company I consult for had three unauthorized calls to (416) 976-9467 made on one of its lines. Each call was one minute long and was billed at $24. Thinking back, we remember the likely perpetrator -- a man claiming to be serving legal papers on someone who supposedly used to work at the office address. There were several small discrepancies to his story, but he seemed just as puzzled as we were. He asked to use the phone, and I remember that he did a lot of dialing, but when challenged he showed a pager with display and claimed he was calling his voicemail. Bell Canada has agreed to remove the charges, but will not tell us the name of the owner of this number. We are not eager to pursue it with the police, because of the small amount of the fraud, but we are concerned that this may be part of an organized scam (else how would the 'process server' benefit?) and others may also have been hit. The $24 charge is quite a bit higher than the usual sex and sleaze lines which -- according to the ads -- are mostly $10. We have cleaned up our act for handling of future visitors who want to use the phone (for now we dial it, and toll restrictors are coming soon), but I would like 1) suggestions for how to pursue this, and 2) to hear from anyone else in 416 who has been hit with calls to this number. Perhaps someone in an adjacent NPA could dial it and let me know who answers. Many thanks. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: eleckc@nuscc.nus.sg (Chua Kee Chaing (Dr)) Subject: Asia-Pacific Engineering Journal - Call For Papers Organization: National University of Singapore Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 02:11:13 GMT ASIA-PACIFIC ENGINEERING JOURNAL PART A - ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING December 1993 Issue on Communications Engineering CALL FOR PAPERS The Asia-Pacific Engineering Journal (APEJ) provides within the rapidly changing Asia-Pacific region a unique source of information on current international research activities and trends in technology. It aims to keep its readers fully briefed with major papers, reports and reviews on state-of-the-art technologies and products. The journal is published in separate parts that cover the disciplines of Electrical, Mechanical, Civil, Chemical and Industrial Engineering. Part A is devoted to Electrical Engineering, and covers the four main areas of Communications Engineering, Computer Engineering, Control and Automation, and Microelectronics. The December 1993 issue of Part A of the APEJ is devoted to Communications Engineering. The issue will be a special issue concentrating on the field of High-Speed Networking, and original contributions in all aspects of this field of research are now solicited. In particular, relevant topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: * Broadband ISDN and ATM networks * Gigabit/s networking * Lightwave networks * High-speed transport protocols * Management of high-speed networks * Flow and congestion control in high-speed networks Prospective authors are requested to submit four (4) copies of their manuscripts, written in English, and including a 100-word abstract, to the following by 1 April 1993. Dr. Kee C. Chua Department of Electrical Engineering National University of Singapore 10 Kent Ridge Crescent Singapore 0511 Fax.: +65 777 3117 Email.: eleckc@nuscc.nus.sg ------------------------------ Subject: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 0:32:59 EST From: lunatix!chelf@ms.uky.edu The other day, I saw the number for a business located in a nearby town (which is not normally in the local calling area), however, the prefix was a local one. I tried calling the number, but could not get through. I tried the operator and she connected me, and after asking why the 'number' was in my town, and the 'business' was in another, she only said, 'It's in the computer, but it is connected to a different town.' Any ideas as to what's happening here? [Moderator's Note: Businesses (actually, anyone, but it is mostly businesses) can have a 'foreign exchange' line -- commonly known as an FX. When they use that phone, or receive calls on it, it is as though they were in the place where the phone exchange is located. There are various reasons one might do this. One reason is the company makes a large volume of calls to that town, and the cost of the FX line plus local calling charges, if any, are less than the cost of the same number of calls dialed as long distance. Other times an FX line is intended to give a company a 'presence' in the town where it is located. They wish to make a convenient way for their customers in that town to reach them, and find the call volume is sufficient to warrant a dedicated FX line rather than hundreds (or thousands) of calls on 800 lines. Whether or not an FX line makes better sense than (for example) a IN-WATS line is an applications problem. With the cost of long distance and/or 800 calls being less than ever before, FX lines are not nearly as common as they used to be. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pacific!mkh%jato@jato-news.jpl.nasa.gov (michael hamilton) Subject: UUCP Through Multiple Carriers Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 18:13:34 GMT I am currently taking a newsfeed through a university (which shall remain nameless, but Thank God John Robinson is back) in Los Angeles. To do this, I must go through my local carrier GTE, and through the carrier that services the university area, Pac-Bell. Further, the University has an Instanet Data PABX port selector that I have to navigate through, before I finally reach the system I want. To do this, I'm using a Telebit T2500, and going through what I believe is a Micom modem on the university side. My question: is all this routing through various switches causing my horrible throughput? I should be getting on the order of 1200 cps, and I get more like 400, if and when I don't time out waiting for the other end. I have tried every combination of register settings, disabling V.42, MNP, etc., but nothing improves this performance. I know it's not the modem, because talking to another T2500 (in the same GTE area) I got >4X what I'm getting now. Thanks for any thoughts on this. Responses through e-mail are preferred, but if you post here I'll eventually see it. michael hamilton mkh@pacific.jpl.nasa.gov / oceanography from space ------------------------------ From: rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) Subject: Hunt Groups Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:10:33 GMT Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange prefixes? I don't want to have either of my numbers changed since one is my old number everyone knows, and the other is a xxx-xx00 number (had to pull some strings to get it). When I ordered service and made various inquiries, I run into folks who don't know what terms like "POTS line" and "demarc" mean, and offered me services excluded by tariff (the sales rep initially told me they could offer me a metered line, though this is prohibited if you have an unmetered line in the same house). [ After answering his questions about the various telco terms, he asked if there was anything else he should know about the fone system, saying that they had obviously not trained enough. I told him he should learn all about area code 710, and to keep asking until he finds someone who can explain what it is for. (Wish I could be there for that :) :) ) ]. rob boudrie rboudrie@chpc.org [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO. Anyone? PAT] ------------------------------ From: wegeng.henr801c@xerox.com (Don Wegeng) Subject: Does a CNID Device List Exist? Reply-To: wegeng.henr801c@xerox.com Organization: Xerox Corp., Henrietta, NY Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:55:10 GMT With all of the requests for information about CNID devices, it occured to me that it would be useful if someone or some publication had assembled a list of the devices that are currently available. I appreciate that it may be very difficult to keep track of all of the products that are being introduced, but perhaps one of the consumer magazines has published a summary. Does anyone know of such a list? Thanks, Don wegeng.henr801c@xerox.com ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.Com Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 10:27 EST Reply-To: turner@dixie.com Subject: A Minor Nit With the Telecom FAQ I think Dave did an excellent job with the faq, but I would like to make a minor nit. > Q: What do "tip" and "ring" mean? > A: The conductors of a wire pair to a telephone set are referred to > as tip (T) and ring (R). Tip (T) is usually the more positively > charged of the two while Ring (R) tends to be more of a ground. This seems to be a common misconception. CO battery is -48, rather then +48 with respect to (WRT) ground. Thus tip is positive WRT ring, but is actually at ground, if current isn't flowing. Ring is then at -48 V, again assuming no voltage losses. The reasons for doing is galvonic corrosion protection. A conductor with a - charge will repel chlorine ions, as Cl ions are negative also. If the line were to have a posative charge, Cl ions would be attracted. This form of corrosion protection is called cathodic protection. It is often used for pipelines, bridges, etc. I don't know how important it is now, but it was very important in the days of open wire transmission lines. CO battery does not have to be 48 V. 24 V is often used for PBX and Key systems, long loops may have a higher battery voltage. > However, two wires normally suffice to complete a connection > between a telephone and the central office; any extra wiring > would be for purposes such as grounding or for party line ringing. Also to supply dial light for the Princess phones. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ Date: 06 Jan 93 10:04:04 EST From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID In TELECOM Digest V13, #8 I read the following concerning Caller ID penetration. Colorado (Richard Lucas): Heavy Demand at initial offering. Nevada (Centel) : 10% penetration IBT (Moderator) : Very popular service long term New Jersey (NJ Bell) : 4.6% penetration (no blocking available) Colorada has PUC mandated restrictions about blocking availability and, as I remember, so does IBT. I am unsure about Nevada -- does anyone know if blocking availablity is mandated there? I realize that initial demand in Colorado doesn't necessarily translate into similar long term demand, but for the sake of argument, assume it does. Let's also assume that Nevada has mandated blocking availability. That would mean that Caller ID penetration is higher in those areas with mandated blocking than in the area that doesn't have any blocking at all available. By more than double in the case of Nevada! Perhaps PacBell is making a marketing mistake by not offering caller id even though mandated blocking restrictions would apply? Perhaps their total revenues would be higher than if no blocking at all was available? Tim Gorman - SWBT *opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence* ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 93 11:25:11-0800 From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com Subject: Do-It-Yourself Caller ID From the Dec 1992 {Telecommunications} magazine in the Technology Watch Page 14: Do-It-Yourself Caller ID "Caller ID hits the computer marketplace. While the Telcos roll out Caller ID systems and regulators wrestle with privacy issues, the consumer marketplace is offering its own form of call screening. One such product is offered through KES Communications Inc., which has released Friends Only, a device that picks up calls before the telephone rings. With it, users can dodge unwanted calls via a three-digit security access code." "When a caller initially gets through, an operator-like voice says: 'Thank you for calling; please enter your access code.' Callers who do not enter the code within ten seconds are disconnected. The device is FCC compliant, but users may encounter some procedural difficulties prior to using the product. KES notes that changes in telco facilities, equipment, or operation of the product. In addition, the local exchange carrier must be notified prior to connection in order to comply with state tariffs; and in some states, PUCs must approve use prior to connection. The device uses RJ-11C connectors which plug into telephone and wall receptacles. It is compatable with special features such as call waiting, call forwarding, and three-way calling. The price is $99.95." No address or phone number was supplied. Wonder if you need a access code to get them to answer the phone? Thomas K Hinder Martin Marietta Computing Standards 4795 Meadow Wood Lane Chantilly, VA 22021 703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5218 (f) [Moderator's Note: This is just the old 'Priv-Code' device. It first came out in the middle 1970's and was manufactured then by the International Mobile Machines Corp. of Bala Cynwyd, PA. It sits on the line and grabs all incoming calls. Unless the person enters the proper code, your phone never rings. Certain codes are allocated to send calls direct to an answering machine you attach to the line. I had one about fifteen years ago; they are fun, but can be a nuisance for people trying to legitimatly reach you who do not have a code number. I think someone wrote me once to say IMM no longer was making the thing; someone else is doing it now. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #10 ***************************** Due to a transmission error, issue 11 appears in this file following issue 14. In addition, some other issues between here and the end of the file arrived out of order as well.   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20352; 7 Jan 93 17:00 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10241 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:55:17 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03882 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:54:53 -0600 Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:54:53 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301072054.AA03882@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #12 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:54:50 CST Volume 13 : Issue 12 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Calling Canada From Italy - Answers (Wm Randolph Franklin) Canadian Competition Full Steam Ahead; Bell Canada Loses (David Leibold) Bell Canada Proposes Extended 911 Service (For a Price) (David Leibold) Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Udi Manber) 16550 UART Request (Randy Zagar) FAQ Update on the Way (David Leibold) Equivalence Charges (Tony Harminc) Bellcore Documents Phone Number Wanted (Daniel Drucker) TSR Comm. S/W (Dave Dunwoodie) Cellular Phones: CLI, VOICE & SHORT (Rudolf Usselmann) What is Junk Fax? (Ron Herff) What Should I Know if I'm Buying a Cellular Phone? (Joel M. Hoffman) Possibility of Interstate Closed-User-Group of Dial-up Modems? (Mike Brown) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wrf@speed.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin) Subject: Calling Canada From Italy - answers Reply-To: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 00:52:21 GMT In December I asked how to call Canada from Italy since AT&T and MCI didn't do it (with US cards). Several people said that there is a "Canada Direct" number from Italy, 172 1001. It charges, roughly, $6 for 3 minutes, then $1 per minute, and say that they take AT&T calling cards. Thanks to: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) Tony Harminc Samuel Ho The Italian PTT prints a wallet card giving direct numbers like this for many countries. It's available at some visitor centers and international airports. I mentioned about using MCI to call from Italy to Germany. That's a real example, they have large ads for the service. They charge $2/minute, which suggests that the call is routed via the USA. Calling Germany directly from Italy is only (!!) $1/min. Italy is apparently one of the more expensive European countries for international calling. International directory assistance from Italy can be complicated. They try to use their own copies of the foreign directories instead of connecting you to a foreign operator. When I tried to get a number in Zurich, the Italian operator who could talk to me in English could not easily read the German phonebook to look up the really obscure number I wanted, that of the Swiss Post Office. On the plus side, the newer pay phones have an LCD display for messages, and the messages are available in four languages. Italy has variable length phone numbers, even within one city, such as Genoa. Area codes are also variable. I'm available for questions about phones in Italy since I just came back from three months over there. Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261 ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 00:02:45 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Canadian Competition Full Steam Ahead; Bell Canada Loses CFRB Radio in Toronto reported today that Bell Canada will not pursue any further appeals with respect to the decision last June which opened up public long distance competition in Canada. Bell appealed portions of that decision relating to the level of compensation that competitors to Bell would have to pay to gain trunk-side access to Bell's local network. That is, while Unitel was able to offer a local number port service (Feature Group A type service), the enhanced services such as equal access, 10xxx+ dialing, 950 access and 800 services were on hold while the appeal was being processed. In December, the appeal court found that the CRTC did not overstep its authority in issuing the long distance decision, and that the CRTC's decision could stand. At that time, Bell could have made another, final appeal to the Supreme Court of Ca nada but as of today's announcement, such an appeal is not proceeding. Some time will elapse as preparations for full trunk-side access are made. The prevalence of Bell Canada DMS digital switches should make the switch to equal access relatively straightforward on a software scale (those DMS switches have to work in the U.S. environment in any event). The costs seem to be in the hardware and trunks necessary to connect to the carriers. At least we're not getting any COCOTs ... yet :-) dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 00:15:05 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Bell Canada Proposes Extended 911 Service (For a Price) {The Toronto Star} reports that Bell Canada has applied to bring 911 service throughout Ontario (and not just certain municipalities that elect to have the service, as is currently the case). Bell proposes that customers be charged 30 cents per month as part of the local monthly service, though. 70% of residences in Ontario have access to 911 at present, paid for by municipalities involved. If approved, the extended 911 service would be installed within five years. Municipalities would still have to staff response centres and connections to emergency services, if they join the 911 service. There are occasional cases outside of 911-serviced territory where calls to 911 are attempted, but fail. In those areas, the operator is normally able to handle emergency calls, but the lack of universal 911 service can be dangerous for the unwary. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 00:57:37 -0800 From: udi@cs.washington.edu (Udi Manber) Subject: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune If you always thought that 1-800 numbers (in the US) are toll free, think again. With new technology and the lack of regulations, people are finding new ways to make money. I learned this the hard way after being charged for (apparently) dialing the wrong 800 number. It took me a month and a half and probably 20 phone calls to find out this story. I'll try to make it short. It is possible, and apparently perfectly legal, to set an 800 number such that when you call you hear a recording that tells you that there will be charges for the call. The call is then transferred to a "station to station" call (quote from someone I talked to, but probably the wrong term) with arbitrary charges. That domain was reserved until recently to 900 numbers but through call forwarding (or some other mechanism) it can be done from any number! (If you haven't already guessed, most of these numbers are adult phone lines.) The idea (if there ever was one) is that you will have a fair warning and can hang up, but this is not enforced and is not always done. There are such numbers out there that will charge you whatever they feel like when you happen to dial them, and they are regular 800 numbers, and maybe even regular local numbers (not 976 or other special prefixes). The possibilities for scams are endless (I list some below for your reading pleasure), and the most scary thing is that it is so difficult to do anything about it. I talked to the billing company (INTEGRETEL which is an umbrella billing company for lots of outfits), US West (more on that later), ATT (who really has nothing to do with that and hate it just as much as I do), and the Washington state utilities commission. Everyone essentially said "just pay it, nothing we can do about it." Only after several conversations with the commission, and calls from them to US West (initially US West would not even take my complaint), I was told that US West now has a policy of removing such charges (coming from INTEGRETEL) for anyone who complains. When the next bill came, I found that they didn't. I called again, and no one knew anything about that policy. After more calls I was finally put in touch with someone probably higher up at US West who seemed to know what he was talking about. According to him (and two people at the commission), there is nothing really they can or going to do (besides handling complaints). They will remove the charges -- and he apologized for the operators and supervisors who did not know about that policy -- but will not prevent this from continuing. (He also told me that he got hold of some of those 800 numbers and indeed some charge you from the first second no matter what you do.) Washington State has a recent law regulating 900 numbers, but there is nothing about 800 numbers (they're free, right?). I don't know if this is a local idea or whether it is all over the place. I was told several times that there are no rules anywhere that say that 800 numbers are toll free. It's just something that everyone "knows". US West feels that they cannot discriminate against businesses that use their lines, and cannot prevent that use without a specific law. Since in this case the 800 number led to an out of state call, the utilities commission can't do anything. Everyone agreed that this is probably a great scam, but ... The beauty of this scam is that you are so far away from the people who are making it (you can't even find out who they are). They get your local phone company to bill you and the phone company feels they have to do it. Complaining is so hard, most people would prefer to pay the charges (I definitely spent more time than it was worth), not to mention that it is part of the phone bill and many people wouldn't notice (it appears as a long-distance call). And in the worst case they will not get your money. So here are some scam ideas (these are all fiction; do not try it at home): You can get an 800 number that is one digit away from a widely used 800 number and rip off anyone who makes a mistake (maybe that's what happened to me, they would not tell me the number). How about setting your own 900 number so that you can forward calls to it by all those who try to sell you something. Wouldn't that be great? They: "How are you doing this evening Mr. Manber?" Me: push a button and voila "You have reached the toll line explaining why unsolicited calls are bothering me. You will be charged $15 per minute starting 15 seconds ago. Please stay on the line..." (I think, by the way, that this is possible...) I was told that there were cases where people's calls got transferred *out of the country* after making local calls. You can put ads for information on how to make $10 a minute - just call 1-800-747-6337. That's 1-800-rip-offs! [This is an imaginary number - don't call please!]. How about tricking modems into calling those "local" numbers? Or going into lots of public places and asking "can I use your phone for a local call?" (You wouldn't block 800 numbers or local calls!) I have never seen this mentioned anywhere. I am really curious to know how this forwarding is physically done and whether anyone knows of any discussion on that at the FCC (who is probably the only agency that can do anything about it). Since I spent quite a bit of time already, I'd like to know any additional information anyone can give me about this (and similar) scams. Udi Manber (udi@cs.washington.edu) [Moderator's Note: We have discussed this here on many occassions in the past. Integretel will give you the name of the client they are billing for if you are persistent enough. The bad thing about outfits like Integretel and their clients are they make it hard on the honest operators of information and (yes, even phone sex) services. They don't seem to care that the public paints all such services with the same brush. PAT] ------------------------------ From: zagar@chester.cms.udel.edu (Randy [Java Man] Zagar) Subject: 16550 UART Request Reply-To: zagar@chester.cms.udel.edu Organization: Marine Studies, University of Delaware Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:51:10 GMT Okay folks ... if you'll e-mail me the names of vendors that sell computers with the 16550 UART on the motherboard, I'll summarize and re-post to the net. Thanks, Randy Zagar Internet: zagar@Chester.CMS.UDel.Edu Bell-net: 302/831-1139 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 22:04:20 EST From: David Leibold Subject: FAQ Update on The Way Some corrections and comments have arrived with respect to the FAQ which was re-posted to start the year off. Since the FAQ hasn't been touched in a year, I am about to get an update out of the way. This is the last chance to send in any corrections or other ideas for the version 4 FAQ which is expected to be available by the end of January. so ... send those cards and letters to: dleibold1@attmail.com or ... dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Jan 93 01:36:49 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Equivalence Charges I was reviewing the phone bill for a company where I am consulting, and realized that Bell Canada is charging for one more equivalence feature than I would expect, e.g. there is a hunt group of three lines - the one published number hunts to the second if busy, which hunts to the third if second is busy, and that's the end - busy signal. Bell charges for three equivalence features for this. The droid in the business office insists that there is an 'ending feature' that must be installed on the third line to make it all work. I believe this is complete nonsense, but just before I open my mouth wide, could someone confirm that technically there is no 'feature' that need be installed on the last line of a hunt group? It would seem that this scheme of charging penalizes small business and residential users who have only a few lines. Large users will barely notice the 'n+1' charge distributed over many lines. Tony Harminc [Moderator's Note: When I worked at the UC phone room about 1960, there was one group of incoming trunks with *97* lines in a rotary hunt. MUseum 4-6100 hunted 6101 which hunted 6102 and on up the line to 6196. Outgoing calls from the switchboard started the other way around, with the first outgoing call on 6196 then backward one at a time. In actual practice the incoming calls met the outgoing calls around 6150. I thought that many lines in a hunt group was pretty outrageous. One time I tried busying out all the lines from 6100 through 6195, then placed a call to 6100 ... it took maybe two seconds longer than usual to hunt that far before sure enough, it rang in on 6196. (This was about four in the morning.) PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Bellcore Documents Phone Number Wanted From: mertwig!daniel@uunet.UU.NET (Daniel Drucker) Reply-To: Daniel Drucker Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 11:09:41 EST Organization: Abnormalities of Reality I was just reading _The Hacker Crackdown_ (Bruce Sterling). It mentions an 800 number and a catalog from Bellsouth where you can order various telco documents. (For instance E911.) Does anyone know the number? Please reply by mail as I do not recieve this newsgroup. Daniel Drucker daniel%mertwig@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ From: Dave Dunwoodie 6042 Subject: TSR Comm. S/W Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 06:38:25 MST I need a TSR that will write to the CRT anything received from the modem. My modem has caller ID, but I'm not in the mood to leave the PC in terminal mode on the off chance that the phone might ring! Ideas? ------------------------------ From: rudi@netcom.com (Rudolf Usselmann) Subject: Cellular Phones: CLI, VOICE & SHORT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:12:39 GMT I have a Motorola MicroTAC Lite pocket phone. It has three features which I still don't quite understend: CLI, VOICE & SHORT CLI - seems to be something like Caller ID, it will store the phone number of the last caller. VOICE - Some sort of mailbox support? SHORT - Some sort of mailbox for short messages? None of these feature are supported yet (at least according to the company I have my service with). Does anybody have more info on these features? When will they beocme available? I'm in the SF Bay Area. The two major cellular providers are Cellular One and GTE Mobilnet. BTW: Which is "better" GTE or C1? Thanks a bunch ! rudi rudi@netcom.com Phone: (415) 321-8692 x236 work; (510) 745-7834 home ------------------------------ Subject: What is Junk Fax? From: ron.herff@satalink.com (Ron Herff) Date: 7 Jan 93 14:00:00 GMT Organization: Datamax/Satalink Connection * Ivyland, PA (215) 443-9434 Reply-To: ron.herff@satalink.com (Ron Herff) The FCC has passed some new regulations regarding junk telephone calls and "junk FAXes." Does anyone have the text of these new regulations? I am particularly interested in what makes a FAX a "junk FAX." Are all unsolicited FAXes "junk FAXes?" Is an unsolicited FAX directly addressed to a person "junk?" and illegal? Ron Herff [Moderator's Note: An unsolicited fax sent to someone is not automat- icaly 'junk' any more than an unsolicited phone call is 'junk', despite what a lot of companies may claim about 'unauthorized' fax messages or 'unauthorized' email, etc. If a large company can call me on the phone and try to sell me something, I can send them a fax message telling them what I think. PAT] ------------------------------ From: joel@wam.umd.edu (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: What Should I Know if I'm Buying a Cellular Phone? Organization: University of Maryland, College Park Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:32:34 GMT I'd like to purchase a portable phone -- one that I can take with me and use in the car, but don't know anything about them. Is there somewhere I can look for info? Or, would some kind soul like to tell me what I should know? The phone will mostly be used in the New York City area (in the city and in the suburbs), if that makes any difference. Many thanks! Joel [Moderator's Note: You might want to get the back issues of the Digest from the Telecom Archives (anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu) and read over the numerous discussions we have had on this in the past. It is really an applications problem: how do you intend to use the phone, how often, etc. There are far too many deals in the market place at any given time to cover them all here. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Possibility of Interstate Closed-User-Group of Dial-up Modems Date: Thu 7 Jan 93 02:46:24 CST From: mb2452@swuts.sbc.com Reply-To: mb2452@swuts.sbc.com I have an application where I want to deploy about 200 dial up modems across several states that are only accessible from a few originating phone numbers. Is this possible with off the shelf services and equipment? Using dedicated lines to PADs on an X.25 network and configuring the ports as a closed-user-group will work; but I am searching for a cheaper solution. Regards, Mike Brown Communications Support / Wide Area Networks Information Services us-mail: Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. One Bell Center, Rm. 24-V-5 St. Louis, MO 63101 voice: 314-235-7863 fax: 314-235-1397 e-mail: mb2452@swuts.sbc.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #12 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22338; 7 Jan 93 17:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31527 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:33:27 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24461 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:33:03 -0600 Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:33:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301072133.AA24461@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #13 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Jan 93 15:33:05 CST Volume 13 : Issue 13 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson GTE Billing - Another Profit Center? (Jack Decker) ACD Equipment Suggestions (Justin Leavens) Telecom Archives Dial Up Update (Mark Earle) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com Subject: GTE Billing - Another Profit Center? Date: 7 Jan 93 02:41:57 From: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com Now I know what you all mean about GTE. I am now convinced that they are totally incompetent. I've already detailed my problems with the obsolete subscriber carrier units. Basically, as it stands now, I am still on the carrier. My connections are clear, but low in volume on my end. After their first couple of bungled attempts at repair, I have not had any problems getting dial tone. My 2400 bps modem works, and I have used a FAX machine on this line with apparent success. Were it not for the low receive volume, and the fact that every time a CB radio user drives by while transmitting I can hear the signal on the phone, and the low on-hook voltage (15 volts) that won't drive some line-powered equipment, I would have no complaint about the service. The GTE supervisor says they can install a filter to cut the RF interference, but it happens infrequently and I'm afraid it might degrade my modem connections. Actually, I was prepared to let it go because they told me that next summer they were going to put a remote unit out here with a fiber-optic link to the central office. When they do that, I will be getting dial tone from less than half a mile away, rather than the seven or eight miles of old cable that are doubtless serving us now. However, a GTE repairman let it slip that due to budget cutbacks, that project has probably been put on hold for now. I wonder if there is any way to get it back on track? I suppose I could escalate my complaints to the PUC, but as I say, I'm afraid that GTE might try a "quick fix" that will really screw up my line (and, as the GTE man said, I'm only paying for voice grade service so I have to expect "a little" interference). In the meantime, I dug out an old rotary dial phone with a volume control handset, so I have at least ONE phone that I can hear fairly well on. But all of this pales in comparison to my recent experience with their billing department. Our first GTE bill was a shocker. Now, to put things in perspective, I have to admit that our income level was on the low side last year (this was one reason we moved) ... so low, in fact, that we now qualify for "lifeline" service, which gives you a discount on the initial installation charges as well as a $4.10/month credit on the monthly service charge (which is a good thing, since the normal monthly rate for flat rate service is $16.09, not including taxes ... considerably higher than what we paid on Michigan Bell. At least the flat rate service here really IS flat rate [no 400 call cap as in Ma Bell territory], so I'm not complaining too much about the higher rate, although it gave me considerable pause when I first learned how high it was). Now, we had paid the $19.50 installation charge in advance (that's the only way they'd install our service) so it was quite a shock when our first month's bill came to $55.50! Here's how they came up with that amount: Private telephone line $12.59 (these are in advance for Interstate access charge 3.50 the period Jan 1 to Feb 1) Michigan Lifeline service credit CR 4.10 (note this is a credit) Service order processing 9.13 "Line connect charges/NRC" 10.38 [Note the above comes to $19.51. I won't quibble over the penny, but I *did* have a problem with the fact that I had already paid this and it wasn't credited!] Local service-38 days from Nov 23 $20.38 (NOTE no lifeline credit!) Federal excise tax (3% of $32.37) .97 State tax (4% of $51.88) 2.08 911 operational charge .50 (MI Bell didn't charge this!) Emergency telephone service .07 [I wonder why is there a separate charge for 911 and emergency telephone service?] Now, I had problems with two things on this bill: First, the lack of credit for the $19.50 prepayment of the "service order processing" and "line connect charges/NRC", and second, the lack of any lifeline credit for the 38 days of initial service. Not that the latter would break me, but if they are supposed to be taking it off, they should do so. Anyway, yesterday (Monday, January 4) I went to the local GTE Phone Mart in Muskegon, Michigan (where I had paid the initial $19.50) in the hope of getting the matter settled. Fat chance! A GTE employee led me to a bank of four memory-dial telephones that had buttons on them preprogrammed to connect callers to various departments (e.g. billing, new service orders, repair, etc.) and told me that I would have to call the billing department from there. I could have done the same thing from home. But the worst of it was that there were already others there trying to do the same thing, and ALL of us were getting busy signals. That's right, not even the normal eternal wait on hold with occasional recorded announcements that you usually get when calling from home, just a constant busy signal. The GTE employee said we should just keep redialing. In addition, the phones themselves apparently went through some sort of private PBX and were equipped with three-way calling, so if you didn't hang up long enough to release the line, you'd dial out on the second leg of a three-way call. Then when you tried to hang up the second time, you'd get your original busy back, or if you hung up for too long, the phone would ring. This caused no end of confusion for the hapless folks trying to reach various GTE departments. The woman next to me was at her wit's end trying to deal with the phone and the busy signals, and all she was trying to find out was where she could pay her phone bill besides at the phone mart. Why would she want to know that? Because there must have been at least fifty people already in line trying to get to the ONE payment window (or at least it seemed like it; I honestly didn't count but it was a LONG line). Naturally, the GTE employees who worked inside the phone mart couldn't take payments, and couldn't tell her where else she could make payments either. After about 15 minutes of redialing, I finally got through and spoke to someone in the business office. After being transferred once (to "collections"), I spoke to another representative who agreed that the $19.50 should be credited to my account, but who said that it might take three or four months(!) for the credit to appear on my bill, and in the meantime I could just deduct the $19.50 each month from the billed amount, until the credit appeared. But the lifeline was another matter. She at first agreed that I had a credit coming, but couldn't tell me how much. She said she'd have to call me back later at home with the amount! I had wanted to pay my bill while at the phone mart (in spite of the long line) but at this point I decided to forget it and wait until I was in town again. Well, just after 3 P.M. I got home and the GTE rep phoned me shortly thereafter. Now get this: She said that I had received a lifeline discount on my installation ($19.50 instead of the normal charge, which was "normally more like $40"), and that this was in lieu of a lifeline credit on my initial service period. I said that just didn't sound right to me, because folks would wind up paying different amounts depending on where their initial billing fell in the billing cycle. In my case it would have been 38 days without the credit, for someone else it could be 15 or 45 or whatever. I asked if this was allowed in the tariffs and she confidently proclaimed that indeed, this was in their tariffs that were on file with the M.P.S.C. (I had already mentioned the possibility of a complaint if we couldn't resolve this matter, since I am really losing patience with GTE, but I tried not to be too hard on the rep ... after all, she can't help it that she works for that kind of employer)! I said that while I was not calling her a liar, I would like to see a copy of the tariff section that authorized them to bill in that manner, and asked if she would send me a copy. She said she would talk to a supervisor and that they would either send a copy to me, or else she would have the supervisor call me. Well ... today she called back and said that they would NOT be sending me a copy of the tariff because, and I quote, "the information I received yesterday was in error". She went on to say that I was indeed entitled to a credit of $5.53, and explained how she arrived at that figure (it included a credit for taxes collected on the amount, which is something I would have asked about had she not mentioned it). And then she said something that struck me as strange ... she said something to the effect of "Since you're getting the credit, you don't need a copy of the tariff, right?" I said no, I didn't, but the tone in her voice almost led me to believe that for some reason they REALLY, REALLY DIDN'T WANT me to have a copy of that tariff! It makes me wonder what they're hiding in there (or if they just plain couldn't find a copy in any convenient place!). She assured me that the $5.53 credit would be on my next bill, and that I could deduct it from my current bill. "What about the $19.50?", I asked ... would that be credited on my next bill? Probably not, she explained, but maybe in another month or two. But, she had said that I could also deduct that amount from my payment, right? Well, yes, if I really wanted to ... (Nah, I think I'll let GTE have another $19.50 to play with until they get around to giving me the credit ... NOT!) Now surely GTE has computers, so why should it take them three or four months to issue a credit for a prepayment? Even if mine had gotten "lost", as was claimed, I had the receipt in hand and could have shown it to any phone mart employee, had anyone there been deemed competent enough to handle billing adjustments. I wonder how much slack they would cut ME if I were four months late paying a $19.50 phone bill? GTE is now the largest telephone company in the United States, and they are the perfect example of a monopoly gone bad. You folks who want to go into competition with a local telco for dial tone should really consider doing it in GTE territory first. You'd probably be able to get 90% of their customer base overnight (the other 10% would be GTE employees and their families, folks who are on vacation, and the EXTREME few who've never had any beef with GTE). And if the regulators tried to stifle the competition, the local folks would probably mutiny! Keep in mind that: 1) A lot of folks in this situation probably don't realize they're being overcharged. They probably expect a high initial bill, so they'd pay the extra $25 or so without question. Nevertheless, it's money that GTE is not LEGALLY entitled to collect. I wonder how much additional revenue they take in this way? Even assuming that the $19.50 would have eventually been credited had I not complained (and I certainly have no reason to believe that would have happened), there's still the other $5.53 that I would almost certainly not have received had I not demanded to see the tariff authorizing the charge. How many "lifeline" customers even know what a tariff is? 2) A lot of folks who did question the bill would have accepted the first explanation given. I almost did, until I thought about the fact that it would be inequitable depending on when the billing cycle kicked in for various customers. In one way, you could say they lied to me at first ... maybe not deliberately, but the first explanation certainly wasn't truthful. How many customers would realize that? 3) What other company do you know that, when a customer appears to inquire about a bill, herds the customer into a room and hands them a phone without so much as a hint of apology, even though the lines are consistently busy? How many other companies do you know that can make customers stand in line for half an hour or more to pay a bill? This sort of thing may be common in other countries, but only the government and monopolies can get away with it here (well, some entertainment-related industries can too, but those are usually cases where demand exceeds supply). Sorry this is so long, but I am now prepared to believe just about every rotten report that's ever been posted about GTE. They sure haven't impressed ME any! I know I'm not one of their prime customers (no optional features on my line, and not even any intraLATA toll revenue for them this month) but when you are a monopoly, you have to serve the small customers and the big ones alike. I say let's give 'em some competition so they don't have to put up with insignificant customers like me! ;-) Of course, I gather their big customers don't get much better treatment, from what I read here in comp.dcom.telecom! Jack Decker --- 1:154/8.0 FidoNet, Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com ------------------------------ From: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) Subject: ACD Equipment Suggestions Date: 7 Jan 1993 12:29:45 -0800 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA I'm about to start looking for equipment for one of our offices to do automatic call distribution and some other items. Not being sure what kinds of things are available, let me list some things we want to accomplish: 1. Must be ISDN compatible (does this throw me out right there?). Our campus runs on a 5ESS. 2. We'd like to automate our switchboard operatations as much as possible, so touchtone menus are needed. 3. Some of our offices want a recorded message to play to each caller before the call is transferred to the office. 4. Some of the offices would like recorded messages to play while callers are on hold in queue. How many callers can typical systems queue up? Any comments or information on what kind of equipment could be purchased/leased to do these things would be very helpful. Please e-mail responses, as I have a hard time keeping up with the volume of messages here these days. Thank you in advance. Justin Leavens / Microcomputer Specialist / University of Southern California ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:47:43 -0600 From: mearle@cgull.ccsu.edu (Mark Earle) Subject: Telecom Archives Dial Up Update Patrick et all, My FidoNet dial up system has been repaired, and some upgrades will be occuring in the next few weeks. I'm re-organizing files into smaller logical groupings, etc. The system will NOT answer the line if it is unavailable (i.e., if I am working on it) so anyone should be able to try accessing without a toll call, if it is temporarily down. Some BBS's use the auto answer feature of the modem, and the modem will answer when the computer is down. My software decodes the word "ring" from the modem, and then issues the answer command. So when the softwaer is turned off, no answer. I have some more storage available. While I don't think there is enough to mirror all of the archives, certainly the more recent stuff would fit; I'll report on that, assuming Pat has no problem with it being available. Also to save connect time, the files will all be compressed with pkzip. Those who might need non-compressed (other non msdos systems, etc) may make arrangements with me to get the files non-compressed. I've found the majority prefer compressed as this saves connect / toll charges. Anyhow, the system is available at +1 512 855 7248, and uses a US Robotics HST modem, which has MNP5 available. NON-HST callers with modern modems (v32/42) should get reasonable transfer rates, although the base connection will be 2400 baud. mearle@cgull.ccsu.edu Mark Earle fidonet 1:160/50 Note: Fidonet system operators or point operators may do automated file requests. Ask for 'files' to get the current list. [Moderator's Note: Thanks for your help in making the Telecom Archives (or at least a subset of the archives) available via dialup phone for our many readers without Internet FTP arrangements. Readers, if you use this service to retrieve back issues of the Digest or other telecom files, be certain to leave a note of thanks to Mark. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #13 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24788; 7 Jan 93 18:42 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02510 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:16:32 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02761 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:16:02 -0600 Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:16:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301072216.AA02761@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #14 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Jan 93 16:16:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 14 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Hunt Groups (Steve Forrette) Re: Hunt Groups (Marc T. Kaufman) Re: Hunt Groups (Daniel Burstein) Re: Hunt Groups (Terry Kennedy) Re: Hunt Groups (Jeff Wasilko) Re: Hunt Groups (Arthur Coston) Re: Hunt Groups (Brian Perry) Re: Hunt Groups (Tom Lahey) Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Ken Stox) Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Martin Harriss) Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Kenneth Crudup) Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery (Paul Robinson) Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery (Rob Knauerhase) Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery (Alan Toscano) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Date: 7 Jan 1993 01:49:34 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) writes: > Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be > placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange > prefixes? I had a similar setup recently, but strictly speaking, it was busy-transfer rather than hunting. It was on a 5ESS switch. The fact that I wanted the busy-transfer was known at the time I placed the order for the two lines, and the computer happened to select numbers on two different prefixes. I would imagine that on a modern SPC switch, the prefix difference would not matter. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: kaufman@xenon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Reply-To: kaufman@cs.stanford.edu Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA Date: 7 Jan 93 01:56:30 GMT rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) writes: > Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be > placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange > prefixes? > I don't want to have either of my numbers changed since one is my old > number everyone knows, and the other is a xxx-xx00 number (had to pull > some strings to get it). When I ordered service and made various > inquiries, I run into folks who don't know what terms like "POTS line" > and "demarc" mean, and offered me services excluded by tariff (the > sales rep initially told me they could offer me a metered line, though > this is prohibited if you have an unmetered line in the same house). You can get the effect you want by ordering Remote Call Forwarding from the old number to the new. The old number becomes a bookkeeping entry in the old central office that just forwards calls to your new number. I use it because there are lots of folks who just know my old number (clients I haven't seen in a few years). Not cheap ($15/mo + message unit charges for the forwarded calls - PacBell), but if you need it, you need it. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@CS.Stanford.EDU) ------------------------------ From: dannyb@Panix.Com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Organization: Panix, NYC Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:43:29 GMT In rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) writes: > Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be > placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange > prefixes? > [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on > different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO. Anyone? PAT] Yes, indeed it IS possible, but whether they'll provide it or not is aanother story. I initially had a single line in the NYC 212-874 exchange, and upgraded (?) to have a total of six lines. There were two hunt sequences in it, and yes, they crossed over from the "old" exchange (874) to the other ("491" I think ...) and back. And, to have even more fun, the lines were all "intellidialed" (tm nyt) which is a version of centrex. This allowed pick up from any line (helpful) as well as the ability to three way a call, hang up, leave the other two folk connected, and get back to dial tone. (VERY helpful if someone calls and you say, oh, John is the one you want, hold while I transfer you). danny burstein dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ From: Terry Kennedy Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Organization: St. Peter's College, US Date: 7 Jan 93 02:50:29 EST Organization: St. Peter's College, US In article , Telecom Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on > different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO. Anyone? PAT] It's certainly possible, but I don't know if the current releases of the switch software will do it. However, the various call forward functions will work across prefixes, or across switches if desired. So the subscriber could order call forward on busy (or on busy/no answer) and then set whatever form of hunt group up that he wanted. This could be done either with customer-selected for- warding (the kind usually explained in the phone book, where the customer sets the forwarding, or with fixed forwarding, where it is set up in the switch and the customer can't change it). Note that your local telco may not know how to sell you these services, so you may have to be persistent. One tack that supposedly works is that they sell fixed call forwarding as part of "Answer Call". Also, if your phone service is measured, you may be able to have fixed forwarding at no per-message charge. 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 ------------------------------ From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 02:58:16 EST Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div. Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com We have a 12 line hunt group with numbers in three prefixs (834-, 762- and something else) in a hunt group without any problem. They are all served off the same 2B switch ... Jeff Jeff's Oasis at Home. Jeff can also be reached at work at: jwasilko@airage.com ------------------------------ From: arthur@ais.com Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Date: 7 Jan 93 21:05:19 GMT Organization: Applied Information Systems, Chapel Hill, NC Our company has hunt groups composed of lines that have different prefixes. For example, one group of ten lines has four different prefixes. It doesn't seem to matter. Local service is from Southern Bell in Chapel Hill, NC. I believe we had a similar situation with another group from GTE on Durham, NC local service. (We have experience with both carriers. Both have given us quite good service the last few years, including solving some interactions between the two locals.) Arthur Coston Applied Information Systems arthur@ais.com ------------------------------ From: brianp@portal.vpharm.com (Brian Perry) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Organization: Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:14:14 GMT I have a setup similar to this on both a 1AESS and a 5ESS switch here in the Boston area. In both cases there are multiple exchanges in the hunt groups. The only criteria is that all the exchanges in the group must terminate on the same switch. Brian K. Perry, Systems Manager Tel: 617-499-2414 (office) Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated 617-576-3111 (main #) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:05:00 -0500 From: toml@Cayman.COM (Tom Lahey) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups We have had this done several times. Over the past two years we have had several additions to our incomming local lines and in each of the cases we were issued numbers with a different prefix (889-xxxx, 880-xxxx, 883-xxxx), and have had them added, to our existing hunt groups. NYNEX (New England Telephone) issued the numbers when we asked for extra trunks on the hunt groups. Currently of our two hunt groups, one has two different prefixes and the other covers all three. I don't know it this has any bearing however we are serviced by a "SLICK 96", which may be doing some of the translation that allows this? Tom Lahey batfish!toml@attmail.com [Moderator's Note: Uh, no ... the SLC-96 (subscriber line carrier) has nothing to do with the hunt groups. It is a way of providing additional phone service in areas where wire pairs are in short supply. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kstox@admips2.Berkeley.EDU (Ken Stox) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... Reply-To: kstox@admips2.Berkeley.EDU (Ken Stox) Organization: AC Nielsen Co. Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 19:25:26 GMT Back in the "old" days, we used to leave an AM radio next to an IBM 1130, you could actually pick up the CPU activity. One clever programmer started writing some very interesting compositions. Of course, with the advent of modern synthesizers, it would be totally unimpressive. #include Ken Stox Consultant to A.C. Nielsen kstox@naitc.com ------------------------------ From: martin@bdsgate.com (Martin Harriss) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... Reply-To: bdsgate!martin@uunet.UU.NET (Martin Harriss) Organization: Beechwood Data Systems Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:50:23 GMT In article armhold@dimacs.rutgers.edu (George Armhold) writes: > At RU, I worked with Sun 4/110s. They were networked via thin-net > coax. I have pretty sensitive ears, and could always hear a > high-pitched whine when lots of data went through the wire (opening an > xterm, for example.) One thing that was neat about this is that > whenever someone logged in to the workstation I was working on I could > actually *hear* them log in. Nobody believed me of course. Whenever > I tried to show it to someone they thought I was nuts. :-) Ethernet tranceivers have a DC-DC converter on them that isolates the electronics that interface with the network and the electronics in your computer. Said DC-DC converter probably operates at 10-20kHz. When the tranceiver electronics sends or receives data, it may draw more current and in doing so change the frequency that the converter operates at. This may be the whine that you hear. So you're probably not nuts after all! Martin Harriss uunet!bdsgate!martin ------------------------------ From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... Organization: Open Software Foundation Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:02:25 GMT In article armhold@dimacs.rutgers.edu (George Armhold) writes: > At RU, I worked with Sun 4/110s. I have pretty sensitive ears, and could > always hear a high-pitched whine when lots of data went through the wire > One thing that was neat about this is that whenever someone logged in to > the workstation I was working on I could actually *hear* them log in. > Nobody believed me of course. Whenever I tried to show it to someone they > thought I was nuts. :-) I believe you. Sun's power supplies seem to be just adequate enough so that during periods of heavy CPU-intensive computations (like interrupt-based devices like network chips causing context switches), when the machine is drawing more current, the regulator in the switcher supply (which is a high-frequency oscillator so that there's less ripple when the AC it produces gets rectified and filtered, and more efficient because of smaller cores to burn up good electricity as heat) causes the oscillator to increase the duty cycle of the primary winding pulses to compensate for the increased requirements. This period of additional supply registers in the cores of the transformers as a slight "bleep", and a bunch of them together produce the "music" you hear. I used to troubleshoot Sun-2's aurally as well. 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: tdarcos@attmail.com Date: 7 Jan 93 16:48:28 GMT Subject: Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery In TELECOM Digest 13-9, Tom Lahey - toml!batfish@attmail.com says: > I've recently started getting telecom off the Internet via AT&T > mail. (currently my only access to the Internet). To quote one of their own ads, "You're not dealing with AT&T." Your message is coming through some X.400 server (BATFISH) that is connected to AT&T Mail. You are probably being charged by the X.400 provider whoever that is. If you were a direct AT&T Mail customer you would have an account like TOML@ATTMAIL.COM just as much as this one is TDARCOS@ATTMAIL.COM. Neither AT&T Mail nor MCI Mail charges anything to receive messages. You should take the service directly from them, as AT&T Mail will only charge you (1) if you send a message (2) if you compose the message on line, there is a surcharge. (MCI does not charge extra for messages composed while on-line.) > Does anyone know how I can get an Internet feed via dial-up? (with > something less than a $0.95 for the first 3000 characters and .05 per > 1000 after that?) I have accounts on both AT&T Mail and MCI Mail. It's no coincidence that I have the account name (TDARCOS) as the same on both systems. I would have tried an account on Sprintmail, but I came across the same thing as you are complaining about: they *CHARGE* to *RECEIVE* mail, at 5c/K, at the same rate as I pay to *send* messages! MCI Mail charges $35 a year to subscribe. AT&T Charges $3 a month and you can use their terminals at airports free. The only cost on either should be a one-time charge of 50c to send a message to "telecom-request@delta.eecs.nwu.edu" to start the subscription. If you want to send messages, they will cost you 50c for the first 500 bytes, then 10c for each 1K up to 10K, then 5c/K above 10K. MCI offers a plan which gives you the first 40 message units (of 5K each) for $10 a month, or the first 250 message units for $25 a month. Message units also include 1/2 page domestic facsimile transmissions. MCI Mail and AT&T Mail are accessible through direct 800 numbers which do not charge you for connect time. AT&T Mail is also accessible via 950-1ATT (950-1288) in many areas. AT&T is only accessible at 2400 baud via their regular 800 number; MCI has 1200, 2400 and 9600 baud 800 numbers. Neither makes any charge to receive mail (AT&T will charge you if you accept a message from another AT&T subscriber that was sent to you /COD). AT&T Mail allows messages to be downloaded using cheapo xmodem7. MCI Mail allows messages to be downloaded using ZMODEM or KERMIT. AT&T does a *much* better job of keeping Internet RFC841 headers on incoming messages, especially those from BITNET Listservers where the originator is often eradicated by MCI Mail and other services. MCI Mail provides a better interface for sending messages. Your account number on MCI Mail is also a free incoming telex number; AT&T charges $25 a month for an incoming telex number. AT&T Mail can be reached by voice at 1-800-MAIL-672 (624-5672) MCI Mail at 1-800-444-MAIL (444-6245) Paul Robinson TDARCOS@ATTMAIL.COM {and} TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:03:35 -0600 From: Rob Knauerhase Subject: Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery > Does anyone know how I can get an Internet feed via dial-up? (with > something less than a $0.95 for the first 3000 characters and .05 per > 1000 after that?) You might not want to trade per-char fees for per-minute fees, depending on how fast your modem is. However, for the price of the call there is the Cleveland Free-Net, (216) 368-8888 which provides both Internet mail and Usenet newsgroups (so you can read the TELECOM Digest either way) at no cost to you. There are also Free-Net systems in Youngstown OH and Peoria IL if those are closer or otherwise preferable to you. Combined with PC-Pursuit (30 off-peak hours of data LD for $30 -- see the Digest archives) that might be an even better solution for you. Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science [Moderator's Note: There are numerous other services available as well that while not free, are reasonably priced. Here in Chicago, both chinet and gagme accept public subscribers. There is also the Portal Communications Company in San Jose, and the nice thing about Portal is their direct connection to Sprintnet; if you subscribe to PC Pursuit then you can make an easy connection to Portal (@C PORTAL) at regular PC rates. And don't forget the Well as another possibility. PAT] ------------------------------ From: atoscano@attmail.com Date: 7 Jan 93 14:51:40 GMT Subject: Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery In TELECOM Digest V13, #9, Tom Lahey asks about alternatives to AT&T Mail, believing he will pay an average $2.05/issue to receive the Digest via AT&T Mail. In actuality, there is *no* usage charge to *receive* messages on AT&T Mail -- *unless* they are sent "COD." ("COD" messages must originate within AT&T Mail. If the recipient doesn't wish to pay for the message (s)he may DELETE it without reading it, in which case the sender is billed for its cost. An on-line mailbox may also be flagged to reject "COD" messages at the time they are submitted by the sender. Messages from the Internet, such as the Digest, may *not* be sent "COD.") Aside from any applicable recurring monthly and annual charges, AT&T Mail's only *usage* charges are for *sending* messages, receiving "COD" messages, and accessing "shared folders." This can be confirmed by calling the AT&T Mail billing office in Atlanta: 800 MAIL672 (option 2). BTW, AT&T Mail now expects to finally implement its previously announced, but as yet unimplemented, Minimum Usage Billing requirement of $25/month/invoice, sometime next year (1994). That is when they expect to convert to a new billing system. Before anyone panics, remember that several mailboxes may be billed together in a single invoice. A Alan Toscano Internet: atoscano@attmail.com or atoscano@taronga.com P O Box 741982 AT&T Mail: !atoscano AT&T Enhanced FAX: !0200607 Houston, TX CIS: 73300,217 AT&T TELEX: 406232556 UI 772741982 USA Work: +1 713 216 6616 Work-FAX: +1 713 216 2193 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #14 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26093; 7 Jan 93 19:13 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01261 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 13:19:38 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20700 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 13:19:14 -0600 Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 13:19:14 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301071919.AA20700@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #11 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Jan 93 13:19:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 11 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Motorola 'Secure-Clear' Cordless Telephones (Tim Tyler via Monty Solomon) Sci.electronics Phone Fraud! (Larry Ching via Monty Solomon) CRTC Review of Telecom Regs (Dave Leibold) Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ... (Phydeaux) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 03:29:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola 'Secure-Clear' Cordless Telephones [Moderator's Note: Monty passed this along to the group. PAT] Newsgroups: sci.crypt From: tim@ais.org (Tim Tyler) Subject: Motorola 'Secure-Clear' Cordless Telephones Message-ID: Organization: UMCC Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 01:39:56 GMT "Why A Motorola Cordless Phone?" "Cordless phone eavesdroppers are everywhere" says pro golfer Lee Trevino, spokesman for Motorola. "But with my Motorola Secure Clear Cordless Phone, my private conversations stay private." So says a glossy brochure (# BA-81) that Motorola's Consumer Products Division (telephone # 800/331-6456) distributes to promote their new 'secure' cordless phone product line. When I first read the cover of the brochure, I said to myself, "Wow, I wonder what sophisticated technology it must use?" Motorola has been developing and selling secure voice and data systems, from DVP and DES up to the current 'FASCINATOR' algorithm for classified military and federal government secure voice for many years. Page Two of the slick brochure provides some rhetorical questions and answers: Why Motorola Cordless Phones? Q. What is meant by Secure Clear? Secure Clear is an exclusive technology that assures you no eavesdroppers will be able to use another cordless phone, scanner or baby monitor to listen in to your cordless conversations. Q. How difficult is it to eavesdrop on someone's cordless conversation? It's not difficult at all. Simply by operating a cordless phone, scanner or baby monitor on the same channel as you're on, an eavesdropper can listen in. Security codes alone DO NOT prevent eavesdropping. Q. What are security codes and what do they do? Security codes allow the handset and base to communicate with each other. With the Secure Clear cordless phone, one of 65,000 possible codes are randomly assigned every time you set the handset in the base. This means that a neighbor cannot use his handset to link with your base and have phone calls charged to your phone number. Q. Describe the basic difference between Secure Clear and Secure Clear protects against eavesdropping. Security codes prevent the unauthorized use of your phone line. Usually all cordless phones have security codes, but not both. Q. What is the purpose of the Secure Clear demo? The Secure Clear demo is a unique feature of Motorola phones that allows you to actually experience what an eavesdropper would hear when trying to listen to your conversation. By pressing the SECURE DEMO button on the Motorola phone, you and the person on the other end will hear the same scrambled noise an eavesdropper would hear. ---------- Hmmm ... I went to the Motorola Secure Clear cordless phone display at a Sears store, took a deep breath, and hit the demo button in order to hear what the "scrambled noise" which would protect a conversation from eavesdropping sounded like. White-noise like that of a digital data stream? Rapid analog time-domain scrambling? No, the scrambled "noise" sounded like inverted analog voice. That's right, they're using the 40 or 50 year old (3kHz baseband) speech inversion system -- the same one which they stopped marketing for their commercial two-way radio gear about a decade ago -- to make Lee Trevino and other ignorant people's "private conversations stay private." For those of you not familiar with speech inversion, it simply flip-flops the voice spectrum so that high pitched sounds are low, and vice versa. It sounds a lot like Single Side Band (SSB) transmissions, although an SSB receiver will not decode speech- inversion scrambling. Prior to 1986, several companies -- Don Nobles, Capri Electronics, etc. sold inexpensive kits or scanner add-ons which could be used to decode speech inversion. Several electronics magazines also published schematics for making your own from scratch, at a cost of about $5. After the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, it became illegal to decode or decipher encrypted communications which you weren't a legitimate party to, so the standard practice of selling these quasi-legal products as 'experimental kits' or 'for educational purposes only' became common. Today, some companies will not specifically sell a 'speech-inversion descrambler,' but instead market a 'speech inversion scrambling system' which means the kit will encode as well as decode speech inversion, although most people buy them simply to hook up to their scanners and monitor the few public safety agencies and business that (still) use speech-inversion scrambling. Yes, technically, it is a felony for you to use a speech- inversion descrambler to monitor these Motorola 'Secure Clear' cordless. Or for that matter, the new Radio Shack DUoPHONE ET-499, cordless phone which also depends on speech-inversion for privacy protection. The public utility of the ECPA has been argued about ever since before it was enacted. It is rather obvious that the ECPA was pushed upon the ignorant, money-hungry Congress by the powerful (& wealthy) Cellular Telephone Industry Association (so the CTIA could propagate misinformation to the public, but that's another story ...). I also realize that the 46/49MHz cordless phone channels are apparently allocated for analog-voice only. Despite the ECPA, it is unconscionable to me that Motorola -- who surely knows better -- would produce the slick brochure & specifically market the 'Secure Clear' line as being invulnerable to eavesdropping. Their wording unequivocally gives the impression that the 'Secure Clear' conversations are secure, not only from other cordless phone and baby monitors, which have several common frequencies, but also against communications hobbyists with scanner radios. It is bad enough that many public safety officers still think that by using the 'PL' ('Private Line,' also known as CTCSS) setting on their Motorola two-way radios, no one else can listen in. While the 'Private Line' fiasco might be attributable to misconception on the part of the radio users, in my opinion, Motorola's Consumer Products Division has to know that there are thousands of scanner monitors who have the technical ability to defeat the speech-inversion 'Secure Clear' system. A Motorola representative at the 1992 Summer Consumer Electronics Show in Chicago confirmed this to me, with a smirk on his face. There's a big difference between Motorola's aforementioned wording and that of Radio Shack's on page 3 of their 1993 catalog: New! Voice-Scrambling Cordless Telephone DUoFONE ET-499. Cordless phones are great. But since they transmit over the airwaves, your private conversations could be monitored. Now you can enjoy cordless convenience with voice scrambling for added [emphasis theirs] privacy protection -- frequency inversion makes transmissions between the handset and base unintelligible... It's not "Motorola should know better." Motorola DOES know better. Otherwise, they wouldn't be spending time or money on truly 'secure' (based on current technology, of course) communications and transmission security systems. I sure am thankful that our federal government and military users of secure-mode communications systems don't rely on Motorola's marketing department to provide factual information as to the level of security provided by Motorola equipment. Too bad that for the most part, the public does. For anyone looking for a cordless telephone that offers a decent level of privacy, take a look at some of the new cordless phones which use 900MHz. Most of the new ones not only use CVSD digital voice for the RF link, but also direct-sequence spread spectrum. By no means are these phones secure ('encoded,' yes, but 'encrypted,' no), despite some of the wording in their owner's manuals. The Tropez 900 actually seems to generate a very weak analog harmonic in the 440MHz spectrum, but you'll still be a lot better off than poor old Lee Trevino. 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 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 03:34:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sci.electronics Phone Fraud! [Moderator's Note: Monty also passed this along for us today. PAT] From: larryc@shell.portal.com (Larry WB Ching) Newsgroups: sci.electronics Subject: SCI.ELECTRONICS Phone fraud !!! Summary: A recent attempt to rip-off sci.electronics correspondents. Keywords: fraud, con artists, phone numbers Message-ID: Date: 1 Jan 93 23:16:23 GMT Sender: news@unix.portal.com Organization: Portal Communications -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091 At about 6PM Thursday evening, I got a phone call. The operator said that he had a collect call to me from Charles Pooley in New York. The name was familiar, but I didn't remember exactly why. I said I would accept the call, but then the "operator" said the call couldn't get through because I had the call collect option blocked. He then said he could pass the call through if I gave him my calling card number. I said that I'd rather call Mr. Pooley myself, and could the "operator" give me Mr. Pooley's number. There was a pause, then a phone number with a San Jose area code! It didn't occur to me until later that , if the call was from New York, why was the call-from number (408) !??! I remembered that Charles and I had been corresponding on a topic from sci.electronics. I was lucky enough to have an old message from him lying around, and emailed him a message about my mysterious phone call. Charles Pooley replyed to me today -- turns out the guy tried the same scam on him too! But this time, the bogus operator said the collect call was from me to Charles! Charles was also wary, and didn't give the crook his calling card number. So - WATCH OUT! How this con artist chose my name and Charles' to try is beyond me. As far as public postings in sci.electronics, I don't think Charles and I had exchanged more than four public postings. Most of our correspondence has been via "private" email. This has definitely raised my paranoia level. If, out of the millions of public postings during 1992, someone should choose two correspondents who have exchange only a slight amount of messages .... I mean, why us? Or, is there a "boilerroom" operation going on, with a bunch of phony operators, armed with USENET listings -- calling people with this con? OH! - I may have put my phone number in one of my public sci.electronics postings - that's probably how the scamsters make their selection. Makes sense ... CHILDREN BEWARE!!! larryc@shell.portal.com [Moderator's Note: I note the public access site you use for Usenet (Portal Com) is located in area 408 (San Jose, CA). PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 23:49:48 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: CRTC Review of Telecom Regs [from Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) press release] December 16, 1992 CRTC TO REVIEW TELECOMMUNICATIONS REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OTTAWA/HULL - The CRTC today announced that it intends to review the approach it takes to regulating telephone companies that provide basic local telephone service in order to ensure that the manner in which it regulates is efficient, effective and in the public interest (Telecom Public Notice CRTC 92-78). In recent years, technological change and increasing competition have significantly altered the nature of the telephone industry. The Commission wants to examine whether or not there are more efficient and effective ways to regulate or to streamline regulation, without compromising basic regulatory goals such as affordable local service and prevention of anti-competitive behaviour. "Canadians currently enjoy the benefits of a first-class telecommunications industry," said CRTC Chairman Keith Spicer. "By undertaking a review of our regulatory procedures we are trying to ensure that the Canadian telecommunications industry remains at the forefront of international communications and continues to provide top-quality service, local as well as long distance, to meet the growing information requirements of residential and business users." Since telephone companies have evolved into multi-dimensional service providers subject to increasing competition, questions arise about the continued appropriateness of traditional monopoly-style regulation. However, the Commission considers that regulatory streamlining will depend in part on the degree of effective competition in the markets served by the telephone companies. While some markets may be increasingly competitive, Canada's telephone companies continue to exercise considerable market power due to their control over access to local telephone systems and their dominance in the long distance telephone market. Where telephone companies exercise market power, regulation will be required to protect subscribers and industry competitors from any abuse of that power. "While the Commission is committed to considering changes to the current framework, in pursuit of regulation that is more effective and more efficient, the resulting framework must ensure that subscribers and competitors are adequately protected," said Louis (Bud) Sherman, CRTC Vice-Chairman for Telecommunications. "Changes must take account of any monopoly or dominant power the telephone companies could exercise." Having raised these general issues, the Commission invites the telephone companies and other interested parties to submit comments and specific proposals for changing the existing regulatory framework. Submissions should bee aimed at achieving the following goals: * reduction of the regulatory burden where there is already effective competition in place; * encouragement of the development of new technology and innovative services to serve the expanding information requirements of residential and business customers; * protection of subscribers and competitors from abuse of market power; * equitable treatment of subscribers in terms of service and prices; * the opportunity for telephone companies to earn a reasonable rate of return; and, * a recognition that the telephone companies and other telecommunica- tion carriers must be permitted to equip themselves to meet increasing competition at home and abroad. During the course of the review proceeding, the Commission anticipates receiving proposals to: * streamline or eliminate regulatory requirements in light of changes in industry structure; * reduce the size of local service subsidies by, among other things, new types of local services to generate increases in local service revenues and encouraging investment to reduce costs; * change the current system of allocating the subsidy to ensure that it is equitably distributed among subscribers; and, * examine alternatives to the Commission's existing rate base rate of return approach to regulation of the telephone companies that may better balance the interests of subscribers and competitors, while maximizing the operating efficiency of the companies. Parties wishing to participate in this proceeding must notify the Commission of their intention to do so by writing to the Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa,Ontario, K1A 0N2, by March 15, 1993. Submissions to this proceeding must be filed with the Commission by April 12, 1993. The Commission will convene and oral public hearing, scheduled to commence on November 1, 1993, in connection with this proceeding. - 30 - Contact: Bill Allen, Director CRTC Public Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2 (819) 997.0313 - TDD (819) 994.0423 - Fax (819) 994.0218 or one of our regional offices listed below: Halifax, Nova Scotia - (902) 426.7997 - TDD (902) 426.6997 Montreal, Quebec - (514) 283.6607 - TDD (514) 283.8316 Winnipeg, Manitoba - (204) 983.6306 - TDD (204) 983.8274 Vancouver, British Columbia - (604) 666.2111 - TDD (604) 666.0778 or from the Department of Communications Regional Office: Toronto, Ontario - (416) 973.8215 Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 11:10:14 PST From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ... Hi! I have the SID chart from the telecom archives, but it's quite old. Has anyone managed to get a list of SIDs for US cellular service providers? My carrier (Nynex mobile in NJ) tells me to just 'dial *611' to find out what system you are on. "We do not have that information." My phone displays SID, and I've noticed that there are many new ones I've wandered into that are not on the list. It is difficult to get *any* information out of Nynex. They tell me they have call delivery into Philadelphia. I try it and it doesn't work. I call them when I'm in Philly, and ask them to call me back on my mobile number and it *still* doesn't work. What do they conclude? Of course, everything is working fine. Finally, I attempted to get roaming rates and information from Nynex. They sent me a booklet from 1990 with a few roamer ports listed. What I really wanted was the rates. When I lived in Chicago, Cell/One in Chicago had a nice handy booklet with all of this. But Nynex told me they could and would give the information out only for cities/systems I specifically requested. That is, in order to find out the rates for, say, California I would have to name each city and have them read the information to me over the phone. How the rates that the customer pays are a confidential item, to be specifically kept *from* the customer I'll never know. After a lot of complaining and threatening to cancel my service they finally photocopied their roamer information -- which is up to date and includes all systems, roamer ports, daily and per minute charges, etc. Do many other 'service' providers give customers this much of a hard time when they want to find out rates? In the last two years I'd say my experience with the cellular industry is that the carriers never have anybody who knows anything answering the phone, and they absolutely refuse to let you speak with anybody who knows anything. , reb -- *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* reb@ingres.com or reb%ingres.com@lll-winken.llnl.GOV h:861 Washington Avenue Westwood NJ 07675 201-376-5766 ICBM: ??.??N ??.??W w: reb Ingres Park 80 West Plaza I Saddle Brook, NJ 07662 201-587-1400 [Moderator's Note: Both Cellular One and Ameritech in Chicago have the booklet you describe, listing roamer ports in hundreds of cities and dialing instructios, etc. They send them out as part of the sign up kit or you can get that information mailed out anytime. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #11 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27108; 7 Jan 93 19:37 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23778 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:00:07 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07721 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:59:33 -0600 Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:59:33 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301072259.AA07721@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #15 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Jan 93 16:49:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 15 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Brent Capps) Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Richard McCombs) Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Bill Huttig) Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Joe Malloy) Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Brent Capps) Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (John Rice) Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Troy Frericks) Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Fred Schimmel) Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (Daniel Burstein) Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (Jan Steinman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps) Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc. Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:03:49 GMT In article andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) writes: > On 25 Dec 92 21:26:00 GMT, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) said: >> I would have thought that by now AT&T would have stopped its annoying >> practice of drastically reducing its capacity on holidays. A number of >> AT&T employees have told me that for reasons that are not very clear, >> the company has traditionally blocked off a major amount of the >> system's capacity on various holidays such as Christmas and Mother's >> Day. This is the real reason you get the "All Circuits Busy" >> recording, not because there is an inordinate amount of traffic. > I can't imagine why they would deliberately turn away business, since > they make money selling it. Furthermore, if you go find back issues > of the {AT&T Technical Journal} in a library, I suspect you will find > that Mothers' Day is the acid test for new routing algorithms like > DNHR (Dynamic Non-Hierarchical Routing) and RTNR (Real Time > Non-Hierarchical Routing). I strongly suspect that AT&T turned on every traffic throttling tool in their arsenal. That's why they're there -- to keep the switch from being overwhelmed by the number of origination attempts. Remember, switches have limited internal resources -- call control buffers, interprocess communications mechanisms, timing-critical events -- that start breaking down when the switch gets really, really busy. If, say, a given interprocess communications channel gets choked with messages, internal watchdog processes may conclude that part of the system is stuck and deliberately swap the switch to the standby CPU, which of course will quickly get overwhelmed and lock up. So to prevent this they turn on a throttling feature like LLC (line load control) which will only give you dial tone on, say, 1 out of every 10 origination attempts. > On 27 Dec 92 09:24:00 GMT, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) said: >> How soon we forget. Hours after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, I >> tried at some length to get though to my home from southern >> California. All circuits were busy. Then I tried Sprint. The call >> went right through. Discussions right here on the Digest pointed to >> the policy of AT&T of purposely restricting incoming access to a >> disaster area. I, for one, was very grateful for the fact that AT&T's >> policies are not always imitated by the competitors. > The choke after the earthquake had a reason behind it. It was to > reserve some large fraction of trunk capacity for outgoing calls from > the disaster area. That policy and the reason for it was plastered > all over the media, in hopes that people would wait for the "I'm OK" > call rather than flooding the network with call attempts to empty > houses. I believe that the disaster assistance agencies also liked > that arrangement, since it improved the chances of their folks on the > scene being able to call out. This should hardly have come as a surprise to anyone. Disaster planning agencies publicised this fact beforehand, and I made arrangements with all my loved ones in the state to call a mutual friend in Texas who would relay messages and act as a kind of information clearing house. When the '89 quake hit I was in Los Gatos not far from the epicenter and was able to communicate with my husband in San Francisco because we could both call Dallas and leave messages for each other. You couldn't get through to San Francisco from Los Gatos for several hours after the quake. All in all I thought AT&T and Pac Tel did a fine job. After all, the power wasn't back on in Los Gatos until the next afternoon, but the phones were working within 15 minutes, and I don't know if they ever actually went down. As an aside, I was working for T1 mux manufacturer DCA/Cohesive at the time, and literally hundreds of these big (6' tall) mux cabinets were rolling around the test lab and mfg area like loose cannons. Engineers were scrambling like mad to keep from being crushed. We had a bunch of $5000 Fireberd T1 testers stacked precariously six high on top of one cabinet, and it's a miracle they didn't fall over. Ironically our customers were required to bolt their muxes to the floor instead of standing them on their castors like ours were, but one customer's mux fell *through* the floor, so bolting it down didn't do them much good. Fortunately, nobody got hurt at our site. I was in Oregon working for Kentrox on T1 CSUs within two months. That quake was the last straw for living in California. Brent Capps bcapps@agora.rain.com (gay stuff) bcapps@atlastele.com (telecom stuff) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... From: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs KB5SNF) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:26:18 CST Organization: The Red Headed League; Lawton, Ok In comp.dcom.telecom, rickie@trickie.ualberta.ca (and other in similar words) writes: > Or, take a lesser used route (MCI or Sprint). For the future, the Well I distinctly remember having trouble calling from Lawton, OK to Fort Worth, TX using MCI, so they get saturated to. Internet: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org If I bounce (the maps have errors that I have no control over) then use bo836@cleveland.freenet.edu BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 11:49:04 -0500 From: wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis The answer -- at least one possible answer -- is that the phone company runs line tests every day at about the same time ... (The same thing happed to me but at 6:20 AM and would wake me up) ... I don't remember why but I ended up buying (about $4 at Radio Shack) a polarity phone line tester; it should the polarity was reversed. Then all I had to do was to change the red and green wire around in the jack and I didn't have anymore pings. Bill ------------------------------ From: Laura G. Malloy Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? Organization: Bates College, Lewiston, Maine Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:14:17 GMT In article glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu (Glenn F. Leavell) writes: > It seems that I've seen discussion on the following topic in the > TELECOM Digest before, but I can't remember the answer or find > anything relevant in the archive index. > My parents live in Mississippi and get their local phone service from > South Central Bell. According to my parents, the bells in their > phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM. They say that the > ping almost always occurs around the same time, but that on certain > nights it may not occur until close to midnight. They've called South > Central Bell about this, and they were told that the ping was NOT > occuring due to anything that the phone company was doing. [deletia] Same thing happens to us in Clinton, NY, each evening (sometimes weekends, too) at just about 11 PM. I've always assumed some sort of telco testing was going on, but it would be nice to know exactly what they are doing! Joe Malloy/WB2RBA German Department/Hamilton College/Clinton, NY ------------------------------ From: bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps) Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc. Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:04:22 GMT In article glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu (Glenn F. Leavell) writes: > According to my parents, the bells in their phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM. SSB is pulling your leg. Your CO switch is running automatically scheduled self-diagnostics. They start every evening at the same time, but they're really testing the line cards and not the lines, so only one line per card gets 'pinged', typically the first one. I used to have a line in Dallas that would ping every evening at 8:15 PM. Brent Capps | bcapps@agora.rain.com (gay stuff) bcapps@atlastele.com (telecom stuff) ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 21:00:32 GMT In article , glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu (Glenn F. Leavell) writes: > My parents live in Mississippi and get their local phone service from > South Central Bell. According to my parents, the bells in their > phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM. They say that the > ping almost always occurs around the same time, but that on certain > nights it may not occur until close to midnight. They've called South > Central Bell about this, and they were told that the ping was NOT > occuring due to anything that the phone company was doing. This, not uncommon, occurrance is caused by automated line test equipment. The real clue is the fact that it happens every night at about the same time.In SCB it's probably MLT or MLT2. This equipment can be set up to routinely test each line in an office, every night on a regular schedule. The phenomena is known as 'bell tap'. When the line is tested, it is disconnected from the line finder, or line circuit, which provides dial tone, for the one or two seconds that it takes to perform the parametric measurements on the line. These tests are usually done at low voltage (10-20v) and won't usually cause a phone to ring. When the line is re-connected to the line circuit, -50v is placed back on the line. The 50v is sometimes enough to cause the ringer magnet to pull the clapper against the bell, one time. Also in some of the 'cheepie' phones with electronic ringers, the sounder will 'cheep' once when voltage in initially applied (re-applied). One solution to the problem is to reverse tip and ring on the phone (reverse the red and green wires at the connector block. This causes the magnet to kick the clapper the opposite direction when voltage is initially applied. This will usually work, but if the phone is an older touch tone phone, this may cause the T.T. Pad not to work (they were polarity sensitive in older Bell Phones). Also, it's sometimes possible to mechanically adjust the bell, so that the -50v pluse isn't quite enough to pull the bell magnet enough to cause a tap. With the advent of automated line test equipment in the past 15 years or so, this has been an on-going problem. It's much more prevalent in Europe, where telephone instruments are of generally higher impeedance and it takes much less voltage to ring the phone. On the other side of the equation, the automated testing allows the telco to recognize deteriorating outside plant cable in many cases before the customer even recoginzes that there's a problem, and fix it. Often out of service lines are reported by the equipment and repaired with the customer never being aware of a problem. A deteriorating cable or cross connect box that could ultimately result in 20-50 subscriber trouble reports can often be found, diagnosed, and repaired before any customer reports occur, so that grade of services is improved overall. (And it's less expensive to do it that way then respond individually to each and every call as they occur), thus everybody saves. John Rice K9IJ | "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was | MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially | Not my Employer's.... rice@ttd.teradyne.com | Purveyor of Miracles,Magic and Sleight-of-hand ------------------------------ From: troyf@microware.com (Troy Frericks) Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:18:19 GMT In article glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu (Glenn F. Leavell) writes: > My parents live in Mississippi and get their local phone service from > South Central Bell. According to my parents, the bells in their > phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM. They say that the Have you tried swapping out the phone? This would rule out some things like EMI being picked up from something like a water softner or a lamp on a timmer. Some cheap (cherp, cherp) phones tend to be less tolerant than others. 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: schimmel@gandalf.ca (Fred Schimmel) Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd. Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:42:11 GMT It used to be that there was something called a line integrity test (LIT) that occured in the interval just before the ring cycle began. The circuit was re-arranged to test the line between the CO and the phone. This is one reason why Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) needs to identify its Ringer Equivalence Number (REN) because the test had differing results depending on the number of ringers on the line. Perhaps you added or removed some phones, modems, answering machines, etc. Perhaps your local CO routinely at 10:15PM does a maintenance check of all its lines, and this is when the ping occurs. Try calling and asking for a test supervisor to see if they do something like this. Or count your equipment total REN and inform the phone company. It could just be a misprogrammed test, or an indicator that the line is faulty. Perhaps someone else remembers more about LIT. I believe this was a #5 crossbar feature. Fred Schimmel Gandalf Data Ltd. schimmel@gandalf.ca ------------------------------ From: dannyb@Panix.Com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto Organization: Panix, NYC Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:35:24 GMT In Tony Harminc writes: > This past November, a company I consult for had three unauthorized > calls to (416) 976-9467 made on one of its lines. Each call was one > minute long and was billed at $24. Thinking back, we remember the > likely perpetrator -- a man claiming to be serving legal papers on > someone who supposedly used to work at the office address. There were > several small discrepancies to his story, but he seemed just as > puzzled as we were. He asked to use the phone, and I remember that he > did a lot of dialing, but when challenged he showed a pager with > display and claimed he was calling his voicemail. > Bell Canada has agreed to remove the charges, but will not tell us the > name of the owner of this number. We are not eager to pursue it with > the police, because of the small amount of the fraud, but we are > concerned that this may be part of an organized scam (else how would > the 'process server' benefit?) and others may also have been hit. The > $24 charge is quite a bit higher than the usual sex and sleaze lines > which -- according to the ads -- are mostly $10. A similar scam has been going on in New York City. A messenger will show up at a company with a package, and when no one there seems to match the addressee, he asks to use the phone. Calls a "540" exchange (one of the extra charge numbers; the others are 550, 970, 976, and another about to be announced) and the company gets billed for $50 or so. When people notice it on the bill and complain, the local telco wipes the charge. But how many people don't ... Which brings up a question or two about this whole concept of surcharged phone numbers: Aside from all the legal questions (I'd love someone to push a strong lawsuit about misbilling and all sorts of other things), I'd like to know the following: Does anybody out here have any sort of breakdwon as to the users, or rather, providors, of these services? Thanks, danny ------------------------------ From: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch (Jan Steinman) Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto Reply-To: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch Organization: Ascom Hasler AG Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 12:08:43 GMT In article 3@eecs.nwu.edu, Tony Harminc () writes: > This past November, a company I consult for had three unauthorized > calls to (416) 976-9467 made on one of its lines. Each call was one > minute long and was billed at $24. Thinking back, we remember the > likely perpetrator -- a man claiming to be serving legal papers on > someone who supposedly used to work at the office address. There were > several small discrepancies to his story, but he seemed just as > puzzled as we were. He asked to use the phone, and I remember that he > did a lot of dialing, but when challenged he showed a pager with > display and claimed he was calling his voicemail. This sounds like a scam I heard about from a client in New York City. It is simple to do, given the right information. All you need is a bunch of numbers of pagers that display a number to call. Call those pagers, and give the 976 number to call. The process server may have been an unwitting victim of this hoax. For whatever reason, my client assigned pagers to virtually all their staff, and the numbers were sequential. The hoax was discovered one day when every beeper in the whole joint began ringing, and people compared numbers and discovered they were the same number. This was not too long ago -- not everyone recognizes the significance of 976, especially when it is in the form of a generally important interrupt, like your pager going off! Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths steinman@hasler.ascom.ch 2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA +1 503 657 7703 Beundenfeldstrasse 35, CH-3013, Bern, Switzerland +41 31 999 3946 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #15 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15828; 12 Jan 93 0:20 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15721 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:18:06 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06215 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:17:41 -0600 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:17:41 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301120417.AA06215@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #16 TELECOM Digest Mon, 11 Jan 93 22:17:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 16 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Weekend Mail Breakdown Here (TELECOM Moderator) C&P Enters Electronic Services Market (Paul Robinson) Bell Atlantic Cellular Charges (Lyle Seaman) Need Help in the Study of Computers and Communications (Michael Hauben) Compressed Speech Warbles ... Need Help! (Michael K. Minakami) Data Intensive Wan - Need Recommendations (Andy Brager) AT&T Buys 20% of Unitel (Dave Leibold) Sega Announces VR Peripheral (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) AT&T and Novel Form Alliance (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) Cheapest LD Company to Call One Interstate Number Four Hours/Week (W Lance) Programming Instructions for a Nokia 101 Cellular Phone (Lustig Help Needed With Motorola Micro-Tac (Brian Cartmell) Looking For DID Information (Roy M. Silvernail) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Weekend Mail Breakdown Here Date: January 11, 1993 22:00:00 CST This is just a short note to say that over the weekend the software was out of order here at eecs. Some changes were made in the way things are mounted on the system and corresponding changes were NOT made to the alias file where the telecom mailing list is referenced. Thus, attempts by me to mail issues of the Digest resulted in sendmail looking for my list and not being able to find it. This somehow got past the sysadmin when the work was being done Saturday morning, so I was unable to get anything out to the list over the weekend. It got repaired when he came to work Monday. Sorry about that. Patrick Townson TELECOM Moderator ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 20:05:56 EST Subject: C&P Enters Electronic Services Market Article Summary C&P, Herndon Firm Introduce Interactive 'Scanfone' (Washington Post, Jan 7, Page D11) John Burgess tells about Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company, in cooperation with Herndon, VA-based U.S. Order, the company that created it, a new phone for use with electronic services such as banking. The phone appears similar to a kitchen wall-mounted telephone stuck on the left side of a credit card reader with a swipe slot and a bar-code wand. The phone with services rents for $11.95 a month. You can order things by using the wand to scan some bar codes, and then select items from the LED display. It is called a "Scanfone' and when you order something you can then swipe your credit card through the reader. Some companies have agreed to sign up for the service, including Safeway, which will deliver groceries for a $9.95 service charge through Grocery Express (who already does the same thing for the same price by picking up the phone and calling them voice.) Maryland National Bank is already running a bank-by-phone four-line display phone. This type of service has not been very popular because it has usually been hard to use and overpriced. The people selling it, naturally, claim that with some practice you can pay bills easier and faster with this system than with a pen and a checkbook (which since not everyone you pay bills to will be subscribed to this, you are still going to need and have to pay with, anyway.) One instant disadvantage is if you order something from a merchant using this method and it's out of stock, you get a notice by U.S. mail, not on the same call as you would on a voice telephone call. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 20:57:04 -0500 (EST) From: Lyle_Seaman@transarc.com Subject: Bell Atlantic Cellular Charges Someone recently posted some cellular charges for the Austin area, so here's Bell Atlantic's rates. There are some discounts if you have lots of phones. Bell Atlantic Cellular Price Plans 10/92, one phone: Activation fee: $50. $ /min free minutes $/month peak/offpeak peak/offpeak 2: 28 0.40/0.40 0/ 0* 12: 27 0.37/0.37 0/ 0* ** 204: 18 0.65/0.15 0/200 214: 70 0.36/0.36 90/ 30** 212: 100 0.35/0.35 150/ 60** 211: 140 0.35/0.35 240/120** *251-500 min usage => 4% discount, 501-750=>6%, 751+=>8%. Discounts apply only to home system minutes. ** these are "annual plans" which are "subject to substantial early termination fee" No charge for busy or unanswered calls. Peak hours 0700-1900 Mon-Fri except New Year's Day, Memorial Day, July 4th, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, and Christmas Day. Off-Peak hours all other times. Airtime charges on a mobile originated call begin when connection to the cellular system is established. Cellular Radio service is capable of being intercepted without the knowledge or permission of the user by third parties possessing certain types of devices or equipment. Each partial minutes of airtime is billed as a full minute. Monthly allowance does not apply to roaming. Airtime and toll charges apply to Bell Atlantic IQ Services (forwarding, call waiting, 3way calling, no-answer/busy transfer). Mobile Messenger: $6/month, free with plans 211 or 212 ------------------------------ From: hauben@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Michael Hauben) Subject: Need Help in the Study of Computers and Communications Organization: Columbia University Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:49:28 GMT Communications among humans has begun to radically change since the introduction of computers into the process. I plan to try to work in the field of computer communications and networks. I am currently a college sophomore and must declare my major or concentration by April. Thus, I am trying to design a special concentration of study to propose to my advisor. Broadly I would like to call my concentration "Computers and Society." I would like to study this field as broadly as possible, incorporating history of technology, sociology, philosophy, and thinking on future implications. However, if I must narrow my approach, I might want to focus on "Computers and Communications." I am interested in the role computers play in our society. Recent technological advances have been advancing society at a faster rate than ever before possible. I would like to study the computer's place in society in relation to what advances it has made possible. Also I would like to study how the technology, that is the computer, can, has, and will change society. Currently I am planning to study computers and telecommunications. I plan to study both the technological foundation, and the social impact and implications of computers to communication. I need to plan a program of studies. I need help figuring out what focus to take in my program of studies, and also suggestions of courses that would form a solid program in the study of computers and communications. It is possible to take courses in other divisions of my University, such as the School of Engineering, if I design my own interdisciplinary major. Again, I would be interested in hearing from others about what majors of telecommunications or computers and communications exists in other schools. Either that or the possible broader major of computers and society or technology and society would be interesting to hear. Also, any suggestions of what kinds of courses should be involved in either majors. Thank You, Michael Hauben hauben@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu am893@cleveland.freenet.edu ------------------------------ From: minakami@xenon.stanford.edu (Michael K. Minakami) Subject: Compressed Speech Warbles ... Need Help! Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University. Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 09:52:23 GMT Hello all, I'm using a GSM compressor to try to compress some voice data digitally recorded at a studio. The uncompressed voice sounds quite good, however once it's compressed there is an annoying warble in the voice. Does anyone have any ideas how I could "fix" this? Any pre-filters? I suspect this is the same warbling experienced by some RELP coders, as GSM employs LPC followed by long-term-prediction and residue encoding. Any leads would be greatly appreciated! Michael Minakami Computer Science/Psychology Stanford University ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jan 1993 00:23:39 +0000 (GMT) From: andyb@wndrsvr.la.ca.us (Andy Brager) Subject: Data Intensive Wan - Need Recommendations Organization: Wonder Server - Public Access for SoCal I need recommendations for a WAN. The WAN will have a star topology, as there will be one central site, and many (currently three envisioned but more to be added) remote sites. The remote sites may have a small (three user?) LAN. The central site will probably have a larger LAN, type unknown, quite possibly Novell. The amount of data involved is enormous. On the order of 500MB every 20 minutes or so. I believe it will not be a steady stream of data, but a 500MB chunk every so often. This may or may not already take compression into account. Currently, ten minutes or so to get the data from the remote sites to the central sites is acceptable, however this may change in the future. Eventually real-time may be required. The remote sites will most likely have the data coming from a HP 9000 HP/UX system. Currently there is no equipment, no cable, no building (as far as I know there is no building). My main question is, what hardware is needed at each end to support this WAN? In addition, what facility and service would be best? My back of the envelope calculations say that T1 would take 45 minutes, T3 would be 90 seconds. Is there a dial-up T3 option? Are there other facilities that would work for this? What sort of bandwidth can one get using a VSAT and spread spectrum (if that is a bad question, how fast can 500MB be transmitted)? One or two of the sites may be geographically close (a few miles?), but most will eventually be quite far. Do I need to worry about the local phone company, or do I only have to deal with a long distance carrier? What other questions should I have asked? What information did I leave out? Thanks in advance!! Andy Large Packages (10K+ Total) to: cerritos.edu!swc!wndrsvr!andyb ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 11:30:24 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: AT&T Buys 20% of Unitel AT&T will buy 20% of Canadian carrier Unitel Communications, according to an announcement issued shortly after Bell Canada and BC Tel announced that there would be no further appeals to last June's pro-competition decision. Before, Rogers Communications had 40% of Unitel while Canadian Pacific had the other 60%. Now AT&T will get 20% with Rogers stake going down 8% to 32%, and CP's stake down 12% to 48%. The deal is expected to close 29th January, plus a $200 million equity investment among the three shareholders to boost capital base. The U.S. stake in Unitel raises concerns. Rod Hiebert of British Columbia's chapter of Telecommunications Workers Union said "The U.S. carriers have enough spare capacity in their systems to serve all of Canada at the flip of a switch." Thus, foreign-controlled carriers in Canada may have no incentive to provide facilities in Canada. The AT&T link does allow for convenient cross-border connections and opportunities. Another part of the deal means Unitel will be getting its network switching equipment from AT&T rather than Northern Telecom. Unitel reports 38 000 subscribers to its limited public long distance service so far. Bell Canada revenues last year were $2.2 million, Unitel's $400 million. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 19:51:50 EST Subject: Sega Announces VR Peripheral >From Page D12 of the January 7, 1993 {Washington Post}: Sega of America said that Virtus Sega, a full-color "virtual reality" peripheral for the 16-bit Genesis, will be available in the fall. Sega plans to release at least four software titles in 1993. The games will feature flying, driving and fantasy action. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 19:53:27 EST Subject: AT&T and Novell Form Alliance From the {Washington Post}, Page D12 of Jan 7: AT&T and Novell, the computer software giant, announced an alliance to create products that link computer networks and business telephones. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 21:25:36 -0500 From: wlw2328@ultb.isc.rit.edu (W.L. Lance) Subject: Cheapest LD Company to Call One Interstate Number Four+ Hours/Week The subject says it all, I am looking for the cheapest way to confer with someone in CA (I am in NY) four or more hours a week. The number will always be the same, and the calls will be after 6 or 9pm EST. Does anyone have any sugg suggestions? I have heard some discussion of purchasing blocks of time in a advance for better discounts. I also thought I heard someone mention (along time ago) a set monthly fee with unlimited calling to one number. Does anyone have any info? The more the better so please respond! Thanks, Lance Ware ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 15:18:29 -0800 From: Barry Lustig Subject: Programming Instructions for a Nokia 101 Cellular Phone The Nokia 101/1000 Series handportable CMT uses an EEPROM NAM that can be programmed directly from the standard user keypad. In order to access the NAM, you must enter the special access code currently programmed into the phone. This code can be changed and therefore may vary from phone to phone. Once the programming mode is accessed, NAM parameters are loaded by entering them into the display and "storing" them to selected memory locations. Be sure to obtain all parameters before proceeding. ACCESS NAM PROGRAMMING MODE: 1. Turn the phone on. 2. Enter the NAM access code. Factory default is *3001#12345 3. Enter [STO] 00. 4. Verify that "STORE NOT DONE" appears in the display. If "NOT ALLOWED" appears, check to see of you have entered the access code correctly. Note: If the correct access code is unknown, reprogramming must be referred back to the wholesale purchaser of the phone. ENTER SPECIAL NAM PARAMETERS (Memory Location 01): 5. Press and hold the [CLR] key until the display clears. 6. In one long string, enter the special NAM parameters according to the format of Example 1 below. Enter each emergency number (such as 911 or *911) followed by the pound (#) key, the Language Code followed by the asterisk (*) key, and the desired four digit lock code. Language codes: 0 = English, 1 = French, 2 = Spanish. EXAMPLE 1: Pound Key__________________ _________ Asterisk Key \ \ / 9 1 1 # * 9 1 1 # 0 * 1 2 3 4 / / \ \_____ Lock Code Emergency_____/________/ \___________ Language Code Numbers 7. Enter [STO] 01 [STO]. ENTER MOBILE PHONE NUMBER (Memory Location 02 or 04): 8. Press and hold the [CLR] key until the display clears. 9 Enter the correct 10 digit phone number. 10. If desired, press the [ALPHA] key and enter a name of up to 16 characters. Note that the zero (0) key can be used to insert a blank space. After the name is entered, press [ALPHA]. 11. (For Primary NAM) Enter [STO] 02 [STO]. (For Optional NAM) Enter [STO] 04 [STO]. ENTER SYSTEM PARAMETERS (Memory Location 03 or 05): 12. Press and hold the [CLR] key until the display clears. 13. In one long string, enter the system parameters according to the format of Example 2 below. Be sure to separate each parameter with an asterisk (*). Do not place an asterisk before or after the string. EXAMPLE 2: System ID________ _____ Group ID Mark \ / _ _ _ 3 4 * 1 * 1 * 3 3 4 * 1 5 * 1 5 Access Method ____________/ / \ \___ Access Overload Class Local Use Mark ______________/ \_________ Initial Paging Channel VERIFY NAM INFORMATION 15. Press and hold the [CLR] key until the display clears. 16. Enter [RCL] followed by one of the memory locations from above (01 through 05). 17. Verify that the information for that memory location is correct. 18. To exit the programming mode, power the phone off then back on. If "NAM ERROR" appears on the display, programming was done incorrectly and must be repeated. Enjoy! barry ------------------------------ From: brc@halcyon.com (Brian Cartmell) Subject: HELP Needed With Motorola Micro-Tac Organization: Encryption Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:38:40 GMT Someone was telling how to reset and put a Motorola in test mode by connecting pin 20-21 but my micro-tac has a eight pin connector with what looks like a ground. Does anyone have a idea of how to put this in test mode? Thanks, Brian ------------------------------ Subject: Looking For DID Information From: roy@cybrspc.UUCP (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 17:52:15 CST Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN Gee, thanks, everybody ... just because I mention TELECOM Digest once in a while, my friends now think I'm some sort of Telecom Guru! :-) This little quest is inspired by John Higdon's recent DID discussion. Can someone provide me a pointer to the DID signalling spec? Hopefully, it's on an ftp site somewhere, although I didn't see any mention in the Telecom Archives index PAT posted last week. Or do I need to go to Bellcore for this? (If so, got a document number?) Thanks in advance, folks! Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #16 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15866; 12 Jan 93 0:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16968 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:19:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24279 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:18:57 -0600 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:18:57 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301120418.AA24279@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #17 TELECOM Digest Mon, 11 Jan 93 22:19:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 17 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY (David G. Lewis) Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? (Andy Sherman) Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? (Gordon Burditt) Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY (John R. Levine) Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY (John Higdon) Re: Additional Phone Charges (Richard Lucas) Re: Additional Phone Charges (Mike Gordon) Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services (James Hanlon) Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services (mark@coombs.anu.edu.au) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY Organization: AT&T Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:09:31 GMT In article tim gorman <71336.1270@Compu Serve.COM> writes: > John Higdon writes: >> Bob Yazz writes: >>> The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period. >> But the PUC cannot order this, just as it cannot prevent any carrier >> from passing realtime ANI to end users. > Actually the PUC could order this and make it stand. Actually, to my knowledge (the Mother of all Disclaimers), the PUC could *not* order this, nor make it stand. The FCC could, but state PUCs have no jurisdiction over interstate telecommunications, and the FCC tends to take a dim view of state PUCs attempting to claim jurisdiction over interstate matters. The FCC, as far as I know, is considering this issue even as we speak. >> In SS7, the calling number is ALWAYS transmitted as part of the >> data packet, although there is a bit that identifies it as a "blocked" >> number if such is the case. > The Network Interconnect package needed to allow SS7 interconection > between the LEC and the IXC's makes provision for the calling number > to be deleted from any IAM message sent to the IXC. This is true in > every central office switch type I am aware of. This includes NTI, > AT&T, and Ericsson. I believe Bellcore TRs specify that this must be provisionable on a per-IXC basis in each CO, FYI. > SWBT policy is that this feature is invoked in all central offices > with SS7 interconnection to IXC's until calling number delivery is > tariffed and sold in that CO and all subscribers have been fully > informed (through bill inserts, etc.) of the impacts they will see. > So the PUC could order this be done in PB-land and also require that > PB negotiate with the switch vendors to insure the capability is > retained from this day forward. It's technically feasible, but outside their jurisdiction for interstate calls. > *opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence* Ditto. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 11:57:20 EST Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) John Higdon writes: > But what people do not understand is that those preciously > private telephone numbers will soon be displayed out of state on > a wide scale. It is only other CALIFORNIANS that will not see > the number displayed. yazz@locus.com (Bob Yazz) replied: > You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, > do you John? The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, > period. I can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac > Bell over this. Californians may *think* they control everything, but in reality NOT. The California PUC has absolutely no jurisdiction over the carrying of telephone calls in interstate commerce. That is the exclusive jurisdiction of the FCC. In fact, this genie is already out of the bottle. All of the major carriers are right now happily delivering your billing number to their 800 and 900 customers who subscribe to ANI. The PUC is allowing it, one assumes because they know they have no authority to stop it. Unless, of course, you mean to imply that the most egalitarian California PUC would allow number delivery to big bad business but not to "da people". :^| yazz> Sounds like an incentive to switch to a long distance company yazz> that does not use SS7. How do you think AT&T might feel about yazz> this? Go and find one. Do you *really* think that AT&T is the only carrier with SS7 on its mind? It may be ahead in its deployment, but it is not alone. Now I know why John and others have been referring to some of the arguments in this thread as Luddite. Do you really think that LECs and IECs expect to make enough money from CNID and ANI to pay for the tremendous investment in SS7? Dream on. SS7 is being deployed because it promises to provide *much* faster and more robust call setup than its predecessors. I doubt you will get any company to drop SS7. A more realistic, and less technically ignorant, campaign would be to persuade one or more IECs to drop calling number delivery over SS7. (A campaign which I would oppose, but one that at least is not just plain stupid). Since you want to kill SS7 to stop CNID and ANI, may I assume you intend to deprive the rest of us of ISDN as well? You can't do that either witout SS7. 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: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 07:20:27 GMT >> You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, do you >> John? The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period. I >> can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac Bell over this. > But the PUC cannot order this, just as it cannot prevent any carrier > from passing realtime ANI to end users. Why? Federal law? What's so special about SS7? Has it been enacted into law by Congress or the FCC? I don't see anything prohibiting a sufficiently provoked PUC (or the state legislature backing the PUC) from doing any of the following (except perhaps common sense on the part of the PUC? Naaaah. Not if the voters are out for blood.) downright silly things: - Prohibiting the inclusion of any equipment that uses SS7 in the rate base, or otherwise fiddling with the formulas so the only profitable thing to do with it is decommission and destroy it. - Prohibiting the use of SS7, especially for in-state calls, with anything but the phone company's own customer service number in any "originating number" or "billing information" field. - Requiring a new tariff for every SS7 packet transmitted. - Making all phone service flat-rate and prohibiting charges for individual calls, thereby eliminating the need for per-call "billing information" except for one billing number for each in-state phone company. Local phone companies eat charges from MCI, Sprint, AT&T, etc. - Abolishing phone numbers (in-state) and using names and addresses. - Threatening the phone companies that if they don't quit sending phone numbers out of state, the PUC will set the rate for local calls at negative five dollars a minute. Customers will then figure out that two more lines with a call permanently connected between them is better than a welfare check, and that pretty soon they can work up to thousands of lines. Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon ------------------------------ Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 9 Jan 93 11:23:05 EST (Tue) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) [The question is whether Pac Bell will ship CLID data via SS7 links to LD carriers for out of state delivery.] I doubt it. The biggest obstacle to long distance CLID delivery isn't technical. It's money. The local telcos claim on the one hand that the CLID data they can provide to LD carriers on their originating calls is valuable and proprietary stuff and the LD carriers should pay them for it. On the other hand, the CLID data passed from an LD carrier to a terminating telco is just part of the standard set of SS7 features and should be passed along for free. I imagine the LD carriers have a somewhat different view. So this means that you're not likely to get CLID any time soon on calls that aren't carried end-to-end by your local telco. Within the US, I haven't heard of any reports of CLID being delivered across a LATA boundary. (Note that LATA boundaries are largely unrelated to area code boundaries. In particular, 201 and 908 are the same LATA.) Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Jan 93 09:44 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> writes: > So the PUC could order this be done in PB-land and also require that > PB negotiate with the switch vendors to insure the capability is > retained from this day forward. Boy, are you giving the CPUC an order of magnitude credit more than it deserves! You have to understand that the CPUC is absolutely brain dead. I could give you a list of things that are wrong with CA utilities as long as your arm that the CPUC shrugs off routinely. Fortunately, the marketplace provides a modicum of inherent regulation, even in monopolies. In any event, I can guarantee you that the California excuse-for-a-regulatory board has not a clue regarding the switch features, technological ramifications, or in fact anything more complex than dialing a call. Check that -- the commissioners have secretaries place calls. Example: Remember the matter that I brought up a couple of years ago about the fact that all cellular prefixes in the Bay Area should carry no toll and be available for $.20 from utility phones? I checked and this is indeed the tariff. Six months of griping to Pac*Bell and the PUC has never resolved the problem of inconsistent charging from PB payphones. Our PUC at work. 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: rlucas@bvsd.Co.EDU (Richard Lucas) Subject: Re: Additional Phone Charges Organization: Boulder Valley School District Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 02:02:14 GMT In article TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM writes: > I may have mentioned this before, but the simplest way to get the > equivalent of an unlisted number is to ask for the phone to be listed > {without address} under your roommate's name of Zyagur Xeanamux. When > someone calls asking for him, you know that it's a telemarketer. > What, you mean you don't have a roommate by that name? Exactly ... In an earlier message in this issue of TELECOM Digest, John Higdon (I think) mentions Pat's problems with repair and comments about IBT having a touch of Ma Bell still with them. Having worked a few years ago on the class action lawsuit against what is now US WEST, I was astonished in my research to discover just how much of Ma Bell was still present in the business office practices of different Baby Bells. With that experience in mind I hope that the following comments on Paul Robinson's message will apply in most parts of the country. These comments are made as a former service rep. Your basic account record/service order is likely to carry two distinct sets of information - listing and billing. They do NOT have to match each other, which provides the method of avoiding the non-pub charge. Request that the LN (Listed Name) be some made-up name (I've seen listings in people's dog's name, and one employee had hers entered as Raggety, A.), and the billing lines to read: BN1 John Smith for BN2 A. Raggety The key question to the company when I worked for them was billing responsibility. As long as the first line of the billing info (the BN1) was the responsible party, we really didn't care too much about the LN. The CI (Credit/Contact Information portion of the order/record) was tied to the responsible party. The closer to a `real' name your LN request is, the less trouble you'll have getting it by the service rep; more unusual combinations may simply involve more haggling if the rep is in his/her God mode. It's your phone line and you don't want to be listed, but your roommate does? Avoid the additional listing charge by giving them the LN/BN2, and you take the BN1 responsibility. Works great! Other codes to consider: Our listing has the (OAD) and (OCLS) codes in the listing line -- the first translates to Out Address Directory and keeps us out of the listings by address book the company produces, and the second translates to Out Customer Listing Service and keeps us off the customer listings lists that they sell to other companies. For an address we simply list our community name (Boulder); our service record shows that for the LA (Listed Address - which can also be completely blank) and then has a SA (Service Address) for the actual physical location. There's all sorts of listing tricks available, but the ones that don't generate revenue are rarely mentioned. Pressing the service reps for additional details is completely legitimate, and even serves as a reasonable test of whether or not the rep knows what they're doing. As a footnote to the listings question, I audited the service records of the individuals specifically named in the class action lawsuit's initial filing. One of them, a doctor, had both a non-pub listing (his name) AND an additional listing (roommate's name), with the corresponding monthly charges (almost $3/month total). Besides being a stupid way of doing it (give her the LN/BN2 and him the BN1, for NO monthly charge), it was against the tariff rules in place at the time. While the subsequent lawsuit settlement returned to him the overcharge for the inside wire maintenance agreement, that overcharge was only a tiny fraction of the listings overcharge. I did notify one of the telco's attorneys about the listings problem, but didn't have a current letter of authorization to follow up on the matter. I wouldn't be surprised to find the charges still in place today, particularly since a number of service reps had probably accessed his records between the lawsuit filing and my audit without ever mentioning (much less correcting) the listings problem. Footnote 2: Linebacker is an ENHANCED wire maintenance agreement, NOT the basic agreement. One poster a few months ago mentioned getting service in the northern midwest, with Linebacker mentioned in a way that indicated that it was presented as the basic maintenance agreement. It isn't in Colorado, and I doubt it is elsewhere either. Rick Lucas (rlucas@bvsd.co.edu) Debate Coach, Fairview HS, Boulder, CO ------------------------------ From: mwgordon@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Gordon) Subject: Re: Additional Phone Charges Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 08:07:50 GMT In article TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM writes: > I may have mentioned this before, but the simplest way to get the > equivalent of an unlisted number is to ask for the phone to be listed > {without address} under your roommate's name of Zyagur Xeanamux. When > someone calls asking for him, you know that it's a telemarketer. > What, you mean you don't have a roommate by that name? Exactly ... Good luck trying to get the number listed under a name that's different than the billing name! Our local telco won't do it, which can be quite annoying when you have a few people sharing a house. (Another college town telecom woe :( ) And forget about being billed under a different name! I've heard that you can get your name trademarked (or something like that) as it refers to you. This supposedly is what stars use to keep their names from being used by unethical retailers, etc. (For example, the Mel Gibson line of sportswear at Sammy W's Superstores.) Now, couldn't a Joe Regular do the same sort of thing? Something like "All businesses are forbidden to use the name Joe Regular (when refering to Joe Regular of 123 Average St. blah blah) in any advertisments or publicatio without the express written permission of Joe Regular." Then write the telco a certified letter saying that they are expressly forbidden from using your name in their publication. Of course you would include a copy of the "trademark" document. The same tactic could be used for those nasty (and brain-dead) junk mailers that love to fill our mailboxes and trash cans. I know it is expensive to get any sort of legal documents created, but maybe some of our readers are lawyers (or have friends or family members who are) and thus can get a free opinion on this. Any opinions about this out there? By the way, I feel that being charged monthly to protect (in one small way) our right to privacy is extortion! What real cost is there associated with being left off of a list? Mike Gordon N9LOI 99681084@uwwvax.uww.edu ------------------------------ From: tcubed@ddsw1.mcs.com (James Hanlon) Subject: Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 20:04:07 GMT Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL jadams@vixen.cc.bellcore.com (adams,john) writes: > I suspect that outside sociological, economic, and political pressures > will do more to answer the posed question than mere technology alone. After much experience, both painful and rewarding, I have to agree. > other "softer" sciences. At least from my perspective, the softer > sciences are indeed *MUCH* harder to master than those we use daily. And are applicable far more often than we'd care to admit. Just what is the ratio? I have my own judgments -- any other opinions? > Will the current industry infrastructure (Don't you just love the way > we can beat this politicisms to death :-) ) remain viable by 2010? US, yes; the LECs and the Inter-LATA carriers make money with zero incremental thought on their parts. Such an easy life will be perpetuated by all sorts of rationalizations -- after all, there's still a Western Union! The international picture will reflect a more entrepreneurial orientation, as formerly nationalized administrations get, first, privatized, then, overlaid with only nominally national wide-band high-connectivity networks. I base my reasoning on the fact that non-US administrations have fewer intrinsic constraints upon them -- they largely limit themselves. It only takes one executive of vision to get the ball rolling, once freed from bureaucratic concerns, and enjoying the support of the Prime Minister/President/King. Network architecture is no longer mysterious these days, and comm/compute hardware is notoriously commoditized. There are numerous non-US telco administrations with the know-how to pull off e.g. a wide-band wireless point-to-point variable bandwidth overlay network for large geographic areas, that considers the PSTN a relatively small component. I am disposed to wireless because, in the foregoing scenario, it permits the subversion of any existing wired network without directly confronting any entrenched (sorry) bureaucracy. Wireless for the first hop is a viable strategy as long as reasonably cheap broadband rf modems are available, and spread-spectrum technology can make the above-10 GHz area sharable. I am assuming that this will happen. > venture. Profit is not a dirty word! I am convinced that rate of > return regulation will die a natural death before the year 2000. > While price cap regulation seems to be in vogue with our lawyer > friends(?), I'm almost positive that zero regulation (price/cost only) > will be in effect by 2010. I predict that individuals in 2010 will have the option to contract with global bandwidth/connectivity providers for any sort of frame transfer, with various guarantees of delivery, ordering, delay, and BER. And AT&T, and FCC, will have very little to say about it. Jim Hanlon tcubed@ddsw1.mcs.com ------------------------------ From: mark@coombs.anu.edu.au (Mark) Subject: Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services Date: 10 Jan 93 00:29:55 GMT Organization: Australian National University Hi, I was chewing the fat and heard about an idea I thought was cute. Telecom Australia is working on a radio phone system that has a lot of potential IMHO. The idea is you have slim compact handsets that are basically a smart radio with a short range. Spread over the CBD at first and then the suburbs are base stations that each phone user can log into with the same handset. When the user is at work they can log into their office station and their calls are charged to their work or when they go home they are charged to their home number. You have the ability of having a single handset you can use at work and home, without having to reprogram it. The idea of the short ranges of the base stations is to enable a high density per area. The system doesn't allow one to roam from zone to zone as such and keep the call going, you have to sit still or at least stay in radio range. If you want to roam, get a hands free car phone or a more sophisticated (and expensive) mobile phone. One bonus for business is your facility phone can be transported around the building with only a power lead needed wherever you set up shop again. No reprogramming or rewiring needed. A business can have their own station to save on call costs. It was mentioned the possibility of the use of smart cards to automate the logging onto the zone station. It would also authenticate the caller if used with PIN numbers etc. Encryption is expected to be encompassed in the system for added security. What I like is you can remove your smartcard or switch off the unit and then can't be tracked. If you want to recieve calls then you log into a zone to let it know you're willing to be contacted. There will be packages offered with these phones and pagers so you can save the phone battery until someone pages you. One problem is the listening in capability that is always there. At work or home your on a radio link, most likely plain voice. It makes taps easier, even with the different frequency assigned to you for each call. This system brings closer the concept of Personal Communication Numbers (PCNs) so you can one day be contacted anywhere in the world, just by anyone dialling your permanent number. The only problems I can see immediately are those involved with the amount of frequencies, RFI and the ease of monitoring. Sounds like a nice system. Mark mark@coombs.anu.edu.au ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #17 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17060; 12 Jan 93 1:18 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03715 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:03:36 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09413 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:03:09 -0600 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:03:09 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301120503.AA09413@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #18 TELECOM Digest Mon, 11 Jan 93 23:03:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 18 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Interesting Statistic on Calls From Prisons (Larry Cipriani) Cordless Key Systems? (Jonathan Edwards) Updating Survey of E-Mail Services - Need Help. (Donald R. Newcomb) PC Software for ATTmail (Donald R. Newcomb) Panasonic KX-Txxxx Mailing List (Bill Cerny) Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56 (Raul Rathmann) Audiovox Cellular Phone MVX-500 (ie Minivox) (Steve Wachtel) Hooking up a US modem in Czechoslovakia (Raul Rathmann) Modem Won't Hang Up (Richard Budd) Area Code 610 (Carl Moore) FAQ About 900 Numbers? (Stephan Meyers) Will a UK Telephone Work in the US (Will it Ring?) (Richard Lamb) Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How? (George Planansky) About C&P's "Swipe Reader" Phones (Paul Robinson) Info Wanted: Telecom in Holland? (Bryan Petty) Internet / UUCP / Compuserve / Anything in Belize? (Larry Krone) Need Help Dealing With PacBell and Harrasing Calls (J. Eric Townsend) Cellular One Offers FREE Weekends in NC (Alan M. Gallatin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 15:43:34 EST From: lvc@cbvox1.att.com Subject: Interesting Statistic on Calls From Prisons Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc. I work on a small part of the AT&T Automated Alternate Billing System, i.e., the speaker independent voice recognition call processing product that is being trialed in Seattle, WA, Jacksonville, FL, Phoenix, AZ and probalby a few other places by now. One of the customers of AABS is an RBOC; they connected telephones in prisons to the AABS. In this situation, the caller can only make a collect call, and the caller cannot reach an operator except if by some fluke a network failure occurs. One statistic which was suprising is the number of abandoned calls, i.e., the caller hung up on the system before their call was completed. 80% of all collect calls were abandonded, and 97% of those were from a prison. I'm guessing the large number of abandonded calls from prisons is due to prisoners trying to beat this system. The motivation for this feature was to (a) eliminate the abuse operators received from prisoners -- operators like this feature quite a lot by the way, and (b) prisoners have been known to have their friends get jobs as operators who can give them free calls. Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com ------------------------------ From: edwards@world.std.com (Jonathan Edwards) Subject: Cordless Key Systems? Organization: IntraNet, Inc. Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:53:33 GMT I am thinking of putting a "key" phone system into my home. The main reason for this is to gain paging capability. But I also want to be able to use cordless phones. I presume that if this is possible at all I would lose the paging function at the cordless phones. Is there any solution to this, or should I just install a separate intercom? Thanks Jonathan Edwards edwards@intranet.com IntraNet, Inc 617-527-7020 ------------------------------ From: dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu (Donald R. Newcomb) Subject: Updating Survey of E-Mail Services - Need Help Organization: University of Southern Mississippi Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:37:59 GMT A year and a half ago I did a survey of e-mail providers which one might use for his personal e-mail. I noticed recently that this was put in the telecom archives under the name "e-mail.systems.survey" and is beginning to need an update. I will undertake to update this survey but need some help. I tried to include those systems that had some sort of inbound communications system (e.g. Telnet, PSN, 800 number, etc) that would provide access from, at least, the continental US. A word or two were included about Fidonet and DASnet. The systems surveyed were: MCImail, ATTmail, EasyLink, GEnie, Pinet, Telemail (Omnet), World, Portal, Netcom, Compuserve, Fidonet and DASnet. I will not have room to include every public-access site and BBS in the country but would like to include pointers to where this information can be found. If you are interested and have experience as a user of these or other systems which should be included, please review the report in the archives and respond to me by email regarding updates, changes, additions or corrections. Thank you. Donald R. Newcomb dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu newcomb@usmcp6.bitnet ------------------------------ From: dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu (Donald R. Newcomb) Subject: PC Software For ATTmail Organization: University of Southern Mississippi Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:50:15 GMT I would like to know the experiences of anyone using an inexpensive non-ATT software package for the PC to interface to ATTmail. ATTmail imposes a stiff fee for "online composition" of messages but this can be avoided by composing messages off-line and up-loading via various mail transfer packages. Most of the PC packages marketed by AT&T are more expensive than I feel is necessary. I understand that a UUCP protocol can be used. How do addresses such as TELEX and X.400 work in various packages? How are they formatted. I would appreciate specific experiences and recommendations. Thank you. Donald R. Newcomb dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu newcomb@usmcp6.bitnet ------------------------------ From: bill@toto.info.com Subject: Panasonic KX-Txxxx Mailing List Organization: Sun, Surf 'n Sushi, San Diego, CA Date: 11 Jan 93 03:06:56 GMT Due to the popularity of the Panasonic KX-Txxx series of key systems, there's a new mailing list starting up to discuss features, bugs and other work-arounds for this wonderful family of electronic key systems. To subscribe, mail to: kxt-request@info.com To post an article, mail to: kxt@info.com. Bill Cerny 10288-0-700-FON-BILL ------------------------------ From: rathmann@nic.cerf.net (Raul Rathmann) Subject: Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56 Date: 11 Jan 1993 07:58:47 GMT Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF Customer Group Hi folks: I am considering picking up a Toshiba Strata DK-56 PBX with various handsets. Does anyone have any opinions on this unit, good or bad? Also important, I will be hooking up a PC based voice mail system to this PBX, probably with Dialogic equipment. Anyone know of any gotchas? I understand that some systems don't signal a disconnect correctly or at all. Does this unit have this problem? Thanks - Raul rathmann@cerf.net ------------------------------ From: wachtel@cerl.gatech.edu (Steve Wachtel) Subject: Audiovox Cellular Phone MVX-500 (ie Minivox) Date: 11 Jan 93 08:13:50 GMT Organization: CERL/EE, Georgia Tech, Atlanta I just recently got a Minivox portable phone. I found out after I had paid for the phone that there are phone options that are not user configurable. These require the service provider (ie my authorized agent of PacTel) to set these options. One option which I consider important is the assignment of the security code. My agent told me that it was customary for them to set my security code to the last digets of the telephone number. Is this right? After much complaining I was able to get them to change the security code. But I want to learn the procedure so that I don't have to rely on them. Please, if anyone has the programmer's manual for this phone or some information on how I might obtain one, or just the code sequences necessary to do this and other phone options, please post a response or send me email. Thanks. Stephen Wachtel stephen.wachtel@ee.gatech.edu Georgia Institute of Technology (404) 894-2507 400 Tenth St. NW, CRB 376 Atlanta, GA 30332-0540 ------------------------------ From: rathmann@nic.cerf.net (Raul Rathmann) Subject: Hooking up a US Modem in Czechoslovakia Date: 11 Jan 1993 08:22:52 GMT Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF Customer Group Hi, I have a friend of a friend that is teaching at university in Czechoslovakia. He wants to hook up a modem to the university phone system. I'm assuming that he can use the extension line coming in to his office to dial out, then with his modem hooked up, he can get the modem to grab the connection with an AT command and he's on his way. Problems I can forsee will be mainly with the phone system and wiring. Could he splice into the phone system and expect the modem (and phone) to work? I'm sure the power situation will be a concern. Does anyone have any good ideas here? By the way, he has said that there is no way to get this info from the university, they're in the dark ages and information is not readily shared. Thanks, Raul rathmann@cerf.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 10:16:03 EDT From: Richard Budd Subject: Modem Won't Hang Up Organization: CSAV UTIA We are experiencing difficulty with our modem connecting with an IBM Control Unit Model 7171. There are 16 lines here at the Czech Academy of Sciences Informatics Institute connected to an IBM 4361 host. Because of the poor quality of phone lines in Eastern Europe, our external connections through modems and the CU are frequently dropped, but the modem remains on-hook and we have to manually power off and reset. This is especially a problem over the weekend when the system is running without operators. Do you know of any software that could automatically take the modem off-hook when the connection is dropped? We use Gandalf ACCESS Series 24A and Hyundai HMD 2404M external modems. All modems on the host side use MNP5 because it is the only way to establish reliable connections for more than five minutes given, again, the quality of the lines. The Czech government is working on improving phone quality, we may have digital fiber optic lines in Prague by the end of 1993. Richard Budd | USA klub@maristb.bitnet | CR budd@cspgas11.bitnet | 139 S. Hamilton St. | Kolackova 8 | Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 | 18200 Praha 8 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:39:13 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Area Code 610 Last Octwober, the Digest had a message (repeated below) about the 610 area code. I have lost track of which digest it was in. Because 610 has just been announced for a split of 215, I am re-sending the message. >Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 09:08:32 +0200 >From: spyros@isoft.intranet.gr (Spyros Bartsocas) >Subject: Area Code 610 >Recently the Greek newspapers are filled with ads of '900' type of >services located in Australia and North America. Examples of prefixes >used are 609-490, and 609-426. Are these local 976 type prefixes? A >lot of these are 610-204-xxxx numbers. Where is 610 located? >Spyros Bartsocas spyros@isoft.intranet.gr [609-426 & 490 are in Hightstown, NJ; a Moderator's Note, omitted here, followed.] [Moderator's Note: I wonder what will become of the +1-610 premium services once 610 gets used legitimatly here in the USA? PAT] ------------------------------ From: artn@bert.eecs.uic.edu (Stephan Meyers) Subject: FAQ About 900 Numbers? Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:36:25 GMT I am interested in getting a 900 or a 976 number in the Chicago area. The information about starting something like this up seems to be pretty hard to get -- most of the "customer service" people have been really rude, treating me as a crank caller. I'm just curious, about how it works, costs, etc, and maybe I'd start up a line. I have found out the basic startup and monthly charge (AT&T wants $2300 install + $750/month + 30 cents/minute + 10% of whats left after 30 cents/minute -- breakeven on a $1/minute call would be around 1200 minutes per month, or 40 minutes per day, without counting startup). Of course, what I would really want is a service who has the equipment, can help me set up a line, and would operate based on a percent of the money (if they take 50% of the money, say, instead of hefty startup costs, that's fine by me). It's strange, in fact, how hard this is to find out. You'd think one or two phone calls would do the trick, and that the phone companies would be dying to sell you the service, but everyone is so rude! me: Hi, I'm interested in finding out how to start a 900 line them: What sort of information would you be providing [as in "Are you another phone sex jerk?"] me: Ummmm, well, I'm kicking around some ideas, but I was thinking about something about the art scene in Chicago. them: You want customers in all 50 states to call you and find out about art. ["you really think ANYONE would be interested in what you have to say?"] me: Well, really just Chicago, but who knows? them: Well you'll have to call Illinois Bell about 976 number service. [she almost hung up on me] me: Well, I'd still like to know about the nationwide service, I'm just trying to figure out what it costs, etc And then I finally got her to tell me how much it costs, and after a little more prodding, she gave me a number for AT&T's equipment leasing for 900 service. Arrgh! It's a multi-billion dollar industry, and I want to (maybe) buy something from you! Give me a little respect, please!!! Anyway, as in the subject line, if anyone has an FAQ with everything you ever needed to know about 900 services, please email to: artn@bert.eecs.uic.edu Thanks! Stephan Meyers | artn@uicbert.eecs.uic.edu (Art)^n Laboratories, inventors of the Stealth Negative PHSCologram (312) 567-3762 [Moderator's Note: The main reason they start the conversation by asking what kind of service you wish to operate is because if you plan on some sort of phone sex thing, they will immediatly tell you they no longer will bill for phone sex. They will give you the lines, but you have to figure out how to do the billing, via some service bureau or otherwise on your own. That little 'gotcha' discourages many would-be sex line operators from beginning. None of the carriers will bill for sex these days ... too much hassle and fraud. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lamb@xtcn.com (Richard Lamb) Subject: Will a UK Telephone Work in the US (Will it Ring?) Organization: XtcN Ltd Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 21:28:38 GMT I bought a phone in the UK and am using it in the US. The DTMF stuff works fine, but I cant seem to make it ring. Should I be able to ? Rick XtcN Ltd, lamb@xtcn.com, Tel:508-655-2960, FAX:508-655-4559, Telex:6504829720 11 Roxbury Ave.,Natick MA 01760,4425 Butterworth Pl.N.W.,Washington D.C. 20016 ------------------------------ From: gplan@cs.umb.edu (George Planansky) Subject: Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How ? Reply-To: george@tusk.med.harvard.edu Organization: HMass, Boston MA Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:32:17 GMT To test modem/terminal-server settings I would like to connect connect the modems directly via a phoneline simulator. I gather that just a modular four-wire flat cable won't work, since the modems, for one, want to see a carrier. Is this something simple to coble together (or not simple and expensive to buy)? Please reply by email, thanks. George george@tusk.med.harvard.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:39:37 EST Subject: About C&P's "Swipe Reader" Phones The number to call to get information about C&P's "Swipe Reader" telephone is 1-800-999-9699. If this call is not accessible from your area, let me know. ------------------------------ From: bp@teaser.lis.pitt.edu (Bryan Petty) Subject: Info Wanted: Telecom in Holland? Date: 12 Jan 93 04:12:51 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh I am doing some research on the Telecommunications infrastructure in Holland. If anyone can recommend any references or contacts for information it would be greatly appreciated. If there is any interest I will post a summary. Thanks! Bryan Petty University of Pittsburgh Graduate Telecom Student/Slave ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 11:20:16 -0800 From: Larry Krone Subject: Internet / UUCP / Compuserve / Anything in Belize Is there any type of Net access available from Belize (Central America?) Please Email responses to: swslr@well.sf.ca.us Thanks, Larry Krone ------------------------------ From: jet@nas.nasa.gov (J. Eric Townsend) Subject: Need Help Dealing With PacBell and Harrasing Calls Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation, NASA Ames Date: 11 Jan 93 16:09:39 Sometime during the night of 6 Jan 93, some individual(s) with a fax decided that my home voice number was also a fax and started dialing. Since then, I've received a *lot* of calls from this fax machine, often on regular intervals (10min before the hour being common). I suspect it's on the east coast, since things started up around 5am this morning. PacBell is being less than helpful. "Hope they notice that the fax isn't getting through." "There's no way for us to figure out where the call is originating from." So I started dropping computer-words. :-) Me: "Can't they set up a line trap?" Them: "Uh... yes.. but, uh, that might not work." Me: "Well, can PacBell at least determine if it's coming in LD or if it's originating from a local exchange?" Them: "uhm, probably." Repair Service just took a call on it, they think that maybe they "can figure out who's calling you and get them to stop". Anybody know the "right" questions/requests to make of PacBell so that they do this sort of thing a bit more quickly? J. Eric Townsend -- jet@nas.nasa.gov -- 415.604.4311 (DoD# 0378) [Moderator's Note: Can you temporarily call forward your phone to a line with a fax machine and recieve a transmission from the idiots? If so, then I presume once their identity is discovered, you could call them yourself and give them a piece of your mind. PAT] ------------------------------ From: alan@acpub.duke.edu (Alan M. Gallatin) Subject: Cellular One Offers FREE Weekends in NC Date: 11 Jan 93 23:27:30 GMT Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C. Cellular One in the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina is offering a new feature on most of their calling plans. In addition to whatever monthly charge you are currently paying, for an extra $10 they will give you unlimited airtime on the weekends (defined as 11:59pm Friday to 12:01am Monday) for all calls made (or received) while in your local calling area. The only charges incurred would be for directory assistance or long distance land charges. Off-peak minutes with C1 go as low as $.20/minute with some plans (and are often more than that) so the break-even point is 50 minutes (or less). Any ideas why they'd just open the floodgates like this? As an aside, Centel (the only competitor in this market) is not matching the program or even coming up with something remotely close. Alan M. Gallatin ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #18 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17955; 12 Jan 93 1:54 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19951 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:47:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07194 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:47:11 -0600 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:47:11 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301120547.AA07194@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #19 TELECOM Digest Mon, 11 Jan 93 23:47:10 CST Volume 13 : Issue 19 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Rutgers Exchange-Changing Mayhem (birchall@pilot.njin.net) Want Info on Ringing Voltages/Cadences Around the World (Steve Pershing) US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (UPI via Ang Peng Hwa) Call for Volunteers at INTEROP 93 Spring (Ole J. Jacobsen) Bellcore NPA/NXX Information (Al Varney) Use a Phone, Go to Jail (Paul S. Sawyer) Canadian Competition Full Steam Ahead; Enter AT&T (Andrew M. Dunn) Visual "Bell" For a POTS Line (Kristobal Pedregal Martin) Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID (John Higdon) Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID (Conrad Kimball) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: birchall@pilot.njin.net (Shag) Subject: Rutgers Exchange-Changing Mayhem Date: 11 Jan 93 22:16:32 GMT Organization: Screaming in Digital, the Queensryche Digest Rutgers University has an outlying campus in Camden, NJ. The campus is in exchange 609-757, with some businesses. Since that exchange has become full, the campus is being moved to a new exchange, 609-225, which went into service on Friday (1/8/93). Banners to this effect were placed on the campus dialins early this week. Within a day, several users of a public system at Rutgers had left posts saying that they would no longer be able to call in for free, because NJ Bell had told them the new exchange wasn't local to them. Naturally, since the "localness" of a call is based on the distance between CO's (at least in NJ), and the CO's were quite obviously right where they'd always been, this caused a lot of confusion for the rest of us, who were quite certain it would be a free call, as always. It turned out that a scenario like this was being repeatedly carried out: User calls the operator to ask about 225. Operator keys 225 into the computer. Since 609-225 doesn't _exist_ yet, the computer decides that they must (of course) mean 908-225, which is some 60 miles away (and, coincidentally, a local call from a _different_ Rutgers campus). Operator tells user that it's not local. User panics. When I called NJ Bell, and explained to the operator that it was a Rutgers campus changing exchanges, the operator's response was, "Oh, I remember when they did that up here in New Brunswick, it'll still be local." Convincing all the users who had been told by NJ Bell that it _wasn't_ local was a bit of a challenge, though! When I mentioned this to a friend in Rutgers Telecom (T.P. Brisco), he pointed out another bit of trivia: "I understand when we split from 908-932 to 908-932 and 908-445, that originally NJB proposed that we take the newly available 809 exchange (instead of 445). We rescinded that proposal on the grounds that a phone number like 908-809-xxxx would lead to too many typographical errors, and confusion with the newly minted 908 area code. Maybe we should've asked for 923 instead of 445?" T.P. also posted a followup message mentioning that people had better specify 609-225 when they called the operator. I think all the users have caught onto the idea now, but there's bound to be a few who stop calling in (particularly people from outside Rutgers who just dial in to use the public system). Of course, those few who continue believing it's a toll call after all our explaining are probably modem-incompetent anyway. Shag birchall@pilot.njin.net, shag@glia.biostr.washington.edu, birchall@njin.bitnet Operator of ShagNet - Rutgers/NJIN dialup access for Burlington County, NJ Happy and informative user of a PPI 14400 FaxModem and GeoWorks Pro Editor of the Queensryche E-mail Digest - "Screaming in Digital" ------------------------------ Subject: Want Info on Ringing Voltages/Cadences Around the World From: sp@questor.org (Steve Pershing) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 15:08:01 PST Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: +1 604 681 0670 I have sold a good few ZyXEL modems to various happy clients around the world via our mail-server. In one instance (and I suspect there are many more) the modems worked fine, but would not answer when a call was incoming. This particular instance was in Japan. After a call to ZyXEL's tech support, they had a hidden register which had to be set, and voil`a, everything worked just fine. Recently, I noticed a posting in comp.dcom.modems in which a Swedish ZyXEL user seemed to be having similar problems. Is there such a great diversity in ringing current and ringing cadences, other than the ringing in country code 1 and country code 44? If there is a FAQ describing this, please let me know about it and I will get hold of it. Thanks! Steve Pershing, SysAdmin The QUESTOR Project FREE access to Environ, Sci, Med, & AIDS news, and more. [also UUCP] on a ZyXEL-U1496S+ => v.42bis, v.32bis, v.33, up to 16,800bps. -=- -=- -=- -=- Fones: (+1 604) Data: 681-0670 Telefax: 682-6160 Voice: 682-6659 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 10:38:51 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report This report is from UPI: Los Angeles -- America's traditional lead in telecommunications is eroding very rapidly as other nations promote new technologies, according to a study released Wednesday. "The potential of new information communication technologies and services is widely appreciated around the world and many nations are making aggressive steps to promote their deployment," said the University of Southern California study. The study, produced by the USC's Center for Telecommunications Management and covering 24 nations, found that the US lagged in a number of key technologies compared with other nations, such as converting analog networks to more efficient digital networks and investment. It said digitalization of the US network stood at just over 50 percent at the end of 1991, which ranks ninth of 18 reporting countries, while US investment in public network infrastructure was 12th among the 18 countries. It also said other nations were retiring used equipment much faster than the US. "While a number of other nations have dramatically increased their capital investment in infrastructure, US investment is flat or declining," it said. "Furthermore, depreciation trends in the US show a shocking pattern." The study added: "During this remarkable period of rapid technological progress and obsolescence, asset lives for public network equipment of local exchange companies have actually increased in the US. Nations like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 18:52:32 PST From: Ole J. Jacobsen Subject: Call for Volunteers at INTEROP 93 Spring Please distribute as widely as possible: Call for Volunteers: The INTEROP Conference Assessment Team (CAT) Interop Company is seeking student volunteers to serve as quality control monitors for INTEROP 93 Spring, to be held in Washington, DC, March 8-12, 1993. This is a unique opportunity for students to attend the industry's premier networking conference and tradeshow, while helping us improve the quality and consistency of the conference. As a CAT member you will receive: * Complimentary conference registration for all three conference days; * Complimentary conference notes; * Complimentary registration for an INTEROP tutorial on Monday/Tuesday [NEW!] (You may be assigned to a tutorial that is not your "first choice", but we will make every effort to acommodate your requests.) * Complimentary lunch all three days; * Special INTEROP CAT T-shirts; * A complimentary copy of the book "Exploring the Internet"; As a CAT member you will be asked to: * Monitor preassigned conference sessions on one of the three conference days, by submitting written reports and acting as the "eyes and ears" of the conference organizers. We will provide you with a basic evaluation form to aid the preparation of the reports. (You will be free to attend any conference session and the INTEROP exhibition on your "days off.") * Provide an accurate count of the number of people attending the sessions you are assigned to. ("Clickers" will be provided!) Successful CAT candidates will be students currently enrolled in a computer science or electrical engineering course at undergraduate, graduate or post-graduate level. Applicants should have some understanding of (and interest in) computer networking issues. All applications must be received by February 15, 1993. Please note that Interop Company cannot cover any travel or accommodation costs associated with the CAT program, however as a CAT member you will be elligible for the standard conference discount rate at a number of Washington, DC hotels. To apply, send e-mail to: ole@interop.com with a brief biography and relevant contact information. Don't forget to send a POSTAL address as we will need to send you some hardcopy material. *** PLEASE: Do not include my message in your reply. If you must include it, please do so AFTER your reply rather than before it. Thank you very much.*** Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions--The Interoperability Report Interop Company, 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040, Phone: (415) 962-2515 FAX: (415) 949-1779 Email: ole@csli.stanford.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 08:31:03 CST From: varney@ihlpl.att.com Subject: Bellcore NPA/NXX Information Reply-To: Al Varney Organization: AT&T Patrick, Several folks have asked for information available in some form from Bellcore -- and my e-mail to them failed. Perhaps you could post this AND include it in FAQ or archive. Thanks. To Bob Larribeau at , asking for NPA/NXX information: Information about which LEC "owns" an NPA/NXX, and lots of other data you might want, is in several Bellcore "products". For example, the NPA-NXX V&H Coordinates Tape (primarily for billing) contains the OCN (Operating Company Number) for each NXX -- you can translate that to an LEC (or equivalent in Canada/Caribbean). To Richard Cox, who asked for information on the NPA/NXX activity guide: I tried to reply, but both and didn't work; SMTP says 'compulink.co.uk' is unknown. ----- So, I've attached a canned response I use for questions about Bellcore, but the telephone numbers correspond to the normal TR/TA document center. The NPA/NXX information is maintained by the (somewhat) separate Traffic Routing Administration (TRA) group, at +1 201 829 3071. To complicate matters, there are three PUBLIC documents published by Bellcore's document center, but maintained by the TRA. These are available by contacting the document center as described in the attachment. - FA20: "Telephone Area Code Directory (TACD) Microfiche" Contains all customer-dialable points in the North American Numbering Plan with the corresponding NPA. Issued monthly. $50 - TR-EOP-000093: "TACD Paper Report" As above, issued annually around September. Ordered by State and Locality. Carrier Identification Codes are included. - TR-OPT-001843: 800/900 List on Paper, giving company name and telephone contact for each NXX assigned with the 800 and 900 codes. Issued quarterly. [Call the document HOTLINE in the attachment for prices of paper documents.] For all other TRA "products", or information about on-line access to a database of routing data, contact the TRA Hotline at +1 201 829 3071, or write to: Traffic Routing Administration Bell Communications Research, Inc. 435 South Street, Room 1J321 Morristown, NJ 07962-1961 These non-public documents and on-line access require signing a "Terms and Conditions Agreement" before purchase. You should ask for a complete list of products and prices. Some of the documents do not include Canada. Some of the more "common-use" TRA documents are: - NPA-NXX Vertical and Horizontal Coordinates Tape (the "V&H Tape") is primarily for billing purposes, and lists (for each NXX) the type of NXX, major/minor V&H coordinates, LATA Code, the ROA, Time Zone, Place Name, OCN (TELCO) and indicators for IDDD and "Non-Dialable". - NPA/NXX Activity Guide lists all NPA/NXX codes schedules to be added, removed or "modified" (monthly). There's also an Active Code List that lists all NPA/NXX codes that aren't planned to be removed or "modified" for the next 6 months. - Local Exchange Routing Guide (LERG) contains information on all USA/Caribbean destinations, switching entities, Rate Centers and Localities, Tandem Homing information, operator service codes, 800/900 NXX assignments, etc. (3 1600 BPI tapes!!!) Mostly useful to IXCs and other TELCos. Good Luck, Al Varney varney@ihlpl.ih.att.com ------ (canned response follows:) ------------------- Bellcore TAs and other preliminary "advisories" are only available by writing: Bellcore Document Registrar 445 South Street - Room 2J-125 P. O. Box 1910 Morristown, NJ 07962-1910 TRs and other "standard" documents can be ordered from: Bellcore Customer Service 60 New England Avenue Piscataway, NJ 08854-4196 or by calling the document HOTLINE (menu-monster) at 1-800-521-CORE (1-800-521-2673). They take AMEX, VISA and MasterCharge, International Money Orders, and Checks on US Banks. If you don't have a document number handy, they can send you a catalog of technical documents. International calls are on +1 908 699 5800. (If you want to order a document, press 2 at the automated greeting. If you want to talk to a person about availability, prices, etc, press 4 at the automated greeting) FAX on (908) 699-5800. If you want to talk to the "pub" folks, or a technical person, the numbers/addresses are in the front of any TR (and the "Catalog"). Al Varney - the above represents my opinion, and not AT&T's.... (And I do wish Bellcore paid commissions for these referrals!) ------------------------------ Subject: Use a Phone, Go to Jail Date: 11 Jan 93 10:02:32 EST (Mon) From: paul@unhtel.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer) Recently here (Strafford County, NH) a man was sentenced to four months in jail for telephone harrasment for making two "hang up" calls. With this type of precedent, couldn't we give telemarketers at least 30 days (first offense...) and 800- number billing converters 5-10 years? :-) :-) Paul S. Sawyer - University of New Hampshire CIS - paul@unhtel.unh.edu Telecommunications and Network Services - VOX: +1 603 862 3262 Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523 - FAX: +1 603 862 2030 ------------------------------ From: amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn) Subject: Canadian Competition Full Steam Ahead; Enter AT&T Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:46:36 GMT In article DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA (David Leibold) writes: > At least we're not getting any COCOTs ... yet :-) No, but AT&T announced yesterday that they're entering the Canadian market via a modified partnership/investment arrangement with Unitel. Unitel is presently a joint venture of Canadian Pacific and Rogers Communications. Each will reduce their stake to 40% to give AT&T 20% of Unitel in exchange for investment, market development, technical expertise, and access to AT&T's American network. Unitel President George Harvey commented that it was the right move to make at the right time, that AT&T was a strong player in the world telecommunications market, and that the arrangement would benefit all parties. He particularly stressed that the move would lead to faster, cheaper communications throughout Canada, and that he expected rates to fall quickly as new arrangements were made. Unitel offers communications services in competition with Bell Canada in the long-distance market, as well as private circuit facilities to businesses (which has been their mainstay up until the present time). It will be interesting to see what this venture brings. It will, at the very least, be a significant change to the Canadian telecommun- ications marketplace. I don't work for Unitel, Rogers, CP, or AT&T. Nor am I a customer (yet). But I did once work for Unitel's predecessor... Andy Dunn or ------------------------------ From: pedregal%unreal@cs.umass.edu Subject: Visual "Bell" For a POTS Line Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 11:51:05 EST Reply-To: pedregal@cs.umass.edu Greetings. I have a couple of applications for a device that flashes a light (maybe even a strobe) when a plain phone line rings. Such a thing must exist, but I can't find sources. Please email to me and I'll summarize. Thanks! Cristobal Pedregal Martin pedregal@cs.umass.edu Computer Science Department UMass / Amherst, MA 01003 [Moderator's Note: The easiest way to do this is get a neon test thing from Radio Shack (or anywhere else ...). Just wire it parallel to the phone line. It does not draw enough current to take the phone off hook but will flash in sync with the ringing of the phone. I have an appliation here where there are several lines going into a computer which is used for voicemail. No one wants to sit and listen to those bells on the incoming phone lines ring all the time, yet it is very important to know if for some reason the computer is not answering the line ... with no bell it would never be noticed if something had gone wrong. So, I have several 'beehive lamps' (the little plastic things with a dome on top and a neon bulb mounted within) mounted on the wall with double-sided tape. Wires run to each from the associated phone line. They flash on for a couple seconds each time a call comes in on that line. The only line with an actual bell on it is the final line in the hunt group -- when it rings, it serves notice that the computer has a full house, at least for the time being. I also have a little counter installed on that line which increments by one each time that line rings ... by viewing the register, one can see how often a full house occurred since the last time the register was reset. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 18:25 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> writes: > Perhaps PacBell is making a marketing mistake by not offering caller > id even though mandated blocking restrictions would apply? Perhaps > their total revenues would be higher than if no blocking at all was > available? Maybe so. I, for one, would buy Caller-ID even if blocking applied to 99% of the state's telephones on a per-line basis. For me, the telephone is an instrument whose purpose is to communicate with friends, business associates, and customers -- plus people who could potentially become one of these. ALL OTHERS are of no interest to me whatsoever. Those who fit into the desired category of callers would never block CNID to me; those in the undesired category can block all they like. I look at CNID as sort of a "wired PL". Just as there are many users on some commercial two-way radio bands who stay out of each others' hair by the use of "private line" encoding, CNID allows a similar enhancement when using the public telephone network. You know that when the phone rings, it is a "desirable" rather than a wrong-number- idiot, a mysterious one-ringer pest, a hangup-when-you-answer creep, a telesales slime, or even a former customer whom you wish never to hear from again. Now if I could just convince Pac*Bell that there are others like me out there. Perhaps I could show them my e-mail ... 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: cek@sdc.boeing.com (Conrad Kimball) Subject: Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID Date: 11 Jan 93 22:17:39 GMT Organization: Boeing Computer Services, Seattle, WA In article , rlucas@bvsd.Co.EDU (Richard Lucas) writes: > The best gauge of consumer opinion is how they vote with their > dollars, not with their words. If Colorado's first-day results can be > generalized to other areas, then John Higdon is quite correct that the > PUC decision in California gives the voices of a few more weight than > the desires of the majority. Sometimes that is quite proper. Tyranny of the majority, and all that. And that's assuming "the majority" is _fully_ informed of the issues, which I doubt is the case in this particular situation. Conrad Kimball | Client Server Tech Services, Boeing Computer Services cek@sdc.boeing.com | P.O. Box 24346, MS 7A-35 (206) 865-6410 | Seattle, WA 98124-0346 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #19 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20998; 12 Jan 93 3:50 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27863 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:37:30 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23203 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:37:01 -0600 Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:37:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301120737.AA23203@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #20 TELECOM Digest Tue, 12 Jan 93 01:37:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 20 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Steve Forrette) Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Mickey Ferguson) Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (John Sullivan) Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Liron Lightwood) Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Curtis Sanford) Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Dave Levenson) Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Lou Taff) 1-800-RIP-OFFS (was Calling 1-800 Can Cost a Fortune) (Paul Robinson) Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (Troy Frericks) Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (John David Galt) Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (Brian Onn) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Rob Boudrie) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Anthony E. Siegman) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Ed Oliveri) Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Ben Cox) Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Paul Robinson) Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Barry Mishkind) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune Date: 11 Jan 1993 22:33:27 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article udi@cs.washington.edu (Udi Manber) writes: > I learned this the hard way after being charged for (apparently) > dialing the wrong 800 number. How did this charge appear on your bill? Was it a call to a 900 number, or perhaps a collect call? Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 16:41:12 PST From: mickeyf@clipper.zfe.siemens.de (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune Reply-To: mickeyf%clipper@pnsts412-sun.zfe.siemens.de > If you always thought that 1-800 numbers (in the US) are toll free, > think again. With new technology and the lack of regulations, people > are finding new ways to make money. [stuff deleted] > It is possible, and apparently perfectly legal, to set an 800 number > such that when you call you hear a recording that tells you that there > will be charges for the call. [more stuff deleted] > So here are some scam ideas (these are all fiction; do not try it at > home): [more stuff deleted] How long will it be before the COCOTs jump into the calling card fraud? How difficult would it be to program a pay phone to look for when a caller dials the 800 number which is associated with one of the long distance providers, and then just capture the calling card digits, but pass on the digits and complete the call? Then the COCOT software just writes the calling card digits and the long distance provider into its private database, which is then dumped and sold off to the drug dealers, etc. The more I think about this, the more I get terrified at just how easy such a scam would be. Hmmmm, maybe I'll just go out and buy a pay phone and modify the software ... NOT! Maybe one idea to regulate COCOTs without too much difficulty or paperwork would be to require them to be bonded, just like a home contractor is. Since the possibilities are just sitting there, this would at least help to pay for any fraud that could result. Or am I being too paranoid? Mickey Ferguson -- PhoneMail Development -- ROLMfax and Eclipse ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 18:37:11 CST From: sullivan@geom.umn.edu Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune I'm now confused. I don't always read TELECOM Digest, so I may have missed something, but I have seen previous posts about INTEGRETEL, etc., and I always got the impression that people trying to bill you for 1-800 calls would get your number from their ANI, and send you a separate bill for whatever they wanted. I hadn't heard of getting actual phone charges from calling 1-800. If I forward calls to some other number _I_ pay the charges on the resulting call, not the person who called my first number. Why would any telephone company agree to provide billing services to anyone like INTEGRETEL anyway? The other thing that has always confused me is why alternative long-distance companies (AOSs?) can charge things to an AT&T calling card. I realize that Ma and the Baby Bells have some sort of agreement to allow charges to each others' calling cards. And I gather that this all has something to do with the fact that there is some standard way to determine if a calling card number is valid. But again, why does AT&T agree to provide billing service for these people? I can't imagine if Sears suddenly decided to accept payments by JCPenny credit cards that JCPenny would actually let them collect on the bills. Sorry if this is all old hat, but I haven't seen good answers to these questions here or elsewhere ... John Sullivan sullivan@geom.umn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 14:24:24 +1100 From: Liron Lightwood Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune So, what happens when you call one of these costly 1-800 numbers from a payphone? Do the phone company pick up the bill? Do you get asked to insert money? Or do you get a recorded message saying the number cannot be dialed? I understand that 1-900 numbers cannot be called from US payphones, but 1-800 numbers can. Does this apply for all 1-800 numbers available in the area where the call is made from? [Moderator's Note: What happened in the past was that the information providers resorting to this sleazy tactic (of issuing a bill to the caller after the caller dialed the 800 number) did attempt to send a bill to the owner of the payphone ... and of course, the 'owner' of the payphone (in effect, the subscriber) was telco itself ... telco would not pay the IP's, and the IP's quickly learned to consult a data base which lists payphone numbers, then refuse to do business with the folks calling from them. The IP's still get tripped up occasionally by COCOTS, (or actually, the COCOT owner gets the bill, he squeals like a pig and the IP has to eat the charges) so when these numbers get iden- tified, they also get added to the list of numbers not to be dealt with. I think the IP's have begun to circulate the 'untouchables' list among themselves as a mutual protection kind of thing. But in the early days of the 800-converted-to-900-or-worse racket, it sure was fun seeing how many charge-backs could be shoved up Mystic Marketing's corporate waste eliminator at one time. Calls went through to those astrologers, Tarot practitioners and 'counseling services' from every payphone in Chicago, I suspect, and probably from other cities as well. So how come the astrologers could not detect this little shortcoming in their scam from the beginning? :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: sanford@ascend.com (Curtis Sanford) Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune Date: 11 Jan 93 16:36:11 GMT Organization: Ascend Communications, Alameda CA In article udi@cs.washington.edu (Udi Manber) writes: > If you always thought that 1-800 numbers (in the US) are toll free, > think again. With new technology and the lack of regulations, people > are finding new ways to make money. > It is possible, and apparently perfectly legal, to set an 800 number > such that when you call you hear a recording that tells you that there > will be charges for the call. Typically 800 numbers are not blocked from pay phones. What happens if you call such a number from a pay phone? Is this a way to have sweet revenge on the COCOT industry? [Moderator's Note: See my comments in an earlier message in this issue. The IP's have begun keeping a data base of payphones, and they refused to service callers from those places. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:20:19 GMT I think that the public, or at least, the readers of this Digest, can help correct this problem ... for every non-toll-free 800 number you can find, share it with as many friends as you can. Then, whenever you have some time to kill and you're near a public telephone, place lots of calls to these numbers. When the telco or other public telephone provider starts getting these bills, they'll probably use their clout with regulatory agencies to suppress such use of the 800 service access code. Any thoughts on this? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 [Moderator's Note: And you also are invited to read my comments on this in an earlier message in this issue. It just won't work any longer; the astrologers and Tarot practitioners don't want any more BS from the deadbeats of the world (like all good TELECOM Digest Moderators) ... Mystic Marketing says cut it out, now! To be sure you do, they've got the number of the payphones at the local 7/11 or bus station, or wherever you are when you get the urge. :) By all means though, keep trying; let's be sure they get their data base as complete as possible. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: lmt@homxb.att.com Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 13:20 EST Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune Pat: With reference to a recent article in comp.dcom.telecom, I wonder if you could refer me to (or send me a copy of) a telecom discussion detailing just how calls to 800 numbers are charged for and end up on someone's bill. I'm having a hard time understanding it. Thanks for any help. Lou Taff, AT&T Bell Laboratories 185 Monmouth Parkway West Long Branch, NJ 07764 (908) 870-7584 lmt@homxb.att.com [Moderator's Note: I'll do better than that, Lou. I'll print another whole issue on the topic -- you are reading it now. Perhaps some of the people who have raised the topic in the past will share their wisdom with you. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:02:51 EST Subject: 1-800-RIP-OFFS (Was Calling 1-800 Can Cost a Fortune) In TELECOM Digest Vol 13 #12, Udi Manber suggested: > You can get an 800 number that is one digit away from > a widely used 800 number and rip off anyone who makes > a mistake...You can put ads for information on how to > make $10 a minute - just call 1-800-747-6337. That's > 1-800-Rip-Offs... From a Government Centrex number in Maryland that is authorized to dial 1-800 numbers, I got the message: "Recording C2. We're sorry, the number you've dialed is not authorized from this location. C2." And this repeats several times. So it looks like some of us are protected from RIP-OFFS! :) Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM "If I or anyone else is caught making opinions, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of our actions..." ------------------------------ From: troyf@microware.com (Troy Frericks) Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 16:16:28 GMT > A similar scam has been going on in New York City. A messenger will > show up at a company with a package, and when no one there seems to > match the addressee, he asks to use the phone. Calls a "540" exchange > (one of the extra charge numbers; the others are 550, 970, 976, and > another about to be announced) and the company gets billed for $50 or > so. Please explain. I thought that 1-976-xxx-xxxx and 1-900-xxx-xxxx were the only way for the called party to gain $$$ from the call. What other ways are there? Do the above reference calls area code 212: 1-212-540-xxxx, 550-xxxx, 970-xxxx, and 976-xxxx? If so, how am I going to know that an extra charge applies (being from Iowa)? 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: Being from Iowa you don't have to worry about it, as your telco will not connect you to a 212-540/550/etc number. In that sense, they (540 numbers) are like 976; since the host telco has no way to legitimatly collect for these numbers from interstate callers (one could question the legitimacy of the whole concept, but that is another issue), telcos simply do not put them through to each other. In the case of 900, specific tariffs apply for interstate calls; for 976 and its kin, they do not. Many of the IP's from a few years ago can tell you how they begged and pleaded with telco to not allow calls to their 976 numbers from out of state: callers from Chicago and elsewhere would dial into (as an example) 415-976-GAYS -- a gay bridge operating in SFCA at 13 cents per minute interstate night rates -- and tie up all the ports so none of the locals could get through at two dollar or more per minute rates. If you are not in NY Tel's territory, you will not connect with 212-540 et al; if you are not in Illinois Bell's territory you will not connect with 312-976. Ditto PacTel and their premium lines. That's why whenever I see these 'urgent memos' from security personnel at various corporations warning their employees against 'a scam originating in New York where they call your beeper number and you call back, getting charged X dollars' I always get a big laugh. It WILL NOT work (to the benefit of the scammer) unless the victim is in the 212/718/914/516 area codes. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John_David_Galt@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 10:18:02 PST I have an idea that would make us more secure against this type of fraud. I wonder if any of the telcos would be willing to implement it. What I'd like to do is get my phone blocked so that direct-dialed calls to a 900, 976, ... number won't go through, but calling-card calls will. That way if I really want to try one of these services, I can get through, but a visitor can't (unless he uses his own card, and then he pays). John David Galt ------------------------------ From: brian@ganglion.Canada.Sun.COM (Brian Onn - OpCom Staff) Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto Organization: Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:28:32 GMT On Wed, 06 Jan 93 00:56:39 EST, Tony Harminc said: > This past November, a company I consult for had three > unauthorized calls to (416) 976-9467 made on one of its lines. [...] > Bell Canada has agreed to remove the charges, but will not tell > us the name of the owner of this number. In Toronto, you can call the Bell Canada Customer Listing Bureau at (416) 446-3090, between 1100 and 1400 EST, and if you give them the phone number, the operator will tell you who the number is registered to. The rules for 976 numbers may be different, however. The process works for most "normal" numbers. Give it a try. Brian Onn. Internet : Brian.Onn@Canada.Sun.Com Operation Commitment, Uucp : uunet!sun!suncan!brian Product Support Specialist. Voice : (416) 477-6745. [Moderator's Note: I just now tried it for 312-976-WAKE, our local wake-up service (if their bill doesn't cause you to jump out of bed, I don't know what would). IBT-CNA (312-796-9600) would only say it is a "Public Announcement Service"; no record as to owner, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 05:59:39 GMT > I believe the bankcard passwords are also often in the clear in the > ISO mag stripe. Shudder! Remember having read something to that > effect on the net. Could some please deny ... please .. please! Denied. (You're welcome!) Bank card passwords are stored in encrypted form (one way encryption using the DES algorithm on a combination of the account number, user selected PIN and a few other things) which allows for local verification of passwords but only by your own bank. There are two different standards by which this is done, but each has a bank-specific encryption key (often refered to as the Pin Verification Key, or PVK). This key is kept highly confidential -- anyone with the key could generate the hashed pin for each possible password (only 10,000 in the typical four digit password) , compare each to the hashed value on the card, and decode the PIN that way. Your own back can verify the password within the ATM; other bank's ATM's must query your bank via the network. rob boudrie ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:08:00 PST From: Anthony E. Siegman Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: Stanford University > [Moderator's Note: I think the banks here which give money on trust > when the network is down do have something called a 'negative listing' ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > of cards which should not be honored in that way. Here in the Chicago I believe another more generic term for this kind of list, made available in any form, is "derog list" (with obvious interpretation). ------------------------------ From: eo@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Ed Oliveri) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: AT&T Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:00:48 GMT In article johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > Citibank machines in New York City at least used to have a similar > feature. For a long time, over a year, someone who clearly had inside > information was using an old invalid Citicard to make $100 withdrawals > from machines all over the city when the machines were offline while > their network nodes were down for maintenance. The maintenance > schedule was deliberately erratic and quite secret. Had the guy used > the card even once in an on-line machine the card would have been > eaten and that would have been that. I never heard whether they > managed to catch him. I'd think that it would have been > straightforward to set up a sting to catch him in the act. Are you sure this was Citibank? Every Citibank ATM I've seen CANNOT eat a card since the card is dipped into the card reader, never leaving the user's fingers. Ed Oliveri, eo@cbnewsb.att.com OR att!cbnewsb!eo [Moderator's Note: The Citibank ATM's in Chicago eat the card for a minute and spit it out when finished with it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... Reply-To: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:05:40 GMT kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup) writes: > winding pulses to compensate for the increased requirements. This > period of additional supply registers in the cores of the transformers > as a slight "bleep", and a bunch of them together produce the "music" > you hear. I used to troubleshoot Sun-2's aurally as well. If you don't configure the device driver for the /dev/audio device on a SPARCstation 10, you can hear interesting music on SpeakerBox, too ... :-) Ben Cox thoth@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:32:27 EST Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... kstox@admips2.berkely.edu writes in TELECOM Digest 13 #14 about how someone programmed the IBM 1130 to generate tones on an AM radio. I've got one better than that. I was in the computer center at Orange Coast College in Costa Mesa, Ca., when someone got the *line printer* to play the five tones from "Close Encounters of the Third Kind"! I was there, I heard it. Slick; it used exactly ONE piece of paper to do this. Do not ask me how. Try *that*, Hewlett Packard! Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: barry@coyote.datalog.com (Barry Mishkind) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 01:50:24 GMT kstox@admips2.Berkeley.EDU (Ken Stox) writes: > Back in the "old" days, we used to leave an AM radio next to an IBM > 1130, you could actually pick up the CPU activity. One clever > programmer started writing some very interesting compositions. Of > course, with the advent of modern synthesizers, it would be totally > unimpressive. Radio Shack actually sold several tunes that played on the TRS-80 and made noise on a radio held near. This was late '70s Regards, Barry Mishkind barry@coyote.datalog.com FidoNet 1:300/11.3 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #20 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22555; 12 Jan 93 4:42 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31841 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 12 Jan 1993 02:32:48 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22792 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 12 Jan 1993 02:32:22 -0600 Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 02:32:22 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301120832.AA22792@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #21 TELECOM Digest Tue, 12 Jan 93 02:32:20 CST Volume 13 : Issue 21 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Sean Case) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Steve Hutzley) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Sean Malloy) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Zealand R. Hatch) Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Michael Rosen) Database of Area Codes, NPA-s and Zipcodes Wanted (John Villalovos) Re: Hunt Groups (John Rice) Re: Hunt Groups (Bill Huttig) Re: Hunt Groups (Barton F. Bruce) Re: Hunt Groups (Steve Forrette) Re: Hunt Groups (Stephen Diercouff) Re: Hunt Groups (Dave Levenson) Re: Hunt Groups (Jim Knight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gsc@coombs.anu.edu.au (Sean Case) Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Date: 12 Jan 93 00:08:56 GMT Organization: Australian National University shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu writes: > Curious enough to hunt for another factoid ... does anyone know what > fraction of the entire snail mail in the US is generated by business > and how much by Aunt Agatha ? > Should give some insight into how much mail the automatic sorters > actually can ever benefit from. And if the dreams of USPS to read > human handwriting are so important? Here in Australia, most envelopes are sold with preprinted boxes for the (four-digit) postcode. Australia Post claim that their equipment can read hand-scrawled postcodes so long as they're in the boxes. Typescript addresses don't have to use the boxes, but pushing the postcode out to the right of the address is supposed to help. They don't say what sort of error rate they have, though. I heard a story some time back that the good ol' USSR had envelopes with a mark sense area for the postcode (possibly using a seven-segment layout). Mail with unreadable postcodes was discarded. That's certainly one approach ... is this just obsolete propaganda? Sean Case gsc@coombs.anu.edu.au ------------------------------ From: hutzley@ranger.dec.com (Steve Hutzley) Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:22:33 GMT In article , ssay@prefect.cc.bellcore. com (say,halim s) writes ... > I would like to find out the encoding for the ZIP code bars on USPS > mail envelopes. > I could figure out this much: > Ones are long bars, zeros are short bars. Start and end with a one. > Each digit has five characters. I could figure out what zero through > nine correspond to. > The only remaining part is the check digit at the end. Only one check > digit is used both for five digit regular ZIP code and nine digit > extended code. > Now my question is: What is the encoding/decoding rule for this single > check digit? > Does anyone know or could you tell me a reference for this "standard"? > I am sure some address generator software would have this algorithm. See {PC Magazine} a few months ago (November/December), they had the whole scheme in there. Its kind of an inverted BCD where the LONG ONES are 0 and the SHORT ONES are 1 (I think), and there were CLOCK pulses in there to compensate for the speed variances of the reading machines. Steve ------------------------------ From: scm3775@tamsun.tamu.edu (Sean Malloy) Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Date: 12 Jan 1993 04:30:42 -0600 Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX > Also, Is there a summary of several bar codes ftp-able somewhere ? As an aside: On wuarchive.wustl.edu in /mirrors/win3/fonts/truetype are two fonts that might relate to this topic: usps_bar.zip and barcod39.zip I make no claims about their accuracy, but if you're running MS Windows 3.1 then they might help. Sean C. Malloy - Texas A&M University - scm@tamu.edu ------------------------------ From: zrh@uts.amdahl.com (Zealand R. Hatch) Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Date: 11 Jan 93 19:28:57 GMT Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA I'm not sure what this has to do with telecom but having recently investigated this I'll share what I know. There is a group of publications available from the Post Office. Publication 25: Designing Business Letter Mail (Aug 1992) This publication replaced the previous Pub. 25 "A Guide to Business Mail Preparation". The major sections from the index are. 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Basics of OCR and Barcode reading 3.0 Physical Characteristics of Automation Compatible Letter Mail ("Machinability") 4.0 Addressing for Automation 5.0 Postnet Barcode 6.0 Facing Identification Mark (FIM) Patterns 7.0 Preparing Reply Mail for Postal Automation It's well writen and has all of the information you need to "produce" a barcode and put it where it needs to go on the envelope. Publication 28: Postal Addressing Standards The major sections from the index are. I Introduction A Background B Overview II Postal Addressing Standards A General B Last Line of the Address C Delivery Address Line D Rural Route Addresses E Highway Contract Route Addresses F General Delivery G Postmaster Addresses H Post Office Box Addresses I Puerto Rico Addresses This publication is "a comprehensive guide to all styles of addressing". Not required reading if what you're interested in is barcodes. Publication 67: Automation Plan For Business Mailers This publication outlines the Post Office's plans for business mail. Interesting as a general overview. Your local Postmaster should be able to obtain these publications for you without cost. As to the question of how does this help with the hand written address, the SORTING of letters is being converted to barcodes and a letter is sorted a bunch of times before it is put in your mail box. So the plan is when a letter initially comes into the post office it's first checked for a barcode. If it is there the letter goes off to the sorters. If not, the address is checked to see if the City, State and ZIP Code are machine readable. If they are the barcode is applied to the envelope and its off to the sorters. If not the letter is queued for manual reading. Again the barcode would be applied and then its time for the sorter. Not all post offices have all of the equipment needed for all of these steps yet. And it will be 1995 before all letter mail will be automated. I hope this helps; Happy Mailing, Zealand Hatch - 408 746-8720 - {where_ever}!amdahl!zrh Amdahl Corporation -or- zrh@amdahl.amdahl.com ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 04:59:38 GMT FZC@CU.NIH.GOV writes: > In TELECOM Digest 12-928, ssay@prefect.cc.bellcore.com (say,halim s) > asks: >> I would like to find out the encoding for the ZIP code bars on USPS >> mail envelopes. > Ask the post office for the circular on bar code. It's a small > pamphlet of about 5 pages, and it explains how all of the codes work, > as there are two codes; one for ZIP code and one for ZIP+4 code. > There is no charge for the pamphlet. If your local Post Office > doesn't have it, try a main office in a large city. I have that booklet. The title is "A Guide to Business Mail Preparation," Publication 25. Here is the address for comments or suggestions and I believe this is where I ordered it from: Marketing Dept Regular Mail Services Div U S Postal Service HQ 475 L Enfant Plz SW Rm 5541 Washington DC 20260-6336 They describe the specs for the Postnet bar code and the FIM patterns. As for the algorithm, I'll have to find my {2600} issue with the article (where I found the address for the publication originally). There's 52 bars in a ZIP + 4 Postnet bar code, with two long bars on either end. I can't remember the exact methodology for the bars in the middle at the moment, I'll repost when I find the {2600} issue with the article. Also, I have a program I ftp'd at one time called envlj. Scan for it via archie, etc. It will print both FIM patterns and Postnet bar codes when you supply a complete ZIP + 4 and only a Postnet bar code when using a five-digit ZIP. Michael Rosen Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ From: villalj@xanth.cs.orst.edu (John Villalovos) Subject: Database of Area Codes, NPA-s and Zipcodes Wanted Date: 12 Jan 93 07:13:58 GMT Organization: Oregon State University I was wondering if anyone could point me in a current or fairly current list of Area Codes, NPA's and Zipcodes. I wanted to be able to set up an application where people could tell me their Zipcode and I could figure out their Area code and possibly some of the NPA's for the Zipcode. I once had a program like this but I don't anymore. It was put out by AT&T and the data was somewhat out of date. Thanks, John Villalovos Certified Netware Engineer villalj@xanth.cs.orst.edu (503) 753-7883 [Moderator's Note: I'll tell you who keeps a great data base on this: our reader Carl Moore has lots of files on this. I'm sure when he sees this he will contact you directly. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 23:14:45 GMT In article , rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) writes: > Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be > placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange > prefixes? > [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on > different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO. Anyone? PAT] Not a hunt group, but 'forward on busy' should work if the lines are in the same switch. It accomplishes the same end. John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com [Moderator's Note: But John, the big difference between the two at least where Illinois Bell is concerned is that 'forward on busy' is handled like any call-forwarding, with a unit (or more) charged on each call. On the other hand, IBT gives 'hunt' for free. Same identical feature, but the one is charged for call after call after call, making it quite expensive if you get several thousand calls each day with 99 percent or more of them going somewhere other than the lead number. IBT tried to get *me* to take that feature on a voicemail system I look after instead of traditional hunting. I said nuts to that and insisted on regular hunting (and checked the bill the next month to be sure they obeyed!) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 21:57:38 -0500 From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups In SouthernBell land there are rotaries on two or more exchange ... I would recomend (if you can get it from your carrier) that you get call forward on busy between the lines ... line 1 on busy forwards to line 2 line 2 on busy forwards to line 1 ... I have my lines set up that way and I only have to pay $1 for each forward on busy ... a rotary would have made be pay about $16 more per line ... and call forward busy does the same thing. [Moderator's Note: Well this seems to be an applications thing based on the volume of calls received. IBT does *not* charge any special fees for hunting. It is free as lomg as all the lines are on the same exchange. You can pay $1 per call forwarded on busy if you wish, but I thought it was too expensive when IBT said each forwarded call would cost one 'unit' -- about 3.5 cents here. Even at three cents per call forwarded, I'd wind up paying several hundred dollars per month for this service, which is useless considering the same thing is free from IBT if you ask for 'hunting' instead. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:19:12 -0500 (EST) From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) wrote: > Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be > placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange > prefixes? Sure is! but depends on local CO equipment. Or there are tricks you can play. Most CO switches cover several exchange codes. Telco may bitch and scream, but often will hunt between exchanges on their own just to make their life easier or to get out of some messup they caused. You may also get number in a hunt group that are 'theoreticals' that have NO exchange mere customers can dial (can YOU dial 017-9325? I thought not!). If you can't get them to do it or it is IMPOSSIBLE (may be on different CO switches, not just exchanges), then, if you have NO message unit implications and NO problems paying for a phone line that only is a number, get call forwarding on the isolated single one and set it to forward and GROUND both Tip and Ring to PERMANENTLY busy it. If they bitch, tell repair you are having some equipment problems and you DID busy it, but if they could DO IT FOR YOU while you get your equipment straightened out, and that you will CALL THEM when you need it restored, they probably will leave it that way for ten years. All calls to that number will then forward to the other numbers were you can have several lines. If you can get few line centrex service, you may be able to get line in use forwarding - more a secretarial feature than hunting. > [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on > different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO. Anyone? PAT] Many times. No problem. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Date: 12 Jan 1993 02:15:55 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article TERRY@spcvxa.spc.edu (Terry Kennedy) writes: > However, the various call forward functions will work across > prefixes, or across switches if desired. So the subscriber could order > call forward on busy (or on busy/no answer) and then set whatever form > of hunt group up that he wanted. This could be done either with > customer-selected for- warding (the kind usually explained in the > phone book, where the customer sets the forwarding, or with fixed > forwarding, where it is set up in the switch and the customer can't > change it). One problem with using call-forward-on-busy as a creative way to create hunt groups of more than two lines is that many telcos restrict it to handle no more than one forwarded call at a time. This restriction may also be placed on Remote Call Forwarding numbers and regular (immediate) call forwarding. With US West in Washington State, RCF costs around $18 per month plus message units, and can handle only one call at a time. You can purchase additional "circuits" for $18 per month each. But, if you can find somewhere to terminate a loop, you can get an unmeasured business line for around $32 per month, add call forwarding for around $4. Then, for $36, you get up to 20 concurrent calls forwarded with no message units. The 20 call maximum was what call forwarding was configured for on my switch - the person at the business office had to check this out when I asked, and I got the impression that different switches had it set to different values. Pacific Bell on the other hand, sets all of their switches to the same value: they only allow one concurrent call for regular call forwarding. Also, if you want to have a busy or no-answer forwarding go to a number that's on a different switch, it is technically a different feature: "busy call forwarding extended." It was not widely available until a couple of years ago. Since this feature is a necessary part of the telco's own voicemail offering, it is now magically available most everywhere now. But some switches may not yet support it, so busy-forwarding may be restricted to the local switch. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: sgd@tfm.com (Stephen Diercouff) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Organization: tfm Associates, Ltd. Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 03:32:39 GMT stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In article rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob > Boudrie) writes: >> Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be >> placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange >> prefixes? > I had a similar setup recently, but strictly speaking, it was > busy-transfer rather than hunting. It was on a 5ESS switch. The fact > that I wanted the busy-transfer was known at the time I placed the > order for the two lines, and the computer happened to select numbers > on two different prefixes. I would imagine that on a modern SPC > switch, the prefix difference would not matter. I have three numbers, with three different prefixes, in a rotary hunt group. The latter two were assigned at the time I ordered the hunt group. If it makes any difference, the switch is a 5ESS, and the territory is USWest. Stephen Diercouff, tfm Associates, Ltd., Bellingham WA voice: +1 206 733 5721 Internet: sgd@tfm.com fax: +1 206 738 0630 UUCP : uunet!nwnexus!tfm!sgd Snail : P.O. Box 5084/Bellingham WA 98227-5084 ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:52:42 GMT In article by rboudrie@chpc.org, Pat adds: > [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on > different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO. Anyone? PAT] In Brooklyn, NY, I have a customer with a 12-line hunt-group (which is used by callers to access a voice-response banking system). Most of the lines in this hunt group are 718-388-xxxx numbers, but three of them are in another prefix. When New York Telephone was installing them, I asked the installer if there was a mistake in the line numbering, and if he would verify that hunting worked correctly throughout the 12-line group. He verified the directory number of each of the lines, and he and I worked together to verify that hunting worked as ordered. The serving central office is a Northern Telecom DMS-100 which was cut into service less than three years ago. The two prefixes are served by the same switch. 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 [The Man in the Mooney] ------------------------------ From: jfk@ais.org (Jim Knight) Subject: Re: Hunt Groups Organization: UMCC Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 04:06:15 GMT M-Net A Public Access Unix System here in Ann Arbor has two different prefixes in it's trunk hunt. We had no trouble getting the phone company to add two numbers from another site into our trunk hunt. We are in the 313 area code, and have both 994 and 996 prefixes in our trunk hunt. Jim ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #21 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07525; 13 Jan 93 2:42 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26437 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:24:54 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00611 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:24:32 -0600 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:24:32 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301130624.AA00611@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #22 TELECOM Digest Wed, 13 Jan 93 00:24:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 22 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson History.of.Area.Splits (Carl Moore) Has Anybody Tried the AmeriVOX Card? (Steve Tomlin) Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Brad S. Hicks) Only in LA ... (Los Angeles Times via Rich Greenberg) These Phone Systems Are Great! (National Lampoon via Dan Danz) Looking at Voicemail (Michael J. Logsdon) Bawling Out Congress by Computer (Dave Niebuhr) Catalogs of Phone Equipment/Systems: Is There a List? (Bill Blum) MF Signaling Test Gear (Bob Turner) Experiences Wanted With Munich-32 (Craig Twardy) Multiline Phone Recommendations (Steve Elias) Phonejak Transmission System? (David Morgenstern) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 18:44:40 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: History.of.Area.Splits Just mailed off to the archives with these additions: Comment that all calls should be makeable as 1 + NPA +7D. Notes about 215/610 and 919/910 splits. Note that 714 now has N0X/N1X prefixes (and that it has become 714/909). Note that 503 will be programming for N0X/N1X prefixes. Note that all New England areas (except Connecticut) will be programming to allow for the NXX area codes (same changes also allow for N0X/N1X prefixes). [Moderator's Note: Here is the most recent version of Carl's work. This will be available in the archives later this week when I get a chance to go there and install it. PAT] -------------- Generalizing prefixes from NNX to NXX (i.e., allowing N0X/N1X) is an alternative to splitting an area which has had only NNX up to this point. When an area has NXX (not NNX) prefixes, its long distance dialing instructions usually are: 7D or 1 + NPA + 7D within area (can no longer use 1 + 7D); 1 + NPA + 7D to other areas (can no longer use NPA + 7D); for 0+ calls, try 0 + NPA + 7D (some 0 + 7D would require timeout). In other words, the leading 1 (or 0) means that what follows is an area code. These instructions can, without further revision, accommodate area codes of form NXX, not just of form N0X/N1X, and thus I believe they will become universal when area codes must generalize to NXX, for which the deadline is January 1, 1995 (had been July 1, 1995). But since the first batch of NNX area codes will be of NN0 form, some areas might be able to keep 1 + 7D for intra-NPA long distance by disallowing prefixes of NN0 form; I do not know if this will be affected by use of 52x codes (x not necessarily 0) for Mexico. It is unclear how generalizing area codes to NXX would affect the policy of not using N0X/N1X prefixes until NNX starts running short. An exception to the above dialing instructions was discovered in Feb 1992 for 215-267 (Denver) and 215-484 (Adamstown) in Pennsylvania. These exchanges are served by Denver & Ephrata Telephone & Telegraph, which also serves a part of the 717 area, and which is keeping the old instructions (1 + 7D and 0 + 7D within area code), even though this will necessitate timeout resolution for some calls from the 215 portion of their service area. This will change only when it is about time for the NXX area codes. Ideally, all calls should be makeable as 1+NPA+7D (this does not necessarily mean that shorter forms would be forbidden). These areas have N0X/N1X prefixes: 213, California, July 1973 (7D on all calls within it) (later 213/818, now 213/310/818) (this area continued to publish 0+7D instruction for within-NPA 0+ calls) 212, New York, some days after 24 Nov 1980 (7D on all calls within it) (later 212/718, now 212/917/718) 312, Illinois, Oct 1982--but got 1st N0X/N1X spring 1983? (7D on all calls within it) (now 312/708) 201, New Jersey (7D on all calls within it; also applies to 609) (now 201/908) 214, Texas, 1986 or 1987 (by July 1987) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 817, at least in Fort Worth area) (now 214/903) 301/202/703, Maryland/DC/Virginia, 1987, due to DC area growth (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (301 now 301/410) 415, California, Feb 1989? (7D on all calls within it) (now 415/510) 404, Georgia, Oct 1989? (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 912) (now 404/706) 919, North Carolina, 2 Mar 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 704) (to become 919/910) 416, Ontario, 3 Mar 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (to become 416/905) 602, Arizona, 1 July 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 313, Michigan, 1990? (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (to become 313/810) 512, Texas, 9 Sept 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (now 512/210) 205, Alabama, Dec 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 215, Pennsylvania, 20 May 1991 (7D on all calls within it; exception noted above, but the new instructions were also applied to: 717-354,355 New Holland 717-656,661 Leola 717-768 Intercourse) (to become 215/610) 206, Washington, 12 Jan 1992 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 813, Florida, 7 Mar 1992 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 305,407,904) 713, Texas, 8 Mar 1992 (permissive dialing 8 Dec 1991) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 714, California, 1992? (7D on all calls within it) (now 714/909) 503, Oregon, 10 July 1993 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) No note about N0X/N1X prefixes, but instructions are being changed to accommodate the coming of NXX area codes: 207, Maine; 413,508,617, Massachusetts; 603, New Hampshire; 401, Rhode Island; 802, Vermont (all New England areas except Connecticut); 1993-1994 (7D on all calls within area code) Areacode splits: If no date appears, the split may not have been announced publicly due to lack of direct-dial facility at the time, or may never have occurred. Early splits can only be guessed at with the following guidelines: If an areacode is of form N1X, it is in a state or province with more than one areacode. (The reverse, if it was ever true, is now obsolete.) If an areacode is in a state or province with only one areacode, it is of form N0X. (The reverse, if it was ever true, is now obsolete.) what?/209 California what?/707 California what?/805 California 305/813 Florida 404/912 Georgia, 1953 or 1954 December 1991 Greater Atlanta call guide, in discussing 404/706 split, said "It's been 38 years since Georgia added an Area Code." what?/309 Illinois 502/606 Kentucky 504/318 Louisiana 616/906 Michigan, sometime after Nov 1960 612/507 Minnesota 402/308 Nebraska what?/607 New York 704/919 North Carolina 405/918 Oklahoma 901/615 Tennessee what?/806 Texas 206/509 Washington what?/608 Wisconsin what?/705 Ontario what?/807 Ontario 201/609 New Jersey, late 1950s 415/408 California, 1960 305/904 Florida, July 1965 703/804 Virginia, 24 June 1973 at 2:01 AM 714/619 California, Nov 1982 713/409 Texas, Mar 1983 (full cutover 90 days later) 213/818 California, Jan 1984 212/718 New York, 2 Sept 1984 (full cutover 31 Dec 1984) Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island became 718; Manhattan & Bronx stayed in 212; Bronx switched from 212 to 718, 1 July 1992 (full cutover 16 May 1993, but until then, calls from Bronx to Brooklyn/ Queens/Staten Island must still be dialed 1+718+7D) 303/719 Colorado, 5 Mar 1988 305/407 Florida, 16 Apr 1988 617/508 Massachusetts, 16 July 1988 312/708 Illinois, Nov 1989 (full cutover 9 Feb 1990) 202 District of Columbia & vicinity, 1 Oct 1990 This behaved somewhat like a split despite no new area code. 202 area code, previously useable for all but the outermost Maryland and Virginia suburbs, was restricted to DC proper. (Use 301 or 703, as the case may be, to reach the suburbs.) As a result, government offices (now including the Pentagon) using zipcodes starting with 200,202,203,204,205 and located in Md. or Va. can no longer be listed in area 202. Prefixes in the Pentagon, which is in Virginia, were previously in area 202 (not 703), and in 1990 were moved to area 703. (Local calls across area code border changed from 7D to NPA+7D.) 214/903 Texas, 4 Nov 1990 (full cutover 4 May 1991) 201/908 New Jersey, 1 Jan 1991 (full cutover 8 June 1991) 415/510 California, 2 Sept 1991 (full cutover 27 Jan 1992) 301/410 Maryland, 1 Nov 1991 (full cutover 1 Nov 1992) 213/310 California, 2 Nov 1991 (full cutover 16 May 1992; was to be 2 May 1992, but was postponed indefinitely because of riots just before then) (all GTE plus some PacBell went into 310) 212/718/917 New York, 1 Jan 1992 (917, to be overlaid on 212 & 718, is to be used for cellular & pagers) 404/706 Georgia, 3 May 1992 (full cutover 3 Aug 1992) 512/210 Texas, 1 Nov 1992 (full cutover 1 May 1993) 714/909 California, 14 Nov 1992 (full cutover 14 Aug 1993) (Riverside and San Bernardino counties go into 909; Orange County remains in 714) 416/905 Ontario, 4 Oct 1993 (full cutover 10 Jan 1994) 919/910 North Carolina, 14 Nov 1993 (full cutover 13 Feb 1994) 313/810 Michigan, 10 Aug 1994 215/610 Pennsylvania, 1994 On Feb 1, 1991, area codes 706 and 905, which had been used in the U.S. for calling parts of Mexico, were discontinued. Country code 52, already available for such calls, was to be used. 706 and 905 thus became available for use elsewhere, and were later announced for use in Georgia and Ontario respectively. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 16:39:14 PST From: tomlin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Steve Tomlin) Subject: Has Anybody Tried the AmeriVOX Card? I read the recent article on the AmeriVOX card and it seemed to be a good way to give family members long distance capability without having to worry about a credit card balance. Does anyone use the AmeriVOX card regularly? If so, how does the service compare to the standard credit cards? Does anyone have more information on the history of the company? Thanks for the info. I'll summarize the responses for the net. ------------------------------ From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com Date: 12 Jan 93 17:17:26 GMT Subject: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? Is it possible under the IXO/TAP protocol, or any companies' interpretations of it, to detect whether or not a particular pager number can receive text pages? If memory serves, when you send a pager message using IXO, you send pagerID message , and then it sends you back either an , a , or another signal (I think ) that means " and we're hanging up on you now." So from that, you'd think not. But the paging computer I call also sends an error message, I think it's error message . This is fine by the spec, which says that after you transmit, you're supposed to ignore anything other than the ACK, NAK, or ESC-EOT. But sometimes those error messages are helpful. For example, if it's an invalid pager ID, you get a message that says so, so I search the return strings for "INVALID PAGER" and if I find it, don't bother retrying. Now what I'd really like, is for the paging computer to detect that I'm trying to send an alphabetic page to a numeric-only pager and give me a with an error message that says so. Does anybody do this? Would this be a reasonable thing to ask the folks at Cybertel and/or Skytel to support? J. Brad Hicks Internet: mc!Brad_Hicks@mhs.attmail.com X.400: c=US admd=ATTMail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 17:07:48 PST From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) Reply-To: richg@hatch.socal.com Subject: Only in LA ... From the {LA Times} Business pages, 1/12/93: Off The Ticker by Carla Lazzareschi Cellular Phone, Hold the Mayo: Los Angeles - indeed the world - gets its first drive through cellular telephone store today with the opening of Cellular Specialists on North La Brea in West Los Angeles {ed note: near Beverly Hills}. The store, brainchild of Bob Neman, offers on-the-go cellular shoppers one stop service for their portable telephone needs without, as Neman says, time-consuming delays or high pressure sales tactics. It is modeled after a fast-food restaurant and sends waitress like order takers to the parking lot with menus listing daily specials. Shoppers select a model and wait during a credit check for a mobil telephone number from PacTel Cellular. Prices, while comparable to those charged by the large electronics emporiums across Soutjhern California, run somewhat higher. What else do they get? While they wait for their phones, customers are offerred a cup of steaming cappuccino. This is, after all, L. A. Rich Greenberg Work: rmg50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com 310-417-8999 N6LRT Play: richg@hatch.socal.com 310-649-0238 What? Me speak for Amdahl? Surely you jest.... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 18:00 EST From: Dan_Danz@vos.stratus.com Subject: These Phone Systems Are Great! Hi Pat ... I thought the list might get a kick out of this ... Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 17:45 EST From: Bill_Everts@vos.stratus.com To: John_Daleske, Dan_Danz Subject: These phone systems are great! Nat'l Lampoon True Facts 12 Jan 1993 According to the {Houston Chronicle}, Suzanne Handerson offhandedly answered a ringing pay phone at a Waco, Texas shopping mall. A voice asked, "Hello. Mrs. Henderson?" Henderson looked around to see if she was on Candid Camera, or a program of that sort. On the phone was the man who tends her yard, calling with a question about the garden. It turned out that the mall pay phone had almost the same number as her home phone. Said Henderson, "It was a question of dialing the wrong number and getting the right person. I was speechless." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 18:47:28 -0500 From: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael J. Logsdon) Subject: Looking at Voicemail Reply-To: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael J. Logsdon) Any suggestions for a PC-based voice mail system for a two campus, 150 phone system will be appreciated. I'm system administrator and I'm looking at Microlog Callstar 1000 sized with four ports and four hours of memory. Can I assemble my own? Mike Logsdon University School, Cleveland am339@cleveland.freenet.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 14:53:31 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Bawling Out Congress by Computer Today's {Newsday Jan 12, 1993} had an article about how by April of this year, all members of the House of Representatives, their staffs, their committees and even standing committees will be reachable via the Internet. Connections to them will be through Compuserve, Genie, MCIMail and ATTMail (other connections would probably be available also). There are no plans for the Senate to go online as yet. Jack Belcher, overseer of the House Information Services, a congressional computer networking department says: "For starters, it's up to the individual member to decide if he even wants Internet access." If so, the member may opt to set up a "public" mailbox, where unsolicited correspondence could be mailed. Or the member of Congress could make a personal mailbox publicly known. Some of the more technophobic members of the House could even opt to have all e-mail messages printed out upon receipt, Belcher said. Though a computer sits in virtually every office, only a handful of representatives and 2,000 of 12,000 staff members currently have Internet access. I can just see it. Our esteemed Moderator states once in a while that MCIMail just out and out dumps the DIGEST if so much as one address is wrong. Think of what MCI can do with this group if one congress-critter's name is misspelled. Well, there goes more of our tax dollars down the drain. I'll stick to good old fashioned letter writing and phone calls. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Note: I'll be interested in seeing how many of them get uptight and start complaining about 'unauthorized email' sent to that address, etc. That has happened with email to executives of large corporations, you know ... they are frightened to death of public contact with their customers ... I should not be surprised to see some of our public servants react the same way. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:19:21 EDT From: Bill Blum Subject: Catalogs of Phone Equipment/Systems: Is There a List? I would like to know if any list subscriber has a list of companies that offer catalogs of their equipment. I occasionally get flyers from companies like Hello Direct and Hi Hello, but little else. Do any of you have specific companies (with 800 phone numbers, preferably) that you have dealt with, and why? Predominantly I'm looking for phone sets at present, but I'm interested in a couple of companies that offer complete lines of phone equipment, as well. ADthanksVANCE [Moderator's Note: 1-800-HI-HELLO is the phone number for the Hello Direct people. PAT] ------------------------------ From: turner@udecc.engr.udayton.edu (Bob Turner) Subject: MF Signaling Test Gear Organization: Univ. of Dayton, School of Engineering Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:37:50 GMT Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT DTMF) signalling? It can be for two or four wire circuits. I know such a device exists, I just don't know who manufactures it. Primarily it will be used to test ANI delivery on customers CPE equipment. Thanks. Bob Turner Senior System Engineer 513-434-2738 turner@udecc.engr.udayton.edu CommSys, Inc. 77 West Elmwood Drive, Suite 101, Dayton, OH 45459 ------------------------------ From: twardy@gandalf.ca (Craig Twardy) Subject: Experiences Wanted With Munich-32 Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd. Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:59:37 GMT I am investigating using the Munich-32 device in a design. Does any one have any experience or comments on it? The real name is the peb20320 and it is manufactored by Siemens. It is a 32 channel hdlc controller. Please respond by email. Thanks in advance. Craig Twardy CAnet: twardy@gandalf.ca Gandalf Data Ltd., 130 Colonnade Road Voice: (613) 723-6500 Nepean, Ontario, Canada K2E 7M4 Fax: (613) 226-1717 ------------------------------ Subject: Multiline Phone Recommendations Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 08:44:26 PST From: Steve Elias Does anyone have any recommendations for a pair of multiline telephones with intercom, auto-redial. For a residence, Radio Shack has a $179 phone that meets this description, but please send along any other pointers. {Teleconnect} magazine had an article about a really nice one about a year ago, but I don't have that issue now. eli eli@cisco.com ------------------------------ From: davidm@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (David Morgenstern) Subject: Phonejak Transmission System? Organization: California State University, Sacramento Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:47:48 GMT I saw the ad for the Phonejak Telephone extension system in the Compuserve rag. So did my teenage daughter. She wants better quality than our current cordless phone is giving us in our apartment. Has anyone used this system? It's a device that has a transmitter and receivers that plug into wall power outlets. The company says that it will support 2400 kbaud data transmission, so I could get some use out of my old Supra upstairs (I recently bought a v.32bis modem) with my creaky Mac Plus. Has anyone used this device for phones? Has anyone used this system for data? Any and all help appreciated! Please reply to my mail address: davidm@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu. Thanks, David Morgenstern, BMUG CheerLeader davidm@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #22 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11952; 13 Jan 93 4:40 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02634 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:45:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16110 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:45:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:45:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301130745.AA16110@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #22 TELECOM Digest Wed, 13 Jan 93 01:45:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 23 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Sprint 800 Residential (Gary Morris) Re: Sprint 800 Residential (Steve Elias) Re: 800 Numbers and Live ANI Advice Sought (Pat Turner) Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works) (Steve Forrette) Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (Dave Niebuhr) Re: More Idiocy From GTE (Charles Mattair) Re: Intra-lata LD and COCOTs (Matt Healy) Re: Wanted: List of Active & Proposed Undersea Cables Worldwide (S. Loftus) Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (Matt Healy) Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud (Eric R. Skinner) Re: Another Payphone Mystery? (David Esan) Re: Panasonic KXT-123211 Software (Phil Wherry) Re: Baby Bell Breakups (John Higdon) Re: Frequently Asked Questions re Telecom Stuff (Don McKillican) Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges (Klossner) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: garym@telesoft.com (Gary Morris @pulsar) Subject: Re: Sprint 800 Residential Organization: Alsys Group, San Diego, CA, USA Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:40:32 GMT In jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) writes: > About a month ago, a Sprint rep called and asked if I wanted to try > Sprint's Residential 800 service... They offered to waive the installation > charge as well as the monthly service charge for the first six months... > I'm confused about the monthly service charge. I thought the rep said > it was $5 a month, ... I also signed up to try this out. I was told the monthly charge would be $5, and that after the 6 month free trial (except for usage), that if we had at least $45 per quarter in usage charges then we would not be charged the monthly $5 charge after that, just usage charges. I haven't had any wrong numbers yet but have only had it for about two weeks. Gary Morris Internet: garym@telesoft.com Ada Software Development UUCP: uunet!telesoft!garym Alsys West (TeleSoft) Phone: +1 619-457-2700 San Diego, CA, USA Fax: +1 619-452-2117 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sprint 800 Residential Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 07:52:48 PST From: Steve Elias I used Sprint 800, a few years before this "Sprint residential" thang became available. The wrong numbers were quite annoying, Get ready for lots more. Some telemarketers are slimy enough to demon dial 800 numbers trying to sell fax toner paper, etc. I now use MCI residential 800. Their security code feature is a Good Thing for residential use. eli ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.Com Date: Wed, 13 Jan 93 00:05 EST Subject: Re: 800 Numbers and Live ANI Advice Sought Reply-To: turner@dixie.com The Moderator wrote a good comment, but I thought I would add a few things. Since mail to Greg seems to bounce, I'll reply to the Digest. As Pat stated 800 service with Real Time ANI is available from the big three. As far as I know this always involves a dedicated trunk to their POP. AT&T is the least flexible, offering to deliver it only out of band with PRI ISDN. At one time this required a AT&T switch, now I suspect their are other peices of CPE equipiment that will handle it. Coastcom makes a channel bank just for 800 service, though I don't know if it will dump the ANI data out a RS-232/V.35 port or not. I would imagine that as AT&T complies with the newer ISDN-1 standards, most any PBX could handle it. The AT&T service is called INFO-2 and is part of their Megacom service. The ANI delivery adds $.02/call up to a limit, past which it is $.01/call. Sprint will deliver ANI with in band MF and MCI will deliver it with your choice of MF or DTMF. If you can't deal with a T span, any dumb channel bank will do. The extra DS0's can be used to taste to joys of LEC bypass. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works) Date: 13 Jan 1993 09:32:06 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA With the upcoming introduction of Caller ID in Washington State, I've been evaluating how I will put it to use to screen calls at home. Since the WA implementation will include calling name delivery, as well as calling number, I've thought of what I think is a clever way to differentiate business callers from residential callers. Any number that's not in my local database can have each word of the calling name run against an English dictionary. Business names are quite likely to have one or more words of the directory listing in the dictionary, whereas residential listings are likely to have no parts in the dictionary. While not perfect, this in combination with rejecting private calls, as well as a local database of known numbers, should work quite well at filtering out the junk. To get fancy, I could always allow calls from names that contain "police", "fire", etc. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:01:22 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct My latest NYTel bill showed a number 890-6611 that I could call for repair service in addition to 611 (I think that's the way it goes). Quite by accident a few months ago, I found that 890-XXXX is a NYTel exchange in each area code. The XXXX varies by area code for the same office. An example is 890-1100 for the billing office in area code 516, but not in area code 212. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:58:30 CST From: mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: Re: More Idiocy From GTE Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX On 28 Dec 92 15:07:25 GMT, mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) said: > As I'm at a friend's house, I decide to put the call on calling > card. 102880+10D. GTE. Huh...? I know this is intralata > but I told them to use AT&T. They can't override my choice of carrier > can they? Try it again except as 102880+7D (713 has gone 1/0+10D on > all LD calls but who knows what GTE is doing). GTE. > Call the operator to see whats going on - it should work, you must be > misdialing, etc. > Finally, in disgust, 1028800. AT&T. Placed the call and nobody > answered :-( Several people sent me Email suggesting this is proper and expected behaviour on the part of GTE. After doing some checking, I think is more a case of permissible (sp?) behaviour. SWB appears to always hand off -- I have started using 102881+ on all intralata calls from my house; an examinination of my last three phone bills shows 0 LD routed thru SWB. SWB will even hand off within the Houston EMS. A call from my house to 713 288 -- both ends within the EMS (288 is a non-EMS exchange) routes thru AT&T which curiously enough is tariffed for the call. Calls to AT&T indicated they see both types of behaviour: the LEC reserving LD service for intralata (GTE) and the other as I see with SWB. Indicentally, this whole mess started when I found out SWB charges 35 cents versus AT&Ts 22 cents for an intralata call I make a lot. Charles Mattair mattair@synercom.hounix.org Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) Subject: Re: Intra-lata LD and COCOTs Organization: Yale U. - Genetics Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:15:31 GMT In article , Jay.Ashworth@f8649. n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jay Ashworth) wrote: > Since these phones automagically route LD calls to the phone owner's > preferred AOS/IXC, (which I'm told is no longer illegal), _all_ calls > go there. Even calls that would normally go through the LEC. > Is there an equal access code that routes calls through whatever LEC > owns the line? Or specific ones for each LEC -- although I suspect that > would be impossible to administer. I also would like to know if there's any such code! Recently I was in an airport whose LD carrier was not AT&T. I wanted to make a short (about 100 km) toll call. When I tried 10-ATT-0 I got a recording saying this call cannot be carried by AT&T, I suppose because they are not allowed to handle intra-LATA calls. The phone would not accept my AT&T card when I dialed 0-xxx-xxx-xxxx or 0-xxx-xxxx. I had to dial 0-0 and tell a human operator the number I was calling and my AT&T card number. Matt Healy matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu ------------------------------ From: George Loftus Subject: Re: Wanted: List of Active and Proposed Undersea Cables Worldwide Date: 12 Jan 1993 19:16:36 GMT Organization: Brown University - CIS In article Frank Vance, airgun!fvance@ uunet.UU.NET writes: > I am looking for a list of all the intercontenental undersea cables, > both active and proposed. I would like to know such things as > capacity, ownership, and where the cable terminates. ------------------------------ From: matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works Organization: Yale University--Genetics Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:19:33 GMT > BTW, Some mail carriers will not deliver 4th class junk if you ask > them, but it is illegal for them to not deliver it. In my apartment building, there's a bin next to the mailboxes where the carrier puts all "extremely obvious" junk mail (ie, 27 identical envelopes arriving bulk rate to various apartments). Every couple of days it gets emptied of anything nobody has claimed. May not be technically legal, but it sure is handy. How I wish junk phone calls were so easily screened! Matt Healy matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu ------------------------------ From: ers@XGML.COM (Eric R. Skinner) Subject: Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud Organization: Exoterica Corporation Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 18:07:16 -0500 In article Tony Harminc writes: > But note that Bell Canada is disallowing such calls to all foreign > countries except the United States. They are not picking a small (and > troublesome) subset as AT&T seems to have done. I think it would be > pretty hard to make a case of discrimination against everyone except > American immigrants. > [Moderator's Note: Are you *positive* that if you try to use a Bell > Canada card on a call to the UK, Australia or New Zealand it won't go > through? Forget what their literature says for a moment and try it. > If it does go through on the card, then the very same situation exists > in Canada as here: discrimination against what you term a 'troublesome > subset' Just two weeks ago I tried calling Australia from a payphone in downtown Toronto; I got the familiar "bong", and punched in my card number. After a few seconds, an operator came on the line, asked me for my number again, then told me that I was unable to make a call to Australia using my card. I tried a few minutes later from a business line at a nearby office and it went through fine. On Bell Canada's new "Millenium" phones which have a card swipe slot, the LED display has been running a message lately to the effect that International calling card calls should be prefixed with "011" instead of the usual "01". I don't know why ... Eric R. Skinner ers@xgml.com Exoterica Corporation Tel +1 613 722 1700 Ottawa, Canada Fax +1 613 722 5706 [Moderator's Note: '011' is for direct-dial international calls and '01' is for operator-assisted international calls, i.e. collect, credit card, third-number billing, etc. Anyway, if calls to other countries are disallowed using calling cards from payphones, why did the operator bother asking you to repeat the number? What difference would it have made if she understood it correctly the first time or not since the call would not be allowed anyway? PAT] ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: Another Payphone Mystery? Date: 12 Jan 93 19:40:13 GMT Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY In article schmidt@auvax1.adelphi.edu (JOHN SCHMIDT) writes: > I recently visited my Alma Mater, WPI in Worcester, Mass. (A/C 508). > When I got there, I wanted to call my mother in Ahmerst Mass. > (413-253****). < And further tales of woe about the request of $2.00 to complete this call > Just ran this through my database. The distance from Worcester to Amherst is 38 miles. They are in two different LATAs. The expected cost by ATT should be: $.18 per minute, with an $.86 surcharge. Where did $2 come from? Why didn't you get ATT? Good questions. David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ From: psw@carillon.mitre.org (Phil Wherry) Subject: Re: Panasonic KXT-123211 Software Reply-To: psw@carillon.mitre.org (Phil Wherry) Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:40:28 GMT petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu (William Petrisko) writes: > We recently purchased a Panasonic KXT-1232-11D hybrid key telephone > system. One feature that attracted us to it was the availablity to > program it over the RS-232 port. This, however, leaves A LOT to be > desired ... in fact, it seems it is actually easier to program from a > display set, because it actually tells you what you are programming > instead of having to use the program book to reference the cryptic > codes. Does anyone know of PC software available as a front-end to > programming the Panasonic phone system? I have one of these switches, and finally settled on a fairly low-tech solution: I dumped the switch parameters to an ASCII file, then used a text editor to annotate them heavily. I'd be happy to supply you (or any other interested readers) with a sample copy; just drop me an email note. Phillip Wherry Member of the Technical Staff The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA psw@mitre.org ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:57 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Baby Bell Breakups paul@panix.com (Paul Gatker) writes: > I heard an interesting theory regarding investing in the Baby Bells. > The theory was that they could be breaking up ala AT&T, and in so > doing, the parts would be much more valuable than the present whole > companies. This due to the rapidly exploding telecom revolution. More than theory, my friend. Pacific Telesis has already applied to break the now-very-lucrative PacTel wireless services off from Pacific Bell. A new holding company would be created and the two companies would have no connection whatsoever. What has happened is that the non-regulated wireless ventures have finally taken off and capital that has heretofore been siphoned off from the regulated utilities is no longer needed. The split accomplishes two things (three if you include the stated, public reason). First, it looks good. Pacific Telesis can now say without lying that there is no connection between the two companies. Second, it prevents any dreaded backflow of funds. While Pacific Telesis never had any problem with having your regulated dollars fund the wireless ventures, it sure as hell does not want the reverse to happen and piss off the investors that it has finally attracted. The stated reason for the split is that it frees the unregulated side of stifling rules imposed by PUCs. Given the fecklessness of the CPUC, I find this laughable at best. I have never seen a utility "suffer" at the hands of the California Pretty Useless Club. Remember, this is the same body that allows PG&E (our excuse for an electric utility in northern California) to charge the highest rates in the country for electricity while at the same time providing service that rivals that in the worst third-world country for unreliability. But you will see the LECs breaking up. While Pacific Telesis has never been at the forefront of technology, it has always been a pioneer in separating people from their money. Once again it is a trendsetter. 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: Tue, 12 Jan 93 13:52:24 EST From: don@stam.qe.bell.ca (Don McKillican) Subject: Re: Frequently Asked Questions re Telecom Stuff The question on getting specifications for the Caller ID service lists a Bell Canada contact at 220 Laurier in Ottawa. That address is no longer valid (in fact I don't think we still have facilities there). The correct address is: 160 Elgin St. Room 790 Ottawa, Ont. K2P 2C4 Incidentally, as of this week, that position (Director - Switched Network Services), has been transferred from Bell Canada to SRCI (Stentor Resource Centre Inc.) So the title may be changing before long too! Plus ca change... (the more things change...) Don McKillican Internet: don@stam.QE.Bell.CA Analyst -- Systems Planning Envoy: [id=DMCKILLI]Bell Bell Canada, Montreal Tel: (514) 870-7611 ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 13:26:17 PST Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon > "There are mechanical locks that can be used to physically lock > the dial pad." Even in the 1960s, many of us got around such locks by pulsing the hook at the right frequency. Today, a hand-held touch-tone (not-R) generator is all you need. Even lines for which touch-tone isn't "enabled" often respond to the tones. (not-R) Touch Tone is no longer a trademark of AT&T or anybody else. > "USOC DH2 - Screening to deny 1+ and 411. ( 1 + 800 allowed.)" How does this prevent you from placing a toll charge through 1 800 CALL-ATT? Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #23 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13386; 13 Jan 93 5:02 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08911 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:42:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23302 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:42:16 -0600 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:42:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301130842.AA23302@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #24 TELECOM Digest Wed, 13 Jan 93 02:42:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 24 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: CNID on Answering Machines? (Toby Nixon) Re: CNID on Answering Machines? (Lance Neustaeter) Re: Legality of City Ordinances Against Junk Calls? (Paul Buder) Re: AC 215/610 Split (Rudolph T. Maceyko) Re: New AnswerCall Features (Rudolph T. Maceyko) Re: A Minor Nit With the Telecom FAQ (Matt Healy) Re: Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ... (Steve Forrette) Re: Equivalence Charges (Steve Forrette) Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Timothy Hu) Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Steve Hutzley) Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (Michael Rosen) Re: Prodigy <> Internet (Tom Benham) Re: Additional Phone Charges (Chuck Munro) Re: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? (Joe Bergstein) Re: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? (Barton F. Bruce) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: CNID on Answering Machines? Date: 12 Jan 93 17:47:39 EDT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) writes: > I find the current discussion of CNID features on modems very > interesting. But, being in the market for a new answering machine, I > want to know if there are any which store CNID, if received, and play > it back when messages are retrieved. Or are there other techniques > available? Anybody? I don't know of any answering machines that store Caller ID info along with the message, but the system we have here at home provides almost the same level of functionality. We have an answering machine that stores the date and time of the call, and a separate caller ID box that also stores date and time along with the number (almost all boxes do that). It's easy to match up the message time with the info in the caller ID box. I'll bet that you can buy a machine with date and time stamping and a separate caller ID box for less than the combination of the two, and without doing much searching. 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 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 20:21:53 PST From: Lance_Neustaeter@tvbbs.wimsey.bc.ca (Lance Neustaeter) Subject: Re: CNID on Answering Machines? David H. Close Had some good questions regarding CNID and answering machines. I've also wondered about the same possibilities and would also note that it would also be very handy for a (digital, of course) answering machine to be able to play a number of different personal outgoing messages depending on which number is calling ("Hi, Joe. I'm not in right now..."). This would also be very useful if you had a message you wanted to get to someone but you haven't been able to get ahold of. You could leave the message on the machine waiting for that person in case they call you -- and you can go about your business without having to keep trying to call them. ------------------------------ From: paulb@techbook.com (Paul Buder) Subject: Re: Legality of City Ordinances Against Junk Calls? Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 220-0636 Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:02:51 GMT lvc@cbvox1.att.com (Lawrence V Cipriani) writes: > Some Ohio cities [e.g., Bedford] have ordinances against telephone > solicitations. What is the legality of such an ordinance? Does > [Moderator's Note: Well, it is a lot like the soon-to-be and ex-cons > in the Chicago City Council passing an ordinance saying Chicago is a > 'nuclear free zone ...' .. about as stupid as they come. We can no > more keep bombs from landing here than Bedford, OH can keep people out > of their jurisdiction from ringing their telephones or citizens in CA > or PA can keep people out of state from seeing their phone numbers. > Maybe the Bedford authorities had nothing better to work on that day. PAT] Here in Oregon it is illegal to do computer telemarketing, that is, a machines recording, no human. It seems to work. I haven't gotten any machine based sales pitches. paulb@techbook.COM Not affiliated with TECHbooks Paul Buder Public Access UNIX at (503) 220-0636 (1200/2400, N81) ------------------------------ From: rm55+@pitt.edu (Rudolph T Maceyko) Subject: Re: AC 215/610 Split Date: 12 Jan 93 17:28:06 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh In article olwejo!bob@uunet.UU.NET writes: > I just heard on the news today that Bell of Pennsylvania will announce > an Area Code split in AC 215. I just read this on clari.tw.telecom. I'm sure others will notice that this seems to conflict with "TWX" use ... ... or has that been abandoned by everyone (including Canada)? Rudy Maceyko Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ------------------------------ From: rm55+@pitt.edu (Rudolph T Maceyko) Subject: Re: New AnswerCall Features Date: 12 Jan 93 17:38:55 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh In article Joe.Bergstein@p501.f544.n 109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) writes: > [Note that the announcement does not clarify what an "urgent" message > is, and whether callers will have an option to flag a message as > "urgent"]. For the uninitiated, we're discussing Answer Call and its call-me- when-I- get-a-message feature. Callers may mark a message as "urgent" by pressing "#" to end the recording of their message, then pressing "9" for options, "1" for marking the message urgent, then "1" to send the message. Interestingly, callers aren't *told* that they can press "9"; it's absent from the menu (for me anyway, 412-441 in Bell of PA land). When I first tried the service, it called me whenever *any* message was left, not just urgent ones. After a few repair calls (with the repeated response from them of "perhaps your touch-tone pad is sending the wrong tones ..."), someone finally found out what was really wrong and fixed it. A limitation of the service that's described in the "brochure" is that the number you define to have the service call you at must be within your regional calling area. It will accept any number but will silently ignore "long-distance" numbers. Rudy Maceyko Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ------------------------------ From: matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) Subject: Re: A Minor Nit With the Telecom FAQ Organization: Yale University--Genetics Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:07:45 GMT In article , turner@Dixie.Com wrote: >> However, two wires normally suffice to complete a connection >> between a telephone and the central office; any extra wiring >> would be for purposes such as grounding or for party line ringing. > Also to supply dial light for the Princess phones. A few years ago, I got a notice from SW BELL in Texas about old dial-light transformers that presented a fire hazard. The letter included templates to hold over any transformers located near phones to check if they were the suspect models, with an 800 number printed to call if I had any. Since there were no transformers in my apartment, I put the letter in file 13. Matt Healy matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ... Date: 12 Jan 1993 20:25:42 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) writes: > I have the SID chart from the telecom archives, but it's quite old. > Has anyone managed to get a list of SIDs for US cellular service > providers? There is a company in Florida whose name escapes me at the moment that publishes a varity of material about cellular roaming. They make the popular "Official Cellular Roaming Handbook" that lists every cellular system in the country, along with coverage maps, local and roaming rates, roam port numbers, customer service numbers, and System ID's. It costs around $16, and is very helpful for frequent roamers. They also make higher-end publications, and you can purchase data on magnetic media if you wish. Perhaps another Digest reader can contribute their name and phone number. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Equivalence Charges Date: 12 Jan 1993 22:28:11 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA (Tony Harminc) writes: > I was reviewing the phone bill for a company where I am consulting, > and realized that Bell Canada is charging for one more equivalence > feature than I would expect, e.g. there is a hunt group of three lines > - the one published number hunts to the second if busy, which hunts to > the third if second is busy, and that's the end - busy signal. Bell > charges for three equivalence features for this. > The droid in the business office insists that there is an 'ending > feature' that must be installed on the third line to make it all work. > I believe this is complete nonsense, but just before I open my mouth > wide, could someone confirm that technically there is no 'feature' > that need be installed on the last line of a hunt group? This is the way hunt groups are tariffed by US West in Washington State, and Pacific Bell in California. It's not for technical reasons, but that is indeed the correct price. When I've only wanted a two-line hunt group, I've found that busy-transfer is a better deal. The monthly cost is a bit more, but you pay for it only on one line, and the installation cost is often a lot less than hunting. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: timhu@ico.isc.com (Timothy Hu) Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Boulder CO Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:40:14 GMT > Same thing happens to us in Clinton, NY, each evening (sometimes > weekends, too) at just about 11 PM. I've always assumed some sort of > telco testing was going on, but it would be nice to know exactly what > they are doing! It happens to us in Cheyenne, Wyoming, too. Timothy Hu timhu@ico.isc.com | The intelligence (or lack of) expressed Interactive Systems Corporation | above does not necessarily reflect the Resource Solutions International | that of anyone else. ------------------------------ From: hutzley@ranger.dec.com (Steve Hutzley) Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:16:15 GMT In article , schimmel@gandalf.ca (Fred Schimmel) writes ... > It used to be that there was something called a line integrity test > (LIT) that occured in the interval just before the ring cycle began. > The circuit was re-arranged to test the line between the CO and the > phone. This is one reason why Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) needs > to identify its Ringer Equivalence Number (REN) because the test had > differing results depending on the number of ringers on the line. > Perhaps you added or removed some phones, modems, answering machines, > etc. Perhaps your local CO routinely at 10:15PM does a maintenance > check of all its lines, and this is when the ping occurs. Try calling > and asking for a test supervisor to see if they do something like > this. Or count your equipment total REN and inform the phone company. > It could just be a misprogrammed test, or an indicator that the line > is faulty. > Perhaps someone else remembers more about LIT. I believe this was a #5 > crossbar feature. Just a note on RENs, When I got my first, 1200 baud (wow!) modem, I called New England Telephone, told them about the modem, and the REN, basically, they said "YEAH, SO!"... so maybe they have some equipment than can compensate for this, or the DROID I talked to got him/her out of a situation he/she didn't understand ... Comments? Steve ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 13 Jan 93 05:13:09 GMT Wow, what incompetence. Next time, I'd suggest putting your request in writing and faxing the damn thing. That way they can't misunderstand or claim to have different orders, etc. Michael Rosen Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ From: tbenham@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Tom Benham) Subject: Re: Prodigy <> Internet Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:52:27 GMT jdelancy@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil writes: > About a month or so ago, someone posted that a gateway for Email from > Internet to/from Prodigy would probably be in business by Christmas. > Anyone have the latest status on that "activation"? I just got a note from Prodigy that advised me to look for Internet mail access in January, but I haven't seen it yet. Tom ------------------------------ From: chuckm@canada.hp.com (Chuck Munro) Subject: Re: Additional Phone Charges Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:02:58 GMT Organization: Hewlett-Packard Canada Ltd, Dartmouth, N.S. And what about the charge made to keep your number from popping up on those new Caller-ID telephones! I'm miffed! A one-time charge I could understand (after all, somebody has to enter a few keystrokes into the switch software), but a *monthly* charge that goes on and on like the Energizer Bunny ??? Chuck ------------------------------ From: Joe.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:32:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? On Jan. 6 in a message from lunatix!chelf@ms.uky.edu, a TELECOM Digest reader inquired about an apparent local telephone number for a business outside the local calling area. Our Esteemed Moderator, Pat, provided an explanation of FX service. I wonder if this reader really encountered remote call forwarding (RCF), a switched inbound service, rather than FX, which is quite costly and requires a substantial amount of usage for cost justification. For our reader(s), RCF establishes a local calling number, that when dialed, forwards the call to a predesignated number. In this case, the predesignated number would be a toll call to the distant business. The business picks up the toll charges for these calls. Why would a business do this? Just as in this reader's case, to maintain what appears to be a local presence by providing a local calling number for the customers. In the Washington D.C. metro area, there are many firms located just beyond the metro calling area. They can be reached from a portion of the metro area adjacent to theirs, but not from the entire metro area. Many of these firms establish RCF numbers which are accesible from the entire Washington D.C. metro area to ensure that the large number of potential customers can reach them via a local call. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:04:34 -0500 (EST) From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: Re: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. lunatix!chelf@ms.uky.edu wrote: > The other day, I saw the number for a business located in a nearby > town (which is not normally in the local calling area), however, the > [Moderator's Note: Businesses (actually, anyone, but it is mostly > businesses) can have a 'foreign exchange' line -- commonly known as an > FX. When they use that phone, or receive calls on it, it is as though FX lines are ONLY one of many ways to do this. An FX line makes sense if there is a LOT of traffic or sometimes if it is also needed to be able to dial back out into the foreign area. Very often, folks will have the phone line delivered to some business there (friend, lawyer, answering service, or whatever) and then simply order call forwarding on the line and set it to forwward to the remote location. Paying for that service, and some modest amount of toll calls is often FAR cheaper than a leased FX line. Some folks instead get that same line and BUY some call forwarding box and simply plug it into a second line they pay for at into the same location. Connection quality may suffer, but you don't need telco to be running the latest generic on their stepper for it to work :-) And just sometimes telco offers 'REMOTE CALL FORWARDING' where NO line goes anywhere. When a local call is dialed, it gets forwarded to the remote site. The toll charges go to the number with this service on it. Often there is a FULL service order write charge and other bullcrap just to change the foward to number. If you have a trustworthy site you can have the first flavor above line delivered to, that is best and someone can plug a phone in and reset the number as needed. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #24 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18532; 15 Jan 93 2:36 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01145 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 00:16:09 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29495 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 00:15:46 -0600 Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 00:15:46 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301150615.AA29495@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #25 TELECOM Digest Fri, 15 Jan 93 00:15:45 CST Volume 13 : Issue 25 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson What's the Best Cordless Phone? (Mohit K. Goval) AT&T Extended Range Cordless Telephone 9530 (AT&T message via Ken Jongsma) Even Egghead Has Trouble Understanding E-Mail (Paul Robinson) Quantitatively, How Much Will LEC Competition Affect Rates? (H. Shrikumar) Correction to NY/Philly Post (Douglas Scott Reuben) Prodigy Update Report in Newsbytes (Newsbytes via ghadsal@american.edu) What is Teleport? (Johan Vounckx) What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (Paul Robinson) Cellular Accessories (J. Philip Miller) TransTalk Experience? (Eric Pearce) Want to Buy! (Ron Martin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: goyal@utdallas.edu (MOHIT K GOYAL) Subject: What's the Best Cordless Phone? Organization: Univ. of Texas at Dallas Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:19:07 GMT Can anyone tell me their opinions on what the best cordless phone is? I'm looking for one that lets the user dial and answer from the base, as well as from the actual unit. So far, I'm strongly considering the new AT&T 5515. It's about $160 w/o tax. Thanks. [Moderator's Note: Maybe you will want to wait for the new AT&T 9530 which is due to be released in a few months. It is digital and uses the 900 megs range. I've included an announcement sent recently to all AT&T employees in this issue which describes it in detail. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) Subject: AT&T Extended Range Cordless Telephone 9530 Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 16:43:16 -0500 (EST) I was sent this from a broadcast to AT&T employees. I thought you might be interested ... *** AT&T today announced a high-power, all-digital cordless phone with four times the range of today's conventional cordless telephones. The AT&T Extended Range Cordless Telephone 9530 operates in the 900-MHz frequency, providing virtually interference-free conversations with consistent sound quality up to one mile from the base. The AT&T 9530 uses full digital transmission to encode speech onto a radio signal, much like music is encoded onto a CD, and to provide clearer sound over a longer range than cordless phones operating in the 46/49-MHz frequency. AT&T's spread-spectrum, frequency-hopping architecture, which is patent-pending, actually avoids interference by "hopping" the radio signal among 50 of the available 173 channels during a conversation. If any of the channels experience interference, the 9530 automatically swaps it for a new, clearer channel. Because it operates over a different frequency, the AT&T 9530 is unaffected by forms of interference common to 46/49-MHz cordless phones, such as garage door openers, baby monitors and radio intercoms. It also performs well in environments typically difficult for conventional cordless, such as high-rise apartment and multilevel buildings. The random selection of 50 of 173 channels, along with digital speech encoding, makes it nearly impossible to eavesdrop on conversations. The AT&T 9530 was designed and developed by AT&T Bell Laboratories, employing advanced integrated circuit technology developed jointly with AT&T Microelectronics. The AT&T Extended Range Cordless Telephone 9530 will be available in late spring at AT&T Phone Centers nationwide for $449.99. For more information, call 800-222-3111. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 17:47:47 EST Subject: Even Egghead Has Trouble Understanding E-Mail In a catalog from Egghead Software, they are selling an E-Mail package for Microsloth Windoze called "The Wire", which, according to the blurb for it: All messages are routed through MCI mail, a centralized electronic mail service maintained by MCI Communications ... a $15.00 per month account fee includes 1-800 access and up to 60 messages of 5,000 characters or less in length delivered via e-mail, fax, telex, U.S. Postal Service, or via gateways to CompuServe, PRODIGY, Internet, and other on-line information services. I *know* that CompuServe and Internet have gateways on MCI Mail. I know Prodigy is considering getting an Internet gateway, but I was unaware that they had a gateway on MCI Mail. So I decided to look and see. A gateway on MCI Mail is called an "EMS": -- Transcript follows -- Pad ID: P3 - Port: 17. Please enter your user name: tdarcos Password: Connection initiated. . . Opened. Welcome to MCI Mail! Reach up to 1,000 worldwide recipients quickly through MCI fax Broadcast. For more information, call Operator 6 at 1-800-999-2096. Today's Headlines At 4 pm EST: --News Of Strikes Against Iraq Boosts Defense Sector Stock --Intel Shares Soar On News Profit Even Stronger Than Expected Type //BUSINESS on Dow Jones for details. MCI Mail Version V11.2.C Your INBOX has 43 messages Command: find ems internet MCI Mail Directory Information MCI ID Name Organization Location EMS 376-5414 INTERNET NRI Reston Command: find ems compuserve MCI Mail Directory Information MCI ID Name Organization Location EMS 281-6320 COMPUSERVE Columbus, OH Command: find ems western union MCI Mail Directory Information MCI ID Name Organization Location EMS 435-6996 WESTERN UNION AT&T USA Command: find ems att att is not listed as an Electronic Mail System. Command: find ems at&t at&t is not listed as an Electronic Mail System. Command: find ems attmail MCI Mail Directory Information MCI ID Name Organization Location EMS 414-0940 ATTMail AT&T USA Command: find ems prodigy prodigy is not listed as an Electronic Mail System. Command: find name prodigy MCI Mail Subscriber Information MCI ID Name Organization Location User has unlisted name in MCI Mail Directory - Transcript Ends -- What this indicates is that there is no gateway on MCI to Prodigy (except maybe via Internet), except that someone (who wishes not to be known) has an ordinary account. Also, I discovered other errors: MCI Mail only gives you E-Mail, Gateway Mail (Like Internet), and Fax messages as part of your "free" allocation. Telex and Paper Mail messages are charged. The moral of this story is that often the advertisement writers don't even understand the technology. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 23:36:53 -0500 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) Subject: Quantitatively, How Much Will LEC Competition Affect Rates? Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst Hi, I (again) have a question ..... I was thinking of scenarios of telecom development, deregulation and de-monoplisation, comparing with the history as seen in the US industry. The following question came up: If LEC competetion were the norm, what changes can one expect? With open competetion in the LD business, we've seen a fall of LD rates, and an improvement of service. (Is there some place I can see quantitatively this fall over the decade or more?) Now, if LECs also were to be opened up, how much (if at all) would the local phone rates change by? Would there be a net change in LEC revenues per line ? What about total LEC revenues? Will it also result in growth of number of subscriptions due to the competition? Or would the rates merely get readjsuted, with different plans, some with lower entry cost, and many restrictions (limited calls per month, per peak hour), other more expensive, but with greater facilities? In general, what would be the fixed cost, and variable cost per call? (The bottom line, how much of the current rates is "water"?) In other words, if the conjecture that a monopoly tends to be relatively inefficient, and increased competition would force them to drive down costs, either by better management or with better techology, is correct ... then by how much can one expect the local dial-tone rates to change ? I look forward to the wisdom on this list. Many thanks! -- shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in ) +========================================== PS: Re: PHONE RESTRICTED FOR TOLL ETC. ... BTW ... I'd be travelling a while, so it turns out its my turn to worry about others using my phone now. The recent discussions on this list has left me better prepared. In article andrew@frip.wv.tek.com .. >> "USOC DH2 - Screening to deny 1+ and 411. ( 1 + 800 allowed.)" > How does this prevent you from placing a toll charge through 1 800 > CALL-ATT? No, but it can still prevent billing to the number. I have little faith in any add on device, or blocker, for what I add anyone can delete. So I am looking for what New England telephone can provide me, implemented *at* the switch, and they taking the responsibility. Turns out that they have two kinds of "1 block", and opting for both would prevent all direct dial toll calls, all premium calls and also alert the operator (called via 0) to not transfer manually to a IXC for a LD call. (I can further be mean, and ask for 0 Operator block as well ... but if they assure me their operator will be alerted, thats fine with me.) These blocks will also imply screening of any collect or third party calls. They'd allow a 1-800 call to go thru. But CALL_ATT can then bill to a calling card, but not to my number since, as per above, the screening will not allow that. I further quizzed them, mentioning the infamous name heard so often in this forum (I think I percieved a hint of recognition from the representative) ... but then she assured me that that will not occur too. Her word is NET's word. I am just going to get them to reiterate three times (a holy number) that no further charges than a fixed monthly bill will apply. I will then order these blocks, and mail then a letter thanking them for the assurances I had heard from them that day, carefully listing my concerns and their assurances, and preserve a copy of the letter. I suppose if still someone slaps me ... its a NET problem, and that should be insurance enough. (Hope so!). So no Dial-1, no Operator assisted calls, no premium calls, no collect calls in, no third party calls. No scam calls. Local call OK, 1-800 OK (and free), Calling card OK (charge his card). Your LEC should have similar blocks too, perhaps in a different combination, and tarriffs. I think this is quite conclusive. Good Luck! ------------------------------ Date: 14-JAN-1993 18:16:02.57 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Correction to NY/Philly Posting Recently I noted that Cell One/NY has initiated automatic call delivery to Philadelphia (00029). I also incorrectly noted that you need to use the "Do Not Disturb" feature to have your calls sent to voicemail, as you need to do in Connecitcut (00119) and the the ComCast areas of New Jersey (00173, 00575, 01487). (And on all of the NACN as well.). Philly is connected to NY via IS-41 RevA, and NOT the "Protocol Translators" which NY uses to connect to CT and NJ. IS-41 RevA *can* apparently hand the call back to NY if no one answers in Philly, so if you let the call go unanswered it will eventually bounce back to your voicemail with Cell One/NY. (The Protocol Translator can handle calls like this FROM CT and NJ, ie, CT and NJ customers roaming in NY will have their calls go back to their home systems if they are not available, but for some reason the PT can't handle a call from NY to CT/NJ so that it will bounce back to NY upon "no answer".) Also, Wilmington is not YET officially connected -- if you go active in Philly and drive down to Wilmington (00123) you will get calls, but you can't go active in Wilmington and have calls delivered. This will change in about a week when IS-41 RevA is set in place to Wilmington as well. Overall, then, a definite improvement, although IS-41 RevA does seem to have one annoying flaw (in my opinion): If someone places a call to you while you are roaming in an IS-41 RevA "networked" area, and either abandons the call, talks to you, or gets a busy, a SECOND call within two minutes will AUTOMATICALLY go to voicemail or and "out of vehicle" recording. IS-41 RevA will not pass a second call along for two minutes after the first! So if someone calls you, and notices that it is taking a while for ringing to start (while you are being located in the roaming market), thinks he may have misdialed and tries you again, if the second attempt is in under two minutes, he will get your voicemail or an "out of vehicle" recording. This occurs regardless of whether you have "Call-Waiting" or not -- you will only get Call Waiting calls AFTER the first two minutes, before that callers will still be dumped to voicemail. Hopefully, someone at Cell One or the people writing IS-41 stuff can reset this to be something like 15 seconds instead of the unreasonably long period of two minutes. As I said, though, overall, not having to use *35/*350 is certainly an improvement! Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:09:24 EST From: GHADSAL@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Prodigy Update Report in Newsbytes WHITE PLAINS, NEW YORK, U.S.A., 1993 JAN 13 (NB) -- Recent layoffs will not impact the ability of Prodigy to meet its announced goal of establishing an Internet connection, a top company executive has told {Newsbytes}. He adds that the staff reductions will not stop Prodigy from implementing publicly announced system improvements. George Perry, vice president and chief counsel of Prodigy Services, discussed the January 11th firing by Prodigy of 250 of its 1,100 employees, citing the need to reduce costs and improve efficiency. Perry told Newsbytes, "This was a painful and difficult move. We felt, however, that the reorganization is a better plan for the future and will greatly aid us in reaching profitability." Perry said, "By sheer coincidence, we passed the one million household mark last week and we have two million individuals as members. We feel that we have contributed greatly to the communications explosion." The Internet connection will allow electronic mail to be sent between Prodigy subscribers and the approximately 20,000,000 users of the many networks that collectively make up what is known as the Internet. Among Prodigy's commercial competition, GEnie has recently added this feature joining America OnLine, CompuServe, Delphi, AppleLink, MCI Mail, AT&T Mail and the WELL as systems which provide this access. In announcing the layoffs, Prodigy President Ross S. Glatzner was quoted as saying, "This is a tough day. But in the end, it was the necessary thing to do. We became very layered over the years and the decision making wasn't as crisp as it needed to be." As part of the reorganization, Prodigy also will turn over the functions of its membership services division to an outside firm, SPS Payment Systems of Layton, Utah. SPS will offer jobs to 65 of the 100 workers in the membership services division, currently located in Yorktown Heights, NY. It has also been speculated in the press that the reorganization will mean less emphasis on programming and systems organization. This view is based on the recent departure of several top programming executives including senior vice president, Henry Heilbrunn, who left the company in the week before the staff cuts. ------------------------------ From: vounckx@goya.esat.kuleuven.ac.be (Johan Vounckx) Subject: What is Teleport? Organization: Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 08:28:09 GMT Hi, I've recently heard the word "teleport". It seems to be a place where companies can make use of lots of communication services, like videoconferences, ... Can anyone give me more information on that? Are there some teleports existing? (It seems that in Torino, Italy, there is one.) Thanks, Johan Vounckx K.U.Leuven-ESAT Laboratory Kard. Mercierlaan 94 B-3001 Heverlee, Belgium [Moderator's Note: A company in the USA headquartered in New York City called 'Teleport' provides local telco bypass service to a few large companies both in that city and a few other places such as Chicago. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 19:15:51 EST Subject: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? I have a question which came up once because of something an article someone mentioned. AT&T has a special schedule for some customers, which apparently the customers love and AT&T's competitors hate. I was wondering what it was. The name of the schedule is either the infamous "Tariff 11" or "Tariff 12". As the last time I looked the AT&T general dial tariffs were numbered 200 or more, this sounds odd. Does anyone know anything about either a "Tariff 11" or "Tariff 12"? Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) Subject: Cellular Accessories Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:40:32 -0600 (CST) Having finally broken down and picked up a bag phone to lug around in my car, I started looking around for accessories. I was quite suprised that I have been uable to find any discount, mail order type suppliers. While Hello Direct is frequently recommended here, they are neither generally inexpensive, nor do they carry a wide variety of brand name products. In my particular case, I am looking for a battery for a Uniden CP 1900A but suspect that there must be folks who sell stuff for many brands. Any recommendations? 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)] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:25:05 -0800 From: eap@ora.com (Eric Pearce) Subject: TransTalk Experience? I'm looking at the TransTalk router from International Transware. It is supposed to allow me to initiate a switched 56k connection from a Mac, i.e. Mac <-- LocalTalk --> TransTalk <-- V.35? --> CSU/DSU --> SW56k-land Does anybody have experience with this product? What is a good, low cost CSU/DSU that will work with it? Someone mentioned Adtran. The primary use would be transfering large files to a print shop (we are a book publisher). The 14.4 modems I'm using now are not fast enough. We are in the boonies, so no ISDN yet. Thanks, Eric Pearce | eap@ora.com | O'Reilly & Associates Publishers of Nutshell Series Handbooks and X Window System Guides 103 Morris St, Sebastopol, CA 95472 1-800-998-9938 or 707-829-0515 ------------------------------ From: ereddy@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Ron Martin) Subject: Want to Buy! Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 21:30:22 GMT I want to buy a key set. Would like to get a small Northern Telecom Meridian setup with three or four extensions, but will take a look at any offers. Mail me with your price, unit description and condition and any other info. Thanks in advance, Ron ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #25 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22616; 15 Jan 93 4:45 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28613 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 02:23:46 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21677 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 02:23:18 -0600 Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 02:23:18 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301150823.AA21677@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #26 TELECOM Digest Fri, 15 Jan 93 02:23:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 26 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Apartment Security Stupidity (Elana Beach) OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Rob Knauerhase) Free Publicity on Telecommunications Issues (Tom Worthington) Calling Cards (was Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune) (Andy Sherman) Voice Mail With Call Back (Paul Robinson) Remote Call Forwarding (Paul Robinson) Paging -> SW Bell Gives Up (Guy Hadsall) Wiring For CSU/DSU Units (Doug Barr) Looking For Portable X.25/Frame Relay Imformation (L. Tzeng via Seth Dobbs) Telecom Management Degrees (J.D. Delancy) Still 0 + 7D For Local Within 713? (Carl Moore) 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized (Jim Rees) Another Teee Heee :-)) (Rich Greenberg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: elana@agora.rain.com (Elana Beach) Subject: Apartment Security Stupidity Organization: Open Communications Forum Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 16:32:05 GMT I live in an apartment building. This place uses a system called Entraguard that lets tenants screen visitors. The visitor punches a three number code on the panel outside the front door, the tenant's phone rings, and if it's someone they want, the tenant hits 9 on his/her touch-tone phone. The tone triggers the front door to unlock. All this was fine and dandy until one day when I came home, I was taken aside by the assistant manager and told to get a new answering machine or else. Turned out that the beep tone on my answering machine was the same frequency as the tone that opened the door. It also turned out that the management of my building traditionally forced tenants to get answering machines instead of getting this Entraguard company to fix the original problem. I talked to the head manager, who claimed the company had come three times and tried to fix it, and there was no fixing it at all. I was supposedly required to get a new answering machine because unsavory types had discovered that my answering machine would let them in. Well, that sure explained the small number of blank messages on my machine that sounded like they originated at the front door ... When I heard I had to replace MY machine because of THEIR problem, I got MAD. Off the the head manager's office I go. The main manager claimed that since this was not a fancy high-income building, I should not expect them to be able to afford a high-tech security system. At the time I knew very little phone tech. I decided to fake it. I told that manager (I was bluffing here) that all that Entraguard had to do was install a certain electronic chip which cost less than $2 which would allow the system to know the difference between an answering machine and a touch-tone. I really did not know what I was talking about, but THEY didn't know that. Within a month, the system seems to have been fixed. They have let me keep my answering machine, and some tests I have run recently show no effect of my beep tone on that door. Another positive effect: when I consulted the net for a place to ask about this, I was directed to the TELECOM Digest. I have enjoyed reading it ever since. I threatened the apartment management that if they ever give me trouble about this door problem again, I was going to bore them with some REAL technical details until it made their heads spin. They seem to be fairly tech-allergic, and they haven't bugged me since. ;-) [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell offers apartment front door security service to grandfathered customers who had it installed prior to about 1983. They use a sort of hybrid centrex from the central office to run it. The pairs from the CO to the phones in each apartment have to be dedicated without any possibility of multiples on those pairs. This is done for security reasons, and other security techniques include having the front door opening device camp-on the line *after* decisions are made by the software to hunt, call-forward, bridge to an answering service, etc. This prevents the place where you forwarded your calls to or your answering service from opening the front door of your building ... the answering service will never see the call, and even with call-forwarding turned on, a front door call will ring through with an easily identified ringing cadence of its own. Likewise, the CO can tell the difference between a digit punched at the phone (4 to open the door, 6 to deny entry and disconnect) and something similar fed to it from a foreign source like an answering machine or pocket tone sounder. IBT called this product 'Enterphone', following the divestiture in the early 1980's, new customers were referred to a company called 'Interphone', a division of GTE in Canada which makes customer premises equipment which does the same thing but instead of being in the CO is wired up at the demarc where telco's pairs meet up with building house pairs. I'll elaborate in more detail on both systems here if anyone is interested. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Knauerhase Subject: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 10:17:34 CST From a local (to Ohio) news item: (COLUMBUS)--State Representative Mike Stinziano says he will introduce a bill prohibiting telephone companies from eliminating flat-rate service. The Columbus Democrat says he believes phone companies will try to force residential customers to pay based on a time, distance, length and number of calls formula. An Ohio Bell spokesman says the company will oppose such legislation. ---------------- I mailed an article here last Thanksgiving about Ohio Bell's sales pitches for their relatively new measured-service variants, commenting that my mother's phone bill listed an _increase_ if she switched to any of their new plans (based on her typical usage). Someone from this group mailed me privately warning that in Michigan there was now no option of flat-rate, and to watch out for the same thing in OBT-land. Well, from the above blurb, something appears to be going on. So far, Ohio's PUCO has been relatively good (or compared to CPUC reports here, stellar :) with respect to rates and features, so I assume (hope) that flat-rate pricing will not shoot up in the face of this legislation. Since OBT is guaranteed a profit (n'est-ce pas?), the Libertarian side of me has no trouble supporting the continuation of flat-rate service for those who choose it, even if some who so choose end up subsidizing high-usage families. Am I overlooking anything? As I am for the time being residing in central Illinois, I'd appreciate it if an interested party closer to Columbus would keep the Digest (and/or me) informed as to how (and if!) this legislation proceeds. Rob Knauerhase University of Illinois @ Urbana-Champaign, Dept. of Computer Science [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat rate service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many years, and for most subscribers, the cost for phone service actually went *down* when they were no longer forced to pay for all the modem users who went through thousands of units a month at flat rate. Naturally, the guys who spent hours every night on a modem calling BBS lines on the other side of the area code (or even inter-area code; our old flat rate plans took in 312/708 and parts of 815/219/414) squealed like pigs when the change was announced; *they* had to start paying their way ... the 90 percent plus of our population which does not use modems or make hundreds (or thousands) of calls each month was very pleased to see a reduction in their bills. When IBT ditched almost all the flat rate stuff a few years ago, the biggest objections came in the form of countless articles on BBS message bases from people talking about the greedy and awful old telco. Count me as one who approves of 'pay for what you use'; I don't like paying subsidies for my neighbor's use of the phone. I don't do it for the electricity, water or gas they use, why should I for their phone calls via flat rate, averaged out pricing? But then again, I don't run war dialers against entire CO's or call computer chat lines in the outer fringes of 708/815. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tomw@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Tom Worthington) Subject: Free Publicity on Telecommunications Issues Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 07:36:36 GMT Toula Mantis is from the Australian Telecommunications Users Group. She is looking for telecommunications stories to write about in the ATUG column in each Monday's Australian newspaper (in the communica- tions section). Toula is currently preparing an overview of Australian R&D in telecommunications for next Monday's issue (her deadline is tomorrow afternoon). She would like input from the R&D community on topics like: "How does R&D in Australia compare with the rest of the world?". Information for good news stores (like what a wonderful research project you are on) or bad news stories (like "what happened to the $13M for AARnet?") would also be welcome. Contact: Toula Mantis Australian Telecommunications Users Group ph: +61 2 957 1333 fax: +61 2 925 0880 She has an "AAP mailbox" (number 9243). If anyone knows how to send to it from the Internet, we would all be impressed. Posted by request by Tom Worthington, Director of the Community Affairs Board, Australian Computer Society Incorporated, as a service to the community. [Moderator's Note: Bearing in mind that as I write this, it is already Saturday in Australia, I'm not sure if submissions will reach her in time, but perhaps she will do a followup soon. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:36:33 EST Subject: Calling Cards (was Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune) Organization: Salomon Inc, Rutherford NJ From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) On 12 Jan 93 00:37:11 GMT, sullivan@geom.umn.edu said: > The other thing that has always confused me is why alternative > long-distance companies (AOSs?) can charge things to an AT&T calling > card. I realize that Ma and the Baby Bells have some sort of > agreement to allow charges to each others' calling cards. And I > gather that this all has something to do with the fact that there is > some standard way to determine if a calling card number is valid. But > again, why does AT&T agree to provide billing service for these > people? I can't imagine if Sears suddenly decided to accept payments > by JCPenny credit cards that JCPenny would actually let them collect > on the bills. This should only be the case with the old-style AT&T Card numbers, the kind that contain your billing telephone number followed by a PIN. Those are not really AT&T numbers, and therein lies the problem. Those numbers belong the local carrier, and they will verify that number for any phone company. For the past year or more, AT&T has been issuing new cards with a private number (so-called CIID cards), and the AT&T Universal Card uses a CIID number also. A CIID card can *NOT* be billed by an AOS, and can *NOT* be billed by another carrier. As you note, AT&T has cross-verification agreements with virtually every local exchange carrier in the country, so that LEC cards can be used to bill AT&T calls and CIID cards can be used to bill LEC carried calls. If your AT&T card can be billed by the slime, then you need to call AT&T and get a new card. 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." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 15:44 GMT From: 0005066432@mcimail.com Subject: Voice Mail With Call Back If anyone is interested, I used to use a local area-code 202 voice mail service which had the option of adding an 800 number on it. Also, the service, which is run by an interexchange carrier, can be programmed (by you) to call you whenever a message comes in, anywhere in the U.S. The nice thing about this is you can also restrict the hours the system calls you. I had mine set up for the hours I was home, 10-2. So if I get any calls from 2:01 pm until 9:59 am, the system would hold them and then at 10:00 it would call me and announce I had messages. I could then enter my password and have the same access as if I had dialed in for messages. If a message comes in between 10 and 2, after the message is left, the system calls me and then announces I have a message. Also, since I can reprogram the number for it to call, if I have to go to a different location, I can take my messages with me. Apparently the only thing I can't do is have it signal a touch-tone pager directly since it uses touch tones to indicate where to call; but the administrator said that they could set it up if I wanted it. The only problem I had with it was the price. Originally it was $1 a month plus 16c per minute of usage, with an additional 16c for access via the 800 number. Then they raised the rate to a minimum $10 a month usage (I guess it got too expensive for them to continue to operate it that way; I had four mailboxes and was running about $8-15 a month usage.) That was when I had to discontinue the service. The other thing I could do was have it deliver messages. I could post a message, then give it a phone number to send it to, and it would send it out just like one of those robodialers. Has anyone else seen anything better than this in a public voice mail service? I may end up going back to it because of the capabilities. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 15:27 GMT From: 0005066432@mcimail.com Subject: Remote Call Forwarding In Telecom Digest 13 #24, Barton F. Bruce says: > And just sometimes telco offers 'REMOTE CALL FORWARDING' where NO line > goes anywhere. When a local call is dialed, it gets forwarded to the > remote site. I had it for a time; the phone company will charge message units for each local transferred call. I wanted an area code 703 number for my voice mail number which was in the 202 area code. > If you have a trustworthy site you can have the first flavor above > line delivered to, that is best and someone can plug a phone in and > reset the number as needed. Not even that. Bell Atlantic (C&P Telephone Company's owner) offers "Ultra call forwarding" in which you can change the call forward number on your phone even from another location. Paul Robinson - TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM [Moderator's Note: We have both 'Remote Call Forwarding' here as you describe it and 'Remote Access Call Forwarding' which is what you describe as 'Ultra'. We can call the switch, enter our passcode and divert our line (equipped with call forwarding) wherever we want it. IBT gives this feature for free as part of the Call Forwarding feature here. We have to pay dearly for the first type however, if we want a phone out of another CO somewhere to be permanently set to ring us. PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Thu, 13 Jan 1993 22:48:00 EST From: GHADSAL@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Paging -> SW Bell Gives Up It appears that Southwestern Bell Corp. of St. Louis MO is giving up on the wireless paging business. It was announed that it will sell its floundering Metromedia Paging (spun off of John Kluge's Metromedia) to New York's LOCATE Corporation. *waving* "Bye Bye Paging as we know it ... hello wireless as we don't know it!" Guy Hadsall Dept. of Health and Fitness The American Univeristy Washington, DC (202) 885-3020 VOICE (202) 885-3090 FAX ghadsal@auvm.american.edu ------------------------------ From: barr@tramp.Colorado.EDU (BARR DOUG) Subject: Wiring for CSU/DSU Units Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 17:10:48 GMT I am trying to find out what kind of wiring is required from the US West demark to a CSU/DSU unit. Is there a specification (wire type, db loss, crosstalk, distance limitation) for all these units or are they vendor independent. I would appreciate replies. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: sethd@amtfocus.amt.gss.mot.com (Seth Dobbs) Subject: Looking For Portable X.25/Frame Relay Information Date: 14 Jan 93 18:17:36 GMT Organization: Motorola, Inc. GSS-AMT, Arlington Heights, Il I am posting this for a friend. Please mail replies to the email address listed at the end. -------------- Dear Netlanders, I am looking for information on the "Portable" software products/ components in the following areas: - X.25 - X.25 - X.25 PAD - Frame Relay - Frame Relay PAD If you have ported some of the above products to your company's platforms, I would like to hear your porting experience. If your company has the above products, I would like to hear from you, too. Please either give me a call at (708) 933-5565 or send me an e-mail at lihs@usr.com. Thanks, Lih-Shyng Tzeng U.S. Robotics, Inc. lihs@usr.com ------------- Seth T. Dobbs * QMS Royal Artist * | sethd@amtfocus.amt.gss.mot.com GSS/AMT Motorola Inc. | Standard Disclaimer ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:26:51 EST From: delancy@chesapeake.ads.com (J.D. Delancy) Subject: Telecom Management Degrees Does anyone know what colleges/universities offer a Telecommunications Management Degree program starting at the associates level? All I've seen has been a Masters Level program at places like Univ of Maryland. delancy@chesapeake.ads.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 10:43:31 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Still 0 + 7D For Local Within 713? I returned a few days ago from the Gulf of Mexico coast area, traveling east to Pensacola, Fla. and west to Houston, Texas. In area 713, I placed at least one local call via 0+ from a pay phone, and (as happened once in North Carolina) I had to leave the area code off although area 713 (and North Carolina) have had to program for N0X/N1X prefixes. ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized Date: 14 Jan 1993 16:02:44 GMT Organization: University of Michigan CITI Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Michigan Bell announced the 313/810 area code split to its customers in August. In the announcement they said, "But from now until Aug. 10, 1994 (that's 8-10-94), when the change will occur, Michigan Bell will carry out a massive program to educate customers." Apparently that "massive program" does not include any notice in the phone book. The 92-93 book, issued by Michigan Bell in November 1992, contains no mention of the split that I can find. By the way, you can get more information at 1-800-831-8989 (I don't know if this is diallable outside of 313/810). Permissive dialing starts December 1993, and ends (with mandatory use of 810) August 10, 1994. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 16:41:35 PST From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) Reply-To: richg@hatch.socal.com Subject: Another Teee Heee :-)) Hi Pat, The {Los Angeles Times} carries a comic strip called "Bound & Gagged" by Dana Summers. For those not familiar with it, it (IMHO) is a knockoff of Gary Larson's "Far Side", and unually not up to Larson's quality. Yesterday's (1/13/93) strip was one of the (again IMHO) exceptions, and in addition should be particularly funny to most readers of the TELECOM Digest. Please picture this: A horse drawn wagon, no sides, just a flat bed with a bench seat near the front. Sitting on the seat is a SNA (Stereotypical Native American) driving the horses. On the bed of the wagon, a fire is burning, and another SNA is waving a blanket over the fire producing smoke balls. The caption: "First Mobil Phone". Enjoy :-)) [Moderator's Note: Cute. Another recent cartoon in a magazine showed a Dirty Old Man at a payphone covering the mouthpiece with a handker- chief speaking into the phone. He is wearing a long trench coat and probably exposing himself. The symbol for electricity leads from the wires on this phone to the next picture of a switchboard where this hateful looking witch of an operator is saying, "I have an obscene call for anyone at this number, will you accept the charges?" The third panel shows this rather perplexed looking woman on the receiving end of the whole thing. The final picture has the man being led away by police and a stern looking judge banging a gavel saying, "he forgot to use star sixty seven when he placed that call. Don't you make the same mistake!" By the way, *67 -does- work from payphones here. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #26 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08308; 18 Jan 93 1:47 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02985 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 17 Jan 1993 23:20:29 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03083 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 17 Jan 1993 23:19:59 -0600 Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 23:19:59 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301180519.AA03083@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #28 TELECOM Digest Sun, 17 Jan 93 23:20:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 28 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Gonna Miss Contel (John Higdon) Telemarketer Conviction Overturned on Appeal :-( (Jack Winslade) Do You Think This is a Fraudulent Ad? :) (Paul Robinson) Re: MF Signaling Test Gear (Pat Turner) What is dBm0? (Ching-Chang Liao) Sprint Can't do Switched 56k (?) (Eric Pearce) Help Needed With Novatel 8320 Transportable Cellular Phone (Joe Smooth) Correction: AT&T Buys 20% of Unitel (Dave Leibold) AT&T PRI (was 800 Numbers and Live ANI Advice Sought) (David G. Lewis) ISDN Modems/Boards? (Sid Stuart) What is GTE NorthNet? (jdg111@psuvm.psu.edu) Info Wanted on Telecom Exhibitions and Conferences (Cliff Featherstone) Source For Used Panasonic 616 Wanted (Steve Gaarder) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 19:31 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Gonna Miss Contel This past week has been a study in contrasts. All three of the LECs with which I have service have had an opportunity to show what it is made of. Torrential rains (at least for here) have come down and many circuits have failed. The first to go was an audio circuit to Mt. Loma Prieta which is used by an Iranian programming outfit to get program audio to a transmitter site for SCA broadcasts. Pac*Bell was called, a repair person picked up the keys, and the circuit was repaired. Day before yesterday, all the data circuits and the telephone quit up at another transmitter facility served by GTE. First, it took a good half-hour waiting on hold to find out that I had called the wrong number to find out the right number for "priority repair". I ended up calling corporate headquarters in Thousand Jokes. Good thing it was a weekday during business hours! Then I reported the list of circuits to someone at a number in Long Beach. An hour and a half later, someone called back to tell me that the circuit IDs were incorrect -- did I have other numbers? No. Thirty minutes after that, someone called to tell me that everything tested fine and that they were closing the tickets out. I reopened the tickets. Later in the day, I was told that someone would have to visit the site but that due to the rain and mud, it would have to be some other day. Since I had just made two trips to the site myself, I gave the person an earful and told him what would be acceptable was complete repair in one hour -- after that major complaints would be filed. The next excuse involved keys. Someone would have to let them in. I told them to use the keys that I had provided years ago for this very purpose. I silenced the whining by pointing out that a new data circuit had been installed the week before without anyone letting in the installer, so they obviously still had the keys. Sometime that night the circuits (except for the telephone itself) started working and some repair person woke me up at 7:30 AM to tell me that everything was fixed. Another call to the 310 number got the phone working by noon. Today, I discovered that our 800 number in Victorville was "disconnected" and called the Contel business office to find out why. I was told that there was no reason for it to be that way and the person offered to report it to repair service. Within fifteen minutes, I received a call from repair service telling me that it had been corrected. Fifteen minutes after that a very apologetic person from the Contel business office told me that it had been out of service for over a week and that she would credit me with the entire monthly service charge as compensation. (If this had been GTE, it would have been days before anyone would have even called me back. It would have somehow been my fault and there would have been no compensation granted whatsoever. With GTE, dollars win out over customer relations every time.) BTW, it should be pointed out that Pac*Bell gives toll-free numbers to call techs back on. Contel invites you to call collect. GTE just gives you toll numbers and expects you to pay. I have no idea how much I spent calling 714, 310, and 805 numbers the other day. When Contel falls into the GTE sewer here in California, the only major phone company left (that knows anything about service) will be Pac*Bell. 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: Sun, 17 Jan 93 02:57:27 EST From: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Telemarketer Conviction Overturned on Appeal :-( According to the {Omaha World-Herald}, Friday, Jan 15, 1993, evening edition, an 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel has said that evidence was insufficient to prove that Bedford Direct Marketing, and its president, Ellis B. Goodman, had defrauded telephone users who had called a 900 number. This decision voids a two-year sentence for Goodman and a $750,000.00 fine for the firm. 'The case has been watched closely by prosecutors and postal inspectors eager to stop what they regard as abuse of 900 phone numbers.' As I reported here some time ago, Bedford Direct Marketing sent cards to thousands of people telling them they had won a prize -- a cash prize or a 'discount shopping spree' {yeah, sure} from Bedford's catalog, and that they must phone a 900 number to claim the prize. The judges stated that the plan was not a scheme to defraud because it accurately and fully explained the costs that people deciding to participate would pay. The dissenting judge stated that 'the court's assessment of the record misses the mark in the real world where schemers like Goodman and Bedford prey upon ordinary people they deem ripe for plucking.' Good day. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 19:34:50 EST Subject: Do You Think This is a Fraudulent Ad? :) An advertisement on page 3 of the January, 1993 issue of "Midrange Computing" mentions Exabyte Corporation's new 2.5 Gigabyte EXB-8200. The ad claims that the Bit Error Rate (BER), number of 1017 bits before an error occurred, is now 1 in 10. The ad further states that: The new BER means that a user will encounter on average one unrecoverable error in 1017 (sic) bits of data read. This reliability specification amounts to one error in the information contained in 100 million years of {The Wall Street Journal}. I found that hard to believe. I don't have the WSJ here, but I do have the {Washington Post}. The Post is a six-column newspaper and a rough estimate is that it is 100 lines deep and 180 characters across. To compensate for pictures, call it 20K per page. 10 ** 17 is 100,000,000,000,000,000 bits. Assume 10 bits are needed for each character (or picture image point, to compensate for the higher amount of data that pictures require.) That amounts to 10e16 bytes of data. As I stated the average page has 20K, so that figure is 500,000,000,000 pages. If the Journal does 50 pages an issue, that's 10,000,000,000 issues. There are roughly 250 business days a year (I know the number is higher, but this is fairer to them and it divides evenly.) That translates into 40,000,000 years. This is a 150% inflation of the number of issues that you could read before you'd find an error! I resent this; if I only read 40 million years' worth of the {Wall Street Journal} before I discovered an error, I'd not be pleased. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 20:00 EST From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Reply-To: turner@dixie.com Subject: Re: MF Signaling Test Gear Bob Turner writes: > Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT > DTMF) signalling? It can be for two or four wire circuits. I know > such a device exists, I just don't know who manufactures it. Several transmission test sets will generate MF. The Ameritec AM-48 ($3k) and AM-44 ($2k) both do. At least one of Ameritec's non-handheld units does also. Some of Hekimian's test sets will too, if a signaling option is purchased. If you don't need to purchase a new TIMS, I would look at one of the Hacker {insert color} boxes that will generate the tones. I have considered purchasing one, as my Ameritec was stolen, and I now use a recently purchased HP 3591A (no DTMF or MF). I was looking at the one sold by Hack-Tic. I'm sure Bill would send you info. You will need to add a xformer, and maybe a DC blocking cap. As far as grabbing MF digits, the digit grabbers double in price with the MF option. As an example: Metro-Tel TPM-32 (DTMF, DP) $250, Metro-Tel TPM-32/MF $700. I think Ziad also makes MF digit grabbers. They do make a butt set that has a digit grabber built in (pHD or PHd) I am considering buying rather than a TS22A. If anyone knows anything about their quality, I would appreciate a note. Some AT&T CPE techs use a Ziad combination digit grabber and level meter, that they seem to have had good luck with. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: Ching-Chang Liao Subject: What is dBm0? Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 20:54:28 CST I just read a paper taken from AT&T Technical Journal. The subject of this paper is "THE 32 KB/S ADPCM CODING STANDARD". In this paper the author use "dBm0" as a unit to represent the level of input signal. I don't know what the definition of "dBm0" is. Is "dBm0" same as "0 dBm"? Is there anyone who knows the answer and can answer this question for me? I will be appreciated if someone answer my question. NAME: Stephen REAL NAME: CHING-CHANG LIAO SCHOOL: University of Missouri-Rolla HOME ADDRESS: 607 E. 12TH ST., Rolla, Mo 65401 TELEPHONE: 314-364-3213 E-MAIL: liao@ee.umr.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 16:21:43 -0800 From: eap@ora.com (Eric Pearce) Subject: Sprint Can't Do Switched 56k (?) We have a Sprint T1 with 16 channels for voice and 1 56k dedicated data line. I want to add a single switched 56k line out of the same channel bank (since there are spare slots). The reasoning behind getting a CB was to be able to mix and match various types of service. Sprint sales says they can't do it, as their "switched 56k network is too advanced for PacBell and won't be able to talk to it" (we are in northern CA). They also volunteered that AT&T and MCI are be able to provide this even though Sprint can't. Does this make any sense? Right now I'm looking at buying a separate SW56 from PacBell (connected to a Adtran DSU 2AR). If I was able to go through the Channel Bank (a Telco Systems Route 24), would I need a OCU card? It seems like the motivation for this would be to avoid a separate termination fee from PacBell, right? Thanks, Eric Pearce | eap@ora.com | O'Reilly & Associates Publishers of Nutshell Series Handbooks and X Window System Guides 103 Morris St, Sebastopol, CA 95472 1-800-998-9938 or 707-829-0515 ------------------------------ From: Joe Smooth Subject: Help Needed With Novatel 8320 Transportable Cellular Phone Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 03:51:49 GMT Hi if anyone has ANY information what-so-ever on the Novatel 8320 transportable phone, please let me know. I am extremely interested in technical information and programming information. Thanks a lot! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 23:50:02 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Correction: AT&T Buys 20% of Unitel In my previous post on Unitel, I wrote: > service so far. Bell Canada revenues last year were $2.2 million, > Unitel's $400 million. Hmmm ... well, maybe Unitel picked up a bit more market share than it bargained for :-) ... actually, Bell should get $2.2 *billion* rather than million. Other than typos like that, the source of info on this one was {The Toronto Star}. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: AT&T PRI (was 800 Numbers and Live ANI Advice Sought) Organization: AT&T Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 14:36:01 GMT In article , turner@Dixie.Com writes: > As Pat stated 800 service with Real Time ANI is available from the big > three. As far as I know this always involves a dedicated trunk to > their POP. AT&T is the least flexible, offering to deliver it only > out of band with PRI ISDN. At one time this required a AT&T switch, > now I suspect there are other peices of CPE equipiment that will > handle it. There certainly are: AT&T operates a conformance testing lab, testing CPE against TR 41459 (the AT&T ISDN PRI specification), and while I don't know the exact numbers, I would estimate that several dozen different products have been certified compatible with 41459. > I would imagine that as AT&T complies with the newer ISDN-1 > standards, most any PBX could handle it. SR-NWT-001937, National ISDN-1, has the following to say about Primary Rate Access: "The switch shall support Primary Rate Access. The detailed requirements on primary rate access for each application are in the process of being defined... The B-channels shall be able to support voice, circuit-switched data, and provisioned packet-switched data. On Demand B-Channel packet on Primary Rate Access is not required for National ISDN-1. The D-Channel initially will only be used for signaling to control B-Channels; therefore, support of packet-switched data on the C-Channel is not required for National ISDN-1. "A transition plan to move from current Layer 1 implementations to TR-754 and the current ANSI T1 Standard at Layer 1 is being worked. Layer 2 shall follow TR-793. The layer 3 network/PBX interface requirements are expected to be a subset of TR-268, Issue 3..." (note: these have since been published in TR-1268.) "In general, current Primary Rate access implementations that are substantially in agreement with the documents listed in this paragraph are acceptable, in Bellcore's view, for National ISDN-1." If I were a marketing type, I would claim that that means that my implementation, which is substantially in agreement with TR-1268, Q.931, T1.607, and NIU.302, is already NI-1 compliant. But I'm not, so instead I'll point out that SR-1937 doesn't really specify in any kind of detail any requirements for PRI for NI-1, leaving that to NI-2, and that while it's possible to talk about PRIs being NI-1 compliant, that can't be interpreted as meaning you can take an "NI-1 compliant PBX" from vendor A and an "NI-1 compliant network switch" from vendor B, hook them up, and expect them to work. That has to wait until NI-2. That said, I will reiterate that not only AT&T products are capable of connecting to AT&T network PRIs. Most PBXs, from my knowledge, allow the user to provision which flavor of PRI protocol is to be supported on a given trunk, and AT&T 4ESS is usually one of the options. > The AT&T service is called INFO-2 and is part of their Megacom > service. Minor correction: MEGACOM 800 service. MEGACOM service is an outward-calling, WATS-type service. > Sprint will deliver ANI with in band MF and MCI will deliver it with > your choice of MF or DTMF. If you can't deal with a T span, any dumb > channel bank will do. The extra DS0's can be used to taste to joys of > LEC bypass. Of course, so can the B-channels on a PRI; additionally, with PRI, you can use call-by-call service selection, so instead of having to dedicate, say, 8 DS0s to 800 and 12 DS0s to WATS, you can have a call-by-call group of, say, 18 channels and take advantage of the fact that one large trunk group will require fewer trunks to handle the same traffic volume with a given blocking probability than will multiple small trunk groups. Disclaimer: I do work on this stuff, but I'm not in Product Management, so nothing I say has the Ring of Authority. I'm just a simple protocol nerd ... David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ From: sid@Think.COM (Sid Stuart) Subject: ISDN Modems/Boards? Date: 17 Jan 1993 18:22:27 GMT Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA New England Telephone is starting to establish ISDN services in the Boston area. We would like to make use of this service to connect NCD Xterminals, Macintosh's and PC's(running DOS/Windows) to Sun dialin servers. I am trying to find out what equipment is available to do this. I know of two pieces of equipment that have ISDN interfaces, but doubt they are compatible. SparcStation 10's have an ISDN port, but I am not sure what, besides another SS10, it will connect with. I have also seen ISDN modems from Black Box that will deliver 38400 bps aync. It looks like they will cost ~$2,000 for each side of the connection though. Are there better solutions out there? Will an ISDN card in a PC running TCP/IP interact with an SS10 ISDN port? Sid Stuart, Thinking Machines Corp. sid@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!sid ------------------------------ Organization: Penn State University Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 14:01:28 EST From: Doug Subject: What is GTE NorthNet? I recently came across a few documents which mentioned a "GTE NorthNet". Is this a big private network of GTE, or is it something the public has access to? If so, where/how do you get connected to it? ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jan 93 05:01:09 EST From: Cliff Featherstone <70154.1536@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Info Wanted on Telecom Exhibitions and Conferences 'ello I am looking for information on international conferences and exhibitions relating to telecommunications in general and voicemail technology in particular. Any information / pointers (preferebly via e-mail) would be appreciated. Cliff Featherstone SERCH (Specialised Electronic Research) South Africa ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 02:10:44 -0500 From: anarres!gaarder@TC.Cornell.EDU Subject: Source For Used Panasonic 616 Wanted A local coop grocery is looking for a new phone system. The Panasonic 616 seems to fit the bill nicely, but is a little too pricey. Does anyone know of a good source for a used unit? Thanks, Steve Gaarder ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #28 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27268; 18 Jan 93 11:02 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18079 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:08:00 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06725 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:07:22 -0600 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:07:22 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301181407.AA06725@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #27 TELECOM Digest Sun, 17 Jan 93 22:41:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 27 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson EFF ... Important Changes ... $ (Karim Saouli) Norway Goes Eight-Digit: One Week and Counting (Morten Reistad) You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? (J. Decker) Cheaper Source of 66 Block Pads Wanted (Pat Turner) "Secret" Phone Codes (Kennita Watson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 11:08:36 +0100 From: Karim Saouli Subject: EFF ... Important Changes ... $ MAJOR CHANGES AT THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION Cambridge, Massachusetts eff@eff.org Wednesday, January 13, 1993 The Electronic Frontier Foundation was founded in July, 1990 to assure freedom of expression in digital media, with a particular emphasis on applying the principles embodied in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to computer-based communication. EFF has met many of those challenges. We have defended civil liberties in court. We have shaped the policy debate on emerging communications infrastructure and regulation. We have increased awareness both on the Net and among those law enforcement officials, policy makers, and corporations whose insufficient understanding of the digital environment threatened the freedom of Cyberspace. But we've found that Cyberspace is huge. It extends not only beyond constitutional jurisdiction but to the very limits of imagination. To explore and understand all the new social and legal phenomena that computerized media make possible is a task which grows faster than it can be done. Maintaining an office in Cambridge and another in Washington DC, has been expensive, logistically difficult, and politically painful. Many functions were duplicated. The two offices began to diverge philosophically and culturally. We had more good ideas than efficient means for carrying them out. And an unreasonable share of leadership and work fell on one of our founders, Mitch Kapor. These kinds of problems are common among fast-growing technology startups in their early years, but we recognize that we have not always dealt with them gracefully. Further, we didn't respond convincingly to those who began to believe that EFF had lost sight of its founding vision. Against that background, the EFF Board met in Cambridge on January 7, 8, and 9 to revisit EFF's mission, set priorities for the Foundation's future activities, adopt a new structure and staff to carry them out, and clarify its relationship to others outside the organization. 1. EFF'S CAMBRIDGE OFFICE WILL CLOSE. We will be shutting down our original Cambridge office over the next six months, and moving all of EFF's staff functions to our office in Washington. 2. JERRY BERMAN HAS BEEN NAMED EFF'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR In December, we announced that Mitch Kapor would be leaving the job of Executive Director. He wanted to devote more time and energy to specific EFF projects, such as The Open Platform Initiative, focusing less on administrative details and more on EFF's strategic vision. We also said that we would conduct a search for his replacement, appointing Jerry Berman as our Interim Director. Jerry's appointment is now permanent, and the search is terminated. 3. CLIFF FIGALLO WILL MAINTAIN EFF'S PRESENCE ON-LINE, AND WILL DIRECT THE TRANSITION PROCESS. Cambridge Office Director Cliff Figallo will manage the EFF transition process, working out of Cambridge. He is now considering a move to Washington for organizational functions yet to be defined. In the meantime, he will oversee our on-line presence and assure electronic accessibility. 4. STAFF COUNSEL MIKE GODWIN'S ROLE TO BE DETERMINED We recognize the enormous resource represented by Mike Godwin. He probably knows more about the forming Law of Cyberspace than anyone, but differences of style and agenda created an impasse which left us little choice but to remove him from his current position. EFF is committed to continuing the services he has provided. We will discuss with him a new relationship which would make it possible for him to continue providing them. 5. COMMUNICATIONS STAFFERS GERARD VAN DER LEUN AND RITA ROUVALIS WILL LEAVE EFF. Despite the departure of the Cambridge communications staff, we expect to continue publishing EFFector Online on schedule as well as maintaining our usual presence online. Both functions will be under the direction of Cliff Figallo, who will be assisted by members of the Board and Washington staff. 6. JOHN PERRY BARLOW WILL ASSUME A GREATER LEADERSHIP ROLE. John will replace Mitch Kapor as Chairman of EFF's Executive Committee, which works closely with the Executive Director to manage day to day operations. Mitch will remain as Board Chairman of EFF. All of the directors have committed themselves to a more active role in EFF so that decisions can be made responsively during this transition. 7. EFF WILL NOT SPONSOR LOCAL CHAPTERS, BUT WILL WORK CLOSELY WITH INDEPENDENT REGIONAL GROUPS. We have labored mightily and long over the whole concept of chapters, but, in the end, the Board has decided not to form EFF chapters. Instead, EFF will encourage the development of independent local organizations concerned with Electronic Frontier issues. Such groups will be free to use the phrase "Electronic Frontier" in their names (e.g., Omaha Electronic Frontier Outpost), with the understanding that no obligation, formal or informal, is implied in either direction between independent groups and EFF. While EFF and any local groups that proliferate will remain organizationally independent and autonomous, we hope to work closely with them in pursuit of shared goals. The EFF Board still plans to meet with representatives of regional groups in Atlanta next week to discuss ideas for future cooperation. 8. WE CLARIFIED EFF'S MISSION AND ACTIVITIES In undertaking these changes, the board is guided by the sense that our mission is to understand the opportunities and challenges of digital communications to foster openness, individual freedom, and community. We expect to carry out our mission through activities in the following areas: POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND ADVOCACY. EFF has been working to promote an open architecture for telecommunications by various means, including the Open Platform Initiative, the fight against the FBI's Digital Telephony wiretap proposal, and efforts to free robust encryption from NSA control. FOSTERING COMMUNITY. Much of the work we have done in the Cambridge office has been directed at fostering a sense of community in the online world. These efforts will continue. We have realized that we know far less about the conditions conducive to the formation of virtual communities than is necessary to be effective in creating them. Therefore, we will devote a large portion of our R & D resources to developing better understanding in this area. LEGAL SERVICES. We were born to defend the rights of computer users against over-zealous and uninformed law enforcement officials. This will continue to be an important focus of EFF's work. We expect to improve our legal archiving and dissemination while continuing to provide legal information to individuals who request it, and support for attorneys who are litigating. Both the board and staff will go on writing and speaking about these issues. Our continuing suit on behalf of Steve Jackson Games is unaffected by these changes. RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT. We have started many projects over the years as their need became apparent. Going forward, EFF will allocate resources to investigating and initiating new projects. To ensure that our projects have the greatest impact and can reasonably be completed with the resources available, EFF will sharpen its selection and review process. IN CONCLUSION ... We expect that the foregoing may not sit well with many on the Net. We may be accused of having "sold out" our bohemian birthright for a mess of Washingtonian pottage. It may be widely, and perhaps hotly, asserted that the "suits" have won and that EFF is about to become another handmaiden to the large corporate interests which support our work on telecommunications policy. However plausible, these conclusions are wrong. We made these choices with many of the same misgivings our members will feel. We have toiled for many months to restore harmony between our two offices. But in some cases, personal animosities had grown bitter. It seems clear that much of the difficulty was structural. We believe that our decisions will go far to focus EFF's work and make it more effective. The decision to locate our one office in Washington was unavoidable; our policy work can only be done effectively there. Given the choice to centralize in Washington, the decision to permanently appoint Jerry Berman as our Executive Director was natural. Jerry has, in a very short time, built an extremely effective team there, so our confidence in his managerial abilities is high. But we are also convinced of his commitment to and growing understanding of the EFF programs which extend beyond the policy establishment in Fortress Washington. We recognize that inside the Beltway there lies a very powerful reality distortion field, but we have a great deal of faith in the ability of the online world to keep us honest. We know that we can't succeed in insightful policy work without a deep and current understanding of the networks as they evolve -- technically, culturally, and personally. To those who believe that we've become too corporate, we can only say that we founded EFF because we didn't feel that large, formal organizations could be trusted with the future of Cyberspace. We have no intention of becoming one ourselves. Some will read between these lines and draw the conclusion that Mitch Kapor is withdrawing from EFF. That is absolutely not the case. Mitch remains thoroughly committed to serving EFF's agenda. We believe however, that his energies are better devoted to strategy and to developing a compelling vision of future human communications than in day to day management. The difficult decision to reject direct chapter affiliation was based on a belief that no organization which believes so strongly in self-determination should be giving orders or taking them. Nevertheless, we are eager to see the development of many outposts on the Electronic Frontier, whether or not they agree with us or one another on every particular. After all, EFF is about the preservation of diversity. This has been a hard passage. We have had to fire good friends, and this is personally painful to us. We are deeply concerned that, in moving to Washington, EFF is in peril for its soul. But we are also convinced that we have made the best decisions possible under the circumstances, and that EFF will be stronger as a result. Please cut us some slack during the transition. And please tell us (either collectively at eff@eff.org or individually at the addresses below) when we aren't meeting your expectations. In detail and with examples. We don't promise to fix everything, but we are interested in listening and working on the issues that affect us all. The Board of Directors of the Electronic Frontier Foundation: Mitch Kapor, mkapor@eff.org John Perry Barlow, barlow@eff.org John Gilmore, gnu@toad.com Stewart Brand, sbb@well.sf.ca.us Esther Dyson, edyson@mcimail.com Dave Farber, farber@cis.upenn.edu Jerry Berman, jberman@eff.org Cliff Figallo, fig@eff.org ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jan 93 15:57 +0100 Organization: Oslo Stock Exchange From: Morten Reistad Subject: Norway Goes Eight-Digit: One Week and Counting Thursday, January 28th 1993 at 16:00 local time, Norway will go through step one in the great number change towards uniform eight-digit dialing in the entire country, without any area codes. The area code 02, now used for Oslo and parts of surrounding Akershus will be affected. Other numbers will stay the same. The new numbers will be : 02 XX XX XX Within Oslo 22 XX XX XX (Postal codes 0100-1299) 02 XX XX XX Within Asker 66 XX XX XX (affects 02-78/79/84/90/98) 02 XX XX XX Within Baerum 67 XX XX XX (affects 02-12/13/53/54/58/59) 02 24 XX XX Within Baerum 67 14 XX XX 02 47 XX XX Within Baerum 67 57 XX XX 02 51 XX XX Within Baerum 67 56 XX XX 02 87 XX XX Within Baerum 67 15 XX XX 02 88 XX XX Within Baerum 67 80 XX XX 02 7X XX XX Within Nittedal 67 0X XX XX (affects 02-76/77) 02 70 XX XX Within Loerenskog 67 90 XX XX 02 82 XX XX Within Loerenskog 67 92 XX XX 02 97 XX XX Within Loerenskog 67 97 XX XX 02 XX XX XX Within Oppegaard 66 XX XX XX (affects 02-80/81/99) And, if dialing any of the above from abroad you dial +47 XX XX XX XX, while the rest of the country is still +47 A XX XX XX or +47 AA XX XXX. Doing such a thing at 16:00 is outragous. On a Thursday, when all shops have open late is even worse. Guess it's still "We don't care. We don't have to. We're The Phone Company". And there is NO permissive dialing period. Go figure. TV commercials are run at one-hour intervals now reminding us about this. So at least a lot of actors get paid. This will be part one of a five-stage change. Next change is April 15th, when the 09 and parts of 06 will change, covering parts of eastern Norway. There is a diskette available with the entrire numbering plan. I will try to get permission from the Telco to post in the archives. Morten Reistad ------------------------------ Reply-To: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com Subject: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? Date: 17 Jan 93 09:26:34 From: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com I'm sure this isn't the first time this has ever happened to a TELECOM Digest reader, but it struck me as a poor way to do business. The phone rang the other day and a young female voice asked to speak to my 15-year-old son. It was a friend of his from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, where we used to live before our move to GTE country. Anyway, she was calling from a pay phone, and had deposited money to pay for the call (this was an inter-LATA call so it was handled by AT&T). But then the operator (or the automated equipment) let the call go on for several minutes without requiring another deposit. When the operator did come back on the line, the girl didn't have enough money to pay for the rest of the call, and because her parents don't currently have a phone (or so she claims), there was no number that the call could be billed to. So the operator stated that the remainder would be charged to the party she called. At no time did the operator converse directly with my son, although he could overhear all of this. After this the call was disconnected. I called AT&T back to inquire about this, and they basically said that they will bill the unpaid remainder of a coin phone call to the calling party, but only if the calling party accepts the charge. I told her that the charge had not been accepted, and that in any case my son (who is a minor) would have no authority to accept such a charge anyway. The AT&T rep then said that if the call appeared on my bill (and it probably would), I could call AT&T and they would issue a credit. That might be acceptable if I were still in Bell territory, but living here in GTE land I sure don't need anything else to foul up my bill. Then she had the nerve to start asking me why I didn't use AT&T as my long distance carrier! I just said it was because I'd had one too many billing screw-ups like this one from AT&T. I rather anticipate that Pat may comment that AT&T is just trying to collect their money, but I would counter that if I answer the phone and the call is not announced as collect (it would be refused in such a case), I should be able to hand it over to one of my children without worrying that an operator might try to stick them with the charge. In a way, this strikes me as deliberately fraudulent, in the same way as if I'd gone to a self-serve gas station and the car before me pulled out without paying, so they added his gasoline purchase to my credit card. In this case, I did nothing to induce that call, I did not agree to pay for it, and it shouldn't be appearing on my bill. The fact that I or someone in my family was a party to the call is irrelevent; unless it can be shown that we had somehow conspired with the caller to do this as a means of toll avoidance (which is certainly NOT the case here, since we had no idea this girl was even going to call), we should not be getting the bill for it, period. I know that we have all come to expect sleazy billing practices from third-tier carriers, but don't think for a moment that AT&T is squeaky clean either! Jack Decker --- 1:154/8.0 FidoNet, Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com Gated through a Linux system ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 13:14 EST From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Cheaper Source of 66 Block Pads Wanted Reply-To: turner@dixie.com An orgnazation I am affiliated with uses a large quality of Larus pads. These pads are aproxmently 3/8"x5/8"x1" and replace the bridging clips on 66 blocks. They use a four resistor square pad configuration to provide a 600 ohm impedence fixed attenuation. The problem is that the total cost of these four resistors and the plastic shell runs about $18/ea. The pads are usually purchased in quantities of a hundred or more. I am wondering if anyone knows of a cheaper source for similar pads? Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: kwatson@netcom.com (Kennita Watson) Subject: "Secret" Phone Codes Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 07:57:41 GMT At the end of the month I'm moving to a house that already has one phone line installed, and having a second line turned on. I have heard that there is a code I can dial into a phone that will tell me what phone number that phone is connected to. Would somebody please email me what it is? If there are other similar nifty codes, I'd love to know those too. I don't normally read this group, so please email me. Thanks in advance, Kennita Watson kwatson@netcom.com [Moderator's Note: No Kennita, obviously you do not read this group very often, if at all, or you would know we have covered this time and again here. The 'secret code' you are seeking changes from one town to the next, and from one phone exchange to the next. Sometimes they are changed after a few months to something else. There is no standard, and no clue at all as to what it might be without knowing *where* (what area code and exchange) the phone is located, and even then, there may be no difinitive answer except from some of the local guys in that town. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #27 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28223; 18 Jan 93 11:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22265 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 07:58:34 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04990 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 07:58:02 -0600 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 07:58:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301181358.AA04990@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #29 TELECOM Digest Mon, 18 Jan 93 07:58:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 29 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Scott Hannahs) Questions on FDDI, 500GB File Servers, Remote NFS Mount IBM (Nita Avalani) Wanted: Small (4-12 Line) PBX/Phone System (Larry Augustin) How to Plan a x.25 Numbering Scheme? (Guido Weppler) New Developments in ISDN From Illinois Bell (David E. Martin) Beware: Portability (Bill Cerny) Looking For Recommendations For UPS For Phone System (Robert P. MacKin) ANI and SS7 (Ross Alexander) Philippine Telephone Monopoly to be Broken (Ang Peng Hwa) Is This a "Real" Security Alert Message of Some Sort? (J. Eric Townsend) USR HST 14.4 Forsale (eabu288@orion.oac.uci.edu) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Hannahs Subject: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution Organization: Massachvsetts Institvte of Technology Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 16:40:45 GMT These are reposts of some articles involving an ongoing dispute with New England Telephone that I posted to ne.general a week ago. It was suggested that I repost them here. This is an interesting problem in that they seem to be hitting universities and modem users. I have heard from at least one other person who was misbilled involving other exchanges. This problem applies to unlimited local service where you get an unlimited number of very local calls un-itemized bill for not-so-local calls. The unitemized bill obviously involved my modem usage to the University which was supposedly in the "free" area. Things seem to be moving along in that I now have an admission that the bills are wrong for lots of people. But it would be "too expensive" to rebate people who were misbilled. ---------------reposts follow--------------- To continue this thread, I have an interesting story about ongoing misbilling by NET which is probably widespread. boaz@concerto.lcs.mit.edu (Boaz Ben-Zvi) writes: > Following N.E.T's announcement of raising some of their rates on 1/15, > I begun wondering how one may offset some of the hike. > Unlimited service costs more than 6-8 bucks above the measured one, > and gives unlimited service to your local area (your town plus the towns > surrounding it), which would otherwise cost $.016/minute (plus 1 cent > per call). I.e., it'll take more than (approx.) 6-8 hours of monthly > phone use (in the local area!) to make Unlimited service a good choice. > (Well, some modem-owners use that much in a single day :-) I saw this about a year ago and after carefully checking that my modem is to a "free" call signed up for unlimited local which was about $6/month cheaper. However after a month or so, I was getting large bills that could only be from the modem calls. I have spent the last year convincing NET that their software is in error and that I was being billed for these "free" calls. Most of the time I have been ignored or told that I do not know what is going on in my own household. Two weeks ago after 50 calls and a formal complaint to the DPU I got someone who admitted that there was a problem and that the table was incorrect for our phone. However he claimed that it was only our phone and nobody else's. I do not see how the billing software could only single out our phone. I have not gotten a satisfactory reply to that question from NET and the complaint to the DPU has not been withdrawn. Since the bill for unlimited local is not itemized to what numbers are called, it is difficult to prove or disprove billing mistakes. I am still asking for an outside review of the billing system but don't know if I have the political clout to get it since they have admitted the one mistake and are stonewalling that there may be others. If anyone else has had a similar problem, I would certainly like to hear about it. Anybody know a good "sleazy" lawyer? This could be an interesting class action. Fortunately I consider it more of a hobby than an annoyance, also an excuse to withold payment to NET since they owe me big time. > The announcement said "New England Telephone does not receive any > additional revenue as a result of the new rates". Sure, they spend > the money we pay them on TV commercials :-) But they can always just bill you incorrectly and make up the difference ... :-) The claim is that you get a cheaper rate since they don't have to itemize your calls, and then they can charge you for whatever calls they feel like. YIKES! Just a follow up to the note I posted last week. New England Telephone now admits (verbally) that they were miss-billing (read overcharging) everyone in my exchange. They are willing to rebate me the amount they overcharged but I was told, "We can't rebate everyone since that would cost too much". I didn't hear any complaints about collecting too much money. They will rebate anyone who complains about it. This is sleaze at its finest. I do not know how many other bills are incorrect only that calls from Jamaica Plain to the 353 exchange were (are?) billed at the local zone 1 call rate and not the free local rate. With the kind of quality control that they operate with I would guess the system is riddled with errors. Has anyone else found such problems? I was told that there couldn't be an error since no one else complained. HAH! I am still waiting for a formal response before pushing the issue further. gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette) writes: > In article , sth@slipknot.mit.edu > (Scott Hannahs) writes: >> I am still waiting for a formal response before pushing the issue >> further. > Good, when you get a written response you can publish it. I certainly will. What I have verbally as of today is that N.E.T. has misbilled everyone from the Jamaica Plain exchange with unlimited local service. These people were billed for calls to the Boston Central exchange which was a supposedly non-billable number. These are two fairly large groups of people. This situation has existed for at least a year. I was told that NET may not be able to figure out when the problem first occurred. I asked about software change logs but got a blank response with a "we will discuss that" type answer. The hopeful news was that this was the first time NET mentioned "subscriber notification" and that this problem is "bigger than we first thought". Some person in billing is trying to fix my bill; she actually got permission (heavy sarcasm here) from her supervisor to spend two hours checking back a year on it. As for written response, after sending many certified letters to NET (including directly to the president Paul O'Brien) I have not received more than a postcard specifying the amount of my bill adjustment (which was incorrect). I am not sure how many people there are literate. In fact today it was suggested by an NET liason to the DPU that I should have contacted the presidential appeal council (or some such body). I mentioned that I had no idea such a council existed and that the NET main office number is unlisted. I asked why I had not recieved an answer to the letter to the president that this person had a copy of and was given another "we have to look into that" answer. So it goes. > Remember the other MIT graduate who found that NET had overcharged > the State House something like a few millions of dollars? No. I might not have been here then. Do you have a date, or reference, names etc. I would like to get ahold of that info. Dr. Scott Hannahs sth@slipknot.mit.edu F. Bitter National Magnet Lab, MIT NW14-1313, (617)253-5570 ------------------------------ From: na@princeton.edu (Nita Avalani) Subject: Questions on FDDI, 500GB File Servers, Remote NFS Mount IBM Organization: Princeton University Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 14:00:14 GMT I have following questions: (1) Is there any way to increase the size of a file partition from 2GB (to 20 - 50 GB, for example) in Unix OS? Is there currently an upper limit on the size of file partitions in mainframe (IBM) environment? (2) Are there any high speed hardware/software alternatives to restore/dump in Unix that would back up everything on the nets/subnets? If so, what is the best product? (3) Does any one have any experiences (good or bad) with the following: Either (1) a FDDI backbone with ethernet from each offices to the backbone/routers/whatever environment or (2) a FDDI backbone with FDDI drop to each offices, with 100+ users accessing very large databases/files (20 GB+) at will and simultaneously. Does the network performance suffer in any way? Can the line speed (100 Mbps for FDDI) be achieved for data transfer for each user under maximum loads? What are the do's and don'ts? I hear that 3COM has atleast two similar set ups (at Northrop and NASA Kennedy space center), does that setup work as planned? Is that the best out there? (4) Are there any pitfalls to setting up a high speed link (T1, T3 or FDDI) between a mainframe (say in California) and Unix LAN (say in Maine)? Even if one could receive data at line speeds, would a file server (Sun, Auspex, IBM) be able to handle it? More importantly, would each user be able to realize the same data transfer rate from their desktops (say Sparc10's) to the file servers? (5) I hear that the NFS, TCP/IP technology is available for IBM mainframes. Has any one ever NFS mounted the mainframe (in CA) on to their Unix file servers (in ME) using T1, T3 or FDDI lines? If so, could you please forward all your experiences (good, and of course, bad)? Were you ever able to access large data files from the mainframe for all your users instantly? Was it a reliabile set up? and finally, (6) Are there any products/vendors out there who make high speed unix file servers of 500GB and more (per server)? All comments, criticisms, etc. are welcomed. Thanks in advance. Nita ------------------------------ From: lma@dayton.Stanford.EDU (Larry Augustin) Subject: Wanted: Small (4-12 Line) PBX/Phone System Organization: DSO, Stanford University Date: 17 Jan 93 19:10:42 GMT I'm looking for an inexpensive phone system for a small business. I don't have any experience with vendors in this area. I'm looking for recommendations, vendors phone numbers, etc. Here are some of the features we're looking for: - we currently have two outside lines and six extensions. We would like the system to be expandable to about four outside lines and twelve extensions. - automated attendant; an incoming is call reaches an automated attendant, and the caller is routed to a particular extension based on a menu selection. - uses standard touch-tone phones for extensions. - any extension can be connected to any outside line. We don't need: - voicemail; we would be satisfied with attaching answering machines to individual extensions. - extension to extension connections (the office isn't that big :-)). if going off hook on an extension immediately connects you to an available outside line (or gives a dial-tone otherwise) that's fine. The most important constraint is cost. PC based solutions are fine -- we have a spare 386 PC we can use. Thanks in advance, Larry ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 20:31:45 +0100 From: Guido.Weppler@FHFD.uni-giessen.dbp.de Subject: How to Plan a x.25 Numbering Scheme? Hi, Networkers! Since we have to plan the numberging scheme of a large X.25-network I wonder if anybody can give me a hint where to get some information about this problem. Today, our network covers only Germany, but we intend to make it international in the near future. The network is growing steadily (more than 200 switching nodes now, to be about 1000 nodes in the future) and transport services over it are used by more and more users. For user addressing we intent to use 14 digit numbers. The question is how to organise those numbers to get a structured numbering scheme that will work even if the network will grow. How many digits should be used for area coding, for subaddressing and for the node ID, etc.? I really would like to know if anybody had to deal with that kind of problem before and I would be very pleased to receive a literature tip or any other kind of information on that problem. Thanks in advance, G. Weppler ------------------------------ From: dem@hep.net (David E. Martin) Subject: New Developments in ISDN from Illinois Bell Date: 17 Jan 1993 22:29:23 GMT Organization: Fermi National Acclerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL, USA Reply-To: dem@hep.net I talked with Bill Kalmyer after getting a cryptic letter from him about ISDN service. He works for Ameritech and is their ISDN product manager for Illinois. Here is what he told me: 1) Base ISDN rates are going up 18%. This will raise our monthly bills for residental service by about $5.00 to about $40 for 2B. 2) IBT is going whole-hog for National ISDN-1. All new services will be by default NI-1. You can still get AT&T Proprietary ISDN (what IBT calls "custom" ISDN) by special request. 3) IBT is offering free FX (foreign exchange) service to those not served by a ISDN-capable CO, so they can get service at the same rates. 5) There is a new ISDN data products center in Wheaton, IL. 6) IBT formerly offered ISDN only from AT&T switches. They now offer NI-1 service from AT&T, NTI, and Siemens. 7) They are working on a new tariff to cut the cost for people with very high monthly circuit-switched data usage. David E. Martin National HEPnet Management Phone: +1 708 840-8275 Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory FAX: +1 708 840-8463 P.O. Box 500, MS 368; Batavia, IL 60510 USA\ E-Mail: dem@hep.net ------------------------------ From: bill@toto.info.com Subject: Beware: Portability Organization: Sun, Surf 'n Sushi, San Diego, CA Date: 18 Jan 93 03:31:01 GMT Inbound call center managers beware: the mad rush to implement CCS-7 (American extension to CCITT SS7) in order to support 800 number portability is going to give you several migraines. Why? A short story: Earlier this week a client discovered they could no longer reach their own x00 number (served by Sprint). Panic ensued, "My customers can't call me!" A urgent call was placed to Sprint: Sprint denied any network problem. They denied it adamantly! Quick escalation up through management. Somebody finally listened, and 48 hours later the problem was traced to a Sprint switch "upgrade" to Northern Telecom's BCS-34 (BCS: Bad Canadian Software ;-). In the meantime, inbound traffic volume diminished. Frantic calls were made to friends, and friends of friends across the nation, "Can you get through on my x00 number?" Blockages were found in three other LATAs, with dozens still untested. Worse still, a blockage was discovered for an AT&T x00 number, too! If your core business depends on inbound x00 traffic, you have been warned. I recommend that you routinely check inbound call completion from your major markets. And get a list of management's phone numbers at your long distance company. Bill Cerny | 10288-0-700-FON-BILL ------------------------------ From: rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Subject: Looking For Recommendations For UPS For Phone System Organization: University of Western Ontario Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 19:27:27 GMT I am looking for recommendations for a UPS suitable for KEY and PBX systems. It should handle 120vac at three or four amps output. I hear Tripplite in Chicago carries something of the description, but I have neither an address nor phone number. I also know that ALPHA UPS systems have a suitable device, but I have no source for them at all. Any help here? Thanks! rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Western Business School -- London, Ontario ------------------------------ From: rale1@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Ross Alexander) Subject: ANI and SS7 Organization: Computer Science, Auckland University Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 20:09:52 GMT Could anybody tell me what ANI is all about? I follow this group regularly but the common kiwi doesn't have to worry about interstate laws and Caller ID (yet). I've read up on the basic idea of SS7 and ISDN so I follow the idea of both in channel signaling and D channel signaling. Any help would be most appreciated. Ross Alexander Computer Science University of Auckland Auckland New Zealand ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 10:12:54 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Philippine Telephone Monopoly to be Broken This from Reuter: MANILA -- Senior Philippine communications official Josefina Lichauco said yesterday (Friday) she was determined to break up the country's telephone monopoly after renewed pressure from President Fidel Ramos. "The president has issued an order to abolish the monopoly and it shall be implemented," said undersecretary Ms Lichauco, who oversees the nation's communications policy. President Ramos, angered by a report that over 600,000 telephone applications have been pending for years, ordered officials this week to dismantle the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co (PLDT) monopoly. The average would-be subscriber has to wait four years to get a phone installed in the Manila area. Ms Lichauco said she was determined to force PDLT, one of the country's biggest companies, to allow other telecommunication companies to interconnect with the PLDT network. ------------------ Comments: a strange story that makes Ms. Lichauco a central figure in breakup. I would have thought that if the President says so, you do so. Regardless of how you feel, you *have* to be determined. Also, for those unfamiliar with the Philippines, it is a long standing joke that the Philippine phone system is modeled after the American AT&T pre-divestiture model. With one exception -- the Philippine system does not work. ------------------------------ From: jet@nas.nasa.gov (J. Eric Townsend) Subject: Is This a "Real" Security Alert Message of Some Sort? Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation, NASA Ames Date: 17 Jan 93 16:21:00 Got this while logging in to a BBS a month or two ago. I was doing the "new user look around" thingie. I didn't bother calling back. It looks a bit like those fake messages that sysops sometimes send in order to scare people off. The "NO CARRIER" bit came when they dropped carrier on me. ---start included text--- CYBERTRON CORP! (R)Telecommunications Security Node:#264839-LL NOTIFICATION: FCC-#9632852 - LINE VERIFICATION IN PROGRESS! ROUTE LINE IS CURRENTLY BEING FORWARDED TO: {DT*2VRP}(c) CALIFORNIA BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION! You have commited a FELONY, according to the FCC ruling #6828744 Telecommunications Privacy Act (1989) Section IV - 3529A-6 Municipal Code of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND IT'S AGENTS HEREIN ... Therefore, you are hereby WARNED! Any further attempt to contact this customer will result in CRIMINAL PROSECUTION and/or EXTRADITION by FEDERAL authorities....Your telephone number has been recorded in our central office! Thank you for using..."CYBERTRONICS SECURITY RESOURCES" Summary: Notify Police and local phone company? YES! Continue to monitor violator? YES! Total time logged was 1 minute(s), with 24 minutes remaining for 07/25/92. Thank you for calling, Eric. NO CARRIER ---end encluded text--- J. Eric Townsend -- jet@nas.nasa.gov -- 415.604.4311 (DoD# 0378) [Moderator's Note: This looks like a very poor attempt at humor to me. I do not think it is any sort of 'real' security alert. After all, why would they close by thanking your for calling and telling you how many minutes you had left on your call? The sysop not only has a warped sense of humor, but he is not very good at editing the print statements in his program. PAT] ------------------------------ From: eabu288@orion.oac.uci.edu (Alvin) Subject: USR HST 14.4 For Sale Date: 18 Jan 93 03:57:12 GMT I have a USR HST 14.4 for sale. It's an external modem for all computers. It has v.42 and v.42bis and tranfser at 1600cps. I still have the original package and documents. It's upgradeable to v.32 or v.fast from USR directly. I am asking $300 for the modem. Email me if interested it. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #29 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28678; 18 Jan 93 11:39 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09984 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:36:37 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20469 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:36:02 -0600 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:36:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301181436.AA20469@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #30 TELECOM Digest Mon, 18 Jan 93 08:36:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 30 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (tanner@ki4pv.compu.com) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (John R. Levine) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Maxime Taksar) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Jeff Sicherman) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Patrick Lee) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (John Higdon) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Joshua E. Muskovitz) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: tanner@ki4pv.compu.com Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 22:29:39 GMT Do not be surprised if the phone company does push for elimination of flat rate calling. They will cite the old argument that one should pay for what one uses, and that low-usage customers subsidize the high usage customers. The problem with this argument is that off-peak phone service (and most residential use is off-peak) does not really cost much to provide. It costs more to meter the service than to provide it, because the physical plant is already installed to deal with the peaks. The cost of phone service may be divided into several broad areas: (a) power (b) accounting functions (billing &c) (c) operator services (d) outside wiring, from office to customer premises (e) inside plant (switches &c.) Let us consider each in turn. Power consumption is negligible. Commercial power costs pennies per Kw/H, and the power requirement is so small that phone companies have been known to satisfy it with batteries. Figure less than a penny per hour, and Florida Power is not known for its altrusim. Accounting functions are largely automated. Humans do not tally your phone calls any more; instead, a computer generates a long tape which is sent to be processed into bills. A human does answer the phone when you call to complain about being over billed. Also, there is a certain cost to generating an itemized bill, amounting to some measurable fractions of a penny per line. If you require accounting on measured service, this can add up. Figure a cost of several cents per page to print a bill showing the measured calls. Figure a small cost in computing, as well, to figure out how much measured service you used even if you do not demand an itemized bill. It is the availability of computers to generate bills which make measured service possible: other costs of providing service would not be worth metering. Operator services are generally billed, and should be at least self-liquidating. Services to work around faulty equipment should be charged against that portion of the plant which has failed. Reference to tarriffs, along with an estimate of time required for service to yield dollars per hour, should be enlightening. Careful measurement and calculation has determined the optimum number of operators on duty at any one time. Outside wiring does not wear out faster if you are talking and more slowly if the phone is on-hook. Unless you have a party line, the wiring is there unused if you are not talking on the phone, so usage does not affect this. This is a fixed cost, however, and is non-zero. You should expect a calculable cost to maintain the wires from the office to your house, and this may be a large portion of your phone bill. In addition to maintenance, you should expect to pay a "cost of money" charge to pay for the original installation of copper between the office and your house; again, this should be a calculable fixed monthly charge. The inside plant is different. Switch capacity is generally a fraction of what would be required if all of the outside plant wanted to talk at once. (To demonstrate, hit an important power pole with a large truck, then try to get dial tone.) The reason that the switch capacity is a limited is simple. They figure out what will be required during peak periods, add a fudge factor, and that's the amount of inside plant purchased for the office. If you are talking during the peak period, you are pushing up the requirement for inside plant. Off-peak, most of the capacity sits idle. When are you at home talking to your friends (or, to cite a favourite example, calling the BBS at the opposite end of the local calling area)? After work, during the off peak hours. Thus, the argument that measured residential service means that you are paying for what you use, is unconvincing. Of course, it sounds good on the surface, and many PUC commissioners will buy it, but for residential service it is not true. So long as the marginal cost of providing off-peak local calls (outside of the effort of metering them) is best measured in the tenths of pennies per hour, and the fixed cost of maintaining physical plant dominates, then it is reasonable to base the charges on the fixed cost. A form of measured service which only charged for peak-hours usage would be reasonable, however, because it would be taking into account the requirement for increased physical plant. An unmetered option here may turn out to be cheaper: just charge a fee for peak-hour access equal to the expensed cost of providing added inside plant. The reason that this may prove cheaper is that you avoid having to track usage and do not have to totalize and generate billing information. You may want to watch the PUC in which you are interested. Surely, if the phone company has expressed interest in going all-metered, the matter will not drop. If you have an appointed PUC, as we now do, they will tend to be fairly responsive to the utilities and less responsive to the rate payers. In order for the rate payers to have any effect at all, they will have to watch carefully and be sure to timely file all testimony. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 17 Jan 93 18:10:40 EST (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big > objection to simply paying for the service they use. This has been argued to death, so I don't suggest that we flood telecom with it, but there is very little connection between the actual cost of providing local exchange service and the message rate plans that telcos offer. Apparently a reasonable message rate for intra-CO calls would be something like one cent per ten minutes, not the two cents/minute or so that most message rate plans charge. There's no reason that people who make long BBS calls at night should pay more, since they're using capacity that is certainly unused at that hour. What would make economic sense is something like the way that industrial customers pay for electricity: partly charge per use, but mostly charge for maximum demand, e.g. your bill is largely based on how much you're on the phone at peak hours like 10AM and 2PM. But good luck explaining that to regulators or POTS users. The NYC plan where you pay for the number of local calls regardless of length also makes some sense, since setting up the call is usually the most expensive part. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 18:34:37 -0800 From: mmt@RedBrick.COM (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS) Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service In article , PAT writes: > [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big > objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat > rate service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many > years, and for most subscribers, the cost for phone service actually > went *down* when they were no longer forced to pay for all the modem > users who went through thousands of units a month at flat rate. > Naturally, the guys who spent hours every night on a modem calling BBS > lines on the other side of the area code (or even inter-area code; our > old flat rate plans took in 312/708 and parts of 815/219/414) squealed > like pigs when the change was announced; *they* had to start paying > their way ... the 90 percent plus of our population which does not use > modems or make hundreds (or thousands) of calls each month was very > pleased to see a reduction in their bills. When IBT ditched almost all > the flat rate stuff a few years ago, the biggest objections came in > the form of countless articles on BBS message bases from people talking > about the greedy and awful old telco. Count me as one who approves of > 'pay for what you use'; I don't like paying subsidies for my neighbor's > use of the phone. I don't do it for the electricity, water or gas they > use, why should I for their phone calls via flat rate, averaged out > pricing? But then again, I don't run war dialers against entire CO's > or call computer chat lines in the outer fringes of 708/815. PAT] This is a very nice theory, Pat, but you have, once again, conveniently forgotten that a "unit" is not an actual, tangible item or product. What we, as telephone consumers, are paying for is network capacity. (Including the wire plant to our doorstep, switching capacity, and various features). The capacity is there whether we use it or not. Remember who uses the most capcity, and therefore determines how much must be there? Yes, they're commercial users. These are the same commercial users that for the most part use this capacity only during the business day. Any amount of money that the telco gets for off-peak usage is just icing -- if they didn't get it, it would not change how much they would get or how much they would spend on peak capacity. Do you really want to be subsidising the peak-period users, Pat? That's exactly what you're doing. I am one of those dreaded modem users, but I use it only during off-peak hours. I also strongly agree with you in that we should pay for what we use. I propose the following solution: All lines should be measured, *however*, there should be a significant (e.g. 60%) discount for calls made during near-peak periods (i.e. evenings) and a 100% discount for off-peak periods (i.e. nights, weekends). What if "near-peak period" usage starts to approach the levels of "peak period" usage? Reclassify the times that the discounts apply (with approval of the PUC, of course). This would be much closer to true pay-for-what-you-use system than the all-lines-always-measured system. Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS mmt@RedBrick.COM [Moderator's Note: Well, IBT does give discounts. Telco says we must pay for what we use, but they do give it away a lot cheaper if we use it at night and weekends. I think the overnight discount is 40 percent off of day rates. Seems fair enough. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 02:20:16 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Organization: Cal State Long Beach In response to Rob Knauerhase's posting of a local (to Ohio) news item, the ever-ready Moderator sayeth: (Quote deleted, see earlier message this issue.) There's probably little doubt that BBS's and their callers use more than their share of phone network bandwidth but at times when the network is rather lightly loaded, so I think the attack is a little misplaced. Given the costs of building and running the network and the relation of those costs to peak usage (as a measure of sizing and support) rather than overall usage, I don't see that you are realistically subsidizing anyone, especially if a lot of *your* activity is business realted during the daytime peak periods. This all comes back to the fact that, for the most part, there is no competition in the local loop so that prices that the Baby Bells charge reflect more on their desire for revenue and their ability to bamboozle utility commissions with legions of economists, lawyers, and lobbyists that those that would be produced by real competition. Hence, as John Higdon as pointed out before, this is all probably part of a strategic plan by the babies to eliminate flat rate service altogether by initially by making it economically more attractive and then eliminating the flat rate service when (virtually) everyone has been motivated to switch. They will then be free to start escalating per-unit/call charges. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: Patrick Lee Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 18:32:41 -0500 (EST) Our Moderator noted: > I've never understood why people had such a big objection to > simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat rate > service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many > years ... Me neither. Most residents in New York City has untimed, but measured, rate service. Just about all the numbers in the 718/ 212 area codes are local to each other, with a few exceptions for border areas. I can't understand why so many phone companies out there still have flat rate service and that their customers don't mind (and now we have state legislatures trying to keep flat rates alive)! I for one like paying for what I use (and I do make over 300 local calls -- 10.6 cents a call with 40 and 65 percent discounts at different times). I have no problem with that even though I will probably be paying less with flat rate. I pay for what I use, fair is fair. Patrick ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 11:07 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service On Jan 15 at 2:23, TELECOM Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big > objection to simply paying for the service they use. Then allow me to give you some. After reviewing many different LEC proposals and conversions from flat rate to measured, a pattern emerges. While at the instantaneous moment of the proposal the move does appear to be revenue-neutral and simply shift costs from the "Aunt Marthas" to the mean and nasty "modem users". But once approved, the LEC is given great latitude with respect to the rates and charging methods relating to that measured service. In California, many residential customers were wooed into giving up unmeasured residential service for measured when it was pointed out how much money could be saved. What they were not told was that even as we speak there is a proposal before the PUC to DOUBLE the per-minute rate for local calls. Well, I suppose if you do not use the phone, this is no problem. But then why have one if you do not use it? A reality so far observed by the CPUC and the state telcos is that residential traffic as a class is far under the peak capacity required by business traffic, which universally pays for measured service. Usage of the local network between 8 PM and 8 AM (even by those despicable modem operators) is virtually down in the noise. For this reason, even business and other measured service customers are given an off-peak break. In my opinion, it should be free (included with the basic charge). The fact of the matter is that the price of no one's service would "go down" as the result of univeral measured service. This is a can of beans hinted at by telco to encourage passage of tariffs eliminating unmeasured plans. > We've had no flat rate service in Chicago outside a very small > local area for many years, and for most subscribers, the cost for > phone service actually went *down* when they were no longer forced to > pay for all the modem users who went through thousands of units a > month at flat rate. This is complete nonsense. During off-peak hours, people who do not use the phone never "subsidize" those who do. The network maintenance costs are present even if NO ONE used the telephone at all. A "unit" as you put it is not a commodity in the same fashion as an ounce of gold. If I pick up the phone and make a local call at 11 PM and it is not charged for because of my unmeasured service, there is not some tiny cost that is now spread over the other millions of customers in California. The cost to complete the call is zero and I was charged zero. The cost that we all share is maintenance of the plant. Business is charged for usage, because the construction of peak facilities is usage-determined, and measured service in this case spreads the burden equitably. > the 90 percent plus of our population which does not use modems or > make hundreds (or thousands) of calls each month was very pleased to > see a reduction in their bills. Oh? How much did your bill go down? If your service was degraded from unmeasured to measured at the same time, this was not a cost reduction but a forced COS change. > When IBT ditched almost all the flat rate stuff a few years ago, the > biggest objections came in the form of countless articles on BBS > message bases from people talking about the greedy and awful old > telco. In the information age it is natural for the telco to want to cash in big time. To do so on the back of the pioneers of that coming era (when indeed those same people are in NO WAY increasing the telco's cost of doing business) is to my mind completely reprehensible. You have obviously swallowed the "equitable sharing of costs" argument for mandatory residential service hook, line, and sinker. And, apparently, so have the Illinois regulators. At least in California, it is possible to have home access to electronic information without paying through the nose, having the telco limit your number of lines, or having telco otherwise stifle open residential use of the telephone. Mandatory measured residential service opens the door for another telco scam: Information Services. It is a simple matter for telco to offer dialup online services that carry no local charges. Competitors cannot do this except through the use of expensive 800 numbers. It has long been believed that compulsory measured service is a precursor to such inequitable arrangements. > Count me as one who approves of 'pay for what you use'; I don't like > paying subsidies for my neighbor's use of the phone. I don't do it for > the electricity, water or gas they use, why should I for their phone > calls via flat rate, averaged out pricing? A telephone call is not a cubic foot of gas, a KWH of electricity, or a cubic foot of water. All of these things are consumable commodities. A telephone call is not. While long distance has been traditionally priced in this manner, there are some valid, serious considerations that even this may need to be changed eventually. Your comparison to electrical, water, and gas usage is completely bogus, and your use of such tells me that you have read all of the IBT propaganda and have accepted it as gospel. > But then again, I don't run war dialers against entire CO's > or call computer chat lines in the outer fringes of 708/815. PAT] So what? How are the people that do this driving up IBT's cost, when they do it in the middle of the night? Particularly when they use a tiny fraction of the capacity that must be in place for the daytime traffic? When someone proposes a "measured day/unmeasured night" scheme, then let's talk. 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: Mon, 18 Jan 93 00:25:55 EST From: Joshua E. Muskovitz Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service > [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big > objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat I would suspect that it is because people consider local phone service to be a subscription service, just like the newspaper or cable TV. With the newspaper, you pay the same amount every day, regardless of the number of pages in the paper. Why not pay by weight, or by section? Why not pay for cable by usage? Because it is inherently more convenient for the USER to conceptualize the charge and prepare for it. It would annoy me every month if my local phone bill was different and I had to puzzle it out. How am I going to assure myself that I really made those calls? With my long distance bill, I can look at the city/number combos and identify 95+% of the calls immediately. Surely the LEC won't itemize the local bill, and even if they did, how am I going to find out the 555-1234 is that wrong number I dialed last month? I realize that from the LECs perspective, matered billing now makes sense because it is technically feasible. But so what? Why should a regulated monopoly get to annoy its captive audience simply for higher profits? josh. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #30 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28959; 19 Jan 93 2:08 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30066 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 23:47:48 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28185 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 23:47:22 -0600 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 23:47:22 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301190547.AA28185@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #31 TELECOM Digest Mon, 18 Jan 93 23:47:20 CST Volume 13 : Issue 31 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (John R. Levine) Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (Dave Levenson) Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (Andy Sherman) Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (Lars Poulsen) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Nelson Bolyard) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Peter Sleggs) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (ronnie@media.mit.edu) Re: Phonejak Transmission System (Mike Baptiste) Re: Phonejak Transmission System (Brad S. Hicks) Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Ron Heiby) Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Alex Pournelle) Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Chuck Munro) Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (Richard Nash) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 18 Jan 93 20:28:48 EST (Mon) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) Hi, it's me again. Tariff 12 is how AT&T cuts special deals with big customers. All of their LD offerings have to be tariffed, but under tariff 12 they make up plans customized to large clients. For example, if they were making a pitch for DEC's business, they'd make a tariff 12 offering for so many leased lines from Maynard to the rest of the world, so much VPN, so much this, and so much that, with pricing determined in some way. They publish it under t-12 and after a short delay to allow for objections to be filed, it goes into effect and the customer buys it. I suppose that if you happened to have the exact same telecom needs as a t-12 customer, you too could buy it under the same terms. In reality, the main point is that it requires AT&T to disclose the special deals they make with large customers so the competition can object if it's predatory and no doubt try to go in and undercut them. Something that may or may not be related is the aggregator business. AT&T has a standard tariff in which many locations get service with the rates determined by the total of all the locations, but bills sent to each location individually, designed for large companies with decentralized accounting. But since resale of LD telephone service is allowed, Fred's Fone Co. can buy service with this deal and then resell it to lots of unrelated companies, with AT&T still billing each location direct and Fred keeping part of the difference between the aggregate rate and the POTS rate. On the one hand, AT&T isn't crazy about having all of the Freds selling their service, since these companies tend to be sort of sleazy and unstable. But on the other hand, this is a way that they can offer competitive rates for companies smart enough to know that POTS is overpriced but not big enough to be worth t-12. I suppose that a really big aggregator could try and cut a t-12 deal of their own, but I'm sure MCI would scream bloody murder. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 14:41:05 GMT Tariff 12 describes AT&T's quantity-discount service. It is offered to selected huge companies which spend millions on communications services, and provides very deep discounts. If you happen to be General Motors, American Airlines, or perhaps John Higdon, ask how much you could save on your long distance bill if you want _lots_ of talk time! 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, 18 Jan 93 23:01:20 EST Organization: Salomon Inc, Rutherford NJ Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) On 15 Jan 93 00:15:51 GMT, FZC@CU.NIH.GOV (Paul Robinson) said: > AT&T has a special schedule for some customers, which apparently the > customers love and AT&T's competitors hate. I was wondering what it > was. > The name of the schedule is either the infamous "Tariff 11" or "Tariff > 12". It's Tariff 12, and yes, big customers love it and (usually) the competition hates it. Tariff 12 offerings are how AT&T puts together special package deals for big customers. Say you're a big firm and want to bundle a whole lot of various voice and data services together. So you go to MCI or Sprint and they offer you a special deal, just for you. They you comparison shop and go to AT&T. So they offer you a special deal that's maybe a little sweeter than MCI's or Sprint's. *However*, AT&T cannot offer that special deal to just you. No indeed, AT&T is the only player in this game who is still regulated and must file tariffs with the FCC for every price change, and AT&T is not allowed to wheel and deal just for you. But, the FCC lets AT&T go after your business by making sure that anybody buying the same particular bundle of services that you are buying can get the same deal you got. AT&T files a new schedule under Tariff 12 that covers your deal. In the unlikely event somebody can actually use your deal, they can get your deal, since it's tariffed. So, by continually amending Tariff 12, AT&T can meet price competition. Needless to say, the competition is often heard objecting to Tariff 12 filings, since their belief in free markets seems to be limited to their own pricing, not AT&T's. Most of the time the Tariff 12's go through, although recently either the FCC or the courts decided that 800 services could not be bundled into a Tariff 12 offering. (Seems bizarre to me, but hey, what do I know?) Oh yes one other interesting and little known postscript. (BTW, This is *NOT* proprietary information from my AT&T days, it was in the media at the time, but nobody remembers this stuff). Among AT&T's Tariff 12 customers is none other than, (Pat, a drum roll please), ....................... MCI. No fooling. 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." [Moderator's Note: Do you recall what it is that MCI purchases from AT&T under Tariff 12? Some international circuits to places MCI does not cover, perhaps? PAT] ------------------------------ From: lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 05:52:27 GMT In article TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM writes: > AT&T has a special schedule for some customers, which apparently the > customers love and AT&T's competitors hate. I was wondering what it > was. AT&T is recognized by FCC as "the dominant Inter-Exchange Carrier" and subject to stricter regulations than other carriers, such as MCI or Sprint. In effect, all of AT&T's pricing must be in accordance with published tariffs, approved by the FCC. Occasionally, however, a large customer comes along, who "deserves" special discounts. The deal is worked out ... and then it is written up in the same kind of anonymous-but-specific language that will be familiar to those of you who have read the fine print in the federal tax code (Like how all real property must be depreciated over 20 years except for football stadiums in cities between one and three million west of the Mississippi which started construction during August of 1990; those can be written off over three years ... while this example is fictitious, you'd be surprised at how blatant much of this is). Tariff 12 is a collection of all the special deals, described in anonymous detail. "Regardless of other tariffs, the following rates apply to business with 1000 to 1195 trunks and a call volume of 1,000,000 to 3,000,000 million minutes per day where less than 65% of the call minutes are within the greater New York City Standard Metropolitan Area ....". In the last couple of years, courts have forced AT&T to honor these tariffs whenever somebody else could match the published descriptions, and creative resellers have put together aggregation packages based on these deals. AT&T of course want to see the tariff 12 rules replaced by a simple statement to the effect that "other tariffs notwithstanding, the company shall be free to offer such discounts as it shall deem necessary to secure important customers"; this is essentially the rule under which MCI or Sprint operates. It is fair to allow sweetheart deals? I guess it depends on your political attitudes. Personally, I think we all would be better off, if the system had a mild bias in favor of "the little guy". Thus, I think it is reasonable to place more restrictions on the dominant carrier. I also think the obligation to publish the sweetheart deal and offer the same terms to any customer in similar circumstances is reasonable. 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: nelson@bolyard.wpd.sgi.com (Nelson Bolyard) Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity Date: 18 Jan 1993 11:05:25 GMT Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA One of my wife's relatives lives in an apartment building with an entry control device similar to the one described in the cited article. When we went to visit her, we followed the instructions on the intercom box, and dialed her three-digit apartment number on what was obviously a pay-phone keypad, and waited for her to grant entry. We then listened as the device obtained dial tone, and dialed a phone number using touch tone dialing. We heard the phone ringing, and heard her answer her phone, obviously not knowing we were at her doorstep. When she told us she'd unlock the door for us, we could hear a touch tone on the intercom at the same time the door lock buzzed. My first thought was that perhaps a "bad guy" with a "pocket dialer" device (capable of producing the usual 12 dialing tones) could also gain entry, even against the occupant's will. Later in our visit we learned that this device is not only used by visitors but also by the residents of the apartment building (which has roughly 30 apartments) themselves to enter to the building. This is done by pressing the * or # key on the outside keypad, followed by the resident's "password" which (I learned) is set by the apartment manager to the last four digits of the resident's phone number. A listing of the occupants' names and apartment numbers appeared on the front of the intercom box, and it would seem that this information plus a phone book should suffice to grant entry to anyone. But even without the right phone book, one can gain access pretty quickly. This device's "password" protocol does not involve entering the apartment number first, and any resident's password will work. So, given that there are 30 apartments, there are 30 combinations of four digits that will open the door. And given that less than 9000 numbers from a typical "exchange" of 10,000 are used, one has a better than one in 300 chance that any valid phone number will work. It is likely that any single page from a phone book contains a working "password". Before leaving, I advised her to keep her door deadbolted even when home, in case she received any phone calls from any unwanted visitors. Nelson Bolyard nelson@sgi.COM {decwrl,sun}!sgi!nelson Disclaimer: I do not speak for my employer. [Moderator's Note: I am rather surprised that this system actually dialed a seven-digit phone number. Most such arragements simply seize the pair at some point between the CO and the tenant to (1) temporar- ily disconnect the wire from the CO and (2) impose their own battery and ringing current on the line. Under the system where your in-law lives, call-waiting is absolutely necessary; otherwise a visitor at the door might wait a long time to reach someone if the line was busy. Better quality systems such as I described will first test for busy on the CO line (I think tip to ground or something) and if the line is busy with a call from the CO then the device puts its own call-waiting tone on the line (regardless of whether the tenant has it otherwise) and when the tenant flashes the hook, the device will put the CO on hold while connecting itself to the pair (and the tenant's phone). When the tenant either admits the guest or denies entrance, the device re-instates the CO and drops from the line ... the system has its own distintive ring of course, so the tenant knows if the incoming call is from the CO or the front door. Most lobby directories (where these systems are installed) do NOT include the tenant's apartment number in the directory ... merely the two or three digit door code. It is up to the tenant to tell guests how to get where they are going. The systems which offer 'ringback' type admission to tenants typically use a five or six digit code selected at random and changeable at will by the tenants. Even those systems still have a regular lock and key for the door to use as an override as well, and for Fire Department and/ or Post Office use. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity From: peters@bsc.guild.org (Peter Sleggs) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 10:10:49 -0500 Organization: Bellatrix Systems Corp., Mississauga, ONT Canada > [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell offers apartment front door security > ... > company called 'Interphone', a division of GTE in Canada which makes > customer premises equipment which does the same thing but instead of > being in the CO is wired up at the demarc where telco's pairs meet up > with building house pairs. I'll elaborate in more detail on both > systems here if anyone is interested. PAT] Please do. Regards, Peter Bellatrix Systems Corp. Mississauga, Ontario Canada peters@bsc.guild.org or beltrix!bsc!peters [Moderator's Note: See my detailed replies in this issue. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ronnie@media.mit.edu Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 13:01:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity Another problem with these apartment security systems is that some of them leave the microphone on during the dialing. In some cases you can flash the switchhook, get a dialtone, and use your Radio Shack $15 tone dialer to make all the phone calls you want. My friend's building was very surprised to find several calls to expensive 900 numbers from the entry phone! Ron (ronnie@media.mit.edu) [Moderator's Note: To repeat, the better systems do NOT use dialtone from the CO. They generate their own dial tone and only get as far as the box by the basement demarc or wherever. The only calls they can make are to two, three or four digit door code numbers. Even the system from IBT which has equipment housed in the CO uses what would be better described as an 'intercom line' or maybe a special sort of centrex to operate. Those phones do not get near the network. One system I installed for a landlord here about fifteen years ago left nothing to chance. I did not even leave a receiver there for the people to get their dirty hands on. I used a speakerphone mounted in the wall behind a steel plate with touchtone buttons ... sort of like a payphone built into a wall. The touchtone buttons were steel, like the ones on payphones. There were 94 apartments, two offices for the real estate company, the quarters for the building engineer and the manager's apartment. The codes were numbered 01 through 98. They pressed '1', then the two digit code. The first digit pressed turned the speaker on. They could hear the phone ringing in the apartment they were calling, and converse with the tenant over the speakerphone which I had permanently regulated as to sound level, etc. The tenant opened the door with '14'; the digit '1' split the connection leaving the control unit listening only to the apartment. To deny entry, the tenant simply would hang up (or dial '16' to disconnect from the door and return to a call left on hold). If downstairs tried to press '14' all that happened was they cut themselves off, but otherwise, they had no control over the downstairs unit. When the apartment disconnected, the battery dropped off the line and the downstairs unit went dead. The tenants all used keys to open the door as did the postman, and the newspaper delivery man. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 19:23:00 +0000 From: Mike Baptiste Subject: Re: Phonejak Transmission Systems My parents purchased one of these sets (even though I warned them) and the sound quality on a cordless phone is noticably degraded when it is used vs a direct connection. In fact, they tried two different phones (AT&T and Uniden) with the same results. As for modem use, that wasn't tried. Using a standard phone with it worked well with very little if any sound quality problems. Mike Baptiste Bell-Northern Research RTP, North Carolina Net: baptiste@x400gate.bnr.ca My employer knows enough than to agree with my opinions! ------------------------------ From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com Date: 18 Jan 93 15:10:03 GMT Subject: Re: Phonejak Transmission System? In TCD 13.22, davidm@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (David Morgenstern), asking about the Phonejak extension system, mentioned: > The company says that it will support 2400 kbaud data > transmission, ... I doubt that very much. Let's see, 2.4 million baud with trellis encoding to support 4 bits per baud, you could easily squeeze almost 10 million bits per second through that. Round off, we'll call it six and a half full T-1 trunks, or one hundred and fifty 64 kb/sec DS0 channels. Somehow I doubt that you can carry 150 full-quality phone lines as a carrier tone on top of your house electrical wiring, certainly not with such inexpensive hardware. On the other hand, you ought to be able to push 2400 bits per second through it pretty easily. I thought you BMUG guys knew your computer jargon better than that. (Somebody get this man a copy of Newton's Telecom Dictionary.) I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm being a little rough on you, but "2400 kbaud" goes way beyond the usual spelling errors. J. Brad Hicks Internet: mc!Brad_Hicks@mhs.attmail.com X.400: c=US admd=ATTMail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad ------------------------------ From: heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 21:17:29 GMT Paul Robinson writes about playing tones from "Close Encounters" on a line printer. At a Comdex in Las Vegas about eight years ago, a printer company (sorry I don't remember their name) had one of their printers with the cover off and was playing *multi-part* music on it, using the print head, platen motor, print head moving motor, etc., anything that would move, buzz, beep, or otherwise make a sound. It was *very* impressive! Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com Moderator: comp.newprod ------------------------------ From: alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 02:09:42 GMT Paul Robinson writes: > kstox@admips2.berkely.edu writes in TELECOM Digest 13 #14 about how > someone programmed the IBM 1130 to generate tones on an AM radio. I've got one even even better. How about programming a CDC 3600 to play the Star-Spangled Banner on its tape drives -- in stereo! I hear it, for real. What a great way to waste time! Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others ...elroy!grian!alex; voice: (818) 791-7979 fax: (818) 794-2297 bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 2400/12/3 [Moderator's Note: One of the most peculiar concerts I've ever gone to was a program which consisted entirely of "Pictures at an Exhibition" performed four ways in a row. Imagine, first the original piano version ... and then the fun began: a transcription for solo guitar was followed by one for the pipe organ; then came the crown jewel: Several people pushed a Sun computer out on the stage along with a big file server. A man walked over to the console, typed a couple things then walked out to the audience and sat down. The computer did the whole thing. The people in the audience (this was at the Chicago Temple Building auditorium) sat there sort of stunned. When the work was finished, they introduced the fellow who had programmed it. For an encore, the computer performed a piece called 'Concert Variations on the Star Spangled Banner', written by John Knowles Paine. I left the program absolutely higher than a kite; it was so wonderful! PAT] ------------------------------ From: chuckm@canada.hp.com (Chuck Munro) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 14:16:39 GMT Organization: Hewlett-Packard Canada Ltd, Dartmouth, N.S. Well, as a matter of fact ..... When I was a customer of H-P (*many* years ago) I had a program on my HP1000 that would rapidly move the brake solenoid up and down on the paper tape reader. This would result in music (quite loud if you placed an IBM punch card in the reader) which you could play from the console keyboard. This was my first experience with a pre-MIDI computer music system. There, I feel better now that I've defended my employer's honor :-) Chuck p.s. I may work for H-P, but they would probably rather deny it :-)) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 21:38:55 -0700 From: rickie@trickie.ualberta.ca (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) writes: >> BTW, Some mail carriers will not deliver 4th class junk if you ask >> them, but it is illegal for them to not deliver it. > In my apartment building, there's a bin next to the mailboxes where > the carrier puts all "extremely obvious" junk mail (ie, 27 identical > envelopes arriving bulk rate to various apartments). Every couple of > days it gets emptied of anything nobody has claimed. May not be > technically legal, but it sure is handy. Underneath my mail box is the famous recycling "blue-box" where it takes only a matter of seconds to sort the junk from the bills. All junk goes into the blue-box:) :) Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: rickie%trickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #31 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03113; 19 Jan 93 4:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31124 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 19 Jan 1993 00:47:46 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30301 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 19 Jan 1993 00:47:16 -0600 Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 00:47:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301190647.AA30301@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #32 TELECOM Digest Tue, 19 Jan 93 00:47:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 32 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: What is Teleport? (Dave Weitzel) Re: What is Teleport? (David G. Lewis) Re: Is This A "Real" Security Alert Message? (rfranken@cs.rmu.edu) Re: Norway Goes Eight-Digit: One Week and Counting (Eric Naggum) Re: Cordless Key Systems? (Todd Inch) Re: Looking For DID Information (Brent Capps) Re: Hooking up a US Modem in Czechoslovakia (Richard Budd) Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Jim Gottlieb) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: M19249@mwvm.mitre.org Subject: Re: What is Teleport? Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 20:26:42 GMT In article vounckx@goya.esat.kuleuven. ac.be (Johan Vounckx) writes: > I've recently heard the word "teleport". It seems to be a place where > companies can make use of lots of communication services, like > videoconferences, ... > Can anyone give me more information on that? Are there some teleports > existing? (It seems that in Torino, Italy, there is one.) > [Moderator's Note: A company in the USA headquartered in New York City > called 'Teleport' provides local telco bypass service to a few large > companies both in that city and a few other places such as Chicago. PAT] Many cities over the past decade or more have had (sometimes with political support) "teleports" established nearby. The original idea was to have a concentrated group of satellite earth stations to direct, redirect etc. outbound, inbound, and satellite hopping communications (video, voice, data, or whatever). Usually these "teleports" were kept out of the city center on nearby cheaper land. For example Washington Teleport is near D.C. in Alexandria. These "teleports" were sometimes supported by business and political interests in the "let's be the city of the future" kind of way. Anyway, if you are trying to get landline access to the "teleport" from the city center some other savings can accrue. The "teleport" may assist in the acquisition or bypassing of the local monopoly telco. Why wait until the signal reaches the teleport before you earn cash? Bundle and go. So, this is how some of the "teleports" got into the local bypass/competitive access business. They got right of ways to have dedicated (usually fiber) links between downtown and the "teleport". Once you build a self-healing fiber loop to maximize your "teleport" users connectivity, why worry about the "teleport"? Other downtown businesses may just want to use the loop and not the teleport. Many want to get to the "teleport" since its often an interexchange carrier point-of-presence. Eventually companies like TCG (Teleport Communications Group on Staten Island, nearby cheaper land, remember), MFS (Metropolitan Fiber Systems in Oak Brook Illinois), Teleport Denver, etc. realized there was as much or more money to be made on the alternative (to the Telco) fiber loop than in being in the ground station business. Within the last several months the FCC has made it alot easier for these CAPs due to several FCC actions on switched access interconnection. Stay tuned, it will be one of the hot telecommunications fights of the 90's. Over 50 US cities now have CAPs. Dave Weitzel "standard disclaimer, and BTW I do NOT work for any of these guys on either side" ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: What is Teleport? Organization: AT&T Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 14:23:36 GMT In article vounckx@goya.esat.kuleuven. ac.be (Johan Vounckx) writes: > I've recently heard the word "teleport". It seems to be a place where > companies can make use of lots of communication services, like > videoconferences, ... > Can anyone give me more information on that? Are there some teleports > existing? (It seems that in Torino, Italy, there is one.) teleport (n): A location, usually including an office complex, which incorporates advanced telecommunications facilities available to tenants and occasionally to other parties. Teleport, the (n): An office complex in New York City, Borough of Staten Island, jointly owned by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Merrill Lynch, and other minority investors, with advanced telecommunications facilities provided by Teleport Communications Group (q.v.) and IDB Inc. (Teleport operates all switched and dedicated landline and microwave facilities; IDB operates the satellite earth stations.) Teleport Communications Group, Inc.: A close-held corporation jointly owned by Cox Enterprises (majority shareholder) and Tele-Communications, Inc. (minority shareholder), which owns and operates primarily fiber-optic facilities as a Competitive Access Provider, providing leased-line services at rates from DDS (64kb/s and subrate) through DS3 (45Mb/s) in New York City, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Dallas. Teleport, Denver: A Competitive Access Provider unrelated to Teleport Communications Group. Teleport, Bay Area: A teleport (q.v.) located in the San Francisco area. teleport (v): To instantaneously move from one location to another, usu. via parapsychic means. > [Moderator's Note: A company in the USA headquartered in New York City > called 'Teleport' provides local telco bypass service to a few large > companies both in that city and a few other places such as Chicago. PAT] More than a few (more like over a hundred). Locations are shown above; there may be some others since I left there (1991). David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu Subject: Re: Is This A "Real" Security Alert Message Of Some Sort? Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 13:44:31 CST > Got this while logging in to a BBS a month or two ago. I was doing > the "new user look around" thingie. I didn't bother calling back. > It looks a bit like those fake messages that sysops sometimes send in > order to scare people off. The "NO CARRIER" bit came when they > dropped carrier on me. > ---start included text--- How did the phone company manage to disconnect the far end modem and connect theirs without causing a loss of carrier or at least some line noise. (Yes, its technically possible, but I doubt any switches out there have the capability). > CYBERTRON CORP! (R)Telecommunications Security Node:#264839-LL > NOTIFICATION: FCC-#9632852 - LINE VERIFICATION IN PROGRESS! The FCC does not do line verifications. > ROUTE LINE IS CURRENTLY BEING FORWARDED TO: > {DT*2VRP}(c) CALIFORNIA BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION! What is a "route line" and how can it be forwarded? > You have commited a FELONY, according to the FCC ruling #6828744 > Telecommunications Privacy Act (1989) Section IV - 3529A-6 Municipal > Code of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND IT'S AGENTS HEREIN ... The United States does not have a municipal code. Municipalities (cities, etc.) have municipal codes. Also, if this was forwarded to the Calif. Bureau of Investigation, it would be California author- ities, not federal ones, handling it. > Therefore, you are hereby WARNED! Any further attempt to contact this > customer will result in CRIMINAL PROSECUTION and/or EXTRADITION by > FEDERAL authorities....Your telephone number has been recorded in our > central office! Federal authorities do not engage in extradition. One state can extradite you from another. The federal Government does not need to go through this. (Well, if you are in a foreign country, they do ... but otherwise, not.) > Thank you for using..."CYBERTRONICS SECURITY RESOURCES" > Summary: Notify Police and local phone company? YES! > Continue to monitor violator? YES! > Total time logged was 1 minute(s), with 24 minutes remaining for > 07/25/92. > Thank you for calling, Eric. > NO CARRIER > ---end encluded text--- Brett (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) P.S. Of course, I know this is totally fake, and didn't even take it seriously from the start ... but it's interesting to see how little sense it makes when it is closely analyzed ... ------------------------------ From: Erik Naggum Reply-To: Erik Naggum Date: 18 Jan 1993 07:04:30 +0100 Subject: Re: Norway Goes Eight-Digit: One Week and Counting [Morten Reistad] > [Numbering plan changes] > 02 XX XX XX Within Asker 66 XX XX XX ... > 02 XX XX XX Within Baerum 67 XX XX XX ... > And, if dialing any of the above from abroad you dial +47 XX XX XX XX, > while the rest of the country is still +47 A XX XX XX or +47 AA XX XXX. There is something fishy here, and no one I have talked to (or tried to) in our beloved and caring Phone Company have been able to help me. Area codes 066 and 067 are in use at present, and they will change at some later date, June 3, I think. Between January 28 and June 3, then, subscribers in Baerum will have international phone numbers like: +47 67 xx xx xx whereas subscribers in the existing 067 area will have international phone numbers like: +47 67 xx xxx OK, so my question to the phone company is how they're going to deal with this variable length dialing sequences that Norway has never suffered before. Apparantly, they don't plan to do anything at all. Nobody calls these remote mountain villages from abroad, anyway, I guess. > Doing such a thing at 16:00 is outragous. On a Thursday, when all > shops have open late is even worse. Guess it's still "We don't care. > We don't have to. We're The Phone Company". And there is NO permissive > dialing period. Go figure. Please be more considerate, Morten. The phone company employees have families, too, and doing this at night would be terrible for them, I'm sure. Remember, most of them had to be at work at 0730, and they'll appreciate being able to leave early on Thursdays to make it to the shops that are open late, like the rest of us. There are rumors that there will be automatic recordings to tell you what new number you should call. I'm sure they'll charge callers for that information. Calling DA from a phone booth now costs you >$2 a minute. I've always appreciated silence, and I guess I'll get plenty of it soon. Those ringing phones have been a plague and an annoyance for years. At last, they do something to help us stressed out independent consultants, and what a wonderful excuse when you failed to call back to an "old" number. Oh, I love it. Actually, what amazes me is that nobody have come forth with little devices that will allow you to dial old and new numbers all through 1993 and they will take care of the translation to the new number when appropriate. What amazes me even more is that they haven't done the entire country en bloc. And this in a country where people can't remember their area code in the first place, and where getting their four-digit zip code right is a major feat for most Oslovians. Best regards, Erik Naggum ISO 8879 SGML +47 295 0313 Oslo, Norway ISO 10744 HyTime Watch this space ^ ISO 9899 C ISO 10646 UCS ------------------------------ From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) Subject: Re: Cordless Key Systems? Organization: Maverick International Inc. Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 18:23:01 GMT In article edwards@world.std.com (Jonathan Edwards) writes: > I am thinking of putting a "key" phone system into my home. The main > reason for this is to gain paging capability. But I also want to be > able to use cordless phones. I presume that if this is possible at > all I would lose the paging function at the cordless phones. Is there > any solution to this, or should I just install a separate intercom? I suppose it depends on how much of a telecom do-it-yourselfer you are. Radio Shack sells (sold?) a paging adapter that you plug all your phones into and then plug it into the telco jack, then press * to page or somesuch. It has relay outputs and an adjustable line-level audio output to be fed into a PA amplifier to drive speakers. If you have one/more cordless phones with a paging button, you could have the relay contacts run the paging button (a simple solder job) or drive several remote-located relays if you have more than one cordless phone. Then put a PA speaker near the base station's microphone. Total cost: about $50 if you have an amp and speakers laying around (any old stereo will work as an amp -- I pick them up all the time at garage sales for $10, including a wonderful Marantz tuner/amp with 80 Watt RMS outputs that is driving my walkman-style headphones in my office and acting a corporate music-on-hold at the moment.) If you want a PBX/key system anyway, a small system that supports single-line analog phones will also support your cordless phone(s) and, if not built-in, a paging adapter that essentially replaces an extension phone and automatically picks up intercom calls are available for $100 or less. Then you'd need to use external paging and be near a speaker with your cordless, or use the above relay-type kludge to hit the cordless's base-station button. Maybe a VOX circuit on the paging speakers instead? ------------------------------ From: bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps) Subject: Re: Looking For DID Information Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc. Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 19:19:22 GMT In article roy@cybrspc.UUCP (Roy M. Silvernail) writes: > This little quest is inspired by John Higdon's recent DID discussion. > Can someone provide me a pointer to the DID signalling spec? > Hopefully, it's on an ftp site somewhere, although I didn't see any > mention in the Telecom Archives index PAT posted last week. Or do I > need to go to Bellcore for this? (If so, got a document number?) Well, I've done a lot of DID design work but I've never run into a spec devoted solely to DID. It is described in the LSSGR section 6, of course, but the LSSGR is probably *major* overkill for what you want. For 'conventional' one-way analog DID where the customer supplies -48V battery, try the Notes on the BOC InterLATA Networks TR-NPL-000275 (my copy is from '86, but they came out with an updated version 2 years ago) section 6, DID signaling. This type of DID signaling is just a combination of wink-start/immediate-start/delay-dial signaling, loop reverse-battery supervision and DTMF/MF/DP outpulsing. Nothing magic to it, but you should be aware that the scheme John is talking about may be considered infringement on a patent held by Brooktrout Technologies of Natick, MA. They make fax/voice response PC cards with an on-board DID interface for just the purpose you described. For the new two-way analog DID, just substitute two-wire E&M supervision for the loop reverse-battery on the trunk and go about your merry way. This service was just tariffed last year by USW here in Portland OR. For digital DID, all you need to do is specify the proper type of supervision on the A/B bits, loop signaling or E&M signaling, and whether you want to use wink-start signaling, DTMF, etc. For DNIS, you just tell MCI or whomever that you want the dialed number to be provided on your incoming 800 calls. If you have specific questions you can drop me an e-mail at my telecom address and I'll try to give you a hand, time permitting. Brent Capps bcapps@agora.rain.com (gay stuff) bcapps@atlastele.com (telecom stuff) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 10:41:38 EDT From: Richard Budd Subject: Re: Hooking up a US Modem in Czechoslovakia Organization: CSAV UTIA RATHMANN@NIC.CERF.NET (Raul Rathmann) asks in TELECOM Digest V13.18: > I have a friend of a friend that is teaching at university in > Czechoslovakia. He wants to hook up a modem to the university phone > system. I'm assuming that he can use the extension line coming in to > his office to dial out, then with his modem hooked up, he can get the > modem to grab the connection with an AT command and he's on his way. Is he using a modem designed for RJ11 or for the local telephone system? If it is for American telephones, he is going to need an RJ11 adapter, (Easy to find at any Radio Shack but a little tough here in Prague). Then he must take the cover off the extension plug and wire the adapter into the phone line. Without an adapter, he can cut the plug off one end of the modem's connection to the telephone line, pull out the blue and brown wires inside that line, and attach them into the extension's outlet. That is our setup with the Gandalf 24EC. He is probably also going to have to reconfigure the modem itself to adjust to local conditions. Instructions to do so will be in the user's guide with the modem. In November, I installed a 1200 baud Hayes external modem an American high school contributed to a school here in Prague. We used the procedure described above using an RJ11 adapter. The modem will also require an MNP-5 card. Otherwise, all he'll get is garbage characters because the phone lines here have a lot of background noise. The MNP-5 tests the line to determine what comes over are actually data bits, and not the next door neighbor or the buzzing sound I always get when calling cross town. When he has his modem running, I would advise him to set it to 1200 bps. Believe it or not, the modem will run faster at this setting because the MNP-5 card will not have to correct as many bad characters generated by background noise. > By the way, he has said that there is no way to get this info from > the university, they're in the dark ages and information is not > readily shared. In which university is he teaching? Of course, I work with 'techies' and we are constantly sharing data. Also, this is Prague. I just returned from spending several weeks in a town in eastern Slovakia and believe me, felt at times like I had warped to the 1950s. Went to the equivalent of prom night at the local gymnasium and thought in the next minute Fonzie from 'Happy Days' would walk in and say 'Heeeyy'. PS Thanks for all the responses to my question about the modem failing to go off-line when the connection ended. Richard Budd | USA klub@maristb.bitnet | CR budd@cspgas11.bitnet | 139 S. Hamilton St. | Kolackova 8 | Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 | 18200 Praha 8 ------------------------------ From: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:46:19 GMT MCMANGPH@NUSVM.BITNET (Ang Peng Hwa) writes: > The study added: "During this remarkable period of rapid technological > progress and obsolescence, asset lives for public network equipment of > local exchange companies have actually increased in the US. Nations > like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and > replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers." I suspect it is much easier to upgrade existing facilities when your country is much smaller than the vast United States. What does Singapore have to do to upgrade to digital? Cut a few cables and run a few fiber strands? Jim Gottlieb E-Mail: jimmy@denwa.info.com V-Mail: +1 310 551 7702 Fax: 478-3060 Voice: 824-5454 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #32 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04327; 19 Jan 93 5:12 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18267 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:13:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22189 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:13:04 -0600 Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:13:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301190813.AA22189@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #33 TELECOM Digest Tue, 19 Jan 93 02:13:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 33 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Tech Assistance (N. Allen) Attempted Mindvox Break-in (John F. McMullen) Alteration of Ring Cadence (Charles Mattair) Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Denis Coskun) Updated Bellcore Report on Future of N. American Number Plan (D. Leibold) Top Ten Traumas? (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) Re: Area Code 610 (Spyros Bartsocas) Re: Area Code 610 (Carl Moore) Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Guy Hadsall) Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Craig R. Watkins) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Rod Gamble) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Patrick Lee) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 19:43:00 -0500 From: ndallen@r-node.pci.on.ca (Nigel Allen) Subject: FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Tech Assistance Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto Here is a press release from Volunteers in Technical Assistance. FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Technical Assistance To: National Desk, Science Writer Contact: Joe Sedlak of Volunteers in Technical Assistance, 703-276-1800 WASHINGTON, Jan. 14 -- The Federal Communications Commission today allocated four MHz of VHF/UHF spectrum to the Mobile Satellite Service for the low-earth orbit satellites (LEO-MSS) and finalized the tentative pioneer's preference awarded to Volunteers in Technical Assistance (VITA). The award is the first pioneer preference granted by the commission. Henry Norman, president of VITA, said "We are deeply gratified by the action taken by the FCC. VITA's global communications network is designed to bring scientific and technical knowledge to the poor in developing countries. The Pioneer's Preference given to VITA for advancing the technology and extending communications to people not now served indicates a recognition that the poor of the world should not be denied a share in benefits of modern technology. The FCC stated that it awarded the pioneer's preference to VITA because it was the first to develop and demonstrate the utility of a small low earth orbiting satellite system for civilian communications purposes. The commission also noted that VITA's pioneering efforts led to this proceeding authorizing spectrum for LEOs to provide services that will provide low-cost data communications between ground stations located anywhere in the world. VITA's system, VITASAT, is designed to provide data communications between 1,000 ground stations, most of them located in developing countries. A major use of the global network will be for disaster prevention, preparedness and mitigation communications. Norman said, "Our goal is to help bring the poor people of the developing world into the information mainstream of development. VITA is really about inclusion -- extending the benefits of modern science and technology to the poor." VITA has already installed ground stations connected to the VITASAT prototype, the PACSAT Communications Experiment, in Sierra Leone, Djibouti, Indonesia, Pakistan, Ireland, the South Pole, and at the Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico. "Today's FCC decision is very important to the development of the VITASAT program," said Helena Wisniewski, VITA's vice president of communications technology. "The FCC's granting the Pioneer's Preference has been the catalyst for the development of the next generation of fully-automated ground stations which will be less expensive and easier to use than our prototypes in the field today." VITASAT is one part of a system called VITACOMM that also includes terrestrial digital packet radio networks in several countries (VITAPAC), and an electronic E-Mail system (VITANET). VITACOMM is designed to link people with the rest of the world. ------------- Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario ndallen@r-node.pci.on.ca ------------------------------ Subject: Attempted Mindvox Break-in From: mcmullen@mindvox.phantom.com (John F. McMullen) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 13:55:17 EST Organization: [Phantom Access] / the MindVox system The following was carried on {Newsbytes} today -- feel free to re-publish it (as long as it carries the permission). John THe following appeared on {Newbytes}, a copyrighted commercial service, on January 18, 1993. It is republished here with the express consent of the authors: Phantom Access Foils Cracking Attempt 01/18/93 NEW YORK, NEW YORK, U.S.A.,1993 JAN 18 (NB) -- An attempt to illegally break into, or "crack" the "Mindvox" conferencing stem contained in Phantom Access, a flat-rate New York-based online service recently featured in various news publications, was detected and rebuffed. Bruce Fancher, co-owner of Phantom Access, told {Newsbytes}, "There was no real damage and we have notified all of our users about the attempt in the hope that they will be even more conscious of security. The nature of this attempt points out one of the things that users of any on-line system must be aware of in order to protect her/his privacy." The attempt came to the attention of the owners of the system, Fancher and Patrick Kroupa, when subscribers reported receiving the following message: "It has been brought to my attention that your account has been 'hacked' by an outside source. The charges added were quite significant which is how the error was caught. Please temporarily change your password to 'DPH7' so that we can judge the severity of the intrusion. I will notify you when the problems has been taken care of. Thank you for your help in this matter. -System Administrator" The system owners immediately sent a message to all subscribers declaring the message to be fraudulent. In addition to pointing out the textual errors in the message -- for example, Mindvox is a "flat rate" system and charges are not accumulated -- the owners admonished users to both safeguard their passwords and insure that they are not easy to decipher. Fancher told {Newsbytes} that the review of Mindvox in a recent issue of Mondo 2000, its mention in an issue of {Forbes}, and his speaking engagements on behalf of the system have led to more rapid growth than had been anticipated. He said, "We are moving to larger space on February 1st and will be upgrading our equipment from a single Next system to multiple Suns. We will also increase the number of dial-in ports and greatly increase the speed of our Internet connection. We are very grateful for the user response to date." (Barbara E. McMullen & John F. McMullen/Press Contact: Bruce Fancher, Phantom Access, dead@phantom.com (e-mail), 212-254-3226, voice/19930115) ----------------- John F. McMullen mcmullen@mindvox.phantom.com Consultant, knxd@maristb.bitnet mcmullen@well.sf.ca.us Writer, 70210.172@compuserve.com mcmullen@panix.com Student, GEnie - nb.nyc mcmullen@eff.org Teacher ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 12:57:17 CST From: mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: Alteration of Ring Cadence Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX We've got three lines coming into our residence: . main number which rings downstairs (one two line phone upstairs) . modem number - no ringers attached . daughter's number which rings upstairs (one two line phone downstairs) Due to our house's layout and phone locations, you can hear any ringer throughout most of the house. The problem is exactly that -- which line is ringing. Converting all phones to multiline really isn't an answer -- they're expensive and we really don't need (want) access to both voice lines all over the house. Does anybody make a (relatively) inexpensive device to convert ring cadence. SWB does not offer alternate cadences on a primary number or I would do that. The order clerk suggested getting a second number with Distinctive Ring (sm) on one of the lines and not using the primary number for that line. Thanks. Charles Mattair mattair@synercom.hounix.org Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: dcoskun@alias.com (Denis Coskun) Subject: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? Organization: Alias Research, Inc., Toronto ON Canada Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 00:15:43 -0500 Do telcos record the dialed digits for all local calls? My back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that it is entirely feasible for telcos to store the number of every single local call that you dial: In a city with 1,000,000 phones, with an average of 10 calls a day on each phone, and logging both origin and destination phone numbers (7 digits each, so 14 ASCII characters), such a log would consume just 1,000,000 * 10 * 14 = 140 Mbytes per day. That would fit on a tape which costs less than $20. If they do keep such logs, what do they use it for and how long do they keep it? And if not, how can you be sure that they don't? Are there laws anywhere that prevent such activity? There couldn't be a blanket restriction against it because they do log long distance calls. In regions where you have measured service for local calls (rather than a flat rate), do you get an itemized list of all your local calls? [Moderator's Note: We here in Chicago do not routinely get a detailed list of local calls, however it is possible, and I have received such a list when I requested it. I think they save the paper for a few months and the microfilm forever. This cuts both ways: When I once complained about excessive usage on my line, a prim and very smug service rep promised to send me the print out so I could see the error of my ways ... When I reviewed the print out in detail, I found a number of calls to internal numbers at IBT; that is, doing a cross-check of the name and address came up with results like 'IBT Company Supply Depot' and 'IBT Company Vehicle Repair Garage', all made at times like eight in the morning when I could not possibly have been at the phone in question. It turned out that a major (like 5000 pairs) demarc in the basement of the office building next door was a hangout for several installer/ repair guys who drank coffee and shot the bull there in their spare time. They also kept lots of supplies in a locker there. My line very conveniently showed up multipled on the first strip in that demarc; anyone calling the supply depot, their foreman, their wife or girlfriend, to get a truck, etc clipped their butt set right on there and made the call. When I called Ms. Prim back, we read selected parts of the print out together in unison. I told her, "I call that theft of service and/or fraud, what do you call it?" After a couple minutes on hold, her supervisor came on the line and told me IBT would write off *all* message units on my bill for the past three months. I told her that was very nice, but to please have her supervisor tell the outside plant supervisor to tell his foreman to tell his guys to lay off my line -- they must have one of their own down there they could use. The calls ceased after that. This all occurred in 1973, within months of the CO I was in then converting to ESS after 60 years of stepping switches. I might add they knew the SxS was on the way out; for the final six months of the old 'Wabash Cannonball' (Chicago-Wabash CO) they let it go to hell, doing absolutely no routine work at all, and it sounded like it at the end! :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 23:15:30 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Updated Bellcore Report on Future of N. American Number Plan I just received a document from Bellcore entitled "North American Numbering Plan Administrator's Proposal on the Future of Numbering in WZ1 - Second Edition", an update to last year's document outlining the future of North American telephone numbering. Like its predecessor, this document is being made available for general release to industry for review. There is a related industry forum scheduled for 16-18 March 1993 in the Washington DC area; comments will be handled under "ANSI procedures, i.e. a contribution-driven consensus process". There is "a recommendation to form both a world Zone 1 and a United states Numbering Steering Committee" in section 9 of the report. To obtain this document, try writing to Fred Gaechter, NANP Administration, Bellcore - Room 1B225, 290 West Mt Pleasant Avenue, Livingston NJ USA 07039 (fax +1 201 740.6860). I will review the document to see what other details are present. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Subject: Top Ten Traumas? From: stapleton@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) Date: 18 Jan 1993 20:40 MST Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department While this is perhaps most appropriate to RISKS, and I'll solicit there as well, what would I need to list as the top ten cases of damage/loss due to telecommunications accidents, disasters, cases of sabotage, etc? I would call the Chicago flood such a thing, as one disaster caused a telecommunications failure, which in turn was disasterous in terms of those who were deprived services. The switching center power failure in New York that caused, among other things, the whole northeast air traffic control system to go comatose is another good candidate. Is there a good way to assess net losses, so as to ever produced a ranked list? Ross ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 15:12:01 +0200 From: spyros@isoft.intranet.gr (Spyros Bartsocas) Subject: Re: Area Code 610 The ad features an "International TeleFRIENDS" logo. The whole ad is in a box. In the border of the box the following countries are listed: MEXICO, USA, THAILAND, ITALY, AUSTRALIA, BELGIUM, HOLLAND, SPAIN, ENGLAND, GERMANY, CHILE, ARGENTINA, BRAZIL and something that ends in ANCE. The ad goes as follows: Do you speak any English? (This line in Greek) Do you want to make new friends all over the world? Call International Telefriends day or night and speak with up to 15 people at the same time about travel, life and romance. Call now! 001 610 204 2907 15 Seconds cost 107 Drachmas (this line in Greek). (This is a few cents less than 50 cents). In the same section of the paper there are three more adds. All of them list KING FISHER INC. Each add has in a different country code. All of them are sex lines. The first few digits of the numbers are: 00.852.17.nn.nn.nn.nn (cost 144 GDM/ 15 Sec) 00.611.41.nn.nn (cost 139 GDM/ 15 Sec) and 00 525 809 nn nn (cost 91 GDM/ 15 Sec) 00 525 809 nn nn ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 9:51:27 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Area Code 610 By the way, those special services dialable only from overseas in "area 610" are on 610-204-xxxx, according to earlier postings. ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 20:10:31 EST From: GHADSAL@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? Brad, Everything depends upon the Paging Company's paging terminal and gateway. Most of the *new* paging terminal front ends handle it, but who in their right (business) mind would invest big bucks into new equipment that is planned on being obsolete in two years? My recommendation is to get really friendly with yur paging company, or a competitors technicans; sales people havent a clue, their job is sell. Hope this helps. Peace GuyH ------------------------------ From: Craig R. Watkins Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? Date: 18 Jan 93 11:25:40 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. In article , mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU= 0205925@mhs.attmail.com writes: > Is it possible under the IXO/TAP protocol, or any companies' > interpretations of it, to detect whether or not a particular pager > number can receive text pages? I haven't seen any indication. When we send IXO pages to digit display pagers, it just takes whatever numbers are in the message and sends them, ignoring all the alpha. > .... But the paging computer I call also sends > an error message, I think it's error message . This > is fine by the spec, which says that after you transmit, you're > supposed to ignore anything other than the ACK, NAK, or ESC-EOT. I have seen thoese "messages" come in different places from different switches. Some before the , some after, etc. > Now what I'd really like, is for the paging computer to detect that > I'm trying to send an alphabetic page to a numeric-only pager and give > me a with an error message that says so. I think what you mean is you want an followed by the message (which would mean a reject) rather than a which I've always interpreted as a data error which should be retried. > Would this be a reasonable thing to ask the folks at Cybertel and/or > Skytel to support? It would be nice info to know if the paging terminal knows. However to get it implemented, I'm not sure how much control they have over their paging terminal manufacturer. Since the protocol is pretty dumb to begin with and there's not much you can derive from it now, I'm not sure much software (other than possibly your's) would take advantage of it. Craig R. Watkins crw@icf.hrb.com HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311 ------------------------------ From: rodg@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Rod Gamble) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 12:10:14 GMT > Bank card passwords are stored in encrypted form (one way encryption > using the DES algorithm on a combination of the account number, user > selected PIN and a few other things) which allows for local > verification of passwords but only by your own bank. There are two > different standards by which this is done, but each has a > bank-specific encryption key (often refered to as the Pin Verification > Key, or PVK). This key is kept highly confidential -- anyone with the > key could generate the hashed pin for each possible password (only > 10,000 in the typical four digit password) , compare each to the > hashed value on the card, and decode the PIN that way. > Your own back can verify the password within the ATM; other bank's ATM's ^^^^ > must query your bank via the network. About two or three years ago the Bank of England (for some reason or other) decided to find out what people used as words for there PINs . Well guess what ... If you found a BoE card in the street you had a 56% chance of using it in a ATM machine if you used a four lettered word beginning with F*** Only a 18% chance with S**T and 13% with C***. Either the Brits are very unimaginary (and I really don't think they are in the English speaking world) or that is probably the case both here or in the USA. It only left 13% with various other PINs. Also another bank in England again which had user choice numbers had a huge group of people that just used the last four digits of there telephone number. I can't remember what is was exactly but it was around the 40% mark. Gee just my luck to find one with a PIN of Rumplestiltskin!! Oh well Cheers de Rod ------------------------------ From: Patrick Lee Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 18:33:21 -0500 (EST) eo@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Ed Oliveri) wrote: > Are you sure this was Citibank? Every Citibank ATM I've seen > CANNOT eat a card since the card is dipped into the card > reader, never leaving the user's fingers. Our Moderator Noted: -> The Citibank ATM's in Chicago eat the card for a minute and -> spit it out when finished with it. I guess Chicago's Citibank has older ATM machines than we have here in New York City. I haven't seen any Citibank ATM machine which eats the card for the past few years. Just dip the card in and take it out and proceed with answering which of the five languages to use. Patrick ------------------------------ nd of TELECOM Digest V13 #33 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21606; 20 Jan 93 4:08 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24081 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 20 Jan 1993 01:37:08 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18137 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 20 Jan 1993 01:36:36 -0600 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 01:36:36 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301200736.AA18137@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #34 TELECOM Digest Wed, 20 Jan 93 01:36:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 34 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Michael Peirce) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (David J. Greenberger) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Ang-Peng Hwa) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Jeffrey C. Miller) Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Jack Decker) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Mike Kimura) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Ethan Miller) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Ed Greenberg) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (John Pettitt) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: peirce@outpost.SF-Bay.org (Michael Peirce) Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 14:34:22 PST Organization: Peirce Software Reply-To: peirce@outpost.SF-Bay.org (Michael Peirce) In article (rocker@vnet.ibm.com), is written: >> [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big >> objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat > I would suspect that it is because people consider local phone service > to be a subscription service, just like the newspaper or cable TV. > With the newspaper, you pay the same amount every day, regardless of > the number of pages in the paper. Why not pay by weight, or by > section? Why not pay for cable by usage? Because it is inherently > more convenient for the USER to conceptualize the charge and prepare > for it. It would annoy me every month if my local phone bill was > different and I had to puzzle it out. How am I going to assure myself > that I really made those calls? With my long distance bill, I can > look at the city/number combos and identify 95+% of the calls > immediately. Surely the LEC won't itemize the local bill, and even if > they did, how am I going to find out the 555-1234 is that wrong number > I dialed last month? It's interesting to note that some of the cellular vendors are starting to introduce a sort of subscription service. They often bundle in the first hour, say, of usage in the stardard charge. Usage beyond this baseline is charged for in a more traditional way, but for that first lump sum of service you basically have a subscription telephone service. Michael Peirce peirce@outpost.SF-Bay.org Peirce Software Suite 301, 719 Hibiscus Place San Jose, California USA 95117 Makers of: voice: (408) 244-6554 fax: (408) 244-6882 Smoothie AppleLink: peirce & America Online: AFC Peirce ------------------------------ From: djg2@crux3.cit.cornell.edu (David J. Greenberger) Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Organization: Cornell Information Technologies Date: 19 Jan 93 05:24:06 GMT Hi, Patrick! patlee@Panix.Com (Patrick Lee) writes: > areas. I can't understand why so many phone companies out there still > have flat rate service and that their customers don't mind (and now we > have state legislatures trying to keep flat rates alive)! I for one > like paying for what I use (and I do make over 300 local calls -- 10.6 > cents a call with 40 and 65 percent discounts at different times). I > have no problem with that even though I will probably be paying less > with flat rate. And I can't understand why you object to phone users in areas supporting flat rate using it. If the phone company thinks it can make money off of it, what's wrong with it? Even for users who don't make more than three phone calls a day (which is about what Ithaca's flat rate service is worth), they have the peace of mind of not having to worry about how many calls they're making. I frequently have trouble connecting to my UNIX system, but I don't have to worry about plugging away with flat rate service. > I pay for what I use, fair is fair. No, you only pay per call. You don't pay by the minute. You don't pay based on distance. Do you really think you're "using" just as much in making a ten-second call next door as in making a four-hour call from southern Brooklyn or Staten Island to northern Bronx? The cost is the same. David J. Greenberger BBS: (212) 496-8324 106 West Avenue Internet: djg2@cornell.edu Ithaca, NY 14850 RIME: Common, ->48 (607) 272-2137 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 17:11:48 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Here in Singapore, we recently swtiched to an *all-metered* system. There is not flat rate service at all except for toll-free lines where the firm called pays. There is an annual "access charge" of S$100 (US$61). The rates are 1.4 Singapore cents a minute during office hours (8-5) and 0.7 cents otherwise. That works out to about US0.85 cents and US0.42 respectively. (They tout it as the cheapest tolls in the world. Ha.) Result? There was a lot of initial resistance. Today, about 78 percent of subscribers pay less. Among my group of friends four of five have phone bills below S$2 monthly. (In my case, it was about S65cents for a few months. It was so low, the phone company didn't even deduct from our autobank.) Singapore Telecom said it was "losing" between S$1 and S$2 million (US$0.6 to US$1.2 million) a month even though they had designed the system to be revenue neutral. Businesses are paying more. In part, users like me are switching to them instead of making calls from home. I'm not sure if the compactness of Singapore plays a part here. But the above may give some indication as to the economics of the local call. ------------------------------ From: jmiller@afit.af.mil (Jeffrey C Miller) Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 19:28:30 GMT In article Rob Knauerhase writes: > I mailed an article here last Thanksgiving about Ohio Bell's sales > pitches for their relatively new measured-service variants, commenting > that my mother's phone bill listed an _increase_ if she switched to > any of their new plans (based on her typical usage). Someone from > this group mailed me privately warning that in Michigan there was now > no option of flat-rate, and to watch out for the same thing in > OBT-land. Yup, for the third consecutive month, OBT has told me how much extra I'll pay if I switch to a measured service. Darned nice of them to remind me how economical flat-rate is. > As I am for the time being residing in central Illinois, I'd > appreciate it if an interested party closer to Columbus would keep the > Digest (and/or me) informed as to how (and if!) this legislation > proceeds. I'll try ... after all, it's in my interests :-). > [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big > objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat > rate service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many > Count me as one who approves of "pay for what you use'; I don't like > paying subsidies for my neighbor's use of the phone. I don't do it for > the electricity, water or gas they use, why should I for their phone > calls via flat rate, averaged out pricing? But then again, I don't > run war dialers against entire CO's or call computer chat lines in the > outer fringes of 708/815. PAT] As someone's .sig said, "those who can't talk math are doomed to talk nonsense" (or something like that) ... I just happen to have my latest OBT bill here right in front of me: Touch-Tone Service : $1.80 FCC Access Charge : $3.50 911 Service Charge : $0.12 Local Access Line : $6.70 Flat-Rate Service : $8.55 Now I'll be more than happy to pay for what I use just as soon as they can tariff it in such a way that I can tell what I'm paying for. By my reckoning, there are four separate charges there that apply to local calls. Why the hell should I pay extra for the "privilege" of Touch-Tone service when it's no more difficult for OBT to process DTMF than DP? Why should I pay the LEC for access to a LD carrier; why not have that charged back through the LD carrier as a charge for access to me as a customer, if lost revenue due to divestiture is a problem? Why should I pay for 911 before I use it -- they're more than happy to charge $0.30 / call for 411, why not the same for 911? Now maybe I'm the one talking nonsense, but it seems to me some significant overhaul is needed before we can start talking about "pay as you use" for LEC's. Jeff Miller, NH6ZW/N8, AFA1HE (ex WD6CQV, AFA8JM, AFA1DO) AFIT School of Engineering, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH ------------------------------ Reply-To: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service Date: 19 Jan 93 19:50:02 From: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com Pat, I generally approve of the way you moderate this conference but I wonder why you always feel compelled to get in "the last word" on any message opposing mandatory measured service? You say you don't understand the opposition to it, yet folks have explained it to you numerous times. For your benefit and those of other Digest readers (assuming you allow this article into the Digest), let me give you a (hopefully) BRIEF summation of the arguments against measured service: 1) In the two states where voters have actually had an opportunity to vote on the issue (Maine and Oregon), they have turned down mandatory measured service handily. The public doesn't want it. 2) Local calls are not itemized. Maybe you trust your telco to count calls accurately. I don't. 3) You don't get credit for wrong numbers or poor connections (some- thing of special concern to those of us who live in GTE land). 4) Unlike gas or electricity, you are not using something up when you use your telephone. There is virtually no cost increase to the phone company when you place a call, since the switching equipment remains powered up and ready whether there are any calls or not. Telephone cables and other "outside plant" (by far the largest expense for any phone company) do not wear out any faster because they are used more often. 5) Even if you assume that the phone company had to add switching capacity because of the number of simultaneous calls placed (and it is really a stretch to assume that, except perhaps on some heavily-loaded exchanges in financial districts and the like), measured local service does not deal with the problem fairly because it charges on a PER-CALL basis, not by time. Thus, a modem user (whom you seem to see as the evil force that necessitates measured service, even though most of us do our modeming during off-peak periods) who ties up a phone circuit for an hour at a time is not charged nearly as much as the guy who makes several one-minute calls to see if a friend or relative has arrvied safely after making a crosstown trip in icy weather. The only reason the telcos want to charge on a per-call basis is because it's now possible to do so economically, and they can convince some gullible people that it's really fairer to do it that way. Do I think telcos are greedy? Well, I have noticed that the small, independent telcos who charge only fifty cents or a buck a month for custom calling features and touch tone (or even offer touch tone free even though NOT required by law to do so) almost NEVER ask for mandatory measured service. Only the big, fat, greedy companies who try to get top dollar for every service offered do. Honestly, Pat, this sounds like a case of "my mind is made up; please don't confuse me with facts!" You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I do rather wish you'd quit using your position as Moderator to beat us over the head with it. It's certainly not the majority opinion; not here and not among the general public if the votes in Maine and Oregon were at all representative. Jack Decker --- 1:154/8.0 FidoNet, Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com [Moderator's Note: Your message is the last one in this series of replies I started publishing a couple days agp. This time, instead of me getting the last word, you get the last word, okay? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jan 1993 15:42:11 -0800 (PST) From: Mike Kimura Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity > [Moderator's Note: I am rather surprised that this system actually > dialed a seven-digit phone number. Most such arragements simply seize > the pair at some point between the CO and the tenant [...] I am not surprised since both the apartment I previously lived at and my current condominium use a system that dials the telephone number. In fact, at most of the security units I visit I can hear the system dialing (sometimes even pulsing) the telephone number. We used to have a private intercom system that opened the front gate. It was inconvenient because the ringer was so quiet I couldn't hear it from upstairs and you had to be downstairs where the unit was to talk and open the gate. When our condo board decided to upgrade to a system using the telephone, I extracted some articles from Telecom, which our Moderator wrote, describing the "better" system. However, next we received a request to provide our telephone number so it could be programmed into both of our entry gates. Instructions indicated to push "9" to let someone in. No mention was made as to how to deny entrance nor was any mention made as to a "password" to open the gate yourself. Also, it was suggested that we purchase Call-Waiting so people at the front gate won't get a busy signal. Most recently the condominium board has been bemoaning the fact that PacBell charges them for two (one at each gate) *BUSINESS* lines. I believe each call from the gate to a condo unit ends up being charged at business rates. Also, the phone lines to these entry gates terminate in the parking garage with a regular phone jack. I wonder how long before someone taps in a phone there and makes calls charge to the association? Mike Kimura (mnk@mass.dnet.hac.com) [Moderator's Note: Well again, the 'better' systems don't leave this sort of thing to chance. They do not require call waiting; they do not require that you provide your phone number for programming; they do not even require that you have phone service from telco. With the system from IBT, if by chance your phone service is terminated, let's say due to a credit disconnect, the front door intercom still works. Your phone may be sitting there dead 99 percent of the time, but if someone comes to the door, presto, you get the door call. The better systems do not care who plugs into whatever jack they please: all they will get is a dialtone to a very limited in scope 'network'. Incidentally, tell the condo association to get only one business line if they insist on doing it the way they are. Have the phone at the back gate be an extension to the one at the front gate. Given that the door calls are only a few seconds in length ideally (in fact, IBT times out the connection after 30 seconds, as does the customer premises version), it would be rare that someone was trying to use the phone at the front gate simultaneously with someone at the back gate. By bringing the gate latch through a certain contact in the phone unit itself, it is possible to fix things so only the gate where the phone is off hook at that moment would get the unlatching pulse, and an 'in-use' light on the phone would be honored by most courteous people who saw it illuminated for a few seconds when they arrived. PAT] ------------------------------ From: elm@cs.berkeley.edu (ethan miller) Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity Date: 19 Jan 93 17:45:43 Organization: Berkeley--Shaken, not Stirred Reply-To: elm@cs.berkeley.edu In article ronnie@media.mit.edu writes: > [Moderator's Note: To repeat, the better systems do NOT use dialtone > from the CO. They generate their own dial tone and only get as far > as the box by the basement demarc or wherever. The only calls they > can make are to two, three or four digit door code numbers. Even the > system from IBT which has equipment housed in the CO uses what would > be better described as an 'intercom line' or maybe a special sort of > centrex to operate. Those phones do not get near the network. ...] The key word here is "better systems." We have a lot of small (8-25 unit) buildings here in Berkeley. Many are protected by intercom security systems. Some of the systems are totally separate from the phone system (push buttons on a wall speaker in the apartment, typically). All of the rest (my sample size is dozens) dial the full phone number. I know; I can recognize the tenant's phone number from the tones or pulses(!) that the system uses to dial. A separate phone line system is *much* cheaper to install for a building without a preexisting security system. You need to put in a new phone line ($40 in Berkeley), a wire from the new line's demarc to the security box, and the box itself. Since the box is on an outside wall, running the phone wire isn't terribly hard. Monthly cost is around $10. My girlfriend's building got such a system about a year ago. It definitely dials her number (via pulse dialing) when I punch up the appropriate code. It even gets a busy signal occasionally. The two digit code number from the keypad is translated to a seven digit phone number. I'll experiment to see if I can make other calls using an external dialer. ethan miller--cs grad student elm@cs.berkeley.edu #include [Moderator's Note: All the landlord needs is a few long distance calls made from that phone to demonstrate a 'regular phone line' is NOT a cheaper way to go. Some landlords may even be too stupid to have those phones blocked from 900/976/incoming calls, allowing someone to stand at the front door and accept incoming collect calls from sex services, etc. The CPE version, from GTE in Canada only cost me about two grand when I installed it for the apartment building I mentioned yesterday. Of course, I did not charge myself for my own labor. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 22:20:18 GMT In article Patrick Lee writes: > I guess Chicago's Citibank has older ATM machines than we have here in > New York City. I haven't seen any Citibank ATM machine which eats the > card for the past few years. Just dip the card in and take it out and > proceed with answering which of the five languages to use. I lived in New York when the CBCs (Citicard Banking Centers) first came out. They were unique in those days because (a) every branch had them and (b) they were all behind locked doors with card readers, instead of out in the street. They were also unique because the card was dipped and removed and HAD NO MAGNETIC STRIPE! I was told that there were bits of metal in the cards that were inserted between two plates of a capacitor. Based on where the metal was, some caps discharged and others did not. Nowadays, I understand that Citibank cards have magstripes, so that they can intenetwork, but remember that there was no plus, star or cirrus system in those days and no reason for Citibank cards to work anyplace but Citibank. I banked at Citibank from January 1978 to October 1979, when I changed jobs and was offered free checking at Marine Midland. By that time, ATMs were becoming more popular around the metro area and Citibank's branch and ATM network was no longer as unique as it had once been. Nonetheless, the CBCs, and available cash 24 hours a day, was quite an oddity on Long Island in those days, and we were happy to have it. Edward W. Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0511 | edg@netcom.com 1600 Stokes St. #24 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95126 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) [Moderator's Note: I got my first ATM card from the Northern Trust Company here in 1973 or 1974. There was no networking; the machine was purely local to that bank and sat in the outer lobby. If it broke down during off-hours (and believe me, it seemed to be down more than it was up) then the lobby security guard had the home phone numbers of a couple bank employees who were on standby duty. They'd come from home at odd hours of the night and restart the machine. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jpp@StarConn.com (John Pettitt) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: Starnet-Public Access UNIX--Los Altos, CA 415-949-3133 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 00:43:50 GMT rodg@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Rod Gamble) writes: [ story about PINs on UK ATM's being four letter works or phone numbers ] Sorry to shoot down your nice urban legend but ... 1) Most UK cards either come with a number or let you choose a number at first use. However the machines don't as I recall have alpha keypads (British phones have not had letters on the dial/keypad for a looooonnnnggg time). 2) There was a survey and the most common numbers started 19?? or ended with two digits between 01 and 12. This strongly implies that dates are used by most people when asked for a pin. John Pettitt, CEO, Dolmus Inc. jpp@starconn.com Archer N81034 apple!starnet!jpp Me, say that, never: It's a forged posting! Fax: +1 415 390 0581 Voice: +1 415 390 0693 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #34 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25698; 20 Jan 93 5:56 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16194 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 20 Jan 1993 02:49:03 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30897 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 20 Jan 1993 02:48:31 -0600 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 02:48:31 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301200848.AA30897@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #35 TELECOM Digest Wed, 20 Jan 93 02:48:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 35 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson GTE Apologizes! (Jack Decker) Help: Phone Network Modelling Algorithms (Peter Murray) Modem Dial Lines and Problems (Jack Lowry) Freeway Call Boxes and CA Rain (Randy Gellens) Strange International "Chat Line" Service -- How's it Work? (James Elliott) 10XXX UnBlocking (Barton F. Bruce) NYNEX Slashes in LATA LD Prices (Barton F. Bruce) Differences Between ANI and Caller-ID (Paul Robinson) AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug (Paul Robichaux) Logging Into AUDIX Box (Daniel L. Grillo) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 00:47:00 EST From: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com (Jack Decker) Subject: GTE Apologizes! I am somewhat astonished. As you know if you saw my earlier message about GTE, I received a first bill from them that was quite a bit higher than I had expected, due to failure to credit me for an installation prepayment that had been made at the time I ordered the service, and failure to apply a lifeline credit to my first 38 days of service. Well, today in the mail I received a quite unexpected and very apologetic letter from someone quite high up the the GTE North regional offices (I don't know if he'd be upset if his name or title were posted publicly, so I won't). The gist of the letter was that the credits had been issued, and that the company is currently experiencing some internal billing problems which caused my account not to be credited properly (and it says that they are in the process of resolving them). Also, a copy of the tariff for the Michigan Lifeline Credit (one sheet) was enclosed for my review, and I was given an 800 number and the name of a contact person I could call if I had any further questions or concerns. Oh, and the letter explained that the 911 operational charge of $.50 is a charge approved by the voters of Muskegon County to cover part of the cost of operating the 911 emergency service center (I tend to believe we have enhanced 911 here). The funny part about that is that I don't recall ever questioning that charge in my conversations with folks at the GTE business office, though I DID question it when I posted my original message here! Things that make you go hmmmm ... As I say, the letter was very apologetic in tone and I believe it was sincere. My only hope is that the person who sent it to me actually will make some attempt to get business office procedures changed a bit, so that the next person who calls will not have to insist on seeing a tariff sheet in order to get their credit. Of course, it would be better yet if the billing problems can be resolved soon, so that this situation doesn't occur again. I suppose it would be too much to ask that everyone else who has been overbilled receive the credit they are due without having to ask for it, but now that GTE is aware of the problem, we can hope that at least it will be fixed so that it doesn't happen again. In any case, I was favorably impressed by the fact that for whatever reason, they apparently cared enough to send this letter. I think I may well call the 800 number and express my desire to be off this subscriber carrier in the not TOO far distant future, although I have been sort of holding off on that until warmer weather comes and I can get underneath my mobile home and give all my internal wiring a good inspection, to make sure that's not part of my "low volume" problem (I rather doubt it but want to be ABSOLUTELY sure; it would be quite embarrassing to call and raise a big fuss and then find out I had a problem with my wiring. I know I can just plug a phone in at the network interface box, but it's hard to determine something as subjective as a volume level on a phone when you're standing outside shivering, your teeth are chattering and the wind is howling!). :-) Jack ------------------------------ From: pcm@scammell.ecos.tne.oz.au (Peter Murray) Subject: Help: Phone Network Modelling Algorithms Organization: Telecom Australia, Information Technology Development Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 00:17:09 GMT Does anyone know of any software tools that could be used for the modelling and dimensioning of both hierarchical and non-hierarchical telephone networks? I would imagine that the software would implement various graph algorithms for both directed and undirected graphs as well as algorithms to calculate the grade of service among other things. Any feedback on available software, algorithms, studies etc ... would be much appreciated. Peter C. Murray pcm@scammell.ecos.tne.oz.au Telecom Mobiles Information Technology Development Information Technology Group Telecom Australia ------------------------------ From: jackl@pribal (jack lowry) Subject: Modem Dial Lines and Problems Organization: Prism Medical Systems Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 00:37:56 GMT What is the guarenteed maximum loss on a local voice line? Here is our problem: We have a pair of MULTITECH v.32 modems in use with a terminal and slaved printer over a dialup circuit. The customer called telling us that the response time was awful. We go out to the site and very quickly find out that the modems are connecting at a maximum of 2400 baud. Forcing the modems to connect at 9600 results in no connection. We have been round and round with the local telco and had no success ... until one of the phone techs that have been coming onsite "hooked us upto a 'FIBER optic circuit'" We have also been told that the loss on the line is 6db and that modems start having trouble at 8bd with 10db being the max guaranteed loss on a phone connection. Modern folklore has it that there used to be a "special" modem phone line avalible. Is this still true? Are there even differenet grades of dialup phone lines? Thanks, Jack wb3ffv.ampr.org!pribal!jackl ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 19 JAN 93 18:07 Subject: Freeway Call Boxes and CA Rain I've heard (but don't know if it is true) that the prolonged rain we've experienced here in Southern California has caused some of the freeway call boxes to run low on power (they are solar powered). 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: elliott@veronica.cs.wisc.edu (James Elliott) Subject: Strange International "Chat Line" Service -- How's it Work? Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 20:09:18 GMT A friend found a listing for a party chat service in a magazine, with a strange phone number, which seemed clearly to be an international call, but with fewer digits than seemed to make sense. (The number is 011-592-1999, which according to my local phone book goes to Guyana, and the 1999 is some combination of city code and very short number). The service is billed as "free, except for normal long-distance charges." Curious, he tried the number, and sure enough, it worked. Then he spent half an hour or so calling operators and customer assistance people trying to find out how much such a call would cost, where it went, and the like. The most common reaction was "Well, that's an international call. Wait and see how much it costs on your bill." When pressed harder, more sophisticated representatives were able to say that it was a Guyana number, but invariably claimed that it was incomplete -- that there were not enough digits for the call to go through. His assertion that it had worked was met with disbelief. Anyway, this leaves me with a few questions. First, why does this number work? Secondly, how does a business make any profit from it? My suspicion is that they set up their own little telephone company in Guyana and bill whatever they feel like as "normal long-distance charges." But I hope that some readers of this group may have more educated guesses than mine, or even some actual knowledge of what's going on! Jim Elliott elliott@cs.wisc.edu [Moderator's Note: Your friend was calling the gay chat line which (I think) used to operate out of the Netherland Antilles with the same sort of billing arrangement. The rates charged are those set by the carrier originating the call to the international point. The way the operator of the service makes money is by getting a piece of the action from the local telco based on the cut *they* get from the originating carrier. The reason the call goes through with 'so few digits' is because someone along the line is intercepting what is dialed and doing with it as they wish, sending it to wherever. You can consider it similar to 'speed dialing' from your local telco. You hand the telco an asterisk and a single digit or two; telco looks at it and translates it into something else. Likewise, the 011-592 sends the call to Guyana and the telecom administration there sees it coming, plucks it off and does something else with it. When this topic came up here awhile back, some readers suggested the call was not getting to Guyana if only because of the miserable condition of the phone service there and the likely inability of the Guyana telecom administration to deal with it. Naturally everyone involved hopes the gay guys in the USA have enough expendable cash that they'll be willing to spend BIG $$ calling; the people running the 386 with a half-dozen Dialogic cards and a bridge attached (that's about all it is) like the checks they get each month; the Guyana Telecom would like to see the balance in their settlement accounts with the USA carriers tipped in their favor, and like the three monkeys, MCI, Sprint and the Mother Company cover their eyes, ears and mouths and take the traffic which is handed to them. Those calls are not very expensive; I subscribe to AT&T's 'Reach Out World' program and pay something like 83 cents a minute for many overseas calls during off-peak hours. At least AT&T has apparently seen the dollar signs flashing where sex-talk is concerned; men and women whispering sweet nothings to one another over the long distance telephone in the wee hours of the morning must pay off since AT&T now cuts similar deals inside the USA with anyone who runs a bridge and can produce the required traffic. AT&T denies it of course, but 702-333-8444 is a good example. Try calling it on any carrier *other* than Mother. AT&T graciously accepts the twelve cents per minute and cuts the 'bridge tender' in on the action. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 05:18:39 -0500 (EST) From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: 10XXX UnBlocking Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. AT&T has been offering substantial $ rebates for expenses incurred by hotels and such while unblocking their PBXes to handle 10XXX traffic. The time limit for applications for such rebates was Jan 15, but now has been extended to, I think, March 16. AT&T has offered to the LECs *free* a form of screening that made such unblocking very easy for the customer. When I had just attended an AT&T unblocking seminar many many months ago, I had asked NET&T if they would be offering this screening, and got a letter back saying "NO". Just five days before AT&T's Jan 15 original cutoff date for rebates, NET&T made available the new form of screening for unblocking. Presumably, if you use it, you will have no further problems when the XXX in 10XXX goes to four digits. AT&T said the NET&T order code and pricing are: RBVXC, $11/line install, $0.00/mo!!, but cautioned me that it was on MY head to determine if whatever NET&T is offering is what my customers need. The usual NET&T sales response is that noone has heard of it, but since AT&T had provided the info that it was only a few days old, the NET&T sales types are off checking on it at least. It may now be offered in your area under some other code. Call AT&T (1-800-UNBLOCK) and ask for the technical specialist on duty. The folks that first answer are for more routine questions. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 03:32:35 -0500 (EST) From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: NYNEX Slashes in LATA LD Prices Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. NET&T has been running ads to tell everyone they have slashed the LD charges within MASS. They are now maybe 1/2 of what they were before, and the old price is quite recent and was radically lower than traditionally. This time they have something to really fear. Teleport Communications has a large fiber loop out through the LATA that gets to many telco tandems and Teleport offers LOCAL DIALTONE from their own #5ESS. If you get your local phone number from them, as I think Lechemere Sales has done, you are a LOCAL call away from probably ANYWHERE in the LATA. They are co-located in some central offices, so even if their fiber or cable-co-coax doesn't reach you, telco can (read has to) provide that last mile on copper. Teleport is owned maybe 50% by various cable companies. Telco should be worried! Ethernet to the home is very close. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 15:27:55 -0500 (EST) From: tdarcos@access.digex.com Subject: Differences Between ANI and Caller-ID In TELECOM Digest 13-29, Ross Alexander writes: > Could anybody tell me what ANI is all about? I follow this group > re gularly but the common kiwi doesn't have to worry about interstate > laws and Caller ID (yet). I've read up on the basic idea of SS7 and > ISDN so I follow the idea of both in channel signaling and D channel > signaling. Any help would be most appreciated. ISDN, ANI and Caller ID are only slightly related. You are essentially confusing (in part) three different areas. While ISDN telephone switches can supply Caller ID and/or ANI, you can receive the information (or your information can be passed) on non-ISDN switches. ISDN is a scheme to provide the means to run aproximately three channels on a single pair of phone wires. In the Basic Rate package (BRI), there are two 56K channels (or two standard "voice" channels) and one 16K data channel that while it is supposedly for call setup and teardown, I have heard you could use it for lower-speed data (look who's talking about 'lower speed' -- I still use a 2400 baud modem.) Caller ID is a means by which a private party can obtain, in real time, the telephone number of the individual calling them, or in some areas, the name or business name of the person or organization calling them. This information is provided automatically unless the party blocks it. (In some areas such as Virginia and New Jersey, if memory serves me correctly, unless you have politically approved connections (like judges and police officers), you cannot block delivery of your telephone number.) ANI is a process by which the billed party of a call obtains the telephone billing number (which in the case of an individual is their telephone number; in the case of a business it could be the main outgoing trunk line or whichever line happened to be selected) of the party who is placing a call at their expense. If the billed party is also the telephone number being called, and is done using "wats" in which the telephone system automatically charges the called party, it is possible for the called party to obtain, in real time, the billing number of the calling party at the time the call is placed. If the call is third-party billing, or placed collect/reverse charge, or billed to a telephone credit card, the ANI information is printed on the telephone bill. Let me ask you, in New Zealand, if someone calls you reverse charges, does the bill show the number from which you were called? I differentiate between the two because ANI has been available since probably inbound WATS numbers have been in existence, and it's only with the availability of Caller ID that this issue even came up. Paul Robinson [Moderator's Note: Actually, no. The earliest 800 lines I can remember were not in a position to identify who was calling by number. PAT] ------------------------------ From: robichau@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (Paul Robichaux) Subject: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug Reply-To: robichau@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov Organization: New Technology, Inc. Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 16:17:10 GMT While traveling last week, I had a chance to try my first Public Phone 2000 (PP2k). Unfortunately, the phones at present have two serious problems which render them unusable, at least for me. Bug #1 is intentional. The phones only accept SWBT and Bell Atlantic calling cards for data calls. Since I have a South Central Bell calling card, that moves me to bug #2. Bug #2 occurs whenever you attempt to place a data call billed to a credit card (Visa, MC, or Amex; I think it might take Discover also.) After swiping my card and dialing the number, the phone displays a curious message: Divide by zero error - R6003 and reboots itself! A call to AT&T's customer service confirmed that bug #1 was intentional and that bug #2 was known and in work. Unfortunately, I never did get to use the darn thing. Moral of the story: always carry your _real_ AT&T card when travelling. Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG Mission Software Development Div. New Technology, Inc. ------------------------------ From: grio@postscript.cs.psu.edu (Daniel L Grillo) Subject: Logging Into AUDIX Box Organization: Penn State Computer Science Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 19:42:52 -0500 Here at work we have an AT&T AUDIX voicemail system that's running on a 3Bsomething. Since it appears this machine is running Unix of some AT&T flavor, it would be nice to be able to log in with a normal shell, grab the audix name & extention database, and have access to the actual recordings. The AUDIX maintainer only has a single account, and it gives him a pretty-text based useless-for-our-needs shell. Is there an account on these boxes without a password? Is there a way to escape out of the AUDIX maintainer program and get a command line? Any info or insight is appreciated. Dan Grillo grio@cs.psu.edu [NeXTmail, PrivateMail, MIME welcome] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #35 *****************************   From telecom Thu Jan 21 02:11:43 1993 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26456 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom@eecs.nwu.edu); Thu, 21 Jan 1993 02:11:43 -0600 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 02:11:43 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301210811.AA26456@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #36 Status: RO TELECOM Digest Thu, 21 Jan 93 02:11:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 36 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Released GSA Docs Slam FBI Wiretap Proposal (NY Times via Mark Boolootian) Chicago Pay Phone Rip-Off; COCOT Triumph! (Bill Pfeiffer) Internet *67 Service (Paul Robinson) Interchangeable NPA Prep (Tim Gorman) Question Concerning 'Smart' House (Rachana D. Patel) Anyone Know of Telecommunication GUI Standards? (Stephen Gay) 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service) (Tom Ace) Re: Strange International "Chat Line" Service (Fred Goldstein) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian) Subject: Released GSA Docs Slam FBI Wiretap Proposal Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 07:59:54 -0800 (PST) Moderator's Note: Mark passed along this correspondence from Dave Banisar discussing a recent newspaper report. PAT] Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 23:22:47 -0500 From: Dave Banisar Subject: Released GSA Docs Slam FBI Wiretap Proposal "GSA Memos Reveal that FBI Wiretap Plan was Opposed by Government's Top Telecomm Purchaser" The {New York Times} reported today on a document obtained by CPSR through the Freedom of Information Act. ("FBI's Proposal on Wiretaps Draws Criticism from G.S.A.," {New York Times}, January 15, 1993, p. A12) The document, an internal memo prepared by the General Services Administration, describes many problems with the FBI's wiretap plan and also shows that the GSA strongly opposed the sweeping proposal. The GSA is the largest purchaser of telecommunications equipment in the federal government. The FBI wiretap proposal, first announced in March of 1992, would have required telephone manufacturers to design all communications equipment to facilitate wire surveillance. The proposal was defeated last year. The FBI has said that it plans to reintroduce a similar proposal this year. The documents were released to Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, a public interest organization, after CPSR submitted Freedom of Information Act requests about the FBI's wiretap plan to several federal agencies last year. The documents obtained by CPSR reveal that the GSA, which is responsible for equipment procurement for the Federal government, strongly opposed two different versions of the wiretap plan developed by the FBI. According to the GSA, the FBI proposal would complicate interoperability, increase cost, and diminish privacy and network security. The GSA also stated that the proposal could "adversely _affect national security._" In the second memo, the GSA concluded that it would be a mistake to give the Attorney General sole authority to waive provisions of the bill. The GSA's objections to the proposal were overruled by the Office of Management and Budget, a branch of the White House which oversees administrative agencies for the President. However, none of GSA's objections were disclosed to the public or made available to policy makers in Washington. Secrecy surrounds this proposal. Critical sections of a report on the FBI wiretap plan prepared by the General Accounting Office were earlier withhold after the FBI designated these sections "National Security Information." These sections included analysis by GAO on alternatives to the FBI's wiretap plan. CPSR is also pursuing a FOIA lawsuit to obtain the FBI's internal documents concerning the wiretap proposal. The GSA memos, the GAO report and others that CPSR is now seeking indicate that there are many important documents within the government which have still not been disclosed to the public. Marc Rotenberg, CPSR Washington office rotenberg@washofc.cpsr.org Note: Underscores indicate underlining in the original text. Dashes that go across pages indicate page breaks. [Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a nonprofit, public interest membership organization. For membership information about CPSR, contact cpsr@csli.stanford.edu or call 415/322-3778. For information on CPSR's FOIA work, contact David Sobel at 202/544-9240 (sobel@washofc.cpsr.org).] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (#4A) Control No. X92050405 Due Date: 5/5/92 Brenda Robinson (S) After KMR consultations, we still _"cannot support"_ Draft Bill. No. 118 as substantially revised by Justice after its purported full consideration of other agencies' "substantive concerns." Aside from the third paragraph of our 3/13/92 attachment response for the original draft bill, which was adopted as GSA's position (copy attached), Justice has failed to fully address other major GSA concerns (i.e., technological changes and associated costs). Further, by merely eliminating the FCC and any discussion of cost issues in the revision, we can not agree as contended by Justice that it now " ... takes care of kinds of problems raised by FCC and others ...." Finally, the revision gives Justice sole unilateral exclusive authority to enforce and except or waive the provisions of any resultant Iaw in Federal District Courts. Our other concerns are also shown in the current attachment for the revised draft bill. Once again OMB has not allowed sufficient time for a more through review, a comprehensive internal staffing, or a formal response. /Signature/ Wm. R. Loy KMR 5/5/92 Info: K(Peay),KD,KA,KB,KE,KG,KV,KM,KMP,KMR,R/F,LP-Rm.4002 (O/F) - 9C1h (2) (a) - File (#4A) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ATTACHMENT REVISED JUSTICE DRAFT BILL DIGITAL TELEPHONY The proposed legislation could have a widespread impact on the government's ability to acquire _new_ telecommunications equipment and provide electronic communications services. _Existing_ Federal government telecommunications resources will be affected by the proposed new technology techniques and equipment. An incompatibility and interoperability of existing Federal government telecommunications system, and resources would result due to the new technological changes proposed. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been removed from the legislation, but the Justice implementation may require modifications to the "Communications Act of 1934," and other FCC policies and regulations to remove inconsistencies. This could also cause an unknown effect on the wire and electronic communications systems operations, services, equipment, and regulations within the Federal government. Further, to change a major portion of the United States telecommunications infrastructure (the public switched network within eighteen months and others within three years) seems very optimistic, no matter how trivial or minimal the proposed modifications are to implement. In the proposed legislation the Attorney General has sole _unilateral exclusive_ authority to enforce, grant exceptions or waive the provisions of any resultant law and enforce it in Federal District Courts. The Attorney General would, as appropriate, only "consult" with the FCC, Department of Commerce, or Small Business Administration. The Attorney General has exclusive authority in Section 2 of the legislation; it appears the Attorney General has taken over several FCC functions and placed the FCC in a mere consulting capacity. The proposed legislation would apply to all forms of wire and electronic communications to include computer data bases, facsimile, imagery etc., as well as voice transmissions. The proposed legislation would assist eavesdropping by law enforcement, but it would also apply to users who acquire the technology capability and make it easier for criminals, terrorists, foreign intelligence (spies) and computer hackers to electronically penetrate the public network and pry into areas previously not open to snooping. This situation of easier access due to new technology changes could therefore affect _national security_. (1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The proposed legislation does not address standards and specifications for telecommunications equipment nor security considerations. These issues must be addressed as they effect both the government and private industry. There are also civil liberty implications and the public's constitutional rights to privacy which are not mentioned. It must be noted that equipment already exists that can be used to wiretap the digital communications lines and support court-authorized wiretaps, criminal investigations and probes of voice communications. The total number of interception applications authorized within the United States (Federal and State) has been averaging under nine hundred per year. There is concern that the proposed changes are not cost effective and worth the effort to revamp all the existing and new telecommunications systems. The proposed bill would have to have the FCC or another agency approve or reject new telephone equipment mainly on the basis of whether the FBI has the capability to wiretap it. The federal-approval process is normally lengthy and the United States may not be able to keep pace with foreign industries to develop new technology and install secure communications. As a matter of interest, the proposed restrictive new technology could impede the United States' ability to compete in digital telephony and participate in the international trade arena. Finally, there will be unknown associated costs to implement the proposed new technological procedures and equipment. These costs would be borne by the Federal government, consumers, and all other communications ratepayers to finance the effort. Both the Federal government and private industry communications regular phone service, data transmissions, satellite and microwave transmissions, and encrypted communications could be effected at increased costs. (2) [Documents disclosed to Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), under the Freedom of Information Act December 1992.] Mark Boolootian booloo@llnl.gov +1 510 423 1948 Disclaimer: booloo speaks for booloo and no other. ------------------------------ From: wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer) Subject: Chicago Pay Phone Rip-Off; COCOT Triumph! Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 02:00:57 -0600 (CST) I have not seen this matter dealt with much in the TELECOM Digest so I am writing about it. About a month ago, Illinois Bell began re-programming their pay telephones to require 30 cents for a local call that used to cost a quarter. My understanding is that this was their remedy for having to refund some kind of an ill-gotten rate increase that they had levied against residential customers. I find this practice very inconvenient and a bit insulting. First, now I have to have AT LEAST two coins to complete a local call from a Ill Bell payphone, while COCOTS remain at a quarter (although they are timed while Bell phones are not). Second, it is quite aggrivating to realize that Bell is allowed to hike the cost of local pay service to the HIGHEST in the nation, so that they can pay back a bogus rate charged to other customers. They claim that the surcharge is only temporary. Their idea of 'temporary' is five years! I have never seen a 'temporary' surcharge reversed. When it is time to do so, inflation will be sited as a reason to keep the charge in place. The Illinois Toll Roads were built in the 1950's as 'temporary toll' roads. Guess what, the toll booths are still there and the fees go up every few years. Surprise, surprise! It is not so much the extra nickle, as it is the inconvenience of having to feed multiple coins into the phone and what appears to be a blatent act of robbery. If Ill. Bell collected monies that they shouldn't have, then they should have to pay it back themselves, not burdon the public phone users with an additional fee. How many calls will be completed using two quarters or a quarter and a dime simply because the caller does not have a nickle? In addition, calls that once cost the basic rate of 25 cents now cost thirty-five (or more) cents, indicating that the boundries of what is considered a 'local' call have been shrunk. What arrogance! I have seen stickers on many COCOTS saying "Local calls still a quarter". My business requires that I make several short (one to three minute) calls to clients when paged. I now seek out COCOTS rather than avoid them as I used to. Maybe this is designed to make cellular more attractive. Perhaps it will, but if I do have to go cellular, it darned sure will not be with Ameritech, the carrier connected with Ill Bell. William Pfeiffer Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal To submit articles send them to rrb@airwaves.chi.il.us To subscribe, send e-mail to journal@airwaves.chi.il.us [Moderator's Note: Bill, you and I have been personal friends for fifteen years; we've lived in Chicago most of our lives and I presume you read the papers as I do. Let's put the record straight here: A tax was imposed many years ago on local telephone calls made from pay phones. The tax was/is one cent. Being unable to collect one cent in a payphone, IBT decided to spread the tax over all their subscribers, more or less by a formula which took the number of payphone calls made in a period of time, multiplying this by one cent each, dividing by the total number of subscribers and tacking it on the bill of each divided by 12, the number of bills in a year. The billing, collection and payment of taxes on telephone calls and service with the varying rates involved is an enormously technical and complicated process. Someone sued and said subscribers should not have to pay the taxes of the pay phone users. IBT asked, "Don't you also use payphones, on average, X times per year? ... So pay your taxes ..." But that argument did not wash. The court said to refund the tax (which had already been paid to the city/county/state) paid by subscribers and henceforth to collect the tax from payphone users who actually made the calls and incurred the tax liability. So now the payphones collect an additional five cent coin, which is the closest present technology can come to collecting one penny. One penny pays the tax for the pay phone call being made at present; the other four pennies compensate IBT for the taxes they paid in the past but had to refund to subscribers without being allowed to collect-back from the governments here who said essentially, "hey, the calls were made and you owe us the penny for each one .. ". (The old system was in effect for twenty years.) I think technically, pay phone calls are 25 cents, tax is one penny and 'adjustment for tax previously paid on user's behalf' is four pennies. IBT estimated that five year's worth of collecting the extra 'adjustment pennies' would compensate them for what they were forced to refund yet unable to reverse back to the governments in the same process. After five years, yes, you will still continue to deposit 30 cents in payphones for calls, barring other unforseen changes, but the distribution of the money will change: IBT will no longer be compen- sating themselves four pennies at a time, although unless the technol- ogy changes, they'll still be getting the pennies but putting them in a different pocket. The COCOT taxes are a little different as are taxes on 'semi-public' coin phones where someone is paying IBT to have the coin phone there. I won't go on, this is already outrageously boring. Utility tax collection/remittances/pro-rations and tax credits are a very technical, detailed and complex process. Add to payphones the fact that the local telcos have to collect and distribute the tax money on long distance calls to the various carriers, etc. Lots of people are employed in the Tax Accounting department at IBT and other telcos. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 10:35:30 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Internet *67 Service Having a full Internet feed for the first time including news group access has exposed me to a new and wider range of services and features available from the Internet. I'd like to tell people about one of them. If the phone system had had Caller ID from the very start, the way people place telephone calls now would be very different. Electronic Mail has generally always identified who sent a message to you, especially on the Internet where all mail is in RFC 841 format which provides the sender's name/id and account address. Only now there is a new capability out which I call "Internet *67 Service" after the telephone code which someone dials to send a message. This service - the one that's left - is being provided by a system in Finland. You send it messages with distribution information in the header and it resends them out with a unique alias. It uses a "double-blind" system, where if you send a reply to someone's alias, it assigns YOU an alias and sends the message to them with the alias for your account! Mostly people have been using it to post to "embarassing news groups" - usually certain "alt" ones - but it could be used in any case where someone wishes to post a comment where the identity of the sender might be embarassing (One example was Moderator having to post a message for "a major telecommunications executive" because he preferred it not be known who it was.) Hirings and Work Wanted items could spring to mind. Posting of messages by persons who want to discuss how they recoverered from being the victim of incest are another. You can get information about this service by sending a request to help@anon.penet.fi. Note earlier in this message I said "the one that's left". There was a service being run in Australia that did even more. First you used the program PGP - a free RSA Public key generator - to create a public and private key. You could then send the service your public key first, then send messages which were UUENCODEd using the matching private key, and told that system where to send the message. It would use the previously supplied key to decrypt the message and then forward it under the unique ID. Unfortunately the backbone supplier for his area caught on to what he was doing, and like most stuffy governmental authorities, takes a dim view of people keeping their private matters private, informed him that the activity he was doing was not a valid use of the network and ordered the service discontinued. Boo. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM, TDARCOS@ATTMAIL.COM, TDARCOS@ACCESS.DIGEX.COM (Sort of tells you I like this name, doesn't it?) [Moderator's Note: I guess the Internet equivilent of 'blocked call blocking' (where people refuse to accept calls sent with ID blocked) would be to put a line in our kill files automatically sending messages from anon.penet.fi to /dev/null, eh? :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jan 93 07:53:16 EST From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Interchangeable NPA Prep Over the past several months, I have read a number of postings concerning dialing patterns and interchangeable NPA readiness. I would be very interested in any specific examples the readers of the Digest could pass along concerning changes the various telco's are making that have the future interchangeable NPA conversion in mind. If these could be emailed to me, I will summarize and post. Thanks, Tim Gorman - SWBT *opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence* ------------------------------ From: rpatel@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Rachana D Patel) Subject: Question Concerning 'Smart' House Date: 20 Jan 93 20:11:57 GMT Organization: University of Pennsylvania I am working on a term paper for a mangement of technology class at the Wharton school of Business at the University of Pennsylvania. I was wondering whether anyone knows about the work Bell Atlantic is pursuing on the cellular technology in a 'smart' house. I have heard that there are plans to provide each individual with a phone line which will be provided over cellular lines. ALso, there are plans for integrating other functions such as heating,airconditioning, phone biils, and banking all over cellular lines. Is there anyone who knows more about this? I would like to know where I could find more information on this. Please let me know about any information that could help me. Thanks, Rachana D. Patel University of Pennsylvania rpatel@eniac.seas.upenn.edu Telecommunication Systems & Management and Technology Program trategic Management ------------------------------ From: gay@mprgate.mpr.ca(Stephen Gay) Subject: Anyone Know of Telecommunication GUI Standards? Organization: MPR Teletch Ltd Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 21:39:12 GMT Greetings, I am trying to locate any standards or recommendations for the graphical display of information pertinent to monitoring a telecommunication network. For instance, is there a standard or recommendation that says that a normal condition should be green and that an alarm condition should be red, or that a point that has been in alarm and has not been acknowledged should blink? I would appreciate any information about such a standard or which group is working on such a standard or any other information you could supply. Please email me directly at gay@mprgate.mpr.ca. Thanks in advance, Stephen M. Gay MPR Teltech Ltd. gay@mprgate.mpr.ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 11:18:31 PST From: awry!tom@hercules.aptix.com (Tom Ace) Subject: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service) Our Telecom Moderator writes: > ... AT&T denies it of course, but 702-333-8444 is a good example.> > Try calling it on any carrier *other* than Mother. AT&T graciously > accepts the twelve cents per minute and cuts the 'bridge tender' in on > the action. PAT] 10333 1 702 333 8444 completed the call. What were you expecting would happen? Tom Ace tom@aptix.com [Moderator's Note: I *know* two things happened. Someone is taking your 10333 and either ignoring it and handing it off one plus by default to AT&T or changing it to 10288 which is another way of getting Mother. I tried 10333 from here and the call definitly would not complete. Actually, it *did* complete to that number, which is an answering machine telling the caller to redial using 10288. On the other hand, AT&T sees those calls arriving in Reno (I think), grabs them and sends them over a T-1 direct to the bridge tender without handing them to the local telco for completion as does Sprint, MCI, etc. Are you in control of your 10xxx assertions when you dial, or is some PBX/COCOT/other private system making those decisions whether you like it or not ... or indeed even if you know it or not? Try 10333 + 0 and ask the operator who she is ... betcha she'll say AT&T, because your system kicked you over there when you thought otherwise. Please let us know the results of your further testing. PAT] ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk]) Subject: Re: Strange International "Chat Line" Service -- How's it Work? Reply-To: goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk]) Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 22:56:27 GMT > When this topic came up here awhile back, some readers suggested the > call was not getting to Guyana if only because of the miserable > condition of the phone service there and the likely inability of the > Guyana telecom administration to deal with it. I saw an article in one of the trades (TE&M or Telephony) lately about Guyana's telephone service. A couple of years ago, it was purchased by the owner of Virgin Islands Tel. They've invested real money and are building pretty much a new network (since the old one was pretty worthless). It's already more than twice the size it used to be. Since these are an entrepreneurial sort, I suspect that they are quietly marketing their country code for such applications. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com k1io or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #36 ***************************** [NOTE: A SPECIAL ARTICLE ENTITLED 'INSIGHT TELECOM WINNERS AND LOSERS' WENT OUT NEXT, THEN ISSUE #37. DUE TO TRANSMISSION/FILE SAVING ERRORS SOME DATA FROM THE SPECIAL ISSUE WAS LOST. *MOST* OF THE SPECIAL ARTICLE IS INTACT BELOW. PAT] Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12145; 21 Jan 93 4:49 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20080 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 21 Jan 1993 00:36:12 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20008 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 21 Jan 1993 00:35:47 -0600 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 00:35:47 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301210635.AA20008@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: Insight 1/93: Telecom Winners & Losers I am passing this along FYI to interested readers of TELECOM Digest, with thanks to Matt Lucas for sending it in. PAT Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 10:50:44 -0500 From: matt lucas Subject: Insight 1/93: Telecom Winners & Losers This is the lead article in the January 1993 issue of {TeleStrategies Insight.} I thought it would be of interest to readers of this bulletin board. (Information about TeleStrategies, Inc. and TeleStrategies Insight appears at the end of the article.) Matt. TELECOM WINNERS AND LOSERS IN 1993 By Dr. Jerry Lucas, President, TeleStrategies, Inc., and Publisher, TeleStrategies Insight It's 1993, time for TeleStrategies' annual analysis of winners and losers in the coming year. First, we'll review how we called them last year (TeleStrategies Insight, January 1992) because it's fun to toot your own horn when you're right. Then we'll cover what happened in 1992 that influenced our assessment for 1993. Finally, we'll tell you what to expect this year if you like to pick winners rather than losers. TELESTRATEGIES' TOP TEN WINNERS AND LOSERS 1. ATM/SONET 2. Collocation 3. PCS 4. Cellular Technologies 5. 800 Number Portability 6. Video Dial Tone 7. IntraLATA Toll 8. Screen Phones 9. AIN 10. ISDN 1. ATM/SONET First, a quick technology refresher: Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) is the standardization of optical fiber transport; Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) is the multiplexing and/or switching access to SONET transport. Last year at this time, the only ATM/SONET game was the RBOCs' Switched Multimegabit Data Service (SMDS). We deemed it a loser and that opinion remains unchanged. Why? SMDS doesn't create value for end users. As planned, SMDS would deliver LAN connectivity to users via a public packet network with 1.5 to 45 Mbps access. First, there is no demand today for public (i.e., inter-company) LAN connectivity except in the research and education market. If you are a player in R&E, you get it for "free" via Internet. (See TeleStrategies Insight, November 1992). Second, if you want switched, intra-company LAN-to-LAN connectivity with 1.5 Mbps access, and you have to pay for it, you can get it today with frame relay technology. Third, the only way to justify 45 Mbps access today is interconnection to an interexchange carrier where voice, data and video can be integrated to the IXC serving center. In summary, if your view of how ATM/SONET will roll out in 1993 is megabit per second, data only, access to a public ATM switch (SMDS), you lose. So what happened in 1992 to make ATM/SONET timely and a winner for 1993? The ATM Forum. In 1992 the computer/LAN people joined with the router, T1 mux, DCS and CO vendors to push for CPE ATM standards compatible with carrier SONET. The end result: it is now possible for ATM CPE to interface with an ATM/SONET-based IXC. Look for the large end user to see the first wave of ATM CPE products and compatible private line carrier offerings by year end. 2. COLLOCATION Last year we picked 1992 as the year the FCC would follow the New York PSC's lead regarding CO collocation for the Alternative Local Transport Service (ALTS) providers. The FCC did just that last summer with the result that collocation for special private line access is here. So, if you were an ALTS and took the risk to start up or fortify your market position, as you already know, you were a winner in 1992. What else happened in 1992 to affect collocation opportunities in 1993? Plenty. First, collocation has now been established as an acceptable practice at the state PUC level. RBOC COs haven't been destroyed by "incompetent" ALTS technicians when on site at the CO, etc. Second, Senator Al Gore was elected Vice President. It is likely that he will use his position to become the U.S. "technology czar," putting special emphasis on his "baby," the National Research and Education Network (NREN), the gigabit replacement for Internet (see TeleStrategies Insight, June 1992). Third, the RBOCs acknowledge they lost the special access monopoly with collocation (a $3 billion market). It's just a matter of time until switched access (a $20 billion market) is opened to competition, further eroding the RBOCs position. In light of this a few RBOCs (or independents) have realized that "if you can't beat them, join them." What should you expect in 1993 regarding collocation opportunities? First, a lot of hype about the telecom infrastructure creating jobs (the Gore/NREN effect) followed by creative RBOC/state PUC initiatives to attract new business. The bottom line for 1993: very special collocation agreements between corporate networking customers and RBOCs with the blessing of state PUCs. If the RBOCs are going to get bypassed anyway, why shouldn't they get in on it themselves. The RBOCs could win big politically with Washington, their state governments and others by teaming with end users! Collocation offers endless possibilities. Watch the creative ones in 1993. 3. PCS Last year we said that there wouldn't be any new spectrum reallocations for Personal Communications Services (PCS) and that the FCC's Pioneer Preference system was the best way to go if you wanted to start up now. We were right on both counts. If you are exploring PCS opportunities in 1993, here's what happened in 1992 that you should know about. (1) You can no longer file for a Pioneer's Preference; (2) The FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making for PCS frequency reallocation and was deluged with comments. MCI's proposal drew significant attention. It calls for the creation of three national consortia in which no one company would have a controlling interest and no one would be allowed to hold both cellular and PCS licenses in the same geographic area. (3) Last month Pacific Bell blew it for RBOC PCS set-asides last when they announced their "Divestiture II," which will split their cellular operations and regulated local exchange operations into two separate companies. Readers of TeleStrategies Insight (August 1991) shouldn't have been surprised because we predicted a year and a half ago that an RBOC would do exactly what Pacific Bell now says it will do. If you aren't a cellular carrier or a PCS pioneer but want to get into PCS in 1993, start by reading MCI's PCS consortia proposal to the FCC. It's well thought out and has had a lot of input from industry players. Start networking with these consortia because 1993 will be open for filings. There will be no set-aside frequencies nor will there be lotteries as with cellular. 4. CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY Last year at this time, the hot topic in cellular was TDMA vs. CDMA. We called TDMA the definite winner for this year and we were right. McCaw, Rogers Cantel and Southwestern Bell are implementing TDMA. Others (Pacific Bell, NYNEX, U S WEST) who are publicly leaning toward CDMA may have to go with TDMA just to meet the digital marketing hype that's starting to float around. Regarding 1993, what new technology developments have arisen to create future opportunities? Packet data via cellular. The significance of packet data via cellular is that the air time costs drop (you pay by the data burst) and less power is drawn from the batteries (giving you longer periods between recharges). The packet cellular systems tested in 1992 were made by Cellular Data, Inc., and IBM (Cellplan II). Cellular carriers are getting ready to roll out one or the other. In 1993, opportunities abound for applications and distribution for low-cost, portable data communications. 5. 800 NUMBER PORTABILITY Number portability allows current 800 customers to move their 800 business to another IXC without changing their phone numbers; they can divide their business based on call origination location, time of day or by a random percentage allocation. No winners or losers were predicted last year because 800 number portability wasn't scheduled to happen until 1993. Starting in May, 1993 or shortly thereafter, 800 number portability will create new opportunities for: IXCs who are lusting after AT&T's 800 customers. Even the smallest IXCs will be able to participate because they can carry national 800 account originating traffic in their service area only. THE MEDIA will bombard the U. S. with 800 advertisements. TV and print media are in for a revenue windfall. Big bucks will be spent by AT&T, MCI, Sprint and others on 800 service advertisements. CONSUMERS will benefit because 800 number portability brings SS7 connectivity with it. This means almost all telephone calls will be distance-insensitive regarding call set-up time. POTENTIAL TOLL FRAUD VICTIMS will have less exposure. Almost all toll fraud (that end users are liable for) originates with an 800 call to a company's voice mail box or direct inward system access (DISA) line. 800 number portability gives users the ability to "red line." Here's an example: the Bronx area of New York City is a hot bed of toll fraud activity. Users will be able to block calls down to that NPA-NXX. LECs performing centralized data base dips will not only be compensated for IXC selection and more, but the SS7 infrastructure will be in place to create other intelligent network services. But what about AT&T? On the surface, 800 number portability looks like a loser for them; they're going to lose 800 customers or at least part of their customers' traffic. But there are some things AT&T can do to mitigate the damage: 1. Fight for Deregulation -- Once 800 number portability goes into effect, AT&T can make the case to the FCC that the (some data lost in this file here) operate a cellular system and demerits in the application process for major, regulated LEC involvement in the consortium.) Also, they are pushing early for end-user number portability. This is a viable PCS/AIN approach. Sprint and AIN: Sprint has it all in some areas regarding full services -- long distance, cellular (the Centel merger) and local (United) service. If they selectively go after AIN in markets where they have all three forces, it's going to be a good PCS/AIN approach. AT&T: AT&T has it all and more, too. It is the largest long distance carrier, telecom manufacturer and has an option to control the largest cellular carrier, McCaw. I'll bet AT&T is currently modifying its 4 and 5 ESS's to come up with a super AIN/PCS/cellular/cable TV switching network. If they focus on AIN/PCS they, too will be uniquely positioned. Also, you can expect to see AT&T protecting its intelligent network patents in 1993 (I know I said that before.) and you can't get into AIN without violating their string of patents concerning the wiretap proposal. (lost some data here) The GSA memos, the GAO report and others that CPSR is now seeking indicate that there are many important documents within the government which have still not been disclosed to the public. Marc Rotenberg, CPSR Washington office rotenberg@washofc.cpsr.org Note: Underscores indicate underlining in the original text. Dashes that go across pages indicate page breaks. [Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a nonprofit, public interest membership organization. For membership information about CPSR, contact cpsr@csli.stanford.edu or call 415/322-3778. For information on CPSR's FOIA work, contact David Sobel at 202/544-9240 (sobel@washofc.cpsr.org).] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (#4A) Control No. X92050405 Due Date: 5/5/92 Brenda Robinson (S) After KMR consultations, we still _"cannot support"_ Draft Bill. No. 118 as substantially revised by Justice after its pu (lost some data here) [NOTE: THE SPECIAL MAILING 'TELECOM WINNERS AND LOSERS ENDS AT THIS POINT. SORRY, AN INTACT UNCORRUPTED COPY IS NOT AVAILABLE.] ^A^A^A^A ^A^A^A^A TELECOM Digest Fri, 22 Jan 93 02:30:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 37 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Ken Thompson) Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Curtis Sanford) Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Dave Niebuhr) Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Andy Rabagliati) Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Tom Roberts) Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Larry Cipriani) Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Ang-Peng Hwa) Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (David G. Lewis) Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Martin McCormick) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Martin McCormick) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Albert Crosby) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Paul Wallich) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Henry Mensch) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Charles McGuinness) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Pete Tompkins) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ken Thompson Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution Date: 21 Jan 93 23:32:38 GMT Organization: NCR Corporation Wichita, KS sth@slipknot.mit.edu (Scott Hannahs) writes: > Just a follow up to the note I posted last week. New England > Telephone now admits (verbally) that they were miss-billing (read > overcharging) everyone in my exchange. They are willing to rebate me > the amount they overcharged but I was told, "We can't rebate everyone > since that would cost too much". I didn't hear any complaints about > collecting too much money. They will rebate anyone who complains > about it. Complain to your state corporation commision. They regulate utilities, and can force them to refund all rate payers for over-charges. Ken Thompson N0ITL NCR Corp. Peripheral Products Division Disk Array Development 3718 N. Rock Road Wichita KS 67226 (316)636-8783 Ken.Thompson@wichitaks.ncr.com ------------------------------ From: sanford@ascend.com (Curtis Sanford) Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution Date: 22 Jan 93 00:47:27 GMT Organization: Ascend Communications, Alameda CA In article sth@slipknot.mit.edu (Scott Hannahs) writes: > These are reposts of some articles involving an ongoing dispute with > New England Telephone that I posted to ne.general a week ago. >> Remember the other MIT graduate who found that NET had overcharged >> the State House something like a few millions of dollars? > No. I might not have been here then. Do you have a date, or > reference, names etc. I would like to get ahold of that info. I believe you are refering to Len Evanchik, who was then (and may still be) Director of Telecommunications for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (and yes, an MIT grad). One of first acts upon taking office was to take a calculator to his past Centrex bills. I believe he uncovered three to five years of double billing on all Centrex measured service calls. The refund was in the millions. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:43:13 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Riposs - Refuse Restitution In TELECOM Digest V13 #29 Scott Hannahs writes: > This is an interesting problem in that they seem to be hitting > universities and modem users. I have heard from at least one other > person who was misbilled involving other exchanges. This problem > applies to unlimited local service where you get an unlimited number > of very local calls un-itemized bill for not-so-local calls. Much text deleted ... dwn What I did when the Suffolk County, New York, government obtained three exchanges for its own use and found that an overbilling was occurring on calls to one of them was to file a formal complaint with the New York Utility (oops, Public) Service Commision when I received exactly no response from NYTel. How did I find out and prove my case? I simply asked the NYTel people to start sending me a Detail Charge Listing on a permanent basis so that I could monitor these calls. While my local calls aren't listed I found that *all* calls made by each assigned phone number are logged. NYTel goofed and listed a call from 516-395-XXXX to 516-281-XXXX which are both *in my house*, in the same CO and serve the same three communities. The overbilling is now finished and I pay the normal rate to call that particular exchange. It took over a year of pleading, talking, attempting to prove that I was right and simply telling the NYTel rep that she/he didn't know what they were talking about. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: andyr@wizzy.com (Andy Rabagliati) Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report Organization: W.Z.I. Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:33:40 GMT In article MCMANGPH@NUSVM.BITNET (Ang Peng Hwa) writes: > This report is from UPI: > Los Angeles -- America's traditional lead in telecommunications is > eroding very rapidly as other nations promote new technologies, > according to a study released Wednesday. > Nations like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write > off and replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers." Well, the United Kingdom had Strowger mechanical exchanges in a lot of places up until eight years ago. They held back on their equipment replacement until BT's System X was ready. Cheers, Andy. andyr@wizzy.com W.Z.I. Consulting (719) 635-6099 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:10:57 CST From: tjrob@ihlpl.att.com Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report Organization: AT&T From article , by jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb): > MCMANGPH@NUSVM.BITNET (Ang Peng Hwa) writes: >> The study added: "During this remarkable period of rapid technological >> progress and obsolescence, asset lives for public network equipment of >> local exchange companies have actually increased in the US. Nations >> like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and >> replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers." > I suspect it is much easier to upgrade existing facilities when your > country is much smaller than the vast United States. What does > Singapore have to do to upgrade to digital? Cut a few cables and run > a few fiber strands? No, you missed the point. It is federal tax policy which is dramatically different between the U.S.A. and many other countries. This is *NOT* a technological question/problem, it is a political one. U.S. carriers cannot "cut a few cables and run a few fiber strands" because U.S. tax policy makes it prohibitively expensive to do so. Telephone equipment has a *VERY LONG* lifetime in the U.S. tax codes (I believe it is 20 years, used to be 30(!)). This was based upon the rate of technological change in the telephone industry during the '30s through the '50s, and is hopelessly out of date in the '90s. [side observation: virtually all U.S. telephone companies are smaller than Japan; most are probably smaller than Singapore (measured by # lines). Size has nothing to do with it.] So what does this mean? It means that U.S. telephone companies can only depreciate their investments in equipment over that long period of time. It is *VERY* difficult for them to justify the replacement of equipment which has not yet been fully depreciated. That means that moderately old equipment (five to ten years old) cannot, in practice, be replaced, EVEN IF THE NEW EQUIPMENT WOULD REALLY SAVE THEM MONEY (not to mention providing new capabilities and services). New equipment, however, can be as modern and as efficient as possible. That is where the action is in the telecom industry. Tom Roberts att!ihlpl!tjrob TJROB@IHLPL.ATT.COM AT&T Bell Laboratories ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 12:56:10 EST From: lvc@cbvox1.att.com Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc. In article jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) writes: > MCMANGPH@NUSVM.BITNET (Ang Peng Hwa) writes: >> like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and >> replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers." > I suspect it is much easier to upgrade existing facilities when your > country is much smaller than the vast United States. That's part of it. Another is US tax code depreciate rates for telecom gear are slower than other countries. If I recall correctly, switching equipment is depreciated over something quite large, on the order of 15 years. Maybe that made sense pre-AT&T divestiture when telecom gear didn't improve as fast as it does today. Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 16:55:19 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom -- USC Report I had written: > The study added: "During this remarkable period of rapid technological > progress and obsolescence, asset lives for public network equipment of > local exchange companies have actually increased in the US. Nations like > Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and replace > equipment twice as fast as most US carriers. Jim Gottlieb replied: > I suspect it is much easier to upgrade existing facilities when your > country is much smaller than the vast United States. What does Singapore > have to do to upgrade to digital? Cut a few cables and run a few fiber > strands? Jim, you are right that Singapore has an edge in its compactness when it comes to going digital. So that report has to be taken with some salt. (I spoke to a mid-level manager at Singapore Telecom and he said as much. This is an about face from not too long ago when big was regarded as better.) But I think the report is right on the money when it notes that while others are writing off equipment faster, the US is going in the opposite direction. This may be due to the recession but it does not bode well in the long term. Personally, I am bit concerned with the headlong rush here in Singapore into high-tech. Often, when I have spoken with those who are either implementing those ideas or who have dreamed them up, I leave with the unshakeable feeling that they do not really know what they are doing. Such feelings, however, cannot be captured in a report like the one above. ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? Organization: AT&T Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:41:31 GMT In article dcoskun@alias.com (Denis Coskun) writes: > Do telcos record the dialed digits for all local calls? > My back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that it is entirely > feasible for telcos to store the number of every single local call > that you dial: In a city with 1,000,000 phones, with an average of 10 > calls a day on each phone, and logging both origin and destination > phone numbers (7 digits each, so 14 ASCII characters), Minor quibble: phone numbers are almost always stored as ten digits, but are stored in BCD, so that the total size of the phone number is five octets. > such a log would consume just 1,000,000 * 10 * 14 = 140 Mbytes per > day. That would fit on a tape which costs less than $20. Of course, they also store a lot of other information, such as originating number, call start time, call end time, etc., etc., etc. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Subject: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:00:21 -0600 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu In June 1987, there was one of those high-profile murders, in Stillwater, that kept everybody talking for weeks. An 18-year-old girl who lived in a nice middle-class addition shot and stabbed both her parents to death, one night. The girl, initially told police that she had been out all night with her friends and had come home to find the bloody mess. According to our paper, one of the things that the police did was to ask Southwestern Bell for telephone records. Apparently, blood was found on a telephone and the police wanted to see who might have been called. All of this occurred about a month after Stillwater got its DMS100 switch. I don't know what the records showed, because the girl's story fell apart and she ended up essentially admitting to the murders. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there is some internal maintenance log of connections. We do not have measured service, here, but even the old Xbar switch printed logs of trouble reports. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:47:19 -0600 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu > 'in-use' light on the phone would be honored by most courteous people > who saw it illuminated for a few seconds when they arrived. PAT] That is, if they can see the light. The growing use of purely visual indicators on publicly accessible telephone equipment is a real scourge. I cringe every time I hear somebody singing the praises of some new payphone or other communications device containing a graphical screen or other visual indicator. That is just something else that will have to be fixed, at some time, or that will give grief or maybe even cause a dangerous situation for either a blind person or somebody else whose call gets stepped on because some blind person didn't get enough information about the system to use it properly. There have been light detectors for use with LED's and other types of signal lamps , for over 30 years. These things are easy to build and quite cheap. They have made most office phone systems accessible. The problem is that most blind people don't carry a light probe around with them. If they did, and came upon this signalling system for the first time, they would probably have been given instructions from the person they were visiting telling them how to use the phone but omitting the part about the in-use lamp since most people just don't think about things like that. A better solution for the hypothetical situation would be to have exclusionary switching on each phone so that if the line voltage is low, that phone can't be picked up. I believe that is how the devices work that prevent extension phones from being picked up when one is already in use. As for the big non-hypothetical problem, there is no easy answer, but we, as technical people, need to give it the college try. There will be more and more people with different handicaps in the work force. Solutions which fix one or two telephones, here or there, just won't solve the problem. The best solution will be to make sure that telecommunication facilities are as accessible to as many people as possible. A good title for a thread on this subject would be, "Why do you Have to See to Hear?" Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 20:42:03 -0600 From: Albert Crosby Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity In several of the recent issues, PAT has mentioned that it is stupid to use a plain telephone line for an apartment building security system. A poster or two have noted that the system is fairly common, and that it is less expensive to use the systems that use POTS. In SWBT territory, it at least was possible to have a POTS line _with_no_1+_long_distance_carrier. I had a good friend who used this as a cost control measure. (No teenagers, he and his wife just felt less inclined to make long distance calls if they had to dial on a card.) If you blocked 900 numbers, 976 numbers (and I guess in this day and age, 800 numbers) plus had no default LD carrier, is there any reason such a line wouldn't be suitable for a security system? Albert [Moderator's Note: No, provided the line also had Billed Number Screening, meaning collect and/or third number calls could not be billed to it, and provided security was not compromised (i.e. calls could get through without busy signals -- call waiting on each line -- and actual phone numbers could not be ascertained by listening to what was being dialed, and the door could not be tricked into unlatching by means of a pocket tone-decoder blown into the receiver). It might also be wise if the phone at the door (a) was non-pub in directory listings, (b) had a number not generally known except to people in management who need to know it, and (d) was set for one-way service, outgoing local calls only in the event someone did learn the phone number. To prevent the line from being used for social conversations from the lobby to an apartment or excessive units from being charged if it is a metered line, you might also consider a timer which would disconnect the line after 30 seconds or so of it going off hook. A special touchtone pad which went dead after the maximum number of digits required would be a good idea as would an armored handset ala payphone style to prevent the receiver from being liberated every week or two by vandals. Glue the ends of the receiver where they unscrew to avoid losing the mouth or earpiece innards to pranksters. Basically, making it like a payphone style handset or if possible, a speakerphone hidden behind a little slot people would speak into, with only the *metal* buttons of the touchtone pad protruding out of the wall would be best. Avoid the plastic touchtone pads if possible since people like to hold cigarette lighters up to them and melt the buttons, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pw@Panix.Com (Paul Wallich) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: Trivializers R Us Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:08:37 GMT In patlee@Panix.Com (Patrick Lee) writes: > eo@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Ed Oliveri) wrote: >> Are you sure this was Citibank? Every Citibank ATM I've seen >> CANNOT eat a card since the card is dipped into the card >> reader, never leaving the user's fingers. > Our Moderator Noted: >> The Citibank ATM's in Chicago eat the card for a minute and >> spit it out when finished with it. > I guess Chicago's Citibank has older ATM machines than we have here in > New York City. I haven't seen any Citibank ATM machine which eats the > card for the past few years. Just dip the card in and take it out and > proceed with answering which of the five languages to use. Actually it's the other way around. NYC Citibank ATM's are older than ATM's anywhere else becaue citi (whatever else their many myriad faults) had (one of) the first atm network(s). Back in the dim times, some marketing schlub discovered that people were afraid to hand their life savings (or card representing same) to a machine that would probably eat it. Citi harped on the safety of their system even though it required developing card-reader technology that wouldn't work with anybody else's cards. The amusing thing is that (at least up through a couple years ago) Citibank in NYC and Citibank in the rest of the country were two different entities, so that a card that worked at one place wouldn't work in the other, e.g. my NYC card wouldn't work in Berkeley. Even more fun, when the various cash-card networks got going (CIRRUS, NYCE &c), a situation developed where an out-of-state Citicard would work anywhere in New York _except_ at Citibank itself. Let's hear it for good network design. paul [Moderator's Note: Speaking of good opportunities for fraud, on my way home tonight, I passed a sidewalk ATM downtown which was beeping as I went past. I went to look at it, and the message on the screen said 'Do you need more time? yes ----> no ----> Mercy me, I said to myself, what have we here? A receipt sticking out of the little slot said *someone* had taken $50 and still had a balance of $32,000 in their account ... simple-minded fool that I am, I pressed the 'no' (I do not need more time) button, and of course a First National Banking Card (combination ATM and debit card here) popped out of the slot ... ooops! Mercy me, I said to myself, what did I do that for! :) Once the card had ejected, it was pointless to stand there putting it back in and trying to hack a passcode, particularly with that camera staring out at me snapping my picture. I took the card to the bank across the street, put it in a night deposit envelope with a note saying 'found loose by ATM, please return to owner' and dropped it in the slot. Riding home on the subway, I was able to feel morally superior and Socially Responsible about the whole incident which was a better way to feel than feeling like a stupid klutz. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:21:12 -0800 Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Reply-To: henry@ads.com From: Patrick Lee Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 18:33:21 -0500 (EST) > The Citibank ATM's in Chicago eat the card for a minute and > spit it out when finished with it. > I guess Chicago's Citibank has older ATM machines than we have here in > New York City. Actually, they have newer ones. Citibank was, I think, the first bank in the New York metro area to offer ATM cards ... and they designed all their own hardware (nobody else was doing it at the time). From day one, Citibank ATMs in New York did not have the possibility of retaining your card (they even used to advertise this fact ... some customers early on were wary of machines which "ate" the card for a while). Citibank banks in other parts of the country are different banks using what looks like any of the usual range of ATM machines available to banks everywhere. Some inaccuracies have probably crept in; it's been many years since This info was useful to me. # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / [Moderator's Note: We still have some machines of the type where you dip the card, and a few where you swipe it through a card reader, then imprint a receipt and take the receipt to a cashier for payout (at the grocery store.) PAT ------------------------------ From: Charles McGuinness Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 17:21:35 EST > At the end of the month I'm moving to a house that already has one > phone line installed, and having a second line turned on. > I have heard that there is a code I can dial into a phone that will > tell me what phone number that phone is connected to. There is such a secret code that works everywhere in your situation! You dial the phone number of your second phone line. The telephone company will give you a ringing tone if you are on your first line or a busy signal if you are on your second line. This is a little known feature, so don't spread the word or the phone company might discontinue it! ;-) ------------------------------ From: tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Reply-To: tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) Organization: Transaction Technology, Inc. Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:19:13 GMT In article , kwatson@netcom.com (Kennita Watson) writes: > At the end of the month I'm moving to a house that already has one > phone line installed, and having a second line turned on. > I have heard that there is a code I can dial into a phone that will > tell me what phone number that phone is connected to. Would somebody > please email me what it is? If there are other similar nifty codes, > I'd love to know those too. In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. 10732 is a private ATT network. I know that this number does return your area code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have read reports from others that it works elsewhere. It does add an "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from. Pete Tompkins tompkins@tti.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #37 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10748; 23 Jan 93 19:10 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22516 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 17:09:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00332 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 17:09:00 -0600 Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 17:09:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301232309.AA00332@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #38 TELECOM Digest Sat, 23 Jan 93 17:09:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 38 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson CCITT SDL Forum - Call For Papers (Joanna Patti) PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs (Glenn McComb) University Telephone System (David S. Greenberg) Integratel Forcing Charges Through (Thomas Brown) Question on Automatic Dialing Equipment and Laws (Jeremy Brest) Wiring For Multi-Lines on One Jack (Richard Osterberg) Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? (Paul Robinson) Any Good Books About ISDN and Telecommuting? (Tim Miller) Iridium Information (Christopher Ward) Government Open Systems Document For Comment (Tom Worthington) Voice Mail For Small PBXs (Halim S. Say) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: parkin@ihlpv.att.com Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 12:56 CST Subject: CCITT SDL Forum - Call For Papers Followup-To: joanna.patti@att.com Keywords: CCITT SDL telecomunications language Sixth CCITT SDL Forum Darmstadt, Germany 11 - 15 October 1993 CALL FOR PAPERS The International Telecommunications Union first published a standard for a Specification and Description Language (CCITT SDL) in the 1970's. Since then SDL has evolved to a language with a formal basis which is used throughout the world's telecommunications industry as the major language for software and systems engineering specification, design and description. Although the large user base needs SDL to be stable, enrichment to meet the changing demands of telecommunications engineering is also essential. Recently, the SDL-92 recommendation, which adds object-oriented features to SDL, has been completed. The SDL Forum was established so that all aspects of engineering involving SDL can be discussed at an international level. Based on previous Forums the expected audience is existing and potential users of SDL, suppliers of tools, and maintainers of the language. The Forum provides tutorials on SDL and a showcase for commercial and research tools and the opportunity to present and discuss new ideas. Papers on all aspects of SDL are solicited as well as papers on usage of SDL in combination with other notations, e.g. Message Sequence Chart, ASN.1, TTCN and programming languages. Objectives of the Forum Presentation of Papers Workshops for exchange of information and ideas Discussions of the evolution of SDL Tool demonstrations Tutorials on SDL (11 Oct.) Suggested Topics for Papers Use and Experience Application Reports Education and Training Testing, Verification and Validation Environments for SDL: tools and methods Methods, Methodologies, S/W Engineering Reuse of Specifications and Components Object Orientation Combining with other approaches Established and research-oriented tools Publication and Deadlines Papers are expected to be published as a North-Holland book for the Forum. Dates to be met are: Draft Paper: 15th February 1993 Acceptance Notified: 31st March 1993 Final Copy: 15th May 1993 Publication: 6th October 1993 Authors' Contact: Amardeo Sarma, Forschungs- und Technologiezentrum Postfach 10 00 03, W-6100 Darmstadt, Germany Telephone: +49 6151 83 2579 Facsimile: +49 6151 83 4590 Telex: 419511 ftz d email: sarma@fz.telekom.de Authors should send the paper title/scope as soon as possible. Information for authors will be sent in January or on contact. The participation fee (includes proceedings, excludes accommodation) is expected to be under 400DM, since the event is hosted on the premises of Bundespost, Telekom in Darmstadt, Germany. Darmstadt is only 25 km away from Frankfurt Airport (22 minutes by bus, which leaves every half-hour or 15 min by taxi) offering convenient traveling connections. An official CCITT SG X meeting on SDL is scheduled for October 19 - 28 in Geneva, offering a convenient coverage of both events for non-European CCITT-delegates. Programme Committee: Chairman: Ove Faergemand, TFL, Denmark (CCITT WP X/3 chairman); Local organizer: Amardeo Sarma, Telekom, Germany; Laura Cerchio, CSELT, Italy; Joachim Fischer, Humboldt Univ., Berlin, Germany; Dieter Hogrefe, Univ. of Berne, Switzerland; Maria Manuela Marques, INESC, Portugal; Michel Martin, France Telecom, France; Heinrich Nirschl, Alcatel-ELIN, Vienna, Austria; Anders Olsen, TFL, Denmark; Birger Moeller-Pedersen, Norwegian Computing Center,Norway; Rick Reed, TSE, UK; Heikko Sorgenfrei, Siemens, Germany. Corresponding Members: Kong E. Cheng, RMIT,Australia; Joao Franco, Telebras, Brazil; Lindsay Jackson, Singapore Polytechnic, Singapore; Audris Kalnins, Latvian State Univ., Latvia; Evan Magill, Univ. of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK; Joanna Patti, AT&T Bell Lab, USA; Anders Rockstroem, Televerket, Sweden; Behcet Sarikaya, Bilkent Univ., Ankara, Turkey; Yasushi Wakahara, Kokusai Denshin Denwa, Japan; Shem J. Ochuodho, Univ. of Nairobi, Kenya. Please copy and widely distribute this document. It is also available is a LaTeX document from Amardeo Sarma. A North American contact for any questions or issues is: Joanna Patti AT&T Bell Laboratories 263 Shuman Blvd. P. O. Box 3050 IHP 2F-545 Naperville IL 60566-7050 tel: (708) 713-5346 fax: (708) 713-7963 email: joanna.patti@att.com ------------------------------ From: gmccomb@netcom.com (Glenn McComb) Subject: PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 08:10:15 GMT Hello! I'm trying to find out how to dial from my (408) to (415) and (510) via my preferred carrier (MCI). When I dial 10222 (MCI access) and then a 415 number, a recording tells me "it is not necessary to use your carrier" or something like that. What they mean is that they are trapping the call and requiring me to pay 0.25/minute for a ten-mile call!!! I know that most states have made this predatory bulls--t illegal, but what is the status on the other states? I'm being strung up by PacBell in California. BTW, MCI would charge me 0.13 + 0.11 for the same call! Any ideas? Thanks. [Moderator's Note: I believe under the tariffs, your local telco, (in this case Pac Bell) has the right to keep that traffic for itself, and there is some question in my mind if MCI is lawfully allowed to handle intra-lata calls between 415/408/510. In reference to the rates you quoted for MCI, I think you mean they would charge those rates for a call of that distance -- provided it was an *inter*-lata call. AT&T also charges 12-13 cents per minute on interstate calls during off-peak hours, but they are not technically allowed to handle intra-lata calls either. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mgreeny@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (David S. Greenberg) Subject: University Telephone System Date: 23 Jan 1993 01:01:25 -0600 Organization: Greeny's Bar & Grill Hi all. At the university I attend/work at, one is able to apply for a four digit code which allows one to make long distance calls by dialing 1,xxxx,AC + 7D (where xxxx is the code...). This then goes out over some outgoing WATs line I suppose, etc. Usually the service isn't too bad, and it's not super expensive, but there are two things that are irritating: 1) Each time a bill is sent to someone, they're charged a 35 cent billing fee. 2) If one wants to call 900 numbers with a code, one has to ask for the 900 number access to be enabled for the code, and be willing to pay a 10% surcharge on top of whatever the regular 900 number cost is. My question is thus "Is it legal for the University to do either or both of the above?", and/or are such actions covered by some tariff(s) somewhere? (or rules, laws, regulations, guidelines, etc...). Also, I've noticed that it's impossible to dial a 900 number with a calling card (I wanted to call a mail order computer store one day that's what this all stems from). Asking Sprint, MCI, or AT&T garnered the response that the 900 calls have the potential to be more costly than an overseas call, so they've been blocked, and ONE can not equest that access be granted. Doesn't this violate something related to equal access? Finally (yes, this is more than I mentioned), can the University be required to allow "dial-1" access from a phone in which the individual room resident gets to choose his/her long distance carrier of choice rather than being forced to deal with the University run system? Thanks in advance, Microcomputer Support Specialist, Student Residential Programs Western Illinois University, Macomb, IL 61455 Internet: mgreeny@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (preferred) GEnie: GREENY (once a month) AOL: GREENY1@AOL.COM (really infrequently....use the internet!) [Moderator's Note: The person, organization, company or institution ultimatly responsible for the payment of the bills gets a lot of leeway in deciding how to run things. There is very little they *have* to give you at all. The 35 cent billing fee they charge is about half of what some telcos add as a surcharge to calling card calls. Your four digit PIN essentially functions like a calling card. Where most telcos will not allow 900-number calls on calling cards, your school is willing to do it provided you pay a surcharge for the extra paperwork involved. It seems to me you have a much better deal than some universities give their students. Read the message from Thomas Brown which follows next in this issue to see *why* some places will not allow '900-style' calls to be billed to credit cards. While his case deals with the workaround to 900 blocking which involves being called back 'collect', the problem remains the same. There are too many disputes involved; no one wants to be in the middle of it. If your university is willing to do it for a ten percent surcharge, then you've got a good deal, I think. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Thomas Brown Subject: Integratel Forcing Charges Through Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 20:42:31 GMT Organization: Lehigh University Our room was recently billed for $90 worth of collect calls from Integratel despite the fact that Lehigh University supposedly traps collect calls to student rooms. Lehigh claims that Integratel must not subscribe to the database of phone exchanges not to allow collect calls through. Lehigh has been unable to figure out how to contact Integratel and is, therefore, passing the charges on to us. What can I do to protect my rights in this case? Is it lawful for a company to bill me for something which I did not request or accept and not provide me with information on how to contact the billing company to dispute the bill? Lehigh says that they just pay Bell of PA in one lump sum and that Bell of PA passes on the money to the individual long distance companies. Bell of PA would not provide me with any useful information on how to contact Integratel. I have read several threads of discussion in the past on this newsgroup regarding questionable billing practices and tactics by Integratel and I wonder if anyone has come up with any more information that I might use and/or pass on to the Deptartment of Telecommunications at Lehigh. Thanks much, Thomas Brown, KA2UGQ Internet: twb0@lehigh.edu Lehigh University UC Box 855 UUCP: ..!uunet!lehigh.edu!twb0 Bethlehem, PA 18015 AX.25: ka2ugq@ka2ugq.nj.usa.na [Moderator's Note: The telephone bill each month lists the charges from each LD carrier on a page (or more) of its own. There should be a page in the billing from telco entitled "Integratel", and a phone number to reach that company for questions. Integratel can in turn tell you the name/address/phone number for their client. Reaching that client is not always an easy task, but it can be done. For starters, your university telecom person should note the number for Integratel from the page in the telephone billing where it appears. They should then notify Integratel and the local telco that the charges are disputed and will not be paid. They will get to fight with Integratel for a couple months on this subject before the charges are finally removed. Since you are not Bell of PA's customer (the university is), Bell of PA need not discuss anything with you, but they might at least have given you Integratel's phone number for customer service. Integratel does maintain its own data base of numbers to which no collect or third number calls should be billed and when you speak with their representative, they'll add you to that data base on request. But let's face it; you, or someone with access to the phone in your room did agree to accept collect charges, in all probability from an 'adult service', since that is the kind of thing Integratel's clients deal in for the most part. It might have been from a COCOT, but $90 seems a bit steep for a regular long distance call. It seems a bit steep for the other kind also, but who am I to decide what gets a person off? :) We all can sympathize with having to pay after the fun is over though; that always has been the hard part of those late night or early morning transactions. By the way, the toll free number (how else would you want to call them!) for Integratel is 800-736-7500. Tell your complaint to the representative who answers. Your telecom administrator might want to call and get all the school numbers blocked. Yours won't be the first call Integratel has received from young men who were similarly situated (or dirty old men for that matter), nor will it be the last. Next time, read the fine print closer in the ad or listen to the message played out when you first call! :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: jeremy@cs.swarthmore.edu (Jeremy Brest) Subject: Question on Automatic Dialing Equipment and Laws Organization: Swarthmore College Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 00:05:20 GMT Does anyone know about any successful applications of the Federal statute restrincting the use of automatic telephone dialing systems? Any reasons to think that successful application would be difficult? The statute is 47 USC 227, for those interested. I can't find any appellate level decisions citing it. Please reply by e-mail. Thanks, Jeremy Brest / 824 San Francisco Court / Stanford, CA 94305 / 415-322-1728 ------------------------------ From: osterber@husc8.harvard.edu Subject: Wiring For Multi-Lines on One Jack Date: 23 Jan 93 01:06:06 GMT Here at Harvard, "they" a few years ago (I'm a freshman) wired each dorm room with new telephone jacks. Each wall plate has a "voice jack" and a "Data jack", with the data one reserved for future use in a campus network that's in the works. Anyway, the voice jack is a standard modular jack, except that it has eight leads on it. They're each setup for only one line (on a CENTREX system), and I can plug in my one line phone with a regular two-lead modular cord. I want them to install another line, and I'm making progess. It seems there's no reason that this jack can't handle four lines on eight leads, correct? Can someone give me a quick outline as to how the standard modular jack is wired. I suspect that each line starts with the middle two leads, and branches outward with line four using the two outside leads. Can someone give me a hint? Thanks. Rick ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 06:41:46 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Subject: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? A TELECOM Digest reader asked me if there was a way to get a list of Internet news lists he could subscribe to. Here is a copy of the reply I sent him: It depends on whether your system charges you for incoming mail. If they don't (or you don't mind paying the charges, which could be as high as US $12 or more at the typical outrageous 5c/K some X.400 services like Sprintmail can get away with for charges), and you can receive a *large* message (250K) then send a message with the following text (subject is ignored): LIST GLOBAL To the following internet address: LISTSERV@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU This will send you the "List of Lists" of what mailing lists that are available from Bitnet. Including lists that peer each other (where the list runs out of two or more sites to reduce network overhead) there are about 3200 lists, 2500 of which are probably different, ranging from the APL language (APL-L) to the ZWriter Users group (ZWSUG). Internet doesn't have any trouble sending a file this large because I got it via MCI Mail once. I once E-Mailed myself (via Internet) a single file to MCI Mail that was 840K. It received it and MCI Mail allowed me to download it. Someone else may have the list of Internet based subscribable lists, I know there is one I just don't know who makes it. I will CC this message to TELECOM Digest and allow the readers there to give some insight. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: timothy@eddie.rmnug.org Subject: Any Good Books About ISDN and Telecommuting? Organization: Rocky Mountain NeXT Users' Group Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:17:41 GMT Are there any good resources available that discuss ISDN and it's relationship to telecommuting? I'm interested in developing a list of applications that would support a telecommuter. Are there any good journals dedicated to this or related topics. Tim Miller, Boulder, CO timothy@eddie.rmNUG.org [NeXTmail accepted] ------------------------------ From: wardc@eng.auburn.edu (Christopher Ward) Subject: Iridium Information Wanted Date: 23 Jan 93 17:28:40 GMT Organization: Auburn University Engineering I have been gathering some technical data about Motorola's Iridium system, and I am having some problems correlating some of the available data: From the {IEEE Spectrum} issues of February 1992 (pages 20-33): Iridium uses the L-band (1610-1626.5 MHz) for bidirectional communication between the LEO (Low Earth Orbit) satellites and the portable phone units. Communication between satellites (crosslinks) and between a satellite and the Earth-based gateway stations (uplink/downlink) occurs in the Ka band: Crosslink: 22.5-23.5 GHz Uplink: 18.8-20.2 GHz Downlink: 27.5-30.0 GHz These gateways support 1300 user channels in the baseline design at 4800 kbps. Basically the aggregate data rate requirements of the up/down links are in the order of 1300 x 4800 = 6.24 Mbps. So what I see (maybe I am missing something) is an approximate bandwidth of 1 GHz in the up/down links allocated to support data rates that "seem" to be well below the actual capabilities of those connections. Does anybody see an obvious explanation to this? (6.24 Mbps <======> 1 Ghz bandwidth) ? Is the Ka band being currently utilized for other satellite communications? (i.e. Geosynchronous satellites) ? Thanks, SdlC ------------------------------ From: tomw@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Tom Worthington) Subject: Government Open Systems Document for Comment Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 04:20:25 GMT The Australian government has issued a draft Open Systems standards document for your comment by 12 February 1993. The document available via the Internet. For further details see the "aus.acs" or "comp.protocols.iso" newsgroup. Tom Worthington Director of the Community Affairs Board Australian Computer Society Incorporated E-Mail: tomw@adfa.oz.au ------------------------------ From: ssay@prefect.cc.bellcore.com (say,halim s) Subject: Voice Mail For Small PBXs Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 19:02:16 GMT How can I get product information on multi-line answering machine/voice mail equipment that can be connected to small PBXs? Would that be in a trade journal? A special issue perhaps? Thanks for your reply, SABiT SAY ssay@cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #38 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18246; 23 Jan 93 23:41 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22482 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:27:20 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16863 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:26:32 -0600 Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:26:32 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301240326.AA16863@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #39 TELECOM Digest Sat, 23 Jan 93 21:26:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 39 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Dave Levenson) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Jim Gottlieb) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Steve Forrette) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Bruce Sullivan) Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (John Higdon) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Dan Danz) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Jim Gottlieb) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Actually ATMs) (Joe Konstan) Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International Chat Line Service) (D Burstein) Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International Chat Line Service) (Tom Ace) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Timothy Hu) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Ronal Thompson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 15:01:26 GMT Regarding apartment security systems, Pat writes (in part): > [Moderator's Note: All the landlord needs is a few long distance calls > made from that phone to demonstrate a 'regular phone line' is NOT a > cheaper way to go. Some landlords may even be too stupid to have those > phones blocked from 900/976/incoming calls... Where my parents live, the entrance phone translates a two-digit tenant number into a seven-digit POTS number, pulse-dials the number, and allows the tenant to unlock the door by a DTMF signal. The line is arranged for pulse-dialing only (which is why the phone uses pulses) and the transmitter is not enabled until dialing is complete. There is no switchook. Entry of the tenant-code causes the phone to go off-hook, pulse-dial, and then enable the transmitter. There appears to be no opportunity to enter tone-dialed digits, or to introduce additional pulses, or even to get the CO dialtone, other than the obvious possibility of physically intercepting the CO pair between the phone and the demarc. Tenants are encouraged to get call-waiting service, to reduce (but not eliminate) the busy-signal problem. The only obvious security hole here is the call-forwarding hole, and even that is under the control of the tenant. If I lived there, I'd much rather have that risk than have some strange CPE that is not under my own direct control sit between my telephone set and my CO loop. Wouldn't you? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 [Moderator's Note: Well Dave, I'm not sure if I would or not. This would be purely an applications problem, and depend on several things. Since I keep my modems on a line totally separate from my 'voice' line, a call-waiting signal from the door would not influence the connection. As for a 'strange CPE that is not under your control', it is really designed to be transparent and I think the advantages out- weigh the disadvantages. To be sure, you cannot control the call- waiting, even if you otherwise have it turned off with *70. You cannot forward the calls, even if your phone is otherwise being forwarded. You can of course unplug the phone or turn off the bell in order to avoid the disturbance. On the plus side however, if you otherwise hate call-waiting and do not want it on the line for ordiinary phone usage, you still get the flexibility of responding to the front door without having to stay off the phone for some period of time when visitors are expected. You can forward phone calls while allowing visitors at the front door to leave a message on a cheap answering machine installed just for the purpose of picking up calls from the door. If front door calls were allowed to be call-forwarded, there is always the risk the place to where calls are forwarded would be busy. At least with an answering machine which answers the door (use one of those devices which listens to the ring and forwards to a device, i.e. fax, modem, etc to keep the answering machine from responding to regular calls) when you are gone, people could be given some message about 'I am busy now and can't receive visitors'; they would not be told you were on the other side of town somewhere and not possibly able to get home prior to them burglarizing your place and escaping at their leisure. So, you have to define your specific requirements to detirmine if a 'strange CPE in the line' is the way to go or not. Overall, I prefer the stand-alone units. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 19:37:05 GMT > [Moderator's Note: All the landlord needs is a few long distance calls > made from that phone to demonstrate a 'regular phone line' is NOT a > cheaper way to go. Some landlords may even be too stupid to have those > phones blocked from 900/976/incoming calls, Time to check the statute of limitations again ... I've had a lot of fun with these things over the years. Back in high school (1978), some friends and I saw one for the first time. We ordered Call Forwarding on that line and took turns forwarding it to ourselves so that we could have a line from that rate area. In fact, I still had it forwarding to myself until about 1990, when I guess they got suspicious about the large number of local calls on their bill. And in the building I now live in, I used to have the line for the entrance phone wired into my apartment. I used it exclusively as a "wake-up line". That was the one phone that would ring while I sleep and the phone system is in "Night Mode". I didn't make calls on it, and it seemed silly to pay for a line that may be used once every month when someone needs to wake me up. Alas, GTE discovered it one day and turned me in to the office of the building. Now I use a pocket pager to wake me up at night. Now what about that lonely line for the payphone in the lobby that no one ever uses ... :-) Jim Gottlieb E-Mail: jimmy@denwa.info.com In Japan: jimmy@info.juice.or.jp V-Mail: +1 310 551 7702 Fax: 478-3060 Voice: 824-5454 [Moderator's Note: You get caught tapping a payphone line (or running an extension of it in secret to somewhere) and you might go to jail. At least Illinois Bell takes that quite seriously. What would you do, use that line to get incoming calls only? You certainly cannot deposit coins for an outgoing call :). How would you deal with being on the phone talking to someone when a legitimate user in the lobby picked up the receiver to make a call? I guess it would be good for quick (and free) calls to directory assistance. Years ago as a young teenager, my uncle owned a drug store with a payphone, and a regular phone back at the pharmacy counter. He had a two-line, turn-button phone with the business line on one side of the button, and an extension to the semi- public payphone on the other side. (Extensions *are* legal on semi-public payphones, but the polarity used to be reversed so you could answer, but not dial out on the payphone extension.) In those days, pay phones had ground start lines and the coin dropping down the slot caused a contact to connect ground to the tip for just a second. I fixed things up so the third position on the turn button phone (momentary press down and release) applied the needed ground to the pay phone line and this allowed outgoing calls without a coin. It took about two days for telco to send an Inspector out to the store to snoop around. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity Date: 23 Jan 1993 02:21:25 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA > [Moderator's Note: It might also be wise if the phone at the door > (a) was non-pub in directory listings, (b) had a number not generally > known except to people in management who need to know it, and (d) was > set for one-way service, outgoing local calls only in the event > someone did learn the phone number. To prevent the line from being > used for social conversations from the lobby to an apartment or > excessive units from being charged if it is a metered line, you might > also consider a timer which would disconnect the line after 30 seconds > or so of it going off hook. The entry phone where I used to live was an armored type that connected to a POTS line and dialed your regular phone number. It disconnected the call after 60 seconds. One day, I was looking for some phun, so I decided to investigate further. I took my cordless phone and pocket dialer down to the entry phone. I punched in the 2-digit code assigned to me, and when my cordless phone rang, I answered the call then immediately hang up. The entry phone did not detect the CPC pulse, and after 20 seconds or so, there was dialtone on the entry phone. Although the pad was disabled, I could use my pocket dialer to dial anywhere I wanted (by the time I dialed the call and it was set up, there was only 25 seconds or so for the called party to answer and talk before the phone's timer expired and it hang up; but I could do this over and over if I wanted to). I did not think to try to call 900 or 976 numbers. Pacific Bell does not offer any sort of toll restriction, except for Centrex customers (at least to my knowledge), so I could place toll calls. I called the local ANAC number, and discovered the number for its line. Then, I called the entry phone from my cordless phone to see what would happen. The "in-use" light came one while the call was ringing, but it did not ring, and you could not pick up the line while the in-use light was on. So, this unit apparently was designed to share the line with other such units, or other devices. Also, I'd like to take issue with the Moderator's opinion on which type of system is the "better" kind. I much prefer the stand-alone unit that uses a POTS line to dial the residents' regular phone numbers. One reason is that if a computer is using the line, I don't want the CPE-generated "call waiting" to interrupt. If I specifically disable call waiting via *70, I don't want the call interrupted, period. Also, the POTS line units will honor any call forwarding I have enabled. Several times, I would have visitors arrive and call up to my unit. I had my line forwarded to my cellular number, so I'd answer their call from my car. I could then tell them that I'm just a few minutes away, and will be there shortly, or whatever the case was. The hard-wired units won't honor call forwarding, so the caller would get the answering machine, and may leave even though I was almost home. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: See my response to Dave Levinson earlier in this issue. This is really an applications problem each person has to solve for themselves. A stand-alone unit may or may not be better for your needs, depending. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 20:05 GMT From: Bruce Sullivan Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity > [Moderator's Note: I am rather surprised that this system actually > dialed a seven-digit phone number. Most such arragements simply seize > the pair at some point between the CO and the tenant to (1) temporar- > ily disconnect the wire from the CO and (2) impose their own battery > and ringing current on the line. Under the system where your in-law (rest of message deleted....) I was relatively unfamiliar with/naive about these systems when I had an interesting experience a couple years ago with one which *did* dial a seven-digit number. I received a call at work from a rather confused person who was standing at the front door of an apartment building about three miles away. Seems they'd punched in the access code for their friends' apartment and got me instead. I suppose the building management must have had a finger check when the input the number. I got the tenants phone number & actually tried to transfer the call to them. Couldn't do that for some reason, but I did call her up and say, "This is Bruce at such-and-so company. Bob is waiting for you at the front door and you should let your manager know that there's a problem." Frankly, 'Bob' and the tenant took it in stride. I think *I* was a bit more taken aback at the time than they were. I was unfamiliar with the workings of these systems. Since then, I've lived in a number of buildings which had similar systems -- all of which required the use of my phone *and* seven-digit number (and, subsequently, call-waiting). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jan 93 10:47 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity Albert Crosby writes: > If you blocked 900 numbers, 976 numbers (and I guess in this day and > age, 800 numbers) plus had no default LD carrier, is there any reason > such a line wouldn't be suitable for a security system? What about intraLATA calls not carried by an IXC? Does SWBT agree to block calls that generate revenue for itself? And what about carrier codes? I have a number of lines with no default carrier, but any company that allows casual calling is happy to put the call through and bill the number. How about charges for DA? How about charges for emergency intercept or verification placed through the SWBT operator? Tell you what: you put an ordinary telephone set on any line that has dial tone one it from SWBT and let me have a crack at it. I'll take you to dinner if I cannot run up some kind of extra charge on it. 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: John points out the best reason of all for using a stand-alone unit instead of a POTS line. Even the most secure of the front door POTs lines still have little chinks in the armor for use by people who know what they are doing, and that is all it takes. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dan@phoenix.az.stratus.com (Dan Danz) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Date: 23 Jan 1993 01:28:32 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA Quite some years ago, in my previous job, I travelled frequently to New York City with a co-worker who, everytime we passed an ATM of a certain brand and model, would walk up to it and punch in a few numbers. You know, sort of like the people that absent-mindedly open the coin-return door on a payphone. After a few times, I got curious and asked why he made the effort. He said that he had worked for the manufacturer of that particular ATM during college. His job was at the end of the assembly line; he tested the bill dispenser by entering the secret code for supervisor state and then entering a diagnostic code that made the dispenser cycle through the dispense cycle as fast as it could go. He just _KNEW_ he'd find an ATM where somebody had left it in supervisor state after doing some work on it ... If he ever does, there'll be a snowstorm of bills coming out. He never would tell ME the code, though. L. W. "Dan" Danz (WA5SKM) VOS Mail: Dan_Danz@vos.stratus.com Sr Consulting Software SE NeXT Mail: dan@az.stratus.com Customer Assistance Center Voice Mail/Pager: (602) 852-3107 Telecommunications Division Customer Service: (800) 828-8513 Stratus Computer, Inc. 4455 E. Camelback #115-A, Phoenix AZ 85018 ------------------------------ From: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 19:25:41 GMT In article henry@ads.com writes: > Citibank banks in other parts of the country are different banks using > what looks like any of the usual range of ATM machines available to > banks everywhere. The Citibanks here often use a nifty ATM built by Transactional Technologies (owned by Citibank). These use a touch-screen running under the X windowing system. However, due to banking regulations, Transactional Technologoes is not allowed to sell these to other banks. Some rule about banks not being in the bank equipment business. Jim Gottlieb E-Mail: jimmy@denwa.info.com In Japan: jimmy@info.juice.or.jp V-Mail: +1 310 551 7702 Fax: 478-3060 Voice: 824-5454 ------------------------------ From: Joe Konstan Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 11:06:26 CST Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (actually ATMs) In TELECOM Digest V13 #37, Henry Mensch writes about the Citibank ATMs in Chicago vs. New York: > Actually, they have newer ones. Citibank was, I think, the first bank > in the New York metro area to offer ATM cards ... and they designed > all their own hardware (nobody else was doing it at the time). From > day one, Citibank ATMs in New York did not have the possibility of > retaining your card (they even used to advertise this fact ... some > customers early on were wary of machines which "ate" the card for a > while). Almost. Citibank was far from first, but they did become the biggest based on ATMs. Two elements in the story are interesting (though their Telecom relevance is somewhat minimal): First, in NYC at least, the earliest "Cash Machines" were just cash machines -- no other banking. At Dollar Savings Bank you would have to open a special, non-interest bearing account, which always needed to have either 200 or 300 dollars in it AFTER any withdrawl (or it would eat your card). They put in a couple of machines at the branches, and as best I could tell the machines were completely off-line. They recorded information on your card and reconciled balances and transactions at the end of the day. Not long thereafter, larger banks started moving into real ATMs. Chemical Bank (where I later worked) was both proud and chagrined by the fact that it had the first ATMs of the major banks in NYC. Chagrined because of what a smaller bank by the name of First National City Bank did. And here is the second part of the story. First National City Bank, which was not, at the time, in the top 5 banks, seized on the idea of ATMs and 24 hour service. They changed their name to Citibank and armed themselves with the slogan "The Citi Never Sleeps." Soon, Citibank ATMs were everywhere and they left the competition in the dust. In an industry with tremendous consumer inertia, Citibank pulled off one of the biggest coups of all time. Much later, a number of other NYC banks put together NYCE (the New York Cash Exchange), a local network of ATMs that was designed to counter Citibank's predominance in the ATM business. While this is less important now, with the high degree of interconnectivity, I believe that NYCE transactions are still generally made without ATM fees. There are other stories involved in home banking (with which I was involved at Chemical), the Atari 400, and related topics, but I'll save those for another time. Joe Konstan konstan@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ From: dannyb@Panix.Com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service) Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 15:00:52 GMT In TELECOM Moderator noted in response to awry!tom@hercules.aptix.com (Tom Ace): > Try 10333 + 0 and ask the operator who she is ... betcha she'll say > AT&T, because your system kicked you over there when you thought > otherwise. Please let us know the results of your further testing. PAT] Or, in most cases, you could try 10xxx-1-700-555-4141 10xxx-0-700-555-4141 to get the automated notice of long distance carrier. dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 09:36:40 PST From: awry!tom@hercules.aptix.com (Tom Ace) Subject: Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service) Yesterday, I had success calling 702 333 8444 when preceded by 10333; our Moderator had these comments: > [Moderator's Note: I *know* two things happened. Someone is taking > your 10333 and either ignoring it and handing it off one plus by > default to AT&T or changing it to 10288 which is another way of > getting Mother. ... > ... Are you in control of your 10xxx assertions when you dial, or is > some PBX/COCOT/other private system making those decisions whether you > like it or not ... or indeed even if you know it or not? Try 10333 + 0 > and ask the operator who she is ... betcha she'll say AT&T, because > your system kicked you over there when you thought otherwise. Please > let us know the results of your further testing. PAT] I had placed the call yesterday on a PacBell residential POTS line (415-821); there was no PBX to screen the 10333. Today, it doesn't work the same way -- I get a recording saying I need to use AT&T to reach the number. I made calls to PacBell and Sprint to ask about all this, and Sprint told me there had been fiber outages which affected service in my area yesterday (not implausible given the amount of rain we've had over the past few weeks). Indeed, I had to try twice to get through yesterday -- I got an "all circuits are busy" recording the first time I placed the call. The PacBell rep was fascinated to hear about a number that could only be reached by AT&T, but she assured me that PacBell would always honor my 10333 request. I wonder if that's true in all cases; does anyone know whether it's common for an LEC to ignore 10xxx codes when there are service outages associated with a long distance carrier (or for any other reason)? If PacBell didn't route my call to AT&T yesterday, then did Sprint do it? Tom Ace tom@aptix.com [Moderator's Note: Perhaps due to the outage, Sprint was automatically transferring some of their overflow traffic to AT&T. It happens. PAT] ------------------------------ From: timhu@ico.isc.com (Timothy Hu) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Boulder CO Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 18:01:06 GMT In article tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes: > that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. 10732 is a > private ATT network. I know that this number does return your area > code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have > read reports from others that it works elsewhere. It does add an > "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from. I tried it here in Boulder. It works! Timothy Hu timhu@ico.isc.com | The intelligence (or lack of) expressed Interactive Systems Corporation | above does not necessarily reflect Resource Solutions International | that of anyone else. ------------------------------ From: ronal@telebit.com (Ronal Thompson) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 18:05:37 GMT tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes: > In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted > that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. 10732 is a > private ATT network. I know that this number does return your area > code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have > read reports from others that it works elsewhere. It does add an > "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from. Works from 408, but I dialed from my DID number, and got the right area code and prefix, but some strange suffix. Maybe our trunk? Ron ronal@telebit.com These ain't no opinions but my own! R.THOMPSON65 GEnie MJWG99A Prodigy and remember, what you think of me is none of my business ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #39 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19425; 24 Jan 93 0:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17332 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:20:51 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14802 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:20:19 -0600 Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:20:19 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301240420.AA14802@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #40 TELECOM Digest Sat, 23 Jan 93 22:20:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 40 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Dan Danz) Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Mark Williams) Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Lonnie Filbrun) Re: MF Signaling Test Gear (Macy Hallock) Re: MF Signaling Test Gear (Daniel Drucker) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Tom Perrine) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Dave Rand) Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug (Kenneth Crudup) Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug (Jim Knight) Re: Alteration of Ring Cadence (Glen Ecklund) Re: Alteration of Ring Cadence (Rich Greenberg) Re: Modem Dial Lines and Problems (Tim Gorman) Re: Modem Dial Lines and Problems (Tom Hitchcock) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dan@phoenix.az.stratus.com (Dan Danz) Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? Date: 24 Jan 1993 01:00:26 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com writes: > Is it possible under the IXO/TAP protocol, or any companies' > interpretations of it, to detect whether or not a particular pager > number can receive text pages? [...] > But sometimes those error messages are helpful. For example, if it's > an invalid pager ID, you get a message that says so, so I search the > return strings for "INVALID PAGER" and if I find it, don't bother > retrying. > Now what I'd really like, is for the paging computer to detect that > I'm trying to send an alphabetic page to a numeric-only pager and give > me a with an error message that says so. Does anybody do this? > Would this be a reasonable thing to ask the folks at Cybertel and/or > Skytel to support? If I send Skytel "**12345", I get back **12345 ... INVALID NUMERIC MESSAGE ... ENTER NUMERIC MESSAGE:> However, since when did SkyTel start using IXO/TAP? I'm currently talking to them using their menu-driven PC connection that is definitely not IXO/TAP, which I would prefer. L. W. "Dan" Danz (WA5SKM) VOS Mail: Dan_Danz@vos.stratus.com Sr Consulting Software SE NeXT Mail: dan@az.stratus.com Customer Assistance Center Voice Mail/Pager: (602) 852-3107 Telecommunications Division Customer Service: (800) 828-8513 Stratus Computer, Inc. 4455 E. Camelback #115-A, Phoenix AZ 85018 ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jan 1993 18:29:40 +0000 (GMT) From: williams@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu (Mark Williams) Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? Organization: Texas Christian University Is there an online version of the IXO/TAP standard for alpha pagers? (Of the documentation, that is.) Mark Williams williams@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu ------------------------------ From: lfil@athos.az.stratus.com (Lonnie Filbrun) Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? Date: 23 Jan 1993 13:11:02 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA Hello, As a tech from *S W*ST Paging I used all models of BBL 3, 3r, 4x, DSS 1, Glenayre GL3000L, M, S, UniPage, and also Motorola paging terminals. Like mentioned before the most common action is to parse the alphanumeric data entered and only transmit numerics giving no indication of the intent to send alpha to a numeric display pager. ---------------------from IXO/TAP protocol--------------------- The response to each block is one of four: 1. "" OK, send next block. 2. "" Checksum or transmission error, send last block again. 3. "" Abandon current transaction and go to next. may occur when the checksum is OK, but the current transation violates a system rule. 4. "" Begin disconnect. Any of the responses may have an optional message sequence before them, although the system designer should understand the consequences to the user with all planned entry devices. It is expected that many systems will save their message sequence responses until immediately before disconnect. For some entry devices, it may also be desirable that messages describing non-checksum errors associated with a particular transaction in a PG service will begin with the letter ID followed by the contents of field 1 for that transaction. After reception of an or for the last transaction in a given service, the entry device sends meaning there are no more transactions remaining in this service. An optional message sequence may be sent at this time to indicate the degree of acceptability of information in all transactions received during the current interchange. Although optional, this message is highly desirable. example: 1 PAGE(S) SENT. An should be sent at this point if the paging central finds any data in step 8 (step 8 is where it sends the one of four responses) by the system to be unacceptable because of content (eg, an invalid pager number or a message field inappropriate for the type of pages, etc. see #2) ( #2 It is most desirable to catch all types of errors in step 8, but practically, some systems will be too slow to catch content errors as they happen.) ------------------------ Using a datascope, you might want to experiment trying to send invalid pager numbers, alphanumerics to a "known" numeric pager and check the output of the last step above for it may tell you something useful. As to getting the terminals manufacturer to upgrade their code to implement a fix, hope you want to buy alot of paging terminals!!! :-) Hope this helps! Regards, Lonnie #import ----------< NeXT Mail Welcome >------- Lonnie L. Filbrun Lonnie_Filbrun@vos.stratus.com (SOS Mail) Stratus Computer, Inc. lfil@az.stratus.com (NeXT Mail) Customer Assistance Center (602) 858-3152 (Voice Mail) Telecommunications Division (602) 231-9447 (Alphanumeric Access#) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 19:54 EST From: macy@fmsys.fmsystm.ncoast.org (Macy Hallock) Subject: Re: MF Signaling Test Gear Organization: F M Systems Medina, Ohio USA In article is written: > Bob Turner writes: >> Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT >> DTMF) signalling? If size is not too important, I'd consider used central office toll test gear. I know of at least two companies that buy and sell this stuff that they get from the telco's as surplus from C.O. upgrades. Their are also instrument resale companies that sell at hamfests that carry used telco C.O. test equipment. Pricing is very flexible. Much of the equipment is W.E., Northeast Elecronics, H.P., W&G and the like. Most of the units are -48 VDC powered (rather than powered from 110 VAC). Its a good idea to know what you want and something about the models/specs. The sellers don't know very much about this stuff, they're just salvage brokers. I've seen a lot of the Northeast and HP MF test units for sale for $100 to $400. Macy Hallock N8OBG +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 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: MF Signaling Test Gear From: mertwig!daniel@uunet.UU.NET (Daniel Drucker) Reply-To: Daniel Drucker Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 17:06:02 EST Organization: Abnormalities of Reality rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP writes: > Bob Turner writes: >> Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT >> DTMF) signalling? It can be for two or four wire circuits. I know >> such a device exists, I just don't know who manufactures it. > Several transmission test sets will generate MF. The Ameritec AM-48 > ($3k) and AM-44 ($2k) both do. At least one of Ameritec's Why pay thousands when you can purchase something like a portable Commodore 64 or some other old computer with a sound chip and make the tones on that? I have a [cr|h]acker's program for the C-64 that does everything from MF to ST/KP to TASI. Daniel Drucker N2SXX daniel%mertwig@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ From: tep@tots.Logicon.COM (Tom Perrine) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Date: 23 Jan 93 21:11:37 GMT Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California In article tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes: > In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted > that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. 10732 is a > private ATT network. I know that this number does return your area > code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have > read reports from others that it works elsewhere. It does add an > "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from. It works from 619, I called from behind our PBX and it returned the outgoing trunk number ... Tom E. Perrine (tep) | tep@Logicon.COM |Voice: +1 619 597 7221 Logicon, Inc. | sun!suntan!tots!tep | or : +1 619 455 1330 4010 Sorrento Valley Blvd| | FAX: +1 619 552 0729 San Diego CA 92121-1498 ------------------------------ From: dlr@daver.bungi.com (Dave Rand) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 10:26:37 PST Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes If you have the AT&T EasyReach 700 service, you can use the on-line redirection facility to allow you to determine the number you are calling from. Up util about three months ago, it also returned the (bogus) billing number, not the real number, when calling the EasyReach service from my cellular phone. Now, the message says that EasyReach can't forward to the number as entered. To use this service, you must be an EasyReach subscriber (a bargain, in my opinion). First, dial your EasyReach number. Enter your primary PIN. Then press "1". Then press "2". Press "1#". Press "#". The number of the line you are calling from will be read back to you. There is no extra charge for this call, and no bill will appear on the number. What you are doing is: "1" - request forwarding; "2" - only calls made with a PIN (although you can specify all calls if you wish); "1#" - forward for 1 hour; "#" use the number that you are calling from as the forwarding number. If you hang up after the number is read back, then your forwarding will not be activated. You can also use the "calls made with a PIN" feature to eliminate the calling card surcharge commonly added by telephone companies. Set up the forwarding number to the number you wish to dial, then use the "2" menu feature to call the number. Only $0.25/minute during the day, $0.15 at night ($0.23/$0.13 in California) ... Dave Rand {pyramid|mips|bct|vsi1}!daver!dlr Internet: dlr@daver.bungi.com ------------------------------ From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup) Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug Organization: Open Software Foundation Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 23:51:24 GMT In article robichau@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov writes: > While traveling last week, I had a chance to try my first Public Phone > 2000 (PP2k). Unfortunately, the phones at present have two serious > problems which render them unusable, at least for me. > Bug #1 is intentional. The phones only accept SWBT and Bell Atlantic > calling cards for data calls. Are you sure? I don't know where you are, but I used a PP2K at Cleveland airport, and used my New England Telephone calling card, which leads *me* to bug #3: The line was only 1200 bps, and the noise was so high as to be unusable. 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: jfk@ais.org (Jim Knight) Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug Organization: UMCC Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:10:00 GMT robichau@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (Paul Robichaux) writes: > While traveling last week, I had a chance to try my first Public Phone > 2000 (PP2k). Unfortunately, the phones at present have two serious > problems which render them unusable, at least for me. I've used the Public Phone 2000's in several areas of the country on multiple occasions. The terminals seem to work fine at 2400 bps with a decent but not great vt100 emulation. I was able to use vi and elm, etc with it. The only thing I don't like about them, is even though I use my AT&t Calling card which normally gets billed with my home phone for regular calls, these calls get billed separately, and I get a bill directly from AT&T for them. Other than that, I've had very good experience with the phones ... Jim M-Net -- America's First Public Access Unix System (313) 996-4644 -or- telnet m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us jfk@ais.org jfk@m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us ------------------------------ From: glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund) Subject: Re: Alteration of Ring Cadence Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:44:26 GMT mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) writes: > Due to our house's layout and phone locations, you can hear any ringer > throughout most of the house. The problem is exactly that -- which > line is ringing. > SWB does not offer alternate cadences on a primary number or I would > do that. The order clerk suggested getting a second number with > Distinctive Ring (sm) on one of the lines and not using the primary > number for that line. It doesn't sound like you need different ring cadences. Just use phones with different sounds. Glen Ecklund glen@cs.wisc.edu (608) 262-1318 Office, 262-1204 Dept. Sec'y Department of Computer Sciences 1210 W. Dayton St., Room 3355 University of Wisconsin, Madison Madison, Wis. 53706 U.S.A. ------------------------------ From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Alteration of Ring Cadence Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail. Playa del Rey, CA Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:49:25 GMT In article mattair@sun44.synercom. hounix.org (Charles Mattair) writes: > We've got three lines coming into our residence: > SWB does not offer alternate cadences on a primary number or I would > do that. The order clerk suggested getting a second number with > Distinctive Ring (sm) on one of the lines and not using the primary > number for that line. That's kind of expensive, so of course its the one SWB would suggest. If the phones have the old mechanical ringers with metal bells (Like the ones in the 2500 type phones), You can do a bit of creative surgery on the bells with a hacksaw. Saw a slice from the rim halfway to the center on each cup shaped bell and re-install. The bell will now sound quite different. For electronic ringers, I can't help. Rich Greenberg Work: rmg50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com 310-417-8999 N6LRT Play: richg@hatch.socal.com 310-649-0238 What? Me speak for Amdahl? Surely you jest.... [Moderator's Note: A hacksaw is a bit of an overkill. All you need to do is adjust the clapper inside by bending it just a tiny bit, or turning the bell parts slightly to create a sort of dull ring on the one phone, and a more shrill ring on the other. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jan 93 09:46:01 EST From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Modem Dial Lines and Problems jackl@pribal (jack lowry) asks in TELECOM Digest V13 #35: > What is the guarenteed maximum loss on a local voice line? > We have also been told that the loss on the line is 6db and that modems > start having trouble at 8bd with 10db being the max guaranteed loss on a > phone connection. I think someone has only given you part of the story. Actual local loops can run up to 8dB as a design limit, individual long loops can have even higher losses. So if both circuits are in the same central office, you could have a possible connection loss of 16dB. If the two circuits are not in the same central office then another 3dB to 6dB of loss could be added by the central office in a totally digital network. This would give a possible overall connection loss of 22dB. If the interoffice connections are over an analog network the interconnecting losses could be even higher depending on how many central offices are traversed and how far apart they are. I would assume that overall connection losses of 25-27dB could be feasible and within normal design limits. If you actually have this situation, you have encountered a rather unfortunate circumstance. > Modern folklore has it that there used to be a "special" modem phone > line available. Is this still true? I've never actually known of or had anyone admit to knowing about a "modem" line in the state of Kansas. Various conditioning levels have been able to be ordered. These provide certain levels of loss and slope. There is, of course, a charge for this. Perhaps these have been considered as modem lines? Tim Gorman - SWBT *opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence* ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Modem Dial Lines and Problems Organization: Multi-Tech Systems, Inc., Mounds View, MN Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 10:29:41 CST From: hitchy@multi.com Multi-Tech Systems Inc. Tom - Tech Support 800-972-2439 Ext.#602 To: Jack Lowry Re: Connection problems w/ V.32 modems The modems should be able to connect over voice quality dial-up lines. You should not need a special data line. There are a couple of questions I have for you: A. What is the exact model of the modems you are using? B. What are the serial numbers? I can see what vs. EE prom is currently in the modem. C. Are you using error correction on the modems? D. Did you try connecting at 4800 baud? It is possible since you are connecting over a Fiber line that the modems are over driving each other preventing you from getting connected. There is an undocumented register that can be changed. That register is S20. Try changing this register to a 8.(ATS20=8&W) This will boost the transmit level to a -8db. The factory setting is a -10db. It is not advisible to go any stronger than this on a dial-up line. If this makes it worse change the S20 register to a 12 (ATS20=12&W). If you have any questions Please give me a call or respond via mail. The hours here are 8:30 to 5:00 cst. Regards, Tom Hitchcock ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #40 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25814; 24 Jan 93 3:42 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09171 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:37:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13985 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:36:41 -0600 Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:36:41 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301240736.AA13985@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #41 TELECOM Digest Sun, 24 Jan 93 01:36:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 41 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Aninda V. Dasgupta) Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Dave Niebuhr) Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Robert J. Woodhead) Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Jonathan Haruni) Re: Fast Backups of Data Over Nets/Subnets (Dave Niebuhr) Re: What Is dBm0 (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) Re: Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56 (Todd Inch) Re: Telecom Management Degrees (Tom Lahey) Re: ISDN Modems/Boards? (J. Reschly Jr.) Re: Sprint Can't Do Switched 56k (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (John Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda V. Dasgupta) Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, New York Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 13:28:04 GMT Talking of telcos recording numbers, a recent sad case of child abduction in Long Island, NY comes to mind. (The following narration is a summary of what the {NY Times} reported.) Katie Beers, a ten-year old, growing up in a severely disfunctional family, is enduring a custody battle between her natural mother and her god-mother, who had brought her up for most of her young life. In steps a certain Mr. Esposito, who had, a few years ago, pleaded guilty to unlawful imprisonment and sexual offenses on a young boy. He showers this emotionally deprived child with gifts and lavishes her with attention. He then takes her out shopping for Christmas gifts, buys her dolls and video games. Next stop: a 7-11 store for some ice-cream. The 7-11 surveilance camera records Katie paying for the ice-cream and meticulously putting back the change in her handbad and carefully tucking the bag under her arm. The pervert then lures Katie into a garage-apartment behind his bungalow and while Katie is trying out the video games, he removes his stero system, turns around a revolving book-shelf and bar, lifts up layers of carpet and flooring, runs a bolt through a hook and lifts up a heavy concrete trap-door using a winch, and opens up the passage to a dungeon. When his sexual advances on Katie is spurned, he gets violent, throws her down the chute into the cramped underground cellar, ties a collar on her neck and imprisons her. Within hours of her imprisonment, the sick man forces Katie to record a message on a tape-recorder, something like : "I am being held by a bad man with a knife ... Oh my God, here he comes!" Katie's god-mother gets that message on her answering machine. Police search Mr. Esposito's bungalow and Katie gets to see the search via close circuit TV, but her cries for help do not penetrate the thick bunker walls. In the search of the premises, police find user manuals to a brand-new portable tape-recorder and Katie's handbag and jacket in the man's van. Police look at phone company logs and determine that the call to Katie's godmother was made from a pay phone, but a search and questioning of people in the neighborhood of the pay-phone reveals nothing new. More searching in the phone logs reveals that 15 attempts were made to place that call to Katie's godmother, but her phone always happened to be busy. So, the person who left the message, got through only on the 16th attempt. This tells police that the call was not made by Katie, because the message sounded as if she got a chance window of a few seconds to place that call. Getting such a window once is acceptable, but 16 times? FBI analysis on the message on the anwering machine reveals that it was indeed played off a tape-recorder. Police start a heavy pressure campaign on Esposito and his family members. They constantly follow them and keep their residences under 24-hour-watch. Finally, the guy succumbs and confesses. Police find Katie safe and sound after 16 days in the cramped dungeon. Anyway, what interested me was in this sad, sad story is the fact that the phone company keeps logs of all calls made from a pay-phone (perhaps all phones?) and calls to a residential phone (again, perhaps all phones?) Moreover, the police (or does it have to be the Feds?) can get to the phone logs in a matter of hours. 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 [Moderator's Note: Yes, you are correct; very little escapes telco's notice these days, and that INHO is good for just such reasons as the case you cited. The telephone should *never* serve as a medium for harassement, fraud or the commission of other crimes. The fact that the telephone has served these purposes over the years was due to the technology in use for many years, not a deliberate thing by telco. The development of ESS and the sophisticated ways in which traffic can be analyzed and reviewed could be viewed by some twisted logic as an 'invasion of privacy' by some people, but I do not view it that way. On a separate note, it should be recalled that under the Constitution of the United States, Mr. Esposito must be presumed innocent of the crimes he is charged with unless he is proven otherwise in court. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 00:12:03 EST From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? YES THEY DO! ESS Systems, even the old XBAR systems were able to do it. It's amazing the things the phone company does that they don't tell you about. I remember there was a Bell pamphlet on the AMA's (Automatic Message Account) that was supposed to go out to all customers but Bell decided that it would be too heavy for people to handle. I mean, after all, knowing that EVERY number you dial is being recorded isn't very comforting. I wonder, with the advent of SS7, do they still use tapes? I mean, with all that connectivity you'd think the info would be sent to a central storage facility. We'll have to wait and see I suppose. But the phone company WILL provide you with a detailed list of all numbers dialed, if you ask for it. Tony ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 09:54:22 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? In TELECOM Digest V13 #37 martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu (martin McCormick) writes: [ ... Text about murders in Stillwater, Ok. deleted ... ] > According to our paper, one of the things that the police did was > to ask Southwestern Bell for telephone records. Apparently, blood was > found on a telephone and the police wanted to see who might have been > called. > All of this occurred about a month after Stillwater got its > DMS100 switch. I don't know what the records showed, because the > girl's story fell apart and she ended up essentially admitting to the > murders. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there is some internal > maintenance log of connections. We do not have measured service, > here, but even the old Xbar switch printed logs of trouble reports. The recent sad case of Katie Beers of Mastic Beach, New York, saw the telephone involved in her safe recovery and the apprehension of John Esposito who allegedly (I use that word only because he hasn't been convicted yet) kidnapped her and held her in a dungeon. The payphone where Katie made a call was found by doing a check of her godmother's phone logs at the telco office. This helped in finding the girl and the arrest of Esposito. BTW: I live three blocks from her in Mastic Beach, New York, but I cannot honestly say that I ever saw her in the last few years. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 12:06:29 GMT alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes: > Paul Robinson writes: >> kstox@admips2.berkely.edu writes in TELECOM Digest 13 #14 about how >> someone programmed the IBM 1130 to generate tones on an AM radio. > I've got one even even better. How about programming a CDC 3600 to > play the Star-Spangled Banner on its tape drives -- in stereo! I heard about an artist who noticed that when he drove over a local suspension bridge, the metal grid deck of the bridge (made this way so snow could fall through it) interacted with the tires of his car to produce a hum, and the frequency of the hum was proportional to the speed of the car. He thereupon went and recorded the tones of the bridge at various speeds, and edited the tapes into a musical score. To my mind, the record-holder for world's largest instrument. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@forEtune.co.jp AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): 72447.37@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: jharuni@micrognosis.co.uk (Jonathan Haruni) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... Reply-To: jharuni@micrognosis.co.uk Organization: Micrognosis International, London Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 14:16:17 GMT In article , PAT wrote: [about a Sun computer performing music to a live audience] > When the work was finished, they introduced the fellow who had > programmed it. I left the program absolutely higher than a kite; it > was so wonderful! Please elaborate ... was the Sun controlling some sort of Synthesizer card which the guy had written a command script for? Was it controlling a MIDI controller plugged into some commercial synth? Or was it just playing some digital recording? What exactly did the guy "program"? What was so wonderful? What was the big file server for? Why was this more impressive than a tape recorder? Jonathan Haruni [Moderator's Note: It was a series of great big executables which were called up one after another for each of the various movements (or parts) of the musical work. I think the executables were kept on the storage device which was connected to the computer until it was their turn to be used. It should be noted that "Pictures at an Exhibition" is about thirty minutes in length, and is composed of several movements, or 'sketches' each ranging in length from a minute or two to several minutes. There was no synthesizer card or MIDI or similar device attached. The executables sent pulses to speakers attached to the computer (actually, what would have been an audio output on the computer was fed to the building sound system) and the speed and duration of the pulses caused the speakers to make the sounds required to resemble the music. That is an overly simplistic explanation of what makes speakers work, but you get the idea. What was so nifty to me was the total lack of any external equipment; just electricity sent to an output causing the speakers to vibrate the way he wanted it. I used to do the same thing with my little Apple ][+ ten years ago, poking binary values into RAM in a certain order then calling the routine so that musical sounds would come out of the speaker, but never of the magnitude of the performance I attended. The Apple had a cassette jack on the back to load programs from tape. By making use of the little two (or maybe four) byte A/D converter inside, I found I could digitize my voice using a microphone plugged into the cassette jack then save the resulting binary on a floppy disk and play it back through the speaker on the Apple. Because this sort of thing is of interest to me, I find fascinating anyone who can write sufficient executable script to transcribe a technically difficult piece of music of 30 minute's duration. A tape recording would not have been the same. Part of the pleasure was hearing the live performance and seeing the 'performer'. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 10:48:38 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Fast Backups of Data over Nets/Subnets In TELECOM Digest V13 #29 From: na@princeton.edu (Nita Avalani) writes: > (2) Are there any high speed hardware/software alternatives to > restore/dump in Unix that would back up everything on the > nets/subnets? If so, what is the best product? Yes there are. AT&T has a product called ABARS that does this very quietly and fast. All data is stored on optical media and all iterations of files are backed up daily. We at Brookhaven National Laboratory have this system installed and I've found that retrieval is quite quick (under two minutes for a file of up to 20K bytes with most of the overhead being in finding the correct platter. It's even faster if the file or files are located on the same one. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu Subject: Re: What Is dBm0 Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 13:33:10 CST > I just read a paper taken from AT&T Technical Journal. The subject of > this paper is "THE 32 KB/S ADPCM CODING STANDARD". In this paper the > author use "dBm0" as a unit to represent the level of input signal. I > don't know what the definition of "dBm0" is. Is "dBm0" same as "0 > dBm"? Is there anyone who knows the answer and can answer this > question for me? I will be appreciated if someone answer my question. dBm0 is power referenced to the test level for the circuit in question. (i.e. if the test level is -16 dBm and the signal currently being measured is -18dBm, then it would be -2dBm0). This is used because most communication circuits have some gain or loss built into them. (The company I work for has +23dB of gain on all of its circuits). By measuring in dBm0, it is possible to have consistent levels. For example, if I have a circuit that has a test level of -16dBm at the transmit, and +7dBm at the far end receive, then I can put in a -16dBm0 tone at the transmit (-32dBm) and get a -16dBm0 tone out at the other end (-9dBm). Brett (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) ------------------------------ From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) Subject: Re: Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56 Organization: Maverick International Inc. Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 18:43:22 GMT In article rathmann@nic.cerf.net (Raul Rathmann) writes: > I am considering picking up a Toshiba Strata DK-56 PBX with various > handsets. Does anyone have any opinions on this unit, good or bad? I looked at this and chose a Tadiran Coral system instead. The Coral is more flexible and slightly cheaper -- several interconnects I spoke to are making it their system of choice. One problem (from memory -- my notes aren't handy) is the Toshiba would not connect to a certain type of line -- either T-1 or DID. Also someone mentioned that there is something wrong with the dialing buttons on Toshiba -- they either don't produce real tones the user can hear (minor annoyance) or they have timed tones which won't sound for as long as you hold down the keys, which is a real pain trying to access answering machines and some voicemail-type services. Also, the Coral is almost infinitly expandible, while the Toshiba contains the number 56 for a reason :-). The Coral also has some funky data features that we may want to use in the future, such as an integral serial data jack (optional) on phones, data-pbx functions, and built-in modems. It has one built-in maintenance modem for remote programming and diagnostics. Since I'm really the DP guy, this appealed to me. The Coral has "CoralMail" as a VM option, so I didn't inquire further. Overall, the Toshiba looks like a decent system, though. I found at least two local interconnects who I like and favor the Tadiran, but getting parts/service on the Toshiba is probably easier, maybe significantly so in your area. Service can be a big issue for PBX's. The people trying to sell me a Toshiba sell nothing else, so they are biased, whereas the Coral-pushers have sold and serviced many brands including the Toshibas. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 10:21:46 -0500 From: toml@Cayman.COM (Tom Lahey) Subject: Re: Telecom Management Degrees > Does anyone know what colleges/universities offer a Telecommunications > Management Degree program starting at the associates level? All I've > seen has been a Masters Level program at places like Univ of Maryland. The New Hampshire Vocational Technical College in Nashua New Hampshire offers an Associates Degree in Telecommunications. They have both day and evening programs. Phone number is: 603-882-6923 Tom Lahey batfish!toml@attmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 17:14:09 EST From: Robert J. Reschly Jr. Subject: Re: ISDN Modems/Boards? I am at home and the literature is at work, but there is an outfit called DigiBoard which builds Ethernet bridge (I think that is right -- the bandwidth differential would certainly make bridging much more effective) boxes that connect over a 1B or 2B voice or data link. I think they also do some compression over the ISDN, but cannot recall for sure. These boxes also run ~$2K per end. I can post more details from the literature if there is an interest. I'm not affiliated with DigiBoard; just saw them at InterOP last fall and grabbed some literature. Later, Bob IP: reschly@BRL.MIL UUCP: ...!{{cmcl2,nlm-mcs,husc6}!adm,smoke}!reschly U.S. Army Research Lab. / Advanced Computational & Information Sciences Dir. / Networked Computer Systems Team / Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD 21005-5067 / ATTN: AMSRL-CI-AC (Reschly) // (410) 278-6808 FAX:-5075 DSN:298- ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Sprint Can't Do Switched 56k Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 04:49:29 GMT In article , eap@ora.com (Eric Pearce) writes: > We have a Sprint T1 with 16 channels for voice and 1 56k dedicated > data line. I want to add a single switched 56k line out of the same > channel bank (since there are spare slots). The reasoning behind > getting a CB was to be able to mix and match various types of service. > Sprint sales says they can't do it, as their "switched 56k network is > too advanced for PacBell and won't be able to talk to it" (we are in > northern CA). They also volunteered that AT&T and MCI are be able to > provide this even though Sprint can't. Does this make any sense? Huh? I specifically remember Sprint's ads touting that their domestic network carries Switch 56 and speech equally and doesn't distinguish between the two. You get a T1 access into Sprint's POP and then can make speech or 56 kbps calls interchangeably. The one trick is that you may need to send the echo canceller canceller (not a repeat) tone. This does not make use of PacBell's Switched 56 at all. Indeed if PacBell is like New England Tel, then Switched 56 won't talk to Sprint -- Switched 56 from the Bell is classmarked as "in the data domain" and won't talk to trunks "in the voice domain" which includes Sprint. But if you have a PBX, its own 56 kbps data applique is probably compatible with Sprint Switched 56. As is a channel bank, using the standard "7/8" coding (V.110/56k). The signaling is inband tone, same a a voice call. BTW, this is probably what inspired me to play with "data over speech" on ISDN. We now have ISDN using speech calls carrying 56 kbps around the LATA, where NETel doesn't even have data trunks yet. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com k1io or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 21:01 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) writes: > It is fair to allow sweetheart deals? I guess it depends on your > political attitudes. Personally, I think we all would be better off, > if the system had a mild bias in favor of "the little guy". Thus, I > think it is reasonable to place more restrictions on the dominant > carrier. I also think the obligation to publish the sweetheart deal > and offer the same terms to any customer in similar circumstances is > reasonable. This is all very egalitarian and populist-oriented and seems just and reasonable until one finds himself in the position of a major user. Then when he is about to spend mega-dollars with a carrier, finds that "cutting a deal" is not so easy. Any customer who represents a significant portion of a provider's business deserves recognition for that business. Giving "the little guy" a better deal than a major player is something reserved for activist PUCs who seem to feel that people who use more can obviously afford it so they should be charged more per unit. It has no place in the real marketplace which was supposedly created by divestiture. In a free market, those who buy in quantity are those who wield the power and can expect accomodations. Is the telecommunications industry operating in a market environment, or is it to be manipulated and regulated to death by idiots as exemplified by the FCC and the CPUC? IMHO, AT&T has long since passed from "dominant carrier" status and should play under the same rules as MCI and Sprint. These carriers have had bloody long enough to get their act together. Sure, AT&T had a century headstart, but in today's technology ten years is an eternity. If MCI and Sprint cannot make it without hamstringing AT&T in restrictive tariffs, then maybe we have too many long distance companies. 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 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #41 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28199; 24 Jan 93 5:10 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06308 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:04:31 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18580 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:04:01 -0600 Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:04:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301240904.AA18580@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #42 TELECOM Digest Sun, 24 Jan 93 03:04:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 42 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? (Ron) Re: Integratel Forcing Charges Through (John R. Levine) Re: Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How? (Todd Inch) Re: Top Ten Traumas? (David G. Lewis) Re: Looking For DID Information (John Higdon) Re: Attempted Mindvox Break-in (Graham Toal) Re: Question About Teleports (Tyson MacAulay) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Jonathan Haruni) Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Darren Ingram) Re: FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Tech Assist (L. Kellet) Re: Differences Between ANI and Caller-ID (M.D. Leech) Re: Wanted: Small (4-12 Line) PBX/Phone System (Jack Carden) Re: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized (H. Peter Anvin) Re: Do You Think This is a Fraudulent Ad? : ) (Robert J. Woodhead) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ucsd!sceard!fewmets!ron@uunet.UU.NET Subject: Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 00:28:44 GMT jack@myamiga.mixcom.com writes: > When the operator did come back on the line, the girl didn't have > enough money to pay for the rest of the call, and because her parents > don't currently have a phone (or so she claims), there was no number > that the call could be billed to. So the operator stated that the > remainder would be charged to the party she called. At no time did > the operator converse directly with my son, although he could overhear > all of this. After this the call was disconnected. Boy, can I top this story :-) Several years ago, my 21+ year old son quit his appartment and took an open-ended trip to Australia. Some disturbing incidents occurred which resulted in *many* long distance calls from him to me. Several months later, I received a > $1000 phone bill from AT&T for the calls. Seems that my son had charged his calls with an AT&T credit card on his disconnected US phone number. I contacted AT&T and could find no one that would admit having the authority to change the bill. As far at AT&T was concerned, my son had the same last name, therefore, I should pay for the calls (seems logical to me :-) I went around and around with them. The issue was not setteled until my son returned to the US and paid the bill himself. I carried a derogatory on my TRW report (with my explanation appended) for several years. I do not recommend AT&T as a company to do business with. [Moderator's Note: Another of our regular contributors could tell a similar story about having been in business *as a corporation* for a period of time and going out of business, only to have AT&T come to him personally for the unpaid phone charges later on, insisting that he was responsible for the corporation he formerly was associated with. But I'll let him tell the story if he wants; it may be for some reason he does not want the details aired. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Integratel Forcing Charges Through Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 24 Jan 93 02:00:41 EST (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > Our room was recently billed for $90 worth of collect calls from > Integratel despite the fact that Lehigh University supposedly traps > collect calls to student rooms. ... TELECOM Moderator noted: > But let's face it; you, or someone with access to the phone in your > room did agree to accept collect charges, ... Given the thick layer of slime with which Integratel seems to be coated, it's not at all clear to me why anyone should accept their claim that someone actually accepted any collect calls. Given the exorbitant amount, I'd suspect that either someone called an 800 number for which Integratel handles 900-style collect billing and they billed back with or without the consent of the caller, or it might just be completely bogus. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: Well, there has to be *some basis* for putting the charges through. There can be errors in billing, misunderstandings, etc, but the charges cannot be made up from thin air. Someone had to say something or the operator had to think they did. It would be total fraud if no one consented to anything. The telcos dislike the extra work Integretel causes their customer service reps, and most claim they only deal with Integretel because of divestiture requirements. If fraud were proveable, they'd drop Integretel in a minute, with the judge's blessings. Integretel needs the LEC's to bill for them; they are too smart to cross the narrow, thin line they walk between legal activity and fraud. An Integretel executive did tell me the company was 'probably' going to begin recording the consent to collect charges in order to combat the reverse fraud which is quite prevalent in the phone-sex industry. It seems a lot of people do make use of 900/976 phone-sex services knowing the rates and routines very well yet later try to deadbeat out of the charges by playing the role of the Injured and Defrauded Consumer Who Knows His Rights. Integretel thinks that tape recording the five or ten second authorization request by the operator and the subscriber's response should put an end to some of this. ("This is the Integretel operator, I have a collect call for XXX at this number from YYY, will you accept the charges at $?? per minute?" -- subscriber says yes or no and the operator cuts out of the connection.) Although the clients of Integretel are mostly sleaze and you may say there should be a plague on all of them, I suspect a lot more customers defraud them than the other way around, from a legal perspective. PAT] ------------------------------ From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) Subject: Re: Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How? Organization: Maverick International Inc. Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 18:52:22 GMT In article george@tusk.med.harvard.edu writes: > To test modem/terminal-server settings I would like to connect connect > the modems directly via a phoneline simulator. (I'll also e-mail the author as he requested.) I have sucessfully connected two 2400-baud modems with just a cable - it took a little trickery and manual manipulation via the AT commands on both ends, but I was in a pinch and it worked. Obviously, dialing and auto-answer cannot be done this way. ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Top Ten Traumas? Organization: AT&T Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 14:17:59 GMT In article stapleton@bpavms.bpa. arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) writes: > Is there a good way to assess net losses [of telecom failures], > so as to ever produced a ranked list? The best metric I've seen is User Lost Erlangs, which is the total traffic interrupted, measured in Erlangs. So if a switch which normally processes 1000 successful call attempts per minute, with each call lasting on average 3 minutes, is out of service for one hour, this represents 3,000 User Lost Erlangs (ULE). (1000 calls/minute * 60 minutes * 180 seconds/call / 3600 CCS/Erlang = 3000 Erlangs) If a DS1 facility with 24 trunks at 80% average occupancy is out for an hour, this represents 19.2 ULE. And so on. The advantages to this are it gives a way to quantitatively measure different types of failures, it incorporates both the number of affected users and the time they are affected, and it incorporates time-of-day and day-of-week factors. Just My Opinion ... David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 12:04 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Looking For DID Information bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps) writes: > Nothing magic to it, but you should be aware that the scheme John is > talking about may be considered infringement on a patent held by > Brooktrout Technologies of Natick, MA. They make fax/voice response > PC cards with an on-board DID interface for just the purpose you > described. Somehow, I do not think that any patent can tell you how to use a standard telephone technology such as DID. But there are other serious negative considerations to DID (kept in place by the telcos because DID is a direct competitor to Centrex). The first is a rather steep installation charge. In Pac*Bell land, it is about $700 just for establishing the DID group. The second is the "termination charge" which essentially puts you on the hook for a multi-year period, even if you disconnect the service. Back when DID involved literally wiring up a switch for DID trunks, these charges had some validity. Now, of course, a few key strokes and the telco has taken thousands of dollars from you. And as a side benefit, those steep charges make you think twice and possibly consider Centrex as an alternative. Telco makes much more money from that in the long run. 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: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) Subject: Re: Attempted Mindvox Break-in Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:42:21 GMT In article mcmullen@mindvox.phantom.com (John F. McMullen) writes: > Phantom Access Foils Cracking Attempt 01/18/93 NEW YORK, NEW YORK, > U.S.A.,1993 JAN 18 (NB) -- An attempt to illegally break into, or > "crack" the "Mindvox" conferencing stem contained in Phantom Access, a > flat-rate New York-based online service recently featured in various > news publications, was detected and rebuffed. Hmmm. the vox guys weren't so keen for publicity when those hackers in Hawaii found that nasty hole in the NeXTs password stuff that let them on to Mindvox. In fact they seem to be keeping that one to themselves. Wonder why. ------------------------------ From: tmacaula@ccs.carleton.ca (Tyson MacAulay) Subject: Re: Question About Teleports Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 11:50:22 EST In v13, #32 of TELECOM Digest there were a few entries about the growth and availablity of Teleports in the US. I would be interested to know if anyone has knowledge of any existing or proposed Teleports in Canada, and who might be building or organizing them. Alternately, I would be interested in hearing from anyone who might be studying the industrial applications of Teleports. Tyson Macaulay tmacaula@ccs.carleton.ca ------------------------------ From: jharuni@micrognosis.co.uk (Jonathan Haruni) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud Reply-To: jharuni@micrognosis.co.uk Organization: Micrognosis International, London Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 19:32:33 GMT In article , rodg@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Rod Gamble) writes: > About two or three years ago the Bank of England (for some > reason or other) decided to find out what people used as words for > there PINs . Well guess what ... If you found a BoE card in the > street you had a 56% chance of using it in a ATM machine if you used a > four lettered word beginning with F*** ... I believe this is a myth. Most ATMs in the UK do not have letters on the keypads, only numbers. Furthermore, the Bank of England is not a consumer bank, and does not have branches, ATMs, ATM cards, or PINs. Jonathan Haruni ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 10:34:11 GMT From: newsdesk@dims.demon.co.uk (Darren Ingram) Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud > About two or three years ago the Bank of England (for some > reason or other) decided to find out what people used as words for > there PINs . Well guess what ... If you found a BoE card in the Er. do you mean the Bank of England (as in the United Kingdom) ... the BoE here does _not_ issue ATM cards and certainly does not have an ATM network. It acts as a central government agency clearing receipts from the clearing banks and generally playing around with inflation. DIMS (newsdesk mailbox)(newsdesk@dims.demon.co.uk) - Views expressed do 184 Brookside Avenue, Whoberley, Coventry CV5 8AD UK - not automatically Tel:+44 203 717 417/Fax:+44 203 717 418/Tlx 94026650 - represent those of *News, features, PR, consultancy & network services* - DIMS or its clients ------------------------------ From: lehane@siesoft.co.uk (Lehane Kellet) Subject: Re: FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Tech Assistance Organization: G8KMH's home for stray RF signals Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 13:22:57 GMT ndallen@r-node.pci.on.ca (Nigel Allen) writes: > FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Technical Assistance > WASHINGTON, Jan. 14 -- The Federal Communications Commission today > allocated four MHz of VHF/UHF spectrum to the Mobile Satellite Service Anybody know which four meg? > The FCC stated that it awarded the pioneer's preference to VITA > because it was the first to develop and demonstrate the utility of a > small low earth orbiting satellite system for civilian communications > purposes. The commission also noted that VITA's pioneering efforts Radio Amateurs aren't civilians? AMSAT have being using LEO for years. And VITA piggybacked on UOSAT (and co-funded). A mention of AMSAT/amateur radio would have been nice ... Regards, Lehane Kellett. G8KMH. Siemens Nixdorf Information Systems, Bracknell. lehane@siesoft.co.uk NTS: g8kmh@gb3xp amprnet: g8kmh@g8kmh.ampr.org Standard disclaimers apply. Warranty void if opened. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 11:04:53 -0500 From: Marcus D Leech Subject: Re: Differences Between ANI and Caller-ID In article , tdarcos@access.digex.com writes: > [discussion of difference between ANI and Caller-ID, and how they > relate (or not) to ISDN]. Just to add to the confusion, there's also an emerging ANSI standard called SCAI, or Switch-Computer Applications Interface. SCAI gives you what Caller-ID gives you plus A WHOLE LOT MORE. The only implementation that I'm aware of is on NTs large switches, and marketted as "CompuCall". The delivery vehicle for this service is typically X.25. Anybody know of any other implementations of SCAI? Marcus Leech, 4Y11 Bell-Northern Research |opinions expressed mleech@bnr.ca P.O. Box 3511, Stn. C |are my own, and not ml@ve3mdl.ampr.org Ottawa, ON, CAN K1Y 4H7 |necessarily BNRs ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 07:59:16 GMT From: texsun.Central!nps002!jcarden@sun.UUCP (Jack Carden) Subject: Re: Wanted: Small (4-12 Line) PBX/Phone System In article is written: > I'm looking for an inexpensive phone system for a small business. I > don't have any experience with vendors in this area. I'm looking for > recommendations, vendors phone numbers, etc. Here are some of the > features we're looking for: > - we currently have two outside lines and six extensions. We would > like the system to be expandable to about four outside lines and twelve > extensions. > - automated attendant; an incoming is call reaches an automated > attendant, and the caller is routed to a particular extension based on > a menu selection. > - uses standard touch-tone phones for extensions. > - any extension can be connected to any outside line. > We don't need: > - voicemail; we would be satisfied with attaching answering > machines to individual extensions. > - extension to extension connections (the office isn't that big > :-)). if going off hook on an extension immediately connects you to > an available outside line (or gives a dial-tone otherwise) that's > fine. > The most important constraint is cost. PC based solutions are fine -- > we have a spare 386 PC we can use. I would recommend the Panasonic key-systems for cost and simplicity. They can use standard telephones or fancy custom models. They will support several lines (comes in two sizes at least) for a few hundred dollars! They will not (to my knowledge) provide automated attendant, but there are plenty of options there. Check out BigMouth and other product offerings if you want to hook up your PC and customize the software to answer your phone. My opinion -- I hate those things! These are my personal opinions. I have no affiliation with Panasonic. We used their product for a telecom-related product demonstration system. I am not am employee of nor do I speak for DSC Communications. Regards, Jack Carden Internet: jcarden@dsccc.com ------------------------------ From: hpa@merle.acns.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP) Subject: Re: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized Reply-To: hpa@nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:38:54 GMT In article of comp.dcom.telecom, Jim.Rees@umich.edu writes: > By the way, you can get more information at 1-800-831-8989 (I don't > know if this is diallable outside of 313/810). Permissive dialing > starts December 1993, and ends (with mandatory use of 810) August 10, > 1994. That's a long permissive dialing period. Here in Illinois we had only three months permissive dialing on the 312/708 area split, which wasn't even announced as much in advance as this one was. Considering the length of the permissive dialling period, I would guess they plan to put it in the 1994 phone book when permissive dialling just has taken effect, and there is still good time for people to learn. hpa ------------------------------ From: trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) Subject: Re: Do You Think This is a Fraudulent Ad? : ) Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 02:00:28 GMT Paul Robinson writes: > An advertisement on page 3 of the January, 1993 issue of "Midrange > Computing" mentions Exabyte Corporation's new 2.5 Gigabyte EXB-8200. > This is a 150% inflation of the number of issues that you could read > before you'd find an error! I resent this; if I only read 40 million > years' worth of the {Wall Street Journal} before I discovered an > error, I'd not be pleased. Clearly, the good folks at Exabyte are compressing their {Wall Street Journal's} before storing them on hard disc. I know I would! Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@forEtune.co.jp AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): 72447.37@compuserve.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #42 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04221; 24 Jan 93 9:05 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22477 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:29:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03973 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:28:49 -0600 Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:28:49 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301240928.AA03973@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: Revised FAQ File For TELECOM Digest David Leibold has prepared a new FAQ for this newsgroup. I am attaching a copy of it here. In addition, this version will replace the existing one being sent to all new subscribers of the TELECOM Digest mailing list as of today, and it will replace the existing version in the Telecom Archives. (The archives is accessible via anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu). Thank you, David! PAT Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 21:45:45 EST From: David Leibold Subject: FAQ List -- edition 4 To: Telecom Digest TELECOM Digest - Frequently Asked Questions - v.4 17 January 1993 This is a list of frequently asked questions made in the TELECOM Digest. New versions of the list are occasionally made available to deal with new, corrected or updated questions. Much of the telecom information that is requested can be found in the TELECOM Digest Archives, which is a collection of text files on telecom topics. These archives are available for access through the FTP protocol at lcs.mit.edu. Other archive sites may be available, plus various FTP mail servers. The monthly posting of the description of TELECOM Digest should contain specific details on how to access the Archives. This list is in the archives under the file name: frequently.asked.questions Direct netmail requests to persons posting on topics of interest to you may also be helpful. In fact, doing things "behind the scenes" can be more productive as the Digest Moderator is frequently swamped with other items. Future editions of this list could include netmail addresses of contacts for certain topics (say for ISDN, cellular, area codes/numbering plan, consumer protection matters, etc); offers to that end would be appreciated. The index to the Archives should be obtained and kept for reference. This index has also occasionally appeared as a posting in the Digest. You should also read the Archives file intro.to.archives to get a better understanding of how the Archives operate. A list of terms commonly used in TELECOM Digest may be obtained from the Archives under the file names glossary.acronyms, glossary.txt and glossary.phrack.acronyms. Suggestions for other common questions, or corrections or other amendments to this file may be made to dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca, or dleibold1@attmail.com, or Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org. Note that any of these addresses are subject to change. This file will be updated as time and circumstances permit; all information herein should be considered subject to correction or change. Thanks to Nathan Glasser, Dan Boehlke and Maurice E. DeVidts and those other inquiring TELECOM Digest minds for their frequent questions. Tad Cook also noted an incorrect touch tone in the 1st edition of FAQ, an error which was corrected since the second edition. For v.3, the following people contributed comments, extra questions and other updated information: Alan Barclay, (alan@ukpoit.uucp) Steve Beaty (Steve.Beaty@ftcollins.ncr.com) Rick Broadhead (YSAR1111@VM1.YorkU.CA) Gordon L. Burditt (sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon) Tad Cook (tad@ssc.UUCP, kt7h@polari.uucp, or 3288544@mcimail.com) David G. Cantor (dgc@math.ucla.edu) Tony Harminc (TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET) Carl Moore (cmoore@brl.mil) Gary Morris (garym@telesoft.com) Dan Sahlin (dan@sics.se) For v.4 the following people contributed more comments and information, (sometimes adapted from the regular Digest postings): Mark Brader, Richard D G Cox, Brad Hicks, Dave Levenson, Don McKillican, Jim Morton, Colum Mylod, Peter Sint, Pat Turner and Al Varney - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - List of subjects questions covered as they appear in this list: Technical - How do phones work? - What is a Central Office? What is a switch? What roles do Central Offices and switches play in the telephone network? - How many different types of switches are there, how do they differ, and what switches are most commonly found in use? - When did the first ESS (electronic) switch go into service? - What frequencies do touch tones use for which numbers? - What are the A, B, C and D touch tone keys used for? Why are they not found on touch tone phone sets? - What is call supervision? - How can I find out what my own phone number is? - Are there other kinds of test numbers used? - Can a US modem or phone work in the UK, or some other European country? (Or vice versa, or in general for international substitution of phone equipment) - What do "tip" and "ring" mean? - Why use a negative charge (-48 volts) for Ring instead of a positive charge (such as +48 volts)? - What is "Caller ID" (or Call Display, or CNID (Caller Number Identification))? - How can I get specifications on how Caller ID service works? - What is the best way to busy a phone line? I have a bank of modems which are set up as a hunt group. When a modem dies I would like to be able to busy out the line that is disconnected, so that one of the other modems in the hunt group will take the call. - What is the difference between Caller ID/CNID and ANI? Numbering - What is a numbering plan? - How was the country code system developed? - What is the correct way to write a telephone number for international use? - What are the prefix digits used in international dialing? - What does NPA, NNX, or NXX mean? - What happens when all the telephone numbers run out? - How is extra numbering capacity achieved in North America? - In North America, why does the long distance dialing within an area code often change so that 1 + home area code + number has to be dialed, or changed to just seven digits (like a local call)? - Is North America really running out of area codes? - How will we make room if North American area codes are running out? - What about expanding area/STD codes in other countries? - What is Bellcore? - How can I contact Bellcore? - How can I get exchange/billing data? What is a V&H tape? Regulatory & Tariffs - What's this about the FCC starting a modem tax for those using modems on phone lines? - Why is a touch tone line more expensive than a rotary dial line (in many places)? - How come I got charged at a hotel for a call where no one answered? Why is the timing on some of the long distance carriers inaccurate? Competition - Which countries have competitive long distance service? - What is a COCOT? - What is an AOS? - What is "splashing"? - Where can I find a list of equal access (10XXX) codes? - How can I tell who my default carrier is (or that of a 10XXX+ carrier)? Features - What is the calling card "boing" and what is it made of? - How can I prevent the call waiting tone from beeping in mid-conversation? Miscellaneous - Is there a way to find someone given just a phone number? - Where can a Cellular/Mobile Radio mailing list be contacted? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------- Technical --------- Q: How do phones work? A: A file in the TELECOM Digest archives under the name "how.phones.work" is available and should explain some details of the workings of the common telephone. Q: What is a Central Office? What is a switch? What roles do Central Offices and switches play in the telephone network? A: A Central Office (CO) is the facility to which the telephones in a public telephone network are connected. It is the front line in terms of the whole telephone system; dial tone, telephone ringing, connection to other telephones, or outside trunks, is done here. A "switch" is a general term referring to facilities where telephone traffic is routed from one destination to another. The Central Office has a switch in a local sense; calls within a municipality can often be completed within a single switch. Beyond this, there are switches for long distance or regional traffic, many of which are not directly connected to user telephones. A hierarchy of switching centres was developed in North America. Level 5 switches are the most common and are generally the local Central Office switches. Level 4 switches are used in regional or larger local settings and occasionally are connected to customer telephones. Level 3, 2 and 1 switches serve larger regions in turn. In general, a call that cannot be handled at one level of switching (by reason of distance covered, or congestion at a given switch) is passed onto the next higher level until the connection is completed. The breakup of AT&T in the USA and the introduction of new services will no doubt have disrupted this hierarchy, but this illustrates how a call can progress from one place to another. A large city usually has many central offices, each serving a certain geographical area. These central offices are connected to other central offices for local calling, or to higher level switches, or into long distance networks. Q: How many different types of switches are there, how do they differ, and what switches are most commonly found in use? A: The original telephone switches were manual, operator-run switchboards. Today, these are generally found in developing countries or in certain remote locations as newer types of switches allow for connection to automatic telephone service. Step-by-step was the first widely-used automatic switching method. This was an electro-mechanical system which made use of rotating blades and mechanical selection of various levels. Dial pulses would be used to cause the switches to select switch groups until the whole number was dialed. Some step-by-step facilities still exist today, but will eventually be replaced by more modern forms of switching (typically a digital facility). Step-by-step, with its mechanical nature, can be difficult to troubleshoot and maintain, and does not inherently support touch tones or special calling features without special addition of equipment. Crossbar was the next step in electro-mechanical switching. Rather than the rotary/level switches used in step-by-step, connections were completed by means of a matrix of connectors. The configuration of crossbar matrix elements was under "common control" which could route the call along a variety crossbar elements. Step-by-step's "progressive control" could not be rerouted to avoid points of congestion in the switches but was rather at the mercy of which numbers would be dialed by the telephone users. Electronic switches were developed in the 1960's. These were often reed relay switches with an electronic common control faster than previous crossbar systems. The fewer moving parts there were, the better. Services such as call waiting or call forwarding would eventually be possible under electronic systems. Finally, the new digital electronic systems provide for a fully- programmable telephone operation. These are all-electronic systems which would process calls without moving parts (ie. solid-state switching) and full computerisation of control. Voice traffic would now be converted to digital format for use with digital transmission facilities. A wide variety of user services can be implemented such as sophisticated types of call forwarding or Caller ID or ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network). Ultimately, all telephone subscribers will be served by such switches as these. Presently, various kinds of switching systems are in use, and the proportions of what technologies are in use in given regions will vary. The most common will eventually be the digital electronic systems. There are significant costs associated with upgrading the network to eventually use digital, fully-programmable switching, but the eventual goal is to modernise Central Offices and long distance networks to such switches. In the meantime, the various switching technologies in use must provide compatibility with each other. Q: When did the first ESS (electronic) switch go into service? A: In the U.S., the first 1ESS switch went into service May 1965 in Succasunna, New Jersey. This was a software-controlled switch using magnetic reed relays. In Canada, the first ESS was set up in Montreal, circa 1967. Despite the capabilities of such ESS switches, some phone companies are replacing these older generation electronic switches (eg. ESS or SP-1) in favour of digital switches (eg. DMS). Any information regarding international firsts in electronic or digital switching would be welcome as a future enhancement to the FAQ. Q: What frequencies do touch tones use for which numbers? A: The touch tone system uses pairs of tones to represent the various keys. There is a "low tone" and a "high tone" associated with each button (0 through 9, plus * (star) and # (octothorpe or pound symbol). The low tones vary according to what horizontal row the tone button is in, while the high tones correspond to the vertical column of the tone button. The tones and assignments are as follows: 1 2 3 A : 697 Hz 4 5 6 B : 770 Hz (low tones) 7 8 9 C : 852 Hz * 0 # D : 941 Hz ---- ---- ---- ---- 1209 1336 1477 1633 Hz (high tones) When the 4 button is pressed, the 770 Hz and 1209 Hz tones are sent together. The telephone central office will then decode the number from this pair of tones. The tone frequencies were designed to avoid harmonics and other problems that could arise when two tones are sent and received. Accurate transmission from the phone and accurate decoding on the telephone company end are important. They may sound rather musical when dialed (and representations of many popular tunes are possible), but they are not intended to be so. The tones should all be +/- 1.5% of nominal. The high frequency tone should be at least as loud, and preferably louder than the low frequency. It may be as much as 4 db louder. This factor is referred to as "twist." If a Touchtone signal has +3db of twist, then the high frequency is 3 db louder than the low frequency. Negative twist is when the low frequency is louder. Q: What are the A, B, C and D touch tone keys used for? Why are they not found on touch tone phone sets? A: These are extensions to the standard touch-tones (0-9, *, #) which originated with the U.S. miltary's Autovon phone network. The original names of these keys were FO (Flash Override), F (Flash), I (Immediate), and P (Priority) which represented priority levels that could establish a phone connection with varying degrees of immediacy, killing other conversations on the network if necessary with FO being the greatest priority, down to P being of lesser priority. The tones are more commonly referred to as the A, B, C and D tones respectively, and all use a 1633 Hz as their high tone. Nowadays, these keys/tones are mainly used in special applications such as amateur radio repeaters for their signalling/control. Modems and touch tone circuits tend to include the A, B, C and D tones as well. These tones have not been used for general public service, and it would take years before these tones could be used in such things as customer information lines; such services would have to be compatibile with the existing 12-button touch tone sets in any case. Q: What is call supervision? A: Call supervision refers to the process by which it is determined that the called party has indeed answered. Long distance calls and payphone calls are normally charged from the time the called party answers, and no charges should be assessed where the other end doesn't answer nor where the called party is busy or blocked by network problems. Q: How can I find out what my own phone number is? A: If the operator won't read your number back to you, and if you can't phone someone with a Calling # ID box, there are special numbers available that "speaks" your number back to you when dialed. These numbers are quite different from one jurisdiction to the next. Some areas use 200 222.2222; others just require 958; still others 311 or 711 and others have a normally-formatted telephone number which can be changed on occasion (such as 997.xxxx). Such numbers exist in many countries; no set rule is used in determining such numbers other than that these are often assigned to codes outside normal customer number sequences and would not be in conflict with regular telephone numbers. Q: Are there other kinds of test numbers used? A: Yes. Again, space (and available information) does not permit a complete list of what each telephone company is up to in terms of test numbers. The most common number is a "ringback" test number. When a two or three digit number is followed by all or the last part of your phone number, another dial tone occurs. Tests for dialing or ringing may then be done. Other numbers include intercom circuits for telephone company staff, or switching centre supervisors, or other interesting tests for call supervision or payphone coin tests. Again, this depends on the phone company, and such services are not usually found in the phone book, needless to say. Q: Can a US modem or phone work in the UK, or some other European country? (Or vice versa, or in general for international substitution of phone equipment) A: Often it can, provided that the AC Voltage and the physical jack are compatible or converted, and it can generate pulse dialing, as many exchanges are not equipped for touch tone. However, in most European countries it is illegal to fit non-approved equipment. In the UK approving equipment is the reponsibility of BABT, and the penalty is confiscation of the equipment plus a fine of up to 2000 pounds sterling. Approved equipment has a mark, usually a sticker, of a green circle with the words "APPROVED for connection to the telecommunication system specified in the instructions subject to the condition set out in them" and the number of the BABT certificate. Non-approved items, if they are sold in the UK must have a sticker with a red triangle with similar wording except that it's saying the exact opposite. It's perfectly legal to sell non-approved equipment subject to the above, as there may be a valid reason for using it, just not on the UK network. In Canada, telephone equipment requires approval from the Canadian Department of Communications. Most equipment designed for North American conditions should be acceptable, but a small sticker from Communications Canada is normally placed on the equipment to indicate approval. Q: What do "tip" and "ring" mean? A: The conductors of a wire pair to a telephone set are referred to as tip (T) and ring (R). Tip (T) is usually positive charge with respect to the Ring (R). Ring is typically at -48 volts (subject to voltage losses). Tip (T) is then at ground when no current is flowing. The actual voltages may differ in PBX/Key system situations (where 24 volt systems can be found) or higher voltages can be used for situations where there are long distances among the subscribers and the switching offices. Two wires normally suffice to complete a connection between a telephone and the central office; any extra wiring would be for purposes such as as grounding, party line ringing or party line billing identification, or even for dial light power on phones such as the Princess. The Tip and Ring terms come from the parts of the plugs that were used for manual switchboards. Q: Why use a negative charge (-48 volts) for Ring instead of a positive charge (such as +48 volts)? A: The reason for doing this is galvonic corrosion protection. A conductor with a negative charge will repel chlorine ions, as Cl (chlorine) ions are negative also. If the line were to have a positive charge, Cl ions would be attracted. This form of corrosion protection is called cathodic protection. It is often used for pipelines, bridges, etc. Such protection was very important in the days of open wire transmission lines. Q: What is "Caller ID" (or Call Display, or CNID (Caller Number Identification))? A: This is a telephone company service that transmits the number of the party to your telephone during the ringing. A data receiver detects this signal and displays or otherwise accepts the number transmitted. Whether or not a number is transmitted depends on political limitations (some jurisdictions do not allow for Caller ID, or at least a fully operational version of it) and technical limitations (ie. calls placed from older technology switches may not be identifiable; long distance services may not be set up to provide end-to-end ID yet). Q: How can I get specifications on how Caller ID service works? A: The official documentation on how the Caller ID or calling line ID works is available for purchase from Bellcore. A description of what those documents are and how to get them is available in the TELECOM Digest Archives file caller-id-specs.bellcore, or see the question "How can I contact Bellcore?" elsewhere in the FAQ. Local telephone companies may be able to provide technical information for the purpose of providing equipment vendors with specifications. Check the Archives for any other relevant files that may appear such as descriptions of the standards and issues surrounding services such as Caller ID. In Canada, for information about the service (known there as Call Display) contact: Stentor Resource Centre Inc, Director - Switched Network Services, 160 Elgin Street, Room 790, Ottawa, Ontario, K2P 2C4. (This address is changed from the one listed in FAQ #3 of 1992; note that the title may be subject to change as well). Tel: +1 613 781-3655. The document is "Call Management Service (CMS) Terminal-to-Network Interface", Interface Disclosure ID - 0001, November 1989. The document at last report was free, at least within Canada. This document deals with Bell Canada's Call Display standards, and may not be applicable outside their service area (provinces of Ontario and Quebec, parts of the Northwest Territories). In general, the North American Caller ID information is passed to the telephone set in ASCII using a 1200 baud modem signal (FSK) sent between the first and second rings. In other nations where a Caller ID service exists, or is being established, contact the appropriate telephone company for information. Q: What is the best way to busy a phone line? I have a bank of modems which are set up as a hunt group. When a modem dies I would like to be able to busy out the line that is disconnected, so that one of the other modems in the hunt group will take the call. A: "Our modem lines all enter on RJ21 "punchblocks" so I've got some rather nice clips that can be pushed over the terminals on the blocks and make contact with the pair that I want to busy out. Between the two terminals on the clip I have a red LED and a 270 ohm 1/2w resistor in series. As long as I get the clip on the right way, it busies out the line and lights up so I can see that I've got one of the lines busied out." "Since most of our modems have error correction, I've even gotten away with putting one of these on a line that's in use -- when the user disconnects, the line remains busy and I can then pull the modem at my leisure. The modem's error correction fixes the blast of noise from the clip as I slip it in." - Brian [Further notes [from Dan Boehlke]: A setup like this is not necessary. For most systems simply shorting tip and ring together will busy out the phone line. Some older systems, and lines that do not have much wire between the switch and the point at which it terminates will need a 270 ohm 1/2 watt resistor. The resistor is necessary because on a short line will not have enough resistance to make up for the lack of a load. Most modern systems have a current limiter that will prevent problems. Older system may not have a current limiter and may supply more current than modern systems do. In the followup discussion, we learned that we should not do this to incoming WATS lines and other lines that will cause the phone companie's diagnostics centers to get excited. A particular example was an incomming 800 number that was not needed for a few days. The new 800 number was subscribed to one of those plans that let you move it to another location in the event of a problem. Well the AT&T diagnostic center saw the busy'ed out line as a problem and promptly called the owner. -dan] Q: What is the difference between Caller ID/CNID and ANI? A: Caller ID or CNID or Call Display refers to a service offered to telephone customers that allows for display or identification of telephone numbers from which incoming calls are made. ANI, or Automatic Number Identification, refers to operations within the telephone network that allow for the registering of a long distance caller's number for billing purposes and not a public offering as such. Special services such as incoming number identification for toll-free or premium program lines (800 or 900 service in North America) make use of ANI information and pass this along to the called party. --------- Numbering --------- Q: What is a numbering plan? A: This is a plan which establishes the format of codes and subscriber numbers for a telephone system or other communications system such as Telex. On a local level, subscriber numbers can have a certain number of digits (in some cases, the number of digits varies according to the exchange centre or digit seqeuence used). The local plan would allow for codes used to reach operators, directory assistance, repair, test numbers, etc. On a regional or even national level, there need to be area codes or number prefixes established in order to route calls to the appropriate cities and central offices. The typical pattern is to use local numbers within a region, and use an STD (subscriber trunk dialing) or area code to call a number in another region. The most common method is to use numbers beginning with 0 as a long distance or inter-regional access digit, followed by other digits to route to the proper city (eg. within the UK, dial 071 or 081 for London, or 021 for Birmingham). Digits other than 0 (generally 2 through 9) would then represent the initial digit of local numbers. In France, there are really two areas; Paris and everything else. All local numbers in France have eight digits. Paris uses an area code of 1, the rest of the country has no area code as such (just the local number, which does not begin with a 1). Long distance access is 16 plus the number for regions outside Paris, or for Paris, access is 16 + 1 + Paris number. Some countries do not use an area code; instead, the local number is unique within the country. This often occurs in small nations but such plans are also active in Denmark and Singapore. Hong Kong got rid of its area codes in recent years and converted to seven-digit local numbers. North America is unusual in the world in that the long distance access code 1 is commonly used before dialing an area codes plus local number (or in most areas, at least until the expansion to new format of area codes is in effect, 1 plus number for numbers within an area code). Most countries include the prefix in their STD codes listing (021 Birmingham, UK; 90 Helsinki, Finland) so that an initial prefix code is avoided. North American area codes have three digits, while local numbers have seven. Q: How was the country code system developed? A: In the early 1960s, a global numbering plan was devised so that the various national telephone systems can be linked; this used country codes of one to three digits in length, assigned according to geographic regions on the Earth. In fact, the system was developed from a numbering plan devised in Europe. International Telecommunications Union (ITU) documents from that time showed a numbering plan of two-digit country codes covering Europe and the Mediterranean Basin countries and even described at that time the overseas access codes to be used in various countries (France 19, UK 010 - most of these codes are still in use today). Many country codes from that original numbering plan were used in the worldwide plan such as France 33, UK 44 although many codes had to be renumbered for the new worldwide plan. The world numbering zones (with initial country code digits) are: 1 North America 2 Africa 3 and 4 Europe 5 South/Latin America (includes Mexico) 6 South Pacific countries, Oceana (eg. Australia) 7 Commonwealth of Independent States (former USSR) 8 East Asia (eg. Japan, China), plus Marisat/Inmarsat 9 West & South Asia, Middle East (eg. India, Saudi Arabia) There are a few anomalies to the zoning; St Pierre & Miquelon, a French territory near the Canadian province of Newfoundland, was issued a country code in zone 5 (country code 508), since North America already has the country code 1, and there were no codes available in zones 3 or 4 (at the time of original assignment). There was room in world zone 5 for the code. Similarly, Greenland (country code 299) could not be fit into the European zones, thus 299 was a code that was available from a nearby zone. The TELECOM Digest Archives has country code listings, including a detailed set which indicates area/STD codes used within country codes as they would be dialed in international dialing (excluding domestic inter-regional prefix digits). Q: What is the correct way to write a telephone number for international use? A: The method recommended by the CCITT (an international telecommunications standards committee) is to use the plus sign then the country code, then the STD code (without any common STD/area code prefix digits) and the local number. The following numbers (given for the sake of example only) describe some of the formats used: City Domestic Number International Format --------------- ----------------- -------------------- Toronto, Canada (416) 870-2372 + 1 416 870 2372 Paris, France (1) 33.33.33.33 + 33 1 33 33 33 33 Lyon, France 77.77.77.77 + 33 77 77 77 77 Birmingham, UK (021) 123 4567 + 44 21 123 4567 Colon, Panama 41-2345 + 507 41 2345 Tokyo, Japan (03) 4567 8901 + 81 3 4567 8901 In most cases, the initial 0 of an STD code will not form part of the international format number. Some countries use a common prefix of 9 (such as Finland or Colombia). Some countries STD codes can be used as they are where prefix digits are not part of the area code (as is the case in North America, Mexico, and a few other countries). As indicated in the above example, country code 1 is used for the U.S., Canada and Caribbean nations under the North American Numbering Plan. This fact is not as well-publicised by American and Canadian telephone companies as it is in other countries. The important consideration is that the digits following the + represent the number as it would be dialed on an international call (that is, the telephone company's overseas dialing code followed by the digits after the + sign in the international format). Q: What are the prefix digits used in international dialing? A: This depends on the country from which an international call is placed. The recommended international prefix is 00 (followed by the international format number), which most countries have adopted or are planning to adopt. Some of the exceptions are: Australia 0011 North America 011 Colombia 90 Russia 810 Denmark 009 Spain 07 Finland 990 Nigeria 009 France 19 W Papua New Guinea 05 Ireland 00 (was 16) Sweden 009 Mexico + 98 Turkey 9 W 9 Netherlands 09 United Kingdom 010 Norway 095 W = wait for another dial tone before proceeding with rest of number + = Mexico uses 95 to access North America (country code 1) specifically; 98 is used for calling other nations (The international access codes in some countries such as Netherlands and the UK are eventually expected to change to 00) Q: What does NPA, NNX, or NXX mean? A: NPA means Numbering Plan Area, a formal term meaning a North American area code (like New York 212, Chicago 312, Toronto 416 etc). NNX refers to the format of the telephone number's prefix or central office code (the first three digits of a seven-digit local North American number). The N represents a digit from 2 to 9; an X represents any digit 0 to 9. Thus, NNX prefixes can number from 220 to 999, as long as they do not have a 0 or 1 as the middle digit. NXX means any prefix/central office code from 200 to 999 could be represented, allowing for any value in the middle digit. Obvious special exceptions include 411 (directory assistance) and 911 (emergency). Q: What happens when all the telephone numbers run out? A: With demand for phone numbers increasing worldwide, the capacity given by a certain number of digits in a numbering plan will tend to be exhausted. In whatever country, capacity expansion can be done by such measures as adding an extra digit to the local number (as was done in Tokyo, Japan or in Paris, France). Extra area/STD codes can be assigned, such as splitting a region's codes (London UK was originally STD code 01, now split to 071 and 081; Los Angeles in the U.S. was originally area code 213, then split to add an 818 area, and recently another split of 213 created the new 310 area). Q: How is extra numbering capacity achieved in North America? A: Within an area code, there are a maximum number of prefixes (ie. first three digits of a phone number) that can be assigned. In the original telephone "numbering plan", up to 640 prefixes could be assigned per area code (of the NNX format, 8 * 8 * 10). Yet, prefixes get used up due to growth and demand for new numbers (accelerated by popularity of separate fax or modem lines, or by new services such as the distinctive ringing numbers that ring a single line differently depending on which phone number was dialed). When the prefixes of NNX format run out, there are two options in order to allow for more prefixes, and in turn more numbers: 1) "splitting" the area code so that a new area code can accomodate new prefixes, or 2) allowing extra prefixes to be assigned by changing from NNX format to NXX format. The preferred option is to go with 2) first, in order to avoid having a new area code assignment. Yet, this gives the area code a maximum of 160 new prefixes, or 8 * 10 * 10 = 800. When the NXX format prefixes are used up, then 1) is not optional. New York and Los Angeles are two regions that have gone from NNX to NXX format prefixes first, then their area codes were split. Interestingly enough, some area codes have split even though there was no change from NNX format prefixes to NXX at the time. Such splits have occurred in Florida (305/407) and Colorado (303/719). The precise reasons why a change to NXX-style prefixes was not done in those cases is not widely known, but switching requirements in those areas, plus telephone company expenses in changing from NNX to NXX format (and the likelihood of an eventual area code split) are likely factors in these decisions. Note that it is prefixes, and not necessarily the number of telephones, that determines how crowded an area code is. Small exchanges could use a whole prefix for only a few phones, while an urban exchange may use most of the 10 000 possible numbers per prefix. Companies, paging, test numbers and special services can be assigned their own prefixes as well, such as the 555 directory assistance prefix (555.1212). Q: In North America, why does the long distance dialing within an area code often change so that 1 + home area code + number has to be dialed, or changed to just seven digits (like a local call)? A: When prefixes change to NXX, that means that the prefix numbers can be identical to area codes. The phone equipment is no longer able to make a distinction between what is an area code and what is a prefix within the home area code, based on the first three digits. For instance, it is hard for central offices to tell the difference between 1+210 555.2368 and 1+210.5552 Thus, 1 + area code + number for all long distance calls is used in many North American area codes. Or ... just dialing seven digits within the area code for all calls, local or long distance (thus risking complaints from customers who thought they were making a local call when in fact the call was long distance). It is up to each phone company to decide how to handle prefix and dialing changes. The rules change from place to place. Q: Is North America really running out of area codes? A: Indeed, apart from special "non-geographic" area codes such as 200, 300, 400 or 500, there are no longer any area codes that can be assigned from the traditional format. At present, all area codes have a 0 or 1 as the middle digit (212, 907, 416, 708, etc). It even appears that the 610 code was freed from its usage in Canadian TWX/ISDN service (and moved to 600), so that the split of 215 area in Philadelphia can use 610. There remains the assignment of code 710 which is reserved for mysterious U.S. government services. Area codes ending in -00 are intended for special services like 800 or 900 numbers. Also, -11 area codes could be confused with services like 411 (directory assistance) or 911 (emergency); indeed, a few places require 1+411 for directory assistance. Q: How will we make room if North American area codes are running out? A: Bellcore, which oversees the assignment of area codes and the North American Numbering Plan in general, has made a recommendation that "interchangeable" area codes be allowed as of January 1995 (advanced from the previous deadline of July 1995 due to unprecedented exhaustion of available area codes). That means that there no longer need to be a 0 or 1 as the middle digit of an area code, and in fact the area code will become NXX format. While some suggest that eight-digit local numbers or four-digit area codes be established, the interchangeable area code plan has been on the books for many years. One aspect of the plan is that, initially, the new area codes may end in 0 (such as 220, 650, etc). This would make it easier on a few area codes so that they could conceivably retain the ability to dial 1+number (without dialing the home area code) for long distance calls within the area code, provided that they have not assigned prefixes ending in zero that would conflict with new area codes. That option is not possible for many area codes that have already assigned some prefixes of "NN0" format, however. Eventually, the distinction between area code and prefix formats would be completely lost. The last remaining traditional area code, 910, was recently assigned to allow for a split of North Carolina's 919 area code. Still, Bellcore expects that NPA capacity is sufficient until the January 1995 cutover to interchangeable NPAs. The interchangeable area code plan will be felt throughout the U.S. and Canada. As a last resort, the N00 codes (like 200) may need to be used. Q: What about expanding area/STD codes in other countries? A: Many countries tend to use variable numbers of digits in the local numbers and STD/area code numbers, thus there is often flexibility in assigning new codes or expanding the capacity of codes. Sometimes codes are changed to provide for extra capacity or to allow for a uniform numbering plan such as ensuring the total number of digits of the STD/area code plus the local number is constant within a country. In the UK, it is reported that the digit '1' will be added to some of the major codes as of 1995 in order to create extra STD code capacity. For instance, London's 071 and 081 codes would be changed to 0171 and 0181 respectively (internationally, change +44 71 and +44 81 to +44 171 and +44 181). There are rumours that France will change its system again, to divide the country into a few regions of single-digit area codes. Presently, Paris has an area code 1, with the remainder of France having no area code as such; eight-digit local numbers are used in and out of Paris. The areas outside of Paris would then get area codes corresponding to particular regions. Australia is moving to single digit area codes, with uniform eight digit local numbers. This replaces the current system with variable length area codes and local numbers. This new plan is to be phased in during the 1990's. New Zealand is also completing a change to single digit area codes, with uniform seven digit local numbers. Hong Kong actually got rid of its area codes a few years ago, replacing the few single-digit area codes with seven-digit local numbers throughout Hong Kong. Q: What is Bellcore? A: Bellcore, or Bell Communications Research, is a company that does a variety of things for the telephone system in North America. It assigns area codes, develops and sells technical documents relating to the operation of the phone system, and does research and development on various communications technologies. Recently, Bellcore did development on MPEG, a video data compression method to allow transmission of entertainment-quality video on a 1.5 Mb/s communications link. Q: How can I contact Bellcore? A: The Bellcore document hotline (with touch tone menu) can be reached at 1 800 521 CORE (ie. 1 800 521 2673) within the USA, or +1 908 699 5800 outside the USA (+1 908 699 0936 is the fax number). A catalogue of documents can be ordered through this number. For the voice menu on Bellcore's document hotline, to order a document press 2 at the automated greeting. If you want to talk to a person about availability, prices, etc, press 4 at the automated greeting. Payment for documents can be made using American Express, Visa, Master Card, International Money Orders, and Checks on US Banks. If you don't have a document number handy, a catalog of technical documents is available. Bellcore TAs and other preliminary "advisories" are only available by writing: Bellcore Document Registrar 445 South Street - Room 2J-125 P. O. Box 1910 Morristown, NJ USA 07962-1910 The mailing address for ordering other "standard" documents (including "TR" documents) is: Bellcore Customer Service 60 New England Avenue Piscataway, NJ USA 08854-4196 NPA/NXX (area codes, exchange codes) information is maintained by the (somewhat) separate Traffic Routing Administration (TRA) group, at +1 201 829 3071. For all other TRA "products", or information about on-line access to a database of routing data, contact the TRA Hotline at +1 201 829 3071, or write to: Traffic Routing Administration Bell Communications Research, Inc. 435 South Street, Room 1J321 Morristown, NJ 07962-1961 If you want to talk to the "pub" folks, or a technical person, the numbers/addresses are in the front of any TR (and the "Catalog"). Note that certain Bellcore documents (particularly certain TRA documents), require the signing of a "Terms and Conditions" agreement before purchase. Q: How can I get exchange/billing data? What is a V&H tape? A: Bellcore sells the NPA-NXX Vertical and Horizontal Coordinates Tape (the "V&H Tape"); this is primarily for billing purposes and lists (for each NXX, or central office code) the type of NXX, major/minor V&H coordinates (a sort of "latitude" and "longitude" used to calculate rate distances for long distance billing), LATA Code (identifying the U.S. long distance service area), the RAO (revenue accounting office), Time Zone, Place Name, OCN (telephone company identifier) and indicators for international dialing and "Non-Dialable". Other related Bellcore documents include: - NPA/NXX Activity Guide lists all NPA/NXX codes schedules to be added, removed or "modified" (monthly). There's also an Active Code List that lists all NPA/NXX codes that aren't planned to be removed or "modified" for the next 6 months. - Local Exchange Routing Guide (LERG) contains information on all USA/Caribbean destinations, switching entities, Rate Centers and Localities, Tandem Homing information, operator service codes, 800/900 NXX assignments, etc. (three 1600 BPI tapes). Mostly useful to interexchange carriers (IXCs) and other telephone companies. - Telephone Area Code Directory (TACD) is a document listing area codes according to location (ordered by state/province and place). TACD also includes a list of Carrier Identification Codes (CICs) used for 10XXX+ or 950.ZXXX long distance service selection. -------------------- Regulatory & Tariffs -------------------- Q: What's this about the FCC starting a modem tax for those using modems on phone lines? A: This is one of those tall urban legends, on the order of the Craig Shergold story (yes, folks, Craig's doing okay as of last report and he doesn't need cards of any kind). It started when the FCC took up a proposal that, if it had passed, would have raised the rate that certain modem users paid, notably those who have set up their own long distance networks for public use, like Compu$erve. The proposal was not enacted into law. Nevertheless, this proposal, or one even worse, could come up again in the future. Here's how to tell the facts from the urban legends. (1) Demand documentation; don't act until you see a copy of the FCC proposal. (2) Once you have the proposal, look at the number. It will be in the form yy-n, yy-nn, or yy-nnn. The first number, before the hyphen, is the year. If, for example, it's the infamous 85-79, you know it was the 79th proposal all the way back in 1985, and no longer matters. (3) If you do see an up-to-date proposal, read it carefully. If you can't tell what part of it enacts a "modem tax", demand that the person who wants you to act explain it to you. If they can't, or won't, then (and only then) bring it up on Telecom Digest, making sure that you always include the FCC proposal's number, so that people know which document you're talking about. Regulators in other countries may also have similar types of notices. The CRTC in Canada issues public notices and decisions on telecommunications using similar numbering schemes. Q: Why is a touch tone line more expensive than a rotary dial line (in many places)? A: This has been an occasional debate topic in the Digest. Indeed, there can be a surcharge from $1 to $3 per month to have the ability to dial using touch tone. In modern equipment, touch tone is actually better and cheaper for the phone company to administer that the old pulse/rotary dialing system. The tone dialing charge can be attributed to the value of a demanded service; tone is better, thus a premium can be applied for this privilege. Also, it is something of a holdover from the days when tone service required extra expense to decode with the circuitry originally available. This is especially true on crossbar exchanges, or where tone would have to be converted to dial pulses as is the case with step-by-step exchange equipment. Today, cheap integrated circuits are readily available for decoding the tones used in dialing, and are a standard part of electronic switching systems. Some telephone companies have abandoned a premium charge for tone dialing by including this in the regular local service charge. Others still hold to some form of tone surcharge. Q: How come I got charged at a hotel for a call where no one answered? Why is the timing on some of the long distance carriers inaccurate? A: Where real call supervision is unavailable or inconvenient, a ploy used by some call billing systems is to guess when a call might be answered. That is, a customer dials the call, and the equipment times the progress; after a certain point in time the billing will commence whether or not the party at the other end actually answers the phone. Thus, calls left ringing for more than five or six rings can be billed. Adding to the problem is the fact that calls don't necessarily start ringing at a fixed time after the last digit is dialed. Needless to say, some calls can be left uncharged in this scheme. Should the call be answered and completed before the billing timer elapses, the call won't be billed. There are reports that California requires proper billing and supervision of calls. Other areas may adopt similar requirements. ----------- Competition ----------- Q: Which countries have competitive long distance service? A: Most countries have a single monopoly telephone company for their local and long distance services. Yet, deregulation of telephone companies and telecommunications in general is a worldwide trend. For better or worse, the international marketplace is demanding more innovation and competition in telecom markets in such areas as electronic mail, fax and data services as well as the long distance, satellite and other network services. The United States has competition in terms of long distance services (ie. a choice of carriers such as AT&T, MCI, Sprint, Metromedia/ITT, Allnet, ATC). This was established in the early 1980s with the court-ordered dissolution of the Bell System into such pieces as regional local telephone providers, AT&T (long distance) and Bellcore (research, administration of telephone standards, etc). The UK has a duopoly long distance situation: British Telecom and Mercury can provide long distance services but that could be challenged as other companies wish to provide long distance services. Canada permitted public long distance competition in June 1992. Prior to that, there was limited competition in terms of such things as fax communication services and various long distance/local service resellers, aimed at business interests. Unitel and BCRL/Call-Net were successful in their application to compete. A subsequent appeal of certain aspects of this decision was made by Bell Canada and other existing telephone companies. The result of the appeal was that the decision could stand, and that long distance competition may proceed. New Zealand recently allowed Clear Communications to compete in long distance. Australia now has Optus as a long distance competitor. Japan has competition in international public long distance services. There are initial signs competition in the "local loop", or local exchange services, also. Reports from the UK indicate that there is significant growth in alternative local services, besides the Mercury/BT long distance duopoly (competition of two). Cable companies are touted as the alternative local phone companie because of the available capacity on cable feeds, plus the cable industry's conversion to fibre optic and digital technologies. A choice of "dial tone" providers may eventually be available to match the availability of competition in long distance services. Q: What is a COCOT? A: Customer-Owned Coin-Operated Telephone, or perhaps Coin-Operated Customer-Owned Telephone. Essentially, this is a privately-owned public telephone as opposed to the traditional payphone that is owned and operated by the local telephone company. Most COCOTs exist in the United States; their status is not too well-known outside the U.S. Certainly there are no approved COCOTs in Canada as such and are also likely rare or nonexistent in other nations. The COCOT is the target of much scorn as it often delivers less than what one would hope for in competition. Cited deficiencies of many of these units include prohibiting access to carriers like AT&T, use of default "carriers" that charge exorbitant rates for long distance calls, etc. Some of them have had problems when newly activated area codes were used. In some cases, COCOTs would not even place calls to numbers whose new area codes could not be dialed and whose old area codes could no longer be dialed. Q: What is an AOS? A: AOS is short for Alternate Operator Service. That is a company other than a long distance carrier or local telephone company that provides operator assisted services for long distance (collect, third number billed calls, person-to-person, etc). Normally this involves having operator staff handle billing and the necessary dialing, but the AOS companies make use of existing long distance services rather than have their own network. Using an AOS, whether for a collect call or credit card call can be more expensive than bargained for. Often, COCOTs (see above) will have their default "carrier" set to an AOS, for optimum revenues. Hotels may also set up phones to use AOS services by default. Q: What is "splashing"? A: Suppose you place a call from city A to city B using an AOS based in city C. The call is considered to be "splashed" if the billing for the call is based on the distance between city C (AOS) and city B (destination) rather than between cities A and B as one traditionally expects such calls to be billed. Thus, if the splashed distance (C-B) is much longer than the origin-destination (A-B) distance, the customer is charged extra money. Q: Where can I find a list of equal access (10XXX) codes? A: The TELECOM Digest Archives has lists of these codes. They are contained in the files occ.10xxx.access.codes and occ.10xxx.list.updated in the TELECOM Digest Archives. New information on these codes or other access codes occasionally appears in TELECOM Digest. An official, full list of these codes was part of Bellcore's Telephone Area Code Directory document. Bellcore also maintains a list of these Carrier Identification Codes as a separate document (see "How can I contact Bellcore?" question for details on purchasing Bellcore documents). Q: How can I tell who my default carrier is (or that of a 10XXX+ carrier)? A: In the U.S., dial 1 700 555.4141, and that should get a recording indicating the default carrier. This should be a free call. From regular lines, dialing 10XXX + 1 700 555.4141 can yield the identifying recordings of other carriers. On payphones, AT&T is always a "default" carrier for coin calls, but not necessarily so when it comes to calling/billing card numbers, collect calls or other operator-assisted calls. Thus on payphones, AT&T's recording is heard regardless if what carrier access codes are used before 1 700 555.4141. Apparently, no other long distance carrier is interested in collecting coin revenues. COCOTs usually handle coin calls with self-contained coin billing equipment (and guessing of call connection time). -------- Features -------- Q: What is the calling card "boing" and what is it made of? A: When a North American call is dialed as 0 + (area code if necessary) + number, a "boing" is heard after the number is dialed. This is the prompt to enter a telephone company calling card number to bill the call with, or to select the operator (0) for further handling, or in some regions to specify collect or third number billing for the call. The boing consists of a very short burst of the '#' touch tone, followed by a rapidly decaying dial tone. The initial '#' tone is used in case certain tone-pulse converters exist on the line; such converters use the '#' to disable conversion of tones to dial pulses, a conversion which would prevent card number entries from reaching the long distance provider. Q: How can I prevent the call waiting tone from beeping in mid-conversation? A: If you place the call, and don't want to get interrupted, a call waiting suppression code is dialed before dialing the call itself. The most common code for this in North America is *70 or 1170 (on rotary dial phone lines). 70# (or 70 and wait on rotary phone) could also be used in some areas. Other countries will have special codes for this, and will vary in terms of capabilities offered. Local phone companies in some areas charge installation and monthly fees for 'Cancel Call Waiting', and you must subscribe for this to work. In some areas it comes free with Call Waiting. In a few other areas it may be unavailable at any price. Thus, to call 555.0000 so that call waiting is disabled, dial *70 (or whatever the correct code is for your area), wait for another dial tone, then dial 555.0000 as usual. Suppressing call waiting tone on an *incoming* call may be possible depending on how your phone company has set the central office. One possible way of doing this is to flash your switch-hook briefly, see if a dial tone comes on, then try dialing the call waiting suppress code (*70 or whatever). Southwestern Bell, for instance, uses a variant of this: *70 (ie. a second hook flash required). The methods are not guaranteed, however; your phone company might be able to give a better answer if the preceding doesn't work. NOTE: each phone company will determine the capabilities of Call Waiting features, and what codes will be used to activate them, and what costs the service will be provided at. The codes are not necessarily the same from place to place. Please consult your phone company for official information in your particular area if any of the above codes do not work properly. Also check the phone book introductory pages as these sometimes include instructions on how to use special calling services such as Call Waiting. ------------- Miscellaneous ------------- Q: Is there a way to find someone given just a phone number? A: Sometimes. There are often cross-referenced city indexes available in libraries and other places that have lists ordered by the phone number. These directories go by names such as Bowers, Mights, Strongs or other brands. Unlisted numbers are not listed, nor are they intended to be traced by the general public. One catch is that such directories are necessarily out of date shortly after their publication what with the "churn" of changing telephone numbers and addresses. In addition, there are phone numbers provided by telephone companies that connect to live lookup services. Operators at these numbers will determine a person according to the phone number. Only a few of these lookup numbers are intended for the general public (eg. Chicago and Tampa). Some countries have also provided number to name lookup as a matter of normal telephone service, although these are often chargeable calls. Otherwise, most of these lookup numbers are for internal telephone company usage. Again, unlisted numbers are not intended to be provided by these services, while the listed numbers are often found in the introductory pages of local phone books. The Compuserve on line service had a facility to find names and addresses based on phone numbers. This facility is reported to have more recent information for residential numbers than for business numbers. Those interested should contact Compuserve staff for assistance or information on this service. Private detectives seem to have other means of getting these numbers, but that's another story... Q: Where can a Cellular/Mobile Radio mailing list be contacted? A: A mailing list dedicated to cellular/mobile radio technologies, namely new digital radio services, is available. Contact dec@dfv.rwth-aachen.de. Fidonet has a CELLULAR conference for cellular telephony issues, for those with access to that network. ( end of list ) --------- Send future Frequently Asked Questions direct to dleibold1@attmail.com, or other addresses mentioned at the beginning of this document. Do NOT use any of the TELECOM Digest addresses for correspondence regarding the FAQ unless all the other FAQ addresses are unreachable.   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06181; 25 Jan 93 2:59 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05212 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:55:37 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02619 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:55:03 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:55:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301250655.AA02619@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #43 TELECOM Digest Mon, 25 Jan 93 00:54:50 CST Volume 13 : Issue 43 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Tony Pelliccio) Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (William Degnan) Re: Internet *67 Service (David Cornejo) Re: Beware: Portability (Brent Capps) Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Jan Steinman) Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) (Udi Manber) Re: PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs (John Higdon) Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Ken Stone) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Gantt Edmiston) Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Sue Miller) Re: Wiring For Multi-Lines on One Jack (John R. Levine) Re: Telecom Management Degrees (Jack Winslade) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 16:12:10 EST From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution Oh yes, the system is FILLED with errors. Last I knew NET was embarking on changing all it's billing and order systems over. Perhaps your area of MA just went through it. I know Providence went through it last October. I had a line installed in my new apt. and five months go by, no bill. Nothing! The best part is, my number ends in 071x and the VA Hospital is 710x. Guess where all my LD was being billed to? Uh huh, the VA. I'd call NET and ask them and they could never find account info, same thing with AT&T for my LD. Who knows, maybe I should have kept my mouth shut and I'd be receiving my service compliments of New England Telephone. The only reason I knew about the LD being billed to the VA Hospital in Providence was because a friend of mine who I call quite often lives in NJ and he got a rather nasty call from someone at VA who takes care of the telecom system asking who he knows that works there. Well, he immediately called me thinking it might have been one of my computer hijinks again but it wasn't. To this day, those five+ months of LD have NEVER been billed to me. I guess VA either just payed them or disputed them. Ah well ... thanks Uncle Sam! Tony [Moderator's Note: I had a phone turned on about twenty years ago at a place where I stayed occassionally and although the service got turned on, the paperwork never made it to accounting for the purpose of setting up a billing account. Since the line had unmeasured metro service (a type of service we had back then) there were never any extra units generated and no reason to ever issue a bill. It went on like that for a year. I was careful to never make any long distance calls from that line or do anything which would start paperwork going. Then one day, some $$#%&# phreak billed a third number phraud call to that line. From a telco unknown to me comes the billing tape; it hits the accounting department and of course the charges promptly fall out and go to suspense, there being 'no such number' to bill them to on this end where Accounting was concerned. In the adjustments/suspense investigative process, someone at telco actually dials my number and discovers it turned on .... hmmm, they say, and they ask the CO to send the paperwork all over again. The next billing cycle, I get a bill for *12 months to date* of service, plus the installation charge which never had been billed, plus next month's service in advance, and of course, plus the (still unknown to telco) phraud LD charge. I got the phraud charge removed, but was hardly in a position to argue with them about the service I had been using for the past year. :( PAT] ------------------------------ From: wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org (William Degnan) Reply-To: wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:42:14 Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution sth@slipknot.mit.edu (Scott Hannahs) writes: > Just a follow up to the note I posted last week. New England > Telephone now admits (verbally) that they were miss-billing (read > overcharging) everyone in my exchange. They are willing to rebate me > the amount they overcharged but I was told, "We can't rebate everyone > since that would cost too much". I didn't hear any complaints about > collecting too much money. They will rebate anyone who complains > about it. The Mass. Department of Public Utilities might be interested in this discussion. And if they are not, try the Office of Public Utility Counsel (or if this is not what it is called in the Commonwealth, its equivalent). Oh ... Did they refund any interest? William Degnan, Communications Network Solutions -Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology- P.O. Drawer 9530 | wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org | mfwic@mdf.fidonet.org Austin, TX 78766-9530 | Voice +1 512 323 9383 ------------------------------ From: dave@telco-nac.com (David Cornejo) Subject: Re: Internet *67 Service Date: 24 Jan 1993 11:38:40 -0800 Organization: Telco Systems NAC, Fremont, CA In article Paul Robinson writes: > Note earlier in this message I said "the one that's left". There was > a service being run in Australia that did even more. First you used > the program PGP - a free RSA Public key generator - to create a public > and private key. You could then send the service your public key > first, then send messages which were UUENCODEd using the matching > private key, and told that system where to send the message. It would > use the previously supplied key to decrypt the message and then > forward it under the unique ID. > Unfortunately the backbone supplier for his area caught on to what he > was doing, and like most stuffy governmental authorities, takes a dim > view of people keeping their private matters private, informed him > that the activity he was doing was not a valid use of the network and > ordered the service discontinued. Boo. In a note that I saw posted somewhere, the operator of this service said that the other reason given by the backbone supplier was that the links to Australia were overburdened even without this added traffic. This was the primary reason why he chose not to protest too strongly. My own feeling is that these services are innappropriate for use on the Internet. I feel that since some other entity pays to transport my traffic on its network that I owe them some accountability. (I know that we usually pay for the connection to the Internet, but in general the transport is at the expense of someone else) If the Australian network (which I believe has educational/government funding) feels that someones late night mumblings to alt.sex.* is inappropriate given their charter who are we to complain? It is after all their dime. Dave Cornejo, Telco Systems NAC voice 510.490.3111 4305 Cushing Parkway ext 5158 Fremont, CA 94538 FAX 510.490.9396 ------------------------------ From: bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps) Subject: Re: Beware: Portability Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc. Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 16:36:14 GMT In article bill@toto.info.com writes: > BCS-34 (BCS: Bad Canadian Software ;-). FYI, the software that drives the DMS-250s used by Sprint is written by BNR -- in Richardson, TX. Brent Capps bcapps@agora.rain.com (gay stuff) bcapps@atlastele.com (telecom stuff) ------------------------------ From: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch (Jan Steinman,- Bytesmiths -,Tel x3946) Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report Reply-To: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch Organization: Ascom Hasler AG Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 11:49:54 GMT In article 5@eecs.nwu.edu, tjrob@ihlpl.att.com () writes: > From article , by jimmy@denwa.info.com (Quotes speculating on reasons for US telecom tech lag deleted.) > No, you missed the point. It is federal tax policy which is > dramatically different between the U.S.A. and many other countries. Can we speculate what the change in administration may do with this? The Clinton/Gore campaign stessed renewed infrastructure, and I believe they specifically called for the funding of a "data highway" system, similar in scope and effort to that which produced the Interstate Highway System. To me, this indicates that if telecom industry lobbyists do their job, there should be no problem getting amortization rates for telecom gear down to those of computer gear, at least in the next four years! Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths steinman@hasler.ascom.ch 2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA +1 503 657 7703 Beundenfeldstrasse 35, CH-3013, Bern, Switzerland +41 31 999 3946 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 20:00:56 -0800 From: udi@cs.washington.edu (Udi Manber) Subject: Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) [PAT writes]: > Yours won't be the first call Integratel has received from young men > who were similarly situated (or dirty old men for that matter), nor > will it be the last. Next time, read the fine print closer in the ad > or listen to the message played out when you first call! :) PAT] I must take strong exception to the tone of the moderator's reply, which automatically assumed that Integretel was right and that student was "guilty." (Although in fairness, I probably would have reacted the same way had I not been on the opposite side recently.) Intergretel will not win any awards for precision or customer service. They make mistakes. Lots of them. In many cases, the "companies" Integretel represents *rely* on the fact that it is extremely difficult to complain against them. A great part of that difficulty is that everyone assumes that you are "a dirty old (or young) man" automatically. So, complaining is not only difficult, it is also embarrassing. As I detailed in a message a couple of weeks ago, it took me two months and dozens of phone calls to successfully remove their charges of $3.95 for one minute call, which occurred through an 800 number call (which I assume was made in error; Integretel would not tell me or even the utility commission the 800 number). It was easier for me to argue that a one-minute call to an 800 number was made in error and I never agreed or intended to have any business with these outfits; but if the charges were $395, I am sure no one would have believed me. 900 numbers provide a reasonable mechanism. There are holes, but if you dial 1-900 you should know that "buyer beware." All the other schemes (call back, call collect, 800 number forwarding, etc.) are there mainly to circumvent blocking. In my opinion, 99% of the time (and I am not sure about the 1% either) the main purpose of such schemes is to defraud someone. The fact that no reasonable regulations exist and these kinds of frauds still flourish is an outrage in my opinion, especially when the victims are then labeled as dirty old men. Udi Manber [Moderator's Note: You say 'the main purpose of such schemes is to defraud someone ...' Who, may I ask, is attempting to defraud whom? 800 numbers being forwarded is one thing, but the willful acceptance of a collect call when you were notified by the operator that so and so was calling collect and the charge would be so much per minute is quite another. If it were as simple as has been suggested, to simply make the claim 'someone accepted the charge' when in fact no one was contacted or made that statement, then why hasn't Integretel done that to everyone? If all they have to do in this 'scam' is punch up some information on billing tapes and pass it along to telco, then why don't we see much more of it than we do? I do not stand up for the way Integretel handles customer service, and I agree that by and large their clients are sleaze. But if you choose to deal with their clients then you should plan on paying their clients. You say 'all the other schemes are there to circumvent blocking ...'; of course they are. The LD carriers use 1-800 numbers as a way to circumvent 10xxx blocking. Some customers use 800/ANI as a way to circumvent Caller-ID blocking. Everyone uses something to circumvent the blocking of something else when it suits their requirements. Why should sex-by-phone providers be any different? Integretel may use sleazy business practices, but I am quite sure they do not commit fraud. If people want to argue with the company and insist they did not make the call, that is fine. Maybe they did, and maybe they did not, but be assured there was *some basis* for the charges. Let's cut out the old BS which goes "I am an injured consumer defrauded by company" unless that really happened, and in most cases it did not happen. If anything, it is far more common for people to try and weasel out of paying for 'information and services' provided over the phone than it is for the IP to just send out fraud billings at random. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 20:23 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs gmccomb@netcom.com (Glenn McComb) writes: > Hello! I'm trying to find out how to dial from my (408) to (415) and > (510) via my preferred carrier (MCI). When I dial 10222 (MCI access) > and then a 415 number, a recording tells me "it is not necessary to > use your carrier" or something like that. There are two ways around this. One is to find a carrier who will give you "950" access and the other is to install direct trunks to your carrier. The first is perfectly doable for even the small user; the latter is something more and more businesses are doing to bypass Pac*Bell and its usary rates. > [Moderator's Note: I believe under the tariffs, your local telco, (in > this case Pac Bell) has the right to keep that traffic for itself, and > there is some question in my mind if MCI is lawfully allowed to handle > intra-lata calls between 415/408/510. The tariff is tricky. There is nothing in it to prevent you, the end user, from making intraLATA calls over a long distance carrier. A long distance carrier is merely prohibited from OFFERING the service to you. Most of them are pretty good about this and even if you ask, the carrier will deny any capability of carrying intraLATA calls. It is we who are in the know who take advantage of the above two methods to save big time on our short distance calls. Pac*Bell has seen this handwriting on the wall for some time and realizes that much revenue is leaking away through bypass. Its remedy (on application to the CPUC) is to lower intraLATA rates to competitive levels (making bypass look less attractive) and then screwing the truly captive customers who cannot go anywhere else for service: the residential and small business local exchange customers. Frankly, I would like to see the current system maintained. Keep the reasonable rates for residence and small business local service. Those of us who know better will bypass Pac*Bell for intraLATA calls, and just let those who don't know any better pay through the nose, subsidizing the rest of us! > AT&T also charges 12-13 cents per minute on interstate calls during > off-peak hours, but they are not technically allowed to handle > intra-lata calls either. PAT] AT&T Megacom subscribers pay around 9 to 10 cents per minute (or whatever they can negotiate). And of course, that includes intraLATA since the trunks come direct from AT&T. No self-respecting business of any size uses Pac*Bell for intraLATA traffic anymore. All that are left doing that are residence and very small business chumps. 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: ken@sdd.hp.com (Ken Stone) Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? Date: 24 Jan 1993 20:51:06 -0800 Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division In article dan@phoenix.az.stratus.com (Dan Danz) writes: > If I send Skytel "**12345", I get back **12345 ... INVALID NUMERIC > MESSAGE ... ENTER NUMERIC MESSAGE:> > However, since when did SkyTel start using IXO/TAP? I'm currently > talking to them using their menu-driven PC connection that is > definitely not IXO/TAP, which I would prefer. SkyTel has their own stuff on one dial in number and IXO/TAP on another. Last time I set it up, I had to call their tech assist number and go thru three people before I got some one that understood what I wanted. Ken ------------------------------ From: sasbge@unx.sas.com (Gantt Edmiston) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 04:11:14 GMT Organization: SAS Institute Inc. tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes: > In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted > that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. Works from 919 too! Gantt Edmiston - SysAdmin SAS Institute Inc. Quality Assurance - V416 Cary NC 27513 919-677-8000 x6091 sasbge@unx.sas.com ------------------------------ From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 06:27:24 GMT In article chuckm@canada.hp.com (Chuck Munro) writes: > Well, as a matter of fact ..... > When I was a customer of H-P (*many* years ago) I had a program on my > HP1000 that would rapidly move the brake solenoid up and down on the > paper tape reader. This would result in music (quite loud if you > placed an IBM punch card in the reader) which you could play from the > console keyboard. This was my first experience with a pre-MIDI > computer music system. I had that same program on an HP 2000 system. We had some nice classical pieces, the names of which I can no longer remember. This was, hmm, 1977 or thereabouts, during my college days as system administrator of the math dept's system. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Wiring For Multi-Lines on One Jack Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 25 Jan 93 01:53:54 EST (Mon) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) You're right, you can wire up several lines on a single modular jack. You can only get up to three lines, since standard phone plugs only have six wires. For eight wires you need a data plug, which isn't very different, but there's no conventions for wiring voice pairs on data plugs. On the six wire voice plug, the pins are numbered from one to six. The wiring arranagement for a single line is the familiar RJ-11, with pins three and four being the ring and tip sides of the pair. For two lines, it's called RJ-14. with the ring and tip for the second line on pins five and two. This is a very common arrangement -- most two-line phones plug into an RJ-14. At the Radio Shack you can get an adapter plug for about $3 which splits out the two lines to separate RJ11 jacks. (At the Harvard Square Rat Shack they don't even ask for your name any more for small cash purchases.) For three lines, it's called RJ25, with the third ring and tip on pins six and one. This arrangement is much less popular. I haven't seen any consumer RJ25 equipment and adapters, though it would be easy enough to wire it up on your own. Keep in mind that most modular telephone cables are only four wires and wouldn't work for RJ25. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 01:13:32 CST From: Jack.Winslade@axolotl.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Re: Telecom Management Degrees Reply-To: jack.winslade%drbbs@axolotl.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha In a message dated 14-JAN-93, J.D. Delancy writes: > Does anyone know what colleges/universities offer a Telecommunications > Management Degree program starting at the associates level? All I've > seen has been a Masters Level program at places like Univ of Maryland. College of St. Mary in Omaha offers such a thing. (Joe, are you listening in?) One of our users is currently registered. I am hoping he will respond as well. You might write or phone for info. College of St. Mary 1901 S. 72 Omaha, NE 68124 402-399-2400 Good day! JSW DRBBS (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #43 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13672; 26 Jan 93 11:33 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15527 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:48:05 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07811 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:47:27 -0600 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:47:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301261447.AA07811@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #45 TELECOM Digest Tue, 26 Jan 93 08:47:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 45 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? (Decker) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Stuart Tener) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (James H. Cloos Jr.) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Monte Freeman) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Roy M. Silvernail) Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Brent Whitlock) Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Graham Toal) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 16:18:18 EST From: jack.decker@f8.n154.z1.fidonet.org (Jack Decker) Subject: Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? In message , ucsd!sceard!fewmets!ron@ uunet.UU.NET wrote: > Several years ago, my 21+ year old son quit his appartment and took an > open-ended trip to Australia. Some disturbing incidents occurred which > resulted in *many* long distance calls from him to me. Several months > later, I received a > $1000 phone bill from AT&T for the calls. Seems > that my son had charged his calls with an AT&T credit card on his > disconnected US phone number. I contacted AT&T and could find no one > that would admit having the authority to change the bill. As far at > AT&T was concerned, my son had the same last name, therefore, I should > pay for the calls (seems logical to me :-) I went around and around > with them. The issue was not setteled until my son returned to the US > and paid the bill himself. I carried a derogatory on my TRW report > (with my explanation appended) for several years. I do not recommend > AT&T as a company to do business with. And then our Moderator wrote: > [Moderator's Note: Another of our regular contributors could tell a > similar story about having been in business *as a corporation* for a > period of time and going out of business, only to have AT&T come to > him personally for the unpaid phone charges later on, insisting that > he was responsible for the corporation he formerly was associated > with. But I'll let him tell the story if he wants; it may be for some > reason he does not want the details aired. PAT] Well, if we're trying to top each other on fraudulent billing stories, I have another entry, only this one involves Sprint. Does that count? :-) The following is from memory, so I don't guarantee 100% accuracy on all the details, but it's pretty close. About three years ago, give or take one, I got a call from a collection agency that represented U.S. Sprint. Turned out that they wanted me to pay a $700 (or thereabouts) long distance bill that I had supposedly incurred. Since my average phone bill is in the < $25 range, I was quite shocked, and pressed for details. Well, it turned out that the bill had NOT been incurred by me personally, but by a company that had dealt in computer equipment and that had gone belly-up. This company had been owned by a friend that I've known since high school, and "somehow" my name had been placed on the account. While it's not inconceivable that I may have contacted Sprint on my friend's behalf at some point to inquire about some aspect of his service (probably with questions about a Sprint "Dial-1 WATS" service that he was considering), I certainly never agreed to be responsible for his bills! Now, I explained the facts of the situation to this man: First, I was never an owner, partner, or even an employee of the firm. Second, the firm had been out of business at that point for at least a couple of years; Sprint had never even so much as attempted to send me a bill, so why was he harassing me all of a sudden? Third, I was not responsible for the calls; I had not placed them and I had not benefitted from them (I suppose that perhaps a few of them had been placed to me, but I can't imagine that it was anywhere near $700 worth, and in any case I hadn't agreed to pay for those!). Further, I offered to give the man the current address and phone number of the former owner of the firm. He said he really wasn't interested in that; the bill was in my name and I was going to pay it! He used all the usual threats, including ruining my credit rating (big deal ... I don't buy on credit) and bringing a lawsuit against me (good luck ... a court would make him PROVE that I owed the money). However, his tone was so downright hostile that it upsest me greatly. Three times I just hung up on him; three times he called right back. My kids said they've never heard me scream at anyone over the phone the way I screamed at him. After about twenty minutes of this harassment (and that's all it was ... harassment pure and simple), he finally offered to drop the matter if I would pay HALF of the amount owed. I again countered that it wasn't my bill and that I had no intention of paying one penny of it, and that if he thought otherwise he could take me to court and try to prove that I owed the money. Only at that point was he finally willing to take my friend's name and number, though he still wasn't sure if he would contact him or come after me! During the course of the "conversation" I had managed to obtain the account number on the bill, so I immediately called up Sprint and asked to speak to a supervisor. I related the entire incident and asked if they could produce so much as a piece of paper showing that I had any responsibility for that bill. I then told her that if they couldn't, they had better call off their collection agency because I had just recently had a gall bladder attack and was still taking medication to help heal my stomach, and this incident had me very emotionally upset and my stomach churning, and I was seriously considering suing Sprint for harassment and emotional distress (all of this was 100% true, by the way). The supervisor said she'd check into it and call me back. About 15 minutes later I got a call back, and she apologized profusely and said they'd make sure I was not contacted about that account again. She did mention in passing that sometimes the collection agency got a bit overzealous in their efforts (that falls into the category of "Great Understatements of All Time")! I replied that they had better sit down and have a long talk with those boys, otherwise Sprint was liable to be on the wrong end of a nasty lawsuit, not to mention some terrible publicity (I could see the headlines: "Sprint charged with telephone harassment!"). After all, the caller had only identified himself as "representing U.S. Sprint", and never would give me the name of the collection agency (though I was told that they were out of Chicago). And even after I specifically told him not to call me back, he persisted in doing so. As an aside, when I next spoke to my friend, I more or less let it be known that I would consider it something of a personal favor if he would consider putting Sprint at the very bottom of the pile of bills to be paid from his failed business. As it turned out, I don't think they ever did contact him about the matter; they just let it drop (for some reason I cannot figure out ... maybe the collection agency knew they had blown it and didn't want to send out any paper with their name and address on it?). The moral to this story is, if you ever contact a long distance carrier on behalf of a friend or client, use their name, not yours, or at least let it be known that you're just making contact on behalf of the other person and are not assuming any responsibility for their bills! What really bothers me about this incident, though, is that no one from Sprint EVER contacted me, not even once, before turning it over to the pit bulls at the collection agency. If they had, I could have given them all the information they needed to contact my friend (who had moved in the interim ... remember, this was a couple of years after the business had shut down). I honestly had not felt so assulted since the eighth grade (when for no apparent reason, another student at the junior high I attended punched me so hard in the stomach that I went right through a wall). It took me at least two days to calm down after that experience. You would have had to been there; the guy at the collection agency was a genuinely mean S.O.B., who probably took a lot more pleasure in his work than he should have. Please, no mail saying I should have filed charges against the guy (civil or criminal); I did consider it (and oh! Part of me wanted to in the WORST way!) but would have had to relive the whole incident in court, would probably have had to travel to Chicago for the trial, and in the end they could afford better lawyers than I could, so there were no guarantees I would have won. Besides all of that, I think there are too many lawsuits filed as it is. As for Sprint, they DID call back to apologize and apparently DID call off the dogs, so after the passage of time I am willing to forgive a little, but my preferred carrier is still MCI. I only wish that MCI would duplicate the 20% discount on calls to whomever you call most frequently in a month (as Sprint does with their "The Most" plan), even if they're not part of your Friends & Family circle, but I digress ... Jack Decker - Internet: jack.decker@f8.n154.z1.fidonet.org - Fidonet: 1:154/8 [Moderator's Note: Sprint does have some real problems in their billing and payment procedures. At the firm where I am employed, we decided to use them for a few months. We go through close to $10,000 per month in long distance charges, and were using a T-1 they installed to take the calls to their switch. I sent them a check for about that amount the second month the service had been installed, and they somehow misapplied the check. To make matters worse, in the process of endorsing the check and running it through the microfilm machine (a machine does both; endorses the check, stamps it with a code saying *where* on the microfilm to look for it; and *where* to find the application of the check, etc), they somehow did it in such a way that later on their endorsement was totally illegible due to bank stamps on top of it, etc. We've all seen those kinds of cancelled checks come back from the bank. Well ... I sent two or three copies of the check to Sprint for investigation and they never were able to locate what they did with it or to whom the credit was given, so they wanted our firm to pay again! After a few months of these arguments, they finally placed me with a collection agency. I contacted Sprint's attorney and he agreed to call off the dogs. He even sent me a letter saying the account was considered paid. Imagine my surprise then when about a year later, what should arrive but a letter from another collection agency. :) I called back Sprint's attorney and read him the riot act; really took him apart over the phone and once again, Sprint backed off. I think the charges are still open on their books because no one at the clerical/supervision level is willing to go to their management for approval of a write-off of that size. I know if it were people working for me and I had to sign off on it, I'd tell them you go sit at that $#%%#$ microfilm machine all day if you have to until you find it! If I hear from them again (I doubt I will as this was a few years ago, but if I do, I shall contact the Federal Trade Commission and a few other places. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tener@cs.widener.edu (Stuart Tener) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Date: 26 Jan 1993 05:08:02 -0500 Organization: Widener University CS Department, Chester PA > In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted > that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. 10732 is a > private ATT network. I know that this number does return your area > code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have > read reports from others that it works elsewhere. It does add an > "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from. A friend of mine tried this number, and said it works from 215! Only thing is he said that it gave an "8" at the end of the number?!? stuart b. tener, N3GWG tener@cs.widener.edu (215)-338-6005 n3gwg@k3pgb.#epa.pa.usa.na (packet) ------------------------------ From: cloos@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (James H. Cloos Jr.) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Organization: Cornell Information Technologies, Ithaca, NY 14853 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 07:34:42 GMT Tompkins writes: > In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was > posted that purported to work nationally: > 10732-1-404-988-9664. I tried it from a couple of phones in the 716 area code. My home is serviced by an independent co that doesn't, I found out, support 10xxx service. I got a "can't complete the call, try again", type message. I then tried it from a NYTel pay phone in Buffalo. It returned my quarter then asked for $2.60 USD. My curiosity piqued -- a not alltogether uncommon situation -- I plopped in the change and ... it works. James H. Cloos, Jr. include Cloos@TC.Cornell.EDU include Cloos@Batcomputer.UUCP Snail: POBox 1111, Amherst, NY 14226-1111 Cloos@CrnlThry.BITNET Phone: +1 716 673-1250 (voice only, for now) ------------------------------ From: ccoprfm@prism.gatech.edu (Monte Freeman) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Date: 26 Jan 93 13:11:45 GMT Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes: > In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted > that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. Well, it doesn't work from 404. Here's the results of my poking around: From home (404) 634-xxxx with AT&T as my default carrier I got a reorder. If I just dial the 404-988-9664 part, then all I ever get is a busy signal. From work (404) 894-xxxx with MCI as the default carrier I got a recording telling me that it was not necessary to dial a 1 with this number. I redialed it this time without the 1. I got a recording that said that I must first dial a 1 or a 0 plus the area code when calling this number. I redialed it again. This time with a 0 instead of a 1. I got a recording telling me that it was not necessary to dial a _1_ (no, that's not a typo) with this number. If I pick up our WATS line and dial this number (I have no idea what company provides the service), then all it does is ring. Strange results from 404 land. Anyone got any ideas here? Monte Freeman -- Operations Department / Information Technology Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 Internet: ccoprfm@prism.gatech.edu Bitnet: ccoprfm@gitvm1.bitnet ------------------------------ Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes From: roy@cybrspc.UUCP (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 17:27:38 CST Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes: > In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted > that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. It works in Minneapolis (612), complete with a trailing 8. There were also about ten digits recited after a second tone. All but the last were 0, and the last was 2. I wonder how this will show up on my phone bill? Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu [Moderator's Note: It will show up as a $59.95 charge from AT&T's 'Find Out Your Number' bureau, converted to a 900 call for the purposes of billing. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 22:40:07 GMT add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda V. Dasgupta) writes: > Anyway, what interested me was in this sad, sad story is the fact that > the phone company keeps logs of all calls made from a pay-phone > (perhaps all phones?) and calls to a residential phone (again, perhaps > all phones?) Moreover, the police (or does it have to be the Feds?) > can get to the phone logs in a matter of hours. > [Moderator's Note: Yes, you are correct; very little escapes telco's > notice these days, and that INHO is good for just such reasons as the > case you cited. The telephone should *never* serve as a medium for > harassement, fraud or the commission of other crimes. The fact that > the telephone has served these purposes over the years was due to the > technology in use for many years, not a deliberate thing by telco. The > development of ESS and the sophisticated ways in which traffic can be > analyzed and reviewed could be viewed by some twisted logic as an > 'invasion of privacy' by some people, but I do not view it that way. Is it only in large metropolitan areas where all calls to and from residential and pay phones are logged, or is this the case in the vast majority of phone systems? In Urbana, after receiving numerous calls which hung up when answered over a period of a few weeks, I called the telephone company to see what could be done about it. They told me that they could not find out what number those calls were made from. They said the telephone system did not work that way. They could put a "tap" on the line which would record what numbers calls to our phone were made from, and they would then match the log created by this tap with a log that we would keep of when we received these hangup calls, and then the police would pursue the matter. This would have cost us a fee (~ $20.00 ?). Our other option was to have our number changed, which they would do for free if we then made our new number unlisted. If they had the capability of looking through their logs to find out where the calls were originating from, I think that they should have done that. We also received several calls for me from some guy that my wife said sounded like a cowboy, but I was never available when he called, and he never left a message or called back at the suggested times. I would have loved to find out who this guy was and why he was calling me, as well as if he was the caller who was hanging up or not. After a while, the calls stopped on their own. At the time, our local telephone system did not have caller ID available, by the way. Perhaps Caller ID is necessary for the logs to be made. * * * * * * --> DISCLAIMER: I speak only for myself. <-- * * * * * * Brent Whitlock Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology bwhitlock@uiuc.edu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [Moderator's Note: It is the type of switch being used and the software it is running rather than the size of the community. If it can be done one place, it can be done another. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:29:21 GMT From: Graham Toal Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? Not exactly. Think about this -- the call was placed from a payphone, and they didn't know which one -- they just knew the called number. Unless the logs for the called number now include the calling number of incoming calls, we can conclude that the telco has structured its data so that you can do a fast search on the called number, ie the data is indexed by both callers number (for billing) and called number (for security services purposes). This is exactly what I said some years ago that the UK System X service does. I can even make an educated guess that the data structure used to index the phone numbers is a linked dag, and that the lookup is almost instantaneous. (Heck, even with an ISAM it would be pretty fast ...) Over here, the over-the-shelf phone cards have serial numbers, so even though they're anonymous, the security services can still find out who all the other people you called are even if they found your call to a single target. Anonymity of payphones is an illusion. Also, in London, a great many public phones are in areas covered by security cameras. This is how they caught an hoax bomb caller last year -- they picked him up in the area minutes after making a call on a payphone. BTW, there's some commercial neural net software out now for detecting cliques in graphs. Want to bet its first application was studying phone network logs? G ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #45 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24179; 26 Jan 93 16:43 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24287 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:09:32 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23033 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:08:50 -0600 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:08:50 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301261408.AA23033@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #44 TELECOM Digest Tue, 26 Jan 93 08:08:40 CST Volume 13 : Issue 44 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Bad Digest Number (TELECOM Moderator) Phone Translation Experiment (Dave Leibold) 5ESS-2000 Switch (Daily Oklahoman via Mark V. Miller) Singapore Phone System Questions (Tom Clayton) FAQ List Update Now Ready (David Leibold) Strange Intercept Message (starr@hriso.att.com) 1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC Intra-LATA LD (Mike McNally) KS-19522L1 (Two Wire) (Jon Cereghino) DMS-100 Bug? (Hans Lachman) AS/400, Novell,Token Ring, Windows 3.1 (Matt Memolo) How Can I Reach AT&T EasyLink? (Ivan Maldonado) Papers on Fibre Wire Using Solitons (Heiko W.Rupp) Prodigy <> Internet Gateway Almost Finished (J.D. Delancy) Discovering Your Own Phone Number in the UK (Joe Harrison) 301-303, Not in 410 (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 10:01:08 EST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Bad Digest Number Issue 43 got sent out to Usenet as issue 43, and to the mailing list the same way, except on the mailing list version, the mail header referred to it as issue 42. Please take your copy of 43 and edit the mail header (if you keep it) so that it reads issue 43. > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:55:03 -0600 > From: TELECOM Moderator > Message-Id: <199301250655.AA02619@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> > To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu > Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #42 > TELECOM Digest Mon, 25 Jan 93 00:54:50 CST Volume 13 : Issue 43 > End of TELECOM Digest V13 #43 > ***************************** Sorry about that. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 02:09:48 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Phone Translation Experiment Reuters reports of a Japanese project to provide live phone translation. An experiment was scheduled for this week to test translation among Japansese, English and German speakers located in Japan, U.S.A. and Germany respectively. Advanced Telecommunications Research Institute (ATR) in Tokyo says 90% of regular vocabulary can be processed, though it may take another decade for such a system to be placed into public service. ATR, Carnegie Mellon University (Pittsburgh) and University of Karlsruhe (Munich) are the partners in this experiment. The idea is to take voice from one party of a conversation, apply speech recognition to convert that voice to text, then translate the text, then send the voice synthesised translation in the language of the other party. The process of translating from voice to voice takes about 20 seconds with this experimental technology. On other translation topics: * AT&T's Language Line exists today to provide translation staff for phone calls. Some organizations such as the Toronto Transit Commission will connect to AT&T Language Line when handling public inquiries. * The Nation's Capital Freenet project (Ottawa, Canada - akin to the Cleveland FreeNet) has an expressed interest to provide automated e-mail and newsgroup translation for the English and French communities. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ From: Mark_V_Miller@cup.portal.com Subject: 5ESS-2000 Switch Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 20:01:51 PST From _The_Daily_Oklahoman_, January 21, 1993, p. 25: Copyright (C) 1993 by The Oklahoma Publishing Company AT&T Upgrades Switches For Rural Customers By Bob Vandewater Staff Writer American Telephone & Telegraph's Oklahoma City factory will produce a new product designed to bring advanced "digital" computerized switch services to rural telephone customers across the United States, plant officials said Wednesday. The new switching product is a smaller, stand-alone version of AT&T's "5ESS" digital telecommunications switch already made at the plant. The product will provide many modern services in market areas with 1,000 or fewer customers where it previously may not have been economically feasible for a small phone utilities [sic] to provide such services. "Telephone customers in rural areas want access to the same custom-calling and digital business services that suburban and urban customers take for granted," said Pete Gannon, manufacturing vice president at AT&T's Oklahoma City plant. "This new product will deliver to the rural markets the same features, software and operational capabilities as our larger switches," he said. AT&T announced plans for the new product, known as the 5ESS-2000 Switch Compact Digital Exchange, Wednesday in Maui, Hawaii, at the annual meeting of the Organization for the Protection and Advancement of Small Telephone Companies. The first shipments of this new product are expected in early 1994. Initial production work may start at the Oklahoma City plant late this year. "While we anticipate significant demand for this product, it is not expected to require an increase in the size of our work force," Gannon said. The Oklahoma City factory, which had product sales of $1.8 billion in 1992, has about 4,100 employees. ------------------------------ From: clayton@master.lds-az.loral.com (Tom Clayton) Subject: Singapore Phone System Questions Organization: Loral Defense Systems Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:36:10 GMT Some of my colleagues are scheduled to go to Singapore on a field service assignment, and would like to maintain a Fax/data communication link with our facility here in the U.S. Their concern is that the Fax machine and data modem available to them might not be compatible with the phone system in Singapore. Any hints, tips, or suggestions would be most welcome. Please respond via e-mail to: clayton@master.lds-az.loral.com Thanks, Tom ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 21:40:46 EST From: David Leibold Subject: FAQ List Update Now Ready As intended, the FAQ List for TELECOM Digest has been updated and upgraded. Some corrections and new data have been incorporated, thanks to Digest reader mail and other sources of information. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca dleibold1@attmail.com [Moderator's Note: In fact, the FAQ was mailed to everyone on the Digest mailing list Sunday night, and distributed to Usenet via the comp.dcom.telecom group at the same time. It was also incorporated into the welcome/information letter sent out to all new mailing list subscribers, replacing the version they had been getting. If you did NOT get a copy one way or the other by Monday morning, then you should arrange to pull it with anonymous ftp from the Telecom Archives at the archives site, lcs.mit.edu if you want a copy. (It will be available there once I do some filing and house-cleaning work in the Archives, probably early Tuesday. My thanks to everyone who participated in creating the revised version. PAT] ------------------------------ From: starr@hriso.att.com Date: Mon Jan 25 14:24:47 EST 1993 Subject: Strange Intercept Message A friend of mine accidently dialed an 800 number, and received a strange repeating intercept message. I haven't even a clue as to the language, but my guess is the message is attempting to say that the number you have dialed is not in service. The number is 800-952-5388. [Moderator's Note: This is a good example of how '800-style' calls can be international in scope *if* the subscriber wants international traffic to the number. In the above example, some company in Germany wanted calls from the USA, so they arranged for an 800 number here to ring there. What has happened now is the service in Germany was turned off for whatever reason and no one has yet told AT&T to quit routing calls from that 800 number overseas. I think what it is saying is 'this is not a working number'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mcnally@wsl.dec.com (Mike McNally) Subject: 1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC intra-LATA LD Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:26:29 GMT Organization: DEC Western Software Lab I just c alled my voice mailbox to check voice mail (it's in 415, I'm in 408) and as I listened to the "Thank you for using Pacific Bell" recording I though of the recent thread concerning intra-LATA long distance. On a whim, I decided to try 1-800-CALL-ATT to see if I could force ATT to carry the call instead. (PacBell won't let 10288 work for such calls; you get a recording.) It worked. I wonder which is cheaper? I billed both calls to my DEC-issued ATT card, so I'll never know. Mike + Software + Digital Equipment + Western Software + mcnally@ McNally + Laborer + Corporation + Laboratory + wsl.dec.com [Moderator's Note: I've noticed that when an intra-LATA call is placed here via AT&T because they were more or less forced into handling it due to it being on their calling card (or via Easy Reach, etc) the billing for same will come on the AT&T portion of the Illinois Bell bill, with a statement saying 'call handled on behalf of Illinois Bell by AT&T'. It is almost as though they are saying, "we cannot legally handle this call as AT&T, but we can act as agents for Illinois Bell and handle it for them." I think AT&T functions like a 'reseller' or open-ended (no defined customer base) aggregator for the local telcos, and pays the telcos for calls which are 'rightfully' the telco's to handle. In many cases, they may just let the local telco handle the whole thing but at AT&T rates. I suspect the same arrangement is in effect in everywhere with the telco of record for that territory. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 15:14:51 -0800 From: cereghin@netcom.com (Jon Cereghino) Subject: KS-19522L1 (Two Wire) I'd like to know if anyone could provide information to hookup a KS-19522L1 tw0-wire recorder coupler. There are a number of screw terminals on the board for which I have no information. I'd like to connect the unit to a 1A2 key system. I would be willing to pay copying costs to someone who has the Bell System Practices (including schematic diagrams) for this unit. It's for hobby use, so my budget is limited to about $10 or so. I would also like to know if anyone has a source for 106 type loudspeaker sets (used). Two companies currently make new ones but they cost $200-325 each. I bought the one I have for $20. E-mail reply is preferred to preserve the TELECOM Digest noise floor's low level. Jon cereghin@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) Subject: DMS-100 Bug? Organization: Netcom Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 06:26:25 GMT My home phone line is acting funny, and I was wondering if any of you CO experts might know what the problem is. It acts exactly as if I had three-way calling (which I don't), but no matter what number I dial (on the secondary dial tone), I always get a fast-busy tone instead of having my call put through. In other words, if I am on one call, and I hang up for one or two seconds, I get a dial tone as three short bursts initially, then continuous. Then I dial any number, and always get fast-busy. Then, I hang up for another one or two seconds and find that the first call is still there (i.e., as if it were on hold). This is odd since I do not have a second line, three-way calling, or any kind of "hold" service. It only started doing this two weeks ago. The only special service I have is Message Center (a phone mail service). It lets me know I have a message by changing my dial tone to an unending series of long bursts. This is clearly different from the "holding" dial tone I describe above. Also, the "holding" dial tone phenomenon happens regardless of the Message Center status. I reported this odd behavior, and the Pacific Bell repair person came out, but could not tell what was wrong. She told me that I'm on a new DMS-100 switch. Anyone out there know why a DMS-100 would behave this way? Is it a misconfigured line or a software bug? Do I have any special capabilities in this mode? If you know any of the answers, please email me directly at "lachman@ netcom.com". If I find out anything interesting I will post it to the net. Thanks, Hans Lachman lachman@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: mmm@wonderhog.eng.ufl.edu (Matt Memolo) Subject: AS/400, Novell,Token Ring, Windows 3.1 Reply-To: mmm@wonderhog.eng.ufl.edu (Matt Memolo) Organization: UF Engineering Computing Services, Distributed Systems Group Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 16:21:31 GMT I'm trying to connect PC's to an IBM AS/400 over Token Ring using PCSupport V2.1.0 and would like to retain connectivity via Novell and do this under MS Windows v3.1. I do not believe this will be possible but though perhaps someone would have tried it before. My remaining option is to put a gateway between the AS/400 to encapsulate the traffic into ODI Novell packets. Many thanks in advance; I can trade info on Florida camping and south Florida restraunts. mmm@eng.ufl.edu Matt Memolo ------------------------------ From: ivan@ne.ncsu.edu (Ivan Maldonado) Subject: How Can I Reach AT&T EasyLink? Reply-To: ivan@nepjt.ne.ncsu.edu (Ivan Maldonado) Organization: North Carolina State University, Raleigh Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:00:39 GMT Anyone know how to reach folks hooked up to "AT&T Easylink", whatever that is? I'm trying to reach the username "idea" hooked up to/through/under that network/gateway/thing. Many thanks for any assistance provided. Guillermo Ivan Maldonado Internet: ivan@nepjt.ne.ncsu.edu Dept. of Nuclear Engineering ivan@flyer.ncsc.org North Carolina State University NCSU Box # 7909 Raleigh. NC 27695-7909 [Moderator's Note: Easylink was the Western Union email system until it got bought out by AT&T. Now it is a branch of ATT Mail. We touched on this a couple weeks ago, but I forget the syntax. Was it something like 'user@esl.attmail.com' or 'user@easylink.att.com'? PAT ------------------------------ From: hwr@pilhuhn.ka.sub.org (Heiko W.Rupp) Subject: Papers on Fibre Wire Using Solitons Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 10:52:51 +0100 Organization: The Home of the Pilhuhn Hi, I'am in search of some literature about solitons in optical data distribution in general and about the news fibre wire connecting USA and Europe in special. I think having seen, that this cable has been installed by AT&T and Deutsche Bundespost. The cable uses solitary waves, so it needs only few (or no) repeaters. I set the followup to poster, as I normally don't read these groups. Thanks in advance. Heiko W.Rupp Gerwigstr.5 7500 Kh'e 1 hwr@pilhuhn.ka.sub.org +49 721 693642 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 08:26:11 EST From: delancy@chesapeake.ads.com (J.D. Delancy) Subject: Prodigy <> Internet Gateway Almost Finished tbanham@cybernet writes: > I just got a note from Prodigy that advised me to look for Internet > mail access in January, Must be close. I sent a note to a friend that has a Prodigy ID. It got to the INETGATE.PRODIGY.COM before it bounced on error code 530 (configuration problems). Apparently the coding to handoff internet mail from the gateway to the Prodigy users still has to be finished. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:25:58 +0000 From: J.Harrison@bra0401.wins.icl.co.uk Subject: Discovering Your Own Phone Number in the UK Within the United Kingdom there have traditionally been a variety of numbers (usually 17x) you can call to find out the number of the line from which you are calling. Like in the U.S., these numbers varied depending on locality. A BT engineer showed me how to dial 175 to get my own number and I believe BT has now standardized on this. In my own area code it only works with lines supporting "Star Services" (the BT name for the package providing call waiting, three-way calling, etc.), but I have heard that in other areas it works on any line connected to a digital exchange (yes there are STILL a small handful of Strowgers here!) If you call 175 you get (sometimes) a minute or so's silence designed to deter the casual or wrong-number caller. Then a voice tells you your area code + number, then "start test". Flash the switchhook (actually you have to hold it down for nearly a second otherwise nothing happens) - you then get some information about the earthing (grounding) on your line, plus a request to selct next test. You can then dial 1 for a DTMF dialpad test (it expects you to key 123456789*0# and then tells you if it heard the tones OK), or 3 and it will give you what it calls a "coin pulse test" designed for payphones. Anything else says you dialed wrongly, EXCEPT if you dial 4 which says "not from this line you can't!". If anybody knows what this does (or the other several undocumented Star Services codes) I'd like to know. Joe Harrison Yes, the disclaimer; I'm on behalf of me not my employer. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 8:31:56 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: 301-303, Not in 410 I accidentally completed a call yesterday to the 301-303 prefix. (A call to 800-477-4704, still in use as C&P help line for 301/410 split, also has 303 in the shrunken 301 area.) I am now concerned about the archives, since they list 303 as a Columbia prefix in 410. Phone books I checked in Maryland last night list 303 as Berwyn (i.e., a Washington-metro-area prefix), which could be pseudo-foreign exchange service from Columbia. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #44 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15690; 27 Jan 93 3:53 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10091 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:34:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24908 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:33:43 -0600 Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:33:43 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301270733.AA24908@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #46 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 93 01:33:40 CST Volume 13 : Issue 46 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Holiday Overseas Callbacks From Bell Canada Operators (Dave Leibold) Ericsson GE Slashes Prices on Two Wireless Data Products (Geoff Goodfellow) Telephone Line Bridge Info Needed (Dan Cook, Ross Escondido) How To Fix Genuine 900 Errors (Brad S. Hicks) So That's Why You Oppose Phreakers! (Robert Virzi) "Advanced Switching" at SWBT (Chris Petrilli) Does Anyone...? (Paul M. Wexelblat) Billing Systems (Lars Kalsen) Call Forwarding From One Line (tamil@qucdn.queensu.ca) Remote Test Unit (Timothy E. White) Cellular Roaming Handbook (Mike Bray) Cellular One/NY Re-bills Roaming Charges (Mike Bray) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:00:29 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Holiday Overseas Callbacks From Bell Canada Operators From Bell News (Bell Canada - Ontario edition) 11th January 1993] Operators give special assistance for overseas calls. Bell operators in the 416 area offered special assistance to callers trying to make holiday connections with friends and relatives in non-dialable parts of the world. Starting four days before Christmas, between the peak-demand hours of 8 a.m. and 11 p.m., operators called back customers once they had made a connection with the overseas party. That special service saved callers hours of repeated tries to operators, hoping they could instantly obtain an a available circuit. Having placed their request, customers were assured by operators that their calls would be placed, and that they would be informed when the connection was made. "Initial response has been great. We'll be testing the special service for six months in the 416 area code," explained Nazir Lalani, section manager, Operator Services. "If it continues to be successful, it will be expanded to other area codes in Bell Ontario territory." Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG [Moderator's Note: This used to be the custom here in the USA many years ago, when all overseas calls to Europe/Africa/the Middle East were routed through operators at the old international center at White Plains, NY. You'd ask the long distance operator for an international operator and be connected to White Plains. After giving the operator the details, she'd have you disconnect and wait for a call-back which could be in less than a minute, or sometimes several hours, depending on where you were calling and the time of day, etc. I seem to recall a call to Cairo, Egypt in the late 1950's, and the AT&T operator saying it would be several hours before the call could go through because 'we have to book the call with the international operator in Paris; the telecom administration in France only lets AT&T use the circuit (*the* circuit?) to Cairo for an hour in the morning and two hours in the afternoon ... and I think we have one or two calls ahead of yours waiting ..." And to this day, 35 years later, where are many of the still non-direct-dialable international points from the USA? Quite a few are in northern and central Africa; countries which used to be French colonies. For British colonies it was the same difference only London controlled who got to call where and when. The overseas operator in Montreal, Quebec controlled the circuits to the far northern wilderness in Ontario and Quebec, with calls frequently going by AM radio from a site in Val-D'or, Quebec. White Plains told Montreal, Montreal told Val-D'or and the lady at Val-D'or would go on the radio calling alternatly in French and English, "Miquelon, Miquelon, this is Val-D'or with a call on Channel 2 ..." and after a couple minutes of this she would report, "they are not answering, White Plains; you know I told you before they only promise to listen to the radio in the morning at ten o'clock." Sometimes Montreal would not even bother to ring Val-D'or, admonishing White Plains that "we are not supposed to call her after 10 PM unless it is an emergency. The radio station and telephone exchange is in her home and she goes to bed at ten. We give her a wake up call at six each morning ..." ... eventually the call to Cairo would go through; after a period of time the phone would ring and as soon as it was answered an operator would ask us to hold on a second ... then from across the ocean a man's voice speaking English with a French accent would be heard: "Hello White Plains, I've got Cairo for you now ... Cairo, this is Paris with a call from the States, they want, umm, oh, uh, White Plains, wait a minute, he rang off on me, I'll try to raise him again but you know dear, you've only got seven minutes, the cable closes down to American Telly at 2100 Greenwich; won't open again until 1100 Greenwich tomorrow ... um, oh, Cairo, wait a minute! Don't cut me off! Put the States onto ... " *That* was an international call years ago. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 00:02:25 -0800 From: geoff@fernwood.mpk.ca.us (Geoff Goodfellow) Subject: Ericcson GE Slashes Prices on Two Wireless Data Products PARAMUS, NJ (JAN. 25) BUSINESS WIRE - Ericsson GE has reduced the retail price of two of its key wireless data communications products - the Mobidem(R) Portable Wireless Modem and the Viking Express Wireless E-Mail Package, which includes a Mobidem, Hewlett-Packard 95LX palmtop computer and wireless elecronic mail utility. Effective immediatley, the price of the Mobidem is now $775 from $1,395 while the complete Viking Express package drops to $995 from its original price of $1,995. "This agressive price reduction allows the everyday business traveler to benefit immediately from wireless data communications," says Ake Persson, vice president of Ericsson GE Mobile Communications. "There is no excuse now not to have one. It is as essential as a briefcase." The Mobidem provides two-way wireless data communications connectivity for palmtop, notebook, and laptop computers. Utilizing Mobitex wireless data networks operated in the United States by RAM Mobile Data, a joint venture of RAM Broadcasting and BellSouth Enterprises, the Mobidem supports automatic nationwide roaming for PC users that travel around town or across the country. The Mobidem is a one-pound, rechargeable wireless data modem that communicates with the Mobitex network. It can be easily connected to any PC that has an RS-232 serial port, and it features and LCD display that shows radio signal strength and number of messages stored. The Viking Express package couples a Mobidem with an HP 95LX palmtop computer and a DOS-based E-mail utility called RadioMail Remote from RadioMail Corp. of Menlo Park, Calif. Mobitex is a public mobile data network that uses packet-switched wireless technology and provides automatic nationwide roaming. Packet switching allows messages to be transmitted or received in a few seconds, eliminating the problems associated with intermittent fading or unexpected disconnections. Mobitex networks are operating in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland and Norway. Based in Paramus, N.J., Ericsson GE designs, manufactures, and markets cellular telephones, land mobile radio products and systems, and Mobitex wireless data communications products and systems for global markets. Ericsson GE also markets cellular systems in North American. For more information about the Mobidem or Viking Express, call Ericsson GE at 800/223-6336. In addition, RAM has a nationwide corporate sales force to work with corporate accounts. For the number of the nearest RAM regional represenative, MIS directors or corporate purchasing managers can call RAM Mobile Data at 201/343-9400. CONTACT: Ericsson, New York Kathy Egan, 212/685-4030 or MCI: Alexander Communications, Atlanta Susan McCord, 404/325-7555 404/325-8041 (fax) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 13:47:19 -0800 From: rossix!amber.dnet!dan@fernwood.mpk.ca.us (Dan Cook, Ross Escondido) Subject: Telephone Line Bridge Info Needed I recently created a small electronic circuit which allows me to use a pair of telephone lines to 'forward calls.' What I do is call the first line, get bridged to the second, then dialout from there. (Dialtone on the second line is not accessable until the correct four digit DTMF password has been entered. I also put a toll restrictor on the line -- just in case.) I use this arrangement to reduce the cost of some automated modem calls from a large variable amount for toll calls ($150-$200) to a small fixed amount for two strategically placed unmeasured residential phone lines ($32) each month. Unfortunately, the method I have used to bridge the lines (600ohm impeadance 1:1 line coupling transformer) really cuts down on the received signal level at the far end. My modem shows a receive signal level of -19db for direct calls and -33db for bridged calls! The signal-to-noise ratio also suffers. This signal loss (or perhaps lack of boost) often makes high speed modem connects an iffy proposition. Questions: 1. There must be a better, yet still relatively simple way to bridge telephone lines. Perhaps I just need to add a bidirectional amplifier of some sort? Any suggestions? 2. Failing a good homebrew solution, anyone know where I can get an inexpensive commercially made telephone line bridge? Preferably with just the bridging function, but even pointers to remotely similar parts/products will be appreciated. Dan ------------------------------ From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com Date: 26 Jan 93 19:14:22 GMT Subject: How To Fix Genuine 900 Errors? Last week, a close friend of mine got a stern warning from the Credit Collection Center, P.O. Box 610894, Miami, FL 33261-0894, +1 305 945 8441, insisting that: 1. She placed a call to +1 900 386 2255, which cost $49.95. 2. She had been billed for this through SWBT. 3. She instructed SWBT to remove the charge, and they did. 4. Therefore, Connections, USA, the owner of that 1-900 number, has instructed CCC to collect this debt. She keeps a close watch on her credit record, because her dearest dream is to own rental property and knows that it's going to be an uphill struggle for somebody with her income, so the threat to her credit record is no small thing to her. Nor is there any question of her paying the $49.95, even if she had it, because she disputes every one of statements 1-3. She only moved to St. Louis last July and has only had this phone number since then. Unfortunately, she did not keep her phone bills, but she is 100% certain that she has seen them all, none of them had a bill for this number on them, and she has never called SWBT to demand the removal of a charge. A Sprint operator (Sprint appears to be Connections, USA's 900 provider) volunteered the information that according to his records, +1 900 386 2255 has not been in use for over a year. If this is true then it is physically impossible for her to have placed the call from her number to that number. What is really making her angry is that the Sprint operator and CCC both insist that the only way for her to untangle this is to phone Connections, USA, on her nickle during business hours (while she's at work, of course, and can't make such calls) and persuade them to drop the charge. Otherwise the non-payment notice will be sent to all credit agencies, and the onus is on her to find them all and append her explanation. There MUST be a better way to handle this, and one that doesn't involve hundreds of dollars in legal fees. If anybody knows, it's you all. Please reply via e-mail; if Pat asks, I'll summarize for the Digest. If there isn't a better way to handle this, then what has the country come to when a firm can bill you at random for service you never received, and know that they can punish you arbitrarily if you don't pay, and that there is no way to fight this that isn't cheaper than paying them? It smells of Danegeld to me, and that makes me as angry as she is. J. Brad Hicks Internet: mc!Brad_Hicks@mhs.attmail.com X.400: c=US admd=ATTMail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:45:19 -0500 From: rvirzi@gte.com (Robert Virzi at GTE Labs) Subject: So That's Why You Oppose Phreakers! ... stuff about NETel overcharging deleted ... > [Moderator's Note: I had a phone turned on about twenty years ago at a > place where I stayed occassionally and although the service got turned > on, the paperwork never made it to accounting for the purpose of > setting up a billing account. Since the line had unmeasured metro > service (a type of service we had back then) there were never any > extra units generated and no reason to ever issue a bill. It went on > like that for a year. I was careful to never make any long distance > calls from that line or do anything which would start paperwork going. > Then one day, some $$#%&# phreak billed a third number phraud call to > that line. From a telco unknown to me comes the billing tape; it hits > the accounting department and of course the charges promptly fall out > and go to suspense, there being 'no such number' to bill them to on > this end where Accounting was concerned. In the adjustments/suspense > investigative process, someone at telco actually dials my number and > discovers it turned on .... hmmm, they say, and they ask the CO to > send the paperwork all over again. The next billing cycle, I get a > bill for *12 months to date* of service, plus the installation charge > which never had been billed, plus next month's service in advance, and > of course, plus the (still unknown to telco) phraud LD charge. I got > the phraud charge removed, but was hardly in a position to argue with > them about the service I had been using for the past year. :( PAT] Interesting that one person's fraud can uncover another's, isn't it! I have to admit I read this with quite a bit of amusement given PAT's consistently hard line against phreakers/hackers/etc. I suppose in one's youth, one may have a different perspective, eh? Or perhaps this explains the position, a long held grudge. Many :-), for the humor impaired. What next, Higdon admitting to overcharging a telco in *his* youth? Again, many, many, :-). Thanks for the chuckle, Pat. Bob Virzi rvirzi@gte.com +1(617)466-2881 ------------------------------ From: petrilli@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Chris Petrilli) Subject: "Advaced Switching" at SWBT Date: 26 Jan 1993 19:37:21 GMT Organization: Department of Redundency Department As part of a project I'm working on, I needed to get some cost estimates from SWBT (South Swestern Bell Telephone) on what it would cost to run digital lines within the City of Austin. When I finally got a hold of the business office that handled the services I needed and told the lady what I needed I was shocked at the fact that: 1) She had no clue what T3/DS3 service was, and said that SWBT didn't provide it and she had no way of pricing it. She later recended the comment when she talked to a "technical support representative". 2) Told me that I was "very lucky" that I was in the 83X exchange because, and I quote: "We've just installed the most advanced switch around." When I asked if she was refering to a NorthernTelecom DMS series, or perhaps the 5ESS series, she said "Um ... no, we're using a ESS1A". I don't know about everyone else, but while the 1A is a nice switch and all, it doesn't quite qualified for "most advanced switch" even with 100 adjuct boxes on it. I was also SHOCKED at the cost of running a T1 line from the 83X exchange (North Austin) to the AT&T POP (downtown) which is roughly 15 miles. The cost was MORE than the cost from AT&T for a T1 line from their Austin POP to Dallas. Somehow I don't think this is reasonable. Chris Petrilli petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu I don't even speak for myself. ------------------------------ From: wex@cs.ulowell.edu (Paul M. Wexelblat) Subject: Does Anyone...? Reply-To: wex@cs.ulowell.edu Organization: Univ. of Lowell CS Dept. Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:34:35 GMT Does anyone know of an answering machine that captures CLI info? (It is clearly possible, since the boxes that display the number can gobble the ASCII without "picking up" the line, an answering machine should be able to do it too.) [OTOH, if somebody makes a fortune on this idea I'd like a 5% inventors fee ...] Wex ------------------------------ From: dalk@login.dkuug.dk (Lars Kalsen) Subject: Billing Systems Organization: DKnet Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:50:19 GMT Hi, I am interested in references to a book or article where Billing Systems are discussed in brief, or a comparison is made. If you have any suggestion - please E-mail me the reference. Lars Kalsen, MIS-Manager SONOFON, Skelagervej 1, 9000 Aalborg, Denmark +45-99-367000 (tel), +45-99-367070 (fax), E-Mail : dalk@login.dkuug.dk SONOFON is the private operator in Denmark on the new European digital cellular GSM-Network ------------------------------ From: TAMIL@QUCDN.QueensU.CA Organization: Queen's University at Kingston Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:20:37 EST Subject: Call Forwarding From One Line Hi, After talking on my home phone I would like to transfer that call to another phone number. Is there any way I can do this, other then buying a PBX and getting a second line. Thanks in advance. Jay tamil@qucdn.queensu.ca [Moderator's Note: If you intend to stay on the line with the third party, just use three-way callling. If not, you might try using a service like 'Starline' (IBT's name for it), a sort of 'home centrex' type service which allows calls to be transferred to another phone outside your premises and you to disconnect. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cm538@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Timothy E White) Subject: Remote Test Unit Date: 26 Jan 1993 18:00:38 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) New York Telephone Central District has begun a service improvement program utilizing Micro Computer System's 105A Remote Test Unit. This equipment, which is primarily a 77 Analyzer with enhanced features, is mounted in the central office of the NNXs to be tested. The 105A RTU is capable of testing all working and non/working pairs originating from the CO. The working POTS lines are accessed through the test train of the switch. The non-working pairs are accessed at the MDF with an optional 100 pair portable shoe switch. Single pair access is available through our MLT 1 dialup or by means of the single pair shoe clip at the MDF. Remote switches and subscriber loops on the F2 side of pair gain devices can be tested with an optional 107A RTU located at the remote location. The unit is programmable and can do sequential NLT and LDT scans unattended. Demand test can be performed virtually simultaneously with the scan tests and all test results can be printed to screen, disk or printer. In addition all tests can be saved in a number of different formats. Communication with the equipment is performed through a dumb terminal, a test station or a PC with MODEM. I would like to hear from any groups or individuals that have had experience with this equipment. I would especially welcome detailed comments on any successes (or failures) utilizing the 105. (These comments and observations are my own and I represent no one other than myself). Thank you. Tim White In upstate New York, wishing it was New Mexico. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 14:38:16 EST From: mike@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (Mike Bray) Subject: Cellular Roaming Handbook There was a post a short while ago about a cellular roaming guide. The one I have is called (the) _Official_Cellular_Roaming_Handbook_ and is published by: Cellular Directions, Inc. PO Box 66843 St. Petersburg Beach FL 33736 I bought the new (at the time) 10th edition for $14.95 (plus $2 for mailing), but the order card in the front of the book suggests that there will be an 11th edition for Winter '93. Their phone number is (813) 345-6150 and their FAX is (813) 347-2981 and they take VISA, MC, etc, etc. As stated in the other posting, this book details every cellular system in the country with SID, coverage maps, roaming costs, customer service numbers, roamer access numbers, and a big section in the back about reciprocal roaming agreements. It also contains information for Mexico, the Caribbean Islands, Australia, and New Zealand. Some of the coverage maps are 3+ years old, but in general this book is a must for anyone that roams! Mike Bray mike@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (or) ...!apple!camphq!mike ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 14:38:16 EST From: mike@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (Mike Bray) Subject: Cellular One/NY Re-bills Roaming Charges While roaming in the San Francisco area last June, I had the opportunity to try Cellular One's NACN (North-Anerican-Cellular- Nonsense). At that time it didn't hardly work, and the folks at Cellular One/SF all gave me conflicting reports about "you have to make at least one call" or "just turn your phone on" etc, etc. At that time, the term Nonsense was justified. But during my last trip to that area in October, they seem to have corrected all their problems and the NACN now works quite nicely. (Except if you have voicemail, right Douglas?) And of course when I get to a new area, I call them and ask them what their roaming rates and policies, are, etc. And I also took my _Official_Cellular_Roaming_Handbook_ too. But when we got our phone bills from Cellular One/NY, we find that the roaming charges are NOT what the carriers themselves say they are! It seems that for certain NACN systems, but not all of them, Cellular One/NY re-bills the other systems' $2.00/day + .50/minute as nothing/day + .99/minute! When I called Cellular One/NY to complain about this, they just say "this is the way we do it" and that's all I can get them to say. I can't find anything about this practice in any of Cellular One/NY's paperwork and they can't seem to explain it either. Has anyone else had this done to them? Mike Bray mike@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (or) ...!apple!camphq!mike ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #46 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24171; 27 Jan 93 7:21 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00720 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:07:31 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09753 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:06:07 -0600 Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:06:07 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301271106.AA09753@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #47 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 93 05:06:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 47 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Sears Kills Catalog After 95 Years (Paul Robinson) Overseas Directory Assistance (sic) (Alan Munn) CONNECT Table of Contents (Patricia Snyder-Rayl) A RISK Question (Paul M. Wexelblat) Pac Bell to go All Digital (R. Kevin Oberman) AT&T Reaches Out to the Arts (Dave Leibold) Who You Gonna Call? Phonebusters! (Dave Leibold) Cable TV Standards (Sean E. Williams) MCI Voicelink (Greg Volk) Answering Machine Exclusion: Schematic (Jon Sreekanth) Request For Information: Telecom in Australia (Wen-hu Liang) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:19:36 EST Subject: Sears Kills Catalog After 95 Years What is probably one of Pat Townson's biggest neighbors is closing its doors today. Sears Roebuck & Company's Mail Order Catalog Division is closing after more than 95 years. It was the use of telecommunications that built the business and it was the failure to use telecommunications that killed it. "Wait," you might say, "more than 95 years means it was operating back in the 1890s. How could they be using 'telecommunications' then? And how does it affect them now?" Think about it for a moment. 'Telecommunications' is the method of communicating over long distance. When we use it it normally refers to things like telephones, satellites, cable TV and Internet E-Mail. But Telecommunications also includes the methods by which other forms of communications are transported. Where the mail can reach, or where trains can go, you can communicate or you can ship goods. And that is what created Mr. Sears' business: the ability of the trains to reach out into 'the middle of nowhere'. Also, the supposedly 'new' idea of 'easy credit' where someone could buy something on time payments. Now look at the Sears Catalog office that closed, and see why: - The company that pioneered a means to reach customers in the middle of nowhere, now had no easy way for customers to reach it. Until last year, incredibly enough, SEARS CATALOG DID NOT HAVE AN 800 NUMBER. There are companies that do 1/1000 of the business Sears does who do have one. But not the largest mail order company in the country. - The company that pioneered allowing people to order on credit or return goods which were unsatisfactory, would not take any plastic except its own. Even JCPenney takes Visa and Mastercard, and JCP even takes Sears' Discover card, too. Sears failed to keep up with technology, and as a result, the company that was created by 'high technology' was killed by failure to stay with the technology needed to keep it alive. Larger companies get fat and slow, they usually need the technology to compete with the little people a lot more than the small companies who have to use the technology just to stay alive. "Telecommunications" gave birth to Sears Catalog. And it was telecommunications that pulled the plug. (And bad management helped grease the skids, too.) Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These opinions are mine alone. [Moderator's Note: The demise of the Catalog was in all the papers here today. That's another 4000 people to be unemployed here. It also appears the R.R. Donnelley Company, printers of the catalog for the past 80 plus years will be out of business as well, since the Catalog was about 40 percent of their business. Sears began here in the late 1800's, but they closed their downtown store many years ago about the same time downtown Chicago and State Street died. Their big block-long six story building at State and Van Buren Sts. has sat vacant for ten years now I guess. In its heyday earlier this century, Sears had its international headquarters in Chicago in a building on the (then) very white and very Jewish west side, on Homan Avenue. In the 1920's, they employed about half the west side neighborhood in some capacity or another. Some of you may recall that Jacob Franks, father of the fourteen year old Bobby Franks who was murdered by Leopold and Loeb was a vice-president at Sears. In his generosity, Mr. Sears before his death left a huge amount of money to the Young Men's Christian Assoc- iation of Metropolitan Chicago. Because of prudent investments, the Sears YMCA still has most of its endowment. Sitting across the street from the ancient and abandoned former Sears HQ on Arthington Street and Homan Avenue in what is now one of the worst ghetto areas in Chicago, the Sears YMCA provides tutoring and recreational programs for black children and teenagers. I am reminded of the time when IBT cut over a stepper CO to ESS about 1974. Sears Catalog and Central Credit facility shared a five-position cord board which had very heavy traffic all the time on 312-WABash-4600. My office number then was WEbster-9-4600. When IBT made the cut, some damn-fool got 922 and 939 mixed up in the tables ... for two days I lived with constant wrong numbers (a couple hundred calls each day) until I convinced IBT to correct the error. Sears never even missed the calls, I'm sure. PAT] ------------------------------ From: amunn@gibbs.oit.unc.edu (Alan Munn) Subject: Overseas Directory Assistance (sic) Organization: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:39:54 GMT Is it possible to connect directly to directory assistance in other countries? We recently had a rather frustrating experience trying to find a number in Brazil through MCI. The MCI operator spoke no Portuguese and had a pretty strong regional American accent. Needless to say the operator claimed that there was no one of that name in the 'small' city we were calling (14 million people). When I asked to speak directly to the Brazilian operator she refused. I then talked to an MCI supervisor who said we couldn't speak directly to the operator, but that he had "an even better solution" -- a Portuguese speaking MCI operator (who did speak pretty reasonable (European) Portugeuse). This helped somewhat but finally he ended up letting us speak to the Brazilian operator at which point we got the number. Can one find out how to dial the operator directly? If I were overseas could I just dial the North American xxx-555-1212 number as if it were a regular long distance call to get directory assistance here? Why wouldn't MCI (although I assume this is common practice) let us talk directly to the operator? Alan Munn Dept. of Linguistics, CB# 3155 UNC Chapel Hill NC 27599 [Moderator's Note: Yes and no. No, you are not supposed to dial international DA direct (no, people in other countries cannot dial 555-1212 in this country -- I don't think), and yes, it can be done in a few cases if you know the number the operator dials (it is not a standard 555-1212, but 011-xxx-555-1212 will work in a few places). You pay the cost of the overseas call. It seems to work for 671 (Guam) and 670 (Saipan), as well as 852 (Hong Kong) but I am not going to run my bill up checking out every possible place. 684 (American Samoa) also goes through. If you think MCI operators are bad, you should hear some of the help AT&T has hired in the past few years at the IOC. I am sorry to say this, but sometimes I am embarassed for them when they try to talk to an overseas operator to obtain a number. Especially annoying is when they split the connection, leaving me on a dead line while I can only hope they are asking for what I want instead of something else. At least when the connection is left in place during the call, I can make a correction if needed instead of waiting for the AT&T operator to come back five minutes later and say nothing was located. When calling some countries, be prepared to wait through five minutes of ringing before they even answer the line, unless you get that infernal 'Telee-kom Services, we're trying to extend your call, please stand by,' message with three bars of music which repeats itself every ten seconds for the five minutes instead. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pegasus@cyberspace.org (Patricia Snyder-Rayl) Subject: CONNECT Table of Contents Organization: GREX Public Access Unix +1 313 761 3000 Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:44:18 GMT CONNECT Table of Contents May/June '93 Issue CONNECT is a new bi-monthly magazine focusing on telecommunications from a user's perspective. Coverage includes the major commercial online services, Internet/Usenet and bulletin board systems. The first issue of CONNECT (May/June '93 cover date) will be available in mid-March. Here is a list of the feature articles and columns that appear in this premiere issue: FEATURES Telecomputing and the U.S. Constitution by Mark Leccese This article explores the current STEVE JACKSON GAMES v. THE UNITED STATES court case and its potential impact on BBS users and sysops across the country. History of FIDOnet by Kathleen Creighton An interview with Tom Jennings, creator of FIDOnet, who discusses how FIDOnet came into being, where it is now, and where it's going in the future. The Weather Underground by Ilana Stern How you can get current weather data and maps online, with a detailed look at the University of Michigan's Weather Underground. Intro to Packet Radio by Andy Funk This introduction to Packet Radio shows how you can get involved in one of the fastest growing hobbies in telecommunications...phone line and modem not necessary! Getting Online with a High Speed Modem by Dan Romanchik Some valuable tips for anyone moving up from 2400 bps or slower to a new high speed modem. Children and Telecommunications by Phil Shapiro Children can learn a lot and gain new friends online. This article gives tips on getting children involved in telecommunications. COLUMNS Connecting with CompuServe Columnist Jim Ness gives us the "Grand Tour" of CompuServe, touching on everything from 9600 baud access to recent changes in the message base software. Eye on America Online Columnist Julia Wilkinson gives an overview of America Online, one of the "newest" national online services with a slick graphical user interface. GEnie's Treasures Veteran GEnie "treasure hunter" Jim Mallory is your guide to the many hidden (and not-so-hidden) treasures waiting for you on GEnie. Telecomputing the Delphi Way Columnist Dick Evans shows us what Delphi has to offer, including the recently added Internet FTP and Telnet capabilities. The Internet Gateway What is the Internet and what does it have to offer? Columnist Miles Kehoe gives us an overview of Internet, along with a few e-mail tips. Clear To Send (CTS) A review of COMMO, the popular multi-tasking terminal package from shareware programmer Fred Drucker. Columnist Victor Volkman tells us why the software has created such a COMMOtion in the IBM telecom market. Dial M for Macintosh Ross Scott Rubin, CONNECT's Macintosh columnist, takes a look at MacIntercomm, the new multi-tasking terminal package from Mercury Systems. Staying Connected for about a Pound Palmtops can be an excellent way to stay connected when you're on the go. Columnist Marty Mankins shows you how to take advantage of this fast-growing market. --------- For more information about CONNECT, please contact Pegasus Press at 3487 Braeburn Circle, Ann Arbor, MI 48108 or phone (313) 973-8825 voice. Or e-mail us at: CIS: 70007,4640 GEnie: UNICORNPUB Delphi: UNICORNPUB Internet: pegasus@grex.ann-arbor.mi.us ------------------------------ From: wex@cs.ulowell.edu (Paul M. Wexelblat) Subject: A RISK Question Reply-To: wex@cs.ulowell.edu Organization: Univ. of Lowell CS Dept. Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:40:23 GMT I know this isn't the RISKS Digest, but... I have a line that rings in two places, home and office. The home and office are in different towns (separate fire/police), but the same telephone exchange. When 911 gets installed, what are the possibilities for what gets displayed who gets the call what is the likelyhood that they can do it right (both customer drops come out of the same CO, so they have a prayer of getting it right.) The RISK, is obvoiusly that the same Fire Department goes to the wrong address (10 miles away). Wex ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Pac Bell to go All Digital Date: 26 Jan 93 15:34:38 GMT An article in this morning's (1/26) {Tri-Valley Herald} reports that Pac Bell plans to upgrade ALL telephone switches (14 million lines) to digital switches by 1997. The billion dollar plan attributed to rapidly growing competition from other carriers. Just three years ago Pac Bell was in the technical backwaters. I live in one of the fastest growing areas in the state and still was on an old crossbar. They had little plan for ISDN or any other digital service. Then came competition! I am now on a DMS-100. The local office also provides ISDN from a new 5ESS with SS7 widely (if not universally) implemented both within the service area and between Pac Bell and at least AT&T. It still catches my attention when I place a long distance call and the line rings instantly without apparent delays or any switching sounds. Simply amazing what a little competition can do. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: koberman@llnl.gov (510) 422-6955 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:38:24 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: AT&T Reaches Out to the Arts AT&T has a reputation for supporting arts, especially during these risky recessionary times. AT&T Foundation recently pitched in $50,000 to support the Canadian Opera Company's productions of the operas Bluebeard's Castle and Erwartung. The COC will also be doing this double feature at the Brooklyn Academy of Music (an institution in which AT&T has some long-standing ties). AT&T is reportedly the largest sponsor of American non-profit performing arts. This latest sponsorship of Canadian arts comes at a time when AT&T's presence in Canada is growing (ie. the part-ownership of Unitel Communications). ref: {Toronto Star}, Eye on Entertainment Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG [Moderator's Note: AT&T has always been generous to service organizations and charities as well. In the 1960's when AT&T and the Bells were one, they gave a lot of financial assistance to the civil rights movement. This being the 25th anniversary year of the asassination of Dr. M.L. King, I am reminded that when he came to visit us (the trustees of the Chicago Temple invited him to speak once a year, sometimes twice), his honorarium was always paid back to us by AT&T and the program for the occassion would note, "Dr. and Mrs. King's personal expenses during their visit have been met with a gift from Illinois Bell Telephone Co." AT&T also endowed the telephone exhibit at the Museum of Science and Industry here for perhaps thirty years. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:10:24 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Who You Gonna Call? Phonebusters! {The Toronto Star} reported on Project Phonebuster, an undertaking by the Ontario Provincial Police, RCMP and the federal Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. The Phonebusters had the task of stomping on bogus boiler rooms that called unsuspecting citizens to offer phony prize winnings or overpriced merchandise. Credit card scams are also done via unscrupulous telemarketing. The police estimates indicate approximately 40 such phraudulent operations are running in Canada, ripping off CAD$20 million each year. Average loss per victim (and there could be 16 000 victims in the province of Ontario alone) is $500, and may become the most widespread phraud ever committed in Canada. Meanwhile, the legitimate telemarketers are making progress with plans to improve their integrity. The Canadian Direct Marketing Association (CDMA) offers a "do not call" list for those who do not want to be called from boiler rooms, and hopefully this list can be made mandatory for all boiler rooms whether or not they are CDMA members. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ From: sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu (S.E. Williams) Subject: Cable TV Standards Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1993 19:39:23 -0500 (EST) I know that cable television isn't discussed with much regularity in this forum, but as it is a form of telecommunications I believe my posting here is valid. I was wondering if the content of cable TV channels is regulated. I'd specifically like to know about the censorship of language, violence, and pornography. Certain stations (MTV, for example) will not show nudity or allow vulgar language. Is this a result of federal regulation, or is it an MTV policy? How about CNN? Of course, it seems that services such as HBO or Cinemax can show what they like. Maybe it's a difference of pay services vs "free" cable services? Please CC: any responses to me, as I may not see it in the Digest. Sean E. Williams sean e. williams, (sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu), is a student of imaging and photographic technology in the college of imaging arts & sciences at the rochester institute of technology in beautiful rochester, new york. (he's also taking a few telecommunications courses...) You can call him at 716-475-4396. ------------------------------ From: gvolk@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Volk) Subject: MCI Voicelink Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 04:55:33 GMT Is anyone here familar with a program titled MCI Voicelink? I do not know much about it, other than the fact that it runs under UNIX. I've heard descriptions ranging from "a long distance billing system" to "a voicemail program." The name makes it soudn like a voicemail program, but I'm still not sure. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 02:06:51 -0500 From: jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) Subject: Answering Machine Exclusion: Schematic Hi Pat: This is either for publication, or FAQ or what-have-you. I typed it up in response to someone's question, so maybe others will find it useful. ---- This is the schematic I traced for an answering machine stopper gadget: it cuts off the answering machine in case any line is picked up. Some answering machines have this feature built-in; the older or inexpensive ones don't. The gadget is called Message Stopper (R), by Design Tech International Inc., Springfield, VA. Several other mfrs make this kind of gadget, so this is just one I happened to buy. Cost, roughly $10. The gadget is in the same form factor as a wall-plug-in Y-splitter. That is, it plugs into the wall RJ11 outlet, and has two RJ11 outlets on it, one marked TEL, the other marked ANS. There are two LED's, the green one on top of the ANS outlet, the red one on top of the TEL outlet. The two outer wires of the three RJ11's are wired in parallel. The schematic for the center two wires is : .-------------- phone .----------------- | | C1 ----| C2 -| | | | | | | '----------------- answering machine | +--|<--+--|<--->|---- | | two zeners +-->|--+ two leds Top led is green, bottom is red. It turns out the leds are basically idiot lights. The outside design makes it look like the green should light up when the ANS is offhook, and the red when TEL is offhook, but actually, depending on the line polarity, only one will glow, and only when the ANS outlet is offhook. If a load is connected on the ANS outlet, both leds will glow when ring voltage comes through. I could not read the zener voltage off the diodes, but I measured 11V across one of them when operating. The theory of operation is straightforward. All telephone extensions in the house are in parallel with each other, and with any device connected on the TEL outlet. If any of these devices is offhook, the phone line voltage is expected to drop below 12V or so, at which point the zeners isolate the ANS outlet from the line. It's a fairly simplistic design, and will not work in all situations, but it mostly works. Regards, Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems, Inc. | Fax and PC products 5 Walden St #3, Cambridge, MA 02140 | (617) 876-8019 jon_sree@world.std.com [Moderator's Note: I shall put this as a file in the archives, which are accessible using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. Thanks for sending it along to the Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ From: whlst2+@pitt.edu (Wen-hu Liang) Subject: Request For Information -- Telecom in Australia Date: 27 Jan 93 06:57:46 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh Hi there, This is Vincent Wen-Hu Liang looking for some help regarding my research on the development of telecommunication in Australia, including the history, industry structure, status of infrastructure, services and other general information. Is it possible to get any year-book published by government department or telecommunication incorporation? How? My report will due by April. As a matter of fact, there isn't much time left. I hope someone can provide me any information of my research topic or contact point, like address, fax or e-mail. Appreciate your attention and, of course, response. Vincent Graduate student of Telecommunication, U. of Pittsburgh, USA E-mail : whlst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu Fax : (412) 682-5341 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #47 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06781; 27 Jan 93 13:10 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01811 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:12:39 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03151 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:12:05 -0600 Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:12:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301271612.AA03151@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #48 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:12:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 48 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (A. Alan Toscano) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Ken Weaverling) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Rick Duggan) Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Carl Moore) Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? (Peter M. Weiss) Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? (Richard McCombs) Re: Integretel Forcing Charges Through (Winston Lawrence) Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) (Chas Mattair) Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) (Udi Manber) Re: Strange Intercept Message (Stephen Diercouff) Re: Strange Intercept Message (John R. Levine) Re: 10XXX UnBlocking (Martin Harriss) Re: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized (John Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 13:29:27 CST Reply-To: atoscano@attmail.com From: atoscano@taronga.com (A Alan Toscano) In TELECOM Digest Volume 13, Issue 45, ccoprfm@prism.gatech.edu (Monte Freeman), a reader in the 404 Number Plan Area, writes about his strange experionces with calls to 404 988-9664, with and without a prepended 10732- and asks: > Strange results from 404 land. Anyone got any ideas here? It's my understanding that the 732 Carrier Identificaiton Code facilitates switched access to AT&T's Subscriber Defined Network Service (SDN) and also its Virtual Telecommunication Network Service (VTNS). Under SDN/VTNS, each customer designs its own dialing plan, providing a "virtual private network." Access to SDNs are normally over dedicated lines, but small branch locations of a corporation might "PIC" their outgoing lines to 732, (or prefix seven-digit outgoing calls with 10732 1 700) in order to facilitate switched access to their SDN/VTN. As the dialing plan of one SDN will likely vary from that of another, the network must identify the caller, in order to know which SDN/VTNS dialing plan to use in routing a call. Thus ANI plays an important role in implementation of SDN and VTNS switched access. Normally, if you prefix a call with 10732 and are *NOT* an SDN/VTNS customer, you'll be told "You have reached a private network. You must be authorized to access this network..." As noted previously in the Digest, an exception is 10732 1 404 988-9664, which normally recites ANI information, presumably to assist AT&T in setting up these networks. (Most AT&T customers' lines are "PIC'd" to 288 and not 732, thus the need to include the 10732- prefix to override the PIC default.) LEC payphones normally force all "1+" calls to the "288" network regardless of any 10XXX code dialed (COCOTs generally block "10XXX-1+" calls altogether) and "10732-0+" calls are treated like "10288-0+" calls. Therefore, it's not generally possible to reach this ANI announcement from an LEC payphone. (NYTel payphones are apparently an exception.) This is no loss to AT&T, however, since payphones aren't often included in private networks! "1+" calls to 404 988-9664 carried over AT&T's normal "288" network and over competitors' networks, reportedly ring without answer. Only if the call is placed "1+" over the "732" network is ANI recited. It happens that 404-988 is Smyrna, GA - one of the SDN support sites. I suppose 404 988-9664 rings "open" on a line at AT&T's facilities there, and has special significance only on the "732" network. I also expect that AT&T will change this number if it continues to receive the increasingly frequent mention in the Digest that it has received lately! Disclaimer: I work for a VTNS customer with dedicated access, and have limited knowledge of 10732- switched access. Therefore, much of this is conjecture. I am not an AT&T employee. A Alan Toscano -- Houston, TX -- -- ------------------------------ From: Ken Weaverling Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Date: 26 Jan 1993 10:05:31 -0500 Organization: Delaware Technical & Community College In article tener@cs.widener.edu (Stuart Tener) writes: > A friend of mine tried this number, and said it works from 215! Only > thing is he said that it gave an "8" at the end of the number?!? Ah, you haven't been paying attention. This is in preparation for North America to switch to 8 digit phone numbers with existing numbers having an 8 added to them. !!! NOT !!! Weave's 10/90 recipe for insanity: Take one programmer, divide into portions: 10% programming consisting of equal parts in systems and applications plus admin duties broken down into 20% for Unix, 5% PRIMOS, 10% hardware and network, 35% DOS/Windows, 10% news, 5% postmaster, and 5% babysitting IRC kiddies. ------------------------------ From: duggan@cc.gatech.edu (Rick Duggan) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes Reply-To: duggan@cc.gatech.edu (Rick Duggan) Organization: College of Computing Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:44:17 GMT In article ccoprfm@prism.gatech.edu (Monte Freeman) writes: > tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes: >> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted >> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. > Well, it doesn't work from 404. Here's the results of my poking around: I got it to work from 404. First, I tried the above directly. When that didn't work, I decided to dial just 988-9664. That just rang about 10 times before I gave up. Finally, I went with 10732-988-9664. Third time's the charm, I suppose. It functioned as advertised, down to the extra '8' at the end. Now, does anyone know if a bunch of comp.dcom.telecom readers are going to have some $10 charge (or some other strange amount) on our next phone bills? They obviously know my phone number :-). rick ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:13:22 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes > In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted > that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. 10732 is a I just tried it from a pay phone in area 410 (using 10732-0 and 10288-0). Both of them got the AT&T thank-you message followed by no answer. ------------------------------ Organization: Penn State University Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 09:55:31 EST From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? In article , Paul Robinson says: > Someone else may have the list of Internet based subscribable lists, I > know there is one I just don't know who makes it. I will CC this > message to TELECOM Digest and allow the readers there to give some > insight. An excellent document is available about searching the Lists-of-Lists electronically, and is itself accessible via electronic mail by sending a note to: listserv@NDSUVM1 (bitnet) or @vm1.nodak.edu with a simple body-of-text message of: GET LISTSOF LISTS This document (153 lines) is authored by Marty Hoag and contains valuable advice (and LISTSERV Database Search scripts) on how to do automated searching. Pete Weiss - Penn State U, co-owner LDBASE-L ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? From: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs KB5SNF) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 01:54:07 CST Organization: The Red Headed League; Lawton, OK, USA In comp.dcom.telecom, tdarcos@access.digex.com writes: > Someone else may have the list of Internet based subscribable lists, I > know there is one I just don't know who makes it. I will CC this > message to TELECOM Digest and allow the readers there to give some > insight. Send a message to info-server@nnsc.nsf.net include the following text in the body of the message: request: info topic: interest-groups The subject is ignored this will send you the List of Lists which is 872K; for this reason, I haven't actually requested it. To get the help file for this info-server, send a message to info-server@nnsc.nsf.net. The Subject field does not matter and may be omitted. Place the following text in the body of the message: request: info topic: help I have done this, and you should probably do this first. There is much shorter list posted crossposted to news.lists,news. announce.newusers,news.answers. If you don't have access to Usenet it can be requested by email, to find out how send a message to mail-server@pit-manager.mit.edu with the following text in the body: path help quit Internet: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org If I bounce (the maps have errors that I have no control over) then use bo836@cleveland.freenet.edu BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 09:10:17 -0500 From: Winston Lawrence Subject: Re: Integratel Forcing Charges Through twb0@lehigh.edu (Thomas Brown) wrote that.. > Our room was recently billed for $90 worth of collect calls from > Integratel despite the fact that Lehigh University supposedly traps > collect calls to student rooms. To which Patrick responded in part with: .... (stuff deleted) > But let's face it; you, or someone with access to the phone in your > room did agree to accept collect charges, in all probability from an > 'adult service', since that is the kind of thing Integratel's clients > deal in for the most part. It might have been from a COCOT, but $90 > seems a bit steep for a regular long distance call. It seems a bit > steep for the other kind also, but who am I to decide what gets a > person off? :) Patrick, you may be not realize how easy it is to be billed for a collect call without realizing it. There is a radio show in New York called 'Off The Hook' (WBAI 10:00pm wednesday nights) which deals with telephone phone companies, hackers (and crackers too). They covered Integratel about a month ago. Basically someone can request a collect call via Integratel's system. The number is dialed (lets say yours Patrick) and a recording says this is a collect call if you do not want to accept the charges hang-up now. If you do NOT hang up guess what? You just accepted a very expensive collect call. If you missed the first two seconds when you pick up the call (not hard when you expected a human being not a machine voice), if your answering machine, or modem picked up, or even a child, now, just by answering your phone you will accept a bill for whatever they choose to bill you for. Note that there is no way to even ask WHAT the charges may be if you did hear the message about it being a collect call. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 10:07:11 CST From: mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX In article udi@cs.washington.edu (Udi Manber) writes: > [PAT writes]: > [Moderator's Note: You say 'the main purpose of such schemes is to > defraud someone ...' Who, may I ask, is attempting to defraud whom? > 800 numbers being forwarded is one thing, but the willful acceptance > of a collect call when you were notified by the operator that so and > so was calling collect and the charge would be so much per minute is > quite another. Pat, Billing collect calls without authorization appears to be a fairly prevalent problem. My daughter had an ATT Call Me (sm) with the old style number (713 498 xxxx pppp). After getting tired of $2.50 (or more) local payphone calls, I changed the card to one with the new style number which AOSs cannot bill against (If I can't talk her into using a SWB phone, force her ;-) ). Hah ... some of the AOSs, not to be denied, just silently converted the call to collect. I didn't have collect/third party blocking at the time so I don't know if this would have affected the billing. I never succeeded in arguing the phone company out of any of the collect charges. PS: Once she got her own number and card and phone bill, she started paying attention when I grumbled about AOS ripoffs. Charles Mattair mattair@synercom.hounix.org Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer. Gates and Walton are the perfect reasons for a wealth tax. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:31:01 -0800 From: udi@cs.washington.edu (Udi Manber) Subject: Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) > [Moderator's Note: You say 'the main purpose of such schemes is to > defraud someone ...' Who, may I ask, is attempting to defraud whom? Students trying to defraud their universities by calling from the dorm or from any other public phones that are not fully blocked, sleaze operators convincing children to call back or accept calls, 800 numbers that are supposed to warn you about the charges but never do, the list goes on and on. (These are just examples told to me by the utility commission.) I am sure you know more about that than I do. Are you trying to say that there is no phone fraud? > But if you choose to deal with their clients then you should plan > on paying their clients. And what if, like me, you never chose to deal with any of them (or even knew they existed), but can't get them off your back? > Everyone uses something to circumvent the blocking of something else > when it suits their requirements. Why should sex-by-phone providers be > any different? "Everyone cheats, steals, and beats their kids, so why do you blame me?" is not a great argument. You missed my point. These schemes, especially the 800-number scheme which I was hit with, pose an unacceptable risk to many unsuspecting victims, and allow easy fraud. You think that when you block your phone you're protected, but you're not. You need to be an expert to be really protected. It could very well be that fraud is not wide spread -- yet. Maybe (probably) most of the complaints against Integretel are from people trying to weasel out of calls they made. Maybe Integretel knows how to cover their behind (I am sure they do), and maybe I am paranoid, but IMHO we should *minimize* fraud opportunities as much as we can, rather than turn a blind eye to them until they hit us personally. In any case, I spent too much time on that. It's time to move on. Udi Manber ------------------------------ From: sgd@tfm.com (Stephen Diercouff) Subject: Re: Strange Intercept Message Organization: tfm Associates, Ltd. Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 04:24:03 GMT starr@hriso.att.com writes: > A friend of mine accidently dialed an 800 number, and received a > strange repeating intercept message. I haven't even a clue as to the > language, but my guess is the message is attempting to say that the > number you have dialed is not in service. The number is 800-952-5388. The intercept is, "Kein Anschluss unter dieser Nummer", which, if I remember my German means, "No connection for this number". Stephen Diercouff, tfm Associates, Ltd., Bellingham WA voice: +1 206 733 5721 Internet: sgd@tfm.com fax: +1 206 738 0630 UUCP : uunet!nwnexus!tfm!sgd Snail : P.O. Box 5084/Bellingham WA 98227-5084 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Strange Intercept Message Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 26 Jan 93 15:16:01 EST (Tue) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > The number is 800-952-5388. It says "Kein Anschluss unter diese Nummer," this number is not connected. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: martin@bdsgate.com (Martin Harriss) Subject: Re: 10XXX UnBlocking Reply-To: bdsgate!martin@uunet.UU.NET (Martin Harriss) Organization: Beechwood Data Systems Date: Wed, 26 Jan 93 03:31:59 GMT In article Barton F. Bruce writes: > AT&T has been offering substantial $ rebates for expenses incurred by > hotels and such while unblocking their PBXes to handle 10XXX traffic. [stuff deleted] > AT&T said the NET&T order code and pricing are: RBVXC, $11/line > install, $0.00/mo!!, but cautioned me that it was on MY head to > determine if whatever NET&T is offering is what my customers need. > The usual NET&T sales response is that no one has heard of it, but > since AT&T had provided the info that it was only a few days old, the > NET&T sales types are off checking on it at least. I don't think it's RBVXC, I think it's RTVXC. RTVXC is the Universal Service Order Code (USOC) that NYNEX uses (or at least that New York Tel uses) to describe one particular blocking option. From memory, RTVXC blocks 1-900, 976, 1-700, 540, 550, and possibly others that I don't remember. But maybe you're talking about something different, in connection with 10XXX, and there really is an RBVXC? Seems like quite a coincedence, though. Martin Harriss uunet!bdsgate!martin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 10:11 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized hpa@merle.acns.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP) writes: >> Permissive dialing >> starts December 1993, and ends (with mandatory use of 810) August 10, >> 1994. > That's a long permissive dialing period. Hah! Got than one beat by a country mile. Somewhere back in 1959 or 1960, 408 was split off from 415. I happened to notice this because of my practice of reading the phone book for fun (makes great "library" reading, if you know what I mean). Anyway, callers from out of state could use 415 or 408 for south bay numbers interchangably for several years. But here is the best part. It was possible to omit the area code if you happened to be calling within the metro Bay Area, even if your call crossed area code boundaries until 1982. In other words, up until eleven years ago, San Francisco was a seven digit call from San Jose -- even though the NPA had been split more than TWENTY YEARS previously! 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 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #48 *****************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22217; 29 Jan 93 19:36 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00870 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 29 Jan 1993 16:56:30 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02044 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 29 Jan 1993 16:56:04 -0600 Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 16:56:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301292256.AA02044@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #49 TELECOM Digest Thu, 28 Jan 93 23:30:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 49 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services (Immo Huneke) Re: 1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC intra-LATA LD (Scott D. Brenner) Re: How Can I Reach AT&T EasyLink? (A. Alan Toscano) Re: Overseas Directory Assistance (Michelle R. Thibault) Re: A RISK Question (Daniel Burstein) Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line") (Daniel Burstein) Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway (Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Huneke_Immo@dodo.logica.co.uk Subject: Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services Date: 28 Jan 93 15:41:27 GMT Organization: Logica Space & Communications In article , mark@coombs.anu.edu.au (Mark) wrote: > This system brings closer the concept of Personal Communication > Numbers (PCNs) so you can one day be contacted anywhere in the world, > just by anyone dialling your permanent number. The only problems I can > see immediately are those involved with the amount of frequencies, RFI > and the ease of monitoring. > > Sounds like a nice system. Yes, it does sound like a nice idea, doesn't it? Yet when a similar service (Rabbit) was launched in the UK in 1992, the take-up was only 10% of predictions. For 200 pounds sterling you get a home base station and a portable _digital_ phone (zero hiss) with a range of around 150 yards. Public base stations are dotted around the capital and many other parts of the UK. The cost of calls is the same as your domestic phone when you're using your own base station, and the same as a public payphone when you're out and about. Only around 5000 Rabbits were sold before Christmas. I suspect that one of the problems might be that the base station is useless without the handset - so married couples or families are unable to use their portable phone while the head of household is away at work. Immo Huneke, S/W Engineer Huneke_Immo@Dodo.Logica.Co.UK Logica Space and Communications Ltd. Immo@LogCam.Co.UK Stephenson House, 67-87 Hampstead Road Tel: +44 (0)71-637 9111 x1315 London NW1 2PL, England Fax: +44 (0)71-383 0530 ------------------------------ From: sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner) Subject: Re: 1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC intra-LATA LD Organization: AT&T Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 18:10:09 GMT In article I just c alled my voice mailbox to check voice mail (it's in 415, I'm > in 408) and as I listened to the "Thank you for using Pacific Bell" > recording I though of the recent thread concerning intra-LATA long > distance. On a whim, I decided to try 1-800-CALL-ATT to see if I > could force ATT to carry the call instead. (PacBell won't let 10288 > work for such calls; you get a recording.) It worked. > [Moderator's Note: I've noticed that when an intra-LATA call is placed > here via AT&T because they were more or less forced into handling it > due to it being on their calling card (or via Easy Reach, etc) the > billing for same will come on the AT&T portion of the Illinois Bell > bill, with a statement saying 'call handled on behalf of Illinois Bell > by AT&T'. It is almost as though they are saying, "we cannot legally > handle this call as AT&T, but we can act as agents for Illinois Bell > and handle it for them." I think AT&T functions like a 'reseller' or > open-ended (no defined customer base) aggregator for the local telcos, > and pays the telcos for calls which are 'rightfully' the telco's to > handle. In many cases, they may just let the local telco handle the > whole thing but at AT&T rates. I suspect the same arrangement is in > effect in everywhere with the telco of record for that territory. PAT] I recently had a similar thing happen. I needed to call home from a payphone and I had no change. Although the payphone and my home are in different exchanges, they're in the same LATA and only about ten miles apart. I used my AT&T Universal Card by dialing 0 and the seven digits of my home number; at the "bong," I entered my ten digit Universal calling card number and the PIN. The call went through. I forgot that AT&T and the LECs recently implemented their own calling card numbering systems (and validation databases). I figured that NJ Bell would carry the call, and it would appear on the "local" portion of my phone bill as an intra-LATA calling card call. I just got the Universal card bill, and the call showed up as an ordinary Universal card call! Pat's explanation above may explain how AT&T carried my call, but how did it even get out to AT&T's network? I only dialed 0+NXX-XXXX. Why didn't NJ Bell grab it and tell me that my Universal Card number was invalid for their network? Or do they (and other LECs) just have arrangements like Pat suggests where they'll let AT&T carry the call in return for payment by AT&T? I should know this stuff better, but I work in a non-network-related part of AT&T. I want to understand how this works. It would certainly be to my benefit if I can force intra-LATA calling card calls to be carried by my company instead of the LEC. Scott D. Brenner AT&T Consumer Communications Services sbrenner@attmail.com Basking Ridge, New Jersey ------------------------------ Subject: Re: How Can I Reach AT&T EasyLink? Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 13:18:57 CST Reply-To: atoscano@attmail.com From: atoscano@taronga.com (A Alan Toscano) In TELECOM Digest Volume 13, Issue 44, ivan@nepjt.ne.ncsu.edu (Ivan Maldonado) asks: > Anyone know how to reach folks hooked up to "AT&T Easylink", whatever > that is? I'm trying to reach the username "idea" hooked up > to/through/under that network/gateway/thing. And, our Moderator responds with some admitted guesses as to the required syntax. Judging from Ivan's question, and Patrick's response, what we're seeing here, again, is the frequent confusion over just what is meant by "EasyLink." LET'S SEE ... Several years back, Western Union developed an email service, and called it EasyLink Instant Mail Service. It was one of the offerings of its Business Services unit. That unit was acquired in December of 1990, by AT&T, which merged it with its own Global Messaging Services unit (original provider of AT&T Mail, AT&T Enhanced FAX, AT&T EDI, and AT&T Learning Network services), and decided to call the resulting business unit "AT&T EasyLink Services." Because the former Western Union email product was, and is, often referred to as "EasyLink Service" (note singular vs plural), confusion reigns. REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU DEFINE AS "EASYLINK" ... Mailboxes on the former Western Union service, (which is often called simply "IMS,") are identified by eight-digit numbers which begin with "62." (These numbers are called EasyLink Numbers, or ELNs.) Mailboxes, and Off-Net Directory Entries on AT&T Mail and other GMS platform services, have *alpha* or *alphanumeric* usernames a la Unix. (Incidently, an IMS mailbox may, in addition to its ELN, also have an optional Off-Net Directory Entry on AT&T Mail. To the outside would it would look like, and be addressed as though, it were an AT&T Mail mailbox.) SO, GENERALLY ... From the Internet, you may address email to alphabetic or alphanumeric usernames as: username@attmail.com Eight-digit numeric IDs which begin with "62" (ELNs) may be addressed as: 62xxxxxx@eln.attmail.com HOWEVER ... Email to "gatewayed" mailboxes on other systems which connect to AT&T Mail, by way of Unix or X.400 gateways, require other address formats, which vary widely by gateway, and are beyond the scope of this article. Also, addressing mail back to the Internet is an entirely different, and far more complicated, matter, and I recommend that EasyLink Services' customers desiring information about any of these formats contact the appropriate Customer Support Center: EasyLink IMS: 800 HELP-ESL (or, +1 314 298 8720) AT&T Mail: 800 MAIL-672 (or, +1 314 770 1608) FINALLY, GETTING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL QUESTION ... The username, which Ivan desires to write to, is 'idea', so, in as much as this is an alphabetic ID, he would address his message to: idea@attmail.com Disclaimer: I am *not* an AT&T employee. Rather, I'm just an AT&T customer with mailboxes on both EasyLink IMS and AT&T Mail, as well as on the Internet. A Alan Toscano -- Houston, TX -- -- ------------------------------ From: michelle@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu (Michelle R. Thibault) Subject: Re: Overseas Directory Assistance Organization: Norut Research Group, Norway Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:17:21 GMT In article amunn@gibbs.oit.unc.edu (Alan Munn) wri tes: > Is it possible to connect directly to directory assistance in other > countries? > Can one find out how to dial the operator directly? > [Moderator's Note: Yes and no. No, you are not supposed to dial > international DA direct (no, people in other countries cannot dial > 555-1212 in this country -- I don't think), and yes, it can be done in > ...] I agree. You have to know the number the operator dials. I've called Norway directory assistance from the US by simply using the country code for Norway and then the number I'd dial if I was in Norway. So, 011-47-0180 worked just fine. I had U.S. Sprint, BTW. As for calling from Norway to the US 555-1212 number to get DA, it doesn't work. I recently ended up calling the US Sprint operator (via their "Norway access number") to get a number in Texas that the Norwegian DA couldn't find for me. BTW, it was interesting to discover that _she_ didn't try to call a US operator to do DA, she just looked it up herself! -- Does the US distribute directory information on-line somehow? (I was looking for a pretty vague reference, so it's not unusual that she couldn't locate it.) Sprint was *very* nice about it -- I was trying to locate a store that I couldn't remember the name of in a small town and the Sprint operator both put me through to DA, told them I was calling internationally when they weren't trying very hard and then put me through to the number when they finally found it. ;-) A pleasant experience all around. I generally like the US Sprint operators. I don't remember them ever giving me any problem with talking to the international operator directly when I've needed to. Michelle ------------------------------ From: dannyb@Panix.Com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Re: A RISK Question Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:40:32 GMT In wex@cs.ulowell.edu (Paul M. Wexelblat) writes: > I know this isn't the RISKS Digest, but... > I have a line that rings in two places, home and office. The home and > office are in different towns (separate fire/police), but the same > telephone exchange. > When 911 gets installed, what are the possibilities for what gets > displayed who gets the call what is the likelyhood that they can do it > right (both customer drops come out of the same CO, so they have a > prayer of getting it right.) > The RISK, is obvoiusly that the same Fire Department goes to the wrong > address (10 miles away). (bearing in mind that you may have some wierd arrangment ... but in general) ... In 99.9999% of the cases, the way this double line setup is arranged is that ONE of the locations is considered the "primary" site, with billing and electronic records considered to be at THAT location. The second ring location is considered to be an "off premise extension" ("OPX" in lingo). Think of location #2 as simply being a second phone set, but instead of being in the next room, it's attached to a VERY LONG extension cord which reaches into the next county. So, if you call from either set, chances are it WILL register as the primary location. This impacts on "911" service in two ways. 1) with basic 911, the call is routed to the emergency center based on your physical location. (this place, in lingo, is called the "PSAP" - for "Public Safety Answering Point"). If both your phones are in the same county, they are probably served by the same PSAP, but you ought to make sure. 2) with Enhanced-911, the calling number and ADDRESS are automagically displayed on the operator's screen. In your case, this would almost definitely give the main location. So you've GOT TO EMPHASIZE to anyone using the phone that they HAVE to tell the operator the real location. A real RISK with 911 systems is that the operators rely on the telco info, and don't even ask the address. (In a proper setting, they would have the address on screen, AND ask for confirmation. but...etc. etc...) 3) depending on the setup of your e-911 system, you MAY be able to have the database flash teh operator that this is a dual address, or a questionable, or something like that. This is often available because large business PBX's, or for that matter cellular phones, do NOTgive a reliable number or address location. (for example, ACME pothole manufacturers may have a main office, and then five satellite locations, all served by a pbx located at the main office...) Good luck, and I hope you never need 911. dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ From: dannyb@Panix.Com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service) Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:21:23 GMT In awry!tom@hercules.aptix.com (Tom Ace) writes: > Yesterday, I had success calling 702 333 8444 when preceded by 10333; > our Moderator had these comments: > [Moderator's Note: Perhaps due to the outage, Sprint was automatically > transferring some of their overflow traffic to AT&T. It happens. PAT] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ In NYC, under LOTS of pressure from the CIty as well as businesses and the Feds, there is actually an official and publicly reported agreement that the carriers will do this. Pressure came about courtesy of the major AT&T outages a few years ago, one of which knocked out nationwide service courtesy of a software glitch in upgrading the system, the other which knocked out approx 50% of NYC ATT long distance service when a switching center died because they had put it on backup power (to reduce the load on Con Ed, the elctrical utility), and didn't realize the batteries were discharging ... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 11:15 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? On Jan 24 at 3:04, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Another of our regular contributors could tell a > similar story about having been in business *as a corporation* for a > period of time and going out of business, only to have AT&T come to > him personally for the unpaid phone charges later on, insisting that > he was responsible for the corporation he formerly was associated > with. Yup! When it came time to shut down the old sales and service firm, it appeared that there was not quite enough money to go around. After the Federal, state, and local taxes were paid in full, there were a few bills left that went begging. So we turned the whole mess over to a bankruptcy attorney, who was to handle the chapter stuff for the corporation. About six months later (the bankruptcy was never filed for various reasons), I got a call from a collection agency representing AT&T. His demand was for a $1,000 bill that was left owing for a nationwide WATS line. By this time I had become quite rehearsed: "This is a bill owed by a corporation which has a bankruptcy pending. Please contact [bankruptcy attorney] for further information." At this time, we had still intended to file. But Mr. Collector would have none of that. He informed me that my name was on the account and that I was PERSONALLY liable. Since I make it a practice to NEVER sign any personal guarantees, I asked for a copy of the document backing his claim. "You know very well that AT&T does not have to have such a document!", he asserted. Then he went through all the usual threats of ruining my personal credit and pursuing legal action. Ah, legal action! He pushed the magic button. First, I reminded him why corporations are formed in the first place. Then he was told that I am represented by counsel. "This is between you and AT&T, you don't need to try to get other people involved." So I let him have both barrels: "I did not personally order the service; a secretary did. Even if I had done so myself as president of the corporation, it would have been on the corporation's behalf and not on my own. You may sue the corporation; you may even take a shot at me personally. But I never want to hear from you again." Then I slammed the phone down. He called right back. "I am only trying to be reasonable", he whined. Then he offered to let me pay a portion of the bill. No dice. (If one pays any portion of an obligation of a corporation or other entity, it is viable evidence that the person has assumed responsibility for that entity.) I slammed the phone down again. His calls over the next several days were picked up by my machine until he made his fatal error. He left a call back number (in Chicago -- are all the slimebag collectors in Chicago?) which I handed over to my attorney and let her call him back. That was the end of it. 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 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #49 *****************************  ^A^A^A^A Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11385; 29 Jan 93 14:26 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28034 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 29 Jan 1993 11:42:41 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26680 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 29 Jan 1993 11:42:00 -0600 Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 11:42:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199301291742.AA26680@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #50 TELECOM Digest Fri, 29 Jan 93 11:42:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 50 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Mitel Value Ripoff Policy (Barton F. Bruce) Neural/Fuzzy Applications Course (Patrick K. Simpson) Steve Jackson Games - Day 1 (Paco Xander Nathan) Wiring of Handset (Tony Fisher) Asynchronous Transfer Method (Leslie Westman) PC Libraries for Remote Control (David Madigan) Bitfax - How to Turn Off "Wait For Dial Tone" Flag (csb@violin.att.com) Rochester Telephone to Offer Customer Name and Address Service (C. E. Reid) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 09:24:59 -0500 (EST) From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: Mitel Value Ripoff Policy Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. I was at an auction Wednesday, and a Mitel SX200D was sold. The dealer that sold it was there and insisted the auctioneer could NOT sell the software as it was merely licensed. As the crowd moved past the switch after it had been bid on, the dealer apparently took the encryption module and left with it. The company closing their business had stipulated that the phones were for sale but the system had to be left running through the end of the following business day, and the new buyer was agreeable, and the sale will not be consumated until that time, I suspect. The receptionist came out saying her PBX was dead. What the dealer had done was soon obvious. He had taken a part from a legal machine BEFORE its sale was final, and crippled it so no calls were being received at a still functioning business. This gives Mitel Elite dealers a nice image. I later called different people at Mitel to see what was happening, and if Mitel customers have NO RECOVERABLE VALUE in software they license from Mitel. I have not yet gotten a final answer. It seems they want to license the Generic's use so it is totally clear they OWN the software, and that those making pirate PALs can be prosecuted. Protecting them selves that way is OK with me, if that is all they are doing. I asked if the dealer was supposed to return the chip to Mitel. Apparently some do, others don't, and presumably the latter get resold for the dealer's benefit, NOT Mitel's and not either customer's. I want to know if Mitel's license is transferable to a new customer or not. DEC lets you transfer your operating system license for a $300 processing fee. If the Mitel license is not transferable, are not many folks carrying it on their books as an asset and should not be? Is Mitel's real intent to protect themselves or is it to charge the second owner of the switch yet another full license fee? Is this dealer doing the wrong thing? Did Mitel's lawyers implement harsher terms than Mitel intended? Or is Mitel as arrogant as some other vendors that are clueless as to why they lose market share as consumers revolt against this sort of abuse? Anyone know for certain what is happening? I expect an answer from someone within Mitel, but maybe someone here knows. When the supply house ships the Panasonic 336, the software in IN IT. Training to be a certified Panasonic 336 TECH is ~$150 - the price of the manuals. The full blown top of the line Panasonic LCD/Speakerphone/ whatever is $100 less than Mitels, and the Panasonic one can do off-hook call announce. Mitel - wakeup! [Moderator's Note: I am surprised the owner(s) of the company did not call the police and have the dealer arrested for theft of company property as soon as he pulled out that part. Assuming the company had met all its obligations to Mitel and/or the dealer earlier, in addition to the criminal complaint against the dealer a civil suit against both Mitel and the dealer would seem to be indicated. PAT] ------------------------------ From: xm8@sdcc12.ucsd.edu (patrick k. simpson) Subject: Neural/Fuzzy Applications Course Date: 29 Jan 93 16:07:35 GMT COURSE ANNOUNCMENT APPLICATIONS OF NEURAL NETWORKS AND FUZZY SYSTEMS Date: April 13-15, 1993 8:30 am - 4:00 pm Location: Catamaran Resort Hotel 3999 Mission Blvd. San Diego, CA Ph. 619/488-1081 Registration: Tuition $990.00 Applied Technology Institute 12960 Linden Church Road P.O. Box 1172 Clarksville, MD 21029 Phone (410) 531-6034 Fax (410) 531-1013 Summary: Applications of Neural Networks and Fuzzy Systems will immerse the student in the most recent results in neural networks and fuzzy systems to applications in some of the most difficult problems in computing today. Application areas will be explored in detail, including sonar, radar, communications, signal processing, diagnostics, sensor and data fusion, forecasting, prediction, modelling, and control. The applications include an extensive description of the work conducted in both Europe and Japan, as well as a full spectrum of the state-of-the-art in these rapidly growing fields. "Applications of Neural Networks and Fuzzy Systems" serves those individuals who want to know what neural networks and fuzzy systems are and how they can be applied. This course distributes information that explains what products and services are currently available accompanied by the instructors recommendations and experience. Each course distributes a book that provides a broad overview of neural networks and their applications, survey papers that provide descibe specific applications areas, and demonstation software (including source code). In-class demonstrations place the student as close to real-world applications as possible without actually going into the laboratory. The text, "Artificial Neural Systems: Foundations, Paradigms, Applications and Implementations," written by the instructor, will be provided to all students. Instructor: Patrick K. Simpson is a Principal Engineer at ORINCON Corporation, a small-business dedicated to the application of intelligent systems to difficult defense-related problems. Mr. Simpson is an active member of the IEEE, having served on the organization committees of several international neural network and fuzzy system conferences as well as holding several executive positions on the IEEE Neural Networks Council. Mr. Simpson was the Program Chairman of the first IEEE Conference on Neural Networks for Ocean Engineering, a lecturer for the NATO Lecture Series dedicated to the application of neural networks to guidance and control and a member of Who's Who in Science and Engineering. Mr. Simpson has written several papers on theory and application of neural networks and fuzzy systems as well as the book "Artificial Neural Systems: Foundations, Paradigms, Applications and Implementations." COURSE OUTLINE: Applications of Neural Networks and Fuzzy Systems is broken into three parts that span three intensive, but enjoyable, days. Neural networks and fuzzy systems are first individually described. In the third part, hybrid fuzzy neural systems are described and applications are presented. Part One: Neural Networks. * A broad overview of neural networks. What are neural networks: Why are they so appealing: What can they do? What can't they do? * Neural Network Paradigms. The fundamental components and nomenclature. * Neural Network Design Methodology. A sequence of design steps is developed that will allow an engineer or scientist to easily apply neural networks. * Neural Network Complexity Analysis. Trade-Offs are examined, such as: size vs. speed, training time vs. run-time, and generalization vs. memorization. * Sonar Applications. Application areas include: beamforming, noise cancellation, feature extraction, detection, and classification. * Communication Applications. Application areas include: adaptive equalization, network control, data compression, error correction, and multi-user detection. * Radar Applications. Applications include clutter rejection, signal classification, deinterleaving, and emmitter identification. * Diagnostic Applications. Historical diagnostic vs. model-based diagnostics. * Forecasting, Prediction, and Modelling. Applications and techniques will include chaotic time-series prediction, forecasting environmental phenomena, and financial market prediction (stocks, commodities, etc.). * Sensor and Data Fusion. Different methods of fusion. Applications to surveillance, control, and diagnotistics. * Software and Hardware Review. A review of the currently available software and hardware that includes manufacturer's demo disks and ordering information. A complete listing of shareware software will be provided. Part Two: Fuzzy Systems. * Introduction to Fuzzy Systems. Answers to some fundamental questions, like: What is a fuzzy system: How is fuzzy different from probabilistic? Why use a fuzzy system? * Fuzzy Control Systems. Applications will be described, including: auto-focusing cameras and aircraft control. * Fuzzy Expert Systems. Applications to commercial appliances, data fusion, and decision aides. * Software and Hardware Review. A review of currently available software and hardware that includes manufacturer's demo disks and ordering information. Part Three: Fuzzy Neural Systems. * Methods of synergistically combining neural networks and fuzzy systems. Neural networks and fuzzy systems can be effectively combined to provide a more competent system. * Fuzzy Neural Control. Several exmples are provided that demonstrate a natural bridge between the two technologies. * Fuzzy Neural Pattern Clustering and Classificatoin. The state-of-the-art in pattern recognition lies in the synergism of these two technologies. A detailed description of several approaches will be provided. For Immediate Registration Phone (410) 531-6034 or Mail Check or Purchase Order to Applied Technology Institute, 12960 Linden Church Road, P.O. Box 1172, Clarksville, MD 21029 Fax (410) 531-1013 ------------------------------ From: pacoid@wixer.cactus.org (Paco Xander Nathan) Subject: Steve Jackson Games - Day 1 Organization: Houston Chronicle Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 06:45:47 GMT [Moderator's Note: This is the first report in a series which will continue in the Digest on a day by day basis. Issues later today will report on days two and three; these are the reports I have now, and as further reports reach us they will be printed. PAT] Steve Jackson Games/Secret Service Lawsuit -- Day One By JOE ABERNATHY Copyright 1993, Houston Chronicle AUSTIN -- Plaintiff's attorneys wrested two embarrassing admissions from the United States Secret Service on the opening day of a federal civil lawsuit designed to establish the bounds of constitutional protections for electronic publishing and electronic mail. In the first, Special Agent Timothy Foley of Chicago admitted that crucial statements were erroneous in an affidavit he used to conduct several search-and-seizure operations in a March 1990 crackdown on computer crime. The case, brought by Steve Jackson Games, an Austin firm, is being tried before United States District Judge Sam Sparks. Carefully nurtured over the course of three years by a group of electronic civil rights activists -- at a cost of more than $200,000 -- the case has been eagerly anticipated as a possible damper on what is seen as computer crime hysteria among federal police. Plaintiffs hope to prove that the printed word exists just as surely on the computer screen as it does on a sheet of paper. The complaint also seeks to establish the right of computer users to congregate electronically on bulletin board systems -- such as one called Illuminati that was taken from Steve Jackson Games -- and to exchange private electronic mail on such BBSs. "This lawsuit is just to stand up and say, at the end of the 20th Century, that publishing occurs as much on computers as on the printed page," said Jim George, of the Austin firm George, Donaldson & Ford, Jackson's law firm. That issue came into sharp focus during George's questioning of Foley regarding the seizure of the PC on which Illuminati ran, and another computer on which was stored the word processing document containing a pending Steve Jackson Games book release, GURPS Cyberpunk. "At the Secret Service computer crime school, were you, as the agent in charge of this investigation, made aware of special rules for searching a publishing company?" George asked Foley. He was referring to the Privacy Protection Act, which states that police may not seize a work in progress from a publisher. It does not specify what physical form such a work must take. "No, sir, I was not," Foley responded. "Did you just miss class the day that was taught?" George asked. "No, sir. The United States Secret Service does not teach its agents about special rules regarding search and seizure at publishing companies," Foley said. "Let the record clearly show that to be the case," George said. Earlier, Foley admitted on the witness stand that his original affidavit seeking a judge's approval to raid Steve Jackson Games contained a fundamental error. During the March 1990 raid -- one of several dozen staged that day around the country in an investigation that the Secret Service called Operation Sun Devil at the time -- agents were seeking copies of a document taken as a hacker trophy from BellSouth. Subsequently republished in an electronic magazine called Phrack, thousands of copies of the document were stored on bulletin board systems around the nation. Neither Jackson nor his company were suspected of wrongdoing, and no charges have ever been filed against anyone targeted in several Austin raids. The alleged membership of Steve Jackson employee Loyd Blankenship in the Legion of Doom hacker's group -- which was believed responsible for the break-in -- led agents to raid the Austin game publisher at the same time that Blankenship's Austin home was raided. Yet the only two paragraphs in the 42-paragraph indictment that established a connection between Blankenship's alleged illegal activities and Steve Jackson Games were shown to have been erroneously arrived at, when George produced a statement by Bellcore expert Henry Kluepfel disputing statements attributed to him in Foley's affidavit. "Is it true that Mr. Kluepfel logged onto (Illuminati)?" George questioned. "No, sir," Foley responded. "But you state that in your affidavit," George said. "That was a misattribution," Foley said. "So you had no knowledge that anything was sent to my client?" "No sir, not directly," Foley said. "Indirectly?" George asked. "No sir." The Justice Department, in papers filed with the court, contends that only traditional journalistic organizations enjoy the protections of the Privacy Protection Act. It further contends that users of electronic mail have no reasonable expectation of privacy. The trial was to resume at 8:30 a.m. It is expected to conclude on Thursday or Friday. [Moderator's Note: More details from the trial in later issues of the Digest today. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 18:21:10 From: fisher@minster.york.ac.uk Subject: Wiring of Handset Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England I have a Nokia "Mobira" cellular telephone handset, type CU 60 T 4624700 (just the h/set, not the box it plugs in to). It's broken. It connects to the box with the gubbins in it through an eight-core cable with a BT-style plug on the end. Can anyone tell me what the eight wires are for? Tony Fisher Dept. of Computer Science, The University of York, York YO1 5DD, U.K. Tel. +44 904 432738 or 432722 Internet: fisher@minster.york.ac.uk Janet: fisher@uk.ac.york.minster UUCP: fisher@minster.UUCP (..!uunet!mcsun!reading!minster!fisher) ------------------------------ From: lwestman@wrdis01.af.mil (Leslie Westman) Subject: Asynchronous Transfer Method Date: 29 Jan 93 08:59:21 GMT Organization: 1926CCSG Robins AFB I am posting this but I have infrequent, undependable news access at best. Please reply via e-mail to: lwestman@wrdis01.robins.af.mil I'm doing a paper on ATM, asynchronous transfer method. I am not familiar with data communications and I'd appreciate any info or opinions you have to share (please mark them as info or opinions so I keep mmy facts straight), as well as pointers on where to look for info on my topic. Names of DataComm journals and other relevant publications would be greatly appreciated. If there is interest in a compilation of what I receive, or my finished paper, please e-mail that to me too, and I'll get it posted to the news. I know that people asking favors shouldn't be demanding, but I am under a tight time constraint (three weeks) so please e-mail me now if you can help. Thanks! Leslie lwestman@wrdis01.robins.af.mil and living in Bonaire, Georgia! (yep, it's a huge place...) ------------------------------ From: madigan@myrtle.stat.washington.edu (David Madigan) Subject: PC Libraries for Remote Control Date: 29 Jan 1993 10:16:33 GMT Organization: Univ of Wash , Stat Dept. I'm looking for software libraries (ideally DLL's with source code) for a remote control application for use on MS Windows PC's. In particular, we want to transmit keyboard inputs and mouse information toa distant PC and receive the resulting graphics display information (VGA) from the distant PC. David Madigan madigan@stat.washington.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 14:12:21 EST From: csb@violin.att.com Subject: Bitfax - How to Turn of "Wait For Dial Tone" Flag Organization: AT&T I have bitfax software on a send/rec modem. How do I switch off wait for dial tone flag? The problem I have is the phone line this PC is connected to cannot dial out. I want the recieving end PC to make the call and my end PC to blindly send the fax. When I try to do this my PC gives "NO DIAL TONE" error. How do I force it to "blind dial" without caring for a dial tone ? ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jan 1993 05:23:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Curtis E. Reid Subject: Rochester Telephone to Offer Customer Name and Address Service A recent legal notice of tariff filings was announced in Rochester, NY's newspaper _Democrat_&_Chronicle_ on December 15, 1993 that: Effective February 19, 1993: - Customer Name and Address (CNA) Service will allow customers to call a designated telephone number to obtain a subscriber's name and address. The customer enters the subscriber's telephone number through a touchtone phone, and the CNA service will give the associated name and address of the subscriber. The charge for this service will be $.46 per request. I called the RTC and asked whether the CNA will give out the name and address for unlisted numbers. I was told it would not. Curtis E. Reid CER2520@ritvax.isc.rit.edu Rochester Institute of Technology/NTID REID@DECUS.org (DECUS) P.O. Box 9887 716.475.6089 TDD/TT 475.6895 Voice Rochester, NY 14623-0887 U.S.A. 716.475.6500 Fax (Business Use Only) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #50 *****************************