Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20484; 5 May 94 1:33 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29251; Wed, 4 May 94 21:54:11 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29239; Wed, 4 May 94 21:54:06 CDT Date: Wed, 4 May 94 21:54:06 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405050254.AA29239@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #201 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 May 94 21:54:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 201 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Ericsson Presents Its ATM Broadband Products (Terence Cross) Cellular Phone Abuse (Jeff Haran) Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Bruce J. Miller) Slow Video Over Cellular (Gregory P. Monti) Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? (Tai Duong) MCI PC Connect (Hugh Pritchard) Tandy 1400HD Acoustic Coupler (Joseph Romero) 900Mhz AT&T 9530 Cordless: ***CANCELLED*** (Michael Rosenthal) NYTel Goes 1+ Dialing (Dave Niebuhr) McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Alan M. Gallatin) IXC Timing Problem (Steven L. Spak) Re: Demise of Newsgroups Feared (David Boettger) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: eeitecs@eua.ericsson.se (Terence Cross) Subject: Ericsson Presents Its ATM Broadband Products Date: 4 May 1994 16:29:14 GMT Organization: Ellemtel Telecom Systems Labs, Stockholm, Sweden Reply-To: eeitecs@eua.ericsson.se ERICSSON PRESENTS ITS ATM BROADBAND PRODUCTS TO SUPPORT U.S. BROADBAND NETWORKS Ericsson Network Systems President Bo Hedfors today at Supercomm '94 presented Ericsson's asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) broadband switching system. The system is designed to enable customers to optimize the communications in the broadband and multi-media network. The Ericsson ATM products will fully support the needs of U.S. network operators for transport, switching and management. Ericsson's broadband system is flexible and can be adapted to meet the operators' or service providers' needs. Its patented ATM Pipe Switch architecture allows the system to be configured for a number of different applications, including backbone switching, access switching and multiplexing. The advantages of the Ericsson system include layered architecture that will allow operators to rapidly deploy and customize services throughout the network; separation of call control from the control of the physical resources, providing flexibility and reducing operating costs; a distributed architecture using a single platform and an inherent ability of the system to accommodate additional service capabilities such as mobility and intelligent networking. The Ericsson broadband system also has an advanced integrated network management system. The system's throughput can grow gracefully from approximately 3Gbps to more than 80Gbps. Bo Hedfors, president of Ericsson Network Systems Inc., said: "When other vendors were upgrading their existing system technology for broadband services, Ericsson invented a complete new ATM systems platform to meet our customers' demands for the multiservices networks era. In addition to providing services, we also considered network management to be a crucial part of our product development and developed an integrated Operation Administration Maintenance and Provisioning solution." Hedfors added that while the market for broadband in the U.S. and worldwide is real and significant, the near term future remains turbulent. "In times like these we believe that operators will come to Ericsson for a solid approach to the development of broadband technology and the broadband network. "Ericsson's new software methods have been vital to the development of our broadband system. Our evaluation shows that productivity can now be increased by 200 to 300 percent, which is true for about 90 percent of the software used in our ATM-based broadband system. System supliers who cannot match these figures will not be able to stay competitive. "Control of software development, handling and distribution is a matter of survival. Our system has been designed to speed up new service development through an inherently more adaptable hardware and software system structure as well as our new software development methods. Not only can new services be developed more quickly, they can also be more easily customized to meet changing market needs. The time to market of new services is critical in an increasingly competitive marketplace." Ericsson has been active in the development and prototyping of ATM and broadband technology and is now focusing on a third-generation ATM switch as part of its product strategy. Ericsson has also been involved in several industry activities involving ATM, including the European research program, RACE. In addition Ericsson has announced field trials with Deutsche Bundespost in Germany, SIP in Italy, Telia in Sweden, and Telefonica in Spain. Ericsson has also been involved in technology cooperations with companies like Texas Instruments for custom designed integrated circuits; Hewlett Packard for network management; NET for development of enterprise switching equipment and Reliance Comm/Tec for access technologies. Initial product availability will be later this year with additional capabilities to be introduced during 1995. Ericsson's 70,000 employees are active in more than 100 countries. Their combined expertise in switching, radio and networking makes Ericsson a world leader in telecommunications. Ericsson Network Systems Inc. is based in Richardson, Texas. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Kathy Egan, Director of Press Relations, The Ericsson Corporation Tel. +1 212 685 4030 ------------------------------ From: jharan@cwa.com (Jeff Haran) Subject: Cellular Phone Abuse Organization: CWA Communications Products, Los Gatos, CA Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 00:56:45 GMT I've been reading and seeing a lot of television coverage lately about cellular telephone abuse. It seems that everything that the cellular providers use to identify which cellular phone is initiating a call is transmitted by the calling phone (caller's phone number and electronic serial number, ESN), therefore its not too tough for the technically proficient criminal to capture these signatures and encode them into his own phone and thus steal cellular service. It strikes me as a technology that invites abuse. Perhaps I'm being naive, but why don't the cellular providers use a more robust authentication service. Your cellular phone would contain an encription key that would also be known to the cellular provider. When your phone went off hook, it would send its telephone number. The provider would look up your number to get your key and send you some random sequence of digits which would vary from call to call. Your phone would take the sequence of digits, use its key to encode them and return them to the provider. Since the provider has your key, it can perform the same encription. If the encoded data that was returned doesn't match what the provider's copy of the key encripts, then its because the calling phone doesn't have the right key and the call is dropped. The key is never transmitted so the crook would have to steal the physical phone to steal the service. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like an obvious solution to an obvious problem. The thing that I can't understand is why this service abuse wasn't anticipated by the cellular telephone founders. Does anybody have any insights as to why it doesn't work this way today? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See also in this issue a report from Alan Gallitin about McCaw Cellular One's new anti-fraud program. PAT] ------------------------------ From: miller@vfl.paramax.com (Bruce J. Miller) Subject: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories Organization: Unisys Government Systems Group, Valley Forge Labs, Paoli, PA Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 15:32:00 GMT Having gingerly entered the cellular phone world last weekend with the purchase of what I believe is commonly called a Motorola 550 flip phone, I soon realized that several accessories (such as a carrying case and a charger that works in a car) would be nice to have. The cost of such items at local dealers exceeds what I paid for the phone. Based on what occurs in the PC business, one would think that mail order houses would have sprung up to satisfy such needs at discount prices. If this assumption is true, could someone knowledgeable supply me with the vital data on these companies? Thanks! miller@gvls1.vfl.paramax.com (Bruce J. Miller) (or 72247.202@compuserve.com) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 12:13:16 EDT From: Gregory P. Monti Subject: Slow Video Over Cellular According to an article in {Broadcasting} magazine, May 2, 1994, GTE Mobilnet is offering a slow-speed video transmission service over cellular telephone to broadcasters. A Tulsa-based firm called FoNet developed the hardware. Video is recorded on a portable device that compresses and digitizes the video as it is recorded. The station field crew can then choose the rate, in frames per second, by which the video will be 'uploaded' to the television studio. They then place a cellular call to a digitized receiving device at the TV station and upload the news clip or story. According to the article, a 15-second clip sent at a quality of 24 frames per second would take 16 minutes to upload. Reducing the quality to 7 frames per second would cut the upload time to 5 minutes. The story doesn't say how those slower frame rates are correlated back to 30 frames per second for broadcast. 'Inverse multiplexing' is also possible to save time. The mobile places two cellular calls and use twice the bandwidth to halve the time. The field compression and cell phone hardware are $16,900. The host and playback hardware are $22,995. GTE Mobilnet is letting broadcasters use the equipment for free as a promotion. Some broadcasters are not convinced that this is a substitute for electronic news gathering (ENG) [sending real-time, full-resolution, 30-frame-per-second video over microwave or satellite links]. The FoNet video quality, when played back in real time over the air, is equal to or worse than VHS home video quality. Also, at many disaster and accident scenes, it's impossible to get a cellular channel because they're all used up by emergency services on the site. Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cap.gwu.edu ------------------------------ From: anhtai@engin.umich.edu (Tai Duong) Subject: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? Date: 4 May 1994 15:59:27 GMT Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor Can anyone give me leads to find a way to record phone conversations on hard disk in my computer? I am working for a trading company that does business mostly by phone and fax. They want to organize "projects" which can contain documents, faxes, and stored phone conversations all on hard disk media. I know voice recordings take up lots of disk space but they are willing to buy many gigabytes of disk space if necessary. Money to implement this is not really an issue. Taking it one step further ... they want to be able to play back the recorded messages for any particular project to update others on the progress of deals. An advance feature would be to be able to search the many recordings from hard disk for words or patterns (eg. for all recordings that contain a particular name) Implementing this from normal magnetic tape recordings might be possible but searches would be very slow and they will not be able to organize recordings to projects. Correct me if I am wrong. Appreciate any leads to vendors, consultants, or ideas. Tai Duong anhtai@engin.umich.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 94 12:35 EST From: Hugh Pritchard <0006348214@mcimail.com> Subject: MCI PC Connect This came from the April 25 issue of {MCI This Week}, which is a newsletter that's distributed in the public lobbies of some MCI buildings. I'm not an MCI employee; and I have no opinion as to the convenience or value of PC Connect. Hugh Pritchard Hugh_Pritchard@MCImail.com ] Take a Byte Out of Long Distance Bills (sm) MCI PC Connect Reduces "Tolls" on Info Highway [Accompanying picture, captioned "Sysop Partner Marketing manager Shelly Carrick and PC Connect product manager Bill Schmidt at the BBS Expo trade show."] One of the most painful bumps on the information superhighway can be the tolls. Computer afficionados quickly realize that toll calls to reach far away bulletin board systems (BBS) can mount up. Ask anyone who's tried to download a multi-megabit file on a 2400 baud modem. Now MCI has created MCI PC Connect (sm), a long distance plan specifically designed to lower the cost of long distance BBS calls by offering two low, fixed rates during the day and evening/weekend hours for a low monthly fee. Daytime plan hours are 8 am to 5 pm Monday through Friday; any other calling hours receive reduced evening/weekend rates. In addition, CyberSurfers can add their favorite BBS to their Calling Circle (r) to receive the 20 percent additional discount (if the BBS is an MCI customer) -- or even name one board as their Best Friend to receive up to 40 percent savings. There's even a program for the bulletin board owner/operators. BBS System Operators (Sysops) can join the Sysop Program and earn commissions for each customer they sign up for MCI service. For more information, call [internal phone number], or send an MCI Mail (r) message to PC Connect. (Internet E-mail address: 665-1059@mcimail.com). ------------------------------ From: 1JCR7732@ibm.mtsac.edu Subject: Tandy 1400HD Acoustic Coupler Date: Wed, 04 May 94 10:45:36 PST Organization: Mt. San Antonio College I have a TANDY 1400HD, does anyone know where i could get a eight-pin din acoustic coupler ... or do you have one you want to sell? If not, does anyone know the pin assingments for this beauty? Please post or email, preferably the latter. Joseph Romero 1jcr7732@ibm.mtsac.edu ------------------------------ From: mrosenth@mbsdev96.lehman.com (Michael Rosenthal) Subject: 900Mhz AT&T 9530 Cordless: ***CANCELLED*** Reply-To: mrosenth@mbsdev96.lehman.com Organization: Lehman Brothers Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 20:07:12 GMT I called AT&T today to find out the status of the LONG AWATED model 9530, 900Mhz cordless phone -- you know -- the one they claimed would have one mile range etc. etc. They told me they cancelled it, claiming it didn't meet their quality requirements (implies someone else was making it?) They said they would design a new long range cordless but it will not be available anytime soon. This really annoyed me since I have delayed purchasing any cordless for the past nine months when I first learned of the imminent release of this phone. So, being back in the market I would appreciate everyones opinion of their 900Mhz phone. I haven't heard anything about some newer models such as those from Uniden. Is anyone using those? What is the range, sound quality, digital?, SS? Thanks, Michael Rosenthal mrosenth@lehman.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The best one on the market is the one sold by Radio Shack. I strongly suggest you check it out. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 94 17:27:18 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: NYTel Goes 1+ Dialing In the new phone book delivered today, I noticed on page 15 of the White Pages that NYTel (oops NYNEX) is already going to 1+ dialing for long distance. What is written is this: Inside Area Code 516: 7D Outside Area Code 516: 1 + AC + 7D No other information about cutover dates was given, though either AC + 7D or 1 + AC + 7D has been available for a few years. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 1+(516) 282-3093 FAX 1+(516) 282-7688 ------------------------------ From: amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) Subject: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Date: 4 May 1994 10:58:47 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC Here's a new one ... saw a brochure for this at a Cellular One center on Long Island yesterday. In an effort to thwart would-be counterfeit phone users, Cellular One just started up an anti-fraud program. A customer participating will simply pick a four digit PIN. Usage is something like this: If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on. Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT 611 and 911. Incoming calls, however, still work. Dialing *560 + PIN (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls. This is, of course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself. Another neat part of the program is that once your phone is off (or out of area) for 20 minutes, the fraud protection goes on automatically. Apparently, many (though not all) roaming areas work with this fraud protection program. According to McCaw Cellular One, if the roaming area does NOT understand the *56 and *560 codes, calls will go through without a problem. Of course, they want to see as many roaming areas cooperating :-) Cell One advocates use of speed dial locations in phones for the lock and unlock codes. While anyone with the phone can view the contents of the location, the important thing to remember is that this is not meant for the phone's protection. Rather, it is designed to make a clone useless. For me, all I have to do is type 99(SND) to dial the memory location with my Cell One unlock code. The "inconvenience" (if you want to call it that) of having to do that once per time the phone is on that I want to make calls is more than worth the trouble it could save me if someone cloned my phone and was succesful in using it. One more tidbit I found interesting: When I called Cellular One to pick my PIN, they asked as many security type questions as they could come up with. (Granted, the dealer who did the activation and had a copy of my application, NAM and ESN could've posed as me, also, but we'll just hope that the dealer has SOME ethics ...) AFTER they entered my PIN in the system, they wanted to make sure that I understood that they would NEVER call me for my PIN. They explained how some people with a cloned phone would want to call my cellular number, hoping to reach me, then pose as Cellular One so they can get the unlock code. They advised that if anyone claiming to be Cellular One called me that I should refuse to talk with them unless I called them back and reached a designated extension. Banks, long distance companies and computer service providers should make such elaborate warnings about PINs and passwords. Alan M. Gallatin amg@panix.com amg@israel.nysernet.org amg@jerusalem1.datasrv.co.il [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then that since the lockout occurs automatically twenty minutes after the last use of the phone that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day? PAT] ------------------------------ From: sspak@seas.gwu.edu (Steven L. Spak) Subject: Re: IXC Timing Problem Date: 4 May 1994 11:15:53 GMT Organization: George Washington University I'm fairly certain that Bellcore does work on IXC/LEC interconnect standards. They probably have some TR's or TA's on signalling and timing for IXC/LEC handoffs. Steven Spak sspak@seas.gwu.edu Transmission Engineer Tel: (202) 392-1611 Fax: (202) 392-1261 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 07:41:00 -0500 From: david (d.) boettger Subject: Re: Demise of Newsgroups Feared > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That First Amendment always has been a > troublesome thing ... Utter pap. > all the Bill of Rights was written under the mistaken assumption > that citizens in the USA would take *responsibilty* for their actions > and words; under the mistaken assumption that people This is simply false. The Bill of Rights was written for one purpose: to keep the government from stealing freedom from the citizens. > would know the difference between *freedom* on the one hand and *license* > on the other. Sadly, that is becoming less and less the case. The Bill > of Rights will cause the ultimate demise of the United States. Not today, You are totally clueless. I don't think that I've ever heard anyone berate the Bill of Rights as the "ultimate demise of the United States". I can't believe that you actually presented this idea for the entire Usenet to see. You sound like a GenX malcontent or a champion of political correctness, taking your freedoms for granted because YOU have been spoiled by them. Shame on you. Perhaps you should go live in some third-world toilet like Haiti so you could have all those pesky freedoms taken away from you at the point of a gun. There's an old saying that goes something like, "Be careful of what you wish for; you might get it." Shame on you, again. David Boettger boettger@bnr.ca [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I *do* live in a third world toilet; it is called Chicago. And I have had lots of my freedom taken away from me at the point of a gun, or in the government's case the implied threat that guns could always be produced to make me comply if I did not do so voluntarily. Lots of people in Chicago have had their freedom taken away from them at the point of a gun; their freedom to travel outside their home, their freedom to go to school or shopping, even their freedom to stand at their window and look outside. If one stands at the window of one's home or walks on the street outside even in broad daylight in large areas of Chicago at present, one will be gunned down in sniper fire and killed. Simple as that. Police are helpless to do much about it because a group calling itself the 'American Civil Liberties Union' says high-rise apartment snipers have Fourth Amendment rights. Unless the police can tell *exactly* which apartment (in, let's say a 25 story building covering an entire city block with 400-500 relatively tiny little apartments) is occupied by the sniper(s), they can't go into *any* of the apartments therein looking. See -- it has all been arranged nice and conveniently so none of the snipers gets their liberties violated. Little children continue to get killed every day on their way to school and other folks go out absolutely when they must to get groceries, etc. In the meantime I get cock-eyed letters from someone in *Canada* who hasn't the foggiest notion what is happening here. If you ask me, you'd do well to shut your mouth and mind your own business up there in Canada. Of all the people to talk about liberties, *your* government certainly did a number on free speech, didn't they? No, political correctness is not my thing at all -- most any long time readers here could tell you that -- but I would like to see eight-year old children in Chicago be able to play outside this summer and/or walk to and from school without the risk of having their head blown off or getting crippled for life. It won't happen while the ACLU is active here! Its not the Bill of Rights per se; its the bizarre and obnoxious interpretations that have been made of this precious document that I detest, by lawyers and judges who do not even live anywhere near the scene of the messes they have created. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #201 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20750; 5 May 94 2:08 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29950; Wed, 4 May 94 22:35:09 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29941; Wed, 4 May 94 22:35:07 CDT Date: Wed, 4 May 94 22:35:07 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405050335.AA29941@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #202 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 May 94 22:35:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 202 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway (Lauren Weinstein) Sprint BBS List (Stuart Whitmore) 800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Paul Robinson) Dumb Question: DID - Centrex - Help! (Rob Allender) Internet White Pages (Jan Richert) Re: Fight A*vertising! Petition! (John Evans) Re: Fight A*vertising! Petition! (Mike King) Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" (Laurent LECHELLE) Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Alan M. Gallatin) Re: NANP and Switches (David Esan) Re: Getting Phone Bills Over the Internet (Steve Cogorno) Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Ry Jones) Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? (William C. Fenner) Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line (Paul Bates) Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Probably Dead (Edwin Green) Re: Equal Access in Canada (Vance Shipley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 May 94 18:19 PDT From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Information Superhighway "TV & MOVIE MANIA" RADIO SHOW HITS THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY LOS ANGELES -- In a first for an entertainment-oriented show, a version of the popular "Professor Neon's TV & Movie Mania" radio program begins worldwide distribution directly to listeners this week via the Internet (or as it is becoming popularly known, the "Information Superhighway"). "The Internet now includes over 20 million users in more than 30 countries, and is growing at an enormous rate," pointed out the show's producer, Lauren Weinstein of Vortex Technology. "Professor Neon's TV & Movie Mania has also broadcast via over-the-air stations, but it's apparent that the time has finally arrived when the global facilities of the Internet can bring this audio show to an even wider audience. Nobody has ever used the Internet to transmit a show like this before," he added. "Professor Neon's TV & Movie Mania" is a unique show which features a look at a broad universe ranging from classic to current television, films, and videos, with a special emphasis on the unusual, odd, silly, strange, bizarre, cult, surreal, and weird. The shows include reviews, interviews, and a wide range of special audio clips, trailers, and many other features. The interview guest for the debut Internet version of the show is Robert Justman, a man whose work has greatly influenced classic television programs ranging from "The Outer Limits" (on which he was assistant director) to both the original "Star Trek" and "Star Trek: The Next Generation" (on which he was associate producer and co-producer, respectively). Many of the most familiar aspects of these programs were the result of his ideas, and he speaks candidly with the show's enigmatic host, Professor Neon, about the production of these programs in this fascinating interview. Professor Neon has featured programs focusing on topics ranging from "Plan 9 From Outer Space" (with guest "Vampira" who starred in the classic cult film), to Forrest J. Ackerman (publisher of "Famous Monsters" magazine), to shows focused on topics from "The Twilight Zone" to "The Three Stooges". The half hour Internet version of the program is being distributed biweekly on the Internet via the Internet Multicasting Service in Washington D.C., on the "Internet Town Hall" channel, and is also available as a file for retrieval by any Internet user from the many Internet Multicasting / Internet Talk Radio archive sites around the world. Users retrieving the audio files can then play them on virtually any workstation, PC, Mac, or other computer with even simple audio facilities. The most recent show, as well as other information regarding the program, can also be heard by calling Professor Neon's TV & Movie Mania Machine" on (310) 455-1212. The Internet version of the show is freely distributable via computer networks and BBS systems. Use by over-the-air broadcasters requires the permission of Vortex Technology. For more information regarding accessing the show via the Internet, please use the contact below. Inquiries regarding other access and versions of the show for broadcast use are also invited. CONTACT: Lauren Weinstein at Vortex Technology, Woodland Hills, CA. (818) 225-2800 (9:30-5:30 PDT) lauren@vortex.com Notes to Internet folks: Information regarding the show, including current guest schedule, etc. is also available via FTP from site "ftp.vortex.com" (in the "tv-film-video" subdirectory) or via gopher from site "gopher.vortex. com" (under the "TV/Film/Video" menu item). For a list of Internet Multicasting Service / Internet Talk Radio archive sites to obtain (via FTP) the audio file for playback, send a message (content is not important) to: sites@radio.com The debut of the Internet version of the show will run via Internet Multicast from Interop on Thursday, May 5. FTP to site "ftp.media.org" or "www.media.org" for schedule information. The audio file of the show should become available in the archive sites for retrieval within a few days, though exact timing is variable. The filenames will probably be "mania1.au" for the audio and "mania1.txt" for the accompanying descriptive text file, though the archive maintainers may change the names at some point to fit their overall naming system. If you have trouble locating the files after a few days, please let us know. If you have any other questions regarding the program, feel free to email or call. In two weeks, our interview guest for the next show will be Joel Engel, the author of the definitive Rod Serling biography: "The Dreams and Nightmares of Life in the Twilight Zone," and of the newly released and highly controversial new book, "Gene Roddenberry: The Myth and the Man Behind Star Trek." If you have any questions for Mr. Engel please email them to: neon@vortex.com as soon as possible. Thanks much! --Lauren-- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lauren Weinstein is a long time participant in the Internet, and a charter subscriber to TELECOM Digest, dating back to 1981 when this journal was first published. From time to time I like to reprint his classic message, "The Day the Bell System Died", and before long it will be time for it again. His latest venture, the "Neon" thing, has been enormously successful and if you have not called to listen to it, you really should. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 18:33:13 -0700 From: whitmore@tahoma.cwu.edu (Rattlesnake Stu) Subject: Sprint BBS List Organization: Central Washington University To reply to those who questioned how the Sprint BBS list I've started will be published, here's what I plan on: 1. It'll always be available for free download from the data number below; 2. I'll distribute it to all large BBS's that I normally call; 3. If it gets big enough, I'll attempt to get it included in the SimTel FTP archives and keep it updated regularly (quarterly?); 4. Also if it gets big enough, I'll try to do the same to keep current copies on new Night Owls CDs; 5. I'll e-mail it to anyone who wants a copy; 6. I'll post it in one or more appropriate newsgroups if people want it and don't complain about wasted bandwidth (perhaps quarterly, or less/more frequently as requested). I hope this answers the question -- essentially, I don't have the funds to do any formal "publication" but will use the same channels as shareware and freeware to get it distributed. If you run a BBS and use Sprint for your long distance carrier on outbound calls on at least one BBS line, send me e-mail to get a copy of the info submittal form. I hope this list will serve both SysOps and callers who use Sprint. Stuart Whitmore FAX: (509) 925-3893 Data: Same as FAX whitmore@tahoma.cwu.edu 71221.1737@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 22:28:49 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA > [Telecom Digest Editor's Note:... Very few [radio call-in shows] are > willing to provide an 800 number for you to camp out on at their > expense. A nationally syndicated one comes from here in the Washington, DC area. The phone number to call into it is 1-800-G-G-Liddy. The name of the host of the show is left as an exercise to the reader. :) Anyone else know of any beyond Rush Limbaugh, which was posted here earlier? Another local station has its own 800 number for its call-in programs. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A place where I frequently eat breakfast always has the Gordon G. Liddy show playing on the radio while I am there. He never interested me a lot. Limbaugh is interesting sometimes and quite funny sometimes. Liddy is sort of blah IMO. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rca@bfs.uwm.edu (Rob Allender) Subject: Dumb Question: DID - Centrex - Help! Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 19:44:25 GMT Organization: Business & Financial Services I've been looking for a network fax server for awhile and need to get inbound routing of faxes to peoples desktop PCs. A few companies have this capability but it requires DID. I know that we have Centrix lines, but I'm not sure if it will work with the wink-start and loop-start that the fax board companies are needing. Anybody know? Rob Allender rca@bfs.uwm.edu ------------------------------ From: jrichert@krefcom.GUN.de (Jan Richert) Subject: Internet White Pages Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 18:38:26 +0200 Hi, Could anyone email me the exact title of the Internet White Pages, publisher and ISBN number? Thanks, Krefcom Communication Services | Internet: jrichert@krefcom.GUN.de Jan Richert, Krefeld, FRG | Datex-J: 02151399843-0001 Voice: +49 2151 313124 | IBM VNET: I1006214 AT IBMMAIL GSM: +358 40 5005686 | IRC-Nick: jrichert FAX: +49 2151 396479 | NIC-ID: JR482 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 94 16:46:49 BST From: eeijevs@eeiub.ericsson.se (John Evans) Subject: Re: Fight A*vertising! Petition! Michael P. O'Leary wrote.. > Read with great interest the article quoted below, it IS the future of > the internet. BUT, it shouldn't be. People like this have no right > to waste bandwidth on a valuable resource like the internet. We must > stop happenings like this with legislation so that the 'information > highway' (or whatever you want to call it) doesn't become expensive > and riddled with a*vertisi*g. (And oh yeah, I use the wild card so > people with the wor a* in their kill file still get this message. I > am taking upon myself the burden of collecting a petition from this > group (and eventually other groups as well) stating our opposition to > this practice and our support for legislation to stop it. We must act > fast though, because the bills that will govern the future are quickly > advancing through Congressional committees. Here is what to do: I must admit, I am a little confused with respect to the way in which people in the U.S. regard the Internet and Usenet -- that is, that it stops with that country's boundaries. I am in Ireland, my Usenet server is in Sweden, how would legislation in the U.S. congress relate to me? -- it wouldn't. If laws are passed in the US outlawing advertising on Usenet, surely ill-mannered advertisers will just obtain access in other countries to the US? What then? Censor every message entering sites in the US? In my view legislation and the Internet/Usenet do not sit well together. What we are seeing now is a shift in the rules of nettiquette. Up until now system admistrators have dealt with network abuse using the powers available to them in their companies and educational institutions, because if they did not, the hassle in flames would make their jobs difficult. Commercial providers will act similarly, making their contracts such that, if a user abuses their access, termination can be easily -- and legally achieved. At the same time, Usenet users are going to learn to use kill files more, to ignore those messages that annoy them, and use moderated groups more. John J.Evans. Ericsson Systems Expertese, Clonskeagh, Dublin4, Ireland, EU. eeijevs@eeiub.ericsson.se ------------------------------ From: mk@TFS.COM (Mike King) Subject: Re: Fight A*vertising! Petition! Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 10:03:29 PDT In TELECOM Digest, V14 #191, Michael P. O'Leary wrote: > ... We must > stop happenings like this with legislation so that the 'information > highway' (or whatever you want to call it) doesn't become expensive > and riddled with a*vertisi*g. (And oh yeah, I use the wild card so > people with the wor a* in their kill file still get this message. I > am taking upon myself the burden of collecting a petition from this > group (and eventually other groups as well) stating our opposition to > this practice and our support for legislation to stop it. We must act > fast though, because the bills that will govern the future are quickly > advancing through Congressional committees. Here is what to do: This bothers me. I really *fear* the day when the government gets involved in controlling the 'net. I can't think of one thing that is controlled by the government that works right. And the last thing I want is a bunch of bureaucrats who haven't the slightest clue as to how Internet- working works sitting around making laws that affect those of us who do. As soon as there is regulation, there will be organizations created to oversee and control. These organizations will then get bloated and bogged in red tape. And we *all* will have to pay for it. Quite honestly, I think use of the 'd' key while reading mail and the 'n' key when reading news is quite effective in dealing with trash and advertising on the 'net. Just the personal *opinion* of... Mike King mk@tfs.com ------------------------------ From: Laurent LECHELLE Subject: Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" Reply-To: laurent@caladan.fdn.org Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 07:20:17 GMT In article jay@coyote.rain.org (Jay Hennigan) writes: > [In reference to AT&T disconnecting unanswered direct-dial calls] > This seems a bit hard to swallow. How many incoming trunks does Larry > King have? Maybe a dozen. Maybe two dozen. How many million calls a > day does AT&T carry? So ten or twenty people listen to ringing for an > hour or so. Are you suggesting that this is going to have enough > impact on AT&T's revenue that they are going to re-engineer their > network to prevent it? Thousands more get busy signals. If AT&T > would improve their call processing time by one second, they would > free up the thousands of busy signal circuits one second sooner (and > AT&T indeed has very fast setup times). I can't discuss AT&T revenue. But for your information, France Telecom does not let people ring more than 30 seconds. After the line is down you hang up. In the same way, when you use a phone terminal in France (a phone, a modem, an answering machine, ...) It needs to have an agreement from France Telecom. And in the special case of modems, it means that the dialer must not called twice within two minutes a busy number. So that, it means that companies probably spend a lot in calls that do not provide benefits. Laurent Lechelle, Courbevoie, France e-mail: laurent@caladan.fdn.org ------------------------------ From: Anthony_Pelliccio@brown.edu (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" Date: 4 May 1994 14:25:32 GMT Organization: Brown University Our esteemed Moderator wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, not at all. Your machine turns itself > on after 12 rings, or approximatly one minute. AT&T is letting calls > ring for at least two or three minutes before cutting them off. Anyway, > how often would it be the case that you forgot to turn your machine on > and an out-of-town call was the first one to arrive thereafrer (instead > of say, a local call, or your own call checking for messages, etc?) PAT] If you happen to have animals of the feline variety that like to walk on your answering machine this function is VERY useful. :) Anthony_Pelliccio@Brown.edu (Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR) Box 1908, Providence, RI 02912 Tel. (401) 863-1880 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is true. My two cats like to climb on the fax machine and lay there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding Date: 4 May 1994 10:45:40 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In a previous article, bruce.mchollan@keystone.keystone.fl.us (Bruce Mchollan) wrote: > A person I work with has a cellular phone with call forwarding. When > he forwards his calls to another number and then calls his own > cellular number he is not charged for the call ($0!). This works even > when he forwards his calls to a number within our LATA that would > invoke toll charges if dialed by land line. He takes advantage to > save the toll charges. Is this legal? Legal? Yes. Believable? No. I've seen a couple of different ways cell companies handle the forwarding charges. Basically, they don't like to give unlimited forwarding for free 'cause of the scenerio you described above. Setup 1) The cell company charges prevailing airtime per minute of the forwarded call. No land or toll (unless long distance) but full airtime. (This is the most common setup) Setup 2) Same as 1, except they only charge off peak rates on forwarding (recognizing that this isn't even an airtime usage problem but they need some rate to charge) (I think Sprint Cellular does this) Setup 3) This one I consider quite interesting: The cell provider first sees how many minutes of actual cellular calls (incoming and outgoing) that you made during the month. You then get up to that many minutes of free forwarding. Anything past that "flexible allowance" is treated under 1 or 2 above. (Unless I'm mistaken, some GTE Cellular One companies do this) What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call? Alan M. Gallatin amg@panix.com amg@israel.nysernet.org amg@jerusalem1.datasrv.co.il ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: NANP and Switches Date: 4 May 94 14:15:57 GMT Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY In article cmoore@BRL.MIL (Carl Moore) writes: > codes. But it's been known (certainly in the Digest) for years that > NNX area codes were coming. True. But that does not mean that switch or other telecom gear manufacturers actually ramped up to meet the deadline. One well known builder of telephone cost monitoring systems was warned by a long time reader of this Digest that 1995 was coming. In fact, the warnings have been coming for at least five years. They are finally ramping up to make the changes by September. They will not say what year however. ;-). I assume similar situations exist in other companies. David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Getting Phone Bills Over the Internet Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 09:14:57 -0700 (PDT) Said by: Robin Fairbairns >> I would like to be able to receive my phone (and other bills) over >> the Internet. As I pay them by Direct Debit in any case their function >> is to inform me what I have spent the money on. It would be cheaper >> for my phone company (who would not have to print and mail a bill, and >> save time for me. > It would be nice, wouldn't it? > information. Since the internet is inherently insecure, that means > that the bill as transmitted would need (at the least) to be > encrypted; authentication information (e.g., digital signatures) > wouldn't come amiss either. Thst wouldn't be that big of a deal; the telco could encrypt using the calling card (main one I guess) number. Let's hope no one else as that! > I agree with you that electronic billing is highly desirable. I > disagree with the assertion that it's presently doable. Pacific Bell already offers electronic billing; unfortunately, it is on disk, and costs between 8-15 dollars per month (I can't remember the exact amount, but it was something that sounded outrageous considering that floppies cost anywhere from .50 to $1.00). Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 09:16:48 -0700 From: Ry Jones Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it is illegal, and yes people listen > illegally to cellular calls. However there is very little risk of fraud > by passing credit card numbers in this way. One, there has to be someone PAT: ugh, wrong, this stuff goes on all the time. What you are dismissing as "very little chance" is a popular pass time with "phreaks". Trust me. National press (Newsweek, Gray Areas) have both reported on this phenomena. > listening to a scanner which is in the proximity of the tower from which > the message is being transmitted. Two, they have to have their scanner > land on the channel (out of 832 such channels) during the five seconds > or so that the card number is being read. Third, credit card verification > involves reading the number, the expiration date and the amount of the > sale -- not the name and address of the card holder. The most fatal flaw. You don't need the name and address of the cardholder to commit fraud. You don't even need a valid credit card to commit fraud. > Fourth, without having physical possession of the card they cannot > make purchases in stores. True. > Fifth, with only the number but no name or address to go with it they > cannot very easily engage in mail order fraud. Not true. Very few companies verify with the bank on small purchases. > Sixth, without having actual possession of the card they cannot see > who the issuer of it was -- unless they have the list of four digit > (starting with three for AMEX, four for VISA, five for MC or six for > DISCOVER) codes telling which bank (or credit grantor) issued the card > -- thus no calls can be made to customer service putting in bogus > inquiries or name/address changes. In short, a non-issue here. Wrong. There is a widely available program called Credit Master that you can use to verify cards which has a list of all banks in it. It also generates algorithmically correct credit cards for any given bank. > If I were going to rip off credit card numbers, PINS and related data, I > would find it far easier to tap the phone line used by an ATM machine > and put some kind of data capture device on that instead ... yet people > use ATMs quite willingly. So what's the beef about cellular phones and > credit card numbers? On the one in a million chance someone *might* > happen to hear your credit card number read, what is it gonna get > them? PAT] Everything. 1 800 CAL LATT is the best thing to happen to credit card fraud in a long time. Sorry to be so pessimistic, but it's true. Instead of gaining tighter control over the credit card market, banks have ceded even more control to customers. Ry ------------------------------ From: fenner@cmf.nrl.navy.mil (William C. Fenner) Subject: Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? Organization: NRL Connection Machine Facility, Washington, DC Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 17:16:14 GMT In article , mark boylan wrote: > Is there a modem that can accept and decode DTMF tones after it's > answered an incoming call? And also, how can I send the output of a > SoundBlaster card over the same phone line? You can solve both problems at once with a ZyXEL modem. Not only will it decode DTMF tones, but it will also play audio directly to the phone line. If you convert your WAV files to, say, 3-bit ZyXEL ADPCM, you can probably use one of the many shareware packages out there and get up and running very quickly. Bill Fenner fenner@cmf.nrl.navy.mil ------------------------------ From: paulb@coho.halcyon.com (Paul N. Bates) Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line Date: 4 May 1994 19:13:58 GMT Organization: A World of Information at Your Fingertips In article , wrote: >> My home is wired for two residential telephone lines. Because of my >> proximity to an am radio transmitter (am 1550khz), many of my audio >> and telephone devices suffer from "radio noise", from that one station >> only though. Some days it is worse than others, some days there is no >> interference at all. > This is an increasingly common problem. Newer more electronic devices > have more opportunities for rectification and internal amplification. > This makes them more susceptable to this kind of interference. I have > an AM Spanish-language station 3/4 of a mile from the house -- same > problem in my bulletprook ole' 1A2. The problem is occurring in the > music-on-hold receiver or amp. I know that the local AM broadcast station in my area provides filters specifically designed for the interference from AM broadcast freq.'s to people in the close proximity to their tower (free of charge). They provide these when you call and complain. Try the station there, maybe they have something that will work. I know for a fact the filters designed for the ham frequencies don't work. Paul N. Bates Celerex Corporation paulb@halcyon.com 14712 NE 87TH ST Phone: 206-869-7200 x20 Redmond, WA 98052 ------------------------------ From: egg@inuxs.att.com (Edwin Green) Date: Wed, 4 May 94 07:33:52 EST Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Probably Dead Organization: AT&T In article Hans-Gabriel Ridder writes: > I was in the Alaska Airlines terminal at the Seattle-Tacoma airport > two weeks ago, and saw a couple of Public Phone 2000's *with > keyboard*. I didn't have time to check them out ... I assume they > were working since after the tariff problems all the keyboards seem to > have been removed. Not true at all. We have not been removing any keyboards due to the problems with the FCC. We simply turn that feature off. Some sets are installed with keyboards, some are not (usually at the agent's request). All the sets with keyboards still need them for TDD usage. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a shame, because the 2000's were >> a very useful service. Too bad it did not work out. PAT] > Since John based his remarks on his experience in one airport, and not > from any offical announcements from AT&T, it's probably a bit premature > to be speaking in the past tense, don't you think? I sure hope so. Edwin G. Green AT&T Bell Laboratories Indianapolis, Indiana, USA INH 1A-519 317-845-3659 egg@inuxs.att.com ------------------------------ From: Vance Shipley Subject: Re: Equal Access in Canada Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 12:38:48 GMT In article Pat injects: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have been told it will by and large > follow the USA numbering scheme; i.e. 10288 for Mother, 10222 for MCI, > etc. with Canadian-only carriers getting a few numbers as well. PAT] Well your Mother (AT&T) isn't in Canada, neither is MCI. AT&T has a twenty percent stake (maximum foriegn ownership of a facilities based carrier allowed) in Unitel, our largest competing carrier. I don't think they will be using 10288 as their main CIC but I wouldn't be at all suprised if they did capture calls placed by roving Americans with it. (We at Northquest just might get a few misdialed AT&T calls having 10289 :) MCI have partnered with Bell Canada, they will be sharing technology. Bell may also trap thier CIC (10222) when dialed by travelling Americans through an agreement with MCI but I doubt it. > etc. with Canadian-only carriers getting a few numbers as well. PAT] Yeah, suprise, suprise our own national carriers will also get to have their own CIC codes, just like the REAL American carriers. Sheesh. Vance Shipley, vances@xenitec.on.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #202 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23252; 5 May 94 4:31 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA02735; Thu, 5 May 94 01:25:02 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA02726; Thu, 5 May 94 01:25:00 CDT Date: Thu, 5 May 94 01:25:00 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405050625.AA02726@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #203 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 May 94 01:25:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 203 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (Chuck Forsberg) Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Alan Leon Varney) More E1 Questions (Ralph Walker) Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Fred Blonder) Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers (Ashley L. Brandwood) Looking For Phone Number/Directory Anecdotes (peicraft@bud.peinet.pe.ca) Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (Kelly Breit) Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? (Jay Hennigan) Re: Cellular Privacy (Scott Townley) Re: Cut-Rate Domestic and International Calling Cards (Kevin Anderson) Re: FAX Mailbox Services (Jack Bzoza) Re: Pac Tel / Air Touch Communications (Lon Lowen Jr.) Kernels and Lt. Kernels (Randy Gellens) Need Used Mitel PAV Dialers (Al Cohan) 800 Market Growth (Judith Oppenheimer) Pagemart 15-Digit Restriction Update (Doug Reuben) Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (Barry Bond) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: omen!caf (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? Organization: Omen Technology INC, Portland Rain Forest Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 20:53:04 GMT In article wjrst1@pitt.edu (William J Rehm) writes: > On 4 Apr 94 18:16:45 GMT, Matt Silveira wrote: >> With regard to ZMODEM, it is not proprietary and there are many >> "shareware" programs available for Macs, PCs, and UNIX boxes, check a >> "mirrored" INTERNET site or sumex.aim at Stanford for Macs. > As I understand the situation, zmodem is indeed a proprietary > protocol. It's use on hosts is only free under certain restricted > contexts, academic use being one of them. Clients, on the other hand, > are free to incorporate zmodem protocols, since a host is required to > use them. > I have admittedly limited knowledge of this situation, but this is how > it was explained to me when I contacted the author's company. The 1986 ZMODEM is public domain, as are the rz/sz sources of that vintage. Omen Technology has improved the performance and reliability of ZMODEM over the last decade. The Good Stuff is not public domain. One should carefully study the Copyright notices in all parts of rz/sz (and Columbia Kermit) software before making decisions that might violate Copyrights. Typical Copyright notices include: may not be, in whole or in part, licensed or sold for profit as a software product itself, nor may it be included in or distributed with commercial products or otherwise distributed by commercial concerns to their clients or customers without written permission This software may be freely used for educational (didactic only) purposes. This software may also be freely used to support file transfer operations to or from licensed Omen Technology products. Use with other commercial or shareware programs (Crosstalk, Procomm, etc.) REQUIRES REGISTRATION. Any programs which use part or all of this software must be provided in source form with this notice intact except by written permission from Omen Technology Incorporated. Use of this software for commercial or administrative purposes except when exclusively limited to interfacing Omen Technology products requires a per port license payment of $20.00 US per port (less in quantity). Use of this code by inclusion, decompilation, reverse engineering or any other means constitutes agreement to these conditions and acceptance of liability to license the materials and payment of reasonable legal costs necessary to enforce this license agreement. Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX caf@omen.COM 503-621-3406 Author of YMODEM, ZMODEM, Professional-YAM, ZCOMM, GSZ and DSZ Omen Technology Inc "The High Reliability Software" TeleGodzilla BBS: 503-621-3746 FAX:-3735 CIS:70007,2304 ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! Date: 4 May 94 23:35:12 GMT Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article justfred@netcom.com (Fred Heald) writes: > To my surprise this morning I found that a feature I've been asking for > forever finally works! > My phone is in 818 (but I'm travelling all over LA, 213, 909, 310, > 714, 805, 619, and all. Not 524 yet, but soon I'm sure. So I tend to > always dial the entire number (1-NPA-NXX-XXXX) first, and get the > ridiculous message "We are sorry, it is not necesary to dial one and > the area code for this call". Well, this morning (in fact, calling > Netcom) I accidentally dialed the 1-818, and the call went through! > Since I'm in PacBel land, I'm hoping they've implemented this all over > the area. FINALLY! and yet with no fanfare or even notice -- I guess > they'd be admitting a mistake. No mistake, just evolution of the dialing plan. The following states have indicated they will permit 1+10-digit dialing for ANY number in the NANP (the first column indicates if Home NPA Toll calls can also be dialed as 7D, or requires 1+ for Toll) 7D California - by 5/94 1+ Dist. of Columbia - see below 1+ Maryland - see below 1+ Nevada - by 7/94 7D New Jersey 7D New York - date unknown (works for 212, 718, 917 now?) 7D Pennsylvania 1+ Virginia - see below 7D West Virginia - by 10/94 1+ Wisconsin - by 10/94 The Washington, DC metro states (Maryland, Virginia and DC itself) support 1+10D dialing for all numbers, but non-metro NPA 703 and the rest of Virginia may not be ready until mid-94. These states also support 10D dialing of Foreign NPA LOCAL calls, and non-metro Virginia areas support 7D dialing of such calls. (NPA 703 in Virginia will permit 7D or 10D or 1+10D local calls, except into the Washington metro area, where 10D or 1+10D is required.) Illinois is the ONE state that REQUIRES 7D dialing for all Home NPA calls, even Toll calls (i.e., does not PERMIT 1 + 10D for such calls). New Hampshire (by 8/94) will permit either 7D or 1+10D for Home NPA Toll calls, but requires 7D dialing for Home NPA Local calls. Foreign NPA Local calls require 1+10D. Some states are requiring 1+10D for Foreign NPA Local calls (Louisiana), others are requiring 7D (Oklahoma) and still others require 10D (Texas). There's probably some place at their intersection where moving in a small circle will hit all three dialing patterns. This analysis does not include Maine or Massachusetts, because I have not received IN WRITING any indication of their plans ... Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ From: RALPH@larscom.com (Walker, Ralph) Subject: More E1 Questions Date: Wed, 04 May 94 16:44 Coming from a T1 background, I have limited knowled in regards to E1. My company is involved in selling products into Europe. But it very hard to obtain expertise on practical applications in the E1 realm. I have a few general questions: 1) At loss of signal from the DTE, what is the proper signal to emanate from the CSU/DSU towards the line side (using CAS signaling)? What comes out of Timeslot 0, 16 and the remaining data payload. 2) What is IRSM switiching mode and how and where is it implemented? 3) What is the repeater spacing on an E1 line and is there an end section (last repeater berfore entering the customer's site) repeater specification? 4) What are the variances from country to country in repects to the use of the national bits and international bits. If there is some place/person on the internet that will provide this information, I have a ton of questions. Any help you can provide will be greatly appreciated. ------------------------------ From: fred@nasirc.hq.nasa.gov (Fred Blonder) Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device Date: 04 May 1994 23:42:40 GMT Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center > Has anyone heard of a digital writing device presumably using > lightpens or something equivalent, that has two "terminals" for > people to use to communicate over the phone as if by writing? ... Back around 1967 or so I saw a system in use at the TWA terminal at what was then Friendship (now BWI) Airport. It consisted of a fairly normal ball-point pen connected to a plastic tab going into a box. It also had a wire coming off, giving a simple switch closure when the pen was pressed against the piece of paper on the top of the box. The box read the pen motions and sent them to a receiver elsewhere in the terminal, which operated a stylus to duplicate the writing onto another piece of paper in real-time. The paper on the transmitter and the receiver where both adding-machine type paper rolls which could be pulled out a few inches at a time, and torn off, and stuffed into a pocket. The pen on the receiver had no visible ink reservoir, so I suspect that the paper was electrically or heat sensitive. Fred Blonder fred@nasirc.hq.nasa.gov Hughes STX Corp. (301) 441-4079 7701 Greenbelt Rd. Greenbelt, Md. 20770 ------------------------------ From: Ashley L Brandwood Subject: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 10:57:32 GMT Hi, I have been given the 1-800-xxx-xxxx numbers of four companies in the US that I need to contact -- unfortunately I do not have any other number for them, and was hoping that someone in the US could tell me either the normal number or a fax number for them. The companies are: Smart Micro : 1-800-ROM-BIOS Bios Upgrades: 1-800-800-2467 Cmos Solutions: 1-800-266-7462 Rom Bios Upgrades: 1-800-541-1943 Any other means of contacting them would be most helpful. (All I do know is that they are supposed to be in the CA phone books!! -- not a lot of help in the UK ! ) Thanks in advance for any assistance ... Ashley A.L.Brandwood Mathematics & Computer Science Brunel University London, England ma90alb@brunel.ac.uk <----<< Prefered Address albrandw@nyx.cs.du.edu 100025.1644@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 17:26:15 ADT From: PEI Crafts Council, Charlottetown, PE Island Subject: Looking For Phone Number/Directory Anecdotes, Lore, Predictions As part of a series of short radio pieces for our local CBC Radio affiliate called "A User's Guide to the Future," I'm preparing an item which centres on the past, present and future of everything to do with telephone numbers. I'm looking for anecdotes, lore, predictions, etc. about telephone numbers and telephone directories. I'm not looking for specific technical details, just interesting information about different ways of communicating telephone numbers, compiling telephone numbers, spelling things with telephone numbers, about the history and future of the "phone book" (how having all of North America's telephone listings on a set of CDs changes telephony, for example), personal "portable" telephone numbers, etc. I've been impressed with the quality of the "asides" that correspondents often to contribute to the Digest and wonder if I might impose upon you all to contribute some by email to me :-) Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 14:30:21 -0500 From: breit@MR.Net Subject: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site? I would like to research more information on "Tariff 12" pricing for long distance services. One of my clients is interested in renego- tiating their rates. We had discussed several options including using a marketing agent for "Option 51 - EPSCS" as we have seen it referenced many times. I have only limited knowledge in this area and agreed to do some research on their behalf. If you can provide me additional information, I would greatly appreciate it. Sincerely, Kelly Breit Enterprise Wide Systems Integration Consultant Breit Companies, Inc. PO Box 47567 Minneapolis, MN 55447-0567 612-449-0951 612-449-8960 Fax Internet: breit@mr.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why yes, in fact recently the FCC can be reached via FTP. We've touched on it here recently and perhaps one of our readers will be so kind as to send you the help file showing how it is done. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jay@coyote.rain.org (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? Date: 04 May 1994 09:38:48 -0700 Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN) In article djo7613@u.washington.edu (Dick O'Connor) writes: > Strange thing happened recently on my second of two residential lines. > Suddenly one day the voice mail card stopped answering on that line, > but when I switched lines it worked fine. Handsets that ring just fine > on our first line stopped ringing on our second line in tests. Yet, > if I called the second line from the first, I hear the "ring", and if > my kid picks up a phone attached to the second line, it answers and we > can talk. > Is voltage somehow involved in "ringing" so that a decrease would > cause to small a *something* for devices like modem cards and handsets > to respond to? Where does this happen, and what's the fix? Ringing is a low-frequency AC signal applied to the line (Typically 90 volts at 20 Hertz). Tell the repair desk that "ringing voltage is not being applied". They will likely find the problem to be the line equipment (printed circuit card in modern exchanges) feeding your line. Jay Hennigan jay@rain.org ------------------------------ From: Scott Townley Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy??? Date: Wed, 04 May 94 16:42:41 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) writes: > I saw a copy of RCD newsfax talking about cellular privacy. The gist > of the article is that the Illinois Attorney General said "persons who > use a telephone which transmits by radio waves have no justifiable > expectation of privacy." The Cellular Telecommunications Industry > Association quickly pointed out that this is not what the federal law > says and then goes on to say "As an industry, we are totally committed > to the personal privacy of cellular telephone users." > Hah! If they were that committed then they would encrypt the > transmission and not depend on silly laws. Ruling in circuit court in Louisiana (if I remember right) a few years ago held that the use of cellular telephones constituted the use of a *radio device*, therefore was subject to the de facto principles of radio reception, i.e, that no reasonabl e expectation of privacy was afforded radio users and therefore none could be guaranteed by a court of law. Note that this principle applies only to the air interface; once the call gets into the wired system, it's called wiretapping and is still illegal without court order. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However the court ruling to which you refer is a very grey area. The FCC thinks otherwise, as do the federal courts in some jurisdictions. Best not listen to cellular calls. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kevinander@aol.com (KevinAnder) Subject: Re: Cut-Rate Domestic and International Calling Cards Date: 04 May 1994 18:48:02 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , hketola@agsm.ucla.edu (Heikki Ketola) writes: question about $0.45 rate to Finland deleted. The 24 hour/day 7 day rate to call anywhere in Western Europe (including Finland of course) is $0.45/minute on Cyberlink. The UK is $0.35/minute. Japan is $0.45/minute. Agent opportunities are available. Kevin Anderson FAX: 619-789-9446 ------------------------------ From: Jack Bzoza Subject: Re: FAX Mailbox Services Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 20:41:00 -0400 On Thu, 7 Apr 1994 09:31:27 PDT Les Reeves wrote and asked about: FAX Mailbox Services >> Does anyone have any info on companies that provide a >> FAXMAIL service? >> What I am looking for is a FAX Number I can give out that receives >> faxes and then allows me to retrieve them from any fax machine by >> dialing up my code. > AT&T came out with a bunch of services for "professionals on the go" > about a year ago, and a FAX mailbox was part of the package. The > disadvantage was that callers had to dial an 800 number and then enter > a bunch more digits for your mailbox. Most business users won't stand > for this nonsense; they punch the number into the fax machine and walk > away. Delrina (the makers of WinFax and PerForm) has just announced a fax mailbox service exactly as you describe. It will ship (i.e. be available) in about two weeks time. It provides you with a personal 1-800 telephone number which can receive faxes or voicemail. It also has a paging notification feature which you can have page you when a fax arrives for you in your mailbox.. To receive your faxes onto your computer, just click on 'Retrieve From MailBox' from the Service's menu found in WinFax PRO 4.0. Type in your password, and your faxes will automatically be sent to you. If you don+t have your computer, or access to one, you can instruct the service to send your faxes to a fax machine. Your faxes are retrieved from the same 1-800 number so there are no long distance access charges. It is currently the ONLY way to retrieve a fax sent to your fax mailbox directly to your hotel room with your laptop. You can call your Fax MailBox either from WinFax PRO or using a touch tone phone to find out if there are any faxes waiting for you. The service will let you know how many faxes you've got, how many pages are in each fax, and at what time each fax was received. And you can even pick and choose the faxes you want sent to you immediately, while leaving others in your mailbox for retrieval at a later time. Other options are available including DID numbers (for international access), and voicemail options (the same mailbox can also take your voicemail messages). Also your telephone company's "call forwarding" service lets you have your faxes forwarded directly to your MailBox. If you want to receive your messages immediately, either to your office or an out of town location, simply call forward your Delrina Fax MailBox number to your current location. Your messages will be automatically transferred. And if that line is busy, your transmission can be rerouted back into your MailBox through your phone company+s "call forward when busy" service. For more info you can call Delrina in California at 1-800-268-6082. Jack Bzoza jackb@delrina.com Delrina (Canada) Corporation ------------------------------ From: lllowen@netcom.com (Lon Lowen Jr.) Subject: Re: Pac Tel / Air Touch Communications Organization: Netcom Online Communications Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 05:31:42 GMT In article , Larry Jones wrote: > Recently, Pacific Telesis (by the way, is that pronounced TEL-uh-sis > or tuh-LEE-sus?) TEL-uh-sis. Lon Lowen Jr. Wayne State University Netcom Online Communications Detroit, Michigan, USA lllowen@netcom.com (lllowen@mts.cc.wayne.edu) ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 04 May 94 18:20:00 CST Subject: Kernels and Lt. Kernels > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you Colonel. Tell me this: any ideas > how Colonel came to be pronounced 'kernel' rather than 'call-on-nell'? > Or put another way, why is it we make popcorn and have left over kernels > rather than left over colonels? And even though this is April Fool's > Day, there *was* at one point in the Army an actual person of Colonel > in rank whose last name was Korne. At least it was not spelled 'corn'. > And why do we call it the kernel in Unix instead of the colonel? PAT The Unisys A Series operating system (known as the Master Control Program or MCP) has a module called the Kernel, and another one called the LtKernel. Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com Net**2 656-6350 (Please forward bounces to Mail Stop MV 237 rgellens@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 94 14:18 EST From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com> Subject: Need Used Mitel PAV Dialers I need some used Mitel 4 Port PAV Dialers. If anyone out there has a few spares I'd appreciate a direct reply. Thanks in advance, Al Cohan ------------------------------ From: producer@pipeline.com (Judith Oppenheimer) Subject: 800 Market Growth Date: 4 May 1994 16:09:59 -0400 Organization: The Pipeline A 1994 Gallup survey found that much of the $7 billion 800 market is still up for grabs. So in 1994 its a $7 billion market. Can anyone tell me how big the 800 market was in 1993? And in 1992? J. Oppenheimer Producer@pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: dreuben@netcom.com (Cid Technologies) Subject: Pagemart 15-Digit Restriction Update Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 12:54:33 PDT Just noticed that my PageMart service is once again accepting pages over 15 digits and working as it used to. I'm not sure if someone read the post to the Digest or perhaps a manager at Pagemart was made aware of the situation by my inquiries, but whatever the case may be, it seems to be back to normal, at least for the past two days it has been! I'll keep checking to make sure that they don't try to go back to 15 digits. (No big deal, most of my pages are over 15 digits so in the event that limit is set back down at 15 I'll know about it shortly after they enact it, which of course I hope they don't!) Doug CID Technologies (203) 499-5221 ------------------------------ From: barryb@bilver.oau.org (Barry Bond) Subject: Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Orlando / Winter Park, FL Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 21:31:26 GMT Greetings! > So the question remains: Where can I purchase a caller ID box with > serial port? I have a (rather expensive) Caller ID communications device from Rochelle Communications, but I believe they have cheaper (single line) units, too. Their address is: Rochelle Communications, Inc. 4030 W. Braker Lane, Suite 130 Austin, Texas 78759 Telephone: (512) 794-0088 Barry L. Bond, Software Engineer SAIC bond@aphst1.saic.com <- work 3045 Technology Parkway barryb@bilver.oau.org <- personal Orlando, FL 32826-3299 72235,1530 (CIS) <- personal Work: (407) 282-6700, Ext. 377 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #203 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07735; 6 May 94 15:34 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA07700; Fri, 6 May 94 11:27:14 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA07691; Fri, 6 May 94 11:27:12 CDT Date: Fri, 6 May 94 11:27:12 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405061627.AA07691@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #204 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 May 94 11:27:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 204 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted (John R. Levine) Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted (Ken Hoehn) Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Probably Dead (Dave Levenson) Re: PageMart Changes Services, No Notice (Rob Lockhart) Re: Protocol for Alpha-numeric Pagers (Rob Lockhart) Re: Equal Access in Canada (Dino Moriello) Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway (Mike Godwin) Re: Cellular Privacy??? (Neil Weisenfeld) Re: Cellular Privacy??? (William H. Sohl) Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Alan Leon Varney) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted Date: Fri, 6 May 94 0:17:12 EDT Ken Hoehn asked: > What do you think of the future of PCS, and the possible 'jump over' of > local services in its use? > I think that may have been what AT&T had in mind! Hi. I'm not a pundit, but sometimes I play one on the net. Second question first -- ten years ago nobody had the faintest idea that wireless telephony would be the runaway success that it is. If you look at projections for cellular usage compared to what's actually happened, you'll find that the projections were too low by about an order of magnitude. Also, nobody anticipated how effective software-based techniques would be in increasing the effectiveness of bandwidth usage, viz. CDMA cellular and all of the 900MHz spread spectrum wireless network and cellular telephone stuff. For example, my connection to the Internet is via a 900MHz spread spectrum wireless Ethernet, giving me a 2MB connection to the next network for a hardware outlay of under $2000, probably five times cheaper than a slower link would have cost three years ago. PCS will be a success, but I think that the main financial effect will be to make the wireline telcos even richer than they are now. For one thing, PCS runs at much higher frequencies than even cellular uses, which means that each PCS cell is going to be real small, and there'll be a lot of them, with a lot of wiring needed to connect to all of the base stations. Also, unlike cellular, PCS can be integrated much more tightly with the wireline network -- I read in America's Network (a trade rag that all telephone engineering managers read) about a test in Chicago in which fairly dumb PCS base stations were connected by ISDN, which runs over regular T1, to the wireline exchange, a 5ESS. All of the PCS fanciness including handoff from one cell to the next was handled by an upgrade to the 5ESS software. This means that to get PCS going, basically all you have to do is to wire up each PCS base station like an ISDN customer line. Compare this to what cellular requires, with large base stations that can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and dedicated phone switches. If I were getting into the PCS biz and I didn't happen to be the local telco, I'd try to cut a deal with the telco to use their switch, greatly cutting both the time to get the system up and the capital cost. Remember, the telco's cost of capital is very low, since telephone bonds are considered to be extremely low risk, and in any event for the first few years PCS would be small enough that it'd be an insignificant increment to their existing capacity. Naturally, the telco isn't going to make this deal for free, so they'd end up with a big chunk of the revenue. If the telco owned a PCS franchise, they'd only make PCS deals with themselves, and they'd be at a huge advantage since they could get going real fast. Sure, there's some dial tone competition coming over the horizon, e.g. CAPs and cable companies. But I've never seen a cable company with the technical smarts to blow their own noses, and I don't think I'd be the only one to be very reluctant to trust my phone business to the same clowns who maintain the cable TV. (Here in Cambridge, for example, the cable company announced with great fanfare several months ago the availability of 500Kb Internet connections via cable. According to people who've tried to order it, it doesn't actually exist.) CAPs are starting to skim the cream, sort of like the pre-equal-access MCI. But dial tone competition from CAPs, PCS, or cellular isn't going to be much of a threat until there's local number portability, something that the existing telcos view with less than no enthusiasm. (Yeah, some of them say they welcome local competition, but their idea of a level playing field looks more like a ski jump.) I doubt portability will work for another decade, during which interval I expect that they'll lobby their way into being allowed to buy up cable and PCS companies, thereby eating the competition. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Organization: The W8HD Group Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 22:53:35 EDT From: Ken Hoehn Subject: Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted > What do you think of the future of PCS, and the possible 'jump over' of > local services in it's use? I think that may have been what AT&T had in mind! kenh@w8hd.org Ken Hoehn - Teletech, Inc. Compuserve: 70007,2374 N8NYO P.O.Box 924 FAX: (313) 562-8612 Dearborn, MI 48121 VOICE: (313) 562-6873 ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Probably Dead Reply-To: dave@westmark.com Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 04:21:38 GMT I have made good use of the AT&T Public Phone 2000: I once used one at the airport in Dallas to log into this Unix system, to read the telecom digest while waiting for my flight. More recently, as we have all noted, they no longer have keyboards on them, and the screen mostly just displays advertising. I did, however, plug the internal modem in my laptop machine into the RJ-11 jack provided on these keyboard-less telephones, and place a data call that way. Less expensive (you only pay the telco for the phone call, no `keyboard rental' add-on) and faster. The PP-2000 internal modem is limited to 2400 bps; my laptop has a V.32 modem in it. 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: rlockhart@aol.com (RLockhart) Subject: Re: PageMart Changes Services, No Notice Date: 6 May 1994 08:08:07 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , dreuben@netcom.com (Cid Technologies) writes: > Since Monday, I noticed that PageMart -- a local and nationwide paging > company -- has REDUCED the number of digits per page to only 15. They > used to take at least 22, perhaps even more (24 Max). > It seems all so silly me to that they think they are going to speed up > paging so much by going from 24 digits to 15; how many people do a > full 24 and how much time would 9 digits less really save? Doug ... do you mind if I send a copy of this to a friend of mine at PageMart? Real customer feedback usually has an effect on things like this 'specially at his level. Hmmm ... wonder what sort of savings dropping from 24 to 15 numeric pages gives? Let's see ... a standard POCSAG block is 20 bits with 12 check bits. 20 bits is five numeric digits, so 24 digits is 5 blocks with one burned digit and 15 digits is 3 blocks with no burned digits. This gives a two block difference. Two blocks is about a single POCSAG paging address, sooooo every time they send a reduced length page for one that would've been 21 digits or longer, they can add a tone only page. Save two pages worth and they can add a numeric page with 10 digits or less. If they average 10K pages per day and 10% (just very conservatively SWAG'ing numbers here on call rates) were 20+ digits, that would give an extra (10% or 10K -> 1K -> 1 extra 10 digit page for every 2 of the 10%'rs ->) 500 pages per day. This would allow them to add 500 pages per day. At a .1 call rate, this would give an extra (500/24 pages per hour at .1 call rate per hour ->) uhmmm .. a little over 200 customers -.. real rates, though, would be vastly different. Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc. Desktop I'net: lockhart-epag06_rob@email.mot.com Wireless I'net (<32K characters): rob_lockhart-erl003e@email.mot.com ------------------------------ From: rlockhart@aol.com (RLockhart) Subject: Re: Protocol for Alpha-numeric Pagers Date: 6 May 1994 08:25:09 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , garym@alsys.com (Gary Morris @ignite) writes: > I would like to write some software for a specialized computer system > to send pages to alpha-numeric pagers. Is there a standard protocol > that these services use to accept messages via a modem? The protocol you seek is called TAP (Telocator Alpha Paging .. PET and IXO are different names for the same alpha paging) protocol. The only formal supplier of the spec for TAP is PCIA (Personal Communications Industry Association .. formerly Telocator) in Washington, DC, at 202.467.4770. Alternatively, if you just want to take a look at the more commonly used portions of the protocol, I've a thread gleaned from a now-out-of-print manual of ours that was used by Telocator as the basis for TAP and would be happy to POST you a copy. > I haven't selected a pager provider yet, so if some use proprietary > protocols I would be interested in know which ones to avoid. I've > talked to several providers and they have said we can do paging from a > PC and they have a software package for PC's, but I have a special > need that requires custom software (and it's running on Sun/Unix). Several use proprietary protocols (e.g., SkyTel has SkyWord (proprietary) access to it's SkyWord service), but almost to a carrier they also support TAP (e.g., SkyTel has SkyMemo (TAP) access to it's SkyWord service, too). We publish a freebie called the Motorola Third Party Referral Guide to Alpha and Data Paging that gets updated on a quarterly basis (current edition is 04 March 94) and includes sections on platform-specific support (Mac, DOS, Windows, Unix, OS/2, MainFrames ..), application and application enablers (e.g., APIs, DDE, AppleEvents, ...), and manufacturers/publishers. If that's of interest to you, it's a Stuffed MacWord 5.1 file available on some of the commercial services like CIS, AOL, and AppleLink (I'm FTP-challenged in addition to being chronologically- and gravitationally-challenged ). Paper copies are available from our NewsStream/NewsCard hotline at 1.800.542.7882, but ask for it by name. Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc. Desktop I'net: lockhart-epag06_rob@email.mot.com Wireless I'net (<32K characters): rob_lockhart-erl003e@email.mot.com ------------------------------ From: dino@CAM.ORG (Dino Moriello) Subject: Re: Equal Access in Canada Date: Fri, 06 May 1994 09:40:32 -0500 Organization: VE2DM In article , Carl Moore wrote: > Back in January, I went to Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. before turning > around back into the U.S. I got to a pay phone on 705-759 there, and > 10288 didn't work (I then omitted it, got the "boing" for Bell Canada, > then punched in my AT&T card number and the call, going to the U.S., > went through). The call didn't make it to my phone bill until March, > and it was in the AT&T part of the bill. So there are no 10xxx codes > currently useable in Canada? All I've seen is a note with my phone bill asking me if I wanted Unitel to ask Bell to give me access to Unitel by simply dialing 1+. Dino Moriello PO BOX 105 Internet: dino@CAM.ORG Radisson,Quebec Compuserve: 76120,1472 Tel.: 514-974-0773 CANADA J0Y 2X0 Packet: VE2DM@VE2FKB 819-638-8281 Please E-mail replies since I can't always read the USENET postings. ------------------------------ From: mgodwin@mcl.bdm.com (Michael G. Godwin) Subject: Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 11:52:42 Organization: BDM International, Inc. In article lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) writes: > The half hour Internet version of the program is being distributed > biweekly on the Internet via the Internet Multicasting Service in > Washington D.C., on the "Internet Town Hall" channel, and is also > available as a file for retrieval by any Internet user from the many > Internet Multicasting / Internet Talk Radio archive sites around the > world. What is this Internet Multicasting Service/town hall channel, and how does one access it??? Is there a more suitable newsgroup foinformation/ discussion on this?? Mike ------------------------------ From: weisen@alw.nih.gov (Neil Weisenfeld) Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy? Organization: NIH Div of Comp Rsrch and Technology Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 15:58:38 GMT Scott Townley (nx7u@delphi.com) wrote: > few years ago held that the use of cellular telephones constituted the > use of a *radio device*, therefore was subject to the de facto > principles of radio reception, i.e, that no reasonabl e expectation of > privacy was afforded radio users and therefore none could be Historically, it has been upheld that users of a radio device should not be able to expect privacy. Unless I'm mistaken, however, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 changed all of this. Right now it is illegal to monitor cellular phone calls, studio to transmitter relays, and other things. This is probably largely due to pressure from the cell phone services, but I'm not really up on the political background. As of April 26, 1994 (if I got that date right), it became illegal to manufacture in the US, or to import, a radio *capable* of receiving the cellular phone frequencies. This includes radios that can be easily modified (e.g. certain scanners that simply needed a diode clipped). Neil Weisenfeld, Computer Engineer Internet: weisen@alw.nih.gov Nat'l Insts. of Health, 12A/2033 Voice: 301/402-4030 Bethesda, MD 20892 Fax: 301/402-2867 ------------------------------ From: whs70@cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy? Date: 5 May 1994 11:42:02 -0400 Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore) In article , Scott Townley wrote: > writes: >> I saw a copy of RCD newsfax talking about cellular privacy. The gist >> of the article is that the Illinois Attorney General said "persons who >> use a telephone which transmits by radio waves have no justifiable >> expectation of privacy." The Cellular Telecommunications Industry >> Association quickly pointed out that this is not what the federal law >> says and then goes on to say "As an industry, we are totally committed >> to the personal privacy of cellular telephone users." Practically speaking, however, the existence of legislation (laws) forbiding the listening to cellular communications have no real impact on what actually is being done. The only true privacy for cellular is with encryption of the call. >> Hah! If they were that committed then they would encrypt the >> transmission and not depend on silly laws. Ditto this statement per above. > Ruling in circuit court in Louisiana (if I remember right) a > few years ago held that the use of cellular telephones constituted the > use of a *radio device*, therefore was subject to the de facto > principles of radio reception, i.e, that no reasonabl e expectation of > privacy was afforded radio users and therefore none could be > guaranteed by a court of law. Note that this principle applies only > to the air interface; once the call gets into the wired system, it's > called wiretapping and is still illegal without court order. All essentially true. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However the court ruling to which you > refer is a very grey area. The FCC thinks otherwise, as do the federal > courts in some jurisdictions. Best not listen to cellular calls. PAT] The fundamental problem facing the user of cellular is that s/he never knows if the call is actually being listened to by an unauthorized listener. Cellular calls use radio and there are probably over one million or more radio recievers (scanners, etc.) which have the ability to receive the cellular frequencies. None of that equipment is illegal to own (although the FCC, effective 4/26/94, now bans the importation or manufacture of cellular capable scaners) and it simply isn't going to disappear because the ECPA says don't listen to cellular. Bottom line, if you use cellular, is to treat each call as if it was being interecepted and, therefore, offer nothing "over the air" that you would ever want divulged or made known to someone you didn't want to hear it (e.g. credit card numbers, etc.) The same can be said for the use of cordless phones, which have no laws (except for a handful of individual state laws) prohibiting listening to their (cordless) conversations. Personally I have no desire to listen to cellular or cordless, I offer this advice to caution folks that the existence of federal and/or state laws prohibiting listening does nothing to actually prevent it from happening. In fact, in those rare cases where someone has possibly been charged for illegal listening, it has only been "discovered" because the individual was blatant about his/her listening (usually through some media coverage of a political figure's cellular phone converstation which was tape recorded by the person being charged). Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!cc!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@cc.bellcore.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The same could really be said of wired landline phones as well. Although probably more secure than any form of radio, it is still not a good idea to say over the phone anything you would not like others to know about. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 14:59:35 +0600 Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Forwarded to the Digest by Carl Moore who received it as a response from Al Varney. PAT] You mentioned: > Since I update history.of.area.splits from time to time, I have > some questions for Al Varney: > All my recent NANP statements were derived (or perhaps assumed) from > a Bellcore Letter (IL-94/01-001, "Status of Numbering in the NANP Served > Area") dated 3 January 1994. Obviously, TELCos can change their minds, > so take this "information", not "truth". >> If, in your message, "Home NPA Toll calls ... require 1+ for Toll", >> do you mean: >> 1. 1+NPA+7D must be used? (I know this applies to Maryland and area >> 703 in Virginia; no information yet for 804 in Va.) >> 2. 1+7D can still be used? (I have not received information about >> Nevada, Wisconsin, or area 804 in Va. requiring 1+NPA+7D for long >> distance within area code.) Sorry I was so unclear -- on re-reading, it was a stupid comment. I should have said "Home NPA Toll calls ... require 1+10D dialing". The 1+7D pattern is not, after January 1995, going to be permitted anywhere in the NANP, including NPA 809 and Canada. Many areas, such as Texas NPAs 409, 806 and 915, appear to be waiting until 1995 to block 1 + 7D calls. Canada is uniformly requiring 1+10D for Toll calls effective 1/7/95. >> And where do you arrive at 7D being allowed for intra-NPA toll calls >> in West Virginia? That would be new information for me. Just reading the Bellcore "table" -- West Virginia appears to be following the Pennsylvania model of "7D Toll" calls, rather than the "1 + 10D Toll" model of Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio. Like Pennsylvania, 1+10D will also work for such calls. >>> NPA 703 in Virginia will >>> permit 7D or 10D or 1+10D local calls, except into the Washington >>> metro area, where 10D or 1+10D is required. >> NPA 703 in Virginia does allow 7D for local calls into the Washington >> metro area WITHIN AN AREA CODE, with the "10D or 1+10D is required" >> kicking in if calling different area code. Again I stupid comment make -- 7D local is permitted within an area code EVERYWHERE within the NANP area. So perhaps: "NPA 703 in Virginia will allow 7D Inter-NPA local calls, except when calling INTO the Washington metro area. Both 10D and 1+10D will work for ALL local calls from NPA 703." The distinction I gather from Bellcore's table is that 7D local calls to other NPAs will work from 703, so long as the destination is not the Metro area -- for example, into NPA 804. The actual term they use for the 7D-not-permitted is Foreign NPA Local calls to the "WMEA". So what is WMEA? Is all of NPA 301 in WMEA from 703's perspective? What about 410? >>> Illinois is the ONE state that REQUIRES 7D dialing for all Home NPA >>> calls, even Toll calls (i.e., does not PERMIT 1 + 10D for such calls). >> Old area 312 never had 1+ for long distance until it needed N0X/N1X >> prefixes, and at that time it got 1+ for long distance to other area >> codes. Are you saying the rest of Illinois is dropping the leading >> 1 for intra-NPA if it was still publishing 1+7D for such? Per the "table", NPAs 312, 618, 708 and 815 do not NOW permit 1+7D dialing for calls. Intra-NPA calls must be dialed 7D and Inter-NPA calls must be dialed 1+10D, regardless of "toll/local" status. The remaining NPAs (217 and 309) will change to these rules by a yet-to- be-announced date. It will probably be before January 1995. Al Varney - any errors are mine, including this statement ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #204 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00350; 6 May 94 16:40 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA10550; Fri, 6 May 94 12:59:02 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA10539; Fri, 6 May 94 12:59:00 CDT Date: Fri, 6 May 94 12:59:00 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405061759.AA10539@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #205 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 May 94 12:59:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 205 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson LDDS Take Over of WilTel (Associated Press via David W. Prince) Firms Vie for Three-Digit Phone Numbers (Boston Globe via Monty Solomon) Three-Digit Phone Numbers (Peter Capek) Book Review: "Understanding Computer Networks" by Apple (Rob Slade) Verifone Programming Manuals (Ry Jones) Help Setting up FTP Server Site (Kenn Krasner) Sprint Resellers (Rich Holland) When is a 'Page' Not a Page? (Michael Diehr) Hackers On Planet Earth (Kevin Crow) Wanted: Merlin or Spirit Phones (Drew Benson) Fax Cited in Numbers Bust (New York Times via Dave Thompson) FCC March Caller ID Order (Carl B. Page) Mac Tie-in to T1 Line? (Steve Rogers) Toronto Utilities Consider Fibre Local Network (Dave Leibold) Directory Formats to Change (Dave Leibold) Prices on DFB Laser, Fiber, Mobile Switching Centers (Hanwook Jung) Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Randal Hayes) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David W. Prince Subject: LDDS Take Over of WilTel Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 04:59:32 EDT Description: LDDS Makes Offer For WilTel Header: AP Online AP 05/04 18:33 EDT V0989 Copyright 1994. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. TULSA, Okla. (AP) -- Long distance phone company LDDS Communications Inc. has offered $2 billion to buy rival Williams Telecommunications Group, saying it wants WilTel's technology and base of large private customers. LDDS is the nation's fourth largest long distance telephone company. Based in Jackson, Miss., it is chaired by billionaire John Kluge, one of the country's richest people. It serves mostly small- to medium-size customers nationwide and is a customer of Tulsa-based WilTel, leasing some lines on its phone network. WilTel, one of the Williams Cos., caters mostly to large business clients. It laid a national fiber-optic network in the late 1980s in the United States by running cable through decommissioned oil and gas pipelines owned by its parent. It leases its lines to other carriers like LDDS as well as to business and government customers. A merger would create a long distance company that could begin to rival AT&T, MCI and Sprint. LDDS had more than $1 billion in revenues last year while WilTel had just under that amount. The president and chief executive officer of Williams, Keith E. Bailey, said Wednesday in a written statement that Williams is pleased with the recent performance of WilTel and comfortable keeping ownership. But Bailey added that LDDS' offer "will be taken into consideration along with a number of other alternatives that we are carefully examining to continue to enhance the long-term value of this asset for our shareholders." LDDS Chief Executive Officer Bernard Ebbers said LDDS would offer $2 billion in cash to Williams or in stock paid directly to shareholders, or in a mix of $1 billion cash and $1 billion stock. Williams board of directors meet next on May 19. Williams shares closed up $3.37 1/2 at $28.87 1/2 in brisk New York Stock Exchange trading. LDDS shares rose 25 cents to $23.75 on the Nasdaq stock market. The purchase offer became public after LDDS filed a form disclosing it with the Securities and Exchange Commission. WilTel International Inc. and LDDS were among three companies that announced earlier this year that they expect to provide long-distance service to Cuba within the next few months. But that plan is stalled because of concerns by the State Department over a relatively large $4.85 surcharge allowed in the agreements for collect calls. The State Department has said it will allow no such surcharge, which would give the Cuban government sorely needed hard currency. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 12:05:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Firms Vie for Three-Digit Phone Numbers Excerpt from {The Boston Globe}, Friday, May 6, 1994 Businesses eager for a new outlet in the information age grabbed up three-digit telephone numbers awarded in a first-ever lottery by Southern Bell yesterday. The company, a unit of BellSouth Corp., assigned the numbers, 211, 311, 511, 711 and 811 in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and Orlando. Anyone willing to pay a $25,000 start-up fee and a minimum $10,000 per month was eligible for the giveaway. The winners were newspapers, the Yellow Pages division of Bell South, and a few other businesses that see value in the memorable numbers. None released specific plans for products. ... The winners could charge for each call or offer services to callers for free while tacking on advertising to those services. ... Petitions for N11 numbers have been filed in most states. But no utility regulators outside Florida have endorsed the service, and BellSouth is the only regional Bell operating company to push for sales, said Mark Long of the Florida Public Service Commission. Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty@roscom.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 May 94 10:58:07 EDT From: Peter Capek Subject: Three-Digit Phone Numbers I have no further details, but I saw a press clipping summary that said Southern Bell is going to sell a "limited number" of three-digit telephone numbers for $25,000 apiece, and a somewhat larger quantity of four-digit telephone numbers for an unspecified price. I'd be interested to know further details. Does anyone know whether, if this is true, these numbers are likely to be dialable nationwide? Or does the existing infrastructure assume that all numbers are ten digits when dialed with the area code? Peter Capek [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See the related article in this issue. The numbers will be dialable only from within Southern Bell's service area. SB certainly has no right to sell away those prime numbers where other telcos are concerned, to say nothing of the logistics involved in trying to call them from elsewhere. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 May 1994 10:45:42 MDT From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Understanding Computer Networks" by Apple BKUNDCNT.RVW 940126 Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Heather Rignanesi, Marketing, x340, 73171.657@Compuserve.com P.O. Box 520 26 Prince Andrew Place Don Mills, Ontario M3C 2T8 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 or Tiffany Moore, Publicity tiffanym@aw.com Bob Donegon bobd@aw.com John Wait, Editor, Corporate and Professional Publishing johnw@aw.com Tom Stone, Editor, Higher Education Division tomsto@aw.com 1 Jacob Way Reading, MA 01867-9984 800-822-6339 617-944-3700 Fax: (617) 944-7273 "Understanding Computer Networks", Apple, 1989, 0-201-19773-1, U$10.95/C$13.95 This is sort of the Classics Comics version of computer networking. In fewer than eighty pages, less than half of them text, you have a very quick overview of data communications. While the majority of the illustrations add little to the concepts being presented, overall this book works reasonably well. It certainly is easily accessible and nonthreatening. The material is extremely limited, but many longer and more tedious books give no more accurate information than does this. As a quick introduction to network and data communications concepts, this may be handy to the busy executive starting with a related project. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994 BKUNDCNT.RVW 940126 - Redistribution permitted on TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '95, Toronto, ON, February 13-17, 1995, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ From: Ry Jones Subject: Verifone Programming Manuals Date: Fri, 6 May 94 9:55:30 PDT With all this talk about Verifones, I am reminded that I have one (a Verifone Junior, tan model, green LED screen) with no manual. I bought it at a Tru Value going out of business sale; they didn't have the manual, or password, or anything. I called Verifone in Hawaii, and never got a response (and that was not a cheap call!). So here's the problem: I want to reprogram the thing to use my Visa validation strings. How can I do this? Some people have suggested pulling the battery out of it and letting the NVRAM drain (to reset the password), but I fear this would merely reset it to a random state (not a null state). Anyone offer any help here? Ry ------------------------------ From: Kenn Krasner From: kkrasner@ritz.mordor.com (Kenn Krasner) Subject: Help setting up FTP server site Organization: Mordor International BBS Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 21:36:57 GMT Can anyone point me to some detailed info on setting up an FTP server site? I'd greatly appreciate it! Please respond to me via email at kkrasner@mordor.com. Thank you for your help! Kenn ------------------------------ From: holland@godiva.ne.ksu.edu (Rich Holland) Subject: Sprint Resellers Date: 5 May 1994 21:38:10 GMT Organization: Kansas State University Does anyone have a list of Sprint WATS resellers they'd be willing to mail me? Thanks! Rich Holland | Internet: holland@godiva.ne.ksu.edu 723 Allison Ave, #8 | Bitnet : holland@ksuvm Manhattan, KS 66502-3273 | WWW : http://godiva.ne.ksu.edu/~holland ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 14:41:38 -0800 From: mdiehr@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Michael Diehr) Subject: When is a 'Page' Not a Page? When is a 'page' not a page? When it is a call into your voicemail system. To explain: Recently, I bought a pager with service package from Costco, one of those membership wherehouse retail stores. I took it to Airtouch Paging (nee' PacTel Paging) here in San Diego and had it activated, and added their $6/month voicemail package to the plan (one phone number). One month later, and I get billed for 113 pager overcalls. Hmm, sez I, "I know I don't get ten pages per day, this must be an error." Two times, I talk to a customer service rep, and they say they'll look into it. The third time I call (after they threaten to disconnect me for nonpayment), someone clears up the mystery: Their policy is to charge for all pages sent to your pager, AS WELL AS ALL CALLS INTO YOUR VOICEMAIL ACCOUNT TO RETRIEVE MESSAGES. Well, I double checked my contract, and it says, clear as day "200 pages per month, with $0.10 / page over 200". A few calls later, and I talk to a manager there, who confirms their policy of charging for ALL calls to the number, and says "I should have been notified". My impression after talking to several people is that their policy is not written down on any brochure, and is certainly not on any contract that they provide. So. They agreed to refund the existing charges, but not change their policy. In my mind this is at best deceptive advertising, and perhaps breach of contract and maybe against CPUC regulations. Any comments? mdiehr@ucsd.edu (Michael Diehr) ------------------------------ From: kc@netsys.com (Kevin Crow) Subject: Hackers On Planet Earth Organization: Netsys Inc. Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 22:46:14 GMT It's not Summercon. It's not the Galactic Hacker Party. | H O P E | It's Hackers On Planet Earth. August 13th and 14th, 1994 In the middle of NEW YORK CITY A celebration of the hacker world and the tenth anniversary of 2600. - watch for further details - [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The *tenth* anniversary of 2600? I am certain the magazine has been around longer than that. I seem to recall hearing about it back in the 1960-70's ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: drew@mtu.edu (Drew Benson) Subject: Wanted: Merlin or Spirit phones Date: 5 May 1994 23:02:59 GMT Organization: Michigan Technological University Reply-To: drew@mtu.edu Does anyone have any AT&T Merlin or Spirit phones or phone system for sale? If not, where can I get them? Our budget is limited here. Actually, a similar phone system would be fine as well. It doesn't NEED to be those particular ones, but I'm looking for something similar. Thanks, Andrew Benson (drew@mtu.edu) ------------------------------ From: Thompson, Dave Subject: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust Date: Thu, 05 May 94 19:07:00 PDT From {The New York Times}, Thu 21 Apr 1994, pp A1,B4 [non-telecom portions condensed] Fax Use Spells / Numbers Arrest / To Harlem Ring (Jump: Use of Fax Leads to Arrest / Of Suspected Numbers King) By Selwyn Raab For 30 years, Raymond Marquez was a thorn to law-enforcement agencies and a legend to countless gamblers in Harlem and East Harlem. ... authorities say ... [he] built a gambling empire that raked in about $30M a year. ... conducted from fake stores in ... northern Manhattan, [while he] lived regally in ... [Long Island and] Florida. .... But the authorities said yesterday that they had arrested Mr. Marquez, 64, and his wife, Alice, 63, on felony gambling charges and had raided and closed 56 gambling parlors and backroom offices .... The Manhattan District Attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, said a large part of the case against Mr. Marquez stemmed from one mistake: his use of a fax to get daily reports on his illegal gambling profits from Manhattan to his vacation retreat in Fort Lauderdale. Mr. Morgenthau, who announced the arrests ..., said the faxes, which were intercepted under a court order, included the names of gambling sites, accounts over the last month of profits at each site and the payrolls for more than 100 people employed by Mr. Marquez in one of the city's largest illegal gambling rings. Mr. Morgenthau's office obtained a court order yesterday attaching more than $35M in assets .... "Up here [he] is sort of a legend," said Lt. Gregory J. Levine of the Manhattan North Public Morals District. "... this time we got him good." Detective Angel Ramirez ... said Mr. Marquez followed the same schedule almost every day. .... "... he's got expensive tastes and ... acts like a Mafia don." .... Since the early 1960's, ... officials have described Mr. Marquez as one of the city's most successful numbers operators. In the Harlem neighborhoods ... [one resident said] "They've destroyed this neighborhood. ... turned into a stinking rat hole." .... [Police Commissioner] Bratton said no evidence of police corruption was uncovered [in connection with this case] .... ... [the] betting parlors offered several numbers games. .... .... Each wager was recorded ... [and sent to] the policy bank ... [on] the second floor of a residential building at 3650 Broadway near 151st Street. ... Claudia Hernandez, 25, who was also arrested ... was in charge of Mr. Marquez's main office on Riverside Drive .... Reports on the daily operations were faxed by Ms. Hernandez to Mr. Marquez and his wife while they were in Fort Lauderdale .... "We intercepted 30 to 40 faxes a day .... It [sic] spelled out in minute details everything about the organization." Mr. Marquez['s] ... father was a numbers operator in the 1940's ... [and] Mr. Marquez ran numbers games for ... a Mafia leader in East Harlem in the 1950's, before branching out on his own. [Comment: no indication of whether they thought fax was secure, or tried to make it so, although in recent years at least some Mafiosi reportedly refuse to talk "business" indoors on by phone for fear of surveillance.] Dave Thompson, davet@fpg.logica.com Logica North America, +1 617-890-7730 ------------------------------ From: carlp@teleport.com (Carl B. Page) Subject: FCC March Caller ID Order Date: 6 May 1994 00:41:59 -0700 Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 Private Unlisted Phone Numbers Banned Nationwide. Law Enforcement Explicitly Compromised. Women's Shelters Security Threatened. Telephone Rules of 30 States Overturned. Direct Marketing Association Anticipates Profit. The FCC released its Report and Order And Notice of Proposed Rulemaking of March 29th, 1994 (CC Docket No. 91-281) With the arrogance that only federal bureaucrats can muster, the Federal Communications Commission has turned the clock back on Calling Number ID and privacy protection rules nationwide. Have you ever had any trouble giving a direct marketer your phone number? You won't any more. Your Per Line Caller ID blocking will be banned, thanks to the FCC Order which preempts the privacy protections provided by 30 states. The order carefully enumerates the concerns of law-enforcement agencies which need per-line blocking to do their jobs. It mentions the need Women's shelters have for per-line blocking. (A matter of life and death on a day-to-day basis) It mentions that the customers who attempt to keep unlisted numbers confidential will be certainly be thwarted. (Can one train all kids and house-guests to dial *67 before every call? Can you remember to do it yourself?) But the Order dismisses all of these problems, and determines that the greatest good for the greater number will be accomplished if RBOC's can profit a bit more by selling our numbers and if the direct marketers have less trouble gathering them. The FCC doesn't seem to trust consumers to be able to decide whether they want per-line blocking. It praises the $40 cost of an automatic *67 dialer as an appropriate disincentive that will benefit the nation by discouraging people's choice of per-line blocking. There was one part of the order I was pretty happy about, until I read it. The FCC has also banned the sale of numbers gathered by 800-900 number subscribers using the ANI system, unless they obtain verbal consent. (Note that no rules prevent sale of numbers from the presumably blockable CNID system.) The problem is that the only enforcement of the rule seems to be that the requirement must be included in the fine print of the ANI sale contract between the common-carrier and the ANI subscriber. So it seems to be up to the common-carrier to enforce a rule which is contrary to their financial interest. How can a person who suffers from publication or sale of their number recover compensation? The FCC is soliciting comments, due May 18th in their Further Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking on two issues: o Whether the Commission should prescribe more precise educational requirements. o Whether and how the policies adopted on caller ID should be extended to other identification services, such as caller party name or CPNI. I can think of some suggestions ... (arl carlp@teleport.COM Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks Public Access UNIX and Internet in PDX at (503) 220-0636 (1200/2400, N81) ------------------------------ From: suned1!srogers@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Steve Rogers) Subject: Mac Tie-in to T1 Line? Date: 5 May 94 20:06:58 GMT Organization: PHD NSWC, Port Hueneme, CA There is a dedicated T1 line used here for video teleconferencing and I would like to use it after hours transferring large data files from Mac-to-Mac at other sites that are also on this video net. Could anyone please tell me what kind of hardware I would need in order to interface between a Mac and the T1 line (incl. vendor names, ph. numbers, etc, if known)? Thanks in advance, Steve Rogers "Once we Americans roared MHIP Program like lions for liberty: now we bleat like sheep for security" - Norman Vincent Peale Port Hueneme Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 05 May 94 21:18:28 -0500 Subject: Toronto Utilities Consider Fibre Local Network Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway [from Bell News, 2 May 1994] Utilities envisage their own fibre optic network. Five Toronto-area electric utilities are weighing plans to build a fibre optic network to rival those of the telcos and the cablecos. Grouped under the banner of the Metro Utility Taskforce on Fibreoptic Services, the utilities plan to use a portion of the network's capacity to control the consumption and metering of electricity, and lease the unused capacity to those who desire access. Said Taskforce chairman Clive Chu: "We could probably build this kind of infrastructure cheaper than anyone else. We've got the poles and rights-of-way in place. We go out and service our lines on a regular basis anyway. All we have to do is run another cable." ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 05 May 94 21:18:16 -0500 Subject: Directory formats to change Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway [from Bell News, 2 May 1994] New-look directories get OK from CRTC Our customers asked for it. We listened, and agreed. And so did the CRTC which just approved our proposal to change the presentation and improve the legibility of our telephone directories. The new-look directories will initially be introduced in Montreal in December 1994, and Toronto in April of 1995. Other directories may be converted at a future time. Two major format changes are involved. The first is the separation of residence and business customers into two distinct sections in the book. The second applies to the residence section of the book. The family name will be printed only once, in bold type. Each individual listing with the same family name (Larissa Jones, Larry Jones) will appear indented under that name. This indented style is both a cost saving as well as a legibility initiative. Splitting the residence and business listings is a revenue initiative (about $90,000 per annum for both Bell Ontario and Bell Quebec). There will be a charge of $2.65 a month for business customers who choose to purchase an additional listing in the residence section of the directory. A recent customer survey showed that of those surveyed, 73 per cent approved of the change to separate residential and business sections. Directories in many American markets already use this style. ------------------------------ From: hjung@acsu.buffalo.edu (Hanwook Jung) Subject: Prices on DFB Laser, fiber, Mobile switching centers, etc.. Organization: UB Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 16:04:25 GMT In future, as the subscription ratio increases to the wireless services, microcells( a few hundred meters in radius) will be deployed. Then, the subcarrier multipled opticla link can be used for the radio remoting purpose for the microcells. The major components to construting the subcarrier multiplexed optical link for the microcell are: . DFB laser( or other laser, LED ) . PIN detector . fiber and conduit . mobile switching center( exchanges, and real estate) . Base station equipment For those who involved in companies which produce any of above products, would you give me some approximate prices on those with some past years' prices also if available? It will be a great help to have some ideas on real world and products. I don't need the exact prices at this time to know reality. Thank you in advance. H.Jung hjung@eng.buffalo.edu ------------------------------ From: HayesR@uihc-telecomm-po.htc.uiowa.edu Date: 5 May 94 11:29 CST Subject: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories > Could someone knowledgeable supply me with the vital data on (mail > order for cell phone accessories) these companies? I received a catalog and brochures from: Hutton Communications 4112 Billy Mitchell Drive Dallas, TX 75244-2315 214-239-0580 Fax-214-239-5264 800-442-3811 They had quite a few cellular accessories. Randy Hayes randal-hayes@uiowa.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #205 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01859; 6 May 94 17:09 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA11682; Fri, 6 May 94 13:36:10 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA11662; Fri, 6 May 94 13:36:03 CDT Date: Fri, 6 May 94 13:36:03 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405061836.AA11662@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #206 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 May 94 13:36:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 206 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Question About Digital Telephony and Delayed Dial Tone (Sean Peacock) Re: NANP and Switches (Paul A. Lee) Re: TCP/IP Over X.25/Datapac (Soren Aalto) Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Doug Reuben) Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Alan Gallatin) Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Erik Ramberg) Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (Bob Keller) Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (Michael D. Sullivan) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: speacock@netcom.com (Sean P Peacock) Subject: Re: Question About Digital Telephony and Delayed Dial Tone Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 07:40:38 GMT John Lundgren (jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com) wrote: > My understanding was at this time, if you have ISDN, or 2B+D, you have > a full channel all the way to the CO. That goes for POTS too, even if > your pots line runs into a SLIC channel bank at the corner. You still > get a dedicated 'bit in the bitstream'. It seems obvious to me that Not totally true. A SLC-96 for example, takes 96 POTS and places them on two T-1s with a third as backup. If 48 people are already using the SLC you'll get blocked. > this can't continue when the home gets a coax to the nearest > 'muxer', and then the muxer talks to the central office using fiber > optics. But still, if the telco expects to offer the mythical 500 > channels and all the other stuff too, then the bandwidth of all the > links to the CO, and beyond will have to be increased. To offer T1 to > the home, where the home already has ISDN, would mean an increase in > bandwidth of approximatly 12. That doesn't sound unreasonable, and > could be done by the telco. Possibly, however there are some costs to be dealt with. Some COs run 50Kft of wire from CO to demarc on pots lines. ISDN is limited to 18Kft without repeaters, T-1 is only 5-6Kft between repeaters. T-1 requires 2 pair instead of 1. Due to the explosion of 2nd lines, teen lines, fax lines etc many areas are out of copper pairs and are going to SLCs. Providing T-1 to the home would only make things worse. And for really high bandwidth traffic (video etc) T-1s arent all that fast. A cd-rom plays at 150KB/sec minimum Converting that into bits/sec is 1.2 Mbit/sec or 77% of the T-1 used for just 1 channel of CD quality audio/MPEG encoded movie. Two TVs, two T-1s not good. With toll-quality audio being trivial in comparison to the data rates required by these newer apps, (64Kbps compressible down to 16Kbps or less depending on quality desired) it may be realistic to expect dedicated channels for phone audio on the fiber/coax systems of the future so that you're not competiting with net overloading from joe sixpack's download of the playboy movie while trying to call 911. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 09:19:57 -0400 Subject: Re: NANP and Switches From: Paul A. Lee Organization: Woolworth Corporation In TELECOM Digest V14 #197, James Slupsky writes: > Firstly, if you are using an access code to dial outside calls (such as > "9"), then your software will not care what digits are dialed after that. That's untrue in many switches. Dialing "9" is often programmed as access to the switch's Least Cost Routing routine. Depending on the architecture and programming of the switch -- and even if dial tone is returned to the caller after dialing "9" -- the digits following the "9" may be simply captured for analysis by the restriction and LCR routines within the PBX, while the PBX itself returns dial tone to the caller. Only after the PBX analyzes and authorizes the dial string will it select (based on LCR) and sieze a trunk and send the dialed digits (or a translation of the dialed digits). > An exception is if your local area gets an NXX ... that has a "1" or a "0" > as the second digit. ... This is not a very large possibility, since it > will take time for telco's to introduce these NXX's. CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc.. > For Toll calls, you would not have this problem. Just tell all the users > that Toll calls MUST be 10 digits, and you MUST use a "1" in front of the 10 > digits. (so a typical toll call might look like -assuming you access > outgoing trunks using "9"- "9 1 520 447 5003". Your switch will cheerfully > pass "1 520 447 5003" to the serving CO. Several variables can act to contravene such a broad assupmtion. How does the dialing plan of the serving telco work for toll calls? Is it HNPA=7D and FNPA=1+10D, or must all toll calls be sent 1+10D? What kind of lookup and translation can the PBX perform for LCR and dial string resolution? With the right PBX capabilities and programming, a lot of other possibilities exist. Ensuring the desired toll restriction and call routing, as well as relieving callers of unnecessary dialing, can be accomplished only with careful analysis of a site's local calling area and dialing plan. > It is unlikely that you will run into NXX codes using a "1" or "0" as the > second digit for some time to come. Not true -- see above. The phone systems that will be impacted by interchangeable area codes are those that perform least cost routing and/or toll restriction. The LCR software of many PBXs requires the "1N0/1X" pattern of initial digits to locate the area code within the dial string, along with a table holding area codes and routing codes. The toll restriction software of many PBXs requires an initial "1" to determine whether the call is a toll call. Both of those assumptions are being invalidated. Different software routines, larger tables, more memory, and more processor power are going to be needed in many PBXs to handle the complexity left by the destruction of those assumptions. _Exactly_ how that complexity affects a particular model of PBX at a particular location is the crucial question. The answers will vary widely, and will be accurately determined only with careful, individual analysis. Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 INTERNET ------------------------------ From: soren@goofy.sun.ac.za (Soren Aalto) Subject: Re: TCP/IP Over X.25/Datapac Date: 5 May 1994 15:28:28 GMT Organization: University of Stellenbosch > In article , Gordon Sawatzky mb.ca> wrote: >> Does anyone know of products that allow TCP/IP over X.25 (datapac) >> connections for Windows? > I don't know of any for Windows, as PCs in general tend to have lousy > serial interfaces and synchronous cards are generally very expensive > (cheaper to build 'em yourself if you have the EE expertise). > However, IP has been running over X.25 for a LONG time now, so it > wouldn't surprise me if you could dig up someone who has done it. For DOS/Windows TCP/X.25, what you need is an X.25 card and a packet driver that supports it. The company I am working for has developed an intelligent (their term, not mine) X.25 card and we have written an RFC-1356 (Multiprotocol Interconnect over something-or-other) SLIP class packet driver for it. The packet driver allows you to associate different X.25 connections (SVC to a given X.121 address or a PVC) with a different SLIP interfaces--I'm not explaining this well, so the example: As you would configure a normal ethernet packet driver for a given S/W interrupt, i.e. wd8003e 0x70 ... loads the wd8003e driver & provides it's API interface on S/W int 0x70, with our driver you can provide interfaces on several S/W interrupts and each interface will correspond to a different X.25 VC, typically to different X.121 addresses. I.e., we can configure it so that int 0x63 --> 12111196 int 0x64 --> 1212234260 int 0x65 --> 121012541 (although at the moment each of these addresses has a XXX-pad sitting on it here and the calls made by the packet driver will be cleared). Anyway, this packet driver will encapsulate IP traffic in accordance with RFC1356 & so will talk to most other IP routers that talk X.25. You can run DOS applications over this or you can run Trumpet Winsock over this as well. The main reason people wouldn't typically do this is that you would have a single user machine monopolizing an entire X.25 port -- and these tend to cost a fair bit/month. What is more popular is to use this card in a PC-based router & use the router to connect a LAN to the Internet via X.25. There are a few PC routers on the S. African commercial Internet doing this at the moment. I must add that the same card we use for X.25 works for frame relay (the firmware is downloadable at runtime) and we have a similar packet driver that encapsulates IP (or other protocols) over several frame relay PVCs. Several PC routers were also running this way over 64Kbit/sec frame relay links here in S.A., although these have tended to be replaced by dinkum Cisco and Wellfleet routers as most of the commercial organisations with 64K access are service providers. I don't know what is considered horribly expensive -- and I can't be held to a quote (other people entirely that _pretend_ to sell the things), but I guess that our card sells in the R2000 -- R3000 range. Now what that means in real money (is about 150 -- 200 fresh chickens?) is US$600 -- 900, or about the before tax salary of the better paid school teachers here in S.A. Feel free to contact my by mail if either interested or disinterested (as I mostly am myself) ... Soren Aalto (commercially known as--but they don't pay for the mail, I do.) Linkdata Cape Town, S. Africa ------------------------------ From: dreuben@netcom.com (Cid Technologies) Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 02:27:03 PDT Yesterday, amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) wrote: > If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on. > Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT > 611 and 911. Incoming calls, however, still work. Dialing *560 + PIN > (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls. This is, of > course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself. > Apparently, many (though not all) roaming areas work with this fraud > protection program. According to McCaw Cellular One, if the roaming > area does NOT understand the *56 and *560 codes, calls will go through > without a problem. Of course, they want to see as many roaming areas > cooperating :-) This is not true at all! If the area you ar roaming in is NOT connected to CO/NY, THEN it is *likely* that the features will be ignored. Otherwise, if you roam into Connecticut or New Jersey, you will NOT be able to make calls, and you will NOT be able to use your features like Call-Forwarding (an of course Three-Way ... forget Call-Waiting, it won't work there anyhow, regardless of what they say :( ) When my phone was cloned, they put the *56/*560 protection feature on it, and I thought it was a great idea. This was before they had the 20-minute time-out period - I think I wouldn't want to have to hit *560 each time my phone was off for more than 20 minutes. However, when I went to CT (SID 00119) or the ComCast/NJ systems (SIDs 00173, 00575, 01487), UNLESS I turned off fraud-protection (ie, told the switch "Let me make calls without having to enter my "unprotect" code), when I tried to make a call from CT or NJ, or use a Call-Forwarding feature, I could not do so. Since the EMXs in CT and NJ are connected to the Ericsson in NY, they "look" to NY to see what the NY subscriber is allowed to "do" while roaming in CT or NJ. If you forgot to turn protection "Off", ie, "unprotect" your phone PRIOR to leaving the NY/00025 system, too bad! The NY switch would tell the NJ or CT switch "Sorry, this guy can't make outgoing calls, deny him!", and that's that! Same holds true for Call-Forwarding. Not that this was bad enough, but then they came up with this 20-minute deal where if you don't register in THEIR switch in 20 minutes you get denied outbound service and forwarding, so even if you do "unprotect" your phone before leaving the NY system and roaming to the CT or NJ systems, after 20 minutes out of NY you will be denied, and there is NOTHING you can do to make calls, short of calling CO/NY (from where? your carphone won't work!). Note that even though Philly is an EMX switch, it's on the NACN (when they feel like it -- don't expect it to work too well at night...). So *56 and *560 usually work. However, I've noticed recently that Philly is doing a lot of switch work on weekends, and *XX/*XXX codes won't work. Add this to CO/NY's nighttime switch work, and there are significant periods of time where your phone may not be able to make outgoing calls. Additionally, even when roaming in an NACN market, the * codes don't always well -- I found that the *56/*560 didn't work from LA at all, which is what promulgated me finally to tell them to just take it off my account already. I think they may want to fix this so that *56/*560 works only for the NY system, but I think that the way the links are set up to CmCast and Metro Mobile/Bell Atlantic this may not be so easy to do. If the roaming system you are in has no connection with CO/NY in terms of call-delivery and stuff like that, the *56/*560 shouldn't make a difference. Thus, if you roamed to Orange County (where you pay ONLY your home airtime rates, no daily surcharge or what I'm sure McCaw thinks is a *very generous* $.99 per min NACN charge, which is a ridiculous price to pay to roam), you would have no problem completing calls, but if you drove over to CT, you'd have no way of entering a *560 and thus no way of placing outgoing calls. (They may have fixed this in the past few months, but I doubt it ...) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then that since the > lockout occurs automatically twenty minutes after the last use of the > phone that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the > *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day? PAT] Well, if you leave your phone on all night to see if anyone called, no. But generally this is correct -- if the switch does not see you register (NOT use, just register autonomously), after 20 minutes you gotta "unprotect" yourself all over again. BTW, on a different issue, CO/SF (also McCaw) has this new policy where you can check your VM for free for ten seconds to see if anyone has left messages. If you listen to them for more than ten seconds, you pay airtime, but you never pay airtime for land retrieval or when a caller deposits a message or just hangs up. A much better policy in my mind than PAYING to have people hang up on your voicemail like GTE Mobilnet does. Maybe NY should think about something similar ... (And NO, GTE has not fixed the "caller pays to hear a busy/unanswered signal" problem yet, although they are now aware of it, and NO, GTE/SF hasn't been able to get Call Waiting to work in the Motorola systems owned by Pac*Bell or Air-Head cellular or whatever they call themselves now ...) Doug CID Technologies (203) 499-5221 ------------------------------ From: amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Date: 5 May 1994 23:14:41 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In a previous article, I wrote about McCaw Cellular's anti-fraud feature which turns itself on after 20 minutes of your phone being off ... Following this, our Moderator noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then that since the > lockout occurs automatically twenty minutes after the last use of the > phone that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the > *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day? PAT] Yes ... according to Cell One, once you turn on the phone, you need to dial the unlock code -- *560 + PIN (SND) -- before making your first call. In that this only needs to be done before the first call and since this can be simplified greatly via most phones' speed dialing, Cellular One tries to convince us that this isn't really an inconvenience. I'm apt to agree. Incidentally, I forgot to mention in my previous post: This is not a mandatory feature of the phone service. You only have it if you ask for it. There is, of course, no charge for it. So far, the only area I know of that offers this feature is McCaw's NY/NJ market. I believe that other McCaw Cellular One markets are also instituting the same program, but I'm just not sure. Anyone know of another company doing the same thing? Alan M. Gallatin amg@panix.com amg@israel.nysernet.org amg@jerusalem1.datasrv.co.il ------------------------------ From: erik_ramberg@SMTP.esl.com (Erik Ramberg) Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Date: 5 May 1994 18:59:49 GMT Organization: ESL Inc. In article , amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) wrote: > Here's a new one ... saw a brochure for this at a Cellular One center > on Long Island yesterday. > In an effort to thwart would-be counterfeit phone users, Cellular One > just started up an anti-fraud program. A customer participating will > simply pick a four digit PIN. Usage is something like this: > If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on. > Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT > 611 and 911. Incoming calls, however, still work. Dialing *560 + PIN > (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls. This is, of > course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself. ...stuff deleted > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then that since the > lockout occurs automatically twenty minutes after the last use of the > phone that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the > *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day? PAT] Yes ... but also keep in mind how easy this scheme is to circumvent ... albeit a bit less likely ... all the criminal needs to do is to track all the pin entries in the area (which also come with their MIN ESN's) and they've got the new code. Essentially all that's been done is to extend the ESN to some more digits, and send these digits out a bit less often. Erik ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 08:34:03 EDT From: Bob Keller Reply-To: Bob Keller Subject: Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? breit@MR.Net asked: > Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site? You can FTP or Gopher to the FCC: "ftp ftp.fcc.gov" or "gopher fcc.gov". Once you get connected to the site, change to the /pub directory and look around. This site is still quite new and "under construction" so don't expect a great depth of information just yet. Here is a list of the subdirectories under /pub: Daily_Business Daily_Digest Events News_Releases Notices Orders Panel_Discussions Public_Notices Reports Speeches The FCC plans eventually to set up a mail reflector and/or mailing list. Until then, I am maintaining a collection of the five most recent FCC Daily Digests in my .plan file and update it daily. You can get this file at any time by fingering my account: "finger rjk@telcomlaw.com". If you don't have finger you can use one of the e-mail finger servers. For example, e-mail to "jfesler@netcom.com" with "#finger rjk@telcomlaw.com" in the subject line (don't include the quote marks and make sure to start the subject line with #), and you will receive the Digests by e-mail response. Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301.229.5208 rjk@telcomlaw.com Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301.229.6875 ------------------------------ From: mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan) Subject: Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? Date: 6 May 1994 01:45:44 -0400 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA breit@MR.Net writes: > Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site? ftp.fcc.gov is accessible by anonymous ftp. At present, the only things posted are news releases and speeches, pretty much. Rules, texts of decisions, and public notices are not yet online (if they ever will be). > I would like to research more information on "Tariff 12" pricing for > long distance services. One of my clients is interested in renego- > tiating their rates. We had discussed several options including > using a marketing agent for "Option 51 - EPSCS" as we have seen it > referenced many times. The FCC ftp site won't help for this. Michael D. Sullivan | INTERNET E-MAIL TO: |also: avogadro@well.sf.ca.us Washington, D.C. | mds@access.digex.net | 74160.1134@compuserve.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #206 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02710; 6 May 94 18:42 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA14517; Fri, 6 May 94 15:12:14 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA14508; Fri, 6 May 94 15:12:12 CDT Date: Fri, 6 May 94 15:12:12 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405062012.AA14508@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #207 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 May 94 15:12:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 207 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson GSM/DECT Radio Emissions (Stewart Fist) Help: Telecom/Radio Equipment Firm Addresses (Christoph Berger) Teleglobe Ambitions (Toronto Star via Dave Leibold) AT&T Collect Calling Comes to Canada (Dave Leibold) Wireless Local Loop in Mexico (Alex Cena) LAPD, Q.931 Software Vendors (Joel Estes) Need Date of First Undersea Cable (Bill Brasuell) Remote Point-of-Presence (Dave Bell) PEP Pager Protocol Software Information Wanted (Mathias Koerber) Link Two LANs Over Two Wire Leased Line? (Alfredo E. Cotroneo) I Have Some Basic Telecom Questions - Help! (domet@ucbeh.san.uc.edu) Northern Telecom Gets Colombia Contract (Dave Leibold) Series 5 Digital Loop Carrier System (DLC) (Chen Xie) ISDN via Microwave Multipoint (Omar Jennings) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Shawn Gordhamer) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Paul Barnett) Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Aamer Soomro) Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (John R. Levine) Lastest Update on Info Superhighway Seminar (Roy Kerwood) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 05 May 94 08:32:57 EDT From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: GSM/DECT Radio Emissions The European Commission is about to issue a directive to limit the amount of EMI that digital phones can produce. The EC is said to be compiling results from a number of studies on the problem, in association with a number of universities. The World Health Organization is also involved in looking at the results and preparing recommendations. The most probable course of action is for the EC to pass the problem over to CENELEC to write up the actual standards. So far they have concentrated on creating 'immunity' standards (shielding for existing equipment) rather than emission standards for the producers of the radio pollution. This looks like a sea change in their thinking. Has anyone got more information on any of this? I'd be very interested to know who is involved, and what has been found, and what is being proposed. ------------------------------ From: tfa589@hp1.uni-rostock.de (Christoph Berger) Subject: Help: Telecom/Radio Equipment Firm Addresses Date: 5 May 1994 13:10:14 GMT Organization: University of Rostock (Germany) Hello, I am looking for adresses of firms in the area of telecommunication systems and radio equipment in the USA or Canada. I'm a German student in telecom and radiotechnic and I want to get a practical training in a North American company. It would be nice if someone can help me. e-mail to tfa589@hp1.uni-rostock.de christoph berger, friedrich-engels-platz 1, rostock, 18055, germany ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 05 May 94 21:18:04 -0500 Subject: Teleglobe Ambitions Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway {The Toronto Star} reported 4 May 94 of Teleglobe's Montreal annual meeting. Buoyed by a record net income last year, recovering from the previous year's loss, Chair/CEO Charles Sirois said "Teleglobe's goal is to triple its traffic volume by 1998, thereby advancing from seventh to third place among the world's intercontinental carriers." ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 05 May 94 21:34:19 -0500 Subject: AT&T Collect Calling Comes to Canada Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway AT&T just announced the availability of its 1 800 CALL-ATT service in Canada. This now allows Canadian callers to place collect calls to U.S. destinations via AT&T. An introductory offer gives a 20% discount to the called party's charges, at least for the next several weeks. MCI's 1 800 COLLECT is still unavailable in Canada. There is a recording which says the service is hoped to be available "later this summer" -- a recording which is apparently still in place from *last* summer. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 May 94 14:00:46 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Wireless Local Loop in Mexico "Northern Telecom Ltd. (NT) said it has signed a supply agreement with Grupo IUSACELL, the largest non-telco cellular operator in Mexico, to deploy the infrastructure for a nationwide basic telephony network. The company said the supply agreement is intended to be $330 million (U.S.) over three years and calls for Northern Telecom to supply innovative digital wireless technology based on a time division multiple access (TDMA) fixed wireless access network for Grupo IUSACELL ..." Does anyone have have additional details on this contract or service? o Deployment schedule o # of Subscribers that will be using the system o Where will most of the equipment be deployed o Where were the trials held and feedback from the trials o Cost of the service Thanks in Advance, Alex M. Cena, acena@lehman.com Telecom Equipment Analyst Lehman Brothers 200 Vesey Street, 14th Fl New York, NY 10285 (P) 212-526-2499 (F) 212-619-6826 ------------------------------ From: iex!estes@uunet.UU.NET (Joel Estes) Subject: LAPD, Q.931 Software Vendors Organization: iex Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 20:09:07 GMT I am looking for vendors of software for Q.931 and LAPD applications. Any suggestions? Please send e-mail to me directly. Regardz(tm), Joel Estes estes@iex.com ------------------------------ From: Brasuell_Bill@tandem.com (Bill Brasuell) Subject: Need Date of First Undersea Cable Organization: Tandem Computers Inc. Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 18:29:35 GMT Does anyone know the date of the first undersea cable between the USA and Europe/UK? In return I'll supply a bit of trivia, in 1876 it cost $7.50 per word to send a cablegram between New York and Buenos Aires. Bill Brasuell "This is cool." Abraham Lincoln Feb.1860 Tandem Computers Inc. Frequently quoted by today's kids. ------------------------------ From: dbell@cup.portal.com Subject: Remote Point-of-Presence Date: Thu, 5 May 94 17:54:58 PDT Is there a procedure whereby I can acquire a number, local to a remote exchange, from my home area? Specifically, I want to set up a line, either in my own place of business in California, or, alternatively, in the state of Pennsylvania, which can give me a local point of access in PA. I should be able to have local calls made from PA. to my p-o-p number forwarded to my California number, and likewise, be able to place calls out of the Pennsylvania line, so that they originate in PA. Naturally, I would incur any toll charges associated with the forwarding in either direction. Can this be done by subscribing to a PA telco, and activating (remotely!) call forwarding? Can this be done with a Pacific Telephone line, locally? Thanks for any information available! I'll watch here for replies, but would appreciate an email note as well ... Dave dbell@cup.portal.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The problem with remote call forwarding is that it only handles incoming calls (in PA) outbound to CA. You can arrange this with some telco in PA; they will give you a number there which terminates only in the desired central office and calls to that number will be forwarded at your expense by direct dialing to California. If you want to work it the other way around, where you in California can make outgoing *local* calls to people in Pennsylvania then you need a Foreign Exchange line. These have largely fallen into disuse in recent years because of the inexpensive nature of long distance calls and the use of WATS lines, remote call forwarding, etc, but they are available. Again you would need to contact the local telco in the place in Pennsylvania of your choice and specifically request Foreign Exchange (known as FX) service. They might tell you your local telco in California has to initiate the request. What will happen literally is that a pair of wires from the selected place in PA will be connected permanently to a phone at your premises in California. When you lift the receiver on that phone, the dial tone you hear will be coming to you direct from PA ... and the calls you make will be handled on a 'local' basis from the place where it is connected in PA. Whether PA or CA is the originator of the request, the two telcos will coordinate it and your local telco in CA will still be the company providing the wires to you from your local central office (where the PA telco will drop the wires coming to you). FX service is -- no kidding here! -- quite expensive. Your permanent, full time wired line from PA will cost you many hundreds of dollars per month fixed rate, and of course you will additionally pay whatever charges apply for a business in PA with a phone there as well. Most likely the billing will all come from your local telco for the whole thing with your local telco doing inter- company accounting/billing with the PA telco, AT&T and whoever else in the middle physically owns the wires and interim switches, etc. The thing with FX is, you've got to be able to justify the cost with *lots* of traffic ... like keeping that line loaded several hours per day minimum. If you can keep the line loaded with traffic several hours per day it will break even; but less than that, you'll find that DDD over the public network costs a lot less. People in PA who dial your 'local' number will in fact unwittingly ring your phone in CA for the price of a local (to them) call; ditto you in reverse. You cannot count evening/overnight/weekend hours in the calculations regards traffic. Nothing beats weekend rates. That several hours of traffic daily has to come from mid-day business hours. Another alternative would be to find an answering service in PA which would hang a call diverter on the wall for you and let you dial into it via DDD only to outdial through the diverter on a local basis. Of course phreaking is rampant; anyone else who finds the diverter can do the same thing, god forbid *their* calls were only local ... ... But now you would be paying (1) a long distance call, (2) a local call and/or local service fees to PA telco, (3) some fee to the answering service each month and (4) your 'dues' to the United Hackerphreaks of America just to get your physical presence there. My thinking is you would be better off with remote call forwarding inbound from PA with a listing in the local PA phone directory while making your outgoing calls DDD from California and glossing over the fact that you are actually in California unless the called party specifically asks your location. Remote call forwarding will cost you $20-30 per path/month out of Pennsylvania plus the per minute DDD rate in effect at the time the call is received. This is much less expensive than FX unless you are running a phone intensive operation like customer service or a credit/collection center or telemarketing, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mathias@solomon.technet.sg (Mathias Koerber) Subject: PEP Pager Protocol Software Information Wanted Date: 6 May 1994 09:22:40 GMT Organization: TECHNET, Singapore Reply-To: Mathias.Koerber@swi.com.sg Where can I get info/src about the pep protocol for pagers? I couldn't find a FAQ. Mathias Koerber | Tel: +65 / 778 00 66 x 29 SW International Systems Pte Ltd | Fax: +65 / 777 94 01 14 Science Park Drive #04-01 The Maxwell | e-mail: Mathias.Koerber@swi.com.sg Singapore 0511 | mathias@solomon.technet.sg ------------------------------ From: alfredo@quickt2.it12.bull.it (Alfredo E. Cotroneo) Subject: Link Two LANs Over Two Wire Leased Line? Date: Fri, 6 May 94 15:50:28 MET DST I am looking for a solution to link two Windows for Workgroup LANS which are 800 metres distant from each other over a (possibly) two wire leased line. The line is just a wire installed by the telephone company and has electrical continuity, if that matters. An alternative would be to have just file transfer between two PCs, if network connection is impractical, too expensive or would strictly require four wires. Current modem technology at 28kbits (+ with compression) or ISDN at 64/128kbit would be too slow since the data to transfer may be in the range of one or two Gbytes per day. (BTW: Did anybody hear of ISDN over a leased line, is that possible?) An alternative to the network connection (bridge?) would be to have just file transfer between two PCs, if that is possible somehow at speeds >= 1Mbit over two wires at 800 metres? Any pointer to specific products (HW and SW), phones, faxes, of suppliers, etc. will be gladly appreciated. Please answer directly, since I am not getting newsfeeds on a regular basis, and if there is interest I will summarize. Thank you, Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Milano, Italy E-mail : 100020.1013@compuserve.com fax: +39-2-706 38 151, ph: +39-2-266 6971 ------------------------------ From: domet@ucbeh.san.uc.edu Subject: I Have Some Basic Telecom Questions: HELP! Date: 6 May 94 14:33:06 EST Organization: University of Cincinnati I recently posted a message requesting help with Telecom ACRONYMS. The response to my message was huge and I thank everyone who responded with suggestions. I am still researching the area of Telecom and have learned a lot in the past few weeks. I obtained Newton's Telecom Dictionary which is a BIG help. I still am having trouble with a few topics. I am aware of what many are but do not know enough about Telecomm to understand many of the technical descriptions. 1.) Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) concept and the basic (2B+D) service. 2.) Broadband ISDN (BISDN) concept. 3.) National ISDN-1. I have found a lot on ISDN but not much that talks about National ISDN-1. At least not in a way I can understand. 4.) Concept of circuit switching. Major steps involved in call setup and take down. 5.) How do you determine/choose a packet size? 6.) Instead of using a bridge to connect two identical networks, why don't system developers just create one larger network? I realize people don't always have the time to sit and answer questions so if you could expand on even ONE of these topics, I would really appr@cup.portal.com)RN~ eciate it. ANY ANSWERS WOULD BE APPRECIATED. In return, I am going to create a FAQ of all basic questions that I answer or get answers to. It will hopefully lessen the amount of questions asked. Luke [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may want to check out the FAQ for this group. The telecom Frequently Asked Questions file is sent out automatically to each new subscriber to the mailing list and is also posted on comp.dcom.telecom from time to time. In addition you can get a copy from the Telecom Archives at lcs.mit.edu by anonymous ftp or email server. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 05 May 94 22:11:36 -0500 Subject: Northern Telecom gets Colombia contract Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway [from Bell News, 2 May 1994] Nortel to install digital network in Colombia. Northern Telecom, our sister company in the BCE family, has landed its largest contract in Latin America with the signing of a $350 million deal to install a digital phone network in Colombia. The contract includes 205,000 digital phone lines in ten regions of Colombia as well as transmission equipment and microwave systems. The agreement follows one signed only weeks earlier by Bell Canada International to provide cellular phone service to the eastern region of Colombia, including the capital, Bogota. ------------------------------ From: chenxie@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Chen Xie) Subject: Series 5 Digital Loop Carrier System (DLC) Date: 6 May 1994 12:25:40 -0500 Organization: The University of Texas - Austin Hi Folks: I am looking to purchase large quantity of Series 5 DLC systems. Could somebody tell me who are the players out there besides AT&T? Small manufacturers are acceptable as long as their products are compliant to the standards. Any other information will also be appreciated. Chen Xie ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 13:32:42 EDT From: Omar Jennings Subject: ISDN via Microwave Multipoint We are interested in any work being done in the area of the (B-ISDN) user connection via wireless in the microwave bands above 2 gHz. Any leads would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: shawnlg@netcom.com (Shawn Gordhamer) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 09:09:32 GMT amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) writes: > What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call? Cellular One in Rochester, MN does not charge anything for forwarding calls. However, I haven't seen any way to use call forwarding to make free long distance calls, and I've tried :). Our coverage spans two area codes, so if someone in the 612 area code calls me on my cell phone, there is no LD charge (I'm in 507). However, if I call him from my cell phone or via call forwarding, there is a LD charge. Shawn Gordhamer shawnlg@netcom.com Rochester, Minnesota USA ------------------------------ From: barnett@convex.com (Paul Barnett) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding Date: 5 May 94 14:08:11 GMT Organization: CONVEX News Network, Engineering (cnn.eng), Richardson, Tx USA In amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) writes: > What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call? Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems. Except, in the Dallas Ft. Worth area, when the number that the call is being forwarded to is a different area code that is normally NOT long-distance, the prevailing airtime rate is charged. This is a little hard to explain. In D/FW, the mobile phone numbers are 'metro' numbers, which can be called from anywhere in Dallas, Ft. Worth, and suburbs (most of the 214 and 817 area codes), without a long-distance toll charge. Conversely, through some magic I only vaguely understand, SBMS will place cellular phone calls to land phones anywhere in the the D/FW 'home' market (it is quite large) without charging a long-distance toll ... airtime only. I believe Cellular One (the A-side provider in D/FW) has a similar policy. And, unless they have changed it in the past year, US West Cellular does not charge air-time or any other fees on locally forwarded calls in the Mpls-St. Paul service area. Paul Barnett Convex Computer Corp. MPP OS Development Richardson, TX ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 May 94 13:21:16 EDT From: asoomro@bass.gmu.edu (Aamer Soomro) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse In article jharan@cwa.com writes: > ... but why don't the cellular providers use a more robust > authentication service. Your cellular phone would contain an > encription key that would also be known to the cellular provider. When > your phone went off hook, it would send its telephone number. The > provider would look up your number to get your key and send you some > random sequence of digits which would vary from call to call. Your > phone would take the sequence of digits, use its key to encode them > and return them to the provider. Since the provider has your key, it > can perform the same encription. If the encoded data that was returned > doesn't match what the provider's copy of the key encripts, then its > because the calling phone doesn't have the right key and the call is > dropped. The key is never transmitted so the crook would have to > steal the physical phone to steal the service. To me this seems hitting pretty close to the Clipper Chip controversy. All the service providers and cell phone manufactures would have to conform to a standard encryption, so that the cell phones could be used with any carrier service. The encryption keys analogous to the phone numbers would be another database to be maintained by the service providers. Would it be feasable to complicate the registeration process by introducing two encryption steps and a comparisson step along with two steps for digit transmission? Aamer Soomro George Mason University Fairfax, Virginia. USA ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 May 94 12:36 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Does anybody have any insights as to why it doesn't work this way > [with per-phone challenge-response passwords] today? The AMPS system in use in the U.S. was designed over a decade ago, and has become much more popular than even the most optimistic forecasts predicted. There's a balance between cost and function, and ten years ago the cost of adding the security features would have been quite high, and the advantage, given the relatively modest popularity they expected, low. On the other hand, if the next round of cell phones (CDMA or TDMA) don't include effective security features, that's just stupid. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: Roy_Kerwood@mindlink.bc.ca (Roy Kerwood) Subject: Lastest Update on Info Superhighway Seminar Date: Thu, 05 May 94 20:18:15 -0700 (PDT) Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a revised copy of the notice posted here earlier this week which did not have all the details. PAT] All seats are reserved and must be purchased in advance. THE 1st TRAVELLERS GUIDE TO THE INFO SUPERHIGHWAY At Hotel Vancouver June 24, 1994 Vancouver, BC Canada All the information you need to know about the INFO SUPERHIGHWAY!! Keynote Addresses Respected professionals involved with the Info Superhighway will provide detailed info on the superhighway and a personalized ROAD MAP for you so you or your company can get onto the SUPERHIGHWAY and get there at the highest speed. Hands on displays of the latest Communications Software and hardware. Video Tele-Conference. On line Databases . WORLDWIDE Internet Connections. World Wide Information access. You will be part of the highest level of the Information SUPERHIGHWAY and have access to the leading edge of the latest Communications Technologies. Lectures on The Information Superhighway. Display by hardware, Software, Communications, Information Suppliers. Timing: 8:00 - Registration of attendees; explore exhibits 8:30 - Introduction to show by Roy Kerwood 8:45 - Honorable Robin Blencoe Minister of Government services and Minister responsible for Sport and The Commonwealth Games been invited to give a keynote address. 9:10 - Mr AF Khan of AF Khan & Assosciates will speak on Voice call processing remote data processing Interfacing to Host Database and I.V.R. Tooolkit as well as Interactive Fax/Records Management. 10:00 - BC Systems Corporation will participate by discussing what government is doing today to support the public and private sectors access to the information highway and could also discuss some future plans which are on the drawing board. 10:20 - Mr. Mike Patterson, Internet expert informs audience of latest developments in the Superhighway from his perspective and future visions in panel format. 11:00 - Mr. Hung Vu of Fonorola will speak on recent developments in data-communications from a providers point of view and will discuss future directions for the information networks. 11:30 - Mr. Mark Watson Of Westel Tele-Communications will speak on the mst current advances in their compnies services. 12:00 - Break for lunch and to examine the exhibits ( lunch will be provided.) 1:00 - Hon. John Manly has been invited to Video Tele-conference link to Ottawa. 1:20 - Det Schmidt of ORB Satellite Communications will provide us with an insight into the outer reaches of the communications world and let us know how close (or Far) we are from truly global instant satellite communications from our own computers or homes. 2:10 - Richard Pitt of Wimsey, a local Internet access, explains "point and click" access to the information super highway using Mosaic and give live demonstration of the World Wide Web, Archie and other exciting new developments in the state of the art. 3:00 - Bruce Woodward of The Cyberstore BBS will do a live demonstration of a LOCAL BBS. 3:30 - A speaker from BCNet the Internet Provider for BC will discuss the present state of BCNET as well as their plans for the future. 4:00 - Question and answer session in panel format with audience participation. 5:00 - Wrap up by Roy Kerwood 5:10 - 8:00 Move to the Vancouver Island room for refreshments and hands on demonstrations by exhibitors and further discussion groups. 8:00 - Show closes Thank you for you interest in the seminar. PLEASE COPY THIS AND PASS IT ALONG TO ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED OR POST IT ON YOUR BULLETIN BOARD. Time is of the essence! Roy Kerwood & Associates 907-1011 Beach Ave. Vancouver BC V6E 1T8 ph-fax (604) 687-3422 Tickets Including Lunch $40.00. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #207 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa15156; 11 May 94 14:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29357; Wed, 11 May 94 10:36:26 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29346; Wed, 11 May 94 10:36:23 CDT Date: Wed, 11 May 94 10:36:23 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405111536.AA29346@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #208 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 May 94 10:36:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 208 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Order on Interstate Caller ID (John R. Levine) Searching For High School Classmates ... Help, Please! (Glen Gilbert) Cellular Telephone Pirates (Knight-Ridder via Van Hefner) Graceful Degradation (Jerry Levin) Erlang B Algorithm (James Slupsky) AT&T Major Billing Errors!! (Shantanu Jana) Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Barry S. Rein) SRI Ends Two Bobs' MGR (Alfredo E. Cotroneo) Cable Dates (Stewart Fist) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: FCC order on interstate Caller ID Date: Wed, 11 May 94 02:39:45 EDT I picked up a copy of the FCC's Caller ID order, which is available by FTP as /pub/Orders/Common_Carrier/orcc4001.txt or orcc4001.wp. (Kudos to the FCC for making this info available so easily and quickly, by the way.) Much of the order is straightforward and not contentious, e.g. delivering CNID between local and long distance carriers is so cheap to implement that neither may charge the other for the data. They also note that per-call blocking is a good idea, and that *67 should be the universal code to block CNID delivery. But the arguments they list against per-line CNID seem, to me, to be astonishingly specious. There are three blocking options 1) per call for anyone, 2) per line for anyone, and 3) per line for special groups. The FCC thinks, not unreasonably, that it's a mare's nest to ask the telco to implement 3, since they have to determine who's in the special groups and who isn't. Then they say: 43. In the NPRM, we tentatively concluded that per line blocking unduly burdens calling party number based services overall by failing to limit its applicability to those calls for which privacy is of concern to the caller. The Commission noted that even in the case of law enforcement personnel, there may be a need to maintain calling number privacy on some calls, but that the same number may be used to telephone other law enforcement personnel, victims of crimes, cooperative witnesses, and family or friends. The Commission asserted that in these types of calls, calling number privacy is not needed and calling number identification can actually be a valuable piece of information for both the caller and called parties. The record reflects the useful nature of CPN based services, and the comments of Rochester illustrate that callers are likely to be interested in blocking only a small percentage of their calls. The comments of USCG illustrate the usefulness of caller ID to emergency services. In contrast, Missouri Counsel's analogy to unlisted numbers is inapposite because caller ID only permits parties called by the calling party to capture the calling party number, and then only if the calling party has not activated a per call blocking mechanism. We find that the availability of per call unblocking does not cure the ill effects of per line blocking. Moreover, in an emergency, a caller is not likely to remember to dial or even to know to dial an unblocking code. For the foregoing reasons, we find that a federal per line blocking requirement for interstate CPN based services, including caller ID, is not the best policy choice of those available to recognize the privacy interests of callers. Thus, carriers may not offer per line blocking as a privacy protection mechanism on interstate calls. We agree that certain uses of captured calling numbers need to be controlled, and address that issue infra. In other words, per-line blocking is a bad idea because subscribers are too dumb to unblock calls when they want to unblock them, although they're not to dumb to block calls when they want to block them. In paragraph 47 they note that where per-line blocking is offered, telcos use *67 as a blocking toggle, so users can't really tell what *67 does, but it doesn't seem to occur to them that the problem is easily solved by requiring a different code for unblock than for block. In paragraph 48 they wave their hands and say that people who care about privacy can just buy a box for "as little as $40.00 per unit" that will stuff *67 in front of each call. Thanks, guys. The docket number is 91-281, with comments due by May 18th. Comments must reference the docket number. Send ten copies (yes, 10) to: Office of the Secretary Federal Communications Commission Washington DC 20554 Before you fire off a comment, please get a copy of the order, since there's a lot of material beyond what I've summarized. For people without FTP access, I've put them on my mail server. Send: send fcc-cnid.txt (for the text version) send fcc-cnid.wp.uu (for uuencoded compressed WP version) to compilers-server@iecc.com. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: gilbert@cs.ucsd.edu (Glen Gilbert) Subject: Searching for High School Classmates ... Help, please! Date: 10 May 94 21:54:13 GMT At the suggestion of someone more knowledgeable than I, relative to the power of computer-aided search, I have been directed to this group to ask for help. I am wanting to locate a list of people (or do a search for these people via net), about 300+ of them, who are being sought for our thirtieth high school class reunion. One (manual) way is to go to the telephone books for the general area, available here in out University library for most all of the US, (Oakland, CA and San Francisco Bay Area) and go through each of them (there are about two dozen covering the Alameda County area and outlaying districts!) to find the names of the people who are "missing". But, aside from being a gargantuan task and extremely time consuming, I am wondering if there is a manner of doing a search of users in that area -- those who are connected to some computing system that is readable from this net? (My lack of expertise is about to show here 8-( ) I don't know if a list of names could be given as a list for a script to do searches of computing resources it that particular area. And, how time-consuming it would be. But, is it a feasible task? And, how would I go about it? I have some pretty good resources (personnel) who could help with the script, but I wanted to throw it out to this group since the numbers who read/write to this group certainly must exceed my wildest dreams -- including the depth and breadth of knowledge!!! Or, would it be a better thing to send a blanket list to cites in the area (SF/Bay Area) and/or the USA to ask others to look thru the list for names of friends/employees whose names they recognize and ask that they ask them to be in touch with me? [Now _that_ one is a task that I shudder to think about. How many would be willing to receive a list of 300+ peoples' names and search through them for people they might know? But, then again, if I knew someone from the Boston area as a coworker and read about a class reuniong from that area, I might look thru the list for his/her name. Then again, I may not! 8-/ ] Have I given enough information to warrant a thumbs up, =b d=, or a thumbs down, =p q=, on this thing? Comments are most welcome. And, if this is not the most appropriate group, then where would you suggest I send this? Oh, yes, I was also thinking of setting up a Group called alt.rec.class.reunions. Does this sound like a good idea? I've not done anything like that before. My experiences have been in reading, replying to and posting articles in the netnews. Thank you for your help. Glen W. Gilbert CSE Operations, UCSD (ggilbert@ucsd.edu) Glen Gilbert, UC San Diego Computer Science & Engineering Dept (619) 534-0454 email: ggilbert@UCSD.EDU ------------------------------ From: vantek@aol.com Date: Tue, 10 May 94 19:47:42 EDT Subject: Cellular Telephone Pirates CELLULAR TELEPHONE PIRATES IN CARIBBEAN COST FIRMS HEAVILY BY DAVID KIDWELL Knight-Ridder News Service MIAMI -- Modern-day pirates of the Caribbean are sailing the waves -- the high-tech airwaves of cellular telephones. So pesky and adept have they become at cloning cellular telephones and running up thousands of dollars in fraudulent overseas bills that Florida cellular companies have begun to block direct dial service to the Bahamas and parts of the Caribbean. BellSouth Mobility this month stopped direct-dial service to Jamaica, Haiti, the Dominican Republic and the Bahamas. Cellular One blocked the Dominican Republic last fall and Jamaica in February. "It's a few bad apples," said Jim Walz, BellSouth's regional vice president. "This cloning problem didn't really hit us until late last year. It's now enough of an inconvenience to our customer base to do something about it. "We don't want any more of our customers to get these exploding phone bills," he said. "And we want them to know if they do get one of these bills, it's not their problem. It's ours. We eat it." Customers can still use their cellular telephones to call the blocked countries, but must use an operator and a personal credit card. Here's how the pirates pillage the airwaves: With a special radio scanner and the right computer equipment, they can pluck from the airwaves the cellular code numbers of legitimate customers. From there, they are able to load the codes into other telephones, then sell them to drug dealers, smugglers or immigrants who can't afford regular long distance service to their former homelands. Charges for the calls, sometimes reaching $10,000 in a month, then show up on the legitimate customer's bill. When the customer complains, the phone codes are replaced, making the duplicate phone inoperable. But catching the pirates is difficult, especially because they're calling numbers overseas. "This particular area -- Miami in particular -- has become a mecca for cellular phone fraud," said Brian Stafford, assistant agent in charge of the U.S. Secret Service's Miami Office. "We're getting dozens of reports every month, and the average for one of these bills is about $6,000." Stafford said South Florida's large Caribbean immigrant population makes it a natural market for cellular pirates. "It's tempting when they can make free calls home for price of a clone phone," he said, adding that the phones sell for an average of $150. Nationwide, the cellular industry estimates fraudulent calls cost about $1 million per day. South Florida is among the top three markets, both in legitimate and fraudulent calls. The others are Los Angeles and New York City. Walz said the battle against the pirates is being waged on computer screens. BellSouth has already persuaded the Bahamas to install computer software like that used in the United States that makes easier to detect duplicate phones and shut them down. "We expect to have service restored to the Bahamas sometime next month," Walz said. Van Hefner Discount Long Distance Digest vantek@aol.com ------------------------------ From: levin@1.121.159.165.in-addr.arpa (jerry levin) Subject: Graceful Degradation Date: 10 May 1994 23:58:45 GMT Organization: Trident Data Systems Can anyone explain to me what is meant by graceful degradation when referring to a data bus? Thanks for your help in advance. Jerry Levin Voice-mail, 703-802-3685 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 04:57:54 +0700 From: jslupsky@pwss.gov.ab.ca (James Slupsky) Subject: Erlang B Algorithm If you are looking for the Erlang-b formula, it is: B(C,A) = [(A**C)/C!]/[sum from i=0 to C of ((A**i)/i!)], where C=# of trunks and A=offered load (in erlangs=CCS/36). A neat recursive formula (for calculating on a computer) is: (taken from "An introductin to Telecommunications Network Traffic Engineering", by Dr. Lansun Lee, 1986 Edition, Alta Telecom International Inc) B(0,A) = 1, B(C,A) = [A*B(C-1,A)]/[C + A*B(C-1,A)] Hope this helps! James ------------------------------ From: sjana@chaph.usc.edu (Shantanu Jana) Subject: AT&T Major Billing Errors!! Date: 10 May 1994 19:08:25 -0700 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Hi everybody, This is Shantanu Jana from Los Angeles warning you about the present misdeeds of AT&T. I believe that most if not all of you have seen the aggressive campaigning of AT&T on television, wherein they started by offering True USA rewards of 20% of all US calls totalling to more than $25, and True World savings, to all numbers in one country of your choice, giving 50% off to all the numbers. Well, I signed up in March 1994, and in the March bill, I did not receive the 20% off, and also on one weekend, when AT&T went to match MCI and offered 73 cents a minute on weekends to India. Guess what, I was billed 86 cents a minute, which is more than half which was guaranteed otherwise. Calling them is no joke too. I called the billing inquiries number, and was put on hold for 24 minutes, after which I went through the operator and managed to reach them. I was given the figure for the credit, and they also noted my complaint for their billing irregularities and for the difficulty in reaching them. Now, a month later, my second bill contains only the True USA credit and not the True World credit, and my billing for International is far from the half off at 78 cents a minute. They billed me at $1.33 per minute. When I spoke to the customer service representative, she could not even give me the credit amount to appear in my future bills. She mentioned something about two working days. Then I asked to be connected to a supervisor, and I was connected to VICKI GARCIA, who managed to find the credit amounts owed to me. I requested her to send me a letter of apology mentioning how they mess up the billing, which she declined, and so I asked her to attach to the bill, a statement informing the subscribers that the bills were messed up and that they should go through them carefully. This too could not be done. At this stage in exasperation, I asked to speak to a person in charge, who could own up to their mistake and send the apology note, only to be informed, that in AT&T (A phone company I believe) beyond the supervisor, you need to write to the Vice President, and you could not speak to anyone further, even if they cannot answer your questions or solve your problems. This I believe speaks highly of an establishment as big and spread out as AT&T. I am really surprised that in a country like the US, such a firm, with such a terrible customer service exists and thrives. GOD SAVE AMERICA!!! I believe that many subscribers who trust AT&T as a good phone company, are being cheated out of what is promised to them, unless they are willing to go through this ridiculous (suposedly customer service), who are only out to con. When, in their advertisements, they have the audacity to ask you to ask them to give it in writing, they are the ones who are covering the big fraud. An obviously harassed subscriber, Shantanu Jana (213) 747-0855. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part or all of the problem lies in the fact that AT&T billing is done by the various local telephone companies and they (the local telcos) seem to not always be up to snuff at having the right software for billing in place. Probably AT&T should have mentioned to you when you first enrolled in their various offerings that in the event your bill -- as prepared and sent to you by the local telco -- was incorrect you should call them (as you have done) and they would issue a manual credit covering the differences between what they advertised and what the local telco in fact charged. I think you may be coming down a little to hard on them demanding a written apology, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: barry.s.rein@jpl.nasa.gov (Barry S. Rein) Subject: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Date: 10 May 1994 23:32:09 GMT Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory We're moving soon and we'll have to get a new phone number. For $10.00 Pacific Bell will let me choose any phone number with the right prefix as long as it's not already taken. I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to remember. Restaurants are supposedly willing to kill for a memorable phone number, so I wonder if there is any research or recommendations on how to select one, ie what combinations are remembered; what combinations are most often mis-dialled, etc. Incidentally, our exchange prefixes are 398, 791, 794, 797, and 798 -- 818 area code. Thanks very much for your advice, Barry Rein barry.s.rein@jpl.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: 11 May 94 01:17:28 EDT From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <100020.1013@CompuServe.COM> Subject: SRI Ends Two Bobs' MGR Swiss Radio International announces a restructuring of its services which will come into effect on June 6, 1994, and will bring -- among other things -- the close down of the popular weekly DX program "The Swiss Merry Go Round", hosted by the "Two Bobs", Bob Thomann and Bob Zanotti. Details on what has been heard today on SRI follow. As reported today by Paul Saffren on the "Grapevine" on Swiss Radio International, in an interview with Nicholas Lombard, Head of the English Satellite Project, these are the dramatic changes coming into effect at SRI on June 6, 1994: - SRI will establish a 24 hours English service on European satellite (Astra, current transponder/subcarrier?), with 1/2 hours news (bulletins, commentaries, press reviews, and Swiss matters to interest to Intl audience) and 1/2 hour feature programs (life, science, economy, culture in Switzerland) every hour; - The current twenty-five people of the news room and English Service will be amalgamated into a one single Dept. for both Shortwave and Satellite service; - There will be an addition of commercial and financial news (advertising?) to the current programs; - There will be definitely a loss of emphasis on Shortwave transmissions, especially in Europe, justified by the "inevitable further decline of Shortwave", especially after the introduction of "mobile satellite receivers". Shortwave transmissions in Europe will be available "only during prime time (morning, midday and evening)", while at the moment there seem to be "no intention to close down overseas". (Might this prelude to a close down of Shortwave in Europe?). No details were given on where "mobile satellite receivers" to receive SRI can be purchased, and at which price. - It was stated that one of the reasons behind the change in broadcast policy is that "satellite is much cheaper" vs. Shortwave as far a the technical infrastructure is concerned, although this choice means "losing autonomy" and depending on other organizations/countries for satellite usage. - On Shortwave only the first half hour (i.e. news, no feature programmes) will be used. Features will be only aired once at 14:30 on SW to Europe, but not to overseas. - The Grapevine and the Swiss MGR as they are now will not continue. As for the two Bob's MGR Nicholas Lombard made a strong comment on the air stating that as "a DX program we will forget about that particular program". There might be a replacement -- perhaps -- strictly in the form of a media program, and on European satellite only, but it will be very different from the current DX program. ----- No mention of the restructuring was given at all on the MGR this week (following the Grapevine program), maybe due to the fact that the MGR was recorded before the announcement was given. Bob Zanotti in today's MGR, however, seemed to anticipate what might be explained on one of the next and last editions of the two Bobs', before closing down on June 6 : "The whole field of telecommunications is changing, moving, and we are moving with it". You get all the irony and sadness of the sentence, once you know the full story. I immediately contacted Bob Zanotti, who has been a good friend of mine for many years, but he declined to add any further comments besides what has being heard today on the air. He only mentioned his sadness and disbelief in hearing himself the complete details of the project on the air. The restructuring of SRI was apparently announced internally only a few days ago. SRI may not be reached by e-mail, but you may contact them by fax on +41-31-350 9569 for inquires or comments on the above. I am sure the two Bobs will be glad to have your support, and hear your comments (maybe there might be a last minute change if there are enough protests). We have offered to relay any e-mail directed to them to us here (100020.1013@compuserve.com or Compuserve: 100020,1013). Well forward all comments to them, if you want to convey your support or protest. We will also appreciate receiving by direct e-mail copy or echo of any comment on the above which appears on Internet/USENET, and on other media, since we do not have a direct Internet/USENET connection. We will also try to interview the two Bobs and other SRI representatives on the next edition of the "Hello There" on IRRS-Shortwave on the air on the week-end of May 15, in an effort to better understand the reasons behind what appears an insane decision. Thank You. 73, Alfredo E. Cotroneo, President NEXUS-IBA is a NEXUS-Int'l Broadcasting Association non profit org. PO Box 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy which operates Phone: +39-337-297788 / +39-2-2666971 IRRS-Shortwave & email: 100020.1013@compuserve.com IRRS-GRM on FM [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although there is a lot of nostalgia and romanticism where shortwave radio is concerned, the SRI people *are* correct that satellite is less expensive and probably it is more reliable also. Consider all the changes in the past few years: radio (in general) yielded much of its influence to television. For a half century or so, Hollywood reigned supreme with radio in the lives of Americans at least. Then television began to replace going to the theatres since talking-pictures were now common in one's own home. Why just listen to the radio when you could listen and *see* what was going on? Now television has been to a large extent been made obsolete by cable and satellite programs. All the inconveniences of listening to shortwave radio have been rendered moot by the ease of a couple buttons on a receiver. People went to motion picture theatres in the 1940's for entertainment which was impossible to obtain elsewhere and to watch the newsreels. We had a theatre here in Chicago called The Forum which showed nothing but newsreels; the news of the day in a 50 minute program which started every hour on the hour from 6 AM until 3 AM the next day. (They closed for a couple of hours in the early morning so the janitor could clean the place up.) During the intermissions between shows they piped in the BBC over a loudspeaker. People were angry when The Forum closed its doors about 1960 saying that television news had put them out of business. And now computers and satellites have largely replaced television and Hollywood. So, I feel shortwave radio served us well and continues to serve us to some extent, but if the purpose is communication among the people of the world over a large geographical span in a very short period of time -- almost instantly -- then there *are* better ways to go about it than shortwave radio with the unreliable and unpredictable problems of radio transmissions as they were done in the past. Which magazine was it a few years ago that grumbled about how the 'challenge' behind receiving shortwave transmissions was now gone. They cited all the shortwave stations which were using repeaters all over the world and how there no longer was any challenge or need for skill in tuning in distant, weak transmissions; no longer any need to know anything at all about how to construct an antenna for best reception. But that was the point, you see: the broadcasters of the world did not want a challenge or stumbling block in the way; they wanted their information widely available. As an information provider, I want the same thing. I don't want it to be hard for you to read this Digest, I want it to be easy ... in the case of SRI and others, I guess their conclusion is they can reach more people for less money and less effort by ditching the old techniques and going with new methods. In that sense, can you blame them? I also love to live in the past, but ... well I think you get the point. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 11 May 94 07:43:21 EDT From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Cable Dates Bill Brasuell asks: > Does anyone know the date of the first undersea cable between the USA > and Europe/UK? You'll probably get a couple of different replies to this query, because of the three attempts. I've got a database on this trivia, so let me straighten it out now. This is the main sequence of events: Back in 1852 the cable crossed the Irish Sea from the UK. This was the first essential step. Dover to Calais had been completed in 1851, thus making the continental connection possible. In 1854 Cyrus Field established a company in America to construct the Atlantic cable from Ireland to be landed in Newfoundland. Lord Kelvin led the push on the English end. It was to be 4000kms (end-to-end) and laid to maximum depth of 4400 m. In 1856 two cables were laid from Canada to Newfoundland to get ready for the Atlantic connection. On August 7, 1857 laying began on the main Atlantic cable but it broke on third day. They tried again early in 1858 and failed again. On the third try later in 1858 they succeeded in laying the cable and getting messages across it. On August 7, 1858 Queen Victoria and US President James Buchanan exchange telegraphed greetings. The cable only carried messages for 27 days, and failed. They laid another using the "Great Eastern" in 1866, and on August 4, 1866 the first permanently-operating Atlantic telegraphy cable link was opened from New York to London -- and via London onto Paris. And later: December 12, 1901 was the first trans-Atlantic radio signal. The letter 'S' was send from Cornwall to Newfoundland by Marconi. The Anglo-American Telegraph Company (cable owners) threatened him with legal action because they claimed exclusive rights to electrical communications in the British colonies. September 25, 1956 was the day the first trans-Atlantic coaxial telephone cable came into operations. Let me add another bit of trivia. November 20, 1871 was the date the first overseas telegram reached Australia. It came via India, Singapore, Djakata to Darwin (later Djakata (then Batavia) was by-passed) and was then carried overland by horse messager to Sydney. Because of many problems, the overland link from Adelaide to Darwin (1937 miles) was only completed on August 22, 1872 when it joined the cable to Melbourne and Sydney. The signals needed to be rekeyed 18 times between Sydney and London, and many of the Morse operators couldn't speak English. Shortly after the official opening of the London link, a Sydney Reuter's correspondent sent a news story to the UK about a ground-breaking ceremony for the new Queensland railway. His despatch began: "Governer turns first sod ..." Unfortunately, by the time it reached London and went into print it had been translated by the Morse operators into "Governer twins first son ..." As he was 80 years old and well-known in London society circles as a gay batchelor, this created some consternation! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for a neat article to close this issue. Does anyone remember the game played by children in the past called 'Chinese Telephone'? A group of people stand in a circle (the more the merrier; twenty or more people are recommended) and the first person must whisper a short sentence one time only to the person to his left. That person in turn must whisper one time only what he *thought* he heard to the person to his left; and on it goes until the final person in the circle tells the person to his left (the originator) what he *thinks* he heard said by the person to his right. The deviation between the original message and the final report can be hilarious. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #208 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa15942; 11 May 94 16:01 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA03961; Wed, 11 May 94 12:15:21 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA03952; Wed, 11 May 94 12:15:19 CDT Date: Wed, 11 May 94 12:15:19 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405111715.AA03952@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #209 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 May 94 12:15:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 209 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Questionnaire for Telecommunications Directory (Nigel Allen) First CAP All Fiber-Optic Transatlantic Videoconfernce (FCC via Bob Keller) Electronic FCC Fees Payment Workshop - May 18 (FCC via Bob Keller) Hackers On Planet Earth -Update- (Kevin Crow) European Real-Time Seminar 1994 (Alf Oennestam) Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (Communications Daily via Gregory Monti) Conference: Using ISDN to Work through the Next Earthquake (Bob Larribeau) Wanted: X25 Package For SCO UNIX (Michael A. Leo) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 May 94 11:25 WET Subject: Questionnaire for Telecommunications Directory From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen) Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-4151 Voice: 416-363-8676 [Note from NDA: Here is the text of a questionnaire that I thought would be of interest to readers of this newsgroupu.] QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FREE LISTING TELECOMMUNICATIONS DIRECTORY An International Descriptive Guide to Telecommunications Companies, Services, systems, and Related Organizations in the Field If you would like your telecommunications service considered for listing free of charge in the Telecommunications Directory published by Gale Research Inc. and your system or service is described by one or more of the categories listed below, please complete this questionnaire and return it by May 31 to: Telecommunications Directory Gale Research Inc. 835 Penobscot Building Detroit, MI 48226-4094 U.S.A. Telephone (313) 961-2242 ext. 1551 or 800-347-GALE, ext. 1551 in Canada and the U.S. Fax (313) 961-6815 If you are already listed, please ignore this questionnaire. Please enclose any literature or other information that might help the editors put together a more complete listing for your organization or service. If your organization has multiple services that should be described in separate listings, please complete a separate questionnaire for each. 1. Company/organization name and address: 2. Unit (particular system/service/unit under discussion): Address: 3. Telephone: Toll-free phone (if any): Fax: Electronic mail address (give system name and your code or address): Telex: Year organization founded: Year system/service established: 4. Head of unit listed in item 2 (name, position, unit): 5. Public/business contact for additional information (name, position, unit): 6. Related organizations (other sponsoring, affiliated, or supporting organizations - please specify relationship [i.e., wholly owned subsidiary, etc.] and indicate city/state/country location): 7. Staff of unit listed in item 2 (indicate number in each category): Total: Management: Technical: Sales and Marketing: Clerical: Other: 8. Service Types (Please check those boxes that describe your type of organizaton, system, or service. For example, a telephone resale carrier would designate "Long Distance Telephone Service". An organization that provides consulting and educational services would designate "Consultant" and "Conference/Seminar/Training Provider". Item 9, General Description, will ask you to briefly amplify the indicators checked here.) Systems or Services [ ] Data Communications Service [ ] Long Distance Telephonme Service [ ] Intrastate [ ] Interstate [ ] International [ ] Cellular Radio Service [ ] Local Area Network Supplier [ ] Teleconferencing [ ] Audio Only Service [ ] Audio/Video Service [ ] Equipment Supplier [ ] Audiotex Service [ ] Videotex/Teletext Service [ ] Videotex/Teletext Equipment or Software [ ] Electronic Mail [ ] Service [ ] Equipment/Software [ ] Voice Store & Forward [ ] Service [ ] Equipment/Software [ ] Satellite/Microwave Networking Service (i.e. uplinks, downlinks, transponder leasing, etc.) [ ] Shared Tenant Service [ ] Facsimile Service (includes fax-0n-demand, broadcast fax, or enhanced fax) [ ] Telegram Service [ ] Teletex Service [ ] Telex Service [ ] Transactional Service (electronic fund transfer, home banking, reservations systems, interactive shopping, etc.) [ ] Two-way Cable Television Other Organizations [ ] Consulting [ ] Legal Service [ ] Financial Service/Insurance Service [ ] Conference/Seminar/Training Provider [ ] Association [ ] Publisher/Information Service [ ] Government/Regulatory/Standards Body [ ] Research [ ] Other (please specify): 9. General description of unit listed in item 2: 10. Specific user applications of system/service (what is system/ service used for?): 11. Geographic areas served (cities, countries, or general geographic regions served): 12. Rate structure (please indicate general rates, fees, or other charges, including start-up costs if applicable): 13. Clientele/availability (primary types of clients; any restrictions or limitations) 14. Means of access (how is the system/service accessed? what equipment is required?) 15. Equipment supplied as part of system/service 16. Publications (periodicals, books, documentation/user aids; please indicate title, price, frequency, and where available from); 17. Other communications services (if possible, please send additional literature on these services for possible inclusion in the Directory): 18. Planned new services (indicate starting date; please enclose additional information if available): 19. Key Features Summary (please recap the main advantages and feastures of your system or service): 20. Questionnaire completed by: Name: Title: Date: Telephone: Fax: 21. [ ] Descriptive material enclosed [ ] Descriptive material sent under separate cover ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:38:16 EDT From: Bob Keller Subject: First CAP All Fiber-Optic Transatlantic Videoconfernce May 11, 1994 CHAIRMAN HUNDT WILL TAKE PART IN FIRST ALL FIBER-OPTIC TRANSATLANTIC VIDEOCONFERENCE USING COMPETITIVE ACCESS CONNECTIONS WITH SIR BRYAN CARSBERG, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FAIR TRADING, UNITED KINGDOM Chairman Hundt will make the first all fiber-optic transatlantic call using competitive access connections by having a videoconference between the FCC and UK at 8:00 a.m., Wednesday, May 25, in Room 856 at the FCC headquarters building, 1919 M St., NW. MFS Communications Co. is providing the technical demonstration using solely competitive networks between the Chairman and Sir Bryan Carsberg, the United Kingdom's Director General of Fair Trading. Both officials plan to discuss informally the value of competition and the benefits of bringing competition to users during the videoconference. The press is invited to attend. News Media contact: Stephen Svab at (202) 632-5050. -FCC- Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301.229.5208 A.R.S. KY3R Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301.229.6875 rjk@telcomlaw.com (Finger me for FCC Daily Digest) CompuServe 76100,3333 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:41:17 EDT From: Bob Keller Subject: Electronic FCC Fees Payment Workshop - May 18 May 11, 1994 FEES ELECTRONIC PAYMENT WORKSHOP WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 1994 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM The Public Service Division will sponsor a Fees Electronic Payment Workshop on Wednesday, May 18, 1994 from 9:00 AM until 12:00 PM at the FCC, Room 856, 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, DC. This workshop is designed for those firms interested in paying processing and/or regulatory fees electronically. Currently, it is proposed that those who pay their fees electronically will file the accompanying paperwork with the Office of the Secretary, Room 222, 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20554 or Route 116, Gettysburg, PA 17326, depending on the particular filing. THIS NEW PROPOSED RULE PERTAINS TO ELECTRONIC PAYERS ONLY. Two types of electronic payment that will be discussed at the workshop are: 1)'CTX' type payments where money is transferred from the payer's bank directly to Mellon Bank, our lockbox bank via mainframe computer. 'CTX' type payments have been widely used by larger corporations to pay their accounts. Use of the 'CTX' payment system is designed for those companies already using electronic computer transfer. 2) The Customer Initiated Payments (CIP) Program where the payers authorize our lockbox bank to debit their bank account. This is a personal computer or touch-tone telephone based system designed for companies not currently involved in electronic data transfer. The majority of the workshop will be devoted to the CIP Program because it fits the needs of most of FCC's clients. The CIP Program is a convenient, safe, and reliable way for your organization to pay its processing and regulatory fees. FCC CIP has been developed especially for FCC fee payments in conjunction with Mellon Bank. Please join us for a discussion and demonstration of this new and exciting innovation at the FCC. Staff from Mellon Bank and the FCC will be there to answer your questions. Please contact Kara Casey or Michelle Mitchell at 202/632-0244 if you are interested in attending. -FCC- Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301.229.5208 A.R.S. KY3R Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301.229.6875 rjk@telcomlaw.com (Finger me for FCC Daily Digest) CompuServe 76100,3333 ------------------------------ From: kc@netsys.com (Kevin Crow) Subject: Hackers On Planet Earth -Update- Organization: Netsys Inc. Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 06:54:05 GMT Hackers On Planet Earth The First U.S. Hacker Congress Come together in the summer of 1994 to celebrate the hacker world and the tenth anniversary of 2600 Magazine. We will have speakers and demonstrations from around the globe, a collection of films and rare videos on hacking, and our very own network between all of us and the outside world! This is an opportunity to feel the real magic of hacking instead of hearing about how we're about to destroy the world in some cheap tabloid or on the news during sweeps week. Government propaganda and corporate doublespeak have finally met their match! If you want to help put together this historic event, contact us by telephone at (516) 751-2600, through the mail at H.O.P.E., PO Box 848, Middle Island, NY 11953, on the Internet at 2600@well.sf.ca.us. We need ideas, people, technology, and karma. H.O.P.E. - August 13th and 14th at the Hotel Pennsylvania, right in the middle of bustling New York City (Seventh Avenue and 34th Street, right across the street from Penn Station). We've rented out the entire top floor (except for the mysterious NYNEX office). Special rates of $99 a night are available from the hotel (double rooms, four can probably fit easily). Cheaper places are also available as is nearly anything else. This is New York City, after all. Admission to the conference is $20 for the entire weekend if you preregister, $25 at the door, regardless of whether you stay for two days or five minutes. We encourage you to bring a computer so you can tie into our giant Ethernet and add to the fun. We hope you try to hack root on the system we'll be running -- all attendees will get accounts with prizes for the penetrators. Dancing and merchandising in the halls; Cellular phone workshop; Celebration of the Clipper Chip (not); Hacker videos from all over the world; Surveillance demos; Hacker legends from around the globe; It's not Woodstock - It's The Future; Many more details are on the way. Information sources: 2600 Magazine The Hacker Quarterly Summer 1994 edition Off The Hook Wednesdays, 10:00 pm WBAI 99.5 FM New York City 2600 Voice BBS 516-473-2626 alt.2600 on the Internet ------------------------------ From: alf@enea.se (Alf Oennestam) Subject: European Real-Time Seminar 1994 Organization: Enea Data AB Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 10:08:24 GMT ENEA DATA AB and TELELOGIC AB are pleased to invite you to the seminar: ********** Designing communication systems for future demands ********* This seminar will give you an overwiew of the possibilities our tools can offer you in real-time design, to preserve your investment for the future. TELELOGIC AB The product SDT, which is an SDL Design Tool for development and ITEX used for test specification of real-time systems. ENEA DATA AB which is OSE real-time operating system products, including OSE delta, designed for distributed and fault-tolerant applications. Seminars will be held at foolowing places: Sweden Stockholm May 24 Norway Oslo May 26 Finland Helsinki May 27 Italy Milan May 30 France Toulouse May 31 Aix de Provence June 1 Rennes June 2 Paris June 3 Austria Vienna June 6 Switzerland Zurich June 7 Germany Stuttgart June 8 Munich June 9 Frankfurt June 10 England London June 21 All seminars are free of charge. Please request further information by email from: alf@enea.se or from: ENEA DATA AB Phone +46 8 638 50 00 Fax +46 8 538 50 50 Box 232 S-183 23 TABY SWEDEN ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 07:03:39 EDT From: Gregory P. Monti Subject: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes A story in the May 11 issue of {Communications Daily} notes that the FCC has given Bellcore permision to assign NXX codes within new NPA 500. 500 is the special access code that will be used for non-geographically-based services, mainly wireless ones like beepers, personal communications services (PCS) and cellular phones. The idea is to avoid separate roamer port numbers and roaming charges. Bellcore had been asked to delay any work on the 500 front until fairness issues were worked out. Now that an Industry Carriers Compatibility Forum has reached consensus on assignment guidelines, the Commission felt it was time to release Bellcore from their 'hold'. The FCC cautioned that it does not want to see numbers assigned "frivolously, hoarded by assignees or prematurely exhausted." Number portability among carriers is not required by the order but it is assumed that numbers within NPA 500 will eventually become portable. Bellcore will need to negotiate with (and adjudicate conflicts among) the 126 carriers who have requested 437 of the possible 792 NXX codes within the 500 NPA. Bellcore would probably start assignments within a few months. Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cap.gwu.edu ------------------------------ From: blarrib@netcom.com (Bob Larribeau) Subject: Conference: Using ISDN to Work Through the Next Earthquake Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 21:22:27 GMT Using ISDN to Work through the Next Earthquake The California ISDN Users' Group Conference June 7 & 8, Sheraton Newport Beach The California ISDN Users' Group is holding a conference on how ISDN and other new communications technologies can be used to keep people working after a major disaster. The conference will include presentations and demonstrations of disaster backup, internetworking and network access, voice, video, and groupware technologies using ISDN. To attend fill out the form below and send a check for $80 ($50 without lunches) to: California ISDN Users' Group P.O. Box 27901-774 San Francisco, CA 94127 Name_____________________________________________________________________ Company__________________________________________________________________ Address__________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip___________________________________________________________ Telephone/email__________________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Send any questions to Bob Larribeau at "blarrib@netcom.com". Plenary Tuesday 8:30 - 10:00 Stan Kluz - Chairman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Welcome and CIUG activities. Keynote - Byron Wagner World-class technology consultant describes his experience using ISDN to solve problems for global organizations like the Walt Disney Company, Apple Computer, Ricoh, and 20th Century Fox. Here's your opportunity to see how media-savvy companies are reinventing themselves with technology and get a high altitude view of the implosion of media and communications. Bob Larribeau - Program Chairman Conference program. Data Networking Track ISDN Data Networking Overview Tuesday 10:30 - 12:00 Bob Larribeau - Consultant Overview of using ISDN for backing up and accessing remote networks. Anita Freeman & Jack Robertson - Pacific Bell Experiences with ISDN after the Northridge earthquake. Ruth Winkler - Pacific Bell Switched 56 service and its relationship to ISDN Wayne McCallum - GTE How GTE's ISDN implementation enhances remote network applications. ISDN Backup for Data Networks Tuesday 1:30 - 3:00 Heather Vaughn - Racal Data Communications Gene Litt - Controlware Two suppliers discuss ISDN as an ideal technology for keeping networks up during a disaster at minimum cost. Larry Cynar - Pacific Bell Pacific Bell customizes private data networks to increase disaster resistance. Bill Bloom - Dunsnet How Dunsnet uses ISDN to keep their network in operation. Data Connectivity Tuesday 3:00 - 5:00 Leslie Conway - Adtran ISDN connectivity for a broad range of high speed data communications applications. Bruce Dillon - IBM Board for the PC that not only supports ISDN, but also can be used as a data or fax modem. Richard Brennan - AT&T Using ISDN to support both voice, video and data in the home. ISDN Remote Network Access Wednesday 8:30 - 10:30 Tom Williams - Combinet Gene Chang - Extension Technology Greg Larson - Digiboard Three suppliers of ISDN equipment that provide high performance remote access to LANs Scott Yeager - MFS Datanet User of ISDN for dialup access to an ATM network. Data Networking Solutions Wednesday 10:30 - 12:00 Pete Moulds - Ascend Communications Danny Young - Intel Jim Hietala - Network Express Jerome Calgo - Transtream Four suppliers of ISDN equipment that interconnects LANs or provides remote access to LANs. Terry Tompkins - Motorola An ISDN user's experience with hardware and software options for accessing LANs from home. Data Networking User Experience Wednesday 1:30 - 3:00 Bill Brasuell - Tandem Experiences at the early stages of extending a large modem based work at home program to ISDN. Ed Tynan - Motorola Inexpensive security measures that significantly reduce the security risks of dialup LAN access. Natalie Clinton - LLNL Lawrence Livermore Labs experiences in implementing a large ISDN based work at home program. Pat Krause - McDonald's The first ISDN user in the U.S. will say how and why he are uses ISDN to support work at home and LAN interconnection. Voice/Video/Groupware Track ISDN Centrex Voice Services Tuesday 10:30 - 12:00 Ella Spradley - Pacific Bell J. Griffin - GTE How ISDN Centrex offerings can assure continued communications after a disaster. ISDN Centrex Voice Applications Tuesday 1:30 - 3:00 Joe Saaveda - Telrad T. Gartman - Lodestar Two suppliers of ISDN telephones will describe how ISDN supports low cost, flexible phone services. J. Pokress - Teloquent Will describe how ISDN can be used to support distributed, work at home customer service. ISDN Groupware Tuesday 3:30 - 5:00 Gary Gysin - Crosswise Curtis Albrecht - Eye Tel Two suppliers of groupware software applications will discuss enhancing communications after a disaster. ISDN Video Wednesday 8:30 - 10:00 Richard Grace - British Telecom New cost effective video solutions for up new applications at lower cost and with rapid deployment. Carl Kikerpill - Compression Labs ISDN providing flexible video conferencing that supports face to face communication after a disaster. Jeffrey Starr - McGaw, Inc. Experience using video conferencing over ISDN. ISDN Video Wednesday 10:30 - 12:00 Intel - name not available at press time PC based video solutions using ISDN. Pat Krause - McDonald's User evaluation of ISDN video systems. Special Session Alternative Technologies Wednesday 1:30 - 3:00 Pushpendra Mohta - CERFNet The role of the Internet in work at home and disaster recovery. Keith Nesson - Pacific Bell Applications using Fast Packet Services (SMDS, Frame Relay, ATM) to provide distributed, fault-tolerant corporate networks. Demonstrations ISDN products and applications will be demonstrated by 17 different companies on both Tuesday and Wednesday. Adtran Extension Technology Ascend Communications IBM AT&T Intel British Telecom Lodestar Technologies Combinet Network Express Compression Labs Northern Telecom Controlware Pacific Bell Crosswise Transtream Digiboard ------------------------------ From: mal@adc.com (Michael A Leo) Subject: Wanted: X25 Package For SCO UNIX Date: 11 May 1994 16:51:16 GMT Organization: ADC Telecommunications Hi, I am looking for an x25 communications package for use with SCO UNIX. We are porting our product to the SCO environment from the Sun environment. I am most familiar with SunConnect's SunLink X.25 product. If anyone knows of a solution, please let me know. Thank you, Michael Leo ADC Telecommunications (612) 936-8305 (voice) mike_leo@adc.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #209 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16386; 11 May 94 16:49 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA05601; Wed, 11 May 94 13:19:05 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA05590; Wed, 11 May 94 13:19:03 CDT Date: Wed, 11 May 94 13:19:03 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405111819.AA05590@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #210 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 May 94 13:19:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 210 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Digital Links Over Analog Carriers? (Taavi Talvik) What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point? (Chuck Campbell) Wanted: Used Octel Voice Mail Systems (Eric A. Litman) Speech Recognition: "Word Spotting" - Help! (Peter B. Flower) Anybody Know Communitronics? (Rich Osman) 'Wireless Cable' Over a Cellular Network? (Barry Raveendran Greene) Telecommunication Events (Jose Luis Sanchez) Bell Canada Alex Videotex Service Officially Closing (Dave Leibold) What is a T-10 Carrier? (Mitch Barrett) New Call Centre (Jeff Robertson) Press Releases via Fax-on-Demand (Nigel Allen) Phone Directory Technology (Stewart Fist) Junk Mail From US Sprint (Dave Levenson) In-Building Cabling For Different Operators (Warren Kwok) Need Modem CID Strings (Maurice Dykes) Correct Contact Information For CallerID-> Serial (John Landwehr) Help Needed With B-ISDN (Padmakar Jogdankar) Contact Representatives NOW to Help Sink Clipper (Monty Solomon) HOTT: Issue 940425, Part 1 of 3 on comp.ai (David Scott Lewis) Need Information on Complete PC (Al Cohan) Need Help: Telecom Interface (Dr. Gerry Higgins) Sprint "Combined Billing" Error (Mike Pollock) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Taavi Talvik Subject: Digital Links Over Analog Carriers? Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 20:01:26 EET Does anybody remember from old times some equipment capable for transmission of 64kbps or higher G.703 data rates over analog carriers. In Estonia we have a situation that there are plenty of analog group channels available but no country-wide digital links. Any hints or references to such equipment are welcome. taavi talvik taavi@vs.ee tel. +372 6 39 9000 fax. +372 6 39 9001 ------------------------------ From: campbell@uuneo.NeoSoft.COM (Chuck Campbell) Subject: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point Date: 11 May 1994 00:26:30 GMT Organization: ACCEL Services, Inc. ph:(713)993-0671, fax:(713)960-1157 Reply-To: campbell@neosoft.com I am looking for information on the hardware necessary to set up a network access point. I would like to make some resources available to my clients via the Internet (anon ftp, telnet, s/w services). I would like to have about five incoming lines fo dial up as well (slip, ppp, etc). I am hoping for a FAQ or a list of all the FAQ's I need to start with. Any suggestions would be helpful, especially on the following: modems, phone service, gateways, bridges, whatever it will take, and some information about pros and cons of various approaches. I'll be happy with text recommendations as well. Please respond by email and I'll summarize. Thanks, ACCEL Services, Inc. | Specialists in Gravity, Magnetics 1980 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2050 | and Integrated Interpretation Houston, TX, 77056 | | 1(713)993-0671 voice Chuck Campbell | 1(713)960-1157 fax President & Chief Geoscientist | email campbell@neosoft.com ------------------------------ From: elitman@proxima.com (Eric A. Litman) Subject: Wanted: Used Octel Voice Mail Systems Date: 10 May 1994 21:43:50 -0500 Organization: Proxima, Inc. I am in immediate need of used Octel systems, both Branch and Aspen. Please contact me if you have a system you would like to sell or know someplace where one can be purchased. Thanks in advance. Eric Litman Proxima, Inc. vox: (703) 506.1661 Director, ProxNet McLean, VA elitman+@proxima.com ------------------------------ From: pbflower@uts.EDU.AU (-s89432566-p.bflower-ele-500-) Subject: Speech Recognition: "Word Spotting" - Help! Date: 11 May 1994 06:00:44 GMT Organization: University of Technology, Sydney I'm presently doing some studies on speech recognition. I'm looking at developing the HMM so that I can do "word spotting". However I don't know enough about word spotting. If anyone has any information I would gladly accept it. Thanking you in advance, Peter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 8:40:39 CDT From: ROsman@swri.edu Subject: Anybody Know Communitronics? I'm looking for a company called Communitronics. They made a WWV receiver that I own a copy of (Model 6010). Their last known location was Hauppauge, NY, but mail to that address comes back. I'm trying to get in touch with then to get the service manual (mine is broken). Rich Osman, WB0HUQ (210) 699-1302 (h:v/fax/msg) Oz@SwRI.edu (210) 522-5050 (w) ------------------------------ From: greenebr@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (Barry Raveendran Greene) Subject: 'Wireless Cable' Over a Cellular Network? Any Information? Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 09:52:09 -0500 Organization: Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab Reply-To: greenebr@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (Barry Raveendran Greene) Hello All, I'm trying to track down some information on a new venture between Bell Alantic and Cellular Vision. It is a trial service that provides 'wireless cable' services over a cellular network. If you know anything or have a pointers to a Internet site that has more information on this trail or the technology, please E-mail directly to my E- mail account. Thanks, Barry Raveendran Greene Internet: greenebr@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu Network Engineer (301) 953-6064 (301) 953-5727 FAX Johns Hopkins University / Applied Physics Lab ------------------------------ From: josel@vms.ucc.okstate.edu Subject: Telecommunication Events Organization: Oklahoma State University Computer Center Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 16:08:18 GMT Hello, I am looking for special events (one or two weeks) related to: - Managament, marketing, strategic planning, public-policy analysis, privatization, and consulting in Telecommunications. People background selected for these events are managers in certain telecommunication areas without technical background. Please, let me know about institutions, universities, etc., which offers such events. The dates required for these events are due August and September 1994. I want to thank you, beforehand, for your prompt response. Jose Luis Sanchez josel@vms.ucc.okstate.edu Electrical and Computer Eng. Oklahoma State University ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 10 May 94 21:54:54 -0500 Subject: Bell Canada Alex Videotex Service Officially Closing Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway Bell Canada received official approval to discontinue the controversial Alex videotex service. From a check of the list of new and deleted services on Alex itself, it appears no new services have been added since 1991, and services were being deleted, at least as of last fall. It seemed the home shopping and commerce offerings were few, and the chat/dating lines plenty (the latter being done with less cost and more finesse on the regional BBS scene). The most useful service left on Alex (IMO) is the electronic white pages, complete with an automated long distance call rate calculator. The following eulogy just arrived in the mail: [Bell Canada letter to Alex service customers follows ...] T.E. Graham T/Director - Business Planning, Bell Advanced Communications 160 Elgin Street, Floor 12, Ottawa, Ontario K1G 3J4 April 29, 1994 Dear Customer, Some five years ago, Bell Canada launched an innovative service that, after its initial trial run, logged more than a million calls from interested people like you. We then decided to go ahead and introduce this exciting, new concept to enable customers to access home-based interactive and transactional services. Though it was risky, we heard your call and answered it. The ALEX service was born. Our early success in Montreal eventually led us to expand into the Toronto Market and become a leader in the Canadian videotex industry. Although our role was primarily one of a carrier providing technical support, we helped our Service Providers develop applications -- from home shopping and personal banking to financial news and learning programs -- in order to keep you on the leading edge of the information explosion. However, while the ALEX service continued to grow and attract interest, the inconsistent rate of development of the videotex industry coupled with Canada's declining economic fortune has made the service difficult to justify. We are faced with having to drastically cut our costs, yet have resisted laying off employees or raising customer prices. So we have been forced to make a painful decision and terminate the ALEX service. This is a difficult decision, and one that must be weighed against the reality of today's tough economic climate. Quite simply, the ALEX network is not the right vehicle, nor the appropriate technology, at this time to deliver the information goods needed in our fast-paced society. We filed on December 30th, 1993 for the de-tariffing of the ALEX service with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), the federal telecommunications regulator. On April 18th we received their approval, and will discontinue the ALEX service effective June 3rd, 1994. The ALEXtel terminal will also be withdrawn from the marketplace and cease to be supported. Bell has always tried to meet the needs of its business and residential customers by offering the best and latest in communications technology. We will keep trying to bring you innovative telecommunications products and services that best fit your needs. As the pace of technology quickens and opportunities begin to unfold, we will be there again ... listening. We will also be ready to serve you, knowing full well that such advances must be balanced by your wishes. Thank you for doing business with Bell. If you have any questions about this matter, please call 1 (800) 267-8480. Sincerely, T.E. Graham ------------------------------ From: mbarrett@ida.org (Mitch Barrett) Subject: What is a T-10 Carrier? Date: 9 May 1994 19:12:25 GMT Organization: Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), Alexandria, VA I am evaluating a government contract for my company, part of which is a telecommunications study. According to the statement of work we are to evaluate among other things T-1, T-10, ISDN ... I can't find any reference to a T-10 anything. Does anyone out there know what this might be and where I can get documentation on it? Thanks, M. Mitch Barrett CTA INCORPORATED 5670 Greenwood Plaza Bvd., Ste 200 Englewood, CO 80111 E-mail: mbarrett@ctaeng.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 20:30:42 EDT From: DIMBIT@delphi.com Subject: New Call Centre Well I am hoping some of the telecom genius' can help me. Our company is looking at setting up a call centre in the United States. This centre will handle travel insurance, home insurance (eg: plumbing goes at 3am we find you a plumber), other call centre functions. We have been doing this for the last ten years in Australia, Canada, and Europe (the company has; I have been doing it for a year and a half!). The call centre will have between 50-70 agents. We have to choose from the following cities to locate the centre: 1. Austin Texas 2. Sacramento, C.A. 3. Salt Lake City, Utah 4. Pheonix, Arizona 5. Charlotte, N.C. I know very little about the U.S. But looks like I will have to move to one of the above (not the nicest but the cheapest for the business!). For argument sake lets say we choose AT&T. We expect our call distribution to be 50% from the East Coast, 25% from the West Coast and 25% from the rest of the States. In our business we have to compare inbound 800 costs as well as outgoing. Typically one inbound call requires three outbound calls to the originating city. I have lots of information on the different cities, courtesy of U.S. Economic Development and Trade. I don't have much information on rates, which in our business is the most important. Any insight or comparisons would be terrific. If anyone responding lives in the above cities I would really appreciate any tips (if we pick your city I will take you out for an imported Canadian beer!). Rates would also be great! Please respond via E-Mail to: dimbit@delphi.com Jeff Robertson, President, CTI Inc. Canada (416) 483-1270 (416)516-2210 Fax ------------------------------ Subject: Press Releases via Fax-on-Demand From: nigel.allen@canrem.com (Nigel Allen) Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 03:40:00 -0400 Organization: CRS Online (Toronto, Ontario) One good application for fax-on-demand services is the distribution of press releases to people other than journalists, typically investors who want current information about a company they're interested in. Some electronic press release distribution services make their press releases available through fax-on-demand. Press release distribution services such as PR Newswire use much the same technology as news agencies such as The Associated Press (computer networks today, but dedicated teletype circuits 20 years ago), but their business is the distribution of unedited press releases paid for by the companies issuing the press releases, rather than news paid for by the news media. (At one time, PR Newswire was owned by Western Union. I'm not sure who owns the company now.) While you can search the PR Newswire database for a fee through some online services (I'm not sure which ones), you can also have a list of currently-available press releases sent to your fax machine by calling 800-578-7888 and entering your fax machine's number using your telephone keypad. Once you have received the list, you can order up to three press releases at a time. There is no charge for this service, and it appears to be available anywhere in Canada and the United States. Similarly, Canada Newswire offers a fax-on-demand service for Canadian corporate press releases. Call 1-800-269-NEWS to request a menu of available stories. A third press release distribution service, U.S. Newswire, makes its press releases available through a BBS in Maryland, PR On-Line at (410) 363-0834. U.S. Newswire's clients include a lot of Washington- based lobby groups and government agencies, while PR Newswire's clients appear to be predominantly corporate. There is a peripheral family connection here. My late grandfather, Ralph Marven, was vice-president of a now-defunct public relations company in Montreal, Editorial Associates. I think that when Canada Newswire was originally established, it was a subsidiary of Editorial Associates. Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada nigel.allen@canrem.com ------------------------------ Date: 11 May 94 05:48:42 EDT From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Phone Directory Technology I am looking for a wide range of information about software and hardware used in the preparation of telephone directories or contacts who I can talk to who might know this stuff. Apparently there are a couple of companies around the world who specialise in this area. I'd like to contact them, and beforehand I'd need to get some background. I'm also interested in the financial side of running directory services; the yellow page directories seem to be highly profitable. I'd also like to get some general history of the development of the Yellow Pages, and the role played by Edward H O'Brien and the famous "Fingers do the walking" slogan and logo. Does anyone know anything about this. It's a pretty narrow area of interest, so it may be best to contact me direct, rather than bore the rest of the TELECOM Digest readers. I'm a technical journalist trying to put together a general overview, using some Australian material. But I need to know more about the world scene, and the world experience. ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Junk Mail From US Sprint Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 16:12:30 GMT The only thing worse than junk mail, IMHO, is junk mail delivered with postage due! Did anybody else receive a recent direct mail advertisement package from US Sprint with insufficient postage? 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: Warren.Kwok@f488.n700.z6.ftn.air.org (Warren Kwok) Subject: In-Building Cabling For Different Operators Date: 11 May 1994 02:29:14 -0500 Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway Hello, all telecom people in the Net, This is the first time I post a message on Usenet through my Fidonet BBS. I am writing to seek kind assistance from people on Internet in soliciting some relevant information about telephone line arrangements in a commercial building from different local network operators. Up to the present moment, telephone service is still a monopoly in Hong Kong. All telephone cables from an exchange to a government building connecting to customer premises equipment is the property of Hongkong Telecom whereas sometimes the Government owns the wiring behind the customer premises equipment (e.g. keyline telephone systems and PABX systems). The present arrangement is that Hongkong Telecom provides lead-in cables terminated at an interconnection point which is usually a distribution frame for routing to our private switching equipment, in most cases, PABX system. Hong Kong will have three more telephone operators after June 1995. As I am working on a government PABX project, I need to devise a set of guidelines on how line facilities of the three new operators can be interconnected with Government owned customer premises equipment. The aim is to formulate a cabling plan arranged in a way to foster competition and at the same time to make sure that line provisioning is manageable on a non-discriminatory basis. I will be keen to learn the expereince of other network operators, governmment administrations regarding in-building cabling arrangements for different fixed telephone networks in a building. Any comments, information on the subject are welcome. also at whkwok@hk.net Maximus 2.00 Origin: HKIE BBS (6:700/488) ------------------------------ From: mhdykes@thinkage.on.ca (Maurice Dykes) Subject: Need Modem CID Strings Organization: Thinkage Ltd. Guest Account Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 02:43:57 GMT I'm in the process of writing a set of Caller ID utilities running under Windows. At first I based the software on a proprietary CID device made by Vive Synergies but now I would like to take advantage of several modems on the market that provide CID data. One problem is that some devices output data in different formats with start/end characters and different date formats, messages etc. I would really appreciate some help in acquiring sample strings delivered by the various modems. By this I mean the actual string data a terminal program would see and not formatted output. This way I can parse the data from several popular devices properly. Thanks in advance for any help forthcoming. mhdykes@Thinkage.On.Ca Maurice Dykes mhdykes@thinkage.on.ca mhdykes@thinkage.com !thinkage!mhdykes ------------------------------ From: John_Landwehr@NeXT.COM (John Landwehr) Date: Wed, 11 May 94 09:38:34 -0500 Subject: Correct Contact Information For CallerID-> Serial The correct contact info for the callerID box to serial is: Rochelle Communications Inc. 8906 Wall Street Suite 205 Austin, TX 78754 512-339-8188 They have a single line box with a DB25 connector for $100 (qty 1). They also have multiple line boxes available, too. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 16:06:37 GMT From: padmakar@cdotp.ernet.in (PADMAKAR) Subject: Help Needed With B-ISDN [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is something I received in the mail a few days ago if anyone would care to respond direct to the writer. Thanks. PAT] Dear Sir, I am working in CDOT New-Delhi organisation. My group is SYSTEMS & NETWORKS. I am interested in Telecommunication. So please sir,send me inforamation about B-ISDN . My EMAIL address is as below padmakar@cdotp.ernet.in So I am waiting for above info. Thanking you. Date : 4 th May 1994 Yours faithfully PADMAKAR JOGDANKAR ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 10:09:05 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Contact Representatives NOW to Help Sink Clipper Passed along FYI to the Digest: Begin forwarded message: Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 13:43:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Stanton McCandlish Subject: Contact Representatives NOW to help sink Clipper At the House hearings on Clipper and Digital Telephony, May 3, 1994, Chairman Rep. Valentine (D-NC), Rep. Morella (R-MD), and Rep. Rohrbacher (R-CA) indicated "reservations" about Clipper. Please contact these Representantives and encourage them. However, Rep. Dan Glickman (D-KS) indicated "cautious support" for Clipper, and espoused a 'more surveillance for law enforcement' viewpoint. It is essential that opinons like these be turned. Contact this Congressman by any means possible, especially if you are a direct constituent of Glickman. Show your disapproval of Clipper, politely but firmly. Congressfolk live on votes, and are not as hard to sway as you might think. There is little support in the Senate for Clipper. Let's make it unanimous by turning what little tide there is in the House. Don't just talk, ACT NOW. Stanton McCandlish * mech@eff.org * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist ------------------------------ From: callewis@netcom.com (David Scott Lewis) Subject: HOTT: Issue 940425, Part 1 of 3 on comp.ai Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 12:33:17 GMT The full-text of the HOTT electronic magazine on VR, neural nets, PDAs, agent software, PCS, interactive media, nanotechnology, MPP, and other emergent telecomputing technologies is now (or will soon be) available on the comp.ai Usenet group. David Scott Lewis Editor-in-Chief and Book & Video Review Editor IEEE Engineering Management Review (the world's largest circulation "high tech" management journal) Internet address: d.s.lewis@ieee.org Tel: +1 714 662 7037 USPS mailing address: POB 18438 / IRVINE CA 92713-8438 USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 13:01 EST From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com> Subject: Need Information on Complete PC I friend of mine is sending me a couple of voice cards manufactured by the Complete PC. Can anyone supply info on how to reach this company? Thanks in advance, Al Cohan ------------------------------ From: telemed@aol.com (Telemed) Subject: Need Help: Telecom Interface Date: 10 May 1994 17:37:05 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) I have designed a multimedia E-mail software package. Does it make sense to add either: A. An Internet interface; B. A point-to-point (modem) interface? It's for distributed work (telemedicine, etc.) Thanks in advance for any advice. Gerry Higgins (Dr.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Personally, Doctor, if you have the wherewithal and ability to add an internet and/or modem interface I don't see how you could go wrong by doing so. Email and the internet go almost hand in hand; ditto, a modem interface will make your product that much more valuable. My advice then is go with it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pheel@panix.com (Mike Pollock) Subject: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error Date: 11 May 1994 10:28:08 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC Sprint recently changed me over from direct billing to "combined billing" on my NYNEX local telephone bill. Simple, right? Wrong. My final direct-from-Sprint invoice was contained activity through 4/10/94. My first combined bill from NYNEX contained Sprint activity through 4/13/94. The proximity of these two billing dates meant I got a _three_day_ billing period for Sprint long distance service on the NYNEX bill. Now, I'm also a Sprint Select customer, which means I have a $6.85/month minimum. In a normal 30 day billing cycle, I easily meet that minimum. However, Sprint was nice enough to bill me $6.85 for this three day billing cycle because in those three days, I only made $1.20 worth of calls. Since this was less than the monthly minimum, the service charge was assessed. It took me several minutes of explaining before the Sprint representative understood what had happened, and I eventually got a credit, but I'm concerned that other Sprint/NYNEX customers might run into a similar problem and not catch it, and Sprint apparently has no desire to have their billing software check for this type of thing. Any suggestions? Mike ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #210 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17015; 11 May 94 17:59 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA07240; Wed, 11 May 94 14:03:10 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA07231; Wed, 11 May 94 14:03:08 CDT Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:03:08 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405111903.AA07231@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #211 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 May 94 14:03:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 211 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson BT Announces Dialing Code Changes (Ted Dupont) What is the Mercury Button? (John Perkins) EFF Summary: May 3 1994 Clipper / Digital Telephony Hearings (M. Solomon) 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Paul Robinson) Pager Schematics and POCSAG/GOLAY Protocols? (Joseph Jesson) Nationwide Name and Address Service (George Thurman) Information on Seminar Wanted (kchok@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu) Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (John Gilbert) Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Bob Wilson) Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Steven H. Lichter) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:28:04 EDT From: usbma9ne@ibmmail.COM (Ted Dupont) Subject: BT Announces Dialing Code Changes The following announcement was distributed to U.S. and Canadian news media on Apr. 28, 1994: Contact: Jim Barron BT Corporate Communications 100 Park Ave. New York NY 10017 USA 212-297-2724 Ted DuPont Burson-Marsteller 230 Park Ave. South New York NY 10003 USA 212-614-4562 Starting April, 1995, New Dialing Codes For Calls To The United Kingdom NEW YORK, Apr. 28 - Starting Apr. 16, 1995, the 100 million-plus phone calls made annually from North America to the United Kingdom will be affected by the biggest change in the U.K.'s telephone numbering system in more than 25 years. The changes will result in a tenfold increase in the U.K.'s telephone numbering capacity and will meet requirements for many years to come. U.S. businesses should begin planning now to accommodate these dialing changes, according to BT (British Telecommunications plc). Starting Apr. 16, 1995, callers to most numbers in the United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales) will need to insert an additional "1" in the dialing code, directly after "44" (the U.K. country code). For example, a North American caller to London will dial "011-44-171" in front of the local number, instead of the current "011-44-71." (In the U.S., 011 is the international access code; 44 is the U. K. country code, and 71 is the London area code). All city codes, not just London, will have the number "1" added. In addition, also on Apr. 16, 1995, the following five British cities facing especially acute number shortages will be given completely new area codes: Current Area Code/Local Number Apr. 16, 1995 Leeds 532 XXXXXX 113 2XX-XXXX Sheffield 742 XXXXXX 114 2XX-XXXX Nottingham 602 XXXXXX 115 9XX-XXXX Leicester 533 XXXXXX 116 2XX-XXXX Bristol 272 XXXXXX 117 9XX-XXXX Starting Aug. 1, callers to the U.K. will have the choice of using the new dialing codes or the existing codes; that is, calls to the U.K. will go through whether or not the caller dials 1 after the U.K. country code (44). This "permissive" dialing phase will be in effect until Apr. 16, 1995, when all calls to the U.K. will require the additional 1. Callers in the U.S. can call 1-800-634-2485 for more information on the dialing code changes. Growing Need for New Numbers These dialing changes are needed to deal with a growing shortage of area codes caused by such new technologies as fax machines, computer data modems and the fact that there are now 150 licensed telephone operators in the U.K., said officials of BT, the U.K.'s largest telephone operator. The dialing changes will not affect calling rates. "It is important that U.S. businesses begin planning for these dialing code changes now," said James E. Graf, BT's vice president of regulatory affairs. "While these dialing changes may seem simple, they will actually require significant efforts by many companies to reconfigure automated dialing equipment, fax machines, telecommunica- tions software systems and PBX's -- in addition to changing signage and stationery." It will be especially critical to change preset numbers stored in phones or faxes, said Graf, because dialing of the old codes by automated dialing systems will mean that calls won't be connected after Apr. 16, 1995. Planning for these changes should begin now: Telecommunications equipment * Computer systems containing international phone codes * Phone numbers stored in any telephone or fax * Personnel records * Databases * Switchboard and PBX systems * Fax ID numbers Stationery and Signs * Business stationery, letterheads, invoices, business cards, address labels, etc. * Advertisements, sales literature, brochures, direct-mail pieces, new product information Phase-In of New Codes To provide ample time to make the transition, BT will be phasing in the new dialing codes according to this timetable: -- Until August, 1994: Current area code only (do not dial 1 after U.K. country code of 44). -- Aug. 1, 1994 through Apr. 15, 1995: Old or new code (users can make calls with or without 1 after U.K. country code). -- Apr. 16, 1995: New code only (1 must be dialed after U.K. country code). Calls dialed without the extra 1 will get a pre-recorded message informing callers of the change. The code changes will not affect cellular phone numbers or toll-free phone numbers; only geographic area codes will change. BT officials further noted that, on an international level, all European countries are moving towards a single international access code. In accordance with this change, the international access code from the U.K. will change from 010 to 00 -- like the other changes, on Apr. 16, 1995. BT is one of the leading global providers of telecommunications services. BT's main products and services are local and long-distance telephone services in the U.K., provision of telephone exchange lines to homes and businesses, international voice and data services to and from the U.K. and supplying telecommunications equipment to customer premises. BT's range of additional services includes private circuits, mobile communications and network outsourcing. ------------------------------ From: johnper@bunsen.rosemount.com (John Perkins) Subject: What is the Mercury Button? Organization: Rosemount, Inc. Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 15:47:23 GMT My parents in London (Chessington, actually) have just recently signed up with Mercury and have been persuaded (by Mercury, presumably) to have a Mercury phone set installed. This phone has a "Mercury button" on it to access the Mercury network. Will someone please tell me what the Mercury button is? I suspect that it simply sends out a hard-coded sequence of DTMF digits which accesses the Mercury network, and one could probably do this manually with any phone that generates DTMF if one knew what the sequence was. Am I right about this? And does anyone know what the access sequence for Mercury is? They have a perfectly good BT "Tribune" phone set that has some special attachments for the hearing impaired, but are under the impression that they can't use it if they want to use Mercury. (I have a feeling that they don't really need the Mercury phone set at all.) John Perkins ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 10:09:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFF Summary: May 3 1994 Clipper / Digital Telephony Hearings Forwarded FYI to the Digest: Begin forwarded message: From: mech@eff.org (Stanton McCandlish) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.news,talk.politics.misc Subject: EFF Summary of May 3 1994 Clipper and Digital Telephony Hearings Date: 4 May 1994 23:19:49 -0500 Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway EFF SUMMARIES ============= May 4, 1994 Contents: * Senate Subcommittee on Technology and the Law holds Clipper Hearing * House Subcommittee on Technology, Environment and Aviation holds hearing on Clipper and Digital Telephony proposals; EFF's Executive Director Jerry Berman and Board Member David Farber testify SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE HOLDS CLIPPER HEARING The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology and the Law held a hearing on Tuesday (5/3) to examine the Administration's "Clipper Chip" Key Escrow Encryption proposal. Witnesses included Asst. Atty. Gen. Jo Ann Harris (Criminal Justice Division), NIST Deputy Director Raymond Kammer, Whitfield Diffie (of Sun Microsystems), Stephen Walker (President, Trusted Information Systems), and NSA director Vice Adm. J. M. McConnell. The discussion touched on a number of key issues, including the necessity of the Clipper proposal for law enforcement; the privacy interests of network users; the costs associated with implementing the Clipper scheme; export controls; and whether those intending to use communications networks to break the law would actually use Clipper as opposed to other encryption schemes. Although a variety of views were offered, few new developments emerged in this controversial debate. Assistant Attorney General Harris and NIST's Ray Kammer both stated that the Clipper Scheme and Key Escrow system would not provide law enforcement with any new surveillance abilities. Rather, Harris argued, Clipper is analogous to a translator. Harris stated, "All Clipper does is, after a court has authorized interceptions of communications, is that we get the ability to understand the content of legitimately intercepted communications". The Administration continues to maintain that the market would accept the Clipper standard based on the assumption that it is the strongest encryption scheme, regardless of who holds the keys. When pressed by Sen. Leahy on this issue, as well as on the question of whether criminals or terrorist organizations would be willing to use the Clipper standards, neither witness offered any assurances, and admitted that this is still an open question. Senator Leahy expressed skepticism: "I have serious questions about whether any sophisticated criminal or terrorist organization is going to use the one code endorsed by the U.S. Government and for which U.S. Government agents hold the decoding keys. There are a multitude of alternative encryption methods commercially available. If Clipper Chip does become the standard encryption method used by Americans, criminals may be forced to use Clipper to communicate with legitimate outsiders. But this is a big 'IF' ". In what may prove to be a significant development, NIST's Kammer conceded that additional fiscal authorization may be needed to fund the implementation of the Clipper proposal. If this is the case, Congress would be required to consider legislation to authorize funding, and at this point passage of such legislation is at best uncertain. EFF will continue to closely monitor this development, and will pass along information as it develops. Sun Microsystems Diffie urged a slow and careful approach to the Clipper issue, cautioning that a rush to implement Clipper may create a bureaucracy that would be difficult to dislodge at a later time. Diffie stressed the need for international for information security, and cautioned against attempts to use the power of technology to increase the power of government. Diffie added, "Integrity of political speech is the root of legitimate laws in a democratic society. We are in a position where if we do not make it a national priority to make privacy available", this integrity may be compromised. Steve Walker, of Trusted Information Systems, stressed the need for the removal of export control restrictions. He also countered the Administration's contention that very few foreign encryption alternatives exist; noting that his company had found over 340. Walker displayed several of these applications, and noted that because of export controls U.S. manufactures of encryption technology face a significant disadvantage on the world market. Although the Senate Hearing did not produce many new developments, it is significant to note that no members of the Subcommittee expressed outright support for the Clipper Chip proposal. Chairman Leahy, the most vocal panel member at Tuesday's hearing, was also the most skeptical, and as such the fate Clipper proposal is still very much in doubt. HOUSE PANEL CONSIDERS CLIPPER AND DIGITAL TELEPHONY PROPOSALS Tuesday proved to be a busy day for Clipper on the Hill, as the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Technology, Environment and Aviation also considered the Clipper and Digital Telephony proposals. Witnesses on the panel included James Kallstrom of the FBI, NSA's Clinton Brooks, NIST Deputy Director Ray Kammer, Dr. Dorothy Denning, Dr. David Faber, EFF Executive Director Jerry Berman (on behalf of DPSWG), and Chmn. Willis Ware of the Congress/NIST System Security and Privacy Advisory Board. The discussion centered mainly on the Clipper issue. Unlike the Senate panel, there seemed to be some support for the Clipper proposal on the House Subcommittee. Rep. Dan Glickman (D-KS), Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, declared his "cautious support", for the proposal, and stressed law enforcement's need for strong surveillance abilities. Subcommittee Chairman Valentine (D-NC), as well as Reps. Morella (R-MD) and Rohrabacher (R-CA) all expressed reservations. James Kallstrom urged full support of both the Clipper and Digital Telephony proposals on behalf of all law enforcement, citing the need to counter the increasing sophistication of digital communications technologies. Kallstrom painted a picture of a network populated by criminals, terrorists, and drug dealers which would pose a great danger to public safety, unless law enforcement is given the ability to intercept illegal communications. EFF's Jerry Berman countered this assertion by arguing that Clipper would only solve law enforcement's problems if criminals use it. The only way to do this, Berman added, would be to mandate the Clipper standard, something which the Administration does not claim to want to do. The only solution is for Congress to deny appropriation for Clipper and send the Administration back to the drawing board, Berman argued. Dr. Farber, appearing as an expert witness, stated that solutions to the Clipper issue will not come easily and will not come in one big step. Rather, a carefully considered and open approach is required. While stressing the need for encryption standards on communications networks, Dr. Farber cautioned against "smoke-filled-room standards" of encryption which are, in his view, likely to bead mistrust. Dr. Farber also argued for the removal of export controls on encryption technology. NSA's Clinton Brooks expressed support for Congressional Consideration of the Clipper issue. He argued that Clipper is a sound technological solution to a legitimate law enforcement and National Security dilemma, and that a public debate on its merits would eventually remove the misinformation and mistrust of government, and would prove Clipper to be in the public interest. Dr. Farber offered a strong caution to this, expressing the concern that a future administration may find it necessary to mandate the Clipper standard. Dr. Farber suggested that at the very least Congress weld into law a guarantee that Clipper remain voluntary, that the Judiciary be an escrow holder. He cautioned, in the words of Benjamin Franklin, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" *************** Written testimony & documents from the hearings are available as: ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/Clipper/[filename] gopher.eff.org, 1/EFF/Policy/Crypto/Clipper, [filename] gopher://gopher.eff.org/11/EFF/Policy/Crypto/Clipper, [filename] http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/Clipper/[filename] where [filename] is: berman_eff_clip-dt.testimony - House testimony of Jerry Berman (EFF) brooks_nsa_clip-dt.testimony - House testimony of Clint Brooks (NSA) denning_clip-dt.testimony - House testimony of Dorothy Denning farber_clip-dt.testimony - House testimony of David Farber kallstrom_fbi_clip-dt.testimony - House testimony of James Kallstrom (FBI) kammer_nist_clip-dt.testimony - House testimony of Ray Kammer (NIST) ware_csspab_clip-dt.testimony - House testimony of Willis Ware (CSSPAB) clip-dt_hearings.docs - charter, witness list, diagrams. * Senate testimony and spoken testimony from both hearings will be made available from in the same directory when obtained. This material will also be available from the EFF BBS within a day or so, at +1 202 638 6120. Stanton McCandlish * mech@eff.org * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 05:39:19 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA In some prior articles, the term 'NNX' has been used to refer to the new format for area codes debuting in International Dialing Zone 1 on January 15, 1995. While this is the format that is being added to the current area code system is technically correct with respect to the additions, I think that this term is wrong and misleading. In area codes and prefixes, the term 'N' is used to refer to a digit space that permits any number from 2 through 9. 'X' is used to refer to an 'any digit' field which allows 0 and 1. Area codes currently permit 0 and 1 (and ONLY 0 AND 1) as the second digit. As of the above date, they will allow any digit for the last two digits of the area code. The first digit of an area code will remain required to be 2 through 9. Based on this, references to the new area codes should say 'NXX' area codes, and not 'NNX' area codes, as it might indicate that the old area codes with 0 and 1 as the middle digit are being replaced by the new area codes, which is not the case. ------------------------------ From: joe@netcom.com (Joseph Jesson) Subject: Pager Schematics and POCSAG/GOLAY Protocols? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 13:58:27 GMT At a Dayton flea market, I picked up several NEC and Motorola pagers in various non-working condition. I was impressed when you consider the sensitivity and selectivity is such a small space (the antenna loops are approx -20db when compared to a diople antenna). It has potential for a single channel 152 (approximately) or 932 Mhz receiver. Any idea where I can get a schematic for the Motorola Bravo, Sensar, or NEC pager? Also, has anyone built a capcode programmer or fully decoded all pager codes (Pocsag / Golay / Flex - 512/1200/2400/6400 rates)? Universal Shortwave, in Ohio, sells a M400 which only decodes POCSAG or GOLAY at 512 bps ... Joseph Jesson joe@netcom.com Day (312) 856-3645 Eve (708) 356-6817 21414 W. Honey Lane, Lake Villa, IL, 60046 ------------------------------ From: gst@gagme.wwa.com (George Thurman) Subject: Nationwide Name and Address Service Date: 11 May 1994 00:48:34 -0500 Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605 I had a 900 number that if you called it and gave them a telephone number, they would give you the name and address of the person who had that telephone number. (In most cases) The 900 number, 1-900-884-1212 has been disconnected, and I think that the company that provided the service has gone belly-up. Does anyone know of any other 900 numbers that provide this same kind of service? GEORGE S. THURMAN (312) 509-6308 gst@gagme.wwa.com ------------------------------ From: KCHOK@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU Subject: Information on Seminar Wanted Date: 11 May 94 10:26:01 CDT Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services Hello out there, I am an exchange student graduating in December. As a part of my program I shall be paid to attend a seminar in the continental United States. I want to attend a seminar on data trasmissions/telephone networks sometime in the first week of August in New York City. If anyone out there knows of any such seminars please write to me at "ldorji@weber.ece.ukans.edu". Thanks for your time. ------------------------------ From: johng@ecs.comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse Organization: Motorola, LMPS Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:04:06 -0500 In article , jharan@cwa.com (Jeff Haran) wrote: > Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like an obvious solution to > an obvious problem. The thing that I can't understand is why this > service abuse wasn't anticipated by the cellular telephone founders. > Does anybody have any insights as to why it doesn't work this way > today? The VHF and UHF IMTS radiotelephones that were widely used prior to the introduction of cellular were much less secure than what we have today. These were programmed by opening the radio up and using wire jumpers to set the area code and last four digits of the phone number (only 10,000 phones were allowed per area code -- no exchange code was in the phone). These phones didn't have any electronic serial number. Signaling of phone addressing and calling numbers was by a ten pulse-per-second tone; so slow you could easily decode it with a tape recorder, if not by ear. As far as I know, IMTS wasn't widely abused. The planners would not have anticipated that the much more secure AMPS system would not have had adequate protection to deal with the threat which, at the time, was probably considered minimal. It is fairly clear that the designers of AMPS underestimated the sophistication of their adversaries, the availability of inexpensive test and programing equipment, and the advantages to the criminal underground of using altered phones. John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ From: bwilson@netcom.com (Bob Wilson) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:27:17 GMT John R Levine (johnl@iecc.com) wrote: >> Does anybody have any insights as to why it doesn't work this way >> [with per-phone challenge-response passwords] today? > The AMPS system in use in the U.S. was designed over a decade ago, and > has become much more popular than even the most optimistic forecasts > predicted. There's a balance between cost and function, and ten years > ago the cost of adding the security features would have been quite > high, and the advantage, given the relatively modest popularity they > expected, low. Its my understanding that the reason better security measures were not implemented was because they were deemed "too secure" and instead the industry decided to wait until it would actually become a problem. I'm not so sure that the cost/function rational really applied. > On the other hand, if the next round of cell phones (CDMA or TDMA) > don't include effective security features, that's just stupid. Indeed. ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse Date: 11 May 1994 08:51:22 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) Air ouch (PacTel Cellular) has been testing a system that looks at the telephones finger like prints beside the EIN. That should slow things down, but also it can cause a problem when you have a loaner phone with your number since the way it operates will be different from you regular phone. I have not heard anything about the tests in sometime so maybe they are finished and being used or not. Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS (909) 359-5338 12/24/96/14.4 V32/V42bis ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #211 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17484; 11 May 94 19:03 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA10382; Wed, 11 May 94 15:41:03 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA10371; Wed, 11 May 94 15:41:01 CDT Date: Wed, 11 May 94 15:41:01 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405112041.AA10371@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #212 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 May 94 15:41:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 212 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson USPS & IRS Mull National ID Cards, Clinton to Sign Orders (Monty Solomon) Book Review: Police Call / Beyond Police Call (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Matthew Scott Weisberg) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Kevin Bluml) Re: Internet White Pages (Lenny Charnoff) Re: Internet White Pages (John R. Levine) Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet (Seth Breidbart) Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet (Nevin Liber) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 01:41:06 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: USPS & IRS Mull National Identity Cards, Clinton to Sign Orders Excerpt from EFFector Online 07.08 From: Mitch Ratcliffe Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 07:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Ever Feel Like You're Being Watched? You Will... Digital Media has learned that the Clinton administration is debating not if, but how, to create a card that every American will need in order to interact with any federal government agency. Combined with two potential executive orders and the Postal Service's designs on putting its stamp on personal and business electronic transactions, the card could open a window on every nuance of American personal and business life. The wrangling among the administration, the U.S. Postal Service, the Internal Revenue Service and Department of Defense, emerged into the public eye at this April's CardTech/SecureTech Conference. The gathering of security experts was convened to discuss applications for smart card and PCMCIA memory card technologies in business and government. The Postal Service, at the conference presented a proposal for a "general purpose U.S. services smartcard," which individuals and companies would use to authenticate their identities when sending and receiving electronic mail, transferring funds and interacting with government agencies, such as the I.R.S., Veterans Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services. President Clinton is also considering signing two executive orders that would greatly expand the government's access to personal records, including an order that would allow the I.R.S. to monitor individual bank accounts and automatically collect taxes based on the results, said sources close to the White House. The collection service will be presented as a convenient way to avoid filling out a tax return. The White House did not respond to requests for comments about this report. The Post Office: We deliver for you. The Postal Service's U.S. Card would be designed to use either smart cards (plastic cards with an embedded microprocessor carrying a unique number that can be read by a electromagnetic scanner and linked to computerized records stored on a network) or PCMCIA cards, which can contain megabytes of personal information. (You've probably seen this type card in AT&T's "You Will" ad campaign, which shows a doctor inserting a woman's card in a reader in order to access a recording of a sonogram). The Postal Service said it is considering AT&T and other companies' smart card technologies. In a slide presentation at the conference, Postal representative Chuck Chamberlain outlined how an individual's U.S. Card would be automatically connected with the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Treasury, the I.R.S., the banking system, and a central database of digital signatures for use in authenticating electronic mail and transactions. The U.S. Card is only a proposal, Chamberlain insists. Yet the Postal Service is prepared to put more than a hundred million of the cards in citizens' pockets within months of administration approval, he said. "We've been trying to convince people [in the different agencies] to do just one card, otherwise, we're going to end up with two or three cards," said Chamberlain. He said in addition to the healthcare card proposed by President Clinton last year, various government agencies are forwarding plans for a personal records card and a transactions (or "e-purse") card. Chamberlain said the I.R.S in particular is pursuing plans for an identity card for taxpayers. Don't leave home without it. Though he did not name the U.S. Card at the time, Postmaster General Marvin Runyon suggested that the Postal Service offer electronic mail certification services during testimony before the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee in March. The proposal is clearly intended as a way to sustain the Postal Service's national role in the information age, since it would give the agency a role in virtually every legally-binding electronic transaction made by U.S. citizens. For instance: * When sending or receiving electronic mail, U.S. Card users would be able to check the authenticity of a digital signature to screen out impostors. * Banking transactions (notably credit card purchases) that depend on authentication of the participants identities and an audit trail, would be registered in Postal Service systems. * Veterans, or for that matter college students and welfare recipients, could check their federal benefits using the identification data on their U.S. Cards. * Visitors to an emergency room would have instant access to medical records at other hospitals, as well as their health insurance information. These examples may seem benign separately, but collectively they paint a picture of a citizen's or business's existence that could be meddlesome at best and downright totalitarian at worst. Will buying a book at a gay bookstore with a credit card that authenticates the transaction through the Postal Service open a Naval officer up to court marshall? If you have lunch with a business associate on a Saturday at a family restaurant, will the IRS rule the expense non-deductible before you can even claim it? "There won't be anything you do in business that won't be collected and analyzed by the government," said William Murray, an information system security consultant to Deloitte and Touche who saw Chamberlain's presentation. "This [National Information Infrastructure] is a better surveillance mechanism than Orwell or the government could have imagined. This goddamned thing is so pervasive and the propensity to connect to it is so great that it's unstoppable." Deep Roots; Deep Pockets; Long History. Chamberlain said the Postal Service has been working for "a couple years" on the information system to back up the U.S. Card. He said the project was initiated by the Department of Defense, which wanted a civilian agency to create a national electronic communications certification authority that could be connected to its Defense Messaging System. Chamberlain said the Postal Service has also consulted with the National Security Agency, proponents of the Clipper encryption chip which hides the contents of messages from all but government agencies, like law enforcement. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Ames Research Laboratories in Mountain View, Calif. carried out the research and development work for Clipper. "We're designing a national framework for supporting business-quality authentication," said John Yin, the engineer heading up the U.S. Card- related research for NASA Ames' advanced networking applications group. "This is not specifically with just the Postal Service. We'll be offering services to other agencies and to third-party commercial companies that want to build other services on the card." For example, VISA or American Express could link their credit services to the U.S. Card. Yin, who works on Defense Messaging Systems applications, said his group has collaborated with "elements of Department of Defense" for the past year, but would not confirm the participation of the National Security Agency, a Department of Defense agency. The NSA is specifically prohibited from creating public encryption systems by the Computer Security Act of 1987. Yin also would not comment on the budget for the project, which other sources said was quite large and has spanned more than two years. A false sense of security? According to Yin, the cards would allow individuals or businesses to choose any encryption technology. "It's not our approach to say, 'Here's the standard, take it or leave it,'" he said. "We're not trying to create a monopoly, rather it's an infrastructure for interoperability on which a whole variety of services can be built." Yet, NASA, which is a participant in the CommerceNet electric marketplace consortium will "suggest" to its partners that they adopt the U.S. Card certification infrastructure, he said. The reality is that government agencies' buying power usually drives the market to adopt a particular technology -- not unlike the way the Texas Board of Education, the largest single purchaser of textbooks in the U.S., sets the standard for the content of American classroom curricula. Since, the administration has already mandated use of Clipper and its data-oriented sibling, the Tesserae chip, in federal systems it's fairly certain that the law enforcement-endorsed chips will find their way into most, if not all, U.S. Cards. Even in the unlikely event that one government agency should weather the pressure and pass on the Clipper chip, it's still possible to trace the source, destination, duration and time of transactions conducted between Clippered and non-Clippered devices. "Most of this shift [in privacy policy] is apparently being done by executive order at the initiative of bureaucracy, and without any Congressional oversight or Congressional concurrence, " Murray said. "They are not likely to fail. You know, Orwell said that bureaucrats, simply doing what bureaucrats do, without motivation or intent, will use technology to enslave the people." EDITOR'S NOTE: Digital Media has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for Clinton and Bush Administration, Postal Service, NSA, Department of Defense, NASA, I.R.S. and other documents related to the creation of the U.S. Card proposal. Mitch Ratcliffe Copyright 1994 by Mitch Ratcliffe and Seybold Publications. Mitch Ratcliffe Editor in Chief Digital Media: A Seybold Report 444 De Haro St., Ste. 128 San Francisco, Calif. 94107 415.575.3775 office godsdog@netcom.com ------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don'tcha just *luv* our resident president now in power? If the above is true -- and honestly, I don't know what to think about some of the stuff EFF churns out from one day to the next; they seem to have their own axes to grind -- then I think Clinton has gained a few more enemies. Given the tremendous amount of heat on him now in the conservative media -- and even the mainstream liberal press has been unable to totally avoid Paula Corbin Jones, Whitewater and all the rest of it -- I strongly believe Clinton will be out of office in the next six to nine months. I think the scenario will be another Richard Nixon: when it is at the point that Congress is ready to impeach him (literally within a day or two in Nixon's case) he'll resign and split rather than go on the books as being impeached ... same as Nixon. And don't think for one minute that Hillary does not have him nailed down firmly in place. She has so much dirt on him yet unrevealed that he wouldn't dare double-cross her. I think before long they will have a marital spat and she will spill her guts on several topics including Vince Foster just to spite her husband. She's very dangerous. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:50:50 CDT From: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Book Reviews: Police Call / Beyond Police Call Most readers of the Digest who are scanner enthusiasts are already familiar with POLICE CALL, a multi-volume set of reference books giving the frequencies for public safety radio communications throughout the USA, along with quite a bit of other useful information relating to the use of scanners. Broken down into volumes based on geography, each volume of POLICE CALL serves various parts of the USA. For example Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky and Wisconsin make up volume 4, which is the portion I get each year. Published annually since sometime in the early 1960's, the 1994 edition includes numerous miscellaneous listings including some federal government entries, railroads, and aircraft. In addition to an alphabetical listing of license holders by state, a cross reference by frequency makes it easy to find out who is occupying a given spot when all you have is the frequency you are listening to without a name or location. Gene Hughes has been the editor of POLICE CALL since its inception. Published by Hollins Radio Data of Los Angeles, the book (or rather, the volume of the book relevant to your geographic location) is a very fine and comprehensive publication. In April, the first new publication from Hollins was released, and it also is proving to be a valuable reference tool for scanner enthusiasts. Entitled BEYOND POLICE CALL, the first (of what is promised to be annual editions) covers all sorts of other listings of license holders. Unlike the original, BEYOND POLICE CALL is a single volume publication covering the entire United States. Unlike the original, this new book only has an alphabetical listing of license holders, broken down first by state, then by type of service, the finally by license holder within the state and service categories. There is no cross-reference by frequency in this book, and that is its major drawback in my opinion. Richard Barnett, known to many people on the east coast for his scanner reference guides, collaborated with Gene Huges on this new book. Barnett is shown as the editor with Hughes as the publisher. According to Barnett and Hughes, nearly two years was spent gathering the information for the new book, and revisions are planned annually, apparently in the spring of each year. The original POLICE CALL usually comes out in the fall. Because it is a consolidated USA listing, the new book runs about 430 pages, (POLICE CALL tends to run about 200+ pages) and my suggestion to the authors would be that subsequent revisions need to be broken down geographically like the original, and most definitly a cross- reference by frequency needs to be included. The kinds of listings you will find in BEYOND POLICE CALL include: -- frequencies used at sports events -- frequencies used by public utilities (here to some extent it gets ridiculous; the authors apparently just did a dump of FCC records; the listings for 'Ameritech' and 'Illinois Bell' go on for better than a page of small type as do the listings for 'Commonwealth Edison') -- amusement parks -- resorts and casinos -- school districts -- newspapers, television and radio news departments -- shopping mall security forces (naturally, living a block and a half from Skokie's 'Old Orchard Mall' I put that one in my scanner right away) -- movie crews -- colleges and universities (their security departments, etc) -- stadiums -- hospitals -- hotels -- taxicab dispatching -- towing services for disabled and/or illegally parked cars -- ski resorts -- race crews -- state fairs -- conventions -- public transportation -- farm cooperatives -- private investigators -- neighborhood watch groups Some of the above makes for very interesting listening, as any scanner enthusiast will tell you. The thing with public safety radio is that it makes up only a small percentage of what is out there. Many people buy a scanner only to listen to the police and unwittingly they miss huge amounts of very good stuff they might miss otherwise. Where to get your copy: I got both of mine (RADIO CALL 1994 Edition Volume 4 and BEYOND RADIO CALL) at the local Radio Shack store here in Skokie. They are $9.99 each and go by RS 'part number' 62-1040 (Beyond) and 62-104x (POLICE CALL) where 'x' runs from 1 to 8 I think for the various regional editions. Our local Radio Shack had a dozen of the BEYOND books two days ago, now the manager is down to just a couple copies left so it is apparently going pretty fast and you may want to get your copy ASAP. I guess you could also order directly from the publisher, but be sure and specify *which state* you live in (or want listings for) if you order POLICE CALL so they know which one to send you. Hollins Radio Data PO Box 35002 Los Angeles, CA 90035 They don't list a phone number, 800 or otherwise, so my assumption is they prefer not to deal with phone call orders or inquiries. They do stress writing to them with suggestions and comments at their address shown above. I suggest just getting your copies from Radio Shack or some other book dealer. ------------------ On the same train of thought, whatever happened to that fellow out of Indianapolis, IN somewhere who published the NORTH AMERICAN RADIO AND TV GUIDE? It came out on a more or less annual basis for many years listing all the callsigns and frequencies of AM/FM radio and television stations in the USA, Canada and Mexico. I've not seen a fresh copy of it for many years now, and the last one I have is Volume 13. Is he still around? I think Sams published it. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: moodyblu@umcc.umcc.umich.edu (Matthew Scott Weisberg) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding Date: 11 May 1994 13:34:40 -0400 Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) writes: > In a previous article, bruce.mchollan@keystone.keystone.fl.us (Bruce > Mchollan) wrote: >> A person I work with has a cellular phone with call forwarding. When >> he forwards his calls to another number and then calls his own >> cellular number he is not charged for the call ($0!). This works even >> when he forwards his calls to a number within our LATA that would >> invoke toll charges if dialed by land line. He takes advantage to >> save the toll charges. Is this legal? > Legal? Yes. Believable? No. > I've seen a couple of different ways cell companies handle the > forwarding charges. Basically, they don't like to give unlimited > forwarding for free 'cause of the scenerio you described above. This is completely believable ... you do this in the Detroit Metro area. I have cellular service with Cellular One. I have call forwarding on my phone ($1.95 per month plus approx. 8 cents per forwarded call) ... I live in Novi, MI (in the new 810 area code). My girlfriend lives in Southgate (35 miles away, in 313). I simply forwarded my cell phone to her number, call my cell phone, and get untimed calls for 8 cents a call to her. Saved me over $35 on the last phone bill. Now, my question is, when the cut over to 810 becomes mandatory in August, will this no longer work? My cell phone has an 810 number. Is this a factor? One of my main motivations for getting the phone was for the call forwarding purpose (although, now that I have it, I can't imagine being without.. heh!). Matt Weisberg, CNE MILLIWAYS - Computer and Network Consulting PP-ASEL 21650 West Eleven Mile Road #202 Amateur Radio: KF8OH Southfield, MI 48076 Internet: moodyblu@umcc.umich.edu (810)350-0503 Fax:(810)350-0504 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 06:41:03 CDT From: kevin@gath.cray.com (Kevin Bluml) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding > In article amg@panix.com (Alan M. > Gallatin) writes: > In a previous article, bruce.mchollan@keystone.keystone.fl.us (Bruce > Mchollan) wrote: >> A person I work with has a cellular phone with call forwarding. When >> he forwards his calls to another number and then calls his own >> cellular number he is not charged for the call ($0!). This works even > Legal? Yes. Believable? No. > What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call? Well, I can name two. US West and Cellular One in the Minneapolis/St. Paul calling area of Minnesota. Neither charge any air time for forwarded calls of either type, N/A or immediate. My bill will typically be three or four pages, half of which are forwarded calls with $0.00 as the cost. Also, when travelling to Wisconsin, I can still reach the home area (Non-roaming) for 20 miles in to WI. There is no toll charge for these calls, even though the last tower is supposedly IN Wisconsin. When I called 911 once 15 miles into WI for a stalled car, the bill showed a WI phone number and I reached the county sheriff in WI rather than the MN state patrol as I would on the MN side. (I was on the home system, and NOT roaming at the time). Kevin V. Bluml - Cray Research Inc. 612-683-3036 USmail - 655 - Lone Oak Drive, Eagan, MN 55121 Internet - kevin.bluml@cray.com UUCP - uunet!cray!kevin ------------------------------ From: charnoff@netcom.com (Lenny Charnoff) Subject: Re: Internet White Pages Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 02:50:24 GMT Jan Richert (jrichert@krefcom.GUN.de) wrote: > Could anyone email me the exact title of the Internet White Pages, > publisher and ISBN number? Publisher IDG Books ISBN # 1-56884-300-3 Lenny Charnoff Information Odyssey-Newsletter and Online Service BBS- 503-650-2992 charnoff@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 94 12:33 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Internet White Pages Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Could anyone email me the exact title of the Internet White Pages, > publisher and ISBN number? Seth Godin and James S. McBride, "The 1994 Internet White Pages", IDG Books, 1994, US$29.95, C$39.95, UKL26.99. ISBN 1-56884-300-3. It's distributed in Europe by Transword Publishers Ltd. For info on availability outside the U.S., contact Christina Turner, +1 415 312 0633. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com Claimer: IDG has published several of my books, but I wasn't involved with this one, even though on the last page of it there's a nice ad for "The Internet for Dummies". ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 21:10:17 -0400 From: Seth Breidbart Subject: Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet Organization: Society for the Promulgation of Cruelty to the Clueless In article andrsonj@rtsg.mot.com writes: > andrsonj@rtsg.mot.com (John Anderson) writes: >> mail mail-server@pit-manager.mit.edu > I have learned that to use the above service, it is preferable to mail > to: > "mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu" > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just my curiosity -- why is it better or > preferable to write to the one address instead of the other? PAT] Because the name pit-manager may go away some time in the future; rtfm is the new official name. Seth ------------------------------ From: nevin@cs.arizona.edu (Nevin Liber) Subject: Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet Date: 11 May 1994 02:23:11 -0700 Organization: University of Arizona CS Department, Tucson AZ In article , John Anderson wrote: >> mail mail-server@pit-manager.mit.edu > I have learned that to use the above service, it is preferable to mail > to: > "mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu" > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just my curiosity -- why is it better or > preferable to write to the one address instead of the other? PAT] My guess would be that this would allow MIT to change the machine the service is on at will, without having to change the outside email address. For instance: my email address is nevin@cs.arizona.edu, yet I never send email from that machine (I don't even have an account on the machine). I'm planning on changing the machine I get email on later this month, yet I won't have to tell anybody that I'm doing it, since I'll still have the same external address (and the internal machines know to route mail to the right machine). (Actually, if I wanted to be even more generic, nevin@arizona.edu works; it is set up as an alias to nevin@cs.arizona.edu. Now if I could just figure out how to get nevin@edu to work ... :-)) Nevin ":-)" Liber nevin@cs.arizona.edu (602) 293-2799 +++(520) after 3/95 office: (602) 621-1685 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #212 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa18297; 11 May 94 21:48 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA14081; Wed, 11 May 94 17:49:41 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA14071; Wed, 11 May 94 17:49:39 CDT Date: Wed, 11 May 94 17:49:39 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405112249.AA14071@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #213 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 May 94 17:49:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 213 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks (Terry Hardie) Re: FAX Mailbox Services (Jack Bzoza) Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (John R. Levine) Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted (John R. Levine) Re: Switch 56 Service (Keith Luca) Re: Broadband ISDN (Junaid Islam) Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts (John Harris) Re: Cellular Privacy (Jason Williams) Meeks Defense Fund (Mark Boolootian) Books from Telecom Library Inc. (Nigel Allen) Replace POST-MAIL by FAX (Fred Hess) Searching For a Specific Telephone! (Karim Farrag) Calling 1-800-COLLECT from Canada (Hugh Pritchard) Call Display From New York (Tony Harminc) Looking For FAX *System* Information (Rich Osman) Break-Even Point For Orange Card (Carl Moore) Looking For List of 800 Providers (Joel Fedorko) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 06:58:13 NZST From: python@bytes.kiwi.gen.nz (Terry Hardie) Subject: Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book For Digest Readers Organization: Computer Bytes BBS, Auckland, N.Z. (+64-9-537-5190) wu/O=JEFFREY_RACE/DD.ELN=62075697@mhs.attmail.com writes: > The manual is free upon request to readers of TELECOM Digest. > Generous-spirited readers are requested to provide suggestions for > corrections or improvements to subsequent revisions of the manual. > Any who make it to the last page and still want more such paper in > their in-baskets from possible survivors of future design projects are > respectfully encouraged to submit the form at the rear of the manual > for future technical mailings (if we survive this one). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When you write to Dr. Race to request your > free copy of the manual, please mention reading about it in TELECOM Digest. > Thanks. PAT] Not sure which one of you I need to send this to, but please could you send me one. Is it on paper or electronic? Terry [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You would write to Dr. Race to receive your copy of the book. I am reprinting this as a reminder since several people have written *me* asking for a copy. I can't help you! Write to the author at the address shown for him at the top of this message. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jack Bzoza Subject: Re: FAX Mailbox Services Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:18:00 -0400 Clarence Gold wrote: > Jack Bzoza (JackB@delrina.com) wrote: >> Delrina (the makers of WinFax and PerForm) has just announced a fax >> mailbox service exactly as you describe. It will ship (i.e. be >> available) in about two weeks time. >> It is currently the ONLY way to retrieve a fax sent to your fax >> mailbox directly to your hotel room with your laptop. > Nice idea, but "the ONLY way"? Hardly. Please inform us of any other solution that you are aware of that permits you to retrieve faxes to your laptop into your hotel room. Note I did NOT say "have faxes sent to your hotel room". The PBX in most hotels does not permit you to receive a call directly from an outside line. The way the existing fax mailbox services work is that you have to call in from a voice line, enter your PIN, then enter a fax phone number for the system to send your faxes. You then hang up the phone and the fax mailbox sends your faxes to the number you entered. This is the method sold by folks like A T & T, SkyFax, etc. There are no other fax mailbox RETRIEVAL solutions available which can receive the fax on the same call out to the best of my knowledge. > Expensive? yes. Yes it is but then this a very specialized service for the traveller. If you need it, then it's worth it. Don't forget you can also get voicemail options, pager notification (i.e. beep me whenever a fax arrives in my Fax MailBox), etc. Long distance is expensive as well. Since access to the MailBox is via your own personal 1-800 number you don't pay any additional connect charges (i.e. they're built in to the cost). If you don't need the service too often, simply use WinFax PRO 4.0's REMOTE RETRIEVAL capability. Yes, Delrina also gives you the ability to use WinFax PRO as your fax mailbox. If you don't mind leaving your PC on all the time receiving faxes, then WinFax PRO 4.0 can be set up for REMOTE RETRIEVAL. In other words, you can dial in to your WinFax PRO 4.0, (provided it's properly set up) enter a password and initiate a retrieval to your present location. This feature was delayed in the initial product shipment but is now shipping in all commercial versions of WinFax PRO 4.0. In fact, WinFax PRO 4.0 becomes the Delrina Fax MailBox principal competitor. Delrina believes that the WinFax PRO user should be empowered individually to control her/his fax communications in whatever manner suits them. > Offered by Delrina? I think not. Looks that way. I believe it is > offered by MCI. Sorry, but once again, you're mistaken. MCI has no such service available. MCI is the supplier of Delrina's Fax Broadcast service. Delrina has integrated WinFax PRO 4.0 into MCI's Fax Broadcast platform to enable WinFax PRO 4.0 users to prepare a fax for broadcast to multiple users (up to 500 per list) at their desktop with their standard Windows software and then to send it via WinFax PRO 4.0 (using the phonebooks and groups already in your WinFax) on a single phone call to a 1-800 telephone number. Delrina's strategic partner and supplier of the Fax MailBox platform is Pacific Bell. Since Delrina is building its own Communications Services Division and not simply reselling other companies products Delrina has selected strategic partners to supply the various components of its business with an eye to providing the very best technology and service in each segment of this venture. > WinFax 4.0 _requires_ a class 1 Faxmodem for mailbox retrieval. > The Class 2 faxmodem that I have cannot be used. Yes. you're right. That is a technical limitation of the hardware as it elates to the fax protocols. You also need a computer capable of running Windows. I guess you won't be able to use it until you spring for $100 for a new modem. > If you want a cheaper alternative, that has been in use for some time, > call 1-800-audiofax, and ask for the name of a "travel mailbox" dealer in > your area. I believe you're wrong again. My understanding is that Audiofax has no product that does direct retrieval on the same call. Yes, you can have your fax sent anywhere you want (in North America). Delrina's Fax MailBox does all that too but that's not the power of the system. We didn't want to simply do a "me too" service but rather tried to do it in a way that leveraged our strengths. > I must admit that the integration into WinFax is kind of cool. That is the entire focus of the service and the product!!! As I said above, there are dozens of services that will store your fax for you in a mailbox and send it to a number that you specify. To the best of my knowledge, only Delrina WinFax PRO 4.0 and the Delrina Communications Services can deliver this type of functionality in a Fax MailBox at this time. > I use WinFax to retrieve faxmail to my machine now, from an Audiofax system. Please see my comments above about RETRIEVAL versus having faxes sent to your location on a second telephone call. I'd be very interested to know how you can do that with a class 2 faxmodem !!! Thanks for your interest. jackb@delrina.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 10:44 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > As I understand the situation, zmodem is indeed a proprietary > protocol. Its use on hosts is only free under certain restricted > contexts, academic use being one of them. Clients, on the other hand, > are free to incorporate zmodem protocols, since a host is required to > use them. My understanding is that Chuck Forsberg developed ZMODEM under a contract to Telenet (now Sprintnet) and they released the spec to the public. Anyone can implement ZMODEM without legal restriction, which is why most comm programs now support it. Forsberg, doing business as Omen Technology, wrote several widely used implementations of it, including DSZ, Pro-YAM, sz and rz. DSZ is a DOS ZMODEM upload and download utility intended to be run from a comm program that doesn't have built-in ZMODEM support, and is shareware. Pro-YAM is a commercial Unix comm program, with a junior shareware version. Sz and rz are tiny zmodem send and recive programs, are free for personal use and in connection with other Omen products, and are shareware for other uses. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 10:50 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > They considered and later acted on the opportunity to offload the higher > cost, less efficient local operating groups, and concentrate on LD. That was certainly the plan, but if you look at how much more money the RBOCs have made than AT&T in the past decade, the crystal ball was kind of cloudy. The breakup has certainly been good news for sophisticated users, since there are all sorts of swell new services that the old Bell System would never have gotten around to providing. The cost shift from long distance to monthly service is a purely political thing, and really has nothing to do with the breakup. If regulators wanted to, they could still mandate a surcharge on LD calls (independent of IXC) and use that to subsidize local service. This could easily be done by cranking up the per-minute rates charged for FG B and FG D connections. But they haven't -- they've moved charges closer to costs, which should be more economically effecient, albeit at the cost of making POTS service less universally available than before. All telcos have some sort of low cost "lifeline" service available for under $10/mo, but I can believe that people are embarassed to ask for it. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: kluca@pipeline.com (Keith Luca) Subject: Re: Switch 56 Service Date: 11 May 1994 11:27:16 -0400 Organization: The Pipeline My organization is reviewing switch-56 service which will will be used to back up a dedicated 56 circuit. We have received proposals form NYNEX and Sprint. The cost difference is not an issue. We are leaning towards Sprint because we feel they will be more responsive then NYNEX. This is based on our experience with NYNEX and the level of bureaucracy that at times makes NYNEX ineffective. MCI has provided this service to us in the past and has demonstrated that they are unreliable. If you have any pro or con comments about NYNEX or Sprint please let me know. Thanks, Keith M. Luca ------------------------------ From: JUNAID ISLAM Subject: Re: Broadband ISDN Date: Wed, 11 May 94 03:14:14 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Try reading "ISDN in Perspective" by Fred Goldstein (Addison Wesley, 1992). It is both readible and highly informative. Best regards, Junaid@Delphi [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As a matter of fact, Fred is a regular participant in this Digest although I haven't heard much from him lately. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 02:04 WET From: joharris@io.org (John Harris) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts Quoting Tdgilman@iris-1.ce.berkel: > I was trying out new modem software yesterday, and under the option > where one can specify the number of redial attempts before giving up, > somthing like the following reads: "Governement regulations may limit > you to 10 redials maximum." > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That has been the case in Canada for > quite a few years and I think it is true here in the USA also now. My understanding is that the Canadian requirement (CS-03) is 10 redial attempts, the American (FCC Part 68) requirement is 15 redial attempts; and the harmonized requirement coming out of the Free Trade Agreement will be two redial attempts. There have been complaints about fax machines that call in the middle of the night, i.e. during cheap rate times, and won't stop. The rules apply to any telephone device, fax or modem. The TIA should be petitioning the FCC for adoption of the new Part 68/CS-03 any time now. John Harris, Mississauga, ON, Canada (905) 828-1002 Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------ From: streak@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Streak) Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy? Date: 11 May 1994 11:31:54 -0500 Organization: The University of Texas - Austin In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However the court ruling to which you > refer is a very grey area. The FCC thinks otherwise, as do the federal > courts in some jurisdictions. Best not listen to cellular calls. PAT] Speaking of which, has anyone actually been caught, tried, and convicted of listening to cellular phone calls? (You have to be pretty stupid to turn on your scanner to the cellular band when a cop pulls you over ... and even then, the chances are unlikely that they will do anything.) Another thing ... suppose I heard some illegal activity on cellular or even cordless? Do I have any legal rights to report it? (didn't the Nancy Kerrigan case get blown up because someone listened to the phone lines?) email: streak@mail.utexas.edu * Jason Williams -- Austin, Tx. main-> streak@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu * University of Texas at Austin streak@underg.ucf.org * Electrical and Computer Engineering [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Forget about cordless. Listen to whatever you want there; just don't repeat it or benefit from what you heard since that rule has existed independently for years. There is no law against listening to cordless phones. A police officer who pulls you over with spare time on his hands *could* make a referral to the appropriate federal agency if he wanted to do so; he probably would not. For your information however, at least one major retailer of scanners (Tandy/Radio Shack) has instructed its employees that they may no longer sell scanners to any customer who indicates the scanner will be used illegally to receive cellular signals. If you ask a Radio Shack employee something to the effect of 'which of your scanners can be modified to pick up cellular calls?', he is supposed to refuse any further conversation with you and *** refuse to sell you any scanners at all ***. Tandy has recently instructed its employees that in the event a scanner purchased from Radio Shack is used in the commission of a crime and it is discovered that the selling employee ** knew or should have known ** that the purchaser intended to make illegal modifications to the radio that the selling employee can be charged with 'aiding and abetting in the commission of a crime'. That may be all just theory, and it may never happen, but at least in this neck of the woods, many RS employees will not talk to you about 'cellular' and 'scanner' in the same sentence. All that despite the fact that the pocket tone dialer Tandy sells can be easily converted -- with a crystal sold at Radio Shack! -- to make the tone caused by a 25 cent coin put in pay phones. But that is also a verbotin topic at 'the shack' ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian) Subject: Meeks Defense Fund Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 13:38:30 -0400 Forwarded FYI to the Digest: From: Meeks Defense Fund Dear Net Citizen: How do you put a price on free and open dialogue on the Net? How much are you willing to spend to preserve the concept of roboust and open debate that have become a part of the Internet's culture? $100? $50? $20? What if the cost of helping to preserve an open and robust Net was no more than $1.29? That's right, less than the cost of a fast food hamburger. Freedom on the Internet for only $1.29 ... cheap at twice the price. A joke? Hardly. The free and open speech, indeed the First Amendment rights of the Internet -- rights we've all enjoyed for decades -- are now being challenged in court. CyberWire Dispatch, the well-respected online newswire written and developed for the Internet community by journalist Brock Meeks, is the subject of a libel suit. CyberWire Dispatch has been at the forefront of bringing the Net community timely and insightful articles. This suit was highlighted in a {Wall St. Journal} article (April 22, page B1). The subject of a Dispatch investigation is suing Meeks for simply doing what journalists in the traditional print medium have done since the founding of newspapers: Print the facts and let the public decide the outcome. Brock and the Cyperwire Dispatch are examples of the "bottom up" journalism that charachterizes the Net, where anyone with a modem can compete with the traditional press. Of course, most of us don't come to the Net with a lawyer in tow, or the resources to defend a legal action taken against us in courts located hundreds of miles from our homes. This libel action is one of the earliest cases of libel involving alleged defamatory statements published over a computer network. It raises the extremely important legal and policy issues. It's impact may well determine how and to what extent anyone feels free to express strong opinions on the Net, wihtout being put at risk of legal action. It is crucial that Brock have a strong defense and that the principles that come out of this case provide the maximum protection to the exercise of free and open speech as possible. CyberWire Dispatch is unique because it's distributed solely in electronic form. A service for the Net community at large. And all CyberWire Dispatch articles are free. Meeks neither charges anyone for receiving them; he gets paid nothing to write them. For all these efforts, he's being sued. And being sued by a company with a large financial backing. Meeks, on the other hand, has no such resources. His attorney, Bruce Sanford of Baker & Hostetler is arguably the finest First Amendment lawyer in the U.S. And although he has agreed to represent Meeks at a reduced rate, the cost of defending against this unmerited suit will not be cheap. We have formed this committee to lend our support in helping him raise money for his legal defense. And all we're asking you to send is $1.29. That's it. Why that price? The math is easy: $1 in an envelope with a 29 cent stamp applied. Who can't afford $1.29 to help save the great freedoms we all enjoy here today? Can you send more? Of course. Any contributions will be welcomed and accepted. Tax deductible donations also are possible by following the instructions below. All money sent for Meeks' legal defense fund will be go to that purpose. All the administrative services for administering the fund are being donated; 100% of your money goes to defer the legal costs of this case. You are encouraged to repost this message. But please, we urge you to keep proper Net protocol in mind when reposting or cross posting this message. Thanks for your time. On behalf of Brock and for future generations of electronic journalists, we appreciate your contributions and support. Sincerely, Samuel A. Simon President, Issue Dynmics, Inc.* ssimon@idi.net Mitch Kapor Chair, Electronic Frontier Foundation* Kapor@eff.org David Farber The Alfred Fitler Moore Professor of Telecommunications Systems University of Pennsylvania* farber@central.cis.upenn.edu Philip Elmer-DeWitt Senior Writer TIME Magazine* ped@panix.com Marc Rotenberg Electronic Infomation Privacy Center* epic@cpsr.org Nicholas Johnson Former FCC Commissoner* 103-5393@mcimail.com Jerry Berman Electronic Frontier Foundation* jbeman@eff.org Mike Godwin Electronic Frontier Foundation* mnemonic@eff.org *AFFILIATION IS FOR INDENTIFICATION PURPOSE ONLY For Tax Deductible Donations: Make Checks out to "Point Foundation" and clearly annotate on the check: "For Legal Defense Fund." Send those checks to: Meeks Defense Fund c/o Point Foundation 27 Gate Five Road Sausalito, CA 94965 For those who don't care about the tax deductible status, send contributions to: Meeks Defense Fund c/o IDI 901 15th St. NW Suite 230 Washington, DC 20005 Meeks Defense Fund Internet: fund@idi.net c/o IDI c/o Point Foundation 901 15th St. NW 27 Gate Five Road Suite 230 Sausalito, CA 9465 Washington, DC 20005 -------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think based on the signatories to the letter shown above, we are safe in waiving the usual comments about making sure something is bonafide before sending money through the mail. I believe all the gentlemen listed above are honest; there are no scams being pulled. By all means, if you wish, send what you can. But first, as they say, a word from the sponsor: Nowhere in the above report is any mention given of whether or not libel did occur. Note that the article seems to skirt that (to me) very basic premise ... instead, the writers complain of how the accused has very little money, is doing all this for free out of sense of volunteer- ism, and how the plaintiff is a big company with lots of money -- as though those facts alone meant anything. Big corporations have rights also; even AT&T is entitled to the protection of the law, the same as you or I. (Note: I use AT&T as an example only, I do not know who is suing him.) Ditto, the fact that you are a poor, underpaid (if paid at all) moderator, working out of the goodness of your heart (or as some people on Usenet like to say about me, to feed my ego-trip) gives one no franchise to violate the law. The law says no libeling, period. Big corporation, little company, single individual, no matter. Newspapers have a little more freedom in this respect and all of us have a bit more freedom where politicians and 'public figures' are concerned, but no one can deliberatly libel another without paying the consequences. Now, that's *if* Cyberwire Dispatch and or its publisher Meeks did in fact publish libelous commentary. I do not know if he did or did not; I do not evaluate the work of other moderators or e-journals. A judge will detirmine the facts. But my point is their argument of 'we are the net, we are something different, the regular rules should not apply to us on account of how we are just volunteers and un-(or under)paid workers; the plaintiff is a big bully with lots of money to hire lawyers,' etc is not applicable. On the one hand, some of these guys want legitimacy for the net. They want, and I agree with them, to have our e-journals treated like any other media. Most of us are damn sick and tired of having our efforts treated like they mean nothing merely because we have no paper editions. Most of us are sick and tired of having the government thumb its nose in our face where our free speech rights are concerned -- getting away with things they would never dare try to pull on the {Washington Post}'s of the world -- merely because they are print media and we are not. So you want legitimacy for e-journals? Fine, then live the life! If the {Washington Post} libeled you, then you would have every right in the world to go after them for it. But you can't have it both ways. If you want to claim the rights afforded you by the constitution and claim the rights given to the media -- I claim all those rights!! -- then can the crap about how 'we are just little private individuals who should not have to be hassled in this way' or words to that effect. Note the article on the one hand calls Cyberwire Dispatch 'the well respected online newswire' then almost immediatly reverses itself. Well hey, the {New York Times} is a well-respected publication also, and there are no doubt times in its long-ago history *it* had cash flow problems and poorly paid help. Its been sued a few times also; that's the price for not watching your tongue in print. So please guys, fight the battle on the merits of the alleged libel, not on the basis of 'I am little and you are big so therefore I am right and you are wrong.' Inform the net of your situation and plead for funds, but do not give us the bit about how the net is so different and special. Now I repeat: it seems a worthy cause otherwise. Lots of netters have come to my rescue in the past and I am glad to bring this latest need to the attention of our generous readers. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Books from Telecom Library Inc. From: nigel.allen@canrem.com (Nigel Allen) Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 12:17:00 -0400 Organization: CRS Online (Toronto, Ontario) If you would like to receive a catalog of Telecom Library's publications, or would like to receive a sample copy of any of the company's magazines (Teleconnect, Call Center or Imaging), contact: Telecom Library Inc. 12 West 21 Street New York NY 10010 U.S.A. telephone 212-691-8215 or 1-800-LIBRARY fax 212-691-1191 Harry Newton is president of Telecom Library, I think. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 17:23:47 +0200 From: hess@elde1.epfl.ch Subject: Replace POST-MAIL by FAX Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne I am currently studying the possibility to replace our POST-MAIL (Internal, National and International) by FAX'ing documents. By "our POST-MAIL" I mean all the traditional mail (NOT confidential) like letters, convocations, informations, ... It's just a question of cost/send. I'll be very happy if you could answer (EMAIL) to any questions below : 1) Have you heard about any experience like that in a school, organisation, or enterprise ? Could you send me any report ? Someone to contact ? 2) FAX sending time: where could I find a report talking about the time I need to send a FAX? What are the speeds used? Quantity of information to be sent (average)? 3) Future of FAXs: What about the sending speed of the next FAX generation? And with the high-speed numerical services? 4) Progression of FAX in enterprises (ten last years)? (In the world). 5) Any suggestions about this experience? 6) Where could I post this message to get more information? Other Newsgroup? You could forward this message anywhere! This experience is a simple research, not a real project, for the EPFL (Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology). Thanks in advance, Fred Email: hess@elde.epfl.ch Sorry for my poor English ! ------------------------------ From: farrag@isis.rz.uni-duesseldorf.de (Karim.Farrag) Subject: Searching For a Specific Telephone Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 15:25:08 GMT Organization: Universitaetsrechenzentrum, Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet Duesseldorf Hi Everybody, For quite a while now I'am searching for a specific telephone probably manufactured by AT&T.Specific features: narrow receiver, the speech unit of the receiver is bent almost 90 degrees; the receiver is shaped like an L , wire phone, mostly seen in black colour.I suppose it most be a very common model in the US , because I saw in many different movies (ex. In the Line of Fire ,Last Action Hero, etc.). Unfortunaly AT&T here in Europe wasn't as cooperative as I thought. Now I am hoping that someone knows which phone I am talking about (telephone manufactor, model number) or maybe the main address of AT&T in the US. Many thanks in advance. E-Mail: farrag@mail.rz.uni-duesseldorf.de ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 13:29 EST From: Hugh Pritchard <0006348214@mcimail.com> Subject: Calling 1-800-COLLECT From Canada [This is from the BRIEFLY column in the May 9, 1994 {MCI This Week}. I'm no MCI employee; I benefit not one whit whether you use 1-800-COLLECT or not. -- HP] CALLING 1-800-COLLECT FROM CANADA Beginning May 10, 1-800-COLLECT (sm), America's favorite way to call collect, will be available in Canada. Canada becomes the first country from which 1-800-COLLECT calls can be made back to the United States. The connection between Canada and the U.S. is made possible through a joint effort between MCI and Canada's Stentor, part of an alliance between the nine major telephone companies of Canada. The 1-800-COLLECT from Canada marks the first joint offering the companies have launched in the consumer marketplace. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:09:36 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Call Display From New York A colleague left a message on my machine here in Toronto while he was waiting for a plane at JFK airport in New York. To my surprise, the Call Display data was not 'out of area' as it usually is for calls from the USA, but the rather unlikely number 212 210-0000. I don't know exactly where he placed the call from (other than that he had cleared security at the time) or how he paid for it. I haven't tried calling the number, but it seems very unlikely to be the actual number on the payphone. I don't know which US carrier he used either - perhaps they are just early in implementing the new FCC requirements ;-) Assuming that the 0000 is fake, who would be setting the number that way? The LEC (implying that the IXC doesn't get the real data)? The IXC making some privacy assumptions of its own? The payphone owner (COCOT)? Tony Harminc ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 11:55:53 CDT From: ROsman@swri.edu Subject: Looking For FAX *System* Information I'm looking for information on fax systems. My brother's business has grown to the point where their single fax is a problem. He also needs to add fax-back capability. Ideally the system would meet the following criteria: PC based Use a range of fax boards Support 3rd number and pickup faxback calls support printing incoming faxes to a laser printer interface cleanly with a network (probably Novell, but TBD) support off peak queuing (for outgoing) support multiple lines (at least three) be easily expandable (add cards, drive space, etc.) Oz@SwRI.edu (Rich Osman) SwRI didn't say it, I did. (210) 522-5050 (w) (210) 699-1302 (h;v/msg/fax) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 17:03:39 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Break-Even Point For Orange Card I have a phone bill with a 15-minute AT&T calling card call from Aberdeen (Md.) to Philadelphia, and it cost $4.70 before Federal tax rate of 3% was applied. This ran a little better than 30 cents a minute, which despite the fifteen minutes still was more expensive than the Orange Card, which would have billed 25 cents per minute plus tax. (PAT's earlier estimate was about ten minutes for break-even point; the longer the call, the more time for spreading out the relatively-high initial charge of other calling cards.) ------------------------------ From: jfedorko@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Joel Fedorko) Subject: Looking For List of 800 Providers Date: 11 May 1994 20:50:33 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana The subject pretty much says it. I'm looking for info on 800 providers and rates. Thanks, Joel jfedorko@ncsa.uiuc.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #213 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21196; 12 May 94 12:46 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA23615; Thu, 12 May 94 08:39:06 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA23606; Thu, 12 May 94 08:39:03 CDT Date: Thu, 12 May 94 08:39:03 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405121339.AA23606@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #214 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 May 94 08:39:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 214 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson NPA Readiness For 1995 (Gregory P. Monti) Emerging Cellular Systems (U. Ezechuk) ID Card Stories -- Reality Check (Lauren Weinstein) Cell One/NY Rates For DC and Boston (Doug Reuben) Help Needed With Speech Recognition..."Word Processing" (Peter Flower) 3270 Emulation (Windows) (Michael Anderson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 07:13:53 EDT From: Gregory P. Monti Subject: NPA Readiness for 1995 North America's Countdown to NPA Interchangeability in 1995 Interchangeable Codes Day is January 15, 1995, which is a Sunday! (Does Hallmark have a line of cards out for it yet?) For purposes of this table, "toll calls" are calls that are *individually itemized* on your local or long distance company phone bill. "Message unit" or "Zone Unit Measurement" or "Extended Area" calls are not individually itemized on bills and I don't consider them "toll" even though they cost something over and above local service. If the local telco doesn't force you to dial them differently, and doesn't bill them individually, then they are treating them like local calls and so will I. Premium calls like 976 are mentioned if I know about them. Otherwise, consider this table to be unreliable as to 976, etc., calls. The "Ready for 1/95" column states whether the NPA has eliminated a dialing plan that won't work once NPAs 281, 334, 360, 520, 563 and 630 come on line. There could be multiple interpretations of what "yes" and "no" could mean, so I took these shortcuts: no 1995 plan announced = no new plan announced, don't know if implemented = yes new plan announced, definitely not implemented = no new plan now implemented, but not mandatory; old one still permitted = yes new plan now implemented and is mandatory = yes I have removed the interchangeable NPAs that will begin 1/95. They will always be "ready for 1/95". NPA Stat Toll Ready Notes Prov calls for within 1/95? NPA dialed as 201 NJ 7 yes 202 DC not applicable yes there are no toll calls within 202 203 CT 1+7 no 204 MB 1+10 yes 1+10D to be mandatory 9/94 205 AL 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 1990 206 WA 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1991, mandatory 1992 207 ME 7 yes 7D announced 1992 208 ID 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993 all US West states 209 CA 7 yes 210 TX 1+10 yes has always been 1+10D toll 212 NY not applicable yes there are no toll calls within 212, 540 & 976 premium services are 7D 213 CA 7 yes has always been 7D for toll 214 TX 1+10 yes 215 PA 7 yes "no 1" campaign ran in 1992, when 1+7D eliminated 216 OH 1+10D yes 1+10D mandatory 1/1/95 217 IL 7 yes Urbana book mentions "10D" without "1", which won't work unless local calls within 217 are also 10D; later Bellcore source says 7D, which I consider more reliable 218 MN 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 12/93, mandatory late 1994 219 IN 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 8/93 301 MD 1+10 yes 302 DE 1+10 yes 1+10D permitted 4/1/94, mandatory 1/7/95 303 CO 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993, mandatory 2/27/94 304 WV 7 yes 305 FL 1+10 yes 1+10D announced early 93 306 SK 1+10 yes 1+10D to be mandatory 9/94 307 WY 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993 all US West states 308 NE 1+10 yes 1+10D announced for all US West states 12/93 309 IL 7 yes per Bellcore source from varney@uscbu.att.com 310 CA 7 yes 312 IL not applicable yes there are no toll calls within 312 313 MI 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993 (was to be 7D) 314 MO 1+7 no 315 NY 7 yes per Bellcore source from varney@uscbu.att.com 316 KS 1+7 no 317 IN 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 8/93, mandatory 12/1/93 318 LA 1+7 no 319 IA 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 12/93 all US West states 401 RI 1+10 yes 7D announced 1992, but 1+10D announced 1/94 to become mandatory 402 NE 1+10 yes 1+10D announced for all US West states 12/93; Lincoln Tel portion 1+10D mandatory late 94 403 AB,NT,YT 1+10 yes 1+10D to be mandatory 9/94 404 GA 1+10 yes 1+10D implemented 1989 405 OK 1+7 no 406 MT 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993 all US West states 407 FL 1+10 yes 1+10D announced early 93 408 CA 7 no inter-NPA calls are 10D, must change to 1+10D 409 TX 1+7 no 410 MD 1+10 yes 412 PA 7 yes not sure if 7D announced 9/93 later Bellcore source from alan.leon.varney@att.com says 7D 413 MA 1+10 yes originally to be 7D; Mass DPU was thought to have ordered 1+10D in 10/93, but J. Covert reports no such order exists; bill stuffer reported here confirms 1+10 is correct; becomes mandatory 6/1/94 414 WI 1+10 yes 415 CA 7 yes has always been 7D toll 416 ON 1+10 yes there are no toll calls within 416 except 976, which are dialed 1 416 976-XXXX 417 MO 1+7 no 418 QC 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 10/93 419 OH 1+10D yes 1+10D mandatory 1/1/95 501 AR 1+7 no 502 KY 1+7 no 503 OR 1+10 yes 1+10D announced mid 1992 504 LA 1+7 no 505 NM 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993 all US West states 506 NB 1+10 yes 1+10D to be mandatory 9/94 507 MN 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 12/93, mandatory late 1994 508 MA 1+10 yes see note under 413 509 WA 1+10 yes 1+10D permitted 5/15/94, mandatory 9/17/94 510 CA 7 yes has always been 7D for toll 512 TX 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1991 513 OH 1+10D yes 1+10D mandatory 1/1/95 514 QC 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 10/93 515 IA 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993 all US West states 516 NY 7 yes inter-NPA calls to be forced to 1+10D; 540 & 976 premium services are 7D 517 MI 1+7 no 518 NY 7 yes per Bellcore source from varney@uscbu.att.com 519 ON 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 10/93 601 MS 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 12/93 602 AZ 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 1990 603 NH 7 yes 7D announced 1992; but per-line blocking to be available to subs who don't want 7D toll; they will be forced to dial 1+10D 604 BC,NT,AK 1+10 yes 1+10D intra-NPA toll to be mandatory 9/94; Hyder, AK, is in 604 per previous postings here 605 SD 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 12/93 606 KY 1+7 no 607 NY 7 yes per Bellcore source from varney@uscbu.att.com 608 WI 1+10 yes 609 NJ 7 yes 1+7 disallowed beginning 9/93 per bill stuffer 610 PA 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 12/93 (was to inherit 7D from 215) 612 MN 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 12/93, mandatory late 1994 613 ON 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 10/93 614 OH 1+10D yes 1+10D mandatory 1/1/95 615 TN 1+10 yes 1+10D posted on pay phones 9/93 616 MI 1+7 no 617 MA 1+10 yes see note under 413 618 IL 7 yes per Bellcore source from varney@uscbu.att.com 619 CA 7 yes 7D toll announced 9/93 701 ND 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 12/93 702 NV 1+7 no 703 VA 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 1987 704 NC 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 1990 705 ON 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 10/93 706 GA 1+10 yes inherited 1+10D from 404 707 CA 7 yes 7D announced 10/93 708 IL not applicable yes there are no toll calls within 708 709 NF,NT 1+10 yes 1+10D to be mandatory 9/94 712 IA 1+10 yes 1+10D announced for all US West states 12/93 713 TX 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 12/7/91 714 CA 7 yes 7D toll began in early 1980s 715 WI 1+10 yes 716 NY 7 yes Rochester LATA, per Telecom Digest 787; matches Bellcore source from varney@uscbu.att.com 717 PA 7 yes 7D announced 11/93 718 NY not applicable yes there are no toll calls within 718, 540 & 976 premium services are 7D 719 CO 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993, mandatory 2/27/94 801 UT 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 1993 all US West states 802 VT 1+10 yes 7D announced 1992; but 1+10D announced 2/94 to become mandatory 803 SC 1+10 yes 1+10D posted on pay phones 9/93 804 VA 1+7 no 805 CA 7 yes 1+7D still allowed in Pac Bell portion, for now 806 TX 1+7 no 807 ON 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 10/93 808 HI 1+7 no 809 Caribbean 1+7 no 810 MI 1+10 yes 812 IN 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 8/93 813 FL 1+10 yes 1+10D announced early 93 814 PA 7 yes not sure if 7D announced 9/93; later Bellcore source from alan.leon.varney@att.com says 7D 815 IL 7 yes per Bellcore source from varney@uscbu.att.com 816 MO 1+7 no 817 TX 1+10 yes 1+10D currently mandatory 818 CA 7 yes has always been 7D toll 819 QC 1+10 yes 1+10D announced 10/93 901 TN 1+10 yes 1+10D posted on pay phones 9/93 902 NS,PE 1+10 yes 1+10D to be mandatory 9/94 903 TX 1+10 yes has always been 1+10D toll 904 FL 1+10 yes 1+10D announced early 93 905 ON 1+10 yes has always been 1+10D toll 906 MI 1+7 no 907 AK 1+7 no 908 NJ 7 yes has always been 7D toll 909 CA 7 yes 910 NC 1+10 yes 912 GA 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 8/92 913 KS 1+7 no 914 NY 7 no inter-NPA calls are 10D, must change to 1+10D; 540 & 976 premium services are 7D 915 TX 1+7 no 916 CA 7 yes 7D announced 9/93 917 NY not applicable yes there are no toll calls within 917; however, since all outbound calls from 917 are cellular, there is a premium airtime charge on all of them 918 OK 1+7 no 919 NC 1+10 yes 1+10D mandatory 1990 143 Total NANP NPAs 117 NPAs ready for 1995 26 NPAs not ready for 1995 31 ready NPAs using 7D solution so far 80 ready NPAs using 1+10D solution so far 6 ready NPAs not requiring a solution (no intra-NPA tolls) 2 non-ready NPAs using 7D but still 10D for inter-NPA 24 non-ready NPAs still using 1+7D Corrections are welcomed. Mail to me, I'll re-post summary. Thanks to Bob Goudreau for suggesting the more detailed breakout. Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cap.gwu.edu ------------------------------ From: uezechuk@mlsma.att.com Date: 12 May 94 10:29:00 GMT Subject: Emerging Cellular Systems Hi, I am compiling material on new generation cellular systems, and would appreciate any help. I will post the summary of responses if there is enough interest. My questions are: 1) What is PCS, PCN, with relevance to cellular systems? 2) What advantages do digital cellular systems have over analog? 3) For a cellular operator, what are the ideal frequencies to operate in and why? 4) What impact does the frequency in #3 above have on operational costs, equipment costs, etc? 5) What are the impacts of operating in the higher reaches of the spectrum, e.g. at GHz levels? What are the impacts of low power systems and their advantages? 5) What are the advantages of CDMA over TDMA radio access technologies? What are the relative costs of these technologies? 6) Any ideas on how to obtain the QUALCOMM CDMA specs? 7) What impact will emerging cellular systems like Steinbrechers Minicell systems have on the cellular operator in terms of cost, operation and equipment? Note: The minicell is based on technology whereby a base station can handle different radio access methods (CDMA, TDMA) as opposed to the traditional approach of hard wired access methods. 8) Does anyone have any ideas of names and addresses (email?) of manufac- turers of Cellular base stations, switching equipment etc? What are the technological merits and demerits of these equipment? Thanks, U Ezechukwu Network Sys UK. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 20:31 PDT From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: ID Card Stories -- Reality Check Greetings. As moderator of the Internet PRIVACY Forum Digest, I'm of course interested in the privacy issues surrounding ID cards, information access and related issues. However, the current round of stories regarding supposed plans for national "smart" ID cards, database tie-ins, etc. seem to have taken on a life of their own, escalating with (as far as I can tell) little real new information to drive them. In other words, there are signs that at least part of these stories are tied to rumors that may have been expanded in the telling. For example, PRIVACY Forum received a message a few days ago that was a first hand report of some comments made by a career government official at a conference, where they were apparently sort of "blue-skying" about the possibilities for increasingly simplified tax collection through various sorts of data tie-ins. There was no sign that these ideas had been incorporated into any sort of formal plan. In a similar vein, a story from the recent past had the U.S. Postal Service talking about the ability to issue millions of smart cards on short order for universal identification purposes. Once again, the impression I got from that piece was of talking about the possibilities for use of such technology -- not that such a plan was about to be implemented in some sort of surprise move! Next I saw items where the messages' authors seemed to be combining the two prior stories into some sort of integrated plan, and were now claiming that "President Clinton is considering signing executive orders to implement parts of these plans." Then the message escalation got even more pronounced -- a message in TELECOM claiming that President Clinton was about to sign such orders. It seems that the entire sequence of messages escalated with little if any real new information being added. One can't help but wonder if we might be looking at a classic case of rumors gone wild. Obviously, these are important issues worthy of widespread discussion and debate. I have no special knowledge of any possible underlying realities to these stories, one way or another. But it did appear that the items seemed to be spreading around the net feeding upon themselves, becoming more dramatic with each iteration. I thought it was worth raising a warning that it might be prudent to not rush to judgment about the validity or veracity of these stories until more specific information, drawn from sources other than the same items that have been circulating the net, become available. Lauren [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Lauren, the story which appeared here was from that fellow via the EFF. The main reason I ran it was because I tend to use EFF stuff when it is sent to me even though I personally have to wonder about their motives from time to time. The story I had here was in the EFFector recently. Maybe I will start being more careful about printing some of their news releases. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dreuben@netcom.com (Cid Technologies) Subject: Cell One/NY rates for DC and Boston Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 14:12:51 PDT I noted about a month ago that Cell One/NY implemented new roaming rates for a large area surrounding the CO/NY system. Specifically, these systems were Metro Mobile (Bell Atlantic)/CT (00119) and Litchfield Cellular (now McCaw), Dutchess County-Poughkeepsie NY/(00479?), ComCast/NJ-DE-PA (00173, 00575, 01487, 00123, 00029), the small Newton, NJ-based Ericsson system (forgot the SID), and the Atlantic City (ComCast?) and Ocean County, NJ systems. In each of these systems (most of which also have automatic call delivery), CO/NY customers pay their home airtime rates, and no daily roam charges. Additionally, in Northern and Central NJ and Fairfield County, CT, you pay only *local* rates (6 cents per minute) to reach anyone from Fairfield County, CT, all the way down to Central NJ, and the airtime charges for these calls are applied to whatever pre-paid airtime allotment you may have, if any. However, I believe I incorrectly mentioned that the Baltimore-Washington (00013) system was $.99 per minute, whereas in actuality it is ALSO included in CO/NY's plan! Thus, you pay your home peak/off-peak rates when roaming in Baltimore/DC. Additionally, the SW Bell/Boston system (00007), Metro Mobile/RI (00119), and the insidious Franklin County, Mass "Let's sit on out fat roam charges and do nothing" system are also included in CO/NY's plan. (The Franklin County system is also SID 119, and is owned by a company called Boston Communications, (617) 247-1112. They have been very intransigent in dealing with other Cell Co's which have tried to set up low-cost roaming there, especially Cell One/Boston, which is trying to set up "New England Network" rates (.44 peak/.29 off-peak) there. The insidious thing about these guys is that they are operated by Metro Mobile [no, that's not that worst part! :) ], and have the same 00119 SID. So roamers, especially those with New England Network rates, have no idea when they place and receive calls that rather than $.44 peak or $.29 off-peak they will instead pay $3 day/$.99 per minute!.This makes me very cautious when using my phone anywhere near their system, since in their vicinity, you simply CAN'T TELL what you will be paying! :( I hope that McCaw's market power convinced Boston Comm to modify rates for NY customers, and not that McCaw is just eating the roam charge and handing them over to those greedy little dweebs and Boston Comm. I tried calling Paul Tobin at Boston Comm about this a number of times, needless to say he never returned my calls.) Thus, CO/NY customers pay home peak and off-peak rates in ALL of Mass, ALL of RI, ALL of CT, ALL of New Jersey, the Metrophone 00029 system in PA, all of Delaware, the Baltimore-DC SW Bell system, and Dutchess County, NY. Moreover, auto call delivery will soon be available (next month?) to Boston and Rhode Island. Note that CO/NY, unlike SW Bell/Boston, does not charge any "home airtime" for calls delivered to you while roaming. SW Bell/Boston has this (IMHO) really cheap policy of charging their OWN customers home airtime rates in addition to roaming rates [and let us not forget the $2 Roam-Department-Christmas-Party Fund ... err ... I mean of course "roamer administrative fee"]. For a company with generally enlightened roaming policies, these charges are a throwback to "soak-the-roamer" practices, except that this time the roamers are also their own customers. Convenient for SW Bell, eh? Pretty cheap and petty, really ... As a result of the above, an account with Cell One/NY suddenly emerges as the preferred roaming method for frequent Northeast Corridor travelers. With no daily charges from Mass to northern Virginia, airtime-free call delivery throughout most of the area, and the use of the (overpriced yet better than the B side) NACN in areas outside of the Northeast, CO/NY stands clearly above its sister "A" carriers in the region, and positions itself substantially ahead of NYNEX (the B side carrier). NYNEX/NY offers, at best, 75-cent per minute roaming in CT, 99-cent per minute roaming in BAMS (Philly and DC), 75 or 99 cent in Boston/RI and Maine, and may still be billing $3 daily charges (incorrectly) for incoming calls to Baltimore/DC. Additionally, I am *still* not sure what their policy is for outgoing calls in "Mobilreach" call delivery areas, as I think some (most?) areas will bill you a $3 daily fee for outgoing calls. And of course, these is still that problem where roamers in DC can not turn call delivery off, so calls can't go back to voicemail -- I only mentioned it to them six months ago, so let's give them another year to finish their squabble with Bell Atlantic -- who cares if the customers can't use it in the meanwhile..:( NYNEX does offer auto-call delivery to both Orange and Dutchess Counties, lower Delaware, Litchfield, CT, and Ocean County, NJ (CO/NY doesn't deliver to these areas, and no Nationlink either), so they do come out ahead of CO/NY in some roaming areas. The also have somewhat better and cheaper rate plans, and don't seem to need to do as much switch work so their system is up more often at night. However, if you intend to do any degree of roaming in the Northeast Corridor, CO/NY is the way to go now, without question. BTW, CO/NY also has voicemail calls bounce back from ComCast/NJ now. Thus, if you receive a call in SIDs 00173/00575/01487, and don't answer it, it WILL go back to voicemail. Previously, outside of the NY system, only Philly and Delaware featured this, using IS-41 RevA. I think this was also placed in service now for ComCast/NJ, as cell delivery in NJ behaves similarly to the IS-41 RevA regime inn Philly and DE. (And no, Call-Waiting will STILL not work in ANY of the Motorola EMX-based switches connected to NY or the NACN, so if you are on the phone, calls will go to voicemail without you being aware of it. Why is it so hard for ComCast and Metro Mobile -- not to mention Pac*Tel in CA -- to get the appropriate software upgrade from Motorola or do whatever is necessary to get this fixed? It seems like other customers may care about this deficiency, not to mention the fact that they can use this to get out of their annual service contracts!) Overall, though, a very impressive roaming package from CO/NY, which is miles ahead of what anyone else -- especially NYNEX -- is offering. And none of thos silly "Please hold on, your party is being located" messages which NYNEX and SNET use for auto-call delivery. I can see why I get so many hangup calls when roaming -- no one wants to wait! :) Doug CID Tech (203) 499-5221 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Doug, you have written to the Digest on many occassions over the past few years on cellular systems and their various shortcomings. Do any of the cell companies *ever* respond to your articles here, or your inquiries of them and make the desired changes? Have any of them ever corrected their problems after you gave them notice? PAT] ------------------------------ From: pbflower@uts.EDU.AU (-s89432566-p.bflower-ele-500-) Subject: Help Needed With Speech Recognition ..."Word Processing" Date: 11 May 1994 23:56:40 GMT Organization: University of Technology, Sydney I'm looking for info on "Word Spotting". I'm doing a report on it and need some of the latest available information. I'm hoping to advance a HMM model program to do this. I'd most appreciate any information on Word Spotting or even speech recognition. Thanking you in advance, Peter ------------------------------ From: ssi@winternet.com (Stillwater Systems) Subject: 3270 Emulation (Windows) Date: 12 May 1994 00:17:58 GMT Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you please provide me with the information I need to obtain them. Thank You, Michael E. Anderson ssi@winternet.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #214 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21828; 12 May 94 13:23 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA25736; Thu, 12 May 94 09:45:08 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA25727; Thu, 12 May 94 09:45:06 CDT Date: Thu, 12 May 94 09:45:06 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405121445.AA25727@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #215 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 May 94 09:45:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 215 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cable Management (Michael G. Kochanek) Getting Phone Number From Address Only (Derrick Sharpe) Calling Card Comparisons (Jakob Kellenberger) Need Call Screener (Narayan Bhagavatula) Local Competition -- Outside Plant vs Dialtone (Randall Gellens) Automated Response Systems (Clive D.W. Feather) How Much of AT&T's Network is Fiber? (Brandon Whichard) Pre-Paid Long-Distance Calling Cards (Larry Gonzales) Email Address Wanted For NTIA Asst. Secy Larry Irving (Robert Jacobson) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Mark W. Earle) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Carl Jones) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (John Musselman) Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Andrew Laurence) Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Gregory P. Monti) Digital Technology Conference in Paradise (J. D. Wilson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mikochan@gamera.syr.edu (Michael G. Kochanek) Subject: Cable Management Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:40:42 GMT I am interested in getting info on cable management software either shareware or commercialy available. We are in the starting stages of rewiring one of our buildings for both data and voice circuits. We are going to follow the TIA-606 standards and it would be much more manageable to have all info in sometype of database. We have around 500 voice circuits and 750 data circuits. The software should be able document all circuits, cables, X connects, and closets. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Mike Kochanek SUNY College of ESF Syracuse N.Y. ------------------------------ From: bptech@picard.infonet.net (Broadcast Partners) Subject: Getting Phone Number From Address Only Date: 11 May 1994 22:01:06 GMT Organization: INS Info Services I am trying to find a way to get someone's telephone number if I already have their address. This is for tele-marketing purposes. We often get references to people, but don't get telephone numbers along with them. Is there a way to get this information? It would be preferable to be able to do it in some type of batch mode also. Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Derrick Sharpe bptech@picard.infonet.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I assume you are saying that a routine check of the telephone directory under that name and address has not produced a number, nor has a call to directory assistance. You might try one of the various cross-reference directories which (in one section of the book) list names and addresses in numerical order by telephone number and (in the other section) in order by street address. Looking up the street address in that section, then finding the person's name within that address will give you a number. You can get these reference books both in printed form as well as online from various sources. PAT] ------------------------------ From: KELLENBER_J@EZINFO.VMSMAIL.ETHZ.CH (KELLENBERGER,JAKOB) Subject: Calling Card Comparisons Date: 11 May 1994 12:59:58 GMT Organization: ETH ZUERICH Hi there ! I'm looking forward to order an calling card, from AT&T, MCI, Sprint or any other US-phone company, my problem is, that I can't get any good information about the prices for the services, about the services and so on. I ordered some information but the companies didn't react, so it's quite difficult for me ( living in switzerland ) to evaluate which calling card has the best conditions, which company has the cheapest prices for their services and on and on ... So please, if you have any information about prices (calling country to country and reaching the US from Europe), the quality of the services, the reliability of the services and other information, write me in email at the following address: kellenber_j@ezinfo.vmsmail.ethz.ch Thanks very much for your help! Jakob ------------------------------ From: narayan@Sunlight.Sunlight.COM (Narayan Bhagavatula) Subject: Need Call Screener Date: 11 May 1994 23:41:24 -0700 Organization: SRW Hi Everybody: I am interested in purchasing a low cost ($30-$60) Call screener which connects to my phone. Typically I expect it to block the ringing of the incoming call on my phone unless the caller presses in a security code using his/her DTMF phones. I know somebody makes them. I will appreciate any information on it. Thanks in advance, Narayan Bhagavatula (narayan@sunlight.sunlight.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Whatever happened to the little Privcode device from several years ago? Is it still being manufactured? PAT] ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 12 MAY 94 00:17:00 GMT Subject: Local Competition -- Outside Plant vs Dialtone With the recent discussion about local (dialtone) competition, and the problems associated with possible duplication of local loop facilities, portability of local numbers (and associated problems with database size and access times, etc.), etc., it occurs to me that it might perhaps be interesting to consider splitting the LEC functions into an outside plant company, and (any number of) dial tone providers. Any dial tone provider would have to co-locate their switches at the local loop termination point, or have a POP there. The outside plant company would maintain the local loops, and have a static switch that associated each local loop with one dial tone provider's switch. There would be no need for a global database of local number assignments, since each local number prefix would continue to map to one CO. At the CO, the mapping between local loops and dial tone switches would be done. The outside plant company could be owned by the dial tone providers jointly, or could bill separately. This would allow for the continuance of the natural monopoly on local loops and other outside plant, while allowing different companies to compete in providing dial tone and features. Comments? Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com Net**2 656-6350 (Please forward bounces to Mail Stop MV 237 rgellens@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ Subject: Automated Response Systems Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:13:51 GMT From: Clive D.W. Feather The following appeared in a newsletter I receive. Names deleted to protect the guilty: We call technical support. XXXXXX has one of those automated phone support services where you navigate through cascading menus by pressing numbers on the phone. You know the kind. For software support press 1, for hardware support press 2. Press 1 if your machine is a XXXXXX, press 2 if it is a XXXXXX. If you are a non-smoker who likes long walks on the beach and quiet evenings in front of a fire, press 1; if your name is Phil, hang up. You get the basic idea. The problem is, none of the cascading choices seem to apply to our case. So we press the numbers that play "Mary Had a Little Lamb" and hope to wind up with someone who can fix our problem. Clive D.W. Feather Santa Cruz Operation clive@sco.com Croxley Centre Phone: +44 923 816 344 Hatters Lane, Watford Fax: +44 923 210 352 WD1 8YN, United Kingdom ------------------------------ From: whichard@seas.smu.edu (Brandon Whichard) Subject: How Much of AT&T's Network is Fiber? Organization: SMU - School of Engineering and Applied Science Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:01:09 GMT I have heard that AT&T's network consists mostly of Digital Radio Equipment. Does anyone know how much of AT&T's network is Fiber? Some of AT&T's major competitors seem to imply that AT&T is slow in updating it's network to more advanced equipment. I am just curious about what the truth really is. Can anyone shed some light on this subject? Brandon whichard@seas.smu.edu ------------------------------ From: strategic@aol.com (Strategic) Subject: Pre-Paid Long-Distance Calling Cards Date: 12 May 1994 08:16:03 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) I am doing a comparative study on the packaging of pre-paid long distance calling card services for both business and residential subscribers. I am interested in price points and unique selling benefits, package naming, hidden disadvantages. If anyone else is interested I will be happy to e-mail compiled information or post it here if applicable. Please respond via e-mail to strategic@aol.com. Thanks for any assistance. Larry Gonzales strategic@aol.com ------------------------------ From: cyberoid@u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) Subject: Email Address Wanted For NTIA Asst. Secy Larry Irving Date: 12 May 1994 06:57:17 GMT Organization: WORLDESIGN, Seattle If there is an NTIA host or one in Commerce Department, and Larry has an address at one or the other, I would appreciate learning of it. He's an old friend from congressional days. Thanks. Please use email to me. Bob Jacobson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 09:00:41 -0700 From: mwearle@netcom.com (Mark W. Earle) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding I'm in the process of closing out my cellular account with Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems of Corpus Christi, TX. In the last bill was an insert sheet (yellow) indicating that starting with the July bill, calls forwarded would incur full airtime for the duration of each forwarded call. Presumably, the set up "star" code call to activate and deactivate forwarding will now cost a minute also. This is a significant change -- previously, there was no call to set up the forwarding (or turn it off) and no charge for the forwarded calls. Many folks used this as a super local area extender ... forward your phone, dial your cell phone number, and talk free for a long time to an area that was a LD/Toll call from the regular phone. Combined with the .02/min "access charge" implemented last year, it seems the cellular providers are slowly charging for more and more things. It should be noted that some roaming costs, though, have dropped in the last five months. The per minute charge is lower, and the daily fee is not charged. But this is not "universal" you still have to check where you intend to roam with the carrier and find out the up to the minute info. Of course the roam rate and daily fees (or lack thereof) influence greately how and how much the phone is used while out of town. Mark Earle mwearle@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: uswnvg!uswnvg.com!cajones@uunet.UU.NET (Carl Jones) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding Date: 12 May 94 01:06:07 GMT In response to the question of which cellular company doesn't charge for forwarded calls, I can answer that US West Cellular does not charge for airtime on any calls forwarded from a cell phone or for the actual call to forward the phone itself. I speak for everyone in a twenty mile radius around me. Any questions? E-Mail cajones@uswnvg.com ------------------------------ From: jcm@frank.nccom.com (John Musselman) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding Date: 12 May 1994 00:56:19 -0700 Organization: North County Communications, San Diego, California In amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) writes: > What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call? U.S. West Cellular (in Both San Diego and Phoenix) jcm@nccom.com John C. Musselman Software Developer/System Analyst ------------------------------ From: laurence@netcom.com (Andrew Laurence) Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 07:51:08 GMT wdh@netcom.com (Bill Hofmann) writes: > This has been the case in 510 since October. I wish I had known that then. I tried it when I saw the initial posting on this thread, and it worked like a charm. I'm CONSTANTLY screwing up, as I travel between 415 and 510 several times a week, and I always forget when calling my girlfriend from my house that I don't have to dial 1-510. Now I can, and it makes no difference. Cool! Andrew Laurence Oakland, California USA laurence@netcom.com Pacific Daylight Time (GMT-7) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 06:59:56 EDT From: Gregory P. Monti Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! On Thu, 5 May 1994 14:59:35, Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com wrote: >> "NPA 703 in Virginia will allow 7D Inter-NPA local calls, except >> when calling INTO the Washington metro area. Both 10D and 1+10D >> will work for ALL local calls from NPA 703." > The distinction I gather from Bellcore's table is that 7D local calls > to other NPAs will work from 703, so long as the destination is not > the Metro area -- for example, into NPA 804. The actual term they use > for the 7D-not-permitted is Foreign NPA Local calls to the "WMEA". So > what is WMEA? I'll bet it's the Washington Metropolitan E_____ Area," whatever "E__" stands for. I've hard it referred to as, "Washington Metropolitan Calling Area," "Wash Met," or just "The Met." It's a land area roughly 15 to 18 miles in radius from the White House within which all calls are charged at the local rate regardless of state or area code. Nobody has *just* this smallish area as their local calling area. The local calling area from any phone with a 202 area code consists of the Wash Met, *plus* seven additional rate areas in Virginia, *plus* three additional rate areas in Maryland. The additional rate areas in Virginia are Engleside (Bell Atlantic Virginia), Lorton (GTE Virginia), Lorton Metro (GTE), Braddock (BA), Herndon (BA), Dulles (GTE) and Dulles Metro (GTE). The additional rate areas in Maryland are Gaithersburg, Ashton and Laurel. Rate areas may contain more than one central office and more than one prefix and may serve towns not named in their names. > Is all of NPA 301 in WMEA from 703's perspective? No. From area 703's perspective, only the Wash Met portion of 301 can ever be a local call -- and that only occurs if the originating 703 phone is *also* a Wash Met phone. Don't let LATAs confuse this. The Washington LATA is larger than the 202 local calling area which is, in turn, larger than the Wash Met. > What about 410? From anywhere in 703, all calls to 410 are inter-LATA, inter-state, toll calls. None of 410 is local to 703. Actually, from DC (202), all of 410 is also an inter-LATA, inter-state, toll call. Curiously, the local calling area from DC does not extend any further east into Maryland than it does from a Wash Met 703 number. Obviously, all these little rules apply only to *landline* phones, not cellular, whose local calling areas span multiple states and LATAs. Also, these rules apply to the rate area associated with the area code and prefix. Due to the heavy use of foreign exchange service, many peoples' phones are served by a distant prefix that would not serve their land area unless they ordered and paid extra for it. Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cap.gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 21:16:53 HST From: NetSurfer Reply-To: NetSurfer Subject: Digital Technology Conference in Paradise - E Komo Mai (Come Join Us) " PNC - People, Networks & Communication '94 " " Turning 21 - A Journey to Maturity " __________________________________ Topic: The Emergence of Application, Information Technology & Policy for the 21st Century. Venue: Mid-Pacific Conference Center, Hilton Hawaiian Village Resort. Dates: October 11 - 14, 1994. Sponsored by The Pacific Network Consortium Limited. The Pacific Network Consortium Ltd., an EMERGING Not-for-Profit Regional Network Services Provider, invites you to enjoy our hospitality and join us in Hawaii for PNC - People, Networks and Communication '94. PNC '94 will facilitate a close exploration to the Building of the Information Super-Highway and examine the essential ingredients to one being a members among a larger; responsible and informed participant citizenry in a Global Informatic Society. This Conference will lay focus to the various concerns as it relates to participation, management, policy, operations, security and factors of collaboration within and through the NII-National Information Infrastructure; here in the United States, and the similar structures in forming - elsewhere in the World. A TASTE of subject areas that will be featured ... O- What will NII mean to me? O- When will it really be here? O- Who will fund the NII? O- Who will be the large stakeholders? O- What role will & must the Government have in developing the NII? O- What does NII mean in terms of Global Citizenry, Fueling Competitiveness in Industry and Education? O- How must the Educational culture evolve to practically react with existing and emerging informatic technology? O- What are some of the problems associated with the youthfulness in the deployment of Networked Information Systems and their use? O- What is the driving force behind the large scale proliferation of information systems? O- What are the benefits of Networking and Inter-Networking? O- How can companies benefit from connectivity to Global Networks? O- What is the promise of an Electronic Government? O- What is Community Computing; is it an EQUALIZING force for citizenry within the NII? ( MYTH & REALITY ) O- How will information services be structured in the 21st Century? O- How will public libraries of the 21st Century service their patrons? O- What is the need for Law & Order on the Information Super-Highway? O- Who & What, will govern the authenticity of information? Confirmed Speakers who have agreed to present as of 04/12/1994. Ms. Gale Warshawsky - Coordinator; Computer Security Awareness Education & the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Computer Security Outreach Program. Mr. Charlie Atterbury - Ret., Dir.: Information, Computer & Network Security; The Eastman Kodak Company. Dr. Vinton G. Cerf - Senior Vice-President; Data Architecture, MCI. Dr. William Washburn - Executive Director; CIX - The Commercial Internet EXchange. Mr. Thomas Kappock - Vice-Chairman; Bancorp Hawaii, Inc. Bancorp Hawaii, Inc., is the largest Financial Institution in the PACIFIC Region with Assets exceeding U.S $12.5 Billion. Ms. Linda Delzeit - Administrator; Academy One Educational Network, NPTN - National Public Telecomputing Network. Mr. H. Leonard Fisher - Ret. Manager; Specialized Libraries of LLNL and Senior Adjunct Professor of Telecomunications Management; School of Technology & Industry, Golden Gate University. Mr. Scott Charney, Esq. - United States Attorney-in-Charge; Computer Crime Unit, United States Department of Justice. Dr. Thomas Saka - Information Specialist; State of Hawaii - Department of Education: IRM - Information Resource Management Division. Dr. Hank Becker - College of Education, University of California at Irvine. Mr. Christopher Baker - Consultant; IAEA - International Atomic Energy Agency, Network & Systems Administration: DEP - Department of Educational Programs, Argonne National Laboratory. Mr. Michael Higgins - Chief; Office of Counter Measures, DISA - Defense Information Systems Agency. Ms. Gail Thackeray, Esq. - Special Prosecutor; Maricopa County - Phoenix, Arizona Prosecutor's Office & The Organized Crime Division. Mr. James Lewis - Liaison Officer; NIIT - The National Information Infrastructure Testbed Consortia. Mr. Bruce Nelson - Novell Inc. Mr. Kenneth Van Wyk - Administrator; Computer Security, Incident Handling & Interdiction, DISA - Defense Information Systems Agency. Dr. Richard Smith - Director of Instructional Technology, Huston Independent School District; Huston, Texas. Mr. Walter Pioli - Director; National Network Services, GTE. Mr. William Cook Esq. - Villian, Brinks, Olds, Hofer, Gilson & Lione. (Mr. Cook is a former United States Attorney; now practicing in the area of Information technology and evolving policies within, and associated with, the NII - National Information Infrastructure. Ms. Bonnie Bracey - Member: Presidential Advisory Council for the development of the United States - National Information Infrastructure. Invitations Forward: Mr. Stanley Young - Officer; Office of Counter Intelligence, DIA - Defense Intelligence Agency. CONFERENCE REGISTRATION TEMPLATE: ___________________________________ Mr./Mrs./Ms./Miss: ______________________________________________________ Preferred Name on Name Tag: _____________________________________________ Organization Name: ______________________________________________________ Postal Address (Line 1): ________________________________________________ Postal Address (Line 2): ________________________________________________ Province/State: _________________________________________________________ Country & Postal/Zip Code: ______________________________________________ Title: __________________________________________________________________ Telephone & Telecopier Numbers: _________________________________________ Electronic Mail Address: ________________________________________________ Form of Payment: [ ] CHEQUE [ ] BANK DRAFT [ ] MONEY ORDER. All Financial Instruments MUST be made Payable, and can be sent to: The Pacific Network Consortium Ltd. ___________________________________ Suite 814 415 Nahua Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96815. United States of America. ------------------------- ADVANCE REGISTRATION FEES: (Registration MUST be received; on, or before AUGUST 5, 1994) _______________________________ FULL - 3 1/2 Day Conference. GENERAL ADMISSION. : U.S.$ 690.00 (*) Members of Non-Profit & Educational Organizations. : U.S.$ 490.00 (*,%) Students. (U.S.$ 20.00 / Day) : U.S.$ 70.00 (%) ( Fees reflect the cost of conference sessions ONLY. Food & Beverage Services within Conference Sessions, and External Tours and Functions are NOT included ) Members of the K-12 Community - for K-12 Sessions ONLY. : U.S.$ 150.00 (*,%) -- SEE below, for conditions regarding (*) and (%) -- LATE REGISTRATION FEES: (after AUGUST 5, 1994) _____________________________ FULL - 3 1/2 Day Conference. GENERAL ADMISSION. : U.S.$ 890.00 (*) Members of Non-Profit & Educational Organizations. : U.S.$ 790.00 (*,%) Students. (U.S.$ 20.00 / Day) : U.S.$ 70.00 (%) ( Fees reflect the cost of conference sessions ONLY. Food & Beverage Services within Conference Sessions, and External Tours and Functions are NOT included ) Members of the K-12 Community - for K-12 Sessions ONLY. : U.S.$ 250.00 (*,%) Please NOTE Conditions: _______________________ * 1) Food & Beverage Services within Conference Sessions are included. 2) External Tours and Functions are NOT included. % 1) Proof of Affiliation is Required - for rate determination. Accomodations: ______________ For your convenience - The Pacific Network Consortium Ltd., have made available, through special arrangements with HILTON HOTELS, quality and spacious accomodations. The Hilton Hawaiian Village sports fine accomodations within our Island Paradise, at a GREAT value. To receive the Special Rate Extension, Please call 1-800-445-8667 & REFER to: "PNC - People, Networks & Communications '94 ". The rates are as follows: PNC '94: Current Rates: Garden View U.S.$ 140.00 + Tax U.S.$ 225.00 Partial Ocean View U.S.$ 155.00 + Tax U.S.$ 250.00 Ocean View U.S.$ 170.00 + Tax U.S.$ 275.00 Travel. _______ United Airlines has been chosen as the OFFICIAL CARRIER for " PNC - People, Networks & Communication '94. United Airlines, is pleased to offer a 5% discount off the LOWEST applicable fare, including 1st (FIRST) class, or 10% Discount off the UNRESTRICTED BUA COACH fare; through a special arrangement with The Pacific Network Consortium Ltd., Help support PNC - People, Networks & Communications '94. Secure your reservations with United Airlines; offering you the MOST in convenience & flexibility with the LARGEST number of seats (5100) PER DAY to HONOLULU. To obtain the best fares or schedule Inform- ation, please call UNITED AIRLINES Specialized Meeting Reservation Center at 1-800-521-4041. Reservation Specialists are on duty 7 days a week, from 7:00 A.m. to 10:00 P.m., Eastern Time (U.S.) Please be sure to REFERRENCE I.D. number " 548NY ". As a UNITED Meeting Attendee, You WILL qualify for special discounts on HERTZ Rental Cars. Mileage Plus members will receive FULL credit for all miles flown to HONOLULU. For your convenience, United will mail your tickets or you can pick up your tickets at your travel agent's desk or an United Airlines ticket office. Contact Information: ____________________ Conference Chairman: Dr. Ernest Kho, Jr. Steering Committee Chairman: Mr. Robert Mathews. Telephone: 808.921.2097 E.mail: bm189@po.cwru.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #215 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24078; 12 May 94 15:42 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29031; Thu, 12 May 94 11:52:06 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29022; Thu, 12 May 94 11:52:04 CDT Date: Thu, 12 May 94 11:52:04 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405121652.AA29022@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #216 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 May 94 11:52:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 216 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Stefek Zaba) Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Keith McNeill) Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone (Fran Menzel) Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone (K.M. Peterson) Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Phone Line (Bennett Kobb) Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Phone Line (Mike Sullivan) Re: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers (Paul Robinson) Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (C. McGuinness) Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Rich Osman) Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Bob Wilson) Re: GSM and Airbags (Ben Burch) Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Jon Sreekanth) Re: NANP and Switches (James Slupsky) Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? (balcroan@netcom.com) Re: Ricky Finds Old Phone (Dave Thompsoni) Re: Ricky Finds Old Phone (David Breneman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: sjmz@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Stefek Zaba) Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button? Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:28:25 GMT Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, England John Perkins (johnper@bunsen.rosemount.com) wrote: > Will someone please tell me what the Mercury button is? I suspect > that it simply sends out a hard-coded sequence of DTMF digits which > accesses the Mercury network, and one could probably do this manually > with any phone that generates DTMF if one knew what the sequence was. You're exactly right, with the tweak of needing a "pause" in there. The access string goes: 131 Your-individual-ten-digit-Mercury-Access-number followed by the full ten (soon to be 11) digit phone number (no "local", i.e. codeless, dialing supported). Hence, a "Mercury-compatible" phone is one which can be programmed with a 13-digit-plus-embedded-pause string on a button, and with a deep enough memory so that pressing the button and going straight on to dial a phone number (possibly with an international access code), and possibly stored on another memory button, won't overflow the internal dialstring memory. The BT Relate (?) phone/speakerphone/answerphone combo we have meets these criteria. Mercury themselves gave me more or less the above description when I called on their helpline. All a "Mercury button" gives you is a nice blue-labelled memory button, and it MIGHT be sensible enough to do a wait-for-new-dialtone after the initial 131 instead of using a fixed-length pause. (I find on my local exchange that a single 0.75s(?) pause works reliably. Your mileage may differ). > Am I right about this? And does anyone know what the access sequence > for Mercury is? Yes, and yes. :-) > They have a perfectly good BT "Tribune" phone set that has some > special attachments for the hearing impaired, but are under the > impression that they can't use it if they want to use Mercury. (I have > a feeling that they don't really need the Mercury phone set at all.) Strictly speaking, ANY DTMF phone is Mercury-compatible, since you can always do the 131, pause, personal-code thing manually; however a memory-buttoned, dial-pausable, deep-enuff-memory phone is needed to be "Mercury-friendly". Stefek ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 10:36:44 EDT From: mcneill@ngt.sungard.com (Keith McNeill) Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button? > My parents in London (Chessington, actually) have just recently signed > up with Mercury and have been persuaded (by Mercury, presumably) to > have a Mercury phone set installed. This phone has a "Mercury button" > on it to access the Mercury network. To Access Mercury what you need to do is dial (ALL in DMTF) 1310123456789 where 131 is the mercury access number, kinda like the US 10XXX Long distance access numbers. where 0123456789 ... is your mercury access code. What you need is a phone that you can store the above sequence with the pause. The trick is the pause as not all phones with memory allow you to store a pause. I used my US phone over there with Mercury as I could store a pause in the memory. So, to make a long story short ... a Mercury Button Phone is little more than a phone that you can store a pause in it's memory. Keith D. McNeill SunGard Capital Markets +1 212 371 1116 560 Lexington Ave, 10th Floor mcneill@ngt.sungard.com New York, NY, 10022 USA ------------------------------ From: f.s.menzel Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 09:45:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone The phones you're looking for were sold to AT&T business customers for use with its PBX and Key telephone systems. The distinctive handset, called the "R" handset, was used on several models, including both digital and analog. With their futuristic look, these phones became very popular with movie makers, but did not find universal acceptance with everyday users. As they are no longer in our product line, I suggest you contact a reseller (other postings here have provided information as to where the resellers advertize). Unless you're planning to put the phone behind an AT&T system, you probably want to be sure that you stick with the low power analog version (model 7102), as the digital version speaks a proprietary protocol. Fran Menzel 908-957-5615 AT&T Global Communications Systems ------------------------------ From: kmp@tiac.net (K. M. Peterson) Subject: Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone Date: 12 May 1994 14:48:40 GMT Organization: KMPeterson/Boston In article farrag@isis.rz.uni-duesseldorf. de (Karim.Farrag) writes: > Specific features: narrow receiver, the speech unit of the receiver > is bent almost 90 degrees; the receiver is shaped like an L , wire > phone, mostly seen in black colour. Sounds like the AT&T 7101 set. No longer manufactured by AT&T; I posted a query here about three months ago asking if anyone had any idea who still carried them, but no responses. Note that the 7101 is a "standard" set. Very similar, sharing many of the same characteristics is the AT&T Merlin phone system. K. M. Peterson email: KMP@TIAC.NET phone: +1 617 731 6177 voice +1 617 730 5969 fax ------------------------------ From: bkobb@newsignals.com (Bennett Z. Kobb) Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Organization: New Signals Research Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:59:20 GMT The FCC has been very clear on its position about telephone interference. The agency says that "filters cannot be relied upon to eliminate tele- phone interference." They recommend only two products: phones from TCE Laboratories of Canyon Lake, TX (210 899 4575) and Pro Distributors of Lubbock TX (800 658 2027). These are what the FCC informally calls the "bullet-proof" phones. ------------------------------ From: mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan) Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line Date: 12 May 1994 01:50:54 -0400 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA paulb@coho.halcyon.com (Paul N. Bates) writes: > In article , wrote: >> My home is wired for two residential telephone lines. Because of my >> proximity to an am radio transmitter (am 1550khz), many of my audio >> and telephone devices suffer from "radio noise", from that one station >> only though. Some days it is worse than others, some days there is no >> interference at all. This is apparently an increasingly common occurrence, prompting the FCC to issue an information sheet that lists two phones that have tested as being highly resistant to RF interference. I don't have the info at hand, but it might be available on ftp.fcc.gov. Michael D. Sullivan INTERNET E-MAIL TO: also: avogadro@well.sf.ca.us Washington, D.C. mds@access.digex.net 74160.1134@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 15:43:12 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA > I have been given the 1-800-xxx-xxxx numbers of four companies in the > US that I need to contact -- unfortunately I do not have any other > number for them, and was hoping that someone in the US could tell me > either the normal number or a fax number for them. I called the numbers and asked them, explaining that "a customer of mine in the U.K. wanted a dialable number for them." All of them gave out their local voice number right away: Your number Number I got by calling them > Smart Micro : 1-800-ROM-BIOS NO ANSWER > Bios Upgrades: 1-800-800-2467 +1 508 686 6468 > Cmos Solutions: 1-800-266-7462 +1 818 880 2136 > Rom Bios Upgrades: 1-800-541-1943 +1 805 650 2030 > (All I do know is that they are supposed to be in the CA phone books!! > -- not a lot of help in the UK ! ) Note that the second entry is a Massacusetts number, not California and might not be locatable in California. Also, 818 is in Los Angeles, while 805 is about 100 miles away towards Santa Barbara. Also "being in the CA phone books" is a tall order; there are probably 50 or 60 volumes if all the phone books in California are included. I hope this helps you. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: marks!charles@jyacc.jyacc.com (Charles McGuinness) Date: Thu, 12 May 94 10:11:00 EDT Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program > In an effort to thwart would-be counterfeit phone users, Cellular One > just started up an anti-fraud program. My wife's cellphone was cloned recently. She was more or less required to join the PIN before you call program when getting her phone reactivated (after they detected the fraud and deactivated). > Apparently, many (though not all) roaming areas work with this fraud > protection program. When she was roaming in CT, she could call away without activating her PIN. So, when 50 miles from home, the fraud protection program was useless. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then ... > that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the > *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day? PAT] That is correct. In fact, every time you wait more than the time out between making calls, you have to unlock. Given that my wife was strong armed into signing up, I would expect all customers to be forced to PIN before they dial before too long. The users of the system are getting to share the inconvenince of the cell system's inherent design flaws :-(. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 00:38:53 CDT From: ROsman@swri.edu Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Somebody (I forget who) wrote: > Yes ... according to Cell One, once you turn on the phone, you need to > dial the unlock code -- *560 + PIN (SND) -- before making your first > call. In that this only needs to be done before the first call and > since this can be simplified greatly via most phones' speed dialing, > Cellular One tries to convince us that this isn't really an inconvenience. > I'm apt to agree. I see two problems with this scheme. 1) If a significant number of people store the access code in their phone, stolen phones are a valuable commodity. 2) If I time out every twenty minutes, the required occurance of pin transmissions is quite high. All I need to do is snatch a PIN transmission and I get everything I need to defraud (esn/pin/min). Yeah I know, not *every* transmission contains the ESN, but how much you want to lay on the fact that the ESN will be transmitted in this initial call. Many systems set their customer phones to transmit it by default. On the whole, it seems to introduce substantial customer inconvenience without adding a lot of security. I *do* think it's a good idea for compromise MIN/ESN pairs, though. Oz@SwRI.edu (Rich Osman) SwRI didn't say it, I did. (210) 522-5050 (w) (210) 699-1302 (h;v/msg/fax) ------------------------------ From: bwilson@netcom.com (Bob Wilson) Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:24:53 GMT Alan M. Gallatin (amg@panix.com) wrote: > Here's a new one ... saw a brochure for this at a Cellular One center > on Long Island yesterday. > In an effort to thwart would-be counterfeit phone users, Cellular One > just started up an anti-fraud program. A customer participating will > simply pick a four digit PIN. Usage is something like this: > If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on. > Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT > 611 and 911. Incoming calls, however, still work. Dialing *560 + PIN > (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls. This is, of > course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself. I fail to see how this is going to stop fraudulent use of cellular phones. Everything that the phone does to communicate to its carrier is done over the air. It would be safe to assume that the steps needed to be taken to 'clone' a phone would require only one more step. Instead of grabbing just the ESN/NAM pairs, it seems possible to grab the 'fraud protection' sequence as well. Unless there is some method of encryption, this seems no more helpful than adding another lock on your door that can be picked anyway. ------------------------------ From: Ben Burch Subject: Re: GSM and Airbags Organization: Motorola, Inc. Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 10:01:59 GMT In article Bill Tighe, bill@noller.com writes: > ... Some Audis in the early 80s would respond to RF by having the > cruise control go to full throttle while the ABS disabled the brakes! Ah, Bill, do you have any pointers to documentation on this? I believe that the causes of the (fatal) Audi "unintended acceleration" events have always been in considerable doubt. Audi claims that it is "driver error", since one can always override the throttle with the brakes, but since I have seen other cars have a simultaneous brake and throttle failure, I have always wondered. Ben Burch Motorola Wireless Data Group: Ben_Burch@wes.mot.com Makers of the Envoy(R) Personal Wireless Communicator ------------------------------ From: jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 10:26:12 GMT In article TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That has been the case in Canada for quite ... > speaker turned off all the time and as a result don't even realize they > are connecting to a live person in errror instead of another modem. I > would rather have seen a rule saying that if voice was detected instead > of carrier, the speaker would automatically turn on regardless of its > setting and play the intercept message (or bewildered human saying 'hello' Or the modem should detect voice and put out a AT-command like response ("VOICE") which would cause the comm software to cease, just like a "NO ANSWER" timeout. Shouldn't be hard for the DSP to detect voice. Do common modems provide any such voice indication? Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems, Inc. Fax and PC products 5 Walden St #3, Cambridge, MA 02140 (617) 876-8019 jon_sree@world.std.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 00:48:36 +0700 From: jslupsky@pwss.gov.ab.ca (James Slupsky) Subject: Re: NANP and Switches Paul A. Lee wrote in his article: > Different software routines, larger tables, more memory, and more > processor power are going to be needed in many PBXs to handle the > complexity left by the destruction of those assumptions. _Exactly_ how > that complexity affects a particular model of PBX at a particular > location is the crucial question. The answers will vary widely, and > will be accurately determined only with careful, individual analysis. My comments were directed specifically for Northern Telecom Meridian PBX's, and are based on information directly from the folks at Northern Telecom. The Meridian switch does no further processing of digits when "9" is dialed (unless you have specified this as your NARS access code), except to determine if the call should be toll restricted, or if it should output the call record to the CDR port. That determination is made based the presence of a "1" or "0" as the first OR second digit. Mr. Lee also writes: > CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially > in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc.. I don't believe this. The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's. All switch routing software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the CO code was NNX. In the original post, it was specified that the system had DOD and DID trunks, but did not have a tie-trunk network, or any other low-cost trunking. Thus, why would they have LCR? Regards, James Slupsky, P.Eng. (jslupsky@pwss.gov.ab.ca) (403) 427-0896 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh yes, indeed, there have been exchanges like N0X around here in Chicago for several years now. For example, 312-508 and 312-407 are both exchanges I call on a fairly regular basis. I don't know about smaller, less populated areas, but Chicago and Los Angeles have had these for a long time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: balcroan@netcom.com Subject: Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 09:02:12 GMT Jay Hennigan (jay@coyote.rain.org) wrote: > In article djo7613@u.washington.edu > (Dick O'Connor) writes: >> Strange thing happened recently on my second of two residential lines. >> Suddenly one day the voice mail card stopped answering on that line, >> but when I switched lines it worked fine. Handsets that ring just fine >> on our first line stopped ringing on our second line in tests. Yet, >> if I called the second line from the first, I hear the "ring", and if >> my kid picks up a phone attached to the second line, it answers and we >> can talk. >> Is voltage somehow involved in "ringing" so that a decrease would >> cause to small a *something* for devices like modem cards and handsets >> to respond to? Where does this happen, and what's the fix? > Ringing is a low-frequency AC signal applied to the line (Typically 90 > volts at 20 Hertz). Tell the repair desk that "ringing voltage is not > being applied". They will likely find the problem to be the line > equipment (printed circuit card in modern exchanges) feeding your > line. If the above call to the local TELCO doesn't work please submit private e-mail and I will give you the answer you can then decide if you want to make it public after it is tried ... BTW if it is what I suspect it is be prepared for the other line to have the same problem shortly .... Butch alias balcroan@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do tell us more! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Thompson, Dave Subject: Re: Ricky Finds Old Phone Date: Thu, 12 May 94 02:02:00 PDT > (Reminds you of the recent incident of someone not knowing how > to use a rotary phone.) Probably the Mar 31 post by Bob Frankston about his 11-year-old son encountering a rotary dial for the first time, described as an example of cultural dependence in user interface design. In TELECOM Digest 14.158 and RISKS Digest 15.72. I have another problem and wonder if it's common: I've "learned" some frequently-used #s by the pattern of my fingers on a DTMF pad, like touch-typing. Once when stuck at a rotary-dial payphone, I had to imagine a 3x4 grid and "dial" on it to redetermine the number! I've also had co-workers be unable to give me a number they call daily, because they put it in their PBX speed-dial lists and then forgot, and we can't find any "display speed-dial" feature (ATT Sys75 g1). Presumably users of telco abbreviated dialing features or (some?) cell or convenience phones etc. could have the same "problem". > ... When did the suggestion about 555-xxxx come in? ... As I recall, all-digit exchange codes came in around 1970 and I remember hearing non-555 numbers in movies/TV for several years after that; I would guess 1975. Somewhat related to which, in TELECOM Digest 14.185 (Apr 27), PAT described Enterprise service as largely obsoleted by INWATS/800. I recall some Enterprise numbers being heavily advertised about 1980 in the St Louis metropolitan or "bi-state" MO/IL area; possibly because this spans a state, LATA, and RBOC boundary, it was more difficult to get 800 coverage of *only* the nearby parts of these two states? Although the pre-breakup RBOCs were *supposed* to cooperate closely . Dave Thompson, davet@fpg.logica.com Logica North America, +1 617-890-7730 ------------------------------ From: daveb@jaws (David Breneman) Subject: Re: Ricky Finds Old Phone Date: 12 May 94 10:12:18 GMT Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA|Yq > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This episode is another one available > in the series from Columbia Video. Lucille Ball once noted that even > had her child been a girl (in those days, pre-birth sex detirmination > had not been developed as a medical technique) they had decided to go > ahead with a boy on the show. The airing of that show was timed in > such a way that Ms. Ball gave birth an hour or so before the pre-recorded > show (usually "Lucy" was done live, before an audience, but not that > night) was aired. Red Skelton's comedy show came on CBS right after > "Lucy" each week, and that night as the show started, Skelton announced > that Ms. Ball had successfully given birth about two hours earlier. Not quite true, Pat. Actually, although I Love Lucy was *filmed* in front of a live studio audience, the show itself was never actually broadcast live. This was in fact Desi Arnaz' major contribution to the Television Art (not as oxymoronic a phrase in the 50s as it is today :-) ). Three synchronized 35mm cameras recorded each scene, covering different shots just like in a television production. Then, the film was cut to produce the finished show. This offered several advantages. First, it allowed the director and editor to pick their shots in the relatively relaxed atmosphere of the cutting room not the control room. It allowed retakes for blown lines. It allowed tighter timing. And, it allowed a much improved picture and sound quality over the only other means of recording for television, kinescopes (the VTR wasn't introduced until 1956). Just compare the quality of an I Love Lucy show with one of it's kinescoped live contemporaries, such as Your Show of Shows or Milton Burle. When Paramount bought out Desilu in the late 60s, they adopted Arnaz' live-to-film concept for many of their own shows, such as The Odd Couple, Happy Days, and much later, Cheers. (Mary Tyler Moore also made use of Anraz' technique in many of the programs her production company produced.) He may have been Cuban Pete, King of the Rhumba Beat to most viewers, but Desi Arnaz also knew a lot about televison, and was one of its unsung pioneers. David Breneman Email: daveb@jaws.engineering.dgtl.com System Administrator, Voice: 206 881-7544 Fax: 206 556-8033 Product Development Platforms Digital Systems International, Inc. Redmond, Washington, U. S. o' A. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, but she did give birth at almost the same time the show was being aired on which she was in the hospital giving birth. And not knowing for sure what to say about the new baby in the show that aired that night, they elected to make it a boy. After debating whether or not in subsequent shows (had it actually been a girl) to just ignore that inconsistency and change the newborn to a girl in future episodes of "Lucy" their decision finally was to keep a boy in future shows regardless of the real outcome. Yes, television was entirely different in the 1950-60 era than it is now. So many of the old, very good radio shows were converted to television productions in those days, sometimes keeping the radio version going as well. One remark by Eve Arden sticks in my mind: She did 'Our Miss Brooks' on radio for quite a few years before it went to television. For the younger readers, Miss Brooks was a high school English teacher at a place called Madison High School. She was secretly in love with the Biology teacher, Mr. Boynton. The school principal was Mr. Osgood Conklin. The show was a weekly comedy and very much a period piece from the high schools of America in the 1940's era. Anyhow, Ms. Arden commented that when they would do the radio show each week they would just do one run-through of the lines from their scripts, usually an hour or so before the broadcast, or maybe a second one if they needed it. Then when it was time to do the show, they went in the studio, sat down and read the scripts out loud over the air. You must remember that in the days when radio carried all those programs since the participants were *heard but not seen* (you, the audience listening on the radio had to make your own mental images) all they did was sit around a table with microphones and read their scripts. No costumes needed, no background scenery, no memorizing of lines, etc. Everyone would just sit around the table, reading as it was their turn to do so with the 'sound man' dropping in the appropriate noises from time to time (doorbell or phone ringing, automobile starting, etc). When the shows began getting cut over to television about 1948-50, all of a sudden everyone had to clean up their act in more ways than one. Now they had to actually memorize their lines, dress appropriately for the scene, walk back and forth across a stage, etc. Eve Arden pointed out that some of the old timers did not like television for the extra work that it caused them in preparing their shows each week; plus the fact that many of them thought television was never going to take off anyway. Miss Arden said that when 'Miss Brooks' was moved from radio to television she got fan letters from people who had listened to the show for years and actually saw her (and the other cast members) for the first time who said stuff like, " ... I never knew that is what you looked like! .." Radio, you see, required some imagination on the part of the listener. Everyone 'knew' in their own mind what the stars of the show looked like, and 'knew' in their own mind what Madison High School looked like. The conversion of the old shows from radio to television changed all that. 'I Love Lucy' never was a radio show however, as best I can recall. It had its beginning on television. Are there *any* of the old radio shows which moved to television in 1948-50 still around actively being shown? I know Lucy re-runs are still on, what about 'Father Knows Best' or Stu Erwin or any of those? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #216 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24988; 12 May 94 16:34 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA01079; Thu, 12 May 94 12:51:20 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA01070; Thu, 12 May 94 12:51:18 CDT Date: Thu, 12 May 94 12:51:18 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405121751.AA01070@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #217 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 May 94 12:51:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 217 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Members Appointed to Network Reliability Council (Bob Keller) FCC Releases Semiannual Study on Telephone Trends (Bob Keller) Sprint Frame Relay Information Wanted (0003436453@mcimail.com) Re: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? (Paul Robinson) Re: I Have Some Basic Telecom Questions: HELP! (William H. Sohl) Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Ras Tafar) Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Drew Dean) Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (Willard Dawson) Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (John Harris) Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (Don Davis) Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? (Mark Brader) Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? (allen0@delphi) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:01:31 EDT From: Bob Keller Subject: New Memebers Appointed to Network Reliability Council May 12, 1994 NEW MEMBERS APPOINTED TO THE NETWORK RELIABILITY COUNCIL FCC Chairman Reed E. Hundt today announced revisions in the membership of the Commission's Federal Advisory Committee, the Network Reliability Council and named Richard C. Notebaert, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Ameritech Corporation, as the new Chairman of the Council. He thanked retiring Chairman, Paul Henson, for his service and said "Dick Notebaert will provide continued excellence in leading the Council to consensus solutions to the issues we face." The Council was established in 1992 in response to a number of large scale outages of the public switched telephone network. In letters to existing and new members, Chairman Hundt explained he, Commissioner Quello and Commissioner Barrett found it necessary to continue the Council, but to modify its charter and its membership. Hundt congratulated the Council on its accomplishments to date, particularly the publication of its study, "Network Reliability: A Report to the Nation," and the establishment of an ongoing reliability monitoring group within the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions. He found that continued expert advice was needed to assess industry efforts to improve network reliability. He also stressed the need for advice as to whether changes in the industry could threaten reliability. The revised charter calls on the Council to evaluate the reliability of network services in the United States on a local and regional basis; to evaluate potential new risks from new interconnection arrangements and changing technologies; to evaluate access to emergency services during network outages; and to collect data on whether network outages have disproportionate impact on certain geographic areas or certain demographic groups. The Council is asked to assemble data and information, perform analysis and provide advice to the industry and to the Commission on these topics. Reflecting the Council's broader mission and its accomplishments to date, several changes were made in the Council's membership. In particular, representatives were added from the cable television industry, the satellite industry, and the emerging personal communications industry. Chairman Hundt thanked those members who no longer would be serving and asked for their continued support. For further information, contact Jim Keegan at 202/634-1867 1994-1996 NETWORK RELIABILITY COUNCIL (NRC) =========================================== Richard C. Notebaert, Ameritech, NRC Chairman Members Robert E. Allen, AT&T Decker Anstrom, National Cable Television Association Morton Bahr, Communications Workers of America Alex B. Best, Cable Labs Ron Binz, National Assoc. of State Utilities Consumer Advocates Ronald L. Bittner, Rochester Telephone John L. Clendenin, BellSouth Steven Dorfman, Hughes Space and Communications Stephen Effros, Cable Telecommunications Association William T. Esrey, Sprint William Ferguson, NYNEX Mathew Flanigan, Telecommunications Industry Association Heather Gold, Association for Local Telecommunications Services George H. Heilmeier, Bellcore Stephen O. Hewlett, NARUC Gerald F. James, International Communications Association Charles R. Lee, GTE Daniel J. Miglio, United States Telephone Association Richard D. McCormick, US West Barbara O'Connor, Alliance for Public Technology C. Alan Peyser, Competitive Telecommunications Association Philip J. Quigley, Pacific Telesis Bert C. Roberts, Jr., MCI John Rose, Organization for the Advancement and Protection of Small Telephone Companies Selby A. Shaver, Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users Group LTG Alonzo E. Short, Jr., National Communications System, U.S. Dept. of Defense Casimir S. Skrzypczak, Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions Raymond W. Smith, Bell Atlantic Mark Golden, Personal Communications Industry Association Thomas Wheeler, Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association Edward Whitacre, Southwestern Bell Observers Larry Irving, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Dept. of Commerce Dr. John H. Gibbons, Office of Science and Technology Policy, White House -FCC- Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301.229.5208 A.R.S. KY3R Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301.229.6875 rjk@telcomlaw.com finger me for FCC Daily Digest CompuServe 76100,3333 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:04:06 EDT From: Bob Keller Subject: FCC Releases Semiannual Study on Telephone Trends FCC RELEASES SEMIANNUAL STUDY ON TELEPHONE TRENDS The FCC has released a semiannual report on Trends in Telephone Service. The report is a summary of information collected by the Commission in much more detailed reports. This report is available for reference in the Industry Analysis Division Reference Room, Common Carrier Bureau, 1250 23rd Street, N.W., Plaza Level. Copies may be purchased by calling International Transcription Services, Inc. (ITS) at (202) 857-3800. The report can also be downloaded from the FCC-State Link computer bulletin board at (202) 632-1361. For further information, contact the Industry Analysis Division, Common Carrier Bureau, at (202) 632-0745. -FCC- Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301.229.5208 A.R.S. KY3R Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301.229.6875 rjk@telcomlaw.com finger me for FCC Daily Digest CompuServe 76100,3333 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 94 12:07 EST From: Hardwire <0003436453@mcimail.com> Subject: Sprint Frame Relay Information Wanted Our company is looking at Sprint Frame Relay. Does anyone have any information on it. I know of a gopher at Indiana where I pull vendor information for equipment, but does anyone know of any for long distance carrier information on frame relay? Thanks! 3436453@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:51:27 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA The short answer is yes. The long answer is you need equipment, primarily equivalent to a voice-mail card on a PC. Tai Duong , writes: > [My employer wants] to organize "projects" which can contain documents, > faxes, and stored phone conversations all on hard disk media. I know > voice recordings take up lots of disk space but they are willing to buy > many gigabytes of disk space if necessary. Money to implement this > is not really an issue. Faxes are not too bad, taking probably about 40K per page. Whether voice takes up "lots" of space is another question. Carl Malamud's Internet Talk Radio does 30-minute transmissions that take about 15 meg, or about 1/2 megabyte per minute of speech. This is about right, as the estimates I have are 4-16K per second, depending on how much fidelity you want and whether the background is important. At 8K per second, which I believe is virtually local telephone call quality speech, one minute would take 480K. I have personally just purchased a Maxtor 540MB (actual capacity 505MB, or 527,000,000 characters) hard disk for $399, which, for example, could easily hold six hours of speech data. It might be possible to use this to index material, then store it long-term on tape with indexes being kept around locally, which might be more cost-effective if huge volumes of sound information are going to be stored long-term. > Taking it one step further ... they want to be able to play back the > recorded messages for any particular project to update others on the > progress of deals. An advance feature would be to be able to search > the many recordings from hard disk for words or patterns (eg. for all > recordings that contain a particular name) If you will be going into huge volumes and/or long-term holding of speech, you would be better off to consider something akin to indexing of information and then storing speech information on 8MM tape with indexes. An 8MM tape can hold 2.5 GB of uncompressed data, and costs about $8. The drive is about $1500. If the information on the tape was indexed, then finding the data is not that difficult. A jukebox holding 1,000 8MM tapes can be purchased for about $80,000. The average access time for a file on a tape in a jukebox (including time for robot search) is about three minutes, allowing fairly quick access. One $8 tape would then hold perhaps 90 hours of voice information with indexes. However, if you need instantaneous access to lots of voice data, then they will have to go with more expensive hard disks. But a combined disk-tape system may be possible if near-line access is acceptable as opposed to immediate access. And it will hold several thousand times as much information at a fraction of the cost. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: whs70@cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) Subject: Re: I Have Some Basic Telecom Questions: HELP! Date: 12 May 1994 11:19:22 -0400 Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore) In article , wrote: > I recently posted a message requesting help with Telecom ACRONYMS. > The response to my message was huge and I thank everyone who responded > with suggestions. > I am still researching the area of Telecom and have learned a lot in > the past few weeks. I obtained Newton's Telecom Dictionary which is a > BIG help. I still am having trouble with a few topics. I am aware of > what many are but do not know enough about Telecomm to understand many > of the technical descriptions. > 1.) Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) concept and the basic (2B+D) > service. For this and other questions on ISDN, contact the Bellcore NISDN Hotline: 1-800-992-ISDN. We have a free info package we'll send you and we can answer questions personally. Live coverage is between 8:00am and 5pm EDST, weekdays. Also consider subscribing to the comp.dcom.isdn newsgroup. That newsgroup has a very detailed FAQ that is posted bi-weekly. Lastly, try FTP to info.bellcore.com and browse some of the material available in the subdirectory: /pub/isdn > 6.) Instead of using a bridge to connect two identical networks, why don't > system developers just create one larger network? Often because the two networks are owned by different entities, different companies, etc. > In return, I am going to create a FAQ of all basic questions that I > answer or get answers to. It will hopefully lessen the amount of > questions asked. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may want to check out the FAQ for > this group. The telecom Frequently Asked Questions file is sent out > automatically to each new subscriber to the mailing list and is also > posted on comp.dcom.telecom from time to time. In addition you can > get a copy from the Telecom Archives at lcs.mit.edu by anonymous ftp > or email server. PAT] Ditto Pat's comments, plus my earlier comment about the FAQ in comp.dcom.isdn Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!cc!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@cc.bellcore.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don't forget also the glossaries on file in the Telecom Archives. These are obtainable using anonymous ftp like the other files there, but they are also searchable on an interactive basis using email. Ask me for a copy of the Telecom Archives Email In- formation Service help file to learn how. Essentially, you use the command GLOSSARY within your letter to the archives, followed by the term you want explained. The results are returned by email. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ras Tafar I Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? Organization: Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago Date: Thu, 12 May 94 13:50:33 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it is illegal, and yes people listen > illegally to cellular calls. However there is very little risk of fraud > by passing credit card numbers in this way. One, there has to be someone > listening to a scanner which is in the proximity of the tower from which > the message is being transmitted. Two, they have to have their scanner > land on the channel (out of 832 such channels) during the five seconds > or so that the card number is being read. Third, credit card verification > involves reading the number, the expiration date and the amount of the > sale -- not the name and address of the card holder. Fourth, without having > physical possession of the card they cannot make purchases in stores. > Fifth, with only the number but no name or address to go with it they > cannot very easily engage in mail order fraud. Sixth, without having actual > possession of the card they cannot see who the issuer of it was -- unless > they have the list of four digit (starting with three for AMEX, four > for VISA, five for MC or six for DISCOVER) codes telling which bank > (or credit grantor) issued the card -- thus no calls can be made to > customer service putting in bogus inquiries or name/address changes. > In short, a non-issue here. > If I were going to rip off credit card numbers, PINS and related data, I > would find it far easier to tap the phone line used by an ATM machine > and put some kind of data capture device on that instead ... yet people > use ATMs quite willingly. So what's the beef about cellular phones and > credit card numbers? On the one in a million chance someone *might* > happen to hear your credit card number read, what is it gonna get them? All you need to commit credit card fraud is the number and the expiration. That's all it takes to order merchandise by phone. I wouldn't risk giving my number over cellular. People can make up a name and vendors won't check to make sure the card number and name match. As for physical cards, a card reader/encoder could put my number on a library card and someone could go to town at those automated cashiers like they have at gas stations. Since I've had my Discover card number used fraudulently at gas stations for two separate accounts, I know a number is all they need. I admit, though, the odds are slim any one would happen to be listening in my area at the exact time I give out my number. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Plus which, without the name and address or something to document the transaction via mail order, that sale will be charged back to the dealer. You the person whose number was used are not out anything. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ddean@robadome.com (Drew Dean) Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? Date: 12 May 1994 12:32:55 -0700 Organization: ROLM - A Siemens Company > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it is illegal, and yes people listen > illegally to cellular calls. However there is very little risk of fraud > by passing credit card numbers in this way. [deleted] > Third, credit card verification > involves reading the number, the expiration date and the amount of the > sale -- not the name and address of the card holder. Fourth, without having > physical possession of the card they cannot make purchases in stores. Not true -- someone, with only a name, card number, and expiration date managed to charge over $4000 of tires, purchased at a retail store, to my father's Citibank-issued card. (I forget whether it was a Visa or MasterCard). You could see the card number hand written into the charge slip, along with a signature that looked nothing like the authorized one. Getting the charge removed took a fair bit of correspondence with Citibank. I never heard if they found the crook, or whether the merchant was in on the scam. (Would you accept a $4000 charge from someone who "forgot" his card ?) Drew Dean (408) 492-5524 ddean@robadome.com ROLM, a Siemens company [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But the point is, the charge was removed. I'm sorry to hear Citibank's customer service is slow at things. The credit card agreement merchants have to sign with the card issuers says in effect, yes, we will accept handwritten charge tickets and attempt to bill them, and yes, we will accept cards that have expired and attempt to bill them. The emphasis is also on good service to merchants and the card issuer will always attempt to bill/collect from the card holder even in irregular circumstances. But as a worst case scenario if the number is not *imprinted* on the card, if the expiration date has passed, or if the charge ticket is not signed with the signature of the legitimate card holder then the merchant eats it. Those collectors at the credit card processing office don't care who pays; they are not proud. They want it off their case load -- off the credit card office's ledgers. If the card holder won't pay, you bet they examine that charge ticket for any irregularities in the hopes of charging it back to the merchant as a violation of his contract. The trouble people have is not so much getting 'stuck' with fraud charges as it is working through the paper mill at the credit card office. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gatech!willard.atl.ga.us!wdawson@uunet.UU.NET (Willard Dawson) Subject: Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? Organization: Willard's House Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 01:02:55 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the electronics department at Venture > they had one from BellSouth I believe. I don't think buying a modem > for 'such a purpose' would necessarily be a waste. If the modem had > Caller-ID built into it and all you needed was to get that data over > to your computer for whatever reason, then such a modem would be a > fine investment. Who else sells CID boxes with serial ports? PAT] You might not want the BellSouth product. I had the opportunity to view one out of the box; the serial port is of the RJ-11 variety. Unless you happen to already have an RJ-11 ==> RS-232 cable... I made the mistake of buying a couple of BellSouth phones through our employee discount program (did I mention that I am a BellSouth employee?). The BellSouth phones are poor. One of mine was very noisy. The other, a two-line speaker phone, exhibits bleed-over from one line to another, and the speaker drops out (seeming just as the remote party says something interesting). Altogether, a lousy deal to foist on loyal employees. Of course, BellSouth does not actually manufacture anything, given the current MFJ restrictions. "Made in Malaysia" says it all, IMHO. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 19:16 WET From: joharris@io.org (John Harris) Subject: Re: Caller ID with Serial Port - Where? Quoting John_landwehr@next.com: > Although several TELECOM Digest articles have mentioned caller ID > boxes with serial ports, I have never seen a reference to a model > number, manufacturer or distributor. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the electronics department at > Venture they had one from BellSouth I believe. Try contacting Vive Synergies Inc., 30 West Beaver Creek Road, Unit 2, Richmond Hill, Ontario L4B 3K1 (905) 882-6107 Fax (905) 882-6238 This manufacturer advertises in the local paper as having a "CALL EDITOR II" for $199.00 and a "CALL EDITOR RSA" for $119.00 which will integrate Caller ID with any DOS or Windows application, particularly ACT! for Windows. From the pictures, the "II" is a typical caller ID unit with a display, the "RSA" looks like a 25 pin D-shell connector with a telephone jack on the back. John Harris, BEL-Tronics Ltd, Mississauga, ON L5L 1J9 (905) 828-1002 Fax (905) 828-2951 ------------------------------ From: dgdhome!ddavis@meaddata.com (Don Davis) Subject: Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 08:15:12 EDT Organization: The Dayton Home for the Chronically Strange >> So the question remains: Where can I purchase a caller ID box with >> serial port? > I have a (rather expensive) Caller ID communications device from > Rochelle Communications, but I believe they have cheaper (single line) > units, too. Or you could try: Zeus Phonestuff 404-263-7111 Atlanta, GA 800-240-4637 Their product costs $99 (they discounted it by 20% for me when I ordered up four of 'em). Has 2 RJ-11 phone jacks, and several neat features: 1. the unit does *not* pass the first ring through to any telephone plugged into the phone jack -- first, it delivers the Caller*ID info out the serial port, then you have the option (under software control) to let the phone number determine whether you want subsequent rings passed through or not. 2. the unit can provide the Caller*ID data in several formats. A checksum feature indicates whether the data received is valid. 3. the unit can store up to about 30 sets of call info in case your system goes offline for a while. 4. software for PC-compatibles is included -- caller database and key macro TSR that'll lurk in the background and hit whatever keys you please depending upon the Caller*ID info. 5. straightforward hardware interface with good documentation -- I wrote my own little application in a couple of hours (I wanted to do some things that went beyond their software). Best wishes, Don Davis Internet: dgdhome!ddavis@meaddata.com | Tel: 513-235-0096 ------------------------------ From: msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada Date: Thu, 12 May 94 18:11:06 GMT > ... Some people, you see, leave the speaker turned off all the time > and as a result don't even realize they are connecting to a live > person in errror instead of another modem. I would rather have seen a > rule saying that if voice was detected instead of carrier, the speaker > would automatically turn on ... One might bear in mind that even when a modem is being controlled directly by a person, it may not be within earshot. For instance, I can initiate a modem call from my desk at work, but the modem I'd be using is in the computer room -- about 100 feet away and behind a locked door. Mark Brader, msb@sq.com, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto ------------------------------ From: allen0@news.delphi.com (ALLEN0@DELPHI.COM) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? Date: 12 May 1994 01:33:32 -0000 Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: >> That has been the case in Canada for quite >> a few years and I think it is true here in the USA also now. The reason is >> a modem has no way of knowing it is dialing a wrong number and being >> offensive to the human victim at the other end ... and some owners of >> modems could care less : > Text deleted for brevity. >> But the way they have it now with limits on the redial attempts is >> the next best solution. PAT] > With my modem, which has a ten memory location, I could easily > misoprogram the unit and not know it unless I caught it during a > dialing sequence. Looking away or being otherwise occupied during the > dialing, I would not be aware of a misdail and just call up the > number's location. > Granted, there are problems with these types of calls. I sure > wouldn't want to be the recipient of them and hopefully won't in the > future. In my city, they just offered a new feature that allows you to enter a number that is busy, and have it redial that number for up to 30 minutes. When it finally gets thru, your phone rings. This is great for making calls but I can see this as a problem for modem users because they have to initiate the call to be connected. Also, I have redialed many times consecutively and have never had any problems. Regards, Allen [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That feature is called Busy Number Redial in most places where it is offered. For a laugh sometime, try dialing your own number and getting a busy signal, then asking BNR to deal with it. A few seconds after you hang up, BNR will find the number to be free and call you back to so inform you and make the connection. You'll answer the phone, have a moment or two of silence from the other end and then be informed that, 'the number you were trying to reach *was* available, but it has become busy again! ...' :) It was misprogrammed here in Chicago for awhile and this would go on for the full thirty minutes of attempts. Hang up, get called back, be told 'it has become busy again'. Repeat above every minute or so for the full period. It has since been fixed here. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #217 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26187; 12 May 94 17:45 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA02691; Thu, 12 May 94 13:48:07 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA02682; Thu, 12 May 94 13:48:05 CDT Date: Thu, 12 May 94 13:48:05 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405121848.AA02682@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #218 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 May 94 13:48:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 218 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Toby Nixon) Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Alan Gallatin) Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? (Michael Moore) Re: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust (Alan T. Furman) Re: IXC Timing Problem (Alan Leon Varney) Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (Kelley Boan) Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (John R. Levine) Re: Worldwide Telecom Information (Robert Shaw) Re: Toll-Free Prank Calls (Carl Jones) Re: CO's and Disasters (Kevin W. Williams) Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Information Wanted (Rob Lockhart) Re: Bell Atlantic Gets Maryland Competition (John R. Levine) Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Carl Moore) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: tnixon@microsoft.com (Toby Nixon) Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 17:38:21 GMT In article amg@panix.com wrote: > If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on. > Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT > 611 and 911. Incoming calls, however, still work. Dialing *560 + PIN > (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls. This is, of > course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself. Something sounds fishy about this to me. Criminals today can capture mobile numbers and ESNs off the air. What's to stop them from also capturing the PINs? All they have to do is set their scanners to look for the "*560####" messages that thousands of people will be sending all the time to unlock their phones, and then generate their own "*560####" message to "unlock" the number. Pretty bogus security, if you ask me. Certainly gives customers the _feeling_ that something is being done about the problem, but all it really seems to do is make everyone enter a few more digits every time they want to make a call. This problem is not going to be solved until there are secure encryption keys and a challenge-based system that never sends the keys over the air. Toby ------------------------------ From: amg@panix.com (Alan M. Gallatin) Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Date: 12 May 1994 13:22:36 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In a previous article, ROsman@swri.edu wrote: > Somebody (I forget who) wrote: (That would be me...) >> Yes ... according to Cell One, once you turn on the phone, you need to >> dial the unlock code -- *560 + PIN (SND) -- before making your first >> call. > 1) If a significant number of people store the access code in their phone, > stolen phones are a valuable commodity. Well, stolen phones are a valuable commodity to begin with. However, this program is to counter cloning. Physical theft of phones is a wholly separate problem. Look at it this way: If I'm walking on the streets of NY and someone scans my phone, when will I (or Cell One) ever find out about it? After tons of calls have been made on my bill and I go to Cellular One to get a new NAM and convince them to take thousands off of my bill. Inconvenience for me, major $$$ loss for them. If someone rips off my actual phone, when will I know about it? Presumably immediately. After calling Cellular One and reporting the theft, the phone will be rendered inoperable. The phone will no longer be useable on its ESN and, therefore, having the unlock code that goes with that ESN and NAM is completely useless. > 2) If I time out every twenty minutes, the required occurance of pin > transmissions is quite high. That's 20 minutes of your phone being off, not 20 minutes of non-usage. If your phone is powered on (in the service area) for a week non-stop, then you only need to unlock it ONCE during that whole week -- that unlock would come before the first call. > All I need to do is snatch a PIN > transmission and I get everything I need to defraud (esn/pin/min). > Yeah I know, not *every* transmission contains the ESN, but how much > you want to lay on the fact that the ESN will be transmitted in this > initial call. There's nothing special about this call, 'cept that you need to make it before any billable call. If the ESN doesn't go out on every call, there's no reason to assume it will necessarily go out on the *560 call either. > On the whole, it seems to introduce substantial customer inconvenience > without adding a lot of security. For the moment, there is a convenient alternative; just don't use it. Alan M. Gallatin amg@panix.com amg@israel.nysernet.org amg@jerusalem1.datasrv.co.il ------------------------------ From: moorem@iia.org (michael moore) Subject: Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? Date: 12 May 1994 12:05:17 -0400 Organization: International Internet Association. William C. Fenner (fenner@cmf.nrl.navy.mil) wrote: > In article , mark boylan org> wrote: >> Is there a modem that can accept and decode DTMF tones after it's >> answered an incoming call? And also, how can I send the output of a >> SoundBlaster card over the same phone line? > You can solve both problems at once with a ZyXEL modem. Not only will > it decode DTMF tones, but it will also play audio directly to the > phone line. If you convert your WAV files to, say, 3-bit ZyXEL ADPCM, > you can probably use one of the many shareware packages out there and > get up and running very quickly. Could you elaborate on the "many shareware packages out there". I am looking for information on how to set up a voice response system for employee dial in of information. Also, are there any comercial packages available for PC's. Thanks, Email to moorem@iia.org ------------------------------ From: atfurman@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust Date: Thu, 12 May 94 04:55:08 PDT The {New York Times}, as quoted by Dave Thompson: > For 30 years, Raymond Marquez was a thorn to law-enforcement > agencies and a legend to countless gamblers in Harlem and East Harlem... > But the authorities said yesterday that they had arrested Mr. > Marquez, 64, and his wife, Alice, 63, on felony gambling charges and > had raided and closed 56 gambling parlors and backroom offices .... > The Manhattan District Attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, said a > large part of the case against Mr. Marquez stemmed from one mistake: > his use of a fax to get daily reports on his illegal gambling profits > from Manhattan to his vacation retreat in Fort Lauderdale. > Mr. Morgenthau, who announced the arrests ..., said the faxes, > which were intercepted under a court order, included the names of > gambling sites, accounts over the last month of profits at each site > and the payrolls for more than 100 people employed by Mr. Marquez in > one of the city's largest illegal gambling rings... Those whose business it is to mind everyone else's business will insist that the struggle against "numbers" cannot be won unless Raymond Marquez's successor is prevented from using effective encryption (that is, something other than Clipper). They are right. Raymond Marquez's interactions with his customers and employees were essentially voluntary. There was no "victim" to complain. The busybodies of the "Public Morals" squad had to invade his affairs to gather evidence. This is -- and always will be -- true of every attempt to criminalize consensual behavior among adults such as gambling, prostitution, pornography, and politically incorrect drugs and sexual positions. But even if all right-wingers were to disappear, one victimless crime would remain -- one whose staggering volume of fines depends on how thoroughly its enforcement bureaucracy does its job. And that, in turn, depends on the tools they have: immense databases, warrantless access to personal banking records, warrantless eavesdropping on cordless phones, etc. I refer to the crime of making a living. If you don't believe me, read the income tax code. ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 15:32:32 +0600 Subject: Re: IXC Timing Problem Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article sspak@seas.gwu.edu (Steven L. Spak) writes: > I'm fairly certain that Bellcore does work on IXC/LEC interconnect > standards. They probably have some TR's or TA's on signalling and > timing for IXC/LEC handoffs. Bellcore documents LEC requirements; for "Calling Card Service - Prompt Tone", they document 60 ms of 941+1477 HZ at -10dBm0, then 940 ms of 440+350 Hz decayed exponentially from -10 dBm0. Unfortunately, documenting a requirement and having it actually be implemented everywhere are two different things. Admitting this, Bellcore states in various issues of "Notes on the Network": "There is no specific requirement for any tone." That's it; an admission that tones are not required to be offered at specific events, with specific volume or frequencies or duration. In other words, the POTS line is a human interface, not a machine interface. On top of that, Bellcore cannot require IXCs to use specific tones WITHIN their network. Believe me, we've had lots of arguements in industry groups. But the upshot is that an IXC can intercept calls in any way it wants (assuming customers are happy with the result). They are even permitted to have a LIVE OPERATOR answer your Calling Card calls!! But there is one alternative: the industry group responsible for achieving "consensus" in IXC/LEC interactions is the ICCF (Industry Carriers Compatibility Forum). This is an open forum -- you can attend meetings or send letters. Dawne Drake on 201 740-4657 is the sectetary, last I knew. Remember that compliance is voluntary, and your request should be phrased in a way that indicates why a "bong standard" for all IXCs would be of benefit to the IXCs (and the country). In article Linda Slovick writes: > I've been testing a product that must redial inter-LATA calls using > the same IXC as the original call. .... > So far, testing this product has been a nightmare. .... > At this point, I had to call a halt to testing and go back to basics. > From reading the Bellcore literature on the subject, I'm getting the > strong impression that we're going about this all wrong. Bellcore > specifically mentions that timing is NOT guaranteed after the call is > handed off to the IXC. Arrgh! As I mentioned above, the telephone system is not designed to interact with machines, except for a few well-specified interfaces. Calling Card entry is not one of them. > Much as I might like to just exclude the oddballs, this is NOT > an option for this project (sigh...). > Questions: > 1.) This whole thing is sounding a bit like the old problems folks used > to have trying to thread FGB calls. The solution to that was to > hook in to SS7ness and dump all this inband listening for > signalling stuff. Is there something tariffed in SS7land that I > could hook my machine through to get signalling that all the IXCs > would have to respect? Nope -- SS7 does not indicate when the IXC is ready for Calling Card digits (however, it should let you know when the IXC has indicated cut-through in the forward direction is required). On top of that, SS7 isn't quite ready for generic handling of all operator calls, so the timing/handling can vary (coin phones are probably non-SS7, PBX calls may get special treatment, prison calls even more special treatment, etc.). Worst of all, an IXC could have live operators handling Calling Card calls -- no bong, no DTMF input. >3.) Anybody have any other ideas on how to approach solving this > problem? Two ideas: 1) Make the calls without calling cards -- use an AOS to validate the card numbers and bill for the calls. In effect, you will be acting like some COCOTs. If you can't handle the Calling Card #, "splash" the call via the real IXC and have a human enter the number.... 2) Deal with the IXCs -- offer to provide the system at an interface they define, and provide them the Card Numbers correlated with the call times on some machine-readable media. Given that some IXCs already provide this service themselves, the smaller ones may be willing to negotiate. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ From: kboan@BIX.com (kboan on BIX) Subject: Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? Date: 12 May 94 16:35:45 GMT Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation breit@MR.Net writes: > Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why yes, in fact recently the FCC can > be reached via FTP. We've touched on it here recently and perhaps one > of our readers will be so kind as to send you the help file showing > how it is done. PAT] I'd like a copy of that help file as well, thanks. Kelley Boan, kboan@bix.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Will someone help Kelley please? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 17:36 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site? That's the easy part. FTP to fcc.gov and look around. You can also get there via Gopher, although they don't update the Gopher menus anywhere near as often as the FCC files. > I would like to research more information on "Tariff 12" pricing for > long distance services. Tariff 12 is a regulatory hack through which AT&T can offer special deals to large customers. Basically, they custom craft a special package for a customer at a special price, and publish that as part of tariff 12. If someone else happened to want exactly the same combination of features, AT&T would provide it at the same price. I didn't see any tariffs at all on the FTP server, 12 or otherwise. I'd think that if your business were large enough to be worth a tariff 12 filing, your AT&T account reps would be able to figure that out. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: 12 May 1994 12:14:25 CET From: SHAW +41 22 730 5338 Subject: Re: Worldwide Telecom Information > I am looking for information about the current telephony > infrastructure in each country around the world. Is there such a > source anywhere? You might want to get a copy of the recently published (March 1994) World Telecommunication Development Report. This has lots of information on the current world telephony structure including the world telecom indicators (there's an electronic version of the indicators available too). The report is around 200 pages long. Ordering information is available from: International Telecommunication Union General Secretariat - Sales Section Place des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 20 (Switzerland) Tf: + 41 22 730 5285 Tlx: 421 000 uit ch Fax: + 41 22 730 5194 Tg: Burinterna Geneva Robert Shaw Information Services Department International Telecommunication Union Place des Nations 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland TEL: +41 22 730 5338/5554 FAX: +41 22 730 5337 X.400:G=robert;S=shaw;A=arcom;P=itu;C=ch Internet: shaw@itu.ch [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I want to make just a brief mention of the role the ITU has accepted with TELECOM Digest. This Digest is partially funded by a very generous monthly grant from the International Telecomm- unication Union, as part of their information exchange. In order to insure the continued publication of this Digest -- now in its 13th year on the net -- addtional support is needed from corporate sponsors and individuals. ITU has set the pace, please follow if you can. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: uswnvg!uswnvg.com!cajones@uunet.UU.NET (Carl Jones) Subject: Re: Toll-Free Prank Calls Date: 12 May 94 00:32:36 GMT Out of curiousity, What statues were used to charge this guy for calling a 1-800 repeatedly? I speak for everyone in a twenty mile radius around me. Any questions? E-Mail cajones@uswnvg.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are various laws depending on the state, but a very common one has to do with 'causing a telephone to ring for the purpose of harrassment'. Another reader noted in a private comment to me that he thought the CO handling the call would create an exception report listing numbers which make excessive 800 calls. They probably do, but the place receiving the calls would still have to know where to look to find *which* CO was shoving all that garbage at them. I think in Falwell's case once they identified the problem as coming at them from outside their own phone system then they started backtracking to the CO in question. PAT] ------------------------------ From: williamsk@agcs.com (Kevin W. Williams) Subject: Re: CO's and Disasters Date: 12 May 1994 10:21:11 -0700 In article , tsw@cypher.apple.com (Tom Watson) writes: > In article , Thomas Tengdin > wrote: >> The telephone company computers will connect some customers >> at a higher priority that others. >> Is there something in CO Class of Service? or other programming that >> gives "priority" service to a select class of lines? > Yes, they DO exist. Will the local operating company tell you if you are > one of the selected few, NO! > The reason for this is that they want some traffic to get through. In > addition, they will usually pick out one house in a block and give it > the "good" treatment. The object here is to at least let some people > get out. This load-leveling (there is a snazzy term for it, but I [ remainder deleted ] I would be very surprised if anyone was using a "one house on the block" type of assignment scheme. On the GTD-5, line can be marked as class A or class B (the default). Class A lines are scanned regardless of overload conditions, while class B lines are scanned only under non overload conditions. Class A is usually assigned only to police, hospitals, etc. This is a simplification: some queuing techniques are applied to keep the switch from oscillating between overload and zero traffic due to the overload condition. All modern switches have some variation on this scheme, although different designs have different details and terminology. Abuse of the feature by overassigning priority lines results in a switch that cannot optimally handle an overload situation. I would be surprised if any operating company used any kind of random assignment technique for the priorities. Kevin Wayne Williams williamsk@agcs.com ------------------------------ From: rlockhart@aol.com (RLockhart) Subject: Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Information Wanted Date: 12 May 1994 08:40:02 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , Pat_Barron@transarc.com writes: > Does anyone have technical info on the Motorola "Advisor" alphanumeric > pager? Specifically, any sort of configuration or status report > modes, All depends on what you want to do, Pat. Some of the programming information is given in the 'tic' book you received when you bought your Advisor and the rest is only accessable from your carrier's Advisor programming fixture. > and/or what one can do with the serial port that seems to be on > the bottom of the unit. These three pins are used to both program the device for cap code, OOR indicator, alert on bad data, and a host of others and to allow dumping of messages to a host mobile computer (through a program called PrintPal) or just to a printer. SkyTel and some others have used this ability to link up paging to laptops et al to send email via paging. However, in almost *all* cases, they've had to develop a cable that would handle holding the Advisor to the spring loaded connection pins and provide the level shifting needed to link to the laptop's RS232 port. The preferable solution for linking a pager-like device to a portable computer is through another family of products of ours called wireless data receivers (e.g., NewsStream and NewsCard .. serial interface and PCMCIA device, respectively). In article , tmb1@SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Thomas Baird) writes: > Also has Motorola published the interface information for accessing > the "advisor" from an IBM PC? I talked to a salesman and his only > knowledge was it could be accesed from a PC and the maximum message > size was 2000 characters per message. Tom, we've not published the Advisor interface. We *have* published, though, the software interface for both our NewsStream and NewsCard Wireless Data Receivers (serial and PCMCIA devices, respectively) that will work on the same services as the Advisor. In fact, they may be found on line on some of the commercial services (e.g., CIS, AOL, AppleLink) in Stuffed MacWord 5.1 format. If these interest you, but you don't have access to the commercial services, give me a shout and I'll see what I can do for you. Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc. Desktop I'net: lockhart-epag06_rob@email.mot.com Wireless I'net (<32K characters): rob_lockhart-erl003e@email.mot.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 02:40 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Gets Maryland Competition Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. Carl Moore wrote: > How would local telephone directories' lists of prefixes, calling > areas, etc. be affected? and Greg Monti responded: > This is one of many issues that were not mentioned in the story I > summarized. Didn't the state mandate number portability? Portability means that any number can be assigned to any carrier, as is currently the case with 800 numbers. Portability is clearly in the works, but as I noted in an earlier message it'll be an enormous project involving billions of dollars of retrofit to the network to look up every single call in a carrier database to know who to route it to. I'd be very surprised to see portability working before the year 2000. In the meantime, I expect that competitive access providers will either do what cellular carriers do, which is to hook up like a PBX and get blocks of numbers which may or may not be full prefixes, or more likely hook up like an independent telco with its own set of prefixes. Their prices will certainly not be the same as the RBOCs, so deaveraged pricing (i.e. calling A->B doesn't cost the same as B->A) which is now relatively uncommon will become the rule. One thing I can definitely promise is massive confusion before it's all sorted out. Expect a lot of really stupid proposals, e.g. assigning each CAP a couple of area codes, or adding yet more digits to be dialed as a prefix to the subscriber's number. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 13:33:45 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! Since I update history.of.area.splits from time to time, I have some questions for Al Varney: If, in your message, "Home NPA Toll calls ... require 1+ for Toll", do you mean: 1. 1+NPA+7D must be used? (I know this applies to Maryland and area 703 in Virginia; no information yet for 804 in Va.) 2. 1+7D can still be used? (I have not received information about Nevada, Wisconsin, or area 804 in Va. requiring 1+NPA+7D for long distance within area code.) And where do you arrive at 7D being allowed for intra-NPA toll calls in West Virginia? That would be new information for me. > NPA 703 in Virginia will > permit 7D or 10D or 1+10D local calls, except into the Washington > metro area, where 10D or 1+10D is required. NPA 703 in Virginia does allow 7D for local calls into the Washington metro area WITHIN AN AREA CODE, with the "10D or 1+10D is required" kicking in if calling different area code. > Illinois is the ONE state that REQUIRES 7D dialing for all Home NPA > calls, even Toll calls (i.e., does not PERMIT 1 + 10D for such calls). Old area 312 never had 1+ for long distance until it needed N0X/N1X prefixes, and at that time it got 1+ for long distance to other area codes. Are you saying the rest of Illinois is dropping the leading 1 for intra-NPA if it was still publishing 1+7D for such? WMEA means Washington Metropolitan Exchange Area, and would include all of 202 plus parts of 301 and 703. 301 extends beyond the WMEA to include southern and western Maryland. In Maryland, you are in 301 (not 410) if you are local to Washington; the 301/410 split was along LATA lines. What do you gather from Bellcore's table regarding local calls from Maryland? Here is what I know from other sources regarding Maryland: local calls to other area codes are just 7D EXCEPT for: 1. local calls to DC and Va. suburbs; 2. across the 301/410 border; some exchanges, such as Silver Spring, are local to all or part of 4 area codes (202,301,410,703). (By the way, 804 in Virginia is too far from the DC area to have local service into it from the DC area.) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #218 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26714; 12 May 94 18:20 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA04288; Thu, 12 May 94 14:49:04 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA04279; Thu, 12 May 94 14:49:01 CDT Date: Thu, 12 May 94 14:49:01 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405121949.AA04279@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #219 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 May 94 14:49:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 219 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Butch Croan) Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Jon Steel) Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" (Brian Bebeau) Re: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? (Paul Lee) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Ross Oliver) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Hugh Pritchard) Re: PEP Pager Protocol Software Information Wanted (Rob Lockhart) Re: Getting Phone Bills Over the Internet (Robert J. Woodhead) Re: Using Call Forwarding to Avoid Tolls (Randy Gellens) Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Kevin W. Reed) Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Paul Robinson) Re: FAX Mailbox Services (Clarence Dold) Re: Bulk Call Display (Vance Shipley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: balcroan@netcom.com (Butch lcroan/.nameBalcroan Lilli) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 09:02:02 GMT Aamer Soomro (asoomro@bass.gmu.edu) wrote: > In article jharan@cwa.com writes: >> ... but why don't the cellular providers use a more robust >> authentication service. Your cellular phone would contain an >> encription key that would also be known to the cellular provider. When >> your phone went off hook, it would send its telephone number. The >> provider would look up your number to get your key and send you some >> random sequence of digits which would vary from call to call. Your >> phone would take the sequence of digits, use its key to encode them >> and return them to the provider. Since the provider has your key, it >> can perform the same encription. If the encoded data that was returned >> doesn't match what the provider's copy of the key encripts, then its >> because the calling phone doesn't have the right key and the call is >> dropped. The key is never transmitted so the crook would have to >> steal the physical phone to steal the service. > To me this seems hitting pretty close to the Clipper Chip controversy. > All the service providers and cell phone manufactures would have to > conform to a standard encryption, so that the cell phones could be > used with any carrier service. > The encryption keys analogous to the phone numbers would be another > database to be maintained by the service providers. > Would it be feasable to complicate the registeration process by > introducing two encryption steps and a comparison step along with two > steps for digit transmission? I am not sure if you have access to the QUALCOMM CDMA spec's or the GSM TDMA , but I suggest you try and attain a copy and read about the encryption process and the authectication processes as they are already in the spec and are probably more secure than you would imagine. In addition to that CDMA is also spread spectrum using a PN sequence. The system I worked on in the military are slightly different in all important way to make them quite secure, but even the PN or PuesdoRandom Noice syetm used in commerical spread spectrum will make any demodulating device not inpossesion of the current PN sequence number of which there are several that change from phone to phone and call to call so even if you got one part you might miss the next until that PN key is used again ... Oh YA ... I think you might of guessed that timing is very important a GPS is at every tower and broadcasting a GPS derived " system time " in the overhead. I WOULD BE SURPRISED IF IT WORKS AT ALL given that they will be attempting it will low-end consumer units bounced around in cars ... HArdly the MIL-SPEC stuff we used in the NAVY! Butch Croan email balcroan@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: steelj@mercury.swindon.rtsg.mot.com (jon steel) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse Date: 12 May 1994 11:35:43 GMT Organization: Motorola Ltd., European Cellular Infrastructure Division In article jharan@cwa.com writes: > ... but why don't the cellular providers use a more robust > authentication service. Your cellular phone would contain an > encription key that would also be known to the cellular provider. When > your phone went off hook, it would send its telephone number. The > provider would look up your number to get your key and send you some > random sequence of digits which would vary from call to call. Your > phone would take the sequence of digits, use its key to encode them > and return them to the provider. Since the provider has your key, it > can perform the same encription. If the encoded data that was returned > doesn't match what the provider's copy of the key encripts, then its > because the calling phone doesn't have the right key and the call is > dropped. The key is never transmitted so the crook would have to > steal the physical phone to steal the service. In the UK there is a similar system to the one you have described above. This feature is known as `TACS Authentication'. It is implemented using a 16-digit PIN code, known only to the subscriber and the service provider. When the subscriber goes `off-hook' his 16-digit PIN code is sent in encrypted form, this is then received at the MSC and decrypted. It is then compared with the subscriber record in the database, and if it does not match, you ain't talking to nobody! Although the PIN is transmitted, it is in encrypted form, so to get round this you will have to know the encryption algorithm. Oh, one more point. The PIN is never encrytped the same way twice (at least not for a long time). I've probably got some functional specs somewhere if anybody is really interested ... Jon Steel. Motorola ECID Ltd, Swindon, UK Tel: +44 793 545281 Fax: +44 793 480120 Email: steelj@zeus.swindon.rtsg.mot.com ------------------------------ From: brian@porky.cb.att.com (Brian Bebeau) Subject: Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" Organization: AT&T Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 14:13:02 GMT In regard to the AT&T feature of cutting people off after a few rings: Someone in an AT&T internal newsletter complained about the same thing recently (his mother is hard of hearing and takes a while to answer the phone). Since a public relations person replied, I don't think I'll be divulging company secrets to repeat the reply. What was said, was that, when the message is being played about leaving a message, the phone is still ringing, and it still rings after the message is finished playing. If you want to let it keep ringing, just hang on (don't leave a message and don't hang up), it'll keep on ringing. Whether it actually works if you just hang on I don't know, but that's what they said. Brian Bebeau Interactive Systems (a Systemhouse company) brian@cblph.att.com at AT&T Network Systems ------------------------------ From: Paul A. Lee ORGANIZATION: Woolworth Corporation Date: Thu 12 May 1994 15:00:00 GMT Subject: Re: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? In a recent {TELECOM Digest}, Tai Duong wrote: > Can anyone give me ... a way to record phone conversations on hard > disk...? Current voice mail technology is based on the process of digitizing (recording) phone signals (conversations), storing them on disk, and retrieving them from the stored database for decoding and playback. The technology has also been adapted to phone logging and retrieval systems. Several manufacturers provide the basic hardware components for such systems to hundreds of system integrators, VARs, and developers. Those manufacturers might be a good starting point for tracking down a source that can provide a logging system, as well as a means of integrating it with a document image storage and retrieval system. Some voice, FAX, and switching board manufacturers are: Amtelco 800-356-9148 Bicom 800-766-3573 203 268-4484 Brooktrout Technology 617 449-4100 Dialogic 800-755-4444 201 334-8450 Dianatel 408 428-1000 Exacom 603 228-0706 Excel, Inc. 508 833-1144 Intervoice 214 497-8862 214 669-3988 Natural Microsystems 800-533-6120 508 650-1300 New Voice 703 448-0570 PCBX Systems Inc. 800-755-7229 714 668-1180 Pika Technologies 613 591-1555 Rhetorex, Inc. 408 370-0881 Teleliaison 514 333-5333 Voice Technologies 716 689-6700 For telephone-quality voice, there are digitization/compression techniques that can greatly reduce the storage required, compared to high fidelity formats like WAV. If you need long-term archival storage with the ability to retrieve at random, you'll want to explore WORM or magneto-optical storage. This type of storage would also work well with image storage. There are bound to be developers out there who have already created something like the application you need. Finding the right developer -- one that knows the technology, understands your application, and works cooperatively -- can be the toughest part of the project. Doing that part well, though, helps to ensure the success of the overall project. Please contact me with more specifics about the application and processing volume if you need more information or assistance. Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 INTERNET ------------------------------ From: ross@ncd.com (Ross Oliver) Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Date: 12 May 1994 19:09:33 GMT Organization: Network Computing Devices In article , barry.s.rein@jpl.nasa.gov (Barry S. Rein) writes: > We're moving soon and we'll have to get a new phone number. For > $10.00 Pacific Bell will let me choose any phone number with the right > prefix as long as it's not already taken. > I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to > remember. Restaurants are supposedly willing to kill for a memorable > phone number, so I wonder if there is any research or recommendations > on how to select one, ie what combinations are remembered; what > combinations are most often mis-dialled, etc. > Incidentally, our exchange prefixes are 398, 791, 794, 797, and 798 -- 818 > area code. I chose xxx-ROSS for my home phone number, on the assumption that it would be easier for freinds and relatives to remember than xxx-7677. It does help, but I'm not sure whether it is because the letters are easier to remember than the numbers, or because not many people have their name embedded in their phone number. I personally dislike lettered phone numbers. I don't like having to translate on the telephone keypad, and it makes modem dialing VERY difficult (1-800-CHK-DUAT for example). I seem to have a more visually-oriented memory, and I remember many phone numbers by picturing the connect-the-dots pattern the numbers form on the keypad. I worked in Silicon Graphics tech support for a while. The incoming tech support number is 1-800-800-4SGI. The double 800 confused a lot of people when I would leave the number in a phone message. I settled on speaking it as "eight hundred, eight zero zero..." This helped some, but I still had to repeat it two or three times on occassion. I recently moved also, but in the same area, so I was able to keep my phone number. Pac Bell charged me the $10.00 AGAIN to keep my "personalized" number. Nothing like a monopoly, eh? Ross Oliver ross@ncd.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 09:54 EST From: Hugh Pritchard <0006348214@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number barry.s.rein@jpl.nasa.gov (Barry S. Rein) writes: > .... I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to > remember. .... I can't speak to the mnemonicity of phone numbers. However, since you can specify your new phone number, be warned that repeating digits increase the chances of people dialing your number by accident. Some people tend to double a digit by mistake when they're dialing. The doubled digit may make the dialed number into YOUR number. I have a phone number of the form -xxyz. People trying to dial -xyzt sometimes, "mysteriously," find they've dialed me instead. Hugh Pritchard, Smoke N' Mirrors, Inc. Hugh_Pritchard@MCImail.com -or- hugh@snm.com ------------------------------ From: rlockhart@aol.com (RLockhart) Subject: Re: PEP Pager Protocol Software Information Wanted Date: 12 May 1994 14:53:02 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , mathias@solomon.technet.sg (Mathias Koerber) writes: > Where can I get info/src about the pep protocol for pagers? I > couldn't find a FAQ. To my knowledge, there's no PEP protocol, but there is an alpha paging protocol that's sounds similar. It's called PET (Page Entry Terminal) protocol and is the predecessor of TAP (Telocator Alpha Paging .. PET and IXO are different names for the same alpha paging) protocol. The only formal source for TAP is PCIA (Personal Communications Industry Association ... formerly Telocator) in Washington, DC, in the US at 1.202.467.4770. If you'd like to take a look at the more commonly implemented portions of TAP, I've a thread culled from our now-out-of- print Programmer's Guide to PET (used by Telocator as the basis for TAP) that covers these. Your tag indicates a Singapore origin. Telecoms' multitude of paging systems (some of which were mine [buffing nails] ) include a number of alpha entry mechanisms not found in other systems (in addition to TAP). These have included, at times, a DTMF entry method and a Telex one. If you are interested in these, as well (assuming you're really looking for alpha entry at *all* ), I'd be happy to help you get in contact with our paging people in Shaw Towers. Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc. Desktop I'net: lockhart-epag06_rob@email.mot.com Wireless I'net (<32K characters): rob_lockhart-erl003e@email.mot.com ------------------------------ From: trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) Subject: Re: Getting Phone Bills Over the Internet Date: 12 May 1994 01:06:48 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. In cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) writes: > That wouldn't be that big of a deal; the telco could encrypt using the > calling card (main one I guess) number. Let's hope no one else as > that! Practically anybody can get calling card numbers. Even if they don't get the final four digits that's only 10K combinations to check, trivial. Such a suggestion is hopelessly insecure. Rather, you would publish a public key and they would first use their private key to encrypt the message, then your public key. You decrypt with your private key then their public key. Such a message is both secure and authenticated. > Pacific Bell already offers electronic billing; unfortunately, it is > on disk, and costs between 8-15 dollars per month (I can't remember > the exact amount, but it was something that sounded outrageous > considering that floppies cost anywhere from .50 to $1.00). When you consider the potential benefit to large customers of getting the bill on disc, it is quite reasonable. And what about the support costs? They probably priced it so that only the people who would really benefit from it buy it, thus reducing their support costs because they won't be getting phone calls from people like us asking "How come I can't load your file into FileMaker version 1.0.0.3b (years obsolete)?" ;^) Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@forEtune.co.jp ALL GENERAL ANIMEIGO QUERIES SHOULD GO TO 72447.37@compuserve.com. PLEASE ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 12 MAY 94 00:05:00 GMT Subject: Re: Using Call Forwarding to Avoid Tolls holderby@inca.gate.net (Tom Holderby) writes: > I've recently become aware of the fact the many BBS's and Internet > service providers use the call-forwarding trick where they go buy a > phone number (without a phone) in outlying exchanges which are > permanently call-forwarded to their main lines, thereby increasing > their local call area. Apparently some of them carry this to the > point of multiple forwarding, which may get them 50 or 75 miles > without a toll. To which our Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Generally, using the *regular, residential > variety* of call forwarding will NOT save money where toll charges are > concerned unless you are able to link two or three large toll free calling > areas together. Generally, two or more short calls linked together cost > more than a single long-haul call covering the same points. ... Out here in Southern California, I know of some BBSes that offer free memberships to anyone willing to let them use a phone in their house for such purposes. The member orders an ordinary residential flat-rate line with call-forwarding. The BBS pays the monthly fee in addition to the free membership, and instructs the member to forward the line on. The member of course can use the line for outgoing calls all he or she wants. By stringing such *flat-rate, residential* lines together, the board can offer a free call area that is quite large, covering several communities. The trick here, of course, is that the lines are residential class and flat-rate. I have no idea of the legality of such practices, but there can be problems with call setup times and maximum numbers of simultaneous forwarded (supervised) calls. Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com Net**2 656-6350 (Please forward bounces to Mail Stop MV 237 rgellens@mcimail.com) Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself| ------------------------------ From: Kevin W. Reed Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device Organization: TeleSys Development Systems (TNET), Mesa, Arizona 602-649-9099 Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:57:09 GMT fred@nasirc.hq.nasa.gov (Fred Blonder) writes: >> Has anyone heard of a digital writing device presumably using >> lightpens or something equivalent, that has two "terminals" for >> people to use to communicate over the phone as if by writing? ... > Back around 1967 or so I saw a system in use at the TWA terminal at > what was then Friendship (now BWI) Airport. About the same timeframe, I remember going on a field trip to the local Fire Dept. This was either in Temple City or Arcadia, CA. They had a box with a pen in it that when they received a call, the instructions and what not were written on the paper remotely by the dispatcher. They then took the paper with them on the call. They demonstrated it to us by having the dispatcher write something like "Hi Kids ..." It was the main attraction of the field trip. Kevin W. Reed (kreed) TELESYS DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS (TNET.COM) kreed@TNET.COM 2359 W De Palma Ave, Mesa AZ 85202 System Administrator / Unix BBS Developer BBS/UUCP/DATA 602-649-9099 ------------------------------ From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Fred Blonder , writes: >> Has anyone heard of a digital writing device presumably using >> lightpens or something equivalent, that has two "terminals" for >> people to use to communicate over the phone as if by writing? ... > Back around 1967 or so I saw a system ... normal ball-point pen > connected to a plastic tab going into a box. It also had a wire > coming off, giving a simple switch closure ... The box read the pen > motions and sent them to a receiver elsewhere ... to duplicate the > writing onto another piece of paper in real-time. The paper on the > transmitter and the receiver where both adding-machine type paper > rolls The device you are describing is called a "Telautograph"(R) machine, manufactured by the company of the same name. With the advent of facsimile machines in the 1980s, Telautograph devices sort of died off, the way facsimile killed off almost all U.S. domestic telex use. But Telautograph Corporation is still in business today. What do they do? They make fax machines under the name "Omnifax"! We have one in our office. ------------------------------ From: dold@rahul.net (Clarence Dold) Subject: Re: FAX Mailbox Services Organization: a2i network Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 00:24:39 GMT Jack Bzoza (JackB@delrina.com) wrote: > Delrina (the makers of WinFax and PerForm) has just announced a fax > mailbox service exactly as you describe. It will ship (i.e. be > available) in about two weeks time. > It is currently the ONLY way to retrieve a fax sent to your fax > mailbox directly to your hotel room with your laptop. > Nice idea, but "the ONLY way"? Hardly. > Expensive? yes. > Offered by Delrina? I think not. Looks that way. > I believe it is offered by MCI. WinFax 4.0 _requires_ a class 1 Faxmodem for mailbox retrieval. The Class 2 faxmodem that I have cannot be used. If you want a cheaper alternative, that has been in use for some time, call 1-800-audiofax, and ask for the name of a "travel mailbox" dealer in your area. I must admit that the integration into WinFax is kind of cool. I use Winfax to retrieve faxmail to my machine now, from an Audiofax system. Clarence A Dold - dold@rahul.net - Milpitas (near San Jose) & Napa CA. ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 17:41:20 GMT In article , Tony Harminc wrote: > So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data ? > It must be some sort of bulk interface, since they are certainly not > letting it ring once and waiting for the data to come down the wire > between the first and second rings. I wasn't aware that any such > interface was tariffed or standardized. It's ISDN Primary Rate Interface, the same retail service which you can get on your PBX at work. Bell call it Megalink service. Vance Shipley, vances@xenitec.on.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #219 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07051; 13 May 94 12:57 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA18981; Fri, 13 May 94 09:03:12 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA18972; Fri, 13 May 94 09:03:10 CDT Date: Fri, 13 May 94 09:03:10 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405131403.AA18972@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #220 TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 May 94 09:03:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 220 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Networking Alternatives For Third/Other World (William M. Eldridge) Cell One NY/NJ: New Feature (Stan Schwartz) Rates in Alaska and Hawaii (Bob Schwartz) Wireless Data Services (Pete Farmer) Re: Book Review: Police Call & Beyond Police Call (Al Cohan) USPS and Smart Cards (Steve Cogorno) Dealing with Obscene Callers in the 90's (Mike Durkin) Responses From Telcos (was: CO/NY DC and Boston) (Doug Reuben) Directory Assistance Companies (josephh888@aol.com) Verifone Junior Programming Hints Summary (Ry Jones) Cell Fone Kloned ... Theft (Ry Jones) Communication Networks (FDDI-ATM) Course (Richard Tsina) BCE Plans Satellite Broadcast Service (Toronto Star via Dave Leibold) Canadian Carrier ACC - First Quarter News (ACC/CNW via Dave Leibold) Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (John R. Levine) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bill@LIFESCI.UCLA.EDU (William M. Eldridge) Subject: Networking Alternatives For Third/Other World Date: 12 May 1994 19:52:25 -0700 Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program I'm interested in devoting part of our Web/Gopher/Ftp archive here to issues in Networking in the Third/Lesser Developed World. I'll be heading to Macedonia in October to work on their network, and I realize the issues are quite a bit different between Europe and Africa, but I would like to create a one-stop archive (as well as a mailing list) that people can go to for information on such things as satellite feeds, packet radio nets, turning 286's into useful network devices, telephony alternatives, and so on, to allow useful services where budgets are quite tight and telecoms aren't always modern. To start with, I'd heard there was an American group set up to deal with East European networking, but I was never able to find out any actual information (like name and contact) for this group. If you could provide me with any information or connect me with people interested in these matters, I'd be greatly obliged. Also, if you're interested in receiving info as it comes in, send in your e-mail address and I'll make up a list (please include the word "3rd" in the title for easy sorting). Thanks, Bill Eldridge bill@lifesci.ucla.edu 310-206-3960 (3987 fax) ------------------------------ From: stans@panix.com (Stan Schwartz) Subject: Cell One NY/NJ: New Feature Date: 13 May 1994 00:33:22 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC I was just down at a local Cell One dealer where a friend works, and he gave me one of the brochures for "Voice Dialing". From any cell phone (connected to CO NY/NJ, of course) you can store up to 20 names and call them from the system's memory, or you can say the digits into the phone one-by-one. You hit # to enter the Voice Dialing menu, and after that all the cellular functions are accessable by voice. The system continuously checks the last 20 samples of your voice to adjust to changes in voice (their example is if you have a cold), equipment, and atmospheric conditions. The charges? Here is the structure effective sometime in June: (In addition to regular monthly access and airtime) Voice Dialing (Stand-alone) $6.95/month Voice Mail (Stand-alone) $6.95/month Voice Mail Plus(Stand-alone) $9.95/month Voice Dialing + Voice Mail $9.95/month Voice Dialing + Voice Mail Plus $12.95/month The first month is free on all of these. Any questions, call CO NY/NJ at 1-800-242-7327 (but I like to call 611 from my cell phone and run up the free airtime while waiting on hold). Stan ------------------------------ Subject: Rates in Alaska and Hawaii From: bob@bci.nbn.com (Bob Schwartz) Date: Thu, 12 May 94 17:27:17 PDT Organization: Bill Correctors, Inc., Marin County, California Recently, I heard that Alaska has only two equal access carriers. AT&T, MCI, and Sprint are not equal access carriers there. Could it be true? Other than wondering why $$$ makes it so (if it is so), it follows that rates must be pretty high for LATA calls. Is the whole state one LATA? Also, I'd like to know what are the day rates for calling the lower 48. Are the rates for Interstate calling banded? Final question about Alaska: are there *problems for Alaskans calling into mainland 800 numbers? If so are these problems caused by poor carrier interaction or by mainland companies that don't *accept* such high priced calls? The fellow that I heard this from was looking for sales people to offer .17/minutes to Alaskans for intra state/LATA calling. Is this of interest to readers in Alaska or is it old and tired news? The inter- state rate he quoted was .21/minute. Interested? Let me know and I'll give him your voice number. The same applies to Interstate calls (inter island calls in Hawaii however, I'm sure the *usual* carriers do operate in Hawaii. Regards, Bob Schwartz bob@bci.nbn.com Bill Correctors, Inc. +1 415 488 9000 Marin County, California ------------------------------ From: petef@well.com (Pete Farmer) Subject: Wireless data services Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 17:46:52 -0800 Organization: Tetherless Access Ltd. I've noticed that there's been very little posted to this list regarding wireless *data* services. Anyone know why? There are some very interesting developments in the wireless arena, both for short, bursty text messaging (a la RAM or Ardis) and for higher bandwidth, IP connectivity within metropolitan areas. Am I simply looking in the wrong place, or is the interest level not very high, or is there a need to establish a new group regarding wireless data services? Peter J. Farmer Internet: petef@well.com Vice President, Marketing Voice: 415-321-5968 Tetherless Access Ltd. Fax: 415-321-5048 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those messages are welcome here, but I do not seem to get very many of them. I'm not certain if any other newsgroup is currently handling the topic or not. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 12:11 EST From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Book Review: Police Call & Beyond Police Call Pat, Gene Hughes was not only a neighbor of mine when I was in Jr. High School, but he is now also a relative of mine. At a recent family get together, Gene and I had a long talk about his publications. Although he likes getting mail, frequently he is inundated with angry purchasers of his book claiming: I bought your book and our local police department is [enter local city] isn't listed. True, up to 50% of *many* local agencies either ignore the FCC renewal requests or forget to renew the license! What is the FCC going to do to a Fire Department, red tag their transmitters? No, but Gene does go on to explain that his copyrighted work (compiliation, I suppose) is obtain from official records and if no license exists, then no listing exists -- or in some editions he prints frequencies previously listed and thought to be in use! So what does the FCC do about compliance with state, local, agencies? They now have a program for something Gene called "preference licensing" or something to that effect. What *can* and in some cases actually happens is that if a license is not renewed and a neighboring entity files on the frequencies of the expried license, the FCC gives the frequencies to the new licensee, rejecting the subsequent late renewal application from the former agency! DO you have any idea what it costs to do a frequency seach, co-ordination and re-programming (and retuning duplexers) for a major public agency? I do, and it don't come cheap. If any of your readers buy the current Police Call series and don't find their local agencies listed, I suggest they call the local agency and ask them "When does your FCC license expire"? I'll bet there will be a lot of red faces -- and save the agency a lot of aggravation. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good point you raise about the lack of cooperation/compliance between a local emergency agency and the FCC. I've always noticed that Police Call carries that very disclaimer in the front of the book. Mr. Hughes says that a lot of agencies do not comply -- have no current license -- and therefore may not be listed. I hope when you talk to him next you'll mention how useful I have found his new publication, and that I hope it will be arranged by frequency in subsequent editions just like the original. Mention to him also that his partnership with Tandy/Radio Shack for the sale of the books seems to be a good one also. Radio Shack scanner customers love the books. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: USPS & Smart Cards Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 10:28:33 PDT Does anyone have an idea as to why the USPS and IRS (or whomever is proposing this) wants to use "Smart Cards"? WHy wouldn't the just use mag-stipe cards? The installed based of mag-stripe readers (at ATMs, supermarkets, schools, etc.) is already in place. Why change to these new cards? Are the Smart Cards supposed to actually "hold" the data? I think that is potentially dangerous. What if I lose the card? Is there a backup? Besides, isn't the point having a network to centralize data into one repository (or at least a distributed, but constantly accessible repository)? Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, as someone mentioned yesterday, this whole thing may be just a big crock anyway. It seems it went from idle conversation at a social gathering to the point of "President is ready to sign order" in a very short period of time. Yeah, what if you lose the card? Wouldn't that make a great time for the finder? PAT] ------------------------------ From: durkin@eisner.decus.org (Mike Durkin) Subject: Dealing with Obscene Callers in the 90's Date: 12 May 94 15:27:43 -0400 Organization: DECUServe Hello, My wife received three obscene phone calls last week and in contacting the phone company to follow-up on any possible future invasions of this sort, the operator referred me to the Anonymous Call Group at my local RBOC. She also stated tracing the call via IQ services, *57, would get the call originator's number to show up on my billing information, but that it takes five calls in a row to get any action. I am in Southeastern Pennsylvania and I thought it best to check this information out prior to launching any further actions. I don't think PA has yet lifted the ANI/CID restrictions? I did check the Telecom Archives, but was unable to find any documents on prank calls and locating/prosecuting the culprit. Any pointers/advice? Thanks, Mike Durkin Intracorp 1205 Westlakes Drive Berwyn, PA 19312 (610) 889-2883 - Voice (610) 889-2899 - Fax [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We've covered this in various past issues of the Digest (which are in the Archives) but off hand I could not tell you which issues to look for without going to look myself. If some readers have a specific reference to which back issues had those things maybe they will pass them along. Yes, there is a lot you can do to end this type of nuisance, and telcos will cooperate if you agree to prosecute. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dreuben@netcom.com (Cid Technologies) Subject: Responses From Telcos (was: CO/NY DC & Boston) Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:52:36 PDT In response to my (usually) long post about Cell One/NY's extended roaming rates and how NYNEX needs to catch up, Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Doug, you have written to the Digest on > many occassions over the past few years on cellular systems and their > various shortcomings. Do any of the cell companies *ever* respond to > your articles here, or your inquiries of them and make the desired > changes? Have any of them ever corrected their problems after you gave > them notice? PAT] Well, it depends what you mean by respond -- I get all sorts of responses; just recently a guy wrote back to me and said something to the effect of "I didn't understand a word of what you said, but it sounded very interesting to me, thanks!". But yes, many of the cell co's which I post about do eventually directly respond. A recent post about NYNEX brought a response regarding the lack of a "Do Not Disturb" (sorry, Ericsson :) ) code the on BAMS AT&T switches in DC for NYNEX customers. As noted in yesterday's posting, this situation has not been resolved as of yet, but at the very least the post seems to have served as a reminder that there is a problem which needs to be addressed. A post about four years ago regarding CO/NY's problems with its roaming partners drew a swift and effective response -- in a few weeks all of the problems were cleared up, and I got to know a few people there who I can talk to whenever something else comes up. (And I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating: CO/NY and most other McCaw systems are probably the most responsive, concerned, polite, and friendly cellular companies to deal with, and manifest a *genuine* desire to listen to customer complaints and promptly address them). More recently, a non-cellular complaint responding to a question about Cable&Wireless' service drew a number of responses from C&W, and ANI -> CID delivery suddenly started working again in some areas. (Hey guys, can you do West Hartford, CT, 203-233 too? It used to work there as well ... thanks! ;) ) A post about PageMart cutting back on the number of digits drew a LOT of responses (thanks!). Some guy was even considerate enough to do a breakdown of the costs associated with transmission of 15 digits vs. 24 digits, and I got two calls from managers at PageMart about the post saying basically that 22 (or 24?) digit service had been restored. So in general, yeah, I do get responses from the companies which I criticize. In some cases, the response is a direct message or call from a representative in the top levels of the firm. At other times, I get a e-mail message or a phone call from someone who works at the company, sees that I have a problem, and tries to work it out with me (ie, a tech person or someone at that level of corporate operations. And finally, there are cases where I post something, and "mysteriously" the problem gets resolved - no phone calls, no messages, it just suddenly starts working again right after the post goes out over the net. (I like these the best -- no need to send "Thank You" notes or make followup calls! :) ) I don't mean to sound like I am trying to use the Digest as my personal "Telcom-problem-server", where I deposit messages so that the telcos and cellular companies can read them. I'd like to think (and forgive me if this sounds too lofty) that it raises the level of awareness to these issues, even by a fraction of a degree. Many of these problems won't be solved unless enough customers notice it and complain about it. It is also frequently the case that a cell company will not even be aware that a problem exists. The dynamics of roaming in all of the newly emerging call-delivery regimes can change so frequently that it becomes potentially difficult if not impossible for a roaming and/or networking department at a cell company to keep up with all the issues that develop. Clearly, most of the posts that I type up stem from a certain disfunction or lacking which affects me, but I think that most of these problems may at some time also affect other customers, and that is probably why I do get responses. I must add that I am continually amazed at the well, "power" that the net has in terms of distributing the right information to the right people, which I think more than anything is why a lot of these issues that I mention are eventually addressed. One important (and probably obvious) point: If you do post a complaint or raise an issue which you would like addressed, leave your phone number. Many of the people who read these at whatever telco are getting a faxed or hard-copy version of your post and have no way of responding to you directly via e-mail, or may not even know how to. I recently "discovered" this, and have subsequently been getting more responses in a more timely manner than before. Doug CID Technologies (203) 499-5221 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: More and more people from telcos and cell companies are 'coming aboard' on the mailing list for the Digest. There is not a day goes by I do not add at least three or four -- usually more -- names to the mailing list of people involved with some telco or another. Its good to know that when problems are discovered someone is out there paying attention. PAT] ------------------------------ From: josephh888@aol.com (JosephH888) Subject: Directory Assistance Companies Date: 12 May 1994 16:56:02 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) We are interested in knowing about companies that can lower our more than $5,000 monthly in directory assistance charges. Please post response here or e-mail direct to JosephH888@aol.com or 74124,2401 on Compuserve or fax to 609-953-7233. Personal business fax, so no cover page or name required. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Ry Jones Subject: Verifone Junior Programming Hints Summary Date: Thu, 12 May 94 10:53:36 PDT Many people replied with useful information on reprogramming a Verifone. Here's a quick summary of what I did and where I am today: Verifone of Beaverton has yet to mail me any information. I pulled the battery and -poof- the memory was dead, but it still says memory positions 79 and 78 are and I cannot reprogram it because it asks for a PASSWORD? when I hit OPTION-STORE. It no longer has a merchant ID and won't read cards. It defaulted from AMEX VISA TRU-VALUE CHECK MASTERCARD to CREDIT CARD, CREDIT CARD, CHECK, PRIVATE CARD, PRIVATE CARD. Does anyone KNOW the default password, or how to reset it? This is a VERIFONE-JUNIOR version 2.05 (Displayed on boot and on a sticker on the ROM). It has a Z80 and 32K of ROM, 32K of RAM. Email me and I'll summarize the results. Ry ------------------------------ From: Ry Jones Subject: Cell Fone Kloned ... Theft Date: Thu, 12 May 94 11:24:24 PDT My cell fone was kloned in Chicago a few years ago with many thousands of dollars of calls to Columbia, etc. GTE took the charges off, no problem, but they required I send them a copy of the bill (!) and a letter stating that I didn't make the calls. No funny fone stuff. This past month, a cell fone of my pal's was cloned and used for nefarious purposes. Cell One (in 206, I'm from 812) took the charges off AFTER the phone was returned to be re-programmed at an authorized Cell One Dealer. Weird. ------------------------------ From: course@garnet.berkeley.edu Subject: Communication Networks (FDDI-ATM) Course Date: 12 May 1994 19:10:28 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley U.C. BERKELEY Continuing Education in Engineering Announces a short course on Communication Networks: COMMUNICATION NETWORKS: FROM FDDI TO ATM (August 9-10, 1994) This course provides an overview of the operating principles and design guidelines for communication networks, and includes a description of the popular current networks and a discussion of major industry trends. Topics include: History and Operating Principles, Open System Interconnection, Overview of High-Speed Networks, Physical Layer, Switching, Trends in Data Networks (FDDI, DQDB, Frame Relay, SMDS), Trends in Telecommunication Networks (SONET, Fiber to the home, ISDN, Intelligent Networks, ATM) , Topological Design of Networks, Control of ATM Networks. Comprehensive course notes will be provided. Lecturers: PRAVIN VARAIYA, Ph.D., Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley. At Berkeley he works on stochastic systems, communication networks, power systems and urban economics. He is the author of "Stochastic Systems: Estimation, Identification, and Adaptive Control" (Prentice-Hall, 1986) and coeditor of "Discrete Event Systems: Models and Applications" (Springer, 1988). He is a fellow of the IEEE. JEAN WALRAND, Ph.D., Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley. He is the author of "An Introduction to Queuing Networks" (Prentice-Hall, 1988) and "Communication Networks: A First Course" (Irwin/Aksen, 1991). For more information (brochure with complete course descriptions, outlines,instructor bios, etc.,) send your postal address to: Richard Tsina U.C. Berkeley Extension Continuing Education in Engineering 2223 Fulton St. Berkeley, CA 94720 Tel: (510) 642-4151 Fax: (510) 643-8683 email: course@garnet.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 13 May 94 23:37:54 -0500 Subject: BCE Plans Satellite Broadcast Service Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway {The Toronto Star} this week reports of a new Canadian broadcast satellite service proposal. BCE, the parent company of Bell Canada and Northern Telecom, announced a proposed $60 million/four-year investment in a multi-channel satellite broadcast service. Plans are to get the service started April '95, eventually offering up to 100 Canadian and U.S. channels. This is intended as competition to Directv, whose operations are expected to start up in Canada later in 1994. BCE is teaming up with Canadian Satellite Communications (Cancom) and WIC (Western International Communications). Cancom already runs its Oak-encrypted (soon to be compression-encrypted) superstation package; WIC operates various stations such as CHCH Hamilton (on the existing Cancom package). Needless to say, cable industry representatives have not reacted favourably to this "death star" service. ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 12 May 94 21:29:12 -0500 Subject: Canadian Carrier ACC - First Quarter News Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway [from an ACC press release via CNW] ACC TELENTERPRISES LTD. REPORTS RECORD QUARTERLY REVENUES AND PROFITS TORONTO, May 10 /CNW/ - ACC TelEnterprises Ltd. ("ACC") today announced its results for the first quarter of 1994. For the three months ended March 31, 1994 ACC reported record quarterly income of $305,317 or $.05 per share compared to $133,768 or $.03 per share for the same period last year. First quarter 1994 revenue was $25.3 million, up 38% from $18.3 million a year ago. The Company's volume of business as measured by billable minues increased 64.7% to 112 million minutes for the quarter, up from 68 million minutes in the first quarter of 1993. Stated Robert C. Watson, President and Chief Executive Officer, "We are pleased with these results and with the ability to differentiate ACC from other resellers through sound financial management and a commitment to profitability." The Company experienced strong growth in toll minutes from both commercial and residential customers. Commercial toll minutes have grown 40% over the first quarter of last year. Residential toll minutes grew to 17% of total minutes from less than 1% of total minutes in the first quarter of 1993. Growth in residential tolls is attributable to the success of the Company's university and affinity programs. The Company currently has exclusive, multiyear marketing agreements with seven universities, two colleges and two major service associations. Gross margin after network costs improved to 32.2% compared to 28.4% in the first quarter of last year. This reflects the implementation of the first phase of equal access, as well as increased network efficiencies resulting from continued growth in customers, as the Company has expanded into Albert and Manitobe and continued to increase its residential customer base. Depreciation and amortization expense doubled to $1.4 million from $.7 million in the first quarter of 1993 due to the change in useful life of dialers to two years, the increase in amortization associated with the acquisition of the ISM customer base in July 1993 and the acquisition of two agents in the first quarter of 1994. Selling, General and Administrative costs increased to 23.1% of revenue from 21.6% a year ago. This increase is mainly due to increases in payroll and other costs related to expanding the business in new markets and administering the growth in billable minutes. Watson further stated, "The results reflected continued strong sales growth even in the face of pricing pressures. While our primary goal is to build market share, we are equally focused on customer service and financial performance. Companies focussed on delivering a quality product while meeting the customers' needs will be the winners." The Company is making ready for equal access and the related conversion costs. The Company believes the costs to convert existing customers to an equal access network could be (dependent on CRTC actions) approximately $500,000 over the next two quarters. Stated Watson, "Equal access, coupled with the opportunity to offer new products, like 1-800 service, will allow us new avenues to provide value added service to our customers, but the associated start-up costs will place pressure on Second Quarter and Third Quarter earnings". ACC TelEnterprises Ltd., a Canadian company headquartered in Toronto, provides worldwide long distance voice and data service to business, residential and university customers in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, Manitoba and Alberta. The Company operates in 32 metropolitan centres and currently has an annualized revenue run rate in excess of $100 million. ACC TelEnterprises Ltd. is traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange and the Montreal Exchange under the symbol "ACL". [detailed financial data omitted; available through the CNW fax service] For further information: Robert C. Watson, President and Chief Executive Officer, ACC TelEnterprises Ltd., Etobicoke, Ontario, (416) 236-3636 ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip Date: Fri, 13 May 94 2:29:59 EDT I was scrutinizing my cellular bill this evening and noted this fascinating (well, sort of fascinating fact): My long distance carrier is Sprint, which bills directly, not through my cell carrier NYNEX. For about three quarters of the LD calls, Sprint billed the call as a minute shorter than NYNEX did. I presume that this is because NYNEX starts the clock as soon as I hit Send, while Sprint doesn't start until the call supervises. On the other hand, for roamer calls with the LD charges billed through NYNEX, the LD and cellular times are the same. If you use an LD carrier who bills through your cell carrier (notably AT&T), the LD times are all the same as the cellular times, meaning that you're paying for LD minutes you didn't actually use. Another advantage of separate LD billing is that you can get the various silly discount plans, e.g. I have Sprint's Most plan. The number I call the most is my own home number (while roaming in New York and Connecticut, primarily), which also has Sprint service, so the LD minutes are 40% cheaper than they would be otherwise. Regards, John Levine, comp.compilers moderator johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #220 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07661; 13 May 94 13:51 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA21480; Fri, 13 May 94 10:31:06 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA21471; Fri, 13 May 94 10:31:04 CDT Date: Fri, 13 May 94 10:31:04 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405131531.AA21471@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #221 TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 May 94 10:31:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 221 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Toll Free Prank Calls (Douglas Adams) Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Mark W. Schumann) Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Michael G. Godwin) Re: Firms Vie for Three-Digit Phone Numbers (Nigel Allen) Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Randy Gellens) Re: Internet White Pages (David McIntyre) Re: Internet White Pages (Bill Blum) Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (A. Padgett Peterson) Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (John R. Levine) Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (Eric Jacksch) Re: FTP Server Site (Paul Robinson) Re: Looking For Information on Faxmail Systems (Jeff Robertson) Re: Internet by Satellite (Edwin Wise) Re: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers (Harbir Singh Kohli) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Carl Oppedahl) Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Bob Goudreau) Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway (Doug Adams) Re: DID Loophole or I'm Screwed up? (Vance Shipley) Re: DunsNet (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Call Display From New York (Danny Burstein) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: adamsd@crash.cts.com (Adams Douglas) Subject: Re: Toll-Free Prank Calls Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET/crash), San Diego, CA Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 19:03:44 GMT > Southern Bell were at the dude's door the next day with a warrant and > local police officers for backup. Naturally everything in sight relating > to telecom or computers was seized -- the usual routine in cases which > involve phreaking. Over the three billing cycles during which this had > been going on it cost Falwell several thousand dollars which Southern > Bell wrote off for goodwill, charging it to AT&T. AT&T filed criminal > charges against the phreak and asked for restitution. Do I recall correctly that AT&T lost this suit? On the grounds of something like Falwell's global advertisement of the 800 number constituted "solicitation for use of service" or some other legal jargon? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You stand corrected. They did not lose. The complaint was not that he had been solicited to use the service and then did so ... the complaint was that contrary to tariff and in violation of the law he caused the telephone to ring repeatedly in an effort to harass. Virtually (maybe every) state in the USA has laws on the books relating to causing another's telephone to ring then not speaking up when the connection has been established. As a side note, the case was reported in various media including {The Advocate}, a national newspaper for gay people. {The Advocate} gleefully reported how Falwell had changed his 800 number after the paper had reported the story earlier in detail, including giving his 800 number in the article. The paper then promptly gave out his new number, with one of those 'we do not encourage you to violate the law by calling Falwell's new number which is 800-xxx-xxxx' type reports. The usually jovial Falwell (when he has a rally, there will always be a large crowd of gay people there to protest and counter-demonstrate; he never fails to walk over, smile and shake hands with all the gay guys, take some out to lunch afterward on his expense account and thank them for being there; he once said if all the gay people did not show up everywhere he went he might consider paying them to show up) responded that if guerilla warfare was now the tactic he wondered what the results would be if 'a few million' conservative right-wing Christians were advised 'not to break the law' by calling the {Advocate's} 800 number for subscription renewals and 'the mailorder sale of porn magazines and sex toys ...'. Apparently the owners of the {Advocate} gave that cheerfully stated threat some very solemn consideration and decided not to publish Falwell's 800 number any longer. PAT] ------------------------------ From: catfood@rosebud.strinc.com (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 19:39:42 GMT Organization: Systems for Today's Retailer, Brecksville, Ohio USA In article , Paul Robinson wrote: >> [Telecom Digest Editor's Note:... Very few [radio call-in shows] are >> willing to provide an 800 number for you to camp out on at their >> expense. > A nationally syndicated one comes from here in the Washington, DC area. > The phone number to call into it is 1-800-G-G-Liddy. > Anyone else know of any beyond Rush Limbaugh, which was posted here > earlier? Another local station has its own 800 number for its call-in > programs. What Do You Know gives its number as 1-800-WHA-KNOW. As in "One, eight hundred, wah-no. Or whack now." It's on American Public Radio at 1100 EST Saturdays, at least on WCPN 90.3 FM in Cleveland. ------------------------------ From: mgodwin@mcl.bdm.com (Michael G. Godwin) Subject: Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 01:57:18 Organization: BDM International, Inc. In article Paul Robinson writes: >> [Telecom Digest Editor's Note:... Very few [radio call-in shows] are >> willing to provide an 800 number for you to camp out on at their >> expense. > A nationally syndicated one comes from here in the Washington, DC area. > The phone number to call into it is 1-800-G-G-Liddy. > The name of the host of the show is left as an exercise to the reader. :) > Anyone else know of any beyond Rush Limbaugh, which was posted here > earlier? Another local station has its own 800 number for its call-in > programs. There's also the "Don (Geronimo) and Mike (O'Meara)" show that also originates from here in the D.C. Area. They've been a fixture locally for years and finally went national six to twelve months ago (maybe even longer, I can't remember). They're picking up new markets all the time. Their number is 1-800-636-1067. And lets not forget the infamous Greaseman, who now broadcasts nationally out of L.A. He has an 800 number but it escapes me at the moment. I would imagine that Howard Stern also has one but I'm not sure. Mike ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 01:59:50 -0400 From: ae446@freenet.carleton.ca (Nigel Allen) Subject: Re: Firms Vie for Three-Digit Phone Numbers Organization: The National Capital FreeNet, Ottawa, Canada Reply-To: ae446@freenet.carleton.ca In a previous article, monty@roscom.COM (Monty Solomon) says: > Excerpt from {The Boston Globe}, Friday, May 6, 1994 > Businesses eager for a new outlet in the information age grabbed up > three-digit telephone numbers awarded in a first-ever lottery by > Southern Bell yesterday. > The company, a unit of BellSouth Corp., assigned the numbers, 211, > 311, 511, 711 and 811 in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and Orlando. Advocates for the hearing-impaired in Canada convinced Bell Canada to assign 711 to the voice relay service that allows the hearing-impaired who use TDDs (telecommunications devices for the deaf) to communicate with hearing people who do noot have a TDD. I think that other Canadian telephone companies will also adopt the 711 number. (The 711 number does not work yet in some communities with older switching equipment. People there will still have to dial an 800 number to reach the voice relay service.) I do not know whether any hearing-impaired advocacy groups formally opposed BellSouth's application to offer the n11 numbers to private businesses, but it would make sense for the U.S. to adopt 711 as a uniform national number to reach the local voice relay service. Nigel Allen ae446@freenet.carleton.ca ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 01 MAY 94 23:12:00 GMT Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet > Anyone who has access to the Internet ... can reach City Hall by > addressing their message to scarlos@crl.com. Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain? Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com Net**2 656-6350 (Please forward bounces to Mail Stop MV 237 rgellens@mcimail.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' only applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever defined for local or state government use. PAT] ------------------------------ From: david_mcintire@cts.qms.com (David McIntyre) Subject: Re: Internet White Pages Organization: QMS, Inc. Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 16:15:59 CST In article jrichert@krefcom.GUN.de (Jan Richert) writes: > Could anyone email me the exact title of the Internet White Pages, > publisher and ISBN number? ISBN: WASTE-OF-MONEY URL: ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet-addresses/lists david_mcintire@ 2 Opinions expressed 2 More fun than I cts.qms.com 3 are entirely my own 3 should be having fnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnord PGP 2.3a key available. Finger xyzzy@imagen.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 21:38:30 EDT From: Bill Blum Subject: Re: Internet White Pages Tried to send e-mail back to original requestor (J Rickert) ... but I either copied the address down incorrectly (or else ;-) Perhaps he means this book: The Internet Directory by: Eric Braun Fawcett Columbine 1994 ISBN 0-449-90898-4 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 06:24:19 -0400 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID > In other words, per-line blocking is a bad idea because subscribers > are too dumb to unblock calls when they want to unblock them, although > they're not to dumb to block calls when they want to block them. This is not what was said at all: a correct statement would be that a subscriber might not know how to unblock or, that unblocking was needed, or even that the line was blocked when an emergency call is placed and they might not have blocked it. We have already seen the question appear relating to "How do you know with per line blocking if it is toggled on or off ?" One answer would be star-six-seven on and "something else" off but the phone company only has 100 star numbers now. In that case it is not hard to imagine a scenario where all that can be done is to dial 911 (of course 911 uses AMI not caller-id *now* and for that matter, it would not be that hard to program a switch to unblock calls to certain numbers. Personally, I agree with the basic service being per-call blocking. I doubt that additional features (just like unlisted numbers) will be available for those who need them. While I understand the poster's comments, it is too bad he felt the need for additional and unwarrented psychological loading. Padgett ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 94 13:04 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller ID Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > I picked up a copy of the FCC's Caller ID order, which is available by > FTP as /pub/Orders/Common_Carrier/orcc4001.txt or orcc4001.wp. (Kudos > to the FCC for making this info available so easily and quickly, by > the way.) A few readers have pointed out that these files are much easier to find if you know that the FTP site is fcc.gov. Oops. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: jacksch@insom.eastern.com (Eric Jacksch) Subject: Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? Organization: a.k.a. insom.ve3xej.ampr.org Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:21:39 GMT > fine investment. Who else sells CID boxes with serial ports? PAT] While slightly different, CS ICON Inc. in Manotic, Ontario (613) 692-2480 sells a board for PC's called CSID. The board not only has the capability of receiving caller-id information, but also can switch the call to one of three output ports, take the phone off-hook, dial dtmf or pulse, does distinctive ring detection, and has a host of other features. It will run under ms-dos, windows, or as a TSR. The product is excellent for securing dial-in lines as well as use in a home or small office environment. Cheers, Eric ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 03:09:44 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: FTP Server Site Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Kenn Krasner , writes: > Can anyone point me to some detailed info on setting up an FTP > server site? I'd greatly appreciate it! You need three things: a computer with an Internet connection; the priveleges on that computer to run a process that can access the network directly on the FTP port, as well as various files on the system which belong to anyone running on the account selected, unless you plan to run anonymous FTP only and only allow it access to its own files or files shared with it; and an FTPD server. FTPD server are readily available from many places. You will need a C compiler for most of them to recompile sources for your machine. Note that you need an FTPD server, not an FTP client. There are two parts to FTP; the client FTP program that dials up a site and asks for files, and an FTPD server that accepts incoming calls and returns information in response to requests. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: dimbit@DELPHI.COM (Jeff Robertson) Subject: Re: Looking For Information on Faxmail Systems Date: 13 May 1994 01:03:03 GMT Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation > I am looking for information on systems that can handle fax calls on a > store-and-forward basis. I've used systems like FaxFacts from Copia, > but am not sure about their support on a few key issues: > CLID support > DID support > If anybody has information on software/hardware to do this, I'd > appreciate the information. Try Ibex FactsLine for Windows it has a DNIS/CLID software module (requires proper Dialogic hardware and phone lines). I have installed a similar system up here in Toronto. Computer Telephone Integrators (CTI) Fax-On-Demand 3044 Bloor St. W. Call Centre Automation Toronto, ON, Can., M8X 1C4 Computer Telephone Int. (416)-399-0584 IVR & Predictive Dialing JEFF ROBERTSON DIMBIT@DELPHI.COM ------------------------------ From: ewise@cie-2.uoregon.edu (Edwin Wise) Subject: Re: Internet by Satellite Date: 13 May 1994 05:31:22 GMT Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange Mr. Soonthon Lupkitaro (fengsth@NONTRI.KU.AC.TH) wrote: > I do not know its advantage to access Internet via satellite. Can anyone > give me some idea? No, really -- a net hookup via outer space has some definite advantages. If you are in the outback, running a cable to the nearest industrial city can pose a real challenge. If you live in a small town, a business hookup can also get extremely expensive. I, too, am interested in the possibilities of satellite hookup to the net. Can it be done? (doh -- anything *can* be done) Is it done? How expensive is it? Who do I talk to? Regards, Edwin ewise@cie-2.uoregon.edu ------------------------------ From: harbirk@ifi.uio.no (Harbir Singh Kohli) Subject: Re: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers Date: 13 May 1994 08:42:32 +0200 Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway Why don't you do what I always do? Call directory information foreign and get the numbers you need. Though I never call the local directory information, I call AT&T's information number and get the local number; you need the name and location. You can use AT&T USA Direct etc. The numbers will be in the {International Herald Tribune}. Sprint and MCI also offer this service but they have very poor service in terms of picking up the phone in my experience. ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Date: 13 May 1994 05:46:27 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In barry.s.rein@jpl.nasa.gov (Barry S. Rein) writes: > We're moving soon and we'll have to get a new phone number. For > $10.00 Pacific Bell will let me choose any phone number with the right > prefix as long as it's not already taken. > I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to > remember. Restaurants are supposedly willing to kill for a memorable > phone number, so I wonder if there is any research or recommendations > on how to select one, ie what combinations are remembered; what > combinations are most often mis-dialed, etc. > Incidentally, our exchange prefixes are 398, 791, 794, 797, and 798 -- 818 > area code. Well, I am sure the criteria you mention are important, but ... I suggest that others are important too. For example, maybe you prefer an exchange that does *not* support Caller-ID, so that when you call others they will not block you, yet will not see your number. Or maybe you prefer an exchange that *does* offer Caller-ID. If you prefer the former, be aware, of course, that sooner or later your exchange will get upgraded to Caller-ID. Why not ask for an exchange that is ISDN capable? Last but not least, there are still exchanges that do not let you choose your long distance carrier (force you to AT&T). You don't want one of those, do you? Carl Oppedahl AA2KW Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers) Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not think there were any central offices not yet equipped for equal access. Are there really? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 06:52:16 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate > In some prior articles, the term 'NNX' has been used to refer to the > new format for area codes debuting in International Dialing Zone 1 on > January 15, 1995. > While this is the format that is being added to the current area code > system is technically correct with respect to the additions, I think > that this term is wrong and misleading. I disagree. People have been referring to the new area *codes* as "NNX" codes because (as you mention), that's exactly what they are. Contrary to your first line above, I've yet to see anyone refer to the new overall area code *format* as "NNX", only as "NXX", which is correct. > Based on this, references to the new area codes should say 'NXX' area > codes, and not 'NNX' area codes, as it might indicate that the old > area codes with 0 and 1 as the middle digit are being replaced by the > new area codes, which is not the case. I think such an assumption is a non-sequitur. Why would anyone think that the appearance of new area codes such as 334 and 520 imply that all the old area codes are going to change? No one worried about such things when new N0X/N1X area codes were introduced. I, for one, am going to continue to use "NNX" when discussing the new NPAs. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: adamsd@crash.cts.com (Adams Douglas) Subject: Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Information Superhighway Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET/crash), San Diego, CA Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:21:04 GMT Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com) wrote: > "TV & MOVIE MANIA" RADIO SHOW HITS THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lauren Weinstein is a long time participant > in the Internet, and a charter subscriber to TELECOM Digest, dating back > to 1981 when this journal was first published. From time to time I like > to reprint his classic message, "The Day the Bell System Died", and > before long it will be time for it again. His latest venture, the "Neon" > thing, has been enormously successful and if you have not called to > listen to it, you really should. PAT] PAT, I would also think it prudent to mention that this serves as a fine example of how advertising on the Net can work and commercial services here can be distributed without rudeness or disruption of other Net users. Best of luck to Lauren, I think the first choice for an interview guest was inspired -- and a sign of a true net.person :). ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: DID Loophole or I'm Screwed up? Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 01:45:46 GMT In article , wrote: > Per FCC Part 68 and TELCo tariffs, anything other than audible ring > and busy tone (with some exceptions) is "meaningful" -- and the call > must be supervised (answered). This includes calls routed to > TELCo-operated Voice Mail systems, which have been known to forget ... Exceptions include recorded announcements like: "You have reached an out of service number at ABC Corporation" Unfortunately some carriers were able to convince the FCC that this was enough of a problem that they now require manufacturers of PBXs to hard code answer supervision for trunk to trunk calls including those to recorded announcement trunks. They put the onus on the manufacturers to prevent people from being able to take advantage of the telcos. The unfortunate result is that now companies must return supervision when a call is forwarded to another company location even if it not answered. Supervision will be returned no matter what after a few seconds. In most cases all recorded announcements will now return supervision. As I understand it it the basic rules haven't changed as far as when answer supervision must be returned by an existing PBX. What has changed is that to manufacture or import PBXs into the United States they must be inflexibly configured to return answer supervision when a call is answered. If you call a company location in city A and the call is directed across the companies private TIE line network to their location in city B, and the call is unanswered, supervision is not required. If you have an existing network which has been in service for a number of years, and your telephone equipment supplier is professional, this is probably the case. The call is unanswered, the call is not billable. Those are the rules which have governed telephone service for decades upon decades. A new PBX would be required to return answer supervision within a few seconds of seizing the outgoing TIE trunk. The call will pretty well always be billable now. The same deal with recordings, once you route the call to an intercept recording the PBX will return answer supervision regardless of the content of the message. This probably seems reasonable or just to many of you but to me it's another case of watering down the service of all the law abiding users for the sake of an undetermined amount of cheating of the telcos. The onus should have been on them to detect those abuses instead of the manufacturers and users of equipment bearing the expense and inconvenience. Typical though. Vance Shipley, vances@xenitec.on.ca ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 05:33:00 PDT From: rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: DunsNet On 03 May 1994 10:49:04 PST, vikram@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (Thrivikrama Shenoy) said: > DunsNet is a corporate packet switching network of Dun & Bradstreet > Corporation. It is a X.25 packet switching network spanning U.S, > Europe, Australia. Recently I heard it reached India too. Is that pronounced "Dunce-Net"? Hey, just askin'... ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: Re: Call Display From New York Date: 13 May 1994 01:37:12 -0400 In Tony Harminc writes: > A colleague left a message on my machine here in Toronto while he was > waiting for a plane at JFK airport in New York. To my surprise, the > Call Display data was not 'out of area' as it usually is for calls > from the USA, but the rather unlikely number 212 210-0000. What's even more unusual here is that JFK airport is in the borough of Queens in NYC, and thus has areacode 718, not 212 ... dannyb@panix.com (or dburstein@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #221 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08432; 13 May 94 15:08 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA23743; Fri, 13 May 94 11:44:37 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA23733; Fri, 13 May 94 11:44:34 CDT Date: Fri, 13 May 94 11:44:34 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405131644.AA23733@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #222 TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 May 94 11:44:30 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 222 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? (balcroan@netcom.com) Re: Graceful Degradation (Bill Tighe) Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Neil Watson) Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? (Kaita Seikku) Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? (Chip Sharp) Re: GSM and Airbags (David Breneman) Re: 3270 Emulation (Jack Hamilton) Re: 3270 Emulation (William M. Eldridge) Re: Meeks Defense Fund (Stephen Cohoon) Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone (Steve Cogorno) Re: Delrina Fax MailBox Retrieval and Class 2 Modems (Jack Bzoza) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (John Musselman) Digital MSK Modem Questions (christos@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu) Request For an FTP Site For X509 (Pat Worden) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: balcroan@netcom.com (Butch lcroan/.nameBalcroan Lilli) Subject: Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 07:29:25 GMT balcroan@netcom.com wrote: >>> Is voltage somehow involved in "ringing" so that a decrease would >>> cause to small a *something* for devices like modem cards and handsets >>> to respond to? Where does this happen, and what's the fix? >> Ringing is a low-frequency AC signal applied to the line (Typically 90 >> volts at 20 Hertz). Tell the repair desk that "ringing voltage is not >> being applied". They will likely find the problem to be the line >> equipment (printed circuit card in modern exchanges) feeding your >> line. > If the above call to the local TELCO doesn't work please submit > private e-mail and I will give you the answer you can then decide if > you want to make it public after it is tried ... BTW if it is what I > suspect it is be prepared for the other line to have the same problem > shortly .... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do tell us more! PAT] I am not sure all problems mentioned above relate to this little problem about to be mentioned ... but always be aware there is the possibility of a "PAIR-GAIN DEVICE" or "SUBCRIBER CARRIER" between the voltages the CO generates on analog tip and ring pair and the analog tip and ring pair that is attached to the phones in question. I would also like to caution regarding all phones as there is no way the phones you get free from {TIME & LIFE} for a subscription is as good as the NTI, AT&T, GTE or other phones purchased at the Phone-Mart in the mall. 1.) PAIR GAIN devices are of various generations and some work better than others at ringing more phones than one. The voltage and current can both be in question. 2.) The capacitance can vary greatly between a "cheapie" phone and a more expensive phone. There is also the resistance between the T & R that can cause a shorting or shunting of a AC signal such as the ringing voltage. This can also cause the phone to ring once and then stop because of the momentary short cause by the insulation breakdown cause the 20 milliamp current caused by a off hook condition. This is read by the CO as an answer! Then the ringing stops and so does the current flow and ooooppps no answer! This was found to be the case in a state that will remained unnamed ... we (NTI) had a engineer camped out at the customer site wait for the problem to be reproduced and as he was watching TV on came an advertisement ... he went to the store in the mall that was giving away one of these phones for free just for coming down ... well it was tested next day and the above was found. They had been giving them away all month long. This was the problem that had went to a VP level to find ... oh BTW a Automatic Line Insulation Test (which had been requested at least three times by NTI but telco said NO IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF TIME) found several of these "$3.95" phones ... not a defective piece of software as the telco had suggested. Butch email balcroan@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: bill@noller.com (Bill Tighe) Subject: Re: Graceful Degradation Date: 13 May 94 11:24:24 GMT levin@1.121.159.165.in-addr.arpa (jerry levin @ Trident Data Systems) wrote: > Can anyone explain to me what is meant by graceful degradation when > referring to a data bus? Computer redundancy can be implemented in many ways and the method used depends on the demands of the application. "Graceful degredation" refers to a redundancy method used for applications where it is advantageous to keep all resources on line when they are functional. As modules fail they are taken off line and the total computer power is reduced. Thus computer power "gracefully degrades" and error recovery techniques hide the failure from the users. Sequoia uses this method for on line transaction processing. Computer modules, 68xxx I beleive, run in parallel and if one fails, the load is shifted to the remaining units. Users may notice an increase in response time but they still have a working system. Since no expensive modules are sitting idle, the customer gets high performance and reliability for the lowest possible cost. Some applications such as aircraft control cannot work with a degraded computer so full idle backup units must be used. Some aircraft systems have triple redundancy, two backups for each working computer. Expensive but necessary. Bill Tighe Email: bill@noller.com Phone: 707-778-0571 FAX: 707-778-0235 PCMCIA; People Can't Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms ------------------------------ From: nwatson@Aspect.COM (Neil Watson) Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button? Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:13:11 GMT In article johnper@bunsen.rosemount.com (John Perkins) writes: >>> Detailed question about Mercury button deleted. The Mercury button is a slightly special "one press" memory button. To access Mercury you need to dial their access code (131 for the 2200 service), wait for dialtone again (high pitched noise) then dial a 10 digit PIN (for identification) followed at last by the called number. The additional complexity is that the Access code will have to be dialled in whichever mode your BT exchange will support (ie it may have to be pulse) and the rest of the number after the Mercury DT has to be DTMF (tone). Thus a phone that can switch between pulse and tone dialling mid-way through a memory dial is a requirement. If you're in a tone-dialling area (which is most exchanges now), then this isn't an issue. Other things that go into the "suitability" for use on Hg are the ability to sequentially dial memories (to dial a certain relative we dial mem 1 followed by mem 5) and the ability to dial other numbers while the phone is still dialling the memory. Also your "last number redial" register needs to be 24 digits or so! From this information you will realize that it is not strictly necessary to have a phone with the fancy blue button to use Mercury. I personally have a normal phone that I've programmed mem 1 to do the Mercury predial and it works just fine. Then again a single, clearly identified button to identify the long distance carrier is simpler. Another thing to take into account is Mercury's recently announced 132 service which uses ANI/CLI to determine the authenticity of the caller. To use this you only need dial 132 followed by the called number. Unfortunately it requires a modern BT exchange and so isn't available everywhere that can access Mercury yet ... (yes, I know CLI isn't available to subscribers in the UK yet, but LD carriers are a different matter.) > They have a perfectly good BT "Tribune" phone set that has some > special attachments for the hearing impaired, but are under the > impression that they can't use it if they want to use Mercury. (I have > a feeling that they don't really need the Mercury phone set at all.) I don't know about the Tribune -- many of the BT sourced phones didn't have sufficient memory versatility to do the job for a Mercury Blue button, but may well have enough for 132 access. Good luck, Neil ------------------------------ From: spk@proffa.cc.tut.fi (Kaita Seikku) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? Date: 13 May 1994 07:12:42 GMT Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Computing Centre TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > ... Some people, you see, leave the speaker turned off all the time > and as a result don't even realize they are connecting to a live > person in errror instead of another modem. I would rather have seen a > rule saying that if voice was detected instead of carrier, the speaker > would automatically turn on ... What if the modems were equipped with DTMF receive capability, and then the software while waiting for the connection to establish, would fall back if any DTMF was detected? (Then it would just be tough to those people who would not know about the DTMF implementation ...) Or actually, my real opinion : As the new features are programmed into the switching software, there should be a new command (like *21*redirection) to ignore calls from the number that last called me (which would be a great help against those "%$&/()= phone sales persons, too). Of course thers's a problem in this, too, since your (B-subscriber's) switch does not always get the A-subscriber number complete. (I mean the old technics, not the deliberate disabling of caller ID, there should be a command to ignore ALL calls that have been originated with caller-ID disabled). internet : spk@proffa.cc.tut.fi answering machine->pager : +358 -43 498 0297 real life: Seikku P. Kaita phone (or FAX) : +358 -31 265 6865 visit at : Saastajankuja 4b32 TAMPERE On The Air : OH3NYB ^^ ^ ^ ..these four a's should have double dots above them, since they are front vowels (as in word 'that'). Isn't it a pitty that in English the word GHOTI can be pronounced like word FISH. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually the feature you suggest has been implemented. Call Screening allows either the entry of a number from which the subscriber no longer wishes to receive calls or if that number is not known (because the calling party blocked his ID) an entry for 'last call recieved' in which case the CO will note the number and block further calls from it to the recipient even though the recipient is not given the number in an effort to avoid violating the privacy of the caller. Here in Illinois Bell territory, we use *60 to add/delete numbers to our Call Screening directory. If thus screened, the calling party gets an intercept message saying the called party 'is not receiving calls at this time.' It does not say 'is not receiving calls from *you*' ... just 'not receiving calls'. Of course the calling party can go to another telephone if they wish, but few people bother; they simply take the hint and don't call back. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 08:22:29 EDT From: hhs@teleoscom.com (Chip Sharp) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts FYI, Most countries have a redial limit much less than the FCC's current 15 redial attempts. For example, Japan has a limit of 2 redials. Some countries relax that limit somewhat if the redials are spaced a certain amount of time apart. You have to check with each country's regulations to determine that time. One interesting question is: Does the redial limit apply to ISDN terminals or just to PSTN modems? If it does apply to ISDN, does it apply only to Speech and 3.1 kHz Audio (Voice-band data) calls or does it also apply to 56/64 kbit/s data calls and multirate (i.e., n x 64 kbit/s) calls? Hascall H. Sharp Teleos Communications, Inc. System Engineering 2 Meridian Road Eatontown, NJ 07724 USA voice: +1 908 544 6424 fax: +1 908 544 9890 email: hhs@teleoscom.com ------------------------------ From: daveb@jaws (David Breneman) Subject: Re: GSM and Airbags Date: 12 May 94 22:43:59 GMT Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA Ben Burch (Ben_Burch@wes.mot.com) wrote: > In article Bill Tighe, bill@noller.com > writes: >> ... Some Audis in the early 80s would respond to RF by having the >> cruise control go to full throttle while the ABS disabled the brakes! > Ah, Bill, do you have any pointers to documentation on this? I > believe that the causes of the (fatal) Audi "unintended acceleration" > events have always been in considerable doubt. Audi claims that it is > "driver error", since one can always override the throttle with the > brakes, but since I have seen other cars have a simultaneous brake and > throttle failure, I have always wondered. This story is indeed bogus. The only way ABS could "disable" the brakes would be if it took out a wrench and unbolted the pedal. The infamous unintended accelleration legend is entirely the result of people pressing down on the gas when they should have been using the brake. At least it allowd some people to pick up some really nice cars cheap when the value of Audis dropped after these scare stories circulated. David Breneman Email: daveb@jaws.engineering.dgtl.com System Administrator, Voice: 206 881-7544 Fax: 206 556-8033 Product Development Platforms Digital Systems International, Inc. Redmond, Washington, U. S. o' A. ------------------------------ From: jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) Subject: Re: 3270 Emulation Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 23:00:27 GMT ssi@winternet.com (Stillwater Systems) wrote: > I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a > great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection > 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe > environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you > please provide me with the information I need to obtain them. Your question really doesn't give enough information. What are your options for connecting to the mainframe? If you can connect through SLIP or PPP or something else that provides Winsock services, there is at least one tn3270 program available via ftp from sunsite.unc.edu. I don't remember the exact path, put it's comething like micro/pc/winsock. There are also several books on the market which include the dial-in only version of NetManage's Chameleon v3. It's not shareware, but it's only $25 or so. Jack Hamilton Postal: POB 281107 SF CA 94128 USA jfh@netcom.com Packet: kd6ttl@w6pw.#nocal.ca.us.na ------------------------------ From: bill@LIFESCI.UCLA.EDU (William M. Eldridge) Subject: Re: 3270 Emulation Date: 12 May 1994 19:42:01 -0700 Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program > I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a > great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection > 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe > environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you > please provide me with the information I need to obtain them. We've had good luck with McGill's TCP3270. It's pretty cheap as well (don't remember the per machine cost, but a site license is something like $500). Contact Pierre Goyette (pierre@cc.mcgille.ca). (Program requires Lan Workplace or Winsock) Bill Eldridge bill@lifesci.ucla.edu 310-206-3960 (3987 fax) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 11:30:12 -0500 From: cohoon@cse.uta.edu (Stephen Cohoon) Subject: Re: Meeks Defense Fund Organization: Computer Science Engineering at the Univ of Texas at Arlington In article TELECOM Digest Editor notes: [Details of net.libel.defendent deleted] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... [Moderator's legitimizing deleted] > The law says no libeling, period. Big corporation, little company, > single individual, no matter. Newspapers have a little more freedom in > this respect and all of us have a bit more freedom where politicians > and 'public figures' are concerned, but no one can deliberatly libel > another without paying the consequences. [More good points from Moderator deleted] > Inform the net of your situation and plead for funds, but do not give > us the bit about how the net is so different and special. > Now I repeat: it seems a worthy cause otherwise. Lots of netters have > come to my rescue in the past and I am glad to bring this latest need > to the attention of our generous readers. PAT] This type of request has been showing up more frequently recently. Someone finds themself in legal trouble and tries to rally the "net" behind their cause. Pat's statements are exactly on point. If you want the support of the net community then state your case. Don't just appeal to our sympathy based on our possession of a modem. Did Meeks make libelous statements or not? What facts support his claim that he is innocent? Why should I believe that the people whose names appear in this posting do in fact support his cause? In my opinion this request is suspect at best. I believe in the value of the net and moderated digests such as this one. However, like all the other forms of media, there are standards of journalism that must be adhered to or the value of the media will disappear. Just my opinions, Stephen Cohoon cohoon@cse.u ta.ed [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, if the names which appeared in the article were there with the permission of the people they represent (and I doubt the author just picked the names out of the ether and attached them without permission) then I have no questions about the authenticity of the appeal. Those are all respected net citizens. But as you stated, I wish they would realize that merely having a modem and being connected to the Internet is no longer -- if it ever was -- a good enough common denominator. Merely publishing an e-journal or maintaining a mailing list is not a tie that binds either. If anything, the tie that binds e-journal editors/publishers/list maintainers ought to be a desire to be treated on a par with the traditional print media, and that includes the 'right' to get sued once in a while when you flap your jaw at the wrong time, or when someone gets bent out of shape and claims that you did. And our objective of course must be to defeat such suits when they arise, thus my printing of the appeal. Still, some people are their own worst enemies; that is particularly true on the net. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 10:20:32 PDT Said by: Karim.Farrag > For quite a while now I'am searching for a specific telephone probably > manufactured by AT&T.Specific features: narrow receiver, the speech > unit of the receiver is bent almost 90 degrees; the receiver is shaped > like an L , wire phone, mostly seen in black colour.I suppose it most > be a very common model in the US , because I saw in many different > movies (ex. In the Line of Fire ,Last Action Hero, etc.). Unfortunaly > AT&T here in Europe wasn't as cooperative as I thought. Now I am > hoping that someone knows which phone I am talking about (telephone > manufactor, model number) or maybe the main address of AT&T in the > US. Many thanks in advance. It sounds like you are referring to the MERLIN/System 25,75, etc Voice Terminals. You will not be able to use these without a Control Unit, which will cost more than $1500 in most cases. The phones themselves range from $250-500 depending on the size. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ From: Jack Bzoza Subject: Delrina Fax MailBox Retrieval & Class 2 modems Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 19:15:00 -0400 In a previous message to Jack Bzoza, Clarence Doid said: >> WinFax 4.0 _requires_ a class 1 Faxmodem for mailbox retrieval. >> The Class 2 faxmodem that I have cannot be used. To which Jack Bzoza replied: > Yes. you're right. That is a technical limitation of the hardware as > 1t elates to the fax protocols. You also need a computer capable of > running Windows. I guess you won't be able to use it until you spring > for $100 for a new modem. BUT JACK BZOZA WAS WRONG !! Catherine Murphy, of Delrina's Quality Assurance department advises: "You may be referring to old information because for Fax MailBox retreival using WinFax 4.0 Class 2 modems can be used. So can CAS modem. Only the remote retrieval is limited only to Class 1 modems. When the UK version of WinFax with MailBoxes is available it will be limited only to Class 1 modems. I hope this information is useful." Sorry for any confusion I may have caused. ------------------------------ From: jcm@frank.nccom.com (John Musselman) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding Date: 13 May 1994 04:54:27 -0700 Organization: North County Communications, San Diego, California Mark W. Earle (mwearle@netcom.com) wrote: > It should be noted that some roaming costs, though, have dropped in > the last five months. The per minute charge is lower, and the daily > fee is not charged. But this is not "universal" you still have to > check where you intend to roam with the carrier and find out the up to > the minute info. Of course the roam rate and daily fees (or lack > thereof) influence greately how and how much the phone is used while > out of town. Roaming is still a ridiculous cost! Another thing I stress about: I am a US West Cellular customer in San Diego. I travel to Phoenix often to visit friends and family. I wanted to get a Phoenix number to avoid roaming and take advantage of my dual-nam phone. It was cheaper to go with Bell Atlantic in Phoenix than it was US West. US West could have had 1 1/2 times the business from me, however different markets are differently priced. For people like myself, I would like to see cellular carriers that are in multiple cities offer a bonus to people who have multiple numbers in multiple cities ... Just my thoughts, jcm@nccom.com -John C. Musselman -Software Developer/System Analyst ------------------------------ From: christos@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Digital MSK Modem Questions Date: 12 May 94 16:21:08 CDT Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services Hello there, I have some questions about MSK bit error rate performance. Going through literature and papers I have encountered a number of MSK implemenatations and different points of view. I have the following questions: 1. Do all MSK implemenatations have the same performance? Serial MSK, Parallel MSK, Fast MSK etc? 2. Parallel MSK is an OQPSK with half sine wave shaping the transmitted pulse. Therefore, the Pe (Probability of Error) for MSK is the same as that for QPSK and BPSK (since Pe for BPSK and QPSK are the same). MSK can also be viewed as orthogonal BFSK. However, the Pe for orthogonal BFSK is Q(sqrt(Eb/No)) where the Pe for BPSK is Q(sqrt(2Eb/No)). Thus, we have two different types of MSK giving different performances. Is the above correct? 3. Also, in the literature it is mentioned that Serial MSK has a better performance at higher bit rates? By performance do we mean Pe? What is the reason for that? Does serial MSK has the same theoretical performance as the parallel MSK? 4. I have seen in a book, I cannot recall which book was that, that the PSD of a stationary process tells us about the probability of occurence of each frequency component. In other words, if the PSD is large at 1kHz for example then we can say that there is high probability that the frequency component at 10kHz will occur. Is that true? The reason that the PSD is a statistical function it should have some statistical interpretation. I would very much appreciate your response. Thanks in advance, Chris Pleaase e-mail: christos@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu ------------------------------ From: pworden@weber.ucsd.edu (Pat Worden) Subject: Request For an FTP Site For X509 Date: 12 May 1994 21:31:35 GMT Organization: U.C.S.D. Department of Communication Can anyone send me a name for the site to download X509 protocol descriptions? Please send any replies to me a benson@acdca.itt.com. I am borrowing my wife's account due to a network screwup on my compnay's machine.) Thanks, Peter Benson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #222 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09006; 13 May 94 16:12 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA26025; Fri, 13 May 94 12:42:04 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA26012; Fri, 13 May 94 12:42:01 CDT Date: Fri, 13 May 94 12:42:01 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405131742.AA26012@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #223 TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 May 94 12:42:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 223 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Releases Fiber Deployment Analysis (Bob Keller) Radio by Phone (Gregory P. Monti) Query About 911 in MIDDLE of Phone Numbers (fico!rca@apple.com) Cable Management (John Holman) FTS2000/DCTN Policy (David Vaughan) Regulatory Analyst Opening (Phil Bullock) Searching For GE TC-1000 in NY Metro Area (mds1@delphi.com) Trying to Convert WAV Files to 3-Bit ADPCM (Richard De A'Morelli) Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack (John Lundgren) Re: AT&T Collect Calling Comes to Canada (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: NANP and Switches (Alan Leon Varney) Re: NANP and Switches (David A. Avery) Re: Call Display for New York (Tad Cook) Re: Emerging Cellular Systems (Silas E. Cheeseman) Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Steve Cogorno) Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors! (John Canning) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:09:00 EDT From: Bob Keller Subject: FCC Releases Fiber Deployment Analysis FCC RELEASES FIBER DEPLOYMENT ANALYSIS The FCC has released a report entitled "Fiber Deployment Update - End of Year 1993." This report presents fiber deployment data and associated information on interexchange carriers, regional Bell holding companies, urban fiber systems, and non-Bell local operating companies. Current estimates indicate that interexchange carriers increased their deployed fiber by about 5.6% during 1993. The local Bell operating companies' deployed fiber grew by about 27% during 1993 and stood at approximately 6.3 million fiber miles at the end of the year. Total 1993 fiber reported by local operating companies exceeded 7.2 million fiber miles. Twenty urban fiber entities listed in this year's study have deployed about 242,000 fiber miles by the end of 1993. Other local operating company data in the study include data on fiber rings, fiber trials and investment, as well as limited information on deployed subscriber copper and fiber. This report is available in the reference room maintained by the Common Carrier Bureau's Industry Analysis Division at 1250 23rd Street, N. W., Plaza Level. Copies may be purchased by calling International Transcription Service, Inc. (ITS) at (202) 857-3800. For further information, contact Jonathan Kraushaar at (202) 632-0745 or 632-1368. -FCC- Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301.229.5208 A.R.S. KY3R Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301.229.6875 rjk@telcomlaw.com finger me for FCC Daily Digest CompuServe 76100,3333 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 06:43:52 EDT From: Gregory P. Monti Subject: Radio by Phone An FM radio newsletter {FMedia!} notes that a Dallas firm, Media Technology, is offering a service called Media Dialup. Subscribers can monitor live radio using touch tone commands. 214 330-8393. I think this is the company's main business number. As a sampler, the firm allows you to listen to Dallas radio stations using touch tone commands on 214 330-8821. For FM, press 1. For AM, press 2. To scan to the next lower station, press 4. Next higher station, press 6. Ordinary toll charges apply. I guess the market for this service is program directors and consultants who want to hear what the big-market boys are doing. Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cap.gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 06:33:11 -0700 From: fico!rca@apple.com Subject: Query About 911 in MIDDLE of Phone Numbers A local radio stations here (KBOB -- "Turn your knob to Bob") recently had to change their phone number after a dismaying percentage of their calls started connecting to 911. Their old number had 911 in the middle of the number. I seem to remember reading something about that here in the TELECOM Digest. The radio station seems to be baffled about the phenomenon. What's the scoop on this? (The 911 people tended to get a bit miffed when they ran "you are the tenth caller" type contests ...) I believe I remember hearing mention that phone switches typically would be programmed to pick up on common misdialings of 911 (9911, 9111, etc) and connect them to 911 in the interests of safety, since it would common for that number to be misdialed out of haste or panic. But sometimes the programming was a bit TOO overzealous. Is that the deal? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 08:37:03 CST Subject: Cable Management From: John Holman (holmanj@uwwvax.uww.edu) I too am looking at cable management systems as well. One thing that is important to us is that the system software produces a good trouble and work order tracking and reporting system. We are installing level 3 voice cable to 110 type blocks on the wall and level 5 wiring for data brought to rack mounted patch pannels. Does anyone have any regrets for using the rack mounting patch pannels for data? We will be using Cabletron hand Cisco routers. Presently we have been using a software that we cooked up here using Dbase IV. It has worked well but does not deal with IDFs very well. The strong side of the software is quick trouble entry and trouble ticket production with all important info including: building name and address, type of equipment (ie.. answering machine, Pots, or data port to board level PACX, billing account number, jack number, room number, and maintanance account number. ------------------------------ From: dvaughan@itd.nrl.navy.mil (David Vaughan) Subject: FTS2000/DCTN Policy Organization: Information Technology Division, Naval Research Laboratory Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 14:30:37 GMT I am looking for current and future (draft) policy regarding low bit rate video (lbrv) over FTS-2000 and DCTN. I am implementing dial-up lbrv 384kbps over the FTS-2000 using Picture Tel System 4000 and Teleos Model 40. If you have any information that might help, please let me know. Thanks in advance, David Vaughan Dept. of Navy ------------------------------ From: pbullock@xmission.com (Phil Bullock) Subject: Regulatory Analyst Opening Date: 13 May 1994 09:44:00 -0600 Organization: XMission Public Access Internet (801-539-0900) Utah CCS Seeks Regulatory Analyst The Utah Committee of Consumer Services has a Public Utility Regulatory Analyst III position available. The Annual Salary will be $31,884.00 to $39,610.00. Regulatory Analyst is required to review and analyze electric, natural gas, and telecommunications utility operations to establish the reasonableness of operations, rates and charges; prepare and present oral and written testimony as an expert witness on behalf of residential, small business, and agricultural interest during formal proceedings; participate in all aspects of utility regulation; assist in formulation and articulation of public policy interest and positions relative to utility operations; assist the Committee of Consumer Services in fulfilling statutory responsi- bilities. Minimum Qualifications: Master's degree in accounting, finance or related field, plus four years of full-time paid professional related employment, two years of which must have been with a public utility or state regulatory commission, or substitutions on a year- for-year basis as follows: related graduate level education for the required employment, or full-time paid professional related employment for the required education. A rating of training and experience or another method will be used to examine for this position. Submit current official state application (DHRM-7) and transcripts to Department of Human Resource Management, 2120 State Office Building, SLC, UT 84114 Opening date: 5-18-94 Closing date: 6-15-94 CTS. ------------------------------ From: mds1@news.delphi.com (MDS1@DELPHI.COM) Subject: Searching For GE TC-1000 in NY Metro Area Date: 13 May 1994 03:48:25 -0000 Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation My parents are looking to buy a new cellular phone, but can't seem to find the GE TC-1000 anywhere in the NY metro area (including into Fairfield County and anywhere within a reasonable distance from Westchester Cty). Their main concern is that they want to stick with Cellular One so they don't lose all their benefits from their current contract. Any help as to a vendor who has the phone and who contract w/Cellular One would be appreciated. Thanks in advance, E-mail to the below address or post. marc ------------------------------ From: spectrum@kaiwan.com (Richard De A'Morelli) Subject: Trying to Convert WAV Files to 3-Bit ADPCM Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:19:15 -0500 Organization: Spectrum Universal, Los Angeles, CA >> You can solve both problems at once with a ZyXEL modem. Not only will >> it decode DTMF tones, but it will also play audio directly to the >> phone line. If you convert your WAV files to, say, 3-bit ZyXEL ADPCM, I have been looking for quite some time for a shareware package that would convert WAV files to 3-bit ADPCM, which would be suitable not only for Zyxel modems, but other telecom specific voice cards as well, such as Dialogic, Pika AVA-4, New Voice, etc. I am especially interested in a utility for the Pika AVA-4 card -- the only one I know of is a commercial package priced at about $500, which is far more for a voice editor package than I can afford. Any help would be most appreciated. Regards, Richard De A'Morelli, Spectrum Universal ------------------------------ From: sgiblab!kn.pacbell.com!jlundgre@uucp-gw-2.pa.dec.com (John Lundgren) Subject: Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack Date: 13 May 94 19:56:58 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network This isn't another request for the phone line in-use indicator. It's a FAQ answer for the same. Radio Shaft has: Catalog Number 43-108 phone line in-use indicator for those who are in need of such a thing (which seems quite often as of lately). I couldn't find the peg it came off of, so I can't tell you what the price is. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But a quick stock check at the local 'shack' on the computer there priced it at $12.99. It is just a little plastic box with a short modular cord on the end. It plugs into any phone outlet and sits wherever you place it. When a phone on that line goes off hook, the LED lights up. Simple as they come. Radio Shack also has a new telephone/tape recorder combination which is supposed to be very good for recording from phone lines. It has a modular plug on the end also and you just plug it into the phone line, add the tape and turn it on. It goes on or off automatically when a phone on the line goes off hook. I'll see it later today or over the weekend for the first time. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 11:28:32 -0400 From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Re: AT&T Collect Calling Comes to Canada On May 5th Dave Liebold wrote: > AT&T just announced the availability of its 1 800 CALL-ATT service > in Canada. This now allows Canadian callers to place collect calls to > U.S. destinations via AT&T. An introductory offer gives a 20% discount > to the called party's charges, at least for the next several weeks. > MCI's 1 800 COLLECT is still unavailable in Canada. There is a > recording which says the service is hoped to be available "later this > summer" -- a recording which is apparently still in place from *last* > summer. MCI released a statement a few days prior to AT&T's press release, stating that it's 1-800-COLLECT offered Canadians collect calling service into the U.S. It gave the impression that the service is available now. What's up? J. Oppenheimer Producer@pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 18:51:25 +0500 Subject: Re: NANP and Switches Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article jslupsky@pwss.gov.ab.ca (James Slupsky) writes: > Paul A. Lee wrote in his article: >> CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially >> in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc.. > I don't believe this. The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change > from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's. All switch routing > software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the > CO code was NNX. You can believe what you want, but the NANP Administrator says: 1951: Start of DDD 1952-1971: N0/1X-NNX-XXXX format for numbers 1972-1994: N0/1X-NXX-XXXX format for numbers 1995-????: NXX-NXX-XXXX format for numbers So NNX for CO codes ended in 1972. I started working on No. 1 ESS(tm) back in 1974, and its routing software had no problem with NXX formats ... Al Varney ------------------------------ From: daa@nic.cerf.net (David A. Avery) Subject: Re: NANP and Switches Date: 13 May 1994 05:52:56 GMT Organization: CerfNet In article , James Slupsky wrote: > Paul A. Lee wrote in his article: >> CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially >> in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc.. > I don't believe this. The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change > from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's. All switch routing > software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the > CO code was NNX. In the Los Angeles area: AC CO city AC CO city AC CO city AC CO city 213 217 LA1 310 201 Beverly Hills 310 401 Downey 310 603 Compton 213 302 LA1 310 202 Culver City 310 402 Norwalk 310 604 Compton 213 303 LA13 310 203 Beverly Hills 310 403 Norwalk 310 605 Compton 213 306 LA1 310 204 Culver City 310 404 Norwalk 310 606 El Segundo 213 307 LA1 310 205 Beverly Hills 310 405 Lakewood 310 607 El Segundo 213 312 LA1 310 206 West LA 310 406 Norwalk 310 608 Compton 213 413 LA10 310 207 West LA 310 407 Norwalk 310 609 Compton 213 418 LA9 310 208 West LA 310 408 Compton 310 610 Gardena 213 502 Gardena 310 209 West LA 310 409 Norwalk 310 615 El Segundo 213 504 LA1 310 210 Lakewood 310 410 Inglewood 310 616 El Segundo 213 506 LA1 310 212 Torrance 310 412 Inglewood 310 618 Torrance 213 508 LA1 310 214 Redondo Beach 310 414 El Segundo 310 715 Gardena 213 600 LA9 310 215 Inglewood 310 416 El Segundo 310 716 Gardena 213 612 LA1 310 216 Inglewood 310 417 Inglewood 310 718 Gardena 213 613 LA1 310 217 Gardena 310 419 Inglewood 310 719 Gardena 213 614 LA1 310 218 Long Beach 310 501 Gardena 310 801 Pico Rivera 213 617 LA1 310 219 Hawthorne 310 504 Gardena 310 802 Norwalk 213 701 LA1 310 301 Mar Vista 310 509 Compton 310 803 Downey 213 702 LA1 310 302 Mar Vista 310 510 Avalon 310 804 Norwalk 213 704 LA1 310 305 Mar Vista 310 512 Gardena 310 806 Downey 213 707 LA1 310 306 Mar Vista 310 513 San Pedro 310 807 Norwalk 213 708 Gardena 310 312 West LA 310 514 San Pedro 310 809 Norwalk 213 717 LA9 310 313 Mar Vista 310 515 Gardena 310 812 Hawthorne 213 812 LA1 310 314 Santa Monica 310 516 Gardena 310 813 Hawthorne 213 912 LA2 310 315 Santa Monica 310 517 Lomita 310 814 Hawthorne 213 913 LA2 310 316 Redondo Beach 310 518 San Pedro 310 815 Culver City 213 917 LA1 310 317 Malibu 310 519 San Pedro 310 816 San Pedro 213 918 Gardena 310 318 Redondo Beach 310 601 Compton 310 901 Long Beach 213 919 LA1 310 319 Santa Monica 310 602 Compton 310 902 La Habra This is a partial list not including AC 818 , AC714 or AC909 David A. Avery daa@cerf.net Avia Research Flight Simulation [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I won't bother with a long list of the ones here in Chicago like you did for LA, but I can assure you that once we here went to 1+ dialing several years ago, whole bunches of exhanges of this same form appeared here almost overnight. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Call Display for New York Date: Thu, 12 May 94 14:59:21 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Tony Harminc writes: > A colleague left a message on my machine here in Toronto while he was > waiting for a plane at JFK airport in New York. To my surprise, the > Call Display data was not 'out of area' as it usually is for calls > from the USA, but the rather unlikely number 212 210-0000. I don't > know exactly where he placed the call from (other than that he had > cleared security at the time) or how he paid for it. I haven't tried > calling the number, but it seems very unlikely to be the actual number > on the payphone. I don't know which US carrier he used either - > perhaps they are just early in implementing the new FCC requirements > ;-) Assuming that the 0000 is fake, who would be setting the number > that way? The LEC (implying that the IXC doesn't get the real data)? > The IXC making some privacy assumptions of its own? The payphone > owner (COCOT)? I used the NPA program to track down that prefix, and it is served by a telco central office in Manhattan. According to NPA, the location of the CO is at 40.75 degrees north latitude, 73.97 degrees west longitude. That CO serves the following prefixes: 210, 218, 252, 253, 270, 271, 272, 273, 282, 284, 286, 287, 297, 301, 309, 314, 317, 329, 338, 351, 359, 370, 372, 375, 377, 401, 404, 413, 419, 426, 448, 454, 455, 457, 458, 461, 462, 467, 469, 471, 476, 485, 490, 503, 537, 551, 557, 565, 573, 591, 599, 610, 622, 624, 625, 682, 687, 692, 697, 712, 813, 818, 850, 851, 856,,867, 878, 880, 883, 890, 905, 907, 916, 922, 949 953, 954, 972, 973, 983, 984, 986, and 987. I suspect that the COCOT owner is transporting the calls to Manhattan from the airport, and maybe serves them from PBX type trunks that give a non-dialable seven digit number for the ANI. Maybe it has something to do with an AOS (Alternate Operator Service) that was handling the billing. By the way, NPA is a fascinating program. It has location, mileage, town (and even zip code for USA numbers) data for all prefixes in the North American Numbering Plan. It is available for $25 from: PC Consultant P.O. Box 42086 Houston TX 77242-2086 Ph. 713/826-2629 (v-mail no answer) I understand that you can leave a message with voice mail and they will return your call. tad@ssc.com (if it bounces, use 3288544@mcimail.com)| [put "attn Box #215" Tad Cook | Packet Amateur Radio: | Home Phone: | on fax or cover pg!] Seattle, WA | KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 206-527-4089 | FAX: 206-525-1791 ------------------------------ From: nbschee@nbnet.nb.ca (Silas E. Cheeseman) Subject: Re: Emerging Cellular Systems Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 22:53:47 Organization: NB*Net In article uezechuk@mlsma.att.com writes: > 2) What advantages do digital cellular systems have over analog? Main advantage is privacy. Conventional scanners cannot monitor the calls. Contrary to popular belief digital cellular does not have better fidelity than analog. > 3) For a cellular operator, what are the ideal frequencies to operate in > and why? 870 to 890 MHz because that's where DOC (FCC in USA) say to. > 5) What are the impacts of operating in the higher reaches of the > spectrum, e.g. at GHz levels? What are the impacts of low power systems > and their advantages? Technical none, we've been doing it for years. Medically there is a belief that portable cellular phones may be linked to brain cancer. For the record, I agree with this possiblity. nbschee@mailserv.nbnet.nb.ca Silas E. Cheeseman Saint John, NB, Canada (506) 674-1321 Computer/FAX ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 19:13:51 PDT Said by: Ras Tafar > name and vendors won't check to make sure the card number and name > match. As for physical cards, a card reader/encoder could put my Oh yes they do. I worked for Macy*s California a couple of years ago, and *every* telephone order that came in that was to be charged to a non- R.H. Macy Co. Card (Macy's West, Macy's East, Bullocks, I. Magnin, and R.H. Macy Presidents Club) had to be sent in for verification with the card company. Not only did the name, number and expiration have to be checked, but also the address. In fact, we could not accept gift orders via telephone on MasterCard/Visa because the merchandise HAD to be shipped to the BILLING address (even if it was a PO Box). American Express would allow merchandise to go to another address, but an American Express agent had to call the Cardmember at home to verify the order. Of course our cash-register system immeadiately verified the name and address of Macy's Cards. > automated cashiers like they have at gas stations. Since I've had my > Discover card number used fraudulently at gas stations for two I cannot speak to Sear's Financial Network's policies as we did not deal with Discover Cards. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ From: john%banzai.pcc.com@sadye.EMBA.UVM.EDU (John Canning) Subject: Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors! Date: Thu, 12 May 94 22:51:54 EDT Pat - In comp.dcom.telecom, you made the following comments about Shantanu Jana's posting about AT&T's problems with billing: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part or all of the problem lies in the fact > that AT&T billing is done by the various local telephone companies and > they (the local telcos) seem to not always be up to snuff at having the > right software for billing in place. Probably AT&T should have mentioned > to you when you first enrolled in their various offerings that in the > event your bill -- as prepared and sent to you by the local telco -- was > incorrect you should call them (as you have done) and they would issue a > manual credit covering the differences between what they advertised and > what the local telco in fact charged. I think you may be coming down a > little to hard on them demanding a written apology, etc. PAT] I am no fan of our local phone company; they mess things up all the time. The first time I thought they got something right was when we moved our office eight months ago. Everything worked beautifully. Until a month later when they suddenly disconnected our service by accident. They thought they were shutting off our old service but got confused ... In any case, I find Shantanu's story rather familiar. I ran into a similar problem last year when I tried to sign up for one of the discount plans. Everything was fine for two months. Then, I was suddenly cut off from the plan. It took several phone calls to the AT&T 1-800 number and two months before they got me back on the plan and arranged for a credit for the previous bills. To this day, I have no idea why I was cut off from the program. However, the experience we had with AT&T's Uniplan office was much, much, worse. When we moved our office last year, we met with our local AT&T rep to go over our office move plans. She wrote us up a new contract and made arrangements for our new calling cards, 1-800 numbers, etc. Everything worked fine except for the billing. AT&T kept sending our bills to New England Telephone rather than to their Uniplan office. It took them five months to get the billing directed to their Uniplan office. In the meantime, we were having to pay an extra $1,500 each month to our local phone company. We asked AT&T to issue us a credit, but they refused to do it. Instead, once the bills were finally straightened out, we received a bunch of free service - partially due to the accrued credits. They also issued us a free month of phone service to apologize for the comedy of errors that we had to live through. Unlike Shantanu, we spent *hours* on the phone with the billing office folks from AT&T. Through this, I learned that very few people at AT&T understand their promotional offerings and only the service people who fix things at 2 AM really understand how the phone system works. Bottom line -- I believe every word that Shantanu said. The problems he experienced were caused by AT&T, not his local phone company. John Canning The Physician's Computer Company Essex Junction, Vermont ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #223 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10549; 13 May 94 19:15 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA00539; Fri, 13 May 94 15:10:04 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA00529; Fri, 13 May 94 15:10:01 CDT Date: Fri, 13 May 94 15:10:01 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405132010.AA00529@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #224 TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 May 94 15:10:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 224 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Barry Mishkind) Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (Carl Oppedahl) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (John Lundgren) Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point (John Lundgren) Re: Wireless Data Services (Joe Ford) Re: Bell Atlantic Gets Maryland Competition (Stephen Denny) Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (Bob Allison) Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? (Mahabala Sastry) Re: 3270 Emulation (Windows) (Roger Fajman) Re: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error (Arthur Rubin) Re: Searching For High School Classmates ... Help, Please! (himsworth@aol) Re: Need Information on Complete PC (Brian Sinofsky) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Peter Campbell Smith) Re: Direct Billing by AT&T (Jeffrey C. Honig) Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (Robert Berger) Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Dave Niebuhr) Information Wanted on Large Digital Data Exchange (Rolly Noel) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 May 94 21:31 MST From: barry@coyote.datalog.com (barry mishkind) Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ >> 611 and 911. Incoming calls, however, still work. Dialing *560 + PIN >> (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls. This is, of >> course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself. > Something sounds fishy about this to me. Criminals today can capture > mobile numbers and ESNs off the air. What's to stop them from also > capturing the PINs? All they have to do is set their scanners to look > "*560####" message to "unlock" the number. Pretty bogus security, if > you ask me. Certainly gives customers the _feeling_ that something is I have to agree. This doesn't make me feel very secure. But, perhaps the answer is more along the lines of what you imply ... the telcos don't really care about the matter, except as a PR thing. Not so long ago, one of the national TV networks had a program on the PIN surfers that watch people at payphones dialing in their PIN. In this case, the reporter was in contact with one of the LD carriers, and as shown, they had computer reports within seconds of the calls that were then made to Hungary, Sri Lanka, etc. IF the computers can catch this that fast ... there is not reason they can't "hold" a phone calling more than one country not in the profile, and have an operator check upon the next call. Some with cell phones. A quick check into the call probably would be apprecaited by the user, rather than a $5000 phone bill. Of course, if the phone companies are allowed a percentage of return on investment, they wouldn't care about the level of fraud, since, not only will they recover it in the rates, but ... the fraud *increases* the gross and they make more profit in the end. A cynical view perhaps, but then I've dealt with the phone companies for years. It's not unthinkable. Barry Mishkind barry@coyote.datalog.com Tucson, Arizona ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip Date: 13 May 1994 10:46:30 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) writes: > I was scrutinizing my cellular bill this evening and noted this > fascinating (well, sort of fascinating fact): > My long distance carrier is Sprint, which bills directly, not through > my cell carrier NYNEX. For about three quarters of the LD calls, > Sprint billed the call as a minute shorter than NYNEX did. I presume > that this is because NYNEX starts the clock as soon as I hit Send, > while Sprint doesn't start until the call supervises. On the other > hand, for roamer calls with the LD charges billed through NYNEX, the > LD and cellular times are the same. [the point being that having one's long-distance cellular calls billed separately could save money] This is one reason a person might choose one cellular carrier over another. Of the two cellular carriers in New York, one (Nynex) lets you pick your own long-distance carrier and be billed separately if you wish, the other (Cellular One) forces you to AT&T and bills you for it. Or at least it was that way a few years ago, can current customers comment? Of course the sad part about all this (not the fault of the previous poster) is that in New York, at least, the oligopoly pricing leads to very expensive air time charges, for many callers 90 cents per minute. This dwarfs the long-distance price component and reduces the benefit of getting to choose your long-distance carrier. One hopes that some day in the US there will be more than two providers for portable phone service, to bring the price down. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers) Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 ------------------------------ From: jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com (John Lundgren) Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Date: 13 May 94 02:21:34 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network I didn't ask for the one I got, but it fits perfectly. ANd the FAX number would have been nicer if it were 329 instead of 379, then it would have been JOHN FAX. Oh, well ... actually my voice number is also JOHNIAC. But no one seems to remember that one. B C N U . . (Now, if I could only get rid of that damn pager number) John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs Rancho Santiago Community College District 17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706 VOI (714) JOHN GAB \ FAX (714) JOHN FRY jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com \ jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com (John Lundgren) Subject: Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point Date: 13 May 94 02:29:07 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network It sounds like you're about to get into the wonderful world of Unix. The addresses we have on the internet don't seem to want to let people telnet into our site. THis is because we have a network with only DOS machines on it. I have heard that we are going to have to get a Unix box and a fully qualified domain name if we want to be fully on the 'net. Hope that helps ... John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs Rancho Santiago Community College District 17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706 VOI (714) JOHN GAB \ FAX (714) JOHN FRY jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com \ jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: fordjb@wln.com Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services Date: Fri, 13 May 94 09:10:19 PDT Organization: WLN In article , writes: > I've noticed that there's been very little posted to this list > regarding wireless *data* services. Anyone know why? There are some > very interesting developments in the wireless arena, both for short, > bursty text messaging (a la RAM or Ardis) and for higher bandwidth, IP > connectivity within metropolitan areas. > Am I simply looking in the wrong place, or is the interest level not > very high, or is there a need to establish a new group regarding > wireless data services? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those messages are welcome here, but > I do not seem to get very many of them. I'm not certain if any other > newsgroup is currently handling the topic or not. PAT] I'm also interested in wireless data services, particularly real-time data links via cellular transmission to Unix file servers. Anyone out there with experience or recommendations regarding cellular modems. Is this group the most appropriate one? Anyone know of another group focusing on wireless data services? Thanks, Joe Ford Voice: 206-352-4434 Fax: 206-352-4712 Internet: fordjb@wln.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, the coverage of telecom in this journal is general in nature, and pretty much includes all the various aspects of telephony. There are a few other specialized groups, but none specifically as you described it ... so stick around, ask questions! PAT] ------------------------------ From: sdenny@spd.dsccc.com (Stephen Denny) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Gets Maryland Competition Date: 12 May 1994 23:27:08 GMT Organization: DSC Communications Corporation, Plano, Texas USA > with 800 numbers. Portability is clearly in the works, but as I noted > in an earlier message it'll be an enormous project involving billions > of dollars of retrofit to the network to look up every single call in > a carrier database to know who to route it to. I'd be very surprised > to see portability working before the year 2000. As an employee of an equipment vendor, billions of dollars sounds real good! Can we have some of it upfront? I am aware of discussions with unmentioned regional suppliers and some potential new ones regarding number portability. There are people wanting to do it soon, even if on a small scale. I agree the full-blown implementation is *several* years out, but things are moving faster in telecom now than 20 years ago due to competition. As someone mentioned earlier, there are ways to do small-scale portability now without any hardware or software mods but they are wasteful. > One thing I can definitely promise is massive confusion before it's > all sorted out. Expect a lot of really stupid proposals, e.g. > assigning each CAP a couple of area codes, or adding yet more digits > to be dialed as a prefix to the subscriber's number. I agree about the confusion state. I think we are in it now. There are two or three flavors of portability being addressed. When we don't say which version we are talking about, confusion reigns. 1. phone company selection portability locally only (within the same LATA, but you select your provider) 2. physical local portability (move your number with you within the LATA - nice but not a big revenue producer, not likely) 3. nationwide portability (take your number with you anywhere) In some respects number two is supported but only within the same CO. With number three you have blown all concept of area code being a geographic area. It now becomes just part of the number. I might also point out that although every call could potentially need a "lookup", 800 numbers are already being "looked up" via Global Title Translation. All 800 numbers are not typically looked up in one single database used by all the world, rather in various locations. In some respects it is a matter of scale to look up all numbers, although I am by no means suggesting that the GTT mechanism do it. Setup time is an issue. One thing you can bet -- some companies will need to do it long before any standards are set. I'd be interested in hearing more discussion, please? Stephen Denny sdenny@spd.dsccc.com DSC Communications Corp. Plano, TX ------------------------------ From: boba@gagme.wwa.com (Bob Allison) Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? Date: 12 May 1994 22:08:51 -0500 Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605 In article , Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX wrote: > The 1986 ZMODEM is public domain, as are the rz/sz sources of that > vintage. > Omen Technology has improved the performance and reliability of ZMODEM > over the last decade. The Good Stuff is not public domain. I have been told that there are important differences in ZMODEM implementations that the user will notice. It has been said that the PD ZMODEM will puke baud barf if you cancel a dl, and it will screw up if you try to put it in the background on a dl. But 'they' say that the higher priced ZMODEM (perhaps that which Mr Forsberg refers to) doesn't have these faults. Is this true? boba@gagme.wwa.com Please vote for rec.arts.ascii - CFV available in news.announce.newsgroups. ------------------------------ From: nsc!mirage.nsc.com!msastry@voder.pa.dec.com (Mahabala Sastry) Subject: Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? Reply-To: nsc!mirage.nsc.com!msastry@voder.pa.dec.com Organization: National Semiconductor Corp. Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:59:11 GMT In article 7@eecs.nwu.edu, puma@netcom.com (puma) writes: > There are several modems that will do that, mostly the better (read, > higher priced) ones. The USR dual standard will, with the following > commands ... > ATH1%T > The H1 takes the modem off-hook, the %T reads the touchtone. Sending > a character or dropping DTR will hang up the line. TyIN 4000 Pro from NSC is a low end data-modem/fax/voice/audio/scanner card that can do this. Mostly targetted for small office or home PCs. Mahabala sastry ------------------------------ From: Roger Fajman Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 00:01:07 EDT Subject: Re: 3270 Emulation (Windows) > I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a > great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection > 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe > environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you > please provide me with the information I need to obtain them. There are freeware or shareware TN3270s. Check out these files relating to TCP/IP for PCs: PCIP FAQ Frequently Asked Questions PCIP FEATURES Features of TCP/IP Packages for DOS and Windows WINSOCK APPFAQ Windows Sockets Applications FAQ WINTCP INFO Windows and TCP/IP for Internet Access They are available via anonymous FTP from list.nih.gov, directory pcip. To order by email, send the command "get filename filetype" to listserv@list.nih.gov. To subscribe to the pcip (TCP/IP for PCs) mailing list, send the command "SUB PCIP your name" to listserv@list.nih.gov. It's bidirectionally gatewayed with the comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc newsgroup. Roger Fajman Telephone: +1 301 402 4265 National Institutes of Health BITNET: RAF@NIHCU Bethesda, Maryland, USA Internet: RAF@CU.NIH.GOV Postmaster for CU.NIH.GOV/NIHCU, LIST.NIH.GOV/NIHLIST, NIH3PLUS List owner for PCIP, SNSTCP-L, and TN3270E, all @LIST.NIH.GOV P.S. - WRQ sells a version of Reflection with TN3270 capability. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 13 May 94 15:39:57 GMT Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc. In pheel@panix.com (Mike Pollock) writes: > Sprint recently changed me over from direct billing to "combined > billing" on my NYNEX local telephone bill. Simple, right? Wrong. My > final direct-from-Sprint invoice was contained activity through > 4/10/94. My first combined bill from NYNEX contained Sprint activity > through 4/13/94. The proximity of these two billing dates meant I got > a _three_day_ billing period for Sprint long distance service on the > NYNEX bill. Now, I'm also a Sprint Select customer, which means I > have a $6.85/month minimum. In a normal 30 day billing cycle, I > easily meet that minimum. However, Sprint was nice enough to bill me > $6.85 for this three day billing cycle because in those three days, I > only made $1.20 worth of calls. Etc. Same situation here with me last April with Sprint/PacBell, but it only took me two minutes talking to Sprint (once I got through the voice-mail menus) The credit was on the the bill two months following. No problem with either Sprint or PacBell. 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) ------------------------------ From: himsworth@aol.com (Himsworth) Subject: Re: Searching for High School Classmates ... Help, please! Date: 13 May 1994 09:11:03 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , gilbert@cs.ucsd.edu (Glen Gilbert) writes: I have spent the last three years building a database for a public school alumni association in Manhasset, NY. Cannot help you with your specific request, but if you decide to go with a formal organization I can help with by-laws, database format (Filemaker Pro), etc. ------------------------------ From: brians@netcom.com (Brian Sinofsky) Subject: Re: Need Information on Complete PC Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 23:36:57 GMT Al Cohan (0004526627@mcimail.com) wrote: > A friend of mine is sending me a couple of voice cards manufactured by > the Complete PC. Can anyone supply info on how to reach this company? Complete PC is now owned by Boca Research, Inc. in Boca Raton, Florida. Brian Sinofsky ------------------------------ From: campbellsm@lish.logica.com (Peter Campbell Smith) Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Organization: Logica, London Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 08:55:26 GMT barry.s.rein@jpl.nasa.gov (Barry S. Rein) writes: >> .... I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to >> remember. .... 2580 is a good one -- straight down the middle of the keypad. Peter Campbell Smith, Logica plc, London. Voice: +44 71 637 9111 Fax: +44 71 344 3638 Internet: campbellsm@lish.logica.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Direct Billing by AT&T Organization: Information Technologies/Network Resources; Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 12:17:57 -0400 From: Jeffrey C Honig My AT&T billing is handled by my local small independent phone company. A couple of times I have called about AT&T billing plans and rewards programs and have been told that I am not elligible because my local phone company has decided not to offer said plan (although they do offer Reach Out America). Is there any way for me to be billed directly by AT&T instead of via my local phone company? Maybe by not selecting a default long distance carrier and having to dial 10288 every time? Also, my wife just received a $20 check offer from MCI. Is AT&T still countering these offers? Thanks, Jeff ------------------------------ From: rwb@alexander.alias.cs.cmu.edu (Robert Berger) Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:32:31 GMT In article padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) writes: > Personally, I agree with the basic service being per-call blocking. If you want per-call blocking on YOUR phone that's fine. I don't see why they can't let the customer have his/her choice. Once again the interests of greedy businesses are being favored over the needs of the consumer. I don't want any business I deal with to have my home phone number. They WILL sell it to telemarketers, and there's no way I can prove who did it. IF they can't offer per-line blocking then they should drop the whole Caller-ID crap altogether. Emergencies are no excuse; 911's have had number ID for years. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 15:13:33 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet In TELECOM Digest V14 #221 RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM wrote: >> Anyone who has access to the Internet ... can reach City Hall by >> addressing their message to scarlos@crl.com. > Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' only > applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever defined > for local or state government use. PAT] I obtained a copy of all US sites that have an Internet connection from Internic via the whois command (whois -h rs.internic.net "domain *") on my Sun workstation (other systems may vary) and it listed federal, state and local governmental entites as '.gov' Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 1+(516) 282-3093 FAX 1+(516) 282-7688 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the clarification and correction. I guess I've no idea why they are in .com then. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rolly_Noel@ualberta.ca (Rolly Noel) Subject: Information Wanted on Large Digital Data Exchange Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 11:16:16 -0800 Organization: Computing & Network Services, Univ. of Alberta I'm looking for product info for large digital data exchanges that will support: -- Attachment of 1000 V.34 modems on the front end, -- Have 4000 serial ports on the back end for connections to terminal servers, support for signal line flow control, -- Able to talk to modem and terminal server ports at speeds up to 115,200 bps. Thanks. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #224 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa13822; 14 May 94 3:25 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA11382; Sat, 14 May 94 00:25:18 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA11373; Sat, 14 May 94 00:25:16 CDT Date: Sat, 14 May 94 00:25:16 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405140525.AA11373@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #225 TELECOM Digest Sat, 14 May 94 00:25:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 225 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Forum in NY (Jorge T. Negron) Need Weather-Resistant Phone (Kyle Rhorer) Footnote to A History of Underseas Cables (James H. Haynes) Loop Start to Ground Start Converter (Leroy Casterline) Alt.sex.beastiality.in.space.and.oklahoma (Dave Wade ) Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service (Sudeepto Roy) Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Javier Henderson) Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Dennis Smiley) Dealing with Obscene Callers in the 90's (Paul A. Lee) Re: Local Competition -- Outside Plant vs Dialtone (Alan Leon Varney) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jnegron@photon.poly.edu (Jorge T. Negron) Subject: Telecom Forum in NY Organization: CATT Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 22:56:43 GMT Center for Advanced Technology in Telecommunications (CATT) Presents: FORUMS IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS PRACTICE Supported in Part by the New York State Science and Technology Foundation Polytechnic University, Five Metrotech Center, Brooklyn, NY 11201, 718-260-3050 NETWORK DESIGN AND ANALYSIS TOOLS The design of computer networks has always been a difficult task and it continues to become more challenging. With new network architectures and carrier offerings emerging almost daily, and with heterogeneous applications sharing capacity, building a network which works at all, not to mention trying to optimize cost or performance, is a formidable job. Network planners and managers have therefore become increasingly reliant upon automated tools to help with these tasks. These tools, which are interactive and graphically based, allow the user to quickly analyze design alternatives, both topological and architectural and to make key decisions about design and configuration tradeoffs. This talk will focus on the state of the art in network design and analysis tools, their major functions, how such tools are architected, how the user interacts with them, some of the algorithms used in these tools, and on current challenges in extending such tools to deal with increasingly large and diverse networks. A live demonstration will be given of INTREPID, a tool developed at the IBM T.J. Watson Research Center and currently in use inside IBM. SPEAKER: Aaron Kershenbaum is a member of the Network Design Tools Group at the IBM T.J. Watson Research Center in Hawthorne. His current research is centered on algorithms and tools for the design and analysis of high speed and multiprotocol networks. From 1978 until 1989, he was part of the Polytechnic University faculty where he served as a Professor of Computer Science as well as heading the Network Design Laboratory at Poly's CATT. From 1968 to 1979, he was part of the group at Network Analysis Corporation which did pioneering work in network design, including the design of the original ARPANET. Dr. Kershenbaum is the author of the book, "Telecommunications Network Design Algorithms" and co-authored the book "Network Management and Control". He is also the author of over 50 technical articles and has supervised over 20 Ph.D. dissertations in the field of network design. He is a fellow of the IEEE. TIME & PLACE: Tuesday, June 21, 1994 9:00AM - 10:30AM Polytechnic University Auditorium 5 Metrotech Center Brooklyn NY Trains: A, F, D, M, R, 4, and 5 are within 1 block of the Metrotech Complex ADMISSION: Corporate members of CATT's Associates Program and Polytechnic students are invited free of charge. The fee for others is $5.00 Please be sure to call 718-260-3050 or FAX 718-260-3074 for a reservation. Jorge T. Negron (jnegron@photon.poly.edu) Center for Advanced Technology in Telecommunications 5 Metrotech Center Brooklyn, NY 11201 ------------------------------ From: rhorer@medics.jsc.nasa.gov (Kyle Rhorer) Subject: Need Weather-Resistant Phone Date: 13 May 1994 22:55:51 GMT Organization: KRUG Life Sciences, Inc. I am looking for a manufacturer/distributor of a weather-resistant phone for use as a house phone on the outside of a building. It is in an enclosure, but the normal consumer phones we have been using don't stand up to the humidity of our South Texas climate :-) Please e-mail and I will summarize if there is any interest. Thanks, Kyle ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (James H. Haynes) Subject: Footnote to A History of Underseas Cables Date: 14 May 1994 00:08:42 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz Another interesting facet of history, also from George Oslin's book, is the relation between transatlantic cables and the U.S. purchase of Alaska. After the 1858 ocean cable failed and the transcontinental telegraph line was completed Hiram Sibley, president of Western Union, decided that a route up the west coast of America, across the Bering straits, and across Russia to Europe offered the most likely prospect of success. Work started on this project, which was abandoned when the 1866 ocean cable proved successful. In the course of the work Sibley visited Russia to see about buying a right-of-way along the coast of Alaska, then Russian territory. A Russian noble told Sibley that for the kind of money he was offering Russia would just about be willing to sell the whole territory. Western Union decided it didn't want to be in the real estate business; so Sibley suggested to Secretary Seward that the U. S. government should take advantage of the Russian offer to sell. Other figures mentioned in connection with this event are Leo Tolstoy, who was made a count in recognition of his work promoting telegraphy in Russia, and a U.S. diplomat named George Kennan. Oslin doesn't say so, but I would presume the latter is an ancestor of the living diplomat with the same name. Alaskan natives built suspension bridges using some of the steel wire left behind when the telegraph company abandoned the project. haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:30:29 -0600 From: Leroy Casterline Subject: Loop Start to Ground Start Converter Dear telecom wizards, My company has a box that connects between a PBX and the CO on PBX analog loop start trunk ports, as follows: ----- ----- ----- | P | loop start | B | loop start | C | | B | <--------------> | o | <--------------> | O | | X | | x | | | ----- ----- ----- We now have a need to connect in a similar fashion in a gound start environment, as follows: ----- ----- ----- | P | ground start | B | ground start | C | | B | <--------------> | o | <--------------> | O | | X | | x | | | ----- ----- ----- Does anyone know of an existing device which could be connected between our box and the PBX, and between our box and the CO, so that we can work in the above environment without re-engineering our analog interface or changing our software? Thanks, Leroy Casterline Cahill Casterline Limited 303/484-2212 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 14:11:15 MDT From: djw@aerie (Dave Wade ) Subject: Alt.sex.beastiality.in.space.and.oklahoma > I, too, am interested in the possibilities of satellite hookup to the > net. Can it be done? (doh -- anything *can* be done) Is it done? How > expensive is it? Who do I talk to? & From djd@netsys.com Thu Jun 3 13:55:52 1993 & From: Duane Dubay & Subject: Your Order & To: djw@lanl.GOV & Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1993 12:48:12 -0700 (PDT) & David, & Thanks for your Usenet order. Your order # is ...have any questions & about the status of your order. & The complete charges are $1828.00. $1800 for the system and & $28.00 for shipping and handling. Per your rquest, it will be & shipped COD. I can let you know when it ships so you can be & prepared for delivery. & If you have any questions, let me know. & Thanks! & Duane J. Dubay & PageSat Inc. "Where cyberspace and outerspace are one" & 992 San Antonio Rd. &Palo Alto, CA. 94303 (415) 424-0384 or Email djd@pagesat.com And one final additional comment, there is a usenet newsgroup about pagesat also ... just in case you need more information from another satisfied customer ... ------------------------------ From: sroy@qualcomm.com (Sudeepto Roy) Subject: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:16:38 -0800 Organization: Qualcomm Incorporated Hello Fellow Netters! Wonder if this is the right newsgroup to voice my indignace about customer service from Long Distance companies. In any case, I hope that AT&T, Sprint and MCI are reading this! These days, whenever you call the 800 customer service number of one of the big three, it seems that you're made to wait for five to fifteen minutes on an average before a voice that belongs to a real person responds back. Over the past few months, my friends and I have been noticing these annoying delays in service. You dial a number and you're forced to wait and listen to music that you don't care about or calling plans and advertisement that you care lesser. This is a phenomenon that occurs round the clock -- I've called at traditionally busy hours and traditionally wee hours (11p.m.- 7 a.m. for instance). Mind you, I have no complaint about service. Once an operator gets my call, I can usually get my requests serviced easily. In most cases, whenever I metion that I had to wait for eight minutes the operator is either bewildered or has the ready answer "Our networks are quite busy, at this time of the day" -- at 1 a.m.? Sudeepto Roy Qualcomm Incorporated, San Diego, CA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way they should respond to your query is 'disproportionatly busy to the amount of staff on hand ...'. It is not so much they are loaded with calls as it is they probably have only two or three people serving the entire United States at that time of night. As a test try calling three or four times at night versus three or four times during the middle of the day in the middle of the week. You'll find almost invariably you wait longer at night, despite the smaller amount of calls since the limited number of people there are still taking as many calls as during the day, and in all probability they may be on manual filing/order taking if the computer is down for updating and/or maintainence. If so, that would slow things down even more. I've noticed the same thing when calling Illinois Bell at odd hours of the morning. They have operated customer service 24 hours per day for about a year now but time and again, my call to them at 4 AM returns a recording saying to please hold for a representative, and that 'the approximate waiting time will be greater than ten minutes'. Less than ten minutes, they state the approximate number of minutes on their recording, more than ten is merely given as 'greater than ten'. When I do get through to someone, it is often times obvious that the 'system is down' since the rep does not have copies of any records and is taking notes by hand. For questions such as 'what is my balance due?' the answer will be he does not have that information available at the present time and will call me back later if I wish. I call an 800 number, so they are paying for the time on hold; I guess they figure it is still cheaper than having more help on duty. What is really annoying though is when they leave their desk (at any time of day or night) and *forget to unplug their headset* from their work station. The Automatic Call Distributor which tosses incoming calls out to the reps uses a plugged in headset as its basis for thinking a position is occupied and a person there is willing to take calls. Normally the rep sits there and a 'click' in their headset followed by hearing a person breathing on the other end tells them a call has been given to them. If no headset is plugged in, the ACD bypasses that position and moves to another idle one. So if you ever call, wait on hold awhile and get 'answered', only to sit there and hear talking in the background but no one actually talking to you then you'll know what happened -- a headset is laying on the desk plugged in while its owner has gone out to the bathroom or for coffee or whatever. Given the volume of traffic they get, as soon as you abandon the call to dial in again, there'll be an immediate seizure and some other poor devil is now on that line waiting for a rep who never will speak to him! On a busy day/night you see, your hangup click in the rep's ear is followed instantly (a half second later?) by a click and breathing from the caller who follows you. Wires on the headset jack make a loop when the headset is plugged in telling the ACD to toss calls that way, thus the need to physically unplug it when leaving. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet From: henderson@mln.com Date: 13 May 94 14:51:09 PST Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the clarification and > correction. I guess I've no idea why they are in .com then. PAT] Look at their address ... scarlos@crl.com. CRL is just another Internet services provider, looks like someone at City hall just got an account there. Just a thought. Javier Henderson (JH21) henderson@mln.com ------------------------------ From: smiley@crl.com (Dennis Smiley) Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet Date: 13 May 1994 16:15:58 -0700 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] > Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain? scarlos probably "rents" space from crl, like I do?? Dennis Smiley smiley@crl.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you two are probably correct. Until now, we were assuming that San Carlos had its own Internet drop there ... obviously they do not if you examine the address. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 17:04:37 -0400 From: /DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com Subject: Dealing with Obscene Callers in the 90's In TELECOM Digest V14 #220, Mike Durkin wrote: > My wife received three obscene phone calls last week ... but it takes five > calls in a row to get any action ... and > I don't think PA has yet lifted the ANI/CID restrictions ... First, as for ANI/CID in Pennsylvania: I lived most of my life in Pennsylvania (until less than two years ago). I watched with amusement and disbelief as the Pennsylvania PUC handled Bell of Pennsylvania's (now Bell Atlantic) application for tariff for Caller ID service. The PUC's Advocate's office got involved and wound up getting the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to declare, a few years back, that Caller ID amounts to wiretapping. (Perhaps those folks also think that a peephole in your front door is an invasion of privacy ...) A feeble attempt was made within the state legislature to revise wiretapping laws to clarify and permit Caller ID, but that was thwarted by the "promise" of federal legislation or regulation to "clarify" the matter (*clarification* by the federal government??!). So far, the state supreme court decision stands and renders moot any decisions about per-line or per-call blocking. Various technophobes have succeeded in thoroughly confusing the matter and in preventing the state legislature from taking any action to permit CID. As for dealing directly with the obscene calls: I learned a bit of the law enforcement perspective on the matter when I received a threatening call several years ago. Pennsylvania law provides penalties for nuisance calls, obscene or harassing calls, or threatening calls. Those three categories pretty much define how the telco and law enforcement handle a situation. Nuisance calls are the hang-ups, the kiddy pranks, and the breathers. Obscene calls and harassing calls pretty much get lumped into one category, because they all consist of a message that is intended to upset or exert power over the recipient of the call, but they don't carry any direct threat of harmful or criminal action. Threatening calls actually convey a threat of action by the caller. For example, a harassing call might consist of, "I'd like to **** your **** until I ****," while a threatening call would state, "I'm going to come over there and **** your **** until I ****." Granted, it seems like a rather fine distinction, but it has to do with something like "probable cause," as the cops explained it to me. Nuisance calls are usually dealt with by the telco. Nuisance calls are so commonplace that, until the telco sees a persistent pattern, it's not worth the effort it takes to gather the evidence the telco needs to justify its actions against the caller to the regulatory authorities. Harassing or obscene calls are misdemeanors, but the telco is still in the best position to deal with them, and it deals with them in much the same manner it deals with nuisance calls. The telco is stuck having to justify yanking out some sleazeball's phone and denying him the constitutional right to talk dirty to someone. And, of course, the cops have much the same limitation, along with their obligation to go after those who are really doing nasty things, instead of those who are just talking about them. About the only thing you might be able to get very readily is for the telco to change _your_ number without a service charge. When a threat is involved, the police take the point, using the telco's resources in the investigation. Threats over the phone of acts that would be felonious are themselves usually felonies. When I had my problem, the police were very frank and realistic about what options I had. If I didn't feel threatened or violated, and the calls did not persist, then let it go. Chalk it up to the cost of living in a tolerant society -- like a neighbor's occasional loud party. If I _did_ feel a threat to safety or sanctity, then I would have to work with the police -- not the telco -- as my primary advocate. For them to fulfill that role, the call had to include a threat ("He _did_ threaten you, didn't he?" was the essence of the heavy hint), and I would have to pursue a criminal complaint clear through the prosecution and conviction. They gave me those realities to consider, and left it up to me. That's probably what you'll have to do, too. Of course, for the garden-variety nuisance or harassing calls, remember the basic rules: - If a caller doesn't respond to two "Hello"s or within 10-15 seconds, hang up quietly without saying anything else. Most of these guys just want to get somebody -- anybody -- P.O.ed; - If the caller starts getting trashy-mouthed, asking or making personal or sexual questions or comments, or stops responding to you, and it isn't appropriate in the conversation, hang up; - Don't give out any intimate, identifying, or compromising information to someone you don't know and didn't call; - Remember that most nuisance callers get their victims by picking the directory listing -- even just the number -- at random, just to try and get a reaction. If you don't give them that big reaction (and the power or control they derive from it), most of them will give up quickly and not call back. Good luck, Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 INTERNET ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 17:36:59 +0500 Subject: Re: Local Competition -- Outside Plant vs Dialtone Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM writes: > [...] it occurs to me that it might perhaps be interesting to > consider splitting the LEC functions into an outside plant company, > and (any number of) dial tone providers. > Any dial tone provider would have to co-locate their switches at the > local loop termination point, or have a POP there. The outside plant > company would maintain the local loops, and have a static switch that > associated each local loop with one dial tone provider's switch. But Competitive Access Providers want to be able to offer local loops as well. Couldn't the "outside plant" be competitive too? (After all, that's what the major CAPS have -- outside plant.) Then there would be competition in "local loop" provisioning when a new office tower or sub-division went in. So you have outside plant competition AND dial tone competition. > There would be no need for a global database of local number > assignments, since each local number prefix would continue to map to > one CO. At the CO, the mapping between local loops and dial tone > switches would be done. > The outside plant company could be owned by the dial tone providers > jointly, or could bill separately. > This would allow for the continuance of the natural monopoly on local > loops and other outside plant, while allowing different companies to > compete in providing dial tone and features. So the outside plant "owner" would have a CO, which would have a database "inside" that connects off-hook phones to a "dial tone" provider? And this CO would pass along "flashes" and "ringing" -- and support coin phones (maybe) and ISDN lines and private-line services? Sounds like a DLC (like SLC(tm)-96) to me, with a little "line-to-T1" database -- not a CO. This is a "slick" (and rather old) proposal for CAP access -- works fine for outgoing calls. On the other hand, now that the correct "dial tone" provider has collected digits and determined that the selected subscriber ISN'T attached to this particular switch, how does one ROUTE the call to the destination's selected "dial tone" provider? How to get incoming calls routed properly is the reason for "database" suggestions when discussing "dial tone" competition. The outgoing solution(s) are much easier, and are also where the revenue is. The incoming problem is really one of fairly paying for terminating the call. One model says that the "caller" pays for the call, so their provider handles the call to the destination. But what if the destination NXX only gets service from some other set of providers? (No one suggests that all CAPs have to serve all NXXs in a LATA.) Does the traditional LEC get the call? Or does the CAP have an NXX-to-termination-provider database? The previous model is sorta like the IXC market today -- the caller selects the IXC, and the IXC figures out a way to reach the destination, even if it means going through a third party (another IXC or the terminating LEC). This only works if the "dial tone" provider is willing to PAY in some form for access via the terminating provider. Maybe the "pay" is just a reciprical access agreement. But probably not -- after all, what "provider" would want to provide service to a customer that only got incoming calls, or made their outgoing call via some other provider? Following the IXC model would suggest that the "dial tone" provider would pay a timed access charge to the terminating provider, or maybe an untimed charge. Either way, the concept of "free unmeasured service" for such calls disappears. Another model suggests that there would be some big database that maps dialed number-to-terminating-provider for every call -- something that will cost a lot to implement (and who pays for that?). But this would get the call to the correct terminating provider, who can recover their costs in the monthly telephone bill (or in per-terminating- call charges). But whatever model is eventually used, I think the concept of "free unmeasured service" for multi-hour calls will be eroded by the introduction of CAPs. If CAPs do not offer such service, those who benefit most from that service will stick with the LEC. The LECs costs will thus be higher, without the (CAP-using) toll calls to balance those costs. The rates for such service will thus go higher, until it balances the costs or folks opt for measured service. Opinion of the future: I don't see a market for a CAP whose customers are mostly those that want to make long unmeasured calls. Over the long run (if they are "modem" users) someone will offer something like an X.25 service (packet of some type) and bill in some combination of per month and/or per packet. If it is cheaper than the remaining high-priced "unmeasured" service, it'll sell. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #225 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14189; 14 May 94 3:56 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA11920; Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:03 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA11911; Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:02 CDT Date: Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:02 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405140615.AA11911@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #226 TELECOM Digest Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 226 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cellular Privacy (Matt Metzinger) Re: Cellular Privacy (Mike Borsetti) Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet (Peter M. Weiss) Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Ari M. Footlik) Re: NANP and Switches (David Esan) Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (John R. Covert) Re: Wireless Data Services (Pete Farmer) Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Laurence Chiu) Re: Caller ID With Serial Port - Where? (Dan Lanciani) Re: Cell One/NY Rates for DC and Boston (Brent Whitlock) Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (John R. Levine) Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Shawn Gordhamer) Re: Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack (1JCR7732@ibm.mtsac.edu) Re: Direct Billing by AT&T (Brent Whitlock) Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers? (Eric Pearce) Cordless Phone Suggestions Wanted (Anand Gupta) Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book (Ken Thompson) Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Carl Moore) Caller ID Gets Me Jealous (Joseph Romero) Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (Christian Weisgerber) Re: Call Screening Device (Leroy Casterline) Re: History of Underseas Cables (Tony Harminc) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: matt.metzinger@tranquil.nova.com (Matt Metzinger) Date: 14 May 94 02:30:54 GMT Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy? Organization: Fidonet: The Tranquility Grille (1:147/3038) Friday May 06 1994 09:58, weisen@alw.nih.gov wrote: > Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 changed all of this. Does anyone know where the full text of this can be picked up in electronic format, preferably by FTPmail? I have no direct FTP access. Matt Metzinger metz@tranquil.nova.com metz%tranquil%okgate@yokm.pillar.com 1:147/3038@fidonet.org 405-755-6136 The Tranquility Grille BBS ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 20:19:05 PDT From: Mike Borsetti, Cellular One/San Francisco Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy Let me add to the discussion that digital cellular provides much higher privacy, as there are no publicly available scanners that can descramble the "buzzing" generated by a digital conversation. Additionally, the TDMA digital standard supports encription, which will be available sometime in the near future. Today's phones will only need a simple reprogramming to take advantage of encryption. mike.borsetti@bactc.com Cellular One/San Francisco ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:31:43 EDT From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet Organization: Penn State University Many universities are running a mail re-director at their domain name e.g. @PSU.EDU which allows the user to always specify that as their e-mail address, yet have it forwarded to their preferred e-mail system. In fact, there may be no mail reading capability at the x.EDU server. Also, mail to that address, which specifies a non-unique name, will usually produce a list of userids/names that are close matches (some limitations do apply). Likewise, FINGER access, as well as Gopher and PH will usually be found at such institutions. Our gopher can be found at info.psu.edu which has a link to our PH database. Pete-Weiss@psu.edu ------------------------------ From: afootlik@dcl-nxt50.cso.uiuc.edu (Ari Micah Footlik) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? Date: 14 May 1994 05:22:56 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) writes: > Or the modem should detect voice and put out a AT-command like > response ("VOICE") which would cause the comm software to cease, just > like a "NO ANSWER" timeout. Shouldn't be hard for the DSP to detect > voice. Do common modems provide any such voice indication? Actually, I know that my old modem, a PPI 2400 internal, used to be able to distinguish voice answers from data or no connections, but, I don't remember how I got it to do that. A number of comm programs I have used have "VOICE" as a no-connect message option, though I don't know if it is implemented. Till Later! Ari Micah Footlik University Of Illinois Champaign-Urbana, Illionis E-Mail To: afootlik@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: NANP and Switches Date: 13 May 94 19:52:26 GMT Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY In article jslupsky@pwss.gov.ab.ca (James Slupsky) writes: > Mr. Lee also writes: >> CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially >> in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc.. > I don't believe this. The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change > from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's. All switch routing > software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the > CO code was NNX. There are 2910 NXXs that have the format NPA (N[0|1]A) in 62 NPAs. I will not include the NXXs here but the NPAs that have them are: 201 210 303 313 410 506 602 615 706 718 818 909 202 212 305 404 415 510 604 619 707 805 903 910 204 213 306 405 416 512 606 702 708 808 904 916 205 214 310 407 501 513 609 703 713 810 905 917 206 215 312 408 503 514 610 704 714 813 908 919 209 301 David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 18:33:24 EDT From: John R. Covert 13-May-1994 1836 Subject: Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote: > If you use an LD carrier who bills through your cell carrier (notably > AT&T), the LD times are all the same as the cellular times, meaning > that you're paying for LD minutes you didn't actually use. Well, we have the same cellular carrier -- NYNEX, and I have noticed that this is _not_ true. NYNEX only prints one time on the bill, the air time, but the LD charge is correctly calculated for the number of supervised minutes, on both roamer LD charges and local AT&T charges billed by NYNEX. john ------------------------------ From: petef@well.com (Pete Farmer) Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:22:53 -0800 Organization: Tetherless Access Ltd. In article , I wrote that I had noticed very little posted to this list regarding wireless *data* services, and asked if I was looking in the wrong place. I have since received a couple of e-maiols pointing me to comp.std.wireless, where I do find postings regarding wireless services. Thanks, Peter J. Farmer Internet: petef@well.com Vice President, Marketing Voice: 415-321-5968 Tetherless Access Ltd. Fax: 415-321-5048 ------------------------------ From: lchiu@crl.com (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows Date: 13 May 1994 16:27:39 -0700 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access In article , Mark W. Schumann wrote: > What Do You Know gives its number as 1-800-WHA-KNOW. As in "One, > eight hundred, wah-no. Or whack now." In the SF Bay Area, the local sports station provides a toll free number (*SPORTS) if you are calling from a cellular phone via GTE. And then the nationally syndicated computer talk show On Computers (Sunday 10:00PDT) has a toll-free number. Laurence Chiu Walnut Creek, California Tel: 510-215-3730 (work) Internet: lchiu@crl.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 21:31:43 EDT From: ddl@das.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) Subject: Re: Caller ID with Serial Port - Where? joharris@io.org (John Harris) wrote: > Try contacting Vive Synergies Inc., > 30 West Beaver Creek Road, Unit 2, > Richmond Hill, Ontario L4B 3K1 > (905) 882-6107 Fax (905) 882-6238 > This manufacturer advertises in the local paper as having a "CALL > EDITOR II" for $199.00 Beware of this device. The design is seriously flawed and Vive isn't interested in fixing it. Here is something I wrote about it a while back when I (foolishly) bought one from HAL. (HAL sells Vive's Call Editor II, obviously ...) The HAL box also has a fairly severe bug. When a call comes in, you see a lot of garbage characters on the RS-232 interface before the actual CNID string. Worse, what you are seeing is the box's echo of garbage characters that it thinks came in over the RS-232 interface. Sometimes it gets enough garbage to generate an ``Unknown Command'' response. Chances are, sooner or laater, it will think it saw a dial command ... Details for those who care: The Call Editor II (made by Vive) attempts to share the single serial input of its 8031 microcontroller between the CNID chip and the external RS-232 port. It uses 1/4 of a 4053 (a rather odd choice given that the other 3/4s appear unused!) for this purpose. When the CNID chip detects ``interesting'' stuff on the line the 8031 switches the 4053 with one of the P3 output bits (I forget which one) so it can look at the CNID data. When it is done, it switches back to listening to the RS-232 port. Unfortunately, they are forgetting to clear their serial buffer (or, at least, forgetting to wait a character time to account for garbage in transit during the switch) so the command interpreter gets to see random bytes. The command interpreter echos these bytes to the RS-232 port and, of course, acts on them. (The details here could be off as they are based on a fairly cursory inspection of the circuit and some of the ICs have their part numbers obscured...) I tried to explain the problem to technical support at Vive but I don't really expect much. The first person didn't know what I was talking about. The second person denied the problem and added the usual line that nobody else had ever reported anything similar. The third person said that it is the fault of the CNID chip that they use and cannot be fixed. He insisted that all I needed to do was write a ``software filter'' to ignore the garbage. He did not seem to understand that their command interpreter was seeing the garbage and could generate spurious dial commands (or who knows what else). He also said that this isn't a problem with telephones in Canada (where they are). An ``engineer'' is supposed to get back to me sometime so I can tell him how to fix the firmware... (Needless to say, the engineer never called back.) Dan Lanciani ddl@harvard.* ------------------------------ From: whitlock@photon.vlsi.uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Subject: Re: Cell One/NY Rates For DC and Boston Date: 14 May 94 02:09:18 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Reply-To: whitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Does anyone know if there are any arrangements for roaming between Ameritech (Central IL in particular, although Ameritech also operates a cellular system in the Chicago area) and the systems in the Westchester County, NY area (between NYC and Poughkeepsie)? Hopefully, there is something besides the $3.00 per day/$0.99 per minute deals... Brent Whitlock Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology whitlock@uiuc.edu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 May 94 01:25:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. I have bought stuff from The Wholesale House, 33852 Del Obispo, #45, Dana Point CA, +1 714 489 4390, WHOLESALEHSE@delphi.com. They seem mostly to handle electronics closeouts and overstocks. Orders must be prepaid by check or COD, no plastic. For cellular phones, they have chargers, battery eliminators, cases, and spare batteries, mostly in the $20 to $30 range. For $120 they have hands-free car mount kits. I haven't bought any cellular stuff from them, since my phone is permanenty mounted in the car and doesn't need any accessories, but other stuff I've gotten has been good. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: shawnlg@netcom.com (Shawn Gordhamer) Subject: Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 18:38:54 GMT HayesR@uihc-telecomm-po.htc.uiowa.edu writes: > Hutton Communications > 4112 Billy Mitchell Drive > Dallas, TX 75244-2315 > 214-239-0580 Fax-214-239-5264 > 800-442-3811 > They had quite a few cellular accessories. I called, and the salesperson told me they were strictly wholesale and would not sell to individuals. Shawn Gordhamer shawnlg@netcom.com Rochester, Minnesota USA ------------------------------ From: 1JCR7732@ibm.mtsac.edu@cc.usu.edu Subject: Re: Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack Date: Fri, 13 May 94 19:22:00 PST Organization: Mt. San Antonio College > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But a quick stock check at the local > 'shack' on the computer there priced it at $12.99. It is just a little > plastic box with a short modular cord on the end. It plugs into any > phone outlet and sits wherever you place it. When a phone on that line > goes off hook, the LED lights up. Simple as they come. Well, how would I go about making one? Should be simple parts? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Check out the file in the Telecom Archives. Your question is one quite commonly asked around here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: whitlock@photon.vlsi.uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Subject: Re: Direct Billing by AT&T Date: 14 May 94 02:22:39 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Reply-To: whitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Jeffrey C Honig writes: > Also, my wife just received a $20 check offer from MCI. Is AT&T still > countering these offers? MCI recently sent me a check for $50 if I would switch back to them. I called AT&T and asked if they would match it. I was told that AT&T does not do that any more. They don't want to play that game anymore. The LD phone company wars have been good to me recently. MCI convinced me to switch with some incentives such as $100 free calling on weekends in one month. I was convinced to take their offer and let them switch me. Then AT&T called me to ask who authorized my long distance company to be changed. I felt like I was a kid being reprimanded by my Mom. I think the sales rep could have been a bit more tactful. But at any rate, she offered me $45 cash and a promise of 20% discount on all phone calls for six months to switch back. So, since I'm not really all that fond of MCI, I took it. Now, I'm being offered $50 cash to switch back to MCI in addition to the incentives they offered me before. I don't know ... I think I would rather stay with AT&T. Brent Whitlock Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology whitlock@uiuc.edu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 21:10:17 -0700 From: eap@ora.com (Eric Pearce) Subject: Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers? Are there dealers for used telco and test equipment in the Bay Area (or by mail order catalog)? I'm looking for stuff like test sets, digit grabbers, T-BERDs, etc. Thanks, Eric Pearce | eap@ora.com | O'Reilly & Associates Publishers of Nutshell Series Handbooks and X Window System Guides 103 Morris St, Sebastopol, CA 95472 1-800-998-9938 or 707-829-0515 ------------------------------ From: Anand Gupta Subject: Cordless Phone Suggestions Wanted Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 03:56:24 GMT Organization: Lafayette College I am in the market for cordless phones. I am planning to purchase around four or five phones for home use. I would like some recommendations on brands. I am looking to buy soemthing less than $ 100 each and need only minimal features. What matters most is range, speech quality and reliability. Brands that I am seriously considering: AT&T, Panasonic and Sony and also Southwestern Bell. I would like personal opinions preferably with model numbers etc. Thanks a lot for your help. If somebody has any phones that he would like to sell then contact me also. Thanks, Guptaa Guptaa@lafcol.lafayette.edu ------------------------------ From: Ken Thompson Subject: Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book For Digest Readers Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 10:02:38 Organization: AT&T Global Information Solutions In article python@bytes.kiwi.gen.nz (Terry Hardie) writes: > From: python@bytes.kiwi.gen.nz (Terry Hardie) > Subject: Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book For Digest > Readers > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You would write to Dr. Race to receive > your copy of the book. I am reprinting this as a reminder since several > people have written *me* asking for a copy. I can't help you! Write > to the author at the address shown for him at the top of this message. PAT] I did and my message bounced. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well then, I suggest you try Terry Hardie, the person who sent the original message, per his address above. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 12:27:05 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate Actually, the history file does refer to area codes being generalized from N0X/N1X to NXX. ------------------------------ Subject: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous From: 1JCR7732@ibm.mtsac.edu Date: Fri, 14 May 94 10:00:24 PST Organization: Mt. San Antonio College I hear of caller ID and I get jealous ... it is not offered here in Los Angles, CA. However, we do offer the services of call return and call block. Here is my theory ... if they offer these two services, then the _phone numbers_ must be there. Further more, they must be in the phone bandwidth of 300-3kHz ... so the, if I had a scope, I could check out the ring and notice patterns if I know who's calling ... right?? I could then build a decoder ... am i just dreaming? They set up the system, I'm just trying to use it. Joseph Romero 1jcr7732@ibm.mtsac.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually yes, you are just dreaming. Caller-ID has nothing to do with the ring you receive on your phone at all. It is transmitted as data between the first and second rings. No matter what kind of fancy equipment you wish to install at your end of the line, the Caller-ID data will not be available to you until/ unless the central office sends it down the line ... an unlikely state of affairs in California at this time. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 00:55:00 +0200 From: naddy@mips.ruessel.sub.org (Christian Weisgerber) Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? In comp.dcom.telecom William J Rehm writes: > As I understand the situation, zmodem is indeed a proprietary > protocol. No. The ZModem *protocol* is public domain. Note there's an updated version ZModem-90 which indeed is proprietary to Omen Technology. ZModem implementations follow various schemes, e.g. Chuck Forsberg's Unix rz/sz are somewhere between shareware and crippleware. > I have admittedly limited knowledge of this situation, but this is how > it was explained to me when I contacted the author's company. I think you misunderstood Omen's/Chuck's response. Christian 'naddy' Weisgerber, Germany naddy@mips.ruessel.sub.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 17:43:32 -0600 From: Leroy Casterline Subject: Re: Call Screening Device > I am interested in purchasing a low cost ($30-$60) Call screener > which connects to my phone. Typically I expect it to block the > ringing of the incoming call on my phone unless the caller presses in > a security code using his/her DTMF phones. I know somebody makes > them. I will appreciate any information on it. I have such a device, called 'Friends Only', which a client purchased for me to evaluate. The device seems to work as promised, and does what was specified above. According to the last page of the small manual, the manufacturer is: KES Communications 2029 S. Loop 250 Midland, Texas 79703 They neglected to list their telephone number, a curious omission for a communciations company. One thing to consider before placing such a device on your line is emergency calls. These devices block ALL calls for which the caller does not have the proper ID. If the caller is calling to tell you that a loved one was in an accident or to request permission to perform emergency surgery on a dependant, you may regret your decision to install the device. Leroy Casterline ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 May 94 16:08:03 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: History of Underseas Cables Some apparent anomalies in all three of these great stories may be resolved by noting that Newfoundland did not join Canada until 1949. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #226 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21847; 15 May 94 14:33 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA09102; Sun, 15 May 94 11:05:19 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA09093; Sun, 15 May 94 11:05:17 CDT Date: Sun, 15 May 94 11:05:17 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405151605.AA09093@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #227 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 May 94 11:05:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 227 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Call For Hearings on Assured Public Access to InterNet (Anthony Wright) Book Review: "Zen and the Art of the Internet" by Kehoe (Rob Slade) 800 Number Billback (Alan S. Evans) The Future of Telephony (mmm@cup.portal.com) Help Needed on Call Iinitialization in GSM, TACS, AMPS (Nimal Senarath) Cellular Phones and Law Enforcement (Nigel Allen) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 00:29:58 HST From: NetSurfer Reply-To: NetSurfer Subject: Call For Hearings on Assured Public Access to InterNet ON SENATOR INOUYE .. 93 Groups Press for Public Right-of-Way on NII FOR RELEASE: May 12, 1993 (The full text of the letter to Congress, Media contacts listed below. as well as a list of organizations that have signed on, follow this release.) NINETY-THREE CIVIC GROUPS PRESS CONGRESS FOR `PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY' ON INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY Washington, DC -- A large and diverse coalition of civic organizations today called for Senate hearings on the need to guarantee a "public right-of-way" in telecommunications policy regarding the so-called information superhighway. The coalition letter, addressed to Commerce Committee Chairman Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-SC) and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-HI), was signed by 93 educational, library, civil rights, civil liberties, religious, labor, arts, consumer, local government, public broadcasting, disability rights and other civic groups. Senator Inouye has said that he intends to introduce legislation, which is expected to be introduced shortly, designed to achieve this goal. "We have come together to ensure that legislation designed to regulate the development of the national information infrastructure (NII) provides for a public space to guarantee the free flow of ideas and information," the letter said. "To ensure the greatest possible diversity of voices on the NII, telecommunications networks must reserve capacity for a `public right-of-way' through which noncommercial educational and informational services and civic discourse can flourish unimpeded by economic barriers." The coalition letter urges Congress to move beyond an exclusive focus on the interests of the private sector in developing its regulatory approach. Specifically, the coalition calls for Congressional hearings that would give the civic sector an opportunity to demonstrate the need for strong public interest protections in the NII legislation. The letter outlines the need to assure access to the information superhighway by rural Americans, low-income citizens, minorities, individuals with disabilities, and the elderly. "The interests of the public must not be left behind," the letter concludes. A copy of the full text of the letter, as well as a list of organizations that have signed on, follow. *** CONTACT: Jeff Chester - Center for Media Education 202/628-2620 Virginia Witt - People for the American Way 202/467-4999 Nancy Neubauer - America's Public Television Stations 202/887-8409 *** May 12, 1994 Senator Ernest F. Hollings Chairman Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation 125 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Senator Daniel K. Inouye Chairman Subcommittee on Communications 227 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senators Hollings and Inouye: We write on behalf of a diverse coalition of civic organizations representing educational, library, civil rights, civil liberties, religious, labor, arts, consumer, local government, public broadcasting, disability rights and other organizations whose members engage in civic discourse protected and encouraged by the First Amendment. For 200 years, American democracy has thrived because of the vibrant debate fostered by the First Amendment. We have come together to ensure that legislation designed to regulate the development of the national information infrastructure (NII) provides for a public space to guarantee the free flow of ideas and information. To ensure the greatest possible diversity of voices on the NII, telecommunications networks must reserve capacity for a "public right-of-way" through which noncommercial educational and informational services and civic discourse can flourish unimpeded by economic barriers. In addition, the public right-of-way promises to improve artistic expression, democratic self-governance and civic culture and empower citizens to become more active and informed. We are heartened that S. 1822, the Communications Act of 1994, addresses several critical public interest issues such as universal service and preferential access for public uses, including hospitals, libraries, educational institutions and public broadcasting. However, the public debate surrounding S. 1822 and the companion bill in the House, H.R. 3636, thus far has focused primarily upon the interests of industry, particularly the telephone and cable companies. There has not yet been adequate discussion about the interests and needs of the public, the intended beneficiaries of the NII. We understand that Senator Inouye is considering introducing a bill that would provide for this public right-of-way. Because such legislation and S. 1822 would literally transform civic discourse in this country, we urge the Subcommittee on Communications to hold hearings on the establishment of a public right-of-way on the NII. Hearings would give representatives from educational, health care, library, governmental, community, religious, cultural and other civic organizations, as well as individual users of the NII, an opportunity to add their valuable perspectives to this debate. In addition to the issues raised by the creation of a universally accessible, non-discriminatory public right-of-way, other significant public interest matters that should be examined in hearings include, but are not limited to, ensuring that small town and rural residents, as well as low income citizens, minorities, individuals with disabilities and the elderly, are connected to the NII in a timely fashion, guaranteeing that telecommunications carriers provide non-discriminatory access to their networks for all users, deploying the NII using rules of good governance, preserving the Communications Act of 1934's mandate to encourage public telecommunications services, providing adequate support for noncommercial programming and information services, and facilitating democratic self-governance over the NII. The Subcommittee has a rare opportunity to ensure that the NII's potential to reinvigorate our democracy is realized. As these bills move through Congress, the interests of the public must not be left behind. For this reason, we regard holding hearings on these public access issues as an essential first step toward ensuring that NII legislation promotes democratic values and fulfills the mandate of the First Amendment. Sincerely, Access America Actors' Equity Association Alliance for Communications Democracy Alliance for Community Media Alliance for Public Technology Alliance of Nonprofit Mailers Alliance To End Childhood Lead Poisoning AnchorNet Community Network Organizing Committee (Anchorage, AK) Arts Wire Association of Research Librarians American Arts Alliance America's Public Television Stations American Association of Museums American Civil Liberties Union American Council of the Blind American Library Association American Federation of Television and Radio Artists American Music Center American Symphony Orchestra League Artists For A Better Image Association of Art Museum Directors Association of Independent Video and Filmmakers Association of Performing Arts Presenters Association of Systematics Collections Center for Civic Networking Center for Media Education Chittendon Community Television (Burlington, VT) Citizens for Media Literacy Common Cause Communications Consortium Consumer Federation of America Dance/USA Deep Dish Television Network Fairfax Cable Access Corporation Friends of the Earth Government Accountability Project High Performance Magazine Institute for Public Representation League of Conservation Voters Libraries for the Future Media Access Project Media Working Group Incorporated Minority Media Ownership and Employment Council Museum Computer Network National Alliance for Media Arts & Culture National Artists Equity Association National Assembly of State Arts Agencies National Association for the Deaf National Association of Artists Organizations National Association of College Broadcasters National Association of People with AIDS National Campaign for Freedom of Expression National Center for Law and Deafness National Coalition Against Censorship National Coalition of Independent Public Broadcasting Producers National Coalition on Black Voter Participation National Congress of American Indians National Council of Churches National Council of LaRaza National Education Association National Federation of Community Broadcasters National Gay and Lesbian Task Force National Humanities Alliance National Minority Public Broadcasting Consortia National PTA National Public Radio National School Boards Association National Trust for the Development of African-American Men National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981) New York Foundation for the Arts OMB Watch OPERA America PEN American Center People for the American Way Action Fund Public Broadcasting Service Public Citizen Public Citizen's Congress Watch Public Service Telecommunications Consortium Safe Energy Communication Council Screen Actors Guild Self Help for Hard of Hearing People, Inc. Shadow Congress Information Network, Center for Environmental Citizenship Taxpayer Assets Project Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc. The Council of Literary Magazines and Presses The Creative Coalition The Literary Network Theatre Communications Group United Cerebral Palsy Associations Office of Communication, United Church of Christ Union Producers and Programmers Network U.S. Catholic Conference Writers Guild of America, East, Inc. ### Please distribute and repost widely. Anthony Wright cme@access.digex.net Coordinator, Future of Media Project Center for Media Education ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 15:24:03 MDT From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Zen and the Art of the Internet" by Kehoe BKZENINT.RVW 940216 Prentice-Hall, Inc. 113 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 (515) 284-6751 FAX (515) 284-2607 or 11711 N. College Ave. Carmel, IN 46032-9903 or 201 W. 103rd Street Indianapolis, IN 46290 or 15 Columbus Circle New York, NY 10023 800-428-5331 or Market Cross House Cooper Street Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1EB England phyllis@prenhall.com - Phyllis Eve Bregman Beth Mullen-Hespe beth_hespe@prenhall.com Pat Carol 317-581-3743 "Zen and the Art of the Internet", Kehoe, 1994, 0-13-083033-X brendan@zen.org Kehoe starts out by quoting E.B. White's exhortation to students of English usage from "The Elements of Style" with, "Get the *little* book! Get the *little* book! Get the *little* book!" Sound advice. It applies equally to those just starting out on the Internet. "Zen" is a mere pocketbook in comparison to some of the other telephone directory-sized guides, but a pocket guide is usually what is needed. Kehoe has done a marvelous job of presenting the essentials, plus a few interesting tidbits, while holding off from reproducing reams of resources from those already available on the net, itself. "Zen" is, itself, one of the very widely known and highly regarded resources on the net. It was also the first introductory guide to the Internet published in popular book form. Therefore, I am rather shocked to note that this third edition, copyright 1994, proudly boasts of over 50,000 copies sold. I'd be delighted to do that well as an author, but it indicates that the book is nowhere near as well-known in the general populace as it deserves. I should, having given these accolades, admit to a decided bias: this is my type of book. Those who are not happy with concepts and only wish to know what button to press may find the book frustrating. Mail, ftp, news, telnet and a number of other tools are covered, but Kehoe does not reproduce, wholesale, help screens from elm and tin. Since the specific programs you will use all have help features, Kehoe evidently does not feel the need to waste paper explaining how to use a program that you may not, indeed, need to use. I agree, and it is refreshing to see at least one Internet guide which gives clear explanations of the essence of the Internet tools without having to fill space with specifics which you will be able to get from the programs themselves. (In response to the first draft of this review, Kehoe stated that Internet providers should be also providing documentation for any system specific features. He also mused on the bewilderment newcomers must feel when confronted with a shelf full of 400 to 800 page guides for a system whose basics are supposedly fairly simple. Again I concur.) Probably for the same reason, Kehoe does not reproduce an annotated, or even expurgated, .newsrc file or "list of lists." Some may say that this is a lack on the part of the book and that it is less interesting for not providing such a directory. These resources are, however, readily accessible on the net (Kehoe tells you where to find them) and cannot, in book form, be anything more than an outdated and possibly misleading first indicator. There is, of course, nothing wrong with the large guides with all of their lengthy references. As the same time, most newcomers will want a gentler, smaller introduction, rather than being dumped into a vat of data. For those to whom the sound of few pages flipping is as music, this is definitely your book. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994 BKZENINT.RVW 940216. Permission is granted to redistribute in TELECOM Digest and associated mailing lists/ news groups. Postscriptum: sadly, Brendan Kehoe was recently involved in a major traffic accident. In one of the network ironies, the flood of email condolences to his personal mailbox had created something of a problem for friends trying to help out. Mid-January, however, saw a dramatic improvement, and when I sent him the draft review he was beginning to work on the backlog of mail. (He responded far faster than many authors who have no such excuse :-) By the time you read this it is possible he may be back at work. (He still has a huge backlog, though, so don't expect any immediate answers :-) Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca Research into rslade@cue.bc.ca User p1@CyberStore.ca Security Canada V7K 2G6 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 19:11:57 -0400 From: al462@freenet.buffalo.edu (Alan S. Evans) Subject: 800 Number Billback Reply-To: al462@freenet.buffalo.edu Recently I was introduced to the latest scam when our company's phone bill showed 2 2-minute calls to an 800 number for which we were billed $60.00. The charges from this company (InfoAccess) appeared on our NYNEX bill. Our SMDR did not show a record of these calls having been made. When I called to discuss this with InfoAccess, they explained that these charges were a monthly subscription charge to call their various client services, which would continue until we gave notice of cancellation. I gave notice of cancellation and told them we were not going to pay these charges because we did not make the calls. Their initial response was that we were responsible for calls made on our lines, but when I politely, but firmly, insisted that we were *NOT* going to pay for these calls, they agreed to credit our account for the charges and block any subsequent calls from the two lines. I then took it one step further and asked if they could block calls from all our lines, which they said they could do if we sent them a letter listing our line numbers. After that I contacted NYNEX. I told them what happened with InfoAccess, and that there had also been another 3 minute call to an 800 number which was billed to us for $11.85 from VRS Billing Systems. I asked if we could request that NYNEX refuse to bill us for these companies, or if we could request that NYNEX block calls to these companies from being made from our lines. No, to both questions. The person I spoke with was sympathetic, however, and did say that although their procedure required that we call the company (i.e. InfoAccess or VRS) that billed us to request credit, if that company refused to issue the credit and we still contested the calls, NYNEX could issue a "final recourse" to get the charges dropped from our bills. Then it would be up to these companies to try to collect from us directly (good luck!). The NYNEX representative also said that it was NYNEX's position that all calls made to 800 numbers should be *free* calls (after all, that's how telcos and businesses have been marketing it for years). Next I called VRS Billing Systems. This time our SMDR did show a record of the call (our PBX system allows any extension to make calls to 800 numbers). I argued that how could they legitimately charge us for a call that was made to an 800 number. After some discussion, which eventually took me to a supervisor, they also agreed, as "a courtesy" to us, to give us a credit for the call this time. I thanked them, and said that as "a courtesy" to them I would not be filing complaints with the FCC and PSC this time. (They even had the nerve to say that they could not process our request to block multiple lines unless we sent them the line numbers on diskette - I sent them a letter anyway.) In case you are interested, here are the addresses of these companies: InfoAccess, Inc. VRS Billing Systems 527 3rd Ave., P.O. Box 327 P.O. Box 611987 New York, NY 10016 San Jose, CA 95161 800-645-8830 800-800-2526 Here are two other similar companies (info supplied by NYNEX on the basis of customer complaints): Zero Plus Dialing, Inc. International Telecharge Group P.O. Box 791285 9999 W. Technology Blvd. San Antonio, TX 78216 Dallas, TX 75220 800-456-7587 800-825-5533 I was not familiar with ZPDI. When I called them to ask for their mailing address, the representative became *very* evasive. It took several point blank requests, plus a consultation with a supervisor, before they gave it to me. ITG also goes by the name ONCOR Communications. I had run into them before when they slammed our NYNEX coin phones. Their strategy is to get the numbers of NYNEX public coin phones and send a mag tape to NYNEX's "Ballot Center" to change the 0+ carrier to them. By the time you find out about it, they have been ripping off the users of the phones with outrageous charges for a couple of weeks. If you change the phones back, they keep trying. The only way to stop them, and other similar operators, is to request a "PIC freeze" from NYNEX. I have sent letters to all of these companies requesting a block on all our lines and indicating that we would refuse to pay any charges they billed to our lines. Even if this doesn't stop them, we will have documented our intention. I hope this helps you avoid a similar experience. At least now you know the enemy. Alan Evans [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'way they can charge you for calling an 800 number' is the same way AT&T can charge for it. For example you can call AT&T's 800 number to put through a collect call to someone or to charge a call to your credit card. Merely because you originated it via an 800 number does not mean charges cannot be incurred for the call as a result. In the case of the Information Providers who use an 800 number in this way, *someone* in your firm called the 800 number and gave the answering operator permission to place the charges on your line. Although you can request a block on the line against future charges of this sort, you cannot legally refuse to pay the charges already incurred since tariffs plainly state you are responsible for the use of your instruments. The other end did deliver information to someone at your firm who authorized it. That person may in fact have not been permitted by your company to do so, but your beef would be with them, not with the Information Provider. Because the amount in question was relatively small your refusal to pay probably will not be dealt with further. The service may possibly place you with an agency for collection, but it would not be worth their time or expense to sue or go further with it than that. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mmm@cup.portal.com Subject: The Future of Telephony Date: Sat, 14 May 94 12:55:18 PDT What will telephony look like in the 21st century? Here are some accurate predictions: CALLER ID -- Future phones will not only identify the caller in advance, but will also subject a sample of the caller's speech to Voice Stress Analysis, to determine mood. I won't pick up the phone if the caller is angry. PICTUREPHONE -- cheap silicon and advanced compression algorithms will make slow-scan video so cheap that every phone will have it. Expensive phones will have pre-recorded images to be sent down the line when the user doesn't want to be seen au natural. FEELPHONE -- even in the 1980's, considerable patent literature existed on tactile I/O devices. This industry will explode once communication standards are established, allowing Taiwan to churn out compatible cheap phones. The major use of these phones will be, of course, phone sex. SCANNERS -- Radio Shack will introduce a cellphone scanner that has a chip which detects mindless chatter, and skips to the next channel when it occurs so you won't have to sit there hitting the SCAN button. Feminists will decry the detection of higher-pitched voices as a parameter in the skip algorithm. SMART ENCRYPTION CHIPS -- all fax machines, modems, etc. will contain a smart encryption chip compatible with law enforcement requirements. It will detect communications concerning possibly illegal activities and forward such material directly to the FBI. An AI simulation of Dorothy Denning inside the modem will decide what is suspicious and what is not. Criminals will be forced to talk in ecret-say odes-cay. ------------------------------ From: ngs@ee.mu.OZ.AU (Nimal Senarath) Subject: Help Needed on Call Initialization in GSM, TACS, AMPS Organization: Dept. of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Univ of Melbourne Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 10:09:49 GMT Hi there, I am a research student in Mobile communications attached to Networks Group, EE Dept, Melbourne UNiversity, Australia. I want to model Call INitialization in TDMA, FDMA systems for my simulation work. I want to know exactly how the decision of initial Base STATION selection is done (i.e. At the call origination). We know that the mobile checks for the highest received pilot signal, and connect to that base station if that is sufficient. However what I need is that how long mobile will measure this Signal Strength before taking the decision and how often it measures this RSS values. (e.g. It can be that average value of RSS over 0.5 seconds intervals may be measured for about 'N' number of such intervals?; I assume measurements at 0.5 intervals because that is the measurement interval used for sending RSS values to the BS by the GSM system after the intitialization process.) Any real known data or any known procedure for a similar system is what I am after. You may e-mail me or any helpful discussion in this news group is greatly appreciated. Gamini Senarath Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering University of Melbourne Parkville 3052 Australia e-mail: ngs@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 May 94 04:45 WET From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen) Subject: Cellular Phones and Law Enforcement Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-4151 Voice: 416-363-8676 Here is a press release from the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association. I downloaded the press release from the PR On-Line BBS in Maryland at 410-363-0834. I do not work for the association. Cellular Phone Industry and Law Enforcement News Conference Monday To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor Contact: Kathleen Lobb, 202-434-8527, for the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association News Advisory: WHAT: Cellular phones are increasingly important tool in law enforcement officials' crime-fighting efforts. At this press conference, the cellular telephone industry will announce important new contributions to law enforcement agencies in communities across the country. Law enforcement officials and industry representatives will discuss how police, community groups, and private citizens are using cellular phones to fight crime. The announcement is part of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association's (CTIA) "Salute to Our Nation's Law Enforcement Officials" in recognition of National Police Week and National Cellular Safety Week. WHO: Dewey Stokes, national president, Fraternal Order of Police Local law enforcement representatives and elected officials: Inspector Jacqueline Barnes, Metropolitan Washington Police Sgt. John Manning, Seattle Police Department Councilwoman Ruth Jones McClendon, San Antonio Thomas E. Wheeler, president, CTIA Senior executives from cellular companies: John E. Rooney, president, Ameritech Mobile Communications Mark Faris, vice president, Cellular One Robert Johnson, vice president, Bell Atlantic Mobile System WHEN: Monday, May 16 10:00 a.m. WHERE: National Press Club, First Amendment Room 14th and F Streets., N.W., Washington, D.C. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sorry for the short notice on this. It only arrived here in my mailbox over the weekend and I rushed it right out into the next outgoing issue. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #227 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24039; 16 May 94 0:18 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA16376; Sun, 15 May 94 20:31:04 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA16367; Sun, 15 May 94 20:31:02 CDT Date: Sun, 15 May 94 20:31:02 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405160131.AA16367@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #228 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 May 94 20:31:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 228 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Andrew Laurence) Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Paul Robinson) Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Steve Cogorno) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Anton Sherwood) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (bigbob@netcom.com) Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line (Bill Tighe) Re: Wireless Data Services (Rob Lockhart) Re: Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers? (John Lundgren) Re: Verifone Programming Manuals (Glenn McComb) Verifone Junior Programmed! (Ry Jones) Re: Radio by Phone (Paul Robinson) Re: Replace POST-MAIL by FAX (Herb Effron) Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (James Holland) Re: Caller-ID Gets Me Jealous (David Hayes) Re: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service (Jonathan Loo) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: laurence@netcom.com (Andrew Laurence) Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 19:43:08 GMT RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM writes: >> Anyone who has access to the Internet ... can reach City Hall by >> addressing their message to scarlos@crl.com. > Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' only > applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever defined > for local or state government use. PAT] Wrong! It's because the entire city appears to be using an individual account at CRL, a well-known public access provider in the San Francisco Bay Area. Andrew Laurence Oakland, California USA laurence@netcom.com Pacific Daylight Time (GMT-7) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 23:25:51 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA >> Anyone who has access to the Internet ... can reach City Hall by >> addressing their message to scarlos@crl.com. > Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain? Probably because they obtained a mailbox on that system. The FCC has a mailbox at Federal_Communications_Commission@MCIMAIL.COM the same way. CRL.COM is listed as a domain server and as a site, so they can probably handle domain service in the future. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' > only applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever > defined for local or state government use. PAT] Doing a lookup on the Internic database, I think the following would disagree with you: Hawaii State Government (HAWAII2-DOM) Domain Name: HAWAII.GOV Iowa State Government, Department of Public Safety (IA-DOM1) Domain Name: IA.GOV Maryland State Government (MD-DOM) Domain Name: MD.GOV North Carolina State Government (NC-DOM) Domain Name: NC.GOV Ohio Data Network (OHIO-DOM) Domain Name: OHIO.GOV Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 22:36:36 PDT >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' only >> applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever defined >> for local or state government use. PAT] > I obtained a copy of all US sites that have an Internet connection > from Internic via the whois command (whois -h rs.internic.net "domain > *") on my Sun workstation (other systems may vary) and it listed > federal, state and local governmental entites as '.gov' > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the clarification and > correction. I guess I've no idea why they are in .com then. PAT] Look at the account name again: scarlos@crl.com. The reason is that they have ONE account on a dial-up host. The company is CRL, which is based in San Francisco. I think that there use of "joins the internet" is a little misleading when they really only have one accout. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ From: dasher@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood) Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Organization: Crackpots for a Better Tomorrow Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 20:09:57 GMT In article , Hugh Pritchard <0006348214@ mcimail.com> wrote: > ... be warned that repeating digits increase the chances of people > dialing your number by accident. Some people tend to double a digit > by mistake when they're dialing. The doubled digit may make the > dialed number into YOUR number. I have a phone number of the form > -xxyz. People trying to dial -xyzt sometimes, "mysteriously," find > they've dialed me instead. I haven't had much trouble with that -- except when my number was 5333, I got a lot of calls for a furniture store at 5533. Anton Sherwood *\\* +1 415 267 0685 *\\* DASher@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Many years ago a friend of mine had an almost identical situation. His number was 2588, and the bus terminal was 2558. No matter what the hour, day or night, his phone would get calls from people wanting to know what time the bus was coming through town, etc. He finally gave up and got his number changed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bigbob@netcom.com (Lord of Love!) Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 20:16:15 GMT The solution is simple ... First of all: CallerID isn't gonna be offered in California for some time to come! So put that fear (if you ever had one) to rest. Second: When I choose my new phone number I picked 310-XXX-7777. It's very easy to remember and will cause you no trouble at all! People just keep it in their minds VERY easily. Trust me. Third: Don't call Pac Bell and ask if the number is free! Check for yourself! When I called for my number they told me it was unavailable ... when I checked my requests it was not in use ... don't rely on their help. Once you get the number ... it's yours to enjoy and believe me ... people will rarely forget it. bigbob@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just because a number is not in service does not mean it is available. The old owner may have it on temporary suspension, or he may have paid to have an intercept there to refer it elsewhere for a few months. Also, a number not in service may in fact be reserved for some other customer who also requested it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bill@noller.com (Bill Tighe) Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line Date: 15 May 94 14:44:18 GMT mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan @ Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA) once wrote.... > paulb@coho.halcyon.com (Paul N. Bates) writes: >> In article , wrote: >>> My home is wired for two residential telephone lines. Because of my >>> proximity to an am radio transmitter (am 1550khz), many of my audio >>> and telephone devices suffer from "radio noise", from that one station >>> only though. Some days it is worse than others, some days there is no >>> interference at all. > This is apparently an increasingly common occurrence, prompting the > FCC to issue an information sheet that lists two phones that have > tested as being highly resistant to RF interference. I don't have the > info at hand, but it might be available on ftp.fcc.gov. At K-Mart yesterday I saw an in line RF filter for telephones. It was a small plastic box with RJ-11 connectors on two ends and a short RJ-11 extension cable. The price was $8.95 and it was in an AT&T bubble pack. This might solve your problem. Bill Tighe Email: bill@noller.com Phone: 707-778-0571 FAX: 707-778-0235 ------------------------------ From: rlockhart@aol.com (RLockhart) Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services Date: 15 May 1994 12:08:05 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , petef@well.com (Pete Farmer) writes: > I've noticed that there's been very little posted to this list > regarding wireless *data* services. Anyone know why? There are some > very interesting developments in the wireless arena, both for short, > bursty text messaging (a la RAM or Ardis) and for higher bandwidth, IP > connectivity within metropolitan areas. Certainly the most successful (read 'profitable' ) of the 'short, bursty text messaging' services, alpha paging, gets some coverage here as do the CDPD and circuit-switched cellular data links in the Wireless Data Food Chain, but you're right in that there's not a lot on the packet data services (e.g., ARDIS, RAM, generic DataTAC, upcoming NexTel and the rest of the SMRs (pronounced SMuR like in those little blue guys that used to be on Saturday morning cartoon television :))) and eSMRs). Some of these other links in the Wireless Data Food Chain are covered in various places like comp.std.wireless or comp.protocols.misc or ... but none seem to cover the overall breadth of TELECOM Digest (or get the coverage on the commercial services that Pat does). Just out of curiousity, what does 'Tetherless Access Ltd.' do? (If that's an inappropriate question, Pat, my apologies.) Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc. Desktop I'net: lockhart-epag06_rob@email.mot.com Wireless I'net (<32K characters): rob_lockhart-erl003e@email.mot.com ------------------------------ From: jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com (John Lundgren) Subject: Re: Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers? Date: 14 May 94 16:08:13 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network Eric Pearce (eap@ora.com) wrote: > Are there dealers for used telco and test equipment in the Bay Area > (or by mail order catalog)? > I'm looking for stuff like test sets, digit grabbers, T-BERDs, etc. Check out the latest Nuts & Volts magazine. They have tons of ads for used test equipment and much of them are from the Bay Area and Silicon Gulch. Also, the trade rags such as Communications Week, Data Comm, Network World, etc. You might call the local electronics stores, since they may have surplus equip, but they probably have copies of N & V available, too. Best of success. John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs Rancho Santiago Community College District 17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706 VOI (714) JOHN GAB \ FAX (714) JOHN FRY jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com \ jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: gmccomb@netcom.com (Glenn McComb) Subject: Re: Verifone Programming Manuals Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 06:49:31 GMT Ry Jones (rjones@poseidon.usin.com) wrote: > With all this talk about Verifones, I am reminded that I have one (a > Verifone Junior, tan model, green LED screen) with no manual. I bought > it at a Tru Value going out of business sale; they didn't have the > manual, or password, or anything. I called Verifone in Hawaii, and > never got a response (and that was not a cheap call!). I would be willing to sell you my verifone programming manuals. Email or call for details. Make an offer, pay by check or credit card. Glenn McComb +1-408-725-1448 McComb Research Fax +1-408-725-0222 10440 Mann Drive Internet gm @ mccomb.com PO Box 220 Compuserve >MHS:gm@mccomb Cupertino, CA 95015 ------------------------------ From: Ry Jones Subject: Verifone Junior Programmed! Date: Sun, 15 May 94 14:53:57 PDT Many thanks to the person who sent me the Verifone Junior default password! For my version, 2.05, the code "166816" was indeed the password. I am posting this to the list for posterity. If anyone ever needs this code again, it will be in a well-known place. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 23:00:01 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Radio by Phone Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA "Gregory P. Monti" , writes: > An FM radio newsletter {FMedia!} notes that a Dallas firm, Media > Technology, is offering a service called Media Dialup. Subscribers > can monitor live radio using touch tone commands.... As a sampler, > the firm allows you to listen to Dallas radio stations using > touch tone commands on 214 330-8821. For FM, press 1. For > AM, press 2. To scan to the next lower station, press 4. > Next higher station, press 6. Ordinary toll charges apply. > I guess the market for this service is program directors and > consultants who want to hear what the big-market boys are doing. Or it could be used to allow people to dial up a system that provides announcements and listen to several different ones, or provide for announcements in foreign languages. If they can design a touch-tone programmed radio, they can do it for tape recorders and other things. Some examples would be offering conference call audio to multiple callers without their being heard by the participants. Another would be to allow someone to set up a series of "feeds" for various events and let other stations call up a number and tap into them, live as opposed to needing a specialized downlink. For a telephone connection the sound was adequate, about what you usually expect for radio piped over the telephone, e.g. some of the information is clipped in a noticable way. Adequate for speech broadcasts, not so good for music. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: herb@halcyon.com (Herb Effron) Subject: Re: Replace POST-MAIL by FAX Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 08:22:37 +0800 Organization: Seagopher I have never had a fax machine. Instead, I use a 14.4 fax modem (which is always set to receive) to handle almost all my correspondence today. I also use e-mail of course. BTW I'm a 28-year user of computers. That's 'years'! not 'years old'. ;-) After the first two years of using a fax modem ('upgraded' myself from my old 1200 baud modem), I was prompted from my experience with it to make two major changes in the way I carry out routine business. New way #1: I now send a "Quick Fax" -- when I want to ask a brief question or send someone an item. This avoids obligatory 'socialization' time when calling someone by phone. By faxing a note, the recipient's answering machine is not cluttered up with junk, provides a pre-prepared note which frees the receipient from having to write down the message, its phone number, when I called, etc. -- and then remembering where she put the note. If the recipient uses a fax modem also, then there's no paper to lose either. Some of my colleagues tell me this is good for the environment and they we should ask for a tax credit. :-) The time it took for the 'comfort level to move from my brain to my 'gut' (having it feel 'natural') was about three weeks. New way #2: I now send _only_ fax correspondence (in place of 'paper') whenever possible. This includes all of my business correspondence on letterhead w/logos from two companies. A Mactintosh computer make this very easy to do. The letter that's received is 'visually clean', i.e. it has no streaks, spots, etc. The time it took for the 'comfort level to move from my brain to my 'gut' (having it feel 'natural') was much longer in this case. About two months. I think it was the absence of a conventional 'signature' that was most difficult for me to accept. At first I 'pasted' in my signature from a scan. Now, I just put: /s/ Herb Effron and no one has yet complained. BTW ... visit Seattle USA on the Internet. You can get there by gophering to: gopher.seattle.wa.us or just look for us in Washington State or under "S" in the gopher directories. Herb Effron ------------------------------ From: holland@perot.mtsu.edu (Mr. James Holland) Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding Date: 15 May 1994 16:56:01 GMT Organization: Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee In mwearle@netcom.com (Mark W. Earle) writes: > I'm in the process of closing out my cellular account with Southwestern > Bell Mobile Systems of Corpus Christi, TX. In the last bill was an > insert sheet (yellow) indicating that starting with the July bill, > calls forwarded would incur full airtime for the duration of each > forwarded call. Presumably, the set up "star" code call to activate > and deactivate forwarding will now cost a minute also. > This is a significant change -- previously, there was no call to set > up the forwarding (or turn it off) and no charge for the forwarded > calls. Many folks used this as a super local area extender ... forward > your phone, dial your cell phone number, and talk free for a long time > to an area that was a LD/Toll call from the regular phone. I have Cellular One service here in middle Tennessee. They offer a service called "Super System" which basically makes the whole state a local call. I combine this with free weekends (for $10 extra/month) and call-forwarding ($2 extra/month) [Super System is $15] and I have the entire state as a local call. I use it extensively for modem communications as well as voice. This state is fairly large and both area codes (615 and 901) are local to me (on the weekends). Also, I can call FROM any area in the state that has Cellular One coverage. I can use it from Memphis to call to Nashville and it either costs me my regular local airtime rate or it's free on the weekend. Call forwarding used to be free here also, but they changed that after businesses started abusing it. They could forward to their business number and get a much larger 'free' dialing area. Are there other states/systems with something similar to Super System? I'm curious ... James Holland holland@knuth.mtsu.edu ------------------------------ From: dhayes@onramp.net (David Hayes) Subject: Re: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 14:39:09 -0600 Organization: ISIS, Inc. In article , Joseph Romero <1jcr7732@ ibm.mtsac.edu> wrote: > I hear of caller ID and I get jealous ... it is not offered here in > Los Angles, CA. However, we do offer the services of call return and > call block. Pac-Tell proposed Caller ID to the California Public Utilities Commission. The Commission said "Yes, provided ..." The "provided" is the crux of the problem. Some people do not like the idea that every business they call will be able to build a telemarketing list from the calls of the general public. Some people value privacy, and buy unlisted phone numbers. Thus, Caller ID has technical answers to this problem. The answers are called "blocking". There are two kinds of Caller ID blocking. "Per-call blocking" is activated when the caller dials a special prefix, *67, before a phone call. If the telephone subscriber wishes to block all their calls, they must dial *67 before every call they make. The other type of blocking is "per-line blocking". Under this system, the caller's phone number is blocked for all calls placed from that phone. If the caller wants to, they may unblock a specific call by dialing *67 before that call. So the difference between these two is that the default with per-call blocking is "Block when I tell you to," while per-line blocking says "Block unless I tell you not to." These two types of blocking can coexist. Some phones can have per-line blocking, and others per-call blocking. The California PUC told Pac-Bell that they could sell Caller ID if: 1. They notified all subscribers that Caller ID and the two blocking services were available; 2. They provided an opportunity for subscribers to select which type of blocking they wanted on their phone; 3. If a subscriber with an unlisted phone number did not take action to select a particular blocking option, their phone would have per-line blocking. So Pac-Tell does have permission to offer Caller ID. This service is not available in your area because Pac-Tell chooses not to offer it, not because the government prohibits it. This same sort of thing has happened in other states, as well. The phone companies have been extremely reluctant to offer Caller ID in states where the public utilities commissions have required per-line blocking. Personally, I believe that the phone companies are afraid that so many people would select per-line blocking (rather than per-call) that no one would want to pay for Caller ID service. David Hayes PGP public key available on request, or send dhayes@onramp.net mail subject: help to pgp-public-keys@demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 14:44:44 -0400 From: Jonathan Subject: Re: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service I agree that delays when calling the telephone company or anybody else are troublesome. In particular, the telephone company should answer calls to repair service and the operator quickly, because many of these calls are quite urgent: some people call 0 for emergencies, and 611 resembles 911, and the telephone company even recognizes that a few calls to 411 are about life-threatening emergencies. The repair service at C&P Telephone, a Bell Atlantic Company (now simply Bell Atlantic) was a bad culprit; not only was the wait sometimes in excess of 5 minutes, but the initial recording when calling Maryland 611 failed to identify itself as Repair and not 911. The automated system that C&P/Bell Atlantic uses is not the best way to handle this. C&P has since hired more representatives, and Bell Atlantic (formerly C&P) is now routing more calls to the smaller, but less busy, Washington, D. C. office. There are several ways to further improve the situation: allow both the Maryland and D.C. repair offices to accept Maryland trouble reports but continue to send calls from the Maryland suburbs to the D. C. office, for example. If there is more room available in the D. C. office then they could even expand the D. C. office, answer more calls there, and allow users to dial the repair number with an area code to choose an office. Automatic routing to the least busy office is not recommended, because if the system fails then it could be a serious problem. On a different topic, TELECOM Digest Editor noted: What is really annoying though is when they leave their desk (at any time of day or night) and *forget to unplug their headset* from their work station. The Automatic Call Distributor which tosses incoming calls out to the reps uses a plugged in headset as its basis for thinking a position is occupied and a person there is willing to take calls. Normally the rep sits there and a 'click' in their headset followed by hearing a person breathing on the other end tells them a call has been given to them. If no headset is plugged in, the ACD bypasses that position and moves to another idle one. So if you ever call, wait on hold awhile and get 'answered', only to sit there and hear talking in the background but no one actually talking to you then you'll know what happened -- a headset is laying on the desk plugged in while its owner has gone out to the bathroom or for coffee or whatever. Given the volume of traffic they get, as soon as you abandon the call to dial in again, there'll be an immediate seizure and some other poor devil is now on that line waiting for a rep who never will speak to him! I agree. There should be a better way to handle the representatives' leaving their desks; what happens if they remove the handset just after a new call arrives? I have had the experience that Pat has described; if I wait a while then sometimes they hang up on me after I sit there for a few minutes. Sometimes it appears that people unplug their handsets right after my call goes in; this may happen to the 0 operator once in a while. (The experience that Pat describes does not seem specific to any one company.) Either way, it is very annoying. Jonathan D. Loo 8147 Ellicott Hall College Park, Maryland 20742 (301) 314-4453 (spring 1994 address good through May 16) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #228 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01384; 16 May 94 16:28 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29017; Mon, 16 May 94 12:44:08 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA29008; Mon, 16 May 94 12:44:05 CDT Date: Mon, 16 May 94 12:44:05 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405161744.AA29008@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #229 TELECOM Digest Mon, 16 May 94 12:44:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 229 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Reach Out and Pay Someone (Van Hefner) GTE Analog Pocket Phone (Gerard Carat) Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine (Rodney Weaver) Umass/Amherst Suffers From Week-long Service Degradation (Jonathan Welch) Info-Affaires Bell Audiotex Service (Nigel Allen) New Area Codes Assigned (Tom Ward) Inteljak Wireless Phone Jak System (bigbog@netcom.com) Telecoms Training (Andrew Hartridge) Clipper [was Re: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust] (Joel M. Hoffman) Need Info on R.L. Drake Co. (Al Cohan) Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming (Gregory P. Monti) Nationwide CID, CLASS and Related Services (Jim Derdzinski) Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (John R. Levine) You're Gonna LOVE This! (Van Hefner) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: VANTEK@aol.com Date: Mon, 16 May 94 12:33:58 EDT Subject: Reach Out and Pay Someone AMERITECH GIVING MONEY TO PAY PHONE, CALLING CARD USERS CHICAGO, May 10 /PRNewswire/ -- The price of a pay phone or telephone calling card call is going to get plenty "lucrative" for some lucky Ameritech customers. The communications company is launching a sweepstakes program that will give consumers on-the-spot awards just for using its products. Starting next week, Ameritech will begin awarding cash prizes from $10 to $5,000 to hundreds of randomly selected users of its pay phones and calling card. "Some fortunate pay phone customers are going to finish their calls, then find out they just won $5,000," said Karen Vessely, Ameritech's president of pay phone services. Ameritech representatives will be incognito at hundreds of its publicly accessible pay phones on certain dates through the end of July, on the prowl for the first person to make a coin call during predetermined time periods. The lucky caller will be asked to scratch off an instant-win ticket that will tell them how much they won. Any of Ameritech's publicly accessible pay phones in the Midwest could be selected. During the campaign, every calling card call made using the Ameritech Calling Card or Complete Card also represents an entry to win. Calling card winners will be selected in a drawing in October. Vessely said Ameritech is launching the sweepstakes to respond to growing competition in the pay phone and calling card industries. "We want consumers to realize the value and quality in using Ameritech to provide these services, rather than AT&T or MCI, or another pay phone company, " Vessely explained. "The sweepstakes is a fun way to get customers to look for the Ameritech brand." For the "Make the Right Call and Go Wild" sweepstakes, prizes will include five, $5,000 grand prizes; ten, $1,000 first-place awards; and 250 prizes of $10 and $50. Customers will find out about the program through bill inserts and an extensive radio and outdoor ad campaign that begins next week. Consumers also can participate in the contest by submitting a write-in entry. Ameritech helps 12 million customers communicate and manage information, primarily in the Midwest. It also has investments in New Zealand, Hungary, Poland and other countries. Van Hefner Discount Long Distance Digest vantek@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All the 'genuine Bell' payphones around here have been decorated with a little sticker saying 'Ameritech Sweep- stakes' for a few weeks now. The stickers go on to say that 'your call could be a winner ...' PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 94 04:48:29 CDT From: Gerard CARAT Subject: GTE Analog Pocket Phone GTE plans to launch in the US a national analog pocket phone which presents partial similarities with the dead CT2 Rabbit network in the UK: Telego can be used inside the home as a limited range cordless phone, transmitting signals through a normal wire telephone line. Outside the home, it automatically switches mode and becomes a cellular phone. However, it is not designed for customers who want to "roam", that is use their phones when travelling long distances. Does it mean that, when outside of home, it also works with base stations and cannot provide roaming over 200 yards? Or will it behave like a cellular network at least in the perimeter of several miles. Can it be used in cars/trains or will users need to be in relatively slow motion? Gerard CARAT ------------------------------ From: 7657 Subject: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine Date: 16 May 1994 10:54:27 -0500 Organization: Promus Companies, Inc., Memphis, TN I'm having problems with a series of annoyance calls from an answering machine, and I was hoping someone here could suggest a solution. Someone has programmed their answering machine to call my number every time they get a message, so throughout the day I get calls that have a long pause, then a male synthesized voice says "Hello. You have a new message. Please Enter remote code." Normally these calls are during the day while I'm at work, so I just need to delete them from my machine, however, occasionally I get a call at seven in the morning, which is downright annoying since I don't normally plan on getting up that early. The number of calls per day range from zero to ten, with an average of fifteen calls per week. I've tried guessing at the remote code, and tried hitting numbers on the phone keypad hoping that I can find a magic number that either turns off his machine, or lets me leave a message. The only thing I've discovered is that hitting "*" makes his machine hang up immediately. The South Central Bell Annoyance Call Center hasn't been much help. They put "tracing equipment" on my phone for ten days, and I called them every day with a list of times for each call I received in that day. After the ten day period, they sent the calling party a *letter* telling them of the problem, then when the calls continued for another two weeks, I called the Annoyance Call Center several times until finally they *phoned* the calling party, who claimed that they did not understand why I kept getting calls. So now, another week later, I am still getting the calls, and the Annoyance Call Center, being helpful as always, said that they would make the effort to put their "tracing equipment" on my line for another ten days. I am not hopeful that after they once again verify the number from which I am receiving the calls that they will be able (or willing) to do anything about it, so I'm asking for any suggestions for a resolution of the problem. The Annoyance Call Center could not recommend anything other than letting them trace the calls again to verify the source of the calls. It is possible that the original caller returned their machine to the store when they first received the letter, and that now someone new has the machine with my number programmed in it. If this is the case, then the Annoyance Call Center will need to do more than just send a letter to the calling party. I know that I could get Caller ID and call the people myself, but I would like to avoid the expense of the connection fee, caller ID box, and monthly fee, so instead, I am wasting hundreds, of not thousands of dollars of the net's money to ask for suggestions. Thanks, Rodney Weaver lweaver@promus.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is unlikely the machine went back to the store and that now someone else has it. How would you explain the unlikely coincidence that some second person (new buyer of returned machine) also accidentally programmed the very same (wrong) number into the equipment? Most likely the same person has the machine and simply is too ignorant to get the equipment under control or doesn't care, etc. This means you will have to attend to it for him. Yes, definitly put Caller-ID on your phone line, along with 'return last call'. Be certain to save all the receipts for your expenses, since he will be paying for the costs you have incurred. Pin down the source of the calls if you can, and use a cross reference directory (your local library probably has one) to locate the owner of the number if his number is published. Send him a polite letter by certified mail requesting that he cease and desist from calling you on the phone and requesting that he make whatever adjustments are required to any automated equipment in his poss- ession and under his control so it will not make such calls either. Advise him of the expense you have incurred in an effort to locate him and request his check in payment. Conclude by telling him that you have previously referred the problem to the Annoyance Call Bureau at telco and are sending them a copy of this letter as well. You will give him ten days to bring himself into compliance and submit his check to reimburse you for your expenses, at which point you will assume suit in Small Claims Court is required if he has not cooperated. Send a copy to the Annoyance Call Bureau, also by certified mail. In the event his number is non-published and not available in a cross-reference book, then instead write your letter to the telco, advising them that you now have the number and are demanding that telco disconnect his service until/unless he brings himself into compliance. Quote his number in the letter to them (along with his name and address if you have it) to show them you mean business. If you cannot locate his name and address, then refuse to pay for the portion of your bill which relates to the Caller-ID service, referring the telco Business Office to the Annoyance Call people and letting them know you needed the equipment to 'cooperate with an ongoing investigation into the source of harassing calls you are receiving.' Stand your ground and don't budge. Either the guy has his machine mis- programmed to dial your number, or it is programmed correctly but dialing incorrectly (both are his problem) or it is dialing correctly but some equipment in the central office is on the intermittant fritz (telco's problem, and less likely than the first two probabilities). You will get the problem resolved, belive me. And, most important, *do not* harass him in return! However, an occassional phone call in which you actually speak to him and attempt to counsel him can hardly be considered harassment if you call in a courteous and business-like manner. Let us know how it all works out. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 09:09:11 -0500 From: Jonathan_Welch Subject: Umass/Amherst Suffers From Week-long Service Degradation After slightly over a week of unreliable phone service things returned to normal and the following appeared in the May 13th edition of "The Campus Chronicle". Jonathan Welch VAX Systems Manager Umass/Amherst JHWELCH@ecs.umass.edu - - - Telephone system returned to normal As you know, the University had a major problem with the campus telephone system which began last Monday, May 2. The symptoms of the problem included calls being cut off, static, a "fast busy" tone when calling on campus and telephones without dial tone. The symptoms were sporadic and fairly random for both academic/administrative telephones and residential telephones. As soon as the problem started, Ericsson, the manufacturer and maintainer of the telephone system, responded. Ericsson staff worked straight through from Monday morning to late Thursday evening to diagnose and remedy the problem. In addition to the normal three on-site technicians, Ericsson brought in staff from their regional headquarters in Northboro, and flew in a high level technician/ system programmer from the Technical Assistance Center in Cypress, Calif. They also had programmers in Cypress and Sweden working remotely to stabilize the system and to determine the cause of the problem. The problem with the system resulted from a unique set of circumstances involving software parameters, system clocking and a normal maintenance procedure performed on the system. The problem was exacerbated by the increases of load on the telephone system we have experienced this year. The campus telephone system is a complex, distributed computer. Such systems are designed with a great deal of redundancy and can self-correct for many faults. Once the problem occurred, parts of the system were contin- ually trying to reset themselves. In this instance, the complexity of the system and its attempts at self-correction made it difficult to trace the problem and stabilize the system. By Wednesday afternoon, Ericsson had made substantial progress in correcting the problem. They made a configuration adjustment in the system and implemented a slight but important programming change in lhe software. This adjustment, while straightforward, was difficult to install on the system because of the heavy call volume on campus and the size of the campus system (18,000 lines on 119 system modules). What Ericsson accomplished is analogous to fixing an electrical problem in a car traveling down the highway at 50 miles per hour. The parameter they adjusted did not initiate the problem, but the change allowed the system to return to normal operations. By early Thursday morning in the residence halls and noon on Thursday in the academic/administrative area of campus, service had considerably improved. Except for a brief interruption of service while circuits were being tested, calls in progress were no longer interrupted by static or cut off. There may have been some problems completing a call or placing long distance calls while work was in progress. However, in general TelCom was quite sucoessful at assisting individuals in making their long distance calls. Ericsson has made adjustments in the system configuration, system clocking and maintenance procedures to ensure that this problem will not recur. I realize the telephone service problems last week were very frustrating for everyone. Telephone service is an important part of our daily lives and any interruptions or degrada- tions in service are a very serious problem. I truly appreciate the patience of the campus community while we struggled to deal wilh the problem. We in TelCom, as well as the Ericsson staff, were even more frustrated (if that is possible) at not being able to get the problem resolved quickly. We apologize for the difficulties and will work closely with Ericsson to prevent this problem from occurring again. Randy Sailer, director Telecommunication Services ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@f438.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Nigel Allen) Date: 15 May 94 21:49:05 -0500 Subject: Info-Affaires Bell Audiotex Service Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway Bell Canada and the Montreal newspaper La Press are running a free French-language audiotex service, Info-Affaires Bell, featuring business information. Call (514) 875-2355 to use the system. Once you have listened to a particular item, you can ask for information to be faxed to you. All the information is in French. I don't think that Bell Canada has any plans to offer a similar service in English. Nigel Allen ------------------------------ From: gaypanda@pinn.net (Tom Ward) Subject: New Area Codes Assigned Date: 16 May 1994 15:56:32 GMT Organization: Pinnacle Online In the latest release of AT&T's Area Code Handbook, the following new area codes will be assigned: OLD NEW Effective Permissive Dialing NPA NPA State Date Date End 206 360 Washington 1/15/95 1/15/95 7/9/95 205 334 Alabama 1/15/95 1/15/95 3/13/95 602 520 Arizona 3/19/95 3/19/95 7/23/95 Other new NXX NPA's assigned but not listed in this handbook are: 310 562 California 217 630 Illinois Tom Ward CompuServe: 73441,237 Internet: gaypanda@everest.pinn.net AT&T Mail: thomasward@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: bigbob@netcom.com (Lord of Love!) Subject: Inteljak Wireless Phone Jak System Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 06:26:25 GMT I bought this thing and it was completely useless! Save your money and aggravation by buying a good cordless phone. bigbob@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Care to elaborate on the main problems you were having? PAT] ------------------------------ From: aa744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Andrew Hartridge) Subject: Telecoms Training Date: 16 May 1994 13:03:49 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA) Reply-To: aa744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Andrew Hartridge) Hi, We are just about to expand into a new building and I find myself faced with the problem of hooking up 1000 phone sets and many data ports. I have not had any experience with doing a new installation. I've always just had to make do with what I have inherited. Question: Are there any training organizations out there, or reference materials on 'How to set up and configure telecomms systems' ... e.g. pros and cons of different wiring closet configurations? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Please reply via e-mail as I don't get to read news very often. Many thanks, Andrew Hartridge ------------------------------ From: joel@wam.umd.edu (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Clipper [was Re: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust] Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 20:27:12 GMT Organization: Excelsior Computer Services In article atfurman@cup.portal.com writes: > The {New York Times}, as quoted by Dave Thompson: >> For 30 years, Raymond Marquez was a thorn to law-enforcement >> agencies and a legend to countless gamblers in Harlem and East Harlem... >> But the authorities said yesterday that they had arrested Mr. >> Marquez, 64, and his wife, Alice, 63, on felony gambling charges and >> had raided and closed 56 gambling parlors and backroom offices .... > Those whose business it is to mind everyone else's business will > insist that the struggle against "numbers" cannot be won unless > Raymond Marquez's successor is prevented from using effective > encryption (that is, something other than Clipper). They are right. This seems to be a major source of misunderstanding. The proposed new law will >NOT< make it impossible for average users to encrypt their data. It will only make sure that the phone company encrypts the data in a way that authorities can break. There will still be nothing (as there is not now) to prevent any user from implementing further encryption. Joel (joel@wam.umd.edu) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 94 10:39:00 EST From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com> Subject: Need Info on R.L. Drake Co. I know this is a little off the subject but I have been desparately trying to find the R. L. Drake Co. formerly of Miamiville, OH. I need info, manuals, etc on their 424 Satellite Receiver and 424 Antenna Positioner. I remember that Drake, if it's the same company was a big player in the 50's and 60's with ham radio. I assume it's the same company but can't find them. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance, Al Cohan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 09:57:05 EDT From: Gregory P. Monti Subject: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming The May 13 issue of the newsletter {Communications Daily} reports that Bellcore will hold seminars on the changes to the North American Numbering Plan over the next six months. They will be in Washington June 16-17, Chicago Aug. 4-5, Dallas Sept. 15-16, and San Francisco Nov. 10-11. The story quotes North American Numbering Plan Administration Director Ronald Conners as saying that, "telephone company switches and customers' PBXs may need software or hardware upgrades or, in some cases, may have to be replaced." The story doesn't mention costs, but gives a number for information: 800 TEACH-ME (800 832-2463). Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cap.gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: 16 May 94 12:26:04 EDT From: Jim Derdzinski <73114.3146@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Nationwide CID, CLASS and Related Services I have a couple of questions about CLASS services. I know that the FCC has issued a ruling making is possible for long-distance numbers to work with the Caller ID service that the various LEC's are now offering. Will the long-distance number identification work with the other CLASS services like Automatic Callback, Call Screening, Repeat Dialing, Call Tracing, etc? I figure it should, considering that if the calling number can be displayed, then those services should be able to make use of it. (For instance, it would be nice to be able to repeat dial (*66) a long distance number that is frequently busy.) Another question I have concerns an oddity I have encountered here (in the land of Ameritech). It seems that when an older CO is finally upgraded to work with CID, the calling numbers originating from it will display, but Distinctive Ringing, Automatic Callback and the like will not work with these numbers. Is there some kind of update that has to done to the equipment to register new CO's and such? (This, I guess, may be related to the above.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 94 00:20 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. I wrote: > In other words, per-line blocking is a bad idea because subscribers > are too dumb to unblock calls when they want to unblock them, although > they're not to dumb to block calls when they want to block them. Padgett wrote: > This is not what was said at all: a correct statement would be that a > subscriber might not know how to unblock or, that unblocking was > needed, or even that the line was blocked when an emergency call is > placed and they might not have blocked it. Yes, they said that, but they had no concern whatsoever that people who needed to block calls for various entirely valid reasons would have trouble dialing *67. Why is dialing *67 to block CLID easy, while dialing *99 or something to unblock it hard? Why isn't it a problem that someone who needs to block CLID (cliche example: abused wife calling spouse to negotiate about kids) might not know the line was enabled for CLID or know how to block it? I also find their scenarios about life-threatening CLID blocking a wee bit far fetched, since telcos are moving fairly quickly to universal 911 and as far as I know all 911 systems use ANI. The death scenario seems to be: A) someone makes an emergency call to a number other than 911, B) the caller's line has CLID line blocking C) the caller is able to dial but unable to say where he or she is D) the caller can't dial the unblock code E) the callee has real-time access to reverse directory information (remember, this isn't 911) and so can quickly determine who the caller is and can rush over and save him and/or her. Maybe I'm unduly sceptical, but this seems like an awful stretch for a rationale to forbid a useful service already available in many states. If this is a big problem, I don't understand why deceased CLID-less phone users haven't been littering the landscape since the advent of dial phones. Many readers will be relieved to know that in today's mail I received some stickers from NYNEX to apply to the phone in my trailer in Vermont warning users that the line has default CLID blocking and one has to dial *67 to enable it. Of course, last month we got a postcard advising us that 911 now works in our extremely rural town, so CLID emergency calls are moot. > We have already seen the question appear relating to "How do you know > with per line blocking if it is toggled on or off ?" One answer would > be star-six-seven on and "something else" off but the phone company only > has 100 star numbers now. True. Fortunately, some of them remain unassigned so it's a perfectly workable solution. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: VANTEK@aol.com Date: Mon, 16 May 94 08:08:45 EDT Subject: You're Gonna LOVE This!!! MCI AND FOX DON CAP & GOWN FOR GRADUATION 'MELROSE PLACE,' 'BEVERLY HILLS, 90210' & MCI LINEUP THE STARS WITH FREE HOTLINE SEND A CELEBRITY GRADGRAM TO YOUR FAVORITE GRAD WASHINGTON, May 12 /PRNewswire/ -- For the graduate who has everything, MCI and Fox Broadcasting Company are offering personalized messages from the stars of FOX's "Melrose Place" and "Beverly Hills, 90210," MCI said. Callers can choose from Andrew Shue (Billy Campbell) and Courtney Thorne-Smith (Alison Parker) from "Melrose Place"; and Jennie Garth (Kelly Taylor), Tori Spelling (Donna Martin) and Ian Ziering (Steve Sanders), from "Beverly Hills, 90210." Beginning May 16th through June 30th, anyone can dial 1-800-671-5225 and send a message from the five most popular stars in television today to the graduate of their choice. MCI Celebrity GradGrams are pre-recorded messages from the actors -- providing congratulations, advice and tips on making it in the real world after graduation. The caller simply chooses which actor's message to send from a voice-prompted menu, leaves their name and indicates the home phone number of the recipient grad. The message is then automatically delivered. With each call made, MCI will make a $1 donation up to $100,000 to Do Something, a national non-profit organization which seeks to inspire and assist young people to take problem-solving action in their communities. "Young people have great ideas to improve their communities, but often lack the resources and guidance needed to put their ideas into action," says Andrew Shue, actor and co-founder of Do Something. "The support of MCI and FOX will help Do Something give every young person the opportunity to strengthen their community." Founded in 1993, Do Something is dedicated to providing local and national grants of up to $500 to young people to implement creative community-building projects across the country. Grant applications are available at participating Blockbuster Video Stores, Guess? merchants, Boys and Girls Clubs and other community organizations. MCI, headquartered in Washington, D.C. is the nation's second-largest long distance provider. MCI offers residential savings and superior customer service through a number of products and services including: Friends & Family, Best Friends, 1-800-COLLECT, the MCI VideoPhone, MCI Friends Around The World Anytime, The MCI Card and WorldPhone. (This is so stupid it has to be heard to be believed! Of course this comes from the same company that operated an 800 number that let you play sound effects of 'a flock of seagulls' with your touchtone phone. You are led through an IVR menu that let's you 'pick the star' then record your name to be delivered to the phone number you enter, at the time of day/night you wish it to be delivered! Need I say more?!!?) Van Hefner Discount Long Distance Digest vantek@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, I would not come down quite so hard on them Vance. If the service is free (as it appears to be; there is no mention of any fee being charged to the parents or proud grandparents or friends or whoever place the order) then the fact that MCI is giving a dollar for each call made is generous of them. Admittedly, none of the people speaking in the messages exactly inspire me, but then, what do I know about anything? It doesn't say much for the USA of the 1990's, but those television shows are among the most popular on the air today so if those stars can do something to make a difference, let them have at it. The people who would inspire *me* under the circumstances are (as they say in college) 'dead white men' all of whom passed before any method of recording their voice for future generations had been devised, with a couple of exceptions. There are a few bright kids in the USA, but promotions like the one you describe are intended for the not-so-bright ones, many of whom also had stupid teachers. Let them have a few minutes of happieness and hope in their otherwise dreary lives. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #229 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11782; 17 May 94 19:47 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA24557; Tue, 17 May 94 13:38:09 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA24548; Tue, 17 May 94 13:38:07 CDT Date: Tue, 17 May 94 13:38:07 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405171838.AA24548@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #230 TELECOM Digest Tue, 17 May 94 13:38:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 230 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Wireless Communication Course (Richard Tsina) Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software (Rick Przebienda) 1-800-OPERATOR Question/Problems (Danny Burstein) Samples From Telecomworldwire (Darren Ingram) Directory Map Shows NNX Area Codes (Linc Madison) SONET Management Standards? (A.N. Ananth) Need List of Area Codes Across U.S. (Joshua Kantro) Re: Bulk Call Display (Derek Andrew) Re: Bulk Call Display (Randy Gellens) Re: Loop Start to Ground Start Converter (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Loop to Ground Start converters (Sheldon Kociol) Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Blake R. Patterson) Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Steve Brack) Re: FCC Releases Fiber Deployment Analysis (Bob Keller) Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!! (Steve Brack) Re: Need Weather-Resistant Phone (John Lundgren) Re: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service (John Lundgren) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 17:12:22 GMT From: course@garnet.berkeley.edu Subject: Wireless Communication Course Organization: University of California, Berkeley U.C. BERKELEY Continuing Education in Engineering Announces a short course on Wireless Technology: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION NETWORKS (July 26-27, 1994) There are technical bottlenecks to developing a ubiquitous wireless multimedia environment: the capacity of the radio link, its unreliability due to the adverse multipath propagation channel, and severe interference from other channels. This course covers the principles and fundamental concepts engineers need to tackle these limitations (e.g., a thorough treatment of channel impairments such as fading and multipath dispersion and their effect on link and network performance). Topics include: Introduction to Wireless Channels, Cellular Telephone Networks, Analog and Digital Transmission and Wireless Data Networks. Comprehensive course notes will be provided. Lecturer: JEAN-PAUL M.G. LINNARTZ, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley. His work on traffic analysis in mobile radio networks received the Veder Prize, an innovative research in telecommunications award in the Netherlands. At Berkeley he works on communications for intelligent vehicle highway systems and multimedia communications. Professor Linnartz is the author of numerous publications and the book "Narrow Land-Mobile Radio Networks" (Artech House, 1993), the text for the course. For more information (brochure with complete course descriptions, outlines, instructor bios, etc.,) send your postal address to: Richard Tsina U.C. Berkeley Extension Continuing Education in Engineering 2223 Fulton St. Berkeley, CA 94720 Tel: (510) 642-4151 Fax: (510) 643-8683 email: course@garnet.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: przebien@news.delphi.com (PRZEBIENDA@DELPHI.COM) Subject: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software Date: 17 May 1994 01:48:46 -0000 Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation Hi, We had a home grown telecommunication package that allowed us to send alphanumeric messages to our PAC-TEL pagers. We are interested in updating the softwaree. We are interested in reasonably priced commercial software or in the protocol specs of the 800 number we communicate with the old package. Any help would be appreciated. Rick PRZEBIENDA@DELPHI.com ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: 1-800-OPERATOR Question/Problems Date: 17 May 1994 07:55:50 -0400 I recently stayed in a hotel (Richmond, Va. Marriot) which had the usual hotel phone surcharges. So, not wanting to burden myself with huge add-ons to my hotel room, I decided to call collect. Now, since I didn't know what extra costs would be added by the hotel's contract with their service provider, I specifically used '1-800-Operator' rather than "0" or "10288-0". Well, I got the AT&T 'boing', the request for my name, and then got the message 'enjoy your stay at the Marriot Hotel'. Note again, that this was a call placed through 1-800-opertor, NOT through a default '0'. Alas, the call did not go through. Why? Because the person I was calling was using his phone line and had call waiting. I heard the ring, heard him click into my call and ask who was there. Yet the AT&T switch somehow got this confused and, while the person I was calling was still asking 'who's there', I got the synthesized voice saying 'your party appears to have hung up, please call again later'. So this brings up two issues. First is the relationship with Marriot and AT&T (remember, again, that this was a 1-800-operator call). Second is the glitchy supervision when making calls to someone with call-waiting. Has anyone else had these problems? I eventually got through to my friend by -paging- him and having him call me back ... Take care, dannyb@panix.com (or dburstein@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 16:36 BST From: Darren Ingram Subject: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 1 Reply-To: satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk We would like to offer TELECOM Digest readers a special price on subscription to Telecomworldwire. The UK price is gbp700 per year for fax. We would be pleased to offer **ALL** businesses a single-copy price of the same (payable in Sterling or credit card) for delivery to an electronic mail box connected to the Internet. The companies would have to sign a piece of paper (yes, old fashioned!) saying they would not redistribute the material and basically subject the copyrighted works in the same way as a printed publication. Site archive licences are available. For genuine bona-fida non-commercial users a very generous (in excess of 50 percent) discount would be offered upon signing a similar warranty which also says that the information would be for their sole use only and for non-commercial purposes). Also we have another product called Satnews, which I will forward similar offer details on later next week. Here are some sample stories from a recent issue: -THAILAND EXPANDS INTERNATIONAL CALL ACCESS TWW-12 May 1994-THAILAND EXPANDS INTERNATIONAL CALL ACCESS TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD BANGKOK, THAILAND- A plan by the Communications Authority of Thailand to install a further 10,000 international telephone communications circuits has been approved by the Thai Cabinet. The Communications Authority is to install 10,000 new circuits for international phone calls, making up its fourth international transmission switching centre. Around Baht6,400 million will be spent on the project, based at CAT's Bang Rak office. The new circuits are set to be operational by 1997, adding to the 7,000 existing international circuits in use by CAT. The Thai National Economic and Social Development board had previously approved the plan, set to provide enough international capacity until 2002, but plans are already being formulated to add a further 25,000 international phone circuits between 1999 and 2017. -AT&T WINS 'CONTROVERSIAL' SAUDI TELECOM CONTRACT TWW-12 May 1994-AT&T WINS 'CONTROVERSIAL' SAUDI TELECOM CONTRACT TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD WASHINGTON, USA/RIYADHI, SAUDI ARABIA- AT&T Corp has won a six-year US$4 billion contract to provide state-of-the-art digital switching and fibre-optic networks to Saudi Arabia, and within hours of the news being confirmed the contract was dogged with controversy. There are allegations that President Clinton assisted AT&T in its contract win to the detriment of competitors. The massive contract will see around 1.5 million new fixed lines being installed as well as a cellular and wireless data providing service for around 200,000 subscribers. Ericsson said that it was surprised at the scope of the bid and the way in which it had been handled, and Northern Telecom said that it half expected the move as negotiations between AT&T and the Saudis were advanced when AT&T ended its exclusive supplier agreement with Bell Canada Ltd -- a NT offshoot -- earlier this year. Intense lobbying by Clinton and other US officials is said to have also helped secure a US$6 billion contract in March for commercial aircraft from the Saudis, awarded to Boeing and McDonnell Douglas. The Australian Financial Review reported that Clinton had personally wrote to King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, urging him to look favourably on the AT&T bid. The New York Times added that Ronald Brown, Commerce Secretary made two personal appeals during trips to Saudi Arabia since last September and Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, spoke on AT&T's behalf during his own trip there a month ago. -BELLSOUTH IN BELGIUM MOBILE DATA PARTNERSHIP TWW-12 May 1994-BELLSOUTH IN BELGIUM MOBILE DATA PARTNERSHIP TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD BRUSSELS, BELGIUM- As revealed in Telecomworldwire (TWW090594) BelllSouth Corp's Mobile Data Inc business unit has joined forces with France Telecom Mobiles International SA to jointly build and operate a mobile data network in Belgium. This will be the first mobile data network in the country. The new venture, known as RAM Mobile Data Belgium, will spend around US$50 million on building the network, with service scheduled to start in Brussels early next year. The network will conform to the Mobitex mobile data standard, developed by Ericsson and Swedish Telecom. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In another issue of the Digest to follow later, a few more samples from a recent issue of Telecomworldwire will be presented. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 23:03:22 -0700 From: LincMad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Directory Map Shows NNX Area Codes It's May, which means the new San Mateo County directories are out from Pacif*c Bell. Of course, I immediately turned to the area code map page, where I saw little inset maps showing area codes 520, 360, and 334, which will come into use during the life of the directory. No mention yet of any other NNX area codes. Zowie kapowie! Linc Madison * Oakland, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ From: ananth@access.digex.net (A N Ananth) Subject: SONET Management Standards? Date: 16 May 1994 23:49:12 -0400 Organization: Prism Communications Inc, Annapolis MD Can some knowledgeable soul throw light on the following questions: - What protocol stack is specified by the SONET standard for Operation, Administration, Maintainence & Provisioning? [I suspect the answer is full blown CMIP, ACSE, ROSE as in Bellcore TR-303] - What management platforms are currently in use at RBOCs in the US that implement such standards? Are these proprietary platforms or commercial implementations? - In practice, do SONET equipment manufacturers implement the mgt protocol specified for the OAM&P channel or is there some other protocol is common use? thanx for any help. ananth Phone: (410) 765-9281 Prism Communications Inc ------------------------------ From: JZK@cunyvms1.gc.cuny.edu (KANTRO JOSHUA) Subject: Need List of Area Codes Across U.S. Organization: Graduate School and University Center, C.U.N.Y. New York, NY Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 04:00:42 GMT Does anyone have or know where I can find a fairly up-to-date list of all U.S. area codes -- listed in numerical order and with the corresponding region? Thanks for any tips. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Check out the Telecom Archives in the /areacodes sub-directory. We have reasonably up-to-date lists there in numerical order. Use anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 09:48:54 GMT From: andrew@jester.usask.ca (Derek Andrew) Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display Reply-To: andrew@jester.usask.ca Organization: University of Saskatchewan In article , Tony Harminc wrote: > So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data ? > It must be some sort of bulk interface, since they are certainly not > letting it ring once and waiting for the data to come down the wire > between the first and second rings. I wasn't aware that any such > interface was tariffed or standardized. We have a service from our local telco called Bulk Calling Line ID. We have a dedicated line to the telco, attached to a Bell 202 modem. At 1200 baud, we receive a line of ASCII text with the date, time calling line, called line, and an indication of whether the called line was busy or idle. Derek.Andrew@USask.CA ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 17 MAY 94 23:12:00 GMT Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display > So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data ? I believe there is just such a bulk interface available, called something like SMDA (Service Message Desk Accounting?). Anyway, I think the deal is you order trunk connections, and one SMDA line for a bunch of trunks. Whenever a call comes in on one of your trunks, info about the calling and called number (and maybe other stuff) is sent on the SMDA line. I think it is for answering services, voice mail providers, and so forth. But I imagine anyone could order it. Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com Net**2 656-6350 (Please forward bounces to Mail Stop MV 237 rgellens@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ From: davep@u.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik) Subject: Re: Loop Start to Ground Start Converter Date: 17 May 1994 17:47:01 GMT Organization: University of Washington Leroy Casterline writes: > Does anyone know of an existing device which could be connected > between our box and the PBX, and between our box and the CO, so that > we can work in the above environment without re-engineering our analog > interface or changing our software? Mitel makes a four line loop/ground start converter that is part of their SMarT line of dialing equipment. Most of the SMarT stuff costs a couple of hundred bucks per four line unit. Graybar carries them, or you could call Mitel at (619) 931-0111 for a dealer near you and a part number. (That number is their West Coast office as of a 1988 brochure). Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: robadome.com!sheldonk@pmail.com (Sheldon Kociol) Subject: Re: Loop to Ground Start converters Date: 17 May 1994 09:50:06 GMT Organization: ROLM - A Siemens Company Reply-To: robadome.com!sheldonk@pmail.com Tellabs makes loop to groundstart converters. Call 214-869-4114. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It has never been clear to me why, if a person or company wants mostly ground-start lines with an occassional line operating on a loop-start basis they simply do not order those lines from telco in that fashion rather than going to the trouble of purchasing equipment specifically to convert one to the other. After all, isn't the default from telco loop-start lines? They certainly do not charge any extra to send them from the CO that way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Blake.R.Patterson@att.com Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service Organization: AT&T Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 15:49:18 GMT In article , George Thurman wrote: > I had a 900 number that if you called it and gave them a telephone > number, they would give you the name and address of the person who had > that telephone number. (In most cases) > The 900 number, 1-900-884-1212 has been disconnected, and I think that > the company that provided the service has gone belly-up. Does anyone > know of any other 900 numbers that provide this same kind of service? The UnDirectory service (Clarity Inc., P.O. Box 8357, Red Bank, NJ 07701, 908-530-5100) provides national dial-up reverse directory for the whole U.S. (Includes Alaska and Hawaii, but I couldn't get info on numbers for Puerto Rico, or 800+ and 900+ numbers.) DIAL: 900-933-3330, then use a touch-tone phone to enter ten-digit numbers. The charge is still $1.00 a minute -- cheaper and as accurate as the defunct Telename service George mentioned. A speech synthesizer says the name and address immediately after you enter the last digit. It's available 24 hours a day. Ameritech offers Chicago-area reverse lookups (NPAs 312 and 708 only). Call 796-9600 from 312+ or 708+ phones and pay $.35 for two lookups. From outside those NPAs, call 312-796-9600; you just pay the toll. This service uses human voice for prompts and synthetic speech (that I find hard to understand) for the names and addresses. Remember, Chicago-area lookups only. No info for unlisted numbers, either service. Try the UnDirectory service: 900-933-3330 !! ($1 a minute) Blake Patterson AT&T Bell Labs [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also please note that both services do charge for their lookup time even if the result is a non-pub or no-record available number. Still, it is worth it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sbrack@esserv01.utnetw.utoledo.edu (Steve Brack) Subject: Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories Organization: University of Toledo Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 00:39:54 GMT Bruce J. Miller (miller@vfl.paramax.com) wrote: > ...Could someone knowledgeable supply me with the vital data on > these companies? Try Hello Direct, at 1 800 HI HELLO. They offer a wide variety of cellphone accessories, as well as many other telecom products. Steven S. Brack sbrack@esserv01.eng.utoledo.edu Toledo, OH 43613-1605 STU0061@UOFT01.BITNET MY OWN OPINIONS sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 16:54:29 EDT From: Bob Keller Subject: Re: FCC Releases Fiber Deployment Analysis An ASCII version of the report, including the tables (but be careful what editor you open it in as the tables have some very long lines) is available at: ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/fib93rpt.txt A complete zip file, including word processing formatted documetns and *.wk1 format worksheets for the tables is available on the FCC-State Link BBS (202-632-1361) under file name 93FIBER.ZIP. This BBS can also be accessed through the FedWorld BBS (703-321-8020) or telnet to fedword.gov. Once connected to the FedWorld system, choose gateway #84. Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301.229.5208 A.R.S. KY3R Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301.229.6875 rjk@telcomlaw.com finger me for FCC Daily Business CompuServe 76100,3333 ------------------------------ From: sbrack@esserv01.utnetw.utoledo.edu (Steve Brack) Subject: Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!! Organization: University of Toledo Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 11:35:00 GMT Patrick A. Townson (telecom@eecs.nwu.edu) wrote: ... : I think you may be coming down a : little to hard on them demanding a written apology, etc. PAT] The way I've always been told to do business, and the way I've always conducted my business, a computer and telecom consultancy, has been to take every reasonable step to satisfy my customers. If that means a written apology for their wasted time on hold and for the inconvenince caused by the billing errors, then so be it. The days of "We don't care. We don't have to. We're The Phone Company." are, at least as far as long distance goes, over, and I say thank God they are. Steven S. Brack sbrack@esserv01.eng.utoledo.edu Toledo, OH 43613-1605 STU0061@UOFT01.BITNET MY OWN OPINIONS sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu ------------------------------ From: jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com (John Lundgren) Subject: Re: Need Weather-Resistant Phone Date: 17 May 94 16:25:10 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network We have a few such phones, and they're just regular phones in weather resistant housings. I hope you have some way of securing the phone, so you don't get people using your phone for toll and ringing up a big bill. You can get metal enclosures with a lock hasp in the hardware stores. They are made for electrical stuff, but are big enough to hold a phone. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For many years, the old Western Electric Company made outdoor phones. They were inside little metal weatherproof boxes with a hinged door on the front which could be locked with a key. Quite reliable instruments, many are still around and if you find one you should grab it. They were all rotary dial I believe, in gray boxes. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com (John Lundgren) Subject: Re: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service Date: 17 May 94 16:20:10 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network I was sending by FTP some stuff to Australia last week, and was bothered by tha fact that the guy on the other end was not available during what I thought were normal hours. Then I checked out what time it was over there. I became acutely aware of what was happening. When it's midnight here, It's teatime in Australia. +17 hours difference. So we all have to remember that in this era of global telecom, there are major time differences that can play tricks with our communications. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This becomes quite apparent when someone in a distant land wishes to use the highly popular CB Simulator service offered by Compuserve. Quite heavily populated by people in the USA (in fact all but a small percentage of Compuserve's subscribers are in this country), the 'CB' is fully loaded -- typically 600-800 users at a time on this, the original version of 'chat' or 'talk' programs -- on Friday and Saturday night in the US time zones. From midnight to 3 AM Eastern time, it will always be rocking, even during the week on the 'adult' machine. Yet a check of the user logs for each channel will reveal a handful of 100xx,xxxx accounts -- numbers assigned to users in Europe and Australia -- hanging in there as well. Despite the fact that they are already well into Saturday/Sunday morning in Europe and late Saturday/Sunday afternoon in Australia/New Zealand they stick around. Then if one logs into the CB early afternoon on Friday or Saturday using USA time, there won't be an American in sight. It'll have several 100xx people all doing their thing while the USA people are still in bed sleeping off their session from several hours earlier. But for the intercontinental action on Compuserve CB, the Americans won't return the favor. They make the European and Australian people get out of bed at odd hours if they want to play! The same is true on the increasingly popular IRC (Internet Relay Chat) as well. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #230 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa12066; 17 May 94 20:16 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA27891; Tue, 17 May 94 15:12:18 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA27882; Tue, 17 May 94 15:12:16 CDT Date: Tue, 17 May 94 15:12:16 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405172012.AA27882@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #232 TELECOM Digest Tue, 17 May 94 15:12:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 232 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Information Wanted on Callback Services (Andreas Werner) Callback Services FAQ v1.2 (Bruce Hahne) Re: SRI Ends Two Bobs' MGR (Will Martin) Re: Meeks Defense Fund (Greg Trotter) Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Redidential Phones (Gregory Ashley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: werner@thunder.hrz.tu-chemnitz.de (Andreas Werner) Subject: Information Wanted on Callback Services Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 17:22:30 MET Because of the urgent need to complete a project I am searching for a more or less complete list of providers of callback-services. The list should includes prices, countries and the adresses and communication link of the provider. All help most appreciated. Best Regards, Andreas W. Werner Chemnitz / Germany werner@thunder.hrz.tu-chemnitz.de 100042.2565@compuserve.com fax: ++49-371-255835 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This request came on the same day as the FAQ which follows in this issue. They seem to go together nicely in this issue of the Digest, with someone in Japan answering the question posed by the reader in Germany. Indeed, this forum is international! PAT] ------------------------------ From: bruce@jise.isl.melco.co.jp (Bruce Hahne) Subject: Callback Services FAQ v1.2 Date: 17 May 1994 03:13:16 -0500 Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway Changes since version 1.1: - Added archive-name header to try to meet news.answers posting guidelines. - Updated MTC entries, CSI entry, and Progressive Communications entry. - Added entries for Global Access Callback, INTEX, Global Communication, Globalcom 2000, Kallback Direct, and STAR*Telecom. - Created "other information" section and added some Japan-specific information to it. - Added pointer to Discount Long Distance Digest. - Attempted to get all phone numbers into a consistent format. LIST OF COMPANIES PROVIDING INTERNATIONAL CALL-BACK SERVICE version 1.2 May 15, 1994 Introduction: This list started as an attempt to gather information about companies which provide call-back services to Japan. Such companies allow you to call from Japan to the U.S. at U.S. rates instead of at the (much less competitive) rates offered by Japan's 3 international phone companies. I have since found that most call-back companies provide call-back services to many different countries, so I will not limit the distribution of this post to newsgroups such as soc.culture.japan and fj.life.in-japan. However, the pricing information I give has a bias towards examples connecting to or from Japan. This document is in the public domain. Please pass it around freely and help people to save some money! Please send additional information on old or new callback companies to Bruce Hahne at any of the addresses listed at the end of this post. Companies are listed in alphabetical order. This information is NOT guaranteed accurate, and may be based in part on advertisements or fliers which are out of date, as well as on 3rd-party reports. For full details and up-to-date pricing information, contact the companies directly. NAME: Business Communications Management, Inc. CONTACT INFO: Business Communications Management, Inc. 1320 El Capitan Drive, Suite 300 Danville, CA 94526 Phone: 1-510-277-3030 Fax: 1-510-277-3555 Internet: vthiry@netcom.com HOW IT WORKS: Call your access number (in the U.S.?), then hang up. Their computer calls you back at a preselected number. BILLING: $50 one-time enrollment fee. $25 monthly minimum. Billed to your credit card. SAMPLE RATES: Japan to U.S. or U.S. to Japan: $0.45/min. Japan to U.K. or U.K. to Japan: $0.74/min. Japan to Canada or Canada to Japan: $0.68/min. Japan to Germany or Germany to Japan: $0.91/min. (30-second minimum per call, billed in 6-second increments) COMMENTS: Rates are the same at all times of the day and week. Monthly statement is mailed to you. No PIN. You can register as many call-back numbers as you want. NOTES: - This company is a reseller of the MTC PASSPORT service, also available from MTC listed below. They do not resell the MTC OneCard mentioned in the MTC entry. - Vthiry@netcom.com appears willing to fax out rate sheets so that you have pricing information in writing. NAME: Global Access Callback CONTACT INFO: Telegroup, Inc. 505 North Third St. Fairfield, IA 52556 Phone: 1-800-338-0225 or 1-515-472-5000 Fax: 1-515-472-4747 HOW IT WORKS: Call a personal access number in the U.S., then hang up. Their computer calls you back at a preselected number. BILLING: No start-up fee, no monthly minimum. 30-second minimum per call, billed in 6-second increments. SAMPLE RATES: Japan to U.S.: $0.79/min. U.K. to U.S.: $0.39/min. Canada to U.S.: $0.23/min Germany to U.S.: $0.63/min. NOTES: This service is also offered by H.V. Griner Telecommunication Associates; see below. NAME : Global Communication CONTACT INFO: 1163 Wunderlich Drive San Jose, CA 95129 Phone: 1-408-252-3105 Fax: 1-408-257-7529 HOW IT WORKS: - Call an assigned number in the U.S., then hang up. - When the system calls you back, say "Hello". - Wait for a beep tone and enter a 7-digit account number, a PIN, and the number you want to call. BILLING: They set up a positive account balance by placing a $200 charge to your credit card. Once the account is set up, you can elect either to have your balance automatically "refilled" and charged to your card, or you can make the requests "manually" by contacting the company. There is no entry fee or monthly minimum. SAMPLE RATES: Japan to U.S.: $0.70/minute. Taiwan to U.S.: $0.89/minute France to U.S.: $0.70/minute COMMENTS: Usable from "almost anywhere in the world". NOTES: I don't know how many digits are in the PIN. NAME : Globalcom 2000 CONTACT INFO: Phone: 1-408-761-1988 Email: scottb@cats.ucsc.edu HOW IT WORKS: Dial your assigned number (probably in the U.S.) and wait for a busy signal. Hang up, and their computer calls you back, giving you a U.S. dial tone. BILLING: Information unavailable. Probably billed to credit card. SAMPLE RATES: Australia to U.S.: $0.88/min. Germany to U.S.: $0.57/min. Hong Kong to U.S.: $0.66/min. India to U.S.: $1.27/min. Japan to U.S.: $0.63/min. Sweden to U.S.: $0.54/min. Taiwan to U.S.: $0.80/min. U.K. to U.S.: $0.44/min. COMMENTS: Voice mail and fax store-and-forward services also available. 24-hour operator assistance as needed. NAME: H.V. Griner Telecommunication Associates CONTACT INFO: Phone: 1-612-441-0658 Fax: 1-612-241-9560 Internet: HVGriner@icicle.winternet.mpls.mn.us Compuserve: 73174,2250 HOW IT WORKS: Dial an unlisted number assigned to you in the U.S. Their computer doesn't answer, but calls you back after you hang up, giving you a U.S. dial tone. BILLING: No startup fee, no monthly fee. Billed in 6-second increments, 30 second minimum. SAMPLE RATES: Japan to U.S.: $0.78/min. NOTES: - This company is a reseller of the Global Access Callback service, listed above. - They are looking for agents outside of the U.S. NAME: INTEX CONTACT INFO: 1-800-877-1456 or 1-516-767-3040 NOTES: No other information available. NAME: Kallback Direct CONTACT INFO: Kallback Direct 417 Second Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 Phone: 1-206-286-5280 or 1-800-959-5255 Fax: 1-206-282-6666 or 1-800-949-5255 Email: cyberspace@kallback.com NOTES: No other information available. NAME: Logical / Kokusai Telecom CONTACT INFO: 2-1-1 Minamidai Nakano-ku Tokyo 164, Japan Phone: +81-3-5385-4701 Other information presently unavailable. Supposedly their rates are 25% below those of KDD, at all times. This company is the Japanese agent for a U.S. company. NAME: MTC OneCard CONTACT INFO: MTC Passport Telemanagement Call Clearance Center 55 S. Market St., Suite 1435 San Jose, CA 95113 Phone: 1-800-967-5382 or 1-408-298-2985 Fax: 1-408-298-6905 HOW IT WORKS: Dial local access number, your PIN, the phone number you're calling FROM, then hang up. Their computer calls you back and gives you a U.S. dial tone. BILLING: $5 for initial account setup. Billed through your credit card. SAMPLE RATES: Japan to U.S.: 70 cents/minute? COMMENTS: Works from anywhere in the world with a local access number: about 45 countries. Other services (speed dialing, conference calls, etc.) also available or will be available soon. NOTES: - MTC also sells a callback service called "PASSPORT", listed below. - I have had serious problems trying to figure out which phone number(s) or addresses to use to contact MTC to request service. So far I have 3 postal addresses, 5 phone numbers, 3 fax numbers, and at least one person has reported being told that MTC doesn't offer the "OneCard". This is clearly not true, since I have one. See the entry below for more MTC addresses and phone numbers. - MTC is allegedly receiving 100 new customers a day, so you may need to be patient about signing up and receiving information. NAME: MTC Passport CONTACT INFO: MTC Telemanagement Corporation 1304 Southpoint Boulevard Petaluma, CA 94954 Phone: 1-800-999-2682 or 1-800-733-2682 Fax: 1-707-769-5940 or Passport International Telemanagement 925 Lakeville St. #318 Petaluma, CA 94952 or Nigel Grace, MTC Passport International Consultant Phone: 1-515-469-6000 Fax: 1-515-469-6044 HOW IT WORKS: 2nd-hand information suggests it works as follows: dial local access number, your PIN, then hang up. Their computer calls you back at a predetermined number and gives you a U.S. dial tone. BILLING: $50 one-time enrollment fee? $25 monthly minimum. SAMPLE RATES: From Japan to U.S.: 46.3 cents/minute, no per-call charge? NOTES: - See notes above on MTC OneCard. - The Passport service is also resold by Business Communications Management, listed earlier. - I have a second-hand report that the $50 enrollment fee has been dropped. NAME: Progressive Communications CONTACT INFO: P.O. Box 5890 Athens, OH 45701-5890 Fax: 1-614-592-4970 Internet: dprince@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu NOTES: - Other information presently unavailable. NAME: Star*Telecom CONTACT INFO: STAR*TELECOM 9541 SW 148 Ave. Cir. North P.O. Box 163055 Miami, FL 33196 Phone: 1-305-386-5343 Phone, in France: +33-1-39-28-00-19 Fax: 1-305-386-6352 Contact person: Ron Valme BILLING: No enrollment fee, no monthly minimum. SAMPLE RATES: Netherlands to U.S.: $0.40/min. Austria to U.S.: $0.34/min. U.K. to U.S.: $0.29/min. NOTES: Phone card available for travellers. Other information unavailable. COMMENTS: I have a second-hand report that this company is a reseller of the MTC Passport service. If so then their prices should be similar to those I have listed for MTC. NAME: Telepassport CONTACT INFO: P.O. Box 1003 Chicago, IL 60690 Fax: 1-708-329-0572 HOW IT WORKS: There are two main methods: 1: Dial a U.S. number given to you by Telepassport, then hang up. Their computer calls you back at your home number. PIN optional. 2: Dial a local toll-free number for Japan, enter account number and PIN, then enter a number which requests a callback to wherever you are. BILLING: $25/month minimum. Billed via credit card or via electronic funds transfer (bank to bank). SAMPLE RATES: From Japan to U.S., standard/discount/economy rates: .98/.85/.79 ($/minute) COMMENTS: PIN is 4 digits. You receive monthly statements. Service available all over the world. Message forwarding, voice mail, and other services available. For extensive information, email the following message to tel-archives@lcs.mit.edu : reply YOURNAME@YOURSITE.YOUR.DOMAIN info telepassport end OTHER INFORMATION: Van Hefner (vantek@aol.com) is the moderator of Discount Long Distance Digest, a free weekly electronic publication which focuses primarily on the long distance reselling industry but also covers other telecommunications businesses. It is targetted at telecommunications resellers, NOT at casual consumers who want to lower their long distance bills. However, Mr. Hefner writes that "everyone is welcomed". To subscribe, send email to telconet@aol.com and put "Subscribe Digest" in your Subject: line. Since this FAQ started out as a way of helping people in Japan to save money on international calls, I'd like to put in a word encouraging all of the above companies to do more advertising in English-language publications in Japan. Japan's three international phone companies regularly take out enormous advertisements in my daily newspaper, but I never see any ads from callback companies. Since almost everyone listed above is undercutting the best Japanese rates by a significant percentage, particularly for calls to the U.S., it seems to me that the possible returns on a few ads would be quite high. I make no guarantees, however; this is just a suggestion. The present per-minute rates of KDD, the major international long-distance provider in Japan, are (after exchange rate conversion, $1.00 = Y103) roughly $2.16/min, $1.74/min, and $1.26/min. depending on the time of day. KDD has recently started a 10% discount program which costs a few dollars extra per month, but I don't know the details. For discussions about Internet and other networking issues in Japan, join the EFJ list: send the message "subscribe Your Name" to . You will receive an acknowledgement giving more information about the list. Disclaimer: I don't work for any of these companies. Bruce Hahne Current address: bruce@jise.isl.melco.co.jp Lifetime address: hahne@acm.org ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 9:37:51 CDT From: Will Martin Subject: Re: SRI Ends Two Bobs' MGR Regarding the supersession of shortwave by satellite-radio broadcasting: This topic has been kicked around on some of the radio-related mailing lists and newsgroups for a while. There are oft-stated arguments on the subject and some ideas I've had that I've not seen elsewhere: First off, cost of equipment for reaching relatively poor target audiences: shortwave reception is cheap and simple technology these days, even though many new receivers incorporate high-tech user interfaces and features. A basic SW radio can be bought for about $US 20 or so; a low-end digital-readout model for $US 50. Satellite reception costs a vast amount more, currently, and even if new-tech audio-only satellite receivers are mass-produced they still will cost more than this. Digital broadcasting may have some effect on this, but I'm going to reserve judgement until I see what shakes out of the trees regarding that whole issue. There's a sizeable investment in shortwave transmitters and more are being built every day. The countries and organizations that use these aren't going to just shut them down and sell them for scrap anytime soon. Same with the receiver investment among the populace -- they'll still be used as long as anything is on the airwaves to pick up. Actually, the main thrust of discussion/negotiation among shortwave broadcasters at fora like the ITU meetings is the overcrowding of broadcast bands and the resulting destructive interference. There are far more candidates for SW broadcast spectrum space than there are slots to give them. So even if some broadcasters cut their SW output, the quantity of signal on the air will still remain high. Now, some people may complain about the *content* of the signals, as the recent increase in US-based religious/political shortwave broadcasters has caused many comments among the hobbyists. But these people have a strong and overriding motivation to spread their messages, and they're probably going to stay on the air even if many government-funded national services disappear due to budget cuts. Also, there's at least one aspect that no one ever seems to mention: you can hide your SW reception. I can listen in my bed to shortwave, using a radio that's the size of a paperback book. In good-signal conditions, I don't even have to extend the whip antenna to receive a major broadcaster with a nearby relay site (for example, Radio Netherlands with their Bonaire relay). No one has ever shown me how they can receive from a satellite without an external antenna of some kind, even if technological advances make it possible to do away with a large dish and low-noise-amp mounted at the feedpoint. How can I duplicate the simplicity of this SW reception I have now in a satellite situation? Consider the number of countries that have come out with edicts banning or severely restricting satellite dishes in private hands: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia have all been mentioned in recent news as doing this. Even if technology makes "stealth" satellite antenna setups possible in the future, it still will be risky in some countries or under some regimes to have any external receiving devices. The high frequencies used by satellite services make direct line-of-sight reception necessary -- no whip antenna inside your house will suffice. So shortwave still is better for reaching a target audience that suffers such repression. (Yes, shortwave can be jammed, but it isn't a totally-successful effort; witness the Eastern Europe and USSR experiences.) Maybe the proliferation of satellite services will cause the amount of shortwave programming directed specifically at developed areas to decrease, with the former senders switching over to satellites and relying on local rebroadcasting of the satellite-fed signal. The VOA has done this in several areas, contracting with local FM or AM medium-wave stations to relay VOA programming. The BBC has explicitly reduced its shortwave-to-North-America services and stated that the US public-radio relays of BBC signals is the reason. Personally, I don't like this, since I feel the BBC should have a mission to give a 24-hour shortwave service to English-speaking areas all over the world, but that's where our opinions differ. I'm lucky enough that a local public-radio station relays the BBC World Service from midnight to 5 AM (6 AM on weekends), but many North Americans do not have this luxury. I still tune in the BBC on shortwave at other times, and put up with weak signals when I wish to hear a program at a time when there is no North-American-directed shortwave signal (such as mid-day). But this reduction of strong signals directed to a target area here actually makes the shortwave-listening/DXing hobby better -- if there are fewer strong signals, it is easier to pull in weak DX! And that weak DX will be the vast quantity of shortwave-broadcast signals directed at other areas, which will still fill the airwaves. Lastly, we're discussing this at a sunspot-minimum point (actually still on the way down) in the solar cycle. Every time this happens, people who can't remember over a decade back predict the imminent death of shortwave. (Similar to the "imminent death of the Net". :-) It didn't happen the last time, nor the time before, nor before that, and we had other technological developments at the time that people thought would kill off shortwave (television, for example). I think people will still be broadcasting on and listening to shortwave 50 years from now, and probably fussing about how it is going to disappear "real soon now" ... Will ------------------------------ From: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu (Greg Trotter) Subject: Re: Meeks Defense Fund Date: 17 May 1994 16:28:10 GMT In article TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Nowhere in the above report is any > mention given of whether or not libel did occur. Note that the article > seems to skirt that (to me) very basic premise ... instead, the > writers complain of how the accused has very little money, is doing > all this for free out of sense of volunteerism, and how the plaintiff > is a big company with lots of money -- as though those facts alone > meant anything. Big corporations have rights also; even AT&T is > entitled to the protection of the law, the same as you or I. (Note: I > use AT&T as an example only, I do not know who is suing him.) I sent email to the fund address, asking for a pointer to the supposedly libelous article. They asked me not to repost it. Basically, it's an article about a direct mail firm that seems to have some shady practices and has run afoul of regulatory agencies in several states. I don't claim to be an expert in libel. However, I do know that most people think that libel is "a published untruth." However, this is not the case. If I remember my journalism days correctly, libel is "damage or injury to reputation." Because of this, you can still libel someone while telling the truth. A typical defense for libel is that the article was "true and absent malice." After reading the inflammatory tone of Brock's article, I have opted not to assist the defense. greg ------------------------------ From: gashley@nwpx30.nts.uswc.uswest.com (Gregory C. Ashley) Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line Date: 16 May 94 08:13 CST In response to recent articles on radio interference I found an internal company memorandum that may be helpful to some. I don't know how current the model numbers or phone numbers are. ------------------- AT&T makes modular telphone filters (Models #Z100A and Z101A) that are designed to eliminate interference from AM broadcast stations. The filters can easily be plugged into any phone which has a standard modular jack. They are available at Phone Center Stores or can ordered by calling the AT&T National Sales and Service Center at 1-800-222-3111. NOTE: These filters are only effective for interference from AM broadcast stations. They are not designed to filter out interference from CB or amateur radio transmitters. Radio Shack makes a "snap-on choke" filter (Catalog #273-104) which is designed to filter out transmissions from CB or amateur radios. These chokes are installed on the telphone cord by wrapping the cord around and/or through the choke. Chokes of many different types, also called "ferrites", "beads", or "toroids", are available at most electronic stores. -------------- Greg C. Ashley (gashley@nwpx30.mnet.uswest.com) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #232 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa12229; 17 May 94 20:20 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA27198; Tue, 17 May 94 14:51:04 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA27187; Tue, 17 May 94 14:51:00 CDT Date: Tue, 17 May 94 14:51:00 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405171951.AA27187@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #231 TELECOM Digest Tue, 17 May 94 14:51:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 231 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Palestinian Country Code (Bob Goudreau) Need New NPA Listings (Tony Pelliccio) Lexus Cellular Phones (Eric A. Litman) New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Bay Area) (Henry Mensch) "Private" Message on CID Box (mwolf@marcie.wellesley.edu) What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (Victoria Matho) Information Needed on Telecommunications in England (Andy Kumeda) Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 2 (Darren Ingram) ANI Numbers For (408) Area Wanted (Neil R. Henry) Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Mark E. Daniel) Telephone Number Syntax Question (Ken Shirriff) Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Anton Sherwood) Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Anton Sherwood) Re: Trying to Convert WAV Files to 3-Bit ADPCM (Stu Whitmore) Texas Gets Caller ID (David Winters) Information Wanted on ITC Autonet (Chris Cariffe) Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Setup Access Point (John R. Levine) Re: NPA Readiness For 1995 (Alan Leon Varney) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 12:17:58 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Palestinian Country Code According to a recent issue of the {Economist}, the recent agreement between Israel and the PLO in setting up a "Palestinian Authority" in the Gaza strip and the Jericho area includes provisions that allow the Authority to issue postage stamps and to use a separate telephone country code. Does anyone know if the ITU has issued the new code yet, and if so, what number was used? The country code list for Zone 9 (which includes Israel, Jordan, etc.) in the Telecom archives shows that 970, 978 and 979 are currently vacant, so I suspect that it will be one of those. Also, are any details yet available about the internal numbering space that will exist within the new country code (i.e., what area codes and local numbers will look like)? I note that Jericho, along with Jerusalem and lots of the West Bank, is currently part of area code 2 in Israel; will Jericho lines still be dialable as Israeli numbers too? (I can't find any listing for Gaza in the current Israel listing.) Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: Anthony_Pelliccio@brown.edu (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Need New NPA Listings Date: 17 May 1994 18:15:25 GMT Organization: Brown University ADIR In order to keep our database accurate, I'm wondering where I can FTP listings of recently changed and upcoming changes to the U.S. dialing plan. ie, area-code splits. I could have sworn this information was available via ftp on bellcore.com but cannot find it there. Anyone know where it might be buried? Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR Anthony_Pelliccio@brown.edu, Tel. (401) 863-1880 Fax. (401) 863-2269 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You might check out the Telecom Archives also, in the /areacodes sub-directory. Anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. PAT] ------------------------------ From: elitman@proxima.com (Eric A. Litman) Subject: Lexus Cellular Phones Date: 17 May 1994 09:02:30 -0500 Organization: Proxima, Inc. I was recently going over the phone options for the Lexus GS300, and noticed that the phone system Lexus offers is a Motorola -- basically a souped-up AlphaTac. When installed by a Lexus dealer, the phone integrates with the stereo system and the AC to mute the stereo, lower the AC, and allow conversations to be held over the car's audio system. My question is, can my Motorola DPC550 handheld be integrated into this system, or are there special "hooks" in the Lexus-specific phone? Eric Litman Proxima, Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 09:12:00 PDT From: Henry Mensch Subject: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Bay Area) So, I'm at a Golden Gate Transit bus stop on Harrison and Third street trying to go meet a friend in Santa Rosa ... there's no schedule posted, and no phone number on the shelter. I extract my handy dandy cellfone and dial '411' and ask for the number for Golden Gate Transit. The lady who answers the phone answers with "GTE can I help you?". Apparently she couldn't because she could not find a number for Golden Gate Transit in SF ... then I remember this bill insert which gave information on this "new service." I asked if I could get connected to the real information operator, and I was informed that *6543 would work. *6543 did indeed work, and I got the number on the first try. Moral of the story: to use GTE's new gimmicky directory assistance dial 411 or 555 1212 ... to get the real stuff dial *6543. Your mileage may vary, especially outside the Bay Area. henry mensch / oracle corporation / "on the internet, nobody knows you're a bear." --tovah hollander pob 14592; sf, ca 94114-0592; usa / NBCS: B3/4 w+ f+ g(-) k+ s+ m p(+) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Henry, a question and a comment: exactly what does this *6543 hook get you into? You said 'new, gimmicky directory assistance' which leads me to wonder, did not GTE offer directory assist- ance like any other telco until recently, i.e. 'new'?. Is the cellular division of the company offering a new service and intercepting calls to 411 or 555-1212 which formerly had gone to a full directory bureau and providing some limited sub-set of the directory? My comment is that as a fine example of how telco service has gotten worse since divestiture, there was a time, until maybe a decade ago when the information operators *memorized* the 'top twenty' inquiries and did not have to look for them at all. The airline and bus schedule information numbers, the utility companies, city hall; all those were on the tip of her tongue. So if you asked (for example) for the number for bus schedules she would *instantly* reply, "eight three six seven thousand". The next twenty or thirty 'often requested numbers' after the 'top twenty' were on an index card at her position that she could glance at. It was only after you got beyond that group of a few dozen numbers people were always asking about that she had to actually use the directory. Generally all the oper- ators -- not just the directory operators -- knew the 'top twenty' by heart so a person who dialed the zero operator for assistance could also be immediatly connected. That's how it *used* to be. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mwolf@marcie.wellesley.edu (MUR) Subject: "Private" Message on CID Box Organization: WELLESLEY COLLEGE Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 14:28:37 GMT Some of the calls I receive from areas that don't yet have Caller ID service are picked up by my CID boxes as "private" (blocked) rather that "out-of-area", even though the calling parties haven't blocked thier numbers. This will be a problem when I install a blocked call rejecting CID box. Have others found this to happen? Solutions? ------------------------------ From: vmatho@mason1.gmu.edu (Victoria Matho) Subject: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? Date: 17 May 1994 12:35:19 GMT Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does?? Thanks in Advance, Victoria ------------------------------ From: kumeda@csulb.edu (ANDY KUMEDA) Subject: Information Needed on Telecommunications in England Date: 17 May 1994 14:52:20 GMT Organization: Cal State Long Beach I am posting this for a colleague of mine who is doing research on 'Telecommunication in England'. He would like some info on the following topics: o recent trends in their communication industry o telecom carriers' market size o cellular phones o communications and broadcast satellites o 'Super Highways' o or any other helpful info, or where to find them Thanks a lot, and please respond to me via e-mail. I will summarize to those that are interested. Andy Kumeda ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 16:36 BST From: Darren Ingram Subject: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 2 Reply-To: satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk We would like to offer TELECOM Digest readers a special price on subscription. The UK price is gbp700 per year for fax. We would be pleased to offer **ALL** businesses a single-copy price of the same (payable in Sterling or credit card) for delivery to an electronic mail box connected to the Internet. The companies would have to sign a piece of paper (yes, old fashioned!) saying they would not redistribute the material and basically subject the copyrighted works in the same way as a printed publication. Site archive licences are available. For genuine bona-fida non-commercial users a very generous (in excess of 50 percent) discount would be offered upon signing a similar warranty which also says that the information would be for their sole use only and for non-commercial purposes). Also we have another product called Satnews, which I will forward similar offer details on later next week. Here are some stories from a recent issue: -US COMPANIES TAKE STAKE IN SOUTH KOREAN MOBILE TELCO TWW-12 May 1994-US COMPANIES TAKE STAKE IN SOUTH KOREAN MOBILE TELCO TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA- Four US companies have been selected to take a shareholding in South Korea's second mobile phone system -- now called Shinsegi Mobile Telecom Co Ltd. Pacific Telesis (PacTel) is to take a 10 percent holding, along with Southwestern Bell (7%), GTE Corp (4%) and Qualcomm Inc (1.2%). The combined foreign stake is slightly more than the 20.2 percent planned by the Federation of Korean Industries (FKI), who co-ordinated the complex arrangements of appointing national and international shareholders. The key South Korean shareholders are the Pohang Iron and Steel Co (POSCO) with a 15 percent stake, Kolon Industries Co Ltd with 14 percent and around 240 local firms making up the remainder of minority shareholders. The formation of the second mobile phone consortium closes a very controversial -- and newsworthy -- chain of events which saw the Sunkyong Group chosen to lead the contract, but this was abandoned after charges of nepotism were made because the son of Sunkyong's chairman is married to the daughter of ex-President Roh Tae-woo. Sunkyong made a second bid, but later withdrew it after winning a 23 percent share of Korea Mobile Telecom Corp, operators of the existing mobile network. -ITOCHU BUILDS HIGH-SPEED CHINESE DIGITAL NETWORK TWW-12 May 1994-ITOCHU BUILDS HIGH-SPEED CHINESE DIGITAL NETWORK TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD BEIJING, CHINA- Itochu Corp has installed a 64kbit/s digital leased line between Beijing and China for JAL Airlines Co, making it the fist Japanese company to build a high-speed network in the country. There are plans to extend the link to cover Talien and Guangzhou. -TRIAL OF CANADIAN INFO SUPERHIGHWAY PLANNED TWW-12 May 1994-TRIAL OF CANADIAN INFO SUPERHIGHWAY PLANNED TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD TORONTO, CANADA- A trial of an information superhighway in Canada is set to begin which will test tele-medicine applications and distance medical education. The so-called Experimental Test Bed Network will be sponsored by the non-profit-making Canarie Group Inc, a group of over 100 private and public organisations created to develop the country's next generation of telecommunication networks. Network services worth C$7.5 million are to be provided by the Stentor alliance and Unitel Communications Inc. Initially regional networks in Ottawa and British Columbia are to be formed before national networks are formed by the year-end. -CLI, INTEL ALIGN FOR VIDEOCONFERENCING PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT TWW-12 May 1994-CLI, INTEL ALIGN FOR VIDEOCONFERENCING PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD NEW YORK, USA- Intel Corp. has formed an agreement with Compression Labs Inc to jointly develop advanced videoconferencing products. The companies first broke news of their alliance in January but this is the first definitive step of intent. Compression Labs' products will support Intel's PC desktop videoconferencing and dataconferencing (workgroup) products. Intel is providing some development funding and has purchased US$2 million of recently-issued Compression Labs stock. -TENDERS FOR BRAZILIAN CELLULAR TO BE RELEASED TWW-12 May 1994-BRIEF TRANSMISSION:TENDERS FOR BRAZILIAN CELLULAR TO BE RELEASED TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD RIO DE JANERIO, BRAZIL- Tenders for US$110 worth of orders to expand a cellular communications network are shortly to be published by Telerj, a business unit of Telebras. Companies will be invited to bid for a contract worth about $30 million to provide 22,000 new cellular lines in Rio de Janerio state and in June the company will put out to tender 60,000 lines in the city of Rio de Janeiro, a deal worth around $80 million. Observers say that NEC is tipped to win the tender as in 1989 it was awarded contracts now worth US$200 million to supply 120,000 cellular circuits. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part one of this sampling appeared in a prior issue of the Digest today. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nhenry@netcom.com (Neil R. Henry) Subject: ANI Numbers Wanted For (408) Area Organization: Remote Access Solutions, Los Gatos, CA USA Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 05:45:13 GMT Can anyone provide private or telco ANI read-off telephones for San Jose CA (408) area. Many thanks, Neil ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 03:05:52 EST From: mark@legend.akron.oh.us (Mark E Daniel) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? In article is written: > Illinois Bell territory, we use *60 to add/delete numbers to our > Call Screening directory. If thus screened, the calling party gets an > intercept message saying the called party 'is not receiving calls at > this time.' Do you have a limit on the number telephone IDs :) that you are allow to block calls from? Or do they charge you on a byte-used deal? :) Like I always say, I'd rather have a list of allowed numbers and forget the rest. :) > jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) writes: >> Or the modem should detect voice and put out a AT-command like >> response ("VOICE") which would cause the comm software to cease, just >> like a "NO ANSWER" timeout. Shouldn't be hard for the DSP to detect >> voice. Do common modems provide any such voice indication? Sure. There are indeed modems that will detect VOICE and do indeed respond with VOICE. Check in c.d.modems to be sure, but I believe that it's mostly the highend Hayes' and I believe the US Robotics Dual Standards which provide this feature. I have a ZyXEL with old ROMs that as of my ROM revision will not detect VOICE, but again I believe this might have been added to the latest ROMs. :) Mark E Daniel (Loving SysOp of The Legend BBS) Inet: mark@legend.akron.oh.us medaniel@delphi.com (Direct INet) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a limit of ten numbers from which calls can be rejected. A new entry to the list at that point cause the oldest entry to drop off. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shirriff@allspice.Berkeley.EDU (Ken Shirriff) Subject: Telephone Number Syntax Question Date: 17 May 1994 06:07:12 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley It used to be that phone numbers had the syntax 123-456-7890 or (123) 456-7890. Now I see lots of numbers of the form +1 123 456-7890. When did this new trend occur, and what does the "+" signify? Ken Shirriff shirriff@cs.Berkeley.EDU [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The +1 indicates the country code for the USA and Canada along with countries using the 809 area code. By coincidence '1' is also the access code we dial when placing a long distance number, but in this instance it represents the country code. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dasher@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood) Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! Organization: Crackpots for a Better Tomorrow Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 19:53:42 GMT In article justfred@netcom.com (Fred Heald) writes: > I tend to always dial the entire number (1-NPA-NXX-XXXX) first, > and get the ridiculous message "We are sorry, it is not necesary to > dial one and the area code for this call". Well, this morning (in > fact, calling Netcom) I accidentally dialed the 1-818, and the call > went through! I just tried it in 415. Hooray! Anton Sherwood *\\* +1 415 267 0685 *\\* DASher@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: dasher@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood) Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate Organization: Crackpots for a Better Tomorrow Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 00:16:50 GMT Speaking of NNX and NXX, is there a letter for the set {0,1}? I haven't seen one used. If (strangely) there isn't a convention, how about B for Bit, so old-style area codes are NBX? Anton Sherwood *\\* +1 415 267 0685 *\\* DASher@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 09:58:45 -0700 From: whitmore@tahoma.cwu.edu (Rattlesnake Stu) Subject: Re: Trying to Convert WAV Files to 3-Bit ADPCM Organization: Central Washington University On Fri, 13 May 1994 16:19:15 -0500, Richard De A'Morelli scribbled: > I have been looking for quite some time for a shareware package that > would convert WAV files to 3-bit ADPCM, which would be suitable not > only for Zyxel modems, but other telecom specific voice cards as well, > such as Dialogic, Pika AVA-4, New Voice, etc. I am especially > interested in a utility for the Pika AVA-4 card -- the only one I know > of is a commercial package priced at about $500, which is far more for > a voice editor package than I can afford. Any help would be most apprec- > iated. I finally got a "solution" to this, which I've been wanting as well. (Note that this is not a perfect solution, but you can make it work.) Use the shareware program Blaster Master to load the .WAV, then save it as a .VOC file. Use the VCNVT program (see the ZyXEL FTP site, I think, or their BBS) to convert the .VOC to the 3-bit ADPCM format. This worked for me. (Blaster Master is a neat program, you can combine and otherwise manipulate files to come up with really outrageous nonsense, as long as you have a good supply of Monty Python and Star Trek .WAV files ... . You can FTP it from the SimTel archives, if I remember correctly, but I don't recall what directory in the SimTel/msdos tree.) Stuart Whitmore FAX: (509) 925-3893 Data: Same as FAX whitmore@tahoma.cwu.edu 71221.1737@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: davidw@bga.com (David Winters) Subject: Texas Gets Caller ID Date: 17 May 1994 03:37:05 GMT Organization: Real/Time Communications - Bob Gustwick and Associates Texas finally has Caller ID. It has been available in Austin, the first area, for a couple of months. It was held up for reasons laid out in the previous postings and the state wire-tap law. A card came in my Southwestern Bell phone bill asking if I wanted per-line blocking. It was stated that I needed a compelling reason to have per-line blocking but did not have to state that reason to the phone company. In reality this means anyone can have per-line blocking. I read in the local newspaper that only 2% of local residents signed up for per-line blocking. I have never received a call yet by a blocked number. A service which was mandated in Texas was called Anonymous call rejection. This only costs 50 cents extra. Anonymous call rejection enables someone with or without Caller ID to block all blocked calls. In other words if someone calls me and has pressed *67 or has per-line blocking, they will receive a recording indicating that I am not accepting blocked calls provided that I have the ACR service turned on. My only problem so far has been the number of "out of area" calls I receive from cellular and out of town numbers. My understanding is that within the next year, long distance carriers will be required to send the Caller ID signal. Caller ID is supposed to be available in Houston (713) and San Antonio (210) later this year. It will be available in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area (214/817) early next year. David Winters | davidw@bga.com [preferred e-mail address] Austin, Texas | CIS: 73510.2404@compuserve.com | AOL: davidwi@aol.com ------------------------------ From: chrys@netcom.com (Chris Cariffe) Subject: Information Wanted on ITC Autonet Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 01:11:57 GMT Does anyone have any info on ITC Autonet? I have just interviewed with this company and am interested to find out what the public has to say. They seem to be a pretty good company. I found that all of the employees I've talked to really like them. They take a great deal of concern in the customer, which is a BIG plus in this industry. Any info would be appreciated. Chris chriss@well.com chrys@netcom Denver, Colorado 303-321-6650 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 18:07 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > It sounds like you're about to get into the wonderful world of Unix. > The addresses we have on the internet don't seem to want to let people > telnet into our site. This is because we have a network with only DOS > machines on it. I have heard that we are going to have to get a Unix > box and a fully qualified domain name if we want to be fully on the 'net. I have a network here with two Windows machines, a Unix machine, and a couple of routers. They're all really on the Internet -- ping tom.iecc.com if you want to say hi to a Windows laptop on the net. Ping xuxa.iecc.com and astrud.iecc.com to say hi to two antique 286 boxes routing packets through a wireless Ethernet, my link to the outside. You probably want to provide services such as FTP to outside users. You can in fact do this with Windows machines (you can FTP to tom as well) although Windows is not a terribly robust server platform. Windows server software exists for many popular services such as Gopher, finger, and WWW as well as for DNS, the system that manages Internet host names. If you want a robust server, you are indeed better off running Unix, which works very nicely on a 386 or better PC. It's cheaper than DOS, too. For an introduction to setting up an Internet node, I'd suggest "The Internet Connection" by John Quarterman and Smoot Carl-Mitchell, Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-54237-4. For a general introduction to the Internet, I shamelessly recommend "The Internet for Dummies", IDG, 1-56884-024-1, which now seems to be the overall best selling Internet book. I think it's one of the finest books ever written in the English language, but since I wrote it I may be biased. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 08:30:45 +0500 Subject: Re: NPA Readiness for 1995 Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article Gregory P. Monti writes: > North America's Countdown to NPA Interchangeability in 1995 Greg, I've added a date to all the non-ready NPAs, indicating when Bellcore believes they WILL be ready (permissive dialing). In some cases, it is a date in the past ... (Mandatory dates before 5/1/94 are also indicated.) I've used JULY to indicate "7/1/94 permissive", since it is such a common date. Note that ALL of these NPAs have elected to use 1+10 for Toll calls (except CA 408, which says "no" for another reason). Al Varney NPA Stat Toll Ready Notes Prov calls for within 1/95? NPA dialed as 203 CT 1+7 no 2/28/94 permissive 314 MO 1+7 no JULY 316 KS 1+7 no JULY 318 LA 1+7 no 9/4/93 perm. 1+10 (4/2/94 mandatory) 405 OK 1+7 no JULY 408 CA 7 no inter-NPA calls are 10D, must change to 1+10D {Table indicates 1+10 Inter-NPA permitted as of 10/11/93, mandatory 10/10/94 -- same comment applies to 209, 619, 707, 805 & 916. So this should be "yes"????} 409 TX 1+7 no JULY 417 MO 1+7 no JULY 501 AR 1+7 no JULY 502 KY 1+7 no 9/4/93 perm. 1+10 (4/2/94 mandatory) 504 LA 1+7 no 9/4/93 perm. 1+10 (4/2/94 mandatory) 517 MI 1+7 no 5/1/94 permissive 606 KY 1+7 no 9/4/93 perm. 1+10 (4/2/94 mandatory) 616 MI 1+7 no 5/1/94 permissive 702 NV 1+7 no JULY 804 VA 1+7 no 5/18/94 permissive 806 TX 1+7 no JULY 808 HI 1+7 no 6/19/94 permissive 809 Caribbean 1+7 no {These have all elected to go with 1+10 Toll, with 1/9/94 as the MANDATORY date. So this should be "1+10 mostly" and "yes". The islands of St. Vincent and Turks & Caicos use "01+10D" for Toll, and 115+10D for operator calls. Turks & Caicos permit 5D local and Anguilla and Montserrat permit 4D local .... } 816 MO 1+7 no JULY 906 MI 1+7 no 2/1/94 permissive 907 AK 1+7 no {Table says the permissive date is NA ?? Mandatory 1+10 date is 1/1/95} 913 KS 1+7 no JULY 915 TX 1+7 no JULY 918 OK 1+7 no JULY ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #231 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14191; 18 May 94 2:44 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA10360; Tue, 17 May 94 23:16:07 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA10343; Tue, 17 May 94 23:16:04 CDT Date: Tue, 17 May 94 23:16:04 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405180416.AA10343@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #233 TELECOM Digest Tue, 17 May 94 23:16:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 233 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID ( Dave Thompson) Re: Nationwide CID, CLASS, etc. (Mike D. Schomburg) Re: Wireless Data Services (Pete Farmer) Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (Terry Gilson) Re: Inteljak Wireless Phone Jak System (Marcial Dumlao) Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Fred Goldstein) Re: SONET Management Standards? (Don Berryman) Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (Don Berryman) Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (K. M. Peterson) Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (Will Martin) Re: New Area Codes Assigned (Scott D. Fybush) Re: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming (Alan Leon Varney) Re: GTE Analog Pocket Phone (Steven H. Lichter) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thompson, Dave Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID Date: Tue, 17 May 94 20:11:00 PDT In Telecom 14.224 Fri 13 May, rwb@alexander.alias.cs.cmu.edu (Robert Berger) replies to: (telecom14.221.8) padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson): >> Personally, I agree with the basic service being per-call blocking. >> If you want per-call blocking on YOUR phone that's fine. I don't >> see why they can't let the customer have his/her choice. > I don't want any business I deal with to have my home phone number. > They WILL sell it to telemarketers, and there's no way I can prove who > did it. > IF they can't offer per-line blocking then they should drop [CallerID]. I also find free per-call a fair balance, at least for myself, as I am *usually* willing to give my number when I call, but there seem to be quite a few who strongly oppose this -- although net users are not a very random sample -- so I think per-line should be available to those who request it and pay a nominal premium (as with unlisted number). In the cited article Padgett went on to say "I doubt that additional features (just like unlisted numbers) will be available for those who need them." but from context I think he meant "I don't doubt"; and although he didn't say "chargeable" most options are. One proposal has been to include per-line with the fee for unlisted, or maybe a discount for unlisted + per-line, as with >1 Custom Calling option. If so many subscribers get per-line as to make CallerID "worthless", which I don't expect, I would take that as a referendum reversing the FCC decision; not all rules are made officially. I find the arguments *for* requiring per-call convincing anyway, and well-presented in the Report and Order, but then para 43 jumps from "a federal per line blocking requirement ... is not the best policy choice ...." to "Thus, carriers *may not offer* per line blocking ... on interstate calls." I think this is the least-supported finding. And if the originating LEC can't determine in- or out-of-state termination of inter-LATA calls and given a single-bit privacy indicator, it apparently prevents per-line for in-state inter-LATA, an unacknowledged encroachment on state jurisdictions? However, Robert, if you can successfully do business by phone without giving *anyone* your number, I'm impressed. *I* probably wouldn't accept your calls. And as has been discussed often, you can't protect your number from any 800/900 user *unless* restrictions on use of ANI data like those in the order take effect. > Emergencies are no excuse; 911's have had number ID for years. Actually I believe E911 (and B911?) requires special trunks and CPE, and as the order discussed at some length (paras 32, 35, 37, 43) although citing only Coast Guard and poison centers, there can well be emergency services that can only afford/justify POTS connections. But if you agree to this exception it's easily implemented: - originating carrier sets PI, and may be allowed to do so per-line; - all carriers still must transport calling number and PI (free); - terminating carrier is allowed to override PI on delivery to an emergency service -- although carriers or FCC/PUCs must then decide who deserves this, almost the kind of question they seemed unwilling to handle in paras 39-40 (per-line blocking for "special needs"); on the other hand, they don't *seem* to have much trouble now deciding who is a valid law-enforcement agency? Arguably there is still a privacy violation if you call something without realizing it is a "caller-id override" emergency service. Ideally if distinctive and standard codes could be established, something like 999-xxxx or 811-xxxx maybe, it would solve this *and* be easier to publicize, teach, and use away from home, just as basic 911 was an improvement over 7D for police etc. On the other hand if 911 centers grow to handle more and more of these other functions, as they seem to be gradually doing -- and set up *effective* plans to deal with power outages, equipment malfunctions, and telco network trouble, fer G*d's sake -- the question is moot; that's even more obvious and convenient. There has also been mention of blocking from women's shelters, recently by carlp@teleport.com (Carl B. Page), 6 May, in 14.205. I assume this is only an issue when the women call their batterers; ordinary business e.g. ordering pizza isn't especially private. I don't understand why they want to hide that they're calling from *a* shelter; I should think that adds a sense of official protection. In fact unless this is part of a confidence-(re)building strategy I would wonder if the woman should talk at all to the abuser. What I *would* want is maybe to block harassing callbacks, by outgoing-only service or by listing under some headquarters office or the police, as they do need to get calls (unsolicited or referred?) from potential clients; and more important to keep their *location* secret to prevent stalking/following, kidnapping, etc. Although I have not seen mention in these discussions, I consider shelters for children to be in the same situation, and know one, Covenant House, that has widely publicized their 800 number for years. Am I missing something? And before someone ties this to a recent thread, yes, harassing calls are punishable anyway, *if traced*; so is battering; but I agree prevention is cheaper, faster, and pleasanter, I just don't think per-line blocking is the only way. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 07:22:39 CDT From: mschomburg@ltec.com (Mike D. Schomburg) Subject: Re: Nationwide CID, CLASS, etc. In Telecom Digest V14#229, Jim Derdzinski <73114.3146@CompuServe.COM> said: > I have a couple of questions about CLASS services. > I know that the FCC has issued a ruling making is possible for > long-distance numbers to work with the Caller ID service that the > various LEC's are now offering. Will the long-distance number > identification work with the other CLASS services like Automatic > Callback, Call Screening, Repeat Dialing, Call Tracing, etc? Delivery of the calling number is accomplished by a thing known as Signaling System #7 (SS7), a sort of packet network (functionally) independent of the "bearer" channels for voice, data, etc. While the SS7 connectivity required to provide interLATA caller ID is also necessary to support the CLASS services mentioned above, it is not yet sufficient. Various standards bodies are now working on the enhancements to the SS7 protocol which will bring about interLATA CLASS (over and above caller ID). In a nutshell, there are two broad sections of SS7: the Integrated Services Digital Network User Part (ISUP) which supports call set-up and tear-down, and the Transaction Capabilities Application Part (TCAP) which supports messages not directly related to call set-up (such as the invocation of CLASS features). SS7 needs to be modified to deal with the presence of multiple signaling networks which may be encountered across interLATA networks. TCAP messages have no trouble invoking CLASS services between SS7-capable exchanges within a single LEC's network, but the situation becomes much more complex when one or more IXCs are interposed, and the far-end LEC may or may not be equipped to handle the particular feature being activated. The mechanism proposed (by Bellcore, I believe) to solve this signaling problem is called Intermediate Signaling Network Identification (ISNI) and will most likely involve a coordinated implementation by LECs and IXCs. As far as I know, there has not been any scheduling or industry coordinating activity yet. > Another question I have concerns an oddity I have encountered here (in > the land of Ameritech). It seems that when an older CO is finally > upgraded to work with CID, the calling numbers originating from it > will display, but Distinctive Ringing, Automatic Callback and the like > will not work with these numbers. Is there some kind of update that > has to done to the equipment to register new CO's and such? (This, I > guess, may be related to the above.) This probably is simply a delay on Ameritech's part before turning up the full feature set. Normally, if they can support caller ID, they can support the rest. Possibly they chose not to include the software necessary for the other features. While I've got the channel open, Pat, I would like to mention that I disagree with your contention that it is absolutely necessary to staff every office 24x7x365. I spent six years managing Network Operations at a fairly large (ok, not really large) LEC, and I believe that with proper management, an operations center can guarantee good service (and no COs burning down). The concerns you have stated are quite valid, and obviously many accidents have in fact happened. What I mean by proper management is that the concerns of (so-called) peon employees must be heard and acted upon. As a manager, I always tried to be sympathetic to ALL employees' ideas, and believe me they are aware of the flaws and gaps in the best plans that management concocts. If you integrate the organization from the (so-to-speak) bottom up, you gain powerful allies who will look out for you, instead of giving you the well-deserved reward to your arrogance. I'm sure you have run into telephone workers who are highly skilled and care deeply about providing high-quality service. As has been pointed out many times here in the Digest, when you have a monopoly there is no real need for management to stress quality. What recourse does the customer have? Mike Schomburg mschomburg@ltec.com ------------------------------ From: petef@well.com (Pete Farmer) Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 10:40:41 -0800 Organization: Tetherless Access Ltd. In article , rlockhart@aol.com (RLockhart) wrote: > Just out of curiousity, what does 'Tetherless Access Ltd.' do? (If > that's an inappropriate question, Pat, my apologies.) Tetherless Access Ltd. (TAL) is a Silicon Valley start-up developing products/services using spread-spectrum packet radio technology to deliver full-time, high-speed (64 Kbps+) Internet connections over distances of up to 20 miles. Our economics are very favorable when compared to leased-line or frame-relay solutions. Our product will hit the streets for full-scale commercial trials later in 1994. If that's an inappropriate answer, Pat, my apologies! ;-) Peter J. Farmer Internet: petef@well.com VP, Marketing Voice: 415-321-5968 Tetherless Access Ltd. Fax: 415-321-5048 Fremont, CA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not at all inappropriate. And please tell us more as the day approaches when you take it public. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tgilson@delphi.com (Terry Gilson) Subject: Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip Date: 17 May 1994 04:59:23 GMT Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation On May 13, 1994 Carl Oppedahl wrote: > One hopes that some day in the US there will be more than two > providers for portable phone service, to bring the price down. In every market area there are presumably two RCC's, however, at least in California, there are more than two providers to get your service from. Cellular resellers buy airtime at wholesale rates from the carriers. They then sell it, usually at discounted rates, to a user who then has a choice between the two carriers and a wider choice of rate plans. In California, resellers file their rates in the form of a tariff with the Public Utilities Commission. They bill their users directly. The carrier is basically guaranteed payment since the reseller pays the carriers whether the customer pays their bill to the reseller or not. Resellers offer all the services of the carrier (with the possible exception of a 24 hour 611 answering service for billing questions) plus a few services of their own. Since in most MSA's and many RSA's, cellular pricing is controlled by a "Duopoly", both carriers offering near-identical rates. Resellers offer a breath of fresh air to users looking for an alternative. Even though the reseller *should* be considered by the carrier as one of their best customers (even though it is at a lower rate, it *is* guaranteed payment), they sometimes regard them as an unwelcome competitor due to the reseller's pricing advantages. At least in some areas of the U.S. there are more than two providers of cellular service. Terry Gilson tgilson@eis.calstate.edu DCN Cellular tgilson@delphi.com Westlake Village CA 71220.2040@compuserve.com 805-379-3333 805-379-9779 F ------------------------------ From: dumlao@cs.nps.navy.mil (Marcial Dumlao) Subject: Re: Inteljak Wireless Phone Jak System Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 07:20:39 GMT In article bigbob@netcom.com (Lord of Love!) writes: > I bought this thing and it was completely useless! Save your money > and aggravation by buying a good cordless phone. > bigbob@netcom.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Care to elaborate on the main problems > you were having? PAT] I bought a wireless phonejak and it's okay if no other noise pro- ducing appliance (i.e., blender, central heater, etc) is on. I'm using it to connect my modem and have two surge protectors connected to it before connecting to the house circuit. You will get static (noise) when a major appliance is turned on, so if you do decide to get one, plan on working late night when nothing else is on. Phones work but again, you'll pickup alot of noise when something is energized. Marcial B. Dumlao mbdumlao@nps.navy.mil [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Except that even late at night, in the winter for example the furnace will be operating, or in the summer the air conditioning will be on. Apparently there is never an escape from the noise sources. PAT] ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred Goldstein) Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate Date: 17 May 1994 21:41:20 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Reply-To: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk]) In article , dasher@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood) writes: > Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 00:16:50 GMT > From: dasher@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood) > Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate > Organization: Crackpots for a Better Tomorrow > Speaking of NNX and NXX, is there a letter for the set {0,1}? I > haven't seen one used. If (strangely) there isn't a convention, how > about B for Bit, so old-style area codes are NBX? Sometimes the set 0, 1 is represented as "Y", thus an old-style number was NYX-NNX-XXXX, and a new-style number is NXX-NXX-XXXX. Also "R" means "2-8", and is used in private networks where the ETN topology reserves 9; thus some on-net dialing is RNX-XXXX. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com k1io or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 ------------------------------ From: Don Berryman Subject: Re: SONET Management Standards? Date: Tue, 17 May 94 14:36:20 CDT > Can some knowledgeable soul throw light on the following questions: I'll try ( I couldn't find a knowledgeable soul) -- > - What protocol stack is specified by the SONET standard for > Operation, Administration, Maintainence & Provisioning? [I suspect the > answer is full blown CMIP, ACSE, ROSE as in Bellcore TR-303] Yes a full blown CMIP, ACSE, ROSE but with a full 7 layer protocol stack (Not a short stack with non-standard convergence function as defined in Bellcore TR-303). Bellcore TA-NWT-000253 Issue 8 has Bellcore's latest view (adapted from the SSSI). The latest draft of ANSI T1.105.04-199x "American National Standard for Telecommunications Synchronous Optical Network (SONET): Data Communication Channel Protocols and Architectures" Defines the following 7 layer protocol stack: --------------------------- CMISE-ISO 9595/9596 ROSE: X.219/X.229 ACSE-X.217/X.227 --------------------------- X.216/X.226 - ASN.1 Basic Encoding Rules: X.209 --------------------------- X.215/X.225 --------------------------- TP4: ISO 8073/8073 ADD 2 --------------------------- CNLP:ISO 8473/ISO 9542 --------------------------- LAPD: ITU Q.921 --------------------------- DCC s--------------------------- The SONET Interoperability Forum (SIF) is actively working on interoperability issues for SONET. Don Berryman don_berryman@adc.com +1-612-936-8100 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Minneapolis, MN 55435 ------------------------------ From: Don Berryman Subject: Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? Date: Tue, 17 May 94 16:00:05 CDT > Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does?? A synchronous modem eliminator allows two local synchronous DTEs to be connected to each other without modems by swapping signals and providing a clock signal. This is basically the same logical function as a null modem cable in the async world. Don Berryman don_berryman@adc.com +1-612-936-8100 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Minneapolis, MN 55435 ------------------------------ From: kmp@tiac.net (K. M. Peterson) Subject: Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? Date: 17 May 1994 22:01:25 GMT Organization: KMPeterson/Boston In article vmatho@mason1.gmu.edu (Victoria Matho) writes: > Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does?? An SME is used in connecting two "DTE"s (computers) that use a synchronous communications method like SDLC or BSC. Synchronization between that type of equipment is generally handled by the modem generating a "clock pulse". The SME allows you to connect together two computers without using a modem. If you're used to using asynchronous communications (like terminal or PC to simple modem), you'd just use a "null modem cable" to connect them, because they don't require clocking. But synchronous equipment needs an external clock to keep them in phase, and the clock in the SME takes care of that. Clear 'nuff? K. M. Peterson email: KMP@TIAC.NET phone: +1 617 731 6177 voice +1 617 730 5969 fax ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 8:47:26 CDT From: Will Martin Subject: Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes > From: Gregory P. Monti > Bellcore will need to negotiate with (and adjudicate conflicts among) > the 126 carriers who have requested 437 of the possible 792 NXX codes > within the 500 NPA. Bellcore would probably start assignments within > a few months. This makes me wonder about the "792 NXX codes". Since these numbers will ALWAYS be dialled with the preceeding "500", why should the exchange codes be limited to being NXX? They could easily be XXX format, giving 1000 (000 thru 999) possible "A/C 500" exchanges. As I thought of that, it also caused me to wonder the same thing about 800 numbers. They, too, are always dialed with the leading "800", and so that number-space could be a full XXX-XXXX range too. The only thing stopping it is the expectation of the users and how the software is written. Are there 800-XXX exchanges in use now? Will ------------------------------ From: fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) Subject: Re: New Area Codes Assigned Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 01:51:05 GMT gaypanda@pinn.net (Tom Ward) writes: > Other new NXX NPA's assigned but not listed in this handbook are: >217 630 Illinois ^^^ Is this new? All the postings thus far about the new 630 NPA have suggested that it will be a split or overlay from 708, not 217. Is 217 that crowded already? I know 708 is. Scott Fybush - fybush@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 16:43:29 +0500 Subject: Re: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article Gregory P. Monti writes: > The May 13 issue of the newsletter {Communications Daily} reports that > Bellcore will hold seminars on the changes to the North American > Numbering Plan over the next six months. They will be in Washington > June 16-17, Chicago Aug. 4-5, Dallas Sept. 15-16, and San Francisco > Nov. 10-11. > The story quotes North American Numbering Plan Administration Director > Ronald Conners as saying that, "telephone company switches and > customers' PBXs may need software or hardware upgrades or, in some > cases, may have to be replaced." The story doesn't mention costs, but > gives a number for information: 800 TEACH-ME (800 832-2463). The Bellcore Digest from April 94 indicates the seminar fees are $765, including one lunch and materials. They appear to be 1-1/2 day seminars. FAX requests for seminar information can be made to: (708) 960-6360 Send name, mail address, telephone and title. You can also request contact by a representative. ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: GTE Analog Pocket Phone Date: 17 May 1994 22:43:39 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) That sounds a lot like the PCS systems being tested by GTE and other companies around the US. GTE, Amertech, ATT, OKI and Motorola have been testing. From what I have read it is as a lot like the cellular phone of today and in the tests it does become a Cellular phone away from its base. What I believe is planned is a lot of cells that are closer then the ones today. There is a real operating system in Texas becasue of the distance from anything. There have been several articles here and in print on it. Steven H. Lichter Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS (909) 359-5338 12/24/96/14.4 V32/V42bis ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #233 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16794; 18 May 94 5:58 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA14344; Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:10 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA14335; Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:08 CDT Date: Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:08 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405180743.AA14335@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #234 TELECOM Digest Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 234 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question (Rich Greenberg) Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question (K. M. Peterson) Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question (Fred Goldstein) Re: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming (Paul A. Lee) Re: Telecoms Training (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Cellular Privacy (Sam Spens Clason) Re: GSM and Airbags (Kaita Seikku) Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential (Dale R. Worley) Re: "Private" Message on CID Box (James Taranto) Re: Loop to Ground Start converters (Jay Hennigan) Re: Palestinian Country Code (Dik T. Winter) Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (Robert Bonomi) Re: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (David Josephson) Re: 800 Number Billback (Jonathan Loo) Re: 800 Number Billback (John R. Levine) Re: Reach Out and Pay Someone (Peter M. Weiss) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Carl Moore) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: richgr@netcom.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 00:39:59 GMT In article shirriff@allspice.Berkeley. EDU (Ken Shirriff) writes: > It used to be that phone numbers had the syntax 123-456-7890 or (123) > 456-7890. Now I see lots of numbers of the form +1 123 456-7890. When > did this new trend occur, and what does the "+" signify? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The +1 indicates the country code for the > USA and Canada along with countries using the 809 area code. By coincidence > '1' is also the access code we dial when placing a long distance number, > but in this instance it represents the country code. PAT] Pat, you are correct as far as you went, but you only answered part of the question. The "+" in this context means "dial the international access code here". 01 or 011 here in country 1, 00 in some other countries. Rich Greenberg Work: ETi Solutions, Oceanside & L.A. CA 310-348-7677 N6LRT TinselTown, USA Play: richgr@netcom.com 310-649-0238 ------------------------------ From: kmp@tiac.net (K. M. Peterson) Subject: Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question Date: 17 May 1994 22:04:25 GMT Organization: KMPeterson/Boston In article shirriff@allspice.Berkeley. EDU (Ken Shirriff) writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The +1 indicates the country code for the > USA and Canada along with countries using the 809 area code. By coincidence > '1' is also the access code we dial when placing a long distance number, > but in this instance it represents the country code. PAT] Also, as I understand the recommendation (E.123), the "+" is the only punctuation permitted ... so, the number should really be +1 213 456 7890 (no hyphen). K. M. Peterson email: KMP@TIAC.NET phone: +1 617 731 6177 voice +1 617 730 5969 fax ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk]) Subject: Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question Date: 17 May 1994 21:39:37 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Reply-To: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk]) In article , shirriff@allspice.Berkeley. EDU (Ken Shirriff) writes: > It used to be that phone numbers had the syntax 123-456-7890 or (123) > 456-7890. Now I see lots of numbers of the form +1 123 456-7890. When > did this new trend occur, and what does the "+" signify? It signifies "when dialing from another country, insert your local international direct dialing prefix, followed by this country code". Thus +1 when dialed from most European countries means "001", while from the US it means "1" (generally), and from some countries it could be practically anything, followed by a 1. Likewise +44 for calls to the UK, which from the US or Canada means "01144". Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com k1io or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 12:29:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming From: Paul A. Lee Organization: Woolworth Corporation Regarding the Bellcore NANP Information Series Seminars mentioned in TELECOM Digest V 14 #229: For those whose interest may be determined by the cost of the seminar, I quote from the Bellcore TEC brochure describing the seminar series: "The $765.00 fee includes all seminar materials, lunch on Day 1, and refreshments." Based on the locations and hotels cited in the brochure, I would expect a room charge of $100-$150 per night, in addition to the seminar and other costs. Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 INTERNET ------------------------------ From: davep@u.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik) Subject: Re: Telecoms Training Date: 17 May 1994 18:45:44 GMT Organization: University of Washington aa744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Andrew Hartridge) writes: > We are just about to expand into a new building and I find myself > faced with the problem of hooking up 1000 phone sets and many data > ports. I have not had any experience with doing a new installation. > I've always just had to make do with what I have inherited. Get some help. This does not sound like a project for a do-it-yourself'er . > Question: Are there any training organizations out there, or reference > materials on 'How to set up and configure telecomms systems' ... e.g. > pros and cons of different wiring closet configurations? Call 1-800 LIBRARY and ask for the current Teleconnect book catalog. It is chock full of just the kind of thing you will need, should you decide to proceed on your own. Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: d92-sam@nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason) Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy Date: 17 May 1994 18:14:50 GMT Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden In article , Mike Borsetti, Cellular One/San Francisco writes: > Additionally, the TDMA digital standard supports encription, which > will be available sometime in the near future. Today's phones will > only need a simple reprogramming to take advantage of encryption. GSM has always been encrypted, setting up a call is based on encryption. Sam Spens Clason, Web ------------------------------ From: spk@proffa.cc.tut.fi (Kaita Seikku) Subject: Re: GSM and Airbags Date: 17 May 1994 12:46:04 GMT Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Computing Centre David Breneman (daveb@jaws) wrote: > This story is indeed bogus. The only way ABS could "disable" the > brakes would be if it took out a wrench and unbolted the pedal. The > infamous unintended accelleration legend is entirely the result of [ bull cut ] C'mon, you should know better: when ever there's software, ther's a chance ... (which doesn't imply that this would have ever happened). Seikku internet : spk@proffa.cc.tut.fi answering machine->pager : +358 -43 498 0297 real life: Seikku P. Kaita phone (or FAX) : +358 -31 265 6865 visit at : Saastajankuja 4b32 TAMPERE On The Air : OH3NYB ^^ ^ ^ ..these four a's should have double dots above them, since they are front vowels (as in word 'that'). Isn't it a pity that in English the word GHOTI can be pronounced like word FISH. ------------------------------ From: drw@severi.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Line Date: 17 May 94 19:51:59 Organization: National Institute for Lameness, Cambridge, MA, USA In article bkobb@newsignals.com (Bennett Z. Kobb) writes: > The FCC has been very clear on its position about telephone interference. > The agency says that "filters cannot be relied upon to eliminate tele- > phone interference." Though I've had luck trying to get rid of interference on my line by using a filter. However, it was a strange sort of interference: It was only present when my modem was off-hook. It turns out that the problem was a strong local radio station was coupling RF into the line, which went into the modem (when it was off-hook), was *rectified into audio*, and sent back out the line. Really ugly. People have asked me about this before, and only now have I found the information I wanted to tell them: The filter I used was from K-COM. They have 1-line (RJ-11, $14.95) and 2-line (RJ-12, I think, 19.95) models. Their phone number is 216-325-2110. Dale Worley Dept. of Math., MIT drw@math.mit.edu ------------------------------ From: taranto@panix.com (James Taranto) Subject: Re: "Private" Message on CID Box Date: 18 May 1994 01:16:37 GMT Organization: The Bad Taranto In article , mwolf@marcie.wellesley.edu (MUR) wrote: > Some of the calls I receive from areas that don't yet have Caller ID > service are picked up by my CID boxes as "private" (blocked) rather > that "out-of-area", even though the calling parties haven't blocked > thier numbers. This will be a problem when I install a blocked call > rejecting CID box. Have others found this to happen? Solutions? From what I've been able to tell, calls form central offices that are Caller ID-ready but where Caller ID has not yet been activated come up "private." You might ask someone calling you from one of these areas to try dialing *67 first and see if his number comes up. If it still comes up "private," then there is probably no fix except to wait until Caller ID is online throughout your area -- but even then, when Caller ID goes nationwide, there will probably be central offices making the transition for a long time to come, so the blocking box might prove impracticable. Cheers, James Taranto taranto@panix.com ------------------------------ From: jay@coyote.rain.org (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: Loop to Ground Start Converters Date: 17 May 1994 15:50:42 -0700 Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN) Our Illustrious Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It has never been clear to me why, if a > person or company wants mostly ground-start lines with an occassional > line operating on a loop-start basis they simply do not order those > lines from telco in that fashion rather than going to the trouble of > purchasing equipment specifically to convert one to the other. After > all, isn't the default from telco loop-start lines? They certainly do > not charge any extra to send them from the CO that way. PAT] A common use for such items is power-failure phones. A company will have ground start lines installed for a PBX, but wants a backup phone to work in case the PBX fails. Emergency phones, elevator phones and alarm dialers designed for loop-start only need such a converter when used in an environment where the only phone service is ground-start and a station off of the PBX is not practical or desirable. Jay ------------------------------ From: Dik.Winter@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter) Subject: Re: Palestinian Country Code Organization: CWI, Amsterdam Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 22:55:06 GMT In article goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes: > (I can't find any listing for Gaza in the current Israel listing.) Gaza is 51. dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924098 home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; e-mail: dik@cwi.nl ------------------------------ From: bonomi@eecs.nwu.edu (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 23:37:21 GMT In article , Victoria Matho wrote: > Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does?? I can't resist answering the question -exactly- as posed! so: Yes, I do. Now, for a -serious- explaination, A 'sync' data circuit is different from a standard 'async' serial circuit, in two ways -- 1) no start/stop 'framing bits', and 2) it doesn't operate at any specific 'baud rate' -- instead, a 'clock' signal is present on another wire, defining when the 'data' wire is to be sampled/driven. Now, the question rises, "where does this 'clock' signal come from. 'sync' devices may use "internal" (meaning -they- provide the clock) or "external" (meaning that it comes from an outside-the-box source) clocking. A normal serial circuit consists of a DTE at one end, and a DCE at the other. By convention, the DCE is the 'clock' source (i.e. DCE uses "internal" clocking, and the DTE uses 'external' clocking [from the DCE]). Side-note, there are -two- separate clocks, one for the data going in each direction. The DCE provides -both- signals. These contortions are necessary for those situations where the circuit is time-division- multiplexed into a higher-speed digital circuit -- when the data (each individual bit, that is) is assured of arriving at -exactly- the right time, it can be simply 'interleaved' into the composite data-stream, without need for buffering. Simplifies the h/w design considerably. SO, to connect to -sync- DTE together, you need, not only a 'null modem' (to invert the TX/RX and signaling leads), but -something- to supply the 'clock' to -both- DTE. *That* is a SME's function -- null-modem plus clock generator. Robert Bonomi ------------------------------ From: davidj@rahul.net (David Josephson) Subject: Re: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Bay Area) Organization: a2i network Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 23:50:50 GMT In Henry Mensch writes: > Moral of the story: to use GTE's new gimmicky directory assistance dial 411 > or 555 1212 ... to get the real stuff dial *6543. Your mileage may vary, > especially outside the Bay Area. And Pat wrote, > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Henry, a question and a comment: exactly > what does this *6543 hook get you into? You said 'new, gimmicky directory > assistance' which leads me to wonder, did not GTE offer directory assist- > ance like any other telco until recently, i.e. 'new'?. Is the cellular > division of the company offering a new service and intercepting calls to > 411 or 555-1212 which formerly had gone to a full directory bureau and > providing some limited sub-set of the directory? Note that GTE Mobilnet has almost no connection with a GTE operating co. except the same corporate parent. Indeed they are intercepting calls to 411, offering, for sixty cents plus airtime, to flip through a paper phonebook and then connect you to the number without your having to dial it yourself. The oprs were so lame that they needed a supervisor to find the number for a newsstand at a hotel. Formerly 411 was just routed to normal telco 411 from a trunk in the subscriber's home area code; the DA opr had no idea it was a cell call. *6543 seems to do that, still, and probably carries the same 25 cent surcharge that it did before. David Josephson - Josephson Engineering - San Jose, CA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 14:20:15 -0400 From: Jonathan Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback Pat Townson wrote: > The 'way they can charge you for calling an 800 number' is the same > way AT&T can charge for it. For example you can call AT&T's 800 number > to put through a collect call to someone or to charge a call to your > credit card. Merely because you originated it via an 800 number does > not mean charges cannot be incurred for the call as a result. In the > case of the Information Providers who use an 800 number in this way, > *someone* in your firm called the 800 number and gave the answering > operator permission to place the charges on your line. > Although you can request a block on the line against future charges of > this sort, you cannot legally refuse to pay the charges already incurred > since tariffs plainly state you are responsible for the use of your > instruments. How does AT&T charge for 800 calls? Either they charge it to a credit card or to somebody who accepts the charges, but if you call 800 CALL-ATT then they do not normally allow you to charge the call to the number that you are on. They can charge collect and third-number calls because they are a telephone company. Most information providers are not operator services providers, and not even AT&T charges calls placed through its 800 number, to the originating number. Also, I do not understand that "you cannot legally refuse to pay the charges already incurred since tariffs plainly state your are responsible for the use of your instruments." Where in the tariffs does it state that there can be a charge ON YOUR TELEPHONE BILL for making calls TO an 800 number? I thought that the very idea of an 800 number is for calls to that number to be toll-free. Jonathan D. Loo [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are not being charged for the call to the 800 number. That part is free to you the caller with the recipient paying for the carriage. You are being charged for the return collect call the Information Provider makes to you, which the AOS operator asked if you would accept the charges for. Admittedly sometimes they do not bother to call back but simply continue the conversation with you on the same connection, but none the less the AOS operator at some point asked if you would accept the charges for the call; when accepted, it then is like any other collect call. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 11:14 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'way they can charge you for calling > an 800 number' is the same way AT&T can charge for it. ... > In the case of the Information Providers who use an 800 > number in this way, *someone* in your firm called the 800 number and > gave the answering operator permission to place the charges on your line. Aw, come on. Dollars to donuts these crooks put through a charge on every call that comes in to their 800 number, permission or no permission, and they never, ever make an actual collect callback. (Consider Kath Mulholland's frequent messages about these charges on trunks at UNH that can't even receive incoming calls.) Also, as was hashed out in Telecom a while ago, there's no reason to believe that the person making an 800 call, or any other kind of call, has the authority to charge anything at all other than that direct dialed outgoing call to the ANI number. Consider PBX trunks, for example. Any business that bills based on 800 ANI is basically committing fraud, and the sooner they're put out of business the better. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I am not sure I disagree with you John. They are sleaze from the beginning ... rotten to the core. But, they do (via their AOS) have the right to place collect calls at the rate charged for same by the AOS, and they do claim they can back up their authority for the collect call by documenting that someone at the 'called number' (although as pointed out they rarely return the call, they merely continue the conversation on the existing connection) accepted the charge and authorized the billing. Often times as Kath has pointed out, the person authorizing the charge had no authority to do so. This then gets down to the legal question of whether or not a company which normally requires purchase orders for all purchases is obligated to pay for a purchase made without authority (or purchase order) by an employee. Maybe they do, and maybe they don't. Under telco tariffs and tradition, verbal authorization for a collect call is the norm, and the AOS people -- unfortunatly I might add -- have full rights in this regard. I agree they should be put out of business however. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 16:03:26 EDT From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Re: Reach Out and Pay Someone Organization: Penn State University In article , VANTEK@aol.com says: > AMERITECH GIVING MONEY TO PAY PHONE, CALLING CARD USERS > CHICAGO, May 10 /PRNewswire/ -- > Ameritech representatives will be incognito at hundreds of its ^^^^^^^^^ > publicly accessible pay phones on certain dates through the end of > July, on the prowl for the first person to make a coin call during > predetermined time periods. The lucky caller will be asked to scratch > off an instant-win ticket that will tell them how much they won. Any > of Ameritech's publicly accessible pay phones in the Midwest could be > selected. So you won't be able to tell them apart from the Shoulder Surfers? I'm not sure I'd want to interact with any one hanging out by a public phone. Thank you very little. Pete-Weiss@psu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 94 00:08:16 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Many years ago (and I wrote to the Digest then) my office and others had extensions of the form 66ab, and got a rash of calls intended for extensions of the form 6abc. A call intended for me from an AT&T office went to the wrong number for that reason. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I have also pointed out in the past, years ago when I worked at the credit card billing office my extension on the centrex system was 7265. The bar and grill downstairs where many employees went for lunch (or to idle away the afternoon hiding from their supervisor) had the phone number 726-5xxx. I could set my watch by it: everyday at 11:30 -- the start of the first lunch hour -- my phone would ring. I would answer; a voice on the other end would say 'damn' (or worse or more crude, depending on who) and click off. They were calling down- stairs to get their lunch order started and had forgotten to dial '9' for an outside line. Then at 12:30, the start of the second lunch hour, the process would be repeated with one or two more calls like that. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #234 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17088; 18 May 94 6:41 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA14825; Wed, 18 May 94 03:28:09 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA14816; Wed, 18 May 94 03:28:07 CDT Date: Wed, 18 May 94 03:28:07 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405180828.AA14816@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #235 TELECOM Digest Wed, 18 May 94 03:28:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 235 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada Equal Access Update (Bell News via Dave Leibold) The Future of Telephony (Part 2) (mmm@cup.portal.com) Information Request on Global Products (Garland Sharratt) AP Reporter in Eastern Europe Needs Assistance (Frank Bajak) European Phone Line Specs (Dexter Wm. Francis) How to Contact Telegroup of Fairfield? (Joseph Doo) Re: Cable Dates in History (B. Z. Lederman) Re: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine (Paul A. Lee) Re: Cellular Privacy? (Timothy L. Kay) A Telephone Exchange Open Day (Arthur Marsh) Re: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 1 (Tony Harminc) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 17 May 94 00:31:06 -0500 Subject: Bell Canada Equal Access Update Organization: FidoNet: The Super Continental - North York, Canada [from Bell News, 16 May 94] We'll roll out Equal Access orders over six weeks. Taking advantage of an innovative approach offered by the CRTC, Bell and our competitors have agreed in principle to a plan to phase-in the introduction of equal access orders over a period of six weeks, beginning July 1, 1994. Under equal access, customers can select an alternate long distance company and dial "1" + the area code + the telephone number" to make a long distance call on that network - just as they presently do with Bell. The conversion to equal access is a massive undertaking for Bell from network, systems and human resources perspectives. So while Bell has met its commitment to having the technical capability in place to offer equal access in the vast majority of our digial switches for July 1, taking a phased-in approach was crucial in order to protect the integrity of the network and ensure that there would be no service disruptions for customers. In late March and early April, Bell approached carriers and resellers who were seeking equal access and proposed a roll-out plan that would see its competitors' initial primary interexchange carrier (PIC) orders processed in an incremental manner over a 13-week period (approximately 110,000 PIC orders per week). In response to objections voiced by some competitors, the CRTC initiated a new "staff review" procedure -- basically a meeting, mediated by commission staff, that gathered representatives from all the parties in "an informal and efficient process to identify the issues requiring resolution, to establish the pertinent facts and to facilitate resolution of the outstanding issues." The two day session, held on April 25 and 26 in Hull Quebec, involved a "lively exchange of views" according to Barry Dixon, vice-president, Carrier Services, who headed up Bell's delegation. Other members of the team were Jennifer Moore, Phil Rogers and Bill McIntyre, and Stentor representatives John Elliot, Jean-Francois Leger and Ernie Goldberg. At the end of the session, commission staff issued a non-binding opinion regarding the appropriate resolution of the issues under debate. Bell has since confirmed our willingness to implement the staff recommendations. Competitors agreed to provide Bell with detailed forecasts of their requirements by May 11, and to closely adhere to consumer protection requirements for obtaining proper authorization from customers wishing to be changed to a competitor. In return, Bell will increase our processing of PIC orders to an average of 200,000 per week, which will shorten the roll-out period from three months to six weeks. We will also attempt to increase this capacity if the processing goes smoothly. There was general agreement that resolution of PIC disputes and problem situations between competitors would be streamlined until after the initial implementation period. In a more controversial part of the opinion, staff recommended that Bell -- unlike the other carriers and resellers -- not receive notification that customers have switched to other carriers, until after the initial PIC processing period is completed. This period is defined as the earlier of six weeks or the time it takes to process the PIC changes taken prior to July 1 (estimated at 1.2 million). Since these notification reports are a primary tool for quickly identifying and rectifying unauthorized PIC changes, the measure will hamper Bell's ability to monitor whether safeguards to protect customers from being moved against their consent are working. It will also prevent Bell from getting a fast start on implementing planned win-back activities - by approaching customers who have moved to a competitor to attempt to "win" them back. Other features of Bell's implementation plan include: * pre-processing a total of 10,000 PIC change orders beginning on June 24 in Bell Ontario and June 27 in Bell Quebec; these orders will actually take effect on July 1. * processing 1,000 PIC orders per day for all carriers and resellers (including Bell), plus a proportionate share of the remaining processing capacity, based on the actual number of PIC orders each company has in the system. Bell will work closely with each of the companies involved in order to monitor and manage the implementation process to the benefit of all parties. Adjustments to speed up the roll-out will be considered as all parties gain experience with the process. ------------------------------ From: mmm@cup.portal.com Subject: The Future of Telephony (Part 2) Date: Tue, 17 May 94 22:38:06 PDT [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part one of this article appeared awhile ago in the Digest. PAT] Here are some more straight-line projections into the future: ADVERTISING -- the cheapest long-distance phone rates will be for a service in which each call is preceded by a 15-second commercial before the connection is attempted. Every five minutes, the commercial reappears and is audible on both ends. Until Congress acts, the main use of this advertising medium will be cigarette companies. AROMAPHONE -- a hybrid integrated circuit will allow even the cheapest phones to have smell input/output. On the receive end, there's an array of 1024 by 1024 resistive heating elements which are overprinted with over one million polymer buttons impregnated with molecules for all known smells. When a button is heated, it releases some molecules. On the transmit end, an integrated circuit gas chromatograph and array of lasers for measuring optical absorbance detects atmospheric molecules, and a neural network associative memory recognizes the button or combination of buttons that would approximate the smell. The sensor is used during receiving to sense when a button is failing to emit enough smell. Common smells would have more than one button, and the aromaphone would skip to the next button when one was used up. Sooner or later the aromaphone cartridge will need to be replaced. AIRPLANE PHONES -- the complete ban of smoking on airplanes and the emerging technology of the aromaphone will converge in an airplane phone which can make aromacalls to a service which sends tobacco smoke data to the aromaphone. Airline aromaphones will differ from the consumer model in that their cartridges contain mostly nicotine and tobacco flavor component buttons. And rather than gently wafting the aroma toward the user using a piezoelectric fan, the airline version has a disposable mouthpiece which is sucked on. ADAPTIVE SPEED DIALING -- many people have very regular calling habits, such as the wife who always calls her husband at the beginning of his lunch hour. With adaptive speed dialing, the phone learns to recognize this and automatically calls him when the phone is picked up at that time of day. People will have to learn to be quick to hit the switch hook if they break their usual dialing habits, to prevent the call from going through. QUADRAPHONIC SOUND -- a brief flurry of interest will be created in quadraphonic sound, when an inventor promotes a set-up to turn a room into a room-size phone with four microphones and four speakers. The way he'll get the rubes to put up $1000 for a phone is through a very slick demo in which you listen to a ping-pong game through the phone. The popularity will decline suddenly once it becomes generally known that ping-pong games are about the only thing that gives a good impression of three-dimensionality. The devices will be available cheaply at garage sales for a few years, then prices will rise as everybody starts talking about what a great investment they are as a collectible (rumor started by collectors who hoard them). PAYPHONES -- to combat ever-increasing amounts of theft from payphone coinboxes and long-distance fraud, the "Fortress" phone will be superseded by the "Terminator" phone. The latter is equipped with numerous non-lethal defense options, including repellent gas, incapacitating gas, spray-on handcuffs and legcuffs, and a transponder embedded in a sticky semi-solid which can be attached to the top of the head by a little robot arm which pops out of the ceiling of the phone booth. Security managers at central locations will use the phone's slow-scan video to view the scene and decide which systems to activate. (Laws against "spring traps" prohibit automatic activation of these systems.) SETI -- The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) while performing an equipment calibration check will broadcast a copy of the David Rhodes chain letter toward a nearby star. Several years later, the first contact with Earth will be made by the Galactic Police demanding that David Rhodes be turned over for trial. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 16:58:00 -0400 From: garland (b.g.) sharratt Subject: Information Request on Global Products This is a request for any information, references, etc., you might have on the subject of the GLOBAL PRODUCT, i.e., a product that is sold in a more or less standardized form throughout the world. I am making this request in support of my University of Ottawa MBA research project (thesis) on the subject of "Global Products in Telecommunications". The question to be studied is whether or not there is the opportunity, for any given product type, in the telecommunications market for a single global product that could be marketed world-wide, as opposed to different products by region. The focus is more on product design than on promotion. The research will determine what has been the success of other companies trying to do the same thing, and will investigate when this is strategically the right thing to do, and when geographic markets must be separately addressed. Some of the issues to be investigated are: * How to convince customers to buy a global (more-common, less-customized) product, instead of insisting on a completely custom solution? (Show them it is lower priced and higher quality?) * What kind of product is suitable as a global product? * What kind of company can be successful with a global product? * What business environment factors encourage or discourage the adoption of a global product? Although the main focus of my paper will be telecommunications, I am researching the global product issue generally over all technology fields. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks, Garland Sharratt garland@bnr.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 17:55:28 EDT From: Frank Bajak Subject: AP Reporter in Eastern Europe Needs Assistance Patrick, I've now settled in to Berlin and have embarked on a series on how telecommunications is changing the way folks are living in eastern Europe ... not just on how the big U.S. and European telecom giants are moving in, but certainly giving that subject its due. The question is: where to start researching this monster. Any ideas on databases available through the Internet or otherwise or publications, preferably electronic but I can live with the others, would be much appreciated. I'm looking for big picture comprehensive studies as well as looks at specific projects. In addition to raw data I am also interested in hearing from folks who are directly involved in building the telecommunications web in eastern Europe, by which I mean from eastern Germany down through the Balkans and east to the Urals. Frank Bajak Frank_Bajak@mcimail.com Associated Press Alt-Moabit 96-C Correspondent 10559 Berlin (49-30)-399-925-21 fax: 399-4341 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suspect you will be hearing from our readers very soon as your note begins circulating around the net. PAT] ------------------------------ From: francis4@applelink.apple.com (Dexter Wm. Francis) Subject: European Phone Line Specs Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 22:08:38 GMT Organization: Apple Computer The ARRL Handbook has a section that details the available range of voltage and current on U.S. phone lines. Does anyone know what the numbers are for phone systems in Europe? df ------------------------------ From: joe@solomon.technet.sg (Joseph Doo) Subject: How to Contact Telegroup of Fairfield? Date: 18 May 1994 06:39:20 GMT Organization: Technet, Singapore Is there a rep from Telegroup of Fairfield on this group? ------------------------------ From: B. Z. Lederman Subject: Re: Cable Dates Date: 17 May 94 16:28:13 EST Reply-To: lederman@intransit_tsc.vntsc.dot.gov Organization: INTRANSIT (VNTSC) In article , Stewart Fist <100033.2145@ CompuServe.COM> writes: > You'll probably get a couple of different replies to this query, > because of the three attempts. I've got a database on this trivia, so > let me straighten it out now. This is the main sequence of events: The information was interesting and useful. But something I've never seen clearly posted anywhere is when these early cables went OUT of service, and why. I know the first one (that ran for 21 days) was burned out through mis-use. The rise time on the cable was very slow (it was basically a large capacitor), and someone who didn't understand electrical principles very well thought the signal would rise faster if it was driven with a higher voltage. It didn't. But I don't know when or why the other cables went out of service. Does anyone? B. Z. Lederman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 15:00:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine From: Paul A. Lee Organization: Woolworth Corporation I would add another course of action to Pat's suggestion of how Rodney Weaver can deal with the automated annoyance calls. Since South Central Bell seems to be lending only half-hearted (or half of some _other_ anatomical entity) help in alleviating the problem, perhaps Rodney needs to rattle a sabre at *them*, too. I recommend sending appropriately covered copies of all correspondence, call logs, and other documentation to the state public utilities commission (PUC) or public service commission (PSC). If the commission itself isn't listed in phone directories, then the state bureau of consumer protection or consumer affairs, or a state government information office, should be able to provide an address or phone number. Make sure to note on letters to the telco that the agency that regulates them is being apprised of the situation, and of the telco's inability to provide effective assistance in solving the problem. *That* might break the impasse, even if the commission never gets involved. Utilities tend to get busy when the agency that regulates them starts taking an interest. Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 INTERNET [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Indeed, it used to be the rule in many or most telco business offices that who got attended to first and who had to wait was a result of who made the most noise. Many/most telco business offices had a teletype machine (now-a-days I suppose it is a fax machine) to the state PUC. People who went to the PUC with their problems then as now found that all that really happens is the clerk at the PUC who listens to your tale of woe simply sends it over to the telco, admittedly to a somewhat higher ranking person than the average service rep, for resolution. Customers who write to the president or chairman of the telco usually get shunted to highly placed flunkies who in turn teletype or fax the problem to the business office people. Usually whatever telco says, the PUC accepts and that is the end of the matter. None the less it is faster sometimes. The rule at Illinois Bell for many years was first handle the commission complaints, then take care of the management complaints. After that, deal with the walk-in customers in the business office, and last, as time permits deal with the subscribers who call on the phone! So the complaining subscriber on the phone might have to make four or five calls to get his problem resolved, but the Commission and/or management rarely had to ask more than one or two times :). Seriously, that was the pecking order. The Commission did not/still does not resolve anything; they simply request that telco get the problem straightened out. When a message came on the dedicated teletype line from the PUC, someone always attended to it right away, at least most of the time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: timkay@netcom.com (Timothy L. Kay) Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 21:14:54 GMT I worked for Radio Shack when I was a kid. At that time, HBO was broadcasting via microwaves, and many people were building non- sanctioned receivers. (I say non-sanctioned rather than illegal because, as far as I know, the legality of the home-built receivers was never tested in court.) Most people were building their receivers using one of a very few easily-available plans. You could even get a professionally designed (empty) printed circuit board for about $20. So it was easy for me to tell that a customer was building an HBO receiver when he asked for a tell-tale list of parts. I started preparing HBO bag-o'-parts ahead of time so that I could get the customers on their way more quickly. One item Radio Shack didn't have was microwave diodes. I had to refer them to another supplier for those. One day, a memo came from Radio Shack corporate headquarters instructing employees to have nothing to do with the construction of HBO receivers. That memo was targeted directly at employees like me. I will plead the Fifth at this point. Oh, by the way, with the next stock shipment, a new inventory item arrived. Yes, microwave diodes. Timothy L. Kay [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Radio Shack/Tandy has always been in the closet it seems regards illegal stuff. They are happy to sell it but never want their employees to talk about it or encourage it. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Arthur@cswamp.apana.org.au Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 01:46:52 From: Arthur@cswamp.apana.org.au (Arthur Marsh) Subject: A Telephone Exchange Open Day In the lead-up to the ballot in South Australia on whether Telstra or Optus will be a subscriber's preferred long distance carrier, Telstra had an open day last Saturday, May 14 1994 at one of their most recent constructions, the Flinders Street Adelaide Communications Centre. Besides a brief visit by Telstra's CEO, Frank Blount (ex-AT&T), which I missed, there was much of interest to be seen. The five story building (which cost AUD$42 million excluding equipment) features dual mains electricity supply, 3 * 2 Megawatt General Motors V16 diesel-powered generators with the capability of providing five days of full power without refueling and generally over-engineered construction. On display were working Ericsson AXE, Alcatel System 12 and Nortel DMS-100 switch units. Also there was a demonstration of ADSL giving full motion video using 2 Mbit/s modulation over 4 kilometres of twisted pair cable, and fibre-to-the-pillar/coax to the home. One technician also demonstrated optical fibre splicing and the use of an optical reflectometer. There was also a demonstration of morse code, but no mechanical exchange equipment in sight. I was pleased to see a live display of current technology, which has been all-too-rare in the past pre-competitive era. * Origin: Camelot Swamp MJCNA, Hawthorndene, Sth Australia (8:7000/8) # Camelot Swamp bbs, data: +61-8-370-2133 reply to arthur@cswamp.apana.org.au ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 94 17:46:58 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 1 From: Darren Ingram > We would like to offer TELECOM Digest readers a special price on > subscription to Telecomworldwire. The UK price is gbp700 per year for > fax. ... > WASHINGTON, USA/RIYADHI, SAUDI ARABIA- AT&T Corp has won a six-year > US$4 billion contract to provide state-of-the-art digital switching > and fibre-optic networks to Saudi Arabia, and within hours of the news > being confirmed the contract was dogged with controversy. ... > Ericsson said that it was surprised at the scope of the bid and the > way in which it had been handled, and Northern Telecom said that it > half expected the move as negotiations between AT&T and the Saudis > were advanced when AT&T ended its exclusive supplier agreement with > Bell Canada Ltd -- a NT offshoot -- earlier this year. If this is the quality of detail that readers may expect, I would suggest saving the 700 Pounds for something else. See if you can find three errors of fact in the last sentence quoted. Tony H. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Readers who wish to do so may send me the 700 Pounds instead. I might be encouraged to make even further improvements in this Digest as a result. In fact, I shall make a special subscription offer to the readers of Telecomworldwire and send them a *free* subscription to this Digest. How's that for a deal! :) Remember, TELECOM Digest is supported by the generous contributions of its friends and corporate sponsors, the primary one of whom is the International Telecommunication Union. But the ITU can't do it all ... you need to help. Thanks very much. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #235 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29729; 19 May 94 15:12 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA18407; Thu, 19 May 94 11:19:05 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA18398; Thu, 19 May 94 11:19:03 CDT Date: Thu, 19 May 94 11:19:03 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405191619.AA18398@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #236 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 May 94 11:19:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 236 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Problems With Call Return (Monty Solomon) Anyone Use AT&T Message Service? (markr@mcil.comm.mot.com) Help with Northern Telecom Meridian System (Lance Ware) "Free Trade" Rules (Dale Wharton) Wanted: Hand-held Challenge/Response Units (Paul Gillingwater) CRTC Now Regulates Canadian Independent Telcos (Dave Leibold) Proposed Upgrading of Canada Direct Service (Dave Leibold) Enormous Sprint Rate Increase! (John McHarry) Ruling on 800 Numbers From Payphones (Stephen Goodman) How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Joseph Herl) Free Long Distance via Cellular via Cellular One (Shawn Gordhamer) Wanted: Business Phone System (Drew Benson) Help: Need TyIN 2000 Developer's Kit From National Semiconductor (T Duong) New DLD Digest FAQ Available (Van Hefner) Info on Info Superhighway Wanted (Yanghee Choi) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Monty_Solomon@bmugbost.uu.holonet.net Organization: BMUG Boston Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 06:06:33 EST Subject: Problems With Call Return Forwarded to the Digest, FYI: Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 15:58:07 From: Russ Greene,Planet BMUG Subject: Problems With Call Return Below is a letter I'm sending to Pac Bell and the Public Utilities Commission regarding my dissatisfaction with Call Return. Feedback, comments and discussion are invited. Attn: Manager Pacific Bell P.O. Box 31024 Walnut Creek, CA 94598 May 15, 1994 Dear Madam or Sir: I'm writing to express my concern and dissatisfaction with the current implementation of Call Return. Furthermore, I urge the discontinuance of Call Return service. It is a bad idea. My situation dictates that I make numerous calls to people who have answered an ad that I run: people I do not know: When I reach someone's answering machine I often choose to leave no message. Sometimes I may reach a wrong number. Many times I get rude phone calls from people who are utilizing Call Return. These calls come at all hours of the day and night; sometimes moments after my call, sometimes days later. Here is an actual example of one of the problems I've had. I made a phone call to someone on a Monday. Upon getting her answering machine I elected to hang up. On Tuesday, more than 24 hours later, I received a phone call from someone saying "Who is this?". I said "Whom do you wish to speak with?". She said "You paged me. Who are you and what do you want?" I said "I'm sorry, you must have the wrong number, I didn't page anyone." (Remember, this is a day after I originally called this woman. There was no way for me to make a connection in my mind between the call I made on Monday and the call I received on Tuesday.) She said "Well somebody from your number called me. I just used Call Return." Eventually, after a heated discussion, I was able to convince this woman that I wasn't going to give out my name and number to someone who refused to identify herself, and that, were the tables turned, she wouldn't want to do so either. I also educated her to the reality that since she initiated the call it was appropriate for her to identify herself to me first. When she did I was able to figure out who she was by running her name through my data base file on my computer, a luxury not everybody has at their fingertips. Everything worked out in the end, this time, but it was a very uncomfortable process to get there because she did not have the education or level of courtesy to deal effectively with Call Return. In many cases things don't turn out as well as they did in this example. The lack of awareness and common courtesy, as exemplified by this woman, is part of the problem. She was ill equipped, as so many people are in our society today, to utilize Call Return in an effective and courteous manner. If used properly the difficulties with Call Return would be fewer. Even so, people utilizing Call Return are placed in the awkward position of making phone calls to unknown numbers and parties. This is wrong. If you don't know who you are calling and the number you are dialing you don't belong on the phone. Period! It follows then, that Call Return is a bad idea. With the wide availability of answering machines and electronic voice mail systems there really is no need for Call Return. Call Return, at best, is another tool for telephone companies to profit from. In reality, since it puts people in the position of calling unknown numbers and parties and demands more skills in the communications arena than many people have, it is more of a disservice to the general public than anything else. Please, see that this service is terminated. Short of discontinuing Call Return as an available service, if free, universal, Call Return Blocking was available I would be satisfied that the public would be served. BMUG Boston 617-721-5840, East Coast BBS of The World's Largest Mac User Group [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that she used it in an extreme way does not make Call Return a bad idea. And there is something to be said about the writer's discourtesy in reaching an answering machine and simply hanging up without speaking, if even only to say that he did not wish to leave a message and would call again later. Ordinarily, Call Return is a good idea since it allows a person who has just missed (typically within seconds or minutes) receiving a call due to being somewhere else. However in this case the fact that the answering machine contained a blank spot -- however discourteous that may have been of the caller -- should have told her the caller did not wish to speak with her at that time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: markr@mot.com (Mark) Subject: Anyone Use AT&T Message Service? Reply-To: markr@mcil.comm.mot.com Organization: MCIL Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:24:16 GMT Has anyone used the AT&T Message Service yet ? I am currently living outside of the USA and usually use AT&T USA-DIRECT to call the US. Well, a few weeks ago, I called, using my calling card, and got a busy signal. After a few seconds, I hear a [computer generated] voice asking me if I want to record a message and have it sent at a later time followed by the prices. (I think it was $1.75 or $1.25, something like that per minute) All I had to do was press '#123' and I was prompted for a message and then was prompted at the end for an OK message. (i.e. press 1 or 0 or something like that) Well, it worked great ... has anyone else used this service? I assume it has been available in the USA for a while already. Comments ? Mark ------------------------------ From: lware@voxel.com (Lance Ware) Subject: Help With Northern Telecom Meridian System Organization: VOXEL Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 23:30:38 GMT I am hoping to tap into some of the wisdom of the net for assistance with our Meridian phone system. Specifically, I want to integrate our 800 number into our system. Currently the line terminates at one phone, and goes unanswered if the desk where the phone sits is vacant. I am not sure how to do this, and PacBell's support is not very helpful. The 800 line has no incoming information, like the DIDs that we have, and my manual doesn't seem to cover anything but the basic installations. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Lance Ware IS Manager & VOXEL Guru VOXEL ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 08:26:29 EDT From: Dale Wharton Subject: "Free trade" Rules This item appeared on a political economics network. Dale Wharton dale@dale.cam.org M O N T R E A L Te souviens-tu? Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 NAFTA AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS by Sid Shniad, Burnaby BC In the runup to the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Telecommunications Workers Union warned members and the general public that the deal posed a threat to the Canadian telecommunications industry. An article in the May 16 issue of the Canadian Communications Network Letter that focuses on the issue of NAFTA and telecommunications indicates that our fears were well founded. The Newsletter quotes Muriel Bradford, the newly-appointed assistant vice president of corporate affairs at Teleglobe Canada. Prior to being hired by Teleglobe, Bradford worked at the Department of External Affairs and participated in the negotiations leading up to the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, and the Uruguay Round of GATT. In Bradford's view, telecommunications policy today is being driven by an increasing preoccupation with trade liberalization. She feels that as a consequence of liberalization, government bodies like the Canadian CRTC and the US Federal Communications Commission will have less and less control over telecommunications activities within their domestic jurisdictions. Speaking at the Canadian Telecommunications Superconference in Toronto in early May, Bradford observed that "Domestic economic policymakers and regulators will be left with fewer options than ever before, and domestic carriers will no longer be able to expand and upgrade their networks secure in the knowledge that their national markets will remain shielded from foreign competitors." This development doesn't seem to bother Bradford, who sees it as providing her new employer with an opportunity to gain market share in larger foreign markets, thereby allowing Teleglobe to move from seventh place to third place among intercontinental carriers by the end of the century. For the rest of us, the prospect of government helplessness and all-out international competition in the communications industry does not appear so attractive. --------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for passing this along. Sid used to send things here to the Digest occassionally, but I have not heard from him lately. I think he grew angry at what he felt was the anti-union stance of many readers here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: paul@eunet.co.at (Paul Gillingwater) Subject: WANTED: Hand-Held Challenge/Response Units Date: 18 May 1994 21:36:50 GMT Organization: EUnet EDV-Dienstleistungsgesellschaft m.b.H I'm looking for suppliers of hand-held challenge/response cipher key systems. These will be used to improve security for a sensitive on-line (dial-up and Internet) access. I envisage they'll work as follows: 1. User connects via public network to our system; 2. Our system lets them log in as normal, but they then are "challenged" with a long code. 3. The user must enter the code into the hand-held unit, which provides the "response" using RSA or similar. 4. The user then enters the "response", which is validated against the expected value. This may involve the use of a public/private key system also, for encryption of transmitted material. I'm very hopeful that units such as I've just described exist -- if not, perhaps someone wants to make them? (e.g. based on HP-100LX). Please reply in e-mail. Commercial replies welcome (i.e. if you wanna sell me something, go ahead.) NB I'm posting from a guest account, so don't bother anyone else here. paul@actrix.co.at (Paul Gillingwater) :: Home Office in Vienna, Austria ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 19 May 94 00:30:46 -0500 Subject: CRTC now regulates Canadian independent telcos Organization: FidoNet: The Super Continental - North York, Canada [from Bell News, 16 May 94] CRTC to regulate independent telcos Only the federal government -- not provincial governments -- has the authority to regulate the 50-some independent telephone companies in Canada. So decreed the Supreme Court of Canada which ruled that Telephone Guevremont Inc. -- a Quebec-based independent telephone company -- should be regulated by the federal Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). The court's decision, handed down April 26, affects all other independent telephone companies, including those that are members of the Canadian Independent Telephone Association. Prior to the decision, these companies were regulated by provincial agencies. In its decision, the Supreme Court said that, as Telephone Guevremont provides interprovincial and international communications services to its customers, it should fall under the CRTC's jurisdiction. The decision settles a dispute between Telephone Guevremont and the Regie des telecommunications, the provincial regulator of Telephone Guevremont and several other independent telephone companies operating throughout Quebec. ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 19 May 94 00:40:46 -0500 Subject: Proposed Upgrading of Canada Direct Service Organization: FidoNet: The Super Continental - North York, Canada [from Bell News, 16 May 94] New Canada Direct feature to make calling from one foreign country to another cheaper, easier Our mission to be a world leader in helping people communicate will take another leap forward if the CRTC gives the green light to enhance the Canada Direct[tm] service we offer. We want to give our customers the opportunity to use their calling cards to call from one foreign country to another and to make long distance calls within foreign countries. The Canada Direct service has been available since 1989 for customers to call back to Canada from over 90 overseas destinations. The country-to-country calling enhancement to Canada Direct that we and our Stentor partners are proposing is a convenient way for Calling Card[tm] customers to make international calls from one foreign country to another or within a foreign country. The new country-to-country calling feature of Canada Direct initially will be offered from over 50 countries where Canadians do the most international business. However, the service will not be offered from the United States. Ideally, we'd like to offer foreign country calling to all the countries where the Stentor owners currently terminate overseas calls direct dialled today. However, Stentor and Teleglobe will respect the wishes of foreign telephone administrations and will not originate or terminate calls in countries whose foreign administrations have not given us approval to offer the enhancement. Teleglobe will continue to negotiate with foreign administrations to add more countries to the service. A special long distance rate structure has been developed for the country-to- country calling enhancement that is, in most cases, lower than those rates for similar services offered by the major U.S. carriers. If the enhancement is approved by the CRTC, it will be introduced to our customers starting June 20. [sub-article] "If we'd only known!" About this Canada Direct enhancement we're asking the CRTC to approve -- is it a "nice to have" or a "need to have"? Read what an article in Ottawa's The Citizen Valley had to say about calling Canada from one foreign country. Marjorie Evers of Nepean says she almost choked when she saw the size of the bill for a call her daughter Tamara, 18, made from Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. "We told her to call so we'd know she was safe," says Marjorie. "It wasn't easy." The Mexican operator insisted the call be billed to a third party. Tamara has an uncle in Florida, and the call for approval, and the bill, went to him. He passed it along to Nepean. The 14-minute call cost $130 Canadian. "And we're still waiting for the bills for four more calls." In the remaining four, Marjorie accepted the charges. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 94 10:21:48 EDT From: mcharry@cwc.com (McHarry) Subject: Enormous Sprint Rate Increase! Sorry about the tabloidiac header, this concerns Sprint local service in downstate Illinois. Sprint very recently obtained an effective rate increase of almost 100%, according to my parents' local paper. What they have done is to get a 5c per call charge added on to the basic service charge, which may have increased somewhat also. The area has been flat rate for at least 40 years. I wonder how they could justify such a massive increase to the Illinois Commerce Commission. Have they been operating at a loss for years? Curious. John McHarry (mcharry@cwc.com or mcharry@digex.net) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 94 11:20 EST From: Stephen Goodman <0003945654@mcimail.com> Subject: Ruling on 800 Numbers From Payphones Greetings all: I seem to recall about three years ago there was a ruling from Judge Greene regarding blocking 800 numbers on payphones. It seems alot of independent payphone vendors were blocking 800 number dialing on their equipment thereby preventing people from using the long-distance calling cards which used 800 numbers for access. Does anyone know if there is a document anywhere on the ruling? (The ruling was made prior to October 1992. I found an FCC document: CC Docket 92-77 10/8/92 which ordered AT&T to provide 800 access on their proprietary cards when I was doing my research.) Thanks!! 3945654@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: jherl@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Joseph Herl) Subject: How Can I Ring Up Myself? Date: 18 May 1994 15:50:59 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Our family is moving to a new house next week, and we will have the same telephone number at both places for several days. How can I call between them? Our phone company (Ameritech) representative doesn't think this is possible, but I remember that it used to be possible years ago to "call another party on the line," and this is similar. We used to dial a code number, hang the phone up and wait for it to ring, then pick up the phone and talk when it stopped ringing. Does anyone know whether this is still possible? Joseph Herl Internet: jherl@uiuc.edu School of Music University of Illinois Telephone: +1 217 333 8733 Urbana, Illinois 61801 USA Home phone: +1 217 355 9040 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a great service that Illinois Bell provides, allowing a number to ring at multiple locations for simply the cost of two local services. Several years ago when I moved from one place to another I used that arrangement to keep my phone service intact during the move. After about a week, I had the old location discontinued. At least in the Chicago 312/708 area, ringbacks are accomplished thus: Dial 1-57x-last four digits. The 'x' is a digit 1-9. It varies from one exchange to another so you have to test to see which works. For example, if your phone number was 555-1212 then a ring back would be generated by dialing 1-57x-1212. If you select the wrong 'x', then the result will be a fast busy signal. If you select the correct 'x', then the result will be a fresh dial tone. On hearing that new dial tone, quickly click the hook once and note that the dial tone changed to a high pitch tone. Then dial '6', and hang up. The phone will commence ringing and will ring for up to three or four minutes in the normal way before timing out. You can tell the other end has answered when the ringing stops. But when you then lift the receiver again, the high pitched tone remains on the line. It won't go away, so you have to talk over it. Obviously short to the point calls are recommended. Once you hang up, the line returns to normal in a few seconds. As a final example, if your number was 234-5678 then you would dial 1-572-5678, but the '2' might be something else depending on which exchange you are in. This works all over 312/708 but I do not know about 217, which is the area for Champaign-Urbana. This is *not* an approved or tariffed service. It is for telco testing/repair purposes only so do not abuse it or count on it being there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shawnlg@netcom.com (Shawn Gordhamer) Subject: Free Long Distance via Cellular via Cellular One Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 17:58:37 GMT If a person has a cellular phone in Rochester, MN (507) and forwards calls to another Rochester number, a person in Minneapolis (612) can call the Cellular One roamer number, enter the Rochester cellular number, and be forwarded to the Rochester number. There are no fees for using call forwarding, and there is no airtime charges. The "roaming coordinator" said that there would be no charges billed, and this is not a "normal" thing to do. Shawn Gordhamer shawnlg@netcom.com Rochester, Minnesota USA ------------------------------ From: drew@mtu.edu (Drew Benson) Subject: Wanted: Business phone system Date: 18 May 1994 13:23:48 -0400 Organization: Michigan Technological University Reply-To: drew@mtu.edu Greetings, I'm looking for an inexpensive phone system designed for small-scale kinds of things. Not more than eight outgoing lines. I'm open to suggestions of brands, features, etc. I don't care whether it's new or used either. Features and price are what matter. Thanks, Drew Benson (drew@mtu.edu) ------------------------------ From: anhtai@engin.umich.edu (Tai Duong) Subject: Help: Need TyIN 2000 Developer's Kit from Nat. Semiconductor Date: 18 May 1994 14:44:58 GMT Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor Hello everyone. I need the Developer's Kit for National Semiconductor's TyIN 2000 voice/modem/fax card. They gave many "Beta" copies out for free but I missed the boat. I'll be willing to pay you for a copy for what ever it is worth. I don't think they have restrictions on them since they were free and is basically a small manual. For those who don't know what it is, the kit is mainly a manual that gives specs on writing software to work with the card. It also has some simple examples. I need to get my hands on some specs. I want to write a TSR that will automatically record a phone conversation as soon as you pick up the phone for any incoming or outgoing calls. Also, I want to write a simple executable to play and fast forward the phone conversation. I'll make the program freeware if anyone is interested. By the way, the TyIN 2000 is an excellent card. It costs $89 right now and has NSC's software to do voicemail and fax. I found the voice quality recordings excellent. I would recommend it to everyone. The only thing I don't like is that Nat. Semi. Conductor is a bit secretive on their cards specs since I am having a hell of a time getting some so I can write these two programs. Appreciate any help anyone can give me. Tai Duong (anhtai@engin.umich.edu) ------------------------------ From: VANTEK@aol.com Date: Wed, 18 May 94 23:40:30 EDT Subject: New DLD Digest FAQ Available We have just released a new version of the Discount Long Distance Digest Frequently Asked Questions file. Included in the FAQ is an index of all subjects covered in previous issues, a short history of the reselling industry, a resellers telecom Glossary, a brief listing of major resellers, reseller/telecom books and magazines, a breakdown of the latest carrier DDD rates and calling plans, and an appendix of agencies and companies involved in various aspects of reselling. Subscription information on Discount Long Distance Digest is also included. To receive a copy of our FAQ File e-mail us at: telconet@aol.com. Be sure to include the phrase: 'Request-FAQ' in the Subject: Field. Discount Long Distance Digest is a weekly moderated mailing list and newsletter delivered free to any e-mail recipient with internet access. We cover mostly issues pertaining to the resale of long distance telephone service. We also give specific information on resellers for people looking to get into the reselling industry, including commission schedules, rates, underlying carriers, marketing strategy, and requirements for becoming an agent. We also cover other business oppertunities in the telecom industry such as pre-paid calling cards, payphones, Operator Assisted Services, international callback services, aggregation, and telephone bill auditing. Van Hefner Moderator Discount Long Distance Digest ------------------------------ From: yhchoi@cd4680.snu.ac.kr (Yanghee Choi) Subject: Info on Info Superhighway Wanted Organization: SNU Date: Thu, 19 May 94 06:42:28 GMT Please send me any info (or info sources) on information superhighway related documents/files/announcements/seminars/servers. I'll post what I'll collect. Please send the info to yhchoi@smart.snu.ac.kr Yanghee [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, that is a rather tall order. The documents on the 'info highway' go on and on. In a way, it is almost like asking 'send me what information you have on the Telephone Company'. Everyone is running seminars on it these days it seems, and the speeches being made and testimony being given before government agencies and others has filled many an issue of this Digest among other things. Maybe you should try to narrow your request somewhat. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #236 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00200; 19 May 94 15:52 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA19684; Thu, 19 May 94 12:08:52 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA19675; Thu, 19 May 94 12:08:50 CDT Date: Thu, 19 May 94 12:08:50 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405191708.AA19675@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #237 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 May 94 12:08:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 237 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Graphic BBS, Gif to RIP (Adan Klein) Cellular Phone Timers (Tony Harminc) Query re: Voice Dictation (Mike McCrohan) Information Wanted on 900 Numbers: Providers and Costs (Lance Ware) Distinctive Ring Line Effects? (Stu Whitmore) Frame Relay SVC Specs Wanted (John Lawitzke) Seeking Beta Site for Telecom Management Software (Donald E. Kimberlin) Internet Address For Computer-Privacy (Al Cohan) Using CDMA for LAN's? (junaid@delphi.com) CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and The Same? (A. Padgett Peterson) CO Switch Types by Exchange Code (Michael Stanford) Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (Mike King) Re: SRI Ends Two Bobs (Garnet Harris) Re: Money Saving Cellular Tip (CO/NY NYNEX Rates) (Doug Reuben) Re: Palestinian Country Code (Josh Backon) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ramzeys@netcom.com (Adan Klein) Subject: Graphic BBS, Gif to RIP Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 08:02:57 GMT I am trying to find a graphical software program that can convert Gif graphic files to RIP (Remote Image Processing). RIP is a much better graphical interface rather then ansi. Basically, what I need a is any software program that can convert a GIF to .RIP file so I can edit it. I am desparate to find such a thing. If someone could please tell me where one might be, that would be so great. If you do not understand what RIP is, then reply, and maybe you have seen one somewhere. Please anyone that might know write me some email right away, I am desparate. Please reply by email. ramzeys ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 94 15:01:52 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Cellular Phone Timers I've finally got into the cellphone racket, and now know the practical answer to a theoretical question that I've been wondering about for a while. Typical cellphones have at least one call timer -- often two or more. These are touted as a way of tracking your airtime -- either for billing clients or to keep track of how your monthly allocation of 'free' minutes is doing, and when you are going to start paying for each one. But not all airtime is chargeable. There are various kinds of free calls (typically *nnn codes), and more importantly, there is no charge for busy and unanswered calls. So if the timers are to reflect reality, the phone has to be told by the network when charging starts and ends -- a supervision signal, if you will. I've never seen signs of such a facility in the AMPS documentation, and now experience says the same thing: the timers start when you press SEND and stop when you press END. (This is on a Nokia 101 handheld.) How disappointing. How useless. Tony Harminc [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is apparently, at present no way to start or stop the timer(s) with supervision. I believe the timers are wired through the SEND button and that is about it. None the less, the timers do provide some guidance in what to expect for your monthly bill. If you are like most users, you can take the amount of time shown and deduct 10-15 percent of that amount to get a realistic idea of the number of actual minutes used. From that, you then subtract your 'free minutes' allotment and you will get a close, if not exact idea what your bill will be for the month. Of course since the billing arrives a week or more into the new service period, you also have to know on what day the billing actually ends if you want to flush the timers and start them over. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike McCrohan Subject: Query re: Voice Dictation Date: 19 May 1994 00:19:59 GMT Organization: Ireland On-Line I am looking for information on Voice Dictation/ Voice Transcription systems. Digital Voice Inc., Dictaphone, and Lanier are the vendors in question. If anyone uses any of these boxes, I'd appreciate it if they mailed me as I have some questions I'm trying to get answered. Additionally, if anyone had the Email addresses of any or all of these vendors, I'd appreciate that too. Thanks in advance, Mike McCrohan, Cloon, Claregalway, Co Galway, Ireland +353 91 98556 mccrohan@iol.ie ------------------------------ From: lware@voxel.com (Lance Ware) Subject: Information Wanted on 900 Numbers: Providers and Costs Organization: VOXEL Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 22:59:56 GMT I would like to get some information on what providers are out there, what plans are available, etc ... Please send email. Lance Ware IS Manager & VOXEL Guru VOXEL ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 00:05:13 -0700 From: whitmore@tahoma.cwu.edu (Rattlesnake Stu) Subject: Distinctive Ring Line Effects? Organization: Central Washington University I have a two part question: 1. I recently had distinctive ringing enabled on a phone line that leads to my BBS. Since then, I've had a significant increase in handshake problems when receiving BBS calls. (The modem itself determines the ring, and seems to be 100% accurate in doing so. I use the ZFAX voice mail/faxback software as a "front end" that loads the front end BGFAX for normal rings and handles Distinctive Ring type 1 as voice. For a normal ring, BGFAX is loaded before the line is answered.) Would a service like distinctive ring affect the line quality after the line is answered, even if there's no switch box to add another hardware link? 2. Is there a way to boost a signal between the wall and the modem, or would I even want to? I'm running an extension cord about 200' from the phone jack to the modem, as moving the jack was out of the question in my landlord's eyes. I'm afraid of signal degradation in that distance -- should I even worry about it? Thanks in advance! Stuart Whitmore whitmore@tahoma.cwu.edu ------------------------------ From: jhl@egr.msu.edu (John Lawitzke) Subject: Frame Relay SVC Specs Wanted Date: 19 May 1994 15:30:25 GMT Organization: Michigan State University. College of Engineering My management has heard that ANSI has recently released a specification for Frame Relay switched virtual circuits (SVCs). Could someone provide me with the exact ANSI reference number so that I can get it ordered? Advance thanks, John Lawitzke Systems Analyst ADAK Communications Corp. Internet: jhl@egr.msu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 11:00:00 EST From: Donald E. Kimberlin <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Seeking Beta Site for Telecom Management Software The maker of some unique PC-based software with significant new ability to maintain databases of WANs; share that information among the several involved functions of an organization and authorized common carrier functions, and conduct automated audits of the monthly bills is seeking a U.S. beta site. This software has already been in use in other nations for almost a year, so a beta test of it does not mean the user has to wring out basic bugs in the software. This release is merely the U.S. version of a proved package. The possibility does exist that detail modifications of functions and screens will occur, as there may be detail items for user convenience that need inclusion. Meantime, using the software portends an opportunity to save significant money with an automated means to trap billing errors and find inactive circuits on complex WANs. This software, although PC-based, requires at least a 486/33 or 66 as a server for the multiple users that access its shared database in order to fulfill all its uses. Further, the organization selected for a beta site should have a dedicated private line bill that runs in excess of USD25,000 per month, preferably much more. Use of the software should provide well in excess of 10% savings per month on that bill. While this software is useful to catalog and track dedicated lines used in switched voice networks, it does not track dial service traffic or billed minutes. Its function is strictly for dedicated lines themselves, and tracking occupancy of those lines with multiplexed applications on them, if any. The provider of the software is not prepared at this juncture to answer casual inquiries or provide multiple demo copies of the software. Please include some description of: - the number and type of lines and nodal points, - common carriers you use, - any private construction or "off-tariff deals" you may have, and - approximate amount of your monthly billing in your inquiry. Seriously interested and qualified parties should e-mail the originator at 0004133373@mcimail.com. The U.S. version of this software will be ready by late May, so seriously interested parties should be prepared to install it in June and start into immediate use. Again, no casual or "merely interested" inquiries, please. There are not facilities available to respond to them. And again, the e-mail address for seriously interested and qualified parties is 0004133373@mcimail.com. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 94 17:19 EST From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com> Subject: Internet Address for Computer-Privacy Computer Privacy is moderated by Prof. Leonard P. Levine and it can be reached at com-privacy@uwm.edu. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Its been awhile since mention was made of this fine publication so now is a good time for it. Originally started by Dennis Rears as a continuation of a very long and controversial thread started here in TELECOM Digest, Dennis turned over control of his publi- cation to Professor Levine several months ago. Actually, two e-journals had their beginning here as part of TELECOM Digest. The other was the very popular Computer Underground Digest (or CuD as it is frequently known) which began here a few years ago as a thread on computer hacking about the same time that the federal government was having a major investigation into computer crime which involved some prominent net personalities. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 06:37:58 EDT From: JUNAID@delphi.com Subject: Using CDMA for LAN's? I have a question for the CDMA and LAN experts out there: After studying how CDMA is implemented, I was wondering if anyone knew if such a concept would work for LAN's. I know that CDMA is designed for Mobile "wireless" applications, but the idea if coding to me seems to also have other possibilities. If you have an Ethernet style topology (i.e. one thick cable) running through an office, is it possible for multiple transceivers to broadcast a message on several frequencies at once (i.e. CDMA). The benefit of such a system to my mind is that it would allow multiple workstations to transmit/receive files simultaneously. It would also allow for applications such as voice and video, which require CBR facility, to also operate on the same network. The coding could be derived as a calculation based on the unique addresses of both the sending and receiving workstations. This would reduce the overhead on the PC/workstation transceiver as it would only have to focus attention on certain frequencies. In other worlds, a kind of digital FDM LAN with packet and VBR facilities. For me, the benefit of such a product is that it would allow a company to go to existing LAN customers and provide a upgrade path to multimedia networking without re-cabling the office or buying new PC/workstations. All you would have to do is put in new LAN cards (and make money?). Question 1: Would such a concept work? Or would you only hear garbage on your cable due to intereference? Question 2: Is there a company developing such a product for LAN's? (Or has it been already developed?) Best regards, Junaid@Delphi.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 08:49:16 -0400 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? In many ways CNID and ANI are similar yet as has been pointed out here, ANI is a much older service and CNID is a parallel (though not always exactly the same) function tied to CLASS services. With the FCC mandate for CNID service, is it not possible that the telcos will use this to drop ANI? Also it has been mentioned that "911 service requires special trunk lines and equipment". Clearly CNID does not and needs only a low-cost display. Will this make local 911 response a possibility? While we are at it, I would *suspect* that per-call blocking will be the standard, per-line will be standard for unlisted subscribers, a different dial tone will be returned when blocking is enabled; emergency, recipient paid (800), and possibly 900 numbers will receive CNID reguardless of privacy bit setting (possibly with a special ring); and a host of other features will be available "at slight additional charge". And pizza shops, like my computers, will refuse to answer if CNID is blocked. Warmly, Padgett [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think ANI will ever be completely dropped in favor of using Caller-ID exclusively since CID can be blocked at the caller's option while ANI delivery cannot be blocked. The latter is delivered more with the idea in mind 'here is what you are paying for when you automatically accepted the collect calls' while the former is intended to announce who is calling. If ANI were dropped, then there would have to be some adjustments made to CID which did not allow the caller to override number delivery in certain cases such as 800 calls. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: CO Switch Types by Exchange Code Date: Wed, 18 May 94 11:15:25 PDT From: Michael Stanford I am looking for a listing of all the CO switch types in the USA by area code and exchange code -- I have heard that such a list is available on the Internet. Do you have any idea where I should start looking? To clarify, my phone number is +1 (202) 332 2110. I would like to look up 202 332 in the list and see that it is hooked to a Northern Telecom XX.XX switch or whatever it is. I presume the list would be quite large -- a maximum of about 200,000 entries. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: mk@TFS.COM (Mike King) Subject: Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 12:24:52 PDT In TELECOM Digest, V14 #233, Will Martin wrote: > As I thought of that, it also caused me to wonder the same thing about > 800 numbers. They, too, are always dialed with the leading "800", and > so that number-space could be a full XXX-XXXX range too. The only > thing stopping it is the expectation of the users and how the software > is written. Are there 800-XXX exchanges in use now? I've seen quite a few 800-800-XXXX numbers listed. Before portability, I believe Sprint administered them. Mike King mk@tfs.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought 800-800 'belonged to' MCI, but I could be mistaken. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 16:55 EDT From: The Tibetian Traveller Subject: Re: SRI Ends Two Bobs Will Martin wrote: > Also, there's at least one aspect that no one ever seems to mention: > you can hide your SW reception. I can listen in my bed to shortwave, > using a radio that's the size of a paperback book...No one has ever > shown me how they can receive from a satellite without an external > antenna of some kind, Will makes several fine points about 'stealth satellite' reception. However, there are small concelable antennas for satellite use. The special forces had one that would fold up to a size like a foldable umbrella. Signal/noise wasn't the greatest, but it allowed one person to carry everything necessary to communicate via satellite on his back. Garnet ------------------------------ From: dreuben@netcom.com (Cid Technologies) Subject: Re: Money Saving Cellular Tip (CO/NY NYNEX rates) Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 23:07:14 PDT On May 13 07:46:30 1994, oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl), in response to a post by John Levine, wrote: > [the point being that having one's long-distance cellular calls billed > separately could save money] > This is one reason a person might choose one cellular carrier over > another. Of the two cellular carriers in New York, one (Nynex) lets > you pick your own long-distance carrier and be billed separately if > you wish, the other (Cellular One) forces you to AT&T and bills you > for it. Or at least it was that way a few years ago, can current > customers comment? It still is that way. CO/NY bills you for both local and toll calls. Local calls are six cents per minute, and you can call from central Jersey to Fairfield County, CT at six cents per minute, plus airtime. NYNEX does NOT bill for local calls, so any call within NYNEX/NY's service area is always toll-free -- you pay only airtime. This can mean a significant savings, especially at night, when rates for both CO/NY and NYNEX are around 30 cents per minute (NYNEX is like 25, CO is around 35, depending on your plan). A 6 cent per minute local charge is around 20% of the total cost, so NYNEX at night can come out to be * 40% * cheaper (ie, 25 cents per minute for a local call on NYNEX, 41 cents per minute on Cell One/NY). Note however that NYNEX/NY's "home" rate plan/local calling area does NOT include Fairfield Cty, CT, as does Cell One's. As to toll calls, both NYNEX and CO/NY charge standard (read: the most expensive) AT&T rates. NYNEX will let you use whatever other equal access LD company it does business with, CO/NY won't -- it has no equal access provisions as they are not required to provide them by law. Interestingly, CO/NY does NOT give you a night discount on your toll calls. You pay AT&T's EVE call rates on ALL toll calls after 5PM -- there is no discount for night calls. You can see this clearly on your CO/NY bill is you roam to other areas near NY which do bill AT&T NIGHT rates. On my most recent bill, I placed two calls to Hingham, Mass (617-749) on a Saturday afternoon, thus normally qualifying for AT&T's NIGHT rate. The first call had a toll charge of 16 cents for a one minute call, which is AT&T's EVE rate, not night. I then drove to Philly, placed the same 1 minute call, and was billed 12 cents for a minute call, which is AT&T's NIGHT rate. Thus ComCast/Philly will bill at AT&T's night rate, while CO/NY won't. Now four cents is no big deal, but it goes to illustrate the point. I talked to CO/NY about this, and it is indeed their policy to bill you the eve rate even when you should be billed the night rate. I usually use our 800 numbers and no-surcharge 800 calling card card, so this is no big deal for me, and I'm not sure if its worthwhile for them to change (seems like no one else noticed or mentioned it to them.) For those who may be outraged that CO/NY is doing this, well, it's a common practice, although most cell co's will bill you at standard night rate, like ComCast does. (And Bell owned ones MUST do this -- they can't "skim" off the tariffed rates). On a recent flight I was talking to a couple of people "associated" with AT&T and McCaw (being purposely vague). Among many other topics of conversation, we discussed good/cheap LD co's to use, and one guy (who wanted to shock me, it seems! :) ) mentioned that the recent LD deal which AT&T cut with McCaw, where McCaw committed to using AT&T at all of its properties, gave McCaw *daytime* LD rates of *eight cents per minute*! So if this is correct, McCaw is skimming between 13 and 17 cents per minute on daytime calls. Now I have no idea how correct this information is, but you can bet McCaw and the other non-Bell owned Cell Co's are getting a very good deal from whatever IXC LD provider they choose. So in most cases, the Cell Co. is not only making money on airtime, but on the LD charges as well. (And I'm sure cell cos which charge a local call charge make something on that, too, although not as much. Additionally, some like CO/NY, extend the local call charge to include a significantly larger area than the Bell-owned cell co can legally offer a similar local calling plan to.) > [...] in New York, at least, the oligopoly pricing leads to > very expensive air time charges, for many callers 90 cents per minute. > This dwarfs the long-distance price component and reduces the benefit > of getting to choose your long-distance carrier. If you think NY is bad, go to LA! Airtime charges for ANY incomplete call, absolutely pathetic coverage, some of the lamest customer service (both A and B sides) in the West, and severe rush hour "blocking" so its impossible to get a call out, let alone receive one! :( LA is *the* definitive example of the worst manifestations which are the direct result of the current duopoly. Airtime charges to call a busy signal are an outrage, and are perpetuated only because there is no alternative. If I worked for LA Cell or Pac*Bell LA I'd frankly be embarrassed to admit it for fear of the same (well-deserved) scorn which early AOS operators received for charging outrageous calling card surcharges to a captive user-base. But back to NY, as I noted before, NYNEX does have somewhat better airtime rates and plans, and does not charge for local calls. If you call locally to NY and NJ, and don't want to be committed to a higher priced CO/NY plan, NYNEX is always a good deal. AND -- they don't charge airtime for incomplete calls over 40 seconds. My main problem with NYNEX is their rather high roaming charges, awkward and dysfunc- tional automatic roaming network, and their exquisitely inept customer service dept, probably the worst in the northeast. If you can get past all this (ie, don't roam and don't call customer service), they have very good service in the NY Metro Area and their system is *slightly* more stable and reliable than CO/NY's. > One hopes that some day in the US there will be more than two > providers for portable phone service, to bring the price down. Amen to that! The sooner, the better! Doug CID Technologies (203) 499-5221 ------------------------------ From: BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il Subject: Re: Palestinian Country Code Date: 18 May 94 23:01:43 GMT Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem In article , goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes: > According to a recent issue of the {Economist}, the recent agreement > between Israel and the PLO in setting up a "Palestinian Authority" in > the Gaza strip and the Jericho area includes provisions that allow the > Authority to issue postage stamps and to use a separate telephone > country code. Does anyone know if the ITU has issued the new code > yet, and if so, what number was used? The country code list for Zone > 9 (which includes Israel, Jordan, etc.) in the Telecom archives shows > that 970, 978 and 979 are currently vacant, so I suspect that it will > be one of those. The ITU refused to issue a separate country code for Gaza since the necessary paperwork wasn't submitted by the Palestinian authorities. If they do submit this, I would assume that Gaza would get its own code. Currently Gaza is under the Israeli 07 area code whereas Jericho is under 02 (Jerusalem) area code. Josh backon@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #237 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01113; 19 May 94 17:32 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA22851; Thu, 19 May 94 13:45:35 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA22838; Thu, 19 May 94 13:45:31 CDT Date: Thu, 19 May 94 13:45:31 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405191845.AA22838@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #238 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 May 94 13:45:30 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 238 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (Carl B. Page) Telecomworldwire Publisher Responds (Darren Ingram) Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!! (Peter Corless) Re: 3270 Emulation (Wind (Steve Forrette) Re: Lexus Cellular Phones (John Gilbert) Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Will Martin) Re: Footnote to A History of Underseas Cables (Ray Bruman) Re: History of Underseas Cables (David Ofsevit) Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Alan Varney) Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Tony Harminc) Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Carl Moore) Re: Cellular Modems (Mike Borsetti) Re: Call For Hearings on Assured Public Access to Internet (C. McGuinness) Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set Up Access (A. Padgett Peterson) Re: Misdialed Numbers (Greg Abbott) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: carlp@teleport.com (Carl B. Page) Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID Date: 19 May 1994 00:27:12 -0700 Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 >> We have already seen the question appear relating to "How do you know >> with per line blocking if it is toggled on or off ?" One answer would >> be star-six-seven on and "something else" off but the phone company only >> has 100 star numbers now. > True. Fortunately, some of them remain unassigned so it's a perfectly > workable solution. In particular, *82 seems to have been selected as the Unblock code if it is needed. Many of the 100 are assigned to stupid, rarely used, or unused applications. For example there are two codes to turn on and off CNID delivery. This is not a blocking option -- it is equivalent to unplugging your CNID display for a while. Since the telcos want to charge money to turn CNID on and off, it is unused as far as I know. Of course, just try getting your local teleco to tell you what *NN codes might be stupidly assigned. I had a lot of fun with US West on that one. How many people use any service is "confidential competitive inforformation". The real source of the reluctance is that they want to use the *NN codes for lucrative services, not a revenue neutral service like per-call unblocking. (arl carlp@teleport.COM Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks Public Access UNIX and Internet in PDX at (503) 220-1016 (2400-14400, N81) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 11:06 BST From: Darren Ingram Subject: Telecomworldwire Publisher Responds Reply-To: satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk In-Reply-To: <9405180828.AA14816@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> > Subject: Re: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 1 > If this is the quality of detail that readers may expect, I would > suggest saving the 700 Pounds for something else. > See if you can find three errors of fact in the last sentence quoted. Telecomworldwire is designed as a management-brief overview and not a complex reporting tool for every event. The publication has to react to the news and of information which has been reported first, second or even third hand, using attributation as required. Perhaps the message was not Pro-American as much as it could have been . Anyway, our international readers and subscribers do not seem to share the same opinion as the writer. Our database revenues keep breaking targer predictions and our fax service is going very well. So we must be doing something right. Unfortunately TWW cannot, by definition, have the same extensive leadtimes as some magazines. And yes, at times, we can screw up, mix things up and the like --- all part of the fun of a pressurised timely wire-feed. > special subscription offer to the readers of Telecomworldwire and > send them a *free* subscription to this Digest. How's that for a > deal! :) Remember, TELECOM Digest is supported by the generous Nice try Pat! ------------------------------ From: pcorless@cisco.com (Peter Corless) Subject: Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!! Date: 19 May 1994 12:25:59 GMT Organization: Cisco Systems Customer Service Patrick A. Townson (telecom@eecs.nwu.edu) wrote: > I think you may be coming down a little to hard on them demanding a written apology, etc. PAT] I second Steve Bracks's remarks on this issue. Getting poor customer service heaps on insult to injury. ( ... literally, if you are in the health care industry! ;-) Apology letters take only a little time to write, and only a stamp to mail. The biggest "cost" is in the emotional trauma of admitting that you could ever possibly have been in the wrong. Customer service today relies upon the empowerment of the person answering the phone to 1) be able to identify the problem and 2) solve the issue to the customer's satisfaction. If a customer feels completely disempowered by the process of lodging their complaint, then it is valid to escalate their issue to someone else who'll listen. A successful customer service transaction with AT&T might not necessarily have resulted in the customer "getting their way," but at least given the impression that their voice was heard. In this case, it seems that the transaction was completely unsuccessful for the customer. A kind reply might not fix the issue either, but again acknowledges the customer as a human being, and shows that AT&T cares about their individual residential users. Action taken to correct an issue at a point like this (taking a lose-lose situation to a win-win) is the kind of thing that service heroes try to do, and are the kind of experiences that win customers for life. To bounce back to the original issue -- misbillings -- if AT&T has problems getting billing done through the local carriers, then it is paramount that they identify the cause of the misbillings and take appropriate action. You would think that they'd *want* to know if customers are getting the great service "as seen on TV," and if not, why not? Otherwise they'll lose not just the customers that their new service plan was trying to attract, but they may also risk losing existing customers! (As many studies show, complaints travel faster than praise, and are often more believed as well!) BTW: Thank you Pat, for pointing out the possiblity of billing through the local carrier as the possible cause of the issue. Issue escalation to Usenet once again came to the rescue! I'll be interested to hear if and how the issue is ever resolved. (You see, I am an AT&T customer myself ... :-) Peter Corless Cisco Systems, Inc. Senior Customer Service Representative email: pcorless@cisco.com toll-free: (800) 553-NETS fax: (415) 903-5007 direct: (415) 903-8723 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think time and again the main reason for many/most of AT&T's billing errors comes as a result of billing through the local telcos. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: 3270 Emulation (Wind Date: 19 May 1994 12:48:37 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc. Reply-To: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) In , Roger Fajman writes: >> I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a >> great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection >> 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe >> environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you >> please provide me with the information I need to obtain them. > P.S. - WRQ sells a version of Reflection with TN3270 capability. "Reflection 3270" is the product which does this. In addition to the base terminal emulation features, it supports file transfer, EEHLLAPI, DDE, OLE 2.0 Automation, and comes with a Visual Basic - like scripting language. It runs with our TCP/IP stack, or can use third-party Winsock- compliant stacks. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: johng@ecs.comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones Organization: Motorola, LMPS Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 12:45:49 -0500 From Motorola Cellular Service Bulletin #179 4/92 Motorola designs and manufactures cellular telephones for several OEM's. In such cases the OEM manufacturer has contracted Motorola to design a unique telephone system to fit their particular requirements. Standard Motorola equipment will not operate properly if installed into unique OEM cables. Motorola strongly discourages any attempt to install a standard Motorola cellular telephone into unique OEM cables. Custom features designed into OEM phones are not operaable with standard Motorola equipment, and standard Motorola telephones do not operate properly on OEM-designed cables. Motorola is under contract to OEM manufacturers in these cases and cannot provide technical details on equipment specially-designed for any customer, nor can Motorola sell unique OEM equipment directly to anyone other than the OEM under contract. Customers are urged to contact their car dealer for information on purchasing the unit which is designed for their application. John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 7:54:45 CDT From: Will Martin Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device >> Has anyone heard of a digital writing device presumably using >> lightpens or something equivalent, that has two "terminals" for >> people to use to communicate over the phone as if by writing? ... We used these here at this agency before we moved over to the then- advanced-technology Western Electric "Electronic Blackboard" for audio teleconferencing. (That was an actual blackboard in a metal frame/stand, about 4' X 5' or so, in which the blackboard area was a double-layer pressure sensitive region. As you wrote on it with chalk, the layers touched and sent a signal which was displayed on a video monitor at the remote site. It used modem-like tones for transmitting the data down the phone line. Erasing was neat -- in the absence of an eraser, cutting off a light-path between two sensors in the eraser tray caused the pressure on the board to be interpreted as an erasure instead of a solid line. Or you could hit a switch and just kill the whole video image at once.) This device went away when video teleconferencing came in. I wonder when WE last sold/leased these, or if they're still around? I just checked with our A/V person on the name of those earlier writing devices we used, and he says they were "Telenotes" -- he's pretty sure that was the name of the company, too, but I guess they could have been made by the previously-referenced "Telautograph" company and "Telenotes" might have been a model name. Anyone out there recall if these were competing brands or just company and model names? I never saw them in actual use -- by the time I got involved in our tele- conferencing work the Telenotes had been relegated to a box on the shelf in the back of the conference area ... they used ordinary ball-point pens writing on plain paper strips. The receiving box's pen was slaved to the sender's, whose writing motions were duplicated at the remote site. I have the vague recollection that there were separate sending and receiving units; the same device didn't switch back and forth from being a sender to being a receiver. In that case, I guess the conferences required two separate phone calls, one for each connection. Anyone recall if that is the case or if I'm wrong about that? (I also dimly recall acoustic-coupling muffs on them ...) I don't know if these could be set up so that multiple receivers could be slaved to a single master. It seems like that would be necessary in many circumstances. Will ------------------------------ From: rbruman@raynet.com (Ray Bruman) Subject: Re: Footnote to A History of Underseas Cables Date: 18 May 1994 22:18:18 GMT Organization: Raynet Corp, Menlo Park, CA Reply-To: rbruman@raynet.com In article 3@eecs.nwu.edu, haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (James H. Haynes) writes: > Another interesting facet of history, also from George Oslin's book, > is the relation between transatlantic cables and the U.S. purchase of > Alaska. > Other figures mentioned in connection with this event are Leo Tolstoy, > who was made a count in recognition of his work promoting telegraphy > in Russia, and a U.S. diplomat named George Kennan. Oslin doesn't say > so, but I would presume the latter is an ancestor of the living > diplomat with the same name. Yes, he is an ancestor, and he was only a 20-year old adventurer when he set out in 1864. In 1870 he published an amazing account of the trip: "Tent Life in Siberia." It was reissued in paperback about 5-10 years ago. Unfortunately it is by now out of print (according to the publisher) but my friend got hers through the Quality Paperback club and I hope to get a copy myself some day. As noted in the forward, it is so much like Mark Twain's "Roughing It" that you could jumble the titles and it would make sense. It is hair-raising, hilarious, and completely engrossing. Ray Bruman Raynet Corp. rbruman@raynet.com 415-688-2325 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 09:01:52 -0400 From: ofsevit@nac.lkg.dec.com Subject: Re: History of Underseas Cables I was surprised that in the excellent series of articles on telegraph and telephone cables there was no mention of Arthur C. Clarke's fine book "Voice Across the Sea" (Harper, 1958). I don't know whether it's in print anymore, but it is very well written and worth finding. It gives the full history of the early cables, and proceeds through early radio telephone connections through the first AT&T voice cables in the 1950s. David Ofsevit Digital Equipment Corp. (for identification only) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps our resident historian on these things, Don Kimberlin will respond to your comment. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 08:02:51 +0500 Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article mark@legend.akron.oh.us (Mark E Daniel) writes: > In article is written: > Do you have a limit on the number telephone IDs :) that you are allow > to block calls from? Or do they charge you on a byte-used deal? :) > Like I always say, I'd rather have a list of allowed numbers and > forget the rest. :) The latter capability is known as "computer access restriction" or some such title. Basically, it blocks calls unless from a small (say ten) set of numbers. Those not on the list can be forwarded to an alternate number or to a TELCo "not accepting calls from this number" announcement. The list sizes are small, each TELCo sets their own limit on size. They will never substitute for a large CPE-based screening system. On the other hand, the Call Block list can have "private" numbers added to it -- something CPE can't do. Al Varney ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 13:11:20 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate dasher@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood) wrote: > Speaking of NNX and NXX, is there a letter for the set {0,1}? I > haven't seen one used. If (strangely) there isn't a convention, how > about B for Bit, so old-style area codes are NBX? The letter Y has been used since the earliest days in this context. Old style numbers are NYX NNX-XXXX. They've always been in upper case, which is not in keeping with mathematical use. Tony H. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 12:03:31 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate I am not 100% sure; I remember Z used for "0 or 1 only". ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 00:34:53 PDT From: Mike Borsetti Subject: Re: Cellular Modems > Anyone out there with experience or recommendations regarding cellular > modems. Yes. As a matter of fact I am the author of a comprehensive yet brief informational paper on how to do data transmissions over cellular (AMPS) entitled -- very creatively -- "Primer on Transmitting Data over Cellular". It currently isn't available on the Internet, but I'd be glad to e-mail it to you on request. If you have a CompuServe account, you will find it posted in the Wireless Data library of the TELECOM forum. The primer contains a discussion of the modem protocols that work well over cellular and of the hardware needed to make it all work. It also lists phone numbers for all manufacturers (known to me) in the field. mike.borsetti@bactc.com Business Development Manager, Wireless Data Cellular One/San Francisco ------------------------------ From: marks!charles@jyacc.jyacc.com (Charles McGuinness) Date: Mon, 16 May 94 11:05:56 EDT Subject: Re: Call For Hearings on Assured Public Access to InterNet I hate to let politics intrude in a otherwise valuable discussion of the technical and business aspects of the telecommunications industry, but I find it hard to let the above referenced article pass by without commenting. The notion of "Assured Public Access to InterNet" strikes me as being pure BS. It seems more like this coalition wants to assure themselves of subsidized telecommunications in the future. On the other hand, I'm glad TELECOM Digest published the letter. Now I can write my representatives to tell them not to waste their time with the demands of this pompous coalition! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 08:21:28 -0400 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point > It sounds like you're about to get into the wonderful world of Unix. > The addresses we have on the internet don't seem to want to let people > telnet into our site. This is because we have a network with only DOS > machines on it. I have heard that we are going to have to get a Unix > box and a fully qualified domain name if we want to be fully on the 'net. We have a similiar situation but it is the result of a corporate firewall many miles from here that blocks inward FTP and TELNET. DOS has nothing to do with it. I have a nice little obsolete 386SX-16 in my office which is running three concurrent Novell DOS 7.0 TASKMGR sessions -- one FTP server, one SMTP server, and a DOS box in case I want to look at things or send E-Mail. The Ethernet package is FTP Software's PCTCP (lots o' plugs). Really just a matter of the right software, an IP address and being registered with a Domain Name Server (DNS). Nice thing about PCTCP is that it gives you the whole header and lets me experiment with features like Telnet 25 (do-it-yourself E-Mail) plus lots of other things that only a fanatic who uses both VAXen and 3090s would notice. Could do the same thing with Windoze I suppose, but TASKMGR, like DESQVIEW, has much less performance overhead on this machine and I'm just lazy. I have another 386DX-25 at home that can do the same thing and was built from the parts left over when I upgraded my main hobby machine to a 486 (at son's urging; 7th Guest ran too slow). Only cost was $39.95 mini tower case with power supply since old CGA monitor and other leftovers are just fine for the purpose. Originally, I set it up to examine E-Mail headers (you can't trust them) and capture entire packets (you can trust those but you have to know what you are looking at) after a friend was the subject of some viciously forged E-Mail but it has proved handy since. Warmly, Padgett ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 10:28:22 CST From: "Greg Abbott" Reply-To: gabbott@uiuc.edu Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers In message Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:08 CDT, telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I have also pointed out in the past, > years ago when I worked at the credit card billing office my extension > on the centrex system was 7265. The bar and grill downstairs where many > employees went for lunch (or to idle away the afternoon hiding from their > supervisor) had the phone number 726-5xxx. I could set my watch by it: > every day at 11:30 -- the start of the first lunch hour -- my phone would > ring. I would answer; a voice on the other end would say 'damn' (or worse > or more crude, depending on who) and click off. They were calling down- > stairs to get their lunch order started and had forgotten to dial '9' > for an outside line. Then at 12:30, the start of the second lunch hour, > the process would be repeated with one or two more calls like that. PAT] Pat, you should have taken a few orders from the callers ... I bet they'd pay closer attention to what number they were dialing! GREG ABBOTT INTERNET: GABBOTT@UIUC.EDU 9-1-1 COORDINATOR COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107 VOICE: 217/333-4348 METCAD FAX: 217/384-7003 1905 E. MAIN ST. URBANA, IL 61801 PAGER: 800/222-6651 PIN # 9541 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A couple times when I was not distracted with my own work and was expecting such calls to arrive I did not take any orders but I did offer suggestions of my own for their dining pleasure. After all, it was the Diner's Club ... I'd answer and the ones who were listening at that point would respond angrily and hang up; they knew they had dialed wrong. For the ones who were not listening when I answered, their first question often as not was 'what kinda soup?' meaning what kind of soup do you have today? I grew quite creative in my responses, most of which cannot be printed in a family digest like this one. If they asked about the luncheon special, I had an answer for that also. Suffice to say my answers were often scatalogical in nature. Then about the same time -- late sixties -- my home phone number somehow wound up on a list of the names/phone numbers of janitors for some real estate company here. I'd get these calls at all hours from crabby tenants wanting to know such things as why wasn't there any heat in their apartment (my answer: for the rent you pay, you are not entitled to any hot water or heat in the winter); when would the garbage be taken away (my answer: if it were not for filthy pigs like you, there would not be so much garbage); or similar. That was only after three or four calls to the real estate company asking them to please correct the typographical error in their list. As I recall, John Higdon once said he had to take hotel reservations for quite awhile on his 800 number; other Digest readers have reported equally creative solutions to persistent wrong number callers. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #238 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01692; 19 May 94 18:55 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA25393; Thu, 19 May 94 14:57:23 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA25384; Thu, 19 May 94 14:57:20 CDT Date: Thu, 19 May 94 14:57:20 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405191957.AA25384@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #239 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 May 94 14:57:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 239 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson What Are Baseworks and Display Construction Set Packages? (A. Hashmi) Directory Assistance From Cellular Companies (Lynne Gregg) Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Bud Bach) Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Andrew Laurence) Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone (Fran S. Menzel) Re: International Callback Services (Peter Leif Rasmussen) Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software (Richard Kashdan) Re: Call Display From New York (Tony Harminc) Re: 800 Number Billback (Jonathan Loo) Re: "Private" Message on CID Box (mwolf@marcie.wellesly.edu) Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Joseph Herl) Information Needed on Netiquette (Rosemary Angela Mauro) Re: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine (Jonathan Loo) Re: DID Loophole or I'm Screwed up? (Randy Gellens) Re: Need Info on R.L. Drake Co. (Bennett Z. Kobb) Re: Problems With Call Return (Steve Elias) Re: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Cellular Phone Timers (Mike Roche) Re: Palestinian Country Code (Carl Moore) Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software (Robert J. Rhodes) History of Area Code Splits (Carl Moore) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hashmi@cnj.digex.net (Atiqullah Hashmi) Subject: What Are Baseworks and Display Construction Set Packages? Date: 19 May 1994 13:04:12 -0400 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, New Jersey, USA Hi netters, Could any kind soul describe what are these packages and what do they do: 1. Baseworks 2. Display Construction Set(DCS) Also if there is any book/material/online info for details on these things, kindly let me know. Thanks very much, Atiq ------------------------------ From: Lynne Gregg Subject: Directory Assistance From Cellular Companies Date: Thu, 19 May 94 09:13:00 PDT Henry Mensch wrote about GTE Mobilnet's "lame" Directory Assistance in the Bay Area. Many cellular operators are sourcing Directory Assistance service to alternative operator services outfits. Many of these firms lack access to LEC or RBOC on-line data (including most recent adds/moves/changes), thus accounting for such inaccuracies in their service. McCaw operations recognize this and rely on LEC and RBOC DA bureaus for Directory Services to provide the highest degree of accuracy and efficiency to its cellular subscribers. McCaw cellular units in the Southwest (including Metrocel in Dallas) recently added automatic call completion to enhance existing DA service. Now subscribers can enjoy the added convenience of call completion when calling for Directory Assistance. The automatic call completion is included as a part of Directory Assistance service and offered at no additional charge. McCaw is extending this service throughout its U.S. operations including those it operates under the Cellular One (tm) name. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ From: bachww@ferret.cig.mot.com (Bud Bach) Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service Date: 19 May 1994 14:22:05 GMT Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola In article Blake.R.Patterson@att.com writes: > Ameritech offers Chicago-area reverse lookups (NPAs 312 and 708 only). > Call 796-9600 from 312+ or 708+ phones and pay $.35 for two lookups. > From outside those NPAs, call 312-796-9600; you just pay the toll. > This service uses human voice for prompts and synthetic speech (that I > find hard to understand) for the names and addresses. Remember, > Chicago-area lookups only. Note that if you ask the thing to repeat the same information several times a real live person comes on line. Bud bachww@cig.mot.com (Bud Bach) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ditto if you sit there and do nothing at all after it first answers; the asssumption then is you are calling from a rotary phone and the call is passed to a live operator. The Name and Address Service we have here has been around since the 1930's. Prior to the consoliated service at 796-9600, the same listings were obtained by dialing -2080. The old 'two-oh-eight-oh' service was manual; that number rang on the desk of the Chief Operator's clerk in each CO and they looked at an index card in a box on their desk. PAT] ------------------------------ From: laurence@netcom.com (Andrew Laurence) Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 17:22:56 GMT Blake.R.Patterson@att.com writes: > DIAL: 900-933-3330, then use a touch-tone phone to enter ten-digit > numbers. The charge is still $1.00 a minute -- cheaper and as > accurate as the defunct Telename service George mentioned. I just tried it on my home number, which is listed and has been in service for more than a year. It told me it couldn't find it. Andrew Laurence Oakland, California USA laurence@netcom.com Pacific Daylight Time (GMT-7) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's because, as Lynne Gregg points out in her note earlier in this issue, many of those outfits rely on old, obsolete listings rather than accessing the up-to-date listings of telco. They'd have to *pay* telco to do that; then there would be less profit in their operation. I guess they figure it is better to work with older, less expensive databases and be right part of the time rather than do the job right but make less profit. PAT] ------------------------------ From: f.s.menzel Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 07:33:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone Steve Cogorno wrote: >> For quite a while now I'am searching for a specific telephone probably >> manufactured by AT&T.Specific features: narrow receiver, the speech >> unit of the receiver is bent almost 90 degrees; the receiver is shaped >> like an L , wire phone, mostly seen in black colour.I suppose it most >> be a very common model in the US , because I saw in many different >> movies. > It sounds like you are referring to the MERLIN/System 25,75, etc Voice > Terminals. You will not be able to use these without a Control Unit, > which will cost more than $1500 in most cases. The phones themselves > range from $250-500 depending on the size. Steve: The controller is not required if you stick to the analog sets such such as the 7102, which deals with ordinary tip and ring. I don't know what price the resale market is getting, but $250-500 sounds high. Fran Menzel 908-957-5615 AT&T Global Communications Systems ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 09:16:55 JST From: plr@ichigo.os.nasu.toshiba.co.jp (Peter Leif Rasmussen) Subject: Re: International Callback Services I would like to comment on the callback FAQ posted here by Bruce Hahne. I read a version of that before and investigated various services and found that Globalcom 2000 looked very interesting. That is about a month ago. The representative I talked with, Scot Bundren was very quick to answer my questions about the services, until I had provided him with my credit card number! Then all questions have gone unanswered, for a period of now two weeks. The answers to questions before used to come within 24 hours. I also now notice that his email address has changed from before scb@netcom.com to now scottb@cats.ucsc.edu. What I want to say is that I fear this might be a scam. Peter Rasmussen, Japan ------------------------------ From: rkashdan@netcom.com (Richard Kashdan) Subject: Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 05:59:50 GMT przebien@news.delphi.com (PRZEBIENDA@DELPHI.COM) writes: > We had a home grown telecommunication package that allowed us to send > alphanumeric messages to our PAC-TEL pagers. We are interested in > updating the softwaree. We are interested in reasonably priced > commercial software or in the protocol specs of the 800 number we > communicate with the old package. I have a Windows-based package called Alfie-Jr. that works pretty well. The publisher is Evtek Corporation 800-388-8499 and it was pretty cheap, I am pretty sure it was something like $39 or $49. Another one you might check out is the Borland Sidekick 2.0 (not Sidekick Plus, but version 2.0 of the regular Sidekick). This will send alphanumeric pager messages. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 14:45:02 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Call Display From New York I found out how my caller from JFK airport in New York placed that call to me in Toronto that showed 212 210-0000 on my Call Display. He dialed MCI's 800 number (he didn't say what it was), and keyed in his MCI card number and my phone number. So MCI seems, under some circumstances at least, to pass CNID to Bell Canada. This is perhaps not surprising, in light of the corporate relationship between the two. It still isn't clear who produced the apparently bogus NPA and number in the first place. How long will it take the regulators to disallow this sort of thing, I wonder. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 17:33:36 -0400 From: Jonathan Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback Pat Townson wrote: > You are not being charged for the call to the 800 number. That part is > free to you the caller with the recipient paying for the carriage. You > are being charged for the return collect call the Information Provider > makes to you, which the AOS operator asked if you would accept the > charges for. Admittedly sometimes they do not bother to call back but > simply continue the conversation with you on the same connection, but > none the less the AOS operator at some point asked if you would accept > the charges for the call; when accepted, it then is like any other > collect call. They often don't call back; AT&T explained to me that they transfer your call to a 900 number; at least that is the case with recorded messages. Or is it? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've heard this is the case also, that your call is forwarded to a 900 number. I presume they somehow have to force in the number from which you are calling so the billing can be done. Either way, it is a poor practice and in bad taste. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mwolf@marcie.wellesley.edu (MUR) Subject: Re: "Private" Message on CID Box Organization: WELLESLEY COLLEGE Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:59:24 GMT Another posting in this folder referred to "Anonymous Call Blocking", a service offered by the phone company in Texas. Is this one of the Fed's mandated services, which will be available everywhere soon, or is it just something offered at the discretion of individual phone companies? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 13:47:41 -0500 Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? From: Joseph Herl Reply-To: jherl@uiuc.edu Many thanks for taking the time to respond to my question about how to call myself. Your response was detailed and absolutely correct. The ringback number 1-577-nnnn works here in Champaign. I think this will be a big time saver when we move next week. Joe Herl [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, so it does work throughout all of Illinois Bell's territory. Mine is 1-573-nnnn. I hope other readers in northern Illinois find this useful. PAT] ------------------------------ From: st014532@oregon.uoregon.edu (Rosemary Angela Mauro) Subject: Information Needed on Netiquette Date: 19 May 1994 03:36:15 GMT Organization: University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon Reply-To: st014532@oregon.uoregon.edu I am currently engaged in putting on a presentation for a telecommunications class at the U of Oregon. I need any information you may have regarding netiquette,nethics and conventional terms used on th intenet or email. Perhaps someone has an email address where I could write for information. Would appreciate any response. Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Imagine that! Someone actually *asking* how to be polite and courteous on the net instead of being *told* by several dozen angry readers ... :) I suggest news.announce.newreaders is one good source for the information. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 21:59:50 -0400 From: Jonathan Subject: Re: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine Another telephone company service that can help is Call Trace, *57. Ask the Business Office about it. It might not be *57 in your area. By the way, Pat's suggestions sounded a little too draconian. The idea of "it is dialing correctly but some equipment in the central office is on the intermittant fritz (telco's problem, and less likely than the first two probabilities)": how often does this occur? It doesn't sound like a common problem, and if there is such a problem: what can be done to fix something that serious? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It isn't that common, and sort of difficult to find and fix. Let's say it is an older central office with a lot of mechanical equipment. One of the pieces of common equipment there -- used by all subscribers -- goes bad, gets a loose connection, etc. It used to be in the old stepping switch offices that sometimes a switch would get old and worn out and miss a 'step' here and there. Maybe the number the answering machine is *supposed* to call is just one digit off the number it actually gets connected to, and then it only happens when the answering machine is making a call and happens to get assigned the piece of faulty equipment in the CO. In other words, it happens all the time to whoever happens to select that particular piece of equipment in the central office, but it only happens that the answering machine gets that circuit once every five or ten calls, like any other typical user. I think I mentioned once that I long ago would call a certain number in the daytime and always get connected with no hassles, yet when calling the same number at midnight or one in the morning I'd always get stuck in the CO somewhere with the call going nowhere and never completing. Once I was able to get someone in night plant willing to look into the matter, it was found that the first trunk in a group of several to be offered to me was bad. In the daytime when traffic in the CO was heavy, no one ever got the first selected trunk over and over again. In the middle of the night I *always* got it. Some of those obscure little kinks in the CO take a Sherlock Holmes to root them out, report them and get them fixed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 17 MAY 94 00:42:00 Subject: Re: DID Loophole or I'm Screwed up? > Per FCC Part 68 and TELCo tariffs, anything other than audible ring > and busy tone (with some exceptions) is "meaningful" -- and the call > must be supervised (answered). I thought it was OK for a PBX to issue an intercept without returning supervision. For example, "The extension you dialed does not exist. Please call xyx-xxyy for assistance." Do these messages have to be supervised? Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com Net**2 656-6350 (Please forward bounces to Mail Stop MV 237 rgellens@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ From: bkobb@newsignals.com (Bennett Z. Kobb) Subject: Re: Need Info on R.L. Drake Co. Organization: New Signals Research Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:30:30 GMT Their current address: RL Drake Co PO Box 3006 Miamisburg OH 45343 800 568 3795 Note that it's Miamisburg and not Miamisville. Have a nice forever, Bennett Kobb ------------------------------ From: Steve Elias Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return Date: Thu, 19 May 94 11:06:29 MST Hi Monty, IMHO, Call Return is a fine service and I am pleased with it so far. It is a good workaround to the California PUC wimp out on Caller ID. I've called back a bunch of wrong numbers to my answering machine so far. It's fun. Just because some people are too clueless or obnoxious or shy to use Call Return courteously does not mean the service should not be offered. There are some of us who are capable of using Call Return courteously and effectively! eli ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 94 07:26:34 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous In TELECOM Digest V14 #228 dhayes@onramp.net (David Hayes) writes: > Personally, I believe that the phone companies are afraid > that so many people would select per-line blocking (rather than > per-call) that no one would want to pay for Caller ID service. Selecting per-line blocking to hide a phone number doesn't help. It doesn't prevent the number from being listed in the directory; all it does is slow the information gatherer down. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 1+(516) 282-3093 FAX 1+(516) 282-7688 ------------------------------ From: mr@Tadpole.COM (Mike Roche) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Timers Date: 19 May 1994 17:43:10 GMT Organization: Tadpole Technology, Inc. Austin, TX Reply-To: mr@Tadpole.COM > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is apparently, at present no way to > start or stop the timer(s) with supervision. I believe the timers are > wired through the SEND button and that is about it. Actually on my Motorola MicroTac UltraLite the timer starts when the phone is assigned a channel and stops a second or so after I push "END" ie. when the phone gives up the channel. My previous phone (an OKI) behaved the same. This yields an accurate "billed" time for completed chargable calls. It would be nice though to be able to tell the phone (FUNC x); "the last call was 'free' (incomplete, customer service etc) so subtract the last call time from the cumulative timer. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 14:14:29 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Palestinian Country Code So you are saying that +972 7 includes Gaza, right? The zone.9 file currently doesn't have any reference to city code 7 under +972. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 14:28:19 -0400 From: rrhodes@infi.net (Robert J. Rhodes) Subject: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software przebien@news.delphi.com (PRZEBIENDA@DELPHI.COM) wrote: > We had a home grown telecommunication package that allowed us to send > alphanumeric messages to our PAC-TEL pagers. We are interested in > updating the softwaree. We are interested in reasonably priced > commercial software or in the protocol specs of the 800 number we > communicate with the old package. There are some commercial packages available that will work with most paging company systems. I have used a package called PC Page, made by Metriplex, Inc. Their phone number is (617) 494-9393. It is a DOS based product that works well. We also are using some software provided by our local paging vendor (Mobil Media)called MobilComm Messaging Software. I don't know how you would go about acquiring it. You could try contacting Mobil Media. Their number is (804) 490-7788. This is a Windows based package and works with 800 service. It was written by a company called Desktop Paging Software, Inc. I don't have the phone number for them. Mobil Media also has a package that is DOS based called SNAP Page. It is similar to the PC Page product. Robert J. Rhodes rrhodes@infi.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 14:04:25 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: History of Area Code Splits New stuff added in history file, which I note has been changed back to history.of.area.splits; this is accounting for the message from Gregory P. Monti, and not yet for that from Alan Varney. This is for these areas: 217,309,618,815 Illinois 304 West Virginia add full cutover note for Lincoln Telephone portion of 402 Nebraska Ohio (all areas: 216,419,513,614) 315,518,607 New York Wisconsin (all areas: 414,608,715) 817 Texas (note that Fort Worth and vicinity changed earlier). Other comments: 408,805 should have been included in changes for California? How do you arrive at 1+10D for 610 in Pennsylvania? It is still part of 215, which along with the rest of Pa. has 7D noted instead. What about area 914 in New York? I was surprised by the note about West Virginia going to 7D for long distance within it. There is some local service from it to other area codes, at least into Maryland; I am most familiar with the local calls between Cumberland, MD and Ridgely, W.Va. In 1991 I wrote a note to the Digest that 707-xxxx from a Ridgely pay phone did indeed refer to the 301-707 prefix in Cumberland. TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although Carl sent the latest version of the "History of Area Code Splits" file to me separately to be included in the Telecom Archives when I do the next update there, it has been quite awhile since it was itself published in the Digest, and it is a file I am asked about frequently. So, to conclude this issue, here is the 'history.of.area.splits' file, updated to May 18. My thanks to Carl for his continued hard work in keeping this Archives file up to date and comprehensive. Date: Wed, 18 May 94 14:07:36 EDT From: cmoore@ARL.MIL Subject: history.of.area.splits Last updated: 18 May 1994 by Carl Moore Generalizing prefixes from NNX to NXX (i.e., allowing N0X/N1X) is an alternative to splitting an area which has had only NNX up to this point. When an area has NXX (not NNX) prefixes, its long distance dialing instructions usually are: 7D or 1 + NPA + 7D within area (can no longer use 1 + 7D); 1 + NPA + 7D to other areas (can no longer use NPA + 7D); for 0+ calls, try 0 + NPA + 7D (some 0 + 7D would require timeout). In other words, the leading 1 (or 0) means that what follows is an area code. These instructions can, without further revision, accommodate area codes of form NXX, not just of form N0X/N1X, and thus could be universal by the time area codes must generalize to NXX. The deadline for switches to be able to handle NXX area codes is 1 January 1995 (had been 1 July 1995). It was thought that the first batch of NNX area codes would be of NN0 form, so that some areas could keep 1 + 7D for intra-NPA long distance by disallowing prefixes of NN0 form; I did not know if this would have been affected by use of 52x codes (x not 0) for Mexico. But on 22 July 1993, it was announced that area 205, covering all of Alabama, would split in 1995 to form 334. It is unclear how generalizing area codes to NXX would affect the policy of not using N0X/N1X prefixes until NNX starts running short. I found an exception to the above dialing instructions in February 1992 for 215-267 (Denver) and 215-484 (Adamstown) in Pennsylvania. These exchanges, served by Denver & Ephrata Telephone & Telegraph (also serving a part of the 717 area), were still using the old instructions (1 + 7D and 0 + 7D within area code), even though this necessitated timeout resolution for some calls. I learned (on 2 September 1993) that they would move to 717 (Denver going to 717-336 because of 717-267 being in use at Chambersburg). On 25 September 1993, I noticed that (during permissive dialing) all long distance from there was to be dialed as 1+NPA+7D (with 0+NPA+7D for all 0+), with "1 717" apparently being dropped after the full cutover to 717. The suggestion (at least from Bellcore) has been seen that ideally, all calls should be makeable as 1+NPA+7D (this does not necessarily forbid shorter forms). These areas prepared for N0X/N1X prefixes before it became necessary to prepare for NNX area codes: 213 California, July 1973 (7D on all calls within it) (later 213/818, now 213/310/818, to become 213/310/818/562) (but for some time, this area continued to publish 0+7D instruction for within-NPA 0+ calls) 212 New York, some days after 24 Nov 1980 (7D on all calls within it) (later 212/718, now 212/917/718) 312 Illinois, Oct 1982--but got 1st N0X/N1X spring 1983? (7D on all calls within it) (now 312/708, to become 312/708/630) 201 New Jersey (7D on all calls within it; also applies to 609) (now 201/908) 214 Texas, 1986 or 1987 (by July 1987) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 817, at least in Fort Worth area) (now 214/903) 301/202/703 Maryland/DC/Virginia, 1987, due to DC area growth (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (301 now 301/410) 415 California, Feb 1989? (7D on all calls within it) (now 415/510) 404 Georgia, Oct 1989? (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 912) (now 404/706) 919 North Carolina, 2 Mar 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 704) (now 919/910) 416 Ontario, 3 Mar 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (now 416/905) 602 Arizona, 1 July 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (to become 602/520) 313 Michigan, 1990? (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (now 313/810) 512 Texas, 9 Sept 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (now 512/210) 205 Alabama, Dec 1990 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (to become 205/334) 215 Pennsylvania, 20 May 1991 (7D on all calls within it; exception noted above for 2 prefixes later moving to 717, but the new instructions also applied to: 717-354,355 New Holland 717-656,661 Leola 717-768 Intercourse) (now 215/610) 206 Washington, 12 Jan 1992 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (to become 206/360) 713 Texas, 8 Mar 1992 (permissive dialing 8 Dec 1991) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) (to become 713/281) 714 California, 1992? (7D on all calls within it) (now 714/909) 503 Oregon, 10 July 1993 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) No note about N0X/N1X prefixes, but instructions are being changed to prepare for NNX area codes: 305,407,813,904 Florida, 7 Mar 1992 (at least for 813) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 207 Maine; 603 New Hampshire (17 July 1993); 1993-1994 (This was to include all New England areas except Connecticut, but this list now has separate entries for Massachusetts, Vermont, and Rhode Island.) (Earlier, for 413 going to 7D on all calls within area code: Feb- June 1993; full cutover 21 Sept 1993; 1+NPA+7D for local calls to another area code permissive 1 Mar to 8 Apr 1993.) (7D on all calls within area code; optional for New Hampshire, with per-line option to block 7D and require 1+NPA+7D for toll within area code) 413,508,617 Massachusetts (order by public utility commission in Oct 1993; mandatory, in 413, 1 June 1994; eastern Massachusetts to follow later in 1994) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 802 Vermont, permissive 18 Feb 1994, mandatory 18 May 1994 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 401 Rhode Island, announced Jan 1994 (but when to be implemented?) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 303,719 Colorado (27 Feb 1994); 612,507,218 Minnesota (late 1994); 319,515,712 Iowa; 701 North Dakota (19 June 1994, full cutover 3 Oct 1994; 605 South Dakota; 308,402 Nebraska (full cutover late 1994 for Lincoln Telephone area); 505 New Mexico (14 Feb 1994, full cutover 19 Jun 1994); 801 Utah; 307 Wyoming; 406 Montana; 208 Idaho; 509 Washington (15 May 1994, full cutover 17 Sept 1994); 1993-1994 (U.S. West areas except Arizona, Oregon, 206 in Washington) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 219,317,812 Indiana, c. Aug 1993 (full cutover 1 Dec 1993) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 615 Tennessee, 1 July 1993(?) (full cutover 1 Sept 1993) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 901 Tennessee, Sept 1993? (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 803 South Carolina, Sept 1993? (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 209,408,619,707,805,916 California; Pacific Bell, by 11 Oct 1993 (These are the California area codes not cited above, as of Feb 1993, as preparing for N0X/N1X prefixes; but some of these, in whole or in part, already have the new instructions.) (GTE areas: 0+NPA+7D for 0+ within own area code permissive 11 Oct 1993, fully cut over 10 Oct 1994; direct-dial not affected.) (7D on all calls within area code) 412,717,814 Pennsylvania, for 717 1 Nov 1993 (full cutover 31 July 1994), for 814 8 Nov 1993 (full cutover 1 Aug 1994); announced Sept 1993 (7D on all calls within area code) 716 New York, 5 Dec 1993 (at least for Rochester Telephone; is this permissive or mandatory date?) (7D on all calls within it) 601 Mississippi, Dec 1993 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 302 Delaware, 1 Apr 1994 (full cutover 7 Jan 1995) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 519,613,705,807 Ontario; 418,514,819 Quebec; 204 Manitoba; 306 Saskatchewan; 403 Alberta (and Yukon and NW Territories); 506 New Brunswick; 604 British Columbia; 709 Newfoundland (and Labrador); 902 Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island; 4 Sept 1994 (all of Canada except 416 and 905 in Ontario) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 315,516,518,607 New York, 1994? (7D on all calls within area code) 217,309,618,815 Illinois, 1994? (7D on all calls within area code) 304 West Virginia, 1994? (7D on all calls within it) 216,419,513,614 Ohio, 1994? (full cutover 1 Jan 1995) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 414,608,715 Wisconsin, 1994? (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) 817 Texas, 1994? (already in use in & near Fort Worth) (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls) Areacode splits: If no date appears, the split may not have been announced publicly due to lack of direct-dial facility at the time, or may never have occurred. Early splits can only be guessed at with the following guidelines: If an areacode is of form N1X, it is in a state or province with more than 1 areacode. (The reverse, if it was ever true, is now obsolete.) If an areacode is in a state or province with only 1 areacode, it is of form N0X. (The reverse, if it was ever true, is now obsolete.) what?/209 California what?/707 California what?/805 California 305/813 Florida what?/309 Illinois 502/606 Kentucky 504/318 Louisiana 612/507 Minnesota 402/308 Nebraska what?/607 New York 704/919 North Carolina 405/918 Oklahoma 901/615 Tennessee what?/806 Texas 206/509 Washington what?/608 Wisconsin 416/519 Ontario, 1953 404/912 Georgia, 1953 or 1954 December 1991 Greater Atlanta call guide, in discussing 404/706 split, said "It's been 38 years since Georgia added an Area Code." 613/705 Ontario, 1957 (did 705 also take part of the then 416?) 201/609 New Jersey, late 1950s 415/408 California, 1960 616/906 Michigan, sometime after Nov 1960 what?/807 Ontario, 1962 (either an area which had no area code, or 705 split) 305/904 Florida, July 1965 703/804 Virginia, 24 June 1973 at 2:01 AM 714/619 California, Nov 1982 713/409 Texas, Mar 1983 (full cutover 90 days later) 213/818 California, Jan 1984 212/718 New York, 2 Sept 1984 (full cutover 31 Dec 1984) Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island became 718; Manhattan & Bronx stayed in 212; Bronx switched from 212 to 718, 1 July 1992 (full cutover 15 May 1993; but until then, calls from Bronx to Brooklyn/ Queens/Staten Island must still be dialed 1+718+7D, and effective 25 Sept 1993 must be dialed 7D) 303/719 Colorado, 5 Mar 1988 305/407 Florida, 16 Apr 1988 617/508 Massachusetts, 16 July 1988 312/708 Illinois, Nov 1989 (full cutover 9 Feb 1990) 202 District of Columbia & vicinity, 1 Oct 1990 This behaved somewhat like a split despite no new area code. 202 area code, previously useable for all but the outermost Maryland and Virginia suburbs, was restricted to DC proper. (Use 301 or 703, as the case may be, to reach the suburbs.) As a result, government offices (now including the Pentagon) using zipcodes starting with 200,202,203,204,205 and located in Md. or Va. can no longer be listed in area 202. Prefixes in the Pentagon, which is in Virginia, were previously in area 202 (not 703), and in 1990 were moved to area 703. (Local calls across area code border changed from 7D to NPA+7D.) 214/903 Texas, 4 Nov 1990 (full cutover 4 May 1991) 201/908 New Jersey, 1 Jan 1991 (full cutover 8 June 1991) 415/510 California, 2 Sept 1991 (full cutover 27 Jan 1992) 301/410 Maryland, 1 Nov 1991 (full cutover 1 Nov 1992) 213/310 California, 2 Nov 1991 (full cutover 16 May 1992; was to be 2 May 1992, but was postponed indefinitely because of riots just before then) (all GTE plus some PacBell went into 310) 212/718/917 New York, 1 Jan 1992 (917, to be overlaid on 212 & 718, is to be used for cellular & pagers) 404/706 Georgia, 3 May 1992 (full cutover 3 Aug 1992) 512/210 Texas, 1 Nov 1992 (full cutover 1 May 1993) 714/909 California, 14 Nov 1992 (full cutover 14 Aug 1993) (Riverside and San Bernardino counties go into 909; Orange County remains in 714) 416/905 Ontario, 4 Oct 1993 (full cutover 25 Mar 1994, postponed from 10 Jan 1994) 919/910 North Carolina, 14 Nov 1993 (full cutover 13 Feb 1994) 313/810 Michigan, 1 Dec 1993 (full cutover 10 Aug 1994) 215/610 Pennsylvania, 8 Jan 1994 (full cutover 7 Jan 1995) 205/334 Alabama, 15 Jan 1995 (full cutover 13 Mar 1995) (the first NNX area code to be announced, on 22 July 1993) 206/360 Washington, 15 Jan 1995 (full cutover 9 July 1995) 602/520 Arizona, 19 Mar 1995 (full cutover 23 July 1995) (announced 29 Nov 1993) 713/281 Texas, 1995 (nature of the split not yet decided) 213/310/818/562 California, Mar 1995 or Mar 1996 (cellular/pager overlay) 708/630 Illinois, 1st quarter 1995 Area codes 706,903,905 had been used, at least in the U.S., for calling parts of Mexico. (These codes were later announced for Georgia, Texas, and Ontario respectively.) 706 and 905 were discontinued 1 Feb 1991 for calls to Mexico (which was and still is reachable in country code 52); I have no such date available for 903. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #239 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04982; 20 May 94 3:07 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA05194; Thu, 19 May 94 23:43:09 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA05185; Thu, 19 May 94 23:43:07 CDT Date: Thu, 19 May 94 23:43:07 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405200443.AA05185@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #240 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 May 94 23:43:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 240 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ADSL and MPEG Viewing Tests (Robin Whittle) Cellular -> Analog Converter (burner@iia.org) 311 Goes Statewide in New York (Dave Niebuhr) Distribution of WATS Numbers in the Numbering Plan (Kurt F. Sauer) Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Kevin Ray) Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Paul A. Lee) Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (burner@iia.org) Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (Sergio Gelato) Re: Anyone Use AT&T Message Service? (Steve Cogorno) Re: CO Switch Types by Exchange Code (Paul Mokey) Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts (John Harris) Re: Wanted: Business Phone System (Paul A. Lee) Re: 800 Number Billback (Carl Oppedahl) Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? (Jay Hennigan) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: zcirrw@minyos.xx.rmit.EDU.AU (Robin Whittle) Subject: ADSL and MPEG Viewing Tests Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:18:06 +1000 Magazine article on ADSL and MPEG-2 by Robin Whittle ADSL stands for Asymmetrical Digital Subscriber Line - a technology for transferring several Megabits/sec of data to the home, and several hundred kbits/sec back to the exchange, using the existing twisted pair copper wires - while the existing analog phone uses them as usual. It does this by throwing a *lot* of Digital Signal Processing at the many barriers the existing wires present to high bit-rate communications. Each ADSL link is independent - it is not like a shared coax cable. For each link, there must be two transceivers - one at the exchange and one at the home. ADSL is seen as a way of bringing Pay TV, Video On Demand and Interactive Broadband Services to homes without the need to lay new cable. In the May and June editions of {Australian Communications} is a two part article I have spent several months preparing. 16 pages of text, tables and diagrams report on DMT ADSL and on the results of the MPEG Test Group's recent subjective viewing tests. The Test Group reports that for MPEG-2, for some types of program, 5 to 6 Megabits/sec is required to give quality comparable to normal television. This does not include 256 to 400 kbit/sec for sound. 2 Megabits/sec may be OK for film material compressed off-line, where a human operator can fine tune the compression algorithm's attention to the most important part of the picture. Fast action video material is much more demanding. Here is an outline of the two parts of the article. Part 1 - ADSL - Bridging the Superhighway Gap? Introduction. Video On Demand. Provision of alternative phone services. Brief comparison with coaxial cable, satellite and microwave Pay-TV distribution. CAP and DMT - Two Approaches to ADSL. How QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation) works - as in CAP. DMT (Discrete Multi Tone) is 249 channels of QAM. The Twisted Pair Bottleneck. Physical description of buried telephone wires. Barriers to transmission of data :- Attenuation. Inter-Symbol Interference. Interference and Noise. Crosstalk. HDSL - High bit-rate Digital Subscriber Line. Brief mention of this which provides 2 Mega bits/sec duplex over 2 or 3 pairs. Why the ANSI standards committee chose DMT over CAP. Telecom Australia's ADSL Pilot - for 300 homes in early 1995. 71 hour 2 Mega bit/sec Video Server from DEC. 155 Mega bit/sec SDH fibres link to ADSL switches, each with 100 CAP or DMT transceivers. Diagram and discussion of the system - which will be the second or third in the world and the first at 2 Mega bits/sec. Table listing the ANSI draft standard's options for downstream and duplex data rates. Discussion of cost and (dis)advantages compared to digital coax. Part 2 - Bringing Home ADSL - The Race is On Detailed discussion of reach limits - depending on cable and data rates. It seems that 6 Mega bit/sec could work to 3 km of 0.4 mm cable (10 kft of 26 gauge). This - or a little more - may be enough to reach between 80 and 95% of urban subscribers in Australia. Many doubts remain about the distribution of cable lengths, crosstalk, impulse noise and the performance of practical ADSL transceivers. Computer models predict 3.7km for 6 Megabits/sec and way over 4km for 2 Megabits/sec. I expect it will take two years of transceiver development, extensive field trials and new surveys of the existing cables before anyone will really know how many homes can be reached at 6 Megabits/sec. Cost and Availability - Assessment of plans by Amati, Motorola and Aware & Analog Devices. Amati plans to release a 2 Megabit/sec "Presto" and a >6 Megabit/sec "Overture" which will use Motorola DSPs and Amati's own custom chips. Aware & Analog Devices are working on multi DSP "chipset" and will evolve cheaper designs from there. Analog Devices have a low-cost 2 MHz 14 bit monolithic Analog to Digital Converter which will be essential for low cost ADSL transceivers. Motorola are designing a single chip transceiver for 1996 at Analog Converter Date: 19 May 1994 23:25:45 -0400 Organization: International Internet Association Does anyone know of an adapter/converter that connects to a cellular phone (most likely in place of the handset) and provides an analog Rj-11 jack? Or, is there some other way to connect analog phone devices to a cellular phone. It needs to be able to make outgoing calls, and the capability of incoming calls would be needed, if it's at all possible. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 17:09:54 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: 311 Goes Statewide in New York This month's insert in NYNEX's (formerly NYTel) bill had a small item about using 3-1-1 for TDD users to contact emergency assistance. This will be in place in all areas where NYNEX has a presence in its various LATA's. 3-1-1 will remain in place until the E911 system is implemented statewide. I do not know what will happen with those LATAs that are small parts of other states (CT, MA, PA and possibly VT). Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 1+(516) 282-3093 FAX 1+(516) 282-7688 ------------------------------ From: ks@netcom.com (Kurt F. Sauer) Subject: Distribution of WATS Numbers in the Numbering Plan Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 21:38:27 GMT I was unaware that 1-800 number prefixes were available to more than one LD provider. Someone called this "portability." Yeah, probably an FAQ question, but I didn't know how to determine if this were true. If it is, how is the call placed? Wouldn't only the LD carrier have the true route for the call? Kurt F. Sauer [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is called '800 portability', and unlike in the past where telcos could only route toll-free calls by the first three digits -- the exchange --, meaning exchanges were assigned to or 'belonged to' a given carrier, now routing can be done on the entire number. The LD carrier enters the correct information in a database which is used by all telcos. When you dial an 800 number, your local telco makes a quick search of the database and routes your call to the 'real' number to which the 800 version is attached. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kevray@MCS.COM (kevin.ray@kray.com) Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? Date: 19 May 1994 14:40:47 -0500 Organization: MCSNet Services TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to jherl@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Joseph Herl): > least in the Chicago 312/708 area, ringbacks are accomplished thus: > Dial 1-57x-last four digits. The 'x' is a digit 1-9. It varies from one > exchange to another so you have to test to see which works. For example, I live in the 708-622 (Elgin) exchange (also including 741/742/468/464/695/ 697/931/888/) in which 1-57[0-9]-my_last_four_digits produced "when dialing a call within your area code only dial the seven digits, when ...". What does work in this exchange is "511" and the last four digits. Dialing 711-last_four_digits is like dialing 911 ... ??? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 18:05:15 -0400 Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? From: Paul A. Lee Organization: Woolworth Corporation You should be able to ring your own line if you're served by a switch that handles (and is enabled for) revertive calling -- I think that includes Northern and Siemens, at least. To use revertive calling: - Go off hook - Dial the number for that line - Listen for revertive call enable tone* * Some switches return a repeating "zip" type tone; others return a gated/modified busy signal - Hang up - Line will start to ring* if revertive calling is in effect * Some switches will ring line normally; others will provide a specially gated ("distinctive") ring for revertive calling - Wait for ringing to stop, indicating another party on the line has answered - Go off hook and converse - Hang up (some switches will return a burst of ring when revertive calling is ended) I've encountered this feature in several GTE service areas. Instructions for using it are published in the Milwaukee (Ameritech) book, but I haven't tried it here. Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 INTERNET [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can't say I recall seeing such informa- tion in the Ameritech book here in Chicago. PAT] ------------------------------ From: burner@iia.org Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? Date: 19 May 1994 23:28:24 -0400 Organization: International Internet Association Joseph Herl (jherl@uiuc.edu) wrote: > Many thanks for taking the time to respond to my question about how to > call myself. Your response was detailed and absolutely correct. The > ringback number 1-577-nnnn works here in Champaign. I think this will > be a big time saver when we move next week. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, so it does work throughout all of > Illinois Bell's territory. Mine is 1-573-nnnn. I hope other readers in > northern Illinois find this useful. PAT] It seems to work in Nebraska that if you dial your own phone number and hang up, it will ring back. That's how we always do it. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After dialing do you get a busy signal or some special tone? If we here dial our own number, in some exchanges we get a busy signal and in other exchanges get an intercept that 'your call cannot be completed as dialed, please check the number and dial again, etc ..." Even if we have call waiting installed, dialing our own number produces a busy signal or the above recording. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 18:35:17 EDT From: gelato@astrosun.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Sergio Gelato) Subject: Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes In TELECOM Digest, V14 #237, Mike King wrote: > In TELECOM Digest, V14 #233, Will Martin > wrote: [...] >> is written. Are there 800-XXX exchanges in use now? > I've seen quite a few 800-800-XXXX numbers listed. Before portability, > I believe Sprint administered them. The question was actually about 800-YXX-XXXX numbers (where Y=0 or 1). I haven't seen any such numbers advertised in North America; but I have seen UK numbers of the form 0839 1xx xxx. Sergio Gelato lato@cornell.edu ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Anyone Use AT&T Message Service? Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 13:07:39 -0700 (PDT) Said by: Mark > I am currently living outside of the USA and usually use AT&T > USA-DIRECT to call the US. Well, a few weeks ago, I called, using my > calling card, and got a busy signal. After a few seconds, I hear a > [computer generated] voice asking me if I want to record a message and > have it sent at a later time followed by the prices. (I think it was > $1.75 or $1.25, something like that per minute) All I had to do was > press '#123' and I was prompted for a message and then was prompted at > the end for an OK message. (i.e. press 1 or 0 or something like that) > Well, it worked great ... has anyone else used this service? I assume > it has been available in the USA for a while already. Yeah -- I use it all the time for messages. There is also a feature that has a real-live AT&T operator deliver it. You can specify if you want whoever answers the phone to get the message, or if the operator should ask for and only release the message to a specific person. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ From: bkron@netcom.com (Paul Mokey) Subject: Re: CO Switch Types by Exchange Code Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 20:57:38 GMT Michael Stanford writes: > I am looking for a listing of all the CO switch types in the USA by > area code and exchange code. You can get what you're looking for from Bellcore at (201) 740-7500. It's available both in paper form and on diskette. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 17:08 WET DST From: joharris@io.org (John Harris) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts Mark@legend.akron.oh.us wrote: > Do you have a limit on the number telephone IDs :) that you are allow > to block calls from? Or do they charge you on a byte-used deal? :) > Like I always say, I'd rather have a list of allowed numbers and > forget the rest. :) Hang in there. There is a CLASS feature called 'Selective Call Acceptance' that will do what you want. Basically it was intended for people who will only take calls from their kids or stockbroker at supper time; so it will have a limit of ten numbers. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a limit of ten numbers from > which calls can be rejected. A new entry to the list at that point > cause the oldest entry to drop off. PAT] For those of you that need more than the ten numbers allowed by the telephone company, there are boxes you can buy. BEL-Tronics in Georgia makes a pair of boxes with a synthesized voice which will reject up to 100 numbers and/or all anonymous calls. It is great for getting rid of junk faxes. The only limitation -- the number must call you once, so you can move it from the incoming call list to the reject list. Model ND100 $ 99.95 MSRP (Number display only) Model AD100 $109.95 MSRP (Name display if your telco sends it) "Dealers may sell for less." Contact BEL-Tronics Limited 8100 Sagl Parkway Covington, GA 30209 (404) 787-6500 (800) 828-8804 John Harris BEL-Tronics Ltd, Mississauga, Ontario L5L 1J9 joharris@io.org (905) 828-1002 Fax (905) 828-2951 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 17:38:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Wanted: Business phone system From: Paul A. Lee Organization: Woolworth Corporation In TELECOM Digest V14 #236, Drew Benson wrote: > I'm looking for an inexpensive phone system designed for small-scale kinds > of things. Not more than eight outgoing lines. I have a Panasonic KX-T61610 hybrid system at home. The system comes loaded for six loop-start trunks and 16 stations. Station sets can be either proprietary (key/feature) sets or standard single-line sets, including answering machines, modems, faxes, cordless, etc. Features (with proprietary phones) include paging (group and all-call), automatic trunk selection (in and out), some call restriction capabilities, live SMDR output, and other basic small business or home functions. The system is under $800, and the sets are $90-$150 from your local Graybar Electric. Do-it-yourself installation and programming. Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 INTERNET ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback Date: 19 May 1994 18:14:55 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Jonathan : > You are not being charged for the call to the 800 number. That part is > free to you the caller with the recipient paying for the carriage. You > are being charged for the return collect call the Information Provider > makes to you, which the AOS operator asked if you would accept the > charges for. Admittedly sometimes they do not bother to call back but > simply continue the conversation with you on the same connection, but > none the less the AOS operator at some point asked if you would accept > the charges for the call; when accepted, it then is like any other > collect call. If it is considered a collect call, then I should think billed number screening would keep it from happening. Yet, on my mother's telephone bill, a charge for an 800 number appeared, despite the fact that there was billed number screening on that line. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers) Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Had the call been handled by AT&T, Sprint, MCI or your local telco, then billed number screening *would* have prevented it from getting through. The thing is, many AOS companies do not consult the database used by the major players. Even your local telco will advise you that (should you request billed number screening) they will not abso- lutely guarentee you will never be billed for a collect or third-number call ... just that *they* will not originate such a charge. But, all is not lost: some of the others maintain their own similar database. For example, Telesphere, a long distance billing service for many AOS's and Information Providers who bill through telcos maintains its own database of people who do not want such charges. They'll gladly add you to their list on request; then the AOS/COCOT's they represent will get the same automatic decline of charges when someone uses one of those phones (or services) that Bell would give. Ditto a couple other COCOT/AOS operations; they tend to work from the Telesphere database as well. Generally whevever I get a charge on my phone bill for a collect (or whatever) call from a COCOT, I just call the customer service number for that carrier and get added to their negative listing. I must be on six or seven such databases by now, and as a result I don't think there is a COCOT/AOS left in the USA that can stick me with charges. If you sign up for billed number screening with your local telco, that will end it where telco and the Big Three are concerned; contacting the Telesphere people will take care of about 80-90 percent of the rest, especially where the more expensive and obnoxious 'charge for an 800 call' IP's are concerned. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jay@rain.org (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? Date: 19 May 1994 18:10:52 -0700 Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN) In article padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) writes: > With the FCC mandate for CNID service, is it not possible that the > telcos will use this to drop ANI? Also it has been mentioned that > "911 service requires special trunk lines and equipment". Clearly CNID > does not and needs only a low-cost display. Will this make local 911 > response a possibility? The special 911 trunks are associated with ANI and ALI (Automatic location idintification), and the PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point) system associated with 911 allows calls to be transferred to other agencies with the ANI and ALI passed. In come cases, I believe that the 911 PSAP operator can seize the calling line as well. The 911 response is often as local as a city police or fire departmant dispatch center, although the ALI lookup tables can be 100 miles away at the LEC's data processing center. Jay ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #240 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10478; 20 May 94 17:36 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA13064; Fri, 20 May 94 10:28:12 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA13053; Fri, 20 May 94 10:28:09 CDT Date: Fri, 20 May 94 10:28:09 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405201528.AA13053@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #241 TELECOM Digest Fri, 20 May 94 10:28:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 241 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Belgian Phone Company Rips Off Customers! (Leo Nederlof) ANI by Calling 1 800 XXX XXXX (quixote@eskimo.com) GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Greg Alexander) Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Clive D.W. Feather) Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Clive D.W. Feather) Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (Stacy L. Millions) Re: Cellular -> Analog Converter (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Lexus Cellular Phones (Greg Alexander) Re: 800 Number Billback (Tim Russell) Cost of Large Fiber Systems (Stewart Fist) Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (James D. Oliver III) Re: "Free Trade" Rules (Alan T. Furman) Re: Problems With Call Return (Al Quaglieri) Re: Problems With Call Return (quixote@eskimo.com) Re: Problems With Call Return (Al Cohan) Call Return is *Good* (Dave O'Heare) Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway (R. Gellens) Re: Video Conference Bridges (teleconxiv@aol.com) Illinois Ringback Numbers (Michael Fumich) Free Information - Teleconferencing Show (teleconxiv@aol.com) Last Laugh! Signs You Have a Bad Long Distance Company (Top 10 List) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:59:12 +0200 From: Leo Nederlof Subject: Belgian Phone Company Rips Off Customers! Having migrated to Belgium about two years ago, I have had to adapt my standards concerning public utilities to a significantly lower level. The phone company, Belgacom, is one of them. It started already when I first applied for a connection. After three months and several visits of inapt service people, I pulled myself a cable from the cellar of the building to my apartment on the third floor, after which the phoney people came, installed a wall socket and charged me the full entrance fee, 4183 belgian francs - about 150 US$ (for which they are legally assumed to even dig a cable to a remote farmhouse, if necessary). Last month I had my connection moved to another house, where wall sockets were already installed. For Belgian standards, this happened almost flawlessly, since it took them, after my old connection had been disconnected, only four days and two visits to get the new connection on-line. The surprise came when I got my phone bill last week: I have to pay the full entrance fee again!!! This is crazy! Who do they think they are? If it weren't for the monopoly, they would never keep their customers. On top of this, the quality of the phone lines is, as we would say in Dutch, kut met peren, meaning far below any acceptable level. Noise, blocking, excess dialing delay, you name it, they got it. I can't wait for competition to enter the telecom market here ... Leo Nederlof Alcatel Bell Research Centre lned@rc.bel.alcatel.be Network Technology Group phone: +32 3 240 7613 Francis Wellesplein 1 fax: +32 3 240 9932 2018 Antwerp - Belgium Disclaimer I: opinions expressed are my own, not my employer's. Disclaimer II: I do not mean to offend Belgian people in general; there's a lot of nice and friendly people here (and besides, I have to live with them.) ------------------------------ From: quixote@eskimo.com Subject: ANI by Calling 1 800 XXX XXXX Organization: Eskimo North Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:51:56 GMT About ten months ago, I read in alt.dcom.telecom or comp.dcom.telecom a posting which contained a number, I think it was 1 800 235 1414, if I recall correctly. By dialing it one would obtain one's own number as a demonstration that call blocking does not work when calling 1 800 XXX XXXX numbers. After that, they would advertise a 1900 XXX XXXX number which would circumvent this. Well, maybe I do not have the correct number or maybe it does not work anymore. After having been posted here they must have got many many calls. Does anybody know if this service has another number now? Or does anybody know any other numbers for obtaining ANI, in the Seattle area? Thanks, Carlos. ------------------------------ From: gregalex@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Greg Alexander) Subject: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Date: Fri, 20 May 94 03:41:45 EDT Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida I am interested in buying a GSM phone, and was hoping to learn a little more about the short message service offered in some. This service allows the caller to be transfered to an operator (if your line is busy or whatever), where they leave a message which pops up on your phone. I have spoken with several stores, service providers and representatives of the actual phone makers themselves (Nokia) (in Australia), and have got different stories from everyone as to how it works. Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). If its a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being in the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message). So both have strengths, but I'd like to know what I'm getting. (Both would be great -- but very unlikely ;) Thanks for any help! Greg galexand@ozemail.com.au ------------------------------ Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:41:00 BST From: Clive D.W. Feather Something the other messages in this thread have omitted is that, even if the phone has a display, the contents of the blue Mercury button are not displayed during dialling or by any "display memory" feature. We now subscribe to 132 service, so I can forget the laboriously memorized ten digit PIN. Readers of Telecom worried about security might be interested to know that Mercury send out the PIN in two separate letters, one giving the first six digits, and the other, posted on a different date, giving the other four. Clive D.W. Feather Santa Cruz Operation clive@sco.com Croxley Centre Phone: +44 923 816 344 Hatters Lane, Watford Fax: +44 923 210 352 WD1 8YN, United Kingdom ------------------------------ Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:47:12 BST From: "Clive D.W. Feather" According to _The_Codebreakers_ by David Kahn, the first teleautograph was used in France to connect the War Office to Army Headquarters (or something similar; this is from memory). It was viewed as secure because there was only one machine in the world! Clive D.W. Feather Santa Cruz Operation clive@sco.com Croxley Centre Phone: +44 923 816 344 Hatters Lane, Watford Fax: +44 923 210 352 WD1 8YN, United Kingdom ------------------------------ From: stacy@sobeco.com (Stacy L. Millions) Subject: Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? Organization: Sobeco Ernst & Young Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 11:56:15 GMT In vmatho@mason1.gmu.edu (Victoria Matho) writes: > Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does?? They are the rough equivalent of the async null-modem cable. They are used to put two sync devices back to back if you are unable to configure one of the devices as a DCE. I have one from Electrodata Inc. that I bought about four years ago. I use it to test routers. It can be configured to provide clock rates from 14.4kbps to 896kbps. stacy stacy@sobeco.com stacy@sobeco.ca sobeco!stacy ------------------------------ From: davep@u.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik) Subject: Re: Cellular -> Analog Converter Date: 20 May 1994 06:37:58 GMT Organization: University of Washington burner@iia.org writes: > Does anyone know of an adapter/converter that connects to a cellular > phone (most likely in place of the handset) and provides an analog > RJ-11 jack? Or, is there some other way to connect analog phone If you have a Motorola flip phone, there are several manufacturers who make them. They generally cost less than $150, and are available from any more competent cellular dealer. Appliance stores may not be aware of them. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: gregalex@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Greg Alexander) Subject: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones Date: Fri, 20 May 94 02:59:58 EDT Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida elitman@proxima.com (Eric A. Litman) writes: > I was recently going over the phone options for the Lexus GS300, and > noticed that the phone system Lexus offers is a Motorola -- basically a > souped-up AlphaTac. When installed by a Lexus dealer, the phone > integrates with the stereo system and the AC to mute the stereo, lower > the AC, and allow conversations to be held over the car's audio system. > My question is, can my Motorola DPC550 handheld be integrated into > this system, or are there special "hooks" in the Lexus-specific phone? Don't know about that model, but (apparently) the new Lexus LS400 has a portable phone. I won't see it till Saturday, but I've heard it *looks* like the Microtac. Might help your enquiry if you ask the dealer about that model. Hope that helps some. Greg galexand@ozemail.com.au ------------------------------ From: russell@ursa-major.spdcc.com (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback Date: Fri, 20 May 94 1:09:59 EDT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'way they can charge you for calling > an 800 number' is the same way AT&T can charge for it. For example you > can call AT&T's 800 number to put through a collect call to someone or > to charge a call to your credit card. Merely because you originated it > via an 800 number does not mean charges cannot be incurred for the call > as a result. In the case of the Information Providers who use an 800 > number in this way, *someone* in your firm called the 800 number and > gave the answering operator permission to place the charges on your line. PAT, I have a feeling you're off base on this one. Remember the scam a couple of years back that was billing directly for calls to an 800 number? Well, the latest rage in the 800 and 900 business is a concept called "calling card", and it's a way of getting around the FTC rules that came out of that. Basically, it requires two calls to the same number, one to "activate" your card, and one to actually get into the program and get billed. The process of calling back supposedly establishes a client relationship and gets around the FTC rules. I'm nearly certain that's what at least some of the calls in question were for, especially seeing VRS mentioned: they're big billers for this. ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 94 04:49:13 EDT From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Cost of Large Fibre Systems Can anyone give me some confirmation on figures that I've been collecting on the capital cost of large-scale, long-distance fibre optic cable systems? My current information is that the cost of the cable and the electronics is about equal, and each represents about 30% of the total cable costs. 36-fibre terrestrial cable costs $12 per metre in Australia. The other 30-40% of the capital outlay is for design, supervision, equipment housing, power, trenching, transport, etc. Does that division sound about right for the average terrestrial system? With fibre cables having data-rates of 2.4Gbit/sec, does 40 to 50kms between repeaters sound about right? I would have thought more based on the 150km distances now being achieved in undersea cables (at a lower rate), but I'm told that 40/50 is now average. What rough price should I allocate for each repeater on each fibre (allowing for any extras needed to drive and house it). In most cases a 36-fibre cable will only have a few fibres commissioned so I need to work it out on a per fibre, or per pair basis. What about the average cost of 2.4Mbit/s terminal equipment? I was quoted $16,000 for a 2.4Mbps optical fibre multiplexer (presumably, using a pair of fibres); is this about right? I know all these prices are always highly variable, and subject to enormous variations, but if anyone can provide price guidelines, or just rules-of-thumb guidance, it would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: oliver@medg.lcs.mit.edu (James D. Oliver III) Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number Date: 20 May 1994 09:10:48 GMT Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science A few years ago I had a roommate named Joe who was about to move into a one bedroom apartment and, thinking it would improve his social life, was going to get SEXY-JOE as his phone number. He dropped the idea after we pointed out that a) women weren't going to go for it and b) we would use this as ammunition for a lifetime. Jim Oliver oliver@medg.lcs.mit.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Back about 1962-63 I got a phone line in my apartment which spelled PATRICK. Actually it was 312-RAvenswood-8-7425. I did not keep it very long and don't remember why; it seems to me that whoever had the number before myself had polluted it pretty badly with messages left in strange places written on walls, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: atfurman@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: "Free Trade" Rules Date: Fri, 20 May 94 02:54:46 PDT Dale Wharton writes: > For the rest of us, the prospect of government helplessness and > all-out international competition in the communications industry does > not appear so attractive. In the USA, we thank our lucky stars that we have the Clipper Chip to save us from the horrors of government helplessness. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 94 02:44 EST From: Al Quaglieri <0005682193@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return Russ Greene recently wrote of his annoyance with Call Return (TELECOM Digest Vol. 14 #236). Here is the comment I mailed him: RG> Below is a letter I'm sending to Pac Bell and the Public RG> Utilities Commission regarding my dissatisfaction with Call RG> Return. RG> Feedback, comments and discussion are invited. Dear Mr. Green, As a writer who works from home, I find the telephone a necessary annoyance. During my working hours, all calls are screened via the answering machine. Picking up the phone requires me to stop working, so I only do so when absolutely necessary. Any call, even one left for the machine to deal with, makes for a break in my concentration. Although I've trained my friends to call once and leave a short message, there are still others who steadfastly refuse to talk to my machine. Instead, they will call every half hour and, not reaching a human, hang up. Call Return has helped me virtually eliminate this rude and unnecessary telephone behavior. It has also effectively squelched crank callers, wrong-number dialers who repeatedly refuse to believe they've dialed a wrong number, insistent salespersons, and other shifty characters who refuse to identify themselves. It's incredible thing that we willingly install loud bells in our homes which anyone, anywhere can make ring, any time of the day or night. We accept this lousy situation for the sake of communication. The very intrusive nature of the medium makes "reaching out and touching someone" a privilege, not an assumed right. If you have the power to ring this bell in my house without subsequently conveying any useful information, I'm happy to have the power to tell you to cut it out. Viva Call Return! Al Quaglieri AQUAGLIERI@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: quixote@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:36:10 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that she used it in an extreme > way ... > ... message and would call again later. Ordinarily, Call Return is a > good idea since it allows a person who has just missed (typically within > seconds or minutes) receiving a call due to being somewhere else. However > in this case ... I thought that one purpose of "call return" was to be able to call back an "anonymous caller" without knowing his(her) number. This was not clearly stated in the brochure about "caller id" services from Uswest, so I telephoned them, the lady who answered hesitated about my question, transferred me to another person who confirmed that "anonymous calls" can indeed be returned. The problem was that in my area, Seattle, "last call return" has not been authorized, even though most other related services have been. Carlos ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 94 15:07 EST From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return Since Party "A" initiates the call to Party "B" in the first place, why shouldn't Party "A" be charged for the call when Party "B" elects to use Call Return? All of the TV Promo's that I've seen usually show a lady running into the kitchen with two or three large shopping bags in her hand, putting them down on the table then making a mad dash to the ringing wallphone, only to pickup and hear dialtone. They of course the pitch for call return, not missing a call etc. What if the first calling Party "A" was telesleeze? Interesting thoughts come up when the issue of who is paying for the call comes up. I personally view Call Return as a form of roulette. What even happened in the "old days" when Party "A" just simply called again? Al ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 10:50:43 -0400 From: doheare@jetform.com (Dave O'Heare) Subject: Call Return is *Good* We were subject to a large number (several per day) of calls that left no messages on the answering machine. When this happens over a period of days or weeks, even the most confident person can become worried that someone might be "casing the joint". We signed up for CLID and got a display. If someone leaves a message on the machine, I'll return the call at a reasonable hour for that person. If they don't leave a message, and the number isn't one I recognize, they get a call back when I get to the machine, whatever time it is. "Hi, you called" in as cheery a voice as I can manage. We then go through as long a song and dance as needed to figure out why they did me the discourtesy of not leaving a message. I then "educate" them (as the original poster said) of the need to leave a message, so that they won't get a phone call like the one I just put them through. I've talked to a lot of telemarketers that way. It amuses me greatly to waste their time instead of them wasting mine :-). If a call comes through as anonymous while I'm home, I answer the phone with "What the f**k have you got to hide?" in as foul-tempered a bellow as I can manage (usually pretty good :-). Nobody's ever done it twice. Dave O'Heare doheare@jetform.com ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 20 MAY 94 01:36:00 GMT Subject: Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lauren Weinstein is a long time > participant in the Internet, and a charter subscriber to TELECOM > Digest, dating back to 1981 when this journal was first published. > From time to time I like to reprint his classic message, "The Day the > Bell System Died", and before long it will be time for it again. His > latest venture, the "Neon" thing, has been enormously successful and > if you have not called to listen to it, you really should. PAT] As I recall, not only was Lauren a charter subscriber to the Digest, but he was a very prolific contributor to it and the Digest from which it spun off (Human-Nets). So prolific that there was a rumor around that Lauren was not human, but an AI experiment at UCLA. There were a few attempts at proving this theory by counting the number of posts from him and their length, and "demonstrating" that no human could have posted them all in so short a time, nor could a human have answered so many questions in such technical detail in so short a time. I can't remember if Lauren ever actually confirmed or denied those rumors ;-) Of course, those were the days when the net was one (small by today's standards) collection of hosts, and people were very friendly and open. One major site was proud of running with no security at all. Anyone anywhere could telnet to them, and have total access to their system. This was very conducive to learning, and research. It was a very different atmosphere, and of course was eventually ruined. Someone deleted their files, thinking themselves clever, I suppose. About as clever as walking into a library and pouring ink over the books. Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com Net**2 656-6350 (Please forward bounces to Mail Stop MV 237 rgellens@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ From: teleconxiv@aol.com (TeleConXIV) Subject: Re: Video Conference Bridges Date: 20 May 1994 10:18:02 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , John McHarry writes: There are a number of companies making videoconferencing bridges. first are the main codec manufacturers - CLI, PictureTel, VTEL, GPT, BT, NEC. There are also companies like VideoServer. Most of today's bridges are ITU/TSS H.320 (or some subset) compatible. Most of the codec manufacturers have proprietary algorithms in their own multipoint control units (MCU's). CTX. CTX+, SG-3, etc. Send e-mail if I can give you more information (dboomstein@aol.com). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 94 09:17:00 EST From: North Coast Communications <0005082894@mcimail.com> Subject: Illinois Ringback Numbers As noted in previous messages, ringback for most Ameritech served numbers seems to be "1-57X" + the last four digits of the phone number. Another writer noted that "511" + last four digits works as well. This is also true in many locations. If the above does not work, try 511 + "your FULL seven digit number". This is what works here in 708-891, 862, and 868 and other locations I have tried. Now does any have the current ANI (200) number? It USED to be 200-TEL1, (or 200TEL 0-9). Many of the ANI numbers seem to be mnemonics of some kind. Michael Fumich (reply to: 3311835@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ From: teleconxiv@aol.com (TeleConXIV) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Free Information - Teleconferencing Show Date: 20 May 1994 10:30:03 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Information to Attendees and Exhibitors TeleCon XIV The Fourteenth Annual Teleconferencing Users Conference THE WORLD'S LARGEST CONFERENCE AND TRADE SHOW ON TELECONFERENCING October 12, 13, 14, 1994 Anaheim Convention Center Anaheim, California Covering: *All forms of teleconferencing; Videoconferencing, Audioconferencing and Audiographic Conferencing, Computer Conferencing, Collaborative Computing; *Local and Wide Area Networking (LAN/WAN) *Distance Learning *Telecommuting, Telemedicine *Applications of the National Information Infrastructure (NII) TeleCon is the worlds largest conference and trade show on teleconferencing. The teleconferencing industry is currently over $3 billion and growing. TeleCon XIV is expected to have attendance of over 12,000 people at the exhibits with over 5,500 attending all three days of the session. TeleCon XIV will have over 700 exhibit booths. Building upon Telecon XIII's 1st Desktop Showcase in 1993, Applied business teleCommunications has expanded the desktop area into its own hall at the Anaheim Convention Center. The Desktop Showcase provides exhibitors with the ability to demonstrate all types of desktop communications: video, collaborative computing, groupware, multimedia applications and video on demand side-by-side in one area. Plans are being made for the showcase to feature networking connectivity between showcase booths and three interoperability booths: * Consortium for Audiographics Teleconferencing (CATS) * Packet Video * Intel Personal Conferencing Initiative (PCI) Potential exhibitors and attendees are invited to fax the following information to 1-405-743-3426: Name Company name Address Phone number Fax number E-mail address Feel free to call 1-800-829-3400 or e-mail requests to TeleConXIV@aol.com. Please specify you saw the info on-line and if you want exhibition or attendee information. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 08:45:19 MST From: Daryl R. Gibson Subject: Last Laugh! Signs You Have a Bad Long Distance Company Forwarded FYI to TELECOM Digest: Date sent: Thu, 19 May 1994 21:31:29 -0700 From: Bob Lennard Subject: David Letterman's Top Ten List for 05/19/94 To: Multiple recipients of list TOP-TEN Send reply to: Late Show Top Ten List mailing list -----> Thursday, May 19, 1994 <----- Signs You Have A Bad Long Distance Company 10. All calls are $2 for the first min., $94 each additional min. 9. Operator makes you describe what you're wearing; 8. Their so-called "dial tone" is just a guy with a kazoo; 7. You can only place long distance calls during an electrical storm; 6. They bill you for calls made by some guy named Pepe, and when you complain they say, "Whatsa problem, man, you no like Pepe?"; 5. Whenever you call their office, you hear gunfire; 4. For some reason, your phone doesn't work unless you're wearing 3-D glasses; 3. Everyone you talk to sounds like the guy at the drive-thru window at McDonald's; 2. No matter what number you dial you always get Richard Simmons; 1. Their slogan is: "Reach out and touch yourself". This Late Show with David Letterman Top Ten list copyright 1994 World Wide Pants. Lists are contributed by Bob Lennard and Rick Nebel. To subscribe or unsubscribe to the list send your request to: listserv@tamvm1.tamu.edu. In the BODY of your message put: subscribe top-ten first last Replace first and last with your name. To unsubscribe, put: signoff top-ten If you have any questions or comments send them to top-ten@tamvm1.tamu.edu ----------- Forwarded to TELECOM Digest by: (801)378- 2950 (801)489-6348 drg@du1.byu.edu 71171.2036@compuserve.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #241 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22334; 22 May 94 14:08 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA25542; Sun, 22 May 94 10:57:13 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA25533; Sun, 22 May 94 10:57:11 CDT Date: Sun, 22 May 94 10:57:11 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405221557.AA25533@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #242 TELECOM Digest Sun, 22 May 94 10:57:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 242 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson LECs Must Offer Signalling Info For Tandem-Switching Services (Bob Keller) AT&T Support for New Digital Signature Standard (David R. Arneke) Book Review: "Internet: Getting Started" by Marine et al. (Rob Slade) CPSR Response to FCC CNID (Monty Solomon) New Area Codes For Modems (Ameritech) (Monty Solomon) Short Message Service (SMS) (Richard Cox) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 13:54:13 GMT From: Bob Keller Subject: LECs Must Offer Signalling Info For Tandem-Switching Services Report No. DC-2602 ACTION IN DOCKET CASE May 19, 1994 RULES ADOPTED REQUIRING LECS TO OFFER SIGNALLING INFORMATION FOR TANDEM-SWITCHING SERVICES (CC DOCKET 91-141, TRANSPORT PHASE II) The Commission took another step in a series of initiatives to remove barriers to competition in the interstate access telephone market by adopting a Third Report and Order in the expanded interconnection proceeding. In prior orders on expanded interconnection for special access and switched transport, the Commission created new opportunities for parties to provide special access and switched transport transmission services in competition with local exchange carriers (LECs). Today's decision will enable parties, for the first time, to offer tandem-switching services in competition with the LECs. The Order requires Tier 1 LECs (those having annual revenues from regulated telecommunications operations of $100 million or more for a sustained period of time), except National Exchange Carrier Association (NECA) pool members, to offer to any party the signalling information necessary for the party to provide tandem-switching services. Specifically, Tier 1 LECs, except NECA pool members, must offer any interested party, including interexchange carriers (IXCs), competitive access providers (CAPs), and end users: (1) the "Carrier Identification Code" (CIC), which indicates the long-distance carrier to receive a call; and (2) the "OZZ," which indicates the specific trunk group on which a call is carried from the tandem to the IXC. LECs currently transmit these data from their end offices to their own access tandems in providing tandem- switching services. The Commission stated that the record showed that LECs will be able to provide this information at minimal cost by treating third-party tandems, in effect, as if they were LEC tandems. The Commission ruled that Tier 1 LECs must offer the signalling information for traffic from their equal access end offices, but not from LEC tandems. LECs will not be required to allow parties to collocate switching equipment in LEC offices. LEC access charges at both the originating and terminating end must be billed to the customer of record. If a terminating LEC's customer of record is an IXC, the LEC must accept billing tapes from the tandem operator used by that interexchange carrier. As a result of the new requirement, a party such as a CAP could collocate its transmision equipment in a LEC end office, transport traffic to its own tandem, and switch it at the tandem. Alternatively, a party could use LEC-provided transport to carry traffic and signalling information to its own tandem. In addition, small IXCs that currently purchase LEC tandem-switched transport could obtain economies of scale by aggregating their traffic from end offices on a single direct trunk, routing traffic to their own tandem or a tandem operated by another party, and switching it at that point. The Commission ruled that LEC offering of the necessary signalling information will constitute a new service under price caps. LECs will be required to make a cost-based showing under the price caps new services test. In addition, LECs will be required to establish a rate element for the signalling information as a separate service category within the trunking basket. This service category will be subject to an upper pricing band of 2%, but not a lower band. The Commission concluded that LECs would not be granted any additional pricing flexibility at this time. The Commission concluded that this further initiative in its expanded interconnection proceeding would serve the public interest because it would produce important benefits at minimal cost. Facilitating third-party access to signalling information would permit various telecommunications entities, including CAPs and IXCs, to offer tandem-switching services in competition with the LECs. Increased competition should, in turn, exert downward pressure on access charges and long-distance rates. In addition, enhancing competition would promote more efficient use and deployment of networks and encourage technological innovation. Finally, competitive tandem-switching services would increase access to diverse facilities for IXCs and users, which could improve network reliability. The Tier 1 LECs subject to the Third Report and Order will be required to file tariffs offering the CIC and OZZ at their equal access end offices within 90 days of publication of the Third Report and Order in the Federal Register. In the Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission also sought comment on a proposal by the Independent Data Communications Manufacturers Association, Inc. (IDCMA) to allow third parties to collocate customer equipment in LEC offices. The Commission will address that proposal at a later time. Action by the Commission May 19, 1994, by Third Report and Order (FCC 94-118). Chairman Hundt, Commissioners Quello and Barrett, with Commissioner Barrett issuing a statement. News Media contact: Rosemary Kimball at (202)632-5050. Common Carrier Bureau contacts: Gary L. Phillips at (202) 632-4048 and Linda L. Haller at (202)632-1298. - FCC - Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301 229 5208 rjk@telcomlaw.com Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301 229 6875 finger me for daily FCC info + see ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/ for other files ------------------------------ From: darneke@attmail.com (David R Arneke) Date: 22 May 94 10:24:49 GMT Subject: AT&T Support for New Digital Signature Standard NEWS FROM AT&T FOR MORE INFORMATION: Bill Jones, AT&T (910) 279-6511 (office) (910) 852-3196 (home) FOR RELEASE FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1994 AT&T SECURE SOFTWARE SUPPORTS NEW U.S. DIGITAL SIGNATURE STANDARD GREENSBORO, North Carolina -- Several of AT&T's commercially available secure software products already incorporate and comply with the U.S. government's newly approved Digital Signature Standard (DSS). "AT&T anticipated approval of Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 186," said William A. Franklin, software security products manager, AT&T Secure Communications Systems. "And we worked with our partner, Information Security Corporation, to ensure that our commercially available secure software products would comply with the new standard when it was announced." The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) this week announced that the Secretary of Commerce had approved FIPS 186, which incorporates the new Digital Signature Standard. The new standard takes effect Dec. 1, 1994. In a May 19 notice in the Federal Register, the NIST said the DSS incorporates a new Digital Signature Algorithm (DSA) appropriate for applications requiring a digital, rather than written, signature. The DSA authenticates the integrity of the signed data and the identity of the signatory. Applications include: electronic mail, electronic funds transfer, electronic data interchange, software distribution, data storage and other applications which require data integrity assurance and data origin authentication. "Using our digital signature software for such applications can help cut government agencies' and commercial organizations' operating costs," Franklin said. "Digital signature authentication can increase the pace of communication, and that, in turn, reduces the cost of doing business." AT&T secure software products that comply with the government's new Digital Signature Standard include: -- AT&T SecretAgent (R) Software, which provides DES encryption, the NIST Digital Signature Algorithm (DSA), the RSA cryptosystem for digital signatures and key management, and the federal Secure Hash Standard (SHS) for data integrity. SecretAgent Version 3.0 is in beta testing, and will begin shipping by June 15. Version 2.0 is currently available. SecretAgent Version 3.0 features include: cross-platform compatibility among MS-DOS, Windows, Macintosh and various UNIX operating systems; user transparent support of RSA and DSA public keys; and mail-enabled operation through the Vendor-Independent Massaging (VIM) interface. -- AT&T Surity (TM) DSA Signature Software, which provides authentication and data integrity assurance for electronic documents. The program uses the DSA and the Secure Hash Standard to verify that documents were transmitted by their assumed sender and that they have not been modified in transmission. DOS, UNIX and Windows version are available. A Macintosh port is in development. -- AT&T Cryptographic Development Kits, which incorporate a comprehensive library of linkable code modules that can be purchased by software developers who want to build security into their DOS, Windows, Macintosh and UNIX applications. One kit includes code for DES encryption, the ElGamal public key cryptosystem, the Digital Signature Algorithm and the Secure Hash Standard. A second contains most RSA security functions, including RSA encryption, key management and digital signatures. A third package combines the DSA and RSA kits. To place orders or get more information, please call the AT&T Secure Communications Customer Service Center at 800 203- 5563. # # # Product names are trademarks of their respective companies. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 14:00:13 GMT From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Internet: Getting Started" by Marine et al. BKINTGST.RVW 940224 Prentice Hall/Brady/Ellis Horwood/Simon and Schuster/New Riders/Digital Press 113 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 (515) 284-6751 FAX (515) 284-2607 or 11711 N. College Ave. Carmel, IN 46032-9903 or 201 W. 103rd Street Indianapolis, IN 46290 or 15 Columbus Circle New York, NY 10023 800-428-5331 or Market Cross House Cooper Street Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1EB England phyllis@prenhall.com - Phyllis Eve Bregman is postmaster 70621.2737@CompuServe.COM Alan Apt Beth Mullen-Hespe beth_hespe@prenhall.com "Internet: Getting Started", Marine et al, 1994, 0-13-289596-X This is *not* a book introducing you to the Internet. This is another book on establishing a connection to the Internet. A "first-timer", as the cover has it, would almost certainly be bemused, if not totally lost, by discussions of service providers, domain name servers and costs. The only introductory material is a brief overview of Internet applications in chapter nine. For those wishing to connect, this is a reasonable overview. It introduces the major topics, but often is very limited in terms of the necessary details. The setup for a router and the selection of software is covered in a scant two paragraphs for each subject. Obtaining an IP number and establishing a domain is recommended six chapters before those items are defined. Where this book does shine is in the listing of organizations related to the internet. If you are serious about establishing an Internet node, you will need to contact a number of bodies quite aside from your service provider. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994 BKINTGST.RVW 940224. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca Research into rslade@cue.bc.ca User p1@CyberStore.ca Security Canada V7K 2G6 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 04:17:54 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CPSR Response to FCC CNID (fwd) Forwarded FYI to the Digest: From: jjohnson@FirstPerson.COM (Jeff Johnson) Subject: CSPR Responds to FCC CNID Ruling Date: 18 May 1994 17:28:55 GMT CPSR has responded to the FCC's recent ruling on Calling Number Identification (CNID). Our response took two forms: 1. Carl Page of CPSR/Oregon, who was (with Erik Nilsson) an active participant in the Oregon state hearings two years ago that led to an Oregon decision that followed many of CPSR's recommendations, wrote a "Petition for Reconsideration" of the FCC's ruling, and is submitting it today to the FCC. I provided advice and editorial feedback on the petition. The main points of CPSR's petition are: 1) Phone companies argue that line blocking undermines the value of CNID, but in fact the evidence suggests that this is false, 2) CNID with no line-blocking undermines the value of the "unlisted number" service, which has a higher market penetration rate than is projected for CNID, 3) per-call blocking is unreliable as a way to preserve privacy, especially in the age of direct marketing, "data harvesters," and the information superhighway, 4) Call Trace could be more useful to residential phone customers than CNID if it were inexpensive and universally available, yet the FCC's ruling ignores it entirely, and 5) the distinction between CNID, which can be blocked, and Automatic Number Generation (ANI), which provides calling numbers to 800 and 900-service providers and which cannot be blocked, should eventually be eliminated, such that blocking is available for all calls. 2. I provided advice to the National Association of State Consumer Advocates (NASUCA), which is submitting its own "Petition for Reconsideration" with the FCC. NASUCA consists of the majority of state Consumer Advocates, who work for their respective state Public Utilities Commissions. NASUCA's main arguments are: 1) the ~40 states that have considered CNID did so in a very open and democratic manner (e.g., held public participation hearings and evidentiary hearings, solicited and received numerous letters and written arguments, etc.), and most (36) of those states have decided that per-line blocking is necessary to provide a fair balance between the privacy of callers and callees, 2) the FCC's ruling, which was not based on such a democratic process, may well pre-empt those of the states, so the FCC should reconsider its ruling and allow CNID blocking, however generated (i.e., per-line or per-call), to work for interstate calls. In other words, calls for which the caller has blocked number disclosure should simply be marked as blocked, regardless of whether the blocking was initiated on a per-call or per-line basis. This would actually be simpler than requiring callers (and the network) to treat interstate calls differently from local calls. Hopefully, the FCC will reconsider. JJ eagle@deeptht.armory.com email info@eff.org * ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 04:18:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New Area Codes For Modems (Ameritech) Forwarded FYI to the Digest: From: mech@eff.org (Stanton McCandlish) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: New area codes for modems (Ameritech) Date: 16 May 1994 10:16:12 -0400 halleen@MCS.COM (Michael Halleen) says: > On the news this morning there was a story that Ameritech is considering > adding a new area code in the Chicago area. They may split the suburbs > (now 708) into two zones, or they might create a new code just for fax > machines and modems. > While right now it costs nothing extra to call to 708 from 312 (suburbs > from city), that might not always be true. > This is not a modem tax scare, but is it possible that this could end up > costing internet users (those who dial up) more money? Could this be > an attempt to squeeze more money out of a growing business? More likely, they are just running out of numbers, or need to change the way calls are routed, or some such administrative problem. This is not really that rare a thing, the branching of prefixes and area codes, and I think it likely that your state Public Utility Commission defines LD charges by distance, rather than by area code or telco whim. > I'd like it if someone from the EFF would answer this. Is there anything > we can do to make it clear that we will not accept this? (besides waiting > for Chicago Cable to start offering phone service) If you mean the splitting of the area codes, probably nothing you can do about it, and there's unlikely to be much of a reason to anyway. If you mean preventing tariffs targeted at modem and fax users, you can always send letters to the heads of both the telco and the PUC discouraging any such ideas if they are brewing. At this juncture - no actual modem-tariff in sight - there's not much else to do. Stanton McCandlish * mech@eff.org * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 13:56:13 -0700 From: richard@mandarin.com Subject: Short Message Service (SMS) gregalex@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Greg Alexander) asked: >> I am interested in buying a GSM phone, and was hoping to learn >> a little more about the short message service offered in some. >> Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone >> is in range? We've just got the first "workable" SMS system in the UK, on the new DCS1800 (PCN) system known as "ORANGE". Essentially it is a message transfer system that uses a form of handshaking between the mobile switch and the handset: so error-free receipt of the message can be guaranteed. If the intended recipient's phone is not in range when the message is sent, the network will hold the message until an error free path is available for the message to be handed over. This is important, as the worst thing about a cellphone being out of range is for there to be a message waiting when the phone gets back into coverage, and that message has to be listened to from a fringe area with really poor reception. When the message is received, it is stored on the user's SIM card -- which can be removed from the phone for security. Even if several people share a phone, the messages would stay completely private (SIM cards can be protected with a PIN code). We do not *just* have a message bureau, however: we also have the ability to send messages *directly from handset to handset* and these messages cost less to send than it would cost to make a phone call to say the same thing! In the future there are plans to provide notebook computer access to the handset (using PCMCIA cards) and this will substantially increase the functionality of the message service. It will become possible to send text messages from the handset (or computer) to any other GSM/PCN system, to any of the old analogue paging networks, or as an X400 message or a facsimile document. If a SMS message contains a phone number with a request to be called back, the handset will (on a key-push) grab that number and store it in the phone's memory, ready to be called back by the user. Oh, and we also have full Caller-ID and last call return. All this because the new ORANGE service in the UK seems to be different to our other Telcos ... rather than saying "how little can we get away with giving the customer", they say "how much useful functionality can we cram into the system, and so make people want to use our phones, without having to increase the prices ! After all, ORANGE is *not* the first PCN (DCS1800) system in the UK ... but it IS the first to offer all these features. A sidenote: although there are two handsets now available for ORANGE, these facilities will only work on Nokia handsets, not on the Motorola alternative. Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, P.O. Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan, Wales: CF64 3YG Voice: 0956 700111 Fax: 0956 700110 VoiceMail: 0941 151515 Pager 0941 115555 E-mail address: richard@mandarin.com - PGP2.3 public key available on request ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #242 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00200; 23 May 94 16:04 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA11554; Mon, 23 May 94 12:24:31 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA11540; Mon, 23 May 94 12:24:27 CDT Date: Mon, 23 May 94 12:24:27 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405231724.AA11540@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #243 TELECOM Digest Mon, 23 May 94 12:24:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 243 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Internet: Mailing Lists" by Hardie/Neou (Rob Slade) Competitive Market Structure for Alaskan Telecommunications (Bob Keller) Network "Resources" on GSM? (Steve Davies) Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (Harry P. Haas) Itemized Billing in UK (Randy Gellens) Fujitsu F9600VS PBX (Jeff Wahlgren) Cordless Phone Wanted With Ten Mile Range (Roger Guorong) TMN/ASN.1/GSM Specialists Needed (Jay Borden) What Kind of Capacity is in VBI? (Paul Robinson) Microsoft Telephony API (Marco A. Pinones) What is a New Activation? (Bob Berger) Hunting GTE (Paul Callahan) War Department Technical Manual (Ry Jones) "Best Booth" at Supercomm (Randy Gellens) Hackers On Planet Earth Newsgroups (kc@escape.com) Accidental Phone Silliness ;) (Elana Beach) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 15:17:56 MDT From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Internet: Mailing Lists" by Hardie/Neou BKINTMLS.RVW 940217 Prentice Hall 113 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 (515) 284-6751 FAX (515) 284-2607 or 11711 N. College Ave. Carmel, IN 46032-9903 or 201 W. 103rd Street Indianapolis, IN 46290 or 15 Columbus Circle New York, NY 10023 800-428-5331 or Market Cross House Cooper Street Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1EB England phyllis@prenhall.com - Phyllis Eve Bregman is postmaster 70621.2737@CompuServe.COM Alan Apt Beth Mullen-Hespe beth_hespe@prenhall.com "Internet: Mailing Lists", Hardie/Neou, 1994, 0-13-289661-3 "What are you writing?" "Another book review ... " "Figures. What's it on?" "The Internet." "Now, there's a surprise! I think I'm gonna have a heart attack and die from *not* being ..." "That's getting old." "Hummph. So this is another Internet guide?" "Nope. It's about mailing lists or distribution lists." "Like in junk mail? 'You may already be a winner' type of thing?" "Well, if it's an unmoderated list, junk mail comes close. Basically these are mail programs assigned to a certain topic. Everyone who is interested in a topic can join a list. When they send a message to the list, it goes out to everyone who is signed up. And everyone signed up gets a copy of all mail sent to the list. However, since it is on the Internet, rather than done through the postal system, it can run fast enough to seem almost like a conversation." "So these guys explain all about it?" "Well, not in a lot of detail. They give a brief idea of the concept, and the different programs like requesters, BITNET LISTSERVs, mail servers and MAILBASE. They even mention Usenet, which does the same type of thing in a different way, even though it isn't really covered. They don't give a lot of detail, but you can always get help from these systems, anyway. One of the big irritations in mailing lists is people who send administrative messages, like when they want to join or quit, to the list itself, rather than the controlling program. They don't belabour the fact, but they do mention it. Twice." "So this is a short book?" "Almost 600 pages." "?" "Most of the book is a listing of a number of mailing lists. You can get similar lists on the net, but this includes lists from a number of sources, as well as more detail than you might get from a simple listing. They also have probably done some editing to get rid of some deadwood. More than deadwood, actually. NETTRAIN doesn't make it." "So you could get all this free? Why buy the book?" "Oh, you could get all the info, and more up to date stuff as well. But you'd have to grab yourself three or four huge files. Even then, you wouldn't have all the info that is listed here. You'd also have to check it out different ways, search all the synonyms for what you want, and that sort of thing. If you are just a hobby user, maybe you don't want this, but if you are serious about the Internet, then you probably do. If you are acting as an Internet resource or trainer you *definitely* want this book." "Good index, then?" "Not perfect. If you want to find the DOROTHYL mystery writing list, it isn't listed under mystery, writing, fiction, or even Sayers. BEN, which deals with botany and ecology of the Pacific coast isn't listed under either botany or ecology. The index could certainly use some work, but it's a start." "Hmmm. Sounds interesting. Can I borrow it?" "No." copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994 BKINTMLS.RVW 940217. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '95, Toronto, ON, February 13-17, 1995, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:52:35 GMT From: Bob Keller Subject: Competitive Market Structure for Alaskan Telecommunications Report No. DC-2600 ACTION IN DOCKET CASE May 19, 1994 NEW COMPETITIVE MARKET STRUCTURE ADOPTED FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE IN ALASKA (CC DOCKET 83-1376) The Commission has adopted a new market structure for telecommunications service in Alaska that will ensure universal service to Alaskans, more fully open the Alaskan telecommunications market to competition, and foster improved efficiency and economic growth. The new market structure is patterned after the competitive market structures in the rest of the country, where carriers compete on price and services. The new structure will replace the Joint Services Arrangement (JSA) under which AT&T and Alascom, Inc., currently provide telecommunications service to and from Alaska. The JSA will be terminated on January 1, 1996. The Commission generally adopted, with minor clarifications and modifications, the Final Recommended Decision adopted by the Alaska Joint Board on October 26, 1993. The Commission said that the recommendations were in the public interest because they provide a comprehensive solution to the Alaska market issues and because they best achieve the five objectives adopted earlier by the Joint Board -- preservation of universal service; continuation of rate integration; maintenance of revenue requirement neutrality; allowance of market-based competitive entry; and encouragement of increased efficiency. Under the market structure adopted in the order, AT&T must provide interstate message telephone service and wide area telecommunications service (collectively referred to as MTS) between Alaska and the lower 48 states at integrated rates and under the same terms and conditions, including quality, technical standards, and availability, applicable to AT&T's provision of services in the Lower 48 states. AT&T must also furnish MTS service between Alaska and Hawaii at integrated rates. After the JSA is terminated, Alascom can offer interstate MTS, independently from AT&T, under its own tariff with no obligation to charge AT&T's integrated rates. Alascom must provide common carrier services to other interexchange carriers providing service to Alaska on a nondiscriminatory basis under tariff at rates that reflect Alascom's cost of service. Alascom's tariff will provide separate rate schedules for competitive (non-Bush) and Bush areas of Alaska. The costs of service in each of these categories will be prepared pursuant to a cost allocation plan developed by Alascom and approved by the FCC. Alascom will continue to have a facilities-based monopoly in the Bush. As the only carrier providing facilities in the Bush, other carriers must use Alascom's facilities to provide service to and from the Bush. Alascom will recover the costs of providing service to the Bush, including satellite and other facilities, through tariffs. Moreover, the order retains the factor for circuit equipment that allocates 86% of the costs of such equipment, including satellite costs, to the interstate jurisdiction. The Commission emphasized its commitment to ensuring preservation of telecommunications service to the Bush. The order requires a four year transition and a number of transition mechanisms before the new market structure is fully implemented. During the first phase, beginning July 1, 1994, AT&T and Alascom will continue to provide service jointly pursuant to the JSA. The JSA will terminate at the end of the first phase effective January 1, 1996. During the second phase AT&T and Alascom may provide service independently. AT&T will be required to purchase from Alascom a fixed amount of service that declines over the two and one half year period. The order requires that the amount AT&T must purchase is based on the demand for north and south bound traffic in the last year of the JSA. This amount is then adjusted to reflect the use by Alascom and other interexchange carriers of Alascom's facilities for interstate MTS. AT&T is required to fund a reduction in Alascom's plant balances by a transition payment to Alascom of $150 million in two installments of $75 million to be paid on July 1, 1994 and upon termination of the JSA. Alascom must apply the payment first to reduce its central office switching plant accounts and then the remaining depreciable accounts. This payment by AT&T to Alascom is eligible for exogenous treatment under the Commission's price cap rules for AT&T. Finally, the order allows AT&T to request equal access from Alaska local exchange carriers. Action by the Commission May 19, 1994, by Memorandum Opinion and Order (FCC 94-116). Chairman Hundt, Commissioners Quello and Barrett. News Media contact: Rosemary Kimball at (202) 632-5050. Common Carrier Bureau contacts: Rose Crellin at (202) 632-1292 and Robert Hall at (202) 634-1861. - FCC - Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301 229 5208 rjk@telcomlaw.com Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301 229 6875 finger me for daily FCC info + see ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/ for other files ------------------------------ From: steve@iaccess.za (Steve Davies) Subject: Network "Resources" on GSM? Date: 22 May 1994 21:21:31 +0200 Organization: Internet Access public-access service Hi Telecommers, I am looking for information about the GSM cellular phone system. The GSM system has recently been launched here in South Africa and I would like to educate myself. Are there any mailing lists that discuss GSM? How about archive sites with information? Many thanks for reading! Steve Davies, Compustat (Pty) Ltd steve@cstat.co.za ------------------------------ From: hhaas@saffron.gatech.edu (Harry P. Haas) Subject: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) Date: 23 May 1994 14:12:27 GMT Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute In article , John Gilbert wrote: > From Motorola Cellular Service Bulletin #179 4/92 > Motorola strongly discourages any attempt to install a standard > Motorola cellular telephone into unique OEM cables. Custom features > designed into OEM phones are not operaable with standard Motorola > equipment, and standard Motorola telephones do not operate properly on > OEM-designed cables. While we're on the subject ... I have a Motorola flip-phone with the hands free kit/3watt amp. It makes for the same setup as the lexus, without muting the stereo. BUT, my stereo has a mute input wire, and the CELLULAR 3-WATT VEHICULAR ADAPTER has a wire yellow-black wire labeled "Auxilary Alert". Hmmm. So does anyone know what the "Auxiliary Alert" wire is used for? If it is not an "activity" signal, does anyone know how to get an "activity" signal from the Motorola system so that I can mute my stereo? Thanks in advance. Harry Haas GTRI/SEAL/RSD/ASB Georgia Tech Research Institute Research Engineer II 225 North Ave. harry.haas@gtri.gatech.edu Atlanta Georgia, 30332 ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 22 MAY 94 23:55:00 GMT Subject: Itemized Billing in UK An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show up as itemized call detail on their phone bill. These were local toll calls from the East End to the West End, which I assume are expensive calls. Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing? Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com (714) 380-6350 fax (714) 380-5912 Mail Stop MV 237 Net**2 656-6350 ------------------------------ From: wahlgren@interaccess.com (Jeff Wahlgren) Subject: Fujitsu F9600VS PBX Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 10:34:56 GMT Organization: InterAccess,Chicagoland's Full Service Internet Provider Has anyone had any experience with the Fujitsu F9600VS PBX? I am looking to purchase a new switch for our schools in the near future. Good, bad, anticdotal, information, stories, any info much appreciated. Email to wahlgren@interaccess.com or post reply. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: hu_g@isis.cs.odu.edu (Guorong Roger) Subject: Cordless Phone Wanted With Ten Mile Range Date: 23 May 1994 15:54:10 GMT Organization: Old Dominion University CS Dept. Is there any kind of CORDLESS PHONE which can be used for ten to twenty miles distance (not a cellular phone, not the regular cordless phone which can only be used within the house). The telephone should still use the regular telephone switching system. The master piece of the phone should be installed at home, and the handset could be bring ten to twenty miles away from the home but be still access the phone at home. Please send email to me if you know the answer. Thanks! Roger [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are, but they are not legal for use in the USA. About the closest you can come to this legally in the USA is to use a manual phone patch attached to a CB radio or some other type of legal radio service. I have a phone patch here for example which I have not used for many years, basically since when I 'got out of' CB ... it can be wired into the speaker and microphone of the base station and also into the telephone line, but the law requires that an operator at the base station listen to both sides of the conversation and manually key the microphone when the telephone side wishes to speak. CB radios can legally (in theory) transmit up to 150 miles; antenna selection, height of antenna and atmospheric conditions play a major role in getting this kind of range. In real practice, two or three miles -- maybe up to ten miles -- is the useable range to be expected from unmodified units operating in urban areas. In any event, *no automatic service* is allowed. Now, if you use radios equipped for 144 megs -- what is known among hams as 'two meters' -- then repeater sites equipped with telephone patches are quite common. They usually belong to a local club whose members jointly maintain the cost of the repeater site and phone line, etc. A license is required from the FCC to operate a two meter radio, and the emphasis and primary use is unit to unit contact rather than unit to phone network. I know they sell the kind of phone you are seeking in Europe, but they are mostly unavailable and hard to find here in the USA. If you've got the money, you might con- sider setting up a little two meter arrangement of your own with a private phone line attached, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 09:31:05 -0400 From: jborden@world.std.com (jay borden) Subject: TMN/ASN.1/GSM Specialists Needed I'm looking for contract asssistance from one or two people who have a good knowledge of (all of) the above. If you think you fit the bill (or know someone who does) please drop me a mail. Thanks, jay b ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 05:47:26 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: What Kind of Capacity is in VBI? Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA I saw the following announcement in the Satnews listing, which reads in part talks about selling space on U.K. Channel 4: > terrestrial Channel 4. The Broadcasting Act 1990 makes provision > for the allocation of a number of lines in the Vertical Blanking > Interval (not used for sound and vision) to users... A question I have is, for a U.S. signal, which I believe the Vertical Blanking Interval also exists, how much capacity is available on a single TV channel and at what speed can the data be sent? Is this related to closed captioning? If not, what type equipment is needed to decode VBI data and what kind of costs are involved to build it? Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: mpinones@netmon.mty.itesm.mx (Marco A. Pinones) Subject: Microsoft Telephony API Date: 22 May 1994 17:50:09 GMT Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey I would like to know if there is any advance on Microsoft efforts to provide a "standard" programming interface for PBXs and telephony services. I sent mail to people at Ericcsson about this and they told me they are working on it. Does somebody know if other companies are working on it? Greetings, Marco P ------------------------------ From: rwb+@J.GP.CS.CMU.EDU (Bob Berger) Subject: What is a New Activation? Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 20:13:41 GMT In most states buying a cellular phone is much cheaper with a new activation; the carrier essentially subsidizes the purchase. Now, just how do they define "new"? Let's say I have an old, clunky cellular phone, and I want one of those whizbang pocket models. If I cancel my old service on May 31st, can I get a "New Activation" from the same company on June 1st? Or must I switch carriers to get a good deal on the phone purchase? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It depends on how liberal your existing carrier is. Some will allow a new 'activation' to occur (for the purpose of getting a new phone at a greatly reduced price, or free) in exchange for your commitment to a new obligation or service contract. In other words, your carrier might say if you are willing to contract with them for another full year at some minimum service level per month (greater than what you are getting now, of course) then they will go along with it. If you are already spending a lot of money with the carrier each month then they may feel there is no need to try and induce you to spend more. Free (or reduced cost) cellular phones in exchange for signing up are a lot like any other service which gives you a bargain for your first commitment (like a record or book club; buy one and get a dozen more for free, etc) ... they want to hook you. Once hooked, they could care less about you. The certain way to accomplish what you want is by switching carriers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 94 07:37:35 CDT From: wpcallah@rwasic17.aud.alcatel.com (Paul Callahan) Subject: Hunting Service From GTE I want to get a second line and have it hunt to the first, or vice-versa. I reacall this from one or two years ago, but not the terms. Let's say, I call GTE up and ask for my old line to hunt to the new, and the sales- droid is confused -- what else can I call it? If anyone wants to get real specific we are talking about a 214-417 line. Thanks, Paul [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is called rotary hunting service. Not all exchanges are set up to do it but these days I can't imagine you would be on one. Nor can all exchanges hunt backward or in a circle or from one number to another further away (called 'jump hunt') but most of them can. Illinois Bell -- maybe other Bells -- give hunting between lines for free but I don't know what GTE thinks about it. Please note there is a more expensive (and charged-for) service called 'transfer on busy/no answer'. 'Transfer on busy' does about the same thing as hunting does, but the way it is done -- the mechanics of it -- are a little different. Since Bell charges for 'transfer on busy' but gives 'hunting' for free, I chose to take the latter for my lines. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ry Jones Subject: War Department Technical Manual Date: Mon, 23 May 94 09:23:42 PDT I have a copy of the TM11-498, Fundamentals of Telephony and Manual Telegraphy. It was published in October 1944, and is really interesting from a historical point of view. One of the things I got a kick out of is the notation by every schematic containing a capacitor: NEW SYBMOL -)|- REPLACES -||- IN ALL DRAWINGS THAT shows the age of the book. It covers a lot about relays and cordboards, and has a lot of information about field telephony. Ry [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Too bad you don't have a scanner so the publication could be entered on line easily and put in the archives. PAT] ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 22 May 94 20:24:00 GMT Subject: "Best Booth" at Supercomm Of more than 1,700 booths representing 496 exhibitors, Unisys took the prize for the "Best Booth" at the SUPERCOMM Telecommunications conference last week in New Orleans. Judging criteria included company identity, product presentation, design elements, exhibit personnel and booth work- ability. More than 23,000 people attended the conference, which is the largest U.S. telecommunications event. In the award-winning booth, Unisys Communications Systems Division showcased the recently announced NAP VoiceSource UNIX solution. Other telephone company applications were featured as well, such as SS7 data collection, desktop video conferencing, multimedia personal computing, and LocateIt (an OSMOS- based geographic mapping system developed by Bellcore). ------------------------------ From: kc@escape.com Subject: Hackers On Planet Earth Newsgroups Date: 23 May 1994 16:43:49 GMT Organization: Escape ONLINE. We've launched a few new newsgroups specifically for the HOPE conference this August in New York City. They are: alt.2600.hope.announce Announcements, bulletins, general info. alt.2600.hope.d Discussion including rides, places to stay, etc. alt.2600.hope.tech Technical issues (network, setup, etc.) If your site doesn't have these groups, ask your sysadmin to subscribe -- they usually will if you ask and it's not being censored by a higher authority. If you can't get on, post questions or comments here or write to 2600@well.sf.ca.us. Hackers On Planet Earth August 13-14, 1994 Hotel Pennsylvania, New York City For discounted room reservations, call (212) PEnnsylvania 6-5000 (no shit). Mention HOPE to get the special rate. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You're right; no shit. The hotel has had that phone number for their switchboard for about sixty years. At one time a very glamorous and famous place, Hollywood even made a movie about it and used that number as part of the movie's theme. Then of course there was the campy Dracula movie a few years ago which used a take-off on the same thing with the number TRansylvania 6-5000. PAT] ------------------------------ From: elana@netcom.com (The Great Whatever...) Subject: Accidental phone Silliness ;) Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 05:38:13 GMT Figured I'd inject some non-serious discussion into this group... ;) Three people figure in this story: me, some guy named Ken and a mutual friend named Karen. Anyway, I was trying to call Ken at a time that I KNEW he was home, and I got his @!%@! answering machine. I got seriously annoyed, so as soon as I heard his machine beep, I hit the "play" button on the outgoing message of my own machine and played it into the phone. Then I hung up. 15 minutes later, my phone rang. It was Karen, calling to tell me that Ken had just called her. He was seriously freaked out, saying: "Elana's machine just somehow called MY machine!! And left a message!!!" Twilight phone Zone for Ken. ;-) I guess that he was not exactly the brightest soul that ever walked on this planet...! :) 8) Elana ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #243 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00763; 23 May 94 17:10 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA13264; Mon, 23 May 94 13:14:37 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA13255; Mon, 23 May 94 13:14:35 CDT Date: Mon, 23 May 94 13:14:35 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Message-Id: <9405231814.AA13255@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #244 TELECOM Digest Mon, 23 May 94 13:14:30 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 244 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Seeks Further Comments on 0+ Call Routing (Bob Keller) Book Review: "The Internet Navigator" by Gilster (Rob Slade) Taiwan and Hong Kong Contacts Needed (Tara D. Mahon) Book Review: "How the World Was One: Beyond Global Village" (Mark Brader) Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Mark E. Daniel) Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Steven J. Davidson, M.D) Remote Telephone Access Information Wanted (Warren Birnbaum) Is There a Gadget Which Detects Fax and Voice? (Hem Ramachandran) Mispellers [sic] of the World, Unite! (Jonathan Welch) Is This True? (Atri Indiresan) DTMF Decoding Help Needed (Chad R. West) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 10:50:24 EDT From: Bob Keller Subject: FCC Seeks Further Comments on 0+ Call Routing Report No. DC-2601 ACTION IN DOCKET CASE May 19, 1994 FURTHER COMMENTS SOUGHT ON PROPOSAL TO ROUTE TELEPHONE CALLS VIA THE CARRIER CHOSEN BY THE PARTY PAYING FOR THE CALL (CC DOCKET NO. 92-77) The Commission announced today that it seeks further comment on whether to mandate a new system for routing "0+" calls -- that is, calls that are made by entering a "0" followed by a long distance number. While it found that the evidence available to it indicated that the benefits of the new system, called Billed Party Preference or BPP, outweighed its costs, the Commission also found that some of the data underlying its cost/benefit analysis were not as firm or as current as it desired. Currently, 0+ calls are sent to the operator services provider (OSP) to which the premises owner or payphone provider presubscribes. Under BPP, calls would be routed automatically to the OSP preferred by the party being billed for the call. For example, a calling card call would be routed to the cardholder's preferred OSP. A collect call would be routed to the called party's preferred OSP. A call billed to a third party would be routed to the OSP to which that third party had presubscribed. The Commission found that BPP would provide three principal benefits. First, it would make operator services more "user friendly." Under a BPP system, callers would be able to make all of their operator-assisted calls on a 0+ basis, and they would be able to do so with the knowledge that calls would be automatically handled by the OSP with which the billed party had chosen to do business at the rates offered by that OSP. Callers who currently use access codes would no longer need to do so. Callers who do not use access codes would no longer face the risk that their call would be carried by an operator service provider with rates considerably higher than the industry average. Based on data in the Commission's November 1992 report issued pursuant to the Telephone Operator Consumer Services Information Act, the Commission estimated that BPP would likely enable consumers to save about $280 million per year by avoiding operator service providers with rates higher than the AT&T/MCI/Sprint average. Second, the Commission found that BPP would force OSPs to refocus their competitive efforts towards serving consumers rather than serving aggregators, such as premises owners or payphone providers. The Commission recognized that such a shift in competitive focus would almost certainly eliminate the commissions that OSPs now pay to aggregators for directing 0+ calls to them. Moreover, based on the available data, it estimated that the elimination of commissions could save operator service providers about $340 million per year on interLATA 0+ calls. Not only did the Commission find that this could offset a substantial portion of the costs of BPP, but that a shift in competitive focus could also foster lower prices and better service for consumers. Finally, the Commission noted that BPP would eliminate certain AT&T advantages in the operator services market. For example, it would enable AT&T's competitors to offer end users the same 0+ access as AT&T. On the other hand, the Commission also noted that BPP is an expensive technology. While it found that available data indicated that the net cost of BPP for LECs would be approximately $380 million on an amortized unseparated cost basis, with an additional estimated $35 million per year for OSP expenses, it observed that this estimate was based on data that was not as firm nor as current as it would have liked. Therefore, the Commission chose to issue a Further Notice that sets forth in detail its cost/benefit analysis based on the available data, giving parties the opportunity to comment on the analysis and to submit additional, updated data to corroborate or refute it. The Commission also seeks comment on whether some or all of the benefits of BPP could be achieved through alternative, less costly measures. Finally, the Commission also addressed some aspects of how BPP should be implemented in the event it decides to mandate it. For example, the Commission decided that, if mandated, BPP should apply on a nationwide basis to all 0+ and 0- interLATA calls and that it should accommodate commercial credit cards. It also concluded that BPP should not give either LECs or OSPs the exclusive ability to issue line number cards, however, it seeks further comment on whether BPP should include a fourteen- or ten-digit screening design. It also seeks comment on whether prison phones should be subject to BPP. Action by the Commission May 19, 1994, by Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 94-117). Chairman Hundt, Commissioner Barrett, with Commissioner Quello concurring in the result and Commissioners Barrett and Quello issuing separate statements. News Media contact: Rosemary Kimball at (202) 632-5050. Common Carrier Bureau contacts: Mark S. Nadel at (202) 632-1301 and Gary Phillips at (202) 632-4048. - FCC - Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301 229 5208 rjk@telcomlaw.com Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301 229 6875 finger me for daily FCC info + see ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/ for other files ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 22:24:22 MDT From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Internet Navigator" by Gilster BKINTNAV.RVW 940211 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 22 Worchester Road Rexdale, Ontario M9W 9Z9 800-263-1590 or 605 Third Avenue New York, NY 10158-0012 USA 800-263-1590 212-850-6630 Fax: 212-850-6799 jdemarra@wiley.com aponnamm@jwiley.com "The Internet Navigator", Gilster, 1993, 0-471-59782-1 73537.656@compuserve.com gilster@rock.concert.net pag@world.std.com This book is an embarrassment to me. I *think* that it's very good -- but I am at a bit of a loss as to why. By and large, this is an Internet guide like other Internet guides. A bit of an introduction and some history, then coverage of the major applications (email, ftp, telnet) and the more esoteric ones (gopher, WAIS, World Wide Web). Right from the front cover, though, Gilster avoids the "whole Internet" bias of so many guides and aligns himself with the dial-up user. There is, in fact, a whole chapter devoted to the use of email to access Internet resources; particularly useful to those on commercial online services, business "mail only" connections or Fidonet. It is, of course, very much easier to point out the flaws. Although Gilster explains "why UNIX," there is a heavy emphasis on the specific commands of mail, trn, elm and other UNIX specific programs. (In the chapter on email access to resources, Gilster switches to Compuserve: oddly appropriate, but no less limited.) While the explanation of LISTSERV is complete and helpful, the sin of sending administrative messages to the list, rather than the LISTSERV, is not emphasized. Even in the opinion chapter, a discussion of the future of the newspaper lauds Clarinet for providing syndicated material, apparently unaware that Clarinet is strictly a reseller, and is providing for no development of editorial content. In spite of minor shortcomings, however, this book has a very comfortable feel to it. The material is clear and well-written, with little attempt at the sarcasm or barbed wit of some other beginner materials. One positive factor may be the grouping of functional items together, so that archie, for example, is covered in the chapter on ftp. There is only one icon; a very helpful little ship which points out Internet accessible resources for the item under discussion. The resource guides included are not extravagantly large, and are of variable quality. The directory of Internet resources is very useful for the beginner: not exhaustive, but of high quality in terms of what *is* covered. The bibliography is more exhaustive than useful, with Gibson's fictional "Neuromancer" next to Quarterman's quite technical, "The Matrix." Overall, I highly recommend this for the beginner to the Internet. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994 BKINTNAV.RVW 940211. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca Research into rslade@cue.bc.ca User p1@CyberStore.ca Security Canada V7K 2G6 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 94 13:38:07 EDT From: Tara D. Mahon Subject: Taiwan and Hong Kong Contacts Needed Dear TELECOM Digest readers, Insight Research is trying to locate people knowledgable about operations support systems (OSS) for Taiwanese telecom providers. We are looking for contact names at wireless or wireline carriers to interview for research on computers and telecom in Asia. We need a cellular/wireless contact at Hong Kong Telecom as well. If anyone can assist us, please send contact information (phone number, fax number, e-mail address, etc.) to tara@insight-corp.com. Thank you in advance for your help. Sincerely, Tara D. Mahon tara@insight-corp.com Insight Research Corporation tdm@insight-corp.com 354 Eisenhower Parkway (201) 605-1400 voice Livingston, NJ 07039-1023 USA (201) 605-1440 fax ------------------------------ From: msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Book Review: "How the World Was One: Beyond the Global Village" Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada Date: Mon, 23 May 94 08:41:46 GMT David Ofsevit (ofsevit@nac.lkg.dec.com) writes: > I was surprised that in the excellent series of articles on > telegraph and telephone cables there was no mention of Arthur C. > Clarke's fine book "Voice Across the Sea" (Harper, 1958). I don't > know whether it's in print anymore, but it is very well written and > worth finding. I doubt that it's in print, because in 1992, Clarke incorporated a large part of it into a new book. I posted a review of that one then, here and in slightly different form to certain other Usenet newsgroups. I saved a copy of the other version of the review; here it is. At the rate that books go out of print these days, it seems entirely possible that *this* one isn't available *either*; I don't know. ---------------------- "How the World Was One: Beyond the Global Village", 1992 Bantam hardcover, approx 300 pages. US price $22.50. ISBN 0-553-07440-7. This book is for people who are interested in telecommunications. They'll like it. Those readers who are voracious Clarke fans, however, may find that they've read considerable parts of it before. The book contains five main parts. The first and longest one tells about the early history of submarine telegraph cables, culminating with the tribulation-filled laying of the first successful cable across the Atlantic; and the second part rapidly takes the story forward to transoceanic telephony and radio. Most of this material was taken from Clarke's 1958 book "Voice Across the Sea", but I had not read that one, and I found it fascinating. Perhaps the most interesting thing was the many kinds of technical difficulties encountered in the early days. Cables were too light, too heavy, too short; they broke, they leaked; they even sabotaged themselves (no, I won't explain that one!). And then there were people problems -- wrong assumptions about technology went untested until after they had been embedded in thousands of miles of cable. On one of the cable-laying attempts, two ships started out in the middle of the ocean and sailed in opposite directions with the two ends of the cable, each paying it out as it went. Their only communication with each other was by telegraph through the cable itself. At one point the connection broke and the ships returned to their starting point -- and each hailed the other with "How did the cable break?" Something had happened on the seabed, and they never did find out what. Then when the first cable was finally laid and the technology finally tested, it hardly worked: after 12 days of trying to adjust the instruments, the operators still needed over 16 hours to transmit a 99-word official telegram. Depending just how they timed their Morse-like code, I figure that the transmission rate must have been somewhere between .05 and .1 baud! The remaining three parts of the book do not really tell a continuous story as do the first two; there are many distinct essays and speeches and even a few pieces of fiction. I had read several of the pieces before, and some of them overlap to some extent. So for these reasons I didn't enjoy the second half of the book as much as the first; but I still found it well worth reading. The third part deals with Clarke's own involvement in the early development of communication satellites. As most of you will know, he invented the idea of using the geostationary orbit for comsats -- though it didn't occur to him then that they might be unmanned! This part puts the idea in context of what he was doing at the time and of what had already been invented by others, and includes the short story "I Remember Babylon" where he anticipated some less savory uses to which comsats might be put. The fourth part concerns the impact of comsats as it has turned out in fact, and Clarke's thoughts on where how they should develop in the future; and the short fifth part is about the renaissance of submarine cables with the appearance of fiber optics. Look how the world has changed already since the telephone appeared ... here are two early reactions to the news of its invention: When news of Alexander Graham Bell's invention reached the United Kingdom, the chief engineer of the British Post Office failed to be impressed. "The Americans," he said loftily, have need of the telephone -- but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys ..." ... In contrast ... the mayor of a certain American city was wildly enthusiastic. He thought that the telephone was a marvelous device and ventured this stunning prediction: "I can see the time," he said solemnly, "*when every city will have one*." The thesis of the book is simple, and one with which most of us on Usenet will agree. I know *I* do. Better communication unites societies, reduces ignorance, and generally benefits everyone; and it is, accordingly, something on which the expenditure of time and money is well worthwhile. As Clarke said on the occasion of the signing of the Intelsat agreement: For today, gentlemen, whether you intend it or not -- whether you wish it or not -- you have signed far more than yet another intergovernmental agreement. You have just signed the first draft of the Articles of Federation of the United States of Earth. Mark Brader "... There are three kinds of death in this world. msb@sq.com There's heart death, there's brain death, and SoftQuad Inc., Toronto there's being off the network." -- Guy Almes This article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 03:01:29 EST From: mark@legend.akron.oh.us (Mark E Daniel) Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service > The UnDirectory service (Clarity Inc., P.O. Box 8357, Red Bank, NJ > 07701, 908-530-5100) provides national dial-up reverse directory for > the whole U.S. (Includes Alaska and Hawaii, but I couldn't get info > on numbers for Puerto Rico, or 800+ and 900+ numbers.) How long does a number have to be in service before it's in this database? I've had my number for over a year ever since I moved here and I decided to see if it knew me, and it said that my number was either unlisted or recently assigned. As I said, I've had this number for over one year and it is in the newest Ameritech directory, issued December 1993. Mark E Daniel (Loving SysOp of The Legend BBS) Inet: mark@legend.akron.oh.us medaniel@delphi.com (Direct INet) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As pointed out here before, most such services skimp on the costs of running same by using old, outdated records. They do not want to pay what telco would charge them for direct and immediate access to an up-to-date database. Therefore, you get what you pay for, or at least they do. They can make a lot more money by producing an inferior product which they then sell to you at a greatly inflated cost. If someone would do this the right way -- the way Ameritech handles 796-9600 -- it would be a winner. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 01:03:48 -0400 From: davidson@medcolpa.edu (Steven J. Davidson, M.D) Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service Pat writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's because, as Lynne Gregg points > out in her note earlier in this issue, many of those outfits rely on > old, obsolete listings rather than accessing the up-to-date listings > of telco. They'd have to *pay* telco to do that; then there would be > less profit in their operation. I guess they figure it is better to > work with older, less expensive databases and be right part of the time > rather than do the job right but make less profit. PAT] I just tried the 900 service with my present and immediate past (1981-1993) telephone numbers. Neither were known to the database. I then tried my "new" work number (in service for six years) it gave another address and business name. Then I tried my mother-in-law's number (12 years and still in service) which was unknown to the database and my parent's number (in use since 1955!) and it was unknown to the database. These last three numbers are all listed in the current Philadelphia directory. Conclusion: This service may not be worth even $1/minute, not just because of absent information, but also because of erroneous information. Regards, Steven J. Davidson, MD, MBA, FACEP | 215.843.3001/3029 voice/fax Div. of Emerg. Med. Serv., 3426 Conrad St., Philadelphia, PA 19129-1651 davidson@medcolpa.edu | davidson@netaxs.com | 71535.204@compuserve.com Opinions are all mine, I'm often wrong, but never in doubt. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 07:02:05 GMT From: Warren Birnbaum Subject: Remote Telephone Access Information Wanted I am currently looking for names of companies that supply telephone access to remote areas via satillite. Any information on this would be appreciated. Thanks, Warren Birnbaum wjb@cheops.cpuc.ca.gov ------------------------------ From: heman@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Hem Ramachandran) Subject: Is There a Gadget Which Detects Fax and Voice? Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 18:42:54 -0500 Organization: University of Texas at Austin Hi, I am wondering whether there exists a gadget (in the market or one which I can make) which detects between incoming fax and incoming voice and switch it to two seperate ports or so? Thanks for any help, Hem [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don't reinvent the wheel, Hem. These are all over the place. Check the Radio Shack store in Austin for starters and ask about the fax and data switch. I think the price is about $100. Another source is Hello Direct at 800-HI-HELLO. You can get the kind which actually listen to the incoming tones and decide whether to send the call to a fax, a computer or a human; or the kind which uses Distinctive Ringing Service from the telco to route the calls. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 06:24:49 -0500 From: Jonathan_Welch Subject: Mispellers [sic] of the World, Unite! Forwarded to the Digest from rec.humor.funny, FYI: From: daugher@cs.tamu.edu (Walter Daugherity) Subject:Mispellers [sic] of the world, unite! Date: Fri, 20 May 94 3:20:01 EDT Message-ID: (True) In an effort to snag more long distance telephone calls (charged to a credit card or a third number), AT&T reserved the toll-free number 1-800-OPERATOR. Not to be outdone, and perhaps knowing the public better, MCI reserved the number 1-800-OPERATER and has been scooping up calls intended for its arch-rival. Walter C. Daugherity Texas A&M University daugher@cs.tamu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 12:43:19 -0400 From: Atri Indiresan Subject: Is This True? This appeared in rec.humor.funny. Can anyone confirm that this is true? Atri > In an effort to snag more long distance telephone calls (charged to > a credit card or a third number), AT&T reserved the toll-free number > 1-800-OPERATOR. Not to be outdone, and perhaps knowing the public > better, MCI reserved the number 1-800-OPERATER and has been scooping > up calls intended for its arch-rival. Is this why AT&T is switching from 1-800-OPERATOR to 1-800-CALL-ATT? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T had the latter of the two numbers in service for quite awhile prior to starting 'OPERATOR'. I would not be surprised to hear there was a lot of confusion between OPERATOR and OPERATER however. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 14:07:55 EDT From: west_c212@orion.crc.monroecc.edu Subject: DTMF Decoding Help Needed I am writing a program that needs to decode telephone touch tone signals. The problem is that I am having trouble finding a DTMF decoder. If anyone know where I can get ahold of one I would appreciate it. Thank you. Chad R. West (Computer Science) Monroe Community College West_c212@orion.crc.monroecc.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #244 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01195; 23 May 94 18:03 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA16173; Mon, 23 May 94 14:29:03 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA16159; Mon, 23 May 94 14:29:01 CDT Date: Mon, 23 May 94 14:29:01 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson)) Message-Id: <9405231929.AA16159@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #245 TELECOM Digest Mon, 23 May 94 14:29:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 245 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Help Needed on Call Initialization in GSM, TACS, AMPS (P. Allen Jensen) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Arieh Cimet) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Lynne Gregg) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Mike Lyman) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (David S. Rose) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (K. Ketheesan) Re: Distribution of WATS Numbers in the Numbering Plan (John R. Levine) Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? (John R. Levine) Re: Video Conference Bridges (Ari Ollikainen) Re: Video Conference Bridges (Alan Leon Varney) Re: Bulk Call Display (Paul Robinson) Re: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error (Robert M. Hamer) Book Review: "Netiquette" by Virgina Shea (K. M. Peterson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jensena@crl.com (P. Allen Jensen) Subject: Re: Help Needed on Call Initialization in GSM, TACS, AMPS Date: 23 May 1994 09:32:12 -0700 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Nimal Senarath (ngs@ee.mu.OZ.AU) wrote: > I am a research student in Mobile communications attached to Networks > Group, EE Dept, Melbourne UNiversity, Australia. > I want to model Call INitialization in TDMA, FDMA systems for my > simulation work. I want to know exactly how the decision of initial > Base STATION selection is done (i.e. At the call origination). > We know that the mobile checks for the highest received pilot signal, > and connect to that base station if that is sufficient. However what I Actually, it's a bit more complex than just the highest pilot signal. The Radio Criteria named C1 used to select is defined as: C1 = (A - Max.(B,0)) Where A = Received Level Average - p1 B = p2 - Maximum RF power of the mobil station p1 is the RXLEV_ACCESS_MIN broadcast by the cell p2 is the MX_TXPWR_MAX_CCH broadcast by the cell Values are expressed in dB (this is for GSM900, GSM1800 differs, and this does not include things like reselect hysteresis, switch-on time, PLMN change, limited service mode, using a prefered PLMN list in the moble unit, etc...) The Received Level Average seems to be what you want to know about - How long does it measure it to compute an average and how many samples are taken as you say below ... > need is that how long mobile will measure this Signal Strength before > taking the decision and how often it measures this RSS values. (e.g. > It can be that average value of RSS over 0.5 seconds intervals may be > measured for about 'N' number of such intervals?; I assume measurements > at 0.5 intervals because that is the measurement interval used for > sending RSS values to the BS by the GSM system after the intitialization > process.) The minimum rate of measurement reporting in GSM is once per second. This is for all cells being measured. (the Mobile station builds a list of stations/frquencies to monitor ...) This can include up to six neighbour cells. In the TCH/F + SAACH case, there are 26 very short intervals (1ms) 24 small intervals (2ms) and one long interval (6ms) every 120ms. For more details - get the book: "The GSM System for Mobile Communications" by Michel Moule and Marie-Bernadette Pautet ISBN 2-9507190-0-7 ------------------------------ From: anl433!cimet@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com (Arieh Cimet) Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Organization: Motorola Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:20:34 GMT gregalex@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Greg Alexander) writes: > Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is > in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas > (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). If its > a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being in > the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message). Short Message is a paging with acknowledgement service, i.e. the system will attempt to deliver the messages until it receives an acknowledgement from the mobile. If a message is received while you are registered in the system then it is delivered right away (and it will be redelivered if there are any errors during transmission until an acknowledgement is received). If you are not in the system, then the messages are stored and the system database is marked so that the next time that you register in the system, all the messages waiting for you will be delivered (there is usually a scrolling mechanism in the phone). The operator may limit how many waiting messages you can have and for how long they will keep a message. I. Arieh Cimet e-mail: cimet@comm.mot.com Motorola ESMR Infrastructure phone: (708) 576-4565 1301 E. Algonquin Road fax: (708) 538-3472 Schaumburg, IL 60196 ------------------------------ From: Lynne Gregg Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Date: Mon, 23 May 94 09:31:00 PDT From: gregalex@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Greg Alexander) > I have spoken with several stores, service providers and > representatives of the actual phone makers themselves (Nokia) (in > Australia), and have got different stories from everyone as to how it > works. Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your > phone is in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service > areas (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). > If its a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being > in the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message). The messaging is delivered over the same cellular network to the phone. Yep, you must be within the coverage area in order to receive the page. It'll be great when the gaps are filled in coverage areas. Those days aren't too far off. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ From: Michael_Lyman@sat.mot.com (Mike Lyman) Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Reply-To: Michael_Lyman@sat.mot.com Organization: Motorola Inc. - Satellite Communications Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:06:50 GMT According to the way I interpret the meaning of "pager", I'd say GSM Short Message Service is a little of both paging facility and message storage/retrieval service. The GSM service specification for SMS makes it possible for a subscriber to receive messages up to 160 characters in length when that subscriber is currently registered in a system that supports SMS. Messages can be received either while the subscriber/phone is idle (not in an active call) or when the subscriber is involved in an active call. The big difference between SMS and a "pager" service is that SMS will, in principle go through most of the actions that normally take place for a regular GSM voice call (authentication, etc). Once a message is delivered to a subscribers' mobile phone, an acknowledgment is sent from the phone to confirm that the phone received the message. If the subscriber is not currently registered in a system or has the mobile unit turned off or << your reason for non-delivery here >> the message will be stored in a Short Message Service Center and a flag is set in that subscribers' database that will cause an indication on the subscribers' mobile unit that a message is waiting, once the subscribers' phone is available. The subscriber can then retrieve the message(s). If the mobile phone is equipped with a SIM card (Subscriber Information Module), then provision is made to store any SMS messages on the SIM. Messages sent to subscribers' via SMS are "secure". That is, the message is encrypted using a sophisticated algorithm. In addition, the originator of the message can be advised of the outcome of the SMS delivery. For a "normal" paging service, pages are sent to the subscriber's pager without any indications in return as to successful delivery (spray and pray service) although there is a movement afoot to provide "ack-back" paging services. I dont think there are any spec's or functional systems (are there ?). The description of SMS that I've given is from a "specifications" perspective and that actual implementation and operation may vary according to the subscriber unit/network equipment vendor. I believe the basic functional description will hold true. Michael Lyman Motorola S.E.D. ( Iridium ) Chandler, Az. lyman_m@sat.mot.com ------------------------------ From: dsr@delphi.com Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Date: Mon, 23 May 94 02:28:28 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Greg Alexander writes: > Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is > in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas GSM, which is similar to the MIRS/ESRM technology in North America, is an integrated system. That is, one single system provides a variety of\ wireless connections. These include two-way voice, one-way acknowledgement alphanumeric messaging, two-way data and in some cases push-to-talk dispatch broadcast. The key here is that all these features are coming through the same system, using the same transmitters, switches and mobile receivers. Therefore the range/coverage on all the services will be exactly the same. If you're in range to get an alpha message, you will also be in range for a voice connection, and vice versa. (Actually, in practice there might some minor discrepancies in fringe areas, but the usual case will be true the vast majority of the time.) David S. Rose / Ex Machina, Inc. ------------------------------ From: ketheesa@enws204.eas.asu.edu (K. Ketheesan) Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Reply-To: ketheesa@enws204.eas.asu.edu Organization: Network Systems Lab, Arizona State University Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 12:15:24 GMT In article 3@eecs.nwu.edu, gregalex@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Greg Alexander) writes: > Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is > in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas > (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). If its > a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being in > the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message). My understanding is that in order to deliver SMS messages in GSM, signaling connection has to be established (if one is not already existing). So that implies that when you are outside the coverage area, you will not be able to send or receive SMS messages. K. Ketheesan Network Systems Lab Electrical Engineering Arizona State University K.Ketheesan@asu.edu Tempe, Arizona ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 94 14:20 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Distribution of WATS Numbers in the Numbering Plan Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [When you dial an 800 number, your local telco makes a quick search > of the database and routes your call to the 'real' number to which the > 800 version is attached. PAT] It's probably more accurate to say that the telco looks up the 800 number and then hands it to the appropriate IXC who can do anything with it they want. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 94 07:56:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. Is it too much to ask that people actually retrieve the FCC's CNID order rather than speculating about what it might say? You can FTP it in about 30 seconds if you're on a directly connected site. It's at: ftp://fcc.gov/pub/Orders/Common_Carrier/orcc4001.txt > With the FCC mandate for CNID service, is it not possible that the > telcos will use this to drop ANI? Considering that ANI is what they use to bill for toll calls, I would think that such a move is, to put it mildly, unlikely. > Also it has been mentioned that "911 service requires special trunk lines > and equipment". Clearly CNID does not and needs only a low-cost display. > Will this make local 911 response a possibility? The hard part about 911 isn't delivering the ANI. The hard part is creating a complete and reliable data base with accurate street addresses in which the number can be looked up. In Vermont, for example, there is an expensive multi-year program to assign a street and number to every address in the state (most of Vermont is small towns where a typical mailing address is Box 42, RFD 1, East Overshoe) largely to make it possible to create the 911 location database. Whether the number comes from ANI or CLID is a nit. > While we are at it, I would *suspect* that per-call blocking will be > the standard, per-line will be standard for unlisted subscribers, ... The FCC order specifically forbids providing per-line blocking to anyone. They say: "Thus, carriers may not offer per line blocking as a privacy protection mechanism on interstate calls." I think this is a terrible idea, for reasons I won't rehash again here. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: ari@viipuri.nersc.gov (Ari Ollikainen) Subject: Re: Video Conference Bridges Date: 23 May 1994 02:40:07 GMT Organization: National Energy Research Supercomputer Center, Livermore CA In article teleconxiv@aol.com (TeleConXIV) writes: > In article , John McHarry digex.net> writes: > There are a number of companies making videoconferencing bridges. > first are the main codec manufacturers - CLI, PictureTel, VTEL, GPT, > BT, NEC. There are also companies like VideoServer. Most of today's > bridges are ITU/TSS H.320 (or some subset) compatible. Most of the > codec manufacturers have proprietary algorithms in their own multipoint > control units (MCU's). CTX. CTX+, SG-3, etc. Send e-mail if I can > give you more information (dboomstein@aol.com). BT's new MCU is made by VideoServer. CLI's MCU2 (proprietary + standards) is made by VideoServer. PictureTel's and VTEL's standards capable MCUs are internally developed. I hope the information you are offering via e-mail is more accurate ... Ari@ES.net Ari Ollikainen {VOX: 510 423-5962} Energy Sciences Network {FAX: 510 423-8744} National Energy Research Supercomputer Center Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory MailStop L-561, PO BOX 5509, Livermore, CA. 94551 ~~RECOM Technologies Inc.~~ ------------------------------ From: Alan.Leon.Varney@att.com Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 10:29:37 +0600 Subject: Re: Video Conference Bridges Organization: AT&T Network Systems > There are a number of companies making videoconferencing bridges. > first are the main codec manufacturers - CLI, PictureTel, VTEL, GPT, > BT, NEC. There are also companies like VideoServer. Most of today's > bridges are ITU/TSS H.320 (or some subset) compatible. AT&T Network Systems also makes a MultiPoint Control Unit, with H.series (Px64) compliance, interfacing with DS1-robbed-bit or National ISDN-PRI trunks. Bandwidths of 56/64/112/128 and 384 (H0 and multirate) are supported. Initial versions of the MultiPoint Model VS handle 24 ports in up to 12 conferences, and can be cascaded to support 46 endpoints. BONDing & 1.5 Mbps are not yet available. It's a new product, so John might not have it on his list. Al Varney ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 11:42:12 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA >> So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data? > I believe there is just such a bulk interface available, called > something like SMDA (Service Message Desk Accounting?). I think you mean "SMDF" -- Simplified Message Desk Format. Some attendant console systems have the capability to use it in order to route calls automatically. I know the system we have at my other office has it as an option. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: hamer@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Robert M. Hamer) Subject: Re: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error Date: 20 May 94 15:49:45 GMT Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. pheel@panix.com (Mike Pollock) writes: > Sprint recently changed me over from direct billing to "combined > billing" on my NYNEX local telephone bill. Simple, right? Wrong. One solution is simply to not pay the NYNEX bill, call Sprint, and tell them you don't want "combined billing." They didn't kick when I did that. If they did kick, tell them you'll feel free to change to another long distance company. You ought to be able to get rates similar to Sprint's from lots of places. Robert M. Hamer hamer@gandalf.rutgers.edu 908 932 3145 ------------------------------ From: kmp@tiac.net (K. M. Peterson) Subject: Book Review: "Netiquette" by Virginia Shea Date: 23 May 1994 15:16:20 GMT Organization: KMPeterson/Boston In article st014532@oregon.uoregon.edu (Rosemary Angela Mauro) writes: > I am currently engaged in putting on a presentation for a > telecommunications class at the U of Oregon. I need any information > you may have regarding netiquette,nethics and conventional terms used > on th intenet or email. Perhaps someone has an email address where I > could write for information. Would appreciate any response. There's a book out on it now!! A L B I O N B O O K S P R O U D L Y A N N O U N C E S T H E P U B L I C A T I O N O F N E T I Q U E T T E B Y V I R G I N I A S H E A -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "Mandatory reading for new users of the Internet. It should be bundled with every modem..." -- from the foreword by Guy Kawasaki =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Netiquette / by Virginia Shea 160 pages / 6" X 9" / $19.95 Albion Books / info@albion.com ISBN 0-9637025-1-3 SPECIAL FEATURES * The first and only book of network etiquette * Authoritative essays on "Business Netiquette," "The Elements of Electronic Style," "The Art of the Flame," and "Love & Sex in Cyberspace." * Useful for every net user, from "newbie" to guru INTENDED AUDIENCE: The twenty-five million users of online services, corporate electronic mail systems, and the Internet. Of particular interest to new participants in online environments such as Prodigy, CompuServe, America Online, USENET news, and electronic mailing lists. BOOK INFORMATION: Cyberspace is booming. Each month, millions of people are discovering the power of the Internet, online services, and corporate email systems. With this power comes responsibility. People who wouldn't dream of burping at the end of dinner post offensive messages to international forums. Middle managers inadvertently send romantic email messages to the company-wide email alias. People at computer terminals forget that there are real live people on the other end of the wire. Topics are lost in noise, feelings are hurt, reputations are damaged, time and bandwidth are wasted. There's no longer an excuse. This book brings etiquette to the bustling frontiers of cyberspace. In a series of entertaining essays, the author establishes the do's and the don'ts of communicating online, from the Golden Rule to the art of the flame, from the elements of electronic style to virtual sex. Accessible to both network wizard and clueless newbie, this is the first book to offer the guidance that all users need to be perfectly polite online. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Virginia Shea has been a student of human nature all her life. She attended Princeton University and has worked in Silicon Valley since the mid-1980s. ABOUT ALBION BOOKS: Albion Books is a San Francisco-based company dedicated to publishing both high-quality bound books and free electronic texts. TO ORDER: The book is available from Computer Literacy Bookshops Inc. In the eastern U.S., call +1 703-734-7771. In the western U.S., call +1 408-435-0744. Or use the response form below to order directly from the publisher via mail or fax. To find out about ordering via email, query info@clbooks.com. For more information about this and other new books, contact Albion Books at info@albion.com. (Note I'm not affiliated with them, this is off the InterNIC Net-Happenings list...) K. M. Peterson email: KMP@TIAC.NET phone: +1 617 731 6177 voice +1 617 730 5969 fax ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #245 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05040; 24 May 94 3:50 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA27534; Tue, 24 May 94 00:43:08 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA27523; Tue, 24 May 94 00:43:06 CDT Date: Tue, 24 May 94 00:43:06 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson)) Message-Id: <9405240543.AA27523@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #246 TELECOM Digest Tue, 24 May 94 00:43:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 246 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Getting Online" by Wood (Rob Slade) Followup: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Andrew C. Green) Local Call Billing in the UK (Richard Cox) CNID *Can* be Spoofed! (Andrew Robson) Documents for AT&T Model 1539? (Bob Keller) Urgently Request For Help With Research (Ali Tianero) PCBX Systems (Paul Barratt) Speech Recognition "Word Spotting" (p.bflower@uts.edu.au) 900 mhz Cordless Phone; Any Information? (Jason Chou) Re: 800 Number Billback (Charles Chambers) Re: Information Wanted on Large Digital Data Exchange (D. Devereaux-Weber) Re: Cellular Phone Timers (Shawn Gordhamer) Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (sameer@atlas.com) Re: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Marty Brenneis) Re: Wanted: Hand-Held Challenge/Response Units (Paul Robinson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 15:30:37 MDT From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Getting Online" by Wood BKGTONLN.RVW 940315 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 22 Worchester Road Rexdale, Ontario M9W 9Z9 800-263-1590 or 605 Third Avenue New York, NY 10158-0012 USA 800-263-1590 212-850-6630 Fax: 212-850-6799 jdemarra@wiley.com aponnamm@jwiley.com "Get On-Line!", Wood, 1993, 0-471-58926-8, U$24.95 Most computer users do not yet have a modem, or don't use it on a regular basis. Those who do get a modem need a fair amount of help from a knowledgeable friend. It would be helpful to have a book which covers all of the traps of buying a modem, what you need, how to hook it up, how to set up the configuration and software, and how to connect to some outside source. The basics of how to deal with email, file transfers, and how to use material with other programs. This is what Wood tried to do. He only partially succeeds. First, you had better have a PC and either Procomm Plus, Crosstalk XVI, Smartcom EZ or Windows Terminal. The descriptions of functions are written strictly for field independent people: those who don't care what is going on, they just want to know what key to press. As long as nothing goes wrong with the communications session, this is fine. Online devotees will know that the chances of nothing going wrong are extremely slim. Wood's material is quite dated. It is very odd that any book written in the past two years and purporting to advise on modem purchase does not mention 14400 bps modems. Also odd is the recommendation to buy MNP 3 or 4 modems: I haven't personally seen one with less than MNP 5 in more than four years. I also haven't seen an acoustic coupler modem available for quite some time. The content is also quite sparse in places. While I can appreciate the desire to write for the non-technical user, the truth is that computer communications is still a field requiring some background to set up. Wood mentions the possible problems with COM ports and IRQ levels -- but only mentions them. There simply isn't enough information here even to start to diagnose or rectify an interrupt conflict problem. The book even suggests that COM ports on computers are so labelled, an unlikely eventuality. This style follows through to the communications parameter settings. Wood does give good suggestions for default settings, but no means of determining problems. The book does contain a smattering of everything. There is a bit on portable communications, online services of various types, netiquette, and so forth. Since these are not really the main thrust of the book, one does not expect extensive discussion, but it seems a bit terse to dismiss the Internet in less than two pages as an "echo network" and "more chaotic than any of the BBS echo networks." (There are quite a number of errors in the short piece on the Internet. And I should also mention a section on viral programs which lists seven antiviral vendors -- four of whom are McAfee agents.) For novices, this does give a good starting guide, but only that. You will still need your knowledgeable friend. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994 BKGTONLN.RVW 940315. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca Research into rslade@cue.bc.ca User p1@CyberStore.ca Security Canada V7K 2G6 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:36:09 CDT From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Followup: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? You may remember that about a month ago, I asked for help in locating equipment that would connect a credit card authorization reader to a cellular phone, for my father's use at a concert. His organization, Symphony II, the orchestra of the Chicago Lyric Opera, was holding a "silent auction" fund-raiser, and needed a way to get credit card sale authorizations at a location where no POTS line was available. Well, TELECOM Digest readers sent numerous recommendations and offers of assistance, and thanks are due to Macy M. Hallock, Jr., Alan Larson, Donald L. Wegeng, Henrik Rasmussen, Merrell Sheehan and Paul A. Lee for their information, and of course PAT for operating TELECOM Digest in the first place. (I apologize if I've overlooked anyone.) As it turned out, Motorola stepped in to help. Following Paul Lee's suggestion, my father contacted Bill Cochran of Motorola, who forwarded the question on to his associate Sonya Borre' (any misspellings are mine). She showed up bang on time at 9:00 a.m. the Monday before the concert at Symphony II offices for a demonstration of the gadgetry required to connect the cell phone to the reader. All went well, and Motorola graciously loaned the necessary equipment at no charge. The concert was held on Sunday afternoon, May 22nd, at Pick-Staiger Concert Hall at Northwestern University in Evanston, IL, and all the credit-card authorizations during the auction went through with no problems. So, readers of TELECOM Digest have been instrumental in solving the problem for us. We thought you'd like to know. Regards, Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron Chicago, IL 60610-3498 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:02:59 -0700 From: richard@mandarin.com Subject: Local Call Billing in the UK RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM said: >> These were local toll calls from the East End to the West End, which I >> assume are expensive calls. {Chuckle} It is claimed that local phone calls in the UK are more expensive than in most countries ... one UK pound buys about 38 minutes of call (before UK tax). The fact that this call was made from the East End to the West End (about six miles in distance) is completely immaterial -- the charge would have been exactly the *same* as the charge for a call to next door. Calls on the BT network (the dominant provider both as LEC and IXC in the UK) are currently charged in "units" and on most COs, calls of more than nine units can be itemised irrespective of the distance/des- tination of the call. The duration of a unit depends on the distance and type of call, as well as the time the call is made. The price of a unit depends on the calling plan of the individual customer, which is known in BT-speak as a "customer option". There are plans to abolish the unit-charging over the next few years. Before STD ("DDD") was introduced here, local calls were charged as one, two, three or four unit fee calls, depending on distance: but the calls were untimed. >> Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing? Local billing in the UK has been part of the national ("STD") billing scheme ever since STD was introduced in the various areas (from 1958 onwards). The option for itemised billing was more recently introduced, but treats local & long-distance in identical ways. In fact the trend here is for the cost of local calls to increase, and the cost of long-distance to drop ... for just the same reasons that charges for intra-LATA long distance in the USA, are so much higher than for inter-LATA long distance. And the costs involved are mostly for the switching, as bit-haulage is getting cheaper all the time! Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, P.O. Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan, Wales: CF64 3YG Voice: 0956 700111 Fax: 0956 700110 VoiceMail: 0941 151515 Pager 0941 115555 E-mail address: richard@mandarin.com - PGP2.3 public key available on request ------------------------------ From: uswnvg!arobson@uunet.UU.NET (Andrew Robson) Subject: CNID *Can* be Spoofed! Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 18:32:22 PDT It would appear that Calling Number Identification can be spoofed, at least for some applications. My most valuable, though low key, use of CNID was as an aid to keeping track of my teenage children. If they are supposed to be at some partic- ular location (e.g. spending the night at a friend's house), their knowledge of the service assists them in resisting the temptation to lie about their location when checking in. This weekend we inadvertently discovered a weakness in the system. We received a call for one of the children from a friend (call her K) which appeared to come from a different friend's (call her A) home. Since I had a message for A, I asked if she could be put on the line since K was calling from A's house. K denied vehemently being at A's house so the call ended poorly. I later found out what apparently had happened. A had been talking to K and they decided to add my child to the conversation. So A placed a 3-way call to my house, added K, but was then called away from the phone. K was there when I answered, and was indeed at home, not at A's house. So CNID can be spoofed if there is a willing collaborator at the desired apparent origin of the call. Since my kids participated in figuring out what happened, they know how it is done. I now have only a little more assurance of their location than my parents did of mine. :-) Andy [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But it isn't the CNID which is being, as you put it, 'spoofed'. Telco *is* reporting to you where the call you received originated at. The fact that another party to the three-way call was not identified on the display can hardly be termed a weakness. You say that 'K' vehemently denied being at the home of 'A'; while she was telling the truth she was doing so out of context obviously, and as the conversation continued I am surprised that she did not mention the fact that the call was three-wayed through 'A'. In a way, it seems odd that 'A' was called away from the phone just as the three-way connection was established and was unable (or chose not) to return to the line for the duration of the call. Don't forget, you are also free to place a call back to the number shown on the display; either your call back to the number shown will result in a straight forward connection to your daughter or it will result in clicking on the line while the call is being forwarded or your being placed on hold while another three-way call is set up. Most folks can tell by the sounds they hear as a call is being established whether or not it is in fact being forwarded (listen for extra clicks or the slightest delay not usually there, etc) and in the event the call does go through as dialed a simple request 'do not put me on hold while you call my child to the phone' would either result in your child answering forthwith or the other end's inability to produce your child (since you have forbade the use of hold they can't very well flash and get another three-way connection up.) Still not perfect, I realize, but with a callback from your end you've added the need for more complicity on *their* end(s), and the risk that among them, someone's parent is likely to answer the phone, or come on the line, etc. In other words, you can add to the obstacle course and increase the likelyhood one or more of them will be caught in a lie. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 22:06:56 EDT From: Bob Keller Subject: Documents for AT&T Model 1539? Does anyone have the documentation (manual, instructions, etc.) for an AT&T Model 1539? This is a single line telephone with a built-in digital (non-tape) remote answering system. I picked one up (or most of one anyway -- it was missing a few cables, mounting brackets, etc.) "as is" out of a "bargain bin" at a local office supply store. If anyone has whatever booklet explains the ins and outs of this thing, I'll gladly reimburse any reasonable expense incurred in copying and mailing/faxing it to me. Thanks! Bob Keller Robert J. Keller, P.C. Tel +1 301 229 5208 rjk@telcomlaw.com Federal Telecommunications Law Fax +1 301 229 6875 finger me for daily FCC info + see ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/ for other files ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 May 94 09:57:59 JST From: ali@ntep.tmg.nec.co.jp (Ali Tianero) Subject: Urgent Request For Help With Research Hello, Patrick! I already wrote to the telecom listserv and asked for the index. I couldn't find any information on cross connect equipments. I decided to mail you personally in the hope that you can help me with my problem. We are studying XC equipment classes and attributes for an incoming project but we lack the needed data for a thorough study. In my opinion, it would help us with our project if we get to know more about the actual equipment so that the XC classes and attributes we are dealing with would become more concrete. Once again, thanks for any help you can extend. Azaleah S. Tianero | email : ali@ntep.tmg.nec.co.jp NEC Technologies Phils.,Inc. | tel(voice) : +63 (32) 400-451 MEPZ, Lapu-Lapu City | tel(fax) : +63 (32) 400-457 6015 Cebu, PHILIPPINES | telnet(voice) : 8-0063-21-1653 | telnet(fax) : 8-0063-21-1607 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This party wrote essentially the same note originally to the Digest mailbox, and I did nothing with it. He then today wrote me at my personal maibox; I still don't really know how to answer him. If anyone wants to take a crack at it, please do so, writing Mr. Tianero personally. PAT] ------------------------------ From: paulb@iconz.co.nz (Paul Barratt) Subject: PCBX Systems Date: 24 May 1994 01:26:49 GMT Organization: Public Access Internet, Auckland New Zealand I had a look today at a system from PCBX, a small business PBX based on 386 / 486 DOS platform. Does anybody have any user experience with this technology? Looks pretty tidy, only not quite %100 for NZ telephony network. Thanks, paulb@iconz.co.nz ------------------------------ From: pbflower@uts.EDU.AU (-s89432566-p.bflower-ele-500-) Subject: Speech Recognition "Word Spotting" Date: 23 May 1994 23:43:02 GMT Organization: University of Technology, Sydney I'm looking for info on Word Spotting. Any info on developing a HMM to do this would be much appreciated. Please mail information or names of books, papers etc. that will do this. ------------------------------ From: jay@kaiwan.com (Jason Chou) Subject: 900 mhz Cordless Phone; Any Information? Date: 20 May 1994 11:00:03 -0700 Organization: KAIWAN Internet, CA Is there any information about 900 mhz cordless phones? Has anyone heard of Micro 900 MHz by Bel-Tronics Limited? Any good? Thanks! Jason Chou | internet:jay@kaiwan.com | compuserve:70254,3706 ------------------------------ From: chambers@uh.edu (Charles Chambers) Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 15:59:08 -0500 Organization: University of Houston Based on the way these LD companies are handling charge back billing based on your ANI, what would the problem with having your ANI blocks from all LD companies (thus they can not bill back to it). I know that this currently can not be done, but rather, if it could be done, what would be the problems? Charles Chambers University of Houston Telecommunications Department Manager of Network Services [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The problem would be two-fold. First off, the rules currently say that local telcos may not withhold name and address information from long distance carriers -- even if the number is otherwise non-published -- for billing purposes. Local telcos are not in a position to evaluate the content of the connection given or the cost for same (except for stuff like billing errors, etc). So if the rule was changed where you the subscriber were allowed to refuse any and all information to the long distance carriers, then you would wind up with no long distance service at all; after all, what carrier would want to handle your calls on the assumption that you might or might not decide reveal yourself and pay for it? You can get basically the same results now if you really want them: by not choosing any long distance carrier (or choosing 'none' if applicable) your phone will be effectively restricted from dialing long distance calls. Dialing 1 + 10 digits here (except for 700,800,900 calls) with no carrier default on your line causes the call to go to an intercept (cannot be completed as dialed). That still allows subscribers to deliberatly force a call out using 10xxx + 1 + 10 digits, but it takes a conscious decision on the subscriber's part; he is hardly in a position later to demand that the carrier not bill him or collect on the charges. Another more call-proof option available to subscribers -- at least here in Illinois Bell terr- itory -- is to have the Business Office completely toll-restrict your line. It can be set up in the central office with no overrides possible at all. With complete toll-restriction, even dialing through the operator won't work since she won't be able to complete the call for you either. Double zero (for the long distance operator) will go to an intercept. You *will* be able to place collect, credit card or third-party billing calls however ... just no direct dial or operator assisted paid calls. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 94 14:02:27 CST From: David Devereaux-Weber Reply-To: David Devereaux-Weber Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Large Digital Data Exchange We have a set of rack mounted modems from: Multitech Systems 2205 Wooddale Dr. Mounds View, MN 55112 (800) 328-9717 (612) 785-3500 We have about 400 on-line now, with plans to expand to 1000. David Devereaux-Weber, P.E. weberdd@macc.wisc.edu (Internet) The University of Wisconsin - Madison (608)262-3584 (voice) Division of Information Technology (608)262-4679 (FAX) Network Engineering ------------------------------ From: shawnlg@netcom.com (Shawn Gordhamer) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Timers Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 23:47:16 GMT Tony Harminc writes: >the phone has to be told by the network when charging starts and ends > -- a supervision signal, if you will. One big problem is that just knowing when charging starts and ends won't be enough. There would also need to be a "charge cancel" signal. When you dial someone, the charge starts immediately, while the other phone is ringing (yes, you are charged ring time, at least at Cellular One). But, if you hang up before they answer, the charge is canceled. Therefore, there needs to be three signals to your phone: - charge start pending - chargable call - charge end I'd be happy if there was a way to subtract the last call from the total time timer on my phone. I know if a charge is real or not, so at the end of the call, I can hit the "undo charge" function, and get an accurate total timer. Shawn Gordhamer shawnlg@netcom.com Rochester, Minnesota USA ------------------------------ From: sameer@atlas.com Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc. Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 22:21:51 GMT In article dasher@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood) writes: > I just tried it in 415. Hooray! It works for the 503 Area Code as well in Portland, OR. Sameer ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 23:13:31 PDT From: Marty Brenneis Subject: Re: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Bay Area) On Tue, 17 May 1994 Henry Mensch wrote: > Moral of the story: to use GTE's new gimmicky directory assistance dial 411 > or 555 1212 ... to get the real stuff dial *6543. Your mileage may vary, > especially outside the Bay Area. And TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Henry, a question and a comment: exactly > what does this *6543 hook get you into? You said 'new, gimmicky directory > assistance' which leads me to wonder, did not GTE offer directory assist- > ance like any other telco until recently, i.e. 'new'?. Is the cellular > division of the company offering a new service and intercepting calls to > 411 or 555-1212 which formerly had gone to a full directory bureau and > providing some limited sub-set of the directory? We are not talking GTE landline service here, we are talking GTE Mobilenet cellular service. They have decided to do their own DA service with people who don't have a clue how to look up a number. Once they look up the number for you they just connect you to it. Of course they nick you a little more for this "service". You pay the airtime while the person takes five times longer to find the wrong number than a professional DA. The only good side is that they handle DA for all of the GTE calling area, this way you can just dial 411 and not worry about what the NPA is for your target party. Pac*Bell is the local DA service from the landline side and they do an excellent job. Perhaps the next time Pac*Bell lays off some DAs, GTE should hire them. Yo! You operating companies out there! I know that the DA centers have been merging for many years. When I dial 411 in the 415 area the DA I speak with really is taking calls for 415,510,707,408 and perhaps many more. The ones in Sub California handle a bunch of NPAs. Why can't they give the number that is outside the NPA that I dialed? It would reduce traffic load. Marty 'The Droid' Brenneis ...!uupsi!kerner!droid Industrial Magician droid@kerner.com (415)258-2105 ~~~ KAE7616 - 462.700 - 162.2 ~~~ KC6YYP ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 15:18:35 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: WANTED: Hand-Held Challenge/Response Units Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA > I'm looking for suppliers of hand-held challenge/response > cipher key systems ... > I envisage they'll work as follows: > 1. User connects via public network to our system; > 2. Our system lets them log in as normal, but they then > are "challenged" with a long code. > 3. The user must enter the code into the hand-held unit, > which provides the "response" using RSA or similar. > 4. The user then enters the "response", which is validated > against the expected value. This may involve the use > of a public/private key system also, for encryption > of transmitted material. > I'm very hopeful that units such as I've just described exist -- if no > perhaps someone wants to make them? (e.g. based on HP-100LX). You need nothing near this complicated or expensive. A simple, and free system for doing the exact thing you have described, called "skey" is already available. The user can either preprint the one-time usage passwords or run a short program on his own PC to compute them. Any time prior to running out of passwords he can generate some more. The following is from the documentation for the program: Description of The S/KEY One-Time Password System Neil M. Haller nmh@thumper.bellcore.com Philip R. Karn karn@chicago.qualcomm.com ABSTRACT The S/KEY one-time password system provides authentication over networks that are subject to eavesdropping/reply attacks. This system has several advantages compared with other one-time or multi-use authentication systems. The user's secret password never crosses the network during login, or when executing other commands requiring authentication such as the UNIX passwd or su commands. No secret information is stored anywhere, including the host being protected, and the underlying algorithm may be (and it fact, is) public knowledge. The remote end of this system can run on any locally available computer. The host end could be integrated into any application requiring authentication. -------------------------- Had people been using this for network logins, that "password grabber" program that was circulating a few months back would have been useless and all people would have gotten was a lot of used and worthless passcodes that no longer work. A person who has it on their system told me that: Generating the keys is a painless process of running a command or two and typing in a password; the program(s) then generate a certain number of keys which can be printed out and carried in a person's wallet. No extra hardware is required. The files for this system can be obtained via anonymous ftp to thumper.bellcore.com: /pub/skey Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #246 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05700; 24 May 94 5:59 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA28684; Tue, 24 May 94 02:42:03 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA28675; Tue, 24 May 94 02:42:01 CDT Date: Tue, 24 May 94 02:42:01 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson)) Message-Id: <9405240742.AA28675@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #247 TELECOM Digest Tue, 24 May 94 02:42:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 247 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Problems With Call Return (Ed Ellers) Re: Problems With Call Return (Bob Schwartz) Re: Call Return is *Good* (Chris Cariffe) Re: Misdialed Numbers (Don Bontemps Jr.) Re: International Callback Services (Steve Cogorno) Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software (Ronald L. Wright) Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (David A. Cantor) Re: Cellular -> Analog Converter (Russell E. Sorber) Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Richard Cox) Re: What is the Mercury Button? (David Woolley) Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (John R. Levine) LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service (Mark E. Daniel) Re: DTMF Decoding Help Needed (Daniel Finkler) Re: ANI by Calling 1 800 XXX XXXX (Glen Roberts) No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Toronto Star via Dave Leibold) Do You Believe in Lauren? (Lauren Weinstein) New Long Distance Carrier is Advertising (Carl Moore) Re: 800 Number Billback (Steven Bradley) Re: Cellular Privacy? (Steven Bradley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return Date: Mon, 23 May 94 15:03:07 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) writes: > I thought that one purpose of "call return" was to be able to call > back an "anonymous caller" without knowing his(her) number. This was > not clearly stated in the brochure about "caller id" services from > Uswest, so I telephoned them, the lady who answered hesitated about my > question, transferred me to another person who confirmed that > "anonymous calls" can indeed be returned. The problem was that in my > area, Seattle, "last call return" has not been authorized, even though > most other related services have been. BellSouth is adding voice response systems to its COs and enhancing Call Return so that, when you enter the code, you get a voice message with the calling number (unless it's blocked or not available through SS7) and can then press a key to place the call IF you still want to. If it's a known number you can decide whether to call it or not; if unknown you can call it or just write it down for later use. Unlike Caller ID, this works on all phones on your line; you don't have to walk to a particular spot where you have added a box. (You also don't have to BUY the box ...) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return From: bob@bci.nbn.com (Bob Schwartz) Date: Mon, 23 May 94 17:22:06 PDT Organization: Bill Correctors, Inc., Marin County, California > My situation dictates that I make numerous calls to people who have > answered an ad that I run: people I do not know: When I reach > someone's answering machine I often choose to leave no message. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that she used it in an extreme way > does not make Call Return a bad idea. And there is something to be said about > the writer's discourtesy in reaching an answering machine and simply hanging > up without speaking, if even only to say that he did not wish to leave a > message and would call again later. Ordinarily, Call Return is a good idea Pat, there is something of an old code amongst those that solicit via phone. It goes something like this: Don't leave a message on a cold call. Perhaps the greater courtesy is for those that seek contributions, answers to surveys, new relationships ... is for them to hang up on a machine. Such messages ane nearly as annoying as the calls themselves. Bob Schwartz bob@bci.nbn.com Bill Correctors, Inc. +1 415 488 9000 Marin County, California ------------------------------ From: chrys@netcom.com (Chris Cariffe) Subject: Re: Call Return is *Good* Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 00:47:21 GMT Yeah, it's a great service. I caught an ex-girlfriend with it, giving me prank phone calls. ------------------------------ From: dpbj@crash.cts.com (Don Bontemps Jr.) Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET/crash), San Diego, CA Date: 23 May 94 18:55:17 PDT My dad and brother live in Costa Mesa and their home phone number is one digit off from a local department store. They get so many mis-dialed numbers that they now answer the phone using the store's name. Sometimes when I'm there visiting, they put the person on hold, and say they will transfer them to the correct department. They answer the caller's questions and thank them for calling the store, then politely hang up. ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: International Callback Services Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 20:24:11 PDT Said by: Peter Leif Rasmussen > I would like to comment on the callback FAQ posted here by Bruce Hahne. > I read a version of that before and investigated various services and > found that Globalcom 2000 looked very interesting. That is about a > month ago. The representative I talked with, Scot Bundren was very > quick to answer my questions about the services, until I had provided > him with my credit card number! > Then all questions have gone unanswered, for a period of now two weeks. > The answers to questions before used to come within 24 hours. I also > now notice that his email address has changed from before scb@netcom.com > to now scottb@cats.ucsc.edu. > What I want to say is that I fear this might be a scam. You might be right. Scott is a student at Crown College, University of California, Santa Cruz. I seriously doubt that he is an agent for a call-back service. His phone number is availible by finger, but that is not a phone number in the Santa Cruz area. Let me know if you have problems; I can find out his campus mail address if you need it. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ From: ronwrigh@connected.com (Ronald L. Wright) Subject: Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software Date: 24 May 1994 00:21:04 GMT Organization: Connected INC -- Internet Services PRZEBIENDA@DELPHI.COM (przebien@news.delphi.com) wrote: > We had a home grown telecommunication package that allowed us to send > alphanumeric messages to our PAC-TEL pagers. We are interested in > updating the software. We are interested in reasonably priced > commercial software or in the protocol specs of the 800 number we > communicate with the old package. McCall Cellular has a product written for Windows called "Message Flash." It was written with Visual Basic, so it might seem a little slow on older systems, but seems to work pretty well. It also allows the sender to distribute group messages as well. I am not sure of the cost of the commercial product, but they have a smaller version available for the free use of your friends and aquaintances. Ron Wright ------------------------------ From: cantor@mv.mv.com (David A. Cantor) Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? Organization: MV Communications, Inc. Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:17:15 GMT In article , Joseph Herl wrote: > Our family is moving to a new house next week, and we will have the > same telephone number at both places for several days. How can I call > between them? > Our phone company (Ameritech) representative doesn't think this is > possible, but I remember that it used to be possible years ago to > "call another party on the line," and this is similar. We used to > dial a code number, hang the phone up and wait for it to ring, then > pick up the phone and talk when it stopped ringing. Does anyone know > whether this is still possible? And TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a great service that Illinois Bell > provides, allowing a number to ring at multiple locations for simply the > cost of two local services. Several years ago when I moved from one place > to another I used that arrangement to keep my phone service intact during > the move. After about a week, I had the old location discontinued. At > least in the Chicago 312/708 area, ringbacks are accomplished thus: [The Moderator went on to describe the actual method by which the ringing of the calling number was accomplished. DAC. ] The service that the Moderator mentions used to be available in Massachusetts (and it probably still is); I used it exactly as described above several times over several moves within Massachusetts. However, when I lived in San Diego, California, and moved within the city, keeping the same telephone number, I found that I could not have this service because in California it was not (and probably still is not) tariffed. The people at the phone company told me it was impossible, and when I told them I didn't believe them because I used to be able to have this done in Massachusetts, they said that it was technically possible but _legally_ impossible because the tariff didn't permit it. Whether you can establish service in two different locations with the same phone number depends not upon technical considerations, but upon whether it is allowed by operating rules (tariffs, and perhaps local office SOP). If you can get the service, you should be able to get the revertive dialing number, too. David A. Cantor +1 203-444-7268 (203-444-RANT) 453 Bayonet St., #16 Internet: cantor@mv.mv.com New London, CT 06320 Foxwoods blackjack and craps dealer ------------------------------ From: sorbrrse@wildcat.cig.mot.com (Russell E. Sorber) Subject: Re: Cellular -> Analog Converter Date: 23 May 1994 13:55:59 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group In article burner@iia.org writes: > Does anyone know of an adapter/converter that connects to a cellular > phone (most likely in place of the handset) and provides an analog > RJ-11 jack? Motorola sells several of these boxes depending on the type of subscriber cellular unit you have. One of the boxes simulates a dialtone for use with a regular landline. For a microtac, I think you want part number S3027. For more info contact the Motorola Cellular information center: 1-800-331-6456. Russ Sorber Software Contractor Motorola, Cellular Division Arlington Hts., IL (708) 632-4047 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:56:13 -0700 From: richard@mandarin.com Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button Clive D.W. Feather said: >> even if the phone has a display, the contents of the blue Mercury >> button are not displayed during dialling or by any "display memory" And the audio to the earpiece or loudspeaker should either be muted, or replaced with confidence tones, when the contents of that memory are being sent to line -- so that they cannot be tape-recorded by users. Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, P.O. Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan, Wales: CF64 3YG Voice: 0956 700111 Fax: 0956 700110 VoiceMail: 0941 151515 Pager 0941 115555 E-mail address: richard@mandarin.com - PGP2.3 public key available on request ------------------------------ From: david@djwhome.demon.co.uk (David Woolley) Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button? Date: Mon, 23 May 94 10:07:19 GMT In article was written: [ Various descriptions of the Mercury button as a deep memory button, with LD to MF switching and pause capabilities deleted] [ Reference to new 132 access code deleted ] As I understand it, a true Mercury button is supposed to only be useable as the first button dialed, to make it more difficult to capture the account code. But mainly it is a marketing gimmick. David Woolley, London, England david@djwhome.demon.co.uk Demon is an IP/SMTP/NNTP Provider. *.demon hosts are independently managed. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 94 17:44 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. [In NPA 500 and 800, why not assign numbers of the form 1XX-XXXX and 0XX-XXXX] Numbers in the 1XX and 0XX ranges have been used for a long time for various sorts of dedicated and non-dialable circuits in regular area codes, so I suppose they may be useful for those purposes in 500. More practically, a lot of phone exchanges are programmed to trap NXX-1XX and NXX-0XX and route them directly to an intercept. Making sure that they are all programmed to special case 500 and 800 seems like a losing battle. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:29:22 GMT From: mark@legend.akron.oh.us (Mark E Daniel) Subject: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service The person writing about this prompted me to try an experament. I believe it might be a nice idea if the LD carriers offering this service automaticly detected the busy signal and offered me the option of leaving a message or hanging up or dialing another number. Sprint offers a similar service to AT&T's costing the same as far as I can tell. At least delivery in the US is at the same price. I was unable to use AT&T's service. I received a message stating that all representatives were busy and that I should try my call again later. Apparently, AT&T's service is handled by humans. *Hopefully* they don't require me to *REENTER* the number to which I wish to have my message delivered after disconnecting from a BUSY number and entering the message system. Again, I suppose that they have to make it universal, since you can dial into at least Sprint's messaging system by dialing +1 800 877 8000 and entering the #22 or #25 at the prompt tone and then entering your FONCARD number, making it possible to have messages automatically delivered to people when you won't be around a phone to call them personally. But the software ought to be written to automatically detect BUSY signals in the appropriate situations, and it could also give users the option of delivering the message to the last number they dialed. After all it is time consuming to have to reenter a sting of digits that you just got done entering not ten seconds ago. :) I believe that I have seen *one* service that automatically detected BUSY and that was Telesphere I believe, equal access code might have been 10555 or somesuch. But that service has disappeared. Mark E Daniel (Loving SysOp of The Legend BBS) Inet: mark@legend.akron.oh.us medaniel@delphi.com (Direct INet) ------------------------------ From: dfinkler@world.std.com (DANIEL FINKLER) Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding Help Needed Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 23:59:35 GMT west_c212@orion.crc.monroecc.edu writes: > I am writing a program that needs to decode telephone touch tone > signals. The problem is that I am having trouble finding a DTMF > decoder. If anyone know where I can get ahold of one I would > appreciate it. You can use USRobotics courier modems' touch tone recognition feature. They can recognize DTMF tones, including A,B,C,D. ------------------------------ From: glr@rci.ripco.com (Glen Roberts) Subject: Re: ANI by Calling 1 800 XXX XXXX Organization: Ripco Internet BBS Chicago Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 21:03:32 GMT 1-800-235-1414 was setup by Private Lines, Inc (of Beverly Hills), the operator of 1-900-STOPPER (no record, no trace calling service) and Full Disclosure. It was a tremendous success. That is, except for paying the bill ... it was generating some 600-1000 calls a day. I have a Caller-ID version setup now on (708) 356-9646 (Only a few percent of non-Chicagoland calls get a number ... maybe that will change between now and next April). Incidentially, there was an AT&T 1-800 ANI number, but they shut it down due to an `over indulgence of hackers.' Glen L. Roberts, author, How To Spy On Anyone Without Getting Caught Host Full Disclosure Live (WWCR 5,810 khz - Sundays 7pm central) Box 734, Antioch, Illinois 60002 Fax: (708) 838-0316 Surveillance Hotline: (708) 356-9646 Bust the Bureaucrats: (708) 356-6726 ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 23 May 94 14:25:20 -0500 Subject: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway {The Toronto Star} reports of a 14-month-old boy in Barrie, Ontario who drowned while his mother attempted to dial 911. Unlike many centres in Canada, Barrie does not have a 911 service, thus calls to 911 are usually completed to a not-in-service recording. The family recently moved to Barrie and didn't realise that local emergency numbers needed to be dialed direct. Barrie Mayor Janice Laking did not feel an inquest into why there was no 911 service in Barrie, but rather advised residents to keep lists of emergency numbers or to program them into phones. Some complications also exist with respect to surrounding communities, considering that any 911 implementation would need to consider that exchange boundaries and political boundaries do not necessarily coincide, not to mention the need for accurate location maps from all communities involved. Bell Canada intends to provide 911 throughout its entire service territory over the next several years. Barrie is slated to get 911 in 1996. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suspect that a lot of Digest readers are like myself and are sharing the grief the parents must be feeling at this time. My first reaction on reading your article was one of horror; I know how *I* would feel if anything -- anything at all -- happened to my little four year old nephew. But still, why in the $%*@! didn't the parents -- immediatly on moving into their new community -- investigate such things as local emergency services and procedures. When we first moved here to Skokie, one of the first things I did was check out a phone directory for numbers and pay a visit to the Village Hall to ask about emergency procedures. No one ever seems to think that a tragedy will happen in their family; it is always someone else, and that is simply not true as we sadly come to realize. Throughout all of northern Illinois, we have the same hodge-podge where police, fire and emergency medical assistance is concerned that exist there in the Barrie area. Due to overlapping telephone exchange boundaries and community political boundaries some communities have 911 for their village alone while others share 911 with a neighboring village. For example, Skokie shares dispatch services with Lincolnwood, while Evanston to our east does their own thing. Where community bound- aries and telephone exchange boundaries are not in synch, it becomes necessary either for telco to create a database which successfully sorts out calls or for the involved communities to reach an agreement with each other. The trouble is, no one seems willing to let some other town handle their emergency calls. They seem to be afraid that if something goes wrong, they'll be the ones to catch hell, and if something goes right then someone else will be the ones to get the praise. As a result, lots of communities here have 911 while the towns on either side of them may require seven digit dialing to reach the police. Since community boundaries are not always obvious in large metro areas, one might think they were in Skokie while actually being in Wilmette. For example, where I live is in Skokie, but merely three blocks south of Wilmette and about the same distance west of the northwestern edge of Evanston. All three of us have 911 service, but via different dispatchers and agencies. A peculiar situation exists in an area south of us where a small area of land is completely surrounded by the City of Chicago (on three sides, and a couple other villages on the fourth side) but yet is not part of any of them; it is an 'unincorporated' area of Cook County. It looks like Chicago; it looks like Norridge/Harwood Heights, the towns on one side of it. There are houses, stores, etc and driving through it one cannot tell that one left Chicago or came back into Chicago a couple blocks later driving down the same street, but Norwood Township is not part of Chicago, nor is it part of anything else; it is just there. Phone service there comes from the Chicago-Newcastle exchange, but it has to be on its own prefix that no one else gets except the people in that little tiny slice of land. Why? Well you see, 911 has to be blocked out of it. If those people dial 911 it goes to intercept. They have to dial the seven digit number for the Cook County Sheriff, and he does not have 911 yet. Across the street (or sometimes the house next door or across the alley!) *is* politically in Chicago, and they dial 911 successfully. Make sure *you and your kids* know the proper number for emergencies in your town; how to report emergencies and *exactly* what address is required, etc. Your kid's life depends on it. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Do You Believe in Lauren? Date: Mon, 23 May 94 20:47:54 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein Responding to messages about my participation in the net during the very early days in the middle to late 1970's: The net was indeed a different place back then. When you telnet'd to SAIL (SU-AI) at Stanford, if you didn't have an account, it would ask you if you wanted to create one -- on the spot. Little by little of course, all over the net, things tightened up -- as they had to, given the influx of users. A different era entirely. When I tell people I was at UCLA when we were site 1 (one) on ARPANET, they look at me like I had been using punched cards (well, actually, I *had* been using punched cards too -- but that's a (//SYSIN DD *) different story). The incident regarding speculation about whether I was human or machine occurred on HUMAN-NETS, one of the pioneering widely-read digests back in the 70's. My response to the public messages on the topic went something like this: "I read with interest the various senders' messages speculating on my mode of existence. You humans really amuse me sometimes." --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 May 94 13:56:36 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: New Long Distance Company is Advertising Recently, I have heard occasional ads for Commonwealth Long Distance. The number to call for information is given as 1-800-7000-CLD (which translates to 1-800-700-0253) or "one 800 seven thousand CLD". ------------------------------ From: steven@sgb.oau.org (Steven Bradley) Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback Organization: The Forest City Exchange, Forest City, Florida Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 01:09:03 GMT Well, here is my two cents worth ... if you really want to aggravate these legal con-artists, do this: Call the service as much as you want and as often as you can from PAY PHONES and see how easily they (don't) get their money then! Someone DOES have to pay the carriage of the call to the 800 line and that same person will not be able to recover the charges to their service, resulting in them taking a loss by using the 800 number approach. Since pay phones permit 800 number calls without charge and the phone companies see fit to permit them to go through since they are free, there is no reason to prevent it passing. Internet: steven@sgb.oau.org Steven G. Bradley steven@gate.net GEnie: s.bradley6@genie.geis.com CompuServe: 73232.505@compuserve.com America Online: sgbradley@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What actually happens is that the Information Provider has a database of pay telephone numbers and yes, you will waste ten cents of his money dialing him and getting him to answer but you certainly will not get him to part with any of his valuable 'information'. In the event the payphone you use for this is somehow not listed in his database (for example it might be a COCOT using regular line service instead of being listed with the telco as a coin line; all of those are in the database) then a call might slip through a couple times. I think we (the Digest readers) all tried this with the Astrologers down in Florida a couple years ago when mention was first made of 800-chargeback calls in the Digest. They got hit for a few grand in uncollectibles from pay phones but bingo! ... a month or two later their database was brought up to date and that was the end of it. Actually, I am not sure the Astrology people lost anything at all; I think through the intercompany billing process the bills went to the local telcos as the 'subscriber' of the phones used. No matter ... don't bother now, it won't work. PAT] ------------------------------ From: steven@sgb.oau.org (Steven Bradley) Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy? Organization: The Forest City Exchange, Forest City, Florida Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 00:21:41 GMT > Scott Townley (nx7u@delphi.com) wrote: > political background. As of April 26, 1994 (if I got that date > right), it became illegal to manufacture in the US, or to import, a > radio *capable* of receiving the cellular phone frequencies. This > includes radios that can be easily modified (e.g. certain scanners > that simply needed a diode clipped). However there is no enforcement of the importation ban, since U.S. customs are not an authority to pass judgement of the technical capabilities of a receiver, that is the FCC's job. But with the use of FCC form 740, the FCC does not even need to see or certify a receiver, hence there is no problem with importing these units. That includes receivers which directly receive cellular -and- units which can be modified easily. It is also legal to import receivers for the purpose of exporting them. Companies -can- import them and sell them to others in the U.S. and stamp the invoice or have printed on the invoice the sale is for export purposes. If the purchaser fails to export it, the purchase may be breaking the law, but the company that sold it with the understanding the sale was for export would -not- be breaking the law. If that person who was intending to "export" it fails to, no-one's going to notice! It is also legal to import or resell domestically the CPU/MPUs and other components to rebuild and restore the sections since the FCC does not regulate raw components. If the design is considered not modifiable or restorable where the CPU/MPU blocks it and that same company can sell the parts to restore it as a separate item/package since the parts do not need FCC approval. Since the international versions do not have this limitation, the parts should be readily available. Since we are talking MPU/CPU (since we are talking of two blocks in the 800 mhz band), no re-tuning is needed. In theory, if they made the EPROM replacable for purpose of field upgrades, and sold the cellular full access EPROM as an after-market item, it would certainly get around the dumb restriction. It does not stop you from getting the scanners, nor does it stop the modifications, merely makes it more difficult, but does not stop it. Steven Internet: steven@sgb.oau.org | Steven G. Bradley steven@gate.net |---------------------------- GEnie: s.bradley6@genie.geis.com | Don't you think it's about CompuServe: 73232.505@compuserve.com | time we FIRED the Federal America Online: sgbradley@aol.com | Communications Commission? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah yes, 'for export only' ... what a laugh. Years ago when CB radios were the latest rage, all the guys would go to this one popular radio repair shop where they could buy linear amplifiers which had been tuned for ten/eleven meters; an area of the radio frequency spectrum where excessive power is expressly forbidden. The guy running the shop always made the purchaser sign a 'declaration' which said the 'foot warmers' or 'pair of shoes' (as they were called by their street name) were being purchased only for resale and exportation outside the United States. An examination by federal agents of the shop records at one point showed all these 'declarations' signed in illegible scrawls which under close examination appeared to be the name John Smith or similar. No one ever could locate John Smith (or any of them, for that matter!) but you sure could hear them out there every night, splattering their signal all over the entire eleven meter territory. The feds finally put the shop owner in the can, under the legal theory that he knew or should have known what the purchasers were actually doing; he was indicted as a co-conspirator with other co-conspirators as yet uniden- tified to the government. After a day or two of virtual radio silence here as everyone hid their linears in a secret place and stayed off the air, things soon went back to 'normal'. You're right ... a lot of worth- less, unenforceable laws. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #247 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19197; 25 May 94 17:43 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA06647; Wed, 25 May 94 13:30:16 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA06635; Wed, 25 May 94 13:30:13 CDT Date: Wed, 25 May 94 13:30:13 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson)) Message-Id: <9405251830.AA06635@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #248 TELECOM Digest Wed, 25 May 94 13:30:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 248 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Equal Access is Not Available Here (Jeff Shaver) FedEx Tracking Software "Covers Up" Mistakes? (Alan Boritz) Software For Fraud Detection? (Sandra Oudshoff) Listing of Telecom EZines (Bob Allison) Book Review: "From Somaphore to Satellite" by ITU (Bob Allison) RBOCS and Video Remote Learning in Schools? (Gerry Moersdorf) Info Highway to Bypass Poor and Minorities (Anthony Wright) OSI Computer Based Training Package Available (Tom Worthington) ANI and Class of Service (was Re: 800 Number Billback) (Danny Burstein) Worldwide Areacode/Telex/Internet List Available by FTP (Paul Robinson) Miss Manners Replies to Call Return (Clarinet/AP via Steve Cogorno) Leaving a Message (Carl Moore) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff.Shaver@f615.n14.z1.fidonet.org (Jeff Shaver) Date: 25 May 94 09:51:28 -0500 Subject: Equal Access is Not Available Here Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway My local telephone company is an independent cooperative. I have very few complaints regarding their service as a whole, except that they won't offer equal access. I can't even use the 10XXX codes, or 1-700-555-4141! The only way to access a carrier other than AT&T is to use calling cards, and that *really* adds up. I've really bugged them about this in the last several years, but they tell me the long distance carriers are "all the same, they all just lease AT&T's lines." I've called and written letters to the major carriers encouraging them to make the first move, but to no avail. I know for a fact that my telco's equipment _has_ the capability to do this, and US West customers only a few minutes away can access the other carriers. *Who* has to initiate the process -- my telco or the other carriers? Who can I write to or call to complain? I realize there are costs involved, but I'm not willing to wait until December 31, 1999 (a generic date, as quoted by an MCI representative). Will the Public Service Commission do anything about it? Anything you can tell me would be very helpful! Jeff Shaver jeff.shaver@f615.n14.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ Subject: FedEx Tracking Software "Covers Up" Mistakes? From: drharry!aboritz@uunet.UU.NET (Alan Boritz) Date: Wed, 25 May 94 09:39:14 EDT Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - +1 201 934 0861 You've probably seen the commercial where the screaming obnoxious boss is one-upp'ed by his clever secretary who uses the Federal Express package tracking software to verify delivery of priority next-day deliveries. Well, it seems that if Federal Express screws up your package delivery, the tracking software will be the LAST place you'll find out about it. I checked on a pretty important package destined for Oklahoma City, OK, today. As of 8:30 a.m. (EST) they only had it leaving Newark as of last night. When there was no update as of 11:30 a.m (the "guaranteed" delivery time), I called a customer service rep and found out that the package was actually in Denver, CO. The tracking software support people couldn't understand why none of the activity since the previous night (showing the actual location of the package) wasn't available. Federal Express's high-tech tracking software surely hasn't improved customer's efficient or cost-effective use of their services. If they mishandle your package, they'll keep the information from you and won't make good on their guarantees. Data censorship to only give good news and nothing bad (at least in print)? You bet. aboritz%drharry@uunet.uu.net or uunet!drharry!aboritz Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - +1-201-934-0861 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 11:23:02 GMT From: A.M.Oudshoff@research.ptt.nl (Sandra Oudshoff) Subject: Software For Fraud Detection? Organization: PTT Research, Groningen, The Netherlands Hi, I'm looking for information about software available (freeware or commercial) that performs fraud detection functionalities, particularly in the area of telecommunications. If you have any information that you think might be helpful, please share this information with me. Thanks a lot in advance, Sandra Oudshoff replies preferably by e-mail to: a.m.oudshoff@research.ptt.nl ------------------------------ From: boba@gagme.wwa.com (Bob Allison) Subject: Listing of Telecom EZines Date: 25 May 1994 09:17:38 -0500 Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605 Here is a list of EZines that are related to telecom, either specifically or generally. They cover things like telecom privacy, government telecom policy, etc. ______ __ ___________ _ /_ __/__ / /__ _________ ____ ___ / ____/__ / (_)___ ___ _____ / / / _ \/ / _ \/ ___/ __ \/ __ `__ \ / __/ / / / / __ \/ _ \/ ___/ / / / __/ / __/ /__/ /_/ / / / / / / / /___ / /__/ / / / / __(__ ) /_/ \___/_/\___/\___/\____/_/ /_/ /_/ /_____/ /____/_/_/ /_/\___/____/ A N D R E L A T E D E L E C T R O N I C N E W S L E T T E R S Here are some interesting electronic magazines and newsletters that are currently available. They cover telecom from the specific to the general, on such topics as telecom privacy and government policy to electronic communities and networks. Generally if an ezine is available on a news group, the publisher prefers it to be obtained that way, especially if you are just looking for a sample to read. EFFECTOR | The Electronic Frontier Foundation's membership newsletter. | It covers telecom policy updates. | E-mail: send request to brown@eff.org | FTP: ftp.eff.org | Usenet: comp.org.eff | Gopher: gopher.eff.org | EDUPAGE | Covers information technology and media. Three times a week. | Short summaries of media articles. | E-Mail: listproc@educom.edu | SUB EDUPAGE YOUR NAME | COMPUTER | Covers happenings in cyberspace, such as government policy. UNDERGROUND | E-Mail: listserv@uiucvmd.bitnet DIGEST | listserv@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu | SUB CUDIGEST YOUR NAME | Usenet: comp.society.cu-digest | FTP: etext.archive.umich.edu:/pub/CuD/ | HOTT | Gathers the latest info on computer, communications, and | electronics technologies from trade magazines, newspapers and | net resources. | E-mail: listserv@ucsd.edu | SUBSCRIBE HOTT-LIST | PRIVACY FORUM | Bit and pieces on threats to privacy. | E-mail: privacy-request@vortex.com | FTP: ftp.vortex.com | Gopher: gopher.vortex.com | NETWORKS | Focuses on the 'community' more tha technology. & COMMUNITY | E-mail: rre-request@weber.ucsd.edu | SUBSCRIBE YOUR NAME) | Gopher: gopher.well.sf.ca.us | gopher.nlc-bnc.ca | COM NET NEWS | Recently introduced newsletter on community networking on the | infobahn. | E-mail: contact rbryant@hydra.unm.edu boba@gagme.wwa.com Please vote for rec.arts.ascii - CFV is available on news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, alt.ascii-art, rec.humor, comp.graphics, alt.bbs, and others. ------------------------------ From: boba@gagme.wwa.com (Bob Allison) Subject: Book Review: "From Somaphore to Satellite" by ITU Date: 25 May 1994 09:08:43 -0500 Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605 For those of you interested in the history of Trans-Atlantic cobles, or the history of telecom, there's a book you might want to search for. My copy is rather old, so if there was no update to it; you may have to look for an old edition. The book is called 'From Somaphore to Satellite'. It was published by the ITU (International Telecommunications Union) in 1963. It covers everything up to that year. It's a big format, 344 page volume. The parts covering the history of the Trans-Atlantic cable were very interesting, at least to me. The book has some interesting old pictures too. ---------------- Please vote for rec.arts.ascii - CFV is available on news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, alt.ascii-art, rec.humor, comp.graphics, alt.bbs, and others. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps you or someone else with a copy of the book would like to quote some of the more interesting excerpts here in the Digest. Please send them in. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gerry@aisun.aiinet.com (Gerry Moersdorf) Subject: RBOCS & Video Remote learning in Schools? Date: 25 May 1994 13:19:36 -0400 Organization: Applied Innovation, Inc. Reply-To: gerry@aiinet.com Does anyone have an opinion on what the RBOCS are trying to do by pushing TV remote learning grants and equipment to school systems? The schools in our district don't even have telephones in classrooms let alone a LAN for a client server teaching tool. To me the priorities are all turned around. What possible business could RBOCS build with the "poor" school districts? Gerry Moersdorf --- Applied Innovation Inc gerry@aiinet.com 614-798-2000 Dublin, Ohio 43017 The datacom pbx guys [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You raise an excellent point, and I would refer interested readers to a related article which is presently circu- lating in alt.dcom.telecom which discusses the 'information highway' and how it seems to be bypassing a lot of poorer communities in the opinion of the author of the article. I am attaching it as the next item in this issue of the Digest. I do not agree entirely with the conclusions of the article, but it is worth thinking about. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cme@access2.digex.net (Center for Media Education) Subject: Info Highway to Bypass Poor and Minorities, Groups Reveal Date: 25 May 1994 00:03:20 GMT Organization: Washington, DC [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Forwarded from alt.dcom.telecom FYI. PAT] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: MAY 23, 1994 FROM: Center for Media Education (CME) Consumer Federation of America (CFA) Media Access Project (MAP) National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) National Council of La Raza (NCLR) Office of Communication, United Church of Christ (UCC) For more information, see contact persons listed at the end of this note. "INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY" COULD BYPASS LOW INCOME AND MINORITY COMMUNITIES Consumer and Civil Rights Groups Urge FCC To Prevent "Electronic Redlining" by Baby Bells WASHINGTON, DC -- A coalition of consumer and civil rights groups today called upon the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to outlaw "electronic redlining" as local telephone companies start to construct the "information superhighway." In two petitions filed today, the coalition submitted to the Commission research documenting that these companies are designing their advanced comunications systems to bypass many low income and minority communities. The research was based on an examination of applications from each of the Regional Bell Operating Companies which have filed video dialtone proposals with the FCC. "Our analysis reveals a clear pattern," concluded Jeffrey Chester, Executive Director of the Center for Media Education. "Low income and minority neighborhoods are being systematically underrepresented in these plans." In their petitions, the groups urged the FCC to clarify the rules that prevent such practices and to issue a policy statement reaffirming the Commission's commitment to the goals of universal service and nondiscriminatory deployment. "At each phase of video dialtone deployment," the coalition argued, "providers should be required to make that service available to a proportionate number of lower income and minority customers." The groups also called on the FCC to revise its policies to ensure greater public participation in the development of these new communications networks. For example, they urged the Commission to require telephone companies to hold public hearings with local officials and consumers in order to get permission to provide video dialtone services. "Right now," explained Bradley Stillman, Legislative Counsel of the Consumer Federation of America, "the phone companies get to decide when, where and how these networks will be built and paid for without any input from the communities that will be served by them. That is not the way we deployed either telephone service or cable TV, which are merged in the video dialtone proposals." Added CME's Jeffrey Chester, "These video dialtone networks could become the primary communications system for millions of Americans. They must be made available in an equitable and nondiscriminatory manner." "The building of the information superhighway is the civil rights issue of the 21st century," stated Anthony Pharr of the Office of Communication, United Church of Christ. "As in the banking and insurance fields, this sort of discrimination is patently wrong. It hurts the communities that need help the most." "Redlining within the telecommunications industry is a front-line challenge to the civil rights community and must be addressed in the national telecommunications legislation now before Congress," added Wade Henderson, Director of the Washington Bureau of the NAACP. The research compared census tract data to maps and other documents submitted to the FCC by the local telephone companies. At least two cities for each of four Baby Bells were analyzed: the Ameritech applications in Indianapolis, IN and Chicago, IL; Bell Atlantic applications in Toms River, NJ and the Washington, DC metropolitan area; Pacific Telesis applications for the California areas of Orange County, San Diego, and the South Bay of San Francisco; and U.S. West applications for Portland, OR, Minneapolis, MN, and Denver, CO. These networks would intitially reach approximately 4 million homes. Applications for the construction of these and other video dialtone platforms are currently under review at the FCC. The analysis revealed two patterns. In some cases entire counties were bypassed, while more affluent neighboring counties were selected for service. For example, Bell Atlantic chose the wealthier suburbs of northern Virginia and Montgomery County, Maryland rather than the District of Columbia and Prince George's County, Maryland both of which contain large minority populations. In other cases, the unserved areas comprise a section carved out of the middle of a city. For example, as one of the petitions explained, "The map of U.S. West's scheduled deployment in Denver depicts a large slice running through the center of the city where video dialtone facilities will not be initially constructed. Lower income and/or minority persons are heavily concentrated in the excluded area." A separate computer analysis of Ameritech's proposal for the Chicago area, undertaken by the Office of Communication, United Church of Christ, led to similar conclusions. The Center for Media Education's "Future of Media" Project supported the demographic research of Dr. Mark Cooper, Research Director of the Consumer Federation of America. Groups supporting the petition include the Center for Media Education (CME), Consumer Federation of America (CFA), National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), National Council of La Raza (NCLR), and the Office of Communication, United Church of Christ (UCC). The Institute for Public Representation, Georgetown University Law Center (IPR), and the Media Access Project (MAP) provided the legal counsel in preparing the petitions to the FCC. The issue of electronic redlining is expected to be discussed by the Senate Commerce Committee in hearings sheduled for tomorrow, May 24. FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: Jeff Chester, Center for Media Education (202) 628-2620 Bradley Stillman, Consumer Federation of America (202) 387-6121 Anthony Pharr, Office of Communication, United Church of Christ (202) 331-4265 Andrew Schwartzman, Media Access Project (202) 232-4300 ---------------- Anthony E. Wright cme@access.digex.net Coordinator, Future of Media Project Center for Media Education 1511 K St, NW, #518, Wash., DC 20005 Tel: 202-628-2620 Fax: 202-628-2554 ------------------------------ From: tomw@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Tom Worthington) Subject: OSI Computer Based Training Package Available Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 05:22:01 GMT THE ESSENTIAL GOSIP EDUCATION PROGRAM STANDARDS AUSTRALIA The Essential GOSIP is an interactive training and development program which provides a framework for developing a plan for GOSlP (Government Open Systems Interconnection Profile) implementation. THE ESSENTIAL GOSIP PROGRAM Assists in the planning, development, implementation and management of adopting GOSIP within your organisation. The interactive GOSIP educational material provided allows the user to work through the three key GOSIP planning stages. These stages - Where are we now?, Where do we want to be? and How do we get there? are as used in the Commonwealth Information Technology Planning Guidelines (CITP). A wide range of supporting theory and research information is available on line: * a library covering more than seventy topics * a full glossary of terms * case studies from Australia and overseas * extra resources - such as access to on-line documents. THE PURCHASE OPTIONS The Essential GOSIP is available for purchase as a single user licence, a site licence for up to eight users or as a customised program. To obtain a free demonstration disk of the Essential GOSIP package, contact: Standards Australia PO Box 1055, Strathfield NSW 2135 Phone (02)7464600 Fax (02)7463333 X.400: S=BASSETT;O=SAA;P=SA;A=TELEMEMO;C=AU Internet: bassett@saa.sa.telememo.au Posted by TOM WORTHINGTON, Director of Information Management Policy HQ Australian Defence Force, Fax: +61 6 2653601 G=T;S=Worthington;OU=CM-DIMP;O=HQADF;P=ausgovdefencenet;A=telememo;C=au ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: ANI and Class of Service (was Re: 800 Number Billback) Date: 25 May 1994 09:40:51 -0400 In steven@sgb.oau.org (Steven Bradley) writes: > Well, here is my two cents worth ... if you really want to aggravate > these legal con-artists, do this: > Call the service as much as you want and as often as you can from PAY > PHONES and see how easily they (don't) get their money then! [some more stuff deleted} to which our Esteemed Moderator added, in part: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What actually happens is that the > Information Provider has a database of pay telephone numbers and > yes, you will waste ten cents of his money dialing him and getting > him to answer but you certainly will not get him to part with any > of his valuable 'information'. [stories of calling various 800-to-billing services deleted] to which dannyb@panix.com explains: Not quite. The usual technique for sorting out incoming calls is to have the telco provide teh phone number, -and- the 'class of service'. This is part of feature group d and might be in 'c' as well. This lets the tele-sleaze opertor know whether the call is coming from a residential phone, a business, a telco coin phone, a cocot (if properly registered at the local office), and a few other designations such as prisons and, if I recall corectly, phones at a hospital. BTW, some groups -do- use ANI for a related purpose, namely to reduce 'excess' calls to their number. (Remember the huge volume of calls that were sent to Falwell's number?) A good example of this is the 1-800-WHY-GUNS setup. If you call it you get a recording describing the need for gun control, etc. Call it a second time and you get the same message. Call it a -third- time and you get a message saying something like 'because try to jam our phone lines, we have to limit you to three calls to our number. Please call xxx-yyyy in the future' Calling it a fourth time gets you a busy or intercept. BTW #2: There is, sensibly enough, a time-out on the restriction. I just called them again from a phone line which had been blocked in the past and got through. Seems they figured out that a two week hold on calls was a good compromise. dannyb@panix.com (or dburstein@mcimail.com) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 13:05:36 EDT From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Worldwide Areacode/Telex/Internet List Available by FTP Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA I am in the process of final submission of a replacement document for my Internet RFC 1394. This document contains a list of all international as well as US Area codes, telex area codes in both international and F.36 formats, time zones, data network numbers, large Internet Gateways and Internet Base-Level domain names. I would like to request comments on the and content of the information (e.g. is there related information I should have considered adding) as well as any inaccuracies in the information I have provided. This document is, in my opinion, essentially finished but I would like to offer members of the Internet Community the opportunity to view the document and point out any possible errors. The document is 141K in size uncompressed and is obtainable through FTP at: ftp.digex.net: /pub/access/tdarcos/newrfc.txt or in compressed forms of: newrfc.txt.gz, newrfc.txt.Z, newrfc.zip and newrfc.zoo, so you can grab whichever one is easiest to handle; the compressed forms must be extracted with BINARY mode ftp. Those without FTP access should write back to this address; the FTPMAIL server at decwrl is probably too slow to provide a response in time. Indicate if you can accept a MIME coded document or UUENCODE, or if you need plain text. I intend to submit this document as a proposed RFC by June 7, e.g. in a little over one week unless I receive reports of a "showstopping" error in the document. Corrections and comments will be appreciated. Please feel free to forward this note elsewhere. Thank you for your interest and attention. Paul Robinson ------------------------------ SPECIAL NOTICE - READ CAREFULLY - ITEM HAS BEEN DELETED Date: Fri, 27 May 94 12:28:31 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson)) Message-Id: <9405271728.AA04433@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom Subject: Miss Manners Objects to Being Used On Wednesday, May 25 in issue 14-248 of this Digest, a reprint of an article by Miss Manners appeared as item 11 of 12. Submitted by Steve Cogorno, it originally appeared in Clarinet and apparently Steve had not obtained permission to reprint it here. I made the erroneous assumption he had. Although it ran intact, with some added commentary by Steve, and the copyright notices, etc were all intact, with credit given to Clarient and the syndicate which distributes Miss Manners, Brad Templeton of Clarinet says it should not have appeared in TELECOM Digest without his permission. In a note to both Steve Cogorno and myself, Mr. Templeton demanded that the article be removed from circulation. He also sent along a little pre-printed apology form letter which everyone involved is supposed to publish in a conspicuous place in the same manner in which the original article was published. Steve sent me his copy of the notice to be run under his name, and it is identical to the one sent directly to me. Note that it includes a blurb on how one might subscribe to Clarinet if one wishes to do so. So, article 11 of 12, issue 248, volume 14 is being overwritten in the archives with this note of explanation, and I must ask all readers to likewise remove the Miss Manners article on 'Call Return' and substitute this message in its place. There now follows Mr. Templeton's suggested notice, for the record submitted by Steve Cogorno and myself. He says this will serve as our pennace for violating his copyright. ------------------------------- From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: ClariNet News Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 20:08:07 -0700 (PDT) Cc: brad@alto.clarinet.com Recently I posted an article from Miss Manners regarding the use of Call Return to this newsgroup from the ClariNet electronic newspaper. This was a copyrighted item that I should not have posted without permission. It has been deleted. Those wishing to know how to get such articles legitimately for their site can contact ClariNet at info@clarinet.com. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: ClariNet News Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 12:00:00 CDT Cc: brad@alto.clarinet.com Recently I posted an article from Miss Manners regarding the use of Call Return to this newsgroup from the ClariNet electronic newspaper. This was a copyrighted item that I should not have posted without permission. It has been deleted. Those wishing to know how to get such articles legitimately for their site can contact ClariNet at info@clarinet.com. Patrick Townson ---------------------- It would be best in the future I think if readers would simply refrain from sending me stuff that has appeared in Clarinet. There are lots of other sources for the same news. Thank you. PAT WE NOW CONTINUE WITH ITEM 12 OF 12 IN THIS ISSUE ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 94 16:30:56 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Leaving a Message I saw the blurb about call-return. I don't have that feature. However, I wonder what sort of calls are getting filtered out when they reach the answering service operator at my Delaware and Maryland telephone numbers. I know there are calls going to there from both numbers, because they cost me on my phone bills (message units in Delaware and tolls in Maryland). Pos- sibly those are unwanted sales calls that get filtered out, but I had a case several years ago where someone reached that answering service and left only a message that (making up the name) "George Smith called". I had no way of knowing who that was, so I could do nothing until that person called again a week later and left a telephone number as well. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #248 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19900; 25 May 94 19:17 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA10186; Wed, 25 May 94 15:11:05 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA10174; Wed, 25 May 94 15:11:03 CDT Date: Wed, 25 May 94 15:11:03 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson)) Message-Id: <9405252011.AA10174@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #249 TELECOM Digest Wed, 25 May 94 15:11:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 249 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson "Erlang" the Programming Language (Steven King) Report on Synchronization Status Messages (Jim Burkitt) Book Review: "NetPower" by Persson (Rob Slade) Can a Unix Box Work as an Internet Router? (Mike McLeish) Internet Access at Home? (wolverine@asu.edu) Internet Access From the Solomon Islands? (Jarlath J. Lyons) Vertical Blanking Interval Capacity (Noel Moss) Long Range "Cordless" Telephones (Al Cohan) Seeking "Informing Ourselves to Death" Article (Jay Bonnet) SMDI Question (chazworth@aol.com) Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (David Taylor) Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (Steven King) Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (John Levine) Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (Dan Declerck) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Richard Urmonas) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Rob Lockhart) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Dan J. Declerck) Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Sam Spens Clason) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com (Steven King) Subject: "Erlang" the Programming Language Date: 25 May 1994 19:44:15 GMT Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group Reply-To: king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com Does anyone have any information on a programming language called "Erlang"? Yes, I know, erlang is a measure of traffic capacity. Apparently it's also a programming language. A snippet from the "Overbeek's Outlook" column from the newsletter of Books & Bytes (a local computer bookstore) mentions it as an "interesting language that has many intellectual roots in the logic programming community." It goes on to say that it was developed at the Ericsson Computer Science Laboratory in Sweden to offer a model for programming concurrent real-time systems. And, since Ericsson is a large switch manufacturer, prototyping telephony applications was one of the language's central design objectives. Since this is a bookstore newsletter, it mentions the book "Concurrent Programming in Erlang", by Armstrong, Virding, and Williams. Anyone have information on either the book or the language? Steven King -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 1994 14:41:14 GMT From: JIM (CC120E) BURKITT Subject: Report on Synchronization Status Messages Press Release: From: Committee T1 Contact: Jim Burkitt, T1X1 Chairman (914) 644-5075 ccmail.jburkitt@nynex.com (Internet) Subject: Technical Report on Synchronization Status Messages Committee T1 just published a technical report "Synchronization Network Management Using Synchronization Status Messages". This new technical report (Report #33) provides techniques and procedures for synchronization message use in SONET and DS1 networks. While ANSI T1.105 (SONET) and T1.403 (DS-1) standards provide codes that pass status information in the synchronization network, this new technical report explains a number of ways to use these status messages to maintain a network. All digital networks require the distribution of what is commonly known as network clock. This network clock starts with a primary reference source at the stratum 1 level. Three other stratum levels subtend off these primary clocks. In addition to the current clock distribution networks, SONET fiber optic rings need to prevent timing loops. In order to help maintain these synchronization distribution networks, T1X1 developed a technical report on how to use Synchronization Status Messages. Committee T1 is sponsored by the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) and is accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Copies can be purchased from ATIS or obtained by anonymous ftp from test.t1bbs.org with the file name /pub/techrpts/tr33.wwn (Word for Windows 2.0) or tr33.ps (Postscript). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 09:56:34 MDT From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "NetPower" by Persson BKNETPWR.RVW 940207 Fox Chapel Publishing Box 7948L Lancaster, PA 17604-7948 Phone#: (800) 457-9112 717-399-7999 Fax#: (717) 560-4702 "NetPower", Persson, 1993, 1-56523-031-0, U$39.95 NetPower1@AOL.COM neta@aol.com Apparently the subtitle used to be, "Educators Resource Guide to Online Computer Services." It certainly deals with online services. *All* of them. The Internet, private bulletin boards, commercial online services, commercial database services, Fidonet, educational networks and a number of others. The educational title is being de-emphasized but this is still, quite obviously, a book for teachers. Two chapters are devoted to classroom projects, two more to a "Kid's Participation Network," and "Kid People." Much of the material will be of interest to others, but the style and the eclectic nature are definitely for educators. Not all resources are listed here, of course. There is, however, an extraordinary wealth of material. Some of it is available online, such as the Inter-network Mail Guide, but this is handy if you are only starting online access. Guidance could use some work. There does not seem to be a lot of order to the chapters. Also, material is sometimes duplicated from chapter to chapter. (K12net gets two fairly extensive citations and a chapter by itself, to boot.) If you are a teacher or an educational researcher, this book is very definitely for you. If you have extensive dealings with online resources, you may also find a lot of useful material here. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994 BKNETPWR.RVW 940207. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca Research into rslade@cue.bc.ca User p1@CyberStore.ca Security Canada V7K 2G6 ------------------------------ From: xxmcleis@indsvax1.indstate.edu Subject: Can a Unix Box Work as an Internet Router? Reply-To: xxmcleis@indsvax1.indstate.edu Organization: Indiana State University Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 16:15:40 GMT I'm trying to justify our school system getting access to the internet, and have been challenged to get these answers *from* the internet. Of course, we have very little money, but do have a few computers. So the question is, can a computer (ie Unix) function as an Internet router, or must we buy one of these routers like CISCO or WellFleet? If so, what's the *cheapest* router available? Can a Unix box connect to a digital comm line (56k)? Please help, your prompt answer will contribute (however so slightly) to the quality of the American education system :) Mike McLeish Vigo County School Corp. Terre Haute, IN xxmcleis@indsvax1.indstate.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 12:06:58 MST From: WOLVERINE@ASU.Edu Subject: Internet Access at Home? Organization: Arizona State University Greetings, I am interested in getting a internet link to my home. I'm not talking about a call up service, but am referring to an actual link to my house. I am thinking of setting up a server. I need to know where to start. How does one go about getting a line set up and what hardware is required? Any response will be appreciated. Thank you all. Virtually Yours, Mike [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Questions like the above two from Arizona and the Vigo Schools are all too commonplace in my mailbox these days. Everyone wants on the internet! Some I answer, some I forward elsewhere but these two I decided to put out to the readers here. They're very typical of what I get in the mail, and hopefully answers from readers will be seen by many others who are asking the same thing. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jjl2584@aw101.iasl.ca.boeing.com (Jarlath J. Lyons) Subject: Internet Access from the Solomon Islands? Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 20:36:36 GMT I have a friend who will be in the Solomon Islands for at least the next year, and he would dearly love to be able to email his discourse drafts around the ether while there. Any suggestions would be most appreciated. FYI, local legends report cannibalism is still practiced on some of the remote islands there. I wasn't adventuresome enough to pursue verification on my trip there in '89. Jarlath Lyons Voice (206) 662-4570 W (206) 938-3358 Home/fax Boeing Commercial Airplane PO Box 3707 M/S 19-MJ Seattle WA 98124-2207 E-Mail: jjl2584@aw101.iasl.ca.boeing.com Lyons' First Law : Never rule out basic greed or stupidity Lyons' Second Law : My Laws (and opinions) are my own ... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well ... the Solomon Islands are a long way from home. Maybe readers have an answer to your question also, along with that from wolverine and the fellow at the Vigo Schools. In response to your side note, I certainly hope your comments were not driven by any cannibalphobic attitudes on your part. If the Solomon Islands do join the Internet and get a news feed, will someone issue a Call For Votes on a newsgroup devoted to cannibalism? I wonder where such a news- group would go in the Usenet hierarchy? Probably under rec.food.cannibalism. Perhaps there would also be a 'soc' group for it also where the politics involved could be debated forever. Then as the newsgroup became very pop- ular and overrun with off-topic postings (sort of like the Editor Notes here in TELECOM Digest) with the on-line Avon Lady doing her thing and the Make Money Fast letter appearing every day or two, someone would issue a call to make it a moderated group. Jeffrey Dahmer (our resident cannibal here in the USA, of late being persecuted by the government and held prisoner in a maximum security mental health facility in Wisconsin) would volunteer to be the Moderator. Exciting times ahead for the net! PAT] ------------------------------ From: sysop@slacc.com Subject: Vertical Blanking Interval Capacity Organization: SLACC STACK BBS - St. Louis, Missouri Date: Wed, 25 May 94 06:26:21 CST Paul Robinson recently wrote to TELECOM Digest inquiring about the capacity of the vertical blanking interval (VBI) in television frames and was also looking for sources of equipment to utilize the VBI. A recent issue of Circuit Cellar Ink (published by Steve Ciarcia, Vernon, CT) contained an article called "Investigating the Vertical Blanking Interval" or something similar. This article contained schematics for building a device to extract teletext, time codes and other information from the VBI. Best regards, Noel Moss ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 94 12:35 EST From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com> Subject: Long Range "Cordless" telephones Pat, someone recently asked about long range (ten to twenty mile) "cordless" telephones -- not cellular. Yes, there are several illegal high power full duplex cordless phones, but there are also rural systems that are perfectly legal. Ritron, located in Carmel, Indiana manufactures a full duplex UHF system they call TeleNexus. It connectes to a regular telco at the "end of the line" from there it generates ringing forward to the rural location and in turn decodes and regenerates DTMF. At the far end, a similar unit has an standard RJ-11 Jack. You plug a regular phone into it and it rings as if the phone was directly connected to the telco. The bandwidth is actually greater than a standard telco line. It costs about $7,500 retail. One drawback: You gotta have power at both ends! Maybe Scott Fybush will jump on this thread and tell us how it worked when he attended Deep Springs College here in CA. I actually saw and heard their unit in a radio shop in Bishop, CA where the telco line was connected. Didn't sound bad, but has now been replaced with cellular. AL ------------------------------ From: puc@stc06.ctd.ornl.gov (Jay Bonnet) Subject: Seeking "Informing ourselves to death" Article Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 15:26:46 GMT I am trying to find a paper that I think was mentioned here (back around Jan or Feb maybe?) that was presented at a conference in Europe and I believe the title was something like "Are We Informing Ourselves to Death?" It was a very interesting presentation about the value of continued and increased use of computers in society. I believe there were some follow-on discussions in TELECOM Digest pro and con but my interest is in finding the original paper again. Any help appreciated. Thanks, Jay [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Check the Telecom Archives, in the sub- directory devoted to special reports, essays, etc. Access the archives using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu, then 'cd telecom-archives'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chazworth@aol.com Date: Wed, 25 May 94 02:27:55 EDT Subject: SMDI Question With the explosion of better computer to PBX intergration schemes for voice processing apps, I have seen more switches and voice mail machines using SMDI (Simplified Message Desk Interface) signaling as a means of signaling between the two systems. Since this is a Bellcore standard, used for Centrex voice mail integrations, does anyone have the data for the signal packets coding scheme? All I know so far is that it is a 1200 baud serial data link and it provides calling and called party ID from the switch to the voice mail. Please reply to chazworth@aol.com. ------------------------------ From: lhdsy1!chevron.com!tdtay@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Taylor) Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) Date: 25 May 94 15:39:32 GMT Organization: Chevron Information Technology Company In article hhaas@saffron.gatech.edu (Harry P. Haas) writes: > I have a Motorola flip-phone with the hands free kit/3watt amp. It > makes for the same setup as the lexus, without muting the stereo. > BUT, my stereo has a mute input wire, and the CELLULAR 3-WATT > VEHICULAR ADAPTER has a wire yellow-black wire labeled "Auxilary > Alert". Hmmm. > So does anyone know what the "Auxiliary Alert" wire is used for? If > it is not an "activity" signal, does anyone know how to get an "activity" > signal from the Motorola system so that I can mute my stereo? The auxiliary alert is usually used to activate a horn or light relay so you can tell when your phone if ringing if you are outside your car. I believe that is only activated when the phone is ringing. David S. Taylor Texas A&M '87 Engineer, RF Systems Chevron Information Technology Co. Base Technology Dept. 1300 South Beach Blvd. Rm 2187 dtay@chevron.com La Habra, CA 90631 310-694-7280 ------------------------------ From: king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com (Steven King, Software Archaeologist) Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) Date: 25 May 1994 16:33:09 GMT Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group Reply-To: king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com hhaas@saffron.gatech.edu (Harry P. Haas) publicly declared: > I have a Motorola flip-phone with the hands free kit/3watt amp. It > makes for the same setup as the lexus, without muting the stereo. > BUT, my stereo has a mute input wire, and the CELLULAR 3-WATT > VEHICULAR ADAPTER has a wire yellow-black wire labeled "Auxilary > Alert". Hmmm. > So does anyone know what the "Auxiliary Alert" wire is used for? If > it is not an "activity" signal, does anyone know how to get an "activity" > signal from the Motorola system so that I can mute my stereo? I'm guessing here (Ignore my Organization: line! I know nothing about the subscriber units!) but it sounds like the "Auxilary Alert" line is probably to sound an external ringer, like your car horn. I doubt that it's an activity sensor suitable for muting your stereo. But hey, I could be wrong. Steven King -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 94 11:38 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > So does anyone know what the "Auxiliary Alert" wire is used for? It's usually used to make the horn blow when the phone rings. That comes in handy for people at construction sites and other places where they're near but not in their car or truck. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com (Dan J. Declerck) Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) Date: 25 May 1994 17:47:27 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Aux Alert is characteristically used for a "horn and lights" option. If you are not in the vehicle when a call is received, Aux_alert will be grounded in a pattern which will mimmick ringing. Using a two-pole relay, you can control the Lights and horn simultaneously. This will give an external alert. Dan DeClerck EMAIL: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com Motorola Cellular APD ------------------------------ From: richard@dnd.icp.nec.com.au (Richard Urmonas) Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Organization: I.C.P. Design & Development, NEC Australia Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 07:14:09 GMT gregalex@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Greg Alexander) writes: > I am interested in buying a GSM phone, and was hoping to learn a > little more about the short message service offered in some. (stuff deleted) > Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is > in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas > (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). If its > a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being in > the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message). > So both have strengths, but I'd like to know what I'm getting. (Both > would be great -- but very unlikely ;) My undestanding of how the SMS works is that if you are out of range or the phone is off etc. the message is held until the phone is detected to be "back on the system". Hence the message "will be delivered". What will be the big variable is how the system will be implemented within various countries, and if it will be supplied to international roamers (i.e. if you are in Thailand and someone within Thailand phones you will they be able to leave you a message ?). I guess this will be one of those big "suplier decides" issues. Richard Urmonas, ICP Group, NEC Australia, 649 Springvale Rd, Mulgrave 3170, Australia EMAIL: richard@dnd.icp.nec.com.au PHONE: +61 3 264 3206 FAX: +61 3 264 3717 ------------------------------ From: rlockhart@aol.com (RLockhart) Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Date: 25 May 1994 06:35:02 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , Michael_Lyman@sat.mot.com (Mike Lyman) writes: > For a "normal" paging service, pages are sent to the subscriber's > pager without any indications in return as to successful delivery > (spray> and pray service) although there is a movement afoot to provide > "ack-back" paging services. I dont think there are any spec's or > functional systems (are there ?). We've talked somewhat openly 'bout our two-way *real* paging technology as has Mtel on their NWN system, probably the first such system to hit commercial service (currently slated for mid next year). If you'd like to follow up, give me a shout. Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc. Desktop: lockhart-epag06_rob@email.mot.com Wireless (<32K characters): rob_lockhart-erl003e@email.mot.com Wireless (< 1K characters): rob.lockhart@radiomail.net ------------------------------ From: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com (Dan J. Declerck) Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Date: 25 May 1994 17:40:06 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group In article , wrote: > GSM, which is similar to the MIRS/ESRM technology in North America, is > an integrated system. That is, one single system provides a variety > of\ wireless connections. These include two-way voice, one-way > acknowledgement alphanumeric messaging, two-way data and in some cases > push-to-talk dispatch broadcast. The key here is that all these > features are coming through the same system, using the same transmitters, > switches and mobile receivers. Therefore the range/coverage on all the > services will be exactly the same. If you're in range to get an alpha > message, you will also be in range for a voice connection, and vice > versa. (Actually, in practice there might some minor discrepancies in > fringe areas, but the usual case will be true the vast majority of the > time.) The GSM spec does not have a minimum limit on call setup time. (at least one that is less than 250 ms) ergo, GSM cannot be used for PTT (Push-To-Talk) dispatch services. Dan DeClerck EMAIL: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com Motorola Cellular APD Phone: (708) 632-4596 ------------------------------ From: d92-sam@nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason) Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? Date: 25 May 1994 09:58:00 GMT Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden In article , richard@mandarin.com writes: > gregalex@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Greg Alexander) asked: >> I am interested in buying a GSM phone, and was hoping to learn >> a little more about the short message service offered in some. >> Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone >> is in range? > We've just got the first "workable" SMS system in the UK, on the new > DCS1800 (PCN) system known as "ORANGE". Essentially it is a message > transfer system that uses a form of handshaking between the mobile > switch and the handset: so error-free receipt of the message can be > guaranteed. > We do not *just* have a message bureau, however: we also have the > ability to send messages *directly from handset to handset* and these > messages cost less to send than it would cost to make a phone call to > say the same thing! Yes, but wouldn't 0956700111@orange.uk be nicer?! Is there any such service out there? > In the future there are plans to provide notebook computer access to > the handset (using PCMCIA cards) and this will substantially increase > the functionality of the message service. It will become possible to > send text messages from the handset (or computer) to any other GSM/PCN > system, to any of the old analogue paging networks, or as an X400 > message or a facsimile document. Wait a minute, isn't SMS defined a max of 160 characters? I am pretty sure that what you are talkin about is ordinary datatransfer that occupies a 9600 bit voice channel. Actually the rate of transfer is sligtly higher but I've never heard of a 11.4kbit modem :-) > If a SMS message contains a phone number with a request to be called > back, the handset will (on a key-push) grab that number and store it > in the phone's memory, ready to be called back by the user. Oh, and > we also have full Caller-ID and last call return. Like if your voice-mailbox or fax-mailbox sent you an SMS every time it receives a message. We have that in Sweden to, at least Comviq does. We have Caller-ID to, but only within Comviq since lame-ass Telia (to be privatised "after" 1996) won't supply the necessary information when routing calls to Comviq. Sam Spens Clason, Web ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #249 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa03266; 26 May 94 11:06 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA22502; Thu, 26 May 94 06:55:11 CDT Return-Path: Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy) id AA22492; Thu, 26 May 94 06:55:09 CDT Date: Thu, 26 May 94 06:55:09 CDT From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson)) Message-Id: <9405261155.AA22492@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #250 TELECOM Digest Thu, 26 May 94 06:55:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 250 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Itemized Billing in UK (Peter Campbell Smith) Re: Itemized Billing in UK (Jonothan Green) Re: Itemized Billing in UK (John Slater) Re: Itemized Billing in UK (samjam@mary.iia.org) Re: Itemized Billing in UK (Clive D.W. Feather) Re: Hunting Service From GTE (Joe Collins) Re: Hunting Service From GTE (Steve Forrette) Re: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service (Nathan N. Duehr) Re: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service (Steve Cogorno) Re: Cellular Privacy? (Neil Weisenfeld) Re: Cellular Privacy? (Bennett Z. Kobb) Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Andrew C. Green) Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Ed Ellers) Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Rob Levandowski) Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts (Steven Bradley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: campbellsm@lish.logica.com (Peter Campbell Smith) Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK Organization: Logica, London Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 08:40:22 GMT In article , RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys. COM wrote: > An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California > (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character > quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show > up as itemized call detail on their phone bill. These were local toll > calls from the East End to the West End, which I assume are expensive > calls. > Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing? BT offers itemised billing for calls that cost more than 9 units, a unit costing about 5p (7 US cents) and buying varying numbers of seconds according to distance and time of day. If you choose that (free) option, these calls are itemised and the rest lumped together as some (large) number of units. The local calling area from London covers all of Greater London, plus the neighbouring suburbs (about 10 million people or so). 'Local' calls are not toll-free however, so a long local call will show up as an itemised one: to be precise, a unit buys 80 seconds from 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 220 seconds at other times, so we may deduce that your character spent over 12 minutes by day or 33 minutes in the evening chatting to his floozie. The rival operators (Mercury and the cable-TV lads) offer itemised billing on all calls. Peter Campbell Smith, Logica plc, London. Voice: +44 71 637 9111 Fax: +44 71 344 3638 Internet: campbellsm@lish.logica.com ------------------------------ From: J.M.Green@bnr.co.uk (Jonothan Green) Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK Date: 26 May 1994 07:51:12 GMT Organization: BNR Europe Limited, Harlow, GB In article RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys. COM writes: > An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California > (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character > quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show > up as itemized call detail on their phone bill. > Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing? I don't watch Eastenders, but I do have a 'phone :-) In my case, I automatically get itemised billing of any calls over a certain **COST** (can't remember what the figure is) regardless of what type of number I'm calling, this means that if I made a **LONG** call on a local tariff it would be shown as a seperate item on the bill, but if I made a very short call on a low cost tariff (eg BT's super-cheapo weekend rate) then it wouldn`t ... confused? You will be :-) I make all my long distance calls through Mercury, which does give full details of **ALL** calls made, (so it's a good job I haven't got a mistress in Manchester :-) Jonathon Green. BNR Europe Ltd, London Road, Harlow, Essex CM17 9NA, UK Email: J.M.Green@bnr.co.uk (Work) JayGee@cix.compulink.co.uk (Home) Fax: +44-279-451866 Phone: +44-279-402510 (direct line) ------------------------------ From: johns@scroff.UK (John Slater) Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK Date: 26 May 1994 05:38:53 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems (UK) Reply-To: johns@scroff.UK In article 5@eecs.nwu.edu, RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM writes: > An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California > (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character > quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show > up as itemized call detail on their phone bill. These were local toll > calls from the East End to the West End, which I assume are expensive > calls. First of all, East End and West End are areas of London, so it's a local call. (I believe Greater London is the largest geographic calling area in the world). Now on the the charging and billing system : British Telecom charges by the unit. 1 unit costs around 5p (7c in your Earth money) and buys a length of time that varies according to distance and time of day. For instance, on a local call at off-peak times, a unit buys 220 seconds (3min40sec). On a call to the USA a unit charge buys between 8 and 10 seconds. An Intelsat call, to give an extreme example, uses up a unit every 0.7 seconds or so. BT offers itemised billing for calls over 10 units (= 50p cost). A local cheap-rate call of over 33 minutes falls into this category, so would appear on the bill. At standard rate during the day, a shorter call than this would do it. A lot of people don't like the unit charging system because callers are charged in whole units even if they only use part of it. (for example a 221 second off-peak local call costs 2 units). This translates to an average overcharge of half a unit per call, at 2.5p each, which adds up to many millions of pounds per year. (Does anybody have the call volume numbers to work out just how much?) John ------------------------------ From: samjam@mary.iia.org (Anne's Fiance) Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK Date: 26 May 1994 00:43:19 -0400 Organization: International Internet Association > Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing? Yes. Not all of the country has itemised billing availabkle. The itemisation is based on the cost/number of units of the call, not the physical distance. If the call is more than 50p cost or more than 5 units in length or if the call was made halfway through another call (via 3 way calling) then it will be itemised. Calls less than 50p or 5 units are not itemised, though for a small fee users can dial a prefix to have calls itemised on a per-call basic. A scam around this is to dial an 800 number (pick one with a robot voice, not a human on the end) and then immediatly interrupt that call to place your legitimate call, which will therefore be itemised. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 09:00:46 BST From: Clive D.W. Feather > An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California You admit to watching "Eastenders"? That's your street-cred gone. > (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character > quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show > up as itemized call detail on their phone bill. These were local toll > calls from the East End to the West End, which I assume are expensive > calls. > Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing? East End to West End [of London; note that these are not the east and west edges of the London area] is a local call. Assuming he has normal BT phone service, this call will be charged at between 3 and 8 minutes per unit (I forget the exact numbers); a unit costs about 5p (7.5 cents) including tax. If he has "full itemization", then all calls of 10 or more units are listed, giving the complete number called, time, date, duration, and cost; I often see local calls itemized on my bill. If the call was special in some way (for example, it was the second call of a three-way call, or was dialed with the "call me back afterwards with duration and cost" prefix code), then it will be listed no matter how many units it took. Other phone companies have different policies: I use Mercury for my non-local calls, and they itemize all calls (and are cheaper). I access Mercury by dialling "1320aaannnnnn" instead of "0aaannnnnn". Clive D.W. Feather | Santa Cruz Operation clive@sco.com | Croxley Centre Phone: +44 923 816 344 | Hatters Lane, Watford Fax: +44 923 210 352 | WD1 8YN, United Kingdom ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 May 94 14:52:04 -0400 From: Joe Collins Subject: Re: Hunting Service From GTE I hope GTE can solve your problem because Bell Atlantic can't solve ours. We have a large multiline dial-in network and wanted to break our lines down into multiple dial-in groups. We also wanted to be able to control the number of lines in each group so as the situation demanded we could change the group size. Enter Bell Atlantic, one droid says "Sure, we can do that", another does not know and the last says "Yes, except that you can't control the call forwarding feature only WE can program the number". Yes, Call Forwarding on Busy, Don't Answer is a solution for many but sadly Bell Atlantic does not care enough to offer the service. Just send them money, they are the only game in town. Joe Collins ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Hunting Service From GTE Date: 26 May 1994 19:13:39 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc. Reply-To: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) In , wpcallah@rwasic17.aud.alcatel.com (Paul Callahan) writes: > I want to get a second line and have it hunt to the first, or vice-versa. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is called rotary hunting service. ..... > Please note there is a more expensive (and charged-for) service > called 'transfer on busy/no answer'. 'Transfer on busy' does about > the same thing as hunting does, but the way it is done -- the > mechanics of it -- are a little different. PAT] There are a couple of other issues here. In many states, GTE does not offer hunting to residential customers at any price (here in Washington State is an example), even though the RBOC in the same area does. Another issue is that on measured rate lines, busy transfer will rack up message units, whereas hunting does not. Also, the monthly charge for hunting sometimes applies to all lines in the hunt group, including the terminating line that doesn't do any hunting itself (and only termin- ates hunting calls from the previous line). Pacific Bell bills this way. Busy transfer is only charged on the lines where the tranfserring originates. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What an odd way to go about billing for hunting. We don't have any charge for hunting at all, residence, business or otherwise. Hunting can go either direction you want, backward or forward. For example, I have my second line hunt to my first when it is busy. My first line then has call-waiting. You can't have both call-waiting and hunting on the same line however; the two are incompatible, but we can hunt from one end of our group of lines to the other at no charge and have call-waiting on the final line for just the small fee charged for the call-waiting feature. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nduehr@netcom.com (Nathan N. Duehr) Subject: Re: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 10:39:17 GMT Mark E Daniel (mark@legend.akron.oh.us) was talking about LD Carrier's Message Delivery Services: MCI is offering one of these services via their calling cards, and in the three occasions I have tried it, all three parties have not received their messages. In one case, the party may not have been home within the allotted eight hour time frame in which the call must have been completed. In another case an answering machine answered the phone. I am personally very unimpressed with MCI's service, and will not be using it again. Regards, Nate Duehr nduehr@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 03:55:18 PDT Said by: Mark E Daniel > The person writing about this prompted me to try an experiment. I > believe it might be a nice idea if the LD carriers offering this > service automaticly detected the busy signal and offered me the option > of leaving a message or hanging up or dialing another number. Sprint > offers a similar service to AT&T's costing the same as far as I can > tell. At least delivery in the US is at the same price. I was > unable to use AT&T's service. I received a message stating that all > representatives were busy and that I should try my call again later. On an AT&T call, if it is busy or no answer, all you have to do is hit #123 and you will be connected to AT&T Message Service. It is not handled by live operators unless you hit 0 to request one. Also, if you use the #123 mode to access Message Service, you do not need to enter the calling number, nor chargeback number (because the original call was placed with a calling card). Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ From: weisen@alw.nih.gov (Neil Weisenfeld) Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy? Organization: NIH Div of Comp Rsrch and Technology Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 20:59:32 GMT Steven Bradley (steven@sgb.oau.org) wrote: > However there is no enforcement of the importation ban, since U.S. > customs are not an authority to pass judgement of the technical > capabilities of a receiver, that is the FCC's job. But with the use > of FCC form 740, the FCC does not even need to see or certify a > receiver, hence there is no problem with importing these units. That I can't comment on the enforcement side of things, but I do want to point out that it is important to oppose an unenforcable law if you oppose what the law says. You never know when the law may become enforcable. About form 740, I was told that form 740 could not be used to get around the law. Again, maybe not enforcable, but still illegal. > the 800 mhz band), no re-tuning is needed. In theory, if they made > the EPROM replacable for purpose of field upgrades, and sold the > cellular full access EPROM as an after-market item, it would certainly > get around the dumb restriction. It does not stop you from getting > the scanners, nor does it stop the modifications, merely makes it more > difficult, but does not stop it. I doubt that this would work as the ready availability of plug-in parts to reenable cellular on the radio would render the radio "easily modifiable" and, therefore, supposedly illegal to import/manufacture. Neil Weisenfeld, Computer Engineer Internet: weisen@nih.gov Nat'l Insts. of Health, 12A/2033 Voice: 301/402-4030 Bethesda, MD 20892 Fax: 301/402-2867 ------------------------------ From: bkobb@newsignals.com (Bennett Z. Kobb) Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy? Organization: New Signals Research Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 13:46:57 GMT > However there is no enforcement of the importation ban, since U.S. > customs are not an authority to pass judgement of the technical > capabilities of a receiver, that is the FCC's job. Say what? The Customs Service's role is to bar importation of RF products illegal to market in the U.S. Customs does not have to pass technical judgement on a receiver. They have only to examine the importer's declaration of the FCC's permitted import categories for the device. As the rules put it: "Failure to properly declare the importation category for an entry of radio frequency devices may result in refused entry, refused withdrawal for consumption, required redelivery to the Customs port, and other administrative, civil and criminal remedies provided by law." > But with the use of FCC form 740, the FCC does not even need to see or > certify a receiver, hence there is no problem with importing these units. > That includes receivers which directly receive cellular -and- units which > can be modified easily. Form 740 had nothing to do with the ban on cellular-capable scanners, which the FCC and Customs are bound to enforce if they don't want to hear from the Hill and cellular industry lawyers. The FCC does have to see it and certify it unless you can straight-faced claim other pretenses and get away with it. And Form 740 was superseded by Customs ABI (Automated Broker Interface) -- more efficiently barring funky import attempts. Why risk breaking Customs and FCC regs to get a scanner that can pick up cellular? Buy a spectrum analyzer or a scanner that is already in the country under the previous rules, should you have a compelling need to do this. > It is also legal to import receivers for the purpose of exporting > them. Companies -can- import them and sell them to others in the > U.S. and stamp the invoice or have printed on the invoice the sale is > for export purposes. But this is an ancient scam with which the enforcement folks are well acquainted. BK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 12:57:55 CDT From: "Andrew C. Green" Subject: Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Leibold) writes: > {The Toronto Star} reports of a 14-month-old boy in Barrie, Ontario > who drowned while his mother attempted to dial 911. Unlike many > centres in Canada, Barrie does not have a 911 service, thus calls to > 911 are usually completed to a not-in-service recording. I have encountered this myself occasionally in the past when I had to call 911 from some unfamiliar location, and precious seconds would be wasted slamming down the phone and redialing for the Operator. This sort of begs the question, naive though this may be: Instead of routing the call to an intercept, can't it be routed to an operator instead? Any operator anywhere would probably be better than a recorded intercept telling the caller to hang up and guess again. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron Chicago, IL 60610-3498 ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns Date: Wed, 25 May 94 13:55:11 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Dave Leibold writes: > {The Toronto Star} reports of a 14-month-old boy in Barrie, Ontario > who drowned while his mother attempted to dial 911. Unlike many > centres in Canada, Barrie does not have a 911 service, thus calls to > 911 are usually completed to a not-in-service recording. The family > recently moved to Barrie and didn't realise that local emergency > numbers needed to be dialed direct. Seems to me that they should have let 911 calls go through to the local operator. South Central Bell used to do that with ESSs in non-911 areas (since 911 was built into the software), but not with SXS or crossbar (which would have had to be modified). We have a small-area situation in the Louisville area as well; a few homes in neighboring Oldham County are served by a CO in Jefferson County. SCB was apparently unable to break out those customers as being across the county line, so if they dial 911 they get the Jefferson County center. (Which is nothing more than a clearinghouse that forwards calls to the appropriate agency, so they just pass Oldham County stuff to the 911 center in LaGrange.) ------------------------------ From: rlvd_cif@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Rob Levandowski) Subject: Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York Date: Wed, 25 May 94 13:11:26 GMT [article about child drowning because parents dialed '911' in an area with no '911' service deleted] My parents have a cottage in southern New Hampshire, in a town whose full-time population is perhaps 500, but whose population swells to around 5000 in the summer because of the summer homes on the lakes. That region -- Cheshire County -- does not have widespread 911 service. There is a regional emergency dispatch center in Keene, but you have to dial 352-1100 to reach it. This is probably in part due to the fact that the equipment in the region seems pretty antiquated; only recently was the local office switched from mechanical switches to electronics (perhaps four or five years ago). This was in large part due, no doubt, to the presence of PC Connection/MacConnection in a neighboring town -- soon thereafter they started using ANI to speed orders. In any case, I'm sure the following bit of information is as true in other rural non-911 areas as it is in Cheshire County: If you can't get through to 911, you should try dialing 0 for the operator. The operator can connect you more quickly than it would take you to look up the number in a phone book or try to dredge it out of memory when you're in a panic. The gossip I've heard is that Cheshire County will jump directly to Enhanced 911 once all of the local offices install modern switches. Since virtually all emergency calls are handled out of the Mutual Aid center in Keene as it is, the political-boundaries question Pat mentioned is already resolved. Rob Levandowski macwhiz@cif.rochester.edu Computer Interest Floor associate / University of Rochester ------------------------------ From: steven@sgb.oau.org (Steven Bradley) Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts Organization: The Forest City Exchange, Forest City, Florida Date: Wed, 24 May 1994 22:19:27 GMT John Harris (joharris@io.org) wrote: > Quoting Tdgilman@iris-1.ce.berkel: >> I was trying out new modem software yesterday, and under the option >> where one can specify the number of redial attempts before giving up, >> somthing like the following reads: "Governement regulations may limit >> you to 10 redials maximum." > The rules apply to any telephone device, fax or modem. The TIA should > be petitioning the FCC for adoption of the new Part 68/CS-03 any time > now. Actually, there is a way around this, if it is software for a faxmodem, such as a fax server, the card itself in firmware is under government regulation, therefore, if you are a developer, do NOT use the internal redial option in the faxmodem, use the BUSY, VOICE, NO ANSWER result codes to re-dial it using the software command to redial last number or even A/ if the last was a dial attempt. This way the meddling FCC can keep its nose out it and allow unlimited and unregulated re-dialing. This is possible because the FCC regulates DEVICES, not SOFTWARE, therefore you can program software to redial 100s of times and the FCC could do nothing to prevent it. That is why they have BUSY, NO ANSWER, RRING, VOICE, etc. Internet: steven@sgb.oau.org | Steven G. Bradley steven@gate.net |---------------------------- GEnie: s.bradley6@genie.geis.com | Don't you think it's about CompuServe: 73232.505@compuserve.com | time we FIRED the Federal America Online: sgbradley@aol.com | Communications Commission? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I hope you are the next victim of someone's 'unregulated and unlimited redialing' rather than me. And no, I do not think 'it is about time we fired the FCC ...'. I think it is time we gave the agency even greater enforcement powers in a few instances that I will not go into here at this minute. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #250 ******************************