Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09711; 23 Mar 93 5:18 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30358 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 02:41:31 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29840 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 02:40:59 -0600 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 02:40:59 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303230840.AA29840@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #201 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Mar 93 02:41:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 201 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Lars Poulsen) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Stephen Friedl) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Jeffrey Jonas) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Clive Feather) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (John Higdon) Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology? (Dave Niebuhr) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (John R. Grout) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Henry Mensch) Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (lee%polarsun@rna.rockefeller.edu) Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Daniel E. Ganek) Re: Bell South Cordless Phone (Brian Oplinger) Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola Advisor Pager (Steven Warner) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 05:43:29 GMT I have been holding off from participating in this discussion about USPS versus UPS because it seemed too off the subject, but Harold brought it right into my field with his comments about packet switches. First, though, let me state for the record that I think the post office is doing a much better job than they get credit for, and they might do it even better if you all would appreciate what they do well and acknowledge that bad service is the exception (and of course should be dealt with when it does occur). I was also amazed at the claim that USPS has no way to trace a package, but Fed Ex does: It is just that they don't activate this costly tracking unless you ask for it and pay for it up front. It is called registered mail; in principle registered mail is tracked by signed log books everytime it changes hands. Few people use it, though, because sending a registered letter costs almost as much as sending the letter by Federal Express ... In article hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > UPS rep that they give shippers sheets of labels where each label has > a single digit in machine readable form (either large OCR or bar > code). We would then stick a bunch of stickers on the package to > represent the ZIP code. As an alternative, software could print the > ZIP bar code on the shipping label. For UPS, this makes sense; for FedEx and clones, it doesn't. The database transaction to look up the routing code from the serial number is what creates the tracking entry at the sorting hub. > Of course, this is a bit off telecom, but it does seem to be > related to packet switching networks. In a packet switched network, > we include a packet serial number to aid in tracking (did we lose a > packet, or did it show up twice, or received out of order), but we > also include the destination address. Each router looks at that > address and figures out where to send the packet next. The router > does not look at the packet serial number and request routing from > some central database. One of our products includes a routing table > at each site. There is an entry for each site in the system. > Whenever a packet is received, we note which port that came in on in > the routing table. When we have a packet to send, we refer to the > routing table and send the packet out that port. If the destination > site is not in the table, we send the packet out all ports except the > one we received it on. What you are describing is the particular form of packet switching called transparent bridging. It works well in smaller networks, but collapses as the network grows larger, because the tables required grow too large to be practical. > We could probably set up a system like the USPS where we would not > need a routing table for every possible destination but could base > routing on each digit of the address, starting with the most > significant. If the most significant digit were 0..3, I might send it > out port 1, 4..8 might send it out port 2. If the MSD is 9 (the same > as the MSD of my address), I'd start looking at successive digits to > determine which port to send the packet out, unless the entire address > matched, in which case I'd keep it. Indeed, this is the difference between bridging and routing in a structured network. The most successful protocol for large networks is IP (Internet Protocol), where each 32-bit host address consists of a network number and a hostpart ("extension number") within that network. The global numbering authority gives out network numbers, and the network manager assigns his own host part. The addresses are thus guaranteed to be globally unique. Each router has a list of nearby network numbers, and which port on the router would be used to get to that network. Anything not listed goes "higher up" towards the well-connected center of the network. The routers in the center must keep track of ALL network numbers. Most of the work of the core routers is not forwarding packets, but keeping track of all the network numbers, and which direction is CURRENTLY the best way to get there. There are about 50,000 network numbers issued, of which about 14,000 are reachable online (the rest are either not connected to the common backbones, or represent numbers that are kept on reserve for later use). As more and more (and smaller and smaller) organizations connect their local networks to the Internet, the routing tables will get explosively larger. Also, the division of the address into a network number and a host number within the network means that we are not filling up the number space, and by some estimates up to 98% of the number space is wasted. (Reality check: My employer runs a network with a couple hundred machines on it, but we have allocated a "class B network" with 65,000 numbers in it; that means we are currently using 0.3% of the allocated space.) To solve these two problems, two complementary management schemes are being deployed: (1) CIDR (Classless InterDomain Routing) allows issuing of network numbers for networks of arbitrary sizes, which could lead to less waste, since you would be able to get a chunk of addresses only 4 times as large as what you think you need instead of having to take 65,000 numbers anytime you think you might need more than 256. (2) Hierachical address assignment means that number ranges are being delegated to specific continents, i.e. while a router in the US still has to know all the networks issued up till now, it would be able to say begins with 231.x.y.z - must be in Europe, lets send it towards Amsterdam, and the router in Amsterdam might be able to say 206.z.y.x - South America. This is expected to greatly simplify future maintenance of the routing tables and slow the exponential growth of the tables to a linear growth. There is wide agreement that the top level must be by continent; there is much less agreement about the next level: Should it be by metro area or by local carrier (in the Internet we have had competition in the local loop for a while). > So, those of us in telecom really do have something in common > with the USPS? It's really all the same. There are only so many ways to solve the same problems. But don't you wish they had sat down together and designed a single numbering system? Life would have been so much simpler if Zip codes and NPAs were the same numbers. > Harold Hallikainen hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu Are you involved with KCBX, the local NPR station that covers both SLO and SBA ? 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: friedl@mtndew.Tustin.CA.US (Stephen Friedl) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? Date: 22 Mar 93 15:07:32 GMT Organization: Software Consulting, Tustin, CA Bill Campbell writes: > Actually the Postal (dis)Service hasn't raised the price of postage in > years! > Postage is still $0.03, the rest is for storage. Even at $.29, it's still just three cents per day! Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA | +1 714 544-6561 3b2-kind-of-guy | I speak for me ONLY | KA8CMY | uunet!mtndew!friedl [Moderator's Note: Ah, you better check your figures and caucus with Clive on this -- in another message in this issue he says it is *one cent* per day. :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:04:02 EST From: jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? [Moderator's Note: In fact, the US Postal Service does have a legal monopoly on the delivery of First Class Mail. Also, the mailbox in front of your house *belongs* to the Postal Service for their exclusive use from the day you mounted the box in your yard, on your front porch or wherever. From that point on, even you are not permitted under the law to leave a note for your neighbor in that box unless the proper postage has been affixed and then cancelled or some other postal indicia appears on the front of the envelope. PAT] May I elaborate upon these comments? 1) When I lived in Esopus, New York (upstate, near Kingston and Poughkeepsie), there were NO addresses on the buildings. There was no mail delivery: the post office was ONE person, so everybody had a PO box or got their mail over the counter. There's no such concept as equal access. ONLY the US Post Office may deliver mail to a PO box. So how's anybody else to send me mail? I could not put a mailbox in the hall (violates the lease -- even christmas decorations on the door were frowned upon). For United Parcel Service / Federal Express, people could NOT use my regular PO address: they had to use a street address of "Black Creek Apartments, Apt 5J" and the driver had to know where the apartment was located. That ment I had two addresses: one for USPS, one for all others. In telephony, this would not be tolerable! It would be like having a different phone number for every long distance carrier! 2) there was a case of a Boy Scout troop being sued or otherwise pursued by the USPS for placing their flyers in people's mailboxes. As Pat said, the USPS has EXCLUSIVE USE of your mailbox. I guess that's why: - newspapers put their own boxes on the mailbox posts; - the pizza places and Chinese restaurants put their ads on the doorknob or in the door, but never in the mailbox. Jeffrey Jonas jeffj@panix.com ------------------------------ From: clive@x.co.uk (Clive Feather) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? Organization: IXI Limited Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 08:48:38 GMT In article bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes: > Actually the Postal (dis)Service hasn't raised the price of postage in > years! Postage is still $0.03, the rest is for storage. One cent per day. Clive D.W. Feather | IXI Ltd (an SCO company) clive@x.co.uk | Vision Park Phone: +44 223 236 555 | Cambridge CB4 4RZ Fax: +44 223 236 550 | United Kingdom [Moderator's Note: Ah, you better check your figures. In another message in this issue Steve says it is three cents per day. :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 03:14 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? rickie@trickie.ualberta.ca (Richard Nash) writes: > Is the US Postal System really *that* bad? I trust then that John > Higdon would never ever use the US postal service? From what I can > gather, the choice to use the postal system is entirely up to you, the > user. Yes, it is really that bad. And you can bet that for any non-first- class delivery requirements, the USPS is NEVER used. I sat down and compiled a list of USPS failures and even I was astounded. Notable examples: A customer on the east coast was annoyed that I was not delivering some goods. I maintained that until I received payment, such goods would not be released. The customer insisted that a check had gone out via Priority Mail. A month later, the check showed up in an envelope that looked as though it had gone to the moon and back without benefit of spacecraft. I have shipped things Parcel Post and had the boxes arrive EMPTY. (Yes, apparently someone had removed the contents enroute.) Insurance was moot; the timely delivery of the eproms was the issue. But the real issue is that communications have progressed beyond our Pony Express holdover. People used to stay in touch by writing letters; telephony was expensive. Now it is cheaper to call -- and with fax technology, graphic communications no longer require our citadel of inefficiency, the USPS. > And do I really care if it takes longer to mail across town than > clean across the continent? Or that historically we all know that > postal clerks will treat you as rudely as possible? If you have no standards of excellence, are willing to be treated like dirt, and are generally content to be provided with bad service and be walked upon in the process, then the USPS is for you. Sounds like a match to me. You probably get a warm glow all over when something you send never arrives at all, right? I am not quite sure what you are saying here. I have given my experiences with the USPS. I use it as little as possible, as you have pointed out is my right. Are you denying the accuracy of my observations, or are you bragging that your own standards are so low that the USPS, even in light of these problems is perfectly fine? > From my perspective up in Canada, when I want to have something > shipped from the other side of the 49th parallel (US), I would prefer > the mail service over ever relying upon Federal Express or any other > inter-national courier to deliver it without a lot of Customs and > Canada/brokerage hassles. I have found that this view is shared by > others also. Then they, like you, obviously have had no real experience in international shipping. I have shipped countless items to Japan, from small disk drives to complete computer systems. I have used FedEx, DHL, Nippon, and several other carriers. None had the slightest problem with customs. And we were shipping "restricted" items -- material that was forbidden to be shipped to specific areas of the world. I would suggest that you "try it before you knock it". But if you are satisfied with the level of "service" a bloated, sloppy institution such as the USPS provides, then you have a perfect right to continue using it. And with my blessings. 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, 22 Mar 93 14:21:29 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology Several readers/subscribers have mentioned how awful the delivery service of the USPS is and I can think of one really beauty that happened to me. Several years ago, around property tax time, I was mailed my bill and forwarded it to my mortgage company for payment out of the escrow funds. It was sent as certified, return receipt requested at an additional charge as is everything else in the USPS (pay for what you want, which I have no disagreement with). From my post office on Long Island, it went to the nearest processing center to be sent to Rochester, New York (third holder of the mortgage). After a week of not receiving the receipt, I began to get nervous and called the bank and they in turn said that the bill had not been paid yet. Calls to the post office yielded nothing but "it will get there, don't worry." I should worry since a tax lien would be placed on my house if the payment wasn't made on time. Finally the receipt arrived. The USPS, in its infinite wisdom, sent it first class to Barranquila(sp), COLOMBIA with a stop somewhere in the Caribbean; from there it went to Fort Wayne, Indiana and then to the bank. I've even had a certified letter take two weeks to go about six miles (distances between post offices) and not receive the receipt. Complain I did and on paper; straight into the bit bucket. Even a local congressman had this happen to him. BTW: The tax bill was paid one day before a lien would have been placed on my house. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: grout@sp90.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? Reply-To: j-grout@uiuc.edu Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 19:38:26 GMT The defendant in the definitive case on the USPS monopoly on first-class mail was the Brennan(?) private-delivery service in Rochester, NY (where I lived at the time). If I remember correctly, the Supreme Court ruled that the USPS monopoly does require correct first-class postage on all first-class mail, and mailboxes used by US Mail are still reserved for them, but that's all ... a delivery service such as Brennan _could_ provide value-added services (e.g., same-day delivery of first-class mail) if they met those critieria. Brennan lost the case only because they did _not_ require first-class postage on the mail they delivered. John R. Grout INTERNET: j-grout@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:15:38 -0800 Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology Reply-To: henry@ads.com dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) wrote: > There was a time when neither snow nor hail ... would stop the mail. These were, undoubtedly, in the era before labor unions. # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / ------------------------------ From: Ops Mgr Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 Reply-To: lee%polarsun@rna.rockefeller.edu Organization: JVNC Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 15:34:10 GMT Will Martin writes: > This past weekend's storm news included at least one Telecom-related > item: At a computer center in New Jersey somewhere, the weight of snow > on the roof was great enough to collapse it, thus putting the facility > out of service. This was operated by EDS and was some sort of central > networking point for Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) on at least one > inter-bank network, not just in the East, but nationwide. Many ATMs, > including some here in St. Louis, MO, were down because of this. > ...... > 3: It certainly seems odd that a site in NJ would be central to the > entire nation's ATM functions. One would guess that some huge Manufacturer's Hanover (soon-to-be Chase-Manhattan) experienced this problem with all their ATM machines last weekend also. Customer service reps seemed very nonchalant about it saying that service would be back to normal on Monday. Lee [Moderator's Note: Perhaps they remembered thirty years ago when banks were only open 9 AM to 2 PM (or 3 PM) Monday through Friday, and that is when you went to get a check cashed or make deposits, etc. If you have ever heard the expression 'bankers hours' (as in 'she works bankers hours'), that is where the expression came from. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Daniel E. Ganek Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 15:26:42 GMT Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA In article eds@mt747.att.com (Edward D Schulz +1 908 615 6043) writes: >> I found a pay phone in Texas that would not accept 10-ATT-0 to get me >> on the AT&T network. Isn't that illegal? If so, where should I >> report this? > AT&T wants to know. Please call 1-800-742-6260 to report the pay phone > that blocks 10-288-0. Thanks. This may be two questions but I'll just tell the story. We stayed at the Days Inn in DC last weekend. I attempted to make a AT&T call. I first just dialed 8 + 0 + number and heard "BONG Comtel" So I hung up and started to dial 10ATT and as soon as I dialed the "0" I got some intercept saying "no, no". So, I dialed 8 + 0 again and just entered my AT&T calling card number after the "Comtel" and lo and behold I heard "thank you for using AT&T" ! 1) Is Comtel AT&T? 2) Does AT&T want to know about this hotel blocking other LD companies? :-) dan ganek ------------------------------ From: oplinger@minerva.crd.ge.com (Brian Oplinger) Subject: Re: Bell South Cordless Phone Organization: GE Corp. Research & Development, Schenectady, NY Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:46:12 GMT In article MARK.STEIGER@tdkt.kksys.com (MARK STEIGER) writes: > That is what the security code does. If someone with the same phone > on the same frequency makes a call, it won't go out through your phone > line, unless they have the same sec code (odds of that are low..). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Is this true? Are the odds low? I have one of the AT$T 5400 10 channel phones and my neighbor and I take turns using each others phone lines. I know this happens because occasionally I get a bad connection so I pick up the corded phone to get a clearer line and get dialtone. I can still talk through the static to whoever called on the cordless at this point. Is my situation unique? Is there anything I can do about it (short of burning down my neighbors house to destroy his phone)? brian oplinger@ra.crd.ge.com <#include standard.disclaimer> ------------------------------ From: Steven Warner Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager Organization: Beach Systems / RTFM UN*X Solutions, Sunnyvale, CA, USA Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 17:18:57 GMT Android Rubin writes: > I would like to know what special characters must be sent to > enable silent pages, and to have pages from an information service > show up in the proper bin. (ie, second display line). Having pages show up on the second display line and send silently is a programmable feature, either thru the hard contact [hardware] programmer or thru Motorola's radio service software, which can program it 'over the air'. (Over the air programming must be enabled thru the hardware programmer first). I have not seen documentation on how to do this with regular pages using control codes. Steven Warner (34W 36L) sgw@boy.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #201 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11284; 23 Mar 93 5:59 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30006 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:24:02 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30844 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:23:30 -0600 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:23:30 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303230923.AA30844@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #202 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Mar 93 03:23:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 202 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson ATM Networks (was Telecom and the Blizzard of '93) (Brad S. Hicks) Re: TDDs and Modem Standards (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Mike Schenk) Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Darren Alex Griffiths) Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator (Chris Schmandt) Re: Good Cheap DAA Module? (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Good Cheap DAA Module? (John K. Scoggin, Jr) Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted (John Rice) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com Date: 19 Mar 93 16:25:54 GMT Subject: ATM Networks (was Telecom and the Blizzard of '93) > Well, I do know that not every bank runs it's "own" ATM system. In > fact, it seems as though there are only a few service providers for > ATM networks. Oversimplified version of the world of ATM networks: LEVEL 1: =Almost= every bank does run its own ATM network, using modems or tie lines to connect each branch bank and its ATMs back to the headquarters central computer system. But if I understood the ATM part of the EDS failure, it was because EDS operated ATM networks for a lot of credit unions who were too small to run their own network, which is why pretty well all CUE (Credit Union Exchange) ATM cards went down during the snow storm. LEVEL 2: There are about a dozen or twenty =regional= ATM networks, such as NYCE, MPS, and BankMate. These interconnect each bank and its own ATM network to a centralized system that routes transactions at from any ATM back to the issuing bank's clearing system, if necessary. This is the part of the picture that Alec Isaacson was talking about in his message, quoted above. So for example, if I'm a Boatmen's Bank of St. Louis customer and I'm at an ATM for Commerce Bank of St. Louis, Commerce doesn't have a tie line back to Boatmen's data center (for obvious reasons) but they =are= both members of a regional network called BankMate, so (in this example) Commerce sends the transaction to BankMate and BankMate, for a fee, sends it to Boatmen's -- which is why the issuing bank charges extra for transactions at "foreign" ATMs. LEVEL 3a: There are two world-wide ATM networks, Cirrus and Plus. (Cirrus covers a =lot= more ATMs, and more countries.) These work the same way that the regional networks do; member banks sign up and buy some kind of a communications link to a clearing system. LEVEL 3b: Then there are the newer debit card products, Maestro vs Visa Debit. What separates these two from Cirrus and Plus is their emphasis on the ability to use ATM cards at merchant locations, not just at ATMs ... eventually, both products promise that you'll be able to use an ATM card for almost any transaction you can do with a credit card. What differentiates Maestro from Visa Debit is that Visa Debit started with a Plus-type centralized network and is trying to impose its rules for merchant transactions and settlement on the banks, whereas Maestro came up with a much simpler set of rules for interconnecting the regional ATM networks to each other, and leveraged off of their existing merchant programs. That's why there are already 13 million Maestro cards in the world; your BankMate or MPS or whatever ATM card =is= a Maestro card already, and you can use at any store, restaurant, or gas station where you see the blue and red circles of the Maestro logo. (If it hasn't done so already, your bank will soon re-issue your ATM card, and you'll see the Maestro logo on it.) The first Maestro transaction was less than a year ago, but there are already roughly 2000 merchants with Maestro stickers; by the end of the year that will include ARCO, Amoco, Target and Safeway. Here in St. Louis, I already use my Maestro/BankMate card for all of my grocery purchases (at Schnuck's or Deirberg's) and all of my gasoline purchases (at Mobil). When you use a Maestro or Visa Debit card, it's like a cross between a credit card transaction and an ATM transaction: the merchant rings it up on a cash register, and then swipes your card, but instead of signing the receipt (ala credit) you punch in your PIN on a terminal next to the register. Disclaimer: I work for MasterCard, the parent corporation for both Cirrus and Maestro. I'm not in marketing or public relations, I'm just proud of the products and thought you'd enjoy learning more about them. J. Brad Hicks Internet: mc!Brad_Hicks@mhs.attmail.com X.400: c=US admd=ATTMail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad [Moderator's Note: Actually, we who are customers of First National Bank of Chicago have had debit cards available to us for about five years now. Our debit cards are called 'Banking Cards' and they work like cash station cards but they also have a Master Charge logo on them and work that way also. I use mine all over town, and in cases where I ordered something through the mail where a credit card was requested, I've given my Master Card debit card number instead. It has always worked fine. We only punch in our PIN if we are using the debit card at a cash station. If we are using it in a merchant's place of business then we sign a charge ticket as though it were a credit card and sales authorization is obtained in the say way via the Xon, Jr. terminals, as they call them. Our Banking Card numbers fall within the Master Charge numbering scheme, coincidentally. In some cases, the charge is immediatly debited to our accounts and the charge ticket we sign is sent through only as a memorandum of the transaction. In other cases, I've seen the charge not show up on my checking account for a few days until it went through the Elgin (VISA/MC) Credit Card Billing Center. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: TDDs and Modem Standards Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 01:58:41 GMT In article Ken Thompson writes: > Are TDD's compatable with any modem standard? I seem to remember that TDD is based on the OLD amateur radio AFSK standard frequencies of 2125 Hz and 2975 Hz. I used to directly shift the oscillator of my transmitter and on reception would use a "BFO" to demodulate the RF FSK down to audio at the above frequencies. I demodulated it with a couple LC tuned circuits (using telephone type 22 mH torroid loading coils) driving a differential amplifier (a 12AX7) driving a 6L6 that keyed the 150 volt loop that drove the selector magnets in the Teletype model 15. Since then, RF Teletype has gone to 170 Hz shift (or perhaps moved on from there ... I know there's HF packet stuff going on). We did run AFSK using the above frequencies on VHF FM. So, to answer the question, I think TDD is compatible with the old amateur radio Teletype standards. If, indeed, that is the case, it would appear relatively easy to build a modem to do TDD. The simplest approach would be to use the existing serial port in a PC. These chips are programmable as to number of bits and the data speed. The word length can be set to 5, 6, 7 or 8 bits. The speed can probably also be programmed to the same as TDD standard. A lookup table could do the ascii to Baudot conversion and back. A simple two chip AFSK modem could then be built using an XR2206 and XR2211. These chips will generate and demodulate pretty much any AFSK signal. There MAY be a chip that is designed for just this standard, which would require fewer external components. Finally, it should be pretty simple to make an internal modem to talk with a TDD. This would, again, use something like the 2206 and 2211 and be driven by a 16450 or 16550 serial chip. You'd still have to deal with FCC part 15 registration (radiation) and FCC part 68 registration if directly coupled to the phone line. If the modem were external (using a serial port in the computer) and used acoustic coupling to the telephone, no FCC registration would be required (the XR chips do not use frequencies above 10 KHz, so do not need registration under part 15). So ... again, I THINK the TDD is based on amateur Teletype. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1993 09:33:14 +0000 (GMT) From: M.R.Schenk@research.ptt.nl (Mike Schenk +31 70 33 23926) Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? Organization: PTT Research, The Netherlands In article magnus@lulea.trab.se (Magnus Hedberg) writes: > Normally telephones in public networks (PSTN) are supplied by > electricity from the telecom network. > We believe that it should be possible to power the telephone from the > electric mains in the house instead of from the telecom network. The > goal is to avoid using "hogh voltage" on the telecom network. > Does anyone know if this idea already has been rejected or performed > somewhere in the world. The big advantage of having the network supply the electricity is that in case of a powerfailure, the phone still works because the the exchanges have backup facilities. Besides from that, you need a closed circuit between phone and exchange anyway so it does not really matter. The only difference is that the high voltage to make the bell ring is not necessary if the phone is powered from other mains. Disclaimer: Although I work for PTT Research, PSTN is not my line of work so the above is just my own idea. Mike ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 22:00:02 PST From: dag@ossi.com magnus@lulea.trab.se (Magnus Hedberg) writes: > Normally telephones in public networks (PSTN) are supplied by > electricity from the telecom network. > We believe that it should be possible to power the telephone from the > electric mains in the house instead of from the telecom network. The > goal is to avoid using "hogh voltage" on the telecom network. > Does anyone know if this idea already has been rejected or performed > somewhere in the world. I was recently doing some research on telecommuting and learned something kinda relevant. I was looking into the possibility of using ISDN phones to connect the homes of my fellow engineers to work. Pac*Bell is pushing the use of ISDN, including free installation and very low monthly rates. They would like to offer these services at residential rates where appropriate, which would mean calls from my house in San Francisco to work in Emeryville would be considered local and not charged for. The Pac*Bell rep told me they were not allowed to offer residential ISDN service because the CPUC mandates that all residential lines have to be able to dial 911 during an emergency, since ISDN requires a box that's plugged into the electric system if an emergency cut out the power system the line wouldn't work and I wouldn't be able to dial 911 on my ISDN line. This means that all ISDN lines have to be at business rates and, even though I have two regular phone lines in my house that would work fine without the power system, I cannot an additional get residential ISDN line in my house. Pac*Bell told me that they are trying to change the tarriff to allow residential ISDN in places that have standard phone lines but due to CPUC bureaucracy they don't expect changes within the next few years. Even though Pac*Bell would like me to give me residential service, and I'd like to buy it, it's not possible because of CPUC regulations (sound familiar?) Instead I'm going to have to either pay business rates for ISDN service, pay extra for a leased line, or pay for two more standard phone lines to get similar but slower service as I would get from ISDN. Cheers, Darren Alex Griffiths dag@ossi.com Open Systems Solutions Inc. (510) 652-6200 x139 Fujitsu Ltd. Fax: (510) 652-5532 6121 Hollis Street Emeryville, CA 94608-2092 ------------------------------ From: geek@media.mit.edu (Chris Schmandt) Subject: Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator Organization: MIT Media Laboratory Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:46:08 GMT In article davep@carson.u.washington. edu (Dave Ptasnik) writes about distinctive ring detectors: > I recently surveyed several manufacturers of this equipment. By far > the unit that I preferred was the SR2/SR3 by Multi-Link (606) > 233-0223. While it only recognizes a maximum of three ring patterns, > US West offers us four, I found it exceptionally reliable, and very > smart when dealing with unusual circumstances. It also sorted out the > rings more quickly than competitors products, actually learning how > our telco sent the patterns, and adapting to the telco. I too, have been using one of these for about six months now, in part the result of answers to a post to this group (thanks, gang!). I'm quite happy with it (got it via the AT&T catalog) but I don't think it really is adaptive. It listens to the first ring, the whole ring. Then it switches (relay) the line onto the appropriate virtual line, which hears the next ring. Seems pretty simple. Yes, it is reliable. It never switches the wrong way. Incidently, I am amazed by how hard it is to explain these "virtual lines" to non-telco types. I can see why NETel markets Distinctive Ringing as "you won't have to answer your teenagers calls again!". chris ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Good Cheap DAA Module? Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 18:59:40 GMT In article tmkk@uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) writes: > I'm looking for a DAA (a module which I can use to interface a project > to the telephone line). I'd like to build an interactive voice > response system using a SoundBlaster card (along with its speech > systhesis drivers) as well as a DTMF decoder circuit. I have an old > article in Byte magazine in which Steve Ciarcia builds something > similar (he called his a TIMS) in which he used a Cermetek (?) DAA to > interface his project to the phone line safely and legally. The > article is several years old, so surely there must be a newer (and > better and cheaper) DAA module available on the market today. The only DAA I've seen advertised is that from Cermetek. It's kinda expensive. They are Cermetek Microelectronics, Inc., 1308 Borregas Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3565, phone 408 752 5055. I would think that Teltone would manufacture a DAA, but I don't see one in their catalog. In general, I think it's less expensive to buy a board (such as the DTMF/voice board) with the DAA already attached. There's still lots of room for creativity in the software. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ From: John K Scoggin Jr Subject: Re: Good Cheap DAA Module? Date: 22 Mar 1993 13:04:26 GMT Organization: Delmarva Power & Light Company Reply-To: scoggin@delmarva.COM In article 4@eecs.nwu.edu, tmkk@uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) writes: > I'm looking for a DAA (a module which I can use to interface a project > to the telephone line). I'd like to build an interactive voice > response system using a SoundBlaster card (along with its speech > systhesis drivers) as well as a DTMF decoder circuit. I have an old > article in Byte magazine in which Steve Ciarcia builds something > similar (he called his a TIMS) in which he used a Cermetek (?) DAA to > interface his project to the phone line safely and legally. The > article is several years old, so surely there must be a newer (and > better and cheaper) DAA module available on the market today. We have been using General DataComm DAA's for years -- never had a problem. John K. Scoggin, Jr. Email: scoggin@delmarva.com Supervisor, Network Operations Phone: (302) 451-5200 Delmarva Power & Light Company Fax: (302) 451-5321 500 N. Wakefield Drive NOC: (800) 388-7076 Newark, DE 19714-6066 The opinions expressed are not those of Delmarva Power, simply the product of an over-active imagination... ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 03:55:02 GMT In article , barr@tramp.Colorado.EDU (BARR DOUG) writes: > We have some dial in modems that "hang". They require power cycling to > reset them. I am interested in testing our setup and see if I can find > the problem (they are NEC modems). Is there any book on modem and > telephone line testing? Any good test equipment? Could it be the > analog phone lines and/or the way the users are disconnecting? Could > it be anything other than the modems? We had a similar occurance on a UNIX system I was working with. The modems would randomly lock up, and require a power cycle to clear. The root cause of the problem was quite logical (once we figured it out). The UNIX system was configured to send a 'logout message' when the user entered the logout command. This messages was "AUTOMATICALLY LOGGING OUT". In many 'Hayes Compatible" modems, in answer mode, any ascii text sent from the computer, toward the modem, when no carrier is being detected, is run through the 'AT' command decoder. If the user logs out, and immediately disconnects (hangs up), the system still sends the logout text to the modem and the modem attempts to decode that logout text as 'AT' command strings. Usually, this is ignored, as the strings aren't preceeded by the "AT" attention string BUT -- in our case the "AT" in AUTOMATICALLY, was decoded. Any characters after the AT were interpeted as modem commands. AS I recall, either the "C" or the "A" were causing the modem to ignore further commands. (Look up the Hayes command "ATC" - I don't have them here). It was intermittent, because everybody didn't hang up immediately. And a disconnect without proper logout didn't result in the 'logout message'. In our case, it was some 'scripted' P.C. programs that were causing the problem, but I was able to re-create it (with difficulty) manually. 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 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #202 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14098; 23 Mar 93 6:36 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31696 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 04:01:54 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31903 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 04:01:19 -0600 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 04:01:19 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303231001.AA31903@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #203 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Mar 93 04:01:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 203 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact (Jack Decker) Re: Washington Times Blows It (Michael Rosen) Re: Washington Times Blows It (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Update: Billing for Information Providers (John Higdon) Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps (Floyd Davidson) Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps (John Higdon) Re: ISDN (Phone Line Bandwidth) (Tom Lynch) Re: IXO (TAP) Protocol For Pagers (Brian Cartmell) Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges (Bryan Montgomery) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:42:01 EST From: ac388@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu (Jack Decker) Subject: Re: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact In message , Pat (the Moderator) noted: > Telco is NOT required to provide service to you until/unless you have > demonstrated an ability and willingness to pay for it. Telco's > services come to you as an extension of credit. As such, credit > grantors may set any standards they like relating to an extension of > credit provided the factors they use are not discriminatory under > applicable federal or local laws, i.e, one standard for white people, > another for blacks, etc. Telco is entitled to be assured of payment. Let me just interrupt for a moment here. Please keep in mind that we are talking about a regulated MONOPOLY. It's not as though if you don't like the terms under which your local telco offers service, you can go elsewhere (at least not yet ... I'm hoping that day comes quickly). But the point is that as a regulated monopoly, you lose some rights that you might otherwise have. In effect, the telcos have wanted the government to meddle in their business (in order to protect them from the "evil" of competition), and the governmental regulatory agency will often require the monopoly telco to accept customers under terms that they'd prefer not to have to live with ... in particular, customers who may not have a spotless credit record. > They are entitled to find out who is in control of the premises where > the phone is to be located. It is not uncommon for someone to move > out stiffing telco, leaving the new tenant in the apartment to take > the heat. Sometimes the deadbeat did not move out at all ... they just > claim they did and ask for service under a new name. Telco is > entitled to pull a credit bureau file on you if they wish to do so, > and the Social Security number is the accepted identifier for this > purpose. So yes, your SSN was 'relevant'. Your employment data was > also 'relevant' since it demonstrates your ability to pay for the > service if not necessarily your willingness to do so. Up to this point I was with you ... after all, it's not fair for those who do pay their bills to get stiffed with the expenses resulting from those who don't. BUT, I have a BIG problem with the two statements you have made above. To take the last one first, employment data isn't relevent simply because there is no requirement that you have employment in order to have a phone. And I've yet to hear of a telco tariff that says that the telco can charge a security deposit solely because someone is unemployed. I don't particularly mind them asking for this information, but a refusal to provide it should not be a basis for denial of phone service (on the other hand, a customer's willingness to give that info might be a valid reason for telco to waive a security deposit that they are otherwise legally entitled to collect). But where I really tilt is when a utility asks for a Social Security Number. No utility has ever gotten my SSN, and they never will (unless there is some drastic change in the law), because they're not legally entitled to have it. It was not so many years ago that you used to see signs hanging on the sides of cash registers warning people that their Social Security card was not supposed to be used for identification. Now, suddenly, it seems that everyone wants it. But, not everyone is legally entitled to have it. Government agencies are not supposed to ask for it unless they give a Privacy Act notification, telling you exactly what use they plan to make of your SSN and whether disclosure of the number is mandatory or voluntary. Certain others are required to have it (your employer, your bank if they pay you interest, etc.) but other agencies are not. Credit reporting agencies in particular may find it convenient to key your records off your SSN, but there is no requirement that you provide them with that information. Of course, a private business might decide not to extend you credit if you refuse to provide your SSN, in which case you are perfectly free to take your business elsewhere. But a telephone company is a monopoly regulated by the government, and since they have other ways to protect themselves (requiring a security deposit, for example), they cannot legally require disclosure of the SSN. In my experience, I have found that any utility will back down if you outright refuse to give your SSN, though they may ask you to come to their office and show them a picture ID (e.g. a driver's license) if they have an office in your area. I don't mind doing that. But, since most local telcos have abandoned their local business offices, they don't even have that option in many cases. I won't go into a long dissertation as to why I refuse to give my SSN, but I will say that it is NOT to avoid payment (I'm never even LATE with utility payments). I will just say that it's because I don't trust credit reporting companies to enter all the data on me accurately, and since they generally seem to think they are accountable to no one but themselves, I want to make it as difficult for them as possible to maintain a file on me, accurate or otherwise. And, frankly, I don't really care if I don't have a credit rating, since I avoid buying things on credit (I don't even have credit cards ... you stay out of a lot of trouble that way). For those interested in both the reasons why you should not give out your SSN to just anyone who asks for it, and what to do in order to avoid giving it out, there is a FAQ called "What to do when they ask for your Social Security Number" that is available on some FTP sites and that is (or used to be) posted occasionally in the misc.consumers newsgroup. I don't endorse all of its recommendations (particularly where it advises you to tell outright lies ... that's just asking for trouble!) but it does contain a few good tips. If you want to read it and have trouble locating it, you might try asking in misc.consumers (or perhaps another TELECOM Digest reader could tell us where it can be obtained via FTP). I would imagine the folks in the various privacy groups could give you that info as well, but I'm not all THAT paranoid so I don't read those groups. > If you do not like questions when applying for telephone credit, > then use the pay station. Uh, Pat, shouldn't the security deposit give the telco adequate protection? I thought that's what it was there for. Even if a person has terribly rotten credit, I think telco is required to provide service as long as the security deposit is paid (unless the applicant actually owes money to the telco itself). Again, I think you forget that we're talking about a regulated monopoly here. Jack Decker | Internet: ac388@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu Fidonet: 1:154/8 or jack.decker@f8.n154.z1.fidonet.org Note: Mail to the Fidonet address has been known to bounce. :-( [Moderator's Note: If you prefer to put down a security deposit or an advance payment for the first month of service, that is your right. I prefer to work with them on open account as do many other people, so we make the required trade-off. Yes, telco is a utility service and a controlled monoply. They *cannot* refuse to do business with any *qualified* customer. The tariff defines 'qualified customer' as a customer who has exhibited an ability and willingness to pay for the service, ie, advance deposit, good credit history, whatever. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 00:14:35 GMT Does anybody happen to know the BBS number for G. Gordon Liddy's BBS in DC? He harped on this story on his show when it was reported. I'd love to shove it back in his face. Mike ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:27:26 GMT In article phil@rochgte.fidonet.org writes: > By the way, on a related note, Friends & Family customers can now > add the Capitol Switchboard to their calling circle if they'd like -- > they are MCI customers. The Capitol number is (202) 224-3121. Which reminds me, I heard on NPR's Morning Edition that Clinton has an email account. It sounded like a Compuserve number, but I was not awake enough to write it down. Anyone know the email address? Thanks! Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 23:13 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Update: Billing for Information Providers Nigel Allen writes: > Here is a press release from the Tax Reduction Institute. > "This is great news," said Mary Mack, director of MIS. "It appears > as though the interruption of LEC billing for business to business was > just a temporary disconnect due to a small group of unethical > advertisers. Tax Reduction Institute supports the Baby Bells' > investigation of such practices." You can believe that, or you can take a more cynical view. Pacific Bell, for one, has been publically bad-mouthing IPs for years. It says in press releases and to customers individually that the company would rather not carry Information Services traffic nor bill for same. It generously waives IAS charges at the drop of a hat by any customer who calls (thereby screwing the provider who delivered the service) and attempts to paint itself as the shining white knight. Pac*Bell would LOVE to discontinue billing for IAS. It would love to see IPs go out of business. That way it would have no competition in an arena that it has been salivating over for years. Pac*Bell (and certainly US West, as well) would like nothing better than to put each and every IP six feet under and then move itself into the highly profitable markets to fill the void. I have said it before and will say it again: The LECs want into a pristine IP market and will resort to any and all dirty tricks to accomplish that end. Since the public is entirely ignorant on the subject and if there is any opinion at all it is usually AGAINST the IPs, the sisters Bell are almost brazen in their actions. They have restrictive entry requirements (stiff deposits, high installation charges), crippling program regulations that they managed to sell to the PUCs, and a public attitude that is guaranteed to help hammer nails into IPs' coffins. After Pac*Bell's history of sabotaging local service so that it could push "reliable" Centrex to customers, I would not trust the company one little bit in this area. If it suddenly decides to stop billing for IPs, there is only one motivation. It wants to wear down its IP competitors -- business people who unfortunately require the services of the LEC to operate. 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: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 08:04:20 GMT In article Graham Toal writes: > itstevec@hamlet.ucdavis.edu (Steve Chafe) wrote: >> Has anyone tried to find the cause of bursts of four or five garbage >> characters that appear randomly (ever few minutes to every few hours) >> on a 9600 bps data call that does not have error correction in effect? > Synchronization problems between digital clocks of neighbouring digital > exchanges. We discussed it a few years ago. One of the biggest problems > with this fault is convincing your phone company that it exists. The cause specifically is controlled clock slips on digital carrier interface equipment. Which can be caused by a lack of proper synchronization between digital exchanges when they are first installed. A few years ago that was common as exchanges were switching from analog to digital at a rapid clip, but it isn't necessarily the likely cause today. Mis-optioned equipment or defective equipment on each particular carrier system is much more likely today than it was a few years back. The difference usually displays itself when one can sometimes call between exchanges and get a perfect connection, but at other times it is quite bad. It depends on which T1 group is slipping and whether you happen to hit a trunk in a group that is or is not. When the two exchanges are not in sync at all there just isn't going to be a good trunk between them at all! Likewise there has been some change in how likely one is to convince the local telco that they have a problem with carrier slips. A mere couple years ago they didn't likely know what a carrier slip was and had no idea if it was happening to them. Today most telco craft people probably have heard of it even if they don't necessarily understand it. And many now do have a good understanding too! Floyd floyd@ims.alaska.edu A guest on the Institute of Marine Science computer Salcha, Alaska system at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 00:52 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps Graham Toal writes: > Synchronization problems between digital clocks of neighbouring digital > exchanges. We discussed it a few years ago. One of the biggest problems > with this fault is convincing your phone company that it exists. This is (or should be) becoming less and less of a problem. With current digital technology, frame slip has virtually become a thing of the past. And if you DO experience it, it is due to a malfunctioning piece of equipment can be found with normal testing procedures. Pac*Bell now considers a phone line or connection to be substandard and in need of repair if "9600 bps modems have trouble on the call". And that is how it should be; standard modems were, after all, designed to work on the public switched network. If you are having problems with devices certified to function on standard phone lines, then the fact that they are having problems is strong evidence that the line is "substandard". Time marches on. Digital telephony is no longer a black art. It is the current standard. 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: tlynch@grappa.ece.utexas.edu (tlynch) Subject: Re: ISDN (Phone Line Bandwidth) Organization: ECE Dept, University of Texas at Austin Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 20:43:42 GMT > If ISDN was available, people would do this. But it's not, so they don't. A friend in Paris was not in his office early one morning because of `talking to the guys installing an ISDN line at my apartment'. Seems someone must have it. Or something else with the same name ... Tom Lynch lynch@cerc.utexas.edu ------------------------------ From: brc@halcyon.com (Brian Cartmell) Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) Protocol For Pagers Organization: Encryption Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:12:37 GMT Does anyone have access to source code for UNIX that calls a IXO protocol system and transfer the information over modem? Thanks, Brian ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 15:31:27 GMT From: Bryan Montgomery Subject: Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges Reply-To: Monty@vnet.IBM.COM Organization: IBM Havant UK TELECOM Moderator noted: Stuff deleted .... >> [Moderator's Note: I think the operator should have accepted your >> British Telecom calling card; this is an acceptable card in the USA at >> least, although perhaps to use it the call has to go back to the UK; I >> am not sure of the technicalities. And Tony Harminc replied: > Nope. And Canadian and US cards are not accepted in the UK for calls > other than those back to the card holder's country either. Canadian (Technically the card holders country could be the UK -- mine is & I have both an MCI and an AT&T card!) > and US cards are about the only ones that work in each other's > countries. Not strictly true -- with an MCI or AT&T card you can use it to call any country, other than the one you are in.I'm not sure when this becomes cost effective, especially from the UK where prices seem to be getting a bit more competitive but maybe if you call Japan at the UK peak time. Enjoy, Bryan Montgomery (Production Engineer) Tel : +44 (705) / (0705) 486363 Extn 8602 Mail Point 33/10 Fax : +44 (705) / (0705) 664431 IBM Havant Tie : 721 - 8602 PO Box 6, Havant Internet : Monty@Vnet.IBM.com Hampshire, PO9 1SA VNET : BRYANM at HVTVM4 Great Britain ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #203 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22213; 24 Mar 93 2:26 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09327 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 23:43:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09007 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 23:43:02 -0600 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 23:43:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303240543.AA09007@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #204 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Mar 93 23:43:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 204 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson "The British Are Coming..." (Paul Robinson) Final Program -- Mobile Computing Day at Rutgers (Br Badrinath) Disconnect After Prolonged Ringing (Robert M. Hamer) International Calling Card (Evangelos Kontogiannis) Telephones in the Army in the Korean War (Dave Niebuhr) '83 Novel Foresaw a Bombing (Paul Robinson) Phone Items in the News (Paul Robinson) Touch-Tone For Everyone in DC Metro Area (Jacob DeGlopper) Amerivox Debit Card (Andrew Luebker) Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors (Matt Healy) Re: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics (Steve Forrette) Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Bruce Albrecht) Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN (Ralph Hyre) Re: Phone Sex Reaches Out to Girl Scout Callers (Andrew E. Mossberg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 09:58:26 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Subject: "The British Are Coming..." Summary from {The Washington Post} of 3/9, Page D1: "Global communications giant British Telecommunications PLC yesterday asked the U.S. government for permission to set up an international telephone network linking businesses in the United States and other countries." American companies complain that this should not be allowed because they can't do the same thing in Britain, the same argument being used to block the purchase of USAir. British Telecom ("BT") filed a petition with the FCC to get into the $5 billion business telecommunications market, and become the first point-to-point carrier for facsimile, data, video and voice traffic with the U.S. There are many carriers and many (complicated) billing options for current transactions, including private networks, which add to the costs of global operations. BT's filing "seeks to end all of that by establishing an 'international virtual network' -- that is, the global transfer of telephonic information through one system." AT&T is deciding if it should protest since foreign markets are not open; MCI had no comment. BT says "Our customers are demanding the single-supplier approach," due to better response from a single supplier and reduced billing problems. BT also says that there is equal treatment in Britain. Dan Briere, president of New Jersey-based Telechoice says that the problem is more of a fear that "the British are coming" which people are nervous over, and is less to do with a lack of equal treatment of U.S. telephone companies in Britain. "'The international virtual network,' the system proposed by British Telecom, 'is for the big guys. It's going to become the preferred service for large business customers,'" Briere said. --- In a related Story: Washington (DC) Times, March 11, Money Section: The Washington Post Co. said it may expand its cable business by adding telephone service to its existing British cable TV service. John Morse Jr., the company's vice president for finance, told the Atlanta Society of Financial Analysts that the company will decide "very soon" whether it will enter the telephone market in Britain, where it is the 14th-largest cable TV operator. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: badri@rags.rutgers.edu (Br Badrinath) Subject: Final Program -- Mobile Computing Day at Rutgers Date: 23 Mar 93 16:06:01 GMT Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Mobile Computing Day -- Final Program 9:30 - 4:00, April 12, 1993, CoRE Building, Busch Campus, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey WINLAB and the Computer Science Department at Rutgers invite you to attend Mobile Computing Day, the first event in a series of informal gatherings of researchers. Mobile computing research attracts people with a variety of backgrounds including computer science, telecommunications, and microelectronics. On April 12, we will learn about work in progress and hear a variety of expert opinions on future directions. Attendance will be limited and there will be a nominal $50 registration fee to cover lunch and other expenses. The theme on April 12 will be: What is Mobile Computing? Is it a New Field? Here is the tentative agenda. Titles of talks will be announced soon: 9:30 Opening Remarks and Introductions (say a few words about your background and current work) 10:15 Integrated Networks of the Future - D.Goodman (Rutgers WINLAB) 10:45 Coffee Break 11:00 Public Network Support for Nomadic Personal Communications Applications - R. Woolf (Bellcore) 11:45 Lunch 1:00 Data on the Air - Broadcasting Databases to Mobile Users T.Imielinski (Rutgers CS & WINLAB) 1:45 Transparent File Prefetching for Low Bandwidth Links D. Duchamp (Columbia) 2:30 Panel "Is Mobile Computing a New Research Area?" Moderator: B.R. Badrinath (Rutgers CS & WINLAB) 4:00 Adjourn To register for Mobile Computing Day (or to be notified of future events) please contact: E-mail: Tomasz Imielinski imielins@cs.rutgers.edu Fax: WINLAB 908-932-3693 Mail: Melissa Gelfman, WINLAB, Box 909, Piscataway, NJ, 08855-0909. Phone: WINLAB 908-932-0283 If you send us $50 now (payable to WINLAB), things will go smoother on April 12. Looking forward to seeing you on Mobile Computing Day. David Goodman and Tomasz Imielinski ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 07:38 EST From: Robert M. Hamer Subject: Disconnect After Prolonged Ringing > Also, there were notes in the Digest about the (previous) practice of > radio-talk-show host Larry King telling people just to let the line > keep on ringing. (That resulted in at least AT&T limiting the number > of rings and disconnecting the call if it was still unanswered.) While I was stuck in the snow March 13-15 in Boston, I tried repeatedly to get through to USAir's 800- reservations and information telephone number. So were many other people. Although it was continuously busy (so busy I think that even a demon dialer would not have helped all that much) I was able to get a ringing signal after perhaps ten minutes of calling at such hours as 4:30 AM. I was terribly displeased when after some minutes of ringing the network would just dump the call, thus losing me whatever place I had obtained in the queue. I'd dial again for 10-15 minutes, finally be rewarded with a ring, and after some small number of minutes, be disconnected again. This behavior is counterproductive and angers the customer (me). Several other remarks about telecom effects of the storm: When I was finally able to get through to a USAIR operator she told me that many if not most of their reservations centers were in the path of this storm (she was in Syracuse) and thus only a few of the operators were able to get in to work. Thus, at the same time as they had increased demand for their services (cancelled flights producing a need for new information and reservations) they had fewer operators at many sites to handle them. She said the attempted to shift as much of the function as possible to centers such as San Diego, but that even with those working at more than normal capacity it didn't make up for the people who couldn't come to work in the snow belt. American Express has several 24-hour emergency numbers for such situations; they were busy, too, and I couldn't even get a ring on them until Sunday the 14th. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 09:51:04 +0200 From: ekon@intranet.GR (Evangelos Kontogiannis) Subject: International Calling Card Hello, I was pleased to see the summary/comparison of long distance plans in the US. What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow me to call a US number while overseas. I don't live in the US currently; my sister does and she has an (international) ATT card, BUT one is required to go through a local operator; this makes the use of that card virtually impossible with local service standards. If this would help, card use will be primarily for four to five monthly calls from Athens to Boston, 20-35 minutes duration for each call. I would like to be able to do this directly, ie. maybe dial a number, give a number code and then dial my call (no operators!). The reasoning behind this is (of course) that US prices are MUCH cheaper than what the (only) telco charges here, ie. I would like to be billed by a US telco for my international calls (to the US mainly) and use the card when I travel. But, NO OPERATORS! Vangelis Kontogiannis ,|INTRACOM S.A. | Athens, Greece ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 06:44:15 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Telephones in the Army in the Korean War Many readers of the Digest might be addicted to the TV series M*A*S*H as I am or are familiar with it. How does this relate to telecom? Easy. Calls were made for choppers to take the wounded farther back from the front lines; they were used to order supplies; they were used as a means of bringing in the next handiest general to take a look at the way the camp was run; they were even used to order ribs and sauce (forgot the coleslaw) from Adam's Ribs near the Dearborn Street station. (Pat: Is there an Adam's Ribs and is/was there a Dearborn Street Station? I'm somewhat familiar with Chicago but on a very limited basis having spent some basic training at Great Lakes Naval Station in 1960.) The telephones and the switchboard were of that era and I know that a crank was used to charge the batteries in those units. The question is: were there lines installed over the countryside? I assume that there were since I seem to remember that someone said the lines were down once or twice. If so, maybe someone from that era could enlighten us on telecom during the Korean War with a perspective of being there at the time. There are some excellent telecom history files in the archives and hopefully more can be added. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Note: Back in the days when Chicago was a first class world capitol, thirty years ago, there was a Dearborn Street Station. This was where the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad originated its trains to the west coast. There was Miller's Pub, a restaurant specializing in ribs located on Adams Street which I believe is what they were alluding to. Coming down to Chicago on weekend passes, you would have ridden the North Shore Electric Interurban Railroad. It had a station at the main gate of Great Lakes Naval Training Center. Once downtown, it ran on the elevated tracks of the Union Loop Company to the terminal at Wabash and Jackson Streets, a block from Miller's Pub. Other than Great Lakes and the Union Loop (which was merged into the Chicago Transit Authority long ago as the Lake Street / Dan Ryan elevated line) the rest of it is all gone. North Shore went out of business in 1962; Dearborn Station has been gone 25 years. Nothing much is left of downtown Chicago any longer; none of the two dozen movie theatres we had downtown in 1960 are left. Of the dozen trans- portation terminals downtown, three are left. I liked M*A*S*H. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 09:56:13 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Subject: '83 Novel Foresaw a Bombing {Washington (DC) Times, Feb 27} John Haydon The explosion at the World Trade Center was an event just waiting to happen, says Arnaud de Borchgrave, co-author of the 1983 Cold War novel "Monimbo," in which terrorists blow up six floors of the World Trade Tower with a bomb left in an elevator shaft. When Mr. de Borchgrave was doing research for the book, which he wrote with Robert Moss, he took a suitcase weighing about 60 pounds to simulate plastic explosives, walked past security at the tower and left the bag outside a bank of elevators. "And this was all done under supervision of the New York police counterterrorist unit, run by Frank Boltz," said Mr. de Borchgrave, editor at-large of {The Washington Times}. "They showed me the best place to put a bomb." He said security never stopped him to search the suitcase, which he recovered two hours later. "At the time we were experimenting how 11 terrorists could create chaos in New York, and the police counterterrorist unit suggested that a bomb left outside the elevators at the core of the building would do the most damage." Mr. de Borchgrave said. "To hear a police official on TV today say they never anticipated this is ridiculous." Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 10:00:43 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Subject: Phone Items From the Washington (DC) Times, 3/11: MCI Communications Corp of Washington and Cisco Systems Inc. said they formed a joint marketing alliance to provide data networking solutions by incorporation Cisco technology with MCI's new HyperStream data services and private lines. The companies said their sales forces will work together to offer coordinated network design and post-sales support. MCI and Cisco said they also are working together on plans to give customers the option of receiving troubleshooting support directly from Cisco through MCI' HyperStream network in the event of a router problem. ------ GTE offers severance to Virginia employees. GTE Virginia has offered early retirement for as many as 180 hourly and salaried employees and voluntary separation for its 400 management employees in the state. The Mechanicsville company is the second-largest local telephone provider in the state behind Chesapeake & Potomac company of Virginia. A GTE spokeswoman said the company had no target for the number of positions to be eliminated through the offers. The action was part of a national incentive program for 26,000 salaried employees of GTE Telephone Operations of Dallas. Paul Robinson TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: jacob@b63510.student.CWRU.Edu (Jacob DeGlopper) Subject: Touch-ToneForrE veryone in DC Metro Area Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:30:03 -0500 (EST) Someone mentioned a few weeks back a C&P bill insert detailing a fairly small rate increase and the dropping of touchtone service as a seperate item. This has indeed happened; my parents have never seen a need for anything other than one rotary-dial phone, but last week when I was home touch-tone dialing worked where it never did before ... Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton (MD) Volunteer Rescue Squad -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - jacob@b63510.CWRU.Edu -- ------------------------------ From: Andrew Luebker Subject: AmeriVox Debit Card Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:00:00 GMT The "AmeriVox" debit calling card is marketed by the World Telecom Group, a division of the PhoneClub USA corporation. The card is not actively advertised through the media. Instead, the AmeriVox card is sold through a multi-tiered network of representatives (independent contractors, not employees of either WTG or PhoneClub USA.) People at higher levels in the marketing pyramid receive additional incentives based on their success in recruiting, monthly sales, etc. AmeriVox cards are available in standard denominations, from $10 to $100, plus a few more expensive sizes for big spenders. A significant chunk (about ten-percent) is immediately deducted for "state and federal taxes," the rest providing calling time at your current per-minute rate. The initial base rate is 24.9 cents/minute. After deducting taxes, the $20 card would only give 72 minutes of calling time, effectively costing you $0.28 per minute at the base rate. Another version of the AmeriVox card lets you call from the USA to Canada, at somewhat higher rates. Since there is no calling card surcharge, you can save money on short calls during the daytime. But long evening or night calls might actually be cheaper with regular calling cards, despite the surcharge. When you pay for the AmeriVox debit card by check (rather than the more dangerous automatic renewal on your Visa/Mastercard), it can be somewhat safer against fraud: If the card is lost or your security code is stolen, you never lose more than the "face value" of the card, probably less if you report the problem right away. There are a few more drawbacks to the card: It bills in full-minute increments, possibly charging you for unanswered calls if they ring too long. Although you can share your security code with other members of your family, the card only allows one call at a time, not permitting simultaneous calls to be charged to a single debit card. The AmeriVox literature also claims that the card will not work for data transmissions, a drawback for modem and FAX users. [Moderator's Note: I don't personally trust multi-level-marketing schemes. A few people get rich, the rest get shafted. This article mentions 'higher levels in the marketing pyramid ..' and I wonder how many levels you can have when you are selling telephone calls. These folks (Amerivox/World Telecom) tried to interest me in selling their service here to Digest readers; I just couldn't get enthusiastic about it. It seems there are too many people above and below you each getting a piece of the action. Also, they have a travel club with 'free' vacation trips and other gimmicks. I stayed out of it. Yes, I am biased; the Digest profits from the Orange Calling Card, but despite my personal involvement, I still think Orange is better. PAT] ------------------------------ From: matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) Subject: Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors Organization: Yale U. - Genetics Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 15:38:17 GMT Why not just get a couple good cordless phones? Matt Healy matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics Date: 23 Mar 1993 01:44:17 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Some COCOTs will allow billing a calling card to certain 900 numbers. The 900 numbers are usually run by whatever company is the AOS for the COCOT, and often there will be ads for these particular 900 numbers next to the payphone. It has to be billed to a card that the AOS can bill to (such as one issued by an LEC), and since the AOS has the ability to generate its own "extra page" on the subscriber's local phone bill, they can put any telecom charges on there they want, including 900 charges. It is true that no "real" long distance company allows calling cards to be used for 900 services. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 16:00:48 CST From: bruce@zuhause.MN.ORG (Bruce Albrecht) Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! >> [Moderator's Note: We've had the 'surname once, first name indented' >> style in many of our suburban directories for a few years now, along >> with the businesses listed separately. > Yes, after I naively posted my message, I was informed by more > knowledgable collegues that this "split white pages; surname once" is > a very common midwest format. It is sort of the thing you find in > Kansas, Nebraska -- all the fly-over states. Apparently it is also in > Chicago. And now, unfortunately, it is here. I have already expressed > my displeasure with Pacific Bell. One can only hope that the local phone company gets it right. When US West switched the phone books to this format a couple years ago, my employer's listing got dropped from both sections, and I knew of other cases where they also screwed up. bruce@zuhause.mn.org ------------------------------ From: bears!rhyre@cinpmx.attmail.com Date: 23 Mar 93 21:36:41 GMT Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? magnus@lulea.trab.se (Magnus Hedberg) wrote: > We believe that it should be possible to power the telephone from the > electric mains in the house instead of from the telecom network. The > goal is to avoid using "high voltage" on the telecom network. Many businesses here user commercial power for their telephone systems. When commercial power goes, so does the businesses phone system. Telco power and service seems to be much more reliable, so I think you'd have a hard time selling this idea to subscribers. Another problem is keeping the electic mains and the telephone wires separated. You don't want to cross the wires. > Does anyone know if this idea already has been rejected or performed > somewhere in the world. ISDN is a 'digital' phone network that runs over regular copper subscriber lines, but I'm not sure what voltages it uses. In the US, the FCC has decreed that the customer provide power for part of the setup, which is one of the (many) factors that his limited its widespread adoption here. For regular analog phone lines, the ring voltage (~90VAC @ 20 Hz in the US, current limited) is the 'high voltage' that is particularly bothersome. Ralph Hyre (rhyre@attmail.com) ------------------------------ From: aem@symbi1.symbiosis.ahp.com (a.e.mossberg) Subject: Re: Phone Sex Reaches Out to Girl Scout Callers Date: 23 Mar 1993 17:18:57 -0500 Organization: Symbiosis Corporation, Miami, Florida (305) 597-4000 Reply-To: aem@symbi1.symbiosis.ahp.com sharonc@meaddata.com (Sharon Crichton) writes: > An unidentified sex line snapped up the number, which spells out > 800-BAD-GIRL. It returns "the 800 number you have dialed has been disconnected. No further information about this number is available" from Miami. :-( andrew mossberg systems specialist symbiosis corporation (305) 597-4110 fax (305) 597-4002 miami, florida 33166-6202 aem@symbiosis.ahp.com uunet!symbi1!aem SPAN: UMIGW::AEM ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #204 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24612; 24 Mar 93 3:43 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19135 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 01:24:48 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16756 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 01:24:02 -0600 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 01:24:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303240724.AA16756@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #205 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Mar 93 01:24:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 205 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (John Pettitt) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Robert L. Ullmann) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Richard Nash) Re: Multiplexing Help Needed (Dale Farmer) Re: Cellular Battery Packs (John Pettitt) Re: Cellular Carriers vs. IXC's (Robert L. McMillin) Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (John W. Temples) Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Steve Forrette) Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Ole J. Jacobsen) Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Steve Forrette) Re: CNID in St. Louis, MO (John Higdon) Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted (Bruce Adler) Re: Old Telephone Numbers (Roy Smith) Re: Washington Times Blows It (Tim Russell) Re: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact (Howard Gayle) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jpettitt@well.sf.ca.us (John Pettitt) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 00:24:44 GMT In Richard Pauls writes: > I agree. Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be > discouraged. It is clearly dangerous. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Why ? If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at 55 controlling a car in two dimensions? As others have pointed out there are laws to cover bad driving already. (And yes I do live in California so what about it?) ------------------------------ From: ariel@world.std.com (Robert L. Ullmann) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Organization: The World in Boston Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 01:05:31 GMT fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) writes: > That's just what one Massachusetts legislator wants to legislate. [...] > one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss > the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because > they have the phone to their ear! So he's proposing a bill that would > make people pull over to use the cellphone. Typical misinformed member of our "general court". It is already illegal to drive without both hands on the wheel when not shifting gears. Just needs a little enforcement, if you are really serious. But lots of new laws make for noiser politics. Which is why the enforcement doesn't work: too many laws. Robert Ullmann Ariel@World.STD.COM +1 508 879 6994 x226 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 18:58:37 -0700 From: rickie@trickie.ualberta.ca (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? bobm@unipalm.co.uk (Bob Morley) writes: > In article , fybush@world.std.com > (Scott D Fybush) writes: >> one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss >> the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because >> they have the phone to their ear! So he's proposing a bill that would >> make people pull over to use the cellphone. > Its already law in the UK. What a wonderful idea! About time someone made the responsibility of the driver solely that of driving the car, not communications officer! How responsible! Now who in their right mind would oppose such a concept? Sorta like requiring you to stop at red lights. (Except in high car-jacking areas) mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com writes: some comments deleted ... and then he said ... > (And of course, if it ever becomes a national issue, the Californicators > will scream bloody murder. If it's true that average commute times in > the LA basin are over an hour each way, then a ban on car phone conver- > sation in a moving vehicle would shut that town down.) Perhaps we can allow phone conversations on vehicles that are moving less than two mph and in a smog density of greater than ten parts per million? :) Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: rickie@trickie.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca Amateur Radio: ve6bon.ampr.ab.ca [192.75.200.15] ------------------------------ From: dale@access.digex.com (Dale Farmer) Subject: Re: Multiplexing Help Needed Date: 23 Mar 1993 09:37:40 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Disini SW, Emmanuel Disini,CST (D1749@AppleLink.Apple.COM) wrote: > I need a device that'll allow me to take two RS-232 cables (just eight > signals -- tx,rx,gnd, rts,cts,dcd,dsr,dtr) and multiplex these onto one > RS-232 cable (I also need a similar device on the other end for > demultiplexing). If you look at the full RS-232 pinout you will see a number of pins that have a (s) at the beginning of the abbrieviations. These are for the second data channel. (pins 12-dcd, 13-cts, 14-td, 16-rd, 19-rts) Many people are not aware of them. I hope this helps. Dale Farmer ------------------------------ From: jpettitt@well.sf.ca.us (John Pettitt) Subject: Re: Cellular Battery Packs Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 00:47:00 GMT In stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > Although I've never tried it myself, I have a friend who swears by > this technique: Hook up the NiCad momentarily to a 12-volt car > battery, using *reverse* polarity. This can be accomplished with > jumper cables. He says that this will breathe new life into tired > NiCads. What happens is that a whisker of christal grows accross the nicad during charge / discharge cycles. Putting reverse current through it "fuses" the growth and reveives the battery (for a short while). However: Do it with a high current source like a car battery and you may end up with a BIG bang and no hands ... I uses to do it with a current limited bench supply (2A). This was in the days when I used to fix calculators for a living (showing my age :-). John ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 05:27 PST From: rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: Cellular Carriers vs. IXC's Steve Forrette writes: > A few weeks ago, someone voiced dismay that LA Cellular was blocking > access to subscribers on the California Super Access Roaming Network > via the roam port. That is to say, for example, that a San Francisco > cellular subscriber cannot be reached in Los Angeles by dialing into > the LA switch's roam port, but can be reached by dialing the San > Francisco subscriber's home cellular number. But a roamer from an > area such that calls won't automatically find them in LA *can* be > reached via the roam port. This can be undesirable since someone > that's in LA who wants to call the SF subscriber who is roaming in LA, > and knows this, can't use the roam port to save the toll, and must > call to SF. Which sounds like an excellent justification for eliminating per-minute, per-mile billing. Why does this happen other than the fact that the IXCs want more money and think they can get away with it? I agree that network transparency is a good and worthy goal, but not if it means the customer gets screwed in the process. Flat rate access for the entire U.S. is the way to go. Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Dude! #include ------------------------------ From: jwt!john@peora.sdc.ccur.com Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs Organization: Private system -- Orlando, FL Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 03:18:05 GMT In article Daniel E. Ganek writes: > 2) Does AT&T want to know about this hotel blocking other LD > companies? :-) While staying at a guest house in Key West last year, I tried to make a long distance call from the credit-card-only public phone (they didn't have phones in the rooms). 10xxx codes were intercepted, so I dialed 00 and asked an operator at the AOS for an AT&T operator. She put me through, and I explained the situation to the AT&T operator. The AT&T operator asked me for the number of the phone from which I was calling, "so we can have that problem corrected." John W. Temples -- john@jwt.UUCP -or- john@jwt.oau.org ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs Date: 23 Mar 1993 19:07:16 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article Daniel E. Ganek writes: > We stayed at the Days Inn in DC last weekend. I attempted to make a > AT&T call. I first just dialed 8 + 0 + number and heard "BONG Comtel" > So I hung up and started to dial 10ATT and as soon as I dialed the "0" > I got some intercept saying "no, no". So, I dialed 8 + 0 again and > just entered my AT&T calling card number after the "Comtel" and lo and > behold I heard "thank you for using AT&T" ! I had a similar thing happen to me a couple of months ago at the Sheraton San Jose (actually located in Milpitas, CA). The instructions in the guest rooms proudly proclaimed that all long distance calls are handled by AT&T. But, dialing a 0+ call resulted in a "*bong* Hotelco" prompt. I entered my AT&T card number, and then the fun started. I could very faintly hear Hotelco's equipment pick up another line, get dial tone, 0+ the same number I did, get it get the "*bong* AT&T", then replay my card number. Then the second line was bridged at full volume, and I heard the regular "Thank you for using AT&T." The line quality left something to be desired, as Hotelco apparently uses some inferior analog bridging device. Also, call completion time was incredibly long. It took 35 seconds from the time I dialed the last digit of the called number before I heard ringback from the called number (this includes the time required me to enter the card number). A similar measurement from a Pacific Bell payphone in the lobby yielded a result of 10 seconds. Also, about one in five calls did not complete and was dropped at someplace in the process. I confronted the front desk personnel about this, and they of course knew nothing of it. I asked for and spoke with the hotel manager, and he said that it was not under their control, as Hotelco was the local phone company in that area! Now, I may have been born in 1967, but not yesterday! :-) I of course informed him that this was total nonsense, that Pacific Bell was the carrier for the area, and the very name Hotelco indicated that it was a specialty carrier catering to the hospitality industry. He did not deny any of this, and countered by saying that it was not under his control. He implied that the decision was made by the owners (it was a francise, and not corporately owned by Sheraton), that I was not the first one to have problems or complain, and that I should fill out a comment card. I got the impression that as the manager, he would prefer to get rid of Hotelco so that his guests would be happy, but the owners of course would not get whatever extra cut Hotelco is giving them. So, just how is Hotelco getting extra revenue? Presumably they are not providing this "service" to hotel guests out of the goodness of their hearts. What I am assuming is happening is that the call is getting routed out of the hotel PBX and into the Hotelco switch via a local call. Then, Hotelco collects my card number digits, and places the real call out from their switch. So, AT&T sees the call coming from Hotelco's lines, and not from the hotel itself. I'm assuming that Hotelco is some sort of aggregator that gets a special kickback from AT&T on calling card calls. Does anyone know for sure? Also, when staying at the Embassy Suites in Arcadia, CA, I had another strange calling card experience. They use AT&T, and thankfully calls go right into the AT&T network. I had a need to place a collect call. So, I 0-plussed it, and said "collect from Steve." It was the real AT&T operator, but she replied "Thank you for using AT&T, and enjoy your stay at Embassy Suites." I'm sure that this was not the hotel operator, or some other funky kind -- just the regular AT&T operator. I guess this is a new service that AT&T offers to hotels in order to offer "more personalized" service. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 8:08:06 PST From: Ole J. Jacobsen Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 I got stuck in Washington DC for two days and had similar problems getting through to United Airlines. I called all the offices listed on my ticket: Denver, San Francisco, LA, Honolulu, Chicago, Seattle and Washington, DC to no avail. Finally, I called the London office and no difficulty re-booking my flight. It was also refreshing to hear the United promo with a British accent when I was on hold. 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 ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 Date: 23 Mar 1993 18:00:00 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article wegeng.henr801c@xerox.com writes: > As you might guess, most calls to their 800-241-6522 reservations > number didn't go though (sometimes I got reorder, sometimes I got an > "all circuits busy" message). Every so often, though, I would get > through to their menu-based system, which would instruct me to "press > 1 to get flight info, press 2... ,etc), and upon making a selection > I'd again get reorder or an "all circuits busy" message. > Anyone know what was happening here? Was United's menu system dialing > another number based on my selection? If so, why not use dedicated > lines? AT&T, and possibly other carriers, offers a service whereby the prompting and routing is handled within the long distance network, and not at the customer's end. If AA is using this service, then this would explain what happened to you -- you got to the AT&T equipment that provides the auto attendant service, but it could not transfer your call to its final destination. Steve Forrette, stevef@wqr.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 22:15 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: CNID in St. Louis, MO rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: > The [Missouri] PSC voted 3-2 that the service "did not violate the public > interest", inspite of the objections of some interest groups. Maybe I will take back what I said about the midwest. It sounds as though the regulators in the state of my birth have a helluva lot more gumption than the CPUC weenies who cave in to every activist group that can grunt. 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: adler@netcom.com (Bruce Adler) Subject: Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 11:17:06 GMT In article rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes: > In article , barr@tramp.Colorado.EDU > (BARR DOUG) writes: >> We have some dial in modems that "hang". They require power cycling to >> reset them. ... > In many 'Hayes Compatible" modems, in answer mode, any ascii text sent > from the computer, toward the modem, when no carrier is being > detected, is run through the 'AT' command decoder. If the user logs > out, and immediately disconnects (hangs up), the system still sends > the logout text to the modem and the modem attempts to decode that > logout text as 'AT' command strings. I've also seen some Hayes clone modems get wedged by remote users using the ATH command to hang up their modems. In order to switch their local modem from data mode to command mode they enter the (patented) +++ attention sequence and then the ATH command. Unfortunately the remote (host end) modem also goes into command mode but it only accepts commands from the host end. Some modems I've used either have bugs (or incorrect setups) and don't recognize loss of carrier during command mode and therefore require a power cycle to reset once they get wedged like this. If you can't fix the modem configuration (to always recognize the hang up and reset) then tell everyone not to use +++ATH. I'd really like to see someone sell a modem that uses a different attention character for originate and answer modes or have an option that disables the attention character in answer mode. That would avoid a lot of potential user confusion. [Moderator's Note: Well most modems allow you to change the plusses into something else. For example, I use CHR$(126). Anyone running a system accepting incoming calls from customers, users, etc should very definitely change from plusses to three tildes, or carats, or something unlikely to become confused by the user's plusses. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 09:15:00 -0500 From: roy@mchip00.med.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Subject: Re: Old Telephone Numbers Organization: New York University, School of Medicine > It was commonly understood in those days that the conversion from manual > to dial simply meant dialing the first three letters of the old exchange > name plus the existing four digit suffix with zeros prepended to the > suffix if necessary to 'fill out' the suffix to four places; i.e. > previously asking for "[Exchange] 24" now meant dialing '[EXChange]-0024'. There is a sign painted on the side of a building near where I live advertising a local business. Judging from the condition of the paint, I'd guess it must date from the 50's or so. The phone number is given as "88-5-xxxx". It's the only place I've ever seen a phone number punctuated like that, but it's obviously an artifact of converting from 2L5D to 7D. Roy Smith Hippocrates Project, Department of Microbiology, Coles 202 NYU School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 [Moderator's Note: If it is '88-5' instead of 'TU-5' then it probably only goes into the early sixties. I do not think All Number Calling was around anywhere until 1961-62. Corrections anyone? PAT] ------------------------------ From: trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 14:23:59 GMT hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > (Anybody know President Clinton's new email address?) That address is CLINTONPZ, both on Compuserve and America Online. Tim Russell Omaha, NE trussell@unomaha.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 07:22:32 PST From: howard@hal.com (Howard Gayle) Reply-To: howard@hal.com Subject: Re: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc., Campbell, California > [Moderator's Note: If you prefer to put down a security deposit or an > advance payment for the first month of service, that is your right. When I got service from Pacific Bell, I chose to pay a security deposit rather than answer nosey questions. The interest they paid on the deposit was much higher than I could get on any other investment with comparable risk. I felt like asking them "Are you *sure* $80 is enough? Wouldn't you like more?" :-) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #205 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26468; 24 Mar 93 4:55 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23086 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 02:32:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21835 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 02:31:20 -0600 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 02:31:20 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303240831.AA21835@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #206 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Mar 93 02:31:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 206 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Using the Telecom Archives (R. Kevin Oberman) Re: Using the Telecom Archives (Clive Feather) Re: Using the Telecom Archives (Lars Poulsen) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Alan T. Furman) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Paul Robinson) Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? (Bob Larribeau) Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Signs of Desperation? (Steve Forrette) Re: Automatic Gain Control on Voice Calls? (Steve Forrette) Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager (Mike Berger) Re: IXO (TAP) Protocol For Pagers (Jim Thompson) Re: TDDs and Modem Standards (Jim Haynes) Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors (Bob Munck) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: Using the Telecom Archives Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 00:50:24 GMT Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > So you can 'telnet lcs.mit.edu ftp' if you wish, and that will > connect you with the ftp socket at that (or any other) site. Sorry, Pat, but this is completely bogus. While you may telnet to the FTP port on a system, FTP does not in any way "use" telnet. Instead, both FTP and telnet relay on common underlying protocols so that on may telnet into the FTP port. That said, it's is a waste of time to do so because this common mechanism is only used for FTP commands passing. The data stream is passed over a separate port that does NOT use this underlying mechanism. Therefore, to ftp a file, one MUST use FTP. You can't get a file in any way, shape, or form from an ftp archive using telnet. I'll be a bit more specific. Port numbers are public information. Telnet to port 21 at some FTP archive. Enter the command "USER ANONYMOUS" and then "PASS myname". Type HELP. You should see a bunch of VERY odd commands. Try one that is obvious. LIST. The command will be accepted and the message "List started" will come back. Then, the world fails with some sort of "Can't build data connection: connection refused" message. Sorry. That said, there are some versions of what is called telnet that have FTP functionality built into them. These are not standard on any OS, so the odds of your hitting one are slim. If it works, fine, but you are not really using telnet. You are just using FTP that is called from your local version of telnet. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: koberman@llnl.gov (510) 422-6955 Disclaimer: Being a know-it-all isn't easy. It's especially tough when you don't know that much. But I'll keep trying. (Both) [Moderator's Note: You do that; continue trying, I mean. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: clive@x.co.uk (Clive Feather) Subject: Re: Using the Telecom Archives Organization: IXI Limited Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 18:50:54 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Someone else (I forget who, the message is lost in > the mess here over the weekend, sorry) brought this up and said I > should have corrected the 'telnet' reference. Well, I say, watch how I > worm out of this one! Actually, ftp is a software program which uses > telnet to get the desired files. Sorry Pat, but that's wrong. 'ftp' and 'telnet' are both programs which use the TCP/IP communications protocol to talk to a program on the same or another computer. > So you can 'telnet lcs.mit.edu ftp' if you wish, and that will > connect you with the ftp socket at that (or any other) site. Indeed it does. The reason is that the 'telnet' program establishes a connection to the remote end, and then provides transparent access to that connection (i.e. what you type goes across, and what comes back appears on your screen). The default port used by the program is one allocated to a remote login program that expects to talk to the telnet program, and so can negotiate things like local v remote echo. > does not allow ftp but does allow telnet ... it will usually work. You can connect, but you won't be able to transfer files or list directories, because these are done by setting up a *second* TCP/IP connection to the FTP server to transfer the data back again. > check out a file on your site documenting socket assignments. I won't > tell you the commands to use once it connects -- that, like using telnet > to connect direct with the mail socket to send anonymous mail is best > learned by the perpetrators themselves. The command to list a directory is LIST, but it will say something like: "425 Can't build data connection: Connection refused." Clive D.W. Feather | IXI Ltd (an SCO company) clive@x.co.uk | Vision Park Phone: +44 223 236 555 | Cambridge CB4 4RZ Fax: +44 223 236 550 | United Kingdom ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 22:43:52 PST From: lars@CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Using the Telecom Archives Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA Patrick, Never advise people to use commands you haven't actually tried!! This suggestion comes from someone who spent endless hours in telephone support for Internet products. While mail servers can usually be tickled from a telnet client, this is not true for FTP servers. FTP servers will not transfer any data or directory listings over the command channel, but insist on opening a second connection for the data. Since a telnet client can't open a connection in passive listening mode, you can't easily prepare for this without having the proper program. Besides, the times have changed. In the old days, when a network site had one shared system attached to the network, site administrators that wanted to restrict access, usually hid the client programs (or set them up with protections so only privileged users could execute them.) Nowadays, when most sites have a local network with many workstations, including PCs whose owners may not allow the system manager to mess with their system setup, the preferred way to enforce restrictions is to install packet filters in the border router, trapping packets addresed to the restricted ports. This is why a host may appear to be "unreachable" to telnet and FTP commands, even though you can ping it. I know these things, because I work for a company that makes routers. 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: atfurman@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 02:05:26 PST My friend Charles Curley claims to have started the private-sector space travel and colonization movement by presenting a conference paper titled "Would You Want the Post Office to Deliver Your Oxygen?" Alan T. Furman atfurman@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 22:49:14 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology Lars Poulsen writes in Vol 13, #201: > I was also amazed at the claim that USPS has no way to trace a > package, but Fed Ex does: It is just that they don't activate > this costly tracking unless you ask for it and pay for it up > front. It is called registered mail...Few people use it...a > registered letter costs almost as much as..Federal Express. Last I heard, a USPS registered letter requiring a signature was $1.15, versus 29c for a regular letter. Fedex charges at least $8 for any package or letter. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: Bob Larribeau Subject: Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? Organization: Consultant Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 13:35:18 GMT > In Europe ISDN phones are powerd by the telecomnetwork. According to > our information this is not the case in the USA. > Are ISDN phones/terminals in the USA or elsewhere powered by external > electric mains? In the U.S. power is not provided by the network. There are a couple of ways that power is delivered to the phone: 1. By a power supply connected directly to the phone. 2. Using PS2 (Pins 7 & 8) on the ISDN line. Typically the power supply supports both the NT1 and the TE using PS2. Power may be provided by an individual power supply or by some kind of bulk power supply. The power supply may have battery back up. In the U.S. the power and the NT1 are customer responsibility. Bob Larribeau San Francisco ------------------------------ From: davep@uwashington.edu Subject: Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? Date: 23 Mar 1993 19:30:48 GMT Organization: University of Washington magnus@lulea.trab.se (Magnus Hedberg) writes: > In Europe ISDN phones are powerd by the telecomnetwork. According to > our information this is not the case in the USA. > Are ISDN phones/terminals in the USA or elsewhere powered by external > electric mains? Your sources are correct. In the USA, ISDN sets require local power. Power is not supplied by the telco. I took an AT&T ISDN Premise wiring course a couple of years ago, and power was one of the big concerns. You could do at either at the desk, or provide power from the local closet. This took an extra pair. There were a couple of advantages to providing power from the closet. Less clutter at the desktop, less contention for what is often congested power outlet space at the desk, and the availability of centralized power failure batteries (which were hideously expensive). Overall the ISDN wiring scheme struck me as very primitive and complex. There needed to be a better way. I hope that significant improvements have been made in the last couple of years since I took the course, but I don't think so. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave P davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Signs of Desperation? Date: 23 Mar 1993 16:56:28 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) writes: > I subscribe to {Telephony Magazine}, and my sub is up for renewal, and > though I've been meaning to do it, I haven't gotten around to it yet. > I got this brightly colored envelope with what seemed like a survey: > The very first question it asks is: > 1. Please continue my subscription to Telephony Yes No > Signature required_________________________________ The magazines that offer a free subscription to qualified people must get signatures every so often from subscribers. This is mainly so that they can pass the subsciber base audit that an independent auditing company conducts from time to time. The decisions of advertisers and the advertising rates are based on the number of subscribers to the magazine, and the advertisers want to see the subscription base audited so that they know that the quoted number of subscribers actually want the magazine, and were not added to the list unilaterally by the magazine just to "pad" the number of subscribers. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Automatic Gain Control on Voice Calls? Date: 23 Mar 1993 17:06:03 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article Mike Whitaker writes: > I was calling (from Cambridge, UK) a friend in the Twin Cities [(612) > 551 XXXX] the other evening about 10.30 GMT. It was quite a noisy > line, and I could quite distinctly, as could she, hear the background > hiss level *rise* when neither of us was talking. > Purely out of curiosity -- is there some kind of automatic gain > control or signal compression (which is what this sounded like) > normally put on phone lines? There is this technique that is used that disconnects the end-to-end call path when there is silence. This is used mainly on international circuits. The purpose of this is so that x calls can be supported on somewhat less than x trunks, as statistically, a certain percentage of calls will always be silent at any given time. This switching is done independently for each direction of the call. When most of the transmission systems were analog, this cutout would result in the receiving end of the silent part of the call hear the background noise go away, so a "feature" was added which causes the multiplexing equipment to put in "false" static, which supposedly matches what's naturally on the circuit, so that the caller doesn't think the line went dead. Apparently, this is still done even if the circuit is fully digital. There is a person in Hong Kong that I talk to from time to time, and this effect is usually on the line. When he's talking, I hear him perfectly clear, just as if he was next door. Since there's no static or delay, I'm assuming that the call is being carried by trans-oceanic fiber. But, as soon as he stops talking, a steady hiss of static comes on the line. It seems quite silly. If the interational carrier is going to use this multiplexing method, at least they could turn of the artificial static generator when the call is being carried on a digital circuit. But, overall, this is still much better than the occasional time when we get an analog circuit with a bad echo canceller. Then, I get to hear a muffled reflection of my voice at what seems almost a second later. It usually takes me a couple of minutes before I force myself to ignore it -- before then, I always stop talking, thinking the other end is interrupting me! Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: mike_berger@qms1.life.uiuc.edu (Mike Berger) Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 20:48:13 GMT Organization: U of Il. School of Life Sciences In article , Steven Warner wrote: > Android Rubin writes: >> I would like to know what special characters must be sent to >> enable silent pages, and to have pages from an information service >> show up in the proper bin. (ie, second display line). The copy of the spec that I have is vague about using fields 1 and 2 for anything but ID and message respectively. And before you ask, I got my protocol spec under a non-disclosure agreement, so I can't post or send a copy. ------------------------------ From: jim@tadpole.com (Jim Thompson) Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) Protocol For Pagers Date: 23 Mar 1993 21:18:04 GMT Organization: Tadpole Technology, Inc., Austin, TX Reply-To: jim@tadpole.com Yea. Its an expect script. ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 15:11:02 -0800 Subject: Re: TDDs and Modem Standards Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz No, 'taint. The originator of TDD was the late Bob Weitbrecht, W6NRM, who was very active in ham RTTY. In fact I believe he was the one who petitioned the FCC to allow FSK rather than make-and-break keying for amateur RTTY on HF. Well in the early 1960s Bob became friends with another deaf man, Pasadena orthodontist Jim Marsters. They worked on a ham license for Jim; but he wasn't able to copy Morse code well enough. (Bob could copy code quite well using an old pair of headphones - I never did understand if he had just enough hearing at some frequency for it to work or if he felt the vibrations on his head.) So they started experimenting over the phone. The first experiments were done with a single tone on the space signal, using about 1400 Hz because that's right in the middle of the telephone passband. The reason for using a single tone on space is so that they can have an interactive conversation without needing a send-receive switch. When one person stops sending the line is quiet and the other person can send. And if you want to interrupt the talker you can start pounding keys and both of you will get gibberish and realize that the listener wants to interrupt. Single tones worked OK around town, but on long-distance connections there was trouble with echoes causing garbles. So Bob added the second tone (1800 Hz more or less) on the mark frequency to suppress the echoes (by being a lot louder than they are). To preserve the interactive conversational ability he had the mark tone go quiet after a few milliseconds of no sending; thus the receiver can break in unless the sender is typing away at full speed. Bob was working for SRI at the time, but quit and formed a company to manufacture the modems using the trade name "Phonetype"; the company name was Applied Communication Corp. or Apcom and was located in Redwood City or San Mateo or somewhere around there. A fellow named Andy Saks was involved, and I believe Jim Marsters was part of the company too, tho he continued to live in Pasadena practicing orthodontics. The Phonetype modem used acoustic coupling as this was before Carterfone, and used 60WPM Baudot Teletype machines because that was about the only kind of terminal that was affordable by ordinary people. Western Union and some of the Bell companies donated castoff Teletype machines for the deaf people to use. There was an organization "Teletypewriters for the Deaf, Inc." which worked to acquire and distribute machines. Bob was concerned about introducing a modem and code that were incompatible with the way the industry was going; but you have to remember this was when the Bell modems (101-type) were huge and hugely costly; the only ASCII terminals were new Teletype machines at $1000 or more. There was a good supply of old Baudot Teletypes, 60WPM was faster than most of the users could type anyway, and the Phonetype model sold for something lke $150 and was something a small company could produce from readily available parts. There were active groups of deaf TTY users in various places; I remember St. Louis had such a group, and they had something like a BBS except that in those days it used paper tape. Don't remember how they handled making the modem auto-answer pre-Carterfone. Thinking of Jim Marsters reminds me of another item of interest to Telcom readers. He really went all-out to live a normal life in spite of his deafness. For instance he would periodically take training with a speech coach, so that his speech, while a little mechanical sounding, was a lot better than the average deaf person's. He loved to talk to people on the telephone; I remember doing a double take when I was visiting a friend in Pasadena and the phone rang and he handed it to me and it was Jim Marsters. I learned his trick: he had a secretary who would listen on the phone and mouth the words she heard. Jim was a superb lip-reader and would get the words by watching her, and then speak into the phone himself. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 12:53:56 EST From: munck@Stars.Reston.Paramax.Com Reply-To: munck@stars.reston.Paramax.com Subject: Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors In article , rothen+@pitt.edu (Seth B Rothenberg) writes: > I am in the process of buying a house two doors down from my in-laws > and thought it would be useful to be able to answer their phone from > my house and vice-versa. ... > [Moderator's Note: ... burying the wire ... cordless phone > ... steal a couple of idle pairs from the telco ... PAT] I can't believe that you didn't warn him about the REALLY DANGEROUS thing he's doing!! "buying a house two doors down from my in-laws" Now if it were "two time-zones" ... Bob Munck ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #206 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11910; 24 Mar 93 12:28 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31908 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 09:39:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30113 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 09:38:33 -0600 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 09:38:33 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303241538.AA30113@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #207 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Mar 93 09:38:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 207 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Brendan Jones) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Joe Bergstein) Re: International Calling Card (Jan Steinman) Re: International Calling Card (Bryan Montgomery) Re: International Calling Card (Aled Morris) Re: Internet Talk Radio (Harold Hallikainen) Re: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed (Marshal Perlman) Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (John Higdon) Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (T.A. Cooper" Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: ATM Networks (Paul Robinson) Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps (Bill Garfield) Re: CNID in St. Louis, MO (Jeff Sicherman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: brendan@macadam.mpce.mq.edu.au (Brendan Jones) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 18:14:44 +1000 (EST) In most, if not all, states of Australia it is illegal to use a cellphone in a car whilst you are moving, *unless* it is in handsfree mode. This law has been around for a few years. Is the law actually enforced? It sure is. I recall a story in the local newspaper last year that indicated over 700 people had been fined for this offence in the previous year in my home state (NSW). People still do it, but a $135 fine and two demerit points on their license probably makes them think twice before doing it again. The argument wrt to CBs is a strawman. You don't have to hold a CB mic up to your head 100% of the time to use it. It's nowhere near as inhibiting as a cellphone handset. Brendan Jones (PhD Student) | Email: brendan@mpce.mq.edu.au | Any similarity Electronics Department | Voice: +61 2 805 8963 | to Andrew Denton School of MPC&E | Fax : +61 2 805 8983 | is purely Macquarie University | Snail: +NSW 2109 AUSTRALIA | coincidental ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 09:11:31 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? In TELECOM Digest V13 #205 jpettitt@well.sf.ca.us (John Pettitt) writes: > In Richard Pauls > writes: >> I agree. Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be >> discouraged. It is clearly dangerous. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Why? If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while > talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and > at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at > 55 controlling a car in two dimensions? It would depend on the airplane and the number of people qualified to fly it and have their hands on the controls almost all of the time. A privately owned plane probably wouldn't have two qualified pilots on board, nor would it have autopilot nor a headset (although I could be mistaken on the latter two). A commercially owned plane would and therefore one or the other of the pilots and the engineer would be able to do some talking over the air without compromising safety. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: Joe.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 23:20:15 -0500 Subject: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? What's all the fuss about use of cellphones in cars? Why not let our wonderful free market system handle this problem? If it's really so dangerous to use a cellphone while driving, why haven't insurance companies raised auto rates for cellular users? Does the insurance industry sponsored Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) have any data on this? Several years ago, I was of the opinion that cellular use should be banned while driving. When I inquired about the insurance issues, I was told that the demographics of typical cellular users (upper middle class, and wealthy suburbanites) were such that their driving habits as a group were quite safe, and that no demonstrated increase in accidents or claims had been shown for that class of autos equipped with cellphones. Is it possible that this has changed over the last one or two years as the cost of cellphones has plumeted and millions more are now in use? ------------------------------ From: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch (Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths) Subject: Re: International Calling Card Reply-To: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch Organization: Ascom Hasler AG Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 11:52:59 GMT In article 4@eecs.nwu.edu, ekon@intranet.GR (Evangelos Kontogiannis) writes: > ...What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow > me to call a US number while overseas [without going] through a > local operator ... This is exactly what my ATT MasterCard/calling card does, in Switzerland and about 50 other countries (according to their literature). I call a local number, the US number, and my calling card number, and I'm there! That is the sole feature that made me choose ATT over the others, since I auto-dial most of my overseas calls, and going through an operator (no matter *what* language they speak!) was unacceptable. ("Duh, excuse me, m'am, but do you speak DTMF?") Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths steinman@hasler.ascom.ch 2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA +1 503 657 7703 Friedlistrasse 19, CH-3006, Bern, Switzerland +41 31 999 3946 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 09:03:37 GMT From: Bryan Montgomery Subject: Re: International Calling Card Reply-To: Monty@vnet.IBM.COM Organization: IBM Havant UK In a previous message ekon@intranet.GR (Evangelos Kontogiannis) wrote: > What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow > me to call a US number while overseas. I don't live in the US > currently; my sister does and she has an (international) ATT card, BUT > one is required to go through a local operator; this makes the use of > that card virtually impossible with local service standards. The local access number for MCI in Greece is 00-800-1211 according to the card in my wallet, perhaps if you can get through to this number you could then ask them for a calling card, if you're lucky and you get accepted the first time, you should receive the card in a few weeks. It did take me three attempts at calling MCI (and about the same for AT&T) to finally get mine about two years ago. Good luck, Bryan Montgomery, Portsmouth, GREAT Britain! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 23:16:28 PST From: aledm@ncd.com (Aled Morris) Subject: Re: International Calling Card > What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow > me to call a US number while overseas. I don't live in the US > currently; my sister does and she has an (international) ATT card, BUT > one is required to go through a local operator; this makes the use of > that card virtually impossible with local service standards. According to the little leaflet that came with my AT&T card, you should be able to make a call directly to the US from Greece by dialling 00-800-1311, a free call, keying in your card number and the US number you want to call (or was it the other way round?) In fact, if you just dial this number and hold on, you should get an AT&T operator, which should be better than the local service. > I would like to be able to do this directly, ie. maybe dial a > number, give a number code and then dial my call (no operators!). Sounds like what you want! Did you try this already? Do you have a touchtone phone? This works for me when I use my AT&T card in the UK (access code 0-800-890011). Aled aledm@ncd.com Network Computing Devices Inc. (415)694 4543 350 North Bernardo Avenue, Mountain View, CA 94043 ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Internet Talk Radio Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 21:15:29 GMT Just a quick note that {Broadcasting & Cable Magazine} has devoted a little over a page to Internet Talk Radio. See page 27 of the 22 March issue. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) Subject: Re: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 02:07:47 GMT s3ung@sms.business.uwo.ca (Simoun S. Ung) writes: > I am looking for 152Mhz and 156 MHz pagers. I have been told that > only China uses these frequencies. Does anybody know where I can > purchase a large quantity of either numeric or Chinese character > units? For the right price, I have a standing order of 10,000 units. Florida uses 152.XXX MHZ. Marshal Perlman Internet: perlman@cs.fit.edu Florida Institute of Technology IRC: Squawk Melbourne, Florida Private Pilot, ASEL 407/768-8000 x8435 Goodyear Blimp Club Member ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 14:39 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada Terry (T.A.) Cooper writes: > From what I have read and have experienced in other countries there > is no better phone system than that which we have here. Yes it's more > expensive that in the US but we can rely on our phones to work ALL the > time. What the hell is that supposed to mean? Are you saying that all telephone service in Canada works 100% of the time with zero failures? If so, that is remarkable. Or, are you saying that US telephone service is less reliable than in Canada? If so, could you please furnish data and the source for that data? I have said it before: the US phone system can be compared favorably against any in the world for price, reliability, feature offerings, and universal coverage. That includes Canada. 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: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 12:47:31 +0000 From: Terry (T.A.) Cooper Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada John Higdon responded to me: > Terry (T.A.) Cooper writes: >> From what I have read and have experienced in other countries there >> is no better phone system than that which we have here. Yes it's more >> expensive that in the US but we can rely on our phones to work ALL the >> time. > What the hell is that supposed to mean? Are you saying that all > telephone service in Canada works 100% of the time with zero failures? > If so, that is remarkable. Or, are you saying that US telephone service is > less reliable than in Canada? If so, could you please furnish data and > the source for that data? > I have said it before: the US phone system can be compared favorably > against any in the world for price, reliability, feature offerings, and > universal coverage. That includes Canada. No it is not up 100% of the time, more like 99.9%. I can count on one hand the number of times that I have lost dialtone on my phone. Each of these outages was as a result of "an act of god" or a drunk driver. Lightning has killed my service a couple of times and a wind storm ripped out the cables once. Drunk drivers tend to have the same effect as wind storms, they take out phone poles and cables. It is interesting that the first point on your list of comparing the US phone system is price. In my book price is a consideration but reliability far outweighs it as a factor in determining the quality of a phone system. I live far enough from "civilization" that I consider my phone a very important safety item. I'll pay a bit extra to know that my phone will work when I pick it up. I'd like to provide you with data to would highlight my opinion, but any data that I have is confidential information that cannot be published. Besides, as the disclaimer says it's just my opinion. Terry Cooper Northern Telecom Ottawa, Ontario Opinions expressed are personal and are not those of Northern Telecom. ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 03:54:24 GMT On Mar 16 at 16:46, TELECOM Moderator writes: (just getting around to a belated contribution to a Higdon-PAT dialogue!) > [Moderator's Note: For some reason, you failed to comment upon my > earlier remarks about the 'network access fee' now being charged, > which adds several dollars per month to the phone bill. Well, that's a good question, but it again has zilch to do with Divestiture! It's the result of the FCC's 1983 "impure 1 1/2" (it was a watered down "Pure 2" option, in their original proposal) decision, which in turn was a 1979-ish docket to replace the old rules for Separations and Settlements. It was put in place coincident with Divestiture, since the two went together like brown on rice, but the reasons are different. What Pure 2 proposed was that non-traffic-sensitive costs of local plant be born by fixed, not traffic-sensitive, charges. Since Smith vs. Illinois Bell (1927), some share of local telephone plant was in the interstate (FCC) jurisdiction. The percentage had risen to over 30% by 1982, providing a subsidy. The FCC got all of its share from interstate toll. What Pure 2 did was take this fixed cost (local exchange wires, mostly) off the toll usage bill and onto the fixed monthly bill. THe proper name for the $2-6 charge is "customer access line charge" (CALC). That's the charge a customer pays for an "access line" (any local phone line). It is often misabbreviated "access charge", as if it were for access _to_ toll, but it's not -- without CALC subsidies, many local charges would be higher! Separations and settlements are a very confusing part of telecom ... 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. [Moderator's Note: Well I think the old way was a better way of handling this. The monthly 'customer access line charge' just keeps going up. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 22:50:58 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: ATM Networks Brad Hicks of Master Card talks about his company's "Maestro" network for access to ATM cards by merchants. I suspect his comments about Maestro becoming used everywhere is a little premature unless MC starts buying up some of the smaller networks. In the Washington, DC regional area, two years ago First American Bank, which had its own Money Exchange network, threw in the towel and became the *final* holdout to switch to the MOST ATM network. (Probably the Arabs who owned BCCI didn't want to pay for another network for this bank. :) ) This now gave MOST 100% penetration in ALL banks, S&Ls, credit unions and ATMs in the Washington, DC area, and for some banks, as far south as Tennessee. Now, the Maryland Department of Social Services has eliminated the distribution of food stamps. Instead, a food stamp client is issued an ATM card on the MOST network. All stores that take food stamps have to have a swipe reader for this reason. The store gets the amount of purchase and the card is debited by the amount of the transaction. This could only occur once every bank was on the MOST network. Also, it now reduces theft (except for merchants creating fraudulent transactions and paying the Food Stamp client to sell part of their allocation) and makes it impossible for someone to sell their excess food stamps since they'd have to give away their PIN code AND card to someone, which makes it difficult if the person doesn't bring it back, to explain how come their account is being accessed. Safeway and Giant Food stores in this area all take Visa, Mastercard and MOST ATM cards for purchases, and they have ATM machines that will issue cash. (And they were slow: Magruders' Grocery was taking Visa and MC two years before Safeway or Giant). And they all still take checks. In my opinion, however, I'm better off using my VISA card for paying for groceries (or else using a check) than using an ATM card: 1. I get at least 30 days interest-free to pay it on Visa/MC; if the merchant's processor is slow, I may even get 60 days, or in rare circumstances, forever; (see #4) 2. An ATM card usage carries from 50c-$2.00 usage charge; groceries purchased on VISA/MC are simple transactions and have no surcharge; (Typical MOST charge is 75c; Cirrus is $1) 3. A check has no surcharge and you get at least 2-3 days float. 4. If the merchant loses the VISA/MC transaction (it happens), your purchase is *free*! So when people look at the difference in cost between an ATM transaction and a VISA/MC credit card, my suspicion is that they will "Go for the Gold (credit card)". Here's a couple of additional points. My mother has a Sears card that looks exactly like a Master Card, in that it has a 16 digit number starting with 5. It has operated some systems that don't correctly verify MC card numbers. I tried it and we didn't get a bill from Sears for its use, either. Correctly verifying machines reject it as an invalid MC number. And the ATM card for my bank has a 'VISA Like' number on it, where it consists of a 16 digit number starting with 4, and an expiration date on it. It does not have the VISA logo on it, and I've never tried to use it as if it really were a VISA card, but it might be interesting to find out. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM [Moderator's Note: I understand the US Government is going to start sending the welfare money each month to people receiving SSI by using an ATM or Debit Card. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps From: bill.garfield@yob.sccsi.com (Bill Garfield) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 20:50:00 -0600 Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569 Reply-To: bill.garfield@yob.sccsi.com (Bill Garfield) In article Graham Toal writes: > itstevec@hamlet.ucdavis.edu (Steve Chafe) wrote: > Has anyone tried to find the cause of bursts of four or five garbage > characters that appear randomly (ever few minutes to every few hours) > on a 9600 bps data call that does not have error correction in effect? >> Synchronization problems between digital clocks of neighbouring digital >> exchanges. We discussed it a few years ago. One of the biggest problems >> with this fault is convincing your phone company that it exists. While proving it to your local telco can be difficult, I recently went through a similar experience with 100% success. The big problem was getting past the teledroid who answers the repair service lines. Using a standard 2500 (tone-dial desk phone) I placed repeated VOICE calls to a number across town in the same place as a BBS where we could simply NOT get connected. With the VOICE party answering, he and I would take turns "swapping tones" with each other by depressing the 9 and # keys simultaneously to generate a single (1477 hz) tone and simply listen to the tone coming from the far end. Whenever we would land on a trunk in the defective trunk group, the received 1477hz tone would pulsate, "ka-bling, ka-bling, ka-bling, etc". The trunks sounded _absolutely_ flawless for regular speech, even music sounded ok, but the slips or density errors stuck out like a sore thumb with a steady tone on the channel. We noted also that the higher in frequency the test tone, the more noticeable the "ka-blings" became. Using * and 0 (941hz) the problem was barely noticeable. Tone level (loudness) made no difference. Armed with this "evidence", we dialed up another call and attached a Halcyon test tone generator across the transmitter leads, set the tone frequency at 1800hz (coincidentally center frequency of 9600 and 14,400 bps modems) and reduced the output to -20. Then we called repair service from another phone and requested a supervisor to call back. The "ka-blinging" call was left up whilst Ma Bell's interoffice folks did an internal trace between central offices. "Find the 'Ka-Bling' and you've found the problem" I told the supervisor. The ensuing process took the better part of the afternoon but ended in success when the tone suddenly came clear. The SWBT supervisor called us back about 20 minutes later and explained that they had found a "mated system in loopback causing pulse density errors." Since that day in December 1992, high speed modem and fax calls between Houston's downtown and "Galleria" areas have been absolutely flawless. We fought this thing for eight months and got it fixed in a little over three hours once we finally had some proof of our own. Ye Olde Bailey BBS 713-520-1569 (V.32bis) 713-520-9566 (V.32bis) Houston,Texas yob.sccsi.com Home of alt.cosuard ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 00:12:16 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: CNID in St. Louis, MO Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article John Higdon writes: > rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: >> The [Missouri] PSC voted 3-2 that the service "did not violate the public >> interest", inspite of the objections of some interest groups. > Maybe I will take back what I said about the midwest. It sounds as > though the regulators in the state of my birth have a helluva lot more > gumption than the CPUC weenies who cave in to every activist group > that can grunt. Does John Higdon have some special posting channel or privilege that makes everything he hays to say always end up in the Digest? I'd hate to see him leave and lose the technical expertise, historical background, and frequent cumudgeonness ... but I'm getting a little tired of his *incessant* whining about a subject that he, heaven forbid, ended up being on the losing side (temporarily, at least). I thought that posts were supposed to contribute something *new* to a thread, not just reflect to emotional involvement of a particular, apparently favored, party. Jeff Sicherman [Moderator's Note: Actually instead of 'favoritism', it is volume of submissions sent which brings John into the Digest almost daily. You only see about half of what John sends in. And unlike some reader/writers here, he has never said a thing to me about stuff of his which wound up in the bit bucket unused. You should have seen enough disagreements between John and I here in the past to realize that if I were to 'play favorites' I could find others more aligned to my points of view with whom to do so. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #207 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13690; 25 Mar 93 2:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09872 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 00:24:00 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01036 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 00:23:07 -0600 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 00:23:07 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303250623.AA01036@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #208 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Mar 93 00:23:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 208 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Comparison of Pricing (Paul Robinson) Caller Identification Catches Kidnapper (Clarinet via Stewart M. Clamen) New Use For a 900 Line (Harold Hallikainen) Florida's Cellular/Pager Coverage (Marshal Perlman) ESN Codes in Cell Phones (Laurence Chiu) Replacement Ringers (Andy Behrens) Help Wanted Setting Up Leased Line - SCOPE-8 (Jerry Krulewicz) MUX Multiple T1's Onto Private Fiber Cheaply? (Ken Stone) Integretel and G. Gordon Liddy (Michael Rosen) Descrambler Plans (Randy Gellens) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 22:29:22 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Subject: Comparison of Pricing I mentioned earlier I upgaded my home phone service from two to four lines. I just got the phone bill so I can give an example for Telecom Digest readers outside the U.S. how much phone service costs. The following sample is used to compare prices for telephone service in the U.S. so that people can see the effective cost of phone service here if they are outside the U.S. Robert A. Heinlein said you can judge the basic wealth of a country by determining two things (1) how much is a loaf of standard bread, and (2) how many hours would a journeyman carpenter have to work to earn enough to buy one. A standard loaf of bread in the Washington DC area ranges from $0.55 to $1.20 depending on whether you want special bread or plain white or wheat. Let me call one 16 ounce loaf of bread to be $0.75. A journeyman carpenter makes about $22.00 an hour, which means it takes him about 2 1/2 minutes. The "minimum wage" which is the floor set by law as the smallest amount an employer can legally pay someone is $4.25 per hour (and State Governments can set this higher.) For the average worker, taxes and payroll contributions eat about 30% of whatever they make. I make aproximately three times this amount. Now, on to the telecom stuff. If someone is in a household in the District of Columbia (Nation's Capital) and doesn't make much money, ($9,000 per year for 1 person, and slightly more for each person in the household, if I remember the ads correctly) they can obtain telephone service for $1 a month. One line only is all a household is allowed to have, and you have to apply for the special rate (I'm certain it's subsidized). This particular service offers unlimited local calling. There are some people that have different (lower) rates because their service is "grandfathered" which means they have an older service which was tariffed when they had the service installed, but isn't available now, but the local authorities require the telco to continue to offer the service to those who had it. For ordinary people, here are the rates in the Maryland Suburbs of DC for residential phone service. A basic line where all outgoing calls are either charged at 9c each or timed at 3c per call and 1.3c per minute, is $5.86 per month. A line with 65 call allotments or $5.90 worth of timed calls, is $8.85 a month. Unlimited residential telephone service is $17.01 a month. C&P Telephone eliminated the surcharge for Touch Tone in its last tariff filing so you get it automatically. A second telephone number (Distinctive Ring), Call Waiting, Three-Way Calling, Speed Calling 8, Speed Calling 30, Call Forwarding, "ultra" Call Forwarding are all extra and range from $1.50 to $6.00 a month, with discounts for taking multiple services. Call Waiting and Three Way costs $5.50, for example. Caller ID (CNID) is $6.50 a month, you buy your own display unit. Included with CNID is "Anonymous Call Rejection" (ACR) where if someone dials *67 to not display their telephone number on a caller-id box, you may optionally tell the switch to reject the call without it ringing your called phone. ACR is available without Caller ID for $3 a month. There are additional taxes and surcharges. Federal and local sales taxes, 911 emergency service and a "subscriber line charge" of $3.50 per line in addition to the regular service rates. Here is what I have at home, and what it costs me (this is transcribed from my phone bill): 1 Residence Line Main-Unlimited calling $17.01 1 Custom Calling - Call Waiting/3Way Calling 5.50 1 Residence Line addl-Unlimited calling 17.01 1 Custom Calling - Ultra Forward 4.50 1 Residence Line addl-Unlimited calling 17.01 1 Residence Line addl-Unlimited calling 17.01 1 Identa Ring-First Dependent number-Residence 4.50 Charge for 3 weeks service (2 lines) 30.35 1/3 of $68.00 for installation of addl lines 22.66 Federal Subscriber Line Charge 14.00 911 Fee: State .10; Local .50 .60 Universal Service Fee .68 Local Surcharge 4.86 Calling Card Calls - C&P 1.54 Taxes: Federal 4.00; State .88 4.88 Total C&P Telephone 162.11 Local Surcharge is obviously a county sales tax. I'm guessing the "universal service fee" is to pay for the deaf tty relay for the overhead costs. So $53.00 of this charge is due to switching from two phone lines to four lines and would not normally be recurring. But what it essentially means is that four phone lines cost roughly $109 a month even if I never send 10c of business to AT&T. But based on the fact that I have an 'extra number' and Call Waiting/3 Way, I have the equivalent of five 'circuits' and five phone numbers. Four regular circuits and one which is createable on request. For those who think that we have poor service here, these are standard POTS dial lines, I can run a modem across them (that's how I'm posting this message). This is not Subscriber Carrier. For those who wanted to know what U.S. phone service costs, well, now you know. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: Stewart M. Clamen Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 12:59:49 EST Subject: Caller Identification Catches Kidnapper Reply-To: clamen+@cs.cmu.edu Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University A recent ClariNet feed carries the following interesting story (redistributed with permission): From: clarinews@clarinet.com ((Hyatt/CJAD/Standard Broadcast News)) Newsgroups: clari.canada.law Keywords: canadian broadcast, police, legal Message-ID: (MIRABEL, Quebec) A Quebec man who allegedly molested his ex-wife and kidnapped his two-year-old daughter last night was found hours later with the help of a new Bell Canada service. Police say the man from Mirabel, northwest of Montreal, called his ex-wife, NOT knowing she had a telephone that displayed the number he was calling from. The woman quickly called police with the number, who found the corresponding address, and proceeded to arrest the man. -- This, and all articles in this news hierarchy are Copyright 1993 by the wire service or information provider and licenced to Clarinet Communications Corp. for distribution. Except for free samples, only paid subscribers may access these articles. Any unauthorized access, reproduction or transmission is strictly prohibited. We will reward the first provider of information that helps us stop violators of this copyright. Send reports to reward@clarinet.com. (Note that while we do like to know about people who do the odd reposting to USENET without permission, rewards are not always provided for reports on that, since's it's usually obvious.) -- Stewart M. Clamen Internet: clamen@cs.cmu.edu School of Computer Science UUCP: uunet!"clamen@cs.cmu.edu" Carnegie Mellon University Phone: +1 412 268 2145 5000 Forbes Avenue Fax: +1 412 681 5739 Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891, USA ------------------------------ From: hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: New Use for a 900 Line Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 19:31:56 GMT A local AM station has a new format and a new use for 900- lines. The station is calling itself "Radio Home Shopping" and running ads 24 hours per day. I seem to recall hearing of a McLendon station (I think they used the call KADS) doing something similar in the 1960s. What's unique about this station is that it's all automated. A member of the public calls a 900 number and reads his/her ad into the system. Various ad classifications are available, which determines how the ads are grouped on the air (a little like classified ads, but the classifications seem rather broad). Each ad runs a bunch of times. I imagine the system automatically times out the ads after they've run for so many hours or so, but I don't know. I listened to it for a while last night. Most of the ads were individuals buying or selling garage sale type items, but there were a few business advertising their products and services, a few employment ads (an alarm company looking for an installer, someone looking for a diesel mechanic, someone looking for a job posted his "radio resume"). The ads run $3.00 for the first minute and $2.00 for each additional minute. The station is the first commercial station I worked for, back in 1970. They are still running the Bauer 707 transmitter that we built as a kit. I spoke with the owner of the station (who I've known since the early 70's) yesterday. He describes it as "a different kind of radio" where you have to get used to a little dead air and some clicks and pops. Actually, the system seemed to do real well. Listening to the station is a little like getting home and pressing the playback button on your answering machine, except that you've got hours of messages. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI [Moderator's Note: Some questions: What do they do about the crackpots who call in with obscene and/or libelous messages? Doesn't anyone screen it at all? How are station ID's handled? Are they on a cart which just kicks in once an hour or so and gives the station name? What happens when there are slow periods in the incoming phone calls, such as three or four in the morning? Do they just play the ones they have more often to keep from having dead air; do they have dead air when traffic is very slow or do they have other filler stuff to play, or music perhaps? Speaking of crackpots and pranksters, what prevents a person from calling in with the recorded audio from some other station or recorded music, etc. Sounds nice, but they must have someone there to keep the listener/participants under control. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) Subject: Florida's Cellular/Pager Coverage Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 02:04:07 GMT I was looking for a pager today, and was curious if anyone knows of a company in Florida that covered a large area for paging? I looked at a few today, and the coverage area was joke ... just a few big cities and that was it!!!! IT WAS SAD! The south end of the coverage area is where I live! So if I go a mile south, I'm a goner! HOW CAN THEY DO THIS? I don't expect coverage in the Everglades, but when I lived in California, I had coverage from Tijuana Mexico to Catalina Island to the Hoover Dam to Sacramento ... how can Florida's coverage be so BAD! I know less people are here, but we are still here!! HELP! Marshal Perlman Internet: perlman@cs.fit.edu Florida Institute of Technology IRC: Squawk Melbourne, Florida Private Pilot, ASEL 407/768-8000 x8435 Goodyear Blimp Club Member ------------------------------ From: LCHIU@HOLONET.NET Subject: ESN Codes in Cell Phones Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 03:35:45 GMT I just read something which worried me a bit. Basically what was said was, a cell phone designed to be used in one country cannot be used in another, even if the other country has the same system (AMPS. E-TACS GSM etc.). This is because the ESN has a country code designator in it (the third couple of numbers in the ESN). Is this true? Can anyone shed any light on this? I am worried since I was planning to use a cell phone from another country in the US (same system). Note I wasn't plan to roam (which I have been told is possible) but to setup a new account completely with a SF Bay Area provider. Thanks, Laurence Chiu lchiu@holonet.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 11:59:21 -0500 (EST) From: Andy Behrens Subject: Replacement Ringers I work in an office with lots of telephones, and sometimes it's hard to tell whose phone is ringing. I've tried swapping bells, and that helps -- but not enough. The Graybar catalog has chimes and buzzers. Those would work, but I wonder if there's anything more interesting available. (I once saw a phone that quacked like a duck when a call came in. That's the sort of thing I'm looking for). Our phone system uses ordinary (90 volt) ringing. Andy ------------------------------ From: wireworks!krulewicz@rutgers.edu Subject: Help Needed Setting Up Leased Line - SCOPE-8 Date: 24 Mar 93 19:27:04 GMT Organization: Wireworks Corporation Help, I am looking for a recomendation regarding a leased line. The situation is that I need a line from area code 908-686 exchange to 908-730 exchange for data use. The 686 end is in NJ Bell territory but the 730 end is in "United Territory" (a Sprint Company.) Previously, I had an OSNA circuit which tied into electronic key system on the 686 end. United had a problem because the location was, I think, 7.5mi from the CO and they had to do some four wire stuff and then put equipment on site to convert the four wire back to two. The circuit worked OK for voice, as long as it didn't rain, but was a disaster with a modem. Sometimes OK for 2400 baud but never for 9600. United absolutely refused to improve the line. They said, "Hay, voice grade. Can you hear the person on the other end?" So I had it taken out. Now, I need to put something in that will do 9600 baud and I guess I'll forget about voice. The NJ Bell sales rep is talking about a SCOPE 8 line, 2 wire, full duplex, wants to know if I need C1, C2, C4 or D1 conditioning. I'm planing on using ZyXEL U-1496E Modems. Is this the best way to do this? Is this the least expensive way to do this? Is there any way to get a good circuit from United Telephone? Thanks, Jerry Krulewicz ------------------------------ Subject: MUX Multiple T1's Onto Private Fiber Cheaply? Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 20:49:16 -0800 From: Ken Stone Well, in my last query I learned a lot about how the LEC's deliver T3. Thanks to all who helped out ... bottom line is that there is no really realistic way to buy T3 other than at the electrical interface or at least not from PacBell. They will sell at the optical interface but the only way you can unbundle the signal off the fiber is to buy whatever MUX equipment they spec ... what a mess. The concept of single CO T3 or greater bandwidth at a reasonable price just hasn't arrived around here yet. Next subject ... I'm looking for suggestions on MUX'ing several (6-10) T1's onto private fiber to run across the street. Since I can spec the fiber and its mine (ie dark), I'm looking at running FDDI for high speed data but I still need several loops for an NT RPE unit. I've so far seen devices from ADC and Laurus? that put a single T1 onto a pair of fibers but that seems rather silly ... these devices all seem oriented at long distance as they are single mode whereas what I'm looking for would just MUX 10 or so full T1's with no compression or tricks or whatever onto a pair of either multi-mode or single mode fibers and be done with it. Any ideas ? Ken Stone ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Integretel and G. Gordon Liddy Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 04:51:10 GMT Today while listening to the G. Gordon Liddy show I heard a woman call up describing a situation where her son called an 800 number where they then called back collect and she found a 12 minute phone call for $60 on her bill. She said the company was Integretel. I know I've read about them on TELECOM Digest before I just don't remember the details. What scams have they been involved in before? I'd like to become more informed before trying to address this on his show. By the way, I called on Monday and got the number to Liddy's BBS in Virginia. It is 703/620-9881. Mike [Moderator's Note: Integretel is a company which bills for a large number of small-time information providers with a variety of topics to discuss, including but not limited to sex-talk with strangers on the long distance phone late at night. Some operate on 900 lines, some operate on 800 lines with collect callbacks. Integretel also does the billing and provides the (alternate) operator services for many COCOT services. As an interexchange carrier, they send billing tapes to the local telcos which is how people get charged for Integretel services on the long distance portion of their monthly bill from the local telco. They do not use the AT&T/Sprint/MCI/local telco data base for billed number screening but they do maintain their own and will add anyone to it on request by calling their office: 800-736-7500. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Date: 24 MAR 93 02:13 Subject: Descrambler Plans I realize this may be a bit off the usual topic, but the readers of this list are my best bet at answering this question, I think. A friend of mine is (dis)served by a cable company which insists on scrambling non-premium channels (such as Nick). They supply a box, but it exhibits obnoxious engineering, such as not passing any signal when off (instead of letting the full cable pass through) and refusing to work for even short periods of time without its authorization signal. Because of this, the box must be placed before the VCR, and must be on in order to view anything. This makes it impossible to view one show and tape another without an A/B switch, which is a hassle. It also makes it annoying to use. What my friend would like is either a remote A/B switch, or a descrambler for non-premium channels (not fraud, because he is paying for them). If anyone can send information on where to get, or how to build such devices, he would very much appreciate it. Please send all replies to me alone, so as not to annoy Pat or the readership. 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 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #208 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17504; 25 Mar 93 4:56 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07271 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 02:24:53 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26743 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 02:24:01 -0600 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 02:24:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303250824.AA26743@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #209 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Mar 93 02:24:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 209 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson National Telecom Newgroups (Nigel Allen) Seeking Test Standards-Hearing Aid Compatible Phones (Paul Cook) Hearing Aid Compatible Handsets (Lee Sweet) GTE Mobilnet Switch Cut (John Higdon) Intra-LATA, Inter-State Regulation (Steve Forrette) Cellular Demonstrator Device (eic@bselab.bse.com) Caller-Pays Numbers and Exchanges (Dan Borkowski) Telephone Handset Speaker (Anton Mitchell) Experiences in Telecommuting Redefined (Bill Gough) Re: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good? (Laurence Chiu) Re: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good? (Robert Eden) Orange Card Advertisements (Joshua E. Muskovitz) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Nigel Allen Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: National Telecom Newgroups Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto A while ago I posted a message wondering about national telecommunications-related newsgroups. I don't want anyone to stop reading the TELECOM Digest, but I thought it would be interesting to see some telecommunications-related discussions that weren't intended to be distributed worldwide. The United Kingdom has uk.telecom. Australia has aus.comms. The messages I saw in aus.comms included several on the pagers-in-schools thread that started here, as well as a directory of people active in telecommunications research in Australia and New Zealand. As well, any country's *.misc or *.general newsgroup can be expected to have a certain amount of complaining about the local telecommun- ications carriers. Canada's can.general and can.politics have had vigorous discussions about various Bell Canada initiatives and the Quebec Yellow Pages controversy that we have discussed here. Even if you don't live in Australia or the United Kingdom, your site may receive these newsgroups, or may easily be able to obtain a feed. I read aus.comms on a site in Toronto. Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada nigel.allen@canrem.com Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 23:28 GMT From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: Seeking Test Standards-Hearing Aid Compatible Phones Can anyone recommend a source for test standards for hearing aid compatible phones? Do Bellcore, EIA or FCC publish these? Paul Cook 206-881-7000 Proctor & Associates MCI Mail 399-1080 15050 NE 36th St. fax: 206-885-3282 Redmond, WA 98052-5378 3991080@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: decrsc!lee@uunet.UU.NET (Lee Sweet) Subject: Hearing Aid Compatible Handsets Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 10:17:15 -0500 (EST) We've received several memos from our PBX vendor (Rolm) saging that _all_ handsets in use by corporations with more than 20 employees _must_ be hearing aid compatible by May 1, 1993 [under 20 employees have until May 1, 1994]. This is an FCC regulation. (I've seen the text; the relevant part is about ten words that says the above.) Does this supersede/override ADA requirements? The Americans with Disabilities Act (exact name?) says (to quote our legal counsel) that all that is needed is to have "public" areas phones and phones used by hearing-impaired people to be so equipped. So, my management feels no need to convert every set, being covered by legal opinion. But: Rolm (and NATA) seem to be very concerned that we know we are 'supposed' to have all handsets converted by 5/1. Part of this may be to relieve themselves of any liability if customers are found to be in non-compliance. (Of course, they also want to sell hundreds of HAC handsets ;-) Anybody have the straight legal scoop? Anybody have any comments on the implementation of this? For example, we have almost zero contact with the off-the -street public, being a software VAR. We do have clients taking training classes in-house, and will have no problem with the two "public" phones that they use. But, 200 handsets for desks that do not have hearing-impaired people? At $40/each (or so), that's big bucks! I also have no problem with keeping a few extras around and swapping out a handset if/when we hire a person that wants such a HAC handset. That's only natural. BTW, I, myself, am the only person we employ who could be classified as hearing-impaired: I wear hearing aids, but find no benefit from HAC handsets, which are magnetically coupled to some hearing aids, FYI. Rolm, for one vendor, always equips _every_ phone with incoming volume controls, which I find very acceptable and preferable to magnetic coupling in a computer (EMF) noisy environment (:-)! Obviously, having system-wide volume controls makes all of this even less logical. What is everybody doing about this? (And, for the non-USA folks, this applies to USA only. I don't know what your countries have done/plan to do; might be interesting to find out.) Lee Sweet Internet - lee@datatel.com Chief Systems Consultant Phone - 703-968-4661 Datatel, Inc. FAX - 703-968-4625 4375 Fair Lakes Court uucp - uunet!decrsc!lee Fairfax, Virginia 22033 USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 18:19 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: GTE Mobilnet Switch Cut On April 2 (Friday night), GTE Mobilnet San Francisco will be retiring its Motorola switch. As you will recall, some years ago after experiencing problem after problem, failure after failure, GTE told Motorola to shape up or ship out. The new At&T switch is replacing the Motorola units system wide and has already been turned up in some areas. As a result of this cut, many dozens of channel banks will be pulled from service, as the AT&T switch will utilize the digital cell site interconnections directly. The schedule calls for a flash cut on Friday night, giving crews the entire weekend to iron out any problems before Monday peak business traffic. 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: Wed, 24 Mar 93 18:47:26 -0800 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Intra-LATA, Inter-State Regulation WDoes anyone know who regulates the tariffs for intra-LATA, inter-state calling? Is it the FCC or the local PUCs? Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: eic@bselab.bls.com Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 09:23 EST Subject: Cellular Demonstrator Device I have an old AT&T cellular demostrator unit, KS-23141-L1. The unit is a grey box that is placed below a sales booth and allows an old AMPS-style cellular (the ones with the IEEE-488 connector) to connect to a POTS line. A POTS line plugs into an RJ-11 on the box, and the AMPS cellular telephone connects to an IEEE-488 connector. The sales person could then demo the cellular handset in markets where there wasn't any cellular service. I am particularly interested in obtaining any promotional material, BSPs, etc. I can be reached vial E-MAIL at: eic@bselab.bse.com ------------------------------ From: dborkowski@gte.com (Dan Borkowski) Subject: Caller-Pays Numbers and Exchanges Date: 24 Mar 93 14:23:51 GMT Organization: GTE Laboratories New England Telephone just announced their CIRCUIT9 service, which appears to be an attempt to add more caller-pays numbers and to separate business info services from adult info services (is that what we're calling them these days?). They've added the 920 and 554 exchanges to the list of caller-pays exchanges. NET claims that a caller must be informed if the minimum charge for the call exceeds $1 or if the charge for any minute is over $1. From the information I have, the following exchanges are classified as caller pays in the NET area: adult - 976, 940, 554; group talk - 550, business - 920. Of course, 900-xxx-xxxx numbers are here as well. Is each telco free to set up their own caller-pays exchanges? Does Bellcore make recommendations in this area? Does the FCC regulate this practice? I recall hearing of a problem several years ago when 976 numbers were becoming popular; NY Tel assigned 956 instead, and there was plenty of exploitation. Are there any national requirements regarding notification of charges? Dan Borkowski GTE Laboratories Incorporated dborkowski@gte.com ------------------------------ Organization: City University of New York Date: Wednesday, 24 Mar 1993 02:57:49 EST From: EH1QC@CUNYVM.BITNET Subject: Telephone Handset Speaker I have a question about the telephone handset speaker. What I would like to know is what is the varistor (?) for which is bridged across the terminals of the speaker in the handset? Also does anyone have any recomendations for any books on designing telecom equipment? Thanks. Anton Mitchell [Moderator's Note: That thing across the earpiece terminals helps keep obnoxious popping, crackling and other noises as a minimum. You can remove it and see if you like the sound better. Gently cut one side leaving room to reconnect it, then gently push it out of the way. I don't think you will like the way the phone sounds, and you will soon get annoyed hearing the loud 'pop' each time you depress the hook. When you have decided it was better the way it was, gently push the thing back in place and make certain the two parts of the leg which you clipped are touching each other. Drop a tiny bit of solder there if you wish to keep it in place. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wgough@kean.ucs.mun.ca Subject: Experiences in Telecommuting Redefined Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 11:35:53 GMT In article , I write: > I am looking for information on distance technology, specifically on > telecommuting, distributed workplaces, and distance education. Even > more specifically than that, I am looking at how people use distance > technology at work. So, if anyone can tell me how telecommuting fits > into their lives, please let me know. As well, if anyone in charge of > telecommuting could describe their experiences in implementing it > (good and bad), it would be appreciated. If you could relate the > problems you have had (from the views of either management or staff), > so much the better. > Please e-mail me your responses. I know this is a pretty broad set of > questions; if there is any amibiguity, let me know, and I'll try to > clarify them. I have had a couple of replies, so far; thanks to those who did respond. However, I have been asked for clarification of definitions. Here goes ... Telecommuting: "home office" concept, i.e. dialing in and doing work at home, for at least part of the day. An example would be a technician who dials in first thing in the morning to check what service calls he/she needs to attend to, and leaves from home instead of going to work and learning of the day's schedule. Distributed workplace: Using links to communicate with and share work between individuals in different buildings. Basically, a business that spans more than one building or geographic location. Distance education: Teaching by CAI **over a distance**, teleconferencing, etc. We have a district ed centre here, and I have checked other newsgroups for information, so there is no need to direct me to other sources. What I am looking for here is maybe a training department organized a course that was taught to several sites simultaneously. Another suggestion was to ask the opinions of those who use distance technology in any way in their daily lives, working or leisure, so I am. I hope this clears things up. Thanks, Bill Gough (wgough@kean.ucs.mun.ca) Faculty of Business Administration Memorial University of Newfoundland St. John's, NF Canada ------------------------------ From: LCHIU@HOLONET.NET Subject: Re: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good? Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 04:29:26 GMT In a article to comp.dcom.telecom, Pauls@ll.mit.edu had the following to say about MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good?: > I would like to know what people think about MCI's Friends and Family > program. I always thought it was a bunch of bull (mostly because I > don't trust much that comes my way by pushy phone salesmen with deals > that sound too good to be true and end up their speech with "well > shall I sign you up then Mr. Pauls?" I have always used AT&T as my LD > carrier, and I have been glad to see that AT&T gets a good deal of > respect on this newsgroup. So I would like to know the following: > Is MCI really less expensive than AT&T? If so, by how much? > Aside from price, which is better and how? (i.e., operators, clarity ... > What is the F&F plan and does it really save me 20% as the MCI > salesman told me last night? > I have heard something about keeping AT&T as my primary carrier while > still taking advantage of MCI F&F. Is this truly possible? Is it a > good idea? > [Moderator's Note: The truth is, long distance rates are all very > close. There are small differences, and each carrier has some > 'gimmick' the others are lacking. You can have MCI/F&F as a secondary > carrier while keeping AT&T if that is your wish. As you may know, not > long ago I reached an agreement to sell 'affinity 1+' long distance > with a company that resells all the major carriers. Mine runs between > 14-17 cents per minute depending on the package. With mine, monthly > residuals are returned to TELECOM Digest to help offset my costs in > moderating the news group. Over the weekend, I mailed out information > packages to everyone who had requested one, along with details on the > 800 service I offer. People should have the packages Tuesday or Wednes- > day. So if you feel there is no substantial difference in carriers > price/service wise, then passing your business to me will make a *big > difference* where I'm concerned. I have just been through this whole exercise. I had AT&T as ny 1+ carrier but found MCI had better rates, especially with F&F to international destinations (I make very few domestic LD calls). So I signed up with MCI and their F&F plan plus their Friends Around the World (I think it was called that) but via 10222, not changing my 1+ carrier. The good thing about F&F internationally is you don't have to worry about your friends being hassled by MCI to become subscribers -- clearly they cannot. MCI was quite happy to bill me directly and now I can get additional 20% discounts on calls to two international destinations. Interestingly I received $20 worth of vouchers from MCI recently in the form of cheques which I could use to pay some of my bill. There were three cheques for $5, $5 and $10 to be used on three consecutive bills. Trouble was they required endorsement on the back authorising the local Telco to switch me over to MCI completely. I called to complain and the MCI operator just credited my account for $20. Laurence Chiu Walnut Creek, CA lchiu@holonet.net ------------------------------ From: Robert Eden (817)897-0491 Subject: Re: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good? Date: 24 Mar 93 08:47:23 CST Organization: Texas Utilities, Glen Rose TX In article , Richard Pauls writes: > I would like to know what people think about MCI's Friends and Family > program. I'm pretty happy with it. Combined with their one-hour minimum calling plan, I pay around .08 a minute for out of state calls. Best rate I've found. When you add someone to your circle, ask them not to solicit them and MCI will oblidge. They're pretty sensitve to that with all the bad publicity. (Friends who were called in the past didn't say MCI gave them too hard a sell) F&F will work even with MCI set up as an alternate carrier (they set up a special billing account (forgot the name)) A friend of mine has this set up at her parents house. Her parents don't want to switch from AT&T, but she wants F&F rates calling home. In addition she can make LD calls from there and have the bill come directly to her. Robert Eden 817-897-0491 Glen Rose, TX Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station robert@cpvax.cpses.tu.com ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ politicese for a nuke plant ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 14:49:17 EST From: Joshua E. Muskovitz Subject: Orange Card Advertisements Not to harp on this, but it is getting a little tiring seeing all of Pat's adverts for the "Telecom Digest Long Distance Company". I hope this doesn't become like public radio, where there are lots of pseudo-ads from the sponsors/supporters... While I like the idea of funneling off some profits into TD, I don't see any kind of accountability except the public perception of our Esteemed Moderator. Josh [Moderator's Note: A few days ago, a fellow from the Annenberg/CPB Foundation wrote an article elsewhere on my new endeavors and his conclusion was there should be a fund raising drive, ala public radio. As he put it, I could not/should not expect people to believe I was impartial as long as I sold telecom-related products and services. I replied asking him if we were to assume National Public Radio was always impartial or if programming decisions had *never, ever* been made on the basis of reactions from the most deep-pocketed patrons of NPR or the direction the stink from Capitol Hill was blowing from one day to the next. He did not choose to answer that question, instead saying he was sorry if I was offended by his comments. I told him I hear Annenberg's name so often on NPR it would never occur to me that they did not have some influence over the programming. NPR staffers have to eat, and so do I, so what was his beef? I think what some of the Usenet-Gods are disturbed about is not so much what I am doing, but the fact that *I said publicly what I am doing*. Any number of other Moderators are subsidized by their employer to one extent or another: they use their employer's equipment and telephone lines, or perhaps their employer specifically gives them time each day to work on their Digest. I never had that luxury. Any number of Moderators' .signatures include mention of their place of employment. Are we to assume they are impartial? I don't know, simply because I don't evaluate the work of other Moderators. I assume they are doing what they believe is in their best interest while maintaining their ethical standards, the same as myself. I assume their readers tell them what they think, as telecom readers tell me. If I were to conduct a 'fund raising drive' ala National Public Radio and beg for donations in exchange for T-shirts, coffee mugs, and luncheon dates with members of the Lyric Opera (doesn't NPR feel their programming merits the help in its own right without having to give away all those premiums to bribe people?) then I would feel quite guilty and want to make an accounting of the money received. I choose instead to sell things I believe to be of value while keeping TELECOM Digest *as nearly as possible* editorially independent. Totally inde- pendent? Of course not ... don't be silly. If I can't pay the phone bill and buy my $2.99 Value Meal every day, then the Digest is as good as dead anyway. I'm not using the Digest to sell my services, I am selling the services in order to keep the Digest alive and well. Would the Usenet-Gods have liked it better had I done the whole thing on the sneak and kept quiet about it? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #209 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19626; 25 Mar 93 19:56 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28542 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:06:20 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12455 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:04:59 -0600 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:04:59 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303252304.AA12455@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #211 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Mar 93 17:05:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 211 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Second Line Installation (Steven King) Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (John Higdon) Re: Washington Times Blows It (Lars Poulsen) Re: Washington Times Blows It (Arthur Rubin) Re: Washington Times Blows It (Greg Andrews) Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (David Lesher) Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager (Samuelson S. Rehman) Re: Answering Machine Features (Scott Coleman) Re: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed (Scott Coleman) Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Andrew Klossner) Re: ATM Networks (was Telecom and the Blizzard of '93) (Toby Nixon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: king@rtsg.mot.com (Steven King, Software Archaeologist) Subject: Re: Second Line Installation Reply-To: king@rtsg.mot.com Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 20:19:17 GMT snyderra@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu (Bob Snyder) publicly declared: > How much should it cost to have a second line installed? I'm going to > be moving in a little bit less than a month, and I want to have a > second line put in for data communications at the new apartment. How much *should* it cost, or how much *does* it cost? Two very different questions, I think. I'll try to answer the latter and leave the former to the Telco Philosophers. A few years back, here in Illinois Bell territory, I requested that a second line be installed to my apartment. The service call was a flat $50. (I think an additional $30 would have been added if I wanted the second line to have a separate bill sent, instead of both lines on the same bill.) For the $50 installation Illinois Bell brought dialtone to the point of demarcation in the building. The demarc is what separates the physical wiring that you (or your apartment managers) own from the physical wiring the telco owns. Anything goes wrong on their side of the demarc, they fix it. Anything goes wrong on your side, you fix it or pay them top dollar to have them do it. Some (or all?) telcos will be glad to sell you an insurance policy that will get you free service on your side of the demarc if anything goes wrong. Illinois Bell calls this plan "Linebacker" and charges about $8/month for it. All Illinois Bell really delivers for this $50 a pair of wires with dialtone to your your premises. The installer had a little time on his hands that day and went beyond the call of duty to ensure that one of the spare pairs at the demarc actually terminated at one the spare pairs behind my wall plate. To make a long story short, none did. We came to the conclusion that they had all been cut somewhere within the walls. Since this was on my side of the demarc the service man (rightly) told me that he could fix it for $35/half-hour, or that I should get my apartment manager to fix it. I opted for the latter, of course. My apartment manager figured since it was phone wires it was telco's problem. Naturally, he wouldn't let me pull cable through his walls myself. Telco said that since it was inside the building and wasn't covered by Linebacker it was my manager's problem. Neither relented, and I cancelled the second line. I did so fully expecting to have to eat the $50 service charge. After all, the man did come out and bring dialtone to the demarc. But when I called, the service rep noticed that the line had never been used. I explained what had happened, and she scratched the $50 installation fee! Illinois Bell's marketing/pricing department is extortionist, but I've never had bad service from them. > New Jersey Bell wants $45 for the visit, plus $16 for each 15 minutes > of work done, with weekend rates "significantly higher." The operator > I spoke with suggested finding another contractor to install the line. All this is the long way around to say that New Jersey Bell's quoted figures are probably in line. The $45 is probably to bring dialtone to the demarc, and the $16/15 minutes is to bring it the rest of the way to your phone. If you can do that work yourself, do it! If you can convince your apartment manager to do it, better still. If not, think about just how much you really want that second line compared to how much it'd cost to move to a different apartment complex ... Steven King, Motorola Cellular (king@rtsg.mot.com) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 12:45 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada Terry (T.A.) Cooper writes: > It is interesting that the first point on your list of comparing the > US phone system is price. In my book price is a consideration but > reliability far outweighs it as a factor in determining the quality of > a phone system. Reliability is assumed. Why bring it up when it is not an issue? I challenge anyone to provide any valid, authenticated data that even hints that telephone service is anything less than world-class reliable in the United States. Or that reliability has suffered as a result of divestiture. From my vantage point, just the opposite is true. Systems are MORE reliable and they are easier to fix if necessary. > I live far enough from "civilization" that I consider my phone a > very important safety item. I'll pay a bit extra to know that my > phone will work when I pick it up. But in the US, you get that kind of reliablity without paying "a bit extra". Are you now saying that US telephone service is so bad that you cannot even depend on the telephone to summon emergency aid? This is nonsense. > I'd like to provide you with data to would highlight my opinion, but > any data that I have is confidential information that cannot be > published. Besides, as the disclaimer says it's just my opinion. Considering the propaganda that I have seen from up north, your opinion is understandable. But I would suggest that you question very seriously any data that appears to support the premise that the US telephone network has somehow gone down the drain since divestiture. Particularly note that most of it comes from Bell Canada itself and from the union. These are hardly unimpeachable sources when it comes to matters that would upset the status quo. 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: lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 04:53:13 GMT In article phil@rochgte.fidonet.org writes: >> By the way, on a related note, Friends & Family customers can now >> add the Capitol Switchboard to their calling circle if they'd like -- >> they are MCI customers. The Capitol number is (202) 224-3121. I thought Friends and Family had to be residential listings? If business listings are fair game, I have a slew of numbers I want to try; including some that I just want to dump some telemarketing on. In article hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > Which reminds me, I heard on NPR's Morning Edition that > Clinton has an email account. It sounded like a Compuserve number, > but I was not awake enough to write it down. Anyone know the email > address? Yes and no. The campaign was wired both coming and going, and they have left that infrastructure up. Mostly the campaign volunteers know how to get to that. After inauguration, they have intended to set up "public input" mailboxes, but I think they were totally unprepared for the response. The one I remember was "clintonpz@AOL.COM". There is also one on compuserve, but you know how un-memorable the C$ addresses are. Anyway, whatever comes in is eventually dumped in hardcopy and routed the same way as incoming papermail, so you must include a postal address in your message. Meanwhile, there are several NetWare workgroups in the White House, and some more of those plus a PROFS system in the EOB. The new team is trying to bring TCP/IP technology in, so they can send email to HOUSE.GOV at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. We had an animated visit by a White House team to our booth at InterOp East; they wanted to see our NetHoppers. We woulk LOVE to sell them a bunch. But the big problem is figuring out how to process thousands of email messages in a meaningful way. They are working hard at figuring it out, but it will take time. Note that even though the house has been on the internet for three years, you still can't get Leon Panetta's email address... (He used to be the representative from SLO, I'm told.) Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer Internet E-mail: lars@CMC.COM MC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l Telephone: +1-805-968-4262 Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083 TeleFAX: +1-805-968-8256 ------------------------------ From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It Date: 25 Mar 93 16:33:07 GMT Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) In trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tim Russell) writes: > hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: >> (Anybody know President Clinton's new email address?) > That address is CLINTONPZ, both on Compuserve and America Online. CLINTONPZ is not a valid Compuserve address. I think the address quoted in an earlier message was correct for Compuserve. Disclaimer: I haven't sent a message to any of Clinton's email addresses. (I don't think he'd listen to me, anyway. I voted for Marou.) Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews) Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 23:57:41 GMT trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tim Russell) writes: > hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: >> (Anybody know President Clinton's new email address?) > That address is CLINTONPZ, both on Compuserve and America Online. Perhaps it is on America Online, but Compuserve uses strictly numeric User IDs. They're two octal numbers separated by a comma. Mine, for example, is 76004,1647. (There is a gateway for exchanging e-mail between the Internet and Compuserve. The domain is "@compuserve.com", and the comma should be changed to a period to form the Internet address. I.e. 76004.1647@ compuserve.com would reach my mailbox from the internet. The gateway's software swaps the comma and period as necessary.) Greg Andrews - gerg@netcom.com - 76004.1647@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 19:32:19 EST Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex Dan said: > I first just dialed 8 + 0 + number and heard "BONG Comtel" So I hung > up and started to dial 10ATT and as soon as I dialed the "0" I got > some intercept saying "no, no". So, I dialed 8 + 0 again and just > entered my AT&T calling card number after the "Comtel" and lo and > behold I heard "thank you for using AT&T" ! I've also run into AOS's that when presented with a non-ATT card, would route the call via Sleeze-Carrier. But then, if you entered an ATT card, it bounced you to the DeathStar Gong. I guess the trick: a) avoids calls abandoned by those smart enough to use a DeathStar card. b) In doing so, also avoids training customers to 10xxx-dial; thus giving a chance to rip off anyone using another card. wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: sam@ssr.nca.com From: sam@ssr.nca.com (Samuelson S. Rehman) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:38:19 -0800 Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager mike_berger@qms1.life.uiuc.edu (Mike Berger) wrote: >> In article , Steven Warner > com> wrote: >> Android Rubin writes: >>> I would like to know what special characters must be sent to >>> enable silent pages, and to have pages from an information service >>> show up in the proper bin. (ie, second display line). First of all, I guess you are trying to send a page to an address in POCSAG but you don't want the pager to beep, but just store the page. You can usually do this by setting the function bits (A-D, also know as the tone) in the address codeword. Most pagers uses this set of sub-addresses for diffrerent operation modes. For example, some pagers use tone A for numeric only, B for numeric but no beep, C for tone only and D for alphanumeric. But some other pagers uses one of the four tones as maildrop addresses. As you can see, it is very inconsistent. For an Advisor, the tones can be programmed by software. According to this manual "Motolora Radio Service Software" I am reading now, you can set a tone or any one of the 16 addresses to beep or not, or even beep at a different tone. As far as I know, by default all addresses beeps. This software is only for paging system developers and paging service providers. You might wanna try to call you service provider and see if that would program the pagers for you. >> The copy of the spec that I have is vague about using fields 1 and 2 >> for anything but ID and message respectively. And before you ask, I >> got my protocol spec under a non-disclosure agreement, so I can't post >> or send a copy. I don't think the ID field would help. According to the latest Glenyare Telocator Alphanumeric input Protocol spec, you simply cannot modify the tone, the paging terminal forces a mapping from the the customer database, using the RIC code as the key. You will need a direct TNPP or other protocol to specify the page tone. I think the easiest way to do this, if you have to use Advisors, is to program an address just for "silent pages". If you tell me your paging service provider's name, I might be able to tell you if they can or even will program it for you. Best Regards... Samuelson S. Rehman {Systems Programmer - RnD.NCA, Director of NIS Systems} Newspager Corp. of America voice:(415)873-4422 | fax:(415)873-4424 | email:sam@nca.com,sam@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: khan@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 11:53:11 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana ljbartel@naomi.b23b.ingr.com (Les Bartel) writes: > I am in the market for an answering machine, and would like the > opinions of those in the telecom group on what constitutes a > reasonable answering machine. I am interested in a low-cost solution, > but a general discussion of features and good/bad/mediocre brands is > welcome. Here are my criteria: * Should use two full-sized cassettes - microcassettes are more fragile and have lower sound quality, and two tapes means the machine can switch quickly from outgoing message (OGM) to recording the incoming message (ICM); with a 1-tape machine it has to fast-forward past the other ICMs on the tape before it can record the new ICM, which may be a long pause if you get lots of messages. * Should have DTMF "beeperless" remote control of most if not all functions. * Should have a decent user-changeable security passcode of at least two digits and preferably three. The machines with a single digit code preset at the factory would take at most ten tries before some telecracker could access your phone messages. The code should be changeable in case it is ever compromised, i.e. someone sees you punch it in (a process which I believe is known as "shoulder surfing") or your roommate moves out and you no longer want him to be able to retrieve messages from your machine. * Should have a sensor which can detect that an extension phone has been taken off-hook, so if you pick up while the machine is handling an incoming call it will instantly drop the line instead of blindly playing the OGM into your ear and then recording your subsequent conversation. * Toll Saver is a must (although our Moderator probably disagrees with this! ;-) * Time and Date Stamping of ICMs - it's always nice to know WHEN a message came in, and you can't always count upon the caller to tell you in their message. As for which machines have these features, my Panasonic KX-T1470 has them all and more, and I paid just over $100 for it a couple of years ago. It's been rock-steady reliable as long as I've owned it. Scott Coleman tmkk@uiuc.edu [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area where the tariffs were concerned. What is the difference between saving on tolls by not answering the phone for a certain number of rings as a way to pass a message to the caller and not answering the phone for a certain number of rings until you are in a position to talk to the caller, ala Larry King? What is the difference between saving on tolls in this way or saving on tolls by passing coded messages in the form of bogus collect phone calls to/from non-existent names? PAT] ------------------------------ From: khan@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) Subject: Re: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 11:56:53 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) writes: > s3ung@sms.business.uwo.ca (Simoun S. Ung) writes: >> I am looking for 152Mhz and 156 MHz pagers. I have been told that >> only China uses these frequencies. > Florida uses 152.XXX MHZ. As does Urbana-Champaign, Illinois. Motorola does have an office of some sort here -- you might wish to contact them. Scott Coleman tmkk@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted Date: 25 Mar 93 21:51:26 GMT Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon > "B carriers are obligated to let you pick which long-distance > carrier you use, while the A's are not." GTE Mobilnet, the B carrier in Portland Oregon, offers only AT&T as default LD carrier. Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) ------------------------------ From: tnixon@microsoft.com (Toby Nixon) Subject: Re: ATM Networks (was Telecom and the Blizzard of '93) Date: 25 Mar 93 21:22:05 GMT Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA In article our Moderator wrote: > [Moderator's Note: Actually, we who are customers of First National > Bank of Chicago have had debit cards available to us for about five > years now. Our debit cards are called 'Banking Cards' and they work > like cash station cards but they also have a Master Card logo on > them and work that way also. I use mine all over town, and in cases > where I ordered something through the mail where a credit card was > requested, I've given my Master Card debit card number instead. It has > always worked fine. A word of caution. My understanding is that the federal laws which require banks to credit you for disputed charges on credit cards DO NOT APPLY to debit cards. If you order something over the phone and give them your debit card number, and the charge shows up on your bank statement but the merchandise never shows up at your door, the bank is under no obligation to credit your account and investigate the charge, as they would be with a credit card. Perhaps Brad Hicks can confirm this. I always use my "real" Visa card when placing phone orders, and use by debit card only when I have the merchandise in hand (like at the grocery store). Toby ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #211 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19704; 25 Mar 93 19:58 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28904 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:02:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17275 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:01:43 -0600 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:01:43 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303252301.AA17275@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #210 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Mar 93 17:01:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 210 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Jason Hunsaker) Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (John Higdon) Re: Touch-Tone For Everyone in DC Metro Area (Carl Oppedahl) Re: No 900 in Louisiana? (William Bryant Faust, IV) Re: AmeriVox Debit Card (Steve Forrette) Re: Telephones in the Army in the Korean War (Ed Greenberg) Re: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics (John R. Levine) Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (John Gilbert) Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Matt Healy) Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Alan Boritz) Re: '83 Novel Foresaw a Bombing (Ben Cox) Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? (Bob Blackshaw) Re: Old Telephone Numbers (Jim Kresse) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jason Hunsaker Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs Date: 25 Mar 93 11:17:17 MDT Organization: Utah State University In article , Daniel E. Ganek writes: > This may be two questions but I'll just tell the story. We stayed at > the Days Inn in DC last weekend. I attempted to make a AT&T call. > I first just dialed 8 + 0 + number and heard "BONG Comtel" So I hung > up and started to dial 10ATT and as soon as I dialed the "0" I got > some intercept saying "no, no". So, I dialed 8 + 0 again and just > entered my AT&T calling card number after the "Comtel" and lo and > behold I heard "thank you for using AT&T" ! > 1) Is Comtel AT&T? I don't know about Comtel, but Contel is an local service provider like U S West. Here in Cache County, Utah the local service provider is U S West. In Box Elder County, Utah (one county west) the local service provider is Contel. Most local service providers I have dealt with will accept my AT&T card number for intra-LATA long distance. > 2) Does AT&T want to know about this hotel blocking other LD > companies? :-) I'd like to know, because it's a real pain not to be able to bypass the hotel's/motel's LD carrier and get AT&T. Jason Hunsaker -|- Logan, Utah -|- Internet: slhw4@cc.usu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 10:59 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > I entered my AT&T card number, and then the fun started. Assuming this is an "AT&T-only" number ... > So, just how is Hotelco getting extra revenue? Probably by routing all those calls made with "embedded number" cards through the AOS. I have stayed at a number of hotels where using my Pac*Bell card resulted in charges from an AOS, but presenting my AT&T card forced the call through AT&T. I know this is the case on many COCOTs. Much better, PR-wise, to complete those AT&T calls gratis than to have them fail and call attention to the fact AT&T is not really the call handler. There are enough of those embedded number cards around to allow revenue to the slimeballs. MCI and Sprint are even promoting them as if they are a New Thing. 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: oppedahl@Panix.Com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: Touch-ToneForrE veryone in DC Metro Area Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 14:50:43 GMT In jacob@b63510.student.CWRU.Edu (Jacob DeGlopper) writes: > Someone mentioned a few weeks back a C&P bill insert detailing a > fairly small rate increase and the dropping of touchtone service as a > seperate item. > This has indeed happened; my parents have never seen a need for > anything other than one rotary-dial phone, but last week when I was > home touch-tone dialing worked where it never did before ... I recommended this (the stop-charging-extra-for-touch-tone, not the small rate increase) in a {Wall Street Journal} op-ed piece five years ago. The argument is that it actually costs the telco more, not less, to serve a rotary-dial customer, because the digit receivers are tied up for a longer time. And, the ratio of off-hook time to billed time is worse (for the telco) for rotary calls than for tone calls. Thus, I argued, the charge-extra-for-touch-tone regulatory policies actually guide people toward inefficient use of the PSTN. At the time I wrote the article, Utah was the only state that had done what I thought everyone should do. After that, California and Oregon followed suit. Now, apparently, C&P in DC has done so ... I would be very curious to hear from readers of this group, which states now do not charge extra for touch-tone line treatment ... What disappoints me a little is that the regulators in DC apparently decided to let the telco raise rates "in return" for this change in service for customers. The explanation for the longevity of the extra-charge-for-tone in most states is that the regulators figure it is a "painless" way to raise money to help subsidize local rates. Of course it is not painless because it encourages inefficient use of the network. Fifteen years ago now, New York Telephone had asked the state regulator for permission to phase out the surcharge for tone -- and the regulator would not let them do it. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW (intellectual property lawyer) 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10112-0228 voice 212-408-2578 fax 212-765-2519 ------------------------------ Date: Thu 25 Mar 93 11:50 CST From: Wm. Bryant Faust, IV Subject: Re: No 900 in Louisiana? > Having just seen an ad for NBC's weather line (1-900-WILLARD) it > stated it was not valid in Louisiana. Have they passed a law that > makes all 900 service illegal or only those that give their proceeds > to charity? No, there is no law banning all 900 service, although such a law would be popular with just about everyone but the broadcasters and the cable operators. There is a state law that has strict requirements on how the cost of the call must be presented in the advertisement. There are also laws against operating a lottery. Most of the promotions to call in and possibly win prize are prohibited unless they also alow mail in entry. I don't have any specifics on the laws available, but I could try to locate them, if there is interest. I think the weather line in question probably does not meet the requirements for informing the consumer of the cost of the call. Wm. Bryant Faust, IV WFAUST@NOMVS.LSUMC.EDU Department of Pharmacology WFAUST@NNOMED.BITNET Louisiana State University Medical Center voice: (504)568-4740 New Orleans, Louisiana 70112-1393 fax: (504)568-2361 ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: AmeriVox Debit Card Date: 25 Mar 1993 18:49:41 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article Andrew Luebker writes: > The "AmeriVox" debit calling card is marketed by the World Telecom > Group, a division of the PhoneClub USA corporation. > AmeriVox cards are available in standard denominations, from $10 to > $100, plus a few more expensive sizes for big spenders. A significant > chunk (about ten-percent) is immediately deducted for "state and > federal taxes," the rest providing calling time at your current > per-minute rate. > The initial base rate is 24.9 cents/minute. After deducting taxes, > the $20 card would only give 72 minutes of calling time, effectively > costing you $0.28 per minute at the base rate. Another version of the > AmeriVox card lets you call from the USA to Canada, at somewhat higher > rates. When looking at the per-minute rate, you need to compare apples to apples. The rates that all of the regular carriers quote you are before taxes as well. 10% sounds like a bargain to me - I now pay around 14% of tax on all of my telephone calls, which includes federal, two kinds of state, and local taxes. When I lived within the Seattle city limits, it was 18.5%! But I guess that's what I get for living in a state with no state income tax. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Telephones in the Army in the Korean War Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 19:01:40 GMT In article dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > The telephones and the switchboard were of that era and I know that a > crank was used to charge the batteries in those units. The question > is: were there lines installed over the countryside? I assume that > there were since I seem to remember that someone said the lines were > down once or twice. I believe that the cranks were used to spin magnetos to provide ringing voltage (jingle juice) rather than to charge batteries. I also understand that the Signal Corps is quite adept at equipping a war zone with telephones of various kinds, although they may use more radio these days. 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 | Ham Radio: KM6CG ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 25 Mar 93 14:09:14 EST (Thu) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > It is true that no "real" long distance company allows calling cards > to be used for 900 services. Not any more. AT&T lets you bill a few of its 900 numbers to calling cards. The pocket Airline Guide had an ad a few months ago for "flight call", a 900 service that provides real-time updates on airline flight operations, and encouraged users to put the call on an AT&T card. I tried it; it works. At 75 cents/minute, though, and nothing available but boring information about flight delays and cancellations, the chances for fraud in this particular case seem low. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: I wonder if I should put TELECOM Digest *exclusively* on a computer with a modem attached to a 900 number and let people download it that way :) ha ha ... of course there would be an 800 number to upload messages to me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? Organization: Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 14:58:17 GMT In article dag@ossi.com writes: >... The Pac*Bell rep told me they were not allowed > to offer residential ISDN service because the CPUC mandates that all > residential lines have to be able to dial 911 during an emergency, > since ISDN requires a box that's plugged into the electric system if > an emergency cut out the power system the line wouldn't work and I > wouldn't be able to dial 911 on my ISDN line. > This means that all ISDN lines have to be at business rates ... Does this mean that with a UPS or backup generator at your house you could meet the requirements and keep a residential rate? I would check the wording of the tariff and see if Pac*Bell is really trying to comply with the tariff or just using it as an excuse to charge you the business rate. John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ From: matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? Organization: Yale University--Genetics Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 01:59:43 GMT The reason why telephones are powered directly off the phone lines is simple: greater reliability with just one point of failure. If a tree knocks down your phone line, you cannot phone anyway even if the phone uses external power. If the phone has external power then a tree knocking down either utility wire cuts you off. PS: During a recent blackout, one local radio station said they could call out ONLY. They had backup power for essential equipment, but the little lights on their phones ran off ordinary outlets! The bells, which would have worked, had to be switched off while they were on the air ... Matt Healy matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu [Moderator's Note: Lots of radio stations have the bell on the phone in the studio wired parallel to a 'beehive lamp' and in serial through the microphone used by the announcer. Whenever the announcer's micro- phone is on the air, the phone bell is cut off. As soon as the ammouncer is cut out of the line (i.e. he starts playing a record or a tape or whatever) the phone bell is alive again. The 'beehive lamp' illuminates in synch with the voltage to ring the bell in either event. This is a common arrangemn small stations where the announcer has to answer allr the phones and do the office work as well as talk on the radio. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 18:46:31 EST From: alan@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? In an article written 3/20/93 magnus@lulea.trab.se (Magnus Hedberg) writes: > We believe that it should be possible to power the telephone from the > electric mains in the house instead of from the telecom network. The > goal is to avoid using "hogh voltage" on the telecom network. > Does anyone know if this idea already has been rejected or performed > somewhere in the world. That concept has been in use for many years in rural areas. Just about at the time when the City of New York was deciding whether or not they had to provide a conventional AC power outlet for New York Tel's fiber mux's (when they didn't request it), I discovered that one of my friends who used to live in rural northwest Ohio (now Chicago) had a phantom power unit on his home telephone line (think his parents still have the same arrangement now). That's not necessarily a good arrangement, except for the local telco. One distinct disadvantage of telco-installed fiber is the inability to use it any time there is an AC power failure at the subscriber side of the cable. Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com alan@camphq.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ From: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Subject: Re: '83 Novel Foresaw a Bombing Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 15:07:06 GMT Reply-To: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria tdarcos@access.digex.com (Paul Robinson) writes: > The explosion at the World Trade Center was an event just waiting to > happen, says Arnaud de Borchgrave, co-author of the 1983 Cold War > novel "Monimbo," in which terrorists blow up six floors of the World > Trade Tower with a bomb left in an elevator shaft. A comic strip in the local student-run newspaper ran a strip featuring terrorists bombing the WTC on the morning that it happened. Imagine the sinking feeling the artist must have had when he saw the news ... Ben Cox thoth@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) Subject: Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? Organization: Corporation for Open Systems Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 15:06:08 GMT In davep@uwashington.edu writes: > magnus@lulea.trab.se (Magnus Hedberg) writes: >> In Europe ISDN phones are powerd by the telecomnetwork. According to >> our information this is not the case in the USA. >> Are ISDN phones/terminals in the USA or elsewhere powered by external >> electric mains? > Your sources are correct. In the USA, ISDN sets require local > power. Power is not supplied by the telco. I took an AT&T ISDN > Premise wiring course a couple of years ago, and power was one of the > big concerns. You could do at either at the desk, or provide power > from the local closet. This took an extra pair. There were a couple > of advantages to providing power from the closet. Less clutter at the > desktop, less contention for what is often congested power outlet > space at the desk, and the availability of centralized power failure > batteries (which were hideously expensive). A while back, I asked vendors in comp.dcom.isdn what the maximum voltage they require was. It seems that +12v and -12v (if it is a TA with an RS232 interface) will do the trick. Now, we come to the problem of the standard. Power Source 1 is between 34 and 56 volts, so that is no go. Power Source 2 must not exceed 56 volts. Aha! no minimum specified. Power Source 3 has been pretty much left to others to define. I can buy gelled acid batteries of 4AH, 12 volts for $25. Greater capacities come higher, its just that this size was fine for our burglar alarm system. Call this creative interpretation of the standards if you wish, but having participated in the development, I feel that there was no 'evil plan' to price ISDN out of sight. Go for it. > Overall the ISDN wiring scheme struck me as very primitive and complex. > There needed to be a better way. I hope that significant improvements > have been made in the last couple of years since I took the course, but I > don't think so. Well, for a synchronous full-duplex point-to-multipoint arrangement that works, I don't think it's all that bad. The only 'improvements' that I am aware of is the statement (at least in the ANSI T1 standard) that "any wiring arrangement that works" meets the standard. > All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - > Dave P davep@u.washington.edu I'm not opinionated, I'm American :-) Bob ------------------------------ From: jim@atvl.panasonic.com (Jim Kresse) Subject: Re: Old Telephone Numbers Reply-To: jim@atvl.panasonic.com Organization: Panasonic ATVL Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 14:52:29 GMT In article 13@eecs.nwu.edu, roy@mchip00.med.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) writes: > [Moderator's Note: If it is '88-5' instead of 'TU-5' then it probably > only goes into the early sixties. I do not think All Number Calling > was around anywhere until 1961-62. Corrections anyone? PAT] I remember when I was growing up in Evergreen Park (SW suburb of Chicago) learning that my phone number was GArden 4 - xxxx. I don't remember All Number Calling until about '63, I think. Jim Kresse jim@atvl.panasonic.com Standard disclaimers apply ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #210 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04777; 26 Mar 93 4:11 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22072 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 26 Mar 1993 01:45:11 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11953 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 26 Mar 1993 01:44:15 -0600 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 01:44:15 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303260744.AA11953@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #212 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Mar 93 01:44:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 212 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Earthquake in 503? (Michael Rosen) Virtual Reality Conference Update (Tom Caudell) Hotels That Charge For Specific 1-800 Calls (ie to LD Carriers) (Phydeaux) Re: International Calling Card (Laurence Chiu) Re: International Calling Card (Scott Marshall) One-Digit Phone Numbers in Siwa (Paul Eggert) How Does One Call These Places? (Douglas W. Martin) Mitel PBX Mailing List Wanted (Dave Johnston) Can a CO Hunt Group Include a DID Number? (Jeff Wasilko) PacBell's ISDN Tariff (was Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?) (A. Blau) Re: Country Code Listings (Mike McNally) How Can I Decode CLID Data From A Digitized Sample? (Scott Coleman) A Marketing Breakthrough! (Glen Ecklund) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Earthquake in 503? Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 05:36:29 GMT I'm too lazy to go looking up the area code ... but was there an earthwuake in the 503 area code? I tried to dial a phone number there (Intel's BBS - 503/645-6275) and got an intercept message telling me that due to an earthquake my call could not go through. Mike [Moderator's Note: There was an earthquake in Oregon Thursday morning. I've not gotten details from anyone there yet except a (503) Directory Assistance operator who confirmed it and said calls were 'getting back to normal'. The Intel BBS is reachable as of this writing. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tpc@espresso.boeing.com (Tom Caudell 206-865-3763) Subject: Virtual Reality Conference Update Reply-To: tpc@espresso.boeing.com Organization: Boeing Computer Services Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:14:54 GMT ==================================================================== = THIS SUMMER, PLAN ON ATTENDING THE FIRST ANNUAL IEEE CONFERENCE = = ON VIRTUAL REALITY TECHNOLOGY = = -- ANNOUNCING TUTORIALS -- = ==================================================================== "IEEE VRAIS-93: Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium" 18-22 September, 1993 Seattle, WA, USA I E E E - V R A I S - 1 9 9 3 S E A T T L E Sponsored by the IEEE Neural Networks Council's Virtual Reality Technology Committee with constituent societies: IEEE Circuits and Systems Society IEEE Communications Society IEEE Computer Society IEEE Controls Society IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society IEEE Industrial Electronics Society IEEE Industry Applications Society IEEE Information Theory Society IEEE Lasers and EO Society IEEE Oceanic Engineering Society IEEE Power Engineering SOciety IEEE Robotics and Automation Society IEEE Signal Processing Society IEEE Systems, Man & Cybernetics Society in colloboration with: SPIE - the International Society for Optical Engineering ==================================================================== >>>>>>>>>>> Announcing the 1993 VRAIS Tutorial Program <<<<<<<<<<<< ==================================================================== Organizer(s) Title ------------------ --------------------------------------- Steve Bryson Introduction to Virtual Reality Implementation NASA Ames Research Center Stephen R. Ellis Design and Calibration of Men and Machines in NASA Ames Research Center Virtual Environments Chris Esposito User Interface Issues for Virtual Systems Boeing Computer Services Mark Green Techniques for Geometrical Modeling and Anima- University of Alberta tion in Virtual Reality Edward Colgate Force Reflecting Interfaces to Teleoperators and Northwestern University Virtual Environments Blake Hannaford U. of Washington Reza Jalili Virtual Reality Architecture for Distributed, IBM T.J. Watson Center Multi-User Environments Hans Jense Applying Virtual Environment Technology for Fysisch en Elektronisch Training and Simulation Laboratorium TNO Thomas P. Piantanida Basic Phenomena of Vision SRI International Henry A. Sowizral Introduction to Virtual Reality Boeing Computer Services Lawrence W. Stark, M.D. Virtual Environments, Display Univ. of California, Berkeley Enahncements, and Top-Down Vision Won S. Kim Jet Propulsion Laboratory Arden Strasser Head-Mounted Display Engineering Virtual Reality, Inc. Elizabeth M. Wenzel Psychophysics and Technology NASA Ames Research Center of Virtual Acoustic Displays ============================================================= = ##################################################### = = # FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: # = = # IEEE VRAIS-93 # = = # Meeting Management # = = # 5665 Oberlin Drive, Suite 110 # = = # San Diego, CA 92121 # = = # Tel. (619) 453-6222 # = = # FAX (619) 535-3880 # = = ##################################################### = ============================================================= >>> CALL FOR EXHIBITS <<< A limited amount of space is still available for vendors, companies, and publishers to display and demonstrate their latest innovations in Virtual Reality technology. Potential exhibitors are encouraged to contact the Exhibits Chair for more information: Dr. Chris Esposito Boeing Computer Services (206) 957-5797 chrise@bcsaic.boeing.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 18:25:50 PST From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: Hotels That Charge For Specific 1-800 Calls (ie to LD Carriers) Hi! I was wondering what people's thoughts were on hotels that charge to connect you to the LD carrier of your choice -- even though you may connect via a 1-800 number. These hotels let other 1-800 calls go through. IMHO it's fine to charge for *all* calls (1-800 or not) because they are providing a service of a telephone in your room. BUT when they decide to pick only *certain* numbers to charge you for I become irate. What's the legality of this, and how do they decide which numbers to charge for? The other day, PBX at the Hilton in San Francisco decided to charge me for a 1-800 calls to United Airlines! (I complained and got the charges removed) You'd think that a fancy hotel wouldn't try to nickle and dime you. reb ------------------------------ From: LCHIU@HOLONET.NET Subject: Re: International Calling Card Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:59:43 GMT In a article to Comp.dcom.telecom, Ekon@intranet.gr had the following to say about International Calling Cards: > I was pleased to see the summary/comparison of long distance plans in > the US. What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow > me to call a US number while overseas. I don't live in the US > currently; my sister does and she has an (international) ATT card, BUT > one is required to go through a local operator; this makes the use of > that card virtually impossible with local service standards. > If this would help, card use will be primarily for four to five > monthly calls from Athens to Boston, 20-35 minutes duration for each > call. I would like to be able to do this directly, ie. maybe dial a > number, give a number code and then dial my call (no operators!). > The reasoning behind this is (of course) that US prices are MUCH > cheaper than what the (only) telco charges here, ie. I would like to > be billed by a US telco for my international calls (to the US mainly) > and use the card when I travel. But, NO OPERATORS! I went through this about six months ago before I moved to the US and ended up getting both a AT&T and MCI calling card to be used in New Zealand. I just called them using their respective USA Direct (tm) numbers and waited to get an operator who would transfer me to the right department. For comparison, AT&T would not take an application over the phone but sent one in the mail to me. MCI took details including credit card information over the phone and sent cards out a few weeks later. My prime motivation was not so much to get cheaper calling (in fact it was usually more expensive to use their cards given their surcharges of $2 I think per call) but to be able to call 800 numbers. There were some differences also in the way it was serviced. 1. AT&T had their service automated -- you dialled the USA Direct Number, heard the AT&T jingle, dialled the number you wanted (without the one first), listened for the boing and then your calling card number and then heard "Thank you for using AT&T". Very nice. Only trouble was you could not call any 800 number not provided by AT&T but the message received (all circuits are busy) was a little misleading. 2. MCI was not automated but had no restriction on which 800 number you wanted to call. Laurence Chiu Walnut Creek, CA lchiu@holonet.net ------------------------------ Subject: Re: International Calling Card From: ieagle@unkaphaed.jpunix.com (Scott Marshall) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 22:25:27 GMT Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX > call. I would like to be able to do this directly, ie. maybe dial a > number, give a number code and then dial my call (no operators!). I dont know about Rome but are you sure your using the right way to call AT&T? In Australia you just dialed 0014-800-811 , and then got an Automated AT&T PBX type deal. "Please enter the number you are calling" and you punch it in ... then "Please enter your calling card number and pin" and then it connected straight through. Cheers, TIE ieagle@unkaphaed.jpunix.com (Scott Marshall) Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 481-3763 1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis ------------------------------ From: eggert@twinsun.com (Paul Eggert) Subject: One-Digit Phone Numbers in Siwa Organization: Twin Sun Inc, El Segundo, CA, USA Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:48:57 GMT Last month I was in Siwa, an oasis in Egypt about 300 km from anywhere else. No paved roads led to Siwa until about ten years ago, and it's still relatively unspoiled. At the check-in desk to the Hotel Cleopatra in Siwa, I saw a list of some Siwish phone numbers: two or three one-digit numbers (police, Chamber of Commerce), and a few other numbers ranging in size to three digits. I had thought that short public phone numbers were a thing of the past. I'm curious: is Siwa unusual, or are there other places like it even now? [Moderator's Note: The police and Chamber of Commerce phones would not be 'public' (in the sense of walk up to the phone, feed money and use it.) Both those organizations would be subscribers with private (but business, if they have that distinction in Egypt) lines. If there are only a few dozen or perhaps a couple hundred telephone susbcribers in Siwa and the system is still manually operated, then single digit or double digit numbers would not be that uncommon, especially if you consider that when phones were first installed in Siwa, the police and Chamber of Commerce were probably among the first to subscribe, and if the numbering started out 1,2,3,4,5, etc then yes, the police, as a long time (maybe charter) subscriber would have a single digit. An exhibit at the Chicago Historical Society had a photo from about 1900 of the Chicago Fire Department 'south side fire alarm office'. The picture showed some horses which were hitched up to a wagon with a barrel of water on it and some kind of pumping apparatus. A man seated at a table nearby was using one of the old 'candlestick' (one piece held up tp mouth, a separate piece held up to ear) telephones and a sign on the wall said 'Englewood Fire Alarm Office, , Telephone Englewood 2'. When that office was finally merged into the 911 system here several years ago, their phone number had just barely changed: 312-364-0002. Generally in the old manual systems it was sufficient to ask the operator for the police or fire department without having to ask by number. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 15:32:49 -0800 From: martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) Subject: How Does One Call These Places? I'm looking for info on how to call the following places: Midway Island: (I assume via the operator in Honolulu, but how is it done? Is it like calling a toll sttation? Wake Island: Easter Island: (I think this is geographically part of Chile, but does not have a Chilean area code.) Tristan Dacunha: St. Helena (listed as country code 290, but not dialable): Pitcairn Island: Any help on these is appreciated. Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil [Moderator's Note: In the case of Wake, Easter and Pitcairn Islands you dial 10288-0 (or 00 if you default to AT&T) and tell the operator the number you wish to call on those islands. She will most likely connect to the International Center in Pitts, PA and they will complete the connection to an operator on those islands who will then extend your call to the desired number. According to my notes, Saint Helena is dialable as 011 + 290 + four digits. I don't know about Tristan Dacunha. Wake and Midway are going to be part of area 808 rather soon and in fact it may be possible to dial them already as 808-xxx-xxxx. I don't know why they would be taken in with 808 while Guam is considered 'international' (011+671+). ------------------------------ From: Dave Johnston Organization: Santa Rosa Junior College Date: 25 Mar 93 10:53:30 PST Subject: Mitel PBX Mailing List Wanted Reply-To: dave@cs.santarosa.edu Greetings: I'm interested in hearing from anyone who knows of a internet mailing list pertaining to Mitel PBXs. I'm not aware of any and was considering starting one, but didn't want to reinvent the wheel. My thoughts are that the list would provide a resource for users of Mitel's products to compare notes on new software or hardware releases, bugs, feature implementations, etc. Hopefully, if there was enough interest, we could get Mitel staff to participate. If anyone is interested in participating in such a list, I'd appreciate a note. Thanks, Dave Johnston, WD6AOE Santa Rosa Junior College Supervisor, Campus Data/Telecom 1501 Mendocino Ave. dave@cs.santarosa.edu Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Voice +1 707 527 4853 Fax +1 707 524 1542 ------------------------------ From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko) Subject: Can a CO Hunt Group Include a DID Number? Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 20:47:34 EST Organization: Air Age Publishing, Wilton CT USA Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com I'm trying to find out if a CO hunt group can include a seven digit DID number. Our CO (a #2ESS, with the 2E4 generic) doesn't seem to have call-forward-busy available. We'd like to have an existing CO trunk forward to one of our DID lines (served by the same switch). Is this possible on this switch? I've called our service rep at SNET, but he hasn't called me back in over a week ... Thanks, Jeff Jeff's Oasis at Home. Jeff can also be reached at work at: jwasilko@airage.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 20:17:22 -0500 From: Andrew Blau Subject: PacBell's ISDN Tariff (was Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?) In TELECOM Digest, Vol13, #211, johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) writes: > In article dag@ossi.com writes: >> ... The Pac*Bell rep told me they were not allowed >> to offer residential ISDN service because the CPUC mandates that all >> residential lines have to be able to dial 911 during an emergency, >> since ISDN requires a box that's plugged into the electric system if >> an emergency cut out the power system the line wouldn't work and I >> wouldn't be able to dial 911 on my ISDN line. >> This means that all ISDN lines have to be at business rates ... > Does this mean that with a UPS or backup generator at your house you > could meet the requirements and keep a residential rate? I would > check the wording of the tariff and see if Pac*Bell is really trying > to comply with the tariff or just using it as an excuse to charge you > the business rate. In fact, the tariff is clear: SDS IS (as it's called) is not available to customers with Residence Service. Thus, even if you supplied your own power source (which the tariff also considers), it's a business tariff. Andrew Blau Electronic Frontier Foundation 202-544-9237(v) Associate for 666 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E. 202-547-5481(f) Telecommunications Policy Washington, DC 20003 blau@eff.org ------------------------------ From: vail!m5@cs.utexas.edu (Mike McNally) Subject: Country Code Listings Date: 25 Mar 93 21:00:52 GMT If I recall correctly -- and I'm sure someone who still lives there can confirm -- the PacBell phone books I had in San Jose included a listing of country codes. Here in my new Austin home, I just noticed that the Southwestern Bell White Pages include the comment: To get international country and city codes, phone numbers, or to call countries that cannot be dialed direct: Dial 00 for operator assistance. (Charges may apply.) Oh boy. They do of course see fit to include ten pages of highly useful advertisements for various services. ------------------------------ From: tmkk@uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) Subject: How Can I Decode CLID Data From A Digitized Sample? Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 13:53:50 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Apologies if this topic was recently covered; I checked the FAQ and all the postings still alive on my site but saw nothing relevant. I'm looking for an algorithm which I could use to decode Caller*ID data based on a digitized sample of the sound sent by the phone company between the first and second rings. My (admittedly limited at this point) understanding of CLID is that it is FSK data, similar to 1200bps modem data (but of course incompatible with standard 1200bps dial-up modems). As a start, how can I determine which portions of the sample contain the MARK frequency and which contain the SPACE? If I could somehow take the raw sampled signal and transform it into a series of 1s and 0s where 1s represent samples containing MARK and 0s represent samples containing SPACE, the rest of the decoding process would be a piece of cake. I'm no DSP expert, nor am I a telephony whiz, so I need your help. If you know how I can approach this problem, please drop me a note. Also, if you know where I can obtain the specs for Caller*ID (i.e. the format of the data, the MARK frequency, the SPACE frequency, etc.) please drop me a note also. I'll post a summary of responses as well as the completed algorithm at a later date. Thanks in advance for your kind assistance. For the curious, my application is to add CLID capability to my BigmOuth PC Voice Mail card. The card is capable of sampling the phone line even when on-hook (in fact, this is how it implements ring-detect), so adding CLID capability should also be possible. ------------------------------ From: glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund) Subject: A Marketing Breakthrough! Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 20:36:54 GMT The following ad is so amazing that I'm sure some of you will enjoy it, and please pass it along to other appropriate newgroups. ------------ _Throw_away_your_old_TV_rod_antenna!_ The RGX-2000 looks like the latest outdoor satellite "dish," but works _indoors_ like ordinary "rabbit ears." _No_wiring_or_installation!_ Legal in all 50 states. _You_pay_NO_cable_fees_because_you're_NOT_getting_cable!!!_ _You_pay_NO_satellite_fees_because_you're_NOT_using_satellite_technology_ _or_service!!!_ Works entirely via proven "RF" technology -- actually pulls signals _right_out_of_the_air._ Instantly locks into every local VHF and UHF channel from 2 to 83 to bring you their movies, sports and special events _just_like_an_ordinary_pair_of_ "_rabbit_ears._" No cable box or special attachments needed! Enhances color and claritrey, helps pull in weak signals. Compatible with all TVs from 3-inch portables to giant 7-footers. Sits on any TV top in less that 4 linear inches of space! Guaranteed not to utilize, replicate, transmit or interfere with any satellite signal. Complies with all applicable federal regulations. Not technical razzle-dazzle but the sheer aesthetic superiority of its elegant mesh design make the RGX-2000 a_marketing_breakthrough!_ Copyright Raffoler, Ltd. -------------- It appears (from the pictures) to be a typical combination of rabbit ears and a bow tie antenna, with a (plastic?) mesh dish, so that it looks a bit like a satellite antenna. (In case anyone is snowed by this, the ad basically claims that this product is no different than a regular antenna, except in appearance.) 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #212 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05810; 26 Mar 93 4:55 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15798 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:31:50 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18538 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:31:02 -0600 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:31:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303260831.AA18538@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #213 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Mar 93 02:31:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 213 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (John D. Gretzinger) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Mark Cheeseman) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone In Your Car!?!?!? (Ron Bean) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Steve Gaarder) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Brian Zimmerman) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Richard J. Pauls) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Adam Gorman) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Rich Greenberg) Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Paul Barnett) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Robert Woodhead) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Steve Forrette) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Nigel Allen) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Alan Boritz) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: JOHN.D.GRETZINGER@sprint.sprint.com Date: 25 Mar 93 13:56:50-0500 Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? >> Why? If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while >> talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and >> at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at >> 55 controlling a car in two dimensions? > It would depend on the airplane and the number of people qualified to > fly it and have their hands on the controls almost all of the time. > A privately owned plane probably wouldn't have two qualified pilots on > board, nor would it have autopilot nor a headset (although I could be > mistaken on the latter two). Sorry Dave, but you clearly are not a pilot. Virtually all airplanes in use today (with the exception of some classics that have been restored to original condition without modern avionics) can use headphones and a PTT switch so the pilot does not need to remove his hands from the controls. Most pilots who fly multiple airplanes have a set they take with them from plane to plane so they *can* keep both hands on the controls (not just the wheel) and talk at the same time. The headphone plugs into the mike jack, and the activator switch is securred with a velcro strap to the control yoke. There are other configurations, but you get the idea. Additionally, once you get used to it, you really have a lot more room for one handed driving than is typically found on the freeways around Los Angeles, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, Atlanta, Baltimore, or Washington, D.C. (the ones with which I am most familiar). John D. Gretzinger Internet: jgretzinger@alamitos-emh1.army.mil / SprintMail: j.gretzinger US Sprint, Costa Mesa, CA +01-714-435-3200 x407 Standard disclaimers apply. ------------------------------ From: cheese@runx.oz.au (Mark Cheeseman) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Organization: Your Computer Magazine, Sydney, Australia Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 11:56:55 GMT Parts of Australia have also made it illegal to use a hand-held phone while driving a motor vehicle. Here (New South Wales) is one such state, as is Victoria, where using a hand-help microphone of any sort is illegal (I wonder how the cops call for backup during a chase -- pull over to the side of the road?). Not that it seems to bother cell phone users much. But all mobile phones sold here carry hands-free as a standard feature. (Brief diversion -- Kenwood sold a remote controller for some of its mobile ham rigs, which had a handset, just like a cell phone. I wonder what the boys in blue would have done if they pulled somebody over for using one of those while driving: "Honest officer, it's not a phone. It's a ham radio!") Mark Cheeseman, Your Computer. cheese@runx.oz.au Fido: 3:712/412.0 Phn: +61 2 353 0143 Fax: +61 2 353 0720 AMPRnet: coming RSN! ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone In Your Car? Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 19:21:35 -0600 (CST) From: Ron Bean jpettitt@well.sf.ca.us (John Pettitt) writes: > In Richard Pauls writes: >> I agree. Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be >> discouraged. It is clearly dangerous. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Why ? If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while > talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and > at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at > 55 controlling a car in two dimensions? I'll bet you're not too worried about rear-ending anyone up there. Or running off the road :-). Could you do it while flying in close formation? zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 02:12:29 -0500 From: anarres!gaarder@TC.Cornell.EDU Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Q: What is the first thing you should do after you rear-end someone? A: Hang up the phone! Steve Gaarder gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us ------------------------------ From: brianz@software.pulse.com (Brian Zimmerman) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Date: 25 Mar 1993 07:04:08 -0600 Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway In Richard Pauls writes: >> I agree. Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be >> discouraged. It is clearly dangerous. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Why? If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while > talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and > at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at > 55 controlling a car in two dimensions? Please note that a trimmed plane flying at cruise speed requires *NO* hands or feet on the controls, only the constant attention to the outside and scan of the instruments. And, on final approach, the controller will invariably say that you need not respond (beyond double-clicking on the transmit button many times located on the yoke). It has nothing to do with dimensions or speed, only proximity TO THE GROUND! A car is much more draining and demanding on reaction speed than flying, something only matched by landing a plane. So, pull safely off the road and talk. Brian Zimmerman [brianz@pulse.com] Pulse Communications Inc., a division of Hubbell (not the telescope). All opinions are my own, none other ------------------------------ From: pauls@pender.ee.upenn.edu (Richard J. Pauls) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Date: 25 Mar 93 16:07:22 GMT Organization: University of Pennsylvania In article jpettitt@well.sf.ca.us (John Pettitt) writes: > Why ? If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while > talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and > at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at > 55 controlling a car in two dimensions? Because it is more dangerous to drive on the highway than fly. If you were flying your plan with hundreds of other planes only a few feet away and crossing your path then it would be a more even comparison. Alone on the road with a car phone would not be much of a problem. I'm more concerned with other people on the road that might get hit. Why not just use a hands-off feature? Then it would be just like talking to a passenger. Rich ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 13:16:44 GMT From: adam@sj.ate.slb.com (Adam Gorman) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? In article , bobm@unipalm.co.uk (Bob Morley) writes: > Its already law in the UK. and In article , jon@hill.lut.ac.uk (Jon P. Knight) writes: > This is already law in the UK, ... This is not strictly true ! The new Highway code says: (reproduced without permission Crown Copyright 1993) Car telephones and microphones: 43. You MUST exercise proper control of your vehicle at all times. Do not use a hand-held telephone or microphone while you are driving. Find a safe place to stop first. Do not speak into a hands-free microphone if it will hake your mind off the road. You MUST NOT stop on the hard shoulder of a motorway to answer or make a call, except in an emergency. The MUSTs and MUST NOTs emphasise the aspects of the code backed up by the law. Failing to observe the rest of code is not an offense but the failures may be relied upon by any party to civil or criminal proceedings to establish or negate any liability in question in these proceedings. What this means is: 1) You could be nicked for exercising proper control of your vehicle if you don't pay attention while nattering on the ole mobile. 2) If you are involved in an accident while on the phone then your failure to observe the code may leave you liable to the blame. 3) Using a cell-phone while driving isn't in itself against the law but wizzing past the boys in blue waving the dog-n-bone possibly isn't a good idea. I used to have a phone in my car and wondered how I'd cope when I ditched it in favour of a big BMW bike. Now the hand-held sits in the pannier, switched off, and my journeys are mercyfully hastle free from that point. Adam Gorman Solstice Systems Ltd adam@bucket.uk.ate.slb.com ------------------------------ From: richgr@netcom.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 20:02:34 GMT In article dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > A privately owned plane probably wouldn't have two qualified pilots on > board, nor would it have autopilot nor a headset (although I could be > mistaken on the latter two). On the few occasions that I have been in a private plane, the pilots all had headsets and had the push-to-talk button mounted on the wheel. Rich Greenberg Work: rmg50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com 310-417-8999 N6LRT Play: richgr@netcom.com 310-649-0238 Previous play (obselete): richg@hatch.socal.com What? Me speak for Amdahl? Surely you jest.... ------------------------------ From: barnett@zeppelin.convex.com (Paul Barnett) Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 13:21:00 CST In a previous message, Dave Niebuhr wrote: > In TELECOM Digest V13 #205 jpettitt@well.sf.ca.us (John Pettitt) > writes: >> Why? If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while >> talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and >> at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at ^^^ "can't", I think... >> 55 controlling a car in two dimensions? > It would depend on the airplane and the number of people qualified to > fly it and have their hands on the controls almost all of the time. > A privately owned plane probably wouldn't have two qualified pilots on > board, nor would it have autopilot nor a headset (although I could be > mistaken on the latter two). Instrument flying requires reading a map and one or more other publi- cations, listening for and writing down amended clearances, adjusting a half-dozen radios and various other knobs and controls, all while keeping the aircraft on course and at the assigned altitude in moderate turbulence, solely by reference to the instruments (without looking out the window). Even if you are clear of the clouds, you still have to watch for traffic that may be coming from ANY direction, and look for the airport, navigation landmarks, etc. A headset or autopilot is not required. Headsets are relatively inexpensive, and therefore more common. Autopilots aren't. Most instructors won't let you use the autopilot anyway, since they have a nasty habit of failing at the worst possible time. A properly trimmed plane will fly straight and level for a few moments hands-off, and will certainly fly indefinitely with one hand on the stick, leaving the other for everything else. It's a real juggling act. It requires a microscopic version of time management, and careful moment to moment planning. The trick is to FLY THE AIRPLANE first and foremost, and do the other stuff as you have the time and opportunity. Successfully doing all of this takes training and practice. If you can't do it, you don't pass the checkride. What's my point? When you are driving, don't use your cellular phone, eat lunch, put on makeup, talk on your CB/amateur radio, argue with your significant other, yell at the kids in the back seat, or do anything else but DRIVE THE CAR unless you are sure that you can do so safely. For some people, that means pulling over to the side of the road and stopping. Others can handle an additional workload and still drive safely under most conditions. And since I think I belong to the latter group, I don't appreciate being penalized by the irresponsible behavior of the people in the former group. Unsafe driving is dangerous, regardless of the cause. We have plenty of laws that prohibit and penalize it. We don't need another one. > A commercially owned plane would and therefore one or the other of the > pilots and the engineer would be able to do some talking over the air > without compromising safety. Large (and not necessarily commercial) airplanes have a significant amount of inertia and require careful attention, since an unexpected deviation may take a long time to correct. Two pilots are generally the rule for planes in excess of 12,500 pounds (gross). But since you brought up commercial planes, I will point out that somewhere in the depths of FAA regulations or Northwest Airlines' corporate policies is a prohibition against extraneous discussions below an altitude of 10,000 feet. FAR 91.117 further restricts planes to speeds under 250 knots below 10,000 feet. If I were follow the popular rationale for banning phone cellular usage while driving to its logical conclusion, then all radios, CD, and tape players should also be disabled when the ignition is on, and passengers should be bound and gagged while in transit. Paul Barnett MPP OS Development (214)-497-4846 Convex Computer Corp. Richardson, TX ------------------------------ From: trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 12:30:30 GMT john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Then they, like you, obviously have had no real experience in > international shipping. I have shipped countless items to Japan, from > small disk drives to complete computer systems. I have used FedEx, > DHL, Nippon, and several other carriers. None had the slightest > problem with customs. And we were shipping "restricted" items -- > material that was forbidden to be shipped to specific areas of the > world. I would suggest that you "try it before you knock it". Although my experience with FedEx has been good, I have had numerous bad experiences with DHL and customs clearance here in Japan, most especially for videotapes and computer software; once it took them a week and 5 faxes from me explaining the contents in excruciating detail (in addition to the complete invoice on the package). My conclusion is that DHL Japan is really screwed up. On the other hand, I have never had a problem with the normal Post Office, either in sending or recieving goods. For example, I send D2 digital master tapes to the USA a couple of times a month via the Japan PO's EMS service; 3-4 days to any location in the USA, my 8lb tapes cost about $40 to send, and they've never had either a loss or a customs problem. The mail is more expensive here in Japan, but they _deliver_. jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) writes: > 2) there was a case of a Boy Scout troop being sued or otherwise > pursued by the USPS for placing their flyers in people's mailboxes. > As Pat said, the USPS has EXCLUSIVE USE of your mailbox. In Japan, this is not the case, and every day, ad fliers get stuffed into my mailbox, many of them with interesting ads for expensive massage services. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@forEtune.co.jp AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): 72447.37@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? Date: 25 Mar 1993 19:26:13 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article tdarcos@access.digex.com (Paul Robinson) writes: > Last I heard, a USPS registered letter requiring a signature was > $1.15, versus 29c for a regular letter. Fedex charges at least $8 for > any package or letter. That's for a certified letter. A registered letter is in the neighborhood of $5. A registered letter is what you are supposed to use if send "bearer instruments," such as cash, bonds, stock certificates, etc., such that mere possession of the item is what makes it valuable (unlike a check which is valuable only to the specified payee). Each time a registered item changes hands, a log book is signed. This way, if the item is lost or pilfered, they can start from the originating post office, and trace its complete route, including each employee who handled it. I had the occasion to send a registered letter last year, and when the postal clerk took it from me, he did not put it in the regular mail bin, but instead took out his key and put it in a locked drawer, in addition to filling out the paperwork. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 14:35:00 -0500 From: ndallen@r-node.hub.org (Nigel Allen) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto In article henry@ads.com writes: > dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) wrote: >> There was a time when neither snow nor hail ... would stop the mail. > These were, undoubtedly, in the era before labor unions. Quite right. A Greek writer (Herodotus?) wrote those words about the royal messengers of Persia. More recently, performance artist Laurie Anderson quoted the line "Neither snow nor rain nor gloom of night/ Shall stay these couriers/ From the swift completion/ Of their appointed rounds" in her song "OSuperman (For Massenet)". Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada ndallen@r-node.hub.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 19:49:27 EST From: alan@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? In an article written March 10, 1993, mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) writes: > I called the Maryland zip code information line and told the person on > the other end that I had five addresses I wished to find the ZIP+4 > for. I asked if it would be easier for him if I faxed the list to him > and called him back later. I was told, with a chuckle, that they > don't have a fax machine. You would think maybe the US Post Office > would have something as simple and common as a fax machine ... They may not have a fax machine, but if you send them your address records on disk (fixed-length format, 100 records minimum) they can add the zip+4 and the carrier route codes, perform minor address corrections, and return the data files to you with status and error codes (for the ones they couldn't find). Using their "address cleaning" service could also qualify you for a postage discount. Not bad for a group without fax terminals. ;) Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com alan@camphq.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #213 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05137; 27 Mar 93 13:00 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00407 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 27 Mar 1993 10:21:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20013 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 27 Mar 1993 10:20:32 -0600 Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 10:20:32 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303271620.AA20013@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #214 TELECOM Digest Sat, 27 Mar 93 10:20:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 214 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Help Solve Our Tele/Modem/Computer/LAN Problem! (Marshal Perlman) I Wear Hearing Aids Too! (Matt Healy) TV Show on British Telecom (Linc Madison) Caller ID Privacy Block in New Jersey? (Alan Boritz) Does Anyone Remember Who Makes the Distintive Ring Box? (Greg Youngblood) 700 Access From Other Carriers (waynel@sod.linet.org) Experiences Calling the South Pacific (Douglas W. Martin) 3606 Field Trials (Fred Gillette) Wiring Standards Book? (Mike Harpe) Calling in Canada (Nigel Roberts) Motorola Mobile Phone Connector Pinout Wanted (Clyde Smith-Stubbs) If They Mention Flying Saucers, They're Out to Get You (Mark Boolootian) ATM's Slowly Returning (Greg Abbott) AT&T AnyHour Saver Lowers Rates (Monty Solomon) New Sleaze From The Psychic Line (Bob Frankston) Use of #77 in Cellular Service (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) Subject: Help Solve Our Tele/Modem/Computer/LAN Problem! Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 17:06:28 GMT Hi. A pal of mine and myself are in need of some help with a pair of Novell systems we are working on (v2.2). Currently, we have two independent systems, each with a NFS and 3 terminals hooked up. There is location "A" and location "B". All the data at "A" and all the data at "B" are totally independent of each other [but both NFS's have the same software running]. "A" is 20 miles from "B"... and this is what we'd like to do: We would like make "A" the NFS (it's a 486/66 etc...) for both locations. WITHOUT USING A LEASED LINE how could one do this? This is a totally hypothetical idea (maybe?) but please take a look at it and see how I could do this: CURRENT SETUP: +Terminal 1 |-| (NFS)|A+Terminal 2 |-| +Terminal 3 2 0 M I L E S +Terminal 1 |-| (NFS)|B+Terminal 2 |-| +Terminal 3 (Note: Each system is 100% independent of the other) THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DO: +Terminal 1 |-| (NFS)|A+Terminal 2 |-| | +Terminal 3 | 2| 0|M? |O? M|D? I|E? L|M? E|S? S| | +Terminal 1 +Terminal 2 +Terminal 3 Basically, it would be LIKE having an extra long ethernet cable over the 20 mile segment ... we know this can be done with bridges, routers, repeaters, etc ... but can it be done with modems? Speed is not important at all (9,600 or 14,400 would be MORE then fine). Can his be done? If so, how? How much will it cost and what is the CHEAPEST WAY? We are a couple of college students, not a big company, so our cash is limited as you can presume ... Please get back to us as soon as possible (VIA E-MAIL IF AT ALL POSSIBLE). We thank-you in advance! Marshal Perlman Internet: perlman@cs.fit.edu Florida Institute of Technology IRC: Squawk Melbourne, Florida Private Pilot, ASEL 407/768-8000 x8435 Goodyear Blimp Club Member ------------------------------ From: matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) Subject: I Wear Hearing Aids Too! Organization: Yale U. - Genetics Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 15:54:07 GMT Some comments on hearing-aid compatible handsets, from one who has worn hearing aids since age 6. I have about 45 dB of loss in the middle of the speech frequency range; more at high frequencies -- this is classified as a "moderate to severe" sensorineural loss. I used to wear behind-the-ear aids with telephone pick-up coils (inductive pickup). Flipping a little switch cut out the regular mike and activated the coil. With the old dynamic phones this worked fine. However, many newer phones produced much lower electromagnetic field strengths and could not be picked up. My hearing aid dealer offered to sell me a gadget for about 25 bucks that clamped over any earpiece which generated the required e-m field. It was basically just an amplifier but with a coil instead of a speaker. However, at about this time I switched to in-the-ear aids. Until about ten years ago, I could not use in-the-ear aids because of feedback problems with the amount of gain I needed. Behind-the-ear aids have much more acoustic isolation between microphone and the ear canal. Now, though, the amplifiers have been improved enough that feedback is greatly reduced. However, very few in-the-ear hearing aids have telephone coils! Two steps forward, one step back! I can use the hearing aid with a standard phone but I have to hold the earpiece in exactly one position to avoid feedback problems. In practice I usually do without the hearing aid. About 1/4 of the time I then have difficulty hearing the other end, but I can usually solve that problem by saying "please speak up; I have a bad connection," not mentioning that the bad connection is inside my head ... The big advantage of the telephone coil was not that it made the phone louder (that can be done in other ways), but that I _only_ heard the phone. It also proved handy for troubleshooting wiring: the telephone coil picked up the 60Hz hum from any live wire quite nicely. It also was able to pick up music from most stereo cables, etc. On the whole I still prefer my in-the-ear aids over the clunky old behind-the-ear types. Matt Healy matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 23:50:17 GMT From: Linc Madison Reply-To: telecom@hedonist.demon.co.uk Subject: TV Show on British Telecom I saw a show last week on Channel Four (one of Britain's commercial TV networks) called "The Goldring Audit." This terribly boring woman is going around looking at the nationalised industries that are being privatised, and last week's installment was about British Telecom. She went into the history of the privatisation and the efforts at bringing competition into the field. She covered all the major bases, including BT going after big business contracts at the expense of residential service, improvements in customer service responsiveness, cable companies proposing to offer telephone service, cellular competition with landlines, the state of payphones and the push towards cardphones instead of coin phones, and Mercury. One bit I found particularly interesting, in view of a recent comment in the Digest, is that one of the BT representatives they had on said that BT had studied going to flat-rate dialling nationwide -- a call from one end of the country to the other would cost the same as a call across the street -- but that there was no way they could do that because it would instantly torpedo any competitors. As it stands, there are only three distance-based charge bands in the UK, not counting premium services. Local, a, and b/b1. Zone a is up to 35 miles; Zone b is beyond 35 miles, and b1 is over "low-cost routes," at a discount. Then again, where I work at the moment, we have phone lines with a most unusual tariff: for UK#1,395.00 per annum, we get line rental plus unlimited, unmeasured local, national, and international calling. Not a bad deal! Of course, the blurb from our telecoms supplier says that they will begin charging for individual calls as soon as they install the necessary equipment to begin doing so, but for now we can call the world at no marginal cost. Don't bother trying to sign up, though, 'cause they only provide service to our corporate office locations, which unfortunately does not include my flat. Linc Madison == Linc@Hedonist.Demon.co.uk == Telecom@Hedonist.Demon.co.uk 59 Stourcliffe Close, London W1H 5AR U.K., Tel. +44 71 723-0582 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 07:45:11 EST From: alan@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (Alan Boritz) Subject: Caller ID Privacy Block in New Jersey? My Continental Data Systems caller ID box had the privilege of hanging up on a "privacy-blocked" caller the other day (answers the phone, plays a digitized message about calls not accepted from your number, and hangs up). I'm a little puzzeled, though, since NJ Bell tells everyone who asks that that feature is not available within their territory. Is NJ Bell only providing caller ID privacy block for some without having a tarrif for the service? Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com alan@camphq.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Subject: Does Anyone Remember Who Makes the Distintive Ring Box? From: tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com (Gregory Youngblood) Reply-To: zeta%tcscs@src.honeywell.com Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 01:49:57 CST Organization: TCS Consulting Services I've recently come across a situation where one of those boxes that recognizes the different incoming ring signals that some telcos can provide would be ideal. Unfortunately I don't remember the name of the company or anything else. All I remember was that you could program it to recognize different ringing signals (long, short short, short long short, etc. etc) and make it go to different ports. Kind of like those fax switches, but this doesnt have to pickup the phone to work. If anyone can help me out, please send the message to me via email (it's bad enough I ahve to ask this again). Thanks in advance. Greg TCS Consulting Services P.O. Box 600008 St. Paul, MN 55106-0008 Specializing in high-end, high performance 486 computer systems ****** PLEASE REPLY VIA E-MAIL as my news feed is temporarily down ****** zeta%tcscs@src.honeywell.com or zeta%tcscs@idss.nwa.com ------------------------------ Subject: 700 Access From Other Carriers From: waynel@sod.linet.org (WayneL) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 15:37:00 EST Organization: WALL/WKOJ I've been following this group on and off for a couple of years now, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I came across something I consider interesting. From what I understand, if someone has a 700 number, say, 700-123-4567, with AT&T, that number is not accessable from MCI without dialing 10288+1 first, and the same would apply to any other long-distance company. What I find interesting is that the FCC has at least one 700 number of its own. The one I know of is for emergency use by broadcast stations. Now in an emergency, I'm not going to want to dial 10288, 10333, 10xxx, one at a time, trying to find which carrier they're on. So, is it possible for a 700 number to be universally accepted by all phone companies? This may seem a strange question, but we don't have equal access at all in this area (950, or 10xxx), so there's really no way for me to verify on my own, and even if I did, I'm sure they don't need me ringing their bells unnecessarily. WayneL [Moderator's Note: The way the 700 number space is set up is that each carrier has completely independent use of the entire 700 spectrum. Not only that, but within a single carrier, 1+700 can and often times does produce different results than 0+700. The only way to identify for telco *whose* (which carrier's) 700 number you want is by prepending the access code 10xxx to what you dial, else you get by default the 700 numbers (if any) of your own 1+ carrier. I always thought it was silly and confusing that 700 was given such a radical departure from the normal way of numbering and processing (0+ or 1+) calls. If you have no equal access yet in your area, then you probably have AT&T as your long distance carrier, meaning 0-700 would send you to Easy Reach and 1+700 would send you to stuff like Alliance Teleconferencing, both AT&T products. If you could dial other carrier 700's it would not only be you 'ringing their bells unnecessarily' it would also be you paying for a bunch of odd-ball calls in the process of figuring out who was where. I'm curious: what does the FCC have going in 700? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 07:26:57 -0800 From: martin@cod.nosc.mil (Douglas W. Martin) Subject: Experiences Calling the South Pacific Last evening, in search of some rare coins, I had occasion to call Tonga (676), Kiribati (686) and the Solomon Islands (677). These were calls to either the "Central Bank of ..." or the treasury department. All were five-digit numbers. Kiribati and the Solomon Islands connected me through what sounded like sxx switches (just like the ones in Toronto). In all three cases, I was put on hold, twice with music. In fact, the "music on hold" for the Tongan number was an electronically synthesized version of "Home on the Range"! And I thought buffalo only rome in Italy. On several of my attempted calls, it appeared to connect, but then I got several minutes of static. I hung up, tried again, and the calls went right through. Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil [Moderator's Note: When you say you were put on hold, do you mean by the business places you called while they were fetching someone to the phone to speak with you, or do you mean by the telcos involved when you called their information service to get the bank's number? Lots of places in Hong Kong and other far east countries seem to be very fond of those little 'music on hold' gimmicks in the DAK (and similar) catalogs which you insert between the phone and the plug coming from the wall. Tap a button on the little box and it starts playing its simple-minded melody over and over. Some telcom administrations also play Looney Tunes to the international callers to their Directory Enquiry service or the Inward Operator when there is a backlog. France has a particularly awful ten or fifteen second recording which consists of five bars of music, title unknown, followed by a gentleman's voice with a crisp British accent saying "Tel-eee-kom Services! We're trying to extend your call ... please stand by." If it takes two minutes to get the operator, then you hear this message six or seven times. If it takes five minutes to reach the operator, then you hear it 15-20 times. I've gotten the same man and same music on calls to directory in Saudi Arabia. AT&T operators processing calls to directory in those places just sit there very stoically through the endless repetitions. PAT] ------------------------------ From: fredg@Newbridge.COM (Fred Gillette) Subject: 3606 Field Trials Organization: Newbridge Networks Corporation Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 16:08:03 GMT Newbridge is currently looking for Beta trial sites for its smallest Bandwidth manager. (The 3606) This unit has a V.35 aggregate output with four RS232 (V.24) data inputs and one module position. The module can be two voice lines or a selection of data lines. The main new feature being tested is Fax relay. This means that voice lines will detect fax calls and connect them to an internal fax modem so that they may be passed digitally thorugh a network. A fax modem chip at the far end will re-create the original analog signal. For additional information contact: Fred Gillette Manager America's Field Trials (613)591-3600 ex3713 fredg@newbridge.com ------------------------------ From: harpe@hermes.louisville.edu (Mike Harpe) Subject: Wiring Standards Book? Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 16:27:15 GMT Organization: University of Louisville I would like to learn more about wiring standards for telecom applications. I want know what RJ-11, RJ-14, RJ-45 and all these other standards actually say. I don't mind buying these either. Can someone send me some references as a sort of required reading list? Michael Harpe, Programmer/Analyst Information Technology, Ormsby Bldg. harpe@hermes.louisville.edu University of Louisville (502)588-5542 Louisville, Ky. 40292 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 07:00:08 GMT From: SVHDEV!ROBERTS_N@strat-sys.bt.co.uk Subject: Calling in Canada Reply-To: svhdev!roberts_n@strat-sys.bt.co.uk I live in England but will be visiting Canada towards the end of next month. As well as my BT Chargecard (which I can use with UK Direct), I do have a couple of US calling cards -- though I've been told that I can't use the US cards in Canada except for calling the US. Any suggestions on the best way to make calls, both local and international while in Canada? (I do have a Canadian address, but obviously, no phone service there). Any else to watch out for telecom-wise while I'm there?? Regards, Nigel Roberts | Tel. +44 206 396610 / +44 473 224323 nigelr@nigelr.ibmpcug.co.uk | Fax +44 206 393148 svhdev!roberts_n@strat-sys.bt.co.uk | Mobile +44 860 578600 ------------------------------ From: clyde@hitech.com.au (Clyde Smith-Stubbs) Subject: Motorola Mobile Phone Connector Pinout Wanted Organization: HI-TECH Software, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 04:02:04 GMT I have as Motorola mobile phone with a 25 pin 'D' type connector on the end. Can anyone tell me the pinout of this connector? E-mail preferred. Thanks. Clyde Smith-Stubbs | HI-TECH Software, | Voice: +61 7 300 5011 clyde@hitech.com.au | P.O. Box 103, Alderley, | Fax: +61 7 300 5246 ..!nwnexus!hitech!clyde | QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA. | BBS: +61 7 300 5235 HI-TECH Software: C Compilers for all manner of machines ------------------------------ From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian) Subject: If They Mention Flying Saucers, They're Out to Get You Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 14:46:50 -0800 (PST) Passed along from the shortwave radio group -- From RCAA000@MAPLE.CC.KCL.AC.UK Thu Mar 25 10:20:37 1993 Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave Subject: if they mention flying saucers, they're out to get you From: Derek Cooper From the London Times today (I did check that it's not April 1st!)- `Officers in Warrington Cheshire fed up with people listening in to their messages, broadcast that a flying saucer had crash-landed in a field & gave details of where to find it. Radio messages about a huge glowing spacecraft were broadcast with the warning "Do not approach. It may be radioactive." The warning was followed by directions to the field in Appleton. The eavesdroppers arrived within minutes, expecting to see little green men. They were arrested instead. Police said that five people had been reported to the Crown Prosecution Service for telecommunications offences. Scanning devices that can pick up police radio messages are widely available but using them to listen to police transmissions is an offence. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 01:09:43 CST From: Greg Abbott Reply-To: gabbott@uiuc.edu Subject: ATM's Slowly Returning I was at my bank today and noticed that for the first time in two weeks the ATM outside was functioning. All of the other ATM's in town which I passed by still had the giant notices pasted over all of the control surfaces saying that they didn't know when the network would be back in service. My bank happens to be one of, if not the, controlling bank (or something) for this area, so I wonder if they were able to link to some other network. Just my $.02 worth. GREG ABBOTT E-MAIL: GABBOTT@UIUC.EDU COMPUSERVE MAIL: 76046,3107 VOICE: 217/333-4348 METCAD FAX: 217/384-7003 1905 E. MAIN ST. PAGER: 800/222-6651 URBANA, IL 61801 PIN # 9541 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 03:32:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T AnyHour Saver Lowers Rates As of April 1, 1993, additional minutes on AT&T's AnyHour Saver plan will be $0.16/min M-F 8-5 and $0.09/minute any other time. The current rates are $0.20/min and $0.10/min. The monthly charge will still be $10 and includes your 60 most expensive minutes. Monty ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: New Sleaze From the Psychic Line Date: Sat 27 Mar 1993 00:50 -0400 I got a cold call from one of psychic lines services to my phone line. After the initial spiel, it said that if I answer "yes", it would continue the call (and tell me whatever) and would bill me $1.xx a minute as a collect call. Would I get charged if I coughed? [Moderator's Note: Either someone was playing a joke on you by using three-way calling to patch you and the psychic's 800 line together or perhaps for some odd reason, the psychic line was in the process of returning a call made to its 800 number to begin a reading with what it believed to be its customer but the number was misdialed/misconnected. If this was Mystic Marketing or any of the folks in Reno, Nevada, I really doubt they are doing cold calls. It would be a waste of time, and generate much ill-will. They have a very active phone room just from the incoming calls they receive; they don't have to solicit. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 9:40:50 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77 (that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles. Same sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the 7 and # keys. # in many other applications signifies time-out, right? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #214 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07450; 27 Mar 93 14:20 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21848 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 27 Mar 1993 12:03:02 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32211 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 27 Mar 1993 12:02:16 -0600 Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 12:02:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303271802.AA32211@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #215 TELECOM Digest Sat, 27 Mar 93 12:02:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 215 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Silicon Valley CEO Testifies Against Clinton's Technology Policy (A Furman) Telecom Statement on NREN, etc. (Curtis E. Reid) Stupid Telco (Ken Levitt) Guess What Was on my Phone Bill This Month (John Castaldi) AT&T Blacklisting? (Deniz Utku) Machinery - January, 1905 (Tony Harminc) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: atfurman@cup.portal.com Subject: Silicon Valley CEO Testifies Against Clinton's Technology Policy Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 04:12:24 PST WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE) via First! -- In a testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, T.J. Rodgers, president and chief executive officer of Cypress Semiconductor testified against President Clinton's recently unveiled high-technology policy, including the "data superhighway" initiative. The testimony challenges the perception that all high-technology CEOs are in accord with the Clinton Administration's technology policy, citing supportive comments from other prominent high-technology leaders. Rodgers' testimony was part of a Congressional Subcommittee hearing on high performance computing. Rodgers told members of the Subcommittee: "The (Clinton) administration would have us believe that the business leaders of Silicon Valley stand unanimously behind its program. The image of John Scully, CEO of Apple Computer, sitting beside the First Lady and applauding the State of the Union address has been beamed far and wide by White House political operatives. "I am here today in strong opposition to the administration's economic program in general and its technology agenda in particular. I am not alone." Rodgers used his own company as one example of a successful company that will be hurt by Clinton's economic program. He pointed out that Cypress generated more than $1 billion in cumulative revenue, $160 million in profits (of which $60 million was paid in taxes), 1,500 jobs, and paid cumulative salaries of nearly $500 million (of which employees paid taxes of nearly $150 million). "If that is an `excess of the 1980s' let's have more," Rodgers said. "As an entrepreneur, I should not have to apologize for my success and that of the company. I am offended by the administration's divisive rhetoric. "As we debate the virtues of raising taxes on individuals and corporations, let's not debate abstractions. Let's debate the realities of who pays and the impact of raising taxes on those people and companies." Following are comments from high technology leaders Rodgers cited in his testimony: -- Joe Zemke, chief executive officer, Amdahl Corp. -- "Whether it is sugar subsidies or `investments' in high performance computing, the Clinton program represents the same logic: siphoning dollars from individuals and corporations and allocating them through a process that is terribly inefficient -- a process that is responsive not to market requirements, but to bureaucratic empires and political payoffs." -- Don Valentine, founding venture capitalist and director, Apple Computer; director, Cisco Systems -- "Don't assume that the Pepsi-Cola kid (John Scully) speaks for Silicon Valley. We do not need pretenders who speak for us. We have visionaries who are rare, important and doers." -- Finis Conner, founder and chief executive officer, Conner Peripherals -- "The development of all technologies and products involves risks and rewards. The government should not be in the business of speculating with taxpayers' money on which of those risks will be winners and which will be losers." -- Scott McNealy, chief executive officer, Sun Microsystems -- "In the current economic climate, the proposed increase in the corporate tax rate does not encourage job growth, business investment, or global competitiveness. Rather, it penalizes profits and will result in further loss of jobs." Other high technology leaders cited in Rodgers' testimony include: Gil Amelio, chief executive officer, National Semiconductor; Wilf Corrigan, chief executive officer, LSI Logic; Pierre Lamond, founder, National Semiconductor; L.J. Sevin, chairman, Cyrix; John Adler, chief executive officer, Adaptec; Scott McNealy, chief executive officer, Sun Microsystems; and Roger Emerick, chief executive officer, Lam Research. Rodgers continued: "I still have most of the wealth associated with my Cypress shares. What have I done with my wealth? I invested it. In fact, I invested it in precisely the kinds of companies on which the administration wants to shower taxpayer subsidies -- the world's most advanced competitors in fields such as semiconductors, biotechnology, software, networking, environmental sciences and health care. Every incremental dollar that Washington takes from me comes directly out of my investments in these companies. "Essentially, the administration is arguing that by taking my money in the form of higher taxes and `investing' it in subsidies, it can make better investments -- create more jobs and wealth -- than the venture-capital firms with which I invest -- firms that are the envy of Japan and Europe. That logic defies common sense." While approving of the administration's move toward a high technology vision, Rodgers criticized its plan to spend billions in taxpayer money to fund technology programs. He argued that these programs, such as the "data superhighway" initiative, could be funded by the free market without any cost to the taxpayers. "Multiple, competing highways are being built day-by-day across the United States. MCI, AT&T and Sprint already have three independent, coast-to- coast, fiber-based long-haul networks. The real issue is extending those networks into the home. The role for government is to untangle the morass of bureaucracy and regulations that prevents private companies from hooking up the `last mile' of fiber to the home," Rodgers said. Rodgers offered the following examples to underscore his position on the administration's "data superhighway" initiative. -- "The regional Bell operating companies would gladly hook fiber optics from the long-haul network to the home. But they are prevented from doing so by regulations that make the huge capital investments uneconomical." -- "Cable operators are already hooked into 60 percent of American homes. They too could make the connection with existing long-haul data superhighways, but they are prevented by regulations that declare them a `natural monopoly' and restrict them to television and movie business." -- "The long-haul superhighway could be hooked into the home through wireless circuits. But the frequencies required are currently being held up by the Federal Communications Commission." Rodgers called for the administration to make further cuts in government spending. He pointed out that while a successful American company like Boeing had to cut 20 percent of its workforce to survive, Clinton's plan to eliminate 100,000 federal jobs only accounts for only five percent of the total government workforce. "The opportunities for cuts go way beyond headcount," Rodgers said. "We could spend hours listing wasteful and unnecessary programs -- programs that made sense 30 or 40 years ago, when they were created, but that make no sense today." Rodgers' overall recommendation: "Washington should stay away from the intricacies of high-tech competition -- whether the issue is the data superhighway, high-performance computing or advanced manufacturing. It should focus instead on the infrastructure of competition -- those factors of production that help all companies equally. President Kennedy said it best: `A rising tide lifts all boats.'" Rodgers concluded his testimony with the following: "America's entepreneurial companies have the guts, brains and drive to beat the best the world has to offer. All we need from Washington is the confidence to let us fight it out." Rodgers founded Cypress Semiconductor in 1983. Cypress Semiconductor Corp., a $300 million international semiconductor supplier, supplies 252 products in seven different product areas. Cypress exports 27 percent of its sales. The company's SPARC microprocessor chipset has been designed into 72 high-performance computer systems, including Sun Microsystems' newest SPARCserver 600 system, the most advanced multiprocessing system available. Note to Editors: A copy of T.J. Rodgers' testimony is available. Please call Ben Gibson at 408/287-1700. CONTACT: Cypress Semiconductor | John Hamburger, 408/943-2902 | or | PR | Ben Gibson, 408/287-1700 --------------- Alan T. Furman atfurman@cup.portal.com (with thanx to Paul Barnett who posted it on Usenet) [Moderator's Note: And thank you, Alan, for passing it along to us. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 26 Mar 1993 21:03:28 -0500 (EST) From: Curtis E. Reid Subject: Telecom statement on NREN, etc. This may be of interest to some of you. Enjoy. Curtis From: IN%"CONKLIN@BITNIC.BITNET" "Jim Conklin" 26-MAR-1993 19:48:06.26 To: IN%"BITNEWS@BITNIC.BITNET" "Multiple recipients of list BITNEWS" Subj: Telecomm statement on NREN, etc. This may be of general interest to those of you wondering what's coming (and why) with the NSFNET and NREN. / Jim ---------Original message------- Finally a clear statement of what they want and why the NSF is planning changes to the backbone funding and usage. For Release: March 23, 1993 LEADING TELCO CEOs JOINTLY SUPPORT CLINTON-GORE TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE The Chief Executive Officers of the nation's leading local and long-distance telecommunications companies today announced that they have signed a landmark public policy position statement (attached) -- signaling strong industry-wide support for the communications technology initiatives envisioned by the Clinton-Gore Administration. The statement was signed by the CEOs of Ameritech, AT&T, Bell Atlantic, Bellcore, BellSouth, Cincinnati Bell, Inc., GTE, MCI, NYNEX, Pacific Telesis, Southern New England Telephone Company, Southwestern Bell Corp., Sprint, U S WEST. The policy statement provides a set of principles consistent with the Administration's initiative, "Technology for America's Economic Growth, A New Direction to Build Economic Strength," and articulates the roles government and industry should play. The CEOs suggest the Administration and Congress adopt these principles as a framework for cooperation among federal, state and local governments, key users communities -- such as schools, libraries and health care providers -- and the private sector (including telecommunications, computer, information, and related industries.) In addition, the set of principles recommends that government support research on applications and services that benefit schools, health care, and industries crucial for U.S. competitiveness, as well as research that will make it easier for people to connect to, and use, information networks. Benefits to come from following these principles would include: * Increased private sector investment in, and continued development of, a national information infrastructure as a result of government serving as a catalyst. Partnerships among government, academia, industry and key user communities will focus on development of experimental technologies that leverage limited government funds. Transferring experimental technologies to commercial (production) networks will provide new capabilities to users, meet their expanding needs, and increase industry's investment in the infrastructure. * Alternative visions of the national information infrastructure can be integrated into a common vision which provides interactive multi-media and other advanced networking capabilities to all Americans. * Industry's incentive to invest in the infrastructure will remain strong because the government will not subsidize commercial networks and because commercial services will not be provided on government- supported experimental networks. * Selected user communities will be provided support for access to, and use of, networks and information through government funding. Supporting these communities represents a shift of emphasis from government's direct support of networks. These funds, predominantly grants, would be carefully targeted by the government to meet urgent societal needs by communities which otherwise could not afford to take advantage of the benefits that the infrastructure can provide -- for example, innovative math and science programs for children in public schools with limited budgets and resources. * Alternative network suppliers will be able to interconnect seamlessly with each other, resulting in a wide array of competitive choices that will spur innovation and result in competitive prices to users. According to George Heilmeier, President and CEO of Bellcore, "The telecommunications industry looks forward to the challenge of evolving information networks to meet urgent societal needs, spur economic growth, and strengthen America's competitive position in the global economy." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 16:37:40 EST From: levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) Subject: Stupid Telco Here's another tidbit in the annals of Telco incompetence. New England Telephone (Nynex) has been running ads on radio and television telling people that as of May 1 you can switch your 800 number to them. I decided to call and ask what the rates were. I was told that they didn't have that information yet. And so it goes ... Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390 UUCP: zorro9!levitt INTERNET: levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org or levitt%zorro9.uucp@talcott.harvard.edu [Moderator's Note: Well, you can switch your 800 number to me as of May 1 also (I am sending out the forms already), and I *do* have the rates for this affinity program whose residuals will benefit the Digest. Rates are from 17 to 23 cents per minute depending on volume. There is no installation fee and no monthly service charge. If you don't have an 800 number (or don't care about the one you have) I can give you one now under the above rates and conditions, or you can ask to have your existing 800 numbers put on our program in about a month. For more information on this and the other telephone affinity programs including 1+ dialing and calling cards, write ptownson@eecs.nwu.edu. PAT] ------------------------------ From: castaldi@heroes.rowan.edu (John Castaldi) Subject: Guess What Was on my Phone Bill This Month Organization: Rowan College of New Jersey Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 21:25:38 GMT This month's phone bill had several collect calls to my pilot number (that is answered only by auto attendant) from information(city) CA. After calling Integretel (grrrr...) I found out that they were collect call backs from a tele-sleeze company ... needless to say, they imediately removed the charges. [Moderator's Note: As you may have discovered, Integretel is not that bad of an organization ... all they're out there doing is servicing a part of the telecom industry a lot of people would rather keep in the closet -- the late night long distance calls between adults who are otherwise strangers whispering sweet nothings and talking dirty. I think the Integretal organization fully understands there is a great deal of fraud -- in both directions; customers try to stiff their IP's far more than the other way around -- and they keep their own list of people who do not wish to be called. When they removed the charges from your line, they added you to their negative-listing at the same time, and I doubt you will receive any more charges billed through them by their clients. In fairness to Integretel, a rep there once said to me she understood how 'misunderstandings' could happen once to any telephone subscriber; but several days in a row, all in one billing cycle; never before and never since ?? If you want your phones to be screened against collect charges from Integretel's many information providers (many, because as 'they' say, there are different strokes for different folks), call them at 800-736-7500. Its no skin off their nose and saves them hassles with billing later on. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dutku@world.std.com (DENIZ UTKU) Subject: AT&T Blacklisting? Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 01:45:10 GMT I heard that AT&T has started to blacklist numbers which are receiving high amounts of fraudulent calls, especially calls made with stolen calling cards. Those blacklisted numbers are usually BBS'es. Some local sysops informed me about the problem. They mention that their users calling with calling cards are having problems. Cards are getting cancelled immediatly after the call is placed. It brings many hassles. It is impossible for a sysop to track fraudulent calls being placed to the BBS. It is not sysop's responsibility at all. Because of a few phreak's fraudulent calls those boards getting big problems and their legitimate users are getting affected. I called AT&T regarding this problem, but couldn't find any person that could help. I know that this blacklisting action is not official. AT&T has been doing the same blacklisting for Alliance Conferancing for years. It is not mentioned officially. So here are the questions: 1: Is it legit to blacklist a number when it is RECEIVING fraudulent calls? 2: Does AT&T think that they can prevent phone fraud by blacklisting? 3: How AT&T will payback the customers who got their card cancelled and are having hassles? (ie. when outside the states, using local phone company card on AT&T USA direct, call a blacklisted number, then your card is cancelled!. It brings so many problems as you can't reach local telco's as they have mostly 800 numbers (which can't be called outside the states) or they ask for call-back etc. A friend of mine in the 612 area, had a call from AT&T security saying his BBS was receiving a large amount of fraudulent calls, and if he doesn't cooperate and give them his user data, they will make him to pay the bill! Well I don't know why AT&T is doing such inofficial fake threats and blacklisting instead of improving their security to deal with phone fraud. [Moderator's Note: It is correct your friend cannot be forced to pay for calls he did not originate or agree to pay for, however if it is believed that your friend is aware of these calls and doing nothing to prevent them -- in fact perhaps encouraging them -- then he can be subpoened by a federal grand jury and *forced* to produce his call log records. If he is not involved in, or actively encouraging the fraud, then it would behoove him to offer his cooperation by (a) first notifying the users in a public message on the system -- in his hello banner perhaps -- that AT&T was making inquiries; that he was assisting the Company and did not approve of toll fraud, and (b) offering a compromise with AT&T where if the Company would tell him the time(s) fraud calls were made to his system, he would supply them with the user record(s) for the specific call. Surely he has a log of who called the system at what times, etc? I think everyone involved in the 'instant information industry' should at least be socially respon- sible enough to cooperate in an effort to reduce toll fraud by the people who call them. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 08:45:12 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Machinery - January, 1905 Reply-To: Tony Harminc I came across the January, 1905 issue of a US magazine called Machinery. My dad had saved it, perhaps because that was the year of his birth. It is full of ads for lathes, milling machines, and so on, and has a fairly small editorial and feature section with articles on engineering practice in various industries. Two things struck me: of the several hundred US ads not one has a telephone number. In a short list of "foreign representatives", several in London have numbers, e.g. "Buck and Hickman, Ltd. Telephone nos. 844, 845 and 867 Avenue", and "George Hatch, Ltd. Phone, 5085, 5096 Bank". Cable addresses and which codes (e.g. ABC, Lieber's, Ambition-Dresden) were used are also frequent. And the following short article: A dispatch from Boston says that two fifteen-year-old boys of that city have established a wireless telegraph connection between their homes, half a mile apart. This recalls the fact that thirty days after the appearance of the first published accounts of Bell's invention of the telephone, two New York boys had built and were successfully operating an experimental telephone system of their own. These two boys have since achieved distinction in the electrical field, and have for many years been allied in business. They are Prof. Frank B. Crocker, of Columbia University, and Dr. Schuyler Skaats Wheeler. ------------- Tony Harminc ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #215 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23108; 29 Mar 93 2:15 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09537 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 28 Mar 1993 23:47:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01324 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 28 Mar 1993 23:47:05 -0600 Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 23:47:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303290547.AA01324@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #216 TELECOM Digest Sun, 28 Mar 93 23:47:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 216 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Hardshell Shock-Proof Case For Motorola Flip Phone Wanted (Paul Gauthier) Source Code For X.25 Program Interface (Chang Chen Hsien) AT&T Rate Reduction is Temporary (Phillip Dampier) Cell One/Boston Rates in NYC (Douglas Scott Reuben) Alliance 1-700 Access (Douglas Scott Reuben) Springtime for Swope in America (Alan Furman) Telegraphics Addresses (John Pettitt) Funny Digits on Calling Card Mag Stripes (John R. Levine) Predictive Dialing (leroy Casterline) Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature (Dan Danz) Ah ... Contel! (John Higdon) Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine (Justin Leavens) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gauthier@ug.cs.dal.ca (Paul Gauthier) Subject: Hardshell Shock-Proof Case For Morotola Flip Phone Wanted Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 21:11:11 -0400 I have one of those nifty little Motorola flip phone jobbies. If you examine my signature you might notice I engage in a number of activities which could result in serious damage to that expensive toy. Mainly I'm concerned about carrying it while cycling and rock climbing. So far, through care, I've managed not to fly off the bike and land on it or drop it from 80' above ground onto the rocks. But I don't really want to have to count on good luck. I'm looking for pointers to a source of a hardshell shock-proof carrying case that would hold the phone. I called the local cellular service center and they had nothing for me. I then went to the local camera shop, thinking that photographers must have to carry their gear into strange situations as well. And I was right. Unfortunately, the cases were a little on the large side. Smallest was 12"x10"x4" or so. I'd like to find something that is close to the size of the phone (ie, 6"x4"x2" internal dimensions). I have limited carrying space both in the backpack I bring climbing, and on the bike. Weight isn't too much of an issue. A hard shell is a must, so that the phone is protected if I happen to sit down on the backpack or lean up against a rock with it in the middle of the sandwich. And some sort of serious shock protection is a must. High density foam or somesuch. Hopefull this would go a long way towards saving the phone if it takes a fall from a 50' clifftop (hopefully inside of the backpack, not just the case alone, but you never know) or onto the road from my speeding bike. The other issues are water-tightness and the ability to hear the ring through it. I'm not too concerned with water-tightness, since I can wrap the phone/case in plastic if I plan to be in a wet environ. I would really like to be able to have a reasonable chance of hearing the ring through the shell. I'd be willing to perhaps drill a hole or three through the hardshell to allow the sound to escape. Any other ideas? Any and all suggestions or recommendations are welcome. Thanks in advance, Paul Gauthier cyclist, rock climber, skydiver, computer scientist (...in order of danger) Electronic: gauthier@ug.cs.dal.ca Voice: (902)423-0089 Fax: (902)420-1675 ------------------------------ From: chchang@ncb.gov.sg (Chang Chen Hsien) Subject: Source Code For X.25 Program Interface Organization: National Computer Board, Singapore Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 05:03:42 GMT Is anyone out there know where can I get the source code (in C language) for X.25 protocol program interface? If you know, please email to chchang@ncb.gov.sg. Thanks in advance. Cheers. ------------------------------ From: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) Reply-To: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 14:38:02 -0500 Subject: AT&T Rate Reduction is Temporary > From: monty@proponent.com (Monty Solomon) > As of April 1, 1993, additional minutes on AT&T's AnyHour Saver plan > will be $0.16/min M-F 8-5 and $0.09/minute any other time. > The current rates are $0.20/min and $0.10/min. > The monthly charge will still be $10 and includes your 60 most > expensive minutes. People should be aware that this is a TEMPORARY reduction in AT&T rates covering the period of March 15-May 31st only. At the end of the period, the normal rates of .20 and .10 per minute will resume. In addition, several people have contacted me referencing my post about long distance plans. They wrote that MCI will allow you to receive MCI Friends & Family discounts by establishing secondary carrier status with the company. Then, one would take advantage of MCI rates by prefixing all calls with 10222 or whatever MCI code is valid in your area. Customer service numbers are: AT&T 1-800-222-0300 residence MCI 1-800-444-3333 [Moderator's Note: My thanks to the several people who wrote to point out the rate decrease on 'Any Hour' was a one time temporary promotion. It will only apply to the calls you make which would be billed during your April or May billing cycle. They would not dare leave those rates in effect all the time ... MCI would have them in court. In fact it is uncertain now, according to one AT&T spokesperson whether or not the temporary promotion will go through without consid- erable protest from MCI on grounds of 'predatory pricing' and complaints of 'they are trying to drive us out of business again, judge ...'. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 28-MAR-1993 15:35:03.08 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Cell One/Boston Rates in NYC Cellular One/Boston (SID 00007) has recently implemented "New England Network" Roaming rates in Cellular One/NY's (00025) system. Roamers from CO/Boston can now place and receive calls (via the roam port, no Nationlink Call-Delivery or auto-roaming yet) at $.44 peak/$.29 off-peak. These rates are better than ANY plan which CO/NY currently offers to its OWN customers! Typically, CO/NY customers pay between $.50 - $.86 peak, and $.27 - $.60 off peak. I checked with THREE people at CO/Boston about this seemingly great deal, and everyone, including the roam coordinator, said they were correct. If you go into New Jersey, be careful as you head south of I-78 - ComCast Cell One/South Jersey takes over there, and you will be billed $3/day $.99 per minute, PLUS CO/Boston's inane $2 "Roamer Administration Fee". I would suggest that if you do roam in NY, see if your phone can block out SID 00173, and you should avoid this probem. You may also want to block out the *tiny* Newtown, NJ system, and the Orange County system (00479?), both of which border the NY system to the north. (CT is not a problem, as MOST of SID 00119 has New England Network rates as well, EXCEPT for Franklin County, Mass. This two-tower system along I-91 is administered by Metro Mobile, but owned by "Boston Cellular". CO/Boston does NOT have a New England Network agreement with them, so any calls placed or received there will get the full $3/$.99/$2 charge! And you can't even tell when you are on that system, as *611/*711 give the generic Metro Mobile recordings, indicating that it is all one big system. Moreover, since there is auto-call delivery to Franklin County, CO/Boston (and for that matter CO/NY) customers who want to get calls in CT and Western Mass have no way of being sure what rate they will pay! CO/Boston is working on this, but the "Boston Cellular" RSA seems to be reluctant to do anything; after all, each call results in at LEAST $4 per customer per day :( ). Overall, though, Boston customers now get a great deal on airtime in NYC. I wonder if the CO/Boston Concord, NH "partnership" customers get the same rates ... Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: 28-MAR-1993 15:33:26.23 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Alliance 1-700 Access > [Moderator's Note: The way the 700 number space is set up is that each > carrier has completely independent use of the entire 700 spectrum. Not > only that, but within a single carrier, 1+700 can and often times does > produce different results than 0+700.... If you have no equal access yet > in your area, then you probably have AT&T as your long distance carrier, > meaning 0-700 would send you to Easy Reach and 1+700 would send you to > stuff like Alliance Teleconferencing, both AT&T products. PAT] To my knowledge, AT&T Alliance Teleconferencing Service is accssed via (10288) 0-700-456-1000/2000. I have never known it to work via a 1-700 access method. Interestingly, the local LEC switches seem to be able to determine that 0-700-456-X00X is NOT an EasyReach call. This is useful so COCOTs can allow (if they are behaved! :) 0-700 ER700 access, and not have to worry about lots of calls to Alliance. When Alliance 700 first started, many LEC payphones allowed such calls to go through for free, and I trust AT&T implemented software to prevent coin Alliance 700 access yet which allows for ER700 access. Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: atfurman@cup.portal.com Subject: Springtime for Swope in America Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 10:51:32 PST In September of 1931, Gerard Swope, head of General Electric Co., proposed a joint administration -- a partnership, if you please -- of private and governmental leaders to "coordinate production and consumption." [Reference: Murray Rothbard, _America's Great Depression_, New York: Richardson & Snyder, 1983] Henry Harriman, a business executive and president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce at the time, proclaimed that "We have left the period of extreme individualism ... business prosperity and employment will be best maintained by an intelligently planned business structure." R.G. Tugwell wrote of Harriman, Swope, and the rest that they "believed that more organization was needed in American industry, more planning, more attempt to estimate needs and set production goals. From this, they argued that ... investments to secure the needed investment could be encouraged." The dean of the Harvard Business School insisted on the necessity of a "general plan for American Business." His example of the benefits of such a plan was the Soviet Union. (Fifty-four years later, Professor Laura Tyson, writing in a RAND Corporation report, praised the superior "investment" policies of the Ceausescu regime in Romania. She is now Chair of the Council of Economic Advisors. Lester Thurow, Dean of MIT's Sloan School of Business, and endorser of the Clinton candidacy, said in 1989: "Can economic command significantly compress and accelerate the growth process? The remarkable performance of the Soviet Union suggests that it can.") Quoting Rothbard: "[President Herbert] Hoover relates that Harriman warned him that if he persisted in opposing the Swope Plan, the business world would support Roosevelt for President, because the latter had agreed to enact the plan. He also reports that leading businessmen carried out this threat." As for Gerard Swope, he went on to help draft the legislation for Roosevelt's National Recovery Administration. > The policy statement provides a set of principles consistent with the > Administration's initiative, "Technology for America's Economic > Growth, A New Direction to Build Economic Strength," and articulates > the roles government and industry should play. [remainder omitted] Landmark, eh? It's springtime for Gerard Swope in America. Alan T. Furman atfurman@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ From: jpettitt@well.sf.ca.us (John Pettitt) Subject: Telegraphics Addresses Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 21:18:04 GMT In Tony Harminc writes: > Cable addresses and which codes (e.g. ABC, Lieber's, Ambition-Dresden) > were used are also frequent. While Tony was talking about 1905, telegraphics addresses still show up from time to time. I have in from of me a letter from Barclays Bank (the largest bank in the UK). At the bottom is the following: Telex: 886002 Answerback BBLGRA G Telegraphics address: Snowbank, London EC3V 0BB This letter is dated March 1993! In addition anybody who has had dealings with the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Farnbrough will have seen: Telegrams: Balooning, Farnbrough John ------------------------------ Subject: Funny Digits on Calling Card Mag Stripes Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 16:07:53 EST From: John R. Levine After months of negotiation with the bank, my Visa/MasterCard merchant account finally got set up last week and they sent me one of those cute little terminals with a mag stripe reader. (Anyone who'd like to charge a subscription to the Journal of C Language Translation should feel free to get in touch.) Not being one to leave well enough alone, I tried running various cards through the stripe reader to see what it found. In nearly every case, there turn out to be more digits on the stripe than are embossed on the card. Here's what turned up on my telephone calling cards: New England Tel 660000 xxx xxx xxxx x -- 100 MCI 660032 xxx xxx xxxx x -- 300 Sprint 660033 xxx xxx xxxx x -- 300 AT&T 8555 xxx xxx xxxx xxxx 17X followed by junk On the first three cards, the last three digits of the PIN seem not to be on the stripe, at least not in a format my terminal can read. My copy of ANSI X4.13-1983, which describes your basic ANSI-standard credit card, says that identifiers starting with 6 are for retail merchandising, and those starting with 8 were reserved at that time. One slightly surprising thing is that the issuer ID is the three digits after the 6, so MCI, Sprint, and the local telcos are sharing ID 6600. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 15:17:19 -0700 From: casterli@lamar.ColoState.EDU (leroy Casterline) Subject: Predictive Dialing I have a client who wants me to research predictive dialing software for him, so as a first step, I'm trying to gather a list of companies who produce these programs. If you know of a company in this business, I would appreciate a reference. If you have used such software yourself, I would also appreciate your opinions of the software/vendor. Frank advice and words of wisdom are hereby solicited! Please reply by mail, and I will summarize for the net if there is interest. Thanks in advance, Leroy Casterline casterli@lamar.colostate.edu ------------------------------ From: dan@quiensabe.az.stratus.com (Dan Danz) Subject: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature Date: 28 Mar 1993 23:47:57 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA Reply-To: dan@phoenix.az.stratus.com Since the PUC finally saw the light and Arizona has emerged from the dark ages of telephony, we now have CallerID available. So, I thought I'd pass on some information about a unique CallerID display unit I stumbled across. It's a CDT Model 370NS, and its great feature is something called "Block the Blocker". Besides the (English or Spanish) display of name, number, time, number of attempts, whether or not the call was answered, memory for 70-90 calling numbers, etc., this little sucker (when enabled) will say "This party will not accept blocked calls" and disconnect. It also records the fact that it received and blocked the call. The unit appears to be made (in Hong Kong??) by a company called Colonial Data Technologies (no address given), and repaired by ICLID Customer Service Center, 80 Pickett District Road, New Milford, CT 06776. I bought mine from Trans-West Telephone Co, 4120 E. Winslow Ave, Phoenix AZ 85040. The Privacy Block feature adds about $25 to the cost when compared to comparable units without the feature. While this is great for knocking out the calls from the !#%*#&@* %*&^*%$$ telemarketeers, I always assumed that legitimate callers (friends, for example) who had blocked out caller information and received the rejection would simply unblock and call back. However, I've recently discovered that, although USWest implemented CallerID and offers Line Blocking, if someone foolishly selects line blocking, they can't selectively unblock the CallerID information on a per call basis. USWest says in a flyer in the latest bill that the ability to temporarily unblock won't be available until October 93. Arrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! I don't understand: if they can block on a per-call basis, why can't they unblock on a per-call basis? What's different in the software? L. W. "Dan" Danz (WA5SKM) dan@az.stratus.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 21:21 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Ah ... Contel! I wanted to see it in black and white before posting, but here is an example of the kind of customer relations that will go forever into the past when Contel is finally and completely GTE-ized. A couple of months ago, calls to our Victorville 800 number were being intercepted by an "out of service" recording. Somehow, the service had been disconnected. A call to the business office (still in Victorville until the Evil Empire takes over) revealed that the disconnect resulted from a clerical error involved with a billing restructuring. There were profuse apologies, an immediate reconnection, and a followup call the next day to inform me that we would be receiving a credit on the next bill. The credit (now that I have the bill) was for the entire month's service and the entire month's usage. In other words, for mistakenly disconnecting our service, we got a totally free month. How can you think anything but good thoughts about a company like that? Contrast that with the time GTE erroneously disconnected my service in Los Gatos. It was out for an entire week while the goons tried to figure out which finger to insert in a certain orifice. I mentioned credit and was told that it would not be worth anyone's while to even compute it. When I insisted, I was transferred from one person to another (presumably in Thousand Jokes) since no one seemed to understand the concept of credits for interrupted service (at GTE, no less). I can imagine what the droids will be like in Plano, Texas. Jeez, I am going to miss Contel. 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: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) Subject: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine Date: 26 Mar 1993 16:38:13 -0800 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Reprinted from {MacWorld} - May, 1993: FULL-TIME FAX FAX FORWARDING Vomax from Macronix is a new kind of telephone answering device that accepts and forwards voice messages and faxes over a single phone line while you access the device from afar using a touch-tone phone or a modem. The Vomax can also optionally display faxes on a television screen, so you don't need to print them out. The Vomax, which stays in your home or office, can be set to call your pager so you know when you've received a message or a fax. The Vomax also lets callers leave a voice-annotated fax. The answering device also puts a date-and-time stamp on all transactions. The Vomax includes a fax modem that sends and receives faxes at 9600 bps and data at 2400 bps. It does not have a printer or scanner. It can connect to a computer's serial port, but also works as a stand-along device. It stores 20 minutes of voice messages or 40 fax pages with its standard RAM. The memory has a battery to preserve data in a power failure. Vomax lists for less than $400 including its software with security features. Macronix, (408) 453-8088 I have no affiliation with anything in this, I just found this interesting ... ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #216 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28798; 29 Mar 93 4:49 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19804 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Mar 1993 02:11:53 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28105 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Mar 1993 02:11:05 -0600 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 02:11:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303290811.AA28105@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #217 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Mar 93 02:11:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 217 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson What the NREN Really Is (Charles Mattair) New CT <-> Boston Call Delivery (Douglas Scott Reuben) U.S Companies Clueless (Jim Gottlieb) New York AT&T Headquarters Building Communication (Michael Hauben) Leasing Lines (Jonas R. Klein) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 11:52:15 CST From: mattair@synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: What the NREN Really Is Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX [Moderator's Note: Mr. Mattair passed along this message to us. PAT] --- Forwarded message from eniac Yes you may forward my parody, but I would like you to attach my Email address to your forward. I am interested in SUPPORTING the NREN, but I personally believe its role should be to serve all of science and education as NSFnet does now. Maybe you should attach this note to your forward. Regards, Greg ---------------- I just returned from a network meeting in San Diego today and thought you would be interested in my interpretation of what NSF proposes for the National Education and Research Network (NREN). Rather than comment specifically, I decided it would be interesting to write a parody which relates the NREN to the construction of a national super highway. Doing so removes the highly technical aspects of the overall planned functions the NREN. Please excuse this style, but I think it's the only way to explain my understanding of their plan in a way that does not immediately get very technical. It may be flawed, but the information is based upon Hans-Werner Braun's presentation ... as I understood it. Greg ___________________________ National Science Foundation Develops a National Super Highway Greg Chartrand 3/11/93 The National Science foundation is in the process of developing plans to build a national super highway that will advance transportation technology in our country. The super highway proposed will replace the existing interstate highway system and allow speeds of at least 240 MPH. The following interview with NSF developers explores their current plans. -------- ME: I understand you are building a new Super national highway(1) to serve the purposes of advancing ground transportation throughout our county. NSF: Yes we are, as a part of an earlier initiative sponsored by the then Senator Gore. We are very excited about the technology that will allow transportation speeds of 240 MPH(2) across the country. ME: That sounds exciting, how will it be built? NSF: Well, we will have this super highway designed to allow the high speed travel(3) and it will have six entrance/exit ramps.(4) ME: Ahh ... that doesn't sound like very many ramps, where will they be located? NSF: Well, several years ago we funded the establishment of six gourmet restaurants(5) scattered across the country, we are going to fund the building of the super highway and access ramps at the restaurant locations. We are however allowing the ramp contractor(6) to build as many ramps as he wishes, at his own expense. ME: I assume then the contractor for the highway(7) builds ramps where ever it makes sense to optimize access. NSF: Well, not exactly. We are separating the contracts for the ramps and the highway so the bidders can be very competitive. ME: I see. How to you plan to connect the rest of the interstate highway system(8) to your super national highway? NSF: Well actually, it's not part of our plan. We are having the highway and access ramps built for us, it's up to the states or other government agencies to provide the highways to the access ramps. We will however fund a few temporary roads(9) to connect parts of the existing interstate highway system, but don't intend to make them permanent. Did I forget to mention that we will be shutting down the existing interstate highway system?(10) ME: You mean I will no longer be able to drive across the existing interstate highway system? NSF: Yes, it will be destroyed. ME: OK, let's see if I understand. I have a state highway system for example, and I put in a connecting highway to your super highway, and I can now travel on it, right? NSF: Well, no you can't. The super highway will only be used for vehicles that can run 240 MPH(11) and we must approve every vehicle, destination, and trip the vehicle takes.(12) We don't want our super highway clogged with vehicles which can only travel 70 MPH!(13) ME: I'm confused. You mean you want my state for example, to build an access road to a super highway it can't generally use? NSF: Well, yes and no. You see we also want to encourage development of toll roads in our country(14). Our six high speed access ramps are wide enough to allow parallel toll roads to be accessed as well as our super highway. Private road builders will be able to put in toll roads between our access ramps, for a fee. ME: So there will no longer be a "free" interstate highway system? NSF: Right! ME: Lets see if I got this straight. You build a national super highway that has six access ramps located where you once established gourmet restaurants and you destroy the interstate highway system. There are no plans to replicate the functionality of the interstate highway systems, but you will allow private toll road builders to use your wide access ramps and develop parallel toll roads to your super highway. My state or the government has to build the roads that lead to the super highway, but once there, cannot travel on it unless the specific vehicle can run at 240 MPH and has specific permission from you to travel on it. NSF: You've got it! ME: Well then you must have a very interesting reason to put this highway and the access ramps at these restaurant locations. NSF: Well, you see, the gourmet food business isn't what it used to be. Fast food has really taken over in our country; we really need to preserve the gourmet food business.(15) High quality restaurants should be located right off of classy high speed highways. We really would like to encourage restaurant patrons to use the super highway so they can have breakfast in San Diego and dinner in Champaign Illinois. We will be looking for patrons who can afford to eat at multiple restaurants and we will let them ride the highway for free! Of course they must have a vehicle that can go 240 MPH.(16) ME: I'm even more confused. How will I get across the country? NSF: Well, if your state puts in an access road to one of our access ramps you take it, and then exit-off on to one of the toll roads that will be built parallel to our super highway. ME: How fast will I be able to go?(17) NSF: What ever the speed limit is on the toll road. ME: What will it cost me to ride on it? NSF: What ever the toll is. You see, we expect that several toll roads will be developed. Competition! It should keep the price down. ME: When the super highway is empty, how will it be used? NSF: Well, we are telling the gourmet restaurants that they should work together even though they will be competing with each other for customers.(18) You know, they could develop plans to send trash to each other so they can demonstrate how fast the transportation is on the super highway, it would be in their best interest.(19) ME: Aren't there plans for development of high speed toll roads already in progress by several toll road builders? What makes you think they will put their roads in-between your access ramps?(20) NSF: F.O.D. ME: What? NSF: Field Of Dreams. If we build it they will come. ME: So again, tell me who pays for what? NSF: The government funds the super highway and six access ramps. The toll road providers build their own roads and pays an access fee for the ramps. The states and other government agencies pay for any roads necessary to get to the access ramps. When you get on a toll road and pay what ever the price is. ME: And the only ones allowed to ride on the super highway are those persons who have special vehicles that can go 240 MPH with your specific permission, or those who can afford to frequent the gourmet restaurants and travel at 240 MPH. Everyone else takes the toll roads. NSF: Right, but don't forget the trash runs between restaurants! ME: Oh, how silly of me! Hmmmm. I wonder if this is really what Senator Gore had in mind? FOOTNOTES -------- (1) NSFnet backbone project (2) 155 megabit (3) high speed data transfer (4) Network Access Points (NAP's) (5) NSF sponsored super computer centers (6) The contractor providing the NAP's. (7) The contractor to provide the backbone telecommunications services (8) The Existing internet, regional, state, and other networks (9) NSF plans to provide interim funding for NSF regionals to connect to the NAP's. State networks and other government agencies are on their own. (10) The existing NSFnet will be turned off at some point after the new "arrangement" is in place. (11) The Very High Speed Backbone Service (VBNS) is reserved for applications and purposes where a demonstrated need for high speed/ capacity transmission is needed. (12) NSF will require approval. (13) NSF does not wish to clog the VBNS with low speed aggregate traffic unless additions are made to the network. 70 MPH=45 Mb/s. (14) The NSF expects commercial providers like AT&T, MCI to put networking between NAP's. Most of the existing NSFnet traffic would go over these commercial networks which would have to be paid for by the users. (15) The usefulness of super computer systems has been grossly reduced by the technological advances associated with very powerful Unix work stations. Super computers fill a diminishing niche in science and industry. (16) NSF is looking for potential users that can use more than one super computer center and use the VBNS to make the application work. Applications of this nature are a bit obscure. (17) There are no specifications for commercial providers. (18) NSF super computer centers are no longer funded by NSF so they compete for commercial and non-commercial business. (19) NSF is asking the NSF super computer centers to develop demonstration applications which show how the network might be used. These applications would demonstrate, and not necessarily do anything useful. (20) The major telecommunications suppliers will be selling similar services this year without the complications of the NAP's. The NAP's primary function would allow communications between commercial vendors which would be very useful, but it is unclear if the telecommunications suppliers will "buy" into this concept. -------- End forwarded message Charles Mattair (work) mattair@synercom.hounix.org (home) cgm@elmat.synercom.hounix.org ------------------------------ Date: 28-MAR-1993 01:28:45.24 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: New CT <-> Boston Call Delivery Finally! SNET/LINX, the "B" carrier 'serving' Connecticut and Western Mass, has finally implemented call-delivery to Boston. SNET, which perenially sits on its hands and waits for the "A" side to initiate new enhancements first, must have figured that since Metro Mobile and Cell One/Boston started call-delivery, that it was about time for them to set it up. (But SNET isn't solely at fault -- I suspect that NYNEX has more to do with long delays in setting any sort of automatic roaming deal up. It took them six years to get FMR is most of NYNEX's NY State properties, and NYC just got it a month or so ago. The A side had automatic roaming and full use of features between New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut for five years prior to the SNET/NYNEX agreement, and even still NYNEX and SNET customers can only get calls; there is no use of features at all [although it is technically possible to do so right away]). Thus: 1. From my "tests", SNET customers can get calls in the Boston system (SID 00028) automatically. Yes, you do have to hear that God-awful message which states "Please hold on, your party is being located. This is a recording number 1-0, SNET Cellular". Still isn't enough to confuse your caller? Ok, after the message is over they may have to wait 20 seconds (of silence) for you to be found! (but you WILL eventually get calls). It's basically the same message which callers hear when an SNET customer is in RI, NY/NJ, or Pittsfield, Mass. I think SNET should get rid of that - it doesn't make the system feel to "seamless", and maybe I DON'T want people knowing I am on my carphone!. (When you get a call in CT or Springfield, Mass, all the caller hears are rings, no "hold on.." message.) 2. One can also gets calls in the Franklin County, Mass system. This is the system on I-91 north of the Springfield MA. system, but below the Vermont line. Previously, although it was billed and operated as part of the SNET/LINX system, you couldn't do anything there except place outgoing calls. In order to receive calls, callers needed to dial the (413) 773-0500 roam port. From my trials, the Franklin County system now seems to be integrated into the SNET system, as calls go through to customers in Franklin County without the "hold on..." message. Features also seem to work fine as well. The Franklin county system used to have a separate SID (not 00088), and I'm stupid not to have checked to see if the SID has now been changed to 00088. I tend to doubt it, though, as this is a very recent improvement, and I don't think SNET has mentioned it to their customers yet. It may still even be in a trial stage. 3. Franklin County now has Follow Me Roaming, so non-SNET customers whose home carriers subscribe to the service can activate FMR in Franklin County. Since the system appears to be integrated into the whole SNET system (noted above), roamers can activate FMR in Franklin and get calls throughout the SNET/LINX service area, or if they have activated in SNET territory outside of Franklin County, can now get calls in Franklin County. BUT -- BE CAREFUL about roamer surcharges -- SNET *MIGHT* charge a separate charge for the Franklin County system -- check with them first! (The "A" side does this, and I'll be posting about this when I get some more time. I suspect that due to who "owns" the Franklin county "B" side, the same thing may occur. I really don't know for sure, though ...) 4. SNET is now using autonomous registration. It is similar to the system used by the "A" side systems around CT which do NOT involve the NYC system. The NYC system allows for "timeouts", where if you are in NY or a roamer from NY, if your phone is not detected for 30 minutes, you are de-registered and calls will no longer be sent to you. (You generally need to "Power ON" or hit SEND to re-register, or just "show up" in the system if you were out of the coverage area.) The other (non-NYC) systems don't have this timeout, so if you are a CT customer and go to Boston, and then turn your phone off and throw it into Boston Harbor, your calls will CONTINUE to be sent to Boston ad infinitum. This can cause some problems in terms of voicemail and other features which hopefully I'll post about later. SNET's system seems to be similar to the latter. If I am active in NYNEX/NYC, and turn my phone off and leave it off for days, calls still come to NYC, and callers get a NYNEX "Out of Vehicle" recording. Doesn't this tie up the temporary/dummy numbers? Is this the way an Autoplex swtich, which both NY and CT utilize, must work? (Or for that matter, why must a Motorolla EMX do that for the "A" side systems?) Or can the Autoplex and/or EMX have a timeout period, and just have not been implemented by their respective carriers? Therefore, if there are any customers of SNET, NYNEX/NY, NYNEX/Pittsfield (I think they have 3! :) ), NYNEX/Boston-RI, or BAMS/Eastern PA-South Jersey, what happens to your voicemail or No-Answer-Transfer when you leave your home system and register in another one. For example, if you are a CT customer and drive to NYC, how can you get calls to go back to voicemail if you do not answer? Do they drop back upon no answer automatically? (I am told by SNET that this is not the case.) I'd be very interested to hear about your experiences with autonomous registration now in place. If I may, I also have another favor to ask. Those of you who use Follow Me Roaming -- could you try this test for me: 1. Activate FMR in a city without automatic call delivery. (I'll use the example of a CT customer in Toronto.). 2. Assuming you get back to a city WITH automatic call delivery from CT, let's say you land at Kennedy Airport in NY, see what happens. I'll bet (I'm pretty sure...) that calls will still go to Toronto. 3. Try hitting *19. Does that turn FMR off and allow automatic call delivery to resume? That's it! As you may have guessed, in *my* tests, it has not been the case, and you are essentially locked out of NY or Boston, or RI, or wherever there is automatic call delivery if you come in with FMR active to an automatic-delivery city. I can go into more detail about this is anyone is interested, but right now I'm curious as to what other happens to other customers from other systems. Please reply via e-mail, and as I said, I'll summarize if there is interest. Thanks! Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: U.S Companies Clueless Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 03:47:22 GMT Tony Harminc writes: > I came across the January, 1905 issue of a US magazine...of > the several hundred US ads not one has a telephone number. And so it continues. In the most recently read issue of Telecom Asia, a publication primarily aimed at telco employees in Asian countries, I noted that not a single U.S. company included the country code in the listing of their telephone numbers. Even worse, many ads provided only an 800 number (not dialable from the prospective customers' coun- tries). 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: hauben@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Michael Hauben) Subject: New York AT&T Headquarters Building Communication Organization: Columbia University Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 08:15:30 GMT I go to school in New York City and am writing a paper comparing two (previously) AT&T buildings. The buildings are as follows: 1) 195 Broadway - the old AT&T building and 2) Madison & 65/6th street - the newer AT&T Building (now Sony) I am interested in what people know about these buildings, especially if there is any communicative aspects in the buildings. It would be interested to know if AT&T made a point of trying to effect communications in either the exterior design or interior design of either building. Also of interest is if there is any communicative difference between the two buildings. I have seen comments refering to the Bell Labs building(s) at Murray Hill in New Jersey being designed with communications in mind. I thus was wondering if this idea was true of either of these two headquarters. Thank you, Michael Hauben CC '95 hauben@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu am893@cleveland.freenet.edu ------------------------------ From: jonas@world.std.com (Jonas R Klein) Subject: Leasing Lines Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 04:53:20 GMT I'm trying to set up an email system at my (private) high school. It will run on a 386 hidden away, with two terminals attached. One terminal will be in each library on each campus. (There are two campuses.) I originally planned to connect the terminals to the computer with phone lines, but this would require four lines, each costing $60+ a month for basic business rates plus unlimited local calling. Would it be possible to rent just the copper from the telco? A couple of short-haul modems cost the same as the activation on the phone lines; this seems like it could be cheaper if renting the wires is cheap. Two years ago our school converted to centrex from a PBX. All the phone lines on campus therefore run into the administration building on my campus. When they put in the new system, they ran a few hundred pairs into this building and hooked them to the old wires. Given this much information, is it possible to tell who owns the lines? Could we have been renting the lines from the telco all those years we had the PBX, (Could we have rented the PBX too?) and if not, who do they belong to now? There's so much beaurocracy at my school it's often hard to tell! 8^) Thanks, Jonas [Moderator's Note: Centrex extensions can call each other at no charge other than the monhtly fee for being there, or for calls which leave the premises, which in your case would be calls terminating outside either campus. Why not have the terminal/modem on each end simply dial the centrex extension where the 386 is located? I assume the 386 is also on campus with centrex extensions available to it. These lines should be able to stay up all the time for all telco cares. Then you dedicate five centrex extensions in a hunt group to the 386. All calls to the 386 would dial into this hunt group. Your terminals will have two of these in use most of the time (unless you wish to deliberatly turn them off nights/weekends). Two others would be available for use by staff/students outside the premises who wished to call in to check their mail. A fifth centrex extension would be used for your mail and news feed to reach you and probably would be better off left out of the hunt group and independent. (I assume you will have network mail and news?) By turning off the local terminals when not likely in use nights/weekends you'd wind up with four centrex lines (or five if you count the news/mail feed line) for use at a time when there'd be far more people off campus wanting to call in than the other way around. This gives you quite a bit of flexibility and allows the 386 to be used from on or off campus with 'accordion-like' phone service; lines available from either direction (centrex extension to extension or off-premises in to centex extension) as needed. To avoid abuse of the phone lines where the terminals are located, put an autodialer on each which seizes as soon as the modems go off hook in response to ATD . The autodialer would dial the four digit extension where the 386 is located. Have those two extensions toll-restricted by the local telco so 9-level (or whatever is dialed for long distance) is blocked out, and set for outgoing service only. Have those modems time out after say, two minutes of inactivity and hangup. Person wanting to use terminal walks up, types ATD and two or three seconds later is on the 386 ready to log in. If they walk away and forget to log out, it will be done automatically when the modem idles-out and disconnects. Finally, take the five extensions terminating at the 386 and have them toll-restricted with the exception (maybe) of the 'uucp line'. Take the 'cu' or 'tip' or (whatever you call it) command and restrict it to superuser and/or root on the 386. No need for people at the terminals on campus to be able to 'cu' and get outside phone lines via the 386. Ditto, there is no reason for people calling in from outside to be able to 'cu' out onto the campus centrex system for whatever mischief they might think of. Now you have a very nice, flexible news and mail system both on campus from two fixed locations or on campus by anyone with a laptop and an extension phone they can dial from as well as off campus by anyone dialing the full seven-digit number of the centrex extension. Simple instructions to users: at fixed locations, enter 'ATD return' and login when system responds. From other campus locations, dial extension xxxx. From off campus, dial xxx-xxxx. Total telecom cost, whatever the school pays for seven centrex extensions; and they may already have the seven to spare not in use. Ah, but you say the 386 was not going to be on campus ... ... it was going to be at your home, in your bedroom perhaps ... ... Well, now you got a buncha 'real' phone calls getting made from the school centrex system ... leasing the pairs would be too expensive. You'd be better off weaseling the school into paying for those five centrex extensions to be terminated in your home (or wherever) instead so the whole thing would remain transparent where the users were concerned. Personally, I'd opt for having the 386 at school (if you had not already planned it that way), and convincing school administrators to give you a key to the premises -- barring Behavioral Problems *they* know about that you did not tell us -- which would allow you to go there on Sunday or at midnight or whenever it was necessary to attend to your ailing system. Keep still another 'ultra-private' centrex extension up to the 386 which you have for your personal dial-in from home whenever you need to be on the machine at night, etc. I wouldn't settle for just two terminals when it is just as easy to have a full fledged campus network. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #217 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00537; 29 Mar 93 5:35 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17967 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Mar 1993 03:01:20 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05750 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Mar 1993 03:00:29 -0600 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 03:00:29 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303290900.AA05750@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #218 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Mar 93 03:00:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 218 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson ISDN in Residential Use (Lynne Gregg) AT&T and Directory Assistance Charges (Lynne Gregg) My Bad Phone Line Swapped Out For Neighbor's Good One! (Dan Ts'o) Re: Answering Machine Features (Marc Unangst) Re: Answering Machine Features (Brent Whitlock) Re: Answering Machine Features (Richard J. Pauls) Re: Answering Machine Features (Bohdan Tashchuk) Re: Answering Machine Features (Daniel E. Ganek) Re: Answering Machine Features (Dave Levenson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lynne Gregg Subject: ISDN in Residential Use Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 12:45:00 PST Peter DaSilva wrote: > If ISDN was available, people would do this. But it's not, so they > don't. > If I could buy ISDN for my house at a residential class rate, I'd do > it, and enough other people would do it that it'd be commercially > feasible to sell ISDN services. But I can't. In some countries you > can get ISDN at commercial prices, but without retail customers there's > no incentive for businesses to get into it. > It's not too late. ISDN would become your digital dialtone, and it'd > also be one of your options for long distance data service. The > problem with ISDN isn't technical, it's political. ISDN ** is ** available in some areas and the price is very reasonable (in view of the carrier's costs to implement). Several corporations and organizations in California (where ISDN is most prevalent, at least with Pac Bell) are running telecommuting trials (work at home) typically engineers or programmers are involved in the telecommuting programs and involve extending TCP nets to users homes via ISDN. I don't view this as a political issue, though it is one that impacts the U.S.'s telecom infrastructure. Users rely on the telecom carriers to deliver these services. Don't write your Congressman on this -- ring up the CEO of your local service provider. For further details on ISDN deployment, I'd suggest contacting the Corporation for Open Systems, in Reston, VA. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ From: Lynne Gregg Subject: AT&T and Directory Assistance Charges Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 14:23:00 PST TELECOM Moderator noted: > Moderator's Note..."I am paying 60-70 cents for each directory > assistance call because the carriers to join the industry in recent > years refused to either establish their own directory assistance > bureaus or share the common costs involved in the maintenance of the > 555-1212 services used for years by AT&T and GTE customers. The > newcomers told their customers to use xxx-555-1212 to get the > information free from AT&T, then dial via the alternate carrier to > place the call. FYI, 555-1212 does NOT get you AT&T. AT&T has no directory assist business here in the U.S. with exception of "800" and International D/A. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ From: tso@cephalo.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu (Dan Ts'o) Subject: My Bad Phone Line Swapped Out For Neighbor's Good One! Date: 28 Mar 1993 21:32:18 GMT Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston,Tx [Moderator's Note: Telecom did not get the original messages in this thread as far as I can detirmine. PAT] In article <1ojbh9$7hl@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> tso@cephalo.neusc.bcm. tmc.edu (Dan Ts'o) writes: > I just moved into a new house and have discovered that I can't > reliably use my old modems out of the phone lines of this house. > Although voice sounds fine, I can't reliably even establish a > connection at 2400baud. Some modems can setup a 1200baud connection, > but still the connection is very shaky and the sessions are frequently > interrupted by garbage. > I should add one other point. I know that the problem is not in my > house wiring because I brought my T1000SE with modem to the phone > junction box outside my house, disconnected the house wiring and > connected up the modem directly. It still did not work. Thanks to everyone that responded to my query. Actually the problem had been there for several months but I just dreaded the battle I thought it would take, so I put it off -- until yesterday. Actually it wasn't so bad, perhaps I was lucky ... I called SW Bell and placed a service call, complaining of noise on the line. I was scheduled a service call without a hitch, and the guy came first thing this morning. As I said, I dreaded the expected interaction. The first hour was as expected: "What's wrong ? The line seems fine." "Well, my modems won't work." "I can't *hear* any problem on voice." "My modems are for voice lines." "Let me check a few things..." So he checks, measures, dials diag numbers, yanks on the house line, climbs on the pole, checks, etc. No problems found. All "levels" are normal, even "excellent". Luckily this guy is open and willing to listen. So I show him my laptop/modem, try to dialout, and we hear the failed connection. I insist that the modem works fine, that I use it all the time from other phone lines, and that I dialed the exact same number from as far away as Canada a few weeks ago and this laptop/modem worked. He looks skeptical but willing to pursue the matter a bit. He calls the "experts", they offer nothing: "measures fine, voice sounds fine, must be fine ..." He says to do more he would need an oscilloscope, and he hasn't touched one in ten years ... The guy is about to give up and has packed his ladder away. I asked if he could bring down another "dialtone" (line) to my house. He is willing and brings out his ladder again. He connects up my house wiring with a neighbor's line. We run the same laptop/modem test. IT WORKS! He says SHIT! At last something he can hang his hat on. He is also incredulous. Sounds fine, "measures" fine, but ain't fine ?!? He puts things back the original way: No workie! He goes and connects me up with a different line between my house and the local distribution point several blocks away: No workie! Finally he gives me the neighbor's line between the local distribution point and the central office! (poor neighbor ...) It works. He calls it highly abnormal ... Anyways, I'm happy, but I hope my neighbor doesn't use modems. Thanks again for all y'all's help. I think I'm lucky that this guy was at least willing to consider the "impossible" ... Cheers, Dan Ts'o Div. Neuroscience 713-798-3100 Baylor College of Medicine 1 Baylor Plaza S603 Houston, TX 77030 tso@cephalo.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu ------------------------------ From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Date: 28 Mar 1993 23:49:44 -0500 Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI In article khan@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) writes: > [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area > where the tariffs were concerned. I disagree. The telco already lets you pass certain messages for free; for instance, you can discover whether or not someone at the number you're dialing is on the phone by noting whether you get a busy signal or a ringback when you call. You can discover whether or not a particular number is valid for free by noting whether you get an intercept. You can even find out what someone's new number is for free by calling the old number and listening to the "The number you have dialed has been changed. The new number is ..." intercept. The telco chooses to structure their rates such that the only service you can purchase is a talk path between two points for a certain period of time. They don't have any method for asking a predetermined question and getting a binary answer. If the telco felt that such a service would be profitable, they would probably ask that the tariffs be amended to allow them to offer such a service. As it is, I feel "that which is not explicitly forbidden is allowed." To bring this back to answering machines, I am continually amazed that they continue to use such antiquated technology as analog magnetic tape. How difficult/expensive would it be to put a small hard drive (10MB or 20MB, say) inside an answering machine, and record digitized voice on it? At 64Kbps/sec using u-law encoding (we're shooting for "phone-quality" here, after all), that's a bit less than 8K/sec. A 10MB hard disk would hold a bit over 20 minutes of messages, minus a little for housekeeping and data structures. This would allow for easy time/date stamping, random access to messages (including deleting a message in the middle of the "tape"), and probably better-quality sound as well. If you really want to save space, use 2-bit or 3-bit ADPCM encoding (19.2Kbps and 28.8Kbps, respectively). A 10MB hard drive then holds 72 minutes and 48 minutes, respectively. I understand that some machines in use now use NVRAM or some similar technology to store messages; however, the cost per megabyte of most such devices is fairly high. You could probably sell 10MB hard drives for $30/ea., or less, if produced in sufficient quantity. Since the introduction of notebook and subnotebook computers, hard drives have become a lot more rugged; the answering machine might be able to survive being dropped on the floor while the drive was spinning. (Of course, you should probably only spin up the drive when you're actually using it, both to save power and to increase durability.) Going a bit further, you could even build in a CNID detector, and have different OGMs for various calling numbers. Or use an ACL to control remote message retrieval; only calls from specified numbers can do more than leave a message. The technology is here; my ZyXEL U-1496E handles voice digitization and DTMF recognition. With a PC to control it, it becomes a very powerful answering machine. But the modem costs $300 and the PC, another $400 or $500; this should be do-able for a street price in the $150 to $200 range. Marc Unangst, N8VRH mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us ------------------------------ From: bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 16:33:59 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana khan@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) writes: > ljbartel@naomi.b23b.ingr.com (Les Bartel) writes: >> I am in the market for an answering machine, and would like the >> opinions of those in the telecom group on what constitutes a >> reasonable answering machine. I am interested in a low-cost solution, >> but a general discussion of features and good/bad/mediocre brands is >> welcome. > Here are my criteria: > * Should use two full-sized cassettes - microcassettes are more > fragile and have lower sound quality, and two tapes means the machine > can switch quickly from outgoing message (OGM) to recording the > incoming message (ICM); with a 1-tape machine it has to fast-forward > past the other ICMs on the tape before it can record the new ICM, > which may be a long pause if you get lots of messages. I agree with all the criteria Scott listed, except for this one. My preference would be all digital recording of ICM and OGM, such as the new AT&T digital answering machine with 26 minutes of ICM recording time. Two full-sized cassettes would be my second choice in recording media. I think it would be very useful if the answering machine also had a feature which calls a preprogrammed telephone number to announce that a new message has been received. This preprogrammed number should be changeable via the DTMF remote control, as well. It should have a synthesized or recorded voice which would announce something to the effect of "This is a message for (enter answering machine owner's name here.) A new message is waiting for you." The telephone number of the answering machine which has the message could be included as well, and the answering machine could prompt for a security code if you want to listen to the message, also. This feature could be set to call for each received message, on a periodic basis if any messages have been received, or to not call at all. I think such a feature could be incorporated into an answering machine like the AT&T digital model mentioned above without much increase in cost. * * * * * * --> 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 ------------------------------ From: pauls@pender.ee.upenn.edu (Richard J. Pauls) Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Date: 28 Mar 93 18:02:09 GMT Organization: University of Pennsylvania In article khan@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) writes: > As for which machines have these features, my Panasonic KX-T1470 has > them all and more, and I paid just over $100 for it a couple of years > ago. It's been rock-steady reliable as long as I've owned it. I agree with your recommended features, but not with your choice. I also own the same machine and there is one real bad feature: it is loud as hell mechanically! It must make seven or eight loud mechanical noises as it slams the tape haeds in and out of the two tapes and controls the directions. In addition, mine is not working now (two yrs old) It keeps losing the outgoing message and when people call they just get a beep. I have replaced the tape and cleaned the heads; any other suggestions? No, get all these features, but don't get this machine unless you keep it in the basement covered with pillows! Rich ------------------------------ From: zeke@fasttech.com (Bohdan Tashchuk) Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Organization: Fast Technology --- Beaverton, OR Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 09:56:38 GMT > [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area > where the tariffs were concerned. ... ] I figure that toll-savers are fair game. After all, AT&T's own machines have them. If you can't outlaw 'em, join 'em. Bohdan ------------------------------ From: Daniel E. Ganek Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 15:06:48 GMT Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA In article khan@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) writes: > * Toll Saver is a must (although our Moderator probably disagrees with > this! ;-) > [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area > where the tariffs were concerned. What is the difference between > saving on tolls by not answering the phone for a certain number of > rings as a way to pass a message to the caller and not answering the > phone for a certain number of rings until you are in a position to > talk to the caller, ala Larry King? What is the difference between > saving on tolls in this way or saving on tolls by passing coded > messages in the form of bogus collect phone calls to/from non-existent > names? PAT] I thought the same way until I bought an AT&T answering machine. They made a big deal of the toll-saver feature in the instruction. [Moderator's Note: Well if AT&T is happy, then I'm happy. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 23:00:03 GMT In article , khan@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) writes: [ his wish-list for answering machine features ] > Here are my criteria: > * Should use two full-sized cassettes - microcassettes are more > fragile and have lower sound quality, and two tapes means the machine > can switch quickly from outgoing message (OGM) to recording the > incoming message (ICM); with a 1-tape machine it has to fast-forward > past the other ICMs on the tape before it can record the new ICM, > which may be a long pause if you get lots of messages. I use an AT&T answering machine with one cassette, but no such pause. The OGM on the tape is only a backup copy. At power-up, the OGM is digitized from the tape and stored in solid-state memory. The tape is then positioned after the last incoming message, and is ready to record a message immediately after playing the OGM from memory. Newer AT&T answering machines are available with solid-state memory for both the OGM and message storage. > [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area I agree. AT&T's machines do include this feature ... apparently they have chosen to sell answering machines to people who want this feature, even if they don't sell quite as much long distance network time to these people over the life of the machine. [It is a grey area, but the machine is made of grey plastic.] Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #218 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04491; 30 Mar 93 8:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18670 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 30 Mar 1993 02:23:12 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05731 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 30 Mar 1993 02:22:31 -0600 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 02:22:31 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303300822.AA05731@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #219 TELECOM Digest Tue, 30 Mar 93 02:22:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 219 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Looking For -48VDC/120VAC Inverter (Jonathan Sadler) The Fortran-Filter Gateway (Mark Boolootian) Interesting Comparison (John Higdon) "Secret" DTMF Voice/Data/Fax Switch? (Joel M. Hoffman) New Communications Magazine Program, WWCR/LTRN (Scott R. Weis) Telecom Products offered by Lifestyle Fascination (Bob Baxter) Break in to a 1A2? (David H. Close) Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Randy Gellens) Re: Help Needed Setting Up Leased Line - SCOPE-8 (Barton F. Bruce) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: sadler@lachman.com (Jonathan Sadler) Subject: Looking For -48VDC/120VAC Inverter Reply-To: sadler@lachman.com Organization: Lachman Technology, Inc., Naperville, IL Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 22:59:20 GMT I am looking for a vendor that carries -48VDC / 120VAC inverters. We havn't calculated the load requirements, so a vendor with many different products is prefered. This will be used for powering a SUN and a router in an application that only has TELCO battery supply. Thanks, Jonathan Sadler Lachman Technology, Inc. -- Back from the grave sadler@lachman.com 1901 North Naper Blvd, Naperville, IL 60563-8895 sadler@cs.wisc.edu (708) 505-9555 x379 FAX: (708) 505-9574 ------------------------------ From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian) Subject: The Fortran-filter Gateway Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 16:24:46 -0800 (PST) [Ran across this on the RISKS Forum and thought you might find it amusing - mb] Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 23:04:46 HST From: "Joe Dellinger" Subject: The FORTRAN-hating gateway Several months ago we started noticing that (now and again) the network connection to the mainland would become very very slow; this would continue for 10-15 minutes or so, then all would suddenly be well again. A while after this started happening a coworker of mine complained to me that the connection to the mainland _never_ worked anymore. It seems that he had some FORTRAN source that he needed to copy to a machine on the mainland, but he never could because "the network wouldn't stay up long enough for the ftp to complete". Yes, it turned out that the network outages happened whenever he attempted to ftp that _particular_ FORTRAN source file to the mainland. We next tried compressing the file; it copied just fine then (but unfortunately the machine on the mainland had no uncompress program, so it was still no go). Finally we "split" his FORTRAN program up into very small pieces and sent them one at a time. Most of the pieces would copy without trouble, but a few would either not go at all or only go after many _many_ retries. Examining the troublesome pieces, we found they all had one thing in common: they contained comment blocks that began and ended with lines consisting of nothing but capital C's (his preferred FORTRAN commenting style). At this point we started sending e-mail to the network gurus on the mainland asking for help. Of course, they wanted to see an example of our un-ftp-able files, so we mailed some to them ... but our mail never got there. Finally we got the bright idea of simply _describing_ what the unsendable files were like. That worked. :-) [Dare I include in this message an example of one of the offending FORTRAN comment blocks? Probably better not!] Eventually we were able to piece together the story. A new gateway had recently been installed between our part of campus and the connection to the mainland. This gateway had GREAT difficulty transmitting packets that contained repeated blocks of capital C's!!!! Just a few such packets would occupy all its energies and prevent most everything else from getting through. At this point we complained to the gateway manufacturer ... and were told "Oh, yes, you've hit the repeated C's bug! We know about that already.". Eventually we solved the problem ... by buying new gateways from another manufacturer. (In the manufacturer's defense I suppose an inability to propagate FORTRAN programs might be considered a feature by some!) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 93 12:52 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Interesting Comparison Frequently on this forum we have discussed the possiblity of cable companies getting into the telephone business and visa versa. While I certainly have political and economic considerations about allowing LECs in the cable business, I have some very real and solid technical objections to ever allowing cable companies into the telephone business. Without so much as a word of warning, TCI (San Jose) decided to move all of its channels around on the cable. No doubt this is in preparation to implement a tiered rate structure to further enhance revenues from it captive audience. But that is not the real problem. Just after midnight, cable service went dark -- including all channels and the digital radio service (DMX). A phone call netted a semi-rude response: "the channels are being re-aligned" and that service would be out until 6 AM. Can you imagine what would happen if it took Pac*Bell six hours to cut in a new 5ESS? Or a radio station six hours to turn up a new transmitter? But it is even worse than that: as I write this the cable service is still a mess and unusable. Sound for one channel's video is heard on another channel. A&E, something I frequently watch has been put on cable channel 11 and is now interferred with by a strong local air signal. Another phone call reveals that they are "still working on it". As a reference point, GTE Mobilnet here in the Bay Area is cutting over to a new AT&T switch at its MTSO this coming Friday -- an operation involving hundreds of cell sites and thousands of customers and a very complex system. CATV is horse and buggy technology by comparison and yet the local TCI zoo appears to be in completely over its head. As much as I am for local dial tone competition, we should never allow cable TV operators anywhere near this market. Divestiture was a walk in the park compared to what disasters would befall us should the CATV baffoons attempt to provide genuine essential services. 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: I assume you do not render payment to them this month on the basis that service has been irregular and mostly unusable. Defy them to pursue the matter further. PAT] ------------------------------ From: joel@wam.umd.edu (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Secret DTMF Voice/Data/Fax Switch? Organization: University of Maryland, College Park Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 03:48:43 GMT Is there a machine that will monitor a call on the receiving end, and listen for DTMF tones and then transfer the call appropriately? What I'd like is to leave a modem on my voice line in answer mode, but have an answering machine on the line also. When most people call, they just get the answering machine (with no annoying message to "press 1 to leave a message, now). But if a caller presses, say, the number 7, the call is transfered to the modem. I still want to be able to dial out with the modem, of course. I suppose I could built it, but I'm not sure how a) to make sure the unit only responds to incoming calls, or b) how to signal the modem to pick up the call after I transfer it. I'm sure there are other difficulties I haven't considered yet, too. Any ideas? Joel (joel@wam.umd.edu) ------------------------------ From: kb2ear@kb2earampr.org (Scott R. Weis KB2EAR) Subject: New Communications Magazine Program, WWCR/LTRN Date: 30 Mar 93 03:37:02 GMT Organization: KB2EAR's Machine Announcing the creation of Spectrum, a new international communications and technology radio program. Spectrum will air Sundays beginning May 2 at 0335 UTC via WWCR Nashville, Tn USA (7435 Khz) and the Let's Talk Radio Network (Spacenet3 Transponder 21, 5.8 Mhz Sub carrier Wide Band Audio). The program will feature produced segments on all aspects of communications from DC. through Light! In addition, there will be a live phone in segment with guests from the communications scene. The program will be hosted by Dave Marthouse, a long time radio enthusiast and professional broadcaster and Mark Emanuele a professional communications consultant. Spectrum will be underwritten by Holmdel, NJ based Overleaf International, a Data Processing and Telecommunications Consulting Firm. Spectrum will originate from studios at Overleaf's Holmdel, NJ Corporate HQ. Dave Marthouse Internet: n2aam@kb2ear.ampr.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 93 23:06:45 -0400 From: Bob Baxter Organization: Fraternity of Fun Folks Subject: Telecom Products Offered by Lifestyle Fascination Hello all, I recently received a copy of the late Spring 1993 catalog offered by Lifestyle Fascination. They are a mail-order company that offers gee-whiz gasdgets, sort of like the Sharper Image. There were several items listed that might be of interest to Telecom'ers. All of the indented text is copied verbatim from their catalog. New CallScreener I.D. turns away nuisance calls, accepts preferred callers, records all numbers! Here's a caller ID that is affordable enough for home use yet has exclusive advance features that make it ideal for small and medium sized businesses. You can pre-program numbers with the keyboard or enter them after a call by touching a button. Numbers allocated as "unwanted" light a red LED and as an option, eliminate ring. Preferred calls light a green LED and ring through. New, unprogrammed callers flash intermittent green. All caller numbers (with names where service permits) are displayed on the LCD screen. If you've been away, all numbers can be reviewed with date and time of each call. You can add personal or company names to any programmed number. All information is retained even during power out! Displays time, month, day when off line. Uses 110V AC included. Available with 169 or 84 name & number capacity. #XCS494 - CallScreener Model P80A, 84 memory - $139.95 #XCS495 - CallScreener Model P160A, 169 memory - $159.95 Protect your anonymity on the telephone by disguising your voice - Voice Changer II. Variable level control alters voice's pitch at the touch of a switch. Works on both incoming and outgoing calls. Voice Changer II is compatible with all telephones -- works with multi-line phones and conference calls. Connects easily to telephone's handset and has built-in amplifier providing volume control. LED light indicates when in use. Powered by 4 AA batteries. SImilar to units that used to cost up to $400! #XTV861 - Telephone Voice Changer - $59.95 Politely end annoying, long-winded telephone conversations with Gotta Go (tm). The quick, easy way to terminate undesirable calls without appearing rude or hurting the caller's feelings. Press the button on Gotta Go to activate the "click" sound imitating call-waiting. This provides the opportunity to end the call by saying "this is the call I've been waiting for." Comes with easy to install 12" cord. Requires 9 volt battery (not included). FCC approved. #XGG429 - Gotta Go Call Waiting Imitator - $19.95 That's it for the products. Lifestyle Fascination offers two numbers to order from: Voice - (800) 669-0987 / Fax - (908) 928-1107. Regards, Phone ... (516) 467-2746 / AOL...BOBTHEDJ Bob Baxter Internet: P00284@PSILINK.COM / BOBTHEDJ@AOL.COM ------------------------------ From: dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) Subject: Break In to a 1A2? Date: 30 Mar 1993 05:43:44 GMT Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena I have a customer with a 1A2 key system, three phones, and three lines. They want to allow a modem to share line three (since its most likely to be used when the business is closed anyway). So ... I bought a simple device to insert in the cable and break out up to five lines to modular jacks. Each jack has four pins. It looks like this: -----------------------------\ from wiring closet ------/ | +----------------------+ | [] [] [] [] [] | +----------------------+ | /------ \----------------------------- to key phone I plug in an old pulse-only phone and get dial tone on the first three lines, just like I expect. But, when I try to dial, I can't break dial tone. I've heard of parity problems with tone dialing, but I thought pulse was pulse. It seems as though the key phone is holding the line off-hook concurrently with my test phone. And, indeed, when my test phone goes off-hook, the key phone lights the line to show its in use. Would it help to insure that only tip and ring are connected in my test phone? Can someone with more experience tell me what I'm doing wrong? Thanks. Dave Close, dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu, BS'66 Ec ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 30 MAR 93 00:55 Subject: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE). I thought the conclusion was that one did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force. Did I remember incorrectly? GTE insists that one always has to pay the FCC charge, but then I expect them to say that, true or false. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com A Series System Software if mail bounces, forward to Unisys Mission Viejo, CA rgellens@mcimail.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself [Moderator's Note: That is correct. The FCC subscriber line access charge is always due and payable. The fact that your phone line is restricted in the type of calls it can make is your choice, not that of telco or the commission. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 01:41:05 -0500 (EST) From: Barton F. Bruce Subject: Re: Help Needed Setting Up Leased Line - SCOPE-8 Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. Jerry Krulewicz (wireworks!krulewicz@rutgers.edu) writes: (FWIW, Email to: wireworks!krulewicz@rutgers.edu bounced.) > Help, I am looking for a recomendation regarding a leased line. > The situation is that I need a line from area code 908-686 exchange to > 908-730 exchange for data use. The 686 end is in NJ Bell territory > but the 730 end is in "United Territory" (a Sprint Company.) You missed an important piece of info. Do you need ringdown VOICE part time or is this JUST DATA??? Your choice of the -E model in ZyXEL is unfortunate. The full blown LCD model also does do four wire leased analog lines. I.E. a data line without ringing and such. The -E may do a non-ringing two wire leased line but I would check. Basically you really DON'T WANT an analog line for data if you can avoid it. A good data grade analog line WON'T have ringing. You are in the same area code, so are stuck with state tarrifs. I have NO IDEA what they are there. In MA or NY it is now probably **CHEAPER** to use 56kb DDS-II than analog. The analog prices are going UP and the DDS-II ones are dropping (we had a 20% cut in Jan in MA). A GOOD DDS DSU/CSU will let you rate adapt from 56kb down to lower speeds and go ASYNC or SYNC!! In NY 56kb is the SAME PRICE as 2.4kb, so ALWAYS install the full 56kb and rate adapt down if you must so you can later speed up to full 56kb sync (or 57.6kb async) without paying for telco reinstall to get a faster speed when your end equipment can hack the faster speed. There are MANY DDS csu/dsus that WON'T do what you want, but a reasonable set of newer ones WILL. WATCH OUT. If you NEVER EVER need more than 9.6, and 9.6 DDS-II is available, older non rate adapting CSU/DSUs can do it. If 2 wire DDS-II is available up to 19.2kb (a NJ company makes the **SPECIAL** hardware needed, so there is a chance you have the offering in their home state), it is generally a tad cheaper, but the equipment NEVER will go faster and probably has zero resale value. A new Adtran unit does double duty as Dialup ISDN or ISDN-based leased line mode to 128kb SYNC or ASYNC (to 115.2kb), but for leased lime mode I doubt there are any tariffs ANYWHERE - yet. It is two wire in both modes and includes NT1 functionality for ISDN. Costs ~ double their regular DDS-III AR four wire to 56/64 unit. Do you need SYNC or ASYNC?? If you must go analog, all non '+' model ZyXELs now go to 16.8 sync or async. The rev 6.0 microcode for the '+' models goes to 19.2kb (FTP to ftp.camb.com for eprom binaries). Check ADTRAN's latest four wire DDS model - DSU-III AR (they are in Huntsville). Or for a much CHEAPER (in all ways - IMHO) unit checkout BAT electronics. WHAT are you doing?? Are you within 10? 20? or maybe even 30? miles and line of site with easy roof or top floor window access for *SMALL* yagi antenna? Is this for SEVERAL YEARS? 64kb, 128kb, 256kb cost ~ $2800, $3000, $3200 per end for NON licensed spread spectrum radio units - plug and play - NO tribute monthly to telco!! Add a COMPRESSING (Gandalf) ethernet bridge to each end for ~$2k and you have a FORMITABLE multipurpose data link at NO monthly charge. I may be off in outer space compared to what you need, but maybe you really could use something MORE that what you asked for - be more specific. Again, WHAT are you doing?? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #219 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15373; 31 Mar 93 6:01 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27484 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 31 Mar 1993 02:59:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21647 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 31 Mar 1993 02:58:35 -0600 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 02:58:35 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303310858.AA21647@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #220 TELECOM Digest Wed, 31 Mar 93 02:58:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 220 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Supreme Court Lets States Ban Robot Dialers (John R. Levine) US Supreme Court Upholds Minnesota Telemarketing Law (John R. Grout) RFD: comp.std.wireless (Wesley S. Jones) ISDN - What For? (Hindra Irawan) How Can I Decode CLID Data From A Digitized Sample? (Fred Ennis) Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Windsor Star via Nigel Allen) Wiring Standards Book? (Donald Crenshaw) Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences (Wil Dixon) Panasonic Phone Programming (Javier Henderson) ISDN Digit Sending (Terence Cross) BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Julian Macassey) Telephone Rates in OZ (Robert M. Hamer) Screen Phones (Arthur Chandler) Freenet, Nixpub Lists Wanted (Craig W. Farley) PC-Based Telephone Accessories (Rob Knauerhase) Interesting Coincidence (dbw@crash.cts.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Supreme Court Lets States Ban Robot Dialers Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 13:34:58 EST From: John R. Levine Reuters reports that on Monday the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a state court ruling that states can regulate or ban automated telephone dialing and announcing systems. Minnesota has a law, similar to that in other states, that bans their use without either a live attendant or prior consent of the callee. Larry Hall, a guy who has one of these machines in his home in St. Paul and used it to make as many as 30,000 calls a day, challenged the law on First Amendment grounds. The State Supreme Court upheld the law, denouncing the devices and saying that the state has a substantial interest in protecting the privacy of a person's residence. Hall appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the appeal and let the Minnesota ruling stand. His lawyers, from the Minnesota branch of the ACLU, said in their appeal that such rulings will put robot calling firms out of business. (Even though I'm one of those card-carrying ACLU members we heard so much about a few years ago, I'd think there are better issues for them to worry about.) The ruling apparently referred specifically to calls to residences, not to businesses. It's also not clear how, if at all, this affects interstate robot junk calls. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: grout@sp90.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: US Supreme Court Upholds Minnesota Telemarketing Law Reply-To: j-grout@uiuc.edu Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 23:06:01 GMT By declining to review an earlier Minnesota Supreme Court ruling in Hall vs. State of Minnesota, the US Supreme Court today left intact a 1987 Minnesota state law which requires unsolicited computerized telephone sales calls to be preceded by a live operator. A similar Federal law passed in 1991 has not yet been enforced. John R. Grout INTERNET: j-grout@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 12:37:19 CST From: news@delphinium.rtsg.mot.com From: jonesw@rtsg.mot.com (Wesley S. Jones) Subject: RFD: comp.std.wireless Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 18:33:38 GMT R E Q U E S T F O R D I S C U S S I O N ------------------------------------------- This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a moderated newsgroup to discuss communication techniques, protocols and standards for wireless computer networks. NEWSGROUP NAME: comp.std.wireless STATUS: Moderated. This is mainly to generate a useful, readable archive. The plan is to make posting as automatic as possible. BACKGROUND: There is a clear need for a shared forum for technical discussions between members of various standards groups concerned with wireless networks. Several committees are dealing with the same basic technical issues and need to track each other's evolving positions. As the issues develop and the questions become more detailed, the danger of needless inconsistencies increases. PURPOSE: The primary goal of this newsgroup would be to to promote consistency and mutual awareness between existing committees (e.g., IEEE 802.11 and ETSI RES-10) and any future committees. The newsgroup would expedite their deliberations by providing a convenient forum for technical discussion between their scheduled meetings. Additionally, the open nature of the newsgroup would help the standardization process by allowing people not normally connected with the standards groups to provide their input. The newsgroup would have no official standing with any standards group or other organization. A secondary goal would be to explore applications for wireless network technology. The emerging standards must, after all, correctly anticipate these applications. SCHEDULE: This RFD was issued on 31 March 1993 and will last for 30 days. If a consensus is reached by the end of the RFD period, a Call for Votes (CFV) will be issued within 5 days. The voting period will continue for a period of 4 work weeks, and end at 11:59PM (EST) on the 28th day. Thank you for your participation in this RFD effort. John McKown & Wesley S. Jones Motorola, Inc. Paging and Wireless Data Group [Moderator's Note: Readers should be advised all Requests For Discussion regards new newsgroups are conducted in news.groups. Because comp.dcom. telecom is a related newsgroup, I am obliged to print the notice here so everyone affected will see it ... DO NOT reply to telecom. Reply only to news.groups and/or the author of the message. PAT] ------------------------------ From: irawan@netcom.com (Hindra Irawan) Subject: ISDN - What For? Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 22:47:26 GMT Hi, I am doing a research paper for my graduate class on ISDN uses. Can anybody post here or email me what are the possible uses of ISDN. Real or fantasy. Thanks, Hindra irawan@netcom.com hin@aol.com [Moderator's Note: Please reply to Hindra direct in email. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: How Can I Decode CLID Data From A Digitized Sample? From: fred@page6.pinetree.org (Fred Ennis) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 17:11:57 -0500 Organization: Page 6, Ottawa, Ontario +1 613-729-9451 tmkk@uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) writes: > I'm looking for an algorithm which I could use to decode Caller*ID > data based on a digitized sample of the sound sent by the phone > company between the first and second rings. My (admittedly limited at > this point) understanding of CLID is that it is FSK data, similar to The Motorola MC145447 chip does what you want, or if you want to go really low tech, the AM7910 modem chip will also decode it down to a serial line. Hope that helps! Fred Ennis, fred@page6.pinetree.org ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives Organization: Echo Beach The following story from {The Windsor Star} (Windsor, Ontario, Canada), Friday, March 26, 1993 was transcribed by Chris Farrar, sysop of the Professional Thinkers Guild BBS, (519) 256-8717, in Windsor. A trial service by Bell Canada comes too late to save a Colchester South farmer who bled to death because his house didn't have a working phone, but it will save other lives, the man's sister says. Ronald Bigelow, 38 bled for more than 30 minutes after accidentally shooting himself in the leg Nov. 1 outside his rural home. The phone was disconnected because he couldn't afford to pay his bills, and the nearest phone was about a half-kilometer (quarter mile) away. His sister, Caroline Meathrell, campaigned to get the 911 service planned for Essex County to be available on all phones, even if they've been disconnected because of non-payment. Now Windsor Residents will get that service by June under a trial service being offered by Bell. Meathrell received a letter Thursday outlining the field trial, which will use specialized computer programming to offer the service. If successful, the service may be expanded into other areas. "It's too bad it wasn't in place for my brother," Meathrell said Thursday from her Windsor home. "It will save someone else's live -- or a few lives." Colchester South police said Bigelow could have survived the wound if the phone had been working. In October, a coroner's jury looking into the death of a Mersea Township woman and her son was told that no one could call the fire department from a burning trailer because the phone had been disconnected. Karen Hope, 29, and Gary Hope, 6, died when their mobile home on Highway 77 caught fire in January 1992. Yvette Meloche, a Bell service representative in Windsor, said the service will only be available in the future to areas serviced by electronic equipment. Under the trial service, a recording will tell people why service has been discontinued and offer three options: the ability to dial 0 for the operator; 911 for emergency service, if available; or 611 for Bell's repair office. The trial service will run in homes served by Bell's Goyeau Street centre. Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario nigel.allen@canrem.com Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario 416-629-7000/629-7044 [Moderator's Note: I may be considered cold-hearted, but I don't understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their own car was repossessed because they did not pay for it just in case they need to go somewhere in a hurry? You say telco is rich and can afford it ... so can the automobile industry. If some charitable group wants to pay the price so everyone's phone can be connected at all times, that would be a fine idea. If telco is being forced to foot the bill, that is not okay. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DONALD.CRENSHAW@tdkt.kksys.com (DONALD CRENSHAW) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 13:47:00 -0600 Subject: Wiring Standards Book Organization: The Dark Knight's Table BBS: Minnetonka, MN (Free!) > I would like to learn more about wiring standards for telecom > applications. I want know what RJ-11, RJ-14, RJ-45 and all these > other standards actually say. I don't mind buying these either. > Can someone send me some references as a sort of required reading > list? One hot document (which I have on my desk right now is ANSI/EIA/TIA- 568-1991 "Commercial Building Telecommunications Wiring Standard". It addresses most specifically eight conductor connectors, i.e. RJ-45. More info on connectors is in TIA/EIA/TSB40. I've not seen that one. To get this document which includes lots about unshielded twisted pair, shielded twisted pair, coax and optical fiber, call Global Engineering Doucments at 1-800-854-7179. Should cost $25-30 US. You might also try EIA at 202-457-4900. Hope this helps, -DON * Origin: The Igloo BBS 612-574-0037 (1:282/4018) (1:282/4018) | The Dark Knight's Table BBS +1 612 938 8924 Minnetonka, MN USA ------------------------------ From: wildixon@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) Subject: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 21:29:23 GMT Are there any users who have implemented some form of ATM out there? If so, I would like to know what you are doing. Wil wildixon@uiuc.edu [Moderator's Note: As we just finished a thread on blizzard and ATM (as in cash machine) breakdowns, I think it fair to say Wil is most likely referring to the 'other meaning' of ATM! :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: jav@crash.cts.com Subject: Panasonic Phone Programming Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA Date: 30 Mar 93 21:28:59 PST Hi there, I bought a used Panasonic Easa-Phone KX-T3130 phone at a garage sale the other day, and I've been trying to figure out how to program numbers into the memories, without any luck. Obviously, I don't have the manual for it. I would like to get in touch with other netters who know how to program this phone. Thanks! Javier Henderson | jav@crash.cts.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 13:50:37 BST From: eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se (Terence Cross) Subject: ISDN Digit Sending I am inquiring about digit sending from ISDN telephone sets, when a *person* is dialing. Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person dials? Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds), and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or something else? Thanks, Terence Cross ------------------------------ From: julian@bongo.tele.com (Julian Macassey) Subject: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers Organization: The hole in the wall. Hollywood Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 16:49:06 GMT On page 7 of the March 20 (1993) issue of the {Economist} is a table of international call prices. According to the table, U.S. to U.K. calls (apparently via AT&T) are $3.42 per minute. Calls from the U.K. to the U.S. are $1.88 (apparently via BT). So I decided to get a BT or Mercury credit card so I could call to the U.K at U.K. rates. Does anyone have any info on this? A start would be the U.S. 800 numbers to contact the Mercury or BT "call home" services. They could probably put me in touch with sales. Julian Macassey, N6ARE julian@bongo.tele.com Voice: (213) 653-4495 Paper Mail: 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue, Hollywood, California 90046-7142 [Moderator's Note: The typical call from the USA to the UK is *not* $3.42 per minute! It is much less. I think they got their tables wrong. I think less than a dollar a minute is more typical. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 30 Mar 1993 10:51:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert M. Hamer Subject: Telephone Rates in OZ I'm going to Australia in late June - early July. If there are any TELECOM Digest readers there, can you tell me what the rates are to call the US from there (Day, night, however it is broken down). I'm trying to decide if it'll be cheaper to just call from there or to use some sort of USA Direct type program. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 08:02:25 -0800 (PST) From: Arthur Chandler Subject: Screen Phones Several companies are getting into the screen-phone (also called, somewhat pretentiously, "transaction phones) act. These nifty little items consist of a telephone, a small LCD screen, and an extendable keyboard for entering data. Philips is selling a 5 inch, 16-line display model for (gasp) $639. AT&T was planning to market a version of their own, but shelved the idea when their market research folks indicated that too few people would be willing to shell out $500 for a phone that, at this point, will basically let you check your bank balances at some banks and let you order airline tickets from some companies.Though AT&T indicated that they might drop the price of their unit to $200, there seems to be little indication that a $200 price tag will attract sufficient numbers to make the venture profitable. One company, Online Resources in Virginia, is marketing a $89 unit that displays only 4 lines of information. The price seems right, and several banks are trying the device out with their customers. One Maryland bank even offers customers a deal of $69 for the phone, plus $6.95 for the service. So far, more than 3,000 customers have signed up. The screen phone seems to me to have more potential than the languishing videophone idea. About a year ago I participated in an independent market survey that was gathering customer response to several videophone models. They were all terrible. Even if they had been wonderful, I still came away with uneasy feelings about privacy and inadvertant use (i.e., leaving the video on and answering the phone after just getting out of the shower). But the screen phone still seems to me to be an interim technology. As more and more people purchase computers and use them as communications devices, screen-phones will take their place alongside of 8-track tapes as a quaint technology of a brief era. ------------------------------ From: Craig.W.Farley@jupiter.risc.rockwell.com Subject: Freenet, Nixpub Listings Wanted Organization: Rockwell International Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 16:23:34 GMT Moderator, You responded to a recent inquiry about Internet access from home that the user should look into Freenet sites and check the nixpub files. Where is a list of Freenet sites? Where is the nixpub (file, I presume) located? Thanks for responding to such basic questions. Craig Farley, Ph.D. cwf@planets.risc.rockwell.com Rockwell International Science Center 1049 Camino dos Rios Thousand Oaks, CA 91360 [Moderator's Note: I don't know where nixpub is kept these days. Can anyone advise Craig? Regards Freenet, the one which comes immediatly to mind is cleveland.freenet.edu. There are lots of people at that site on the telecom mailing list. I'll bet root@cleveland.freenet.edu would be able to supply details on sites and things like his own indial numbers, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Knauerhase Subject: PC-Based Telephone Accessories Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 12:04:34 CST Organization: Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois @ Urbana I seem to remember the mention in comp.dcom.telecom of several different nifty-neato devices which use a personal computer to do something phone-related. As is obvious from this description, I'm vague enough on the memory that searching the archives would be tough. So, I'm soliciting pointers to solutions (or descriptions of hacks) for: - call direction/voice menu (i.e. "Press 1 for this, 2 for that, etc.") - password to ring phone (i.e. "Enter code to talk to Rob, else get answering machine") - Caller-ID (usually a caller-ID box with a serial port?) - control of things via BSR or something similar (i.e. call up and turn on a coffeepot) - anything else interesting that I am forgetting right now. Please address replies to me (knauer@cs.uiuc.edu), unless you think the rest of the Digest would be interested. If there is sufficient response, I will prepare a summary either for posting or for placement in the archives. Thanks, Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science ------------------------------ From: dbw@crash.cts.com Subject: Interesting Coincidence Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 11:52:38 PST Today I received a proxy form for the shares of ATT that I owned. I thought t that it was interesting that I am instructed to mail the completed proxy form to PO Box 976 in New York. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #220 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18613; 31 Mar 93 7:29 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26046 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:10:13 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27098 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:09:21 -0600 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:09:21 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303311009.AA27098@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #221 TELECOM Digest Wed, 31 Mar 93 04:09:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 221 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Personal Communications Services and New Lobby Group (TAP via Nigel Allen) Telepoint Phone Penetration in Singapore (Ang Peng Hwa) 100 Mbits And Connectors (Marco A. Pinones) US NPA/NXX List (Greg Trotter) Two-Wire Repeater Suggestions (Dave Levenson) Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Mark D. Austin) Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine (David H. Close) Re: Answering Machine Features (Joel Snyder) Re: Answering Machine Features (Monty Solomon) Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine (Wil Dixon) Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature (ronnie@media.mit.edu) Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Dave Levenson) Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Mike McNally) Re: Break In to a 1A2? (Dale O. Miller) Re: Break In to a 1A2? (Ed Greenberg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Nigel Allen Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: Personal Communications Services and New Lobby Group Organization: The Gashlycrumb Tinies James Love (LOVE@vm.temple.EDU) of the Taxpayer Assets Project posted the following message to the PROG-PUBS mailing list. Taxpayer Assets Project Information Policy Note March 29, 1993 CLINTON TRANSITION LEADER FOR THE FCC, RON PLESSER, SPEARHEADS INDUSTRY GROUP TO LOBBY FOR FCC APPROVAL OF NEW SPECTRUM ALLOCATION FOR "PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES." Before the ink could dry on his new business cards, Ron Plesser has cashed in on his recent position as director of the Clinton Administration transition team for the FCC. According to a March 10, 1993 press release, Plesser is the general counsel for PCS Action, Inc, a high powered industry lobbying group which is promoting a rapid allocation of spectrum for new wireless telecommunications technologies for voice and data, while limiting competition in individual markets. Personal Communications Services (PCS) is the term used to describe a family of digital telecommunications technologies ranging from "handheld telephones to cutting-edge wireless computing and data transmission devices." The industry group claims the market for such services could top $200 billion by the year 2010. In addition to general counsel Ron Plesser, who has no previous experience in common carrier regulation, PCS Action has chosen Podesta and Associates to handle the group's public relations, a firm headed by Tony Podesta. John Podesta, Tony's brother and a former partner in the firm, is currently the staff secretary for President Clinton. We were surprised if not amazed to learn of Ron Plesser's new lobbying efforts, because the Clinton transition team had announced ethics policies which reportedly prohibited lobbying agencies for six months. The members of PCS Action are an impressive collection of firms involved in cellular telephone, telephone, broadcast television, cable television, and publishing businesses, including: APC/Washington Post Company Associated PCN Company Cox Enterprises, Inc. Crown Media MCI Communications Northern Telecom Omnipoint Communications, Inc. Providence Journal Co. Qualcomm, Inc. Times Mirror Cable Television Time Warner Telecommunications. A major element of the PCS Action lobbying effort is to limit the number of PCS licenses in each market. According to the group, "more than two PCS licenses would over-saturate potential markets and marginalize this new service." The group also wants to insure that PCS licenses should be "well-qualified" to operate these businesses, suggesting some non-market mechanism to screen out competitors for the PCS licenses. Excerpt from: Washington Telecom Week; March 26, 1993 PLESSER SPELLS OUT MOST CONTENTIOUS ISSUES FACING NEW PCS COALITION, by Jim Rogers Two highly contentious issues face a newly formed coalition of communications firms that is trying to press its own agenda in the debate surrounding Personal Communications Services, according to Ronald Plesser, the organization's general counsel. Plesser, who also served as the Clinton Administration's point man for the transition effort now under way at the Federal Communications Commission, told Washington Telecom Week that getting the FCC to agree to limit PCS licenses to no more than two or three per major market and also agreeing to authorize 40 MHz of spectrum for each license will be the coalition's two toughest challenges ... On the issue of limiting the number of licenses in each major market, Plesser said that the coalition's position "is not just the question of two or three PCS licenses." "You already have two cellular licenses in each market," he said. "If you keep PCS to two licenses, you're probably looking at six or seven competitors in each market. If you give PCS five or six licenses per market, then you're talking about 11 or 12 competitors. "What the coalition is saying, is that it's not certain that with a higher level of competitors you can get the kind of return necessary to build efficient PCS systems. We are concerned that if there are too many competitive licenses in the area, it will force development of PCS to the other side of the competitive curve and there won't be enough left to support anybody," Plesser said. "This is no milk toast issue at all," he continued. "lt's a fairly tough issue and I think the coalition's members are convinced that it is critical ... that if this thing goes to five or six PCS licenses per market, that will marginalize and dilute the service." James Love, Director voice 215/658-0880 Taxpayer Assets Project fax call 12 Church Road internet love@essential.org Ardmore, PA 19003 ----------- Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada nigel.allen@canrem.com Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 09:55:20 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Telepoint Phone Penetration in Singapore Singapore Telecom has attracted more than 24,000 subscribers to its zonephone or CT2 service during the first year of operation, making it one of the most successful marketeers of the new technology [in the world]. The other top marketeer is Hong Kong's Hutchison Paging, which managed about 50,000 subscribers in the first 12 months, CT2 developer Motorola said in a statement. Hong Jong's population is about double Singapore's three million. Telecom introduced the zonephone, often called the "poor man's handphone" because of its limited functions and lower costs, last January. The launch attracted 2,500 subscribers in the first two days. Like the handphone, the pocket-sized zonephone is portable but calls are restricted to the 4,000 spots in Singapore where the base stations are set up. The phones cannot receive calls, unless they are used at home or in the office together with a home base unit. As such, users usually combine the phone with pagers. Telecom had 506,752 pager subscribers and 112,800 cellular phone subscribers as at end-January, a spokesman said. ------------------------------ From: mpinones@netmon.mty.itesm.mx (Marco A. Pinones I.) Subject: 100 Mbits and Connectors Date: 31 Mar 1993 05:21:50 GMT Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey We're testing some products for our lans and wans. When using twisted pair, they say it can go up to 100 Mbits. Is this for real with the connectors from Panduit, ModTap or Simmons? I mean, is there any lose when connecting the pair to the final connector? Thanks in advance for any advice. I'm talking about RJ45 conns. Mpinones ------------------------------ Subject: US NPA/NXX List From: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu (Greg Trotter) Date: 30 Mar 93 13:08:28 -0600 Organization: Gallifrey - Home of the Timelords I noticed in the Telecom Archives that there is a list of Canadian NPA/NXXs, but none for the United States. Is there a source for this, or is it the exclusive domain of Bellcore? Greg Trotter Norman, Oklahoma Internet: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu Fidonet: 1:147/63 Treknet: 87:6012/8009 | I don't even represent me. [Moderator's Note: Anyone is free to copy the list of NPA/NXX codes, but the main reason it has never been in the Telecom Archives has been the sheer volume of data, and that it constantly is changing and being updated with new prefixes opening, etc. When the transition (for me) of part time caretaker to full time caretaker is finished, hopefully by this summer, the Archives is one place which definitly needs a lot of work done. We'll eventually have these files; some readers have them now, basically pending me working out a place to put them. For now, call 10288-0 and ask the operator for the ones you need. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Two-Wire Repeater Suggestions Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 15:28:05 GMT I'm using a Panasonic KX-T123211 small-business PBX, with two off-premises station lines. These lines are connected using the OPX accessories supplied by Panasonic for the purpose. They connect to a couple of OSNA lines leased from NJ Bell, as specified by Panasonic. The OSNA lines produce 4.0 dB of loss. This is the loss specified in the tariff for this service. The system works fine for calls between on- and off-premises PBX stations. Outside (trunk) calls to OPX stations need more volume. It is useable, but both ends have to strain to hear. Can anybody suggest a two-wire voice frequency repeater which passes loop supervision, AC ringing, and will add about 4.0 dB of gain in each direction? Thanks! Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: austin@eecom.gatech.edu (Mark D. Austin) Subject: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? Organization: Computer Engineering Group, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA 30332-0250 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 19:50:46 GMT Greetings, I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver. I think this frequency used to be the same one that used to come out of a whistle distrbuted in Captain Crunch cereal. Does anyone remember this story? I was trying to tell this story to a friend who did not believe me. Could anyone verify and perhaps provide some more details on this amusing story? Thanks in advance, Mark Austin Georgia Tech, Wireless Communications Group School of Electrical Engineering, Atlanta, GA 30332-0250 E-MAIL: austin@eecom.gatech.edu PHONE: (404) 853-9370 [Moderator's Note: Captain Crunch reads the Digest from time to time, and perhaps if this message is brought to his attention, he will favor us with a reply. I'd love to hear from him again. Yes Mark, there is a phone enthusiast who goes by that handle. And yes, there are tones which do not appear on touch tone pads which if sounded in the phone cause certain reactions from the network such as you describe. Very modern phone systems, I'm told, listen for those tones and the context in which they are heard: they should *never* be heard from the user side of the network, for example, and if they are, the machine hurries to tell its keepers about the intruder(s). If those tones are heard from the network side of things, then all is well. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) Subject: Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine Date: 31 Mar 1993 05:13:54 GMT Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) writes about the new Vomax. A little over a year ago I read where partially defective RAM chips were going to become available at very low prices. The author predicted that these would work very well in answering machines since an occasional lost bit in voice recording would not be noticeable. He predicted that, by now, we should have seen lots of very high capacity machines using low quality RAMs. Does anyone know if the Vomax is the first of the breed? 40 fax pages of storage implies quite a lot of RAM ... Dave Close, dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu, BS'66 Ec [Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service, it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, from the public machine in the hotel lobby, etc. It must take a lot of storage space. I subscribe to the 'Overflow Mailbox' part. My fax line has 'forward on busy/no answer' to the mailbox, then Ameritech starts trying to pass the message to me and keeps trying until the line is open or answered. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jms@opus1.com (Joel M-for-Vnews Snyder) Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Date: 30 Mar 1993 10:46 MST Organization: Opus One Reply-To: jms@Opus1.COM In article , bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) writes ... > I think it would be very useful if the answering machine also had a > feature which calls a preprogrammed telephone number to announce that > a new message has been received. Buy the Sony IT-A4000. It's an all-digital speakerphone/answering machine (16 minutes of messages memory). It has all the features of a good machine: three voice mail boxes (i.e., "press *1 to leave a message for bill, *2 for ..."), last-number-redial, two kinds of speed dialing (one-button and multi-button), programmable outgoing message, announce message (announce but take no message), and a third for what you asked for. When a message comes in, it can call any number, say something (either the default, or you can create one, like, "please call joel to the phone"), accept a security code, and then you can DTMF your way to happiness. It also has a call timer, something I find really useful (plus a clock, of course). There are only a couple of things I'd like to be able to do with it that I can't. One is I can't FF/REW in a single message. I can skip, repeat, and all that, but I can't go back just a few seconds to catch a hastily spoken phone number. Another thing: I can't forward a message from one voice mail box to another. But otherwise, it's an incredible machine. $200 from either J&R (lousy customer service, no return policy) or Crutchfield (incredible customer service, fantastic return policy). Joel M Snyder, 1103 E Spring Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719 Phone: 602.882.4094 (voice) .4095 (FAX) .4093 (data) Internet: jms@Arizona.EDU BITNET: jms@Arizona ------------------------------ From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features Reply-To: Monty Solomon Organization: Proponent Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 22:39:05 GMT In article bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) writes: > I think it would be very useful if the answering machine also had a > feature which calls a preprogrammed telephone number to announce that > a new message has been received. This preprogrammed number should be > changeable via the DTMF remote control, as well. It should have a > synthesized or recorded voice which would announce something to the > effect of "This is a message for (enter answering machine owner's name > here.) Several of the Panasonic answering machines with integral telephones have this feature which they call Message Transfer. You compose your own transfer OGM and program the transfer OGM phone number. You can turn this feature on/off and change the transfer phone number remotely. The machine will call the transfer phone number and play the transfer OGM and listen for your code. At this point the machine works the same way as if you had called it. It will retry the transfer phone number up to 15 times within a ten-minute period if it reaches a busy signal. It can also be configured to dial a pager. Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty%roscom@think.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 07:41:15 PST Reply-To: wildixon@uiuc.edu From: wildixon@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine In the posting it is mentioned that the system works over a single voice line. Does it require three way calling? Does it have provisions for call waiting? Wil Dixon ------------------------------ From: davep@carson.u.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik) Subject: Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature Date: 30 Mar 1993 17:02:39 GMT Organization: University of Washington dan@quiensabe.az.stratus.com (Dan Danz) writes: > I've recently discovered that, although USWest implemented CallerID > and offers Line Blocking, if someone foolishly selects line blocking, > they can't selectively unblock the CallerID information on a per call > basis. USWest says in a flyer in the latest bill that the ability to > temporarily unblock won't be available until October 93. > Arrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! > I don't understand: if they can block on a per-call basis, why can't > they unblock on a per-call basis? What's different in the software? Well -- at the very least it might encourage people to give up per-line blocking ;-). Pretty clever ploy on the part of US West if that is the case. US West seems to feel that the fewer lines that have per-line blocking, the more value their service will have, the more bucks they can make, etc. So why not just implement per-line blocking in a silly and inconvenient way. Perhaps I'm just too paranoid. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave P davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: ronnie@media.mit.edu Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 02:14:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature In Florida, when the police were investigating a burglary that happened to me, I got several calls from detectives. I always knew when it was one of them because it was the only blocked calls I ever got. I wonder how they would react to a device such as the one mentioned in the referenced article. Ron (ronnie@media.mit.edu) ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 15:48:46 GMT Pat writes: > [Moderator's Note: Perhaps they remembered thirty years ago when banks > were only open 9 AM to 2 PM (or 3 PM) Monday through Friday, and that > is when you went to get a check cashed or make deposits, etc. If you > have ever heard the expression 'bankers hours' (as in 'she works > bankers hours'), that is where the expression came from. PAT] The public's idea of bankers hours was based, as Pat correctly says, on the hours the bank was open to the public. The reason, of course, is that every day the bank is required to post the day's transactions to its books, verify that the vault inventory, and settle up with corresponding banks. In the days before automation, this was a time-consuming process. New transactions had to wait until the process was finished (atomic database update transactions!). The bank had a daily 'close', usually at about 2:00pm. From then until the end of normal office hours, the bank employees were doing their database transactions. Modern telecommunications and computer technology enables today's banks to remain open to the public far longer. They still have a daily close, and a daily update of their accounts, but it usually happens in the middle of the night, and far from the offices where the public deals with the bank. The inter-bank settlements happen over wires (see, Pat, this article is not totally irrelevant to the group!) and as a 'background' operation. (The banks who use our computer products talk to each other from time to time all day long, using UUCP.) Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: vail!m5@cs.utexas.edu (Mike McNally) Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 Date: 30 Mar 93 20:31:20 GMT ole@CSLI.Stanford.EDU (Ole J. Jacobsen) writes: >I got stuck ... problems getting through to United Airlines. A friend from Providence RI was stranded here in Austin. On Sunday, he spent a good deal of time trying to get through to the automated flight information line United runs. On most of the (rare) occasions he'd get through to the initial menu, the transfer to the system would itself get a busy signal. It turns out that he (and anybody else) was wasting their time anyway. United didn't (doesn't?) bother to update the schedule information for flights until about an hour before the "book" time, even though it was clear that *every* flight in/out of the east coast (and probably everywhere else) would be significantly delayed or possibly canceled. (A United person at the Austin airport told my friend this when he showed up and only then learned that his flight was cancelled; the robophone system had told him it was on time.) ------------------------------ From: domiller@ualr.edu Subject: Re: Break In to a 1A2? From: domiller@ualr.edu Date: 30 Mar 93 07:14:25 GMT Organization: University of Arkansas at Little Rock In article , dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) writes: > I have a customer with a 1A2 key system, three phones, and three > lines. They want to allow a modem to share line three > I plug in an old pulse-only phone and get dial tone on the first three > lines, just like I expect. But, when I try to dial, I can't break > dial tone. If memory serves, the key system needs to know the phone is offhook by a short across the second pair. When I used a standard phone, I used one set of the switchhook closures to provide that signal. I'm sure the more knowledgeable can say exactly why, but I believe it had something to do with the hold feature. Dale O. Miller - Systems Programmer University of Arkansas at Little Rock DOMILLER@UALR.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 10:59:19 -0800 From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Break In to a 1A2? Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Gee, I'd think that somebody from Caltech would know about A-lead, but then, it's been a while for most of us ... You need to manage the second pair on the jack properly. That is to say you must short that pair before you pick up the phone (or modem) and open it AFTER you hang up. If you open it BEFORE you hang up, you'll put the line on hold. THat's what the red HOLD button does. It breaks the A-Lead pair BEFORE popping up the line button breaking the line. Your modem should be able to do this. Look in the back of the book for a parameter for "multi-line phone systems," for "A-lead" or something like that. 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 | Ham Radio: KM6CG ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #221 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02583; 1 Apr 93 5:08 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31372 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 02:50:36 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21322 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 02:49:46 -0600 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 02:49:46 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304010849.AA21322@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #222 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Apr 93 02:49:45 CST Volume 13 : Issue 222 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson San Francisco Radio Pioneer Passes Away (John Higdon) Cap'n Crunch Speaks (John Draper) Akron BBS Sting (Akron Beacon Journal via Nigel Allen) Telephone Messages on Your Workstation (Rafael Furst) Choke Area Code? (Dave Leibold) Practice Safe Cell Phoning (Dave Leibold) US Justice Department and TDDs (US-DOJ Press Release via Nigel Allen) Switch Variances in Calling Number Delivery (Mike Riddle) Ameritech Faxtra Service (Brent Capps) Going to the Hogs (Don Kimberlin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 23:02 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: San Francisco Radio Pioneer Passes Away Edward Davis, a San Francisco radio pioneer and institution in his own right, died yesterday at his home in Sausalito after a long bout with cancer. Ed, a self-declared graduate of "Hell's Kitchen" in New York, came to San Francisco in the 1940s. Along with two partners, he put KDFC on the air on a shoestring. Since that time KDFC, along with an AM station acquired in the 1950s, has continuously broadcast a program of classical music. Ed was a major factor in the FCC's "classical music exemption" for AM/FM combos when simulcasting was prohibited in the 1960s. Many in the Bay Area started their radio careers at KDFC as board operators. Others have worked in other capacities at what can be best described as an efficient "minimalist" operation. Ed received great satisfaction in providing a quality product with the most compact staff and minimal equipment. For many years the station consisted of a bank of Revox tape recorders and a minimum-wage employee pressing "start" buttons in a room several feet from the FM transmitter itself. Even when KDFC became successful, Ed Davis refused to give in to conventional station operation practices. To this day, the station has a full-time staff of three people: one each for sales, operations, and engineering. Nearly ten years ago, he moved the operation from the small room at the mountaintop transmitter site to a beautiful restored Victorian in Pacific Heights. Here, the station became automated "for real", reducing the already small part-time staff. With a station that literally ran itself, Ed branched out by offering "classical music packages" to stations around the country. In essence, he was offering his secret to providing the most for the least. Included was a business plan, equipment recommendations, and digital tapes with the classical programming itself. Several years ago, he and some trusted employees purchased a station in Anchorage which has proven to be surprisingly popular. I have been associated in one capacity or another with Ed Davis since the early 1970s. I have provided him with engineering service and he has provided me with much support, admonishment, and advice. He will be missed by me and by many who have had the pleasure of knowing this great broadcaster and fine human being. 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: crunch@netcom.com (John Draper) Subject: Cap'n Crunch Speaks Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 20:31:15 GMT Mark writes: > I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used > to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver. > I think this frequency used to be the same one that used to come out > of a whistle distrbuted in Captain Crunch cereal. Does anyone remember > this story? I was trying to tell this story to a friend who did not > believe me. Could anyone verify and perhaps provide some more details > on this amusing story? Well, here it is from the "Horses mouth" ... Turning the "Way back machine" to 1968 or earlier, the long distance phone system used in-band signalling at 2600 Hz. During this time, ATT was converting from SF (Pulse dialing with 2600 Hz pulses) to MF (Multi-frequency), NOT associated with touch tones. By 1968, about 90% of USA phone network was MF capable, but there were some exchanges (Little Rock Ark to be exact) that still responded to SF signalling. The Cap'n Crunch whistle, when a certain hole was glued, produced 2600 Hz tone, and it was possible (but with great skill) to dial an 800 number terminating into Little Rock, sending a long burst of 2600 Hz which cleared down from the 800 number, and set you on a long distance trunk. At that time, it was possible to "pulse dial" using the Cap'n Crunch whistle. Shortly after 1971 (About the time the {Esquire} article was released), the Little Rock tandom office converted to MF. Thus was how I got the name Cap'n Crunch. Now, almost ALL long distance trunk switching is done "in band" and will NOT respond to ANY tones. Although some 800 numbers now terminate overseas and I'm told that SOME trunks will respond to in-band signaling, but I'm sure those are being watched carefully, and most are probably filtered. But even if it was possible to punch through the filter, they would no doubt be using C5 signaling which is more advanced and using a more complex handshaking mechanism. Tone tolerances and puse repitation rate are also critical, so ordinary blue boxes would not be able to produce the rapid pulses necessary to permit sucessfull switching. But I'm told it's possible. Hope this helps ... John D. [Moderator's Note: Thanks very much for writing us and responding. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: Akron BBS Sting Update 3 Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto This message was originally posted in misc.activism.progressive by David Lehrer (71756.2116@CompuServe.COM). Contact Mr. Lehrer, not the poster, for further information. "Munroe Falls carryout" The following is an editorial published in the {Akron Beacon Journal} on Wednesday, March 24, 1993. This editorial is copyrighted by the {Akron Beacon Journal}, and commercial use or resale of this article is forbidden. Permission to post this editorial in its entirety has been generously granted by Mr. David B. Cooper, Associate Editor. Background: The 9-month long Mark Lehrer/Akron Anomaly BBS felony trial situation terminated on March 8, 1993. Topic: Published articles about the Akron Anomaly BBS 'sting' directed by Munroe Falls, Ohio police chief Steve Stahl on June 18, 1992. All published articles concerning this 'sting' and associated battles will be distributed immediately upon permission being granted by the author(s). Responses are encouraged! From the Beacon: "We welcome your letters and the chance to publish as many as possible." "We ask that letters be original, concise and legible and bear the writer's full signature, address and daytime phone number." "All letters are subject to editing. We withhold names only for good reason. The same conditions apply to letters sent by fax." "Please address your letters to Voice of the People, Akron Beacon Journal, P.O. Box 640, Akron, Ohio 44309-0640." "If you want to send your letter by fax, use our fax number: (216) 996-3520." David Lehrer 07084027 MUNROE FALLS CARRYOUT Akron Beacon Journal (AK) - WEDNESDAY March 24, 1993 Section: EDITORIAL Page: A14 MEMO: Editorial / Our Opinion TEXT: The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution was written to safeguard ordinary citizens against unreasonable search and seizure. Recently, however, law-enforcement officials have taken to seizing possessions of convicted and suspected criminals, particularly drug dealers. In the case of 23-year-old Munroe Falls resident Mark Lehrer, police confiscated a sophisticated, $3,000 computer setup, programs and disks on the suspicion that he might be letting kids look at dirty pictures. That charge was never proved. In fact, it appears that police received only one or two complaints about his computer bulletin board, none from area parents. Lehrer contends a clerical error put the pornography into files accessible to all the bulletin board's users, not just adults. Police enlisted a 15-year-old, falsified his identity for a membership and then helped the teen call up a possibly offending program. But, when the Summit County grand jury refused to indict the University of Akron computer whiz on the original charges, Munroe Falls police filed other charges based on the possibility that some of the programs in Lehrer's private collection contained pictures of minors. Lehrer did plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of 'attempted possession of criminal tools' -- his computer -- based on those subsequent charges. No one downplays the seriousness of crime in our society, whether it's in the suburbs or inner cities. None argue that children should be able to view pornography. But in the absence of compelling evidence that Lehrer was trying to peddle child porn to kids, either at the outset of this case nine months ago or now, it could appear that the police acted hastily in confiscating the computer. Such actions invite questions as to whether the police were protecting against a child pornographer or using the intimidating powers of the police and judicial system to help themselves to a nice hunk of expensive machinery. DESCRIPTORS: MUNROE FALLS; MARK LEHRER; POLICE; BIOGRAPHY; CHILD PORNOGRAPHY; EVIDENCE; OBSCENITY --------- Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada nigel.allen@canrem.com Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ From: rafe@xenon.stanford.edu (Rafael Furst) Subject: Telephone Messages on Your Workstation Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA Date: 1 Apr 93 01:21:47 GMT Does anyone know of a telephone/computer system that lets members of an office building record, retrieve and organize their telephone messages on their desktop computer (specifically I am interested in Sun Workstations). advTHANKSance, Rafael Furst rafe@cs.stanford.edu (415) 424-1463 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:42:54 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Choke Area Code? From William Houston's World of Sport, as it appeared in last Friday's {Globe and Mail}, there is a reference to {Providence Journal} writer Bill Reynolds statement: "There's no truth to the rumour that Buffalo has changed its area code to 043". Buffalo teams or not, interchangeable NPA's aren't going that far. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:50:40 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Practice Safe Cell Phoning A report from Reuters notes that one company is cashing in on the current scare on cellular phones and cancer. Quantum Laboratories offers a $49.95 Callguard device that is supposed to cut out 97% of the radio emissions from cellular phones. The cellular industry, meanwhile, was reported to be getting a task force going on cellular phone safety. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: U.S. Justice Department and TDDs Organization: Echo Beach Here is a press release from the U.S. Department of Justice. U.S. Justice Department to Award $2.5 Million in ADA Grants, Announces New Telecommunication Devices for the Deaf Contact: Obern Rainey, of the U.S. Department of Justice 202-514-2007 or 202-514-1888 (TDD) WASHINGTON, March 31 -- The Department of Justice today announced a $2.5 million federal grant program to speed compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and also the installation of telecommunication devices for deaf persons (TDDs) for access to its automated ADA telephone services. The department will award grants in amounts ranging from $85,000 to $200,000 to applicants who propose cost-effective and efficient approaches to disseminating information to individuals with disabilities and organizations covered by the act about their rights and responsibilities under Titles II and III of the ADA. Individuals and not-for-profit organizations, as well as state and local government agencies may apply for the grants, but only those applications that are national in scope or significance will be considered for funding. The department is particularly interested in receiving, but is not limiting its funding to, proposals that: reflect an ability to begin project activities in an expedited manner; represent joint ventures between covered entities and persons with disabilities; specifically address how members of minority communities will be included with the population targeted by the applicant for receipt of technical assistance and/or provide technical assistance to state or local government entities that have responsibilities under Title II of the ADA. The Solicitation for Applications also appeared in the Federal Register on March 15, 1993. Applicants may submit grant proposals to the Public Access Section, Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice until 5:30 p.m. EDT, May 14, at 1425 New York Ave., N.W., 4th floor, Washington, D.C. 20005. In a related action, the department announced that users of telecommunication devices for deaf persons (TDDs) may now receive automated telephone information service through the ADA Information Line and the ADA Technical Assistance Grant Information Line operated by the Public Access Section of the department's Civil Rights Division. Until recently, TDD users could contact information line operators but could not use the automated services that are also available. Individuals with a TDD and either a rotary dial or touch-tone telephone may call the information lines at the numbers listed below and communicate directly with available operators; however, a touch-tone telephone is necessary to access the prerecorded information. The ADA information Line and Grant Information Line may be reached in the following manner: ADA Information Line -- Callers may reach this line by dialing 202-514-0383 (TDD) or 202-514-0301 (voice). Operators are available to answer ADA questions from 1-5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday. The automated information system, however, is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. By using the automated system, callers can obtain prerecorded summaries of the statute and regulations, and phone numbers of agencies that can provide additional assistance. Callers may also place orders for the department's ADA publications through the automated system. Grant Information Line -- Callers may reach this line by dialing 202-515-3519 (TDD) or 202-514-0317 (voice). This line will be in operation during the 60-day application period extending from March 15 to May 14. During this time, an operator will be available to answer questions about the department's 1993 solicitation for technical assistance grant proposals from 1-5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday. The information on the automated system will be available 24 hours a day, seven days a week during the application period. By using the automated system, callers can obtain prerecorded information concerning the 1993 grant solicitation, including application deadlines and procedures and order a grant application package. Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada nigel.allen@canrem.com Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 07:23:30 CST From: Mike.Riddle@axolotl.omahug.org (Mike Riddle) Subject: Switch Variances in Calling Number Delivery Reply-To: mike.riddle%inns@axolotl.omahug.org Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE Hello All! In a newgroup related to supporting the ZyXEL modems, there have been several reports of their internal Calling Number Delivery working with ESS5 but not with DMS100/200 switches. I thought that all the switch vendors implemented the Bellcore standard? Is this a case of picking standards, or is there a problem of implementation somewhere? (I know about the one-line vs. two-line display, and that in my area at least, one of the DMS switches support two-line). Thanks, <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>> mike.riddle@inns.omahug.org Sysop 1:285/27@fidonet.org inns.omahug.org +1 402 593-1192 (1:285/27) ------------------------------ From: adcmail!bcapps@uu4.psi.com (Brent Capps) Subject: Ameritech Faxtra Service Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 11:48:18 PST Hi Pat, > [Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for > example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service, > it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who > subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, from the > public machine in the hotel lobby, etc. It must take a lot of storage > space. I subscribe to the 'Overflow Mailbox' part. My fax line has > 'forward on busy/no answer' to the mailbox, then Ameritech starts > trying to pass the message to me and keeps trying until the line is > open or answered. PAT] Pat, I'd love to tell you how we designed it, but it's a trade secret. Brent [Moderator's Note: We have ways of making your spill your guts. :) But seriously, it is an excellent service, and worth every nickle they charge -- I think it is $14.95 per month although they gave it to me free to try out for awhile. It seems to work a little different than 'forward on busy/no answer' usually works however. I don't know *what* number it is forwarding to (they won't tell me) and as soon as the forwarding is effected but before the ringing starts there is a series of five very short quick beeps; it rings once or twice, then the fax tones are heard as the mailbox answers, which I might add gives my name and fax number in the display window of the calling machine. The caller does not even know he did not reach me. Immediatly on reciept of the fax, Ameritech then starts trying to get through to me every five or ten minutes to shove the fax back my way. I wonder what prevents them from redelivering it to themselves if they call me only to find my line still busy? Maybe they don't actually try to call me but only query Rogers Park CO to find out if the line is free or not. The other variant on this is called 'Fax Mailbox'; you give out a seven-digit direct dial mailbox number as your own then you call and retrieve stuff as you wish. This plan is more expensive and includes such features as 'broadcast' where you put the message in your box and tell Ameritech to deliver it to everyone on your distribution list. I don't need all that, but since the fax machine is on the same line as my modem and terminal used for Digest work, 'overflow mailbox' is a dandy addition. Now let's get out the torture rack, the whip and chains so Brent can make his voluntary and freely given confession about the inner-workings of Faxtra. :) There are *some readers here* who know what happens when I require source code for review and they openly defy me. :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 20:23:32 -0500 From: Don.Kimberlin@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Don Kimberlin) Subject: Going to the Hogs News that appeared recently indicates that cellular phones are going to the hogs. It was reported from Des Moines that Iowa hog farmer Dave Rousselow got a message containing assorted grunts, squeals and snorts on his answering machine. The message was, however, music to the Rousselow's ears. It told him where to locate his misplaced cellular telephone. He'd apparently dropped it in the hog pen, where one of the porkers stepped on it, happening to push its "redial" button, which made a call to the last number he had dialed, his house. So, on receiving the message, Rousselow went out to the hog lot and found his misplaced cellular phone in the soup under a fence. Origin: Borderline! BBS Fidonet Cabarrus N.C. (1:379/37) Don Kimberlin - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Don.Kimberlin@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG [Moderator's Note: About 20 years ago, I got out of a cab at home and left my (first and original) voice pager in the back seat. This was one of those big, clunky, stab you in the hip models. No sooner than I got inside, I realized it was *gone*! I called the number for it, and delivered a message, exhorting the cab driver to return immediatly and bring my pager back. He showed up five or ten minutes later after four or five messages transmitted by myself. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #222 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04006; 1 Apr 93 5:54 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10881 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 03:44:54 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20089 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 03:44:02 -0600 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 03:44:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304010944.AA20089@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #223 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Apr 93 03:44:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 223 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson PacBell CalREN Network (Scott Loftesness) Big Files: NYC <-> E Berlin (Robert Cooper) Banks Joins CONNECT (Patricia Snyder-Rayl) TeleStrategies Conference on Numbering Plan Crisis (Dave Leibold) Field Strength Meter Wanted (Arlindo Ribeiro de Loyolla Filho) Cable TV Providing Telcom or ISDN? (dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu) Brief Review of _Interrupt_ (Rob Knauerhase) Disaster Recovery (Seth B. Rothenberg) Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Dave Niebuhr) ATT Proposes New Overseas Facility (Dave Niebuhr) George Gilder a Contributing Editor at {Forbes} (Robert L. McMillin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 Mar 93 08:51:40 EST From: Scott Loftesness <76703.407@CompuServe.COM> Subject: PacBell CalREN Network [from a Pacific Bell press release] Pacific Bell has announced plans to build a communications super highway connecting participating California universities, research labs, major hospitals and leading high-tech firms in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles. Many users hooked up to the developmental portion of the full spectrum super highway will receive free access through a nonprofit organization. In exchange, these users will help develop innovative applications in education, healthcare, business, government and research. "We're bringing together some of the brightest minds in California to develop applications that will bolster California's economy and quality of life," said Phil Quigley, president of Pacific Bell. "With this project, we're taking a major first step to ensure that broadband technology will be practical from the first day customers get access to it." Known as the California Research and Education Network (CalREN), the project will use new communications switching and transmission technologies in an advanced telecommunications network capable of transmitting voice, data, video and images concurrently. CalREN will make these capabilities available to public, educational and business participants. "California's telecommunications infrastructure will play a pivotal role in boosting business productivity, creating jobs, enhancing education, improving health care and reducing traffic congestion," Quigley said. "We're jump-starting the applications development process in hopes that the innovative services resulting from this effort will help jump-start the California economy." While a major objective of this project is to serve as a testbed for network applications development, Quigley said an advanced telecommunications system would also make possible: teleseminars, in which two-way video, electronic "white-boards" and simultaneous data exchange allow participants to take part in educational programs from their offices; "virtual" consortiums, where business people, students, professors or scientists from geographically dispersed organizations work together to solve complex problems; electronic medical records processing, remote patient monitoring and remote specialist consultations. Eventually, applications could evolve to include multimedia patient records that include digital voice annotations, diagnostic images and video in a single "file" and allow doctors to exchange those files over the high-speed network; interactive editing of feature film footage via computer, ending the current time-consuming process of physically shipping film; interconnecting high-speed data networks; and access to a wealth of existing databases. "The vision for this project takes full advantage of revolutionary advancements emerging from the telecommunications industry and provides a model for an infrastructure that can grow rapidly with future developments," Quigley said. CalREN will bring together as many as 80 educational, medical and high-tech industrial organizations in the San Francisco Bay Area, and a like number in Los Angeles. The participants agree over the next two years to develop and pilot advanced telecommunications, information technologies and applications to improve the quality of life for all Californians. In addition to applications development, business participants in the CalREN project will be asked to help nonprofit organizations, particularly schools, participate in the project. This assistance may include sponsorship, funds, applications or equipment. The network can be envisioned as three tiers. At the top is an ultra-high-speed switching and transmission fabric based on new digital technology, ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode). It can simultaneously route voice, data and video communications over fiber-optic lines with equal ease at speeds eventually reaching billions of bits per seconds, a so-called "gigabit network." This will be the foundation for such applications as teleseminars and high-definition imaging. The second layer is composed of emerging high-speed "fast packet" data services that operate at millions of bits per second. Typical applications for these services include interconnection of data networks, high-speed telecommuting and medical imaging. Within the bottom tier are services that transmit at tens of thousands of bits per second, providing transport for such services as telecommuting, exchanging health-care records and accessing sophisticated computerized information sources, such as library data bases. Plans are for CalREN to begin offering the full set of services by year's end in the Bay Area, and in early 1994 in Los Angeles. Many of the CalREN services are commercially available on a limited basis from Pacific Bell today. The full cost of the project will be paid by commercial users and through funding by the nonprofit organization. CalREN is consistent with efforts by Governor Wilson, the state legislature and the Clinton/Gore Administration to promote an electronic superhighway, Quigley said, adding that government should serve as a catalyst for increased investment of this sort. Some aspects of the CalREN project will require approval from governmental authorities, Quigley noted. CONTACT: Pacific Bell Telephone, Linda Healey, 415/542-4719 ------------- [Moderator's Note: Scott Loftesness is one of the sysops of the very popular Telecommunications SIG on Compuserve (GO TELECOM). If you are a CIS subscriber, I urge you to look at the Forum. PAT] ------------------------------ From: coop@Panix.Com (Robert Cooper) Subject: Big Files: NYC <-> E Berlin Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:11:30 GMT My company would like to send compressed graphic files between New York City and East Berlin. We need some help in selecting the best method. The files are multi-MBs in size. We have both RS6000s and PCs on both ends. My company is not now on the internet (I'm writing this from my private account on a public access machine), but these files (CAD files) fall under business usage so I think we need to get a commerical connection if we get on at all. We are looking into UUnet and PSI, and high-speed modems for direct links. So first question, how are the phone lines into east berlin? Are they so bad we shouldn't even consider direct dial up? If a modem would work, the net seems to generally like ZyXel and Telebit. Which one is better for international call with large files? Second question(s): any recommendation on commerical internet providers doing international connections? If we can get 56k lines on both end that, of course, would be best. Can I get a 56k line in east berlin? Can I afford it? If I have to do modem dial ins to get to the internet provider, should I just skip them and go direct? A lot of questions, I know. I would be thankful for any and all help. Please e-mail your advice. Thanks in advance!!! Robert Cooper Brooklyn, NY coop@panix.com 212 309-9600 (Work) ------------------------------ From: pegasus@cyberspace.org (Patricia Snyder-Rayl) Subject: Banks Joins CONNECT Organization: GREX Public Access Unix +1 313 761 3000 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 18:58:56 GMT Pegasus Press, Inc. NEWS RELEASE | Corporate Address: | Pegasus Press, Inc. | 3487 Braeburn Circle | Ann Arbor, MI 48108 CONTACT: Patricia Snyder-Rayl Pegasus Press, Inc. (313) 973-8825 voice (313) 973-0411 FAX America Online: PegasusPR CompuServe: 70007,4640 Delphi: UNICORNPUB GEnie: CONNECT.MAG Internet: pegasus@cyberspace.org F O R I M M E D I A T E R E L E A S E MICHAEL A. BANKS BEGINS "THE INSIDE LINE" COLUMN FOR CONNECT MAGAZINE ANN ARBOR, Michigan (March 24, 1993) -- Pegasus Press today announced the addition of Michael A. Banks as an editorial staff columnist for CONNECT magazine. With literally thousands of book and magazine article credits to his name, Michael Banks is recognized as one of the premiere authors in the computer industry. He has authored such books as DELPHI: The Official Guide (Brady Books/Simon & Schuster), The Modem Reference (Brady Books/Simon & Schuster), Understanding FAX and E-mail (Howard W. Sams & Co.), Portable Communications (Brady Books/Simon & Schuster), and Laptop Power (Brady Books/Simon & Schuster), as well as co-authored Pournelle's PC Communications Bible (with Jerry Pournelle, published by Microsoft Press). In a new column for CONNECT called "The Inside Line," Michael Banks voices his opinions and shares with readers his unique viewpoint on the online world of telecomputing. "I'll be more outspoken," says Banks, "and, depending on the reader, more controversial in this new column than the majority of computer magazine publications allow." Along with fast facts, useful news and information, Banks will bring readers the truth about what's available online, changes in the online world, why things are as they are online, and what's happening behind the scenes. "I'm going to shoot from the hip, but with accuracy," Banks said. Banks promises his column will deliver some fascinating opinions and extrapolations, all delivered in the style hundreds of thousands of computer users have enjoyed in his books and other publications. The first installment of "The Inside Line" will appear in the July/August issue of CONNECT, which will be available on newsstand and bookstore shelves in June. "We feel Michael is an excellent complement to CONNECT's current line-up of columnists and authors," says Patricia Snyder-Rayl, managing editor for CONNECT. "Michael's style of writing and ability to explain cutting-edge technology in easy to understand terms is exactly what we want readers to find in CONNECT." CONNECT is a bi-monthly magazine covering the major commercial online services (such as CompuServe, America Online, GEnie, Delphi and BIX), the Internet and bulletin board system networks (such as Fidonet and RIME). The publication is available from newsstands and bookstores everywhere. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:51:20 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: TeleStrategies Conference on Numbering Plan Crisis I received a brochure in the mail from TeleStrategies regarding their 13-14 April 1993 Washington DC conference "The North American Numbering Plan Crisis". Topics include the basic principles of numbering plans, the upcoming interchangeable NPA codes in North America, local number portability, equipment upgrading topics and more. Conference cost is listed as USD$985. For more information on this conference, call TeleStrategies at +1 703 734.7050 or fax +1 703 893.3197 or mail at Box 811, McLean VA USA 22101. Other than passing along the information, I have no connection with TeleStrategies. Also, this may not necessarily be the same thing as the Future of Numbering Forum that was scheduled for this time (16-18 March 1993) unless there was a change of plans from what was outlined in the document "NANPA's Proposal on the Future of Numbering in WZ1." Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: 31 Mar 1993 21:10:52 +0000 (C) From: EOLOYOLLA@orion.cpqd.ansp.br Subject: Field Strength Meter Please help me. Someone know about field strength meters? I'm interested in getting one to fix antennas. Leader Instruments has one, but it's much expensive, about US$900.00. I'm much obliged for your help. Thanks, ARLINDO RIBEIRO DE LOYOLLA FILHO RADIO AMATEUR PY2-LOY(B) TECNICO EM ELETRONICA CENTRO DE PESQUISA E DESENVOLVIMENTO TELEBRAS - CAMPINAS BRASIL FONE (0192)39-6733 FAX (0192)39-6125 ADDRESS-RODOVIA CAMPINAS-MOGIMIRIM KM 118,5 P.O.BOX 1579 CEP13088-061 CAMPINAS-SAO PAULO-BRASIL EMAIL EOLOYOLLA@VENUS.CPQD.ANSP.BR [Moderator's Note: Well, you get what you pay for (or at least you are supposed to get more if you pay more) but it seems to me $900 is a bit steep for these instruments. The $29 units at Radio Shack may not quite provide the accuracy you desire, but there ought to be a happy medium considerably less than the price you were quoted. Basically a FSM measures the strengh of a nearby radio wave. It will also measure what is termed 'SWR' (or standing wave ratio), which is considered to be a Bad Thing in too large a quantity. As the antenna is 'cut' or 'trimmed' to precisely the right length or some fraction thereof for the desired frequency, the FSM will show when optimum configuration has been reached. The SWR will show if some part of the signal is going back down the coax to the transmitter, thus causing spurious radiation which manifests itself on your neighbor's television set during their soap opera program or in grandpa's hearing aid. Can anyone suggest a good source of these instruments in the USA to our reader from Brazil? PAT] ------------------------------ From: dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu Subject: Cable TV Providing Telcom or ISDN? Date: 31 Mar 93 13:23:23 EDT Organization: Hampshire College I've heard a bit of (mis)information about Cable TV's capability/ interest in entering the telcom arena. Due to my lack of technical knowledge, I was wondering how feasable it is for CATV to provide telephone service or digital platforms like ISDN in the near future? dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu ------------------------------ From: Rob Knauerhase Subject: Brief Review of _Interrupt_ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 12:59:45 CST Organization: Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois @ Urbana After a bit of searching (several libraries did not have it), I was able to get a copy of the new fiction novel _Interrupt_, by Toni Dwiggins. The premise of the book is a phone phreak who tries to bring down the entire US telephone system (and almost succeeds). The back cover regales it with things like (not an exact quote) "What Tom Clancy has done for techno-thriller, Dwiggins does for techno-mystery" and the like; these comments are a bit overdone, in my opinion, but book- jacket comments frequently are. The book is quite accurate technically. However, in some cases, it was almost gratuitously accurate -- it seemed as though the author was either showing off her research or deliberately reaching out to geeks like the readership of this forum (grin). You shouldn't read it to learn about the behind-the-scenes phone system, but if you already know something about those matters, you'll appreciate many of the references and situations. The technical level is such that non-telecom-hackers can also read it with perhaps only slightly diminished enjoyment. Without giving away the plot, let me say that the twists and turns of the story are fairly well done; I had "pegged" the bad guy about halfway through and later found my guess to be wrong (though I was able to guess correctly at that time). The bad guy's method is perhaps a bit hard to stomach in real life, but the personality painted for him in the book makes it quite believable within that context. The obvious comparison for this book is the movie _Sneakers_, not as much for similar plots as for similar genre -- techno-geek stories with at least some attempt at technical accuracy. In this comparison (in my opinion), it loses. It's a good story, but not nearly as well-done as _Sneakers_. All in all, I recommend it as a good read, but not a "gee-I've-gotta- go-out-and-get-a-copy-this-instant" novel. Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science ------------------------------ From: rothen+@pitt.edu (Seth B Rothenberg) Subject: Disaster Recovery Date: 31 Mar 93 19:12:44 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh We've seen a lot of discussion lately about disaster recovery, so I thought it would be a nifty topic for my paper for my Impact Analysis class, a cross listing between the School of Business and our Master of Telecom program. I am interested in comments/references anyone can suggest. (For example, I was duly impressed with CBS' ability to recover from the WTC blast.) If you can send direct mail, that's helpful, since I sometimes fall behind in the newsgroup. Thanks, Seth Rothenberg rothen+@pitt.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 15:32:38 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy There was an article in {Newsday} yeaterday about a man being sued by Medphone, a Paramus, N.J.-based medical equipment company. The charge was that he libeled the company via computer using PRODIGY. It seems that he held some stock in this company and during discussions about it in one of the newsgroups, stated that he didn't like the way it was performing. (One of the statements in the article said that Prodigy was the nation's largest on-line service; guess they never heard of the Internet.) They are saying that he caused $30 to $40 million in damages to the company via his comments and that he has a hidden agenda. Eric Wachtel said "We don't believe this was someone having just a bit of fun; He went at this is a methodical manner. I certainly have a lot of suspicions ... but I can't comment on it now." Peter DeNegris, a polling inspector for the Suffolk County Board of Elections, and an attorney himself, stated that he lost $9,000 due to declines in the stock. Sitting on the sidelines is Prodigy who has in the past been accused of censoring e-mail. IMHO, if Medphone wins this case, it will give Prodigy the tools to censor e-mail. During a three month period DeNegris posted about two dozen messages concerning insider dumping among other things and predicted several days ahead the upcoming stock price changes. Said Wachtel "In some cases it was scarily correct." This will be an interesting case to follow since it is being conducted in federal court in New Jersey. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 15:45:17 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: ATT Proposes New Overseas Facility A local weekly paper on Long Island (Suffolk Life) had a section concerning the proceedings of the local Zoning Board of Appeals concerning a local businessman and AT&T to build an overseas transmitting facility about 1 1/2 miles from where I live. Permits are needed before July 1, 1993, or AT&T will cancel the deal and look for another site. The zoning change is required since the location is currently for a sales office for a residential development. AT&T would need 3.25 acres and employ seven or eight people temporarily while contributing an estimated $35,000 to the local school tax (out of a $75 million dollar budget, that is peanuts). The proposed on-line date is 1996 but that could slip due to the action of the ZBA. Personally and from a telecom issue, I'd like to see the facility here if nothing more than to show people that my community commands the respect of international companies and not just junk food ones either. As a side note, the defunct RCA transmitting and receiving facilities for overseas are located within 15 miles of where I live. Telecom has a long attachment to Long Island. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 05:23 PST From: rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: George Gilder a Contributing Editor at {Forbes} Just a short note to tell you all that I just noticed author George Gilder's name in {Forbes} listed as one of their contributing editors. More evidence, I think, that of the financial magazines out there, {Forbes} really has superior coverage when it comes to telecom and technology matters. Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Dude! #include ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #223 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08533; 1 Apr 93 8:02 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24738 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 05:45:50 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18523 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 05:45:01 -0600 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 05:45:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304011145.AA18523@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #224 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Apr 93 05:45:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 224 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: ISDN Digit Sending (Ketil Albertsen) Re: ISDN Digit Sending (Wil Dixon) Re: ISDN Digit Sending (Bob Larribeau) Re: ISDN Digit Sending (David G. Lewis) Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Ang Peng Hwa) Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Robert S. Helfman) Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Barry Margolin) Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Steven H. Lichter) Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Leonard Erickson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ketil@edb.tih.no (Ketil Albertsen,TIH) Subject: Re: ISDN Digit Sending Organization: T I H / T I S I P Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 19:55:41 GMT eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se (Terence Cross) writes: > I am inquiring about digit sending from ISDN telephone sets, when a > *person* is dialing. > Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person > dials? Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds), > and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or > something else? Either. With my ISDN phone I can dial the entire digit sequence before I pick up the handset. In that case, the entire number is transferred in the Setup message. If I lift the handset before I start dialing, the digits are transferred one by one. I don't know if my local exchange has implemented any sort of timeout; I never used that much time dialing. (And I usually dial before I lift the handset -- the phone has an "edit" (delete) function available then, but there is nothing of that sort with the digit-by-digit transfer.) ------------------------------ From: wildixon@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) Subject: Re: ISDN Digit Sending Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 20:21:10 GMT eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se (Terence Cross) writes: > Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person > dials? Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds), > and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or > something else? I checked the Northern Telecom Practices for a quick answer. Several hundred pages later I picked up my phone (Northern Telecom M5317T ISDN set with functional signaling) and test flew this question. Dial 9 -- got second dial tone -- ten seconds later I got recorded announcement on 'cannot compete call as dialed'. Dialed 5 -- broke dial tone -- five seconds later I got recorded announcement. Dialed 53332 -- a valid five digit number -- call completed within a second. Dialed 533 -- an invalid number - ten seconds later I got recorded announcement. So, it can be assumed the digits go one at a time, inter digit timeout in our case (DMS-100 BCS 34) is roughly ten seconds for a potentially valid number on the first digit, five seconds after that. Hope this helps. Wil wildixon@uiuc.edu 217-244-1321 ------------------------------ From: Bob Larribeau Subject: Re: ISDN Digit Sending Organization: Consultant Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 15:59:49 GMT > I am inquiring about digit sending from ISDN telephone sets, when a > *person* is dialing. > Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person > dials? Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds), > and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or > something else? There are two methods for dialing. The first (called en bloc) uses the Called Party Number Information Element in the SETUP message to transmit the digits to the network. The second (Overlap) sends the digits one at a time after the SETUP message is sent to the network. There is an interdigit timeout to determine the end of the number. Most ISDN phones I have seen in the U.S. user Overlap dialing. The Fujitsu phones support both in the following way: 1. Enter the number and then go off hook. The phone takes the numbers entered and puts them into the SETUP message; thus using en bloc dialing. 2. Go off hook. The phone sends the SETUP message. Then enter the digits which are sent to the network one at a time in Keypad Information Elements. Many TAs use en bloc mode dialing. Bob Larribeau San Francisco ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: ISDN Digit Sending Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 14:37:48 GMT In article eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se (Terence Cross) writes: > I am inquiring about digit sending from ISDN telephone sets, when a > *person* is dialing. > Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person > dials? Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds), > and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or > something else? The answer is, of course, yes. To both. Two modes of signaling are defined for Q.931: en-bloc and overlap. Overlap signaling is the first method you describe. In more detail -- the caller goes offhook, and the phone sends a SETUP message to the network. The network responds with a SETUP ACKnowledge message which, among other things, tells the phone to turn on dialtone. As each digit is pressed, the phone sends an INFOrmation message to the network carrying one digit. (The first INFO message, by the way, gets a response telling the phone to turn off the dialtone ...) When all the digits have been sent, the network sends a CALL PROCeeding message to the phone. From this point on, the overlap and en-bloc methods are identical. En-bloc signaling is essentially the second method. When the user goes offhook, the phone locally generates dialtone. As the user enters digits, the phone processes them locally. When it determines that the end of dialing has been reached, through a timeout, digit counting, or some other means, it sends a SETUP message with the complete called party number. The network responds with a CALL PROCeeding message. The advantage to the overlap signaling method is that the phone doesn't have to parse digits -- knowledge of the dialing plan is located in the network, not the CPE, so when the dialing plan changes (e.g. our favorite, 1+ dialing limited to 10D calls) it doesn't require an upgrade of large numbers of CPE. The advantage to the en-bloc signaling method is that it requires less signaling and makes an "erase" easier. Speaking in generalities, overlap signaling is "appropriate" for "traditional" phonesets - a handset, a keypad, and maybe a display. En-bloc signaling is "appropriate" for more "automated" phonesets - for instance, if I had an ISDN phoneset application in a workstation, en-bloc signaling would make a certain amount of sense. Currently, the vast majority of CPE (in the US, at least) use overlap signaling, because that's what the vast majority of ISDN switches in the US use ... PRI, of course, uses en-bloc signaling, because it's almost exclusively one switch sending to another switch. To quote Tanenbaum: The nice thing about standards is there are so many to choose from. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Apr 93 12:31:21 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives Pat asks: > I don't understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services > if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their > own car was repossessed.... The reason those who do not pay should be given the 911 service is simple: humanitarian. It's part of the thing about being more human and more humane. The phone service should be there because it can be, and was, the difference between life and death. As someone from a country without such LifeLine services, I have always admired the US for such concessions. I think it is one of the things that will continue to make the country great. The analogy of the automobile is just that -- an analogy. Analogies are not arguments. To give an extreme case of life without such humanitarian leanings, there was in China, a man who was drowning in a lake. Several passers-by stopped. All could see the man but a few asked: "Who will pay me to rescue the man?" No one could or would. The man drowned. [Moderator's Note: And yet hospitals in Chicago, USA, notably the University of Chicago Hospitals and the Rush Presbyterian Medical Center receive gun-shot victims and the gang-banging perpetrators by the truckload night after night (a typical Friday night brings a dozen ambulances to U of C's emergency room unloading docks in an eight hour period with victims of violent crime) and the Intake Doctor says 'who will pay me to rescue this man?' ... and seeing no evidence of Public Aid Medical Green Card or other insurance the indigient gang-banger is 'stablized' (the law requires that much) and loaded back in an ambulance whose driver is instructed to take the patient to Illinois Masonic or else County Hospital. The patient died on the way? That's too bad. PAT] ------------------------------ From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives Date: 1 Apr 1993 05:21:44 GMT Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA In article Nigel Allen writes: > The following story from {The Windsor Star} (Windsor, Ontario, > Canada), Friday, March 26, 1993 was transcribed by Chris Farrar, sysop > of the Professional Thinkers Guild BBS, (519) 256-8717, in Windsor. > A trial service by Bell Canada comes too late to save a Colchester > South farmer who bled to death because his house didn't have a working > phone, but it will save other lives, the man's sister says. > His sister, Caroline Meathrell, campaigned to get the 911 service > planned for Essex County to be available on all phones, even if > they've been disconnected because of non-payment. > [Moderator's Note: I may be considered cold-hearted, but I don't > understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services if > they do not pay for it..... Sorry, PAT, but payphones (at least here in So. Calif.) allow you to dial operator and 911 without paying for anything. I think the Canadian solution to non-payment is a good idea. The line is already in place. The switchgear certainly isn't going to get loaded to any appreciable degree by a line that can't call much of anything. To tell the truth, this should be a service that's available to everybody at minimal cost. In SoCal, Pac Bell offers Lifeline Service for about $3 a month, but the idea of a 911-only-service sounds like something that could only benefit society. And yes, PAT, sometimes you come across as cold-hearted. You must have read too many Ayn Rand novels as a college student. (Atlas Shrugged, and others of that ilk). [Moderator's Note: *All phones* which are *connected* allow you to call 911 without paying, since it is a reverse-charge call; the police pay for it. In 1957, I was the captain of the debate team in high school. Ayn Rand was on a tour promoting her (then) new book 'Atlas Shrugged'. With the permission of Arthur Erickson (our debate teacher; he was also responsible for school-wide assemblies) I wrote her a letter and invited her to speak at our school. She came, and sold a few copies of her novel which she autographed. That evening, she gave an autographed copy of 'Atlas' to me because Arthur and I took her to Ohare Airport for her flight to the next stop and we bought her dinner on the way there. I recall there had been a lengthy review of 'Atlas' a day or two before in the {Christian Science Monitor} which we gave to her to read before dinner. She read it with much interest, from time to time taking a drag through that ostentatious cigarette holder she carried around everywhere and sipping her cocktail. Arthur smoked Viceroys and I did too, only because Arthur was Very Sophisticated and I wanted to be Sophisticated also. Finally Rand finished the review in the {Monitor} and squinted at me for what seemed a long time then she said, "You are such an intelligent young man! Too smart to believe in Gott! Why do you believe in Gott?" Arthur tried to keep a straight face but finally had to hold the {Monitor} up in front of his face to hide his amused reaction, since she was very serious. I just sat there, my Sophistication having failed me. Throughout dinner she stared at me. We dropped her off at Ohare and it was quite late so Arthur insisted on delivering me to my parents and coming in the house to relay the whole thing to them with much amusement. I've still got my autographed copy of 'Atlas', and I still think she was not part of RealWorld. PAT] ------------------------------ From: barmar@Think.COM (Barry Margolin) Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives Date: 31 Mar 1993 22:22:00 GMT Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA In article Nigel Allen writes: [News story about a Bell Canada plan to allow 911 from disconnected phones.] > [Moderator's Note: I may be considered cold-hearted, but I don't > understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services if > they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their > own car was repossessed because they did not pay for it just in case > they need to go somewhere in a hurry? You say telco is rich and can > afford it ... so can the automobile industry. If some charitable group > wants to pay the price so everyone's phone can be connected at all > times, that would be a fine idea. If telco is being forced to foot the > bill, that is not okay. PAT] The quoted article didn't say that they were being forced to provide this service. The overhead of it is presumably miniscule -- the connection is already there. How many emergency calls is the average disconnected home expected to make, anyway? This is different from the automobile analogy, in which resources (cars) would be wasted when they're not in use; if there were some way for a single emergency car to be shared by all the people in town whose cars had been reposessed, that would be a better analogy. BTW, it's not really even the telco that's footing the bill, since it will probably get the government to allow it to include the overhead of this service in their rate formula (actually, I don't know how rates are set in Canada -- *is* it government-controlled as in the US?). So it's really all the paying customers. However, I really doubt that the expense of this service would even be measurable. Barry Margolin System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting? Date: 31 Mar 1993 22:20:38 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) Over the years of running a BBS I have been asked by AT&T and Sprint for information on one or more of my users. They have never made demands of me and have always explained the reason. I have given them the information they want, but could not tell them for a fact that was the real name or phone number since I only check local users and spot check others by dialing them while they are one line and just seeing if it is them. Most times it is and a couple of time they have had call waiting and dumped real fast. I have never be approached by any police agency. I work for a telephone company so I can understand them trying to keep the fraud under control. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 07:40:02 PDT From: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting In TELECOM Digest volume 13, # 215, Our Moderator noted: > [Moderator's Note: It is correct your friend cannot be forced to pay > for calls he did not originate or agree to pay for, however if it is > believed that your friend is aware of these calls and doing nothing > to prevent them -- in fact perhaps encouraging them -- then he can be > subpoened by a federal grand jury and *forced* to produce his call > log records. If he is not involved in, or actively encouraging the > fraud, then it would behoove him to offer his cooperation by (a) > first notifying the users in a public message on the system -- in his > hello banner perhaps -- that AT&T was making inquiries; that he was > assisting the Company and did not approve of toll fraud, and (b) > offering a compromise with AT&T where if the Company would tell him > the time(s) fraud calls were made to his system, he would supply them > with the user record(s) for the specific call. Surely he has a log of > who called the system at what times, etc? I think everyone involved > in the 'instant information industry' should at least be socially > responsible enough to cooperate in an effort to reduce toll fraud by > the people who call them. PAT] Well, as a BBS operator, I think that my users have rights too. And I'm not exactly pleased with the way you so blithely assume that the sysop in question may be encouraging illegal activites. Nor with the idea that he is *required* to explicitly state that illegal activities aren't allowed on the system. Mind you, I think that *not* doing so is incredibly stupid, but requiring it sounds like the old "I am not now and never have been.." bit of the McCarthy era. If AT&T calls up and *demands* something, they are going to get informed that they need a warrant in accordance with ECPA. If they *ask*, I'll be willing to co-operate in tracking fraud. But since *I* can be sued by the users whose info I give out, I'll request that they send me something in writing, and I'll talk to a lawyer about what exactly needs to be done to co-operate without opening me up to legal trouble. Don't forget, AT&T has no more "right" to my logs to help solve their problems than I have the right to *their* logs to track down the idiots that call to try to hack into my system. That said, if I can safely do so, I'll arrange to give account info for calls at specific times & dates. But if they want anything more than a week old, I'll have to set something up. Because except for outgoing calls, the logs aren't kept beyond that. Backups can get some of it, but they cost *money* (at $25 a tape and 3 tapes to back up the system I can't afford much of a backlog). BTW, here's part of "turnkey" setup for the BBS package I run. I think it makes things clear enough. *********************************************** * * * QuickBBS 2.76 Policy * * * *********************************************** The following is a statement of the policy under which This System is operated. It outlines the general behavior demanded of callers to the System, and explains the general guidelines under which caller information is handled. Press <> to continue. The Operators of this System are DIAMETRICALLY opposed to the use of Telecommunications for fraud, theft, or any other illegal, immoral, or otherwise questionable behavior. All information entered into this System, in both public and private databases, is reviewed on a daily basis by the Operators. Data pertaining to any actions considered inappropriate will be deleted. We reserve the right to inform the proper authorities of any illegal activities. Press <> to continue. All reasonable efforts will be made to safeguard individual information from unauthorized access. The rights of System Operators to examine individual records are confined to: <1> Providing responses to caller requests <2> Technical and maintenance considerations <3> Preventing illegal and unauthorized entry and use <4> Statistical analysis, bulk or aggregate <5> Accounting and usage documentation Press <> to continue. The System Operators will not disclose confidential information on any user without caller consent, except in response to a court order or subpoena, or if the obvious intent of the user is to commit an illegal or fraudulent act. Access to the this New QuickBBS 2.76 BBS is a privilege. Those who are allowed access are expected to keep their passwords secure. Passwords are for the User's protection, and are for the assigned caller >>only<<. Use by any other person or group, or any unauthorized use of the designated password will result in the denial of access for all involved. The use of more than one name is grounds for denial of access. Those who violate the above will be removed from the Userlog and denied access. Press <> to continue. All information obtained from this System is for the use and entertainment of our Users, as registered in the Userlog of this System. Neither the System Operators nor any other user is responsible for any use, misuse, abuse, and/or illegal activity that might be based on information obtained from this System. Press <> to continue. -------------------------- Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (preferred) uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson Internet: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #224 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01891; 1 Apr 93 19:31 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23295 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 16:47:16 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25089 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 16:46:01 -0600 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 16:46:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304012246.AA25089@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #225 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Apr 93 14:46:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 225 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Paul Houle) Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Matt Healy) Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (David G. Lewis) Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Steve Forrette) Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Joel Snyder) Re: Washington Times Blows It (Richard Budd) Re: Washington Times Blows It (Dan Hartung) Re: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones (Paul Robinson) Re: Use of #77 on Cellular Phones (Tony Harminc) Re: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones (Monty Solomon) V&H Report: 4/93 (David Esan) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: houle@nmt.edu (Paul Houle) Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? Organization: New Mexico Tech Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 21:43:44 GMT In article austin@eecom.gatech.edu (Mark D. Austin) writes: > I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used > to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver. > I think this frequency used to be the same one that used to come out > of a whistle distrbuted in Captain Crunch cereal. Does anyone remember > this story? I was trying to tell this story to a friend who did not > believe me. Could anyone verify and perhaps provide some more details > on this amusing story? Yes, John Draper, the phone phreak who took on the psuedonym "Captain Cruch" discovered that a whistle that was distributed as a premium for Captain Crunch cereal could produce a 2600 hz tone if you covered up one of the holes on it. This is significant because the first generation of automated toll equipment used 2600 hz as a guard tone; i.e., any line that was idle had a 2600 hz tone on it. Bell system engineers had not realized that a person could generate a 2600 hz tone at a phone, which would fool one of the toll stations along the line into thinking that you had hung up and that the line was idle. When the tone was stopped, the other end would assume that the line was about to be used, so the distant toll station would assume that it was talking to the other switch, and would go into a mode where it was wiating for commands -- which were expressed in terms of "MF" (multifrequency) tones that were similar to touch-tone, but different. A "blue box" was a device that did this. Phone Phreaks from the early 1960's to middle 1970's had pretty free reign over the network. They could, say, call directory assistance in a distant area code, which was free at the time, and then use the 2600 hz tone to get to the command mode and then call anyone they wanted for free. International calls could be dialed directly with the blue box, since IDD didn't exist at the time, and phreaks could also control all the stages of routing a call. After investigation of irregularities in network activity, the Bell System became aware of the "blue boxers", and started a program to catch them. By looking for irregularities in the AMA (billing) records (and by making long-distance DA calls supervise), they were able to detect things like a phone phreak "talking" to a DA operator for five hours. Other equipment was installed that would detect foreign tones in the network and record the conversation in areas that had heavy phraud, such as NY and Detroit. In the meantime, the Bell system developed SS7, a comprehensive system of out-of-band signalling, that separates command and signal pathways, and the all-digital networks of AT&T, Sprint and their competitors are essentially invulnerable to this kind of fraud. A protocol using MF tones is still used to relay information between LECs and IXCs, but I am aware of some people who put a great deal of effort into manipulating this and who didn't have any success. Similarly, some foreign countries still use older equipment, from which a phreak can dial internationally to anywhere; I am aware of some people from MIT who took a trip to Mexico a few years ago to do this. However, the blue box and the Crunch whistle are dead in the US. ------------------------------ From: matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? Organization: Yale U. - Genetics Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 02:41:52 GMT Donn Parker's book {Fighting Computer Crime}, from back in the 1980s, has a long account of Phone Phreaking, including an interview with Captain Crunch. According to Parker, at that time he had become a programmer with a new handle: Captain Software. I've no idea what he's been up to since. Bruce Sterling's recent book {The Hacker Crackdown} also has some interesting telco and Phreaking history, but he's less cautious about fact-checking than Parker. Sterling's book does mention Parker, whom Sterling describes as the Grand Old Man of computer crime-fighting. Matt Healy matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu [Moderator's Note: In case you missed it, look a couple issues back on Thursday morning ... John Draper sent us an article. PAT] ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 14:44:27 GMT In article austin@eecom.gatech.edu (Mark D. Austin) writes: > I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used > to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver... > [Moderator's Note: ... yes, there are tones which do not appear on touch tone pads which if sounded in the phone cause certain reactions from the network such as you describe. Very modern phone systems, I'm told, listen for those tones and the context in which they are heard: they should *never* be heard from the user side of the network, for example, and if they are, the machine hurries to tell its keepers about the intruder(s). If those tones are heard from the network side of things, then all is well. PAT] Additionally, "modern" phone systems (not necessarily "very modern", just "modern") are no longer capable of being defrauded in this way, because the implementation of SS7 moves the signaling path out of the voice band and on to a separate signaling network. So a switch which receives a tone over an SS7-ISUP-signaled trunk, even if that tone is a valid KP or ST or other MF signaling tone, will at the very least ignore it, and may (as Pat says) raise a flag to the network operator. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 05:53 PST From: rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? > I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used > to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver. > I think this frequency used to be the same one that used to come out > of a whistle distrbuted in Captain Crunch cereal. Does anyone remember > this story? I was trying to tell this story to a friend who did not > believe me. Could anyone verify and perhaps provide some more details > on this amusing story? I would recommend Steven Levy's history, {Hackers}. It's got a number of anecdotes about John Draper, aka Captain Crunch. I think it's still in print ... Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Dude! #include ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge Date: 31 Mar 1993 17:19:25 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA. tredydev.unisys.com writes: > I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the > Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if > one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator > calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE). I thought the conclusion was that one > did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force. > Did I remember incorrectly? GTE insists that one always has to pay > the FCC charge, but then I expect them to say that, true or false. > [Moderator's Note: That is correct. The FCC subscriber line access > charge is always due and payable. The fact that your phone line is > restricted in the type of calls it can make is your choice, not that > of telco or the commission. PAT] While the Moderator is correct in saying that the 'access' charge is always due and payable, I would like to point out that in the case you describe (a line with toll restriction), the line still does have access to the interstate network -- it can receive interstate calls. Also, it would not surprise me if it can call 800 numbers as well. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: jms@opus1.com (Joel M-for-Vnews Snyder) Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge Date: 31 Mar 1993 10:55 MST Organization: Opus One Reply-To: jms@Opus1.COM In article , MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA. tredydev.unisys.com writes ... > I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the > Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if > one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator > calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE). I thought the conclusion was that one > did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force. > Did I remember incorrectly? GTE insists that one always has to pay > the FCC charge, but then I expect them to say that, true or false. Well, you can talk your local phone company into whatever you can talk them into. My phone company sent me straight to the FCC, which said, in effect, "even if your phone company could keep you from using long distance service for outgoing calls, they can't keep you from RECEIVING long distance calls, so there." Pay up, and smile. You could be buying service from Deutsche Bundespost Telekom. Joel M Snyder, 1103 E Spring Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719 Phone: 602.882.4094 (voice) .4095 (FAX) .4093 (data) Internet: jms@Arizona.EDU BITNET: jms@Arizona [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 16:56:33 EDT From: Richard Budd Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It Organization: CSAV UTIA Harold Hallikainen(hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu) wrote in TELECOM Digest V13 #203: > Which reminds me, I heard on NPR's Morning Edition that > Clinton has an email account. It sounded like a Compuserve number, > but I was not awake enough to write it down. Anyone know the email > address? It's 75300.3115@compuserv.com. We sent a message to that address asking Bill Clinton when he was coming back to Prague. He can bunk at the Castle this time, though I heard he was also welcome to stay with the family who hosted him in 1970. Lars Poulsen(lars@spectrum.cmc.com) wrote in TELECOM Digest V13 #211: > The one I remember was "clintonpz@AOL.COM". There is also one on > Compuserve, but you know how un-memorable the C$ addresses are. > Anyway, whatever comes in is eventually dumped in hardcopy and routed > the same way as > address in your message. was the one I remember too. My records also show 0005895485@mcimail.com and clinton-info@campaign92.org as other E-mail addresses. None of our correspondence to those addresses bounced back to us, so they probably went through. That includes the MCI address. I included the Prague address in all correspondence. Maybe Bill will remember his expatriate constituents, considering he was once one himself. BTW, I took Mark Boolootian's suggestion and subscribed to the FOREIGN POLICY section offered by Clinton's campaign organization. Worked like a charm! His people are sending me a lot of mail regarding the current constitutional crisis in Moscow. FYI, CNN was providing us live coverage of the Boris Yeltsin impeachment hearings before the Congress of People's Deputies this morning. Richard Budd | USA klub@maristb.bitnet | CR budd@cspgas11.bitnet | 139 S. Hamilton St. | Kolackova 8 | Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 | 18200 Praha 8 ------------------------------ From: dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us (Dan Hartung) Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 03:21:14 GMT gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews) writes: > (There is a gateway for exchanging e-mail between the Internet and > Compuserve. The domain is "@compuserve.com", and the comma should be > changed to a period to form the Internet address. I.e. 76004.1647@ > compuserve.com would reach my mailbox from the internet. The > gateway's software swaps the comma and period as necessary.) Did they change it? I haven't been on CI$ in a while but I thought it was ....@cis.com -- must say that the full name makes more sense! Dan Hartung dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us Birch Grove Software ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:57:12 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) , writes: > Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77 > (that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles. Same > sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the > 7 and # keys. # in many other applications signifies time-out, right? When the # appears *after* the number. If a # appears as the absolute first "digit" then it can be interpreted as a speed dial number. Or it could be used for a function, but in either case, it can indicate the caller is not dialing a number directly, but is either dialing an alias (speed dial number) or is issuing a command (function code). It may be that they have only recently gotten the software to take # first as a code, which may be why most systems used * for both function codes and speed dial numbers. Or they may have run out of * code space and moved to # which isn't being used. Realize there can be two classes of Speed Dial numbers; caller pays and called party pays. If the system supports caller-pays speed dial numbers, then they can be done as one or two digits and a #, or let the user's telephone support speed dial the same way by using two digits and # to indicate a caller-pays speed dial number. One possibility is to set a standard. * first may mean function or speed dial, and # first could be used to mean called-party pays speed dial. By using prefix # to indicate a speed dial number, the local system can allow as many digits as it wants, so that the abandoned vehicles office can be #77, United Air Lines can be #UAL, and WMAL Radio can be #WMAL. Also, by having # or * first gives more room for speed dial numbers. The reason for this may be an attempt to move speed dial numbers from * codes to # codes in order to make sure that there are enough codes available. This may also be done to prevent confusion, i.e. does *69 on a cellular phone mean "Redial last connected number" or does it mean "Jane's Massage Parlor"? :) Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 23:27:38 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Use of #77 on Cellular Phones From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) > Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77 > (that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles. Same > sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the > 7 and # keys. # in many other applications signifies time-out, right? A number of Toronto radio stations advertise (for call-in shows and traffic reports etc.) that they "can be reached in most areas of the province on cellular phones by dialing #frequency" -- e.g. station CBL on AM 740kHz is #740, even from areas in Ontario well outside the reception area. Of course they always pronounce it e.g. "number-sign seven forty", since the # character is not generally called pound here. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones Reply-To: Monty Solomon Organization: Proponent Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:38:27 GMT In article Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) writes: > Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77 > (that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles. Same > sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the > 7 and # keys. # in many other applications signifies time-out, right? 77 is SP (State Police). In Massachusetts, there are signs to call *SP for assistance. It is a free call and works on both Cellular/One Boston and Nynex. You can also call *SP to report disabled vehicles, accidents, etc. In other states, *77 doesn't work and you must call 911. Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty%roscom@think.com ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: V&H Report: 4/93 Date: 31 Mar 93 16:57:43 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 April 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. Numbers that begin with 88 are nondialable stations in the US, Canada and Mexico. They are ranches in the middle of the Nevada or Texas desert, or isolated outpost of civilization (always wanted to use that phrase) in the tundra of Canada. I find place names like the Bar J Ranch, Double B Ranch, and JD Dye, Texas, Amargosa, Corncreek and Reese Valley, NV, and Chick Lake, Redknife and Taglu, NT. I gather they are ringdown stations, or radio-telephone stations. [It has been noted in c.d.t. that at least two of these numbers are for a bordello on the NV-CA border.] 905 in suburban Toronto, and 810 in suburban 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 512: 710 ( 2, 7) 416: 680 ( 6, 2) 708: 644 (11, 10) 216: 583 (17, 4) 212: 705 ( 4, 5) 714: 668 ( 9, 12) 713: 636 (13, 9) 503: 581 (18, 7) 205: 693 ( 5, 13) 215: 665 ( 8, 5) 703: 615 (14, 5) 303: 574 (20, 11) 919: 691 ( 7, 19) 602: 657 (10, 13) 403: 610 (15, 5) 803: 573 (19, 9) 313: 688 ( 4, 8) 206: 649 (11, 7) 604: 591 (16, 9) 612: 567 (21, 6) 1. 512 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 2. 212 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split, and the movement of the Bronx to 718. 4. 919 - split is planned. Number should be reduced by split. 5. 313 - split is planned. Number should be reduced by split. 6. 416 - split is planned. Number should be reduced by split. 7. 714 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 8. 215 - split is planned. 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 602 (Arizona) and 206 (Western Washington). [Of course, this ignores the rumor the next announced split will be in Florida.] The three smallest NPA's were and remain (Although 917 has moved from last to third from last): 917: 124 - The new NYC NPA (+20 new exchanges) 906: 117 - Michigan's Upper Peninsula (no change) 807: 105 - Western Ontario (No change) 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 April, and divided by the number in April and multiplied by 100. In math notation that would be: ((April # - January #)/January #)*100 The top ten are: 917 19.23 (Growth of new NYC NPA) 203 6.40 (CT) 404 3.13 (Atlanta) 516 3.04 (Lon Gisland) 719 2.87 (Colorado) 919 2.82 (Eastern NC) 305 2.47 (SE Florida) 816 2.34 (Northern Missouri) 609 2.34 (Southern NJ) 805 2.33 (North of LA, California) The only NPAs to be in last reports top ten and this reports top ten are: 917 (last 2 reports) , 305 All the NPAs and the number of nxx's in each are listed below: 512: 710 615: 562 310: 480 907: 402 908: 353 918: 300 709: 261 212: 705 214: 562 513: 476 616: 401 912: 351 218: 300 608: 254 205: 693 404: 560 317: 465 508: 397 510: 350 613: 299 509: 253 919: 691 809: 556 916: 459 219: 380 207: 349 208: 299 603: 244 313: 688 501: 554 306: 452 316: 379 318: 345 706: 297 901: 234 416: 680 314: 550 201: 450 213: 377 304: 345 712: 286 308: 212 714: 668 813: 548 913: 446 209: 373 419: 344 812: 285 417: 206 215: 665 203: 548 412: 443 217: 370 408: 339 202: 285 707: 200 602: 657 405: 539 614: 437 914: 369 319: 339 903: 284 506: 182 206: 649 305: 538 515: 436 502: 369 517: 338 808: 279 802: 181 708: 644 904: 537 407: 423 704: 368 618: 337 606: 279 719: 179 713: 636 619: 537 402: 422 418: 367 505: 332 518: 275 607: 176 703: 615 817: 530 601: 421 406: 365 702: 328 507: 275 307: 171 403: 610 804: 514 415: 420 701: 361 715: 321 909: 274 401: 141 604: 591 717: 501 210: 418 801: 360 819: 314 902: 273 413: 135 216: 583 414: 501 410: 417 504: 357 815: 314 705: 273 302: 129 503: 581 718: 500 818: 416 301: 357 915: 313 814: 268 917: 124 303: 574 514: 499 617: 414 605: 356 805: 307 315: 267 906: 117 803: 573 312: 494 516: 406 519: 355 609: 305 806: 265 807: 105 612: 567 816: 480 716: 404 204: 354 409: 301 309: 264 David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #225 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09185; 3 Apr 93 3:30 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25442 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 01:26:36 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28561 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 01:25:33 -0600 Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 01:25:33 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304030725.AA28561@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #226 TELECOM Digest Sat, 3 Apr 93 01:25:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 226 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson TeleTeaching 93 (Kathy Kothmann) Call Accounting System For High Volume PBX Needed (Bill Garfield) Payphone In Band Signalling Question (Anton Mitchell) New Communications Magazine Program on WWCR/LTRN (Scott R. Weis) CND/Caller-ID Boxes (David HM Spector) Call Waiting Tones With Distinctive Rings Not Working (Russ Latham) Help Needed With V.P. Hotline For 12 Step Program (Juan Gascon) Dialing Codes in France, UK (Linc Madison) Connecting Work to Home (Terry Lemons) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 08:00:37 -0600 Reply-To: "SIG/Tel (Special Interest Group/Telecommunications) of ISTE" From: Kathy Kothmann Subject: TeleTeaching 93 Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 14:31:12 +0200 From: "Morten F. Paulsen" WELCOME TO TELETEACHING 93 International Conference and Exhibition in Trondheim, Norway, August 20-25, 1993. The development and application of telecommunications techniques to enhance human knowledge and skills is the main theme of TeleTeaching 93. The conference will cover the entire field of telecommunications in education, training and work: Interactive video, multimedia, videophone, computer-assisted learning, TV-based instruction, video conferences, electronic mail, bulletin boards, on-line data bases etc. Areas of application: o primary education o secondary education o higher education o training o distance working Aspects to be considered at the conference: o What technology can do now: the implementation of new techniques to meet the learning needs of society o What technology promises for the future: goals and visions for the next century PLENARY SESSIONS: The five keynote speakers - all prominent international experts in the field of technology and education - will be presented in plenary sessions: Luis Rodriguez-Rosello, Head of the DELTA Unit under the Commission of the EC: "Existing and Future Technology for Teleteaching" Barry Arnett, Education Consulting Services Executive for Skill Dynamics, IBM: "Education and Human Development at Future Workstations" Jaques Perriault, Lecturer at University Paris II: "New Requirements for the Educational System in Industrialised Countries Due to Changing Training Needs" Iam Chaya-Ngam, President of Sukothai Thammatirath Open University, Thailand: "The Use of Teleteaching Methods for the Development of Competence in Developing Countries: The Case of STOU" Tony Bates, Executive Director for Research and Strategic Planning at the Open Learning Agency of British Columbia, Canada: "Educational Aspects of the Telecommuni-cations Revolution" SPECIAL SESSIONS: There will be three Special Sessions with parallel programmes: Special Session 1: Invited speakers will focus on international trends in the use of telecommunications in education. Special Session 2: 10 TeleTeaching projects will high-light the diversity of international telecommunications in education. Some of these projects are still open for participation. Special Session 3: The European Programme for Advanced Continuing Education (EuroPACE) and Developing Learning Through Technological Advance (DELTA) will be discussed. PAPER SESSIONS: 100 papers from 30 different countries will be presented in 7 Paper Sessions with 3 to 5 parallels. WORKSHOPS: 13 different workshops will be organized before and during the conference. Poster Presentations, Short Contri-butions and Demonstrations will all add to the variety of the TeleTeaching 93 programme. PRECONFERENCES: Teaching and Learning in a Global Network, CPAW'93 August 18 - 19, 1993 Contact: Helen Bargel Internet: helenb@winix.no Dialcom: 01:YNP100 High Speed Datacommunications Network August 19, 1993 Contact: Frank Kobberoed Fax: +47 7 544040 EXHIBITION: The exhibition will be open during the whole conference. ELECTRONIC INFORMATION: You can get updated information about TeleTeaching93 from this Internet address: info@tt93.tih.no By writing HELP in the subject field, you will receive the necessary information to access the files you want (ASCII-format). The text-part of the message should be empty. If you need help, please contact: infoadm@tt93.tih.no PROGRAMME INFORMATION: Contact: Jan Wibe, chairman of the Programme Committee Internet: janwi@ifi.unit.no Dialcom: 01:YNP079 REGISTRATION: The deadline for early registration is March 31. Fee before March 31: NOK 2000 Fee after March 31: NOK 2500 Working language: English The conference is organized by The Norwegian Computer Society on behalf of the International Federation for Information Processing. ------------------------------ Subject: Call Accounting System For High Volume PBX Needed From: bill.garfield@yob.sccsi.com (Bill Garfield) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 17:23:00 -0600 Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569 Reply-To: bill.garfield@yob.sccsi.com (Bill Garfield) The company I am with has several networked MITEL SX2000 PBXs. We have tried several expensive call accounting packages but have been so far disenchanted with each product. I am looking for _suggestions_. The major problem with the conventional packages I've tried is that we do not use access codes. Each digit string is processed solely on its own content, and handed off to various trunk groups based on the ENTIRE digit string. My contention is that if I as a human can look at the digit string and tell where the call is headed, then the call accounting package I use should be able to make that determination as well. We had a package that came close but alas we quickly outgrew it. I am looking for something that is preferably PC based which can handle 2 million call records per month and store 90 days worth. It needs to be capable of handling multiple sites (multiport). It needs to do pre-processing on the fly so that I can extract -on demand- any call record or extension detail -including today's records- at any time, and have those call records dumped to the printer (or to a flat ascii file) within a few minutes of the request. Obviously something like this is going to be disk i/o intensive, so a huge ram drive is likely in order. I really don't want to hear from vendors aspiring to sell me their product. Rather I would like to hear from USERS as to what in their opinion works and what doesn't, especially on MITEL equipment with heavy call volume and complex ARS tables. Please e-mail your responses to my address as it appears above. If others express interest I will consolidate the replies and post back to the c.d.t. Moderator for possible inclusion in a future issue. Thanks. Disclaimer: This is a personal request on my own behalf. I speak only for myself. Any opinions expressed are solely my own and not those of my employer. Ye Olde Bailey BBS 713-520-1569 (V.32bis) 713-520-9566 (V.32bis) Houston,Texas yob.sccsi.com Home of alt.cosuard ------------------------------ Organization: City University of New York Date: Saturday, 3 Apr 1993 00:05:10 EST From: EH1QC@CUNYVM.BITNET Subject: Payphone In Band Signalling Question Hi, Could anyone please direct me to a source of information I need about payphone in band signalling. I know the frequencies they use. But I would like to find out how the CO signals the phone to accept the money or to perform a coin return. Payphones I have seen use four wires. Two of them are the ring and tip. I would guess that the other two are for signalling but in what ways? Any information would be great. Thanks. Anton Mitchell ------------------------------ From: kb2ear@kb2ear.ampr.org (Scott R. Weis KB2EAR) Subject: New Communications Magazine Program on WWCR/LTRN Date: 2 Apr 93 14:07:40 GMT Organization: KB2EAR's Machine Announcing the creation of Spectrum, a new international communications and technology radio program. Spectrum will air Sundays beginning May 2 at 0335 UTC via WWCR Nashville, Tn USA (7435 Khz) and the Let's Talk Radio Network (Spacenet3 Transponder 21, 5.8 Mhz Sub carrier Wide Band Audio). The program will feature produced segments on all aspects of communications from DC through Light! In addition, there will be a live phone in segment with guests from the communications scene. The program will be hosted by Dave Marthouse, a long time radio enthusiast and professional broadcaster and Mark Emanuele, a professional communications consultant. Spectrum will be underwritten by Holmdel, NJ based Overleaf International, a Data Processing and Telecommunications Consulting Firm. Spectrum will originate from studios at Overleaf's Holmdel, NJ Corporate HQ. Dave Marthouse Internet: n2aam@kb2ear.ampr.org Scott R. Weis KB2EAR, EMT-A Inernet: kb2ear@kb2ear.ampr.org Packet: KB2EAR@KB2EAR.NJ.USA Snail Mail: 10 Palmer Rd., Kendall Park, NJ, 08824-1228 Phone: +1 908 297 0469 ------------------------------ From: spector@jpmorgan.com (David HM Spector) Subject: CND/Caller-ID Boxes Reply-To: spector@jpmorgan.com Organization: LAN Systems Integration/Technology Services Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 17:55:09 GMT I suppose this has been asked a million times, but I didn't see it in any of the documents in the archives @ lcs... Can anyone suggest a caller-id display unit that also has an RS-232 out the back? Or, any suggestions on how I have get/borrow/build a suitable device so that my computer(s) can record the caller-id info? Thanks much, David HM Spector J.P. Morgan Vice President 30 Broad St LAN Systems Integration New York, NY 10260 Spector_David@JPMORGAN.COM +1 212.235.9285 ------------------------------ From: rlatham@hpmail1.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (Russ Latham) Subject: Call Waiting Tones With Distinct Rings Not Working Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 13:42:19 -0600 (CST) I have distinctive ringing on my phone line (different phone numbers ring the same line, but with a different ring pattern), which also used to work with the call waiting tones, ie there would be a double beep when the second number is called. About a month ago, the call waiting tones all started sounding the same for the different numbers. It sounds as if there is some type of muting on the line, and then a single partial beep comes through. I disconnected everything on my phone line, and connected two different phones to the service entry point, and still experience this. I have been talking to the phone company (Southwestern Bell) for the last three weeks, and they can't seem to find the problem. The distinctive ring signals still work though. The problem is just with the call waiting tones. Does anyone have any idea what might be wrong? I don't have much faith in SW Bell being able to figure out the problem. There was also one other noticeable difference in my service at about the same time. My answering machine used to always hang up immediately after the calling party hung-up. Now, it stays on the line, and records about five seconds of 'nothing' after the person hangs up. There is some real faint clicking sounds every now and then, like some type of signalling, but nothing else. Does anyone know what type of switches they use in their central offices in the Fort Worth (Texas) area? Any info appreciated ... Thanks, Russ Latham rlatham@mailbox.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com Motorola, Inc. rlatham@ftpbox.mot.com rlatham@decster.uta.edu ------------------------------ From: juang@spock.dis.cccd.edu (Juan Gascon) Subject: Help Needed With V.P. Hotline For 12 Step Program Date: 2 Apr 1993 12:17:53 -0800 Organization: Coast Community College District, Costa Mesa, CA Originally we had thought to have areas forward their phones to a 700 EasyReach number if that were more cost effective but it seems that's not possible. 800 numbers are too expensive and are "called number paid" but it might work if we can identify the caller's area and bill them (say using ANI or DNIS???). The object is to get people who need help within this area to make a local (or free if we could afford it) phone call which after routing by the V.P. would either answer their questions about meetings and such or patch them to volunteer somewhere within the area that can help. (There are a lot of suffering addicts out there that need to reach out and touch somebody. We'd like to be there for them.) Most of us are inexperienced with telephony and V.P. systems in general and could use some kind hearted Guru that is willing to do some charity (or nearly) consulting to point us in the right direction. [Moderator's Note: You would get ANI, or identification of the calling number as part of your monthly bill on an 800 number, and if you wish to charge these calls back to specific groups, it would be easy enough to match your groups with a list of telephone exchange prefixes in the respective areas they serve. There are voice processing programs avail- able also which would ask the caller to enter either his zip code or his area code and telephone prefix number, then use the information entered to retrieve a file with information about the specific group in his area. You could also probably have an 800 number which went into a line which you (members of the organization) forwarded among yourselves based on the day of the week or time of day. Each of you would have notes available with the correlation between zip code and group meeting, etc. In addition, by doing it this way (forwarding the incoming 800 calls to members on thier home lines) you'd now have the flexibility to offer immediate counseling as the need arose in the process of making the referrals. You'd still get a monthly print out of who called for accounting purposes. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Apr 93 20:39:44 BST From: Linc Madison Reply-To: telecom@hedonist.demon.co.uk Subject: Dialing Codes in France, UK I have a couple of questions about dialing inland calls in France. As diligent readers of this Digest are well aware, France has abolished "area codes" with the exception of Paris. In France: FROM TO Dial Paris Paris 8 digits Lyon Lyon 8 digits (for "Lyon" read "any city other than Paris") Lyon Paris ??? 01-XX.XX.XX.XX ? Paris Lyon ??? 0-XX.XX.XX.XX ? Lyon Calais ??? just the eight digits, or prefixed with 0? Am I guessing right on the dialing patterns? Also, in Denmark, do you always just dial eight digits for any inland (i.e., not international) call? Having spent a while this morning thumbing through "The Code Book" (BT's comprehensive list of STD codes within Britain), I have a lot more sympathy for the notion of abolishing area codes and going to all-figure dialing. There are a number of places in Britain where the area code for the same place depends on whether the local number is three or six digits. Most of them are straight-forward -- the code for three-figure numbers in Eastling is 079589, and for six-figure numbers it's 0795. However, there are several that are not consistent in that manner: Albrighton 090722 / 0902, Auchterhouse 082626 / 0382, Barbon 046836 / 05242, Barlaston 078139 / 0782, Barnham Broom 060545 / 0603, Bassenthwaite Lake 059681 / 07687, Billesdon 053755 / 0533, Bishopston 044128 / 0792 -- and that's only half way through the B's! (This list is about three years old, so most of these have probably been consolidated already, but it still shows how confusing the system is.) And now they want to add an extra digit in all the codes! Another footnote: 0200, 0300, 0600, 0700 and 0900 are in use as geographic area codes in the U.K. Thus "900" numbers are on 0898, 0891, 0839, 08364, 06609, 06608, 06607, 06606, 06605, 0338, and 0336. In addition, 0640 numbers are charged at the International Zone 6 (Australia/New Zealand) rate, which is even higher than the "premium services" rate. Cellular phones are on 0860, 0831, 0836, 0374, 0385, 0850, and 0881. Linc Madison == Linc@Hedonist.Demon.co.uk == Telecom@Hedonist.Demon.co.uk 59 Stourcliffe Close, London W1H 5AR U.K., Tel. +44 71 723-0582 ------------------------------ From: lemons@cadsys.enet.dec.com Subject: Connecting Work to Home Reply-To: lemons@cadsys.enet.dec.com () Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 21:59:10 GMT Hi! What are YOU using to connect systems at home (or small remote locations) to computers at work? Traditionally, this has involved: (1) 300 bps, then 1200bps, then 2400bps and, lately, 9600 bps modems (one at work, and one at home); (2) a voice-grade phone line, connecting the modems; (3) a terminal, or PC with terminal emulation software, at home; (4) a host system at work. Nowadays, there are a host of other choices: Data Highways: o faster modems (14400bps (V.32bis) and, in future, 56000bps (V.fast) o switched 56KB data lines (dropping in cost) o ISDN (it's coming, it's coming, it's ... ) o ETV (Ethernet via cable TeleVision) Network Protocols: o asynchronous DECnet o Serial Line INternet Protocol (SLIP) o Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) And, for those of us wanting to display X at home: eXcursion PC-Xview Xvision PC-Xremote What mix of these have you found to be attractive, and why? Or, what sounds good to you, but you can't do it right now because of ? I'm looking forward to a good discussion, and to learning a lot from it. Thanks! Terry Lemons Semiconductor Engineering Group Digital Equipment Corporation ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #226 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11681; 3 Apr 93 5:00 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27817 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 02:54:30 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29961 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 02:53:46 -0600 Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 02:53:46 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304030853.AA29961@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #227 TELECOM Digest Sat, 3 Apr 93 02:53:45 CST Volume 13 : Issue 227 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Houston Chronicle NII Story (Mark Boolootian) MCI HomeOffice Link Press Announcement (Scott Loftesness) Hospital ER tx and "Dumping" (was Phone Service Expected) (Daniel Burstein) Seeking Recommendations on Cellular Service in Baltimore (system@apres) Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? (Mike Coleman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian) Subject: Houston Chronicle NII Story Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 13:26:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 93 14:54:12 CST From: Joe.Abernathy@houston.chron.com (Joe Abernathy) NREN Wrap -- This is my last story for the {Houston Chronicle}. It is to appear on April 4, 1993. Please feel free to redistribute it for any non-commercial use. To those of you who have provided so much help these past four years, thanks. It's been a real education. I've accepted the job of Senior Editor-News at {PC World} magazine, and I'll still be writing the {Village Voice} Technocracy column, so I hope you'll all stay in touch. My new contact information is P.O. Box 572390, Houston, Texas 77257-2390, joe@blkbox.com. By JOE ABERNATHY Houston Chronicle Staff Writer The specters of class struggle and international economic warfare are casting a shadow over administration hearings on how to build a sophisticated national computer network. Billed as an engine of job growth, a central concern is emerging that the "data superhighway" promised by Vice President Al Gore and President Bill Clinton during the campaign could produce a large underclass of "information have-nots." Based on an emerging global computer network known as the Internet, which links up to 12 million people in more than 30 nations, the National Research and Education Network (NREN) is a decade-long project of former Sen. Gore. Gore envisions a future in which oceans of data, including libraries of movies, books and other creative works, would be readily avail able to every home. In selling a $5 billion spending plan focused on the network in 1992, Gore held forth the image of classrooms without walls, sophisticated medical collaborations, and globally competitive small businesses. "The NREN is at all odds the most important and lucrative marketplace of the 21st century," he said in a recent statement. But in trying to make it work, it has become apparent that the NREN remains in many ways a captive of its privileged institutional heritage. Some Americans don't even have telephone service, and many still don't have computers with which to access the net. Two congressional hearings were held in late March concerning the National Information Infrastructure, and a bill has been introduced that would take up where Gore's 1992 High- Performance Computing Act left off _ bringing the net to classrooms, small business and other potentially disenfranchised Americans. Clinton's budget includes an additional $489 million over six years for the network. And while the regional Bells, newspapers and other information giants have been struggling for years over the future of the medium, congressional insiders say that with the increased attention, a resolution seems likely to be found during the current session of Congress. "What I think is really getting squeezed out is that there hasn't been a genuine, public interest, bottom-up grass roots voice. It's a huge, huge issue," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington offices of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the primary champion of civil rights in the new electronic medium. "It's about people, it's about institutions, it's about who gets to connect and on what terms." Observers also fear that the rush to wield the network as an economic weapon could produce dramatic incursions into free speech and other civil liberties. "I'm very concerned that the rhetoric about national competitiveness is transforming itself into a new cold war," said Gary Chapman, director of CPSR's 21st Century Project in Cambridge, Mass. "The concerns of intelligence and other federal agencies including NASA has been to look at technology resources that are not related to military security but to economic benefits as being things that have to be protected by Draconian measures of security." Recent disciplinary actions at NASA Ames Research Center in Northern California seem to support Chapman's concerns. Up to eight of the 11 scientists disciplined in December were targeted because of their participation in politically oriented, international discussion groups hosted on the Internet computer network, according to documents obtained by the {Houston Chronicle} under the Freedom of Information Act, along with subsequent interviews of NASA Ames personnel. "Some people there were accused of dealing with foreign nationals about non-classified technology issues," said Chapman, whose organization also has made inquiries into the matter. "NASA said the U.S. has to protect its technology assets because of the global environment of competitiveness." The issues are even simpler for Raymond Luh, a subcontracting engineer fired by NASA. Luh, an American of Chinese ancestry, feels that his career was destroyed simply because he joined in one of the thousands of political discussions aired each day over the Internet. "I feel I have been gravely wronged by NASA," Luh said. "I cannot possibly seek employment elsewhere. My reputation as a law-abiding citizen and a hard-working researcher has been tarnished almost beyond repair." NASA refused to comment on the matter. According to FOIA documents provided by NASA's Office of the Inspector General, Luh was fired when "a document containing Chinese writing was found in (Luh's computer). Investigation determined that Luh's office computer held a large volume of files relating to his efforts to promote Most Favored Nation trade status for the People's Republic of China. Luh was not authorized to use his computer for this activity." To Luh, however, he was only one of the chorus of voices that joined in a fiery debate surrounding fallout from the Tiananmen Square massacre. He wasn't trying to make policy -- he was exercising intellectual freedom, in his spare time. "That's a very dangerous and disturbing kind of trend," said Chapman. "The parallel is with the Cold War and transforming the modes of thinking and the practices of these agencies into new forms of control, even in the absence of militarily significant enemies. We'll start thinking about the Japanese or whatever Pacific Rim country you want to pick as being `enemies,' and intellectual commerce with these people will be a matter of economic security. "The freedom of expression aspect of that is very critical. We want to make sure that this is a system in which people can express themselves freely without repercussions." Observers fear that Luh may be only the first such casualty as federal agencies and special interest groups reshape the Internet into their own model, carving up a pie estimated to be worth $3.5 trillion. While Gore's vision implies the construction of a high-speed, high-tech fiber optic network, a number of counter-proposals are being floated. The Electronic Frontier Foundation -- which earlier made a name for itself with a successful court challenge to the conduct of the Secret Service in a hacker crackdown -- is focusing on building a less powerful, less costly network that could reach more people, more quickly. "Our central concern is that we get from debate to doing something," said Jerry Berman, EFF director. EFF's approach -- endorsed by Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass. -- is to build an ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) service atop the telephone network, making a modest level of digital computer transmission available quickly to every home. The more sophisticated fiber optic approach implied by Gore's NREN could be implemented as time and money allow. But few voices have been heard backing ISDN. "The current state of the discussion is turmoil and chaos," said the CPSR's Rotenberg. "It's a mistake to place too much emphasis on any technological configuration. A lot of that energy and those resources would be better spent talking about users and institutions rather than technology and standards. "This is like trying to explain railroads in the 18th century or cars in the 19th century. Here we are in the 20th century, and we know something big is happening right under our feet and we know it has something to do with these new telecommunications technologies. "None of us knows where this is going to take us, but I think people should have some sensitiv ity to the prospect that the future world we're going to live in is going to be shaped in many ways by the decisions we make today about the information infrastructure." ------------------------------ Date: 02 Apr 93 23:18:08 EST From: Scott Loftesness <76703.407@CompuServe.COM> Subject: MCI HomeOffice Link Press Announcement "A QUICK LOOK AT MCI HomeOffice Link" ------------------------------------- Corporations across America now have formal policies that encourage employees to work at home since "homeworkers" are increasing productivity and reducing costs for employers. MCI HomeOffice Link provides the technology to make it happen. With HomeOffice Link, 800 calls can be routed to sales and service representatives, agents and others working from home by providing network-based processing of 800 calls. MCI HomeOffice Link extends the ultra-flexibility and convenience of MCI's 800 Enchanced Call Router (ECR) services and features to employees working at home full-time, part-time or just after hours. How Does It Work? After dialing an 800 number, callers hear a greeting, and can select from a pre-programmed menu of options. Or, a caller can enter a zip code, PIN, employee code, etc., to reach the appropriate representative. Benefits: * Fast efficient service. Callers get fast and effective service because they direct their own calls. Plus, MCI HomeOffice Link makes the connection to a home office completely transparent to the caller. * Assures smooth call handling. Using the TNT (Takeback & Transfer) feature of MCI HomeOffice Link, homeworkers can transfer calls to any company location nationwide. Likewise, other offices can transfer calls to employees working at home. HomeOffice Link saves the caller time by not requiring hang up and redial to reach another party or location. With the Busy/No Answer Rerouting feature, calls can be rerouted to another destination or to voice mail for appropriate handling. The caller has the capability to return to the original menu of options using MCI HomeOffice Links's Caller Takeback feature. * Keeps the called party informed. The "attended transfer" capability allows employees to discuss the caller's needs during a call transfer. The message announcement feature allows for promotional messages to be played while the caller is on "soft hold" during the transfer process. Better yet, the Announced Connect feature helps to make sure the employee accepts the call. Additional Information: According to a readership study, 98% of employees are happier working at home. MCI HomeOffice Link provides these additional advantages: * Customization. HomeOffice Link maximizes 800 call routing for callers and the employer. ECR features can be mixed and matched to meet the specific needs of each application. * Savings. HomeOffice Link is a network solution rather than a hardware solution, so a company does not need to invest in new or upgrade existing equipment. A single 800 number can connect to all company locations, anywhere in the continental U.S. * Improved call-flow management. Fast and comprehensive reporting (including complete call detail) is available to assist in making real-time management decisions. * Reliablity. The MCI network. PUBLIC RELATIONS ANNOUNCEMENT MCI INTRODUCES NEW 800 SERVICE FOR CORPORATE WORK-AT-HOME MARKET New York--March 11, 1993--Corporations with work-at-home programs now will be able to route incoming business calls to employees' home offices through a single 800 number using a new MCI service, called MCI HomeOffice Link. Companies using MCI HomeOffice Link are able to route calls to employee home offices using pre-assigned personal identification numbers, employee codes or caller zip codes, among other options. Callers phoning the company on the HomeOffice 800 number first will hear a company greeting and then be asked use their touchtone keypad to enter the appropriate pre-assigned number of the person being called. MCI, through its intelligent network, then routes the call to the home office of the person being called. If the employee is not home or is on another line, MCI can transfer the call to a phone mail system, a customer's call center or some other predefined alternate destination. "This service actually evolved from an application that MCI developed jointly for Dun & Bradstreet's telecommuting program," said Jonathan Crane, president of MCI National Accounts. "The introduction of MCI HomeOffice Link demonstrates MCI's ability to develop custom applications and turn those applications into service offerings that provide key solutions to a customer's ever- changing business needs. HomeOffice Link will appeal to corporations that have marketing, sales, customer service and other employees working from home offices on a full or part-time basis." Dun & Bradstreet Information Services, one of the nation's leading business information service providers, uses HomeOffice Link to support its nearly 400 business analysts and sales repres- entatives working from home offices. These home-based employees can be reached through a single 800 number by entering the employees' identification number. "We had a very clear need for a way to route and handle incoming calls to these home offices," explained Jim Haines, D&B assistant vice president for telecommunications. "We went to MCI and asked that they put on their thinking caps and figure out a way not only to route these calls to our employees' home offices, but also to find a way to have calls answered if the employees were not at home. Through collaboration with us, MCI arranged for the option of having calls answered into phone mail or routed to our call centers if the employee is not available when the call is received." With the HomeOffice Link service, MCI customers can receive call reports as frequently as every day, weekly or monthly. The call reports can be used to track costs and assess routing schemes for improving productivity and balancing workloads. Other MCI 800 services can be used in conjunction with HomeOffice Link. For example, a HomeOffice customer could use MCI's advanced Takeback and Transfer service to allow a home worker to reroute the same 800 call to an alternate destination such as a customer service center, order processing center or even another employee's office. Previously, the caller would have had to hang up and redial a separate number. Growth of Corporate Work-at-Home Market MCI HomeOffice Link service is just one of a number of services MCI is providing to corporations with telecommuting programs. Last year, MCI introduced a new Telecommuting Consulting Service to help corporations better meet the communication needs of their home workers. Dun & Bradstreet and Digital Equipment Corporation are two of a number of major U.S. corporations that MCI is working with in this program. Many large companies are initiating and expanding work-at- home programs to create more flexible and mobile office environments and as a way to meet the requirements of the new Clean Air Act, which is aimed at reducing auto pollution in large metropolitan areas. Already, the corporate work-at-home market is estimated at more than 6.6 million American workers, according to Link Resources of New York. MCI's HomeOffice Link is another 800 service innovation offered as part of MCI's fast-growing Enhanced Voice Services (EVS) family of products. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., MCI offers a full range of domestic and global telecommunications services through one of the world's largest state-of-the art networks. With 1992 revenue of over $10 billion, the company is the second largest long distance provider in the United States and has more than 60 offices in 55 countries and places. ------------------------------ From: dannyb@Panix.Com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Hospital ER tx and "Dumping" (was Phone Service Expected to Save) Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 04:45:07 GMT Lives References: In the thread about providing "911" phone service to deadbeats, our Moderator made some comments about how hospitals will begin treatment of gunshot victims, and if they don't have medical coverage, transfer them to other hospitals. I'm getting off telecom topics here so I'll keep it short. Any hospital which does this is making some heavy duty violations of federal law (and possibly local ones as well). Under the "Comprehensive Omnibus Budgetary Reconciliation Act" (referred to as COBRA), any hosiptal getting federal money (i.e. Medicare -- which means 99.999% of hospitals) has the duty to treat a patient, and cannot transfer him out unless medically indicated. Note that it doesn't matter whether the patient uses Medicare; if the hospital takes any federal money, then ALL patients are covered. More details available by email. Stay healthy!!! dannyb@panix.com [Moderator's Note: Oh, I know all about COBRA; my former employer, the attornies have to keep on supplying me with the medical insurance I had for the next year if I want (can afford!) it. But I also know what I hear listening to the police and paramedics on my PRO-34 scanner; those people should realize the public spies on them. I'm always hearing the dispatchers telling the officers that " ... UC called to say they are 'on bypass' (meaning they contend the emergency room is too backlogged to accept further patients)", and telling the 'wagon men' (slang for the guys who drive the paddy wagons around) and paramedics to take their loads to 'County'. Of course, Cook County Hospital's ER is always logjammed; you can sit there eight hours *in the emergency room* waiting to be treated on a typical weekend evening. In fairness to UC, they do write off a huge amount of bad debt each year based on treatment of the local yokels in ER (all inner city hospitals do), which is why they all charge so much, which is why my (now payable totally by myself) insurance costs so much, which is why I am dropping it. I'll be interested to hear what President Rodham-Clinton has to say about all this later this year. By all means, stay healthy! In Chicago, that means staying inside your house after dark where it is less likely (though still possible) you will be shot or assaulted. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Seeking Recommendations on Cellular Service in Baltimore From: marcal!apres!system@mcdchg.UUCP (System Operator) Date: Fri, 03 Apr 93 14:04:34 CST Organization: Applied Research, Cary, Illinois I will soon be relocating to the Baltimore, Maryland area (Columbia, actually) and would like to hear recommendations for a cellular provider in the area. I will probably be travelling within the state, from Frederick down to Gaithersburg, but home will be Columbia. I currently have CellularOne service here in northern Illinois, and have no particular complaints (except the lack of a *cheap* monthly charge for pay-as-you-go: I generally use less than 30 minutes a month, usually 10 minutes or so.) I'd like to hear about the Maryland providers in that area, and what deals might be available. Dan uunet!mcdchg!marcal!apres!dan system@apres.UUCP (System Operator) Applied Research (cryptography & security BBS) 1 708 639 8853 ------------------------------ From: coleman@twinsun.com (Mike Coleman) Subject: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? Organization: Twin Sun Inc, El Segundo, CA, USA Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 01:51:19 GMT I was just told that using, say, my Sprint calling card, via their 800 number to call next door (within the same LATA), was illegal. Is this (nonsense) really true? Is it enforced? Mike El Segundo, California--Where the jets rumble over the sharks [Moderator's Note: If Sprint does not have intrastate and intralata tariffs on file then yes, it is illegal. So is the sale of alcoholic beverages between the hours of 4 and 7 AM in Chicago (5 AM to 12 noon on Sunday, and 4 AM to 6 PM on Election Day or *anytime at all* in those precincts of the city which have by voting established Prohibition). Yes, we legally have Prohibition in a few small areas of the city. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #227 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14910; 3 Apr 93 6:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27804 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 04:11:37 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29761 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 04:10:37 -0600 Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 04:10:37 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304031010.AA29761@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #228 TELECOM Digest Sat, 3 Apr 93 04:10:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 228 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Steve Forrette) Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (John Higdon) Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Joe Konstan) Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Al Varney) Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Alan Boritz) Re: The Fortran-filter Gateway (John Nagle) Re: The Fortran-filter Gateway (David W. Barts) Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning (Jacob DeGlopper) Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning (Ben Cox) Re: Field Strength Meter (Rich Greenberg) Re: Field Strength Meter (Harold Hallikainen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge Date: 3 Apr 1993 00:32:56 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article jms@Opus1.COM writes: > In article , MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA. > tredydev.unisys.com writes ... >> I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the >> Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if >> one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator >> calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE). I thought the conclusion was that one >> did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force. > [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access > for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls > (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access? PAT] Well, isn't it no different than each side of a conversation having to pay the basic monthly fee for local exchange access? After all, even though "caller pays" for regular toll calls, the recipient must pay the basic local charge to get dialtone in order to receive the calls. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 21:20 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge On Apr 1 at 16:46, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access > for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls > (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access? PAT] I count two accesses there: yours and his. Whether you receive calls or make them, you have access to the network, no? I suppose it might be argued that a receive-only situation is half an access, but I do not think that there are provisions for fractional billing in this area. But even so, as was discussed at length some time back, the name on the charge has no bearing on the purpose of the charge. Regardless of the name, "access", the purpose was to compensate LECs for the loss of long distance revenue as a result of divestiture. If you call it a "Mandated Subsidy" (a much more accurate description), then you will not feel the need to discuss matters such as interLATA access. 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: Joe Konstan Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 17:46:54 CST Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge This discussion came around (as it always does) to the question of whether you are paying because someone else can call you from "the network." Our Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access > for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls > (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access? PAT] No -- you are viewing this in what is a very sensible (and therefore almost by definition wrong) manner. There are two valid interpre- tations, of which I think the second is perhaps easier to use, though the first at least has some sense to it. 1. The fee pays for network access as a fixed cost -- not a variable one. Therefore, you are paying a monthly (not per-call) amount that covers the fact that your telco and the IXC must connect somehow. Variable costs (per-call) are also assessed to one party as part of long-distance rates, but fixed costs exist for each line regardless of how many call it makes or receives. 2. This fee is nothing more than a way for local phone companies to retain the subsidy that Mother used to generate from long-distance rates without getting the approval of each PUC. In addition, it is somewhat more appealing politically since it is "FCC mandated" and has a catchy title. In the end dollars are dollars. Telephony isn't the only industry that plays games like these. Airlines, for example, have a tendency to request FAA regulations to handle whatever it is that they want. The FAA regs on carry-on baggage were instituted because the airlines wanted a rule to use rather than just tell passengers that they had too much carry-on for a certain flight. Similarly, utilities often ask state PUC's for special fees to cover things rather than just cover them by increasing the utility bill. Oh, well! Joe Konstan konstan@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 22:40:48 CST From: varney@ihlpl.att.com Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article jms@Opus1.COM writes: > In article , MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA. > tredydev.unisys.com writes ... >> I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the >> Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if >> one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator >> calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE). I thought the conclusion was that one >> did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force. >> Did I remember incorrectly? GTE insists that one always has to pay >> the FCC charge, but then I expect them to say that, true or false. > Well, you can talk your local phone company into whatever you can talk > them into. My phone company sent me straight to the FCC, which said, > in effect, "even if your phone company could keep you from using long > distance service for outgoing calls, they can't keep you from > RECEIVING long distance calls, so there." Pay up, and smile. > [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access > for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls > (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access? PAT] Not speaking as a company spokesperson, and from pretty old memory, here's what I remember of the Sub. Line Access Charge ... First of all, the name has some incorrect connotations, and some FCC staff probably regret using it. It is a Subscriber Line Charge, but has little to do with "Access". Prior to divestiture, the "Long Lines" department and local telephone companies had evolved an elaborate system of accounting for costs and charges related to various types of calls. Initially, toll calls cost a lot of money and were charged a lot of money. Over time, as toll call volume grew and costs on a per-call basis dropped, the Bell System faced a social and economic problem. With PUC and FCC approval, they kept toll charges higher than real costs warranted, and "gave" the extra profits to the local TELCOs (including independents) based on call volume. In return, the local TELCOs would figure these profits into their income for rate-making purposes. Net result was that the charges for local telephone service (line charges) were somewhat lower than they would have otherwise been. Since all lines didn't make equal use of toll calls, this represented a form of "tax" on the toll callers (heavily business) used to achieve the Universal Service goal of the Bell System and government agencies. More people could afford telephones, which meant more people would use telephones and eventually make or receive toll calls. This helped keep toll rates down, perhaps even below the rate they would have had without the extra profit. One could argue that everyone gained, in the long run. With divestiture, the local TELCOs had a problem with how to transition from this non-competitive extra profit from a single carrier to a more competitive (cost-based price) environment. They could either maintain the extra toll revenue by over-charging the new Interexchange Carriers or by adding that lost revenue into their costs and raising per-line rates for local service to reflect true costs. Neither the TELCOs nor the ICs liked the first choice, arguing that such an approach would ultimately cost the TELCOs profits and customers because the big-business toll users would all just order direct lines to the ICs. Since the extra-high TELCO access charges to the ICs would make such toll calls much more expensive, this would be a reasonable decision by large businesses. However, in the long run, such a choice by most large toll users would have meant the loss of even more IC-access revenue, and ultimately the line charge or some other TELCO service would have to increase to recover that revenue. So the second choice was made -- raise the per-line rates to reflect the revenue loss from lowered rates to the ICs. In order to make this a reasonably painless process to the PUCs, the TELCOs and their customers, a gradual transition from the high-IC-access-charge to higher-line-charge was planned. And just to keep the PUCs and TELCOs from having to argue all this out in every jurisdiction, the FCC elected to do it for them using their mandated "Subscriber Line Access Charge". Every so often, the FCC mandates that this charge be increased and the rates charged to the ICs for access to the TELCOs subscribers be decreased. Ideally, his change is revenue-neutral to the TELCOs, and lowers the costs of toll calls. Each time the "Access Charge" has been raised, the rates charged by the ICs for toll service have dropped. Rather than viewing the "Access Charge" as something you pay in order to access a toll network (an IC), instead view it as a just another part of the monthly line charge, mandated by the FCC instead of the PUC. The only lines that should not pay that charge are one's whose rates were NEVER subsidized by the per-divestiture toll "tax". And lines that only permit local outgoing calls (and all incoming calls) still have to pay their fair share, including the "Access Charge"; worse yet, they don't have the benefit of cheap toll calls! A side effect of all this is that the cost for a local TELCo line has increased rapidly in the last 8 years. So now TELCos have to adopt (via PUCs) "life-line" services in order to make telephone service affordable to some. But now the "tax" to support this is much more obvious -- it's not hidden in the cost of toll calls (except in the high rates some countries charge for International calls). Al Varney - all from memory, so I'm sure there are some errors. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Apr 93 06:16:28 EST From: alan@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge In an article written March 30, 1993, MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com writes: > GTE insists that one always has to pay the FCC charge, but then I > expect them to say that, true or false. Moderator noted: > charge is always due and payable. The fact that your phone line is > restricted in the type of calls it can make is your choice, not that > of telco or the commission. PAT] That doesn't seem right, but FCC rules seem to mandate it for outbound AND inbound facilities. The only exceptions under Part 69 are for broadcast channels and wire facilities that can not be connected to common line facilities. But what about semi-private phone systems that offer subscriber services, such as those at some universities that have no telco presence (or where telco no longer has a presence)? At what point must they also file a tariff for, and collect, access charges for THEIR end-users? Alan Boritz 72446.461@compuserve.com alan@camphq.FIDONET.ORG [Moderator's Note: I am also wondering how they handle this in the case of highly restricted phones such as on centrex systems where the number cannot make outgoing calls at all and can only receive calls on the centrex -- no incoming calls from outside the premises. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: The Fortran-filter Gateway Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1993 17:30:36 GMT About twenty years ago, I had a similar problem with a time-sharing user who was accessing a UNIVAC mainframe via Telex. Whenever he made a listing of the link output from his program, his connection would disconnect. The problem was that Telex considers "NNNN" as an end of message, and the system library contained a symbol with "NNNN" in its name. Every time the listing reached that point, a disconnection resulted. The user switched to TWX. John Nagle ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1993 09:51:11 +0800 (PST) From: David W. Barts Subject: Re: The Fortran-filter Gateway > Several months ago we started noticing that (now and again) > the network connection to the mainland would become very very slow; > this would continue for 10-15 minutes or so, then all would suddenly > be well again. In other words, the gateway gets C-sick easily. If the manufacturer fixes the problem, will they call it "the Dramamine patch"? David Barts N5JRN UW Civil Engineering, FX-10 davidb@ce.washington.edu Seattle, WA 98195 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 11:48 EST From: jacob@mayhem.CWRU.Edu (Jacob DeGlopper) Subject: Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning Dave Leibold writes: > A report from Reuters notes that one company is cashing in on the > current scare on cellular phones and cancer. Quantum Laboratories > offers a $49.95 Callguard device that is supposed to cut out 97% of > the radio emissions from cellular phones. Maybe some of us should get together and start selling a packet of information on how to completely eliminate radio emission from your cellular phone, as well as reduce your monthly bill by some healthy amount. If anyone's really creative, maybe they could put together a power-switch remover for popular cellular phones ... Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton (MD) Volunteer Rescue Squad -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - jacob@mayhem.cwru.edu -- ------------------------------ From: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Subject: Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 18:13:41 GMT Reply-To: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) writes: > A report from Reuters notes that one company is cashing in on the > current scare on cellular phones and cancer. Quantum Laboratories > offers a $49.95 Callguard device that is supposed to cut out 97% of > the radio emissions from cellular phones. Hmm; if anyone wants to send me their cellphone and $50, I'll perform a service (modification to the phone) that will cut out 100% of those pesky emissions... :) If this Callguard device really does cut 97% of the radio emissions, I'm surprised anyone would pay a dime for it. If not, then Quantum Labs may have a slight problem ... Ben Cox thoth@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ From: richgr@netcom.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Field Strength Meter Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 05:02:12 GMT In article EOLOYOLLA@orion.cpqd.ansp.br writes: > Please help me. Someone know about field strength meters? I'm If you already have a sensitive VOM (aka multi meter) such as the Simpson 260 or similar, you can make up a FSM by connecting around a foot of wire (~30 cm) to each of two banana plugs, and connecting a germanium diode between the two plugs. Plug it into the meter, and set it for a low current range. Spread out the wires and you have a FSM. Not as accurate as a $900 one, but useable to peak a transmitter or antenna. Note to PAT: You can't measure SWR with a FSM directly. Indirectly, you can minimize the SWR by maximizeing the field strength (not precise but reasonabally close) unless the FSM is placed where it will respond to stray RF currents on the shield (if coax) or unbalanced currents (not coax). With the FSM responding more to these stray RF currents than to the antenna's radiation, maximum on the FSM would be nowhere near minimum SWR. Rich Greenberg Work: rmg50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com 310-417-8999 N6LRT Play: richgr@netcom.com 310-649-0238 Previous play (obselete): richg@hatch.socal.com What? Me speak for Amdahl? Surely you jest.... ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Field Strength Meter Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1993 03:36:35 GMT In article EOLOYOLLA@orion.cpqd.ansp.br writes: > Please help me. Someone know about field strength meters? I'm > interested in getting one to fix antennas. Leader Instruments has > one, but it's much expensive, about US$900.00. > [Moderator's Note: Well, you get what you pay for (or at least you are > supposed to get more if you pay more) but it seems to me $900 is a bit > steep for these instruments. The $29 units at Radio Shack may not > quite provide the accuracy you desire, but there ought to be a happy > medium considerably less than the price you were quoted. Basically a > FSM measures the strengh of a nearby radio wave. It will also measure > what is termed 'SWR' (or standing wave ratio), which is considered to > be a Bad Thing in too large a quantity. As the antenna is 'cut' or > 'trimmed' to precisely the right length or some fraction thereof for > the desired frequency, the FSM will show when optimum configuration > has been reached. The SWR will show if some part of the signal is > going back down the coax to the transmitter, thus causing spurious > radiation which manifests itself on your neighbor's television set > during their soap opera program or in grandpa's hearing aid. Can > anyone suggest a good source of these instruments in the USA to our > reader from Brazil? PAT] Actually, the field strength meters I'm familiar with are several kilobucks. They are actually calibrated in volts per meter (the true field strength, though the one I've used most actually measures the magnetic field but is calibrated to read the electric field based on the intrinsic impedance of free space ...). The ones I've used are from Potomac Instruments, 932 Philadelphia Ave, Silver Spring, MD 20910, phone +1 301 589 2662. There are also field strength meters that measure power density (watts per square meter, or a derivative) for determining RF safety. The one I'm most familiar with there is from Holaday Industries, Inc., 14825 Martin Drive, Eden Prarie, MN 55344, phone +1 612 934 4920. Finally (almost), it seems to me that SWR merely indicates the ratio of the load impedance to the characteristic impedance of the transmission line (or the inverse) and should have little to do with spurious radiation unless the output network of the transmitter varies its harmonic radiation with load impedance. I often think that in amateur radio circles (I'm WA6FDN), SWR is over-rated. I really like to use a Smith Chart to visualize what's going on with SWR. But, I'm not an expert on transmission lines (or anything else, really!). Finally, this is probably the first posting I've seen from South America. A friend's parents live in Uraguay. Anyone know of any internet access down there so she can get her parents on email? Thanks! Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI [Moderator's Note: Is the importance of SWR over-rated? Back in my CB radio days (about ten years during the 1970's) I had a Cobra-142 XL, single/double sideband / AM radio. I replaced the channel selector with a Digiscan that gave me coverage from around 25.5 megs all the way up to almost ten meters, 28 something, in 10 kc hops. If I needed 5 kc either way, I had a slider on it for the difference. A frequency counter in the line told me where I was at. The Uniden chips in those radios could be programmed to cover three thousand (!) 'channels'; the trouble was you could not get it to oscillate (or 'key up') much below 26 megs without stuff on the other end falling out. Anyway, most of the guys here stayed 'upstairs' working the skip from the east and west coast. Two lousy watts, but that radio had excellent modulation on SSB -- it was loud on AM also. My 5/8 wave ground plain antenna was mounted on a tripod on top of the elevator machine room on the roof, 90 feet in the air -- tallest building for two miles, and I was a block from Lake Michigan. The coax had an 100 foot run via building conduit and the elevator shaft. I treated SWR like a religion; an in-line meter said it was always (1.2 to 1) or (1.3 to 1). Guys in Indiana told me I sounded like a local -- all on two watts (considering some loss between the antenna and downstairs). I had another 100 watts I could have put on, but I didn't need to! I even had a guy in Venezuela say he heard me one time although he couldn't make it back to me. (He sent a note to my post office box.) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #228 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24344; 4 Apr 93 0:01 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05544 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 21:59:03 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05282 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 21:58:29 -0600 Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 21:58:29 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304040358.AA05282@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #229 TELECOM Digest Sat, 3 Apr 93 21:58:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 229 Index To This Issue: Don't Forget: Set Clocks Forward! Stupid Switch Tricks (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) MajorBBS Demo v.6.02 Problem (Sebastian Wiszniewski) FCC Dark Fiber Decision (Scott Loftesness) Help Me Find A Small, Unobtrusive Pager (Scott Coleman) NPA Program For DOS Released (Bill Garfield) Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing ... Feds Delay Intro of GSM (David E A Wilson) How Fax Mailboxes Work (John R. Levine) A Very Interesting Intercept (Paul Robinson) Telecom Policies and AT&T Break-Up: Info Needed (Gudmundsdottir Thuridur) How to Busy Out a Line? (Jeff Wasilko) "Cellular Travel Guide" Available From Communications Publishing (J Covert) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu Subject: Stupid Switch Tricks Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 19:16:21 CST On the second line at my parent's house, an interesting problem has recently started occuring on the second line. (This is in St. Louis, MO (314) 355-). The phone will function normally up until its last usage at night (about 10:00 PM), and then the first time it is used the next morning, it will not work. The phone is picked up, and battery is present (and the phone can generate DTMF), but no dial tone is received, and any attempt to dial is ignored. This has occurred about three times so far (all this past week, but not on three consecutive days). The first two times, I called the line from another line in the house, and the problem line rang as expected, and when answered it, it was a perfect connection, as would be expected. After this, the line worked perfectly for incoming and outgoing calls. The third time, I just let it sit, and after somewhere between ten and sixty minutes, it corrected itself. Always before calling the problem line form the good line, I made several attemptes at seizing the line (over a two or three minute period), and none were successful. This also was not done at the same time each morning (the problem may have kicked in at the same time, since I have no way of knowing when that happened, but my 'first attempt to use the phone' each morning was different by about an hour or so). There are a lot of possibilities here (in spite of my background as an electrical engineer, I haven't had time to really troubleshoot this, as it has only happened three times, and I will be leaving town tomorrow). I have considered the possibility that the wiring is the problem. It is definitely in the jury-rigged category (60Hz hum is readily heard on the line), and maybe something in the connection is so borderline as to cause the switch to not always register a seizure on the line. Perhaps the ringing voltage 'cleans' a contact or something and fixes the line (remember, calling the phone fixes the problem for at least the rest of the day -- not just for that one call), but that doesn't explain the spontaneous fix that occurred on the third try. I also do not think this is the problem, because all the connections are clear and there are no spontaneous disconnections. I'm beginning to wonder if this is some kind of 'stupid switch trick.' I know the switch isn't *SUPPOSED* to do anything like this, but I have seen some of the crazy things that our switch does where I work, so almost anything is possible. The line has no special features on it (not even Call Waiting). I have no other details (it would be nice to know if calling the line but NOT answering it fixes the problem ... but I cannot make the problem occur in order to test this). This does not occur often enough to justify a complaint to the telco (SW Bell), as I am well aware how they handle strange but reproducible problems, and I don't even want to think what they would do with this non-reproducible problem. I don't know what kind of switch we are served by (we are getting caller-ID shortly, and already have other CLASS features, so it's at least a 1A (or equivalent) and I would imagine its probably fully digital). Has anyone every seen/heard of a switch doing something like this? Replies by E-Mail would be fine, and I'll summarize for the group if I get anything interesting. The problem may well be with wiring, although I can come up with no explanation as to what would cause a problem of this nature. (BTW, my brother just informed me that it happened again ... someone just called him, though, so the problem is fixed again for today) ... however, that would be the SECOND time it happened today. It it keeps up at this rate, we will have to call SW Bell repair, so I would appreciate if anyone can offer any explanations. (I would have to check over the inside wiring before we called SW Bell, since we don't have inside wire maintenance). Brett (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) ------------------------------ From: wisznie@ecf.toronto.edu (WISZNIEWSKI SEBASTIAN) Subject: MajorBBS Demo v.6.02 Problem Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 17:18:40 GMT ANYONE USE MajorBBS ? I have a copy of MajorBBS Demo v.6.02. According to the documentation it is a working demo but I can't get it to answer any calls. I have a USR Sportster 14.4 external and a 486. I run MajorBBS under DOS. Anyone? Sebastian Wiszniewski - University of Toronto COMP 9T5 I-NET: wisznie@skule.ecf.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 03 Apr 93 11:54:55 EST From: Scott Loftesness <76703.407@CompuServe.COM> Subject: FCC Dark Fiber Decision News from the Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 Report No. CC-505 Common Carrier Action March 29, 1993 Four BOC's Denied Authorization to Cease Providing Dark Fiber Service The Federal Communications Commission has denied the applications of Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., US West Communications, Bell Atlantic Telephone Companies and BellSouth Telephone Companies to cease providing dark fiber services. "Dark" fiber service is the provision and maintenance of fiber optic transmission capacity between customer premises where the electronics and other equipment necessary to power or "light" the fiber are provided by the customer, not the local exchange carrier (LEC). In denying these applications, the Commission concluded that dark fiber service is subject to FCC jurisdiction under Title II of the Communications Act because dark fiber service is "wire communication" offered by the BOCs on a common carrier basis. The Commission also found that Section 214 authorization was required for termination of the BOC's dark fiber service because such action would "discontinue, reduce, or impair service to a community." Finally, the Commission concluded that the BOCs had not met their burden of proof because, on this record, they failed to show that the public convenience and necessity will not be adversely affected by discontinuance of their dark fiber service. Action by the Commission March 26, 1993, by Memorandum Opinion and Order (FCC 93-165). Chairman Quello, Commissioners Marshall, Barrett and Duggan. News Media contact: Rosemary Kimball at (202) 632-5050. Common Carrier Bureau contact: Norma Bell at (202) 632-6917 or Colleen Boothby or Greg Vogt at (202) 632-6387. ------------------------------ From: khan@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) Subject: Help Me Find A Small, Unobtrusive Pager Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 15:21:31 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana I'm looking for a new pager. I currently use the standard boxlike display pager which clips to one's belt. I don't like wearing the pager actually clipped to my belt, however, so I usually carry it in my pants pocket. However, when I get a silent (vibrate) page, it often buzzes against the metal keys which I also carry in that pocket. In addition, it's bulky and hard to get at when a page comes in. And it's far too big and heavy to fit comfortably in my shirt pocket. I've heard of so-called wristwatch pagers, but have never seen one. You see, I live in a somewhat podunk town, and although we have multiple paging companies in the area (including Cybertel, an Ameritech company), it seems that nobody carries wristwatch pagers or can even order them for me. Several years ago I had a "Sensar" pager which was slightly larger than a fountain pen, and would clip to my shirt pocket comfortably. The Sensar would be fine now except for the fact that this model has no silent/vibrate option -- the closest it will get is a single peep, which is still disruptive in some situations. Do they still make Sensar-style pagers? Do the newer Sensars have a silent page mode, with either a vibrate or a simple flashing LED instead of a peep? Do the wristwatch pagers have a silent mode? Are they reliable and sturdy? How come nobody seems to want to carry this style of pager in their store? Can I get one to work on 457.0750 MHz, the frequency I'm currently using for my paging service? How expensive are they? And finally, what other options should I consider? Thanks in advance for your suggestions. Please email responses to me; I'll post a summary. Scott Coleman tmkk@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Subject: NPA Program For DOS Released From: bill.garfield@yob.sccsi.com (Bill Garfield) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 20:11:00 -0600 Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569 Reply-To: bill.garfield@yob.sccsi.com (Bill Garfield) Robert Ricketts (The PC Consultant), author of "NPA" a comprehensive DOS-based NPA-NXX lookup utility, has just released his 1st quarter 93 version, posted on CI$ in the Safety Net as NPA931.ZIP. It is also posted on a couple public BBS' in the author's home city of Houston, TX. Though NPA is a shareware program (registration $25) it is not crippled. An optional feature (special registration $175) enables exporting of data. "NPA" can do searches (including wildcards!) for any city, state or province based on either the city/state name or the npa/nxx. Output includes NXX's within the NPA, city name, county name & population, latitude and longitude and ZIP code of the rate center. Wildcards are valid in any field, though * searches will yield copious output. Give "NPA" a pair of npa/nxx's to work with and the program output will include great circle mileage between the two nxx's. Previous users of "NPA" will appreciate that the new release is lightning FAST!! The program will run in full screen mode or from the DOS command line. Online, context-sensitive help is available with the key in full screen mode. NPA931.ZIP includes its own self-extracting database of V&H tables, current as of 1st Q 93. The database includes all current North American npa/nxx's, thus the whole package is sizeable, at just over 600k. The author is a reader of the TELECOM Digest but does not currently have ready access to Internet/Usenet. For more information contact: The PC Consultant P.O. Box 42086 Houston, TX 77242-2086 (713) 826-2629 - v-mail if no answer CIS 73670,1164 Ye Olde Bailey BBS 713-520-1569 (V.32bis) 713-520-9566 (V.32bis) Houston,Texas yob.sccsi.com Home of alt.cosuard ------------------------------ From: david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) Subject: Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing ... Feds Delay Intro of GSM Date: 3 Apr 1993 16:30:42 +1000 Organization: University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia. I was going to type in the following but was beaten to it. David Maddison is happy for me to re-submit it for use in the TELECOM Digest. From: EXTDSM@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU (MADDISON,David) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 01:21:15 GMT Organization: La Trobe University This little snippet was hidden away on page 18 of yesterdays "Age". What a caring, alert press we have. ~From: "The Age" Newsaper (Melbourne, Australia) 31 March 1993 PHONES A TURN-OFF FOR ASIO ************************** The introduction of a new mobile phone system billed as untappable is being delayed because ASIO and law-enforcement agencies have insisted that they be able to listen in on conversations. The new network, called GSM or Global System for Mobile, was due to be introduced by both Telecom and Optus from tomorrow. But apparent confusion between law enforcement agencies, telecommun- ications carriers and industry regulators about whether the system could be tapped and who would pay for modifications to the system if it could not, have held up launches. It is unclear exactly how the confusion arose as it is known within many sectors of the telecommunications industry that it is possible to tap GSM phone calls. Calls cannot be tapped on the GSM network itself, but they can be tapped when they pass through a base station on the way to another mobile handset or through the fixed telephone network to an ordinary phone. The GSM system is digital and sends phone calls in an encoded or encrypted signal. This encryption makes it virtually impossible to tap the radio signals sent out on GSM handsets. Conversations cannot be picked up by scanners as can conversations on the current analogue, or 018 system. The so-called security of the GSM network has been highlighted by both Telecom and Optus over the past few months as they have moved to sell its benefits to possible customers. David Wilson +61 42 213802 voice, +61 42 213262 fax Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ Subject: How Fax Mailboxes Work Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 3 Apr 93 13:02:15 EST (Sat) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > [Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for > example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service, > it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who > subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, ... Faxes aren't that much data. Incoming messages from my fax modem, stored in what is essentially G3 format, are between 20K and 30K per page. I don't believe that they can be compressed much more; G3 uses a very effective Huffman compression technique and none of the compression programs I've ever tried have been able to squeeze out as much as another 10%. I suppose they could be stored as G4 which takes advantage of similarities between adjacent scan lines and might optimistically cut down the size 30% or so. That means that with 10GB of disk, which fits under a desk these days, one can store about 400,000 pages of fax data, which should be enough for a fairly large server. > ... it rings once or twice, then the fax tones are heard as the mailbox > answers, which I might add gives my name and fax number in the display > window of the calling machine. One can build this using off-the-shelf parts. The fax answering service attaches to the phone network like a voice answering service using DID trunks, with each customer forwarded to a separate number in the DID number block. Brooktrout has for several years been selling fax modems with integrated DID support which pass the DID number to the host. The CSI string that the caller sees is sent to the modem by the host, so it should be easy enough to look up the appropriate client name and number corresponding to the DID number and return that as the CSI. I have no idea what hardware Ameritech is using, but I see no reason that one couldn't build a system like this out of a network of PCs running QNX (a fast message-passing soft-realtime networked Unix workalike used in a lot of funky data management applications) with some strings of SCSI disks and a bunch of DID modems for a parts cost of about $40K. Add another $100K for software development and overhead and it's still not a large investment to start a business. > My fax line has 'forward on busy/no answer' to the mailbox, then > Ameritech starts trying to pass the message to me ... Soapbox time: Ameritech has no business running a service like this. The only telco features this service needs are DID trunks and forward on busy/no answer, both rather vanilla features that are supposed to be equally available to all customers. Ameritech may also be using a feature that lets the fax mail system query the status of lines in the CO, again somthing that should be equally available to all. If the telco can play both sides of the fence like this, they will inevitably jigger things around to give their own service a huge advantage over competitors'. Case in point: I've heard of places where the monthly charge for busy/no-answer forwarding is more than the monthly charge for voice mail. Can we say cross-subsidy? Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 04:32:17 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: A Very Interesting Intercept On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a wrong number. I thought I'd share this recording for those of you interested. I have translated the number to something else so as not to give away the original number; this number also gives the same message. The number to try is +81 45 33 000 0000. Listen especially to the accent on the announcement. This announcement was done with real care and precision. It is quite interesting. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: thuridur@scf.usc.edu (Gudmundsdottir Thuridur) Subject: Telecom Policies and AT&T Break-Up: Info Needed Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 18:59:42 PST I am doing a research on the positive and negative arguments for using telecommunications policy as a key element of a national industrial policy, and the efforts to date in achieveing this goal. In addition, I am studying what positive and negative lessons other countries have learned from the experience of breaking up AT&T, and what lessons U.S. policy-makers can learn from efforts at telecommunications reforms in other countries. I really appreciate any ideas you might give me regarding those subjects. Thuridur Gudmundsdottir thuridur@usc.edu 340 Cloverdale Ave. #210 Los Angeles, Ca. 90036 (213) 939-1206 ------------------------------ From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko) Subject: How to Busy Out a Line? Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 19:04:47 EST Organization: Air Age Publishing, Wilton CT USA Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com I need to make one of our lines busy after normal business hours and on weekends. What is the best way to do this? Can I simply install a switch that shorts tip and ring together? Thanks, Jeff Jeff's Oasis at Home. Jeff can also be reached at work at: jwasilko@airage.com [Moderator's Note: I don't think it is a good idea to just short the tip and ring. You're better off to put a couple other pieces in there. A dead short will cause a trouble report to be issued. You want the phone to appear to be busy instead. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 19:38:57 EST From: John R. Covert 03-Apr-1993 1928 Subject: New "Cellular Travel Guide" Available From Communications Publishing The Fourth Edition of the "Cellular Travel Guide" (formerly "The Cellular Telephone Directory") is now available from Communications Publishing. The new 1,184 page guide includes coverage maps, system IDs and roaming information for metropolitan and rural cellular markets throughout the U.S. and Canada plus information for those international locations which provide visitor service on AMPS systems. 1-3 copies, $19.90, 4-7: $17.90, 8-15: $15.90, 16-31: $13.90, ... Credit card orders can be phoned to 800 927-8800. Shipping is free if you send payment with your order to Communications Publishing, P.O. Box 500, Mercer Island, WA 98040. [My only involvement with this company is that I like their book and have occasionally sent corrections or made recommendations to the publisher.] John [Moderator's Note: This is a reminder to the USA readers that Saturday night/Sunday morning marks our semi-annual clock change. Clocks should be set FORWARD one hour at 2:00 AM local time. For a good time, call 202-653-1800 at about 1:59:30 Eastern Standard Time. You'll note at the magic second, the clock doesn't miss a beat! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #229 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04165; 4 Apr 93 5:02 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11434 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 03:03:25 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09973 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 03:02:03 -0500 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 03:02:03 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304040802.AA09973@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #230 TELECOM Digest Sun, 4 Apr 93 03:02:00 CDT Volume 13 : Issue 230 ^^^ Index To This Issue: Did You Set Your Clock Forward? Administrivia: The Usual Overflow; Time Changes, etc. (TELECOM Moderator) Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Alan Hales) Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Graham Allan) Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Julian Macassey) Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Ken Stox) Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Ed Greenberg) Re: Toll Saver (was Answering Machine Features) (Gordon Burditt) Re: Toll Saver (was Answering Machine Features) (Jack Dominey) Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Ben Cox) Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (joe@nyx.cs.du.edu) Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (Terry Cooper) Re: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences (Steve Forrette) Re: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences (Bon Smith) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 22:31:24 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: The Usual Overflow; Time Changes, etc. Once again I'm sorry to report the queue is overloaded beyond hope with messages -- mostly replies -- to topics discussed in the past couple weeks and it was necessary to purge 435 articles unused. Nothing personal, you understand ... Many of you should have received your Orange Card by now, along with your PIN. I hope it is working out well for you. Since the Orange Card is a brand new program (literally, it was started in January, 1993; you in the TELECOM Digest readership are the charter customers of a company which hopes to have at least a million customers later this year), there have been some bugs, not the least of which was the second application which went out to many of you from Accent Communications asking for additional details. To clarify things, the carrier is LDS. Accent is the customer service side of LDS. Orange is the marketing/sales component. I don't like the idea of so many different corporations either, but they did not ask my opinion. The new application from Orange (you early birds got the original version) is in the form of a self-addressed mailer you send in with no postage or envelope required. Most of you got the paper card in laminated plastic ... a new 'credit card like' card is in the works. People who requested the 1+ and 800 information now have their packages, or should have them, and these are starting to come back to my office. If you ordered one and did not receive it, let me know. My hope is that within a few months the Digest will become self-supporting to the extent someone (myself?) can be paid to work part time at least a few hours daily, ending the problems the Digest is having now with mail long delayed in being answered, if it ever is, etc. Don't forget that we in the USA lose an hour tonight ... clocks should be set forward one hour as of 2 AM local time Sunday morning. And I'm so busy this weekend, I really could use that hour ... ... but we will recover it in the fall. If anyone claims to you that they did something exactly at 2 AM on Sunday, you can tell them they are a liar; after 1:59 AM comes 3:00 AM, today only. Call 202-653-1800 to calibrate your clocks. Patrick ------------------------------ From: alan@dadd.ti.com (Alan Hales) Subject: Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers Organization: Texas Instruments Incorporated, Dallas TX Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1993 21:25:14 GMT In article julian@bongo.tele.com (Julian Macassey) writes: > According to the table, U.S. to U.K. calls (apparently via > AT&T) are $3.42 per minute. > Calls from the U.K. to the U.S. are $1.88 (apparently via BT). > So I decided to get a BT or Mercury credit card so I could call to the > U.K at U.K. rates. > [Moderator's Note: The typical call from the USA to the UK is *not* $3.42 > per minute! It is much less. I think they got their tables wrong. I > think less than a dollar a minute is more typical. PAT] Typical evening/night rates for calls from the USA to the UK are about $0.60 per minute. I don't make many calls to the UK during the day, but I think the rate is something like $1 per minute. Calls from the UK (BT) to the USA used to be more expensive than this, but I don't know if this is still the case. Alan Hales, alan@dadd.ti.com ------------------------------ From: ALLAN@MNHEP8.HEP.UMN.EDU (Graham Allan) Subject: Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers Organization: University of Minnesota - High Energy Physics Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1993 15:10:09 GMT In julian@bongo.tele.com writes: > According to the table, U.S. to U.K. calls (apparently via > AT&T) are $3.42 per minute. I think the prices in the table are probably wrong. Perhaps they are the "call home" charges? At the moment I pay about $0.48 per minute to call the UK, using Sprint (this is probably closer to $0.70 before the Sprint World/Sprint Most discounts). Last time I checked (about December), Mercury charged about UK#0.45 per minute ($0.68) to call the US from the UK (BT charges a bit more, probably about UK#0.65). Both these rates are for the cheapest possible time of day. > A start would be the U.S. 800 numbers to contact the Mercury or BT > "call home" services. They could probably put me in touch with sales. The BT chargecard operates differently from US calling cards: you have to have a BT account (ie, a phone number!) to have one. If you still want to look into it, the UK Direct number is 1-800 445 5667. The Mercury chargecard was only recently introduced, and is even more restrictive than the BT one -- I think it only works by going through the operator, and I'm not sure if they have any arrangements to use it internationally. Graham ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 Apr 93 10:57 PST From: julian@bongo.tele.com (Julian Macassey) Reply-To: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers On Mar 31 at 12:32, tdarcos@access.digex.com Paul Robinson writes: > julian@bongo.tele.com (Julian Macassey), writes: > Looks like everyone is a little bit wrong here. Yes, the {Economist} blew it. I can't get a straight answer from BT re rates etc. But obviously the U.S. price was "worst case". Yours, Julian Macassey, N6ARE julian@bongo.tele.com Voice: (213) 653-4495 Paper Mail: 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue, Hollywood, California 90046-7142 [Moderator's Note: The US price was not 'worst case' -- it was totally non-existent. No such rates exist. Maybe that rate applies at a pay phone. That is the only place it would come close. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stox@genesis.MCS.COM (Ken Stox) Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives Date: 3 Apr 1993 23:22:20 -0600 Organization: MCSNet Contributor, Chicago, IL Ang Peng Hwa writes: > Pat asks: >> I don't understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services >> if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their >> own car was repossessed.... > The reason those who do not pay should be given the 911 service is > simple: humanitarian. It's part of the thing about being more human Look at it this way, you are driving one night past this guy's house. You just happen to have a (heart attack, seizure, acid flashback ...) and pull off to the side of the road. A kind gentlemen (who has been unable to pay his phone bill) comes to your rescue. Now then, how would you want the phone network to behave? Ken Stox stox@mcs.com ..dogma, half price! #include [Moderator's Note: Suppose I need to be taken to a hospital in a hurry some distance away and the same kind gentleman had not made his car payments and Chrysler Credit Corporation had pulled the vehicle. How would you want the automobile industry to behave? Suppose he had the car but it was out of gasoline and he could not afford to buy any. How would you like Standard Oil to behave? Why is telco getting the brunt of your 'my need is the most important criteria' argument? What difference does it make if leaving the loop connected for limited emergency calls only costs a few cents? If everyone who read this Digest sent me only one penny each time they read it, my life would be considerably more comfortable than it is now. (Box 1003, Chicago, IL 60690 -- hint! hint!!) ... since it is only a penny to you and a lot to me, does that give me the right to take it from you by force? You say telco can afford it? What possible difference could that make in the discussion? PAT] ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 06:26:58 GMT I think I agree with Patrick on this one. You want phone service? Pay a bill. The logical next step would be to require that any residence without a phone be equipped with a 911 only phone at no charge. 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 | Ham Radio: KM6CG [Moderator's Note: But the point is, there would be a charge, its just that the users of the service you propose would not be the ones paying for it. Whether, as someone else wrote, the common calamity affects us all or not is a question which could be debated. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Toll Saver (was Answering Machine Features) Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1993 03:22:10 GMT > [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area > where the tariffs were concerned. What is the difference between > saving on tolls by not answering the phone for a certain number of > rings as a way to pass a message to the caller and not answering the > phone for a certain number of rings until you are in a position to > talk to the caller, ala Larry King? What is the difference between "Toll Saver" reduces the time the line spends ringing. The time to answer even if there are no calls (about six rings?) is around the typical time for humans to answer. The "Larry King" method extends the time the line spends ringing to a lot more than several times the typical minute before callers give up when they're calling humans. Some AT&T answering machines provide "Toll Saver". I'd be very surprised if AT&T recommended the "Larry King" method in their marketing literature or anything else distributed to the public. The way they set up their network to give up after extended ringing suggests that they don't like it one bit. > saving on tolls in this way or saving on tolls by passing coded > messages in the form of bogus collect phone calls to/from non-existent > names? PAT] I'd be very surprised if AT&T operators recommended that method to anyone, either. However, I have had operators recommend to the (wrong) person answering a person-to-person call that the answerer give the operator a time to try again, which the operator would pass back to me, and the operator also passed my name (and number, if I wanted!) to them. Either of those two bits of information passed stood a very good chance of turning a future person-to-person call into a future direct-dialed call, and that's what happened -- he arrived home, got the message, and called me. No, this wasn't any code; I really expected a better than 50-50 chance that the person I called was going to be there and take the call. And I expected to keep trying until it went through. Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon [Moderator's Note: What the operator was supposed to tell the person taking the message was "ask him to call Operator 7 in Podunk; she has a call for him from Mr. Burditt." Then she would suspend the ticket for up to 24 hours. When your party got the message, he would dial the operator and ask for Operator 7 in Podunk. His operator would be tipped off that this was an earlier person to person call that had not been completed. The computer would pull up the details on her screen; she would complete the call to you and when you answered she would advise you "ready on your call to Mr. Smith". The call would then be billed to you at person to person rates. You originally asked for person to person service; that is what you are now getting and what you shall be expected to pay for. Person to person means just that: the telco will attempt to locate the person and having done so, get them on the phone and back to you if there is a delay. You could have had all that service for the P-to-P surcharge. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jdominey@nesca.attmail.com Date: 3 Apr 93 16:21:52 GMT Subject: Toll Saver (was Answering Machine Features) PAT mentioned a few days ago that he felt the Toll Saver feature of answering machines fell into a "grey area", since it allows you to get information (or exchange a message) without paying for it. While there may be some conceptual validity to comparing this with coded exchanges in fake collect calls and the like, I think there's another pragmatic way of looking at the issue. Toll Saver uses very little of telco's resources. ["telco" in this message embraces local and interexchange companies]. A fake collect call ties up operator, machine, and special trunk time for, let's say, 15 seconds. This is in addition to any ringing time on the answering party's end. The Larry King Show "let the phone ring" example used to tie up signalling trunks for up to 30 minutes before the new policy came into effect. And even now it uses those trunks for four minutes (I think) before the automatic cut-off. Toll Saver, on the other hand, uses perhaps 24 seconds (four ring cycles) of signalling. It has the added benefit, from telco's POV, of encouraging people to call the machine to check messages. The additional revenue *may* be enough to offset the cost of the abandoned calls. All of this has absolutely no bearing on whether or not Toll Saver is legally, philosophically, or politically right or wrong. And if this kicks off another debate on telco's "real" costs versus charges, I apologize to PAT and the readers of TELECOM Digest in advance! Jack Dominey AT&T Network Planning, Atlanta GA (404) 810-6936 AT&T Mail !dominey or try dominey@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 23:52:22 GMT Reply-To: thoth@uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin) writes: > I would recommend Steven Levy's history, {Hackers}. It's got a number > of anecdotes about John Draper, aka Captain Crunch. I think it's > still in print ... Yes, it is: Dell Nonfiction; ISBN 0-440-13405-6 Ben Cox thoth@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 00:31:48 MST From: Joe@nyx.cs.du.edu Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? Let me begin by saying that it is a shame that I feel that I have to forge this note. Recent seizures of computer equipment from BBSes tend to get me paranoid about anyone who might think that *I* am phreaking into the phone system. With that in mind ... I saw a Chinese student here get a Radio Shack pocket dialer, put a different crystal in it, and then by rocking two of the keys on the keypad back and forth, could produce the tone of a quarter dropping into a pay phone. Since the pocket dialer could store a number sequence, storing the alternating keys made it easy for him to sound off quarters dropping into the phone. I watched him place a call to China and insert a few "dollars" into the phone for the first minute. I was shocked and quite disbelieving that modern (genuine Bell!) pay phones would operate like this. This worked whether or not the pay charges were automatically handled by a computer or a live operator. I thought it was a trick, so I asked to see it and placed a short-distance (85 cents) call to try it and sure enough, it went through (and gave me a 15 cent credit to the next period!) I then sat him down and explained to him that it was a felony, and that is a very serious crime. He was under the impression that if he got caught, they would just deport him. I tried to use scare tactics. Don't know if it worked or not ... his studies are over and he is back home in China. [Moderator's Note: They would put him in jail for awhile, *then* they would deport him. Thank you for sharing; now permit me to share with you. Why do you feel anonymous mail is so hard (or impossible) to identify? Your message came to me from louie.udel.edu; he got it from relay1.uu.net where it was known as AA19173. It arrived there at 02:33 EST on Friday. UUNET got it from nyx.cs.du.edu where it left a few seconds earlier at 00:31 MST Friday under ID AA9304020031 - AA16397. 'Nyx' is a public access machine at the University of Denver. It was a trivial matter to ask someone at cs.du.edu to check system logs around 12:30 AM Friday to find out what *actual user names* were on line then, and there weren't that many. Please do not send anonymous mail to telecom. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1993 00:37:09 -0500 From: Terry (T.A.) Cooper Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada > Having read some of the propaganda being distributed up your way, your > opinion is understandable. I cannot imagine, however, that telephone > service could be any better than it is here. Add to that the choices > and prices for services and equipment and I would have to conclude that > competition is the way to go. It is not likely that I would pay much attention to the propaganda since most of it comes from the unions (I have no use the scourge of the NA economy, unions). There are some facts that lead me to believe in the regulated monopoly that we used to have: 1) Canada is the second largest country in the world (Russia is still bigger). 2) There are only 26 million people here. This leads to the fact that there is a lot of distance to be covered and very few telephone users to go around. What competition means is that the wannabe Telcos will serve the high population areas (southern Quebec and Ontario) and will leave the rest to the regional (real) Telcos. The regional telcos will of course no longer have the profits of the cities to support the more remote areas. The US doesn't have this problem of course since there is less space and you can't go anywhere without being in a crowd. Terry Cooper Northern Telecom Ottawa, Ontario "Opinions expressed are personal and are not those of Northern Telecom." ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences Date: 04 Apr 1993 04:29:31 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article wildixon@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) writes: > Are there any users who have implemented some form of ATM out there? > If so, I would like to know what you are doing. > [Moderator's Note: As we just finished a thread on blizzard and ATM > (as in cash machine) breakdowns, I think it fair to say Wil is most > likely referring to the 'other meaning' of ATM! :) PAT] Yes, I'm sure he is. I use Adobe Type Manager regularly with Mircosoft Word For Windows in order to get all of my favorite fonts, etc. Oh, you mean the *other* other ATM? :-) I heard a good line once: There are two organizations ruled by acronyms: the military and the phone company. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: ROBERT SMITH Subject: Re: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences Date: 04 Apr 93 05:36:53 GMT Reply-To: ROBERT SMITH Organization: Stakeholder Relations, NCR Corp in Dayton,OH In article wildixon@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) writes: > Are there any users who have implemented some form of ATM out there? > If so, I would like to know what you are doing. > [Moderator's Note: As we just finished a thread on blizzard and ATM > (as in cash machine) breakdowns, I think it fair to say Wil is most > likely referring to the 'other meaning' of ATM! :) PAT] Imagine the confusion that exists here at NCR. We are the world's leader in ATM's (the cash machines) but, as part of AT&T, ATM often has the other meaning. Bob Smith E-mail => Robert.D.Smith@daytonoh.ncr.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #230 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06052; 4 Apr 93 5:56 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13372 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 04:01:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14545 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 04:00:03 -0500 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 04:00:03 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304040900.AA14545@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #231 TELECOM Digest Sun, 4 Apr 93 04:00:00 CDT Volume 13 : Issue 231 ^^^ Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: 1-800-TADPOLE Wanted! Help Locate 'Touch America' (Juan Gascon) Re: Cable TV Providing Telcom or ISDN? (Garrett Wollman) Re: Telecomm Wiring Standards For Buildings - Books (Bill Blum) Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Greg Abbott) Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Conrad Kimball) Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors (Todd Inch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: juang@spock.dis.cccd.edu (Juan Gascon) Subject: Re: 1-800-TADPOLE Wanted! Help Locate 'Touch America' Date: 4 Apr 1993 01:15:41 -0800 Organization: Coast Community College District, Costa Mesa, CA In article dag@ossi.com writes: > jim@tadpole.com (Jim Thompson) writes: >> As you can see from the headers, I work for Tadpole Technology, Inc. >> Tadpole would really like to have '800 TADPOLE', (800 823 7653). >> Perusing the Telecom Archives, the 823 NXX is 'owned' (?) by a company >> called 'Touch America'. Has anyone heard of them? Any contact >> information for 'Touch America'? >> Also with 800 portability just around the corner, what will the >> situation be after May 1? Will I be able to call my favorite 800 >> vendor and say, "I'd like to have 800 823 7653." (If it is unassigned, >> of course.), or will I still need to call Touch America, and then >> 'move' the 800 service? > Well, I just called the number and got a recording saying that the > call couldn't go through; the old "We're sorry, the number you have > reached ..." deal. That means that the chances are no-one is using > it. Of-course, if you don't act quick one of the less ethical telecom > readers (most of us are great guys and gals of-course) could snap up > the number and try to sell it back to you for $500. As to how you get > numbers after May 1, I have no idea, but would also be interested in > finding out, I hope that it's something simple, like call your > favourite carrier and tell 'em which number you'd like and then they > give it to you. I am not a telecom guru but I have recently been through this experiance. Apparently when 800 numbers expire or are dropped they can go into a referral period for six months and this period may be extended. Thereafter they "age" the number for a year before anyone can request it. You may however take the number after, I believe it was 90 days, if you agree to pay for calls that would have gone to the previous owner. This agreement is in writing. The person I spoke to joked that it would be great to get a business competitors dropped number and take advantage of his client base. hmmmmm ... BTW now that I have your attention and seeing as this poster wants more of a reply to Follow-up, I wonder if any kind Guru can help us out. I am working with a non-profit 12 step group to develop a Voice Processing (8 port NewVoice dialogic compatible) system that will serve all of Southern California. More specifically LATA 5. We are trying to device a way that the individual caller after dialing 411 and getting a listing will only have to make a local call (or free) to reach the V.P. which will be housed in Monrovia, CA (GTE sigh ;^( ) Anyway originally I had thought to have areas that are far enough away to justify it, forward their phones to a 700 number I secured. But one cannot forward to 700 numbers I found out recently. We need away to have the calling area billed directly for the calls arriving to the V.P. because the Region will not be able or willing to pay 800 service for all calls in and out. I heard that NET New England Tel has a caller-pays service, Is anyone out there contemplating this (you listening PAT?)? Are there anything like Public Service Announcemnts PSA that television stations are required to air for free, available to non-profit organizations from LD carriers and if not why? Perhaps someone with more clout and knowledge than I could write congress a little note. There are a lot of suffering addicts out there that would like to use their last two dimes to reach out and touch us. Is anyone in CyberSpace willing to help us help them with consultation and information? Please. Thanks, Juan G. [Moderator's Note: As I pointed out earlier to you, use an 800 number and then correlate the numbers shown on the ANI with the individual chapters of your organization. Let each of them pay their share. You can get 800 service quite inexpensively these days. This will make it very easy for clients to reach you and provide good records for your local chapters later on. Regards TADPOLE and other desired numbers: what I have found out is that as of May 3 there will be a common database of all 800 numbers, probably maintained by Bellcore. The database is apparently 'more or less' up and running now, but final modifications to telco switches are going on now and a few more weeks are needed to firm things up. I've had people (such as the TADPOLE company) ask me what to do if they want a 'vanity' number known to not be in service but whose prefix is assigned to some company other than mine. My source says what you should do is order the number you want. If it is not in use at this time, then *ignore the carrier it 'belongs to'*, because as of May 1 it won't belong to them anyway. If you order 800 service through me for example -- and Lord knows I'll appreciate your patronage -- then on the form I send you if you request it, fill in the 800 number *as though you already had it* and the 'ring to' number where you want it to go. Include a note saying 'dont have this number but want it when portability is in effect' ... every effort will be made to secure it for you, and my understanding is the requesting carrier need only notify the database operator of how to route it. If you do have an 800 number now and want to keep it, fill in the form the same way and note 'I currently have this 800 number, please retain it'. If you have no 800 service and are not particular about the number you get, I have a few in stock now. My source says the database will *not* take instructions for changes until May 1, which is Saturday, meaning May 3. If rates of 17-23 cents per minute with no monthly fee on a *genuine* 800 number (not the MCI add-a-pin variety) seems like a good deal to you, or at least breaks out to the same as what you pay now more or less, please give TELECOM Digest your traffic. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Garrett.Wollman@UVM.EDU (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Cable TV Providing Telcom or ISDN? Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 20:21:13 GMT In article dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu writes: > I was wondering how feasable it is for CATV to provide telephone > service or digital platforms like ISDN in the near future? This is an interesting question. I know for a fact that is possible to provide reasonable-quality audio over cable-like media, because I've done it. In particular, every packet from the IETF Audiocast in Columbus which we receive here passes through this University's broadband network (using equipment from Ungerman-Bass). (We get packet video the same way.) This network currently runs two channels of data (on channels 3 and 4A) and as many as eight channels of video, with capacity primarily limited by rack space in our headend. (Well, there's also this broken RF modem out there...) However, there are a few features of this particular kind of data transmission which make it undesirable for large-scale data applications. 1) It's slow. Each data channel currently runs at 5 Mbit/s; we could upgrade to 10 Mbit/s if we felt the need. (As it is, most of the campus is moving or has moved over to Ethernet-over-fiber, because they don't like paying for maintenance of the broadband.) 2) It's slow. Whenever a user sends a packet on this network, it is broadcast on the reverse mode of the appropriate channel. The packet must then make it to our headend to be amplified, translated over to the forward mode, amplified again, and distributed back to the recipient. This means that two people in a building a quarter mile away could have their connectivity disrupted by flipping a single switch in the room next to me. Of course, this is a fault shared by the current telephone and cable systems, and not shared by more conventional network technologies like Ethernet. 3) Privacy. This is the biggest problem. When dealing with a broadcast medium like this, snooping is extremely easy. Now before you respond ``but people put up with the risks for cellular'', keep in mind that we are discussing non-mobile, fixed-location, fixed-wire applications here. People generally don't think of privacy as being an issue when there is no obvious wireless connection involved. (And people ask me why I don't have a cable box...) The obvious solution is encryption, but people here will recall the problems that various governments have with the possibility of truly private telephone conversations. Garrett A. Wollman wollman@emba.uvm.edu uvm-gen!wollman UVM disagrees. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 Apr 93 14:09:15 EDT From: Bill Blum Subject: Re: Telecomm Wiring Standards For Buildings - Books A previous poster suggested contacting Global Engineering Documents for information in this area. > From: DONALD.CRENSHAW@tdkt.kksys.com (DONALD CRENSHAW) > Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 13:47:00 -0600 > One hot document (which I have on my desk right now is ANSI/EIA/TIA- > 568-1991 "Commercial Building Telecommunications Wiring Standard". It > addresses most specifically eight conductor connectors, i.e. RJ-45. > More info on connectors is in TIA/EIA/TSB40. I've not seen that one. Global Engineering Documents 1990 M Street NW, Suite 400 Washington, D.C. 20036 (800) 854-7179 (202) 429-2860 (202) 331-0960 FAX I spoke with Marcia Knights about several books and they faxed me info (summary): EIA/TIA-568 is $77 (stnd defines generic tc wiring system for commercial buildings to support multiproduct/vendor environment; helps someone with little knowledge of tc products on planning/installing building wiring). EIA/TSB-36 "Technical Systems Bulletin Additional Cable Specifications for Unshielded Twisted Pair Cables" (an addendum to the 1991 EIA/TIA-568) is $27 (guidance on categories of UTP cables for data apps; requirements on transmission performance of these cables). EIA/TSB-40 "Telecommunications System Bulletin Additional Transmission Specifications for Unshielded Pair Connecting Hardware" (another addendum to EIA/TIA-568) is $29 (help in specifying connecting elements that are compatible w/ various cable grades; outlines testing methods and min trans requirements for UTP connecting hardware used in hi-speed LANs; categories of connecting hdwr described herein correspond to cable categories in TSB-36). EIA/TIA-569 "Commercial Building Standard for Telecommunications Pathways and Spaces" is $87 (3 concepts: buildings are dynamic, building tc systems and media are dynamic, tc is more than just voice and data). EIA/TIA-570 "Residential and Light Commercial Telecommunications Wiring Standard" is $45 (describes premises wiring intended to connecting 1 to 4 exchange access lines to various on-site equip; geared towards LECs, equip designers and manufacturer, building owners/contractors and tc specialist companies. EIA/TIA-606 "The Administration Standard for the Telecommunications Infrastructure of Commercial Buildings" is $76 (documentation of cables, termination hdwr, patching/cross-connection facilities, conduits, etc.; provides a uniform admin scheme independent of apps). I have no connection with GED. Looks like TIA-568, TSB-36 and TSB-40 might be useful based upon descriptions. BTW, GED will take POs, credit card orders or COD. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 17:08:59 CST From: Greg Abbott Reply-To: gabbott@uiuc.edu Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives > Pat asks: >> I don't understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services >> if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their >> own car was repossessed.... In Champaign County, Illinois, there is a $.65 surcharge on each and every telphone access line. If persons who have had their phone service disconnected, or had no "normal" telephone service connected, were to have access to 9-1-1, we would have to figure out some way for them to pay for their portion of the cost of providing this service. Just from an administrative view point, this would be nearly impossible! The cost of running a 9-1-1 center is staggering. The surcharge monies only account for about 1/3 of our annual budget. The issue over how to fund 9-1-1 service has been debated thousands of times and there are a number of very good taxing systems in use. I happen to like the surcharge on telephone access lines because it taxes those persons who wish to have access to the network. I have had several people call me up and complain about the surcharge. The majority understand once I explain what it is for and what service it provides. I had one elderly resident tell me that I could disconnect 9-1-1 from her telephone as she never has had a need to call for any type of emergency assistance and she never planned on it either! I never planned on having that pedestrian step out from behind that stopped bus either, but she did ... and my car happened to be in the most inconvenient location at that very moment. Car, driver and pedestrian are all O.K. now, I might add. In short, at some point people have to realize that their personal safety is their responsibility. The government can regulate and mandate all kinds of things to help prevent accidents, but nothing can ever account for every type of emergency situation. People have to be prepared for these emergencies. One way to be prepared is to be able to quickly summon emergency responders. Subscribing to telephone service (and paying the bill) provides them with access to 9-1-1 to accomplish this. If people don't want to pay for the service then they'll have to run down to the corner pay phone or knock on a neighbors door ... both of which consume valuable time in an emergency. The Director of our center and I disagree on this topic ... slightly. He feels that indigent citizens who have had telephone service disconnected because they couldn't afford to pay for it, should continue to be allowed access to 9-1-1. He also likes the idea of an emergency only telephone service at a substantially reduced rate. The thoughts and opinions expressed here are my own. They in no way reflect the policies or opinions of my employer. GREG ABBOTT E-MAIL: GABBOTT@UIUC.EDU 9-1-1 COORDINATOR COMPUSERVE MAIL: 76046,3107 VOICE: 217/333-4348 METCAD FAX: 217/384-7003 1905 E. MAIN ST. PAGER: 800/222-6651 URBANA, IL 61801 PIN # 9541 ------------------------------ From: cek@sdc.boeing.com (Conrad Kimball) Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives Date: 4 Apr 93 06:21:54 GMT Organization: Boeing Computer Services (ESP), Seattle, WA Pat asks: > I don't understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services > if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their > own car was repossessed.... I can't speak for everywhere, but at least here in the Seattle area, 911 services _are_ paid for, by the public -- they aren't provided by the telco as a community service (we passed a bond issue to make 911 available in all communities within the county). If the public chooses to define the service to be universally accessible, so be it. There simply are a number of governmentally-supplied services that are universally available, and emergency services are among them - rightfully so IMHO. 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 ------------------------------ From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) Subject: Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors Organization: Maverick International Inc. Date: Sat, 04 Apr 93 22:24:03 GMT In article rothen+@pitt.edu (Seth B Rothenberg) writes: > I am in the process of buying a house two doors down from my in-laws > and thought it would be useful to be able to answer their phone from > my house and vice-versa. I could easily string a four-pair wire you meant 2-pair, right? :-) ^^^^^^^^^ > between the houses, possibly without even touching the house in > between (I need to check if the deed allows me to cross the backyard). > My question is whether this is safe? I understand that the phone > company is supposed to use lightening arrestors at the building > entrance. Do I need to? Naturally, the phone wire is not the highest > point anywhere. Probably not a big deal. If you can scrounge up some spare protectors, it wouldn't hurt to add them, but you DO already have the protector at the remote houses, just not at the local ones. > Does anyone know of a simple intercom that will run the 100 feet > between the houses? I've hooked up the cheapo $15 Radio Shack (and others) 1-pair wired intercoms via a spare pair in underground phone wire about 1 block long. Worked well, but as-is they are too easy to use for eavesdropping and there is a "master" with the on/off/volume and push-to-talk button which can eavesdrop and the "slave" (just a switch, speaker, and capacitor) which can only "beep" the master, requesting someone there to turn it on. If you had one set for each direction, that might work well. The "eavesdrop" mode is a great burglar-alarm or baby monitor as well. > [Moderator's Note: (Good suggestion of burying the wire, but 3' deep > in conduit? and non-suggestion of stealing pairs and other big-old-city > "technology" omitted.) If I were you and you're talking typical suburbia, and (big assumption) you, the neighbor, and the in-laws are all fenced in, I'd simply run outdoor wire from your house to your fence (in conduit underground if the fence doesn't touch the house) and along the INSIDE of the neighbor's fence to the in-laws. Make the neighbor a batch of brownies or something in exchange for letting you run the wire there. The typical people move every five years or so, so this semi-temporary solution is easy to disconnect or rip out but should last as long as the fence. A lot easier than digging 100' x 3' trenches. If you do need to bury -- special underground two-pair wire is available and the telcos often bury it only 6" or so. You can bury it shallow if it's on private property with everyone's full knowledge and if you keep an eye on it. Or -- use some underground water pipe -- the tough black stuff that comes in a roll - for conduit. Caveat: Most "quad" four-conductor wire is good for outdoors stapled to a house or fence or something, most multi-pair is not recommended (personally, I'd use it anyway if you aren't in harsh weather zone, realizing that you may need to replace it after five or ten years.) You DON'T want both lines in one quad cable, or even two quad cables run side-by- side for that distance due to crosstalk. Along the lines of the Moderator's non-suggestion: If you have underground main phone trunks with the green "pedestals", you can simply connect the unused second pair of your underground house drop to the proper pair (match colors with your in-laws drop in their pedestal), which doesn't even steal a pair from the telco -- just two houses connected to the same pair -- a "multiple" in telcoese. This assumes that you have two-pair drops and only one phone line (typical). Caveat: I successfully did this once, but was caught disconnecting it (it was intentionally temporary) by the neighbor across the street from the pedestal, who worked for the telco! Obvious suggestion: Ask the telco to do this for you! They usually will, but I don't know how much they'd charge. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #231 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id ab20008; 5 Apr 93 1:42 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07091 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 23:45:48 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05502 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 23:45:00 -0500 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 23:45:00 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199304050445.AA05502@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #232 TELECOM Digest Sun, 4 Apr 93 23:45:00 CDT Volume 13 : Issue 232 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work (Steve Forrette) Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work (Wil Dixon) Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Steve Forrette) Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Daniel Burstein) Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (John R. Levine) Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Ehud Gavron) Re: Dialing Codes in France, UK (Richard Cox) Re: Dialing Codes in France (Frederick Roeber) Re: Answering Machine Features (Brad Whitlock) Re: Answering Machine Features (Greg Andrews) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work Date: 4 Apr 1993 07:21:09 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for >> example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service, >> it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who >> subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, ... > One can build this using off-the-shelf parts. The fax answering > service attaches to the phone network like a voice answering service > using DID trunks, with each customer forwarded to a separate number in > the DID number block. There's another way to do this, which conserves DID numbers. You get a special data line from the CO that gives you information about calls coming in on each trunk. You can then have all customers busy/no answer transfer to the same number. As each call comes in, you get a message on the data line which basically says "the call coming in on trunk xx was forwarded from yyy-yyyy." This method eliminates having to pay for a DID number for each customer, and is used quite a bit by voicemail service bureaus. As for how to detect loopbacks, no special access to the telephone network is needed. Every so often, the faxmail server just needs to place a call to the subscriber. If the call gets forwarded, it will appear on one of the inbound trunks. Assuming that you wouldn't want to just use time coincidence to detect a looping call for fear of ignoring a real call that happens to arrive at an unlucky time, the service bureau can answer the call, and figure out that it is talking to itself when the each end exchanges the fax machine IDs at the beginning of the call. > Soapbox time: Ameritech has no business running a service like this. > If the telco can play both sides of the fence like this, they will inevitably > jigger things around to give their own service a huge advantage over > competitors'. Case in point: I've heard of places where the monthly > charge for busy/no-answer forwarding is more than the monthly charge > for voice mail. Can we say cross-subsidy? I couldn't have said it better. US West was busily promoting such a faxmail service here last year. They are spending the ratepayer's dollars on services that anyone with a PC could set up in his garage, but are ignoring services (such as BRI ISDN) that only the telco can provide. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: wildixon@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) Subject: Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 14:55:21 GMT Ameritech is using Centigram's voice mail platform in many of their CO based voice mail applications. Centigram uses Brooktrout's Fax card in their voice mail applications. What you are seeing is Centigram's box stock, off the shelf, VoiceMemo II system. In addition to 'store and forward', you can do 'fax on demand', 'fax publishing' (fax via distribution lists) and most anything else you can dream up. We use the system, we have one in house, for fax machine overflow, ie voice mail for fax machines. wildixon@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept Date: 4 Apr 1993 07:30:59 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article Paul Robinson writes: > On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a > wrong number. I took this opportunity to compare the international service of the three big carriers in the US. The results are right in line with what I would expect from these carriers: AT&T: Call setup time under two seconds total, followed by well-done KDD intercept. MCI: 14 second call setup time, followed by boring MCI intercept telling me that the number is not in service. Two things disturb me here: first of course, the long call setup time. More importantly, if MCI is not allowing the "real" intercept to play, and is providing their own, this creates the possibility in some cases of the "real" recording providing necessary additional information about the call failure, but the customer just hearing the generic MCI message. Sprint: First attempt: "call cannot be completed as dialed"; second attempt: immediate fastbusy; third attempt: call setup time under two seconds, followed by KDD recording Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: dannyb@Panix.Com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 13:17:12 GMT In tdarcos@mcimail.com (Paul Robinson) writes: > On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a > wrong number. I thought I'd share this recording for those of you > interested. I have translated the number to something else so as not > to give away the original number; this number also gives the same > message. > The number to try is +81 45 33 000 0000. > Listen especially to the accent on the announcement. This announcement > was done with real care and precision. It is quite interesting. I tried the number from my home in NYC, area code 212. When I used "Allnet" I got a local intercept saying something like "the number you have dialed is not in service in the country you have called." When I used AT&T I got connected in about 1/2 second! (was I -really- routed to Japan?) and got the recording, in English FIRST, then Japanese, which leads me to suspect that there is some local ("somewhere" in the USA) intercept for this which is "smart" enough to know what's going on. Guess I'll have to wait for my phone bill ... dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 4 Apr 93 14:26:12 EDT (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) In article you write: > On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a > wrong number. ... > The number to try is +81 45 33 000 0000. Hmmn. I tried that number using my regular carrier, Sprint, and got a U.S. announcement from Sprint that the call couldn't be completed as dialed. Bummer, SS#7 strikes again. (These days, I get U.S. busy signals when I call a number in Spain that's busy, don't want to tie up those expensive trunks.) So I tried 10288 and the same number. A lot more hiss this time, but still a U.S. announcement, encouraging me to call my AT&T operator. More SS#7. Then I tried 10222. Aha! Success, a Japanese intercept with a strong American accent. Like, wow, man. I knew I could count on MCI's cruddy equipment not to understand that they'd reached an intercept. To be fair, the recording was nice and clear even though it was in Japan, obviously carried end-to-end via digital facilities. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1993 20:11:44 GMT In article Joe@nyx.cs.du.edu writes: > I saw a Chinese student here get a Radio Shack pocket dialer, put a > different crystal in it, and then by rocking two of the keys on the > keypad back and forth, could produce the tone of a quarter dropping > into a pay phone. It IS interesting that signalling thru the telephone microphone can simulate coins dropping in the phone. I'd think they'd make it a little more secure than that. I am reminded of a former student of mine in a class on operational amplifiers. After explaining the amazing Schmitt trigger, how you could build an oscillator with a schmitt, a resistor and a capacitor, and how you can get six schmitts in a package (74C14, 74C914 or 74HC14), he built several oscillators in a very small box. One oscillator would trigger two other oscillators that were of appropriate frequency to simulate coin drops. It actually worked. He only tried it out to verify it worked, then apparently took the box apart. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ From: gavron@spades.aces.com (Ehud Gavron) Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? Date: 4 Apr 1993 15:58 MST Organization: ACES Research Inc. Reply-To: gavron@aces.com Some anonymous guy wrote some stuff ... our Moderator responded: > Why do you feel anonymous mail is so hard (or impossible) to > identify? Your message came to me from louie.udel.edu; he got it from > relay1.uu.net where it was known as AA19173. It arrived there at 02:33 > EST on Friday. UUNET got it from nyx.cs.du.edu where it left a few > seconds earlier at 00:31 MST Friday under ID AA9304020031 - AA16397... Pat, I'm sure you felt very clever doing this, however you were probably wasting your time. Mail de-authentication INCLUDES the use of intermediate systems, but ALSO makes the end system appear to be an intermediate system. For example, let's say I want to send you a forged note. I'll create text of the form: Received From: one fake host from another fake host (timestamp) Received From: another fake host from yet another fake host Received From: a usenet newsgroup! (Oh no, Mr. Bill!) FC 822 headers here Message text here Then I'd sent this message through fakehost2, fakehost3, and finally to you. When you get the message there would be NO WAY for you to determine which of fakehost3,fakehost2,myhost,fakehost,another fakehost,usenetgroup the message really originated at. If I pick reasonably busy hosts for all of them (or heck, just route it through five, and tack an extra five on the front) you'd never get it. It's great when you can be clever, or even boast about it, but JUST AS THE CELLULAR INDUSTRY tries to tell its clients the airwaves are safe, please don't tell the readers of this Digest/Newsgroup that email is authenticated. _That_ is still in committee. [Moderator's Note: You know, I'm not as dumb as I look. Either a host exists or it does not. If you don't recognize a host in the envelope, then try to resolve it. If it resolves, fine. If not, it is fake. If it is fake, delete that line from the envelope being investigated to reduce the clutter. Do this with all sites in the envelope. Now, first things first: *which site* gave it to my site? I look at the log here at eecs.nwu.edu: who gave you at