Telecom

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ Telecom / 1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso / back.issues / 1981-86.volumes.1-5 / vol4.iss064-118 < prev next >

Wrap

Text File | 1990-12-09 | 401.7 KB | 9,921 lines

Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #64 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Fri, 3-Aug-84 19:05:21 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Fri Aug 3 16:02:38 1984 TELECOM Digest Saturday, 4 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 64 Today's Topics: Advantageous European Use of non-fixed-length phone #s Single tone after dialing Re: Charging for local Directory Assistance calls AT&T goes to the Olympics Unordered phone from AT&T 1+ in NJ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu 26 Jul 84 16:34:57-CDT From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA> Subject: Advantageous European Use of non-fixed-length phone #s In Germany, you frequently find, that large institutions (with many lines) have a very short phone-number, which gives you their in-house information. If you know the extension of the person you want to call, all you do is keep on dialing, and you get through directly. for example: 1) dialing 607 gets you company X operator, who connects you to the person Y on extension 123 2) dialing 607123 gets you through direct. This has several nice advantages and one disadvantage: D) there is, of course, a question of timing, when dialing the first few digits, which get you the operator, if nothing else follows during a certain time-period. A) it's easier to remember shorter numbers A) when calling from overseas, I don't get charged when Y is not near his phone. TO leave a message, I dial again to reach the company operator. Sometimes, the company operator can be reached without having to redial, by hitting one of the special keys, I believe. (I know about PERSON-to-PERSON calls, thank you. You know, of course, why I prefer to dial DIRECT. Unfortunately, an answering machine or a secretary taking messages defeats my economy measures, a topic which might be worth addressing seperately, i.e. "Desirable PHONE Features and Usage Patterns" Maybe, I'll get to that later. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jul 84 11:31:45 PDT (Friday) Subject: Single tone after dialing From: Bruce Hamilton <Hamilton.ES@XEROX.ARPA> What does it mean when I always get a loud, single tone after dialing certain prefixes (presumably electronic exchanges)? The call then goes through very quickly. --Bruce ------------------------------ Sender: Wegeng.Henr@XEROX.ARPA Date: 29 Jul 84 11:17:19 EDT (Sunday) Subject: Re: Charging for local Directory Assistance calls From: Don Wegeng <Wegeng.Henr@XEROX.ARPA> My own experience here in Rochester NY (which is served by Rochester TelCo) is that it *is* possible for the D.A. operator to determine whether a D.A. call is *necessary*. For example, if I request a number which was assigned after the current edition of the phone book was published, the D.A. operator will give me the number and then ask me what is the number that I am calling from so that a credit can be given for the call to D.A. I have no idea whether Rochester TelCo uses a different system than is standard for D.A., but it is clear that there is system which allows this feature. /Don ------------------------------ Date: 29 July 1984 22:53-EDT From: Bruce J. Nemnich <BJN @ MIT-MC> Subject: AT&T goes to the Olympics This from today's Boston Globe: ------------------------------------------------------------ Overseas journalists left hanging on the telephone LOS ANGELES -- AT&T, once the most sophisticated telephone systen on the planet, has become the laughingstock here among foreign journalists, who have been waiting all week to get overseas lines installed. The French, who say arrangements are the worst they've seen in a quarter-century, threatened to walk out. The Germans say that the Russians and Yugoslavs were much more technically advanced. Meanwhile, the Pacific Bell people are ready to reach out and slug someone. They've been catching hell from US journalists for uninstalled phones that are AT&T's responsibility. Making things worse is that AT&T is making everybody pay through the nose. Ah, divestiture. The irony of all this is that AT&T has devised the most creative electronic message system in history to make for easy communications within the Games. Any journalist, official, volunteer, coach or athlete can reach another in seconds or find a wealth of Olympic-related material. It's become a more popular toy here than any video game. ------------------------------ Date: Wed 1 Aug 84 15:24:22-PDT From: Bob Larson <BLARSON@USC-ECLB.ARPA> Subject: Unordered phone from AT&T Recently I received, via UPS, an unordered telephone from AT&T. There was an order number on the mailing label but no explanation of why I received it either on or in the package. Another person I know also received such a phone, and upon contacting AT&T was informed it was on a special "3 month free trial" and that they would pay postage for its return if she did not wish to pay rental for it. Does anyone know if the regulations on such packages from UPS are the same as in the mail? (Mail regulations specify that you can keep unordered goods.) Is AT&T trying this anywhere besides Los Angeles? If I had wanted to rent a phone, I would have expected to be able to choose color and model. I feel no obligation on my part to waste my time returning this unordered merchandise. Bob Larson <Blarson@Usc-Eclb.Arpa> ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jul 84 14:36:13 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: 1+ in NJ Euugh, I *hate* 1+ already!! Interestingly enough, you still don't need it for 800 numbers, but you need it for 900 numbers, and 700 still doesn't work here [when are they going to install that for real??]. I guess they assume that 800 will never be used as an exchange - but how about the rest of the n00's?? Would they be used as exchanges at some point? Now, if the office is smart enough to tell me ''I must first dial a 1 before this number'', why doesn't it just tack it on and send the call? The current setup seems excessively idiot-proof to me. _H* ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #65 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Tue, 7-Aug-84 20:47:54 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Tue Aug 7 17:43:05 1984 TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 8 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 65 Today's Topics: What is the 700 pseudo-area ? Long distance directory assistance Western Union Easylink AT&T problems, inefficiencies, and stupidities loud tone after dialing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 Aug 1984 17:11 PDT From: Lars Poulsen <LARS@ACC> Subject: What is the 700 pseudo-area ? Reply-to: LARS@ACC A submission in last TELECOM digest mentioned 700 numbers. I know about 800 and 900 numbers, but what is the 700 pseudo area code ? / Lars Poulsen ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Aug 84 19:25:38 edt From: "John Levine, INTERACTIVE, 441 Stuart St, Boston MA From: 02116(617-247-1155)" <haddock!johnl@cca-unix> Subject: Long distance directory assistance Now that Ma is charging 50 cents a pop for long distance directory assistance, it appears that we have competition in that arena, too. MCI has been touting their directory assist at 45 cents rather than 50, and an experiment shows that SBS provides it too (I'll have to wait for the bill and see what it cost.) Do any readers know if other OCCs are providing it, yet, and how much they charge? Also, 50 cents regardless of time of day seems awfully high, considering that I can make a one minute toll call for about half that. How much are the long distance carriers paying the local telcos for it? John Levine, ima!johnl or Levine@YALE.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 1984 12:56:20 EDT (Monday) From: jose rodriguez <jrodrig at mitre-gateway> Subject: Western Union Easylink Have anyone signed up with WU Easylink? I just have and is it poor. First after sending a letter saying I was interested in it, I got a phone call from this woman which I could hardly understand and would only repeat this canned speech about "... easy this and easy that..". It was pretty obvious she was just trained into getting accounts without little knowledge of what she was actually dealing with. Fine. Now she insisted on me telling her what kind of equipment I was using - it seems you are allowed only one. Well I was trying to tell her that I used several: ibmpcs, terminals and a c64 at home and that it does not matter what equipment I use but for some reason she just couldn't deal with this. I bet she had a form with one entry in it. Finally I told her to put down ibmpc (probably the most generic answer). A week later I get this letter with several different codes but no phone numbers. I mean how do they expect to connect with their network? Also I got this little note saying that they will send me their user guide in a week. Today I got a mailgram letter saying that they were forwarding a msg I had because I haven't read it in 10 days. I called their phone: 800 WU CARES (good sarcasm) and after waiting for a long time a lady told me the phone and several characters I have to type before being ask to login. Do this people expect to compete with MCI Mail? It looks like WU really doesn't know what they are doing. I yet don't know what types of mail I can send (beyond being able to access telex terminals and send telegrams). Any comments? Jose jrodrig@mitre-gw ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 84 01:25 EST From: Andrew D. Sigel <sigel%umass-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> Subject: AT&T problems, inefficiencies, and stupidities All is certainly not well with either AT&T Informations Systems or AT&T Communications. I have recently had my own annoying (albeit minor) difficulties with them, and these, related below, definitively illustrate to me the new lower levels of service we all have to look forward to. When I moved at the beginning of June, I purchased one of the phones I was leasing, and returned the other one. This was done on two separate days, and through my local AT&T Phone Center Store. I purchased the phone on May 31, and returned the second phone on June 6. My June 16 bill arrived, and neither transaction was on it. Fine, thought I, a little over two weeks is not unreasonable. When my July 16 bill arrived from New England Telephone with no mention of my purchasing the phone, and yet another full months rent on both phones, I got a little miffed, and called ATT IS. The purchase order finally came through on July 20 (seven weeks), and the termination order on the second phone had not yet come through. I had to locate my receipt for the return and call them back, even though it had no more information than I had already related over the phone; the first cust. service rep. would not process the return on my say-so, while the second would. It is the notion of a seven week back-log that I find a dangerous symptom. I called ATT Com. the other day to get a rate card for their long-distance system. I wanted to know just what the advantage was in having MCI, and there is nothing like comparing a rate chart from MCI with one from ATT to find out exactly what kind of premium is to be paid. Quite frankly, I was appalled at the combination of mis-information and non-information ATT presented me with in the guise of information. To the best of her knowledge, my representative thought that an information sheet would be going out to customers, but she thought it would be the usual chart showing what hours were day, evening, and night, and what the discounts would be, but with no actual rates. Her explanation of this probable omission? Why print a rate schedule if it was (FCC willing) going to be changing soon, and downward, too. (Never mind that the competitors do just that.) The schedule would naturally not include any intra-state rates, either. She did offer to look up individual rates for a given area code and prefix, but had no way of finding out which mileage category these rates were in. I was given some blatantly false information (other long distance companies don't have to tell the FCC when they want to change their rates while ATT does is the one that sticks to mind), and was given an extensive sales pitch on the unexciting $10/hour nighttime rate package (MCI is STILL cheaper, thank you very much). About intrastate rates, here in Massachusetts, ATT is the only carrier allowed to handle calls from the 413 to 617 area codes (and vice versa). Their rates are at least a third over comparable interstate calls (for the first minute) which is inexcusable, in my opinion. There is no reason why I should be able to call a friend in Boston from Amherst and talk for one minute, and pay the same price I would to call a friend in Los Angeles (evening rate). Finally, have people caught the ATT commercials with entire neighborhoods stampeding after the mail truck to get their phone bills, so they can get their coupons to buy varied merchandise with ATT credits? This new arm of ATT is so well organized that they were unaware I had moved as of two months after the move was accomplished. ATT IS and ATT Com. both knew I had moved, and had, along with NET, adjusted my bills quite efficiently (I received one bill combining calls from both numbers, and changing my billing date from the 13th to the 16th; 15 sheets in all), but they hadn't realized that I wasn't getting any coupon information. Incidentally, they'll be sending out your coupon credit balance every quarter starting in September, according to the gentlemen giving me the informaion (800-992-0992). In short, ATT doesn't seem to be telling its right hand what its left is doing, and doesn't much seem to care, either. I'll admit that no immediate credit for long numbers on MCI can be a pain. But its the only drawback so far to MCI, and if ATT isn't willing to give me a simple way to do comparison shopping (lets face it: who has 5 minutes to wait every time we want to know how much a call will cost), I won't shop at their 'store'. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 7 Aug 84 02:08:07-PDT From: David Roode <ROODE@SRI-NIC.ARPA> Subject: loud tone after dialing Location: EJ286 Phone: (415) 859-2774 I recently dialed a number and received a loud gong/chime tone after dialing. I was then connected to an Operator who told me "You've reached an operator" and suggested I re-dial. What is the gong/chime used for? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #66 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Tue, 14-Aug-84 18:28:56 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-ML:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Tue Aug 14 15:23:51 1984 TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 15 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 66 Today's Topics: [NYT: ITT 3takes] Directory Assistance 1+ dialing; Telequest AT&T intrastate rates Long distance Directory Assistance AT&T difficulties Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #64 [The disk pack (LIB:) which Telecom resides on was down due to a broken disk drive last week. Any mail addressed to TELECOM or TELECOM-REQUEST was lost and should be resubmitted to those addresses. --JSol] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 2 Jul 84 13:31:11-EDT From: Clifford Neuman <BCN@MIT-EECS> Subject: [NYT: ITT 3takes] NEW YORK -- It will be five years -- on July 11, to be exact -- since Rand V. Araskog, son of a Fergus Falls, Minn., dairy farmer, took over the reins of ITT, the telecommunications giant whose electronic wires span the globe. Araskog had the tough job of succeeding Harold Geneen, the legendary conglomerate builder who molded ITT into a $21 billion behemoth. But what Geneen brought together, Araskog has torn asunder, creating a trimmer, yet still troubled, ITT. In his tenure as ITT's chairman and chief executive, Araskog has lopped off more than 65 companies and raised some $1.2 billion in the process, substantially cut ITT's ballooning debt, and simplified ITT's unwieldy bureaucracy. For this, he has received high marks. But Wall Street eagerly awaits Araskog's next act. And, ITT's poor showing in the stock market is a measure of a widespread belief that not much else is waiting in the wings. ``This is no time for Araskog to rest on his laurels,'' said Harry Edelson, a technology analyst with the First Boston Corp. ``He's got to do something from here on out. It's time for the company to be reinvigorated. He's sold the cats and dogs. Let's get into the horses.'' Added Brian R. Fernandez, an analyst with Nomura Securities: ``To get a real spark of renewed investor interest, you need either a divestiture or operations will have to turn around.'' But ITT is so huge that Araskog's next move will have to be a stunner to have any impact. He sits at the pinnacle of an empire that resembles a Hollywood version of the multinational mega-corporation. ITT is the king of telecommunications overseas and is just beginning to break into the American market, newly opened to all comers after the AT&T divestiture. Its insurance and information operations include the Hartford Insurance Group and the electronic mail system used by the White House. And it has a grab bag of other diverse businesses including Rayonier forest products, Sheraton hotels, Scott lawn products, and the Continental Baking Co., maker of Wonder Bread and hostess Twinkies. ITT is a sleek corporate world where Araskog jets to meetings h Brussels, London, Washington, and New York in a turquoise-and-white 12-passenger Gulfstream III. He meets monthly with his 80 senior lieutenants in a corporate board room of microphones and maps, a setting that looks like everyone's fantasy of a Pentagon war room. Yet behind this facade of high-stakes finance is a company burdened by problems in many important lines of its business. Araskog refused to be interviewed for this article, but analysts and others familiar with his sprawling domain were, for the most part, critical and impatient with ITT's lumbering progress of late. The company's much-heralded foray into the wild and woolly American electronics market has been characterized as tepid, at best. The strong dollar continues to push down ITT's earnings from abroad, the source of over half its pre-tax income. Storm-related losses -- some $15 million from one East Coast storm last March alone -- have battered the Hartford Group, ITT's single biggest income source. And, many of its businesses are only marginally profitable: Pretax profit margins in 1983 plunged to 1.3 percent for insurance, were a scant 4.2 percent for hotels, and 4.5 percent for bakery operations, and even its core telecommunications business returned only 7.8 percent. All the while, Wall Street continues to clamor for ITT to sell even more low-performing businesses in order to raise the cash to further pay down its still-sizable debt and to fund its brighter prospects. In the 1984 first quarter, ITT's earnings fell to 52 cents a share, from 92 cents in the previous first quarter. Analysts have recently been lowering ITT's 1984 earnings estimates to less than the $4.50 that ITT earned in 1983 on sales of $20.2 billion. ``I've described ITT to my clients as either a permanent mediocrity or a turnaround that won't happen,'' said one analyst, who declined to be named. ``On paper, they seem to have a lot of strengths. But those strengths don't seem to pay off.'' ITT has made much ado lately about cracking the American telecommunications market, which accounts for about 40 percent of the world market. American telecommunications is the promised land for ITT -- it feels it can parlay its overseas expertise in making telephone switching equipment and office switchboards onto American soil. But, to date, ITT has barely gotten its foot in the door. Most of its domestic sales have been in basic telephones, some five million or 20 percent of the market, in 1983 alone. At the high ticket end of the market, its products are few -- and dated -- and many analysts say that ITT hasn't shown much appetite for competitive battles. Instead, aggressive competitors like Canada's Northern Telecom and Western Electric have left ITT in the dust in critical product areas. ``ITT is a company that's blown more telecommunications opportunities in the last 10 years than any other company,'' said Harry Newton, president of Telecom Library Inc., a telecommunications research group. ``ITT has faced the same opportunities that hundreds of newcomers have faced in this industry. But ITT has not had the resources, or management focus, or attention, or discipline to do anything.'' The company has done poorly in the $3 billion-a-year market for new central office switching systems used by phone companies. It spent over $1 billion to develop its new digital switching product, the 1240, a state-of-the-art entry that has been rolling up sales overseas. But ITT must still pump millions more into the 1240 to adapt it for the American market and the product may not even be available here until 1986. ITT's domestic version, the 1210, is considered the Cadillac of the industry here, but is so expensive that it has fared badly in the face of aggressive competition. In the market for PBXs, automated switchboards critical to the offices of the future, ITT offers only a single low-end product that must do battle in the most competitive end of this market, also estimated to be in the $3 billion range. ``They've not done well in the central office market or in PBXs, which is the fastest-growing market,'' said William Ambrose, an analyst with Northern Business Information, a research group. ``They offer products of old design and they haven't been quick to react. There going to have to come up with some new products soon or they'll be in big trouble.'' Many of ITT's woes can be traced to its legacy as a supplier to governments and not a marketer to end users. ITT's telecommunications sales overseas have been largely to government agencies. As a result, ITT is well schooled in the ways of wooing governments, but not in facing stiff rivals in wide-open markets. And ITT is being forced to develop these new skills in one of the most turbulent areas of American business. ``They've never had to position themselves in this market and they've never had to face this intense competition,'' said Robert Sullivan, an analyst with Paine Webber. Added Ambrose: ``They've never had to understand what the end user wanted. They had to understand what the governments wanted and then engineer it to those standards.'' ITT, however, shrugs off such remarks. ``There's no reason to believe we won't do well in the American market,'' said M. Cabell Woodward Jr., chief financial officer of ITT ``We've only been up and operating here for a short time, but our worldwide telecommunicatons effort is going well and I would be suprised if we didn't do well here.'' Woodward pointed to a few recently placed orders -- a $150 million sale to United Telephone of Florida of a 1240 system and sales of other equipment to four of the seven Bell operating companies -- as evidence of ITT's success. ITT is also moving into computers, where it faces many problems as well. The company has gotten low marks for its highly advertised entry into personal computers, the ITT XTRA, an IBM-compatible machine that has been dubbed just another ``me-too'' product in an already crowded field. Tough competition has already forced ITT to slash prices of the XTRA by 20 percent -- even before shipping it to stores. ``ITT will have a battle royal on its hands and there's no telling whether they will win,'' said Ulric Weil, a technology analyst with Morgan Stanley. ``This is not the best of times to be a new entry and it is still a fairly hostile environment for IBM-compatible PCs. There are some 50 companies making them and ITT will be going against the likes of AT&T, Sperry, and IBM. The fact that ITT has had to cut prices already shows how treacherous these waters are.'' [The article goes on to describe some of ITT's ventures, other than telecommunications, so I deleted that segment for publication in this list. --JSol] ------------------------------ Date: 7 Aug 1984 2008-PDT From: Bob McConaghy <RMCCON at SRI-CSL.ARPA> Subject: Directory Assistance Satellite Business Systems is charging 45 cents for two numbers through their own directory assistance service. ------------------------------ Date: Wed 8 Aug 84 09:45:54-PDT From: Richard Furuta <Furuta@WASHINGTON.ARPA> Subject: 1+ dialing; Telequest I don't know why there's the resistance to dialing 1+ for long distance calls. It can be a very useful device from the standpoint of the telephone user. In this area, 1+ dialing is required for all toll calls. I find it very useful to be reminded that a call is toll when returning a call from within this area code. It's a real easy rule to remembe---if you have to dial 1+ you have to expect a toll charge. Pacific Northwest Bell is offering a new service called "Telequest." In essence, it looks like they've combined the yellow pages and directory assistance. You call the number, ask for a category (and some number of subcategories), and the operator gives you three business names and addresses in your area. The example they give in their ad is finding a hotel with restaurant and gym. A bit of a shocker is the cost ("a mere $1.85 a call" they say in their advertisement). Also if interest is that they've assigned the service a 555 prefix number. --Rick ------------------------------ Date: 8 August 1984 12:56-EDT From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC> Subject: AT&T intrastate rates The fact that intrastate long distance rates are much higher than interstate rates over the same distance is not the fault of AT&T. State Public Utility Commissions jack up these rates way above costs and use the surplus to keep local basic rates low. In the past the FCC has done the same with interstate rates, but they are moving to more cost-based pricing. If rates were all based on costs, you could expect a $25-30/month bill for your basic service, but long distance rates (interstate) would be about 34% less, and intrastate rates about 50% less. Good for companies which make lots of long distance calls, but residential customers would be very unhappy. Marvin Sirbu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Aug 84 02:30 EST From: Andrew D. Sigel <sigel%umass-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> Subject: Long distance Directory Assistance Both ATT and MCI offer two free calls per billing period, providing that you have made long distance calls (I think in the amount of $10.00 or more is the minimum, but I'm not sure) during said same period. It is therefore possible to parlay that into 4 free calls per billing period if you keep track and spread them out, after which MCI is a nickel cheaper. I expect that the 45/50 cents figure comes not only from the time of the call (which can last a couple of minutes), but also to pay for operator time and other related expenses. Whether it's justified is another question entirely. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Aug 84 10:01 EST From: Steven Gutfreund <gutfreund%umass-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> Subject: AT&T difficulties ATT Service has definitely degraded. 1) I signed up for "Reach out America (and slug someone)". They completely botched the billing, charging me double (when the should not have charged me for installation, and not noting the first free hour. 2) They re-issued a credit card with my name spelled wrong. Think this is an easy thing to fix, forget it. NET does the accounting so they have the credit card info, But they can't reissue a new card since the only way they can change a name is to cancel the old card (and number) and re-issue a new one. Ok, so what do I care, the same number is used by AT&T on their card, I will use that card. No, that card also has a Name mis-spelling, and they can't correct it because of NET. This is all the more aggravating because my original card and my monthly billing appears correctly each month. 3) My sister with PAC Tel Marketing in Silicon Valley tells me that they are in a real tizzy out there. The valley has run out of all DDN service, can't install any more, and they have been waiting forever for the packet switching technology to become available. It seems that all of this is the result of putting all your chips into the new untested technology, and getting burned by engineers who tell you they are "almost ready". I used to feel that AT&T was overly consevative and tortoise-like with their umpteen years of development and Nteen field test, after looking at how they have been rushing into half-done projects, I tend to feel they may have to slow down a bit. Query: why do other smaller companies have it easier at developing new products (outside of smaller customer base). - Steven Gutfreund ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Aug 84 04:19:13 pdt From: sun!gnu@Berkeley (John Gilmore) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #64 A question I haven't seen answered anywhere: Why does Mother Bell not permit you to dial your own area code when making a local call? For electronic exchanges it clearly can be ignored by the software, and it makes it harder to write programs that know how to dial any phone number. (Of course in 1+ areas it would have to ignore the 1+ too. Big deal.) PS: Telecom seems to be back (at least V4 #64) on the Usenet. Thanks, whoever brought it back...it's been gone for months. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #67 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Wed, 15-Aug-84 19:08:16 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Wed Aug 15 16:03:10 1984 TELECOM Digest Thursday, 16 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 67 Today's Topics: EasyLink New Toy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 84 23:38 EDT From: Dehn@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA (Joseph W. Dehn III) Subject: EasyLink EasyLink definitely has problems, but it is not quite as bad as it looks at first. All your questions about phone numbers and who you can send to will be answered when you get your user guide. That is, assuming you actually read through it. When I got mine, I looked at it a little, and decided I didn't want to. It had all these strange-looking command sequences, with plus-signs after them, and I decided they were crazy to be offering something like this to the general public. So I didn't even try it. Some time later I got a call from one of their sales reps, who was surprised when I told him that I was already signed up (apparently they don't bother to check their subscriber list when following up sales leads). Unlike the robot-person who collects the sign-up information, this person tried to be helpful, and caused me to reconsider reading the manual. I did so, and found that it is not a total loss. In fact, in some ways it actually is "Easy"er than MCI Mail. The thing that I find most frustrating about MCI Mail is the excessive prompting. (I know, I can pay extra and have less. Amazing marketing strategy.) EasyLink has just about none. Although the syntax looks strange at first, being derived from Telex, it is very concise and regular (except for the "computer letter" services that have been kludged on). For someone used to computer languages, it is simple once you read the manual. And if you ARE a computer (e.g., a mail system), it is definitely much friendlier; this is probably a consequence of the fact that Telex messages are often sent automatically using paper tape. Unfortunately, the average user will probably find this too much to learn in one step. If Western Union expects to sell this in competition with MCI Mail, they will have to do one or more of the following: (1) make an optional prompting mode, (2) make a front-end program for personal computers that masks the syntax (they are selling something called EasyLink Instant Mail Manager, but I am not sure if it does this or just provides word processing and terminal emulation), (3) completely re-do the documentation so as to introduce the new user to the essential features step by step. Another thing that makes the service more confusing than it needs to be is the existence of two different mailbox identifiers for each user: an "EasyLink mailbox" number, and an "EasyLink Telex" number. The second is intended for use by regular Telex subscribers who want to send you a message. However, since EasyLink subscribers can send to any Telex user by simply specifying the Telex number, they too can use your "EasyLink Telex" number to send you a message. There is nobody who needs to use the "EasyLink mailbox" number! This is apparently a vestige of a previous policy where some more deliberate action was needed to connect EasyLink and Telex, but now it just adds confusion. One more comment on electronic mail companies in general: they don't seem to understand that electronic mail is a way to communicate. I am constantly getting paper messages from MCI announcing this and that; never have they sent me an electronic message, except (sometimes) in response to a message I have sent to MCIHELP. As for Western Union, when the sales rep offered me a phone number where I could call if I had any questions, I asked if there was some way I could reach him via EasyLink, so he gave me a Telex number. When I sent a question to that Telex number, I got a reply (from a different person - it was a general customer service department or something) telling me that they were unable to answer my question because they didn't have my telephone number! -jwd3 ------------------------------ Date: 14 May 84 21:38:13 EDT From: Hobbit <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: New Toy I recently bought myself a dialer, and seek to share my experiences with it. This is a pocket-size unit with a flip-open case, and doubles as a clock, calculator, memory or manual dialer. Officially, it is the Dictograph Dial-It II, and can be had for ~60 clams from DAK inc. [The other catalog houses wanted $70!] Now, *I* have no real use for a memory dialer, since I am reasonably good at remembering numbers and can easily outstrip this sucker for speed. This thing has 100 ''locations'' capable of holding 32 digits each [but see below]. Why so many digits, I ask?? I still haven't figured that one out - do you know anytime you would dial 32 numbers to call somewhere?? So the sucker finally showed up in the mail, and if it had a personality and wanted peace and quiet, it came to the wrong place. What do any of us do when we get a new machine? We hack away at it until we discover first its weaknesses/shortcomings, and then the workarounds to overcome those [meanwhile submitting SPR's]. I removed it from its box and examined it. Click, the case opens from the *top* - weird! Actually it turns out that this configuration makes it easier to hold and type buttons with one hand. The display was blank. I pressed a likely-looking button and got a ''d'' in the rightmost digit. Then I figured What The Hell, they gave me this nice manual along with it, might as well read it. The documentation told me the basic syntax of commands, and I took it from there. The unit does indeed produce touch-tones from a very small speaker built into the bottom. This unit is a tad thicker than a typical clock of its type; its batteries are somewhat tall and there must be room for the speaker. A small array of holes cut through the bottom of the case lets the tones out. They are the typical tones generated by that dialer chip - more square-wavey than a regular TT pad and mixed up with clocking glitches. This tends to reduce performance because the Bell tone parsers are touchy and want tons of volume. Because this must pass through the carbon mike, acoustic interfacing and tone volume/purity become somewhat important. The manual claims that if you hold the handset such that the microfern is sitting in a vertical position, it will work better - and indeed, this is the case. Holding a carbon mike that way does increase its transmission capabilities - How, I have no idea. They also mention the well-known trick of pounding the handset on the wall to break up the carbon particles. So, as I was playing around with it, storing things, deleting them, trying to do recursive invocations, whatever... I discovered lots of shortcomings, which I will not hesitate to pass back to the manufacturers. Neato things include a password you can enable to turn it on, a downcount timer, an upcount timer, 24-hour mode, 24-hour alarm, a slow-dial hook for flakey fern systems, and a Manual mode in which you press button, unit sends that tone just like a regular TT pad. Following are excerpts from the resultant flame I sent off to these people. ----------------- The unit is a really good idea, and can be quite useful even to one such as I who doesn't need 100 memories for phone numbers. With some minor fixes and improvements, this thing could be far and away the best dialer concept on the market. Let me, therefore, run down what I found wrong with it. You will see that I am using this approach because what I have to say will never fit on your Warranty Registration Card. I got your 800 number in Buffalo [the one you so thoughtfully *didn't* supply in the manual] and talked to someone who knew all about the 99 bug. He informed me that the designer resides overseas and is hard to reach; perhaps this can be forwarded to him through whatever channels?? The 99 bug is the one that bites when you attempt to modify Location 99 with a digit string of *shorter* *length* than the current contents. If you use a longer or equal string, it works okay. Otherwise the unit does really strange things with memory, loses your current storage, creates one or more locations containing *extremely* long strange sequences, and basically crashes, the only fix being power removal. You'd have to look at the microcode for the thing to begin to fix this one; I assume the aforementioned designer is responsible. The unit could use a Date register as part of the clock. This may not be built into the processor you use - but a suitable software workaround could probably be created without too much trouble. You advertise the capacity of the thing as 100 locations of 32 digits each. [That length, although *very* handy for some things, is a tad longer than most people would utilize for telephone numbers.] 100 x 32 4-bit digits is 3200 possible stored digits. Memory is kept in a 1Kx4 RAM, and allowing for location-pointer overhead, you actually get somewhere around 930 digit capacity across all the memories. This works out to around 30 *true* 32-digit locations. I notice that memory is used in dynamically-allocated chunks instead of fixed partitions - *nice* feature, but to live up to the advertising, it should have a 4K memory or so in there. The manual also fails to mention that an attempted SET returns the ''d'' in the display if memory is full. I find it regrettable that one cannot use the * and # tones within stored numbers. I would greatly favor using other keys for SET and PAUSE, and allow the * and # equivalent tones to be stored in a location as well as 1-0 and L and C. 4 bits will address 16 possible keystrokes, so bus capacity for the extra keys shouldn't be any problem. You may not believe it but this has its uses, just like 32 digits do. A somewhat blue-sky idea: Why not, instead of making 99 and 98 special, allow the in-stream insertion of *any* other location?? That way, if you have more than one long-distance carrier service, you can program more than one access code. With Bell's divestiture, there will come a day when each call will be cheapest via a certain carrier. The Dial-it could not only store a number, but using the ''insert-location-XX-here'' feature, the user can program the cheapest calling method in on top of it. Once you get people to understand what this feature could do for them, they would *welcome* a dialer with the capability. Added security would be provided by the fact that someone else wouldn't know where the person stored his personal access codes. When more of these things hit the market, all someone has to do is say ''oh neat, let me look at that'', type 99 or 98, and remember the person's access numbers, unless they are stored in some other place selected by the owner. I like the ''lock'' feature, but its usefulness diminishes when all I want to do is check the time. I therefore would only use the lock if I *know* I'm not going to be looking at it for a while, or there's a chance it would fall into the wrong hands. I haven't come up with a defeat for a locked unit yet, but give me time.... The tones leave something to be desired. The dialer chip is known for imposing a lot of clocking glitches on the signal and producing something less pure than the sine waves from a good ole Western Electric touch-tone pad. The fact that the signal must pass through the carbon mike compounds the difficulty. I found that my unit, as shipped, would not *reliably* dial my home phone [which has a brandy-spanking-new mike in it], and was completely useless on public fones. Bashing the handset and holding it vertically helped a *little* but I'd still have trouble. In an effort to fix this, I did the following: First, I installed a resistor in parallel with the one going to (-) for the output transistor. Halving the supplied resistance makes the tones louder [that's 50 ohms, supplied by you, down to 20 or 25 now. I suppose it'll drain the batteries faster!], and this somewhat improved matters. But after the carbon mike, the key to success is not just noise, it's still purity. I noticed that when I held the dialer atop a roll of electrical tape which in turn sat on the mike, performance was very good. The inside of the roll created sort of an acoustic chamber which did the right thing to the tones. I can't carry a roll of electrical tape everywhere I go, so I did the next best thing. As supplied, the configuration of holes in the back of the unit is flat and tends to rock around on the middle of the bulge of the mike piece. Since the edges therefore are open to the air, the tones escape. I sat the unit down on a small round object and bent the center of the hole pattern upward [into the unit] enough to clear the mike hump. Then I made a ring on the back out of string and duct tape. Although public phones still give me trouble, the unit works better than stock. I therefore offer the following suggestions: Build, into the back, some kind of rubber gasket that will seal around the microphone and create the right kind of resonant chamber between it and the dialer. This, if done right, won't add *too* much to the thickness. Perhaps there is an even flatter speaker out there in the market that will help? Increase the tone volume, and, if possible, high-filter the output so it's more ''pure''. I haven't figured out how to do that last bit yet; fiddling around with capacitors and things didn't work. Look into the chip that Rat Shack uses in their pocket dialer - I haven't checked but it may be different than the one you use, and I know that one does a *real* good job on any phone held in any position. I'm considering replacing the dialer chip if they are pin-compatible. Also, Rat Shack does have a rubber gasket on the back of theirs which lies quite flat and greatly aids transmission. The calculator section needs some work. Just about any $9.95 LCD calculator you pick up today will do constant holding on at least multiply and divide. That is, if you type 2 X = = = = you will see building powers of 2. This thing doesn't do that, requiring more typein, and if that wasn't bad enough, typing = twice is an implied *minus*!! Try typing 5 = = 3 =; you'll get 2. This is a definite *bug*. While you're at it, at least one memory on the calculator would be a real convenience. If you upgrade the memory to 4K, you could hold *lots* of extra numeric memory. I mentioned that the memory is dynamically partitioned. This is fine as far as capacity goes, but if you have lots of numbers programmed into it and try to read 99 or some higher-number location, the unit takes a *long* *time* to find that location. Fixed partitions might actually be more efficient and would fit in 4K, including length and insert-loc-here headers. An extra window should be installed in the lid, to keep dust out of the display. There should be a way to abort a long sequence, for those times where the phone missed a digit or something and you must otherwise wait for the entire sequence to play out [including pauses, etc]. This will become necessary, if you enable the insertion of any other location in a true recursive manner. For instance, if location 12 has 4 6 2 <insert-12> 5 in it, you'll get 4 6 2 4 6 2 4 6 2 ..... As it stands right now, 99 and 98 are recursive only one level deep, and only for the duration of *digits* within the invoked location. That is if 99 has 4 2 L 3 3 in it, invoking 99 will produce 4 2 4 2 3 3. True recursion would be more desirable [and more fun!], as long as there's an abort key. The stronger you make the case, the better. These pocket toys often get sat on, bent, and thrown around. The case as it stands is reasonably tough, but you can never be too safe, especially when they want $60 of my hard- earned green stuff for it. --------------- My inclination is to say Go Out and Buy One. It is a neat toy and has its uses, the discovery of which is left as a reader exercise. I wonder if I should have included a copyright notice along with all those ideas??? Yar, har. _H* ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #68 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Fri, 17-Aug-84 17:22:50 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Fri Aug 17 14:18:36 1984 TELECOM Digest Saturday, 18 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 68 Today's Topics: directory assistance 2400+ baud modems and protocols International Calling Information in the phone book [Once again, LIB: was offline. So if this is your third try at submitting TELECOM mail, I feel for you. --JSol] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11 August 1984 21:10-EDT From: Ray Hirschfeld <RAY @ MIT-MC> Subject: directory assistance SBS's "We've Got Your Number" directory assistance costs $.45 for up to two requests, according to an insert to my latest bill. If they can't provide the number for some reason, they'll charge you anyway. ------------------------------ Date: 15 Aug 84 22:22:36 EDT From: jalbers@BNL Subject: 2400+ baud modems and protocols I am looking for any and all information on 2400 baud modems for use over Ma Bell lines between micros, micro to mini, or between mini's. I've seen 2400 baud modems adverrtized in places like BYTE that claim things like '300/1200/2400 Hayes compatable with parcticly no line lossage at 2400 baud'. Does this mean 2400 baud has some type of error check going on? How about these new Ven-Tel modems that sport 'variable baud rates'? What exactly does this mean to the user? Does the micro also have to support 'variable baud rates?'. I really want to know all I can about the modems that operate above 1200 over standard phone lines. What kind of 'protocols' do they have, how hard are they to get running, what considerations the user has to make when ordering one, and which one is the 'best buy'? Jon (so many unanswered questions) Albers jalbers@bnl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Aug 84 12:18:19 EDT From: Rick Adams <rick@seismo.ARPA> Subject: International Calling Information in the phone book I recently needed to look up the country number for the Netherlands. I looked at the phone book and was astonished to find that it is no longer there. A little later, I looked a little harder and found it. Interestingly, the "Maryland Suburban" book has the International Calling Infromation, just like it alwyas did. However, the "Northern Virginia" and the "District of Columbia" books did not. (They did have it in the 1983 edition). All three of these books are put out by C&P Telephone, so I would expect them to have the same information. Which is normal, having the international info deleted or having it available? ---rick ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #70 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Tue, 21-Aug-84 20:22:12 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Tue Aug 21 17:19:01 1984 TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 22 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 70 Today's Topics: Re: Phone line woes 700 Pseudo-NPA Intrastate vs. Interstate rate differences New York City NPA split Re: Phone line woes NPA, NNX, and NXX Loud Touch Tones ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20 Aug 84 23:53:11 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: Re: Phone line woes I called some parts house in California today, and got dumped into their ''all our reps are busy, please hold for next available one'' queue. Then some generic Muzak came on, which was all broken up. Figuring I had a lousy connection, I dialed 0+ the number to get credit. First attempt: ''I got a real crummy connection on this one before.'' Click! The oper hung up on me. Thank you for using AT&T, my rump!! Second attempt: Same line, oper apologized for the inconvenience and offered credit and reconnection, as she had been trained to do. I warned her that she'd reach the recording again. She said she'd *wait* until I reached a human! I said ''Hmm, if you do that, STATPAK will get mad at you...'' ''How do you know about that??!!'' ''Oh, I used to work there...'' -- I went on to explain how I had left shortly after they had implemented this package that runs under TSPS and monitors all the call handling rates of the operators. A truly fascist piece of software. She informed me that not only was it still in place, they were cracking down and trying to get the operators to handle calls even faster than before. I told her that in that case I had better stick out the recording alone, and she went away. Well, although it's true that the divestiture/competitive system has fouled everything up beyond recognition, a lot of what you see still depends on the individual you deal with. Within five minutes I had seen the extreme ends of the operations spectrum. AT&T offers operator services, and plugs it like it's such an advantage over the other carriers. Well, what the hell are you supposed to do when there *is* no other way?? Amazing, the illogic a marketing department can hack up. _H* ------------------------------ Date: 20-Aug-1984 1310 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: 700 Pseudo-NPA The 700 NPA was assigned to AT&T's automatic conference system, which was discussed at some length a year or so ago. Briefly, this system allowed you to call the conference system nearest you (or to specifically choose any one of the conference systems in the country if that would be more advantageous) to begin setting up, by a special dialing sequence, a conference of up to about 50 participants. The basic rate structure was to pay for an MTS call for each leg of the conference between the conference system and each participant (including the "controller" of the conference) plus a fee for the use of the conference equipment. It was a neat system, but the FCC denied the tariff as proposed, because it represented a drastic departure from current pricing, which is based only on the originator's location, and not on the location of any of AT&T's equipment. The FCC determined that the proposed ratemaking was a dangerous precedent which could have a detrimental effect on the nationwide network. Shortly after this decision, the 700 code disappeared from all the places we had seen it installed. ------------------------------ Date: 20-Aug-1984 1315 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: Intrastate vs. Interstate rate differences As Dr. Sirbu points out, the difference between intrastate and interstate toll rates is part of the mechanism used to hold down the price of local service. The new LATA structure may cause this to gradually change. Since it is not the local company providing inter-LATA service, we may (this is mostly speculation on my part) see the inter-LATA intrastate rates head towards the interstate rates, especially as more competition emerges in this market. This may also mean that the intra-LATA toll rates in some areas may go even higher. There are two indications in the case of Massachusetts which may indicate the future course of ratemaking here: 1. The inter-LATA and intra-LATA rates were just revised, with New England Telephone and AT&T now having different rates. For the moment, they are essentially the same amounts, but the rate schedules are now separate. 2. The rates were lower than the old rates. This may indicate that in this area, intra-LATA rates may not need to rise as much as they might in other areas. Local calls are always measured on a timed basis for all but those residential customers who choose the more expensive unlimited service options, so the rate structure here may not involve as much of a cross-subsidy as in some other areas. ------------------------------ Date: 20-Aug-1984 1324 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: New York City NPA split The 212/718 split will take effect on 1 September 1984. 212 will be the Bronx and Manhattan, with 718 assigned to Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island. Permissive dialing will permit 212 to continue to be used for the entire city until 1 January 1985. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Aug 1984 12:38:35 PDT Subject: Re: Phone line woes From: Ian H. Merritt <SWG.MERRITT@USC-ISIB.ARPA> Pacific Bell is not without its service problems, but I think that in the long run, exccept for the excessive rates, this area will benefit (both in GTEville and Pacific) from the break-up. Still, I was not in favor of it in the first place, and I think I would still prefer it not to have happend. ------------------------------ Date: 21-Aug-1984 0941 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: NPA, NNX, and NXX Though we've discussed the alphabet soup many times in Telecom, since I just got an inquiry, I'll explain it again: NPA stands for Numbering Plan Area, and means area code. NNX means an exchange code which uses only the digits 2 thru 9 in the first two positions, and 0 thru 9 in the third. NXX means an exchange code which uses only the digits 2 thru 9 in the first position, and 0 thru 9 in the third. N0/1X is the format used (today) for NPAs. As you can see, an NXX exchange may have the same format as an N0/1X NPA. /john ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 84 15:38 EDT From: Denber.wbst@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Loud Touch Tones I went to Siggraph in Minneapolis last month and decided to make a phone call from my hotel room. I picked up the phone, held it to my ear and hit "9". The phone blasted out a tone that could be heard clearly across the room and through a closed door. It didn't take long to learn to hold the receiver at arm's length while dialing - it was painfully loud at the earpiece. The phone appeared to be a standard touch-tone desk phone and the voice levels were normal. Has anyone else ever encountered such an energetic tone generator? Is there any reason why the tones should be so loud? - Michel ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #71 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Wed, 22-Aug-84 17:44:38 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Wed Aug 22 14:41:08 1984 TELECOM Digest Thursday, 23 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 71 Today's Topics: NYC area code split N.E.T. before/after the breakup Multi-pair color codes Re: Loud Touch Tones ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Aug 84 21:47 EDT From: Richard Kenner <KENNER@NYU-CMCL1.ARPA> Subject: NYC area code split Does anyone know if companies who have large lists of residential phone numbers (such as banks, brokers, insurance companies, etc.) will be updating their lists to reflect the 212/718 split? Is NY Telephone providing information that would make this easier? What about businesses outside NYC (or NYS)? What about Universities? It seems to me that some organization (like NYU) which currently has my phone number but never calls would be exactly the type to not have to call until the number has been reassigned in 212 so they would get the wrong number unless they dialed 718. Should people in Queens, Brooklyn, and Staten Island try to remember what organizations have their phone numbers and call each to update it? ------------------------------ Date: 21-Aug-1984 2213 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: N.E.T. before/after the breakup JSol, I'm not sure your experience is any worse than many I've had with N.E.T. long before divestiture. A similar experience several years ago deserves relating. Our Corporate Telecom people were surprised to find a fairly large number of toll calls on one of our Arlington Foreign Exchange lines. Since we use those lines only for calls to the Boston Metro area, and since normal users have no direct access to the lines, this was pretty strange. N.E.T. couldn't figure out what was going on, and told us that we must have made the calls, since they were DDD calls, "obviously" placed from our lines. One thing we had noticed was that calls to the numbers for which we were receiving these bills were going unanswered. They should have been answered by our attendant. This raised my curiosity, and I started calling the numbers at various different times. Eventually, one evening, I got an answer. The person who answered lived in Arlington and had recently had phone service installed. She was getting bills for her local service, but had never been billed for any of her long distance calls. And, of course, she hadn't complained. The final answer was that before this started we had had some of the lines removed. N.E.T. had not been able to tell us which lines were removed. This was a rather strange method of finding out! (It was also a strange method of finding out how separate EVEN BEFORE DIVESTITURE the toll and local billing accounts were maintained.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 84 03:34 EDT From: Paul Schauble <Schauble@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA> Subject: Multi-pair color codes I seem to recall asking this before, but I can't find the answer in anything I have on hand. Does anyone know how the color coding works on multi-pair cables? In particular, - on two pair, red, green, black, yellow, which is ring and tip? - on multi-pair, which of color/white or white/color is ring/tip? - is there a preferred order for using the colors? Thanks, Paul ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 84 11:14:59 EDT From: Ron Natalie <ron@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: Re: Loud Touch Tones The reason is that the touch tones really are that loud. Real telephones mute the receiver while the buttons are being pressed. If you have a standard Western Electric phone, you can tell this by pushing a button in partially, which causes the mute, but not far enough in to generate the tone. -Ron ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #72 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!zehntel!zinfandel!dual!ucbvax!da emon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Thu, 23-Aug-84 19:06:42 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Thu Aug 23 16:02:06 1984 TELECOM Digest Friday, 24 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 72 Today's Topics: Telephone Headsets Universal Dialing Re: Multi-pair color codes DA charges 5-line wiring Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #71 SW Bell chooses Sprint Loud Touch-Tones ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wednesday, 22 Aug 1984 17:51:08-PDT From: nelson%quill.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (The universe is laughing behind From: your back) Subject: Telephone Headsets What's the deal with telephone headsets? I think they're neat, but the last time I checked into buying one, it was around $200! Does anyone know why they're so expensive? Any ideas on where cheaper ones can be found? JENelson Wed 22-Aug-1984 21:05 EST ------------------------------ Sender: SAI-relay@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Date: Wed, 22 Aug 84 21:40 EDT From: Frankston.SoftArts@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Universal Dialing Reply-to: Frankston@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA (Bob Frankston) The mention of the 700 NPA made me think of one that doesn't exist but should. One of the 800 services available redirects calls to a local handler. But the callee pays. It would make sense to have a similar service where the caller pays. It does seem silly to have to go through elaborate directories to find the nearest Airline, Tymnet/Telenet/Uninet/MCI Mail etc number. I should be able to dial 1-600-123-5456 from anywhere in the country. The rates would be equivalent to what a call to the local number would be. Admittedly this means that the charge would vary but at least it would not present the distance independence properties that upset the regulators with respect to 700 numbers. It would also greatly simplify providing software that does dialing. You would actually be able to ship a product wihout having to provide elaborate directories that must be updated constantly. Note that in the current system you cannot ship software that uses 1-617-123-4567 because that will not work within the 617 area Why?? I dunno, doesn't seem to make sense, but that it is. Of course, there is still the problem of prefixing to escape into the global name space. I.e., the "9", or "8-1" or whatever it takes to get out of the local PBX.. Does such a service exist? ------------------------------ Date: Wed 22 Aug 84 22:07:36-EDT From: Gene Hastings <Gene.Hastings@CMU-CS-C.ARPA> Subject: Re: Multi-pair color codes On 2 & 3 pair cables, green, black and white are tips of pairs 1, 2, and 3. Red, Yellow and blue are the respective rings. On multi-pair cables the colors blue, orange, green, brown and slate (gray) are paired with white for the first 5 pairs, then with red, then with black , yellow and violet for a total of 25 pairs. Therefore: Pair 1: blue/white; white/blue is tip Pair 2: orange/white Pair 3: green/white Pair 4: brown/white Pair 5: slate/white Pair 6: blue/red red/blue is tip etc. Pair 11:blue/black black/blue is tip ad nauseam. You may occasionally find existing communications cables (not necessarily telephone) that have unfamiliar or irregular color codes -like the ICEA (Insulated Cable Engineers Association)color code for control cable that has solid colors with several different stripes. Look in the vendor's catalog to figure these out, or cut it out and sell it for scrap. Gene ------------------------------ Date: 23 Aug 84 01:20:05 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: DA charges .. It turned out that they saved 3 to 7 seconds and that considering that they were getting so many million phone calls...they saved lots of money not spent on man-hours. Then why the hell are they *charging* now, where they used to have humans do all the work for free?? It's all so bass-ackwards. Between that, 1+, ''thank you for using AT&T'', and the inferior audio quality of the alternate carriers, it's almost enough to make one want to punt phone service entirely. Wait till the USPO has to go through the same thing. _H* ------------------------------ Date: 23 Aug 84 01:33:46 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: 5-line wiring Someone recently asked which wires are ring and tip on various configurations. I dug this out of some documentation a while back; it represents a more-or-less standardized way that TelCo wires their 5-line phones thru 50-conductor cable. I checked out the colors in a ''virgin'' WE fern removed from service, and they are the same. Most of the connections come up to that grey plastic thing under the dial with all the screws on it. The line columns are under each pickup key. --5-line wiring-- Fern Wire Amph Comments conn colors conn. ---- ------ ----- -------- 1R BluWht 1 Line 1 Ring 1T WhtBlu 26 Line 1 Tip 1B OrgWht 2 Line 1 "A1" lead 1H WhtOrg 27 Line 1 "A" lead 1L GrnWht 3 Line 1 Lamp LG WhtGrn 28 Line 1 Lamp Ground [on the 1x group] 2R BrnWht 4 Line 2 <ditto> 2T WhtBrn 29 . * GryWht 5 ?? - . 2H WhtGry 30 . 2L BluRed 6 . LG RedBlu 31 . 3R OrgRed 7 Line 3 3T RedOrg 32 . * GrnRed 8 . 3H RedGrn 33 . 3L BrnRed 9 . LG RedBrn 34 . 4R GryRed 10 Line 4 4T RedGry 35 . * BluBlk 11 . 4H BlkBlu 36 . 4L OrgBlk 12 . LG BlkOrg 37 . 5R GrnBlk 13 Line 5 5T BlkGrn 38 . * BrnBlk 14 . 5H BlkBrn 39 . 5L GryBlk 15 . LG BlkGry 40 . 1 BluYel 16 Aux signals: 2 YelBlu 41 . 3 OrgYel 17 . 4 YelOrg 42 . HL GrnYel 18 Hold light HLG YelGrn 43 . SG BrnYel 19 PB sig - ground to aux equipment L2 YelBrn 44 Buzzer light RR GryYel 20 Common Ringer [is line out to network block!] RT YelGry 45 . ER BluVio 21 Excluded ckt ET VioBlu 46 . [fone home!] EB OrgVio 22 . ["A1" for excl] EH VioOrg 47 . ["A" for excl] R GrnVio 23 Speakerfern hook [R1 lead] RR VioGrn 48 . [T1 lead] ON BrnVio 24 . [P3] ON1 VioBrn 49 . [P4] L1 GryVio 25 . [LK] N VioGry 50 . [AG] Lines: 1,26 4,29 7,32 10,35 13,38 "A" : 2,27 5,30 8,33 11,36 14,39 Lamps: 3,28 6,31 9,34 12,37 15,40 CommR: 20,45 ... Most of the *meanings* of the wires wasn't explained in any kind of text, so if you want further info you'll have to experiment, or try to to contact WE or someone else who makes 5-liners and get some additional documentation. _H* ------------------------------ Date: 23 Aug 84 09:22:14 PDT (Thursday) From: Thompson.PA@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #71 Re: NYC area code split (MSG from <KENNER@NYU-CMCL1.ARPA> in V4 #71) I would think that in the New York City case that updating company phone lists would be pretty easy. In this case they must be sortable along Zip Code lines. Does anybody happen to know if "The Phone Company" tries to do this when they split an area code or whether they just lucked out this time because Zip boundaries and exchange boundaries are likely to coincide when you come to a big river? Geoff <Thompson.pa@XEROX.ARPA> ------------------------------ Date: 23-Aug-1984 1523 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: SW Bell chooses Sprint This news item was in the August issue of Telecommunications magazine: Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. has selected GTE Sprint Communications Corp. to provide interstate long-distance service. The GTE Sprint Service will save the former BOC an estimated 17 percent ($50,000 annually) on certain business long-distance calls originating from Houston. Sprint will handle all official long-distance calls made by Houston telephone employees to locations outside Southwestern Bell's traditional five-state territory. Because of divestiture, SW Bell cannot maintain its own facilities outside its territory and must contract with long-distance companies for service. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Aug 84 09:52:05 pdt From: sdcsvax!sdccsu3!brian@Nosc (Brian Kantor) Subject: Loud Touch-Tones Most touch-tones phones have a resistor in series with the receiver element which is used to drop the level of tones while dialling. During the time that a button is NOT pushed on the dial, this resistor is shorted out so that full level is sent to the receiver element. Probably the phone you used had the contacts in the dial stuck together so the resistor didn't get in the circuit when you pushed a button. Maybe somebody spilled Coke into it or something. ihnp4 \ Brian Kantor, UC San Diego decvax \ akgua >---- sdcsvax ----- brian dcdwest/ ucbvax/ Kantor@Nosc ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #73 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Fri, 24-Aug-84 17:00:07 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Fri Aug 24 13:57:22 1984 TELECOM Digest Saturday, 25 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 73 Today's Topics: What you can find inside a phone... Long Distance Services Re: Telephone Headsets ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23-Aug-84 16:42:45 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: What you can find inside a phone... Some years ago, I was at a large swap meet, and there was this guy there trying to sell an ITT (non-telco-owned) 2500-type (desk touch-tone) phone. It seemed to be in pretty good shape, so I asked him what he wanted for it. "One dollar?" he replied. Hmmm. Rather inexpensive, even for an ITT set. It seemed to weigh about the right amount (so I figured it wasn't empty) and the transmitter and receiver were intact in the handset, so I bought it. So... I take the set home and try plugging it in. Seems to work OK, until I try to dial. Nothing! Not even the little tone bursts indicative of reversed polarity. So, I grab a screwdriver and open up the unit. The reason for the problem was immediately obvious. A petrified roach (who apparently had an incredibly bad sense of timing) was wedged between two of the contacts on the hookswitch. Once removed, the phone worked fine, and in fact it is now the "white courtesy telephone" that ties into my keysystem comm line in the livingroom. But really... talk about bugs in the phone system... --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 23 Aug 1984 18:34:13-PDT From: nelson%quill.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Documents of Our Lives.) Subject: Long Distance Services I recently checked out long distance services for the Nashua, NH area. I thought I'd share my results in case someone is thinking of joining one. Services compared: AT&T, Allnet, MCI, and GTE Sprint [I've also used a long distance service local to La Crosse, WI: Century Area Long Lines (CALL), but I don't think anyone's interested in hearing about that.] AT&T ==== Well, everyone knows about these guys. Their gimmick is the "coupons" that you get every time you make more than $15 worth of phone calls in a month. The more you spend, the more coupons you get. You get a statement every 6 months showing your current coupon balance. This promotion makes me think of the S&H green stamps my mom used to get; we wound up with TONS of those things, and never did get much out of them. Allnet ====== Their services are not offered in Nashua. My dad uses this (in Minneapolis), so I'm somewhat familiar with it. Allnet has two nice features that I know of. One is an 800 number which you can use when you're away from your home city. It's more expensive than AT&T operator-assisted rates IF you stay on the line for more than 5 minutes. Presumably, you'd want to use the 800 number to call your family or office in your home city; they'd call you right back, using the local access number. Allnet's other feature is you can charge your bill to your AMEX card. (My dad does this--don't know if they accept other cards.) MCI & Sprint ============ Both offer service in Nashua, with the standard claim for savings. MCI has no monthly fees; Sprint requires a minimum of $5 of phone calls per month. I went with Sprint, because MCI doesn't have any way for someone to use their service outside of their home city. I did hear a rumor (was it here?) that MCI has applied for clearance to offer nationwide 800 access, which customers will use instead of local access numbers. Supposedly, no additional fees are involved. Sprint doesn't have an 800 number like Allnet, but they give you a little booklet with all of the phone numbers for every city they serve. You can use your calling card in any of these cities, but the charge is similar to Allnet's 800 service: you end up paying more than operator-assisted rates if you stay on the line too long. Sprint also offers "volume discounts." For monthly bills greater than $20, you get an additional 8% off your daytime calls, 11% off your evening calls, and 12% off your weekend calls. The percentages go up if your bill is over $45 (somewhere around there), and once more around $75. So far I'm pleased with Sprint. Their line quality is OK. But, I tend to think that AT&T has everyone beat as far as that goes. I'd appreciate any corrections, experiences, feedback, etc. JENelson Thu 23-Aug-1984 22:41 EST ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Aug 84 9:17:14 EDT From: Robert Jesse <rnj@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: Re: Telephone Headsets Plantronics (Santa Cruz) makes both in- and over-the-ear headsets in many different configurations costing from about $100 through $180. DAK Industries (N. Hollywood CA) sells an over-the-ear model for $49 + $3 p&h. Based on personal experience with Star- sets from Plantronics vs. the photograph of the DAK unit, it appears as though you may get what you pay for. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #69 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Mon, 27-Aug-84 00:23:52 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Mon Aug 20 21:19:42 1984 TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 21 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 69 Today's Topics: Phone line woes Re: Phone line woes 2400 baud modems Re: 2400+ baud modems and protocols 1+ is not always not free DA Charging Variable length numbers; the German example Unordered phones 1+ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 17 Aug 84 17:36:57-EDT From: Jon Solomon <M.JSOL@MIT-EECS> Subject: Phone line woes I spent most of today talking to New England Telephone's various offices to straighten out one of my phone line's records. It all started when I got this months set of phone bills. I was being billed for a line I had disconnected a month and a half ago (at least). Then there was static on my line. I called repair service ON THAT LINE so they could hear the static. They looked up my records, but couldn't find anything listed for that number. I knew there was something wrong at this point. I called the RSC (Residence Service Center) and told them what had happened at Repair office. They also could not find any record of my new number. They asked me if I would mind them changing it yet again, so they could clear up the confusion with a minimal of fuss. The number, 542-JSOL, was clearly unique and I wasn't going to give it up without a fight. They eventually told me that I would start receiving bills under the new number. I can only assume that they will stop billing me for the old number, 338-4033, at the same time. Probably that is a poor assumption in this day and age. I got two calls from various departments of NE Telephone asking me for information. One of them was obviously a repair person who told me that 542-JSOL was "REMOTE CALL FORWARDED" to my main number. I told them that I had call forwarding, and that I had manually forwarded it to that number. They insisted that I prove it. I did. I disconnected the call forwarding, and lo', he called me on 542-JSOL and sure enough it was working, and had the static I reported earlier! They also informed me that they had no cable and pair listing for my number, and that they would probably have to send someone out here to find that information firsthand. I almost offered to do it for them, but decided that it would probably be too confusing for them if I did. All in all, I would say that NE Telephone's service quality has gone down considerably due to divestiture, And if this is the sort of problem that goes on all the time, I think I liked it the other way better (with AT&T controlling everything). Oh well, --JSol ------------------------------ Date: 17 Aug 1984 19:32-PDT Sender: GEOFF@SRI-CSL Subject: Re: Phone line woes From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <Geoff @ SRI-CSL> As the saying goes: When AT&T merged with Department of Justice, Everyone got screwed. ------------------------------ From: deutsch.pa@XEROX.ARPA Date: 17 Aug 84 22:26:31 PDT Subject: 2400 baud modems We recently bought some model 224 modems from Codex . They are 1200(Bell 212A)/2400 only, full duplex. I think they use a (proposed?) CCITT standard protocol. They come in a stand-alone version and a somewhat more expensive "smart" version with an auto-dialler and a little command language. Our communications folks evaluated them and like them. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Aug 84 13:55:40 PDT From: Matthew J Weinstein <matt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA> Subject: Re: 2400+ baud modems and protocols Gamma Technology has a modem that plugs into the IBM PC/XT or a stand-alone chassis, and runs synchronous communications at 9.6kbps over dial-up lines. It is claimed to be CCITT V.29 and V.27 compatible. (The modem supposedly uses the same chip set as FAX machines.) Model: FAXT-96 Price: $1995 (qty 1-9) Protocols: V.29 @ 9.6,7.2,4.8kbps V.27 ter @ 4.8,2.4kbps V.21 chan 2 FSK @ 300bps Features: Automatic adaptive equalization/selectable link amp. echo suppression and squelch options. Compatible with group 3 fax machines. Optional support for SDLC adapter card. Gamma Technology, Inc. 2452 Embarcadero Way Palo Alto, CA 94303 415-856-7421 (insert standard disclaimer here) ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 20 Aug 1984 09:12:47-PDT From: libman%grok.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Sandy Libman) Subject: 1+ is not always not free >Date: Wed 8 Aug 84 09:45:54-PDT >From: Richard Furuta <Furuta@WASHINGTON.ARPA> >Subject: 1+ dialing >I don't know why there's the resistance to dialing 1+ for long >distance calls. It can be a very useful device from the standpoint of >the telephone user. In this area, 1+ dialing is required for all toll >calls. I find it very useful to be reminded that a call is toll when >returning a call from within this area code. It's a real easy rule to >remembe---if you have to dial 1+ you have to expect a toll charge. Life's never that easy! I live 25 miles north of Boston and pay $20 per month extra on my phone bill so that I can make unlimited calls to the Central Exchange [Greater Boston Area]. In order to call numbers in the Central Exchange I have to dial 1+ [unless these numbers are ALSO in my contiguous area, in which case I am forbidden to dial 1+ [Intercept -> recording -> "you lose" tone.]] Because of this, my "1+ is a toll call" clue is taken away. I am frequently bitten by calling numbers which I thought were in the Central Exchange, but turn out to be a couple of miles outside of it, thus being actual toll calls. The only way for me to tell if the call is covered by my flat rate service is to look at the charts on 4 separate pages of the Boston phone book. Speaking of gripes -- I pay $240 a year for this Central Exchange service, but I cannot get The Phone Company to automatically send me the (set of 5) phone books for the covered area. ------------------------------ Date: 20-Aug-1984 1239 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: DA Charging In the case of Rochester, we have a small, local telephone company which has built a system for handling DA charging in which the caller's number is transmitted to accounting equipment in the DA center. If a charge is to be made, the DA operator indicates that fact, and the accounting equipment generates the charge. For local DA, this is fairly easy to do. However, for the nationwide network, a complete redesign would have been required. When you call NPA 555-1212, a local call record is made. This call record indicates the time you dialed the call, the time it was answered, and the time it terminated. You might say: AH, just have the distant DA operator only press the charge button (which would mean that the call would appear unanswered) after the valid charge is determined. Not acceptable for two reasons: 1. having conversations while the call appears to be on hook is not good from two standpoints: transmission, if in-band signalling is still in use, and network planning, i.e. keeping track of the actual usage of the network. 2. the caller could hang up before the supervisory signal returns to the source, thereby getting something for nothing. ------------------------------ Date: 20-Aug-1984 1246 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: Variable length numbers; the German example Werner provided an example of calling large company X with (as an example) 607 as the main number and 607 123 as extension 123. This is not the way this is actually done in Germany. Directory listings indicate numbers which are in PBXs, and indicate which point in the number is the break between the prefix and the extension (the HYPHEN is used for this in Germany). The instructions in the directory tell you that if you need to reach the switchboard, you should leave off all of the number past the HYPHEN and replace it with 1 or 0. (It used to always be 1, but now it's no longer consistent.) The instructions also tell you that if you know the extension, you can dial a different extension. Germany does not use timing to cause the call to end up at the attendant; the attendant always has an assigned number. In DID installations in the U.S., the same approach is taken. In Germany, the attendant is almost always 1 or 0 (though not ALWAYS -- U.S. military PBXs in Germany usually use 92 or 93 for information and/or attendant). In the U.S., the main number is not consistent at all, but is usually listed in the directory. There is no mechanism in Germany for hitting a special key to cause a call already ringing at a station to revert to the attendant. The station, after answering the call, can usually transfer the call to an attendant, but normal German phones do not have any special keys. ------------------------------ Date: 20-Aug-1984 1254 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: Unordered phones The "unordered phones" in California pose an interesting legal question. If the phones had been sent through the U.S. Mail, they could definitely be considered to be gifts, and there would be no reason to return them or pay for them. I'm not sure that the same applies to unsolicited merchandise delivered by something other than the U.S. Mail, but if it DOESN'T, it is still AT&T's responsibility to retrieve the phone from the point of delivery at their own expense. No one should have to pay a red cent to return it, or to even leave their home to drop the phone off somewhere. AT&T is likely to imply that they have the right to begin billing for the phones after the three month trial period is over. And AT&T is a big, dangerous-looking company -- they probably figured most people would be too lazy to return the phones and would simply start paying. The other interesting aspect is that it was specifically General Tel areas which were especially chosen as good target areas into which to ship the phones. Many General Tel users will jump at the chance to have an AT&T phone, even though it won't do a whole lot to improve their service. ------------------------------ Date: 20-Aug-1984 1300 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: 1+ A submission (probably from New Jersey) voiced the often heard complaint "If the system is smart enough to tell that I needed a 1, why not just place the call." That's not the point. The main reason for going to 1+ in New Jersey was the same reason for the recent conversions in other major urban areas; the 201 NPA is just about out of NNX codes, and will have to start using NXX codes, where it is no longer to determine from the first three digits dialed whether an area code was dialed or one of the new exchanges. Granted, for those NPAs which don't conflict with exchanges, the system could handle the calls. But the 1+ is required on ALL NPAs from the outset, so that everyone, as a result of all current dialing stopping working, is forced to change their dialing habits NOW, before the problem occurs. Almost any other implementation would mean that if your autodialer has, for example, 303 499-7111 stored, it would continue to work up until the day that a 303 exchange is opened in New Jersey, at which point it would stop working, and possibly raise havoc for the person whose number is 303-4997. The one implementation which can prevent this is the use of timing to do the translation, but not all exchanges are capable of handling timing-related translation, and even those which can would cause a four second delay in completion of calls to exchanges corresponding to area codes. Not requiring the 1 on 800 is a mistake, probably only in some exchanges. In a related question, someone asked why dialing one's own NPA isn't permitted. It is, in some places, especially the Southeast. But it has the side effect of causing the call, even if it is to a number in the same exchange, to route through the toll machine. This could have been avoided if the exchange had a six digit translator for the home NPA which corresponds to the existing three digit translator, but this requires additional memory (or circuitry in the case of XBar exchanges). And it's essentially impossible in some exchanges. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #74 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Mon, 27-Aug-84 21:51:53 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Mon Aug 27 18:50:20 1984 TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 28 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 74 Today's Topics: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #73 long distance service quality Fiber optics query Personal Locator Service ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 24 Aug 84 17:42:26-CDT From: Clive Dawson <CC.Clive@UTEXAS-20.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #73 The latest issue of Consumer Reports has done an evaluation of Long Distance Services. I haven't had a chance to read the article myself, and don't have it with me at the moment, but it looked pretty comprehensive. There was one clear winner, and it was NOT ATT, MCI or SPRINT. I'm trying to remember the name--I think it was Skyline. More later. CLive ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24-Aug-84 18:12:07 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: long distance service quality The joke with the so-called "cheap" services of Sprint and MCI (etc.) is that it often takes multiple calls to carry on a simple conversation. I occasionally have to make both MCI and Sprint calls using numbers provided to me by various of my clients for my use when calling them or their associates. My reaction to both services is the same: TERRIBLE. Maybe some people just don't CARE how bad a connection sounds, how much echo or hiss is present, or how often you have to repeat yourself to be heard. Often connections are especially bad in ONE direction, but sometimes the person you called never bothers to tell you that he can hardly hear you, he just struggles along. Then there are the connections that just suddenly drop, or that switch you to another caller. I get both of these regularly. REALLY professional on business calls. People actually say (and I say it too), "How about calling back FOR REAL using AT&T next time?" And how about call blocking? Just TRY to get a call through from L.A. to New Jersey in mid-afternoon on Sprint or MCI. Good luck. I hope you like an hour of all trunk busy signals. When I have my choice, I always use AT&T. In a couple of years, once the access issues settle down, the artificial price differentials will vanish and AT&T should be as cheap, if not cheaper, than the other services. At which point, anybody who hassles with the "toy" carriers is getting what he or she deserves. Even now, if a call if valuable enough to pay for, it's valuable enough to hear the other person and have stable connections. As far as I'm concerned, the non-AT&T carriers are jokes. But then, P.T. Barnum predicted that such services would prosper to some extent: "There's a sucker born every minute." --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24-Aug-84 18:34:31 PDT From: Richard Shuford <vortex!richard@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: Fiber optics query Hello. I'm doing some research on fiber optics, and I'd like to know what experience readers of this digest have had with fiber-optic-based computer communication. Short comments on how cost effective a particular local-area network (or other communication link) has been are fine, though if you have more details they'll be appreciated. Thank you. .............Richard Shuford.............. ------------------------------ Date: 25 August 1984 00:56-EDT From: Eliot R. Moore <ELMO @ MIT-MC> Does anyone have experience, good or bad, with ITT Private Line Service? Regards, Elmo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Aug 84 00:29:47 pdt From: sun!gnu@Berkeley (John Gilmore) Subject: Personal Locator Service A few years ago I was hearing all about how CCIS would make it possible to offer "Personal Locator Service". In this service, you would have a phone number which could be called from anywhere and the calls would follow you around to wherever you happened to be. (You had to check in with the machines to tell them where you were going, of course.) I recently heard a rumor that Bell filed with the FCC to propose this service but the FCC would not let them offer it. Anybody know what really happened and why? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #75 From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon Organization: U.C. Berkeley Date: Tue, 28-Aug-84 17:54:50 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Tue Aug 28 14:51:34 1984 TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 28 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 75 Today's Topics: Alternate carrier quality Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #74 MCI Service TELECOM Digest V4 #74 long distance service quality Re: long distance service quality headsets long distance service SBS Skyline service ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 84 19:02:40 pdt From: (Mike O'Dell[x-csam]) mo@lbl-csam Subject: Alternate carrier quality The latest issue of Data Communications has a very long and detailed article describing some actual MEASUREMENTS they did of the various long-distance carriers. Their measurements were biased toward how well the circuit would carry data, but this generally reflects overall circuit quality. The best was Allnet, I believe, with SBS Skyline a very close second, with AT&T a not-quite-as-close third. The big advantage AT&T had was with circuit set-up time and the average number of calls per sucessful connection. Skyline would have done as well in the calls per connection category, but their circuits are noticeably slower to set up. The tests seem to have been quite well thought out. They used very sophisticated analog and digital test gear at each end of a New York/ San Fransisco call placed from the SFO end each time. They ran the tests at various times between 0800 and 2200 Pacific time to get a good sample of backbone loads, and they ran them repeatedly over a two or three week period. They ran the analog loop measurements first (all kinds of bandpass tests, phase distorsion, group delay characteristics, etc.) with an automated test system on each end and then kick in the digital circuit tester which included a set of standard modems. They then ran bit error tests, block error tests, burst length tests, and long message tests with traffic going one direction at a time, and then with full-duplex traffic. Anyway, this is worth looking up because it is the first real test I have seen not conducted by the seat of the pants. I strongly suspect they really wanted to have the results air-tight in case of legal hassles. Anyway, I recommend the article to you. Personal note: Since January, I have consistantly gotten better circuits on with my SBS Skyline service than with AT&T (I regularly A/B them), and my phone bill is dramatically lower. (No, I don't save Green Stamps.) -Mike O'Dell ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27-Aug-84 19:04:01 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #74 When it comes to technical issues, "Comsumer Reports" can be trusted about as far as you can throw their building. They are real good when it comes to conventional consumer products, but they are out of their league when technical issues become involved. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Aug 84 22:25:12 pdt From: <hplabs!intelca!cem@Berkeley> Subject: MCI Service I heard through the rumor mill at Central Telephone, (ie working relative) that MCI has purchased easement rights on some undisclosed rail line that runs through the country and plan on setting up optical fibers for high bandwidth time multiplexed voice communication. Any one have any further info? --Chuck ------------------------------ Date: 28 August 1984 13:05-EDT From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC> Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #74 I wouldn't be surprised if personnel locator service is not in part a casualty of divestiture. There has been a major battle before Judge Greene over whether the CCIS Service Access Points (databases) belong only to AT&T or whether the BOCs should have the right to use them too. I wouldn't be surprised if this debate were delaying personal locator service. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Aug 84 10:32:56 PDT From: "Theodore N. Vail" <vail@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA> Subject: long distance service quality Lauren Weinsten writes that the quality of AT&T long-distance service is much higher than its competitors and goes on to state: "In a couple of years, once the access issues settle down, the artificial price differentials will vanish and AT&T should be as cheap, if not cheaper, than the other services. At which point, anybody who hassles with the "toy" carriers is getting what he or she deserves." He is, of course, correct. However the competitive services (e.g. sprint) offer billing services not matched by AT&T. Moreover AT&T's closest approach is quite expensive. When I am at a friend's home (or at a business telephone) I can use sprint service without paying a surcharge (for operator assistance or use of credit card) and without having to reimburse my friend for the cost of the call. I realize that this flexible billing was essentially "forced" on the competitive services. However it is the reason I use sprint when not at my home or my office. Until AT&T provides an equivalent service at the equivalent price, there will be a major niche for competitive services -- even if the quality of the connection is much lower. ted ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Aug 84 08:14:34 PDT From: David Alpern <ALPERN%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> Subject: Re: long distance service quality Lauren, I agree with you completely. But in some areas AT&T isn't any better. From Boston to Chicago, for example, AT&T sounds like you're next door. From Sunnyvale to Chicago, it might as well be the moon -- Sprint gives consistently better connections, with less background noise and less echo. My father just picked up service with SPS. WOW! AT&T is no comparison for clearness of the line, although we don't have enough experience yet to tell if lost connections and other such occurences are a problem. - Dave ------------------------------ Date: 28 Aug 84 1427 EDT (Tuesday) From: Richard H. Gumpertz <Rick.Gumpertz@CMU-CS-A.ARPA> Subject: headsets Anybody know anything about Nady Systems, Inc. at 1145 65th Street, Oakland, CA 94608, phone (415) 652-7632? They offer "EasyTalk" headsets, models TH-15H (full headband) and TH-15E (over the ear) for $29.95 and $27.95 respectively. These prices include a line-powered amplifire which plugs in series with the regular handset. UPS delivery is also included. They also market various wireless microphones, two way 49MHz communicators, etc., all at fairly low prices. Is the stuff any good? ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 84 23:53:05 PDT (Mon) From: Jeff Dean <jeff@aids-unix> Subject: long distance service I agree with Lauren that the alternative carriers are often useless for conducting serious business. I too use AT&T when I have "important" calls to make. However, I don't share his view of the future. For those of use who have used the alternative carriers over the past few years (my particular experiences were with Sprint and MCI), it is obvious that they have improved their services dramatically (and they appear to be continuing in that direction. On the other hand, I think that AT&T service has already started to deteriorate, and I'll bet that the financial woes of AT&T will eventually result in further deteriorization of service. AT&T is a very different company now. It is a mistake to assume that their future products and services will bear any semblance to what they have done in the past. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 28 Aug 84 17:30:40-EDT From: Jon Solomon <M.JSOL@MIT-EECS> Subject: SBS Skyline service I've used them for about the past year and have found that their quality is not a match for AT&T. Most of the time the volume of the connection is quite low, lower than SPC or MCI even, and occasionaly, we get a line which has a delayed response time. You almost have to think you have a simplex (half duplex) line. Ugh, I thought we gave up half duplex back in the '60s. In addition, BBN has direct lines to MCI's toll switch, and the quality is quite good, which leads me to believe that they will be the quality leader when equal access comes to town. The only thing SBS Skyline service has that AT&T doesn't have is cost effectiveness. SBS charges are quite good, the best in the industry (except if you are calling one of Allnet's best trunks). Oh, one more thing. I just picked up AT&T's Reach out America service. You get 50% off on evening calls (50% off the daytime rate, that is - 35% normal, plus an additional 15% for belonging to the plan), and night/weekend calls cost $11.30 for the first hour, and $8.50 for each additional hour. If you make all your calls at night, and on weekends, you can save more money than using SBS Skyline service, *or* Allnet. Not as good as I had hoped, but still the best you can do. Cheers, --JSol p.s. it's going to be very interesting to note the next year or two as "equal access" becomes the norm. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #79 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Tue, 4-Sep-84 21:28:26 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 5 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 79 Today's Topics: Where can I find.... Carrier line quality Equal Access -- A scream! telephone costs Equal Access ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 Aug 84 19:43 EDT From: David H M Spector <SPECTOR@NYU-CMCL1.ARPA> Subject: Where can I find.... Can anyone point me in the right direction for some basic telephone technical information. Such as, where can I find documentation on wiring, installing, debuging {...etc...etc} of one phone equipment/systems? Also, are those nifty handsets purchasable anywhere? Please respond by mail, if there is enough interesting stuff I will summarise.... Thanks, Dave Spector NYU Systems Group SPECTOR@NYU-CMCL1 ------------------------------ From: mknox@ut-ngp.ARPA (mknox) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 84 20:06:12 CDT Subject: Carrier line quality I decided to finally add my 2 cents to the question of ATT vs other carrier line quality. I have, for business reasons, 1) standard AT&T, 2) AT&T WATS, and 3) SPRINT. The SPRINT is extremely useful for calls not placed from base, and for calls made to other points within the state and to Mexico. The WATS service is only good for out-of-state to calls within the US, and the standard AT&T is needed for in-town and most out-of-country calls. I find the service to be good on ALL of the above. But there are three interesting problems: SPRINT billing: they DO bill me for perhaps 50 calls a month I did not complete (let it ring 5 or 6 times). AT&T billing: MUCH worse. NO ONE in the continental UNITED STATES can track down an errant WATS bill, I have decided. SPRINT quality: I have never had any significant line problems with voice SPRINT service. BUT... I have a 1200 baud 212A modem which absolutely REFUSES to connect over a SPRINT line. The line sounds fine, but the modem says NO WAY. It works just fine over AT&T lines. ------------------------------ Date: 03-Sep-1984 2232 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: Equal Access -- A scream! I was just poking around at Equal Access. Dialed 10222 (MCI) 0 NPA NXX-XXXX. MCI's switch (yes, I know it was MCI and not the BOC) gave me the following recording: For operator assistance please hang up and dial 10288 plus 0... Guess they're glad to hand that business over to AT&T. /john ------------------------------ Date: 3 September 1984 23:54-EDT From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC> Subject: telephone costs There have been few good studies published of the actual costs of local calling -- mostly because the telcos themselves don't know. The accounting systems that they set up years ago under FCC orders didn't require them to keep track of detailed information in that way, so they never did. That's beginning to change, but little of that type of data has reached public print. One of the few good studies in this area is a paper by Bridger Mitchell of Rand published in the American Economic Review in 1978. Also, see the book by Meyer et.al. published by Charles River Associates entitled something like "Competition in Telecommunications" Marvin Sirbu ------------------------------ Date: 04-Sep-1984 1622 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: Equal Access Couple of things: 1. If you choose anyone other than AT&T as your primary carrier, 0+ will work within your LATA, but outside your LATA, you will get whatever that carrier provides (such as the recording telling you to dial 10288 0 ... which MCI provides). Likewise with overseas. MCI says "MCI does not yet provide service to the country you are calling, but plans to." 2. You can forward through any carrier. 3. Speed calling does not store a carrier, so you get either your primary carrier, or, if you precede the call with a 10xxx code, you get that carrier. 4. NO-PICK is an option in at least Northwestern Bell, which means that 1+ only works within your LATA; all calls have to have an explicit carrier choice. 5. In some places, just plain "0" may not work if your carrier is not AT&T. This is worth objecting to, because of the potential impact on emergencies. Interesting times are ahead! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #80 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Wed, 5-Sep-84 21:03:52 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Thursday, 6 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 80 Today's Topics: A bug or a feature? More on alternate carriers Hardware info Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #79 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Sep 84 20:43:21 PDT From: "Theodore N. Vail" <vail@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA> Subject: A bug or a feature? General Telephone has just replaced it's old step-by-step switch serving the Malibu exchange (213-456-xxxx) with a new electronic switch. I believe that the press releases announcing the switch to the new switch called it an EAX-5. I have two lines served by the new switch and I just discovered the following (which works on both lines): If I dial my own number, I don't get a busy signal, instead I get a soft "beep" every two seconds. This lasts for 6 beeps. If I hang up before the last beep, then the phone rings; when picked up it gives 5 more "beeps", again one every two seconds. After that the line becomes quiet, but sidetone remains (so that you can talk between two extensions). If I hang up after the last beep, the phone doesn't ring and when picked up gives a dial-tone. Is this an unannounced "intercom" feature? On the other hand, if I simply leave the phone off the hook, then, after 20 seconds, dial tone goes away; a ringing signal occurs and within another 10 seconds I receive the following recording in a male voice: "The alloted time for you to dial has been exceeded, please hang up and dial again. This is a recording." After playing the recording 4 times, the line becomes quiet and then after about 10 seconds a strange tone (not a dial tone is heard). After about 10 seconds it changes frequency. Then after another 10 seconds a "nasty" chirp occurs at a rate of 2 chirps per second. After about 20 seconds this goes away and once again the line is quiet. ted ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Sep 84 13:48:41 EDT From: Brint <abc@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: More on alternate carriers It seems quite likely that the reason for the alleged poor quality of MCI, Sprint, and others stems not from deficiencies in their own equipment but in the interconnect provided by the local phone company whose loyalty may still be to AT&T (who got there first and, therefore, got the better connections). ------------------------------ Date: 5 Sep 1984 11:04 PDT (Wed) Sender: TLI@USC-ECLB From: Tony Li <Tli@Usc-Eclb> Reply-to: Tli@Usc-Eclb Subject: Hardware info Hi all, I'm looking for something rather different. I hope you can help. A friend of mine is moving overseas to a location where phone service to a new residence takes approximately 1-2 years to install. Fortunately, there is a line 2-3 miles away that is already installed that he can use. What I guess I'm looking for then is a phone which has a range of 2-3 miles, the base station is not the receiver, and preferably can be wired for 220. Price is no object. Thanks in advance, Tony ;-) <Tli@Usc-Ecl> ------------------------------ Date: 5 Sep 84 16:30:03 PDT (Wednesday) From: Kluger.PA@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #79 Today, the telephony expert at my site gave me the bad news about AT&T installation of a transcon (Palo Alto, CA to Rochester, NY) 56K bps data line. Leadtime of 4 or more months! My question: have you had any experience with 56K bps leased line service from any of AT&T's competition? How does the leadtime, cost, quality of service, technical ability, etc compare with AT&T? What was used for the last mile, Digital Termination, DDS from local telco, etc? Thanks, Larry Kluger <Kluger@Xerox.ARPA> ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #81 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Thu, 6-Sep-84 18:54:33 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Friday, 7 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 81 Today's Topics: Equal Access Re: A bug or a feature? Bell 212A Modem DIP switches CO feature & connection (responses) 4-Month Lead Time For 56 Kbps Lines ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wednesday, 5 Sep 1984 18:43:35-PDT From: priborsky%bison.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Tony Priborsky) Subject: Equal Access How will WATS numbers fare with equal access? The blurb in a recent newspaper article indicated that I will have to declare my long distance carrier (having subscribed in advance to a non-AT&T carrier if I so chose) will be accessed by 1-, same as AT&T. Will MCI "forward" 800 calls over to AT&T? If so, will they charge for the service? What about the 900 service? Thanks... Tony. [Most likely you will be told by the MCI switch to hang up and dial 10288-1-800 and the number. Yuck.--JSol] ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 5 Sep 1984 19:03:38-PDT From: nelson%quill.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Documents of Our Lives.) Subject: Re: A bug or a feature? In La Crosse, Wisconsin, the Century Telephone Corporation runs the show. I don't know what type of equipment they have; I do know that after I would finish dialing a number (either rotary or tone), I would hear a series of fast "beeps" which seemed to correspond to tones generated by a touch-tone telephone. Anyway, we had nearly the same results with dialing our own phone number. A female voice would come on, saying "You have dialed a party on your line. Please hang up the phone and try again. If you need further assistance, dial your operator. This is a recording." If we hung up right away, nothing happened. If we waited for a few seconds before hanging up, the phone would be silent for a second, then start ringing. When we picked it up, a clicking noise could be heard. Hanging up would restore things back to normal. I personally liked the feature; it was a great way to check out the telephones I installed for friends, although I think the phone company had intended it to be used by people who wanted to call each other, but shared a party line. Does anyone know how to get the ringback effect on 603-88y-xxxx? If so, please let me know. I'm specifically looking for the 888 and 881 exchanges. Thanks. JENelson Wed 5-Sep-1984 22:15 EST ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 6 Sep 1984 05:19:09-PDT From: waters%viking.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Lester Waters) Subject: Bell 212A Modem DIP switches "It's always a DIP switch!" Does anyone out there have any info about the banks of DIP switches contained in a Bell 212A 300/1200 baud modem? It would be nice to have info on all the switches and their meanings, but in particular, I am looking for a switch that controls the action of whether or not to take the phone off the hook when Carrier is Detected. Currently, If TR (Terminal Ready) is raised, and the phone is taken off the hook, the modem takes the phone off the hook internally to itself - thus preventing me from dialing the phone. A while back, the modem used to wait for both TR (DTR) and CD (Carrier Detect) before picking up the phone. I have a button on the phone, much like a Hold button, which is pressed when the phone is used as a data line (after dialing your destination and hearing the carrier). Any help would be appreciated. - Lester - ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 6 Sep 1984 05:54:25-PDT From: goldstein%donjon.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: CO feature & connection (responses) Ted Vail's observation about the new 5EAX ringback feature reminds me of all the variations I've seen on that theme among "Bell" COs. It's generally the policy of a CO (steppers may not be smart enough, though) to allow a ringback number to be dialed, so people can adjust bells, etc. It probably dates back to the days when telco installers did everything! If they meant it for us peons to use, they'd have documented it. But in Jersey Bell areas, the common technique was to dial 550, wait for dial tone, rotary pulse (only) a "6", then hang up. In a New York Tel CO I once lived near, you dialed your own number, which returned a special tone and ringback. In Boston, you dial 98n (n=0,1,2 or 3, depending on which CO) followed by the last four digits of your own number. Etc. Always fun to know. Re: Why the snit carriers usually sound so bad: Except for SBS and a few local resellers, the bulk of the trivial carriers don't pay for trunk-side (ENFIA-B/C, now Feature Group B) access to the local networks, but hook up to the line side, rather like PBXs with remote access features. Don't blame the telcos if line-side connections (Feature Group A) sound cruddy; how do you think the snits keep their costs down? Also, most are much more likely than ATTCOM to use satellites (long delay), etc. Do blame the telcos if they don't make trunk-side connections available, though; some LD carriers have had problems getting them. Re: Overseas hookup via radio: You're likely to have two major problems with the foreign government trying to use a "long-range cordless phone". One is that you'd need a license to use the radio waves (cordless phones in the US are treated as "incidental radiation" devices and allocated special frequencies; other countries don't). Two is that you'd need permission to hook it up to the local telephone network anyway, which is doubtful. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Sep 84 15:57:50 EDT From: dca-pgs @ DDN1.ARPA Subject: 4-Month Lead Time For 56 Kbps Lines I'm amazed that you could get them as fast as four months. When I was with the DDN (until last June ) we were hearing 12-18 months. XEROX-PARC must have more juice than the Defense Department... -Pat Sullivan Defense Switched Network (DSN) <dca-pgs@ddn1> ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #82 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Fri, 7-Sep-84 22:55:12 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Saturday, 8 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 82 Today's Topics: Re: ringback feature How are international calls effected by the break-up? AT&T is moving toward profit limit (Associated Press) EAX / Interconnect Communications Forum Thank you Judge Green Determining your own phone number ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 84 18:16:36 cdt From: seung@ut-ngp.ARPA (Hyunjune Sebastian) Subject: Re: ringback feature As long as we're talking about curious numbers to call, I thought I might put in my two cents' worth. In Boston, there is a number you can call which connects you with a mechanical voice that tells you the number of the phone you are calling from. It's handy when you're trying to get incoming calls on an unmarked phone. Unfortunately, I've forgotten the number. Does anybody know it, or know a similar number for other areas? Sebastian [The Cambridge CO/Toll center uses 1-200-555-1212, Most other ESS's in Boston use 977. I don't know much about CrossBar exchanges in the Boston area. --JSol] ------------------------------ Date: Fri 31 Aug 84 05:16:49-CDT From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA> Subject: How are international calls effected by the break-up? (if at all) Regional phone-companies seem to be able to decide themselves, which LD-company to use in case of 'generic LD-calls' (at least that's my impression from the press - not sure what has been said here on this topic). As international calls have to get routed, at least part of the way through the national net-work, can someone speculate on what MAY happen to such calls ??? ------------------------------ Date: Wed 5 Sep 84 03:09:42-CDT From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA> Subject: AT&T is moving toward profit limit (Associated Press) WASHINGTON (AP) [last week sometimes - Werner] AT&T, despite service backlogs and increased competition, has begun moving closer in recent months to its maximum authorized profit margin for interstate long-distance telephone service. A company spokesman said Tuesday, AT&T's rate of return, or profit margin on long-distance services stood at 12.36 percent after the first seven months of 1984. that compares to a maximum authorized margin of 12.75 percent annually, based on AT&T's investment in facilities. Formal reports filed by AT&T with the FCC show the company actually exceeded its authorized margin during the three-month period ending June 30 after falling substantially below the maximum rate during the first quarter. AT&T has been filing a revised version of a special monthly report on interstate phone operations with the FCC since Jan 1, when it gave up ownership of ... [ you know what ] ... has so far filed written reports for the first 6 months of the year. Results through the end of July were disclosed Tuesday by AT&T's Pic Wagner in response to an inquiry about the unexpectedly high profit margin reported for the month of June - 17.6 %. Wagner said the earnings of the firm's long-distance unit, AT&T Communications, have become extremely volatile on a month-to-month basis and thus cannot be used as a reliable guage [sic] of final 1984 results. .... [ .. The world largest magic show: accounting. brought to you by: ... ] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6-Sep-84 14:55:36 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: EAX / Interconnect The behavior cited for the EAX-5 in Malibu is normal for the new EAX series. Dialing you own number is the standard ringback in those offices -- that's all that's going on. Pretty sensible, actually, though a bit simple for subscribers to find. --- While the 2 to 4 wire interconnect situation certainly accounts for part of the perceived poor quality of many alternate carriers, it can't easily account for such factors as dropped calls, extremely high hiss and noise levels, or all intertoll trunk busy situations. Things will get better with better interconnect, but that's only one element of the overall transmission path. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 84 09:22 EDT From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Communications Forum MIT COMMUNICATIONS FORUM National Media Policymaking September 20, 1984 4-6 p.m. Marlar Lounge, E37-252, 70 Vassar St., MIT speakers: Jeremy Tunstall, City University of London Jack Lyle, Boston University Rapidly developing mass media technologies have ended a relative ly stable, "classical" era of national and international policy. Familiar concerns about cultural integrity are now mixed with desire to participate in advanced technologies as a matter of economic policy. The policymaking process has attracted many newly interested parties and engendered much debate, sometimes between government agencies. Professor Tunstall has undertaken a study focusing on the policy making process in the United States, Britain, and France, and the prospective effect on the relationships between the United States and the countries of Western Europe. ****** Multichannel MDS: Wireless Cable? October 4, 1984 4-6 p.m. Bush Room, Bldg 10-105, MIT speakers: Howard Klotz, Contemporary Communications Peter Lemieux, Information Architects/ MIT A new band of television has been created which may provide for as many as 28 different television channels. The FCC has reassigned eight channels in the ITFS band to MDS and is permitting the leasing of "excess capacity" on ITFS channels to commercial users. In effect, This service has been termed Multi channel MDS (or MMDS) and is seen as potential competition for cable television. MMDS would be free from local regulation and would not have to carry broadcast signals. To be successful, however, it may require creative arrangements between commercial entrepreneurs and nonprofit educational institutions. ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 7 Sep 1984 12:42:20-PDT From: gassman%vortex.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Easynet Engineering 381-1683) Subject: Thank you Judge Green The following story must go down in the history of the telephone company's split up. It shows how stupid reality can be, to meet the legal requirements of a society. A leased telephone circuit was ordered "many" months ago which was to go from Andover, Mass. to Salem, New Hampshire. These two locations are about 10 miles apart, and both within New England Telephone's (NET) domain. The problem is that they are separated by a state line which is also the LATA line (Local Access and Transport Area). Under new regulations, any circuit crossing from one LATA into another must be "carried" by a "long distance" carrier. The choices are growing, but basically ATT is the best game in town. The order is placed to ATT thru our corporate telecom offices, ATT designs the circuit out of a building in White Plains, NY, and ATT contracts the local loops to the local companies. In this case, both local loops go to NET. The design isn't that big an engineering job. There are circuits in available directly from the Lawrence telephone central office (CO), which serves Andover, to the CO in Salem. These circuits cross the LATA but do not belong to ATT. Where they are used, the long distance carrier must rent them from NET. Many existing circuits crossing the NH/Mass LATA are now rented to ATT, but apparently due to high cost and paperwork involved, ATT considers this a last resort in building a new circuit. The "best" engineering job that ATT could do is to take the circuit from the Lawrence CO to ATT's office in Lawrence. This is known as a point of presence, refered to as a POP. From ATT's office in Lawrence, it could go up to Manchester, New Hampshire. Manchester is the only POP that ATT has in New Hampshire. From there, it would go direct to Salem. A bit out of the way, but only by about 50 miles. Now for the punch line. The circuit was designed and built from Lawrence, Ma. to Philadelphia. From there it goes to Trenton, New Jersey, on to New York City, and then up to Manchester, New Hampshire. It goes direct from Manchester to Salem. Over 800 miles to get 10 miles up the street and across the border. The reason the circuit was designed this way was because the existing circuits between the Lawrence and Manchester POPs aren't in ATT's design database yet, so do not exist. Why cry you ask, it still gets there. True, but at the moment the circuit is still not up and running reliably. The tech at NET is responsible for getting the circuit working, but rather than having to debug a direct circuit, the tech must trace the circuit thru about eight different offices. We are having trouble getting the person to do this, but don't blame them for their attitude. As an addendum, late word is that a circuit from Lawrence been found in the data base of ATT which can be used. Some strings are going to be pulled, and we may have the circuit re-engineered by tomorrow. bill gassman Internal Network (Easynet) Engineering DEC - 603-884-1683 ------------------------------ Date: 7 Sep 1984 11:36-EST From: randy@uw-june.ARPA Subject: Determining your own phone number With everbody buying their own phones now, I have had the following happen to me several times. You're at a friend's house, or the friend of a friend's. The friend is out, and you want to leave the phone number with someone else. You look on the phone for a number, but you friend has not written it in. Is there something you can do with the phone to find out the number of the line it's connected to? Directory assistance is not always the answer. Thanks, Randy. Randy Day. UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4}!uw-beaver!uw-june!randy ARPA: randy@washington CSNET: randy%washington@csnet-relay ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #83 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!mhuxl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sun, 9-Sep-84 04:25:46 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Sunday, 9 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 83 Today's Topics: Determining your own phone number Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #82 International Calls and the Break-up Speculation: International Routing The funny machine that gives you your number back... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 7 Sep 84 18:49:19 PDT From: Matthew J Weinstein <matt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA> Subject: Determining your own phone number [Number, pleeease?] Some cities have special codes reserved to identify the number you are calling from (I recall PacBell having *3 (113) a few years back). The low tech solution is to call the operator and ask for the number you're calling from. The operators generally have this info, and they will often provide it to you. If they don't, try another operator. - Matt ------------------------------ Date: Fri 7 Sep 84 23:19:44-EDT From: MLY.G.PCLH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #82 In the massachusetts area there is a easier way to find out the number you are calling from. Dial "2002222222" Then you will get a voice telling you what number you are calling from. Pete... ------------------------------ Date: 08-Sep-1984 0112 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: International Calls and the Break-up Until you get equal access, nothing changes. Once you get equal access, if you do nothing, you get the local company's default for unspecified users, which is almost always AT&T, though it could be anything, as long as 1+ can get you to anywhere, and 0+ can also get you to anywhere. A company COULD make 1+ and 0+ do nothing, but it is unlikely that any local company would do that, at least not yet. New subscribers may begin to actually declare which carrier is primary at the time the line is ordered. You may be allowed "no-pick" -- I've seen a phone with no-pick. With no-pick, each call has to be preceeded by a 10xxx to select the carrier. At the moment, it's pretty much AT&T's ball game with respect to overseas. The local C.O.s know that other carriers don't offer overseas, and so 011+ goes to a recording in the local C.O., telling you that the number you've called can't be made with the carrier you have dialed. Except for MCI. MCI is close to offering service to Luxembourg. So MCI gets handed any 011+. They give you a recording which says "MCI does not presently serve the country you are calling, but plans to soon. Please dial 10288 011 plus the international number of the person you are calling." I suppose if more than one other carrier were offering service they might not be able to point you at AT&T like that. They also provide that message for countries they are UNLIKELY to serve any time in the near future. If you choose any carrier other than AT&T, you can expect odd things to happen, potentially inconsistently from place to place, any time you dial a service they don't offer. But you can always select the carrier of your choice. An interesting attribute right now is that of the seven or so carriers operating in D.C. at the moment, SBS is the only one which checks to see if you are signed up with them already, and denies you access if not. MCI has arranged billing agreements with some operating companies, so that if you dial an MCI call with 10222 or by designating MCI as your primary carrier, you'll get your bill for MCI service right with your regular telephone bill. All the others which let calls go through must plan on using the opportunity to sign users up. I'm not sure if they'll be able to get a phone number to subscriber translation out of the operating company if they don't have a billing arrangement, but they could probably get the info if someone runs up a big bill and can't be contacted by phone to sign up. Interesting times ahead! /john ------------------------------ Date: 7 Sep 1984 2225 PDT From: Harris B. Edelman <HEDELMAN@JPL-VLSI.ARPA> Subject: Speculation: International Routing Reply-to: HEDELMAN@JPL-VLSI.ARPA Bear in mind that the world telephone region codes were determined, more or less unilaterally, by AT&T some years back. You care to make any guesses as to who might make the most concerted push for selection as the default international carrier? (You were perhaps hoping for someone other than Old Mother Phone?) BTW, while on the subject of world region codes, the 1+ now so widely used in North America for toll switch access is no coincidence; 1 just happens to be the N.A. region code. ------------------------------ Date: 8-Sep-84 7: 5:32 EDT From: James A. Dorf <cd001kmm%BostonU.BITNET@Berkeley> Subject: The funny machine that gives you your number back... ------ Simply dialing "220" seems to work on all the ESS machines I've come across in Boston.. The 1(200)555-1212 hack seems to work nearly everywhere (and maybe even in N.J.!) /jad ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #84 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Mon, 10-Sep-84 19:12:39 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 11 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 84 Today's Topics: ring back protocol Re: V4 #83 -- Determining your own number How to get your own number ? finding your own number Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #81 (800 and Equal Access) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 8 Sep 1984 22:17:17-EDT From: meister at mit-ccc Subject: ring back protocol i live in Malden, Mass. as far as i know, the trunk line i am connected to is the Arlington trunk line. when trying the ringback #'s given for the boston area, (98n and the last 4 digits of my number, n=0,1,2,3 depending on which local telco) some interesting things happened. 981,982,983 all failed. 980 immediately gave me a series of tone pulses of approx .1s duration. this would continue unitl i hung up. i dialed 980 and then the last 4 digits of my phone #, but no ringback or other indication of activity. BUT(heres the interesting part) i dialed 980, and when i got the tones, i pulse dialed a '6'. my phone line immediately went dead. i am not sure if it is back yet, as it happened early today. does anyone out there have any ideas as to what is going on? ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, 9 Sep 1984 11:04:44-PDT From: fox%nanook.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (David B. Fox) Subject: Re: V4 #83 -- Determining your own number A while ago I was out at a customer site (a high school) setting up their dial-in lines. I needed the phone numbers so that I could check out the lines... unfortunately they were not written on the jacks so that the students couldn't find out what they were. I tried the operator like Matthew suggested. The operator referred me to the Business office for the information. That wouldn't have been much help either. I tried pursuing it with the operator but to no avail. It seems that it is now considered a risk to the owner of the line if they give out the number. Oh well. I did, however, find the local "magic number" and was able to get the information I needed. I don't know what kind of switch Manchester, NH has but that same number won't work in Nashua, NH. Anyone know what kind of switching equipment is being used in Manchester and Nashua? David Sun 9-Sep-1984 14:03 EST - Bedford, New Hampshire ------------------------------ Date: 9 Sep 1984 16:47 PDT From: Lars Poulsen <LARS@ACC> Subject: How to get your own number ? Reply-to: LARS@ACC I tried dialing 1(200)555-1212 [Santa Barbara, GTE service area]. Got "The call can not be completed as dialed. Check the number and dial again. This is a recording. 805-682". Well, at least they gave me 6 of the ten digits. I suspect that the fake 200 area code may only be valid in (former ATT) areas. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Sep 84 20:19:17 EDT From: Ron Natalie <ron@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: finding your own number I tried the 200-555-1212. What I get is the little lady saying... zero zero zero zero zero zero zero... but the phone also keep ringing. How odd. Our other favorite method (but it takes time) is to call up and make a credit-card call. It will show up on your bill next month. Third, you can sweet talk a friend of yours at the 911 center to tell you what the ANI readout says. -Ron ------------------------------ From: ihnp4!ihldt!jhh@Berkeley Date: 10 Sep 84 10:05:24 CDT (Mon) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #81 (800 and Equal Access) AT&T's proposal is that the carrier chosen for an 800 call be based on the number. All current 800 numbers would be assigned to AT&T. If MCI wanted to provide 800 numbers (and they do), the customer would get one of MCI's numbers. The other carrier's objections to this plan is that each carrier would not necessarily get the same set of numbers in every city. This would prevent their customers from using national advertising, which they argue effectively makes AT&T the only 800 service. The other carriers want to register the carrier with the 800 number in the AT&T database where 800 number routings are stored. Since Long Lines developed that database, they are not too enthused about that idea. The jist of this is that, since the callee pays for the call rather than the caller, the callee selects the carrier, regardless of any choice of the carrier selected by the caller. John Haller ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #85 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Fri, 14-Sep-84 09:42:04 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Friday, 14 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 85 Today's Topics: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #82 (new telephone channels) Info about telephones? Michigan Bell and BBN Equal access [Kahin: Fiber Optics] odds & ends "smart" phones dialing only 7 digits Determining your own phone number ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ihnp4!houxm!homxa!mzk@Berkeley Date: 10 Sep 84 11:20:59 CDT (Mon) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #82 (new telephone channels) What are ITFS && MDS. Thank you. ------------------------------ Date: Mon 10 Sep 84 20:24:50-EDT From: Bob Soron <Mly.G.Pogo%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA> Subject: Info about telephones? Can anyone recommend a book (or detailled yet easy-to-find magazine article) on telephone installation? Our house is hard- wired, and I'd like to replace our old ten-button touchtones with something a little more modern. Thanks... ...Bob ------------------------------ Date: 11 Sep 84 16:16:32 EDT From: dca-pgs @ DDN1.ARPA Subject: Michigan Bell and BBN Congrats to BBN; I understand that they won a sizable contract from Michigan Bel to build a large data network. Can anyone out there supply some more info on this project? Will the net be based on C/30 IMP technology (indeed, will it be based on packet switching?)? Will BBN implement other facilities, such as E-mail, and what will they use? (i. e., C/70, VAX, etc.) is Is this BBN's first venture in building common carrier facilities? Many apologies for typos; this thing doesn't backspace. Best, -Pat Sullivan Defense Switched Network ------------------------------ Date: Mon 10 Sep 84 21:09:10-EDT From: Robert S. Lenoil <LENOIL@MIT-XX.ARPA> Subject: Equal access Living in the Back Bay, I have just come under equal access, and completed a semi-rigorous review of what the various long distance carriers have to offer. I initially am going with MCI, but NOT for their low rates. (on the contrary, MCI had the highest rates, next to AT&T, on calls from Boston->New York) You see, MCI is giving me one hour's worth of free calls, worth about $12.50. After I've used up the $12.50, I will change carriers for a $5.00 fee, for a $7.50 profit. My next target is USTel, which claims it will enclose $25 in coupons along with my second month's bill. I might actually stay with USTel, as they are AT&T resellers (which means their quality should be comparable to AT&T's), and they were among the lowest priced carriers for the Boston->NY mileage band. Presently, before my MCI presubscription goes into effect, I am using ALLNET. They are also AT&T resellers, and though the setup time is slightly longer, the call quality is just fine. ALLNET's prefix is 10444, and as they have a billing agreement with NET, anyone can use their service. Also, ALLNET and USTel both claim to bill in 6 second increments. I am eager to see how this looks on the ALLNET bill section generated by NET. ------------------------------ Date: 11 September 1984 20:59-EDT From: Steven A. Swernofsky <SASW @ MIT-MC> Subject: [Kahin: Fiber Optics] Date: Tue, 11 Sep 84 12:05 EDT From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Fiber Optics To: *bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA Communications Forum Monday Seminar Series on FIBER OPTICS Dr. Stewart Personick Bell Communications Research "Optical Fiber Technology and Applications" Optical Fibers; Sources and Transmitters; Detectors and Receivers; Optical Components; System Phenomenology; Telecommunications Trunk ing; Data Links; Local Area Networks; Analog Links; Broadband Networks; Measurement and Sensing Systems; Emerging Technology and Applications (Integrated Optics, Heterodyning, Photonic Switching) First meeting: September 17, 1984 Room 36-144, MIT For further information: (617) 253-4181. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 84 9:12:00 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA> Subject: odds & ends Would some hotels charge if you just picked up the phone and got dial tone and made no call? On July 2, I saw the following exchanges in use at Mount Vernon, Va. (area code 703): pay phone was 780 (local service to DC & suburbs) but a charge-phone right next to it was 781 (local to DC & Va. suburbs but not to Md.) Jan. 1984 Northern Virginia (DC area suburbs) directory mentions a restricted calling card good only for calling a particular phone number (such as calling home from college). Comments on 1+ coming to New Jersey: Even without NXX exchanges, 1+ makes some exchanges, currently available as local calls just over the area-code border, also available within one's own area. (For example, Trenton has local service to 736 in Morrisville, Pa., and 1+ makes possible the use of 609-736 distant from Trenton.) Requiring 0+areacode (not just 0+) within the area is a feature of areas using NXX (except in Los Angeles area), and we've been told in this digest that area 201 will need NXX (any timetable on this)? How does all this affect 609? I have heard that most NJ phones won't even shut off the dialtone on leading 1+ (and this now has to change). I dial 1+ by hitting the switchhook. This does fail on rare occasions. Cases of 1+ on non-toll calls I know about: Local (and message-unit) calls going over areacode line in NYC and Los Angeles areas. (Must dial 1+areacode+ local number for this.) From 261 & 621 prefixes (and at least 1 other) in Md., the phone book (Laurel or Md. Suburban) says to dial 1+number ("this is not a toll call") to reach 569 in Md., because 569 without the 1+ is a local call to Springfield, Va. In area 215 (Phila., etc.) in exchanges adjacent to the Phila. metro area, you can get Phila. metro service, and dial 1+number to get Phila. metro area numbers not already included in flat rate or extended flat rate areas. [Boston Metropolitan service also crosses the 1+ boundary in many places (especially those outside Rte 128). Boston Central Exchange doesn't include those 1+ areas in the Metro calling area. --JSol] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 84 00:10:47 pdt From: tamir@Berkeley (Yuval Tamir) Subject: "smart" phones I am interested in purchasing a "smart" phone that has the following features: (1) Speakerphone (2) Tone/pulse dialing (3) Memory for at least 10 numbers (4) Automatic continuous redial of busy numbers One model that has these features is the Panasonic 2130. It retails for $99 around here. Its main disadvantage is that it will automatically redial busy numbers for a maximum of only 15 times. If you are trying to reach, say, the IRS, you may want it to continue redialing as fast as possible for hours . . . I am looking for recommendations or warnings about specific models (the Panasonic and others) that provide the above features. If there is sufficient response, I will post a summary. Yuval Tamir ARPANET/CSNET: tamir@Berkeley UUCP: ucbvax!tamir ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 84 9:31:11 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA> Subject: dialing only 7 digits It has been noted that 1+ doesn't always mean a toll call, but note that when 1+ is in force, you CANNOT make a toll call if you dial only 7 digits. [That's not completely true. 1+ in many areas means "use a toll switch". It doesn't always mean that non 1+ calls will use the toll switch, nor does it say that non 1+ calls will always be local. --JSol] ------------------------------ Date: 12 Sep 1984 14:04-EST From: randy@uw-june.ARPA Subject: Determining your own phone number Several people have responded to my question of how to determine the phone number of your own phone (without calling Directory Assistance, etc.) In Seattle I have tried all of the following, none of which has worked: 1-200-555-1212 200-555-1212 *3113 1-200-222-2222 200-222-2222 These generally come back with a "Your call can not be completed as dailed" message, although one came back with a "Please check your owner's manual" message. The best idea so far was a suggestion to call 911 and ask them what number you are calling from. Anyone else know how to determine your own number? Randy Day. UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4}!uw-beaver!uw-june!randy ARPA: randy@washington CSNET: randy%washington@csnet-relay ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #86 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sun, 16-Sep-84 14:31:19 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Monday, 17 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 86 Today's Topics: Discovering your own phone number(s) Re: TELECOM Digest Determining your own phone number. rephrasing 1+ Hotel telephones ITFS/MDS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 13 Sep 84 21:01:58 EDT From: Jim Berets,,, <jberets@bbn-vax> Subject: Discovering your own phone number(s) I'm in the Boston area, so the various 1-(200)+ numbers work. However an interesting thing happens... When I try it from work (497-XXXX), I get a recording saying I'm calling from 491-XXXX. Trying again will give a different 491-XXXX (though sometimes the same one). Are these the outgoing lines allocated to our PBX? Dialing the given 491 numbers yields ring sometimes (no answer), but busy more often. I would guess the following. Dialing out causes the PBX to choose one of its available outgoing lines (491's), so that is what 1-(200)+ tells me. Someone dialing in (to 497) would have some piece of the XXXX handled by our PBX (we don't have all of 497). Someone dialing in (to one of the 491 numbers allocated to us) would get the PBX (so of course it is either busy or no one answers). The telco can't allocate the same numbers for both incoming and outgoing, because then if the PBX gave person X 497-XXXX for an outgoing call, this would cause person Y (whose number is the same as that for the outgoing call) to not be able to use his phone. The 491/497 difference dates back to before the installation of the PBX (our main number is a 491 so I presume this has never changed). The installation of the PBX required a bigger block of numbers than remaining in 491. Does this sound reasonable? Jim ------------------------------ From: ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!digi-g!dan@Berkeley Date: Fri, 14 Sep 84 02:30:08 cdt Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest Determining your own phone number. Around Minneapolis, I can dial "511" and get the mechanical voice reciting my phone number over and over and .... But I just tried it and only got a busy signal. I don't know if that function is really busy, or the feature has been removed. I used it no more than two weeks ago. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Sep 84 11:22:13 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA> Subject: rephrasing In those places which require any sort of 1+ dialing, you cannot make a toll call by dialing only 7 digits. (JSol, do you understand what I was trying to say? In New Jersey before the 1+ implementation, you dialed just the 7-digit number for local calls and for ANY direct-dialed call in your area code.) [To the best of my knowledge, you still dial just the 7 digits in NJ to place a call within the area code. 1+ is only for out of area code calls. Someone please correct me if I am wrong. --JSol] ------------------------------ Date: 14 Sep 84 12:23:22 PDT (Friday) From: Lynn.es@XEROX.ARPA Subject: 1+ Part, if not all, of area code 714 (next to Los Angeles) recently switched the meaning of dialing 1+. It used to mean a toll call (regardless of being in the area code or out), but now means outside area 714 (regardless of being toll or not). Out of habit, I recently dialed a toll call within 714 with the 1+, and was rewarded with an earsplittingly loud triple tone, followed by a recording telling me to redial without the 1. I found it very annoying since they knew what I wanted. There should be no ambiguity since I don't believe that 714 has any area codes duplicated as prefixes; nor should they have to do that in the near future, since they carved 619 out of 714 to free up hundreds of new prefixes. /Don Lynn ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Sep 84 15:40:07 EDT From: Will Martin <wmartin@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: Hotel telephones The past two hotels I've stayed at, and several I recall before those, have tried to stick members of my party with charges for local calls though no such calls had been made. They definitely generate a "local-call" charge when you merely make an intra-hotel room-to-room call; I believe that merely picking up the handset (other than to answer a call coming in) will generate such an automated billing entry. It has gotten so that I will not even touch the telephone in a hotel room except to answer it. If I want to call home, I'll go to a payphone in the lobby or somewhere else. I assume they have designed the system this way because those people who DO make local calls from a hotel phone make enough that they have no idea exactly how many, and the hotel collects (really "steals") lots of extra local-call charges without having to pay the telco anything, so it is all pure profit. Will Martin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14-Sep-84 00:47:40 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: ITFS/MDS ITFS is a microwave band that was originally set aside for educational video broadcasts of various sorts. When you see a church with a small dish pointed at some local high spot, it's ITFS. MDS is Multipoint Distribution Service -- which is a pair of microwave channels normally used for movies (like the "Z" channel in L.A. or HBO in many cities). It is unauthorized MDS receivers that are the target of much legal activity in many cities right now, since they can be received via various sorts of antennas/receivers including small dishes, horns, converted coffee cans (as published in "73 Magazine" years ago) and the ever-popular "white dildo" units. Since the former of these services is little used, action has been taken to open up many of the channels for other uses. However, in most cities, all people really want to do with them is show movies, though some legitimate data uses are contemplated in some areas as well. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #88 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!hudson!ihnp1!ihnp4!ucbv ax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Tue, 18-Sep-84 19:39:08 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 19 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 88 Today's Topics: Using a phone next to a noisy fan. Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #85 International "800" Service Reflections about payphones ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17 Sep 1984 20:48 MDT (Mon) Sender: KPETERSEN@SIMTEL20 From: Keith Petersen <W8SDZ@SIMTEL20> Subject: Using a phone next to a noisy fan. Much of the trouble you have hearing when using a phone in a noisy environment is caused by the microphone (transmitter) in the handset. This is because of the "side-tone" that is provided so you can hear your own voice in the receiver while talking. A very effective solution is to get a Roanwell "Confidencer" noise-cancelling microphone. These are available direct from Roanwell or from your telephone equipment supplier. On a 500-series handset you simply unscrew the cap and remove the old carbon transmitter and replace it with the new Roanwell unit. On other types of handsets which don't have a screw-off cap, it may be necessary to replace the whole handset. --Keith ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 84 11:19:44 pdt From: <hplabs!intelca!cem@Berkeley> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #85 In Telcom V4 #85 ucbvax!tamir mentioned one of his requirements for a smart phone was continuous or more than 15 redials on busy. I recently read an article that said "attack dialing", or continous redialing on busy was illegal for more than 15 retries. Is this true? Can someone point me to the correct FCC reference, or article/paragraph? I have my modem/computer do my home dialing also and it doesn't stop after 15 tries. --Chuck ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Sep 84 8:49:55 CDT From: Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <wmartin@ALMSA-1.ARPA> Subject: International "800" Service Just received a sample copy of one of those expensive newsletters ($277 for 24 issues), called International Communications News. Most of the data is on satellites, but this one short item looks to be of particular interest to Telecom readers: AT&T, FRENCH AGREE ON FIRST TRANSOCEANIC TOLL-FREE SERVICE AT&T today unveiled a proposal for the first transoceanic telecommunications service that would allow businesses in the US to receive toll-free telephone calls from customers in foreign locations. In a filing made today with the FCC, the company sought initial approval to make AT&T International 800 Service available between the US and France later this year. The French PTT has agreed to concurrently offer a toll-free international service for US-to-France calls. (From the Sept 14, 1984, issue.) Comment: I bet these numbers are kept really hush-hush! Think of the charges a malicious caller or prankster could force a company to pay if he found out an international 800 number and called it repeatedly. I also find it hard to imagine that this service is really that worthwhile. The usual uses of 800 numbers (telemarketing, data dial-ups, customer service) don't seem to fit well in a US-to-France link situation. Anybody have some ideas as to what kinds of businesses would use this service and for what purposes? Will Martin ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin ------------------------------ Date: 18 Sep 1984 12:20 PDT From: Lars Poulsen <LARS@ACC> Subject: Reflections about payphones Reply-to: LARS@ACC The Sep 24 issue of Communications Week has an article about equipment now available for the "Private Pay Phone" market. The issues raised about significant features made me realize some of the significant differences between the - otherwise technically similar and mostly compatible - switched networks here and in Europe. Apparently, a Private Pay Phone - like a PBX - needs a cpu and a list of long distance charges coded by prefixes, areacodes etc in order to charge for the call as it is being made. This obviously complicates the equipment. In my native Denmark, in contrast, the carrier will provide you with a charge pulse for each message charge unit spent; whether on metered local service or on long distance calls. In fact, residential lines have a meter connected across the access loop at the CO, and this is how phone bills are generated - itemized long distance bills are only available for operator-assisted calls. If you want, you can rent a meter to install at your own end of the loop so that you can verify your phone bill. This makes a pay phone very simple: all it has to do is count the coins and add available message units to an up-down counter as coins are inserted, then subtract a message unit for each charge pulse. The result of this is much lower charges for medium-distance toll calls. / Lars Poulsen ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #88 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!hoxna!houxm!ihn p4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Tue, 18-Sep-84 20:50:47 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 19 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 88 Today's Topics: Using a phone next to a noisy fan. Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #85 International "800" Service Reflections about payphones ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17 Sep 1984 20:48 MDT (Mon) Sender: KPETERSEN@SIMTEL20 From: Keith Petersen <W8SDZ@SIMTEL20> Subject: Using a phone next to a noisy fan. Much of the trouble you have hearing when using a phone in a noisy environment is caused by the microphone (transmitter) in the handset. This is because of the "side-tone" that is provided so you can hear your own voice in the receiver while talking. A very effective solution is to get a Roanwell "Confidencer" noise-cancelling microphone. These are available direct from Roanwell or from your telephone equipment supplier. On a 500-series handset you simply unscrew the cap and remove the old carbon transmitter and replace it with the new Roanwell unit. On other types of handsets which don't have a screw-off cap, it may be necessary to replace the whole handset. --Keith ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 84 11:19:44 pdt From: <hplabs!intelca!cem@Berkeley> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #85 In Telcom V4 #85 ucbvax!tamir mentioned one of his requirements for a smart phone was continuous or more than 15 redials on busy. I recently read an article that said "attack dialing", or continous redialing on busy was illegal for more than 15 retries. Is this true? Can someone point me to the correct FCC reference, or article/paragraph? I have my modem/computer do my home dialing also and it doesn't stop after 15 tries. --Chuck ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Sep 84 8:49:55 CDT From: Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <wmartin@ALMSA-1.ARPA> Subject: International "800" Service Just received a sample copy of one of those expensive newsletters ($277 for 24 issues), called International Communications News. Most of the data is on satellites, but this one short item looks to be of particular interest to Telecom readers: AT&T, FRENCH AGREE ON FIRST TRANSOCEANIC TOLL-FREE SERVICE AT&T today unveiled a proposal for the first transoceanic telecommunications service that would allow businesses in the US to receive toll-free telephone calls from customers in foreign locations. In a filing made today with the FCC, the company sought initial approval to make AT&T International 800 Service available between the US and France later this year. The French PTT has agreed to concurrently offer a toll-free international service for US-to-France calls. (From the Sept 14, 1984, issue.) Comment: I bet these numbers are kept really hush-hush! Think of the charges a malicious caller or prankster could force a company to pay if he found out an international 800 number and called it repeatedly. I also find it hard to imagine that this service is really that worthwhile. The usual uses of 800 numbers (telemarketing, data dial-ups, customer service) don't seem to fit well in a US-to-France link situation. Anybody have some ideas as to what kinds of businesses would use this service and for what purposes? Will Martin ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin ------------------------------ Date: 18 Sep 1984 12:20 PDT From: Lars Poulsen <LARS@ACC> Subject: Reflections about payphones Reply-to: LARS@ACC The Sep 24 issue of Communications Week has an article about equipment now available for the "Private Pay Phone" market. The issues raised about significant features made me realize some of the significant differences between the - otherwise technically similar and mostly compatible - switched networks here and in Europe. Apparently, a Private Pay Phone - like a PBX - needs a cpu and a list of long distance charges coded by prefixes, areacodes etc in order to charge for the call as it is being made. This obviously complicates the equipment. In my native Denmark, in contrast, the carrier will provide you with a charge pulse for each message charge unit spent; whether on metered local service or on long distance calls. In fact, residential lines have a meter connected across the access loop at the CO, and this is how phone bills are generated - itemized long distance bills are only available for operator-assisted calls. If you want, you can rent a meter to install at your own end of the loop so that you can verify your phone bill. This makes a pay phone very simple: all it has to do is count the coins and add available message units to an up-down counter as coins are inserted, then subtract a message unit for each charge pulse. The result of this is much lower charges for medium-distance toll calls. / Lars Poulsen ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #89 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!mhuxj!mhuxn!mhuxl!ulysses!ucbvax!t elecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Wed, 19-Sep-84 20:04:05 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Thursday, 20 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 89 Today's Topics: pulse-meter toll charging (in Europe) New phones at UMass prove to be lemons 212 modems Lower cost for medium distance toll calls in Europe Re: US-French 800 service Headsets DDN connection for NCR TOWER running UNIX Touch-tone decoding on an IBM PC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 18-Sep-84 18:37:57 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: pulse-meter toll charging (in Europe) Of course, such charging techniques are infamous for being inaccurate, particularly in the excess charge direction! There are all sorts of problems with pulse rates coming through too high, even through forms of crosstalk with other lines. When such systems are used, as was noted, it is generally IMPOSSIBLE to get an itemized bill, which probably makes the government-owned post office/telephone operations quite happy. Having your own counter at home can verify the total number of pulses, but does you little good if excess pulses are actually being sent down the line, which is often the case. The result is that it's almost impossible for the average subscriber to ever be REALLY sure that their charges are accurate, and almost impossible to get a refund if you suspect a problem, since all the telco has to work with is a total number of pulses -- and you can't prove much one way or another from that. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Sep 84 01:56 EST From: Andrew D. Sigel <sigel%umass-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> Subject: New phones at UMass prove to be lemons I thought the following (slightly edited) article printed yesterday in the Massachusetts Daily Collegian (Univ. of Mass school paper) would be of interest to this digest. The headline, "New phones a heartache for students" (article by Kenneth B. Albert) seems an adequate summation of the situation. ----------------------------------------------------- New telephones installed in the University of Massachusetts dormitories last summer are causing problems for students, including those who own or rent home computers. The new phones have receivers that do not couple with the computer modems, so students with computer terminals in their rooms cannot "log on". Chuck Wyman, associate director of the UMass Computing Center, said, "I was talking to a student with a direct-connect modem. He could send information, but not receive it. This looks like a problem with the phone itself. "If students are unable to communicate with the computer from their rooms, they will come to the public terminals and we don't have enough space as it is," he said. "The acoustic couple modems are going to have the most trouble," Wyman said. "The receiver shape itself could easily cause problems." Under the state bidding system, the University was forced to buy 7,000 phones at $105,000 from the lowest bidder, the Mura Corporation, according to Gerald Quarles, director of the Housing Assignment Office. The telephone system was tested in Prince House [grad student dorm] and a 14 percent error factor was found, said Quarles. The error factor means that of the 7,000 phones, 920 could malfunction. Quarles said, "It would have cost about $30,000 to test the entire system. "What was the best way to proceed? Turn on the whole system, or expect a 14 percent error factor in the fall?" Quarles asked. "We decided to wait." Sophomore Laurie Autlet said, "I can't make long distance calls because the phone quality is so bad. The other night I couldn't get a dial tone for fifteen minutes." Sherri Miller, a sophomore living in Knowlton House said, "If you move the phone at all, the jack falls right out. The operators keep cutting in for no reason. It happened three times in one call to New York the other night." "All this started as a result of the AT&T divestiture," Quarles said. "Last year, all of our phones were AT&T rentals. The University was informed in February that the rate would be going up about 300 percent over the next three years," he said. "There wasn't much time to respond." The rate increase "forced the University to step up modernization. We decided at that time to purchase our own phones," and eliminate "the need to push up student fees," he said. "We've done around 500 repair jobs in the last week and a half." ------------------------------------------------------- Ignoring the fact that the article badly needs a rewrite, it brings up some interesting fodder for discussion. I wonder how many of the "cheaper" phone manufacturers are making a decent living selling to government, because they are required to accept minimum bid, even if it is for equipment that is not compatible. I think the University was off it's proverbial rocker in not specifying, in the bid, that the phones must be acoustic-modem compatible. I also wonder about warranties, and how ANY company can survive on a 14 percent error factor (except the American car industry, of course). And given that there have been 500 repair jobs in 10 days, one wonders if the 14 percent number will prove to be a fluke, and the actual number much higher. I'll send a follow-up when I hear more. Andrew Sigel ------------------------------ Date: 19 Sep 84 04:10:46 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: 212 modems From: waters%viking.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Lester Waters) Does anyone out there have any info about the banks of DIP switches contained in a Bell 212A 300/1200 baud modem? Is that the standard Dataphone 212A type, in the cast aluminum box with external transformer and the kludge run into a 5-liner to make a standalone unit? If so, we *do* have the documentation on the suckers, sent to us by someone down at ATTIS after we bitched hard enough. We also have an 8-position rack; they all take the same plug-in cards. The cards have two boards each, one mounted toward the front, upside down and about half the length of the main card. *Cute* modems, and they work quite well, but Krighst help us when they break. The only doc we have is the installation guides and stuff, not schematics. Anyway, WE loves to mis-label their components so you can't tell what they are. _H* ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 19 Sep 1984 07:06:55-PDT From: minow%rex.DEC@decwrl.ARPA Subject: Lower cost for medium distance toll calls in Europe In V4.88, Lars Poulson described the difference between European (Danish) and American pay-phone systems, noting that the European method of charging for a "pulse" yielded lower-cost medium-distance toll calls. He somewhat understated the case. When I lived in Europe and travelled a lot, I could call between the Copenhagen airport and my home outside of Stockholm for 10-15 seconds for one Danish Kroner (about 10 cents). Enough to say which plane I was on. By contrast, to call 15 miles on Cape Cod, (Orleans to Provincetown) cost a minimum of 90 cents. Martin Minow. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Sep 84 11:36:23 EDT From: Joe Pistritto <jcp@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: Re: US-French 800 service A US-France toll free hookup is indeed useful. For instance, a client of mine is a French concern with a large US marketing/support/ co-production operation. They could use this service to help their marketing efforts, and also for customer access to service personnel. (who have to be available 24hours anyway). For a US company selling in Europe, this would bridge a major gap in phone service. I suspect that this is part of a push on AT&T's part to better their rival long distance companies, and it could result in a substantial expansion of US business contacts in Europe. Good idea, even worth repeating in other Common Market countries... -JCP- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Sep 84 13:13:29 EDT From: Ron Natalie <ron@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: Headsets Actually, the Plantronics headsets that most operators use now are constructed to be light and non-fatiguing. You can get a noise reducing option for them but all it is is a stupid cup that goes on the microphone. Better yet, try one of the headsets that are designed for use in airplanes and helicopters. The two front runners are Telex and David Clark. _Ron ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Sep 84 10:50 EDT From: Harold Grossman <hcgrs%clemson.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> Subject: DDN connection for NCR TOWER running UNIX Does anyone have any information about putting an NCR TOWER running UNIX on DDN? Specifically would an 1822, HDH, or x.25 connection be the most appropriate? What type fo drivers are available(commercilaically or public domain)? What sources of interface boxes are available? Any information whether personal experience or hear-say on putting something like an NCR TOWER on DDN will be greatfully appreciated. harold (hcgrs@clemson) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Sep 1984 15:32 PDT From: HALVORSEN@SU-CSLI.ARPA Subject: Touch-tone decoding on an IBM PC Does anybody know if there is available off-the-shelf hardware which will enable an IBM PC to decode touch tone tones sent to it from a phone? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #90 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Thu, 20-Sep-84 20:10:51 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Friday, 21 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 90 Today's Topics: Re: New phones at UMass prove to be lemons Re: Using a phone next to a noisy fan. AT & T packet network AT&T long distance touch tone service question long-distance pay phones in Japan...and, who's bugging me? Flipped Tip and Ring, Modem/line test patterns ESSex finding your own number in NJ Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #87 (re: 1+) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 19 Sep 84 20:57:12 EDT From: Chuck Kennedy <kermit@BRL-VGR.ARPA> Subject: Re: New phones at UMass prove to be lemons The government (U.S., at least) is not required to accept minimum bid if the proposed equipment does not meet specifications. I have to agree that the problem with UMass seems to have been a lack of specifications. Seems like they didn't put too much effort into the buying process and now they're paying for it. -Chuck Kennedy U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab Arpanet: Kermit @ BRL UUCP: ...!{decvax,cbosgd}!brl-bmd!kermit ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Sep 84 11:09:28 EDT From: GMM Labs <eed_wgmm%jhu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> Subject: Re: Using a phone next to a noisy fan. I am currently evaluating a few different headphone models. They range in price from $50 to $300. The best in terms of vocal and aural quality seems to be the Plantronics (~$200). The $49 model is cheap and even sounds pretty good. It has a more adjustable volume control than the Plantronics (the Plantronics having only three settings) but both work well even with a 10K BTU air condition- er running behind my head, a Spinwriter CLACKING away, and over three muffins running constantly. Of course, if I go deaf from the noise, neither will do me much good... I will post to the net when I am done with the eval. -r RICK at MIT-MC eed_wgmm.jhu at csnet-relay ------------------------------ From: <bang!todd@Nosc> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 84 18:40:15 pdt Subject: AT & T packet network AT&T announced FCC approval of their new 56kb Packet Data Network. The system will be available for aprx. $1000 a month, plus aprx. $0.80 for each packet sent. Off hours have a special $0.60 charge. The system requires that each customer place his own 'packetizing' equipment at each termination, and also showed several units that were compatible with the system. bang!todd ------------------------------ From: <bang!todd@Nosc> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 84 18:40:20 pdt Subject: AT&T long distance It says in the August 27 issue of Communications Week that AT&T wants to change the type of connections it has to Southwestern Bell's COs. Instead of the "equal access" direct connection it has always had with CO's, AT&T wants to get the cheaper Enfia B service. This would give them a 950 number to give them the same kind of "trunk-side" switching that SBS Skyline has now (950-1088). AT&T would slash rates by 15% in states where this change is made, because of their savings. Southwestern Bell is going to federal court to prevent AT&T from getting the cheaper service, since they would lose about $310 million annually (AT&T says it's more in the area of a $50 million loss). They'll probly try the same thing in California eventually. So much for 1+ dialing ... bang!todd ------------------------------ From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcc3!sdcc6!ix21@hao.UUCP Date: Mon, 17 Sep 84 02:32:56 pdt From: Strokebusters <hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcc3!sdcc6!ix21@hao.UUCP> Subject: touch tone service question I recently bought with a switch to change from pulse dialing to touch tone dialing. My intention was to save money from touch tone service by using pulse mode when making local calls and flipping the switch when using my alternate long distance carrier service. Now I received a letter from my phone company saying that I have to pay for touch tone service; even though I use the slower rotary dialing mode when placing a local call or when calling the local number to reach my long distance service. Does anyone know how the local phone companies can justify charging for touchtone service for a non touchtone phone? David Whiteman sdcsvax!sdcc6!ix21 sdcsvax!sdcc6!ix21@nosc.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 20 Sep 1984 04:51:17-PDT From: ofsevit%spags.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (David From: Ofsevit..229-6743..LTN2-2/C08) Subject: long-distance pay phones in Japan...and, who's bugging me? In Japan they also have the system where you can call anywhere in the country from properly marked pay phones (there are several different colors with different levels of service) and keep feeding coins to keep the connection alive. A short local call is 10 Yen (about 2.4 cents) and the few long-distance calls I made seemed very reasonable. There didn't seem to be the big premium for coin phones that exists in the U.S. All in all a better way to have pay phones. On a completely different topic: Every so often (sometimes several times a day) my home phone rings once and stops. If I pick it up during the ring, there is an immediate click and hangup. I never get threats, heavy breathing, or any other signs of prank callers. My theory is that TPC is trolling the lines looking for modems. How do I get them to stop? David ------------------------------ Date: 20 Sep 84 02:30:50 PDT From: Murray.pa@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Flipped Tip and Ring, Modem/line test patterns I wanted to make sure my software was going to work with a pair of Codex 224 modems, so we had 2 new phone lines added to my office. The lines worked fine from a phone, but when I connected the phone via the modem, dialing didn't work. You guessed it. After flipping things, everything worked OK. Is it normal for modems to flip Tip and Ring? Actually, I think they are failing to flip them since the normal cords flip them. In any case, the obvious setup didn't work. Codex isn't exactly a tiny outfit. Are phones without diodes really rare enought so they could have missed something like this? None of our phones around here have diodes. Is that uncommon? unreasonable? I assume it's a chicken and egg problem. If you started out without them, you had to get your Tip and Rings sorted out, and if you had them sorted out, why bother with the diodes... Do they charge extra for them? Is there any reason not to get them? Once it was working, I sent several hundred packets back and forth to determine the error rate. I never saw a CRC error. Are there any bit patterns that are known to provoke errors? (I remember getting several for a disk years ago.) Or better, has anybody published a table of patterns for each modem? ------------------------------ Date: 20 Sep 84 13:07:29 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: ESSex The word is out: Rutgers will sometime soon be converted from Centrex to something wild and wonderful called ESSex. This is still a CO-based system but with lots more features. Right now, we have this crazy kludge that first of all is split across two central offices. The 932 exchange is half New Brunswick and half Piscataway, with tie lines between the two. If you're on the Piscataway side of the river, and dial 2-7nnn or some other extension located on the other side of the river, you hear the delay typical of two ESS offices talking to each other. Now they want to change that and give us full programmability - imagine what fun we're going to have finding the bugs!! One *major* problem is that Rutgers is almost 100% old black *rotary* dial phones [eccch], and quite a few of the ESSex features require touchtone. Rather than a global upgrade, they are going to arrange something like that if your department will pay for it, you can upgrade your phones. Naturally, everyone will start bringing in their $10 one-piece cheapferns so they can have touchtone... Well, this is about all I know right now. Now, does anyone out there have or have messed with ESSex, and can tell us something about how it works so we're prepared for the change? What are its good points/lossages/just plain war stories? Can't wait till December... _H* ------------------------------ Date: 20 Sep 84 13:07:43 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: finding your own number in NJ As far as I know NJ [201] has never had any ''funny'' ANI numbers. The best way is to dial 0 and say ''This is an installer, what line am I on?'' -- works every time, even at odd hours of the night. NJ TSPS ops are trained to give out the number when they hear the magic words ''installer'' or ''repairman'', no questions asked. This will probably work everywhere else, too. _H* ------------------------------ From: Christopher A Kent <cak@Purdue.ARPA> Date: 20 Sep 1984 1620-EST (Thursday) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #87 (re: 1+) Boy, I don't know what all the furor is about -- where I grew up (Cincinnati, NPA 513) you've had to dial 1+ for toll calls for at least 15 years. If you dial a toll call without the 1+, you get told to dial again with 1+. I wonder why it's just now showing up in other parts of the country? chris ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #91 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Fri, 21-Sep-84 18:04:58 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Saturday, 22 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 91 Today's Topics: who is bugging you... Re: who's bugging me... Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #87 (re: 1+) Re: AT&T long distance (TELECOM Digest V4 #90) finding your own number in NJ Re: (re: 1+) Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #87 (re: 1+) Re: long-distance pay phones in Japan 80 cents a packet? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 20-Sep-84 19:57:55 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: who is bugging you... I think it's EXTREMELY unlikely that the "one ring" calls that a TELECOM user reported are "TPC searching for modems." First of all, even if such scanning was going on, they wouldn't bother calling several times a day! Maybe one call a year or something. But in any case, an effective modem "searcher" most certainly wouldn't drop off as soon as you answer, since most modems delay a couple of seconds after answer (at least) before sending carrier. Most likely you're just the target of some bored kids. Ignore the problem as best you can and it will probably fade away... --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Sep 84 23:51:56 edt From: chris.maio@columbia Subject: Re: who's bugging me... I don't remember where I heard this from, but I've always been under the impression that those annoying single rings are the result of the phone company "polling" the line to determine how many phones you are using. The idea (please correct me if I'm wrong) is that each ringer on a standard phone draws about an amp, so if your line draws 5 amps, you've got 5 phones plugged in. If you've only told the phone company that you have two phones, you get a call from them asking you to pay the extra rental charges. This happened once to someone I know, but fortunately, the phone company only "found" one of the two extra phones. The phone company also (used to?) sweep the lines with a 600-volt signal periodically, which I'd heard was an attempt to destroy components in home-brew equipment. - Chris P.S. In New York City, you can dial 958 to get the number you're calling from. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Sep 84 9:26:50 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #87 (re: 1+) I have had 1+ in Delaware (NPA 302) for as long as I can remember, but not requiring the 1+ sometimes raises interesting points as to what exchanges are or aren't in use. I know of a few instances in other areas THERE where 1+ hasn't been required (475, 478, 674--at least the pay phones in those exchanges). 475 & 478 are both local to some 215-area points, so that makes all of Delaware AND those 215-area points reachable by dialing only 7 digits! From 475, you're local to 874 and 876 (Chester, Pa.), but 875 is Laurel, about 90 miles downstate. I said very recently in this digest that when 1+ is in use, you can't make a toll call by dialing only 7 digits. It confused me initially when I found out that you can make toll calls within some areas by dialing only 7 digits; you have to pay attention to your local calling area, and a slip of the dial might send you far away from your destination within local area and/or area code. Lack of 1+ is understandable in NYC and Washington DC (although NYC now requires 1+ for calls to other areas), because of local & message-unit calling areas covering those entire area codes. Wasn't 1+number used for any toll call within Cincinnati Bell area at one time? (That area covers 513 and also part of 606.) In other words, if you were in 513, could you omit the area code on some toll calls to northern Kentucky? (Cincinnati exchanges are local to some northern Kentucky points.) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Sep 84 09:41:41 edt From: "John Levine, P.O.Box 349, Cambridge MA 02238-0349 From: (617-494-1400)" <ima!johnl@cca-unix> Subject: Re: AT&T long distance (TELECOM Digest V4 #90) If you read more carefully, you'll find that what AT&T is doing is far more sleazy than just switching to ENFIA B. They want ENFIA B for terminating trunks only, retaining their current ENFIA C (unequal access) for their outgoing trunks. This means that they'd still have the current premium 1+ service for people who originate calls, but have cheaper ENFIA B trunks for calls coming in. Since ENFIA B and C are supposed to be electrically similar, the net is that there'd be no change in service, just a big saving for Ma. Evidently whoever wrote the tariffs neglected to say that incoming and outgoing trunks had to match. Pfui. John Levine, ima!johnl or Levine@YALE.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 84 11:36 EDT (Fri) From: _Bob <Carter@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: finding your own number in NJ As far as I know NJ [201] has never had any ''funny'' ANI numbers. The best way is to dial 0 and say ''This is an installer, what line am I on?'' -- works every time, even at odd hours of the night. NJ TSPS ops are trained to give out the number when they hear the magic words ''installer'' or ''repairman'', no questions asked. This will probably work everywhere else, too. Er, are there still installers? No mind. Just asking her "what number am I calling from?" has always worked for me. _B ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 84 10:15:12 PDT (Friday) From: Lynn.es@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: (re: 1+) It would appear that Kent's message was in reply to my last Telecom message. If so, he missed the point. It is not that 714 area code added 1+ for toll calls, but that they got rid of it! (and also added 1+ dialing for out-of-area-code calls, but that is a different use of 1+, and irrelevant to this). My complaint was that the system's reaction to dialing the now unneeded 1+ shouldn't be a recording, not the opposite case of failing to dial a necessary 1+. /Don Lynn ------------------------------ From: Christopher A Kent <cak@Purdue.ARPA> Date: 21 Sep 1984 1223-EST (Friday) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #87 (re: 1+) Yes, I was also confused the first time I came to Palo Alto and discovered that I didn't have to dial 1+, for any calls! I still dial 1+ out of habit. Yes, in the Cincinnati Bell area, you can dial certain toll calls into 606 (northern Kentucky) withouth 1+. But calls to Dayton, which is also in 513, require 1+. chris ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 84 12:01:00 PDT (Friday) From: Halbert.PA@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: long-distance pay phones in Japan Few people used to have private phones in Japan, and so pay phones were (and still are) quite common. In fact, the rates for calls from home phones are the same as those from pay phones. --Dan ------------------------------ Date: 21-Sep-84 12:43:38-PDT From: jbn@FORD-WDL1.ARPA Subject: 80 cents a packet? That can't be right. At 56KB, costs would be several thousand dollars an hour. Please correct the note on AT&T's packet service. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #92 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Wed, 26-Sep-84 13:29:29 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 25 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 92 Today's Topics: 1+ handling in NJ Hotel charges - a legal question? Re: Who's bugging me? Communications Forum letter prefixes ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 22 Sep 84 00:25:58 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: 1+ handling in NJ I have heard that most NJ phones won't even shut off the dialtone on leading 1+ (and this now has to change). No, they have fixed that. They *had* to do that before making 1+ official. Even the crossbar offices now recognize a leading 1, where they used to ignore it completely. 800 numbers still don't require 1+. 10 still gets you *immediately* to TSPS [under ESS], so no preparations for equal access have been made here yet except 950. I still hate 1+. It will probably be another 5 years before they start using any of those n1x or n0x ''exchanges'' anyways! Feh! _H* ------------------------------ Date: 22 Sep 84 00:26:27 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: Hotel charges - a legal question? On a number of occasions I have had to call the desk and *ask* what a given hotel's surcharge policy was, because it was not documented anywhere in the room. First, I think surcharges for local calls are a crime, but apparently it's legal. *Why* is it legal? But a better question is: If I am to pay for something, I have every right to know [without working too hard] what the bottom line is. If the hotel will not tell me what they are going to charge for my calls, could it be shown that they are infringing on my rights, and therefore invalidate the surcharge? A similar situation would be if you stayed a couple of nights and only *then* found out you were paying $129 per night for the room. And of course, charges for *picking it up* are entirely off the wall! What can we, the public, do about this slimy ripoff that is infesting every city? _H* ------------------------------ From: decvax!ittvax!ittral!shackelt@Berkeley Date: Mon, 24 Sep 84 03:20:25 edt Subject: Re: Who's bugging me? While it may be possible that the short ring could be the telco testing your line to see how many ringers you have, ringers don't draw anywhere near 1 amp unless you have a fog horn. Ringer impedance runs around 8000 ohms at 60 Hz and less at the normal 20 Hz. The current is so low in fact that a wet phone line would cause a false reading. Does your phone ring a short burst on a rainy day? If so you may be getting a wrong number. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Sep 84 14:34 EDT From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Communications Forum MIT Communications Forum THE MIT COMMUNICATIONS PROBLEM October 11, 1984 4:00-5:30 Marlar Lounge, 37-252 (70 Vassar St.) MIT, Cambridge David Clark, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science A plan to provide a data communication network for MIT has been evolving over the last several years, and implementation of the network is now in progress. Since the MIT campus has a rich set of requirements, the design of this network provides insights for the design of other sophisticated networks. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Sep 84 14:48:00 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA> Subject: letter prefixes Is there any better way of finding letter prefixes (such as JUniper 5 in Silver Spring, Md.) than roaming hither & yon thru old publications? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #93 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sat, 29-Sep-84 16:08:51 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Saturday, 29 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 93 Today's Topics: Hi-tech answering machines Codex 224 ringing only once ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 Sep 84 1817 PDT From: Allan A. Miller <AAA@SU-AI.ARPA> Subject: Hi-tech answering machines I am looking for a phone answering machine with the following features: full function beeperless remote control; security code. I found one from Radio Shack in the 85 catalog, Sharper Image has one from Panasonic, Codaphone has one. They are about 250$. However, none of them seem to allow user changeable security codes. Does anyone have any experience with these units or know of any others that have the required features? Please answer directly to AAA@SU-AI as I am not on the list.P ------------------------------ Date: 27 September 1984 02:14-EDT From: Minh N. Hoang <MINH @ MIT-MC> Subject: Codex 224 I work for Codex... in the department that handles the 224 development coincidentally. I checked into your Tip and Ring reversal problem and I guess it does exist if you expect the modem to reverse Tip and Ring between the Telco and Telset jacks. At the Telco jack, T, R, MI, MIC and the programming resistor leads are arranged according to the RJ45S specification in FCC part 68 requirements. English translation: that jack has the same alignment as the one on the wall if you don't use the other leads (exclusion-key telephone, programmable mode DAA.) Similarly the Telset jack is RJ11 and also looks like the one on the wall. So the standard modem board just pass T/R through. We did put provision into the printed circuit wiring so that T/R can be reversed on board but that has to be done by a technician (ours, according to pt. 68). That involves cutting 2 wire straps and installing 2 other. But don't get your tools yet. The cable(s) we supply with the unit do not -- should not -- reverse T/R. The plugs should have the same alignment. You might have gotten a 'defective' cable, I have seen a few 8-pinners reversed... Anyway, phones without diode protection aren't that rare. But they are like acoustic-coupling modems... On the lighter side, thanks for the indirect compliment to our modem's performance. Hmm... if y'all want errors maybe we shouldn't spend those few months tweaking the adaptive equalizer. The modem was designed to work well over international circuits - as a V.22 bis. Thus you will have problem determining the bit error rate over typical ATT-C lines. We did digital loopback tests overnight to our remote beta sites and collect 1-2 errors in >12 hours. A high of about 10 was collected over a 3-day weekend... If you want to characterize the modem seriously, you will need a telephone channel simulator to introduce controlled amounts of noise, phase jitter etc. For BER test, we generally use the standard 2047 pseudo-random pattern along with those bit-error rate tester. Well, the modem isn't sensitive to that either. Cheers. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Sep 84 07:38:11 est From: ECN.davy@Purdue.ARPA (Dave Curry) Subject: ringing only once Several years ago, ringing everybody's number once to see how many phones he had used to be one of GTE's (Lafayette, Indiana) favorite pasttimes. They stopped doing this 7 or 8 years ago, supposedly because some guy sued his telco for invasion of privacy or some such and won. GTE, being afraid of getting sued, stopped trying to spy on its customers this way. I'm not sure if the above is correct -- perhaps someone who follows the phone laws can confirm or correct it. I do know, however, that GTE (at least around here) does not do any of that stuff anymore. Perhaps all the deregulation has something to do with it too -- maybe some of those little "beep-beep" ringers don't show up like they should, or maybe so many people have extra phones now it just isn't worth the hassle. --Dave Curry {decvax, ihnp4, ucbvax}!pur-ee!davy eevax.davy@purdue ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 84 14:58 EDT From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA MIT Communications Forum COMPETITION FOR INTELSAT Thursday, October 18, 1984, 4-6 p.m. Marlar Lounge, Bldg. 37-252, 70 Vassar St., MIT, Cambridge For two decades INTELSAT has had a near monopoly of international satellite telecommunications. This was justified on many of the same grounds as AT&T's monopoly of domestic telephony: the merits of uniformity and standardization; cross-subsidy of less-developed by more developed areas; and economies of scale. Orion Satellite and several other potential competitors have recently applied to serve the lucrative North Atlantic routes. This has touched off intense debate about "cream-skimming," the value of INTELSAT, and America's international communications policies. Christopher Vizas, Orion Satellite Corporation Joseph Pelton, INTELSAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #94 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Tue, 2-Oct-84 18:44:27 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 3 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 94 Today's Topics: Hi-tech answering machines thanks, but... FAST Modems Radio Shack answering machine 7D in Jersey Correct rates for ACCUNET(R) Packet Service ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 30 September 1984 02:46-EDT From: Paul R. Grupp <GRUPP @ MIT-MC> Subject: Hi-tech answering machines The top of the line Radio Shack answering machine *DOES* allow you to pick your code #. You do so by entering it in the main unit with a cord connecting the remote while you enter it. The only possible problem is if the remote's batterys go OR power go off on the main unit when it's backup battery is dead then they will NOT talk to each other. The remote also has many other features that most do not. It is definatly worth looking at. Regards, Paul Grupp ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 1 Oct 1984 09:57:46-PDT From: ofsevit%spags.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (David From: Ofsevit..229-6743..LTN2-2/C08) Subject: thanks, but... Thanks to all who had suggestions on why my phone was ringing once and hanging up when I answered. Unfortunately it seems more and more to be pranksters. It happens if I let it ring 2 or 3 times, and lately I have heard talking in the background before the hangup. Any suggestions on what I can do about it, short of torturing every urchin in the neighborhood? Thanks again, David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Oct 84 15:37:11 EDT From: Doug Kingston <dpk@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: FAST Modems I need a information on the fastest available modems for dialup (switched) telephone lines. Price is no object. -Doug- ------------------------------ Date: 1-Oct-84 14:24 PDT From: Steve Kleiser <SGK.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA> Subject: Radio Shack answering machine I have the top of the line answering machine (tad-150?) - the $300 job. I really do like it - but then, I also wish I had beeperless remote - but at least I HAVE full function remote. This machine DOES allow the user to change the security code at any time (by plugging the remote into the machine and setting the code via LCD display). What I really like is the recording of date and time of each call, which is then displayed during message playback. With my old machine, I used to include on the answer message "at the tone, pls leave your name, phone #, and time you called ..." The people who got used to my old machine still leave the time - sometimes WAY off (!). Anyway, I gave up my requirement of a beeperless remote because of the time feature, which I found in no other unit (at least I never found a unit with time recording AND beeperless remote). Let me know what you end up with, OK? -steve- ------------------------------ Date: 1 Oct 84 23:16:31 EDT From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: 7D in Jersey Yes, New Jersey has always been and still is such that you dial the seven digits within the area code. [There are exceptions for the fringe areas next to another area code, where 7D is local to places in Pennsylvania or across the 201/609 border. In these cases, if say you're in 201 and can call 215-344 as local, you'd dial 201-344 to get 344 in Jersey, which, hopefully, is somewhere on the other end of the area!] When you think about it, requiring 1+ to get to points within your own area code is really braindamaged. If you dial 344-2954, where the hell *else* is the call going to go, unless you have one of the above kludges? If you ask me, NJB has done it reasonably right all along, and only now is getting bitten by the 1+ stuff because everyone else is running out of exchanges. 1+, if used, should *only* be an indicator to the office of ''Ten digits follow'', or if the second digit is 0, do special things. Note for 201 people: Ever try 620|630|640-nnnn? You wind up at some Washington, NJ intercept whose only job is to ask you what number you dialed. Is that a waste of their time and money, to say nothing of three perfectly useable exchanges?? It might be also noted that those calls are routed through *non*-CCIS trunks. No, I didn't tell you that.... _H* ------------------------------ From: ihnp4!ihldt!jhh@Berkeley Date: 2 Oct 84 04:08:02 CDT (Tue) Subject: Correct rates for ACCUNET(R) Packet Service As suspected, the rates quoted in a previous issue were high. Having finally obtained a copy of the Press release, here are the correct rates: $0.82 per kilopacket First 4000 kilopackets (per month) $0.77 per kilopacket 4001 to 8000 kilopackets $0.72 per kilopacket 8001 to 12000 kilopackets $0.67 per kilopacket 12001 and subsequent kilopackets $0.34 per kilopacket All non-business-hour usage Each packet may contain up to 256 bytes. Access lines cost $470 for 4.8Kbps, $615 for 9.6Kbps, and $1865 for 56Kbps monthly. The link to the packet switch must be obtained separately. John Haller ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Oct 84 16:12 EDT From: Marshall.wbst@XEROX.ARPA A phone installer in Webster, N.Y. (Rochester Telephone Company) said that the local #5 office sometimes scanned all lines looking for leakage to ground. He said that this might cause a slight noise in the phone. He was not sure of this though. --Sidney Marshall ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #95 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Wed, 3-Oct-84 18:23:47 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Thursday, 4 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 95 Today's Topics: submission from net.general 1+? Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94 MIT Communications Forum Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Oct 84 18:35:28 EDT From: Jon Solomon <jsol@bbncca.ARPA> Subject: submission from net.general The issue which bothered me the most of the three I posted was the one dealing with charges for data transmission over phone lines. Apparently, just for modems to work correctly, the central office has to sense when a carrier is on the line and do something special to make sure it isn't inadvertently clipped or interrupted during the data conversation. So there is technology available to detect when someone is using a modem on a telephone line, and presumably this technology could be connected to the time & charges apparatus in the central office. The result would be that if you use your line for voice, one set of charges apply, and if you use it for data, another set might apply. This mechanism is rather crude though since I does not keep track of the amount of bits being communicated. The new all-digital telephone systems will do this and charge by the bit for use of a special digital data channel paired with a quality voice line (which is fairer for us slow terminal hackers). Some of this stuff is going into medium-scale testing soon. (There was an article about a large experimental Japanese digital telephone system in IEEE Spectrum a few months ago. There was another article about internation datacomm wars more recently.) Since I know there are hundreds of telecomm engineers outs there, I sincerely invite corrections and further enlightenment. I was very disappointed that I did not get a single response on this particular issue. Please don't leave me disappointed any longer! (I don't read any of the comm newsgroups anymore, so followup or direct reply will have to do.) Joe Falcone Eastern Research Laboratory decwrl! Digital Equipment Corporation decvax!deccra!jrf Hudson, Massachusetts tardis! ------------------------------ Date: 2 Oct 1984 17:29 MDT (Tue) From: "Frank J. Wancho" <WANCHO@SIMTEL20> Subject: 1+? According to one of those radio news tidbits, some motels in southern Cal have been burned because PacTel REMOVED the requirement for 1+ for calls made within the area code. It seems callers were using 9+ with no accounting instead of 8+. Now, not only will the motel owners be stuck for the unbillable calls, but will also have to bear the expense of installing new equipment that supposedly detects and refuses a non-local 9+ call... --Frank ------------------------------ Date: Tue 2 Oct 84 16:53:28-PDT From: Chris <Pace@USC-ECLC.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94 Two items: I have ITTs answering machine and it works without a remote unit. You set up a code via dip switches under the machine and then talk in the right sequence to activate. You can erase all the messages you heard or keep them for playback later - your choice. It is about 4 years old, so there is probably something even better out now. The second pertains to the problem with pranksters. Answering machines are great! Every so often some bozo decides that it's fun to make me answer the phone; I just turn the answering machine on. It is very despiriting to pranksters and if its someone I really want to talk to, I can hear it in time to pick it up (has a speaker so you dont even have to get up). Chris. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Oct 84 07:54 EDT From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: MIT Communications Forum The seminar by David Clark, "The MIT Communications Problem" has been postponed to October 25 (originally October 11). Same time, same place. ------------------------------ From: ihnp4!ihuxk!rs55611@Berkeley Date: 3 Oct 84 11:52:27 CDT (Wed) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94 A couple of ways to discourage prank calls, assuming they're pranks, and not malicious: 1. When you think someone is on the line (giggling, breathing, etc.) try to hurt their ears a little. Blowing a whistle real loud into your mouthpiece works pretty well, assuming you're not on a digital (ie PCM) central office where your whistle signal will get clipped at +3 dBm anyway. Even if clipping does occur, it will be pretty annoying to the prank caller. If you don't have a whistle, give them a shot of Touch-Tone! 2. Whisper, but loud enough for them to hear (as if you were talking to someone else in the room with you), "Quick, turn on the tracing circuit!", or words to that effect. Who cares whether this is technically plausible, the person on the other end is probably going to hang up quickly! Bob Schleicher ihuxk!rs55611 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #96 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Fri, 5-Oct-84 19:34:54 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Saturday, 6 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 96 Today's Topics: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94 AT&T and DNHR net.followup followup article to the one posted in net.general ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ihnp4!ihldt!jhh@Berkeley Date: 4 Oct 84 17:07:47 CDT (Thu) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94 Oops, the correct rate for a 56Kbps Accunet port is $1065 per port, not $1865. Who said slashes through zeros made things clearer? In the my face is red department, John Haller ------------------------------ Date: 5 Oct 84 11:14:49 EDT From: dca-pgs @ DDN1.ARPA Subject: AT&T and DNHR Data Communications, Sept 84. "AT&T Launches NonHierarchical Network." "Ever so quietly, AT&T Comms is slipping its dynamic non-hierarchical routing (DNHR) scheme into place. Sixteen cities have been switched over to the new routing procedure, and AT&T expects to have made the full transition to nonhierarchical switching by 1987. . . . . . . ...the 'smart' offices avoid busy circuits by evaluating the originating nyumber and destination, as well as time-of-day. AT&T insiders say the large amount of extra line capacity gained from the efficient DNHR networrk carries tremendous implications for services AT&T will be able to offer its customers in the future... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (quote was from p. 15) Does anybody have a good guess on when AT&T will be coming out with their Software Defined Network (SDN) (virtual private network) offering? Have a nice weekend. Best, -Pat Sullivan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Oct 84 13:44:59 EDT From: Jon Solomon <jsol@bbncca.ARPA> Subject: net.followup followup article to the one posted in Subject: net.general Anything is possible. I have no inside information and could not discuss it if I did. However, you are misinformed on a couple of factual points. First, telephone central offices (plain or digital fancy) do not look for or detect data signals on customer lines. It would be very expensive to modify them to do so - even the new electronic and/or digital variety. If they did, you could always make voice calls and then switch in the modem after a delay (which is in fact what you do now, except you switch in the modem as fast as possible). What the telcos probably want to do is introduce special data lines (perhaps digital) as an improved service to their customers. Then they might lobby to force data users to stop using pots lines (Plain Old Telephone Service). I forgot what the second point was, if any. Dick Grantges hound!rfg ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #97 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sun, 7-Oct-84 03:30:12 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Sunday, 7 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 97 Today's Topics: detecting modems Re: Phone company scanning for modems more net.followup stuff ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 84 16:30:36 pdt From: braun%ucbic@Berkeley (Douglas Braun) Does anyone out there have any references to any articles on the VLSI ethernet controller chip that Intel, AMD, and others are producing? Articles in practically-oriented magazines such as Electronic Design News would be quite useful. Thanx, Doug Braun P.S. Please mail replies directly to above address at Berkeley. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5-Oct-84 20:13:57 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: detecting modems Since modems on long-distance voice-switched circuits usually need to trigger the echo-suppressors along the path to ensure a full-duplex connection (via a 2225 Hz tone) it would be theoretically possible for the triggering of those suppressors to be used to indicate that a modem call was in place over that circuit. With CCIS, determining the called and calling numbers would be practical. Without monitoring of the data, however, there'd be no way to know whether it was business data, residential data, hearing-impaired TDD communications (ASCII mode), or something else. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Oct 84 13:21:33 edt From: mar@mit-borax (Mark A. Rosenstein) Subject: Re: Phone company scanning for modems What he may be thinking about is echo suppression on long distance lines. Long distance trunks have circuitry to make it easier for voice to be understood, but which would screw up modem traffic. Thus these trunks detect the frequency which is used as carrier on the answer end of the connection in Bell 103 (the same frequency is used in most other protocols), and when they detect it turn off the echo suppression. As far as I know that is the only place the phone company checks for modems right now, and they don't do anything else with that information. They do not have these circuits on individual customer lines, and because of the expense probably never will. -Mark mar@mit-borax.arpa ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Oct 84 18:53:31 EDT From: Jon Solomon <jsol@bbncca.ARPA> Subject: more net.followup stuff From: paul@dual.UUCP (Baker) Organization: Dual Systems, Berkeley, CA Central offices do not and do not need to know if a modem is being used. On the other hand Echo suppressors that are used to prevent you hearing your own voice returned after a few seconds on long lines, need to be disabled for a full-duplex Modem to work. It does this by detecting the answer tone given by the Modem. Note that this is the same tone for all Bell standard Modems. Digital central offices are in no better position to interpret information passed through them. There does seem to have been an interest in the past by phone companies to try and charge Modem users more than voice users. So far none of them have been successful. Paul Wilcox-Baker ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #98 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sun, 7-Oct-84 22:01:26 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Monday, 8 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 98 Today's Topics: NYT- NSA Secure Telephone article. Echo Suppressors white house radios ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 6 Oct 1984 23:48-PDT Sender: GEOFF@SRI-CSL Subject: NYT- NSA Secure Telephone article. From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <Geoff@SRI-CSL.ARPA> n062 1458 06 Oct 84 BC-PHONES 2takes NSA Seeking 500,000 'Secure' Telephones Exclusive 6 p.m. EDT embargo By DAVID BURNHAM c.1984 N.Y. Times News Service WASHINGTON - The National Security Agency is proposing that the government and industry be equipped with as many as 500,000 telephones that can be secured against interception. The agency is convinced that the Soviet Union and the other nations are obtaining important intelligence from United States telephones. Although cloaked in secrecy, a program like the one the agency proposes could cost hundreds of millions of dollars. The project could also lead to a new role for the intelligence agency in private industry. Under the proposal, production of the secure phones would begin in two years. The decision by the largest and most secretive American intelligence organization to propose a major effort to combat telephone eavesdropping was disclosed by Walter G. Deeley, the senior official in charge of protecting government communications. He said in an interview that electronic eavesdropping by the Soviet Union, other countries he did not name and corporations posed a genuine threat to the security of the United States. ''I want the country to be aware that if we don't protect our communications, it can do a great deal of damage to us,'' Deeley said. ''This is a problem that goes to the very fabric of our society. It is not just a worry of the national security agencies.'' He said he believed the United States was in ''deep trouble,'' adding: ''They are having us for breakfast. We're hemorrhaging. Your progeny may not enjoy the rights we do today if we don't do something.'' A Reagan administration official familiar with intelligence matters agreed there was a surveillance problem, but he also said no final decision had been made to go beyond research or to request money to produce the phones. In August, the National Security Agency sent a letter to more than 2,000 major corporations saying, ''The U.S. has initiated an effort to develop low-cost, user-friendly secure telephone instruments.'' The number of secure telephones currently used by government agencies is classified information. But the Carter administration said there were 100 such phones in the government, and it planned to buy 150 more. The cost of each phone then was $35,000. The Reagan administration has bought an unknown number of additional secure phones. The phones proposed by the NSA would be used by the Central Intelligence Agency, the Defense and State departments, military contractors and other private corporations such as banks that handle information of possible use to a foreign power. The NSA was set up by President Truman in a secret executive order in 1952 to conduct electronic intelligence all over the world and protect the sensitive messages of the United States. It has used its secret budget, now estimated at $4 billion a year, to make itself a major sponsor of advanced computer research, and it has played an important covert role in shaping national communication policy. Its top officials almost never grant on-the-record interviews. ''Anyone making a phone call to the West Coast or Boston from the Washington area has no idea how the conversation will be transmitted,'' Deeley said. ''It might go via fiber optics, conventional cable, microwave towers or one of the 19 domestic satellites. If is going via satellite you can presume the other guy is listening to it.'' Asked for specific examples of electronic espionage, he said he could not disclose them because they were classified. Citing individual cases, he said, would give the Russians important clues about the ability of the United States to detect their efforts. Deeley said his agency was developing a similar program to improve the security of computerized data. ''This area has blown up extraordinarily fast,'' he said. ''In many ways computerized data is more harmful than telephones because it's all record information. ''The financial institutions have become aware of this problem. The insurance companies are becoming aware. The rest of the private sector companies are just now beginning to see that if they are going to survive, they have to protect their communications.'' He said increasing American use of communication satellites and microwave transmission towers made it economically possible for almost any nation and many large corporations to intercept messages, then use high-speed computers to sort them out. A spokesman for the American Telephone and Telegraph Co. said he could not estimate the amount of telephone traffic that was subject to relatively easy interception because it was transmitted by microwave towers or satellites. But he added that one rough indicator was that 70 percent of AT&T's domestic equipment and 60 percent of its overseas equipment transmitted telephone messages through the atmosphere rather than by cable, which is harder to intercept. Few members of Congress other than members of the Senate and House intelligence committees are aware of the NSA's plan. One exception is Rep. Glenn English, D-Okla., chairman of the House Government Operations Subcommittee on Information. In a letter Sept. 24 to the General Accounting Office, a congressional investigative arm, he said, ''There can, of course, be no objection to maintaining adequate security for classified information.'' He said, however, that he knew ''from past experience that the national security bureaucracy has a tendency to require a degree of protection for classified information that may be excessive.'' He added, ''Technological security measures are very expensive, and my concern is that the unnecessary use of these measures is a waste of scarce federal funds.'' English asked the GAO to prepare an unclassified report on whether the proposed protective measures were necessary and worth the cost. Henry Geller, director of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration in the Carter administration and now the head of the Washington Center for Public Policy Research of Duke University, raised questions about the project. He said that when the Carter administration studied Soviet eavesdropping, it decided that its biggest security agency should be responsible for assuring the communications security of the American military and American intelligence services but that the Commerce Department should be responsible for working with private companies. ''There was a strong belief in the Carter administration that the United States has a long and important tradition that the telephone systems and broadcasting groups are independent, privately owned entities,'' he said. ''Adopting a plan that gives the NSA, a branch of the Pentagon, an important role in the communication network of private corporations and civilian agencies of government is a significant policy change that should be carefully examined by Congress before it is adopted.'' Deeley said his agency's concern prompted it earlier this year to award five of the major American communication companies small contracts to conduct individual studies; the object would be to determine whether they could mass-produce a low-cost, easy-to-use telephone that would be difficult to intercept. The companies are AT&T, the GTE Corp., the ITT Corp., the Motorola Corp. and the RCA Corp. Deeley did not describe the telephones, but experts in the field said each would presumably have a small computer that would transform the voice signals into a stream of coded digits. They said this would require time and expensive equipment for an outsider to decode the message. However, after the coded message was transmitted by conventional means to another special telephone, the receiving unit's computer could quickly turn the digits back into an understandable voice. As a result of the preliminary studies supported by his agency, Deeley said that he hoped to get bids on the project in November and sign an agreement with two of the five companies before the end of this year, and that production of the devices could begin before the end of 1986. ''We're talking about a half a million phones,'' Deeley said. While the Carter administration paid $35,000 for each such phone, Deeley said the NSA hoped that mass production could cut the cost. ''Communications security is like insurance,'' he said. ''It has no intrinsic value until it is needed. Some people buy insurance, some don't. If you are a responsible person with a family, you take out a little term insurance. If you aren't, you buy a case of beer.'' Deeley said a major investment in secure telephones by the private sector would result in a substantial reduction of the cost of such equipment for the federal government. ''If Exxon or Hanover Trust want to protect themselves,'' he said, ''they ought to be able to get the right equipment to achieve that goal. If they don't care about other people reading their mail, that's their business.'' nyt-10-06-84 1808edt *************** ------------------------------ Date: 07-Oct-1984 0952 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: Echo Suppressors Echo suppressors are currently only used on circuits longer than approximately 2000 miles. In addition, the echo suppressors are in a layer of the network not at all related to accounting and billing. You can rest assured that the telcos are not today, nor will they in the near future, be using anything related to echo suppressors to determine whether a modem is in use. ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 18 September 1984 21:06-MDT Sender: pur-ee!uiucdcs!uok!mpackard@Ucb-Vax From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!uok!mpackard@Ucb-Vax Subject: white house radios The most distressing thing to hear is the secretary of state discussing problems or passing information over a clear radio, but it happens all the time. Just listen to HF in the 11.200 to 11.300 band and you will here just about everyone of importance talking around the subject. The fact that the military spends billions on communications gear, doesn't mean they use it. Usually the operator is lazy and just gets a frequency the fastest way he can. "get me a freq as soon as possible I must speak to the president" and the operator says gee not again, Oh piss I'll just give him the HF. The easiest way to determine an aircrafts communications capability is to look at it's antenna's. (you can't tell which ones are the bogus ones) Don't forget to examine the skin for bumps which house some of the antenna's. The reason for bumps is because the maintenance types have to fix them sooner or later. uok!mpackard ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #99 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Wed, 10-Oct-84 21:32:22 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Thursday, 11 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 99 Today's Topics: "false" alarm about telecom rates (for now) AT&T's "Notes on the Network" Re: Telecomm rates? Secure military communications Ref: Telecom 4-97 ..VLSI Ethernet Chip info New Jersey dialing British Break-up of the phone-monopoly NSA concern over phone tapping ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sunday, 7 Oct 1984 21:05:53-PDT From: falcone%erlang.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Joe Falcone, HLO2-3/N03, dtn From: 225-6059) Subject: "false" alarm about telecom rates (for now) CC: I've gotten a few notes insisting that it wasn't possible for the phone company to charge special rates for a phone line that was used for data purposes for various reasons (regulatory and electronic). Well, it was tried once, as described by this reposting from net.followup. It is also true that carrier sensing is relatively straightforward and could be tied in to a time-and-charges scheme, but probably will never happen because of the new special digital data networks. My thanks to ea!mwm for the SW Bell account. Joe Falcone >Newsgroups: net.followup >Path: decwrl!amd!fortune!hpda!hplabs!pesnta!petsd!vax135!houxm!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!u iucdcs!ea!mwm >NSubject: Re: new twist on computer "crime" and la >Posted: Thu Sep 27 12:17:00 1984 > >Nf-ID: #R:decwrl:-371600:ea:4300008:000:1465 >Nf-From: ea!mwm Sep 27 14:17:00 1984 /***** ea:net.general / decwrl!falcone / 12:25 am Sep 25, 1984 */ Quite a while ago, some of the local telephone companies were proposing changes to the tariffs which would consider any line used for data transmission (modems) a BUSINESS line and therefore subject to the business rate schedule. For most of us, this would result in rather stiff rate increases. After an initial flurry of messages on the net about this, I haven't heard a thing. Anyone following this? Joe Falcone /* ---------- */ Much of that came from cases here in Oklahoma. A BBS had his phone rate tripled, with no additional service, because the existing laws made any store&forward device some sort of "information terminal." After hassling the guy (Robert Braver, by name. His BBS is the USEMC, phone number 405/360-3020), the phone company backed off. Something to do with the new tariff associated with the divestiture on Jan. 1, 1984. Currently, Southwestern Bell in Oklahoma will charge you a high rate if you hook up a modem and plan on both incoming and outgoing calls through the computer. If you are going to do just one or the other, they only charge you the standard residential rate. My understanding was that Oklahoma was a test case for Southwestern Bell, and they were going to extend the high charge practice to other states if it worked. Since they aren't charging all modem users a high rate ($54/mo, as opposed to $10/mo), I suspect that they've given up. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Oct 1984 00:57-PDT Sender: MHAMILL@SRI-CSL Subject: AT&T's "Notes on the Network" From: MHAMILL@SRI-CSL Does any one have information on where I can order the book- Notes on the Network by AT&T? Thanx, Mark Mhamill@SRI-CSL ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Oct 84 22:56:29 EDT From: steveg@hammer.UUCP (Steve Glaser) Subject: Re: Telecomm rates? There is a thing on most phone lines (particularly long distance trunks) called an echo supressor. Part of the 103/212/VA3400 modem protocols is a magic tone to disable these beasties as they alter the signal and echos aren't a big problem in full duplex modems anyway (transmitting and receiving use different frequencies). Steve Glaser (tektronix!steveg) ------------------------------ From: <bang!crash!frankb@Nosc> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 84 23:56:16 pdt Subject: Secure military communications I don't know about communications in the civilian sector of government, but I know that those of us in the military who had security devices used them. I was in a tactical military intelligence unit in Germany for two and one-half years, from January 1982 to June 1984. During that time, I witnessed the transition from the old voice encryption system (Nestor) to the new (Vinson). We practiced both systems often, while in the field and in garrison. This was necessary with Nestor, as it was a cumbersome and somewhat unreliable (due, most likely, to its old age) system, involving a lot of work setting little switches, and trying to get the little "sandwiches" (as we called them) to fit in their slots. Vinson is much better, being much more reliable (I never witnessed a failure), providing a better level of security, and being a lot more friendly to those using it. We always used our encryption systems for communications, even those of relatively minor importance. For this reason, my unit, as well as many other tactical MI units, was never outsmarted due to a breach of security. The same cannot be said of combat units. I do not know why they have yet to being using encryption gear such as we had, but it will be a problem in wartime. It was incredibly easy not only to find US units in an exercise, but to jam and deceive them as well. Some US combat units practice abhorrent security procedures; weaseling your way into their nets was a simple matter. However, there were (possibly) just as many units which had good radio discipline. This means requiring proper authentication when sending a message, and always questioning the security of your net when you have even the faintest notion something funny is going on. Incidentally, from what I saw during my time in the Army, communications security (COMSEC) is getting better, along with many other components of military operations. Perhaps, in a few years, there won't even be any major COMSEC violations anymore. Perhaps... Frank Boosman sdcsvax!bang!crash!frankb@nosc ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 9 Oct 1984 05:16:34-PDT From: potucek%nisysg.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John M. Potucek @261-3297) Subject: Ref: Telecom 4-97 ..VLSI Ethernet Chip info Date: Tues. 09-Oct-1984 @0818EDT From: John Potucek In snswer to the request from Doug Braun on VLSI Ethernet Chips... There is in the September 1984 issue of Computer Design a fairly good article on the very same subject. Included is a listing of the pertinent VLSI devices with part numbers which compose the various manufacturers chips/chipsets. I hopr that this helps, doug BCNU, /jmp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Oct 84 15:17:01 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA> Subject: New Jersey dialing Before New Jersey went to 1+ dialing, some points there required 1+ on all toll calls. What becomes of 1+ on toll calls within an area code there? (Also, how are local calls across area code boundary to be dialed? Such calls in, say, NYC require 1+area code.) (By the way: I was in NJ on Sunday 16 Sept., and saw the present instructions on a pay phone, prefix 609-423 near Paulsboro along I-295. As reported earlier in different words, the instructions are just like those for NYC--but this pay phone's instructions did NOT single out the home area code for 0+ calls!) [You still have to dial 0-201-XXX-XXXX if you are within 201 and want operator assistance in completing the call. Sigh. --JSol] ------------------------------ Date: Tue 9 Oct 84 15:21:52-CDT From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA> Subject: British Break-up of the phone-monopoly [ the following information was extracted from an article in "The Economist" of Oct 6-12, 84, page 88. "The Economist" is the most informative weekly publication printed and is available by subscription in the US at a weekly cost of a little more than $1. You'll never touch Time and Newsweek again. Note: all monetary figures below are in Sterling, not dollars. - Werner ] British Telecom (BT), Britain's state-owned telecommunications utility, will be sold to the public next month. The government hopes that the 51% of BT being sold will fetch at least $3.5 billion (US$4.3 billion). The sale, the largest ever on the London stock exchange, is both important to the treasury and the biggest test of the Conservative government's determination to reduce the role of the public sector by the "privatisation" of state assets. Will BT be a greater success in the private sector than it has proved in the state sector? It will be hard for BT to fail completely. It controls the fourth-largest telephone system in the world, after the US, Japan, and West-Germany. It's network connects 29m telephones, roughly 5% of the world's total. It handles 60m calls a day and employs around 241,000 people. Yet it's market is far from saturated: Britons each make 383 calls a year compared with 667 by the Danes and 1,441 by the Americans [US only, probably]. Most important, in the first 5 years, it will be almost as much a monopoly in the private sector as it has been in the public .... [it goes on describing how the Conservatives, after gaining power in 1979, seperated BT from the post-office, and prepared it for privatisation. It discusses it's 5 divisions in some detail, it's efforts to leap-frog from some VERY old equipment to the latest technology, digital System X, optical fibres, X-stream, mobile services, value-added services, etc. lots of figures and statistics. It is really interesting how the Brits try to take care of the social responsibilities in communications and at the same time encourage competition and guarantee a profit. Competition is stiffled somewhat and consumer interests are not served completely, as the following may exemplify:] Most important, BT will be allowed to increase its charges for a "basket" of its services - all trunk and local calls and exchange line rentals to business and residential subscribers - by a maximum of the retail price index minus three. In other words, if inflation is 5%, BT's maximum price increase will be 2%. This basket covers about half of BT's revenues, but less of profits because it does not include the highly profitable international services. BT can juggle the increase between items in the basket (and is anxious to make residential customers pay their way), but there is an understanding that increases in line rentals will not exceed the RPI plus 2. [it is really interesting, even educational, how the Conservatives try to make the change to privatisation survive the next Labour-government, who is sure to come and sure to be tempted to roll back these changes. It is also most interesting to speculate what will happen, when significant work-force reductions will be the result of modernisation. Remember, this is the country where the change to electric trains did not mean the man shovelling the coal was out of a job. ] As BT gets more efficient (around 15,000 people will have left the workforce in the three years to next March) it could reap considerable rewards: one more local call a week at cheap rate per residential subscriber adds $44m to annual revenues; one more trunk call over 35 miles each week adds $354m to revenues. Almost all of this would flow through to profits. This is in contrast to American regulation, which imposes a limit on the rate of return - and so limits the incentive to improve. The government is rigging things as far as it dares in BT's favour. It plans to restructure the utility's balance sheet for privatisation so that debt as a proportion of equity will fall from 92% in 1983-84 to 45%. No network competitor other than Mercury wil be permitted until at least 1990. Until July, 1989, it will not be possible for independent companies to buy capacity in bulk, and so at a discount, from BT and then re-sell the lines to subscribers at a price lower than BT's. [ and now the trick to survive the next Labour government, a real cutie ] All employees on privatisation will be given $70-worth of free shares - and will get two free shares for each one bought up to a limit of $100. In other words, each employee could own shares with a face value of $370 for an outlay of only $100. Similarly, each telephone subscriber who buys shares of $250 (payable in three calls) will qualify for an $18 rebate on his quarterly telephone bill. The aim is no secret: the more people become shareholders, the more difficult it will be for a Labour government to re-nationalise BT. [ now IF those shares are really WORTH $250, this is a steal and a truely significant example, how a public utility could be financed and owned by the general public. I, for one, would like to see telephone and cable-TV owned by the members of the local community, and paid for as part of the house-mortgage payments. In this manner, the physical plant would be TRUELY owned AND paid for, by the public, and it's administration would have to be responsive to the public, as everyone has the power of a share-holder, which is a totally different ball-game from the government running it which often seems to get away with ignoring it's "share-holders". Schools and hospitals should be run the same way, with Federal guide-lines to guarantee a certain quality and national minimal standards, but responsive to local superior or special demands. The reason, I name these 2 areas, is the fact that after health, housing, education, and personal freedom, I consider communication and transportation the next most significant items on my list of communal interests, where cost and profit and control should be shared by all, as well as certain losses due to providing a certain amount of basic services to everyone to guarantee opportunity for growth to the disadvantaged -- sorry, guys, about the quasi-philosophical/political side-tracking; I got carried away. hope you reward my typing-efforts by some typing of your own - telecommunications-topics, including social, economic and political implications, of course. Flames and insults directly to me, please. I will collect them and post noteworthies, edited (censored ??) for public consumption. ] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Oct 84 23:54:18 pdt From: sun!gnu@Berkeley (John Gilmore) Subject: NSA concern over phone tapping What a joke! The NSA-designed phones will of course use DES chips (where else will you get 500,000 chips capable of "secure" speech encryption in 2 years) which they can read but few others can. Putting half a million cheap, *truly* secure phones on the US/world market would make it possible for all countries and interested parties to keep their information safe from the NSA. Somehow I think they're sharper than that -- so what's the hidden purpose? Maybe this means they have recently developed hardware and/or software for relatively cheap (eg non-Cray) breaking of DES. They can now affort to decrypt on a large scale (eg at point of interception, for filtering before transmission to NSA), while nobody else can. DES is used so little these days that encrypted traffic stands out from the usual cleartext and can be singled out for attention by interceptors with limited decrypting capability. (The gov't under Carter only had 150 DES phones??? Who could you call?) With these new phones, lots of who-cares stuff will be encrypted, making it harder for people without their new algorithms to decide what to decrypt. The other half of the joke is that the NSA's job throughout the world is to do exactly what they accuse other countries of doing. They are suspected of doing it in the US too. They had the law rewritten several years ago to permit interception of "envelope" information, as long as they don't listen to the people talking (or sending computer data, etc). This allows them to legally intercept domestic microwave traffic and analyze the touchtones therein to determine who is calling to/from numbers they are interested in (eg foreign embassies, suspected drug dealers). This "envelope" loophole also allows them to install interception equipment which is capable of full undetectable wiretapping, but of course they don't exceed their legal charter. Right. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #100 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Thu, 11-Oct-84 21:43:11 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Friday, 12 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 100 Today's Topics: [Carl Moore (VLD: New Jersey dialing] NSA breaking DES AT&T Tariffs on modem lines AT&T ISN Query St. Mary's men make phone booth history ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Oct 84 7:36:28 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA> Subject: [Carl Moore (VLD: New Jersey dialing] [You still have to dial 0-201-XXX-XXXX if you are within 201 and want operator assistance in completing the call. Sigh. --JSol] ********** Yes; the instruction card I saw on pay phone (609-423) said 0+areacode +number for all 0+ calls. That instruction is the same in NYC--but the instruction cards I saw there (before 212/718 split) did single out area 212. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 1984 09:20-EDT From: David.Anderson@CMU-CS-K.ARPA Subject: NSA breaking DES Wait a minute ... The last I heard about the NSA's ability to crack DES was that they could do it if they spent considerable funds and built a machine with 1 million custom processors to perform the decryption in parallel. Just because the possibility exists doesn't mean they actually have, or even hope to have, the capability. On the other hand, if they are actually building such a machine ... --david ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 11 Oct 1984 06:52:33-PDT From: waters%viking.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Lester Waters) Subject: AT&T Tariffs on modem lines The following (LONG) article is forwarded from an article composed by a system operator of our local computer bulletin board (CBBS/NW) as I thought it would be of general interest to many people on the net. *********************************** Well, it seems that Mother Bell is at it again. In light of the impending break up, she has decided to "suddenly" implement a little known 1965 tariff. This "Information Terminal Service" tariff would seem to be another in the long line of efforts to minimize the impending "losses" which the Bell Company sees coming as a result of the impending government imposed breakup. If you have not seen the number of messages on the local bulletin board systems (which would be effectively forced out of operation should this tariff go into effect), or the numerous articles that have been going around in the trade papers lately, let me bring you up to date. This tariff imposes a monthly charge of approximately $50.00 on each modem connected to a residential phone line ($38.00 in Oklahoma where the tariff is currently in effect) and increases the charge for touch-tone service by about $2.00 regardless of the frequency of use. This would probably be substantially higher for a business line. One of the more amusing reasons I have seen given for the sudden implementation of this new charge was "Because of the expense of providing 'Data Grade' lines for use with these devices". Funny, but I don't remember requesting a "Data Grade" phone line. It even says in the modem manual that the modem was designed for use on "Voice Grade" phone lines. Does this mean that what we now consider a standard phoine line (marginal though it may be at times) we should be paying more for? And does it mean that a "Voice Grade" phone line will be considerably worse? This seems to me, not unlike a measure proposed a few years ago by an Eastern senator which would have imposed a $50.00 yearly tax on all computer terminals both in commercial and private use. When asked for the reason for such a tax, he replied "because there are so many of them that they need to be taxed". Consider for a moment the possible effects of such a charge beyond the obvious effects on the public bulletin board and remote access systems. The possibilities are indeed frightening as this would not only effect the no-charge systems such as CBBS/NW and the Beaverton RCP/M (just to name 2) but the large commercial systems such as Compuserve and The Source as well. This tariff would seem to be a throwback to the days before the landmark "Carterphone" decision which made it legal to connect privately owned and produced equipment (that had been FCC approved) to the phone network without the use of a phone company supplied DAA (Direct Access Arrangement) device. At that time, since the only people who could supply the DAA device was the phone company, and since the DAA could not be purchased but only rented from the phone company, the phone company was assured of receiving their "cut". At the time this tariff was instituted (judging from the date quoted by phone company representatives) it might have been construed as an attempt to prevent anyone else from getting into the business of building modems. Since in 1965 about the only people building modems were the Bell system itself so it would have received little opposition. Consider also some of the other new (or "revised" as the phone company would rather refer to them) charges that will most likely be coming up soon after the 1st of the year (the date of the Bell system breakup). *Message Unit Billing:* This is the way that long distance calls are billed. Only after the 1st of the year you will probably be billed in this manner for local calls as well rather than the monthly flat rate that most of us now pay. *Answering Unit Billing:* An "unofficial" rumor that has surfaced from some phone company representatives. Currently, only the phone that is originating (making) the call is billed for time spent on the line. Unser this method of billing, the answering unit would also be billed for connect time. Now consider some of the things that are already being billed... *Network Access:* This is the basic charge for hooking up to the phone network. It currently also covers your charges for local calling and usually does not vary regardless of the number of local calls placed in a month. The question now is; when the phone company begins Message Unit Billing for local calls, will the Network Access Charges be reduced or eliminated? Probably not. *Extended Area Service:* This is the charge for connecting to other "local" exchanges that are not part of your phone company's operating area. An example would be a GTE customer in Beaverton who is calling a Bell system customer in Portland. While this is considered a local call, you are billed for the ability to connect to the Portland system. *Regulated Lease:* This is the rental charge you pay on any phone company equipment that you have in your home (the only simple, honest charge that I can find on the bill). *Other Charges:* This is not meant to be a vague category, but this is what it says on the bill. I have no idea what it covers. These combined with things like Federal Excise taxes, 911 Emergency taxes, late payment charges, and others (which are all billed separately) make for quite a phone bill. And we have not even considered long distance charges... The really curious part of all this is that even the phone company does not seem to know just how they want to implement this new charge. In Oklahoma, it seems to be a surcharge just as described in the 1965 tariff. However in Seattle the word is that they intend to bill any line that has a modem on it as a business line. Confused? Me too! It would appear that the phone company is selecting random areas to implement these new charges as test cases. Perhaps to see which variation of the surcharge receives the least resistance after which they would start to impose the charge on a nationwide basis. Personally, I don't believe for a second that the "breakup" of the Bell system will prevent the system from at least "recommending" procedures for the network at large. All in the interest of reducing losses of course, while the newly "independent" companies regain control of their separate operations. Well, I fear that this article has rambled far enough for one session. If you would like more information on how the battle is going, I will conclude with names, addresses, and phone numbers of the organizations that have formed to contest these new and questionable charges. I will also attempt to update you as new news becomes available. I will also be attending a meeting of the Seattle based Telecommunications Users Group (TUG) coming up on 10/15/83 at which the sloe topic of the meeting will be the charges that I have discussed here. I hope to bring back news (hopefully good) from that meeting. Representatives from the Bell system, as well as from numerous modem and computer manufacturers are expected to attend. I have also suggested that CompuServe and The Source be contacted so that they might also be represented. Seattle contacts: Telecommunications User's Group (TUG) Brian Sullivan or Glenn Gorman (206) 746-0145 (206) 763-7733 Oklahoma contacts: Oklahoma Modem User's Group 911 West Imhoff Rd., #634 Norman, OK. 73069 Robert Braver, President 24 hour hot line (recorded message updated daily) (405) 360-7462 Periodic updates will also be available on CBBS/NW (503) 646-5510 or (503) 284-5260 as further information becomes available to us. Downloaded from USENET ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Oct 84 13:29:07 EDT From: dca-pgs <dca-pgs@DDN1.ARPA> Subject: AT&T ISN Query I'm trying to get a good handle on what ISN is. A typical ad decribes some but not much. Typical ad: "We'll Make You A Star." "...The network brings together the star topology, a Packet Controller with a centralized transmission bus, and a collision-free network access protocol, making it truly unique in local networks. ... ISN even provides centralized control and administration; and, because all interfaces are housed in a central cabinet, security is high. ... Moreover, you're always assured of fast response time because of the shortness of the net's centralised transmission bus. ... " --------------------------------------------------------- So; apparently this is a logical token ring. Is AT&T making this a co-packaged offering with PBX products, to run on in-place wire plant? This would add to its appeal, but the add didn't say. Is anyone "out there" installing or using ISN? All info & war stories appreciated. Best, -Pat Sullivam (try "Sullivan", I went to a going-away luncheon and now can't spell my name!) ------------------------------ Date: 8-Oct-84 23:03 PDT From: William Daul - Augmentation Systems Div. - McDnD From: <WBD.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA> Subject: St. Mary's men make phone booth history TO NATURAL-DISASTERS: I send this to break the L O N G silence this distribution list has had. Times Tribune (Monday, Oct. 8, 1984) Moraga, Ca. At St. Mary's College, it's thumbs down for goldfish swallowing, thumbs up for stuffing people into phone booths. On Saturday, 24 students at the tiny school crammed themselves into a Pacific Bell phone booth, breaking the 1959 national record by one small body. That body belonged to 5-foot-2, 120 pound Irwan Kamdani, a senior who moved here from Indonesia four years ago. "I don't know if we have anything like that there," he said. But this was great." In less than 10 minutes, the booth was scientifically packed with 24 aching, contorted men in a contemporary recreation of the stunt staged on a spring night in 1959 in response to losing a basketball championship. Sure, nobody could breathe. And yes, it hurt to be on the bottom of a human pile. But the final word: it was fun. "Swallowing goldfish," said Mike Wilson, number 19 in the pile, "now that's stupid." ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #101 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!hudson!ihnp1!ihnp4!ucbv ax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sun, 14-Oct-84 21:23:23 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Monday, 15 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 101 Today's Topics: Carterfone NSA breaking DES Re: FAST Modems Let's not blame the breakup for everything Florida Wideband Fiber Optics Network NOTES ON THE NETWORK AT&T ISN AT&T ISN Recognizing Digital Signals Two modems on one phone line ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Oct 84 21:38:45 EDT From: Ron Natalie <ron@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: Carterfone Actually, the act behind the Carterfone decision was even a more facist act by the phone company. The Carterfone was a device that could be equated to the modem Acoustic coupler and was used to patch the phone into a radio. There was no electrical connection involved. -Ron ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 1984 19:39 PDT (Thu) Sender: TLI@USC-ECLB From: Tony Li <Tli@Usc-Eclb> Reply-to: Tli@Usc-Eclb Subject: NSA breaking DES In a paper by Diffie and Hellman, they describe a method for exhaustive search which would enable someone to break the DES using a large parallel architecture. This, however, is not the same thing as the NSA breaking the DES. The NSA in it's infinite wisdom, helped design the DES. The possibility exists that there is a trivial method of attacking the DES, and that the NSA may have it. It may not take more than a Vax.... Cheers, Tony ;-) ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 84 20:11:04 PDT (Thursday) From: Kluger.PA@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: FAST Modems In many cases, 9600 bps 4 wire leased line modems can be used over the dialup network by using two phonelines at the same time. Two phone calls are placed, two phone lines are required at each modem location. "Dual dial backup" equipment is available from several vendors including Paradyne and Codex. Larry ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 12 Oct 1984 06:03:06-PDT From: goldstein%donjon.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Let's not blame the breakup for everything Les Waters' reprint from the CBBS is full of so many inaccuracies that it isn't worth even responding to specifics. Once again, somebody who has an axe to grind and knows little about the telephone industry has written a Phillipic that seems to blame divestiture for everything from the Spanish Inquisition and the Thirty Years' War to the sinking of the Andrea Doria. Come on, folks, let's be reasonable! "Information Terminal Service" tariffs go back many years; the Oklahoma case was based on an ancient state tariff that predated the widespread use of time-sharing, not to mention micros. It's a state regulated matter, which hasn't been affected by the divestiture at all, and if you don't like it, you can let your state regulators know. In Oregon, one sole Commissioner runs the show and sets all telephone rates. Other states have larger commissions, but I doubt if many of them would really want everyone who bought a $229 modem at Toys-r-Us to pay $50/month for $9 residential service. If Telco thinks the CBBS is a commercial venture for money (there are some out there, of course) then they pay business rates. It worked that way before 1983 and it still does. Other local charging plans have been batted around for decades. New York City hasn't had flat-rate residential or business service for many years, and the Bell System (AT&T) started a big "usage sensitive pricing" push around 1974. Never mind that most of their costs are usage insen- sitive, USP gives them an excuse to keep "little old lady" basic monthly rates down to about a fifth of cost in exchange for ripping off blind anyone who has the temerity to pick up a phone (or modem). The "access charge" thing goes back to 1930 (Smith Vs. Illinois, US Supreme Court), and is the FCC's conceptually reasonable (if screwy in implementation details) way of recovering the fixed ("monthly") cost of stringing miles of wire to all yer houses, when part of that cost is legally Interstate and under their, and not the state's, jurisdiction. They used to let AT&T Long Lines own that cost, but MCI discovered that they could get away with using the wires without paying for them. That's another story, though. Local telephone rates haven't been deregulated. Before any screwy "new" tariffs take effect, the state has to let them. But as long as people scream out in self-righteous pain about paying their $2 monthly "access" charge and act as if every hike in the rate *level* were going to put them out of house and home, then telcos will be forced to look elsewhere for revenue to cover the huge fixed cost of all those wires. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 84 10:52:05 EDT From: dca-pgs @ DDN1.ARPA Subject: Florida Wideband Fiber Optics Network Microtel, Inc. of Boca Raton, FL, is an "intercity" (that is, intra-Florida) carrier offering wideband network service via a Florida state-wide FO network: LaserNet. Standard trunk size is 405 Mbps. The net uses NEC eqpt with repeater spacing of 25 miles. LaserNet offers VF, T1, T1C, T2, T3, and 90 Mbps (2XT3) interfaces. Microtel is a partner in the Southeastern Communications(tele-) Network (STN) and plans to expand the LaserNet to the Washington, DC area within the next 2 years. The tariff tends to run about 30% less than AT&T. For more info: Mr. Charles Siperko VP, Operations Microtel, Inc. 7100 West Camino Real Boca Raton, FL 33433 305-392-2244 --------------------------------------------------------------- Best, -Pat Sullivan DCEC/R610 ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 12 Oct 1984 11:23:55-PDT From: molineaux%donjon.DEC@decwrl.ARPA Subject: NOTES ON THE NETWORK Notes on the Network may be obtained by calling the AT&T Customer Information Center in Indianapolis at 800-432-6600. The following books may be ordered from: AT&T Bell Labs,Room 1E 335 101 Kennedy Parkway,Short Hills,NJ 07078 or by calling AT&T at 201-564-2582. Publication Yearly Fee Bell Labs Record $20 Telephony $30 Bell System Technical Journal $35 ------------------------------ From: tcs@usna.UUCP Date: Fri, 12 Oct 84 17:10:40 EDT Subject: AT&T ISN Pat, Take a look at the description on Computer Technology Review, Summer 1984,pp 279, for a rough description of the basis of ISN. It is a contention bus(es) system [3 busses actually] that avoids the problem of collisions [ala Ethernet]. It is an 8.64Mbit/sec bus so the claim of "fast response time because of the shortness of the net's centralized transmission bus..." is a bunch of marketing hype. Response time depends on system loading, etc. Besides, one of the things you can do is decentralize it by connecting remote packet controllers to the central node via fiber optic cables. It is really a star configuration and they push the idea that it doesn't have collisions like ethernet, but they don't tell you that the central clock module in each packet controller is not redundant (sp?) so if it dies, so does your network. They also don't (yet) have interfaces to ethernet, etc. It is not clear to me how to ship IP packets across this thing (assuming an interface to an IMP exists). But then again, the only folks that have come here to talk have been more the marketing type and not the technical type. Until I can talk with some of the technical types I'll stay skeptical about its usefulness as a data switch. It is supposed to use in-plant wiring (25pair cables to your existing phones). Adding a box on the side of your phone (the phone is digital - 19.2Kb data rate) allows an RS-232 connection (19.2Kb data). The remaining bandwidth (out of 64Kb) is for signaling. The folks who have been here have not mentioned host interfaces (ie. high speed). -tcs Terry Slattery U.S. Naval Academy 301-267-4413 ARPA: tcs@brl-bmd UUCP:decvax!brl-bmd!usna!tcs ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Oct 84 17:23:44 EDT From: Jon_Tara%Wayne-MTS%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA I run a BBS which is up only when I'm not using the machine (plug - Detroit FIDO PCUTILboard - (313) 393-0527) and, for various reasons would like to busy-out the line when I'm using the machine. Now, I know that other people do this all the time, but I a bit leary. I mean, the god-awful racket the phone makes when you take it off the hook, along with the STERN message ("Please hang up. Please hang up NOW!) lead me to beleive that, just maybe, Ma doesn't want me doing it. So, is there some "proper" way to busy-out a line? Obviously, I don't want to pick up the receiver and hear the racket, so I need some sort of a box (I presume a resistor across the line?). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 84 07:19:30 pdt From: (Mike O'Dell[x-csam]) mo@lbl-csam Subject: AT&T ISN It isn't a token ring at all. It is, however, DATAKIT in disguise. The box in the closet is an adaptive time-division switch which provides circuit switching. Connections are established by first saying to the network (in effect) "Hello Central! Connect me with number 46." Just what you'd expect from the people that brought you cross-bar relays. -Mike ------------------------------ Date: 11-Oct-84 18:56:26-PDT From: jbn@FORD-WDL1.ARPA Subject: Recognizing Digital Signals In a limited sense, long-distance telephone systems do recognize data signals. Normally, voice connections over long paths, especially long ones, pass through units called ``echo suppressors''. These are basically voice-actuated switches that make the path half-duplex. While the long-haul system is full-duplex, subscriber loops, being only two wires, are not, and something must be done to prevent hearing your own voice delayed by twice the propagation time of the circuit. Echo suppressors perform this function but prevent full-duplex communication. Modems intended for use on the switched network turn off the echo suppressors by issuing a tone at the start of the connection (this is one of the functions of the standard modem answer tone) and as long as some signal is transmitted thereafter, the modem suppressors remain off. This makes the connection full-duplex and modems must be able to cope with echo, which they typically do by assigning different frequency bands to the originate and answer ends of the connection. This is well-known and documented as a feature of the AT&T system. As far as I know, the other vendors also obey the same echo-suppressor control protocol. John Nagle ------------------------------ Date: Sat 13 Oct 84 12:49:34-EDT From: Alexander M. Fraser <T.ALEX@MIT-EECS> Subject: Two modems on one phone line I would like to get my two modems to talk to one another on one phone line. I have a 1200baud internal modem for one of my computers so unfortunately I can't directly connect them. Is there any local/ non-charging ('cept for message units of course - they're OK) number that will just keep the phone off of the hook, and be silent? If not, how should I go about this (aside from using another phone line I mean)?? Alex ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #102 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Tue, 16-Oct-84 17:35:55 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 17 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 102 Today's Topics: Two modems on one phone line Eavesdropping. Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #101 Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #101 Long Distance Information service ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 14 Oct 1984 21:01 MDT (Sun) Sender: KPETERSEN@SIMTEL20 From: Keith Petersen <W8SDZ@SIMTEL20> Subject: Two modems on one phone line If the two modems do not require the d.c. current that is normally present on the phone line, you should be able to connect them together using one of those modular "Y" jacks that are sold to allow plugging two devices into the phone line. Just don't plug it into the phone line. The modems should talk to each other if you have a command to force "answer mode" on one and "originate" on the other. --Keith ------------------------------ Date: 15 Oct 1984 06:20-PDT Sender: GEOFF@SRI-CSL Subject: Eavesdropping. From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <Geoff@SRI-CSL.ARPA> n062 1528 14 Oct 84 BC-EAVESDROP High-Level Group to Combat Soviet Eavesdropping By DAVID BURNHAM c.1984 N.Y. Times News Service WASHINGTON - President Reagan, acting on on intelligence reports that Soviet eavesdropping is a serious security threat, has ordered the creation of a cabinet-level group to combat it. Reagan signed a directive three weeks ago spelling out the extent of the threat and ordering a government move to reduce the loss of government and private industry information that might help the Soviet Union or other nations. According to the unclassified version of the president's order, equipment that is used to eavesdrop on telephone conversations and other kinds of electronic messages is now widely available and ''is being used extensively by foreign nations.'' The order added that the technology ''can be employed by terrorist groups and criminal elements.'' With the widespread use of microwave towers and satellites to transmit telephone messages and other data, the messages of government, businesses and individuals have become increasingly subject to interception. Antennas in Cuba and on Soviet trawlers cruising offshore reportedly are able to identify and record much of this traffic. While the Ford and Carter administrations were concerned about the problem and ordered some changes in government practices to deal with it, Reagan's National Security Decision Directive 145 is the first public assertion by a president that international eavesdropping constitutes a threat to the United States. The president's directive was obtained after Walter G. Deeley, the National Security Agency's deputy director for communications security, disclosed in an interview that the agency hoped to equip government and industry with 500,000 special telephones. The telephones are meant to make it far more difficult for eavesdroppers to conduct electronic surveillance. Reagan said that both government and privately owned communication networks transmit large amounts of classified and unclassified information that, when put together, can reveal important secrets. ''The compromise of this information, especially to hostile intelligence services, does serious damage to the United States and its national security interests,'' Reagan's directive said. ''A comprehensive and coordinated approach must be taken to protect the government's telecommunications and automated information systems against current and anticipated threats,'' the document continued. ''This approach must include mechanisms for formulating policy, for overseeing systems security resources programs, and for coordinating and executing technical activities.'' The directive, written by the staff of the National Security Council, established the Systems Security Steering Group, made up of the secretaries of state, treasury and defense, the attorney general, the director of the Office of Management and Budget and the director of central intelligence. In addition to setting overall policies, the directive said the steering group was responsible for reviewing all communication security proposals before they were submitted ''to the Office of Management and Budget for the normal budget review process.'' The directive's explicit requirement that the budget office review and approve all electronic security programs appeared to thwart efforts by the National Security Agency, which suggested this summer that it should become the ''national focal point for communications security requirements and funding.'' The National Security Agency is the nation's largest and most secret intelligence organization. With an estimated annual budget of $4 billion, its twin missions are to collect electronic intelligence all over the world and protect the sensitive communications of the United States. It also serves as the principal adviser to the president and the National Security Council on communication security questions. Reagan's directive set up the National Telecommunications and Information Systems Security Committee, subordinate to the cabinet-level steering group. This committee has 14 members, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the director of the top security agency. The committee was ordered to establish two subcommittees, one focusing on telephone security and the other on computer security. In a third major assignment, Reagan authorized the security agency to serve as the ''national manager'' for telephone and computer security. In this role, the agency was authorized to conduct, approve or endorse all government research on this problem. The president's directive also orders the agency to examine government telecommunications and computer systems to determine their ''vulnerability to hostile interception and exploitation.'' The order explicitly authorized the agency to monitor ''official communications'' but added that such monitoring ''shall be conducted in strict compliance with the law, Executive Orders and applicable presidential directives.'' The presidential directive did not say the agency had the right to monitor the communications of private corporations, but guidelines under which such monitoring may be conducted were approved by Attorney General William French Smith earlier this year. nn nyt-10-14-84 1825edt *************** ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 84 10:56:49 cdt From: ihnp4!tellab1!rcl@Berkeley (Opus) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #101 Regarding "Notes on the Network"; This book was replaced in 1983 by "Notes on the BOC INTRA-LATA Networks". the new "Notes..." may be purchased from the same source listed for the old "Notes..." Ron Lewen (ihnp4!tellab1!rcl) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 84 16:55:15 EDT From: Joe Pistritto <jcp@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #101 What are the data rates associated with the popular trunk types? In particular, I know that T1 is 1.544 Mbps, how about T2 & T3? ------------------------------ Date: Tue 16 Oct 84 16:04:17-EDT From: Robert Scott Lenoil <G.LENOIL@MIT-EECS> Subject: Long Distance Information service Now that MCI and SPRINT are offering long distance directory service comparable to AT&T's, one question comes up: how are they doing it? Are they buying the service from AT&T, or do they have access to directory information via the RBOCs? (By the way, MCI's service, like AT&T's, allows two free long distance information requests per month, with all others at 10% off AT&T's rates (currently $.50). SPRINT does NOT allow any initial free requests, and their price is the same as AT&T's; no deals here.) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #103 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Wed, 17-Oct-84 17:10:18 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Thursday, 18 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 103 Today's Topics: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #102 Jove: joint networking proposal by IBM and British Telecom Name and address service in Alabama Net 1000 - AT&T's Answer To AUTODIN II? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 84 20:16:18 EDT From: Robert Jesse <rnj@BRL-TGR.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #102 "Please hang up and try again. If you need help, hang up and then dial your operator." A recorded message that interrupted a news conference between astronauts in the space shuttle and reporters on the ground. -- U.S. News & World Report, 22 October 1984 "Current Quotes" ------------------------------ Date: Tue 16 Oct 84 22:32:06-CDT From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA> Subject: Jove: joint networking proposal by IBM and British Telecom [ excerpts from an editorial in The Economist, Oct 13-19, 84, page 13 ] NO, BY JOVE THE PROPOSED IBM AND BRITISH TELECOM JOINT VENTURE FOR A DATA TRANSMISSION NETWORK IS ANTI-COMPETETIVE ... [such a request] lies in the British government's in-tray, in the form of an arcane request for a telecommunications license. Britain's trade secretary has to decide on a proposal by BT and IBM for a joint venture, aptly if unwisely called Jove, to run a value-added network (van) in Britain. ... As British trade secretary, Mr Norman Tebbit should none the less refuse to let BT and IBM do what they want: their proposal runs too big a risk of interfering with the competitive free-for-all that is Britain's, and Europe's, only real hope of getting back into the technology game. LET THE MARKET SET THE STANDARDS The hundred or so computer and communications companies that have filed hostile comments about the proposed venture make two main objections to it. The first, which they wrongly rate more important, is that the van will run on a communications standard called Systems Network Architecture [SNA] which is owned by IBM. The opponents say that the use of IBM's proprietary standard will give IBM a big advantage - not just in the market for British vans, but also in the markets for the computers, other machines, and other networks (such as local ones) which will eventually hook up to the van. Jove's detractors want the British government to back an alternative called Open Standards Interconnections [OSI], which is being developed in international committees and will be owned by nobody. These arguments of Jove's opponents against SNA are hard to credit. An industrial standard, wether proprietary or not, is best established not by a committee but when enough customers buy it to make it a standard. That process of standardisation by consumer choice should not be interfered with. If SNA does become a network standard, IBM's advantage, if any, will be slight. It will be stuck with the standards as much as anybody; and even some of IBM's critics admit that it will not require superhuman effort to build good links between SNA and OSI ones. The charge of anti-competitiveness, the second main objection to Jove, is much more serious. Believers in competition need to be thoroughly suspicious of a proposal by the world's (and Britain's) biggest computer company and Britain's near-monopoly telecommunications company to start holding hands. It is technically true, though only just, that IBM and BT are in different businesses. But any IBM executive who proposed such a deal with one of America's regional (and still mostly monopoly) telephone operating companies would be laughed out of IBM's boardroom, just before being laughed out of court. The real problem is that the British government's too-cautious partial deregulation of BT has left the company with powers that are inherently anti-competitive in the context of the deal it wants to make with IBM. It is not clear wether anybody else who wants to offer a service like Jove would be allowed to provide it. Even if competition in this kind of van market were open to all comers, the overawing team of BT and IBM, backed up by BT's control of the physical network, would all too likely be an effective deterrant. IT IS THE SECONDARY COMPETITOR WHO MATTERS Worst of all, the deal threatens to discourage secondary competitors - those who want to provide not a van of their own, but equipment or services to ride on the back of the IBM-BT van. These are exactly the people on whom a revival of British electronics depends. Competing with BT should be made as easy as possible for them. In America, anybody with a product or service to latch on to the public network has the right to full technical details about how the network operates. In Britain, unhappily, even a privatised BT will be able to keep much of that information secret. The simplest course would be to say NO to the two companies. Until BT proposed something grander, IBM was preparing a limited van of its own - which could still offer BT some salutary competition. But an outright rejection is not essential. It might be more helpful to let the van run, but on conditions that forced BT and IBM to make knowledge about the inner workings of the network available to competitors. However it is done, the British government needs to make sure that Jove has some company on Olympus. [ either way, it seems to me as if IBM is ready to gobble up another big market. while Europeans still huddle in their traditional, and mostly government controlled committees, IBM is ready to do something. It's amazing when you think about it, to see IBM leading the pack. But European governments are simply too unwilling to give up control over the communications industry, otherwise the market forces would have achieved long ago what governments have successfully obstructed, the merging of the European companies into fewer but more competitive giants of international scale. The products would not necessarily be better, but at least there would be products coming out at a faster rate, possible even competing more successfully in the world markets. Why are these developments important to us outside Britain? Well, for one thing, we'll have to interface and live with whatever de-facto interface the British communications scene presents to us, and furthermore whatever alternative technologies are defeated by IBM there, will be less likely to even be available as an option for us here. Besides, when not depressing, it's often amusing, even educational, to watch developments in Europe. - Werner ] ------------------------------ Date: 17-Oct-1984 1243 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) Subject: Name and address service in Alabama South Central Bell has just announced that in conjunction with a change in the pricing for D.A. service within Alabama (now 40 cents per call with NO allowance, no exemption from hospitals and hotels, and 25 cents from coin phones unless charged to a calling card, in which case 40 cents applies) names, addresses, and ZIP codes can be provided if a number is given. Alabama used to refuse to give you the address, even if you needed it to verify that you had been given the number for the right subscriber. The bill insert claims that the service is only provided on Alabama customers to callers within Alabama, but it seems to work from outside the state as well (it should, since that costs 50 cents, except from Canada). There is a form with the bill insert so that name and address will not be provided to callers who provide a telephone number. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 84 12:37:06 EDT From: dca-pgs <dca-pgs@DDN1.ARPA> Subject: Net 1000 - AT&T's Answer To AUTODIN II? I was reading in the 17 Oct issue of MIS Week that Net 1000 is in heavy seas ("A Hole In Net 1000", Robert Feldman, p. 1). Apparently Ford Motor Co., who was to have been a majotr customer, dropped Net 1000 last week in favor of Tymnet/Tymshare. Reason: Insufficient nodes/access points into the network. That was a big part of why AUTODIN II was cancelled; of course , the DoD's reqt for survivability made that part of the argument even stronger. EDS Inc. appears to have been successful with a strategy of highly centralized nodes, (e. g., VIABLE), but VIABLE is less a distributed network than a number of quasi-independent host servers which are interconnected by thin VG pipes for non-real-time Q/R and nighttime file dumps. I would guess that remote VIABLE terminals are heavily multidropped. I guess NET 1000 and AUTODIN II could be termed how-to-do packet-switching unprofitably, by overcentralizing, while EDS/VIABLE could be called how-to-do "everything but packet-swirching" profitably. Best, -Pat Sullivan ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #104 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sat, 20-Oct-84 23:42:54 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Sunday, 21 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 104 Today's Topics: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #103 two quick questions Re: Usage Sensitive Service and Fairness Finding out your phone number Md. local options ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 17 Oct 84 15:28:15-MDT From: The alleged mind of Walt <Haas@UTAH-20.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #103 Re: British Telecom & IBM's proposed VAN The big problem with SNA as an interface standard is that IBM can change the standard any time they want, and in fact can do the development work in house and announce the new standard and the product that uses it at the same time. This makes competeing with them highly unprofitable, because you are always trying to catch up to get your market back. The real advantage of having a standard set by an organization like the CCITT or ISO is that the changes are out in the open and predictable, so that everybody has at least equal time to work the problems, if not equal resources. The best solution for the UK, in my opinion, would be to ban British Telecom from the VAN business, and allow other vendors to build VANs on top of BT circuits the way Tymnet and Telenet do in the US. Re: Net 1000 Actually, they aren't really planning to have a two-node network as such, but they put Ford on the testbed before the other nodes were running. The last time I talked to them, they planned to have a network of reasonable size running sometime in 1985. Having acquired some personal experience with the problems inherent in networking, I think they might be a little optimistic. Regards -- Walt ------------------------------ Date: Wed 17 Oct 84 22:48:02-EDT From: Bob Soron <Mly.G.Pogo%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA> Subject: two quick questions First, I'd appreciate any recommendations for speaker- phones. Please respond directly to me, since I'm not a big fan of netwide commercials or plugs; I'll gladly summarize to the digest if there's any interest. Second, we have an old 10-button Touch-Tone phone. Are there any phone collectors out there? Might this be -- now or in the future -- a collectors' item? I don't even remember how long ago we got it -- it was as soon as the service was introduced in this area. (It's hardwired, so I don't know how -useful- it is, even if one can live without the * and # buttons.) ...Bob ------------------------------ From: <hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!desint!geoff@Berkeley> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 84 23:00:46 pdt Subject: Re: Usage Sensitive Service and Fairness There have been some accusations on this list that AT&T (and, after disvestiture, the local phone companies) have been pushing for Usage Sensitive Service even though they do not have usage-sensitive costs. I would like to argue that this is not so. Although I have a strong personal interest in avoiding USS (I take the Usenet news feed over my home phone line), I fear there are some very good business reasons for a phone company to want it. It is true that most of a telephone company's costs are for plant and equipment, and are usage-independent. But that equipment is capable of handling a certain fixed maximum load. If that maximum is exceeded, even if only for short periods of time, more expensive equipment must be installed. Thus, the phone company has a very strong financial incentive to keep you from exceeding that maximum. The simplest way to do this is to encourage you to limit you calling, even in the local area. I think a lot of phone company executives are probably sweating profusely under the specter of more and more hour-long modem calls from cheap PC's flooding a system that was designed on the assumption that the average call length was a few minutes, while the state PUC refuses to let them adjust rates to suppress it (or at least make the people who are causing the need for new equipment pay for it). Not to sound pro-phone-company. No GTE customer can be that. But they really do have a problem here. USS is one solution. I would like to hear others proposed, especially ones that preserved our current privilege of cheap digital communications. Geoff Kuenning ...!ihnp4!trwrb!desint!geoff ------------------------------ Date: 19 October 1984 01:36-EDT From: Donald E. Hopkins <A2DEH @ MIT-MC> Subject: Finding out your phone number In the Washington/Maryland/Virginia area, the operators ask for a password when I call them up and ask for the number that I am calling on. They explain that they are not allowed to give out that information. I know that it is available to them, though, as once, one DID give it to me, and another time, on another exchange, one started to read it off, stopped after saying the fourth digit, and then realizing what she was doing, asked for the password. I asked her why they had that policy, and she said that if I were calling from an unlisted number, it would be wrong for them to give me the number. I wasn't, though... *SIGH*... -Don ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Oct 84 9:23:23 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA> Subject: Md. local options The following types of local service are in the just-released Oct. 1984 Northeastern Maryland phone book: Unlimited Service (flat rate) Per Call Service (message rate) New Local Measured Service (timed calls) with the latter 2 having the same fixed charge! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #105 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sun, 21-Oct-84 23:01:30 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Monday, 22 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 105 Today's Topics: Secure Voice Facilities Today's World of Phones... usage sensitive pricing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 18 Oct 84 18:14:58 CDT (Thu) From: nbires!uokvax!emks@Berkeley (Kurt F. Sauer) Subject: Secure Voice Facilities /***** uokvax:fa.telecom / ucbvax!telecom / 6:57 am Oct 11, 1984 */ What a joke! The NSA-designed phones will of course use DES chips (where else will you get 500,000 chips capable of "secure" speech encryption in 2 years) which they can read but few others can. Putting half a million cheap, *truly* secure phones on the US/world market would make it possible for all countries and interested parties to keep their information safe from the NSA. Somehow I think they're sharper than that -- so what's the hidden purpose? /* ---------- */ John, The US government only uses DES for sensitive *unclassified* information. There are better algorithms/systems for encrypting data; they're used to protect classified information. I can't elaborate much, but users don't just "pick" keys, they're provided. (I.e. the government won't just give the phones to just *anyone* who happens to want one.) kurt [...I think "cheap" and "truely secure" are mutually excl. properties...] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21-Oct-84 11:48:09 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: Today's World of Phones... PHONES By ANDREW POLLACK c.1984 N.Y. Times News Servvice NEW YORK - When the historic breakup of the American Telephone and Telegraph Co. was announced in January 1982, executives at scores of telecommunications companies were certain that a huge, lucrative market had been laid at their feet. ''It's what we've been pushing for for a long time,'' William G. McGowan, chairman of the MCI Communications Corp., said the day he heard the news. McGowan probably winces when he remembers those words now. On Monday, MCI reported a plunge in quarterly profits from 1983. In addition, its third-quarter revenues actually dropped from the prior three months. Its main source of comfort is that none of its competitors - including AT&T itself - is doing any better. The year 1 A.D. (after divestiture) has proved a bonanza of sorts for consumers, who have seen prices for long-distance phone service and telephone equipment plummet as myriad companies battle for their business. But it has been a brutal year for MCI, ITT, GTE-Sprint, and other contenders for shares of what had once been the domain of AT&T. For them the Jan. 1 breakup of the old phone monolith has brought price wars, management shake-ups, foreign competition, depressed profits - even red ink in some cases - and plunging stock prices. ''No one's doing well,'' said James M. McCabe, telecommunications analyst for Prudential-Bache Securities. ''It's a miserable market for everybody.'' Wall Street isn't predicting a rapid recovery. Asked about his list of recommended stocks, William Becklean, Kidder, Peabody & Co.'s telecommunications analyst, said, ''It's kind of dried up.'' AT&T has fought harder to protect its markets than competitors had expected. It has slashed prices and rolled out new products at a rapid pace. Although its efforts have often been clumsy and ineffectual - AT&T, too, is having a bad bottom-line year - even a staggering elephant inflicts damage on those around it. What is more, the breakup has called attention to the new market opportunities, attracting Japanese and European companies as well as the newly independent Bell operating companies. Thus, the few companies that once had considered AT&T to be the only competition are finding themselves competing with one another and with newcomers. Severe competition is expected to continue for at least another two years, and a shakeout is inevitable. No one doubts that the big companies such as MCI and GTE-Sprint in long distance and Northern Telecom and the Rolm Corp. in so-called private branch exchanges - telephone systems used mainly in offices - will come through the debacle intact. But the future of some of the smaller contenders remains uncertain. There have already been casualties. In the residential phone market, Phone-Mate and Technicom International had to be acquired by other companies just to survive the fray. Datapoint, Rockwell International and Telesciences have folded their tents in the private branch exchange (PBX) business. In long-distance service, U.S. Telephone was bought out after it plunged into the red and its chief executive resigned. There are some healthy companies, too, of course. The local Bell operating companies, still isolated from most competition, are doing well. So are players in certain market niches, such as data communications and equipment used by the phone companies themselves. Indeed, industry executives, despite the bruising of 1984, remain optimistic about the breakup's ultimate effect on the survivors. ''I still think it's going to be an opportunity,'' said Allan L. Rayfield, president of diversified products and services at the GTE Corporation. ''I'd say in the ability to grow the business and attract the customers, we are better off,'' said William E. Conway, chief financial officer of MCI. For now, however, gloomy news abounds throughout the industry. In the last 10 days alone, GTE reported losses in both its telephone equipment business and in its communications sector, which provides long-distance and data communications service; ITT said it was laying off about 800 employees because of problems in its telecommunications business; Rolm, the major manufacturer of business telephone equipment that is being acquired by the International Business Machines Corporation, reported an operating loss for the quarter. And the third-quarter earnings that AT&T itself reported this week were a sharp drop from its second quarter and well below analysts' cheery expectations. All of the companies are suffering from a fierce struggle to position themselves in the new era of telecommunications. ''I've seen in 18 months as much change in products and markets and customer needs as I saw in the past 10 or 15 years,'' said Desmond F. Hudson, president of Northern Telecom Inc., the United States arm of the Canadian telephone equipment giant. Many of the entrenched telecommunications companies, most of which had cheered on divestiture, had it better in an odd way when they were still fighting a monopolistic AT&T. MCI, for instance, had taken huge bites out of AT&T over the last few years by charging lower rates for long-distance telephone calls. Because it could not get equal connections to the AT&T-owned local networks, its service was a bit awkward for users, requiring that they punch in complex numerical codes to tie into the MCI system. MCI's connection costs were low, however, and it passed those savings on to consumers in the form of lower long-distance prices. Now, however, the AT&T breakup has given MCI what it always thought it wanted - equal access to the local networks. The unwelcome side effect is that its costs - and thus its prices - are no longer well below AT&T's. MCI, in effect, used to offer a unique product. Now it offers the same product as AT&T and a host of smaller newcomers and is feeling the effects of competition. ''MCI was always yelling for equal access,'' said Becklean of Kidder, Peabody. ''They never wanted equal prices. But unfortunately, you can't get one without the other.'' Although price cutting and other forms of fierce competition have characterized the entire telecommunications industry this year, different sectors have been hit with differing degrees of ferocity. The first market to turn sour was the residential phone market, which started to go bust even before the breakup occurred. Customer phone sales were deregulated last year, and people began buying their phones rather than leasing them. It seemed like a great opportunity for manufacturers of all sorts of telephones. But consumers did not react the way phone makers had hoped. Many continued to lease their phones. And many bought the AT&T equipment that they already had in place. ''The consumer was a little slower than we expected,'' said Rayfield of GTE, which recently liquidated 500,000 phones at bargain-basement prices. Meanwhile, new, often defective, phones flooded the market. Factories had sprung up throughout Asia with one thought in mind: to ship cheap phones to the newly deregulated and vast United States market. Everyone from blow-drier makers to consumer electronics companies entered the business. The result was a huge pile-up of inventories. To make matters worse, there was a consumer backlash against relatively poor quality phones. Also, a government-ordered switch in frequencies used for cordless phones made most of the existing ones obsolescent. The punishment was brutal. Phone-Mate, long a major manufacturer of answering machines, reported a huge loss and was taken over by Asahi Corp., its Japanese supplier. Technicom International is merging with its majority shareholder, TIE-communications, to stay afloat. Teleconcepts, Webcor Electronics, Comdial and Dynascan have all sustained heavy losses. In contrast to that kind of bloodbath, the situation in private branch exchanges - machines that connect all the phones in a large office - has been downright tranquil. Ever since the government's Carterfone decision of 1968 opened telephone equipment up to competition, a group of companies has steadily gained ground at the expense of a Bell monopoly that was lackadaisical in marketing and lethargic in innovating. Led by Northern Telecom, Rolm and Mitel, they whittled AT&T's share of PBX shipments to below 25 percent. Since the leading companies were already firmly entrenched by the time the breakup took place, there was not much benefit they could derive from it. In fact, they will probably lose market share. AT&T has become more aggressive in its own marketing. Japanese and European companies are making inroads, as are start-up domestic concerns. And most of all, the newly independent Bell operating companies are coming on strong. To make matters worse, the overall growth of the PBX market is slowing to less than 5 percent a year, compared with 8 percent or so in the late 1970s and 1980s. That leaves an estimated 40 companies vying for a PBX business that can now support maybe a half-dozen players. The result is the usual price war and consequent profit plunge. PBX systems once sold for $1,000 a line; prices are now down to $600 to $700 a line. Earlier this year, prices plummeted briefly to as low as $400 a line - well below break-even for any of the companies. ''There is no such thing as a final price'' anymore, said James T. O'Gorman of the ELRA Group, a consulting firm that advises companies on the purchase of telecommunications equipment ''The PBX market is in trouble,'' said Alan Fross, vice president of the Eastern Management Group, a Parsippany, N.J., consulting firm. Some of the upheaval is traceable to the entry of the Bell operating companies into the market. The consent decree breaking up the Bell System originally prohibited the local phone companies from selling equipment to customers. But Judge Harold H. Greene changed the decree to allow the companies to sell, but not to manufacture, equipment. That has been a mixed blessing for the PBX companies. Some - notably NEC, Japan's leading telecommunications company - have increased their sales by using the Bell operating companies as distributors. But for others, the operating companies represent an unwelcome new source of competition. This is especially true for the legions of small distributors, known collectively as the interconnect industry, that sell and install business telephone equipment. The Bell companies often compete with existing distributors carrying the same products, which only adds to the confusion and price competition. Union College in Schenectady, N.Y., which is in the market for a new PBX, last week received three bids for the same Northern Telecom PBX - one from Northern Telecom itself, one from Continental Telephone, an independent telephone company, and one from a distributor. It also received three bids on an Intecom PBX - one from the manufacturer, one from General Electric and one from Nynex, the Bell company serving New York State. Not only are the Intecom bidders offering the same equipment, but they have all contracted with the same local company to perform the installation. Yet all three offered different prices. The school has not yet decided which bid to accept. ''It should be interesting,'' said Diane Winkler, the school's telecommunications manager. Nor are the Bell operating companies sticking to their own backyards. Both the Southern New England Telephone Co., which serves Connecticut, and US West, which serves most of the Western part of the country, are vying for business in New York, along with Nynex. The operating companies are also attacking in another way. They are reviving Centrex, a service that connects phones in a building through the phone company's switching center, rather than through a box on the customer's premises. Most people expected Centrex, which offered few sophisticated features, to go the way of the dinosaurs. Instead, the Bell companies have cut prices and started to incorporate many of the features found in PBX's, such as the ability to transfer a call automatically to another phone if the first one is not answered or is busy. The North American Telecommunications Association, which represents the interconnect industry, has cried foul. It filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission, charging that adding such features violates the ban on the Bell companies providing computerized or ''enhanced'' services from the same facilities that provide basic telephone service. The FCC has not yet acted on the complaint. The association predicts even tougher times ahead for its industry. It estimates that total shipments by the interconnect vendors - all those besides AT&T and the Bell operating companies - will drop from 1.4 million lines worth $1.13 billion at the manufacturer's level in 1983 to 990,000 lines, worth only $700 million, in 1985. The major players are developing new, more sophisticated PBX's. For example, PBX's are now being made to transmit data as well as telephone conversations. Perfecting them will require a heavy and risky investment in software, one that not all of the interconnect companies may be in a position to make. Mitel, once a front-runner, has had serious problems with its newest PBX, leading to losses, and it is unclear whether, in the current unforgiving market, it can ever fully recover. GTE has also had production problems with its newest PBX, contributing to the company's equipment losses. AT&T is having production wobbles with its new System 75 PBX and its equipment subsidiary is eternally in a state of reorganization. Nevertheless, AT&T is too big to fall by the wayside and has the resources of Bell Labs behind it. Rolm-IBM and Northern Telecom also are certain to remain major players. Intecom, NEC, GTE, Mitel, ITT and others are fighting for the remaining spots in the top five. It is, however, in the market for long-distance service that the breakup has created a truly unprecedented opportunity to pick up market share. For the first time, the alternative long-distance companies will be given ''equal access'' to the local telephone systems. That means consumers will be able to use a competitive service without dialing many extra digits and without needing a tone phone. For the competitors, the opportunity comes at a high cost. Since May, all of the long-distance companies have had to pay higher charges for access to the local networks. In areas with equal access, they must pay the same charges as AT&T. And late last week the local companies asked the FCC to allow them to raise those access charges. A year ago access charges were 17 percent of MCI's revenues, said Conway. Today they are 26 percent and the percentage will go up as more equal access is phased in. AT&T, meanwhile, has lowered its rates by 6.1 percent since May. That has forced the other long-distance companies to remove their monthly service fee and take other measures to stay price competitive. To win new customers, companies have been advertising heavily and also spending money to build new networks. MCI is investing about $1 billion this year and plans to spend $1 billion next year. GTE is putting almost as much into Sprint. Earlier this year, Sprint had to quit accepting new customers in some areas because it ran out of capacity. MCI said that in cities with equal access, it is winning 10 to 15 percent of the market, triple its current market share. Rayfield of GTE said Sprint is winning 6 to 15 percent of the market in equal access cities. But price competition, combined with rising costs, has resulted in lower revenues for the companies, even when their volume sales increased. Both MCI and GTE-Sprint picked up many new customers in their third quarters, yet saw their overall revenues drop from the second quarter. In the old days, MCI used to grow 20 percent between consecutive quarters. Profit margins were squeezed badly, too. MCI's earnings for the quarter were only 3 cents a share, an 86 percent drop from the 22 cents a share it earned in the third quarter of 1983. Toward the end of the quarter the profit squeeze became so painful that MCI had to raise its rates back up. Clearly, the companies need better market penetration to get a robust bottom line. But they are not gaining as quickly as they had hoped. Part of the problem is that consumers are not forced to choose a long-distance company. If they do not specify differently, they are assigned by default to AT&T. Indeed, in Charleston, S.C., the first city to get equal access, AT&T retained 75 to 80 percent of the customers. Nearly half of those were customers by default, people who failed to specify a carrier. *************** ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Oct 84 20:00 EDT From: Dehn@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA (Joseph W. Dehn III) Subject: usage sensitive pricing While it is true that the cost of the plant is insensitive to usage only up to some level of usage, after which more capability must be added, it is also the case that a large part of the plant is completely insensitive to usage. What is not clear to me is what fraction of the plant has this characteristic. The lines from my house to the central office, including the part that enters my house, the part along the street, all the poles, and whatever circuitry is involved in connecting the line to the switching equipment, all must be installed and maintained in exactly the same manner whether I make one five minute call per month or stay continuously logged in to some computer. This part of the plant is physically large, and does not seem (to the outside observer) to have benefitted much from advancing electronic technology. The actual switching equipment, and the trunk lines between local central offices, however, seem to be subject to decreasing cost due to advances in electronics, fiber optics, etc. Thus, the part of the plant which would have to be expanded if there were more usage seems to be the part which should be a decreasing part of the total cost. Does anyone have any meaningful estimates of how these costs break down? How are they changing? -jwd3 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #106 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Mon, 22-Oct-84 23:31:04 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 23 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 106 Today's Topics: Last miles Hi Tech Answering machines Mending the breakup ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 22 Oct 1984 13:29-EDT Sender: WTHOMPSON@BBNF.ARPA Subject: Last miles From: WTHOMPSON@BBNF.ARPA While the discussions about 56K and 288K dial-up are invigorating, some of us brutes are still struggling along at 1200 bps. Question: I've had a couple of scalding experiences with signal loss in the "last mile," between the CO and customer premise. The only remedy I have found to date has been to install RJ45S jacks and get modems with RJ45S plugs. This seems to cut down the level of noise that can debilitate users. Are there other remedies? I notice that modems like Hayes do not even seem to bother with RJ45S -- does anyone have any experiences with what happens when the data going gets tough? ------------------------------ Date: 22 Oct 84 1041 PDT From: Allan Miller <AAA@SU-AI.ARPA> Subject: Hi Tech Answering machines Here are some responses I got which did not also go to the list. I also found out that the Radio Shack beeperless is an oddball. It listens for sound, any sound as control input. It would run down a menu and expect you to say something or punch any button to choose that menu item. This is used for the security code input also. Thanks to everyone who answered. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I own (and use) a Code-A-Phone Model 2530 answering machine which I purchased last February. It seems to almost meet your requirements. I paid about $145 plus sales tax for it. I have seen it for sale for as little as $140. It has full-function remote control from standard touch-tone telephones. It provides an (only) three digit user security code, which is not user changeable. The major disadvantage of the machine is the "fast-forward" feature -- it doesn't go to the next message. It simply "fast-forwards" while you are holding down the button. The quality is good. It is very small, using mini-cassette tapes. There is no endless-loop for the outgoing message. It simply rewinds the outgoing message cassette after each usage. This allows the outgoing message to range from a few seconds to 1/2 hour. It does have an "outgoing message only" mode. With the reservations mentioned earlier (short, non-user changeable security code and not very good fast-forward), I highly recommend it. David G. Cantor -------- I got an ITT machine about 3-4 years ago that had a settable code that you can use get your messages without beeper. It was about $320 (I think) but at that time was the only one on the market that worked without a beeper. Basically you set some dip-switches on the bottom of the machine to set the code, so it is easily changed. Chris. I have ITTs answering machine and it works without a remote unit. You set up a code via dip switches under the machine and then talk in the right sequence to activate. You can erase all the messages you heard or keep them for playback later - your choice. It is about 4 years old, so there is probably something even better out now. Chris <Pace@USC-ECLC.ARPA> ------- Just a short response re answering machines: I am very satisfied with the one I have had for the last year + 1/2 or so. It is an IQ3000 made by Phone-Mate. The machine can be set up to play 2 differnet messages at up to 4 different times a day; (first message cannot exceed 30 s, second cannot exceed 30 min); There is a 3-digit security code you can change at the machine- (the machine allows you to play back, AND record new messsages remotely, under TT-dial control); It can be set to answer after 2, 4 or 6 rings, or to an "AUTO" mode, where if you DONT have a message, it will always answer after the 4th ring, and if you DO, it will always answer after the 1st ring (good way to save of LD$); It will respond to line polarity reversal, or lack of line current in order to know when to hang up; there is always VOX control of in coming messages, and a host of other minor features. ..... A good place to buy one cheap seems to be E33rd Typewriter and Electronics (when they have them)... somewhere around $250 and worth every penny Steve Kleiser <SGK.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA> ------------------------------ Date: Mon 22 Oct 84 14:21:57-MDT From: William G. Martin <WMartin@SIMTEL20.ARPA> Subject: Mending the breakup Just out of curiosity: Suppose we made a national decision that the AT&T breakup was a mistake (I think we've already come to a national realization of that...). Suppose this becomes a campaign issue and enough constituents are vocal enough about it that a majority of congresscritters come to the conclusion that legislation to restore the "telco monopoly" we all knew and loved/hated for so many years is needed. Could it be done? That is, we now have a bunch of independent companies floating around out there in the marketplace. Is it constitutionally possible for legislation to manipulate these companies into one big AT&T again? (We've proven that the government can break Humpty Dumpty; can it put him back together?) Suppose we reach a national consensus on several points: 1) Long-Distance revenues SHOULD subsidize local phone rates. 2) Competition in LD services (cream-skimming) CAN be allowed in a regulated marketplace -- AT&T would make less but still would make enough. (See note below.) 3) A national telephone system CAN have a mixture of leased and customer-owned hardware, with interface standards providing the insurance that the network will work. Could not such a re-joining, at the same time it gathers back the BOC's, also gather in all these "independent" phone companies that have provided such poor service for so many years, and meld them all into an integrated whole? (No more Telecom complaints about General Tel, for example!) Would we not then have a "best of all possible worlds" situation, with a single responsible national telephone entity, yet with an amount of competition in telephone equipment sales and LD services, which will give the lowest-cost residential phone service to the populace, and also provide a single point-of-contact for maintenance and installation, eliminating many of the problems the breakup has caused? Can we do this without nationalizing the telephone companies? This sounds good, but I'm afraid the only way it could be done is to change a lot of laws which would pave the way for future government takeovers of other fields. I wouldn't want to pay that cost; I'd rather put up with the mess we've now created. Note about AT&T income: AT&T and the BOC's (and maybe the independent telcos, for all I know) have always impressed me as being incredible money-wasters. In little things, like the failure of the cashiers at the bill-paying windows to recycle the unused mailing envelopes [I pay my bill in person at a Southwestern Bell Service Center], and in big things, like political payoffs (there was some scandal about SW Bell a few years back), inflated executive salaries and perks, excessive numbers of employees, fancy offices and facilities, etc. My wife has worked as a temporary for the local SW Bell offices, and seen stuff about charitable contributions and fancily-printed stockholder reports, etc., which have no business being paid for by telephone customers. Such a restructuring as I mentioned above could also trim out a lot of the waste and luxury that artificially inflates telephone costs. (As a career gov't employee, I see no reason for executives to make more than the standard white-collar GS schedule pay rates; you can live on them -- if everyone in every business was paid at roughly these rates, we'd all get along OK, and there'd be a lot less pretentiousness and silly extravagances... I guess I'm sort of a Puritan at heart...) Anyway, as someone who has functioned all my working life with ugly grey metal furniture and spartan surroundings, I have no sympathy for those who contend that luxurious surroundings are in any way a "necessity" to the sucessful operation of their business. (Before I get a flood of "you ought to see MY skungy office" protests from various AT&T/Bell Labs/etc. sites, let me emphasize that I realize that the whole organization is not wallowing in luxury. Probably the people who do the real work are in cramped cubicles and sitting on broken chairs at the same institutional grey-metal desks as are in this office. But there's enough wasted fanciness and featherbedding which, if eliminated, would make up for an awful lot of reduced income due to LD service competition and customer-owned equipment!) Anyway, after all that, it boils down to: is it possible to fix this mess if we made up our national consciousness to do so? I would think we could. Where do we start? Will Martin ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #107 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Tue, 23-Oct-84 13:45:58 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC> TELECOM Digest Wednesday, 24 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 107 Today's Topics: putting the telephone company back together Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #104 [This is the last digest to be prepared at MIT-MC. All future digests will be prepared from BBNCCA. You should start sending submissions to TELECOM@BBNCCA. TELECOM@MIT-MC will forward to BBNCCA, so will TELECOM-REQUEST@MIT-MC. --JSol] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 84 15:48:46 PDT From: "Theodore N. Vail" <vail@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA> Subject: putting the telephone company back together Will Martin asks if the telephone company can be put back together. The answer is well known, but bears repeating: Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall Humpty Dumpty had a great fall All the King's horses and all the King's men Can't put Humpty Dumpty together again. ted ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 84 20:19:49 edt From: vax135!hpk@Berkeley (Howard Katseff) Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #104 TeleText-5 is a news and information service offered to the public in 2 delivery formats: (1) Broadcast TeleText-5, delivered via the KSL-TV signal using TV sets equipped with teletext decoders; and (2) TeleText-5 delivered via telephone to computers equipped with modems. Broadcast TeleText-5 is based on the North American Standard and features high resolution graphics and color. The service is being demonstrated daily at KSL's Broadcast House. Interested individuals and groups are invited to attend. Call (801) 575-5993 for more info. The dial-up service can be accessed by dialing (801) 575-5911. Telephone contention makes it necessary to limit 300 Baud calls to 5 selections and 1200 Baud calls to 10 selections. If no selection in 30 seconds the system disconnects. Selection (D) downloads 5 news files at 300 baud and all files at 1200 baud. It can be used as 1st selection only. Technical data: Modem type 103/212A. 300/1200 baud. 8-bit ASCII word. Parity ignored. 2 stop bits. Full duplex. No echo. 40 ch/line. RS232 terminal software. KSL has authorized BYU's Daily Universe to offer a Utah County edition of dial-up TeleText-5, using the number (801)378-2959. Provo users should enter the password "KSL" when prompted for request and user name. TeleText-5 - an advertising supported service. Paul H. Evans manager/editor in chief David Webb editor Joanne Milner assistant editor Read. . . Listen. . . Watch TeleText-5 KSL-Radio (1160) KSL-TV Ch 5 "The News-Information Specialists" Please call again. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #109 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sat, 27-Oct-84 09:21:45 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: The Moderator (Jon Solomon) <Telecom-request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Oct 84 18:27:47 EDT Volume 4 : Issue 109 Today's Topics: New TELECOM location Proposed AT&T International Rates British Telecom and IBM: Application Denied MCI credit cards Last miles MCI starts overseas service Illinois Bell New Service Offerrings ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 84 14:01:42 EDT From: Jon Solomon <jsol@bbncca.ARPA> Subject: New TELECOM location To: /src/jsol/.telecom/mailbox*@bbncca.ARPA TELECOM will now originate from BBNCCA. Submissions will be accepted at TELECOM@BBNCCA, and communication with the moderator will be accepted at TELECOM-REQUEST@BBNCCA. A couple of changes will be made in the processing of digests for telecom: 1) Submissions will no longer be formatted to fit within 70 columns. Submissions will appear as they are sent, so be sure and format the output as you want it to appear. There are simply too many issues to deal with when justifying and I don't want to ruin tables and other information which is preformatted. 2) The date of each digest will be the exact date and time that I prepare the digest. I have a program which will make the digest, and it will insert a datestamp. Previously I have been sending issues out using the next day's date. Enjoy, --JSol ------------------------------ Received: from BBN-UNIX.ARPA by BBNCCA ; 16 Oct 84 20:03:37 EDT Received: from 26.7.0.16 by BBN-UNIX ; 16 Oct 84 20:03:21 EDT Received: from DEC-RHEA.ARPA by decwrl.ARPA (4.22.01/4.7.34) id AA04653; Tue, 16 Oct 84 17:02:24 pdt Message-Id: <8410170002.AA04653@decwrl.ARPA> Date: 16-Oct-1984 2001 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) To: jsol@bbn-unix.ARPA Subject: Proposed AT&T International Rates AT&T has proposed new rates for international calls to all points other than Canada, Mexico, and Cuba. If approved these rates will go into effect in late November, 1984. Shown below are rate comparisons from the current to the new for direct dial only. Direct dial rates apply even if the operator places the call for you if your area does not allow customer dialled IDDD calls. Higher rates apply for calls to countries where direct dial service is not yet available (higher rates apply to the additional minutes as well; in the current rates they are $1 or $2 more than the dial-additional minute charge). In each case the rate for the first minute is shown followed by the rate for additional minutes. The time periods are known as Standard, Discount, and Economy. Under the current rates, there are no special weekend rates. Under the new rates, some countries can be called at the Discount rate on Saturday (Sat) or Saturday and Sunday (SS) during what would otherwise be the Standard rate. New rates Current Rates United Kingdom of GB and NI UK and Ireland S 7a-1p 1.65 1.09 1.95 1.18 D.SS 1p-6p 1.24 .82 1.46 .89 E 6p-7a .83 .60 1.17 .71 Irish Republic S 1.93 1.16 D.SS 1.45 .87 Same as above E 1.16 .70 Germany (Federal Republic) Continental Europe S 1.98 1.16 2.23 1.25 D 1.49 .87 1.67 .94 E 1.19 .70 1.33 .75 France S 1.97 1.14 D.SS 1.48 .86 Same as above E 1.18 .68 Italy S 1.96 1.17 D.Sat 1.47 .88 Same as above E 1.18 .70 Rest of Europe S 2.15 1.22 D 1.61 .92 Same as above E 1.29 .73 Australia Pacific Region S 2p-8p 3.36 1.38 5p-11p 3.96 1.48 D.SS 8p-2a 2.52 1.04 10a-5p 2.98 1.12 E 2a-2p 2.02 .83 11p-10a2.38 .89 Japan S 3.49 1.52 D.SS 2.62 1.14 Same as above E 2.09 .91 (rate increase for many calls ) Republic of China (Taiwan) S 3.96 1.58 D.SS 2.97 1.19 Same as above E 2.38 .95 (rate increase for many calls ) Republic of Korea S 3.96 1.63 D 2.97 1.22 Same as above E 2.38 .98 (rate increase for many calls ) Philipines S 5p-1a 3.96 1.58 D 1a-10a 2.97 1.19 Same as above E 10a-5p 2.38 .95 (Rate increase for many calls ) Pacific Region except above S 5p-12m 3.76 1.53 D 10a-5p 2.82 1.15 Same as above E 12m-10a2.26 .92 (Rate increase for many calls ) Israel Near East S 7a-4p 2.94 1.27 8a-3p 3.46 1.25 D.SS 4p-1a 2.21 .95 9p-8a 2.59 .94 E 1a-7a 1.76 .76 3p-9p 2.08 .75 Near East except Israel S 2.94 1.27 D 2.21 .95 Same as above E 1.76 .76 (New rates: SS for Israel onl y) Africa Africa S 6a-12n 2.56 1.34 2.71 1.39 D 12n-5p 1.92 1.01 2.04 1.04 E 5p-6a 1.54 .80 1.62 .84 Indian Ocean Indian Ocean S 6p-1a 5.15 2.14 4.90 2.04 D 1a-11a 4.38 1.82 3.68 1.53 Significant E 11a-6p 3.86 1.61 2.04 1.22 Increase India India S 5.46 3.08 5.75 3.26 Down D 4.69 2.62 4.31 2.44 Up E 4.10 2.31 3.45 1.95 Up Central America Central America S 8a-5p 2.30 1.06 5p-11p 2.46 1.06 Note D 5p-11p 1.73 .80 8a-5p 1.85 .80 Time E 11p-8a 1.38 .64 11p-8a 1.47 .64 Change Carribean/Atlantic Carribean/Atlantic S 7a-4p 1.58 1.05 4p-10p 1.58 1.06 Note D 4p-10p 1.19 .79 7a-4p 1.18 .80 Time E 10p-7a .95 .63 10p-7a .95 .64 Change Colombia South America S 8a-2p 2.60 1.22 7a-1p 2.60 1.11 D 2p-12m 1.95 .92 1p-10p 1.95 .84 Increase E 12m-8a 1.56 .73 10p-7a 1.56 .67 Venezuela S 7a-1p 2.45 1.00 D 1p-10p 1.84 .75 Same as above (Reduction) E 10p-7a 1.47 .60 South America except Columbia and Venezuela S 2.86 1.22 D 2.15 .92 Same as above (Increase) E 1.72 .73 ------------------------------ Received: from UTEXAS-20.ARPA by BBNCCA ; 24 Oct 84 03:21:31 EDT Date: Wed 24 Oct 84 02:21:11-CDT From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA> Subject: British Telecom and IBM: Application Denied To: telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA [ The Economist, 20-26 October 1984, page 70 ] British Telecom / IBM - Wedding Off -------------------------------------- ... the department of trade and industry's "no" was based on the anti-competitive threat it saw in the proposal. ... ... Now BT and IBM may become rivals. the DTI's rebuff to their joint proposal contained encouragement for a go-it-alone IBM vans. Two aspects of the decision have wider implications. One involves establishing a standard way by which computers in a network talk to each other. Opponents of the IBM/BT venture made much of the fact that it would use IBM's proprietary network standard, SNA, and not the OSI alternative favoured by the EEC. The government seems to be gung-ho for OSI. As the DTI killed the IBM/BT scheme, the treasury recommended official procurement of only OSI-based (or fully OSI-compatible) equipment. This will please the French and West Germans. Both have opted to support OSI rather than SNA. OSI is in its infancy, but is touted as a way to let a European information industry flourish in the face of American and Japanese competition. The other aspect concerns BT's brand new watchdog, the Office of Telecommunications Policy (Oftel). The BT/IBM scheme was its first big test. Oftel opposed the vans; so its director-general, Professor Bryan Carsberg, must be relieved that his submission formed the basis for the DTI's decision. This does not end the worries that Oftel's staff of 50 may prove inadequate to grapple with a privatised BT. But at least Oftel knows it can expect some backing from the DTI. [ now let's watch if IBM got a product ready to gobble up the market - Werner ] [ PS: Sprint has followed MCI to offer discount international calls. see NY Times, Oct 23, page 34 ] ------- ------------------------------ Received: from MIT-XX.ARPA by BBNCCA ; 24 Oct 84 19:54:09 EDT Date: Wed 24 Oct 84 19:21:07-EDT From: Robert S. Lenoil <LENOIL@MIT-XX.ARPA> Subject: MCI credit cards To: telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA After receiving my new MCI credit card, I was disturbed at how little information was provided on the rate structures when using that card. After calling MCI, here's the scoop: There are two access numbers to make an MCI credit card call. The first, a no-coin-necessary (although MCI doesn't mention this) 950-xxxx number, can be used from most major cities. The rates are normal MCI rates, plus a 50 cent surcharge. For more rural areas, there is an 800 number to dial up. The rates are above normal MCI rates when using the 800 number, and a one dollar surcharge applies. What disturbs me is that NOWHERE does MCI mention that there is a surcharge for using their credit card; I only found out after speaking with them. Can they get away with this? ------- ------------------------------ Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by BBNCCA ; 24 Oct 84 22:54:12 EDT Date: 24 October 1984 22:55-EDT From: Minh N. Hoang <MINH @ MIT-MC> Subject: Last miles To: TELECOM @ MIT-MC The RJ45S jack allows for an external programming resistor to set the modem output level so that the central office sees the max. allowable signal. Many modems operate only in permissive mode and output its transmit signal at -9 dBm or less. The phone company likes it that way. When the line is noisy, and you can't get another one, the alternative is to slow down. Yes, that means going back to the old Bell 103 300 baud FSK whistler. FSK transmission will get you through lines where all other (personal opinion...) modems can't even detect carrier. The FSK working threshold is 3-5 dB signal-to-noise ratio. A good 212 dies around 10-13 dB SNR. And you should have 2 good modems at both ends, unlike my current dial-up line... Minh ------------------------------ Received: from 26.7.0.16 by BBNCCA ; 25 Oct 84 12:58:42 EDT Received: from DEC-RHEA.ARPA by decwrl.ARPA (4.22.01/4.7.34) id AA26690; Thu, 25 Oct 84 09:58:51 pdt Message-Id: <8410251658.AA26690@decwrl.ARPA> Date: 25-Oct-1984 1257 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) To: telecom@bbncca.ARPA Subject: MCI starts overseas service MCI now (as of last week) offers service to Belgium, Greece, East Germany, the United Arab Emirates, Argentina, and Brazil. Their rate to Belgium compares with AT&T as follows: STANDARD DISCOUNT ECONOMY MCI 1.89 1.15 1.29 .89 1.19 .68 AT&T 2.23 1.25 1.67 .94 1.33 .75 New AT&T 2.15 1.22 1.61 .92 1.29 .73 (The "New AT&T" rate is the proposed, not yet approved or implemented, restructuring of AT&T's overseas rates, due some time in November). They plan to begin service to a few other places, notably the U.K. and Australia in December and January. From places with "equal access" you simply dial 10222 to select MCI, and then continue as normal (011+). You do not need an account with MCI; you will be billed through your local phone company along with all your other calls. For other places, you have to have an MCI account, and access them with 950-1022 (or other numbers in the few places that's not available) and then have to dial account code and so on. ------------------------------ Received: from UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA by BBNCCA ; 25 Oct 84 15:31:05 EDT Date: Thu, 25 Oct 84 10:14 CDT From: "Tony R. Barron" <cepu!bradley!tony@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA> Subject: Illinois Bell New Service Offerrings To: TELECOM at BBNCCA Ameritech, parent company of Illinois Bell, and the same folks who brought you restructured Centrex, is testing a new Party Line offering in Chicago. It's hailed as an entertainment service which connects up to 14 callers to a 24-hour-a-day party line. Callers from selected exchanges can now dial one of four special numbers to bridge into the on-going conversation. Costs are 30 cents for the first minute and 8 cents for each additional minute. Chicago residents can now satisfy their secret urges to play Phil Donahue for about the price of a movie... "We're the phone company. We can do anything." ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #110 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Mon, 29-Oct-84 14:06:20 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Oct 84 13:21:38 EST Volume 4 : Issue 110 Today's Topics: RJ41 and RJ45 Multiple carriers FROM the UK to the US MIT Communications Forum ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 26 Oct 84 02:10:59-PDT From: David Roode <ROODE@SRI-NIC.ARPA> Subject: RJ41 and RJ45 To: Telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA Location: EJ286 Phone: (415) 859-2774 These two data-connect options differ. One provides information to the modem to let it adjust its performance to suit the previously determined characteristics of the loop to the central office. The other is a combination of a line with a guaranteed minimum signal level and a resistor in circuit with the line to reduce the signal level to a guaranteed maximum level. Does anyone know which of RJ41 and RJ45 fits which of these two descriptions, and can anyone shed any additional light or offer corrections? ------- ------------------------------ Date: 26-Oct-1984 1226 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) To: telecom@bbncca.ARPA Subject: Multiple carriers FROM the UK to the US I just received the following from Jeremy Barker in the U.K. BT now has agreements with MCI International and GTE Sprint to operate international service between the US and the UK. This is all well and good, now MCI and Sprint customers in the US will be able to make cheaper calls to the UK than AT&T currently provides. There is however a VERY SERIOUS CATCH. Calls from the UK to the US will be RANDOMLY ROUTED by any one of the three carriers. BT customers will not be able to select which carrier is (or is not) to be used. Knowing the kinds of problems with fade and noise on the current lines, and the poor (randomly cut, etc.) connections provided by MCI and the like in the US I forsee a substantially higher percentage of failed and inaudible calls. (Even though BT goes to great length to say that all that will change will an increase in the number of transatlantic circuits and that this will result in fewer failed calls due to network congestion). I should point out that Telex has been this way for years, since there have "always" been multiple Telex carriers. Telex traffic to the U.S. can be routed either by translation of the first several digits of the Telex number, or as is most commonly done, by weighting the random selection algorithm to correspond to the same percentages as the incoming traffic indicates. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Oct 84 06:34 EST From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: MIT Communications Forum To: Telecom@USC-ECLC.ARPA, Human-Nets@RUTGERS.ARPA, *bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA, Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA MIT COMMUNICATIONS FORUM: November 29, 1984 4-6 p.m. Room 37-252 "As satellite communications becomes increasingly effective and commonplace, the United States Information Agency has moved boldly to use the technology in its public diplomacy program. It has already established its own private television network and has recently funded a major feasibility study of direct satellite broadcasting for the Voice of America. "Although international shortwave radio broadcasting is an accepted medium of public diplomacy, satellite broadcasting and television are as controversial as they are powerful. What are the long-range opportunities for using satellites and television? How will they affect or be affected by international attitudes towards information and communication? What will be the effect on Intelsat and on the allocation of the orbital arc? How will it change the domestic presence of the USIA, including the prohibition against domestic distribution of Agency productions? Dan Mica, Chairman, House Subcommittee on International Operations; Michael Schneider, USIA; Hewson Ryan, Director, Murrow Center for Public Diplomacy, The Fletcher School ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #111 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Fri, 2-Nov-84 16:58:22 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Fri, 2 Nov 84 15:12:13 EST Volume 4 : Issue 111 Today's Topics: Found on a wall... DNR's ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 Oct 84 01:30:50 EST From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: Found on a wall... To: telecom@RUTGERS.ARPA In my travels through the building's fern closets recently, while mapping how they wired this place, I found the following scribbled on the wall: 800-352-4732 0480 + phone no. Naturally, I tried it [with a touch-tone set, or course!]. When the 800 number answers, it gives a brief tone, around 1350 Hz [?]. Upon entering 0480, it rings once and gives three more tone bursts. Entering a subsequent number, with or without area code, delays for a bit, feeps a few more times, and goes to a weird busy tone. Terminating the subsequent number with ''#'' eliminates the timeout. Ideally, this thing could be a voice-synth database that would tell you the current cable/pair numbers for a given line. I believe that I give NJ Bell too much credit by assuming that they would actually have something like that set up. Anyone have any idea what this thing really is? _H* ------- ------------------------------ Date: 31 Oct 84 15:01:16 EST From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: DNR's To: telecom@RUTGERS.ARPA I have heard tales of a device called a Dialed Number Recorder [DNR] that the telco sometimes places on a line to record any and all touch-tone digits dialed, whether to dial an initial call or after it's connected. The purpose is apparently to log activities of fone hackers and build a case against them in event of toll fraud, etc. It seems to me that such a device would permit any telco employee free access to your personal carrier passwords, banking services, and anything else you might do over the fern using touch-tones. Is this legal? Does anyone know more about these devices, what they do, and when they may be placed on a line? _H* ------- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #112 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Mon, 5-Nov-84 15:46:13 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Sun, 4 Nov 84 22:27:27 EST Volume 4 : Issue 112 Today's Topics: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #110 DNR's Found on a wall... Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #111 Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #111 Social Impacts of Computing: Graduate Study at UC-Irvine 800-352-4731 Re: TELECOM question... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 84 07:35:57 pst From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!darrelj@Berkeley (Darrel VanBuer) To: ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #110 Paraphrased from part 68 of FCC Rules and Regulations: RJ41S Universal Data jack RJ45S Programmed Data Jack Both jacks offer direct connection to the telephone line, plus contain a Telco supplied resistor, which in the proper transmitter circuit results in a local output between -12dBm and -0dBm out, with output at the central office at -12dBm (a permissive modem has a fixed output of -9dBm as a compromise based on distribution of loop losses and desire to limit central office levels). A universal jack has a second, switch-selectable circuit which contains an attenuator chosen so that a -4dBm level at the jack is attenuated to -12dBm a t the central office. This latter is for "fixed loss loop (FLL) equipment". An RJ41 jack can be used for any modem (including RJ-11 permissive plugs), however, I've never actually seen a FLL modem, so an RJ-45 will serve all likely needs (including permissive plugs). It's also quite a bit cheaper than an RJ-41 jack because a single 1/2 watt resistor is much cheaper than an attenuator. A programmable-level modem can be converted to permissive RJ-11 plug be providing a cable containing the -9dBm programming resistor, 5490 ohms. Darrel J. Van Buer, PhD System Development Corp. 2500 Colorado Ave Santa Monica, CA 90406 (213)820-4111 x5449 ...{allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,orstcs,sdcsvax,ucla-cs,akgua} !sdcrdcf!darrelj VANBUER@USC-ECL.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Nov 84 16:04:37 pst From: Phil Lapsley <phil%ucbeast@Berkeley> To: telecom@bbncca.ARPA Subject: DNR's There is indeed such a thing as a Dialed Number Recorder, and your summation of its function is essentially correct. Out here in Pac Bell land, the general usage is to place one on a suspected phone phreak's line and record all the touch-tone or rotary digits dialed on the line in question. The "recording" is not an audio recording, but a print-out on adding machine type tape. If a review of the numbers dialed on the line would seem to indicate fraud, then the device is set to record the first "n" (generally 2) minutes of conversation, for "identification purposes". That is, if somebody makes a fraudulent call, the telco can then use these tapes in court, presenting an argument along the lines of "not only did the fraudulent call take place over his line, but he even identified himself." Of course, if the call happens to be a data call, then they have a tape recording of the first several minutes of your data transmission, probably with your login and password. It's anybody's guess as to whether they actually decode this information or not. The legality of this has been extensively established. The basic conclusion of the courts is that the phone company has the right to monitor calls which they suspect are fraudulent, so long as this monitoring is not excessive (there have been cases of the telco recording *all* the calls of a person over a month, which the court felt was a little overboard -- one or two minutes being more like it), and that such monitoring is used only for the protection of the phone company (so if they hear somebody making a dope deal in the first two minutes of the conversation, that's not admissible evidence because it did not have to do with the telco.) Phil (ARPA: phil@Berkeley.ARPA) (UUCP: ...!ucbvax!phil) ------------------------------ Date: 2 Nov 1984 17:30:30-EST From: york@scrc-vixen To: telecom@mit-mc Subject: Found on a wall... I tried calling the 800 number that was found on the phone closet wall from my office in Falls Church, Virginia (near D.C., area code 703). I received the recorded message "we're sorry, you have dialed a number which cannot be reached from your calling area." ------------------------------ Date: Fri 2 Nov 84 20:50:04-EST From: Keith M. Gabryelski <GZT.KEITH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #111 To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA In reply to the DNR message. I have never heard of DNR, but I think I understand what you are talking about. About 6 months ago when I was taking a tour of a local CO (under 1a ESS) a P-1 was telling me of something of that sort on ESS. It seems that when you make (or try to make) a call on ESS, it (the system) records several things. Your number. The calling number. Whether you dialed TONE or PULSE. If the number you dialed was busy. If you recieved a "Trunk-Busy" (re-order). If the number you dialed Rang-out. If someone picked up the phone. If you got a "We're sorry, you're a putz.. recording." (and what type of recording it was..) This seems to be the same part of the system that checks for the omnipotent 2600hz. If it detects this infrequent (?) tone, it will drop a trouble card and check for any strange MF tones. Anyway, as far as I can tell, they do not record any DTMF tones from your line after you are connected to the number you dialed. They actually have no right or reason to do it anyway. (but ofcourse, they have no right to listen in on customers calls... err check the line for clarity while a customer is using the line..) That last bit reminds me.. let me take you on an excursion for sec.. [Push]-- When I was taking that tour, I noticed speakers on some of the coners of some walls. When i asked what they were used for, I was given some BS about intercom stuff.. I believed them. Later, when I was snooping around, I saw/heard a switchman listening to a conversation through thoughs speakers. I don't remember what they said, but I am sure that person just picked a random CP and checked out the conversation.--[Pop] Hope some of that helped.. Keith ------- ------------------------------ Date: Fri 2 Nov 84 20:53:29-EST From: Keith M. Gabryelski <GZT.KEITH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #111 To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA Just when we all thought Pacific Bell and the Los Angeles City Attorney's office were going to behave like responsible adults in dealing with Bulletin Board System problems, they've decided to act like asses instead. According to messages left by Tom Tcimpidis and others, the telephone company brought a great deal of political pressure to bear on City Attorney Ira Reiner, forcing Reiner to to prosecute him under a section of the law involving "Computer and Credit Card Crimes." For those unaware of the rather boring history of this case, Tcimpidis computer system was seized on May 16 of this year when Pacific Bell discovered what investigators claim was an illegal credit card number posted on a message board. Until recently, however, Tcimpidis was under the impression that no charges would be filed against him. On August 29th, however, Tcimpidis was informed that the City Attorney's office plans to file charges. The full extent of these charges and the laws under which they are being filed are not currently known. Tcimpidis, who is suffering from two broken ankles, said the City Attorney's office has ided to prosecute him under a new law involving credit card and computer crimes. Lynzie Flynn, operater of a system known as "Lynzie's Motherboard" has established a defense fund on Tcimpidis' behalf. She may be reached through her subscriber system at (818)980-6482. Or, checks payable to Lynzie's Motherboard, with an indication that the donation is for Tcimpidis's defense fund, should be sent to: Lynzie's Motherboard PO Box 284 No. Hollywood, CA. 91603 Tcimpidis also is asking that computer bulletin board operators as well as users write to City Attorney Ira Reiner's office, expressing their opinion's of his actions; using as few four-letter words as possible. In addition, it is important that anyone with copies of messages appearing on Tcimpidis' system between February and May 16 of this year to provide him with with a hard copy of that material. It can be sent to him at: Tom Tcimpidis, The Mog-ur P.O. box 5236, Mission Hills, CA 91345 Voice 818-366-4837 Mog-ur's BBS 818-366-1238 [Re-printed from a local BBS] ------- ------------------------------ Date: 3 Nov 1984 1159-PST From: Rob-Kling <Kling%UCI-20B@UCI-750a> Subject: Social Impacts of Computing: Graduate Study at UC-Irvine To: telecom@MIT-MC CORPS ------- Graduate Education in Computing, Organizations, Policy, and Society at the University of California, Irvine This graduate concentration at the University of California, Irvine provides an opportunity for scholars and students to investigate the social dimensions of computerization in a setting which supports reflective and sustained inquiry. The primary educational opportunities are PhD concentrations in the Department of Information and Computer Science (ICS) and MS and PhD concentrations in the Graduate School of Management (GSM). Students in each concentration can specialize in studying the social dimensions of computing. The faculty at Irvine have been active in this area, with many interdisciplinary projects, since the early 1970's. The faculty and students in the CORPS have approached them with methods drawn from the social sciences. The CORPS concentration focuses upon four related areas of inquiry: 1. Examining the social consequences of different kinds of computerization on social life in organizations and in the larger society. 2. Examining the social dimensions of the work and organizational worlds in which computer technologies are developed, marketed, disseminated, deployed, and sustained. 3. Evaluating the effectiveness of strategies for managing the deployment and use of computer-based technologies. 4. Evaluating and proposing public policies which facilitate the development and use of computing in pro-social ways. Studies of these questions have focussed on complex information systems, computer-based modelling, decision-support systems, the myriad forms of office automation, electronic funds transfer systems, expert systems, instructional computing, personal computers, automated command and control systems, and computing at home. The questions vary from study to study. They have included questions about the effectiveness of these technologies, effective ways to manage them, the social choices that they open or close off, the kind of social and cultural life that develops around them, their political consequences, and their social carrying costs. CORPS studies at Irvine have a distinctive orientation - (i) in focussing on both public and private sectors, (ii) in examining computerization in public life as well as within organizations, (iii) by examining advanced and common computer-based technologies "in vivo" in ordinary settings, and (iv) by employing analytical methods drawn from the social sciences. Organizational Arrangements and Admissions for CORPS The CORPS concentration is a special track within the normal graduate degree programs of ICS and GSM. Admission requirements for this concentration are the same as for students who apply for a PhD in ICS or an MS or PhD in GSM. Students with varying backgrounds are encouraged to apply for the PhD programs if they show strong research promise. The seven primary faculty in the CORPS concentration hold appointments in the Department of Information and Computer Science and the Graduate School of Management. Additional faculty in the School of Social Sciences, and the program on Social Ecology, have collaborated in research or have taught key courses for CORPS students. Research is administered through an interdisciplinary research institute at UCI which is part of the Graduate Division, the Public Policy Research Organization. Students who wish additional information about the CORPS concentration should write to: Professor Rob Kling (Kling@uci) Department of Information and Computer Science University of California, Irvine Irvine, Ca. 92717 714-856-5955 or 856-7403 or to: Professor Kenneth Kraemer (Kraemer@uci) Graduate School of Management University of California, Irvine Irvine, Ca. 92717 714-856-5246 ------------------------------ From: ihnp4!e.d.mantel@Berkeley To: ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley Date: 03 Nov 1984 19:05 EST Subject: 800-352-4731 This sounds like a beeper service to me. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Nov 1984 03:00 EST From: GZT.KEITH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA To: jsol%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Date: Mon 29 Oct 84 21:38:16-EST From: Keith M. Gabryelski <GZT.KEITH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM question... To: jsol@BBNCCA.ARPA In-Reply-To: Message from "Jon Solomon <jsol@bbncca.ARPA>" of Mon 29 Oct 84 1 9:42:43-EST Thanks very much for your quick reply, I now understand how that all works. Expect to see some input from me in the future. I never even considered the thought of have OCC Phreak related stuff. I didn't even think there were people on OZ that were using OCCs. I thought that stuff was limited to 12 year olds with VIC-20's... I don't suppose you or anyone you know of has any information on New England Bells (I think it is New England's) DMS-100 system. They seem to of switched over to Non-Bell equipment, instead using General Electrics Switching system. I hear-tell it is like ESS, with its call-waiting/forwarding stuff, but have no idea of how it originaly came about or why they didn't use ESS. Also, I was wondering if it had any special capabilities that ESS does not have. Bye Bye, Keith ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #113 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Mon, 5-Nov-84 21:51:57 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Mon, 5 Nov 84 21:00:51 EST Volume 4 : Issue 113 Today's Topics: Pay phones: the new enemy Pen register Touch Tone (well, Touch Calling) Intercept The L.A. BBS Credit Card Case ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun 4 Nov 84 20:56:18-PST From: Jim Lewinson <a.Jiml@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA> Subject: Pay phones: the new enemy To: Telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA Date: Wed 31 Oct 84 09:42:35-PST From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA> To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA Man Loses Fight With Pay Telephone IOWA CITY, Iowa (AP) -- Police responding to reports of a stabbing found instead a bleeding 20-year-old man who lost a confrontation with a pay telephone, authorities said. According to police, Richard A. Anderson had tried to call a friend from a pay phone and when the call went unanswered angrily tried to jerk the receiver out of the phone. Police said Anderson just managed to stretch the wire webbing that covers the telephone cord. The receiver stayed put. So Anderson again vented his anger -- this time by throwing the receiver, police said. But when the receiver reached the end of its cord, it snapped back and the cord wrapped around Anderson's neck. The sharp edges of the wire webbing dug into Anderson's skin, cutting him. When Anderson struggled to free himself, the webbing cut deeper. ``Once we got out what had happened,'' said one police officer, ``it was, `Be real. This did not happen.''' Anderson was treated at University Hospitals and released. ------- ------------------------------ Date: 5 November 1984 12:12-EST From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC> Subject: Pen register To: TELECOM @ BBNCCA Devices to log all the numbers you dial from your phone (whether rotary or touch tone) are called pen registers. Currently any law enforcement agency can ask the telephone company to install such a pen register on your line, which they will normally do; a search warrent is NOT required. A Supreme Court case in 1979 (Smith v Maryland) determined that the requirement for a search warrent before law enforcement agencies could tap your phone only applied to the CONTENTS of the call, but not to the dialing of the call in the first place (traffic analysis). This differs from the applicable law for First Class Postal Mail where a search warrent is requried before the post office will record the return addresses of anybody who sends you a letter. Note that the reasoning in the Supreme Court case would not cover recording of touch tones sent DURING the call. This could be interpreted as interception of the content. However, other intepretations of the wiretapping statutes (noted recently in TELECOM), suggest that only ORAL communications protected. Thus recording of touch tones might be held unprotected by the need for a search warrent for wiretapping. I believe that legislation has been considered in the Committees on the Judiciary which would apply Postal Service type standards to the use of pen registers on your telephone line, thus overturning Smith v. Maryland. Write your Congressman. Marvin Sirbu ------------------------------ From: Christopher A Kent <cak@Purdue.ARPA> Date: 5 Nov 1984 1549-EST (Monday) To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA Subject: Touch Tone (well, Touch Calling) Intercept Speaking of odd equipment dealing with Touch Tone... When I moved last May, I decided not to pay for Touch Calling through GTE any more; my phone has switchable pulse/tone dialing, so I was happy to save myself a couple of $$ a month. I figured I could dial the local access number on pulse and switch to tone when I needed it. Well, when I moved in, I tried dialing with tone, just for grins. I got an awful, ugly tone burst back from the CO, so I hung up, and dialed with pulse. Then, when I had connected to the access number, I switch to tone and proceeded to try to dial. I got the same ugly tone burst. Apparently they have something on the line that is monitoring for DTMF frequencies at all times, and bitches at me when it hears them... most annoying. I can't dial through a secondary PBX, or anything. Do I have a right to complain about this? So far, I've just been dialing from the office, but I may have to break down and get tone service again (and pay the bogus installation fee, ugh). Cheers, chris ---------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5-Nov-84 15:00:12 PST From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: The L.A. BBS Credit Card Case To: TELECOM@MC While not saying anything one way or another about the guilt or innocence in this case, there are two interesting points about this case that are only occasionally mentioned (this info gleaned from messages on other lists): 1) The TPC Credit Card number involved was apparently owned by a person for whom the BBS operator used to work, a position that he may have left under other than "ideal" circumstances. 2) The message in question was on the BBS for quite a long time (weeks? months?) and was not just present for a short time. The defense lawyer has explanations for both of these events, of course, so one shouldn't say anything about guilt, but they are interesting tidbits nonetheless which certainly serve to complicate the situation. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #114 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Tue, 6-Nov-84 21:35:58 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Tue, 6 Nov 84 17:21:22 EST Volume 4 : Issue 114 Today's Topics: LA BBS Case Tone calling intercept DMS-100 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 5 Nov 84 22:09 EST From: "Richard Kovalcik, Jr." <Kovalcik@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA> Subject: LA BBS Case To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA Yes, I believe the explaination is that the number appeared on the BBS system (long) before the BBS owner went to work for the credit card number owner. That is a pretty good explaination in my book. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Nov 84 03:39:30 EST From: Jon_Tara%Wayne-MTS%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA To: TELECOM%BBNCCA@MIT-Multics.ARPA With the discussions about recording called numbers, I thought this would be an appropriate time to get an update on caller identification to the called party. I know this was discussed in Human-Nets a couple of years ago (and possibly here more recently) but I presume that equipment availability and laws have changed in the mean time. (We're having a discussion in a legal forum here about it, but don't have much technical information. The social aspects have kept us pretty busy. If anyone wants to see what *true flame* looks like, I'll be happy to send out copies of the discussion so far.) Would appreciate any information about available systems, costs, areas where this might be available now (other than 911), specific laws either permitting or prohibiting, etc. ------------------------------ From: hou4b!dwl@Berkeley (d.w.levenson) To: Telecom-Request@BBNCCA Date: 5 Nov 1984 14:07 EST Re: The number found on the wall in New Jersey: The 800+ number you found at Rutgers is the number of a large radio-paging system in the area. The code 0480 selects a specific pager, probably riding around on someone's belt. The number you enter after hearing three beeps is displayed (up to ten digits) on the LCD display of the pager, and is the message to the pagee. He or she is probably trying to return your call, by dialing the number(s) you entered. After you've entered a message, the system acknowleges your message by sending 20 more beeps, and then disconnects, providing a re-order (fast busy) tone. -Dave Levenson AT&T ISL Holmdel, NJ ------------------------------ Date: 06-Nov-1984 1245 From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert) To: cak@purdue.ARPA, telecom@bbncca.ARPA Subject: Tone calling intercept Yes, you most certainly do have a right to complain. The phone company can charge you for CCITT Q.23 (Touch-Tone) service only if you are going to use it for network signalling to THEIR own switching systems. Once you have completed a call through their network, the Q.23 tones are just data, over which they may not have any control, other than the normal rules for what can be transmitted. Q.23 signals are legal data transmission signals under those rules. It doesn't matter what you're talking to, a computer at your office or a bank , another common carrier, a private PBX call extender, whatever, that's not the ir bag. However -- in areas with TRUE equal access (10288 for AT&T, 10222 for MCI) yo u do have to pay them to use Q.23 to access those carriers, since you are then signalling to the local phone company's switch, not the carrier's switch. But for the 950-10xx numbers or other access numbers, Q.23 is just data, and is not subject to a charge. They HAVE to fix that device so that it either only works when you're trying to signal to them or take it off your line completely. You may have to fight this one all the way to the President of your local phone company! /john ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 6 Nov 1984 12:59:44-PST From: goldstein%donjon.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Fred R. Goldstein) To: telecom@bbncca.ARPA Subject: DMS-100 New England Tel, and many other BOCs, are buying the Northern Telecom (Not G.E.!) DMS-100 central office as well as Western Electric's new #5 ESS. ESS is an AT&T trademark, and AT&T is no longer affiliated with the Bell companies (did our correspondent forget?) so the Bell telcos like NET are free to shop around. Northern is affiliated with Bell Canada, which long ago spun off from AT&T. The DMS-100 is a large digital switch. #1 ESS is analog, while most implentations of the "new" #5 ESS are hybrids, with an analog crossbar (solid-state diodes, not metallic) line switch and a digital center. DMS-100 can handle about 800k CCS of traffic (over 20k simultaneous calls) and up to about 100k lines in regular service. It provides all your usual features, including Centrex and PBX features; when sold as a PBX, it's called the SL-100. AT&T Technologies has been slow to deliver full-size versions of the #5ESS, leaving NT and others a market window. Analog switching is hopelessly obsolete, since a digital switch can handle T-carrier, fiber optics and digital radio transmission media without converting to analog first. DMS-100 uses one-line codecs on its line interfaces, with one line per card mounted in a drawer arrangement. It's very compact and not outrageously expensive. NET will be cutting one over soon in Newton, Mass (ca. 40k lines) and already has a few running. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #115 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Thu, 8-Nov-84 19:19:12 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Thu, 8 Nov 84 18:06:17 EST Volume 4 : Issue 115 Today's Topics: LA BBS Case Wanted: Info on Smart PBX Signalman Mark XII ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 6-Nov-84 16:58:05 PST From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: LA BBS Case To: TELECOM@BBNCCA As far as I'm concerned, from currently available information, there are just too many "coincidences" in the case for me to have much (if any) faith in the BBS operator. And in any case, I strongly feel that people must take the initiative to be responsible for the material on their BBS's in the long run. If a message hangs around for a couple of days that's one thing, but for weeks or months? Some people claim that BBS operators should be immune to having any responsibility for what's on their boards, and try to use the USPS and telcos as an example. However, I claim that a much better analogy would be a physical bulletin board in a corporate building, or a newspaper that took classified ads. In both of these cases, any entity that allowed the use of such facilities, over a period of time, for the posting of messages promoting illegal activities would be (and have been found to be) responsible. The fact that the BBS's do not use a physical medium like a wallboard or newspaper does not change the fact that they are subject to the same rules. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 84 14:19:01 pst From: jdd@decwrl.ARPA (John DeTreville) To: Telecom@BBNCCA Subject: Wanted: Info on Smart PBX [This may be a repeat article. --JSol] Here's a question for TELECOM readers: Are there any PBXs available that can be configured as servers controlled fro m some external computer system? Various vendors seem to be offering smart PBX stations that integrate some workstation functions, but they still make bette r telephones than they do workstations. Instead of taking this approach, you could imagine using real workstations that communicated with the PBX over a LAN , sequencing it through calls, being told of user inputs, etc. The PBX would know how to interface with the telephone environment; the workstations or whatever could concentrate on integrating voice communication into a larger user environment. So, does any vendor offer anything along such lines? Cheers, John ------------------------------ From: hou4b!dwl@Berkeley (d.w.levenson) To: Telecom-Request@BBNCCA Date: 7 Nov 1984 15:41 EST Dialed Number Recorders are provided by a company called Hekimian. They are useful in gathering evidence against Phone-Phreaks, in that they can detect and record DTMF (touch-tone(r)), MF addressing, and SF supervision signalling. I'm no lawyer, but I assume that the telco may connect one to a line at any time they want to. Having its record admitted as evidence in a court of law may be more complicated. -Dave Levenson ------------------------------ Date: 8 Nov 84 17:03:10 EST From: Eric <LAVITSKY@RU-GREEN.ARPA> Subject: Signalman Mark XII To: telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA, info-micro@BRL-VGR.ARPA Hi, I am considering purchasing an Anchor Automation Mark XII modem, but first I need some more information. I have heard that the modem loses in one major respect: it cannot send a break. Is this true, or has it been corrected in later versions? Are there any other major losses with this modem? Does it give off a lot of RFI? Is it sensitive to outside RFI? How does it handle noisy/weak lines? Any other tips/ tidbits of information regarding this modem would be much appreciated. Thanx, Eric ------- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #116 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Fri, 9-Nov-84 21:29:55 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Fri, 9 Nov 84 17:26:11 EST Volume 4 : Issue 116 Today's Topics: LA BBS Case Re: Anchor Signalman Mark XII Modem RE: LA BBS case Smart PBX vs. workstations Signalman Mark XII modem Signalman XII Anchor MKXII Modems Tarriffs.....where to find... that writing on the wall... Re: Signalman Mark XII Digital service to residences ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu 8 Nov 84 21:20:19-PST From: Chris <Pace@USC-ECLC.ARPA> Subject: LA BBS Case To: Telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA I dont have much information about the case, but I would take exception to Lauren's view. BBS operators may or may not have the capability to police everything. I realize that this is not quite the same thing, but at ECL, we have bboards that run upto 6000 disk pages. Completely impossible to reasonably police. You would almost have to show that there was complete negligence or knowledge of the illicit use to fairly prosecute. The newspaper analogy falls down in that people cannot post their own messages to a classified ad. If the BBS operator is not immune, then a complete change in the environment - ie elimination of free posting - would necessarily be in order. Is this desireable? Maybe, maybe not - I am really not sure. Chris. ------- ------------------------------ Date: 8 Nov 1984 23:18-PST Subject: Re: Anchor Signalman Mark XII Modem From: JOHN@SRI-CSL To: Lavitsky@RU-GREEN Cc: Telecom@BBNCCA This is in response to your request for info on 'personal' experiences with the Mark XII modem. I recently did a performance evaluation of this modem for my employer. Data error rate was comparable to other intelligent modems (low frequency of occurance over good quality local lines, both 1200 and 300 baud). Didn't try to send a break (no need) but don't recall seeing anything in the instructions stating there is a problem with this. No problem with RF emissions noted (nearby FM radio). The Anchor lacks a monitor speaker, a useful feature, and doesn't have a switch to force the RS-232C Carrier Detect lead TRUE. (With CD low, many terminals won't display the characters sent by the modem. Thus, you will have to dial "blind".) RS-232C connection is a ribbon cable with IDC DB-25P connector that hangs out the rear of the unit (which results in a manufacturer's savings of about $5.00 over a DB-25S connector mounted on the rear of the unit). However, this forces the owner to deal with a fixed (short ??) cable length. In summary, the Signalman Mark XII is a good value but users should be prepared to live with its shortcomings. John McLean Telenova Incorporated ------------------------------ Date: Fri 9 Nov 84 02:06:45-CST From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA> Subject: RE: LA BBS case To: telecom@UTEXAS-20.ARPA Lauren, I agree that there are coincidences, to raise suspicions, but that should not allow us to overlook the fact that they are not PROOF and, there- fore, inadmissable. I thought long and hard about it, and if PROOF is found for who did it, I have no objections against some wrists getting slapped. But no more, really, as the deed is no more than a childish prank, and what society needs is "to reform" rather than "vengeance", and a criminal record is not the proper way to reform anyone. Now, is it possible that a message stays on a BBS undetected by the SYSOPS? Initial reaction is, no, why does anyone set-up a BBS, if not out of need and fascination with lots of messages floating by. Really? I only have to think about the temptation I feel to make my machines do some good for someone while I sleep, and I can easily imagine creating some groups which I would never look at. So why didn't one of the steadier customers who ran into the message bring it to the attention of the SYSOPS? You and I would have done so quickly, I'm certain, if for no other reason than to protect the SYSOP, so could it be that someone did and could speak up? I'd talk to the regulars of the BBS if I was the City Attorney. But even IF the SYSOP knew, I still don't see why he should be guilty of anything for not having erased it. Stupidity, maybe, but criminal? certainly not in my value-system (which is not identical with the current legal system, I hurry to point out - but then all is in flux) Now, the more I think about it, the more I become convinced that if I ever set up a BBS, it's "as is", I provide the playground, you all are responsible for what you do there. So, I would not want to be bothered by anyone, and might even ignore mail-messages, if they'd really pile up. Well, I guess, I'm not really BBS-SYSOP material, and wouldn't stick my neck out to become a legal test-case. And an analogy. I enter and leave my house through the garage, and take a le ft turn, religiously. If someone would post an offending messages or someone's credit card number on my front door, or (please, don't) on the right side of my house, it would go undetected for weeks. So, am I negligent, suspiceou s of having it put up myself because it's my neighbors, with whom I have an argument over his noisy dogs? (not in reality) Unless I'm caught doing it no court will condemn me (I hope). Moral: current events have hopefully put all SYSOPs on warning that even if the court battle can be won, a little supervision can prevent a lot of prolonged troubles. And if you ever encounter any questionable messages on any BBS, don't hesitate to notify the SYSOP in no uncertain terms what you think. You might even indicate, that nasty developments might force you to testify in some court of law to the fact that the SYSOP had been made aware of the message on his system. But remember, "uncertain terms" does not mean "nasty" or "accusing" - friendliness is what we good guys in the white hats are most famous for. ------- ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 9 Nov 1984 05:52:39-PST From: goldstein%donjon.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Fred R. Goldstein) To: telecom@bbncca.ARPA Subject: Smart PBX vs. workstations The whole question of "Smart PBX controlled by a LAN" or "PBX-based workstation" is drenched in marketing hype but woefully short of realistic substance. The inherent concept of a PBX is that of a circuit switch, voice-oriented, which must transfer audio (digitized PCM, most often) in real time, since a transmission delay in the ms. range would be noticeable as signal degradation (echo). That's been a major reason why "packet voice" has been a flop for all but the hairiest long-distance applications where a little echo is expected. "Workstation" is still a pretty nebulous term. To me, it refers to sort of a "super-PC", which uses a LAN to access data stored on a database or file server and communicate with others. LANs are bursty, fast and usually run in packet-mode; PBXs have smooth, medium-speed (<= 64kbps) data flow and require seconds to set up calls, unlike LANs which send virtual circuits (or datagrams -- I'm not falling into that rathole) in milliseconds. Given those constraints, which basically mean that a PBX is a second-rate workstation server, some vendors do have products planned in that space. Rolm just announced "Cedar", a hybrid IBM PC-clone and telephone in one box, for use (only) with its CBX, and they also have a telephone board called "juniper" which plugs into the IBM PC and lets it act like a fancy telephone, as well as be a terminal using the CBX as a data circuit switch. InteCom's LANmark is a high-speed packet switch that acts like a LAN and is packaged inside its IBX PBX, and they are supposed to be doing joint workstations with Wang. And there will be more... But what do you gain? Too many folks are talking about "new PBXs" that may have great data features but aren't reliable or mature for voice. The two functions are really quite different and so without doing an appli- cations analysis, it's probably a good idea to avoid cosolidated voice and data, the same way you'd avoid consolidated toaster-dishwashers (which GE could, of course, make just as easily.) ------------------------------ Date: 9 Nov 1984 07:22 MST (Fri) From: Keith Petersen <W8SDZ@SIMTEL20> To: Eric <LAVITSKY@RU-GREEN> Cc: Telecom@MIT-MC, Info-Micro@BRL, Info-Cpm@AMSAA Subject: Signalman Mark XII modem If you do get the Signalman Mark XII, here's a tidbit from CIS that may help avoid a potential problem. --Keith Sb: #Anchor MK XII Modem 10-Mar-84 00:22:26 KUGRAM Vol 2, No 1, Pg 26, top left corner says: "The reason some people may have had problems using Anchor Modems is that their phones had a serial number ending in DMG (i.e., 2500DMG). This means that these phones are grounded. There is a black wire inside the phone just after the telco wire enters the case. Cutting this wire will disable the ground and allow the modem to function." Wonder if this might have something to do with some of the strange problems A FEW people have with a modem that seems to work for most others with the same equipment. ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 8 November 1984 23:43-MST From: bang!crash!bblue@Nosc To: bang!lavitsky@Ru-Green Subject: Signalman XII The Signalman Mark XII stock, does not send break. However, Anchor Automation does have a rom available on request that corrects the problem. I don't know why they don't just switch over to the new rom... The modem loses in a couple of other respects though - signficant depending on your uses. It has no hardware default switches, thus you cannot set a power-up condition - it must always be initialized by software control. The led signal indication is quite limited. For example, send and receive data are the same led! Those things aside, it is a reasonable performer for the price. Just don't expect too much from it. --Bill Blue bang!crash!bblue@nosc {ihnp4, sdcsvax!bang}!crash!bblue ------------------------------ Date: 9 Nov 84 09:49:46 EST From: Alexander B. Latzko <LATZKO@RU-BLUE.ARPA> Subject: Anchor MKXII Modems To: lavitsky@RU-BLUE.ARPA Eric, I have been using seven (7) Anchor Mark XIIs at remote 1 and remote 28 (Rutgers University Newark for those in the great etheric mists) since July and have had time to develop some opinions. 1> The modems I have support break. I did get a special prom from Anchor but was told the production line was going to be modified as of August 1984 to include break. 2> They do not support the full Hayes command set but they do support enough to be dialed by Xtalk VXI . 3> I could not check for RFI but sitting directly next to a TV and a Z-29 doesn't cause any screen glitches. 4> Reliability is ok but sometimes they become a little flakey in autoanswer mode when they have been on for a month or two non stop. alex <latkzo@ru-blue> ------- ------------------------------ Date: 7 Nov 84 13:15 EDT From: "David H M Spector" <SPECTOR@NYU-CMCL1.ARPA> To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA Subject: Tarriffs.....where to find... Does anyone know where I can order the tarriff stuff? And, also how much it costs?? Thanks Dave Spector ------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Nov 84 23:19:10 EST From: Jon_Tara%Wayne-MTS%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA To: telecom%BBNCCA@MIT-Multics.ARPA re: Anchor Signalman XII Modem The Mark XII does not send breaks in 212 mode, although it does in 103 mode. You can send the modem back to Anchor along with $30, and they will upgrade it (a ROM for newer ones, a whole new PC board for older ones) so that it will. Another flaw that people should be aware of is that it does NOT observe RTS (it isn't even connected!) This causes problems with programs that expect the modem to drop the phone line when RTS is dropped. I have a fix that takes one transistor, one resistor, and one cut trace. (Send a message for a copy of the pretty picture of how to do this.) I'm not in a position to make any quality measurements, but I've been running one on a BBS (and also for calling out to BBSs) and I've had no more noticible problems than with any other 1200 bps modems I've used (Hayes and Vadic). In fact, it seems to cope with weak signals better than most. (I've had none of the flashing carrier lights I've had with Vadics...). I bought mine locally for $250, so I'm not complaining about the flaws. (Cermetek is advertising a "Hayes compatible" 1200 bps internal IBM PC modem for about $150 on a special "buy direct" deal.) ------------------------------ Date: 9 Nov 84 05:35:15 EST From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA> Subject: that writing on the wall... To: telecom@RUTGERS.ARPA The 800+ number you found at Rutgers is the number of a large radio-paging system in the area. The code 0480 selects a specific pager, probably riding around on someone's belt. Wow! I wonder how many people I woke up? We eventually figured that something like this was the case, and ceased messing with it, in case we were beeping people out of dreamland or dropping trouble cards all over creation. If you know any victims, please pass a sincere ''sorry guys!'' on from me... I can't help being a *little* disappointed that it wasn't a nifty cable/pair identifier service, via which we could find the physical location of any of our dialup lines! _H* ------- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 84 10:28 PST From: pencin.dlos@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: Signalman Mark XII To: Eric <LAVITSKY@RU-GREEN.ARPA> Eric; I will not make any pro or con recommendations but by the time you have read this I think you will understand my position. 1) The Mark XII does not recognize the TR signal from the host machine, and as such it becomes quite difficult to get it's attention to cause a hang-up or reset software switches. 2) It is inconsistant in the return of result codes caused by phone related activity. (i.e. some numeric result codes return the numeric with a "CR" and some do not. This makes writing auto answer routines very difficult.) 3) If the modem is software programmed in 300 baud and the incomming call is connected a 1200 baud (as in an RBBS) the modem will not respond to the software interupt signal (+++) from the host at 1200 baud, an thus it is practically impossible to disconnect after the call until the calling party hangs- up. As an auto dial out-going modem I have no complaints, as a front-end for an RBBS it is useless. The lack of a speaker is also a major draw-back for dealing with ring-back systems. You may now make your on decision concerning this unit. Russ Pencin Sysop- Dallas Connection. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 30 Oct 84 18:18:25-EST From: Gene Hastings <Gene.Hastings@CMU-CS-C.ARPA> Subject: Digital service to residences To: telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA CMU is currently planning some experiments with the local operating company to try a data under voice scheme that would become a tariffed service if it proved practical. The experiments (to begin in about a month) would use apparatus at the subscriber and CO ends of a subscriber pair to carry normal voice service and a 9600 bps serial line. There is a "spine" at the CO, something (if not exactly) like the PRONET token ring, which would route the lines to their destination(s). At the moment, existing tariffs preclude the local operating company from reformatting or encoding the data; the user must accept the bits out in the same format they went in. It is plausible that the system might eventually be able to support data rates to 56 kbps, which holds out the promise of having your favorite PC on a LONG extension of a campus network. The target price that CMU is asking for (based on line charges and amortization of modem costs) is $50/mo. The Bell people seem to think that they can manage this, but they have by no means guaranteed it. Look for new rumors in January. Gene Hastings ------- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #117 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Sun, 11-Nov-84 02:33:05 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Sun, 11 Nov 84 1:35:16 EST Volume 4 : Issue 117 Today's Topics: Re: Signalman XII RE: LA BBS case BBS owner. Anchor Signalman BBS's -- who is responsible? TARRIFS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 9-Nov-84 13:43:47 PST From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: Re: Signalman XII To: bang!crash!bblue@NOSC Cc: INFO-MICRO@BRL, TELECOM@MC Another problem with that modem is that it apparently doesn't support standard DTR! This means that all enabling of incoming calls and all hanging up of calls must be handled through online commands to the modem, which most standard software, quite rightly, does not support. The lack of DTR support brands this modem a NO BUY in my opinion. DTR is a MINIMUM requirement for any modem. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9-Nov-84 13:05:57 PST From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: RE: LA BBS case To: CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20 Cc: TELECOM@MC I'm not claiming that current legal remedies are "correct" for such situations, but I don't feel that BBS operators can properly be considered to be "blameless" in such situations either. As for your "number on the side of your house wall analogy"... I don't buy it. You don't promote the concept of people coming by your house at all hours to read your wall! If you did, you might be more concerned about checking that wall from time to time. The BBS's, by their very existence, are actively promoting the idea that people should use them. For your wall analogy to work, you'd have to take out an ad somewhere saying, "Come read my wall, it's fun and interesting!" There is a significant difference between a random message in a random place and and an entity (like a BBS) set up explicitly for the purpose of sending and receiving messages. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 1984 19:11 EST From: GZT.KEITH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA To: telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA Subject: BBS owner. Hhhhmmmm... As I see it, the BBS operator should be convicted of felony- stupidity. I was a SYSOP for about one year. You cannot got through a week without knowing most (if not all) of the messages on your board. I don't know how he ran his board, but I would hope that he would have the sense to get on the board every once in a while and read some of the messages. If not only to read the feed-back from its users, atleast to see how his board was doing. I admit, there were two or three message bases I never looked at, but at the end of the week, it was almost impossible not to see messages of questionable nature, (when doing backups or clearing the message bases for more space). I also remember getting messages concerning certain posts, (usually about jokes of questionable taste). I would think, (hope), that a user would bring up the fact that something illegal was posted on the board (unless ofcourse if they expected something of that nature on there. ie, the BBS itself supported illegal activities.) But after all this, I don't think that the BBS owner should be prosecuted. I think the law should get on the BBS owners that openly allow posts of questionable nature on their boards. There are plenty out there; owned, operated, and used by twelve year olds that get a kick out of charging their phone bills to little-old ladies from Tescalusca, Kansas. (exageration, but you get the point). I don't see how the law can criminally neglect these systems that they would have an open and shut case against but arrest a BBS owner on questionable charges. End of randomness.. Keith ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 9 Nov 1984 16:35:06-PST From: goldberg_1%viking.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Marshall R. Goldberg LJ02/E4 DTN 28 2-2325) To: telecom@bbncca.ARPA Subject: Anchor Signalman I operate two BBS's running with tested BELL 212 modems. Several callers have problems with overloading using the Signalman modem. One user solves the problem by leaving hi telephone handset off hook. Another user returned his modem and got a Qubie. Marshall ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9-Nov-84 19:06:54 PST From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA> Subject: BBS's -- who is responsible? To: TELECOM@MC I think the key element of this discussion revolves around who is responsible for the messages on a BBS. Now, if all users were *known* in some manner to the BBS operator (via confirmed address/phone number info, for example, and maybe signed statements of "BBS rule understanding") then I can see how a BBS operator might be able to freely operate without *much* concern for message content in most cases. But to the entent that a BBS allow anonymous, unverified use, SOMEBODY must take responsibility, and it's going to have to be the operator, since in most cases there is NO WAY to find the originator of a libelous or illegal message! If we accept the concept that certain sorts of messages are illegal (soliciting for stolen goods, as a very simple example) there would seem to be a need for SOMEONE to be responsible! Otherwise, the potential for abuse (and for such unfortunate events as lawsuits) is pretty large. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat 10 Nov 84 15:44:28-PST From: HECTOR MYERSTON <MYERSTON@SRI-KL.ARPA> Subject: TARRIFS To: Telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA If you want to get copies of the actual tarriffs you have two choices, either deal with the FCC and the various state regulatory agencies or subscribe to a service which will provide them to you. We use United Technologies MIS 8049 W Chester Pike Upper Darby, PA 19082 Tel (215) 853-4850. Be prepared to spend considerable amount of time in filing and posting. There are imnumerable varities, inter Service Area (ex LATA), intra-Service Area, inter state, different carriers etc. They range in size from the AT&T WATS (FCC #2) in one 2 inch binder to the Pacific Bell California Tariff in 10 four inch binders and growing. ------- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ****************************** ----------kgd Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #118 From: telecom@ucbvax.ARPA Path: watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom Organization: University of California at Berkeley Date: Mon, 12-Nov-84 23:11:32 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA> TELECOM Digest Mon, 12 Nov 84 22:34:07 EST Volume 4 : Issue 118 Today's Topics: BBS's -- who is responsible? The LA BBS (Mog-ur) case Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #117 The disvetiture Signalman XII ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 11 Nov 84 12:06:11 PST From: "Theodore N. Vail" <vail@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA> To: telecom@bbncca.arpa Subject: BBS's -- who is responsible? The problem here is the conflict of rights. The First Amendment to the Constitution states: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech". This was extended to State (and local) Governments by the Fourteenth amendment. On the other hand, there are well-known exceptions. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded auditorium (unless there is a fire); there are both civil and criminal penalties for libel; etc. In the BBS case, there are a number of questions. Should individuals be forced to give up part of a Constitutional Right because the Telephone Company has failed to install appropriate equipment to validate telephone charge calls? It would be easy to install equipment at each pay telephone that would require physical possession of a charge card. Is there a law stating explicitly that divulging a telephone charge number is a criminal offense? If so, is the law enforced fairly? I know of a dormitory at San Diego State University where a Sprint number was posted -- on a bulletin board -- for a whole semester before Sprint invalidated it. During that semester, tens of thousands of dollars worth of long distance calls were placed against that number. No prosecution took place. Are other types of Bulletin Boards, such as those outside of super- markets, those on University campuses such as UCLA, etc. normally policed? I know full well that the UCLA administration would not take responsibility for UCLA Bulletin Boards. Moreover since the administrators are "pillars of society" and have fancy lawyers, the Telephone Company wouldn't take them on. The "responsible party" is certainly the poster of the message, not necessarily the owner of the bulletin board. The fact that the poster is hard to find doesn't change responsibility. ted ------------------------------ From: mcb%lll-tis.arpa@lll-tis (Michael C. Berch) Date: Sun Nov 11 14:14:37 1984 Subject: The LA BBS (Mog-ur) case To: telecom@bbncca The real question raised by the Mog-ur case (regardless of its specific outcome) is whether we want, as a matter of public poli- cy, to hold BBS sysops (and others in similar situations, includ- ing, for example, commercial services [The Source, CompuServe] and those who post and redistribute Internet/Usenet digest) CRIM- INALLY responsible for failing to detect and remove messages pro- posing illegal activities. Very rarely do our laws impose standards of affirmative conduct that result in criminal sanctions if they are not performed faithfully. These exceptions usually fall into categories where serious and immdiate harm to persons would result: operators of dangerous machinery or explosives; manufacturers/sellers of foods and drugs, and so forth. I don't think anyone has a problem with holding a drug manufacturer criminally liable for failing to in- spect a batch of product for dangerous impurities. Unfortunately, the L.A. prosecutor has misinterpreted the differ- ence between CRIMINAL and CIVIL standards of conduct. If the Mog-ur sysop has breached a standard of conduct (and I draw no factual conclusions, based on third-hand evidence!) the remedy is for the aggrieved party to sue for damages. This way, both our society's interest in freedom of communication and expression AND the aggrieved party's property rights can be served in a controversial case. And ideally, our legislature could more specifically define a standard of conduct that assures that sysops and those in similar positions know what is expected >from them. Personally, I would rather err on the side of permis- siveness, but practically ANY reasonable standard of conduct is better than having a gung-ho prosecutor try to create a whole new class of information-age crimes. Michael C. Berch mcb@lll-tis.ARPA ...ucbvax!lbl-csam!lll-tis!mcb ------------------------------ Date: Mon 12 Nov 84 11:54:53-EST From: Doug Alan <Nessus%MIT-EECS@MIT-MC.ARPA> Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #117 To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA It completely offends me that anyone could think that a Sysop should be held responsible for the messages that appear on his BBoard. It's like saying that a paper manufacturer should be held responsible for what people write on their paper. It's like saying that the phone company should be be resposible for what is said on their phone lines. It's like saying that grafitti must be cleaned from bathrooms. It's like saying Thomas Jefferson should be resposible for everything said by anyone. It's disgusting! -Doug Alan ------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Nov 84 14:44 PST From: Halsema.ES@XEROX.ARPA Subject: The disvetiture To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA From "Three Degrees Above Zero": "The Bell System's financial position became increasingly fragile in the decade and a half after Alexander Bell's original patents expired in 1893 and 1894. Many independent telephone companies sprang up.... By 1900 there were over 6,000 companies, and by 1907 almost half of the telephones in the United States were non-Bell. Subscribers were becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the service. For example, they would often accidentally reach one of the other companies, and in most cities they had to pay two or more telephone bills each month...." Sounds familiar! As my pappy used to say, the more things change, the more they stay the same. ------------------------------ Date: Mon 12 Nov 84 16:34:47-PST From: Nicholas Veizades <VEIZADES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA> Subject: Signalman XII To: lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA We at Sumex are using these modems for autoanswers and having lots of problems: Namely, The lack of DTR control. This problem was fixed by a slight modification on the Hardware. In other words a reset circuit was added and connected to pin 20 of the RS232 connector so that the local host can reset the modem at will. The modem seems to go to some weird mode at times and it will not accept any commands or will not answer the phone. This behavior is best detected by a flashing data LED most of the time but not always. Powering off and on is the only way to get the modem back in normal operation. No win in a multi user rotary system. The people at Anchorman at first were very defensive and did not acknowledge the faults of their modem. The service manager at Anchor even went as far as to suggest to us to buy another brand since we were not pleased with theirs. Finally recently the Anchor people suggested to return the modems for a fix which we are in the process of doing. As originates the Anchorman XII seems to work fine. Nick. ------- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ******************************