Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1981-86.volumes.1-5/vol4.iss155-208

Text File | 1990-12-09 | 348.9 KB | 9,268 lines

 7-Feb-85 16:59:22-PST,5316;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   7 Feb 85 16:54:59-PST
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 85 19:33:42 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #155
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Feb 85 19:33:42 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 155

Today's Topics:
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #153
                           That neet number
                       Residential PABX systems
                                 mail
                       MIT Communications Forum
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: 5 Feb 85 18:47:01 EST
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #153
To: [e-mail]

re: noise & Southwestern Bell...

I have had a problem with noise on the lines up here in Rochester, NY.
It seems to vary with the time of day (maybe even phases of the moon,
since this is such a dog of a phone company up here). I have a cheap
plug in modem card on an old Apple II+ at home . The brand name is
Networker with Netmaster software . What I have discovered is that there
is an AM radio station that comes in loud and clear on the phone lines
(usually at night) with some music programming. During these periods,
the garbage character rate goes way up and I usually get disconnected
from my system  at work which connects me to this net. When I disconnect
the modem from the phone line, the music goes away, so clearly the modem
card is somehow acting like an antenna and picking up this radio
station.

Any suggestions for a cheap fix (short of building agiant Faraday cage).

Thanks,

Earle Kyle
Xerox Corp.
Webster, NY 14580.

------------------------------

Date:    5 February 85 19:28-EST
From:      Michael Grant  <[e-mail]>
To: Telecom Digest <[e-mail]>
Subject: That neet number

Here in Merryland, at least on my exchange, that neet number is 311.  I
am on a *really* old cross-bar exchange.  We're dated for ESS in  late
1986, equal access....?????  C&P says MAYBE in 1988, but probebly not
before.  My exchange is 301-439 in case you wanted to know.
-Mike Grant

------------------------------

Date:    5 February 85 21:49-EST
From:      Michael Grant  <[e-mail]>
To: Telecom Digest <[e-mail]>
Subject: Residential PABX systems

Earlier this week I sent a query about a residential apartment building
which houses 550 tenants.  I just attended a meeting for a proposal of
what to do about our decreped in house phone system.  The Seal Corp.
presented our building with their option.  I thought it was particularly
interesting, so I bring it up here.

Their idea is to install a PABX in the building.  The building would buy
local service in bulk from C&P (our local telco) and in turn sell it to
us tenents.  By their estimats, this would cut out local bill in half.
They were even willing to finance the thing for us.  The system will
even allow such things like you get with custom calling even though out
exchange dosn't offer it yet.  And...they say we can also simulate
equal access too!!!  Their system uses Telesaver (another AT&T reseller)
as default.  For this, the building would get kick backs from Telesaver
for the long distance calls the tenants make (10% of the total calls per
month.)  The only drawback that I see up right away is that having a PABX
is seen as a bussiness by MaBell.  That means that any local calls will
be billed in message units.  This might not be so bad in the long run
since C&P wants to make residential service that way anyway.

Can anyone see anything wrong with this?  Is this not a good thing to get
into?  Are there other companies that will do this sort of thing?  Does
anyone have any better ideas?  In my own opinion, this sounds pretty
neet.
-Mike Grant

------------------------------

Date: Tue 5 Feb 85 23:13:11-EST
From: Kathleen Carley <[e-mail]>
Subject: mail
To: [e-mail]

  I'm trying to collect background information for a paper I am
writing on computer mail and I was wondering if you could tell me:
  1) Whether or not you charge for mail, and if so how
  2) Do you charge your users for sending messages or files over the
ARPA-NET
  thankyou
  Kathleen Carley
  Asst. Prof. Carnegie-Mellon University
-------


------------------------------

Date:  Wed, 6 Feb 85 16:13 EST
From:  [e-mail]
Subject:  MIT Communications Forum
To:  decvax!ittvax![e-mail], [e-mail],

Update on February 21 MIT Communications Forum Seminar, "Software
Protection and Marketing":



Jim Button, author of PC-File and PC-Calc and founder of Buttonware,
Inc., will be speaking at this seminar.  A systems engineer for IBM for
17 years, he is now one of the leading proponents and marketers of
user-supported software ("shareware")



(The other speakers are Todd Sun of Multimate International and Marvin
Goldschmidt of Lotus Development Corporation.  The seminar will be held
at 4:00 in room 37-252.)

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 8-Feb-85 13:32:59-PST,6910;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   8 Feb 85 13:28:27-PST
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 85 16:03:14 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #156
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 8 Feb 85 16:03:14 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 156

Today's Topics:
                     Re: Residential PABX System
           SWB test of Call-Tracing, etc, now in Austin, TX
               Providing Attack Warnings to the Public
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #153
                            Cheep ringers
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 7 Feb 1985 18:31 PST
From: Lars Poulsen <LARS@ACC>
Subject: Re: Residential PABX System
To: TELECOM@MIT-MC

My immediate reaction to this remarkable story is that this would
seem to make the building owner a local TELCO, and telephone companies
are supposed to be regulated by the local PUC. To wit, this business
entity has an exclusive right to supply telephone service to
residences in a defined geographical area.

Now, on second thought, some ladlords in office buildings have
already done similar things, and this has turned into a vehicle
for providing BYPASS service, and apparently TELCOs have not
been able to succesfully challenge this.

Where does the limit go ? Is the local telco industry really
deregulated into a free-for-all ? Can I band up with the
adjoining homeowners and form the "San Rogue Gardens Telephone
Company" and go shop around for the best deal from long-distance
providers ? (maybe setting up a microwave link to that office
building down the street that has a bypass link to San Francisco ?)

Please, someone, explain this.

        / Lars Poulsen
          <Lars@ACC>
------


------------------------------

Date: Fri 8 Feb 85 03:15:23-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: SWB test of Call-Tracing, etc, now in Austin, TX
To: [e-mail]

in recent days, the same services earlier described as being offered in
Orlando, Fla, are now being test-marketed by SouthWesternBell here in
Austin.  There are also other developments of new $$$-requests i have not
found the time yet to tell you about.  More later (I hope to find time).
-------

------------------------------

From: Kurt F. Sauer <mtxinu!ea!uokvax!emks@Berkeley>
Date:  6 Feb 1985 03:44-CST (Wednesday)
To: ARPANET Telecom Digest <ea!mtxinu!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley>
Subject: Providing Attack Warnings to the Public

What about warning systems?  Attack warning is a complicated matter.  As I
understand it, the process is very closely tied with existing C^3IS systems.

Currently, the means of warning the public consist of

    a.  The National Warning System, or NAWAS, a dedicated voice circuit
        which connects to the National and Alternate National Warning
        Centers at CMC, Colorado, and Olney, Maryland.  Manned on a 24-hour
        basis, NAWAS is the primary means of disseminating an attack warning
        to thousands of regional, state, and local warning points.  While
        currently a leased-line system, it is currently in upgrade to MB
        technology circuits.

    b.  The Emergency Broadcast System, or EBS, a coordinated (?) system of
        commercial broadcast systems.  Under FCC regulations, almost all
        AM and FM broadcast stations with output > 25W is required to par-
        ticipate in the EBS, with its cascade alerting and weekly tests.
        The President can broadcast on the EBS through the White House
        Communications System, controlled from a classified location in
        Washington DC.

    c.  Local warning systems, such as public address speakers, the more
        traditional sirens, and air-horns.

    d.  AP/UPI (and some other major news systems) participate in US-wide
        tests on a weekly basis.  The President can make broadcasts using
        the same means as in (b), above.  ABC, NBC, and CBS (possibly
        others, but I don't know) has direct video/audio feeds, as well.

As certainly as it seems that this confederation of communications systems
would be enough to get the "word" to the public, I believe that it isn't.

The "word" could range from an official statement that a crisis existed to
the worst-case "BOOB"-style attack warning.  Although I'm reasonably con-
vinced that the latter isn't really in the cards, we've got to be prepared
to operate in that condition.

What other warning systems can we use or devise?  The federal government
suggested CHAT-TV in the 60's, but it was cancelled; I don't think that people
would want "Big Brother" "controlling" their T.V. these days.

While some would say that having advanced public warning systems is simply
a way of fostering the nuclear war survival strategies, these systems would
also provide a simple, single way for local governments to warn their populus
of *any* impending emergency.  We in Oklahoma **still** have problems letting
people know of impending tornadic activity.  People don't listen to the radio!

Please restrict your responses to the technical aspects of this.

        kurt




------------------------------

Date: Wed, 6 Feb 85 07:46:54 pst
From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!darrelj@Berkeley (Darrel VanBuer)
To: telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #153
Cc:

From part 68 FCC rules:  the following jacks are all the same physical
object with different wiring:
RJ-11    one line on pins 3-4
RJ-12    one line plus A/A1 signalling on 2-5 for keysystem (but line is
connected before the keysystem due to incompatibility)
RJ-13    one line plus A/A1 signalling on 2-5; esentially a single line
keysystem phone
RJ-14    two line phone, line 1 on 3-4, line 2 on 4-5

Some intermixing will work, but not all (e.g. an RJ-13 phone in an RJ-14
jack will short out line 2 when off hook, an RJ-11 phone in an RJ-12 or
RJ-13 will fail to "inform" the keysystem the phone line is in use, thus not
light the line lamp).
Darrel J. Van Buer, PhD
System Development Corp.
2500 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90406
[phone] x5449
...{allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,orstcs,sdcsvax,ucla-cs,akgua}
                                                            !sdcrdcf!darrelj
[e-mail]


------------------------------

Date: 8 Feb 85 12:14:54 EST
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cheep ringers
To: [e-mail]

Did you ever call someone who has a crossbar line and a $5 phone?  You
can *hear* the little feeper down the connection, since you're actually
connected to his line while ringing.  Then you can amaze your callee by
asking him which particular brand of $5 telephone he bought....

_H*
-------

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 9-Feb-85 21:35:49-PST,5448;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   9 Feb 85 21:32:35-PST
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 85  0:04:04 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #157
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 10 Feb 85  0:04:04 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 157

Today's Topics:
                          Carrier invocation
                     Re: Residential PABX System
               Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #155 - phone noise
                         Billing strangeness
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 8 Feb 85 19:27:54 EST
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: Carrier invocation
To: [e-mail]

In a normal ESS exchange, if I dial my own number I get a busy signal
immediately, which is the proper thing to do.  Now, if I prefix that with
1-201-<number>, there is a delay with a couple of clicks [meaning it's
doing more involved routing], and then I get the busy.  Is the switcher
interpreting this as an inter-LATA call and passing the details to AT&T
blindly without figuring out what the number was first?  This is weird???

_H*
-------

------------------------------

Date: Sat 9 Feb 85 01:27:42-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Residential PABX System
To: [e-mail]

Lars Poulsen (LARS@ACC) wonders if this wouldn't constitute being a small
phone-company which would come under FCC-regulation.

just happens that on local TV tonight was a report where SWB attacks the
internal phone-installations of a Dallas high-rise, which might now get
direct connections to LD-carriers.  I'll keep you posted as things develop.

in general, I think I have heard that as long as you don't cross a utility
easement you can string a private phone-line to a neighbors house, but I
might be wrong and any crossing of property lines would put you under FCC
control.
-------

------------------------------

From: fortune!redwood!rpw3@Berkeley
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 85 14:06:25 pst
To: fortune!dual!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #155 - phone noise

+---------------
| From: [e-mail]
| re: noise & Southwestern Bell...
| I have had a problem with noise on the lines up here in Rochester, NY.
|                                 ... What I have discovered is that there
| is an AM radio station that comes in loud and clear on the phone lines
|                                                    ... When I disconnect
| the modem from the phone line, the music goes away, so clearly the modem
| card is somehow acting like an antenna and picking up this radio station.
| Any suggestions for a cheap fix (short of building agiant Faraday cage).
+---------------

As you describe it, the radio signal is most probably coming in through
the power lines, not the phone lines. This is not unusual, if the power
lines run near the radio station's antenna. When I was at Fortune Systems,
at one of their early locations, we were in the ground wave of a 50kW talk
station. If a prototype system was not properly grounded (and how many are,
all spread out on the bench?), one could see VOLTS! of R.F. on the logic
"ground" with an oscilloscope. This caused MOS logic errors, to say the least!
(It's confusing enough when your prototypes are crashing for other reasons...)

The solution was to make sure the power supplies were all properly grounded
to the "green wire" in the power cord. In your case, if you don't have a
modern house with good solid grounds (third prong) in the outlets, you may
have to make your own (see any book on ham radio for tips and techniques).
If you already have good grounds, you may have to try an "RFI" filter, or
even an isolation transformer. Borrowing an oscilloscope may be of use in
measuring/tracing the problem (especially if the scope's connected to a
friend who has RFI-killing experience, such as a neighborhood ham operator).


Rob Warnock
Systems Architecture Consultant

UUCP:    {ihnp4,ucbvax!dual}!fortune!redwood!rpw3
DDD:    [phone]
USPS:    510 Trinidad Lane, Foster City, CA  94404



------------------------------

From: ima!johnl@bbncca
Date: Sat Feb  9 14:45:00 1985
Subject: Billing strangeness
To: bbncca!telecom

I was looking at my typical zillion page phone bill ("this page is to tell you
that we don't care if you pay the bill on the next two pages") and noticed that
every month for quite a while, AT&T has been billing me for exactly two calls
to interstate directory assistance.  For a while, I assumed that friends had
absent-mindedly called D.A. direct before carefully billing the following call
to their credit cards.  I make all of my L.D. calls through SBS, including
D.A. calls, and I'm rather suspicious, since two calls is the number that
you get for free if you make any AT&T phone calls.  Anybody else notice this?

Also, I saw in a flyer from SBS that General Telephone of California has been
charging message units in some areas for calls to 950 numbers.  You can get
your money back by applying in writing to General Tel's central billing office.
They claim they'll have it fixed by April.  Uh huh.

John Levine, ima!johnl or [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
11-Feb-85 19:47:01-PST,8696;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  11 Feb 85 19:38:25-PST
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 85 22:02:30 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #158
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 11 Feb 85 22:02:30 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 158

Today's Topics:
                           Equal access...
                             could it be?
                        TELECOM Digest V4 #157
                  "TalkLine" snafu, Pacific Telephone
             Re: Providing Attack Warnings to the Public
                        re: Billing Weirdness
     precise tone plan (the prompt after 0+ numbers, MCI, SPRINT)
                     Re: Residential PABX System
                             Phone Noise
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 10 Feb 85 00:37:44 EST
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: Equal access...
To: [e-mail]

   These are apparently the first exchanges in the Baltimore area to be
   upgraded to equal access.  The choices are: (drum roll please)

Okay, how about hitting us with that once again, but put the dial codes
for each carrier in??  I assume these will be standard country-wide,
right?  'Twould be a handy reference for those of us slated for equal
access sometime in late '86 [sigh!!].

_H*
-------

------------------------------

To: telecom@bbncca
Subject: could it be?
Date: 09 Feb 85 22:15:51 PST (Sat)
From: Jerry Sweet <jsweet@uci-750a>


This is a good one.  Every once in a while strange (i.e. never made)
long distance calls show up on my bill.  Usually they are for very
small amounts, and usually it is not worth my trouble to take the time
to have them removed from my bill (after all, how much is my time
worth?).  However, I heard an apocryphal rumor that it is the practice
of Phone Companies (mine is Pacific Bell) to bill calls that have been
removed from customers' bills to other random customers in the hopes
that someone will pay them.  This sounds like an unlikely fraud, but I
suppose that their billing programs are capable of such a thing ("Oh,
this call's been removed from X now?  Well, let's fire up the old
random number generator and give it to some unsuspecting Y."), and I
suppose that many people feel that the ten minutes or so (and N brain
cells) required to have a few cents removed from their bill aren't
worth it.

Could it be?

-jns

P.S. Next week, we'll explore what happens to phone calls placed in the
Bermuda Triangle... /j

------------------------------

Date: 10 February 1985 13:54-EST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #157
To: TELECOM @ BBNCCA

The issue of whether an apartment or office PBX system is regulated or
not falls under the jurisdiction of the local Public Utility Commission,
and not the FCC.  Basically, if it is a SHARED service, and run on a
non-profit basis, it certainly will not be regulated.  If it is run on a
profit making basis by the building owners, there's a chance a PUC would
step in to regulate, but it is still unlikely.  To be considered a
common carrier, you generally have to offer service to "anyone".  An
apartment owner is serving a very restricted market, and therefore would
probably not fall under the common carrier definitions.


The issue is, as noted, currently under consideration by a number of
PUCs including Texas.



Marvin Sirbu

------------------------------

Date:     Sun, 10 Feb 85 22:43:58 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  "TalkLine" snafu, Pacific Telephone

I heard of someone getting a big phone bill from Pacific Telephone
as a result of "TalkLine" not being available in certain prefixes
(and associated promo material that should NOT have been sent but
was).  Word of this reached me thru local TV news out of Philadelphia!
Anybody with more info about TalkLine?


------------------------------

Date: 10 Feb 85 16:49:04 PST (Sunday)
Subject: Re: Providing Attack Warnings to the Public
To: <[e-mail]>
From: Michael Neary <[e-mail]>


Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #156

The EBS system has been a technically viable means of communicating
emergency warnings for more than a decade:  that obnoxious two-tone is
designed to automatically activate special receivers.  But the weekly
tests are a major obstacle in getting someone like me to set up an
automatic receiver in my home.  No "alarm' system with a planned
false-alarm rate of once a week is tolerable.  I worked at a radio
station that monitored our 'feed' with such a receiver - - the weekly
blasts drove us up the wall!

This, I suspect, is why nobody in Oklahoma wants an automatic EBS
receiver.  They probably aren't even available any more.

There must be a viable technical solution to the present over-testing of
the 'EBS network'.  The two-tone detector and automatic speaker
switching could be verified by an independent local oscillator.  The
necessary added function can be in one (micropower) LSI, but in any case
is electronically trivial.

~ Mike


------------------------------

Date:    11 February 85 12:49-EST
From:      Michael Grant  <[e-mail]>
To: Telecom Digest <[e-mail]>
Subject: re: Billing Weirdness

I noticed too that I got billed for 2 Long Distance Directory Assistance
calls.  I called AT&T and complained.  They told me that I didn't make the
required minimum of calls over AT&T...I can't remember the minimun, it was
about $2 worth.  Does SBS offer 2 free calls to LDDA?
-Mike

------------------------------

From: William R. Soley <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 85 11:26:55 PST
To: [e-mail]
Subject: precise tone plan (the prompt after 0+ numbers, MCI, SPRINT)

Is the tone burst (bong) sent after dialing 0+ calling card calls in
some areas a standard tone?  If so what is it and does anyone have any
experience detecting it?  I want to build a feature to allow password
authenticated users of my ham radio repeater to place toll calls without
having to transmit their calling card numbers to anyone who cares to
listen.

I am also interested if anyone knows the prompt tones for MCI or SPRINT.

Thanks. -Bill

Please reply to:
      ucbvax!hplabs!oliveb!tymix!wrs%c39.tymnet (UUCP)
or    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 Feb 85 15:02 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Residential PABX System
To: [e-mail]

What constitutes a Telephone Company, thus subject to regulation by
FCC/PUC?

My understanding is that anything that crosses a public road or railroad
is ipso facto within the jurisdiction of the tarrifed telco.
Conversely, if your wires /don't\ cross a public road or railroad, then
anything you do is your own business, (subject to laws of tresspass,
etc).  The terms "public road" and "railroad" have precise legal
definitions, and all this is as per Federal Communications Act.

Hence, if my understanding is correct, yes, an office building or
apartment operator can install his own PBX, and yes, you can string a
wire to your neighbor's house, if he agrees, and if it doesn't cross the
road.  But you can't string it across the road, or even through a tunnel
under the road.  Even if you have an easement for a tunnel, and you
already have steam pipes, computer lines etc, you can't put a telephone
wire through without the telco doing it.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, anybody.

Art Axelrod
Xerox Webster Research Center


------------------------------

Date: Monday, 11 Feb 1985 14:25:56-PST
From: [e-mail]  (Sandy Libman)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Phone Noise

Re:  Phone Noise

I had a similar problem (radio station on my modem).  My BELL 212A didn't
seem to care, but when I switched to a DEC DF03, the line was unusable.

I called TELCO (during the breakup) and they sent someone who installed a
"Radio Suppressor".  It works.  No more trouble with the modem.  No charge
for the filter.

[The reason I mentioned the breakup is that at first, no-one would take
responsibility to fix the problem ("Call AT&T", "Not us, call NYNEX", ...),
and then several people showed up at the same time to install it.  Lots of
"I'll do it.", "No, I'll do it.", etc.  But that's another story.]



------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
15-Feb-85 17:00:13-PST,5352;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  15 Feb 85 16:56:23-PST
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 85 19:10:06 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #159
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 15 Feb 85 19:10:06 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 159

Today's Topics:
                   HOLD circuit for residential use
                        TELECOM Digest V4 #158
                        Re:  Carrier invocation
               Re:  TELECOM Digest V4 #155 - phone noise
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Andrew Klossner <andrew@orca>
To: telecom@Berkeley
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 85 14:34:06 PST
Subject: HOLD circuit for residential use

Radio Shack sells a box which plugs into a phone jack and supplies a
HOLD capability.  When you want to put a call on HOLD, you double-click
the phone, listen for the squeak which means that the box is active,
then hang up.  You can pick up the call from any instrument on the
line, or if you do nothing for six minutes the line will be
disconnected.  The box includes a wall-bug which you have to plug into
a 115VAC outlet, and the bug buzzes, but since you never have to touch
the box you can install it in, for example, the garage.

  -- Andrew Klossner   (decvax!tektronix!orca!andrew)       [UUCP]
                       (orca!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay)  [ARPA]


------------------------------

Date: 12 February 1985 08:42-EST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #158
To: TELECOM @ BBNCCA

    My understanding is that anything that crosses a public road or railroad
    is ipso facto within the jurisdiction of the tarrifed telco.
    Conversely, if your wires /don't\ cross a public road or railroad, then
    anything you do is your own business, (subject to laws of tresspass,
    etc).  The terms "public road" and "railroad" have precise legal
    definitions, and all this is as per Federal Communications Act.

    Correct me if I'm mistaken, anybody.

If you cross the road with a wire, the city (and the State) certainly
has the right to make rules about what can use public rights of way.
(That's how cities get away with regulating cable companies but not
Satellite Master Antenna Systems for apartments).  In many States the
telephone company has an exlusive franchise to use the roads to run
wires for the purpose of offering COMMON CARRIER telecommunications
services.  The key phrase here is common carrier.  If Citibank runs a
fiber from their midtown to downtown offices (which they have done) the
telephone company can't complain because the fiber is being used for
intracompany communications.  Only if Citibank started selling excess
capacity on the fiber to anyone who wanted communications service (i.e.
acted like a common carrier) would their be a possibility of regulation.

The New York Teleport will use fibers to connect users to a satellite
dish farm being built on Staten Island.  The Teleport will not be
regulated as a common carrier however, because each user will own his
own fiber from Staten Island to his premises in Manhattan.

Marvin Sirbu


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Feb 85 23:23:09 pst
From: newton2%ucbtopaz.CC@Berkeley
To: telecom@Berkeley

I'm having trouble making the following message wend it's way to
Richard Outerbridge, so I hope you will indulge my taking the graffito approach:

Dear Richard Outerbridge:

  Thanks very much- your message containing
sources for voice scrambler info was exactly what I was hoping for.
Unfortunately both books are for the moment unavailable from the
UC Berkeley library (one possibly filched, the other in use).

  After my tantalizing and disappointing afternoon at the library,
I'd be very grateful for any brief summary you could provide.

  By the way, what does a "verifier" at a phototypsetting firm do?
(the only stuff the library *did* have was most of Cryptologia.)

   In happy anticipation,

        Doug Maisel


------------------------------

Date:     Sun, 10 Feb 85 16:52:14 EST
From:     Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
To:       *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re:  Carrier invocation

That's odd.  Before we had an ESS exchange dialing yourself gave you
a busy signal.  After ESS, you got a tape recording telling you "your
number could not be completed as dialed,"  although it might as well
have said "you can't call yourself, stupid."  In both cases, trying
to user 1+ on any local call caused a "your call can't be completed
as dialed."  Although, recently I've heard "You do not need to dial
one first."

-Ron

------------------------------

Date:     Sun, 10 Feb 85 16:54:54 EST
From:     Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
To:       fortune!redwood![e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  TELECOM Digest V4 #155 - phone noise

Of course the problme with the radio station on the modem could be
some poor design inside the modem, causing the modem to become a
poor AM receiver.  I used to have the same problem with my stereo
when I lived two blocks from an AM radio station.

-Ron

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
16-Feb-85 21:23:14-PST,8100;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  16 Feb 85 21:17:02-PST
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 85 23:42:35 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #160
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 16 Feb 85 23:42:35 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 160

Today's Topics:
                              Bell 212AR
                            bell acronyms
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 16 February 1985 21:14-EST
From: Stephen C. Hill <STEVEH @ MIT-MC>
Subject:  Bell 212AR
To: TELECOM @ MIT-MC, INFO-MICRO @ MIT-MC

Can someone tell me the signal transition to make from a computer to make a
Bell 212AR go back on-hook (ps, what does the AR respresent?).  I have been
asked to do this, but as usual, no documentation has been made available.  The
application is to make a bulletin board hang up if no activity is noticed
within some set time.


------------------------------

Date: Sat 16 Feb 85 20:22-EST
From: "Robert C. Patterson" <GZT.RCP@mit-oz>
Subject: bell acronyms
To: jsol@mit-eecs


 This list is not totally complete, so I will send you an updated list as
I receive one..


(=-> Telephony Acronyms <-=)

ACD    = Automatic Call Distributing system
ACS    = Advanced Communications System
ACTS   = Automatic Coin Telephone Service
ACU    = Alarm Control Unit
ADCI   = Automatic Display Call Indicator
ADP    = Advanced Data Processing
ADS    = Automatic Voice System
AFADS  = Automatic Force Adjustment Data System
AIC    = Automatic Intercept Center
AIOD   = Automatic Identification Outward Dialing
AIS    = Automatic Intercept System
AMA    = Automatic Message Accounting
AMARC  = Automatic Message Accounting Recording Center
ANC    = All Number Calling
ANF    = Automatic Number Forwarding
ANI    = Automatic Number Identification
AP     = All Points
ARPANET= Advanced Research Projects Agency Network
ATA    = Automatic Trouble Analysis
ATM    = Automatic Teller Machine
ATTIS  = American Telephone and Telegraph Information Systems
AUTOVON= AUTOmatic VOice Netework
AUTODIN= AUTOmatic DIgital Network
BCP    = Byte Controlled Protocals
BDT    = Billing Data Transmitter
BELCORE= BELL COmmunications REsearch
BICS   = Building Industry Consulting Services
BIOC   = Break Into Other Computers
BIS    = Business Information System
BLF    = Busy Line Field
BOC    = Bell Operating Company
BOS    = Business Office Supervisor
BSC    = Binary Sychronous Communication
BTL    = Bell Telephone Laboratories
CAMA   = Centralized Automatic Message Accounting
CCI    = Computer Carrier Interupt
CCIS   = Common Channel Interoffice Signaling
CCSA   = Common Control Switching Arrangement
CDA    = Call Data Accumulator
CDO    = Community Dial Office
CEVI   = Common Equipment Voltage Indicator
CF     = Coin First payphone
CICS   = Customer Information Control System
CLR    = Combined Line and Recording
CLRC   = Circuit Layout Record Card
CMD    = Centralized Message Distribution
CMS    = Circuit Maintenance System
CN/A   = Customer Name / Address
CO     = Central Office
COER   = Central Office Equipment Report
COMAS  = Central Office Maintenance and Administration System
COSMIC = COmmon System Main InterConnecting frame
COSMOS = COmputer System for Mainframe OperationS
CPO    = Customer Premises Equipment
CREG   = Concentrated Range Extention with Gain
CSACS  = Centralized Status, Alarm and Control System
CSDC   = Circuit Switched Digital Capability
CSL    = Coin Supervising Link
CSO    = Central Services Organization
CSP    = Control Switching Point
CSS    = Customer Switching System
DA     = Directory Assistance (/C = computerized, /M = Microfilm)
DACCS  = Digital Access Cross Connect System
DCTS   = Dimension Custom Telephone Service
DDD    = Direct Distance Dialing
DIAD   = (magnetic) Drum Information Assembler / Dispatcher
DIAS   = Defense Automatic Integrated System
DID    = Direct Inward Dialing
DLL    = Dial Long Line equipment
DNR    = Dialed Number Recorder
DNIC   = Data Network Identification Code
DOC    = Dynamic Overload Control
DP     = Dial Pulse
DRE    = Directional Reservation Equipment
DSA    = Dial System Assistance
DSS    = Direct Station Selection
DTF    = Dial Tone First payphone
DTMF   = Dial Tone Multi Frequency
EADASS = Engineering and Administrative Data AcquiSition System
EAS    = Extended Area Service (or Engineering Admin. System)
EBCDIC = Extended Binary Coded Decimal Interchange Code
ECASS  = Electronically Controlled Automatic Switching System
ECDO   = Electronic Community Dial Office
ECO    = Electronic Central Office
EDTCC  = Electronic Data Transmission Communications Central
EMS    = Electronic Message System
EO     = End Office
ESAC   = Electronic Systems Assistance Center
ESS    = Electronic Switching System
ESSEX  = Experimental Solid State EXchange
ETFD   = Electronic Toll Fraud Device
ETS    = Electronic Translator System
EVX    = Electronic Voice eXchange
FACD   = Foriegn Area Customer Dialing
FAT    = Foriegn Area Translation
FTS    = Federal Telephone System
FX     = Foriegn eXchange
HACD   = Home Area Customer Dialing
HNPA   = Home Numbering Plan Area
HOBIS  = HOtel Billing Information System
IDDD   = International Direct Distance Dialing
IDF    = Intermediate Distributing Frame
INWATS = Inward Wide Area Telephone Service
INADS  = INitialization and ADministration System
IOD    = Identified Outward Dialing
IP     = Intermediate Point
ISC    = International Switching Center
JIM    = Job Information Memorandum
KDCI   = Key Display Call Indicator
KP     = Key Pulse
KSU    = Key Service Unit
KTS    = Key Telephone System
KTU    = Key Telephone Unit
LAMA   = Local Automatic Message Accounting
LDX    = Long Distance eXtender
LIU    = Line Interface Unit
LL     = Long Lines
LLN    = Line Link Network
LLP    = Line Link Pulsing
LMOS   = Line Maintenance Operations System
LSS    = Loop Switching System
MAAP   = Maintenance And Admistration Panel
MCC    = Master Control Console
MDAS   = Magnetic Drum Auxiliary Sender
MDF    = Main Distrbution Frame
MF     = Multi=Frequency
MILNET = MILitary NETwork
MTR    = Magnetic Tape Recording
MTSO   = Mobile Telephone Switching Office
NBO    = Network Build Out
NCA    = Network Control Analysis
NOTIS  = Network Operator Trouble Information System
NPA    = Number Plan Area
OCI    = Out of City Indicator
OIU    = Office Interface Unit
ONI    = Operator Number Identification
OSS    = Operation Support System
OUTWATS= OUTward Wide Area Telephone Service
PAM    = Pulse Amplification Modulation
PATROL = Program for Admistrative Traffic Reports On Line
PBX    = Private Branch Exchange
PCI    = Panel Call Indicator
PCM    = Pulse Code Modulation
PP     = Primary Point (or dial Post Pay payphone)
PPCS   = Person to Person, Collect, Special
PSDS   = Public Switched Digital Service
RACEP  = Random Access and Correlation for Extended Performance
RASC   = Residence Account Service Center
RC     = Regional Center
RCC    = Radio Common Carrier
RJE    = Remote Job Entry
RMATS  = Remote Maintenance Admistration and Traffic System
ROTS   = Rotary Out Trunks Selectors
RR     = Route Relay
RRO    = Rate and Route Operator
RSU    = Remote Switching Unit
RTA    = Remote Trunk Arrangement
RTAC   = Regional Technical Assistance Center
RU     = Receive Unit
SA     = Service Assistant
SAC    = Special Area Code
SAMA   = Step=by=step Automatic Message Accounting
SARTS  = Switched Access Remote Test System
SC     = Sectional Center
SCAN   = Switched Circuit Automatic Network
SCC    = Switching Control Center (or Specialized Common Carriers)
SCOTS  = Surveilance and Control Of Transmission Systems


 As I said, as I get more for the list, I will send it to you.

-GZT.RCP@MIT-OZ


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
18-Feb-85 16:53:50-PST,3101;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  18 Feb 85 16:51:45-PST
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 85 19:08:56 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #161
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 18 Feb 85 19:08:56 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 161

Today's Topics:
             Telebyte 'Accelerator' Data Compression Box
                       Bell 212AR - Revisited
                             Phone Noise
               Re:  TELECOM Digest V4 #155 - phone noise
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 17 Feb 1985 14:52:39 PST
Subject: Telebyte 'Accelerator' Data Compression Box
From: Eliot Moore <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Catching up on my paper mail this weekend I noticed an ad for Telebyte
Corp's "Accelerator", claiming >3:1 compression rates, error free.

The usual questions: Are these guys for real? Has anyone used one?
Are they shipping? What's the going price?

Elmo
-------


------------------------------

Date: 18 Feb 85 09:10:18 PST (Monday)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bell 212AR - Revisited
To: [e-mail]

Steve:

AR is just a version designation.  Don't worry about it.

Assuming that a connection is in progress, drop DTR (Data Terminal Ready)
at pin 20 of the EIA interface.  The modem will go on hook when DTR is not
true (i.e. negative voltage).

However, you will have to bring it back up again in order for the next
call to be answered.  A few milliseconds is all that is required, but to
make sure, ya outta drop it for a couple seconds, then bring it back up.

(To be polite, ya probably outta send a message: "Connection Timed Out"
 or something equally mundane, just prior to dropping DTR).

-----
Hints/Suggestions - not relevant to the above discussion:

Another way to implement operation is to detect Ring Indication (Pin 22),
then turn on DTR.  At the ~next~ ring the dataset will answer.

When you want to indicate that the computer is unavailable,
bring up pin 25 (Busy).


John

------------------------------

Date: Monday, 18 Feb 1985 11:01:13-PST
From: [e-mail]  (Sandy Libman)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Phone Noise

>Date:     Sun, 10 Feb 85 16:54:54 EST
>From:     Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
>To:       fortune!redwood![e-mail]
>Subject:  Re:  TELECOM Digest V4 #155 - phone noise
>Of course the problme with the radio station on the modem could be
>some poor design inside the modem, causing the modem to become a
>poor AM receiver.  I used to have the same problem with my stereo
>when I lived two blocks from an AM radio station.

In my case the Bell 212A also received the radio station, but wasn't
bothered by it.  The DF03 was useless until the Radio Suppressor was
installed.  I made the assumption that the 212A had that filter built in.


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
25-Feb-85 07:06:31-PST,5156;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  25 Feb 85 07:01:43-PST
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 85 18:54:49 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #162
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 21 Feb 85 18:54:49 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 162

Today's Topics:
                            "T1" circuits
                New Mailing List -- VideoTech@SRI-CSL.
                      Electronic Mail Directory
                    Re:  Electronic Mail Directory
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #161
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 19 Feb 1985 16:21 PST
From: Art Berggreen <ART@ACC>
Subject: "T1" circuits
To: telecom@bbncca


There seems to be some uncertainty in what "T1" service constitutes.
I am hoping someone out there could detail all the "T1" and T1 related
services offered by the TELCOs.  I.e., what is "DS1" and how does
it relate?  When can one get unstructured 1.544 MB/s bit streams
(the one with 1's alternating polarity and 1's density constraints),
and when does one have to conform the the 24 channel multiplexing
scheme used for voice and lower speed data?

                        Art Berggreen
                        Advanced Computer Communications
                        [e-mail]
------

------------------------------

Date: 20 Feb 1985 0029-PST
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow  <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Mailing List -- VideoTech@SRI-CSL.
To: Past HOME-SAT & Video-Disk mailing list people:: ;,

VIDEOTECH@SRI-CSL

    VideoTech represents a rebirth and combination of the HOME-SAT,
    VIDEO-DISC and TELETEXT mailing lists.  Appropriate topics for
    discussion on VideoTech might be, but not limited to:

        - Home Satellite (TVRO, DBS)
        - Cable Television
        - Video Disc Technology
        - Video Tape Recorders (Beta/VHS/UMatic)
        - Teletext
        - Stereo Television
        - HighRes Television

    All requests to be added to or deleted from this list
    should be sent to VIDEOTECH-REQUEST@SRI-CSL

   Coordinator: Geoffrey S. Goodfellow  <Geoff@SRI-CSL>

[You need to send a message to VideoTech-Request@SRI-CSL if you want
to be on the list.  Getting a copy of this message doesn't mean your
on the list.]

-------


------------------------------

Date: Wed 20 Feb 85 06:52:31-EST
From:  Wayne McGuire <[e-mail]>
Subject: Electronic Mail Directory
To: [e-mail], [e-mail],

     Does anyone know if any work is underway somewhere to develop an
online directory of all electronic mail users and addresses?  The
online directory of Arpanet/Milnet users at SRI-NIC provides a model
of what I have in mind.  It would be most helpful if the NIC directory
were expanded to include the electronic addresses of users of MCI
Mail, Easylink, Compuserve, The Source, Delphi, Bitnet, Usenet, and
other computer networks, and made generally available.  A directory of
all electronic mail users in the world would in fact probably fit
handily on one or two laser disks.  These disks could be updated
monthly, and widely distributed to local nodes and perhaps even to
individuals.  One might enrich this tool with a natural language
interface for searching the directory, and some software which would
know the best (if any) route to send mail from one node to any other
node on any net.

     This is a product which is begging to come into existence.

-- Wayne McGuire <wayne%mit-oz@mit-mc>
-------


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Feb 85 09:04:36 pst
From: adrion%ucbingres@Berkeley (Rick Adrion)
To: [e-mail], [e-mail],
Subject: Re:  Electronic Mail Directory
Cc: [e-mail]

I am sure the folks at the CSNET-CIC will soon reply, but the
main problem with nameservers is getting the initial data and
keeping the database updated. The NIC uses site liaisons (and
the directory is inaccurate, although pretty good), the CSNET
nameserver has individuals maintain their own entries (unfortunately
there are fewer than one would like). On ARPANET most sites
support "finger" a protocol which allows you to ask a site
for a persons mail id (you have to know the site).

------------------------------

From: ihnp4!drutx!rkp@Berkeley
Date: 20 Feb 85 11:23:45 CST (Wed)
To: ihnp4!cbosgd!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #161

Concerning 212A and 212AR data sets:

The 212A is an unregistered version of that type of
data set, and the 212AR is a registered version of that type of
data set.  The changes are so minimal that the FCC
allows you to use a 212A as a maintnenace-only replacement for a
212AR.  In other words, you can't use a 212A in a new
installation, but you can use it in case your 212AR goes on the
fritz.

   Russell Pierce            AT&T Something or Other...
   [phone]            1200 W. 120th Ave.
   ...!drutx!rkp            Denver, CO  80234



------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
26-Feb-85 04:23:15-PST,4360;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  26 Feb 85 04:21:34-PST
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 85  6:39:54 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #163
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 26 Feb 85  6:39:54 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 163

Today's Topics:
                    Re:  Electronic Mail Directory
             Telebyte 'Accelerator' Data Compression Box
                            Md. pay phones
                        Residential PBX;  T-1
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Thu, 21 Feb 85 16:07:48 EST
From:     Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  Electronic Mail Directory

There is also a UUCP users directory that is done by Rich Kiessig.
He periodically asks people to send him their info if they want to
be in the next copy of the directory.

-Ron

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Feb 1985  09:42 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: Eliot Moore <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Telebyte 'Accelerator' Data Compression Box

They could be for real, as long as you're shipping just text.


------------------------------

Date:     Mon, 25 Feb 85 11:14:15 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Md. pay phones

I recently saw 25 cent charge for pay phone in Md. suburbs of Washington,
DC.  (Prefix 301-577, should also be reachable via area code 202.)
But I still see 20 cent charge on 301-272, Aberdeen.  272 and 577 are
in different LATAs (Baltimore & Washington); could that have effect?


------------------------------

Date: Monday, 25 Feb 1985 14:19:37-PST
From: [e-mail]  (Fred R. Goldstein)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Residential PBX;  T-1

Re: the proposal to put in a residential PBX;

A PBX can be used by residential customers, in which case its trunk
lines go at the (low) residential rate.  This is sometimes the case
in college dorms, but you must be sure that ONLY residential phones
(dorm lines and not administrative lines) can use the residential
trunks.  That means careful classmarking to restrict the non-residential
phones away from residential trunks, and on to business tariff trunks.
It's the "nature of the use" that counts.  Hotels are special, and
NOT residential in that sense.

Resale of local trunks is a state option.  It used to be taboo, but the
FCC made interstate circuits shareable in the '70s, and many states have
followed on.  "Joint User" tariffs apply in some places when a local
line is shared; this typically charged 50% of the line rate for each
additional customer sharing a line.

Crossing a right of way may affect telco rates (it become inter-site)
for lines, and it may require town permission to cross their roads, but
it doesn't make anyone a phone company.  If a landlord requires
tenants to purchase telephone service through his resale operation, then
he's treading on thin ice.  But making a shared PBX available is generally
okay.  Some states are questioning it -- Southwestern Bell is upset by
the idea, but some telcos (Bell Atlantic?) are going in to the business
via their unregulated subsidiaries.

_____

Re: T1 question on last issue;
Common carrier T1 services require that you meet several constraints,
including bits density (10% ones), no more than 15 consecutive zeroes,
and follow standard framing on the 193rd bit.  Extended framing is
a future, since the BOCs don't support it yet.  ATTCOM wants it, though.
How you format the subchannels is up to you; you don't have to use
24 or 44 channels, but you need to meet the bit restrictions since
that's where the clocking comes from.

A technique called "B8ZS" (bipolar eight zero substitution) overcomes the
consecutive zeroes problem, and permits 192 of 193 bits to be available to
the user.  But don't try it here -- it's common in Europe, but North
American telcos don't support it yet in many places.  It's described in pub
41451, but most existing T1 carrier equipment predates it.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
27-Feb-85 14:35:12-PST,4844;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  27 Feb 85 14:29:28-PST
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 85 17:11:03 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #164
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 27 Feb 85 17:11:03 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 164

Today's Topics:
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #160
                  AT&T sells 5ESS to British Telecom
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 21 Feb 85 08:19:01 pst
From: decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!darrelj@Berkeley (Darrel VanBuer)
To: telecom@sdcsvax
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #160

Most standard modems will hang up the phone line when DTR is made false (and
won't answer if DTR is still false).  This is definitely true of a Bell 212A.
I don't know how the 212AR differs (it could just be newer technology that
the 1978 212A version).

Darrel J. Van Buer, PhD
System Development Corp.
2500 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90406
[phone] x5449
...{allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,orstcs,sdcsvax,ucla-cs,akgua}
                                                            !sdcrdcf!darrelj
[e-mail]


------------------------------

Date: Wednesday, 27 Feb 1985 09:37:08-PST
From: [e-mail]  (Jeremy Barker - REO2-1/J2)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: AT&T sells 5ESS to British Telecom


        AT&T SELLS 5ESS TO BRITISH TELECOM


AT&T and Philips Telecommunications - a UK-based joint company set up to
market a version of AT&T's 5ESS switch - named 5ESS-PRX - has secured an
order worth $21M for 9 exchanges from British Telecom.  These switches will
be used to build a UK-wide overlay network said to offer services
comparable to 800 and other WATS services in the US.  This service will be
marketed by British Telecom using the name Link Line and the network will
be known as the Derived Services Network.  The Link Line service will be
first operated using reconditioned Strowger equipment salvaged from BT's
general network because the awarding of the contract to AT&T/Philips was
delayed.

This order places AT&T/Philips in the front runner position to provide the
alternate switch design for British Telecom's general network.  Current
plans by British Telecom to install a British designed switch - System X,
on which work started around 1970 - are severely behind schedule with only
6 exchanges in service.  Plans published in early 1982, shortly after the
first exchange was commissioned, called for over 50 installations by 1986.
The introduction of pilot ISDN digital services is being hit by software
problems on System X.  System X is manufactured in the UK by Plessey and
General Electric Company (GEC - no relation of GE in the US) and was
jointly designed by Plessey, GEC and STC, an ITT subsidiary at the time.

The alternate switch system - named System Y - is the first major purchase
by British Telecom of a non-UK designed switching system.  Previously BT
only large import was of an AXE switch made in Sweden by LM Ericsson for
use in an international switching center.  The contract to supply System Y
will be awarded to one of Thorn-Ericsson (a joint between Thorn-EMI and
LM Ericsson of Sweden), Northern Telecom and AT&T/Philips.  System Y will
initially be installed in about 20% of new and upgraded exchanges alongside
System X but after 1990 orders will be split based on reliability of
installed equipment.

If AT&T/Philips are selected as the supplier a large manufacturing facility
- including semiconductor production - will be set up in the UK by Western
Electric to manufacture equipment for the European market.  It is widely
believed that a condition of the System Y supply contract is UK-based
manufacture of the equipment.

BT's rival network operator - Mercury Telecommunications - has shortlisted
Thorn-Ericsson, STC, Northern Telecom and Italtel, an Italian consortium of
manufacturers, to supply switches for its network.  STC would supply a
switch designed by ITT.  Mercury has already purchased a switch from
Nothern Telecom for its international service to the US.

There is also currently speculation that British Telecom may buy about
20-30% of Northern Telecom's stock, but this will most likely be vetoed by
UK regulatory authorities if Northern Telecom is selected as the System Y
supplier.

****************
This information was obtained from various published sources.

Jeremy Barker - Digital Equipment Corp., Reading, England.
...!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-janus!barker (uucp)
[e-mail] (Internet)

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 3-Mar-85 14:49:00-PST,5632;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   3 Mar 85 14:43:09-PST
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 85 16:58:20 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #165
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 3 Mar 85 16:58:20 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 165

Today's Topics:
                      1200baud over 3002circuit
                       VAX - SUN FILE TRANSFER
                  AT&T sells 5ESS to British Telecom
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
Subject: 1200baud over 3002circuit
Date: 27 Feb 85 21:45:56 EST (Wed)
From: mrose@udel-dewey

I just "took delivery" of a 3002-data circuit from Telco between my
apartment and place of work.  My problem is that the 9.6kbs modems I
ordered won't be delivered until the 20th of March.  Ugh.  I happen to
have a couple of direct-connect 1200baud modems sitting around.  This may
be a *silly* question, but can I use these modems until my real ones
show up?  The interface provided by TelCo is a 4-wire box, while the modems
use the standard TelCo modular jack.

Thanks,

/mtr

ps: replies to me only please...


------------------------------

Date: 28 Feb 1985 0000 GMT
From: WIECLAWEK, JOE <[e-mail]>
Subject: VAX - SUN FILE TRANSFER
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA

     We are interested in doing "high speed" file transfer between
a VAX-750(VMS) snd a SUN Workstation. (using TCP/IP ?)
     Can anyone offer any experiences, suggestions, or advice ?

     * The hosts are about 3 miles apart.

     * We are currently installing an Ungermann/Bass broadband LAN.
       (Accessible at both sites)

     * One consideration is to use pount-to-point modems across the
       broadband cable.
       (What are possible host to modem hardware interfaces?)

Joe Wieclawek
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena CA     91103
M.S. IPC
[phone]
ARPAnet - JAW@JPL-MILVAX

------

------------------------------

Date: Wednesday, 27 Feb 1985 09:13:50-PST
From: [e-mail]  (Jeremy Barker - REO2-1/J2)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: AT&T sells 5ESS to British Telecom


        AT&T SELLS 5ESS TO BRITISH TELECOM


AT&T and Philips Telecommunications - a UK-based joint company set up to
market a version of AT&T's 5ESS switch - named 5ESS-PRX - has secured an
order worth $21M for 9 exchanges from British Telecom.  These switches will
be used to build a UK-wide overlay network said to offer services
comparable to 800 and other WATS services in the US.  This service will be
marketed by British Telecom using the name Link Line and the network will
be known as the Derived Services Network.  The Link Line service will be
first operated using reconditioned Strowger equipment salvaged from BT's
general network because the awarding of the contract to AT&T/Philips was
delayed.

This order places AT&T/Philips in the front runner position to provide the
alternate switch design for British Telecom's general network.  Current
plans by British Telecom to install a British designed switch - System X,
on which work started around 1970 - are severely behind schedule with only
6 exchanges in service.  Plans published in early 1982, shortly after the
first exchange was commissioned, called for over 50 installations by 1986.
The introduction of pilot ISDN digital services is being hit by software
problems on System X.  System X is manufactured in the UK by Plessey and
General Electric Company (GEC - no relation of GE in the US) and was
jointly designed by Plessey, GEC and STC, an ITT subsidiary at the time.

The alternate switch system - named System Y - is the first major purchase
by British Telecom of a non-UK designed switching system.  Previously BT
only large import was of an AXE switch made in Sweden by LM Ericsson for
use in an international switching center.  The contract to supply System Y
will be awarded to one of Thorn-Ericsson (a joint between Thorn-EMI and
LM Ericsson of Sweden), Northern Telecom and AT&T/Philips.  System Y will
initially be installed in about 20% of new and upgraded exchanges alongside
System X but after 1990 orders will be split based on reliability of
installed equipment.

If AT&T/Philips are selected as the supplier a large manufacturing facility
- including semiconductor production - will be set up in the UK by Western
Electric to manufacture equipment for the European market.  It is widely
believed that a condition of the System Y supply contract is UK-based
manufacture of the equipment.

BT's rival network operator - Mercury Telecommunications - has shortlisted
Thorn-Ericsson, STC, Northern Telecom and Italtel, an Italian consortium of
manufacturers, to supply switches for its network.  STC would supply a
switch designed by ITT.  Mercury has already purchased a switch from
Nothern Telecom for its international service to the US.

There is also currently speculation that British Telecom may buy about
20-30% of Northern Telecom's stock, but this will most likely be vetoed by
UK regulatory authorities if Northern Telecom is selected as the System Y
supplier.

****************
This information was obtained from various published sources.

Jeremy Barker - Digital Equipment Corp., Reading, England.
...!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-janus!barker (uucp)
[e-mail] (Internet)

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 6-Mar-85 17:40:05-PST,5223;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   6 Mar 85 17:32:38-PST
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 85 16:57:10 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #166
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 6 Mar 85 16:57:10 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 166

Today's Topics:
                     Equal access in Boston dead
                       No Long Distance Service
                   abuse of long distance services
      new england telephone business office becoming more useful
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue 5 Mar 85 12:46:11-EST
From: Robert Scott Lenoil <[e-mail]>
Subject: Equal access in Boston dead
To: [e-mail]

Saturday morning, I tried to make a long distance call by dialing
10444-areacode-phonenumber, 10444 be the prefix for ALLNET.  I received a
recording saying that "my long distance phone call could not be completed
as dialed...."  Some experimentation revealed that not only did NO prefix
work, but my default carrier, which had been MCI, had defaulted back to
AT&T.  (I discovered this by dialing 0-areacode-phonenumber, which would
normally give me an MCI recording telling me that MCI doesn't have operator
service; try AT&T.  Instead, I directly received an AT&T operator.)  I
called New England Telephone repair service, and they told me "It's not our
problem; contact your long distance carrier."  Even the supervisor on duty,
while willing to admit that it probably WAS their problem, insisted that the
rules require that I contact my long distance carrier, who in turn would
notify New England Telephone of the trouble.

Yesterday I called New England Tel's business office.  The people there were
much more understanding, and willing to address the problem.  They are
supposed to be getting back to me today.  However, in the interim, my
curiosity led me to check if other phones in the back bay were having the
same problem.  My conclusion:  Each of four phone lines I've checked has had
its equal access seemingly disconnected.  Therefore it is very possible that
this condition exists throughout the Back Bay, and that unwitting consumers
are having their calls routed through AT&T.  Should this prove to be the case,
I certainly hope that these people, as will I, hold New England Telephone
accountable for the difference between AT&T's prices, and what they rightly
should be paying for these phone calls.

Robert Lenoil
-------


------------------------------

Date:     Tue, 5 Mar 85 17:33:39 EST
From:     Brint Cooper <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  No Long Distance Service

My son is looking for local telephone service only.  He shares an
apartment, and one of the crew abuses long distance calling.  The area
is northern Virginia.

Is it possible to get such service from the phone company?  (Yes, I
know; call the phone company.)  No doubt, most central offices have such
a capability, but does any BOC actually provide this "non-service?"

Alternatively, do they provide a service similar to alternate
long distance carriers in areas without equal access?  That is, every
long distance call is made only by someone who knows a special code.

Obviously, physical solutions (short of no phone at all) will not work.

Thanks,

Brint

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 85 14:04:47 EST
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: abuse of long distance services
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]

I was once in that situation (where people would abuse my phone).
What I ended up doing is locking the whole phone in a box and telling
the others that they would have to get their own phone service. If
that didn't work you could wire the jacks in the apt so the phone line
only works in his bedroom.

If that fails, tell him to look for another apartment. If his roommates
refuse to respect his wishes, then he has no choice but to move out.

Cheers,
--JSol



------------------------------

To: telecom@bbncca
Subject: new england telephone business office becoming more useful
Date: 06 Mar 85 16:08:07 EST (Wed)
From: jsol@bbnccv

Lately I have noticed that the New England Telephone business office
is becoming more and more educated as time goes on. More and more of
the service representatives are becoming aware of what the procedures
are and it takes me much less time to explain what I`m looking for
from them. Most of them know about equal access (in the areas that
offer it), most of them know about central office sorts of things,
like I wanted two numbers, one on each ESS computer in the Back Bay
Central office, and I didn't even have to explain what a ESS computer
was (although they called it a different central office, she knew
what I was talking about).

I think NET needs to be given a commendation for its service reps.
Anyone notice similar experience/education out of the Business office
in your areas?

--JSol

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 7-Mar-85 20:47:36-PST,2862;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   7 Mar 85 20:44:01-PST
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 85 23:23:03 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #167
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Mar 85 23:23:03 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 167

Today's Topics:
                   Equal access in Boston restored
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu 7 Mar 85 17:03:10-EST
From: Robert Scott Lenoil <[e-mail]>
Subject: Equal access in Boston restored
To: [e-mail]

First, let me answer Brint Cooper's question from #166 about having a
phone with no long distance service.  Here in Back Bay, where we have
equal access, if you elect not to subscribe at all to any long
distance carrier, your calls will be blocked, i.e. you could reach
AT&T by dialing 10ATT, or any other carrier.  Also, if your primary
carrier is SBS, you must dial your authorization code whenever you
make a long distance call via SBS (you just dial 1 + auth. code +
phone #).  The problem with this, though, is that someone could dial
10ATT, and route the call over AT&T, which won't require any
authorization code.  I'm not sure if New England Tel offers the best
of both worlds; SBS as primary carrier plus blocking to prevent you
from using anybody else, but if they do, it would solve your problems.
(Of course, I don't know what your local telco in Virginia does, or if
you have equal access.)

Okay, now the good news.  After my frustrating run-in with New England
Telephone over my equal access not working, I'm happy to say that the
problem has been fixed.  Thank heavens for the service reps in the
business office; without them, I would have kept getting "it's not our
problem" from lower-echelon repair service employees who are only
slightly more animate than robots.  I spoke today with the repair
service manager for Boston.  He said the problem was due to some new
*SOFTWARE* to do translations that had been installed last week; it
seems that said software wasn't designed with equal access in mind.
The problem only arose when calling New York, but since that's all I
call, to me it seemed like equal access failed completely.  I'm glad
that the trouble report was allowed to propagate to his desk; he told
me that everyone up until him said that the problem must have lied
with my long distance carrier, and he thanked me for heading off all
the future problems that would have ensued with that software.
(BTW, what are "translations?"  I'm fairly sure that I know, but I'll
let one of the "pros" give a nice textbook definition.)

-Rob
-------


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 9-Mar-85 21:51:21-PST,10631;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   9 Mar 85 21:45:40-PST
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 85 23:51:16 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #168
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 9 Mar 85 23:51:16 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 168

Today's Topics:
                             Phone Sharing
                   collect calls under equal access
                          0+ from rotary dial
                       Equal access pay phones
                 Re: Equal access in Boston restored
                              value of spectrum
           AT&T wants FCC's okay fro private business lines
          news from the SW:  PUC approves private pay phones
            news from the SW:  Bellcore accepted into MCC
      Equal Access problems in Boston allow free calls from MIT
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Thu, 7 Mar 85 09:24 EST
From:     Steven Gutfreund <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Phone Sharing

This brings up one of my wish list 1+'s for the phone system, a way
of entering a prefix code on the phone to distinguish my calls from
my roomates (you have no idea what a pain it is to dis-entangle a bill
of multiple users all pro-rated for taxes, a mix of local and national
calls & some who want Reach-Out-America and some who don't). I don't
think equal access has any provision for this sort of phone sharing.

Indeed in general it should make no difference whose physical phone I am
at, there should be a transparent way of indicating this is a bill to
my phone.

Since we are still prior to equal access, there does seem to be a way
with multiple non-AT&T carriers to do this.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 85 08:36:40 est
From: ulysses!smb@Berkeley (Steven Bellovin)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: collect calls under equal access

How will these work?  Right now, only AT&T has operators, but that won't
necessarily be the case forever.  Suppose you use (for example) an SBS
operator to place a collect call to me, and I only subscribe to AT&T.
Whose facilities will carry the call?  Who will I pay?

        --Steve Bellovin

------------------------------

Date:     Fri, 8 Mar 85 12:44:10 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  0+ from rotary dial

Some if not all exchanges will now give the special tone (the prompt
for the self-service credit-card entry) even if you make a 0+ call
from a rotary dial phone, in which case you have to wait a few seconds
for it to "time out" and send your call to local operator.  This happened
to me recently from 302-656 and 302-731, both ESS.


------------------------------

From: ima!johnl@bbncca
Date: Fri Mar  8 21:29:00 1985
Subject: Equal access pay phones
To: bbncca!telecom

How are they supposed to work?  Dialing 10XXX+number seems not to do what
I'd expect.  Do outfits that have billing arrangements with local telcos
have the option of having telco collect their coins at pay phones, too?

At least around here the 950 numbers work pretty reliably without putting in
a dime.

A final note -- the new instruction cards on pay phones are amazingly
uninformative.  They tell you how to place a call within the area code
(which is the LATA here) but if you want to make a long distance call, you
have to guess.  Dialing 1+number or 0+number goes to AT&T, as always, but
you wouldn't know it from the instructions.

John Levine, ima!johnl or [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 85 17:37:19 est
From: mar@mit-borax (Mark A. Rosenstein)
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: Re: Equal access in Boston restored

More was wrong than just you not being able to get equal access working
on calls to New York.  Normally restricted phones (centrex, dormatory,
and payphones) were allowed to make FREE calls to New York during this
time.  The condition existed for more than a week before they
discovered that it was a software bug introduced when trying to convert
Cambridge to equal access.  New England Telephone is assuming the cost
of the free calls made during that time.
                    -Mark

------------------------------

Date:           Fri, 8 Mar 85 22:32:08 PST
From:           "Theodore N. Vail" <[e-mail]>
To:             [e-mail]
Subject:        value of spectrum

There has been discussion in Telecom in the past about the "free
resource", the frequency spectrum.  The value of this spectrum is
brought home, with a vengeance, by an article in today's Los Angeles
Times Business Section which stated that the TV station KTLA, Channel
5, is for sale, and that the president (of Golden West Television,
its owner) expects that $500 million (yes 1/2 of one billion dollars)
would be a "fair estimate" of what the station may fetch!  The station
is independent (not network); its physical facilities are old and worth
at most a few million dollars.  The purchaser will obtain the station's
programming and existing advertising contracts, as well as its good
will.  However it's clear that its most important asset is its FCC
license to use channel 5 in the nation's second largest television
market.

The 6 megahertz channel belongs to the United States Government and is
licensed at (essentially) no charge to the station.

One wonders how much the Government would collect if this, and all
other stations, had to bid to obtain its channel.  One can't also help
wondering how viable the various long-distance services and "bypass"
services would be if they were required to pay a reasonable fee for
their use of the spectrum.  Note that in any large metropolitan area the
microwave spectrum that these companies use is a very limited resource
(almost entirely used in lower Manhatten already).  Standard economic
theory requires that limited resources be restricted by high prices and
this is done for "commodities" ranging from oil to diamonds.  However,
Uncle Sam seems to be immune to the market.

If these companies were not subsidized by "free" use of the spectrum,
long distance bypass would be more expensive and perhaps the high
local rates and "long distance access" fees now being charged by the
operating companies (to make up for revenues lost to bypass) could be
substantially reduced.

ted

------------------------------

Date: Sat 9 Mar 85 07:11:32-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T wants FCC's okay fro private business lines
To: [e-mail]

AT&T wants FCC's okay for private business lines.
-------------------------------------------------
Washington (AP) - AT&T on Thursday proposed that it be allowed to offer private
telephone networks for business customers using the existing web of
long-distance telephone lines as a backbone.

If approved by the FCC, a corporation could have a system of dedicated lines to
its offices across the nation without the cost of having a seperate piece of
wire running from the main office to each of the outposts.

An employee in any office could dial other phones on the network as easily as
dialing a local call.

AT&T said it would still be cheaper to maintain private dedicated circuits on
heavily used lines.  With private lines, customers pay a flat monthly rate no
matter how many calls are made.

AT&T said the service is designed for companies already heavily into private
lines and would allow expansion of a private network to enhance price
performance.

AT&T spokesman Jim Byrnes said there would be overall savings for a customeer,
although there might not be a lower price on each individual phone call.

If the FCC approves, the service will be offered this year, AT&T said.

-------

------------------------------

Date: Sat 9 Mar 85 16:35:38-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: news from the SW:  PUC approves private pay phones
To: [e-mail]

[ from the Austin American Statesman - March 8, 85 ]

    PAY PHONES MAY BE PRIVATE

The PUC Thursday approved privately owned pay telephones to be connected
to Southwestern Bell Telephone's network.  Owners of the private phones will
be able to charge only 25 cents or less from calls made from the privately
owned pay telephones.  The PUC order goes into effect within 20 days.

[ I assume, these phones have no capability for long-distance calls, other
    than by dialing a local number for MCI, Sprint, etc.  --  Werner       ]
-------

------------------------------

Date: Sat 9 Mar 85 16:37:06-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: news from the SW:  Bellcore accepted into MCC
To: [e-mail]

[ from the Austin American Statesman - March 8, 85 ]

BELL COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH (BELLCORE) has been accepted as the 21st member of
the Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation (MCC).  Bellcore,
headquartered in Livingston, NJ, is the research arm for Southwestern Bell
and six other regional holding companies split off from AT&T in last year's
divestiture.
-------

------------------------------

Date: Fri 8 Mar 85 14:17:38-EST
From: Ralph W. Hyre Jr. <[e-mail]>
Subject: Equal Access problems in Boston allow free calls from MIT
To: [e-mail]

The software problem that made it difficult to make long distance calls to New
York from regular phone also made it easy to get free phone calls to New York
on MIT's internal dormline phone system.  Our student paper reported
that this condition existed from Saturday afternoon and 3pm Wednesday.

Normally, attempts at direct-dialed long distance calls or other toll calls
are blocked from dormline, since New England Telephone has no way of charging
for the calls.  Apparently the equal access bug removed this block.

3 years ago, it was possible to simply get the operator to complete the call,
just by saying "I'm having some sort of trouble getting through", but then
they discovered abut dormline's pay-phone like status and stopped doing it.)

How is New England telephone going to straighten the billing out?  They said
they would eat the cost of the free MIT-New York calls, but how will they
correct for the overcharging?
                    - Ralph
-------

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
14-Mar-85 15:20:30-PST,3690;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  14 Mar 85 15:14:35-PST
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 85 17:45:20 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #169
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 14 Mar 85 17:45:20 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 169

Today's Topics:
                      Equal access collect calls
                           T1, T1C, T2, ...
        Re: AT&T long distance (TELECOM Digest V4 #90 and #91)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ima!johnl@bbncca
Date: Sun Mar 10 16:25:00 1985
Subject: Equal access collect calls
To: bbncca!telecom

Some of the carriers such as ITT have billing arrangements with the operating
companies for casual users, but bill customers who have selected them as
primary carrier directly.  Such an arrangement makes collect calls practical,
since they always have some way to bill.

But here's a similar issue.  If I call home from Europe and either call
collect or with a calling card, I pay the bill to AT&T, and I pay AT&T's
international rate.  Rates from the US to Europe are typically about half
what they are the other way, so by doing so I save a bundle.  My question is
what the division of revenue is.  Does each end just keep its money and
assume the collect and credit card calls will even out as they split the
costs anyway, or is there some more complicated setup?  Knowing the phone
company, there must be.

John Levine, ima!johnl or [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 11 Mar 85 17:44:51 EST
From: Roy <[e-mail]>
Subject: T1, T1C, T2, ...

Anyone know where I can get info on the high speed "protocols" used
by the phone company (and others) called T1, T1C, T2, and also CEPT1
and CEPT2?  Are they just data rates or are they more like the RS-232C
type protocol which has electrical characteristics?  The reason I'm asking
is that I'm investigating making a ethernet to ethernet "gateway" that
goes over a microwave (or land) link operating at one of these speeds.
I have the design (from SUMEX) for Ethernet gateways, but they don't
(I think) have any design which talks over these kinds of lines.  So any
help on the protocols or multibus cards that interface into this kind of
stuff would be appreciated.  Thanks.

Roy
-------
-------

------------------------------

From: ihnp4!houpo!bear@Berkeley
Date: 12 Mar 85 16:10:44 CST (Tue)
To: ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: AT&T long distance (TELECOM Digest V4 #90 and #91)


If you read even more carefully you will see that what AT&T wants is
equal pricing for equal services. If ENFIA B and ENFIA C are equal
for incoming calls why should AT&T be prohibited from using the less
expensive trunks? Should OCCs be required to pay premium rates for
terminating traffic from places that they have equal access? There
are complex issues to be resolved in the transition from the old
AT&T to the new competitive environment, but "sleazy" is unkind.
ricing for equal services. If ENFIA B and ENFIA C are equal
for incoming calls why should AT&T be prohibited from using the less
expensive trunks? Should OCCs be required to pay premium rates for
terminating traffic from places that they have equal access? There
are complex issues to be resolved in the transition from the old
AT&T to the new competitive environment, but "sleazy" is unkind.

Jim Allen ...ihnp4!houpi!bear AT&T Bell Laboratories [phone]



------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
15-Mar-85 12:06:30-PST,6909;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  15 Mar 85 12:02:25-PST
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 85 13:35:01 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #170
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 15 Mar 85 13:35:01 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 170

Today's Topics:
                             900 Service
                       no long distance service
                             RE: T1, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu 14 Mar 85 21:36:05-EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 900 Service
To: [e-mail]

Does anyone know what the pricing structure is for 900 service? What sort
of calling volume do you have to have before you would clear a profit?
Any information or pointers to information would be appreciated.
-------


------------------------------

Date: Thu 14 Mar 85 19:49:42-PST
From: David Roode <[e-mail]>
Subject: no long distance service
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]

One standby way of restricting long distance access would be to
install a semi-public coin telephone.  This is the kind of coin
telephone that incurs a monthly fee (greater than the usual phone
line), but no long distance calls are possible on such a phone.

Recently, a problem happened with a local jail.  It seems
the inmates were using many purloined calling card numbers
and Sprint, MCI, etc. codes.   The sheriff's solution:
He is going to ask the telephone company to install
rotary dial phones.  Currently they have something that
looks like a Charge-a-call on a metal device that rolls
from cell to cell, with a ruggedized conduit being uncoiled
to carry the wire along with the phone.  The inmates are allowed
local calls on this phone, and so can apparently get
to Sprint.
-------

------------------------------

Date: 15 Mar 1985 09:44 PST
From: Art Berggreen <ART@ACC>
Subject: RE: T1, etc.
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA

This is a summary of information which I have obtained from a short
investigation of T1 and related services.

All T1 services are based on "T1 carrier" circuits.  These circuits
employ twisted pair cables to transmit serial bit streams at 1.544 MB/sec.
(or 2.048 MB/sec in Europe).  Due to losses in the twisted pair cable,
repeaters are required every mile or so to recover and regenerate the
data.  The data bits are sent using a technique known as Alternate Mark
Inversion (AMI).  In AMI, a pulse is sent for every "one" bit and no pulse
for every "zero" bit.  In order to avoid capacitive DC line charging, every
pulse is generated in the opposite polarity from the previous pulse.
Receive timing information must be derived from the incoming pulse stream.
In order to insure that receive timing remains synchronized with the bit
stream, there must be a minimum number of pulses over a given time.  This is
usually addressed by allowing no more than 15 consecutive zeros between
one bits.  Other techniques exist to overcome the consecutive zeros problem.
These techniques (B8ZS and HDB3) detect sequences of consecutive zeros
and send pulses which violate the alternating pattern of pulses.  The
receiving end recognizes these specific violations and converts them back
to zero bits.

Usually imposed on the basic bit stream is a data framing pattern.  This
framing is used to subdivide the data stream into 24 Time Division
Multiplexing (TDM) slots (32 slots in Europe) which carry independent
voice or data traffic.  In North America, each frame consists of a framing
bit followed by eight bits for each of the 24 TDM channels for a total of
193 bits per frame.  This works out to an overall bit rate for each
subchannel of 64KB/sec.  Frames themselves are grouped into "superframes"
of 12 frames or "extended superframes" of 24 frames.  The framing bit
follows a pattern which is used to locate boundaries of superframes.
In North America, one bit is "robbed" in each of the subchannels every
sixth frame to carry circuit signalling information.  This only leaves
7 bits in each subchannel that can carry data without being corrupted,
limiting data transmission to 56KB/sec (7/8 of 64KB/sec).  In Europe,
the first subchannel carries framing information, and the sixteenth
subchannel carries signalling information.  Therefore all 8 subchannel
bits can carry data, resulting in all 64KB/sec available for data
transmission.  The subchannels can also carry Asynchronous data streams
by sampling the asynch stream at 64KB/sec and regenerating the
asynch stream at the remote end to within a 64KB/sec resolution.
Due to sampling resolution, asynchronous data can only be supported
up to 19.2KB/sec.  The basic 1.544 MB/sec service is referred to
as "DS1" and the 64KB/sec subchannel service is referred to as "DS0".

Several companies sell TDM multiplexers which use standard framing on
T1 circuits to provide up to 24 communication ports with standard
RS-232C interfaces.  Most of these will run up to 56KB/sec synchronous
or 19.2KB/sec asynchronous.  Some of them can combine the bandwith
of several channels and provide higher speed ports than 56KB.

T1C is similar to T1 but conveys 48 subchannels in 385 bit frames by
running at 3.080 MB/sec.

In order to migrate toward ISDN capabilities, a new framing and signalling
standard is evolving called Digital Multiplexed Interface (DMI).  This
standard will support full 64KB/sec subchannels by reserving the 24th
subchannel for signalling.  The interpretation of the data on the signalling
channel is defined by one of four operating modes.  Modes 0 and 1 are intended
to be compatible with existing signalling mechanisms.  Modes 2 and 3
provide for ISDN capabilities by defining the signalling channel to
carry an HDLC framing sequence.  The HDLC messages carry the signalling
information for the other subchannels.

                        "Art Berggreen"<[e-mail]>

------

------------------------------

Date: 14 March 1985 23:29-EST
From: Leigh L. Klotz <KLOTZ @ MIT-MC>
To: telecom-request @ BBNCCA

I received a solicitation call from ITT or some subsidiary recently.
They, as usual, wanted to sign me up then and there for long distance
service.  When I queried them on rates they responded "up to 30% less
than AT&T."  The caller said that she could not provide me with better
rate information than that, and I said I was uninterested.  She repeated
that it was always 30% less than AT&T, and said yes when I asked if that
meant their rates were tied to AT&T's rates for each particular call.
She also said that other long-distance companies do not publish their
long-distance rates.

Is all this correct?


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
18-Mar-85 14:47:11-PST,9900;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  18 Mar 85 14:40:16-PST
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 85 17:25:55 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #171
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 18 Mar 85 17:25:55 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 171

Today's Topics:
          Publishing Alternate Long Distance Rates (V4 #170)
                     Microcom Networking Protocol
                       Amtrak tel. no. & 301-731
                April-May Communications Forum seminars
                          nenew F-O T1 lines
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri 15 Mar 85 17:23:03-EST
From: Ralph W. Hyre Jr. <[e-mail]>
Subject: Publishing Alternate Long Distance Rates (V4 #170)
To: [e-mail]

Well, SBS Skyline DOES publish their rates (and the struture is simple enough
that I can easily program my Apple to compute the cost of a call 'on the fly'.)

        Travel Rates    Regular Rates (per minute)
        U.S.    Canada    Mass/Adjacent    Coast-Coast    Anywhere else
Daytime        .58    .81    .27        .43        .37
Evening        .38    .60    .15        .24        .20
Night/Weekend    .28    .38    .11        .17        .15

                    - Ralph Hyre
-------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Mar 85 17:12:59 est
From: Ken Mandelberg <[e-mail]>
To: telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Microcom Networking Protocol


I have been looking at some glossy literature for Microcom
modems, including their 2400 baud entries. The modems use
MNP (Microcom Networking Protocol) to allow error free
data transmission.

Here are some questions:

1) Does anyone know what the MNP algorithm is. I am really
only interested in the asynch case?

2) Does it work well under varying situations (no data - just
line noise, intermittent single character i/o, long bursts of
data). I would be worried that in the single character case,
the packaging might really cut down responsiveness. Remember
the raw data rate is only 300/1200/2400 on these modems.

3) Whatever the algorithm, there just has to be some overhead
even when there is no noise (and more when there is). The glossy
doesn't mention it, but I wonder if it the modem expects to
do flow control with the host and computer, and if so what
kind (XON/XOFF?)?. It strikes me that this could play havoc with
applications which use raw mode. The glossy has no mention
of a buffer in the modem.

4) The glossy says that MNP is rapidly becoming any industry
standard. (This is a little funny. Microcom has an advertisement
which shows a huge pile of their competitors modems, none of
which use MNP). Does anyone know what other modems use MNP, and
if there are other industry standards?



Ken Mandelberg
Emory University
Dept of Math and CS
Atlanta, Ga 30322

{akgua,sb1,gatech,decvax}!emory!km   USENET
km@emory                      CSNET
km.emory@csnet-relay          ARPANET


------------------------------

Date:     Mon, 18 Mar 85 10:59:51 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Amtrak tel. no. & 301-731

A telephone # at Amtrak, 400 N. Capitol St. NW, Washington,
DC 20001 is given as 202-383-3860, ATS 733-3860.  I have never
seen ATS before.

301-731 used to be at Hagerstown, Md., but the tel. #'s on that
exchange were changed to 301-790 plus last 4 digits of old number.
Now 731 appears at Lanham ("Hyattsville" on phone bill; reachable
via 202 areacode); 790 in DC area is at McLean, Va.


------------------------------

Date:  Mon, 18 Mar 85 11:27 EST
From:  [e-mail]
Subject:  April-May Communications Forum seminars
To:  [e-mail]

              Massachusetts Institute of Technology
                      Communications Forum



                 Wideband Metropolitan Networks:
               CATV and Alternative Possibilities
                          April 4, 1985
        Stephen Weinstein, Bell Communications Research

     New business and residential communications services +
will require wideband metropolitan networks with capabilities ,
beyond those of present telephone and cable television +
facilities.  This seminar will describe the technical and +
political problems of building these capabilities into existing ,
CATV systems and discuss present and proposed techniques +
including hybrid systems using the telephone network.  It will,
review the advantages of a distributed star network architecture -
and high bit rate optical fiber and discuss how these *
technologies are being introduced by telphone companies, CATV, ,
and other communications providers.  Possibilities for advanced ,
services on a future network of this kind will also be +
considered.


             Resource Sharing in Local Area Networks
                   April 10 (Wednesday), 1985
                     Leonard Kleinrock, UCLA

     Distributed systems present a number of fascinating +
challenges, not the least of which is the problem of allocating ,
system resources to an unpredictable demand stream.  This problem -
was presented to us in the form of wide area computer networks in -
the l970's and faces us in the form of local area networks (LANs) -
at present.  The key issues and principles of resource sharing in -
LANs will be discussed including, for example, topology, access ,
method, and medium.  The seminar will also review how these ,
problems have been resolved in current products and consider some -
likely new solutions.



            Telecommunications Developments in Europe
                         April l8, l985
       Peter Cowhey, University of California at San Diego
                  Eli Noam, Columbia University

     The divestiture of ATfT and regulatory policies favoring ,
competition in long-distance telephone service have had a +
profound effect outside the United States -- especially in other -
highly developed countries: Japan, Canada, and the larger nations -
of Western Europe.
     In Europe, the traditional PTT (Post, Telephone, and +
Telegraph Administrations) monopolies have been questioned.  ,
British Telecom has an officially sanctioned competitor, and BT ,
itself has been privatized.  While other countries have not ,
officially moved as much toward the American model, private ,
companies have entered new areas on the fringe of traditional ,
core services.  Although impetus for policy change often derives -
from general arguments for deregulation and competition, much is -
also made of the need to stimulate European industry in order to -
export to the burgeoning American market.



                     Encoding Voice Signals
                         April 25, l985
              Bernard Gold, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
             Robert McAulay, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
               Robert Price, M/A-Com Linkabit, Inc.

     Although not visible to the public, vocoders (VOice CODERS) -
have been around for a long time.  To date, however, technical ,
difficulties and cost have limited their use to such applications -
as secure communications for the military.  This seminar will ,
discuss the historical development of vocoders, why they have ,
been used in the past, and the potential they have for enhancing -
public communications systems.



                    Long Distance Land Lines
                           May 2, l985
                      Gus Grant, Fibertrak
               additional speaker to be announced
          (note: to be held in Building 34, Room 401A)

     With deregulation of long distance communications in the ,
United States, several corporations have announced ambitious ,
plans to build long distance land lines.  Collectively, these ,
plans portend a dramatic increase in long distance capacity.  ,
This seminar will discuss the market forces driving this +
expansion and the business strategies of some of the major +
competitors.



                 New Directions in Media History
                           May 9, l985
             Douglas Gomery, University of Maryland
                Morris Dickstein, Queens College
                       David Thorburn, MIT

     New approaches to the academic study of film and other forms -
of mass media have gained prominence in recent years, as the ,
methods of traditional disciplines such as history, literature, ,
cultural anthropology, and economics have begun to be applied to -
contemporary audiovisual texts.  Centrally interdisciplinary, ,
this emerging media scholarship promises new perspectives on the -
cultural significance of media texts and institutions and +
powerfully revises conventional accounts of their historical ,
development.




                          Marlar Lounge
                    MIT Building 37, Room 252
                   70 Vassar Street, Cambridge
                   Thursday, 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.
                        (except as noted)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 18-Mar-85 07:12:18 PST
From: Richard Shuford <vortex!richard@rand-unix>
Subject: nenew F-O T1 lines
To: [e-mail]

One more datum for those collecting T1 lore:  During a recent
conversation with a New England Telephone network-maintenance
supervisor, I was told that all new T1 links being installed in
his territory (Vermont) were fiber-optic, not twisted pair.
He was not sure, but he believed that the F-O connections were
multimode graded-index type.
......RSS


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
23-Mar-85 16:44:33-PST,2527;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  23 Mar 85 16:42:08-PST
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 85 19:00:52 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #172
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 23 Mar 85 19:00:52 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 172

Today's Topics:
                  Re:  Microcom Networking Protocol
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 19 Mar 1985 14:33-EST
Subject: Re:  Microcom Networking Protocol
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]


Some of the information you seek concerning MNP may be found in
the August 1984 issue of "Data Communications," in a discussion
on protocols.  The MNP protocol is proprietary, and I'm not sure
how much exact detail is available, short of paying $2,500 for a
licensing agreement.  I know there is a variable-length header,
and that the protocol can take up less than 8 kilobytes (this
info is in the article).

In answer to your second and third questions: when trying to
establish a connection over very noisy lines, you may be able to
establish the connection itself without being able to establish
the MNP portion of the connection.  (MNP must be present and
active in both modems for it to work, however it is certainly
possible to dial in to non-MNP modems.  The connection will
simply not have error correcting capabilities.)

Of course there is an overhead for all of this, and with MNP
implemented the modems and the protocol insist on flow control.
MNP ignores the switch settings concerning flow control and
implements its own, which consists (I think) of hardware flow
control from DCE to DTE, and of software flow control between
DCEs.  (I may have that backward.)  In tests I have run with
these units in reliable mode, overhead can range from minimal to
14%.  I think the modems must clear their buffers before resuming
transmission, rather than waiting for a percentage of buffer to
become available, but that is strictly a guess.

Lastly, I believe the reference to "standard" refers to the
implementation of MNP or MNP modems by such groups as Telenet,
MCI Mail, Uninet, and others.  I know that Telenet has
established special Microcom numbers in their public dial
facility.  I guess that makes a standard....

WCT

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
31-Mar-85 09:37:36-PST,14096;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  31 Mar 85 09:30:15-PST
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 85 11:25:50 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #173
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 31 Mar 85 11:25:50 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 173

Today's Topics:
             Blocking Incoming Calls and other SL-1 hacks
                         Collect Wrong Number
news from the SW:   MCC's Bobby Inman named to SWB's board of directors
                        2400 baud modem review
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu 28 Mar 85 02:31:14-CST
From: Clive Dawson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Blocking Incoming Calls and other SL-1 hacks
To: [e-mail]

Does anybody know enough about the guts of the Northern Telecom
SL-1 PBX to tell me if there is a way to set up an extension which
cannot receive any incoming calls under any circumstances?

The situation is that we are setting up a call-back system for
extra dial-in security.  One of the vulnerable points of such
systems has to do with people dialing in on the lines used to
place the outgoing call-backs.  It is theoretically possible
that if an incoming call arrived at the same instant the call-back
system initiated a call, a break-in could occur.

In order to make efficient use of the outgoing trunk lines, we want the
outgoing lines connected to the call-back system to go through the PBX.
Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a fool-proof way to set up a line
which cannot be dialed into.  In particular, there seems to be no way to
set up permanent call-forwarding.  Another idea was to give these lines
4-digit extension numbers starting with something like 8, so that any
attempt to dial them would produce a WATS dial tone.  Apparently the
software doesn't let you do this sort of thing.  We are told that the only
way to properly do this would be to use the customer partition feature
(which is designed to let several customers share the same switch) and
declare all the call-back extensions to be a different "customer".  The
problem here is that they would either have to be given their own set of
outgoing trunk lines or else special hardware would be required to tie them
in to Customer 0's trunk lines.  In either case we are talking big bucks.
I'm still hoping that some sneaky trick exists to accomplish this.

And talking about sneaky tricks, somebody discovered a feature (bug?) in
the SL-1 which allows extensions to be call-forwarded to outgoing trunk
lines.  For example, if dialing 8 gives you access to a WATS line, then
call-forwarding an extension to "8" will give callers to that extension a
second dial tone and allow them to place long distance calls.  If the
extension can be dialed directly from outside the premises, this is
obviously a big security problem.  Furthermore, the audit-trail printout
produced by the SL-1, which normally logs all long-distance calls dialed
and identifies the extension, shows no record of such calls.  I'd be
interested to learn whether this is an inherent flaw, or whether our
switch was simply not configured correctly.

CLive
-------

------------------------------

Date:    28 March 85 23:30-EST
From:      Michael Grant  <[e-mail]>
To: Telecom Digest <[e-mail]>
Subject: Collect Wrong Number

I'm mad, I mean really mad. (not crazy mind you, but just plain pissed off)
About an hour ago I got this call, the conversation went as follows:

RING
Me: Hello
Operator: I have a collect call from Terry, will you pay for the call?
Me: No.
a few seconds of silence
Terry: Is Joe there?
Me: Ummm...I think you have a wrong number
Terry: Is this 202-439-6339
Me: Nope, that wasn't very nice of that operator
Terry: What do you mean? Why did you accept the call if you didn't know me?
       Maybe you know...
Me: I DIDN'T ACCEPT IT!
I got her number, and said goodbye.

I flashed the hook, and got an operator back on line,
Operator: Are you done?
Me: Yes, but I didn't accept the call, why did you put it through?
Operator: I'm not the same operator, I didn't put it through, it's not my
          problem.
she hung up on me.  That was the rudest encounter I have ever had with an
operator in my life.

I dialed O operator, and explained my problem, he told me I would have to
call my bussiness office and get it taken off my bill.  I'm going to also
lodge a formal complaint.  What's happening to phone service in this
country?  Don't anyone say it...Divestiture. Damn.
-Mike

------------------------------

Date: Sat 30 Mar 85 15:19:07-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: news from the SW:   MCC's Bobby Inman named to SWB's board of directors
To: [e-mail]

[ from the Austin American Statesman - March 30, 1985 ]

Bob Inman, chairman and chief executive officer of MCC has been elected to the
board of directors of Southwestern Bell Corp.
-------

------------------------------

Date: 31 Mar 1985  08:39 MST (Sun)
From: Keith Petersen <[e-mail]>
To:   Telecom@BBNCCA
Subject: 2400 baud modem review

The following review was not written by me.  It was downloaded from a
Remote CP/M system.  Unfortunately there is no way to reach the author
because it is unsigned.  It is presented here for its possible
informational value.  Please address discussions/comments to the
mailing list, not me.  I don't own a 2400 baud modem.
--Keith

10 Mar 85

*** DISCLAIMER ***

The products described here were repeatedly tested for a specific
application only.  No value was placed on advanced features not
directly related to their intended use.  The opinion expressed herein
is that of the reviewer and may, in fact WILL differ considerably from
other reviewers' opinions.

This is an unsolicited review.  Anyone able to disprove the reviewes
claims is welcome to do so.  This review is about as unobjective as it
can get.

    In a data processing environment, chances are the employee
with a terminal and a modem (or computer) and access to the business
computer via dialup will be more productive and is more likely to put
in a few hours' worth of unsolicited overtime per week than the
employee who has access to the same computer only during working
hours.  Therefore, it was decided that the office computer be set up
with at least one high-speed dialup line and the most economical
choice was that of a 1200/2400 baud modem.

    The modems were going to be used for two purposes:
   1. unattended autoanswer
   2. occasional use for dialout

    Testing was started as soon as modems became available through
a local distributor.  Due to this factor only two brands were
evaluated. Here is the story on both of them:


1. PENRIL 2024

    The Penril 2024 seems to be the first widely available
1200/2400 baud modem, with the exception of the prohibitively priced
VADIC 4400 series.  The 2024's list price is somewhere around $900.

    The 2024 offers two baud rates, 1200 and 2400.  The 1200 baud
protocol can be switched from 212A to V.22 at configuration time.  By
today's standards, the 2024 cannot be considered a "smart" modem in
that its smartness is limited to the ability to dial a phone number.
Placing the modem in autoanswer mode is accomplished by simply
configuring the internal and external switches according to the
manual, releasing all front panel switches and plugging it in.  The
2024 does not have a power switch (a definite plus in this
application).

    Originating a phone call with the 2024 is a cumbersome
procedure, especially in an application where the modem may be 100
feet away from the terminal.  First, the modem must be taken out of
autoanswer mode by pressing a front panel switch.  Next, the originate
baud rate must be selected by locking the HI/LO switch IN or OUT.
Note that if you set up the modem for 2400 baud, you can call a 1200
baud number because of the "fallback" feature.  You just have to
adjust your terminal baud rate after connect.  The 2024 has no abort
provisions.  While dialing, the TALK/DATA switch can be used to abort.
When connected, you must either cause the remote computer to drop
carrier or you again have to hit the switch.  An alternative is
dropping the DTR line low, but in some instances that's a bit hard to
do.  Dialing a phone number is very awkward. The sequence is
"CRNnnnnnnn<CR><LF>" so to dial 555-1212, you type CRN5551212^M^J.
Fine if the ENTER key on your keyboard generates a CR-LF sequence;
with most terminals you have to hit two keys.  Sorry, no redial
capability.

    The Penril worked fine calling the local TYMNET 2400 baud
access number, but no connection was established to any long distance
modem at 2400 baud.

    The modem is superbly suited for unattended autoanswer mode.
the 2024 can be turned on and left alone and if something goes wrong
it's the software but not the modem.  The continuous high-pitched
noise coming out of the built-in speaker may be objectionable to
some -- it picks up the strongest local AM radio station.  the
speaker can be turned low or off via an internal jumper block.

    One 2024 modem was tested initially in early November 1984,
and two were again tested in late February 1985.  No difference was
found between the three modems, even though the early onemay have been
a preproduction unit.


2. USR COURIER 2400

    The USR Courier seems to be the first smart low-priced modem
to be released, probably due to the fact that, unlike many
manufacturers, it does not use the Rockwell chip set.  It features
Hayes 2400 compatibility.  I will briefly summarize the positive
aspects of the modem:

    - externally accessible, well-labeled configuration switches
    - external switch to reverse pins 2 & 3, thus eliminating the
      need for a null modem
    - result codes can be completely turned off via switch
    - volume control for internal speaker

    After setting the configuration switches (an easy task for
anyone who has ever set up a modem) the Courier is ready for
operation.  With the appropriate switch setting, it can be used both
in originate and answer mode without any hardware changes.

    Originating a call can be accomplished with the now-famous
ATDT sequence, except that command letters no longer have to be in
caps. As with other smart modems, any character typed while dialing or
waiting for carrier aborts the action and hangs up the line.  The
"escape" character can be used to either return the modem to command
mode (like the Hayes) or to hang up (like other USR modems) depending
on a configuration switch setting.

    The Courier was used to successfully connect to the local
TYMNET number.  A later model also was able to talk to a VADIC 2400
baud unit over long distance (Wayne Masters' RCPM).  The Courier was
also able to call and be called by a Penril 2024 and another Courier.

    As to autoanswer mode, the modem was a complete washout to put
it mildly.  Surely, hard- and software are partly to blame but the
fact that other modems (including USR Password and AD212A) work with
the same setup indicates a serious flaw in the Courier.

    The hardware used, for whatever reason, drops DTR while
changing baud rates.  The duration is so short that all other modems
tested on the hardware, EXCEPT the Courier, are totally unaffected.
The Courier will, upon carrier lock and receipt of the first character
typed, drop the carrier 3 out of 4 times at 1200 and 2400 baud.  While
no considerations were given to 300 baud performance, it was noted
that those problems only exist at 1200 and 2400 baud.  Placing a 5MFD
capacitor from the DTR line to ground totally fixed this problem.

    In autoanswer mode, the modems were used as follows:
   - all result codes are inhibited
   - on carrier loss, computer reboots, cycles DTR, then waits for a
     character typed by constantly polling the data input port
   - on receipt of character, baud rate is tested and, if necessary,
      changed

    I must again stress that this method works with all modems
tested.  The USR Courier, however, would simply refuse to answer any
more phone calls after answering a few.  No set pattern was
discovered.  Sometimes, the modem would work properly for 5-10 calls
then refuse to answer, at other times it would only allow 1 or 2
calls.  When it refused to answer, no outside indication was given
as to the problem.  The appropriate LEDs on the front panel were lit
yet the modem did not respond to the ring.  Surely, this is a most
serious deficiency and I have decided that the Courier is unfit for
use in this particular application.  I am convinced the problem lies
solely with the Courier, particularyly sonce both the Auto Dial 212A
and the Password 1200 work in the exact same environment (except for
the much-needed 2400 capa- bility, of course).

    In closing I must again stress that the USR certainly is a
superb modem and very well suited to originate applications.
Considering that 99 out of 100 modems sold will never be used for pure
autoanswer purposes, the Courier is not at all a failure.

    One modem was tested in late November, two in late February
(both were preproduction units) and thre PRODUCTION units were tested
in March.  All five units exhibited the same problems.

    ...may those who have the power to change things do so, may
those whose toes I stepped on test for themselves before stepping on
mine, may those who want to buy a Courier not be discouraged.

    If YOU intend to use a USR Courier in an autoanswer-only
environment, please by all means give it a try, it may sure work for
you.  If it doesn't, you have been warned, and if it does, either
"they" fixed it or the problem is installation-dependent...

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 1-Apr-85 20:33:56-PST,4666;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   1 Apr 85 20:32:16-PST
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 85 22:37:16 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #174
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 1 Apr 85 22:37:16 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 174

Today's Topics:
           Re: Blocking Incoming Calls and other SL-1 hacks
                            Hayes 2400 modem
                    speaking of sneaky tricks ...
                          Common Carrier T1
                     MCC unveils Mistery Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:  1 Apr 85    1:11 EST
From:   James A. Dorf   <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Blocking Incoming Calls and other SL-1 hacks
To:  [e-mail]

-----
Why do you stipulate "permanent" call-forwarding on your modem extension
when I think "standard" SL-1 call-forwarding would work:  once set, the
only way to alter or cancel call-forwarding on the SL-1 would be for your
dial-OUT modem to dial "#1" (or is it "*1"? (my SL-1 extension is on an ACD..))
...  Unless the modem (or software running the modem) can be modified to
tone-out the cancel-code and then hang-up, security is preserved..

Eh???? /jad
-----

------------------------------

Date: Saturday, 23 March 1985  10:35-MST
From: STERNLIGHT@USC-ECL
Subject:   Hayes 2400 modem

I have had a Hayes 2400 modem for a week, now.  It came with a note
saying that it wouldn't work on some earlier PBX's, and if I had one,
to return the modem and a new one would be sent out in 2 weeks.

It is much more vulnerable to shot noise (appears as random left-hand
curly brackets) than the Hayes 1200, at 1200 baud.

--david--

------------------------------

Date:  Apr 1985 1 09:39-EST
From: [e-mail]
To: Clive Dawson <CC.Clive@utexas-20>
Cc: telecom@bbncca
Subject: speaking of sneaky tricks ...

Here at CMU the dialup numbers for the comp center micoms all start
with the digit '9', which makes it impossible to call those numbers
through the local switch.  Apparently this was done to keep the hackers
in the dorms from tying up these lines.  This used to be a real hassle,
since my only means of connecting to these machines from my office used
to be via modem, and I'd have to place a real phone call to reach them
(and I had to pay for my measured local usage).  The campus operator
said that she couldn't connect me directly.

------------------------------

Date: 1 Apr 1985 12:06 PST
From: Art Berggreen <ART@ACC>
Subject: Common Carrier T1
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Cc: TCP-IP@SRI-NIC


I have been trying to get a handle on the bit stream framing requirements
for using common carrier T1 circuits (DS1).  There seems to be a feeling
that, at least, 193 bit framing must be followed.

My conversations with various people (including people inside various
ATT companies and BELLCORE) lead me to the conclusion that the 193
bit framing has no technical basis and was rather a convention that
ATT wanted to enforce before divestiture.  Since divestiture, it appears
possible to utilize common carrier T1 service without regard to
framing (the ones density requirement will always be there).

Any one have DEFINITE information to the contrary?

                    Art Berggreen<[e-mail]>

------

------------------------------

Date: Mon 1 Apr 85 18:57:58-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCC unveils Mistery Program
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]

    MCC Unveils Mystery Plan

There's a new research program in the works at MCC ... MCC's directors approved
the new program last month and that it will be under way by fall.  But [Inman]
is not ready to reveal jsut what the new MCC team will be researching.  The
consortium has had at least three new programs under consideration:
computer-to-computer communications, semiconducter materials and computer-aided
manufacturing.

Four programs are well under way at MCC - computer-aided design, semiconductor
packaging, advanced computer architecture, and software engineering.

Inman said approval for the new program, which demanded a three-quarters vote
of the 20-member MCC board, represents a "vote of confidence" in the
consortium's current research programs.

[ after Bellcore joined, the priority given to communications' issues should
  have increased.   ---Werner ]
-------

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 2-Apr-85 18:47:15-PST,4523;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   2 Apr 85 18:43:58-PST
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 85 20:52:47 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #175
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 2 Apr 85 20:52:47 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 175

Today's Topics:
                  Multi-line telephones for residential use
                       T1 framing requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 1 April 1985 22:28-EST
From: Jon Solomon <JSOL @ MIT-MC>
To: telecom @ BBNCCA

Can anyone furnish me with a complete list of common carriers
serving the Boston area and their equal access prefix codes? I want
to do a survey on quality vs. price so I can decide which one
will best serve my needs.

Thanks,
--JSol


------------------------------

Date:           Tue, 2 Apr 85 14:23:55 PST
From:           "Theodore N. Vail" <[e-mail]>
To:             [e-mail]
Subject:        Multi-line telephones for residential use

Sometime ago I asked telecom readers about multi-line telephones for
residential use, which could serve more than two lines.  Since then I
have learned of two:

Another telecom reader mentioned that at Winter Consumer Electronics
Show in January, Teleconcepts announced a product called the
"FeaturePhone V", an instrument which was said to have the ability
to handle three central-office trunk lines.  According to a company
spokesman, it has just a single "in-use" light that shows both actual
use and a "hold" condition, but apparently some form of remote pick-up
is supported.  Its wiring requirement is said to be just the 3 trunk
pairs.

This phone was being promoted for use in residential installations, but
it's not clear that Teleconcepts will actually get it into wide retail
distribution.  Because very few residences have three trunks, the market
for it seems to be small.  For more information contact

     Teleconcepts Inc.
     22 Culbro Dr.
     West Hartford, CT  06110
     203/666-5666

I have found (and bought) a four-line phone at (of all places) the
Radio Shack Telephone/Computer Store in Santa Monica, selling for about
$170.00.  It provides essentially all of the features of a standard
teleco office keyset without requiring special wiring (aside from the
standard two wires per line).  It does require a low-voltage supply
(9v DC) and a battery backup.

The functional differences are

1.  The display consists of 4 green led's (not red).

2.  When a line is ringing, the corresponding led flashes only when the
    bell is ringing (there is no trigger to keep it going continuously
    until that line is answered).  The hold and in-use signals are as
    usual.

3.  It is not as sturdy as the telco instrument.

4.  It provides a modular jack into which can be plugged a dialer, a
    speaker phone, etc. This is connected in parallel with the built-in
    instrument.  The current flow obtained when the instrument is
    off-hook signals the other equipment (no special switching is
    required).

5.  It connects to the lines using 1 to 4 RJ11 modular jacks (which
    can be 1 or 2 line, per FCC specs) instead of using a 50 conductor
    amphenol plug.

The hold is of a type common in residential two line instruments.  A
simple circuit (one for each line) maintains the current flow and holds
the line.  When any instrument on that line is picked up, the lowered
impedance causes a voltage drop, which the hold circuit senses, causing
it to release.

I have had it for about two months with no problems yet.

[I have no business or personal affiliation with Teleconcepts or Radio
Shack.  Nor have I ever seen the FeaturePhone V.]

ted

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Apr 85 12:51:32 pst
From: amdcad![e-mail] (Phil Ngai)
To: decwrl![e-mail]
Subject: T1 framing requirements

I believe the phone companies have alarm circuits which go off when
the T1 framing information is invalid. Even assuming they would be
willing to turn off or ignore the alarm on your non-conforming datastream,
isn't being able to take advantage of the phone company's diagnostic
equipment worth the cost of putting in at least the 193th bit framing
information?



------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 3-Apr-85 21:46:26-PST,5013;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   3 Apr 85 21:44:44-PST
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 85 23:28:38 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #176
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 3 Apr 85 23:28:38 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 176

Today's Topics:
                      Re: Equal access carriers
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #174
                        Re: Common Carrier T1
                   The wonders of Modern Technology
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue 2 Apr 85 22:10:48-EST
From: Robert Scott Lenoil <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Equal access carriers
To: jsol@MIT-MC

     Date: 1 April 1985 22:28-EST
     From: Jon Solomon <JSOL @ MIT-MC>
     To: telecom @ BBNCCA

     Can anyone furnish me with a complete list of common carriers
     serving the Boston area and their equal access prefix codes? I want
     to do a survey on quality vs. price so I can decide which one
     will best serve my needs.

     Thanks,
     --JSol

Here are all the prefix codes that I know:

10288 - AT&T
10222 - MCI
10333 - possibly US Tel?
10444 - ALLNET
10777 - SPRINT
10888 - SBS
10488 - ITT
10220 - Western Union

That only leaves First Phone LINK Service.  If anyone knows their prefix
code, please post it.

-Robert
-------


------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Apr 85 09:11:56 est
From: decvax!watmath!hardware@Berkeley (MFCF Hardware Lab)
To: telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #174


I was wondering how I should go about posting an arcticle on fa.telecom
I think I have to do it through the moderator (You?).  My question to the
board is: does anyone have the scematics for telephone keypads? I have drawn
up four keypads and each one has a different layout, they are western electric,
northern telecom and two northern electric. One of the northern electric is out
of a payphone, which is probably why it is different.  I am an avid phone
collector, and would appreciate any drawings or scematics anyone has on tele-
phones. (PBX and such included.)
                Thanks,
                    Andrew Rahme.
                    hardware@watmath



------------------------------

Date:  3 Apr 1985 08:37:37 PST
Subject: Re: Common Carrier T1
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]



Art,

I have to admit it:  I nearly fell for it, until I noticed the date of your
message.  Really one of the cleverest and most subtle April-fools messages!!!

                            Danny.


P.S.,

  In the remote case that this is a genuine inquiry:  There is a LOT to the
  technical requirement for T1-framing.  There are STRICT rules for the
  193rd bit -- without it all the equipment of the carrier will indicate
  errors and would send warning messages to their NCC's which probably will
  result in  discontinuing your service, unless special costly arrangements
  are made around it.  There also others rules like the good old
  "no-consecutive-16-zeroes" and "at-least-3-ones-in-any-sequence-of-24-bits",
  and more.  Some of these rules are no longer mandatory in Europe, and within
  N years they will not be needed here either, hopefully for a small N.
  The 193rd-bit will be in for LONG time.  I bet.
                                        []
-------

------------------------------

Date: 3 Apr 85 15:12:20 PST (Wednesday)
Subject: The wonders of Modern Technology
From: "Bruce Hamilton.OsbuSouth"@XEROX.ARPA
To: [e-mail]


My G.E. one-piece phone has a lot of nice features, like optional 20
pulse per second dialing as well as 10-pulse and tone, plus a 12-number
memory.  However, the ergonomics are TERRIBLE.  The pulse/tone and
ringer on/off switches are right next to your thumbs.  And another
thing, which is the object of this story...

Last night I picked up the phone and dropped it.  I noticed I might have
accidently dialed some digits, so I tried pressing the switchhook
countless times, but I could NOT get dial tone.  I decided to let it go
until morning.

Imagine my surprise when, 10 minutes later, four cops showed up at my
door!  Turns out there are three "emergency" buttons just above the
numeric keypad which require only a SINGLE keystroke to call the
numbers.  I had programmed in 911.  Apparently the 911 folks can hold
onto your line somehow, once you call them.  When they didn't hear a
voice on the other end, they sent the cops.

After the appropriate apologies, I STILL couldn't get dial tone.  Ten
minutes later I saw my Code-A-Phone answering machine flashing one of
its lights in a strange way, and I figured out that IT had clamped onto
my line, started recording, and finally stopped and started flashing
when it ran out of tape.

Moral: DON'T program in emergency numbers.

--Bruce

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
 6-Apr-85 17:01:48-PST,5794;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;   6 Apr 85 16:57:57-PST
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 85 19:38:33 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #177
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 6 Apr 85 19:38:33 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 177

Today's Topics:
                    alternatives to modems (query)
                  Re: alternatives to modems (query)
                      ATT&T glossy advertising -- proto
                  Delayed Call Forwarding weirdness
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:  Apr 1985 4 11:12-EST
From: [e-mail]
To: videotech@sri-csl, telecom@bbncca, info-hams@brl
Subject: alternatives to modems (query)

I'm looking for information on higher bandwidth alternatives to modems
for communications from our department to off-campus users.  The
technologies that I'm considering include using an otherwise unused
cable channel, packet radio, and anything else you can suggest.  I'm
looking for pointers to existing systems in other cities, technical
articles describing these technologies, and vendors of off-the-shelf
equipment.  Please respond by mail, and I'll post a summary later.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Apr 85 10:09 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: alternatives to modems (query)
To: [e-mail]

If you have the equipment to transmit a closed cable television channel
you may look into having a full teletext channel (no picture, using
almost the entire 525 lines for teletext code).

I'm not suggesting that you send out a picture, just that you use the
technology to send data to a decoder on the other end of the cable.

With a 5.7 Mbit/sec. rate, which US teletext uses, you could get super
fast data transmision, even if you included a lot of error checking and
correction.

See Radio and Electronics magazine Nov81, Dec81 and Feb82 for a 3 part
article on what teletext is and is capable of.

    Chuck


------------------------------

Date:           Fri, 5 Apr 85 13:29:50 PST
From:           "Theodore N. Vail" <[e-mail]>
To:             [e-mail]
Subject:        ATT&T glossy advertising -- proto

I just received a fancy advertising brochure from AT&T Bell
Laboratories.  It contained a lot of spiff about high-visibility
projects at Bell Labs, an editorial about the "ultimate network" (i.e.
AT&T's Network Systems), etc. It is well done and quite similar to what
I receive from many other large corporations.

The unique difference is that it came with a letter inviting me to
subscribe to future issues for $15.00 per year!

With this kind of merchandising effort, how can AT&T's competition fail to
succeed?

ted

------------------------------

Date: Fri 5 Apr 85 16:41:22-PST
From: Ole Jorgen Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Delayed Call Forwarding weirdness
To: [e-mail]




    I want to tell you about a an interesting hassle I am having with
Pacific Bell, and maybe someone can make a few comments based on your
knowledge of how an ESS works, or perhaps point me to some wizard that
can verify this behaviour.

    A couple of weeks ago I had "Delayed Call Forwarding" (DCF)
installed on my 325-9427 number. This feature (also commonly known as
forward-on- no-answer) allows the incoming call to be routed to a
secretary, answering service or whatever. The restriction is that the
destination number is FIXED, it is programmed in at the time of
installation, and to have it changed you pay another $6 and presumably
wait a couple of days. Well, since I have TWO lines, the obvious way
to make this a more flexible service is to have the DCF go to my OTHER
number, 325-9542 which in term would be variably forwarded to the
number of my choice.

    This would yield the following (expected) behaviour:

    1. You call 325-9427
    2. You hear 3 rings
    3. On (or about) the 4th ring the call is transferred to
       325-9542 which rings ONCE to indicate that it is forwarded
    4. Normal forwarding then takes place (the caller hears ringing
       while all this is going on) and the destination number is
       reached.

      BUT, this does not work at all. When the second line is forwarded,
no DCF to that line takes place and the phone will ring forever on the
first -9427 number. I tried to explain to the Pac Bell people that this
was very undesirable and only works this way because both numbers are on
the SAME ESS. In other words, the ESS "knows" that -9542 is forwarded
and this somehow overides DCF. The way they explained this to me is that
there are conceptually TWO tables, one dynamic (for normal call forwarding)
and one fixed for DCF. The fixed "DCF-table" is altered when -9542 is
forwarded and this results in a "no-go" for DCF.

    If you instead have DCF going to ANOTHER  CO, the first CO has
no "knowlege" of any forwarding tables in the second CO and therefore you
can merily forward your DCF destination number to wherever you like and
things will work as one normally expects.

    Now for the punchline: Pac Bell cannot determine whether the above
restriction is a bug or an intended feature and have requested Bell Labs
to investigate, something which apparently takes 6 months or more. Meanwhile,
I am considering biting the dust and having the DCF go to another CO (my
office) and "steer it" from there.

    If anyone out there has extensive knowledge of ESSs, I would
appreciate a message or a call, is this a bug or a feature??


<OLE>
-------

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
10-Apr-85 16:09:29-PST,4872;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  10 Apr 85 16:04:34-PST
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 85 17:58:37 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #178
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 10 Apr 85 17:58:37 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 178

Today's Topics:
                     alternatives to modems (query)
                        Toll-Free 900 numbers
                  Re: Multiple phone line management
                           Two-Line Phones
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Apr 1985 4 11:40-EST
From: David.Anderson@CMU-CS-K
Subject:   alternatives to modems (query)

I'm looking for information on higher bandwidth alternatives to modems
for communications from our department to off-campus users.  The
technologies that I'm considering include using an otherwise unused
cable channel, packet radio, and anything else you can suggest.  I'm
looking for pointers to existing systems in other cities, technical
articles describing these technologies, and vendors of off-the-shelf
equipment.  Please respond by mail, and I'll post a summary later.
--
[e-mail]   ..!seismo!cmu-cs-k!dba   [phone]


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8-Apr-85 04:13:42 PST
From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Toll-Free 900 numbers
To: [e-mail]

I recently stumbled across the fact that there is a class of area
code 900 numbers that is toll free, instead of incurring the
usual $0.50/$0.35 charge step.  Locally (here in L.A.) I saw an ad
for an info number that was given as (900) 200-XXXX.  The ad clearly
stated that the number was toll free.

It seemed a bit odd, so I checked with both the GTE and the AT&T
operators.  Both needed a bit of coaxing to get past the immediate
"50 cents for the first minute" line.  What we eventually determined
is that (900) 200-XXXX represents a special class of toll free
900 numbers.  Presumably there is some good reason why an entity
would choose (900) 200 over (800), perhaps relating to regional office
call distribution and routing for large companies....

Does anyone have any specific information about the purpose of the
toll free 900 service vis-a-vis 800 service?  Thanks.

--Lauren--



------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Apr 85 04:06:11 pst
From: sun!gnu@Berkeley (John Gilmore)
To: telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: Multiple phone line management

In the latest Pac Telesis flyer they offer a "Premiere communications system"
service, to wit:

    "links your separate phone lines (up to 20) in a single
    system.  It operates on a touch-tone set and features call
    hold, intercom, call transfer, three-way calling and call pick
    up."

This is listed on the same page as call waiting, forwarding and speed calling,
leading me to believe that it's implemented in the CO rather than in big
relay racks hanging in your basement.

This costs $7/mo per line for 2 to 6 lines, $10/line for up to 20 lines,
plus a $5/line installation fee.

This is the first I've heard of it, does anyone have further info?


------------------------------

Date: 8 Apr 85 10:00:04 EDT (Mon)
From: Nathaniel Mishkin <apollo![e-mail]>
Subject: Two-Line Phones
To: apollo![e-mail]

A couple of months ago I sent a query about two-line phone with "true
hold" (i.e. a hold that can be set on one extension and released on
another).  Since several people asked me for any information I found
and since the following might be of general interested, here it is:

I stopped by an ATT Phone Center Store and they've just recently (within
the past few months) come out with a two-line phone with hold.  It's
a bit of an ugly sucker and it has the truly outrageous price tag of
$199, but it does the job.  It is a tone-only phone.  It can be left
on the desk or mounted on the wall.

After I was at the ATT store, I crossed the street to Radio Shack and
saw that they too now have a two-line phone with hold AND a tone/pulse
selector switch.  It costs $69.  It looks pretty much like a conventional
touch-tone desk phone with three buttons (line 1, 2, and hold) and a
slide switch (tone/pulse) jammed in.  I asked how it sounded and the
salesman said "We're using it as the business phone -- try it yourself".
So I made a local call.  It sounded OK.  Hard to judge because the
environment was a bit noisy.  Anyway, he said that the phone's been real
popular and that he expect they'll be coming out with other models (e.g.
a wall-mounting version) in the near future.

                    -- Nat
-------


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
13-Apr-85 12:23:57-PST,1851;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  13 Apr 85 12:20:19-PST
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 85 14:29:13 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #179
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 13 Apr 85 14:29:13 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 179

Today's Topics:
                 718-976; areacode & zipcode around LA
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #178
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Fri, 12 Apr 85 7:56:04 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  718-976; areacode & zipcode around LA

I called 718-976-3838 again recently, and just got phone bill
showing NEW YORK, NY again for it.  (718 should be fully cut
over by now, so this seems to be a permanent arrangement?)

Rule of thumb in Los Angeles area: if zipcode is 91xxx, phone
is probably in 818 area; if 90xxx, in 213 area.


------------------------------

From: tektronix!andrew%lemming.tek@Berkeley
To: tektronix!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 85 16:05:15 PST
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #178

Here in Oregon/Washington, Pacific Northwest Bell has been offering
something like the Pac Telesis "Premier communications system" for
several months now.  It's called the "Centrex" system.  Their radio and
newspaper ads harp upon the fact that there's no equipment on your
premises, it's easy to upgrade and downgrade, and they claim an average
two hours downtime in forty years.

  -=- Andrew Klossner   (decvax!tektronix!orca!andrew)       [UUCP]
                        (orca!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay)  [ARPA]


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
14-Apr-85 19:05:50-PST,1851;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  14 Apr 85 19:00:46-PST
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 85 14:29:13 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #179
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 13 Apr 85 14:29:13 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 179

Today's Topics:
                 718-976; areacode & zipcode around LA
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #178
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Fri, 12 Apr 85 7:56:04 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  718-976; areacode & zipcode around LA

I called 718-976-3838 again recently, and just got phone bill
showing NEW YORK, NY again for it.  (718 should be fully cut
over by now, so this seems to be a permanent arrangement?)

Rule of thumb in Los Angeles area: if zipcode is 91xxx, phone
is probably in 818 area; if 90xxx, in 213 area.


------------------------------

From: tektronix!andrew%lemming.tek@Berkeley
To: tektronix!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 85 16:05:15 PST
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #178

Here in Oregon/Washington, Pacific Northwest Bell has been offering
something like the Pac Telesis "Premier communications system" for
several months now.  It's called the "Centrex" system.  Their radio and
newspaper ads harp upon the fact that there's no equipment on your
premises, it's easy to upgrade and downgrade, and they claim an average
two hours downtime in forty years.

  -=- Andrew Klossner   (decvax!tektronix!orca!andrew)       [UUCP]
                        (orca!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay)  [ARPA]


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
17-Apr-85 14:36:02-PST,9755;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  17 Apr 85 14:28:29-PST
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 85 16:25:33 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #180
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 17 Apr 85 16:25:33 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 180

Today's Topics:
                  Modem calls using NON-ATT carriers
                           900 number query
                         more about Premiere
                         Re: Premier service
                    800-xxx-xxxx (except in sssss)
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #179
                 718-976; areacode & zipcode around LA
                           1.544 Mb formats
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 15 Apr 85 10:03 PST
From: M. D. Parker <[e-mail]>
To: Telecom%BBNCCA@Nosc
Cc: mike@logicon
Subject: Modem calls using NON-ATT carriers

I recently attempted to utilize some of the other long distance carriers
to call other modems.  However, I have run into some problems and it seems
to be independent of the baud rate (both 300 and 1200).  Here are some
characteristics of the problem:

    1. Call other modem number.

    2. The remote modem answers and my modem gives a CONNECT indication.

    3. Barely seconds into the call the modem gives me the NO CARRIER
        indication and the call is terminated.  There are no 'noise'
        brackets (i.e. {{ at 1200 baud).

I do not have this problem using the ATT.  What kind of problem am I seeing
here?  Is this simply a weak signal over the connection?

Mike Parker

ARPA:  mike@logicon


------------------------------

Date: 15-Apr-85 10:49 PST
From: William Daul - Augmentation Systems - McDnD  <[e-mail]>
Subject: 900 number query
To: [e-mail]

It is the 900 numbers that can handle multiple simultaneous calls?  If so, how
does the equipment work?  Thanks,  --Bi//


------------------------------

From: dual!qantel!stv@Berkeley (Steve Vance@ex2499)
Subject: more about Premiere
Date: 15 Apr 85 18:52:29 GMT

I have the Bell pamphlet, "10 ways Premiere makes your life a lot
easier", which doesn't tell me everything I would want to know about it,
by any means.  Apparently, Premiere is something you can get when you have
two or more phone lines going to your house, or when some family member
lives near enough to you to be serviced by the same ESS office.  The
brochure is only 10 pages, with one sentence per page, with a cutsie
picture depicting what the sentence is saying.  What follows, in fact, is
the full text of the brochure.  (Don't get upset, Lauren, there's no
copyright notice on it.)

Page 1: Reach family members by pushing 2 buttons with INTERCOM.
Reach anyone on any Touch-Tone line in your home instantly by pushing
just 2 buttons.  No more yelling from the kitchen to the office or kids'
room.  Indispensable in an emergency!

Page 2: Answer any ring from any phone with CALL PICKUP.  Call pickup
lets you answer Grandma's phone from your bedroom.  Or your business
phone from the kitchen.  So you never have to make a mad dash for a
distant phone again.

Page 3: Switch calls from one line to another with CALL TRANSFER.  Let
your phone do the running around.  Send your wife's calls to the
greenhouse, business calls to the office or studio.

Page 4: Put calls "on hold" while you consult in privacy...with CALL
HOLD.  Here's the simple solution for all those times when you're on the
phone, yet you want to consult with your family--or even answer another
call--without being overheard.

Page 5: Talk with family, friends or business associates in 2 different
places at once--with 3-WAY CALLING.  Visit with long distance relatives
or friends on birthdays or anniversaries...arrange local church, school
or club activities--all on a 3-way call right from your home.

Page 6: Never miss a call--even if you're already on the phone--with
CALL WAITING (OPTIONAL FEATURE).  If someone is trying to reach you
while you're on the line, a gentle "beep" lets you know.

Page 7: Make sure calls reach you wherever you go with CALL FORWARDING
(OPTIONAL FEATURE).  Instead of being tied to your house to answer
calls, have them follow you.

Page 8: Distinguish between inside and outside calls with DISTINCTIVE
RINGING (OPTIONAL FEATURE).  Distinctive Ringing lets you know whether a
call is from outside (2 rings) or inside (1 ring) your home.

Page 9: Reach important numbers in seconds with CONVENIENCE DIALING
(OPTIONAL FEATURE).  Convenience dialing lets you reach up to 30
emergency or frequently-called numbers by pushing just 2 buttons.  Cuts
search-and-dial time by 80%!

Page 10: Away or busy?  Let someone else answer with ALTERNATE ANSWERING
(OPTIONAL FEATURE).  If you've stepped away--or you're already on the
phone--Alternate Answering automatically routes your incoming calls to
another line so someone else can answer--and take messages for you.

There's a card stapled to the front of this cornucopia of information:
you can call Bonnie Fair toll free at 415-572-6330, although if you
don't live in the Northern California Pacific Bell service area, she would
probably be happier if you called your local business office if you want
to know more.  She did tell me that no extra equipment was necessary,
in fact, it's not even necessary for an installer to visit your home,
although I don't know how they could make one phone in your house ring
and not all the others without some kind of special hardware somewhere!
--

Steve Vance
{dual,hplabs,intelca,nsc,proper}!qantel!stv
dual!qantel!stv@berkeley
Qantel Corporation, Hayward, CA



------------------------------

Date: 15-Apr-85 13:35:42-PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Premier service
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]

     This is much like Centrex II, an early ESS-based service allowing
large organizations to have internal dialing and other PBX-type services
without on-premises switching equipment.  Everything was done in the
CO using software in the ESS.  There was an operator position for the
``PBX operator'', but it was just a very specialized terminal into the ESS.
     Providing this service for small organizations makes a lot of sense.
The big guys buy their own PBX systems today.

                    John Nagle


------------------------------

Date: 15 Apr 85 22:04:46 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 800-xxx-xxxx (except in sssss)
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]

Why is it that many of the 800 numbers advertised have an exception for
a whole state? I assume that it's a regulatory/billing problem.
Sometimes I see another 800 number for use within a state, so (at least
in some cases) it's not just the cost. Aren't the billing computers
smart enough to keep track of the different rates? I'd think crossing a
state line would be just one more complication among many.

------------------------------

Date: Tue 16 Apr 85 21:25:16-EST
From: Robert Scott Lenoil <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #179
To: [e-mail]

     Date:     Fri, 12 Apr 85 7:56:04 EST
     From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
     To:       [e-mail]
     Subject:  718-976; areacode & zipcode around LA

     I called 718-976-3838 again recently, and just got phone bill
     showing NEW YORK, NY again for it.  (718 should be fully cut
     over by now, so this seems to be a permanent arrangement?)

The switch to 718 for the boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten
Island did not bring an accompanying change in boundaries - they are
all still part of New York City, thank you.  (This is just the sort
of thing us non-Manhattanites feared would happen when we lost the
212 area code.)

-Robert
-------


------------------------------

From: ihnp4!homxa!hood@Berkeley
Date: 17 Apr 85 09:39:03 CST (Wed)

To: ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom
From: Ron Hood
Subject: 1.544 Mb formats

I've noticed some discussion on the formats for T1 carrier, and DS1
streams during the last few digests.  While I don't claim to be an
expert I can offer a few pointers to good sources.

A sort of standard reference in the former Bell System is the
"Red Books"; a three volume set published by Western Electric covering
everything you could ever want to know about transmission.  I don't
know if the set is available to the general public, but you might look
around.  The title is "Telecommunications Transmission Engineering" and
was published by WeCo Technical Publications, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

A second document is Compatibility Bulletin 119 (formerly TA 34).  This
contains the "Interconnection Specification for Digital Cross-Connects"
which is a round about way of saying that it has the specs for the
DS-1, DS-2, DS-3, and DS-4 formats.  This is alleged to be available from:

        Publishers' Data Center, Inc.
        P.O. Box C-738
        Pratt Street Station
        Brooklyn, New York  11205
        [phone]

A slight clarification of terms is that a T1 line is a digital metallic
carrier system developed by AT&T while a DS-1 stream is a standardized
1.544Mb interface.  In practice the terms are used interchangeably since
the only difference is that T1 will sometimes have a DC offset to power
remote repeaters.  I don't advocate misusing the terms, but you'll find
it where ever you go (similar to baud vs bits per second).

            Ron




------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
18-Apr-85 22:49:57-PST,10154;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  18 Apr 85 22:43:05-PST
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 85  0:52:23 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #181
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 19 Apr 85  0:52:23 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 181

Today's Topics:
            [Carl Moore (VLD:  Re: answer to NEW YORK, NY]
                      Re:  answer to NEW YORK, NY
                  Delayed call forwarding revisited.
                Re: Modem calls using NON-ATT carriers.
                             800 numbers
                 Equal Access and Data Communications
                  Re: 800-xxx-xxxx (except in sssss)
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #180
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Wed, 17 Apr 85 16:01:32 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  [Carl Moore (VLD:  Re: answer to NEW YORK, NY]


----- Forwarded message # 1:

Date:     Wed, 17 Apr 85 7:41:24 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)  <cmoore@BRL-VLD>
To:       Todd Cooper <[e-mail]>
cc:       cmoore@brl-vld
Subject:  Re:  answer to NEW YORK, NY

Even before the 212/718 split, "NEW YORK, NY" on a phone bill
referred to Manhattan.  (Brooklyn is "BKLYN NYC, NY".)

----- End of forwarded messages


------------------------------

Date: Wed 17 Apr 85 15:49:20-PST
From: Ole Jorgen Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Delayed call forwarding revisited.
To: [e-mail]


Well, finally Pac Bell gave me a straight and plausible answer to why
you cannot have delayed call forwarding in conjunction with direct
call forwarding on the "rollover" line as I wanted. If the rollover
(2nd) line is forwarded to a line *outside* your CO, you could end up
getting what they term an "invalid sequence" e.g.  3 rings followed by
busy if the destination number is busy. This is not "allowed" and
hence the ESS decides not to rollover if the second line is forwarded
out of its own CO. (It will work as expected if the 3rd number is on
the same ESS). Too bad, it would have been such a wonderful feature
without this restriction.

<OLE>
-------

------------------------------

Date: 17 Apr 1985 23:46-PST
Subject:  Re: Modem calls using NON-ATT carriers.
From: JOHN@SRI-CSL
To: mike@LOGICON
Cc: telecom@BBNCCA, john@SRI-CSL


I have experienced something similar to the problem you described (but
with some differences).  My "modem disconnect" problem occurred only
at 1200 bps (no problem at 300 bps).  The problem also occurred only
when I called from my home (in Pacific Bell territory) to the computer
(in General Tel territory) thru a tandem line (about 15 miles distance).
[No problems experienced when calling the computer from a local terminal.]

After alot of head scratching,  I determined that the answering modem
(on the computer) generated considerable "splatter" in the 2600 Hz
region.  This splatter caused the Pac Bell equipment to think that
the call (coming from the GTE CO) had been terminated.  So the Pac
Bell equipment responded by terminating the call.

After replacing the answering modem with another, the problem
disappeared.

I don't know if your non-ATT carrier (or the other equipment in the
signal path) uses 2600 Hz for signalling.  But this is a possible
explanation for the 1200 bps problem.  (Don't know about the 300 bps
problem though.)

John McLean





------------------------------

Date: Thu 18 Apr 85 01:40:01-PST
From: David Roode <[e-mail]>
Subject: 800 numbers
To: [e-mail]

Here at the DDN Network Information Center, we have an 800 number
[[phone]], so I have learned a few things about them.  They are
implemented as special routes on a computer somewhere.  Each line used
a part of an 800 number service has a (dialable) number in the area
code where the service is located.  These lines are in a hunt group
for each service.  Although you can dial the non-800 equivalent for a
service, you cannot make outgoing calls on the 800 lines.  An 800
number can be a network of different services, in which case the
service you reach when you dial the number can depend on your
location, and also on the time of day, customer-accessible
special-case programming, etc.

The base cost of an 800 number is roughly $60 per line per month.
Usage is billed at normal AT&T WATS rates, with a volume discount
based on the number of hours per month.  There is an extra charge of
$300 to have a single number which is accessible for both Intrastate
and Interstate use.  So, there is a cost to having the same number,
even when both Intrastate and Interstate access is purchased.
-------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 17-Apr-85 20:02:11 PST
From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Equal Access and Data Communications
To: [e-mail]

The following was posted to Usenet in response to a query
regarding non-AT&T carriers and automated data calls...

---

I've found extreme variability among non-AT&T carriers when it comes
to data call testing.  Most of them can handle 300 bps, but starting
at 1200 things start to get risky.  Some routes work all the time with
some carriers, some routes only 1 call out of 4 or 5, some routes
not at all.  Also, some brands of modems/carriers don't mix well
at all (one example: Sprint and the D.C. Hayes Smartmodem).

However, general issues of quality aside, there is one REALLY good
reason to generally avoid the non-AT&T carriers for automated
data traffic (like UUCP).  As far as I know, only AT&T provides
called party answering supervision on all calls.  Some of the other
carriers *may* provide it on calls to *some* cities--some don't support
it at all.  It is almost impossible to get these firms
to admit what their status is on this point, since they don't really
like to admit how their charging is done.  But in general the
non-AT&T carriers still operate on the "fixed timeout" basis for
charging.  That is, if a call is held for a fixed length of time
(usually about 30 seconds) the charging starts.  Period.  This
could cause massive problems with systems that use autodialers and
have to timeout through busy signals, long call setup sequences,
and similar problems.  Very substantial amounts of billed (but never
answered) calls could result.  This applies both to completely
separate networks and to WATS resellers.

The alternate carriers CAN get called party supervision if they
want it.  In fact, they pretty much HAVE to get it when they
go equal access in a city.  Note though, that this means that the
availability of the supervision info is based on where you are
calling TO, NOT where you are calling from.  Even worse, it appears
that there has been no quick action on the part of the alternates
to make USE of the supervision data (that is, to provide the means for
passing the information back to a central billing point) even
when it IS available in a destination city.  So the information is
being ignored by these carriers in most cases, even when it exists.

Draw your own conclusions about what this means when it comes
to using alternate carriers for automated modem calls....

--Lauren--

P.S.

I wonder how the subscribers in equal access cities who get
randomly assigned to non-AT&T carriers will react when they
suddenly find that collect/third party/etc. calls no longer
work as they expected.  Or how about the first time they
call operator to get credit for a wrong number (or a connection
where they couldn't hear the other party, etc.) and are told
that they have been switched to some other Joe Random service
and the operator can't help them?

The billing irregularities of the alternate carriers may also
cause people a lot of nasty surprises.  People are used to the
concept that they don't get charged for a call unless it is
answered.  With the alternates, this just isn't usually true.
I wonder if anybody is going to warn people that they've been
switched to a carrier that just "guesses" about when to
start billing?

Fat chance.

--LW--



------------------------------

Date: 18 Apr 85 09:06:56 PST (Thursday)
Subject: Re: 800-xxx-xxxx (except in sssss)
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]



re:  "...Why is it that many of the 800 numbers advertised have an
exception
        for a whole state? I assume that it's a regulatory/billing
problem..."

Sort of a regulatory problem.  It has to do with Interstate vs.
Intrastate tariffs.  If it's Interstate, AT&T gets it - if it's
Intrastate, the local operating company gets it.  The costs for the two,
vary significantly.
So, if a company wants to offer inbound WATS to ALL of it's customers,
it must put in two lines.  One to handle calls from all other states,
and one to handle calls from within the state in which they are located.
Clear as mud?

later--
  John

------------------------------

From: vax135!ariel!houti!ccw@Berkeley
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 85 12:07:21 est
To: ariel!vax135!houxm!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #180

At least in the old days, it was a regulatory problem.  Also
I think that if you had an intrastate call billed to the
national number there was the possibility of having to
use the national network. I.E. if you dialed an in
state number it was cheaper (because it was provided by the
local telco) per call handeled.  If the national number
was dialled then ATT long lines or whatever was involved.
There would also be the problem of local regulations,
which would differ from the national.
-----------------------------------------------------------
The opinions stated herein are often based on heresay,
and in any case are probibly no longer current.




------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
24-Apr-85 14:14:35-PST,6376;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  24 Apr 85 14:09:16-PST
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 85 16:16:57 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #182
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 24 Apr 85 16:16:57 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 182

Today's Topics:
                 more on equal access and supervision
                        Conferencing two lines
                         Common Data Carriers
                       Phone Surge Supressors?
                    Re:  Instate vs. Outstate WATS
                  Anderson Jacobson modem info needed
                     Credit?  You want *credit*??
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 19-Apr-85 14:51:52 PST
From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: more on equal access and supervision
To: [e-mail]

Just to clarify, just because you have equal access to the alternate
carriers at your ORIGINATING point doesn't say anything about
the availability of called party supervision info.  That info is
typically related to the availability of equal access on the
DESTINATION side of the call.  And, as I mentioned earlier, most
(if not all) of the alternates are ignoring that information even
when it is available.

--Lauren--



------------------------------

Date: Sat 20 Apr 85 18:02:02-PST
From: Ole Jorgen Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Conferencing two lines
To: [e-mail]


Can anyone tell me what the Kosher way of adding "Conference" to my
two-line phone is?  Presumably all I would need is two inductively
coupled coils with the correct (600 ohm?) impedance and a ganged
switch which activates/deactivates both of them. What kind of trans-
former should I use, what kind of rating, coupling ratio etc, and
where can I get such a thing?

<OLE>

PS. The AT&T "outboard" solution which is meant for *single* line phones
    is $89, too fancy and *far* too expensive. Help!
-------

------------------------------

Date: 21 Apr 85 21:15 PST
From: M. D. Parker <[e-mail]>
To: telecom%bbncca@Nosc
Cc: mike@logicon
Subject: Common Data Carriers

Just for curiousity, suppose a computer system is available on the following
packet networks:

    UNINET
    TYMNET
    TELENET

Which would you choose to use and in what order?  reasons would be appreciated
as well.

Thanks

Mike Parker
ARPA:  mike@logicon


------------------------------

Date: 22 Apr 85 11:59 PST
From: M. D. Parker <[e-mail]>
To: telecom%bbncca@Nosc
Subject: Phone Surge Supressors?

I just recently came across a data processing products catalog and saw
an interesting gizmo, a phone surge suppressor.  Does anybody really use
these type of devices?  If so, why?  Also, if I have a home computer
that is always on and everything, should I consider purchasing one of
these items?

Thanks

Mike Parker
ARPA: mike@logicon


------------------------------

Date:     Mon, 22 Apr 85 16:57:37 EST
From:     Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  Instate vs. Outstate WATS

> Sort of a regulatory problem.  It has to do with Interstate vs.
> Intrastate tariffs.  If it's Interstate, AT&T gets it - if it's
> Intrastate, the local operating company gets it.  The costs for the two,
> vary significantly.

Not exactly right.   What happens is who regulates pricing.  Before
divestiture, the charges to call Washington, DC (another state)
were cheaper than calling some intervening place instate because
the instate call was not subject to ICC regulations.  The same
phone company handled the call.

> I.E. if you dialed an in
> state number it was cheaper (because it was provided by
local telco) per call handeled.

As I said, in Maryland it was cheaper to dial out of state.

-Ron

------------------------------

Date: Monday, 22 April 1985  11:50-MST
From: lyle <lyle%sjuvax.uucp@BRL-TGR>
Subject:   Anderson Jacobson modem info needed

A friend of mine just purchased one of the oldest modems I have ever
seen at a recent computer festival. It was made by ANDERSON JACOBSON
INC, in sunnyvale california. The problem is that now he wishes to use
this to link up with the Vax 11/780 here at St. Joes. University. What
I was hoping is that someone out there has some manuals or
documentation on the thing.

The stats as far as I know are:

    Anderson Jacobson Inc.
    Sunnyvale California

    ADAC - 1200
    power: 115 vac
           60 Hz
           1/4 A.
    Serial # 0375,01

If anyone has any information about it, please mail me.

                    Thanks Alot in Advance
=============================================================================
Wayne J. Lyle (CF)                                    St. Joseph's University
{allegra | astrovax | bpa | burdvax}!sjuvax!lyle             Philadelphia
=============================================================================


------------------------------

Date: 24 Apr 85 03:44:54 EST
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: Credit?  You want *credit*??
To: [e-mail]

Remember back in the good ole days when you got cut off on a
long-distance call, or got the wrong number?  You called up the
operator, she said ''Oh, I'm sorry, I'll reconnect you and arrange credit'' and
proceeded to do so.

Jersey has just been moved over to the post-divestiture kludge that covers these
situations.  Now you get connected to a Credit Operator, and you have to
tell that person the number you called from, the number you called, and the
conditions requiring billing adjustment.  It turns out that there is a
direct 800 number to get this operator as well, so you don't have to bug
the NJBell operators about it if it was an AT&T call.  The billing
center is in Philadelphia and now covers five states.  This is apparently
necessary since NJBell operators now cannot access AT&T billing records
since they are separate companies, so you have to talk directly to
AT&T for billing correction.

Yettch!  When are they going to put it all back together so it works *right*?

_H*
-------

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
27-Apr-85 19:52:37-PST,8304;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  27 Apr 85 19:47:18-PST
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 85 21:53:15 EST
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #183
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 27 Apr 85 21:53:15 EST    Volume 4 : Issue 183

Today's Topics:
                  Phone-A-Friend hits the stands...
                 re: Surge Supressors for Telephones
                           Re: Wrong Number
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #181
                       Re:  Common Data Carriers
                    Which network would *I* pick?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 19850424-1938EST
To:  TELECOM@BBNCCA
From:  [e-mail]
Subject: Phone-A-Friend hits the stands...



Well, it seems that the underground has really hit the overground.
For a small price, you can now call Phone-a-Friend in Worcester, MA
(617/550-5000 but you can't call it 'cept from Worcester|). Just like
the old conferences that populated the California telephone underground
in years past (tho' I think a few are still up), this little baby
has its share of morons who yell obscenities, but unlike the old conf's,
PaF seems to have a moderator. I haven't heard one mentioned in the radio
spots -- anyone with info want to share it? Also, any idea when these
will be standard for most cities?
                                                         Joe
[reply to [e-mail]]

------------------------------

Date:    24 April 85 19:08-EST
From:      Michael Grant  <[e-mail]>
To: Telecom Digest <[e-mail]>
Subject: re: Surge Supressors for Telephones

Most, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, modems are optically
isolated from the phone lines, (or isolated in some way).  That means that
there is no 'electrical' connection between your computer, and the phone
lines themselves.  An Optical Isolator is a device that converts the signal
into light, (usually with a small LED), and back into electricty, (usually
with a photo-transistor.)  This effectivly detatches the equpiment from
the line.  Now, to tie this in with surge supressors.  When a surge comes
down the line, it's not supposed to burn out your modem, just this opto-
isolator instead...if even that.

From direct experience, I find modems pretty durrable to the phone lines.
Once lightning hit something on my house, and destroyed most of my computer.
The only thing left was the modem.  I've never had a modem die due to an
electrical storm.  Ever seen a phone go out due to a surge?

A surge supressor isn't going to make your connection look better when a
spike comes down the line.  When that spike hits the line, your data is
going to be splattered all over the place.  Not even the fanciest
equipment is going to be able to recover those bit.

All in all, I'm pretty negative toward the idea.  I don't speak for everyone on
the list.  I'm sure that there are people out there that will disagree with
me.  If it makes you feel more secure with one of these on your phone line,
get one.  Oh, and better make sure you get one for the electrical outlet
too if you havn't already.

There just seems like there's a glut of computer crap you can get for your
home computer these days, that no one really needs like keyboard covers, key
cap enlargers, screen filters, power line conditioners (to make it a smoother
sine wave!), lazy-susans for monitors... And what gets me is the price.
The people who sell this stuff think us computer people have *lots* of
money to spend on this crap.  (Some do, I suppose.)
-Mike Grant

------------------------------

Date:    24 April 85 19:47-EST
From:      Michael Grant  <[e-mail]>
To: Telecom Digest <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Wrong Number

This is what finally happened with that collect long-distance wrong number
call I recieved a few weeks ago.  Let me recap what happened.  I got this
call in the middle of the night, the operator asked me if I'd pay for this
call.  I immediatly said, "NO."  So, she put the call through anyway.  When
I finished talking to the person, (she wanted to speak to someone named Joe)
I flashed the key to get back to the operator.  She told me that she couldn't
(and wouldn't) give me credit for the call, and that I'd have to get the bill
and call my local phone company.

Anyway, I got the bill, and called C&P (my local telco) I explained the problem
to them.  They told me that I'd have to call AT&T to get credit because it
was an AT&T operator who screwed up.  So, I called AT&T.  They told me that
they had nothing to do with the billing, and that I'd have to take the
matter up with my local operating company.  I called C&P back again, and
explained my problem again.  After much hassel, It was finally decided that
AT&T didn't have the power to take such a call off my bill.  The call then
got removed from the bill, (the tax too!)

Since divestature, service has degraded SOOOO much.  "We don't care, We don't
have to.  We're the phone company"  Someone has got to start up a phone
company to compete with Bell on the local level.  I think then, they'd
have to listen to their customers, (while they still had them.)
-Mike Grant

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Apr 85 10:59:35 pst
From: hplabs!vienna!bob@Berkeley (Bob Toxen)
To: ames!hplabs!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #181

In reply to Lauren's comment on billing irregularities of non-AT&T long
distance carriers:

1. In the six years that I've heavily used MCI there was only *one* case
   where I was incorrectly billed. It took only a three minute phone call
   to a rather pleasant lady to get credited. During the same time when my
   AT&T/Pacific Telephone business phone went out completely it took AT&T
   *three weeks* to fix it!

2. A forty mile phone call over MCI (Mtn. View to San Francisco) at 1200
   baud munged a character every few minutes (AT&T doesn't do much better
   on this route). With a 40% discount over AT&T the occasional UUCP
   re-try would be well worth it.

3. When was the last time *you* dialled the wrong long distance number?
   I think that most people will be overjoyed when they randomly get switched
   to MCI and realize a 40% savings (less 2% for wrong numbers) over AT&T.

4. I find that MCI lines to be of equal *or higher* quality than AT&T,
   probably because of modern equipment. MCI from San Jose to Wash., DC is
   consistently better than AT&T!

If I sound biased, I am, towards lower cost, higher quality phone service.
I have no monetary interest in MCI.

Bob Toxen        "System V. Consider it SUB-standard! (My opinion)"
Silicon Graphics
{ucbvax,decwrl,ames!vienna,dual,its}!olympus!bob



------------------------------

Date:     Thu, 25 Apr 85 18:27:43 EST
From: Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
To: "M. D. Parker" <[e-mail]>
Cc: telecom%bbncca@Nosc, [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  Common Data Carriers

I access a database that is on UNINET, TYMNET, TELENET, and DUSNET.
I'v only used TYMNET and TELENET, and TYMNET is far superior.  TELENET
is one of the most exasperating experiences I've ever had.

-Ron

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lynn Gold)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 85 17:56:16 pst
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Which network would *I* pick?


Why, TYMNET, of course!  :-)

Seriously, Tymnet has more nodes than either of the others you mention;
it is also more secure.  I have used TELENET as a private user, and
it is MUCH slower than Tymnet, but since you're not going to out-and-out
believe someone who works for one of them, I suggest you look at a study
done by DATAPRO Research Corporation (they're in Delran, NJ) which compares
TELENET, Tymnet and several other companies.

--Lynn Gold
...tymix!figmo

["The opinions expressed here are probably the same ones my company would
express, had I bothered to ask the marketing dep't."]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
28-Apr-85 13:48:29-PDT,5726;000000000000
Return-path: <[e-mail]>
Received:  from BBNCCA by SRI-CSL via DDN;  28 Apr 85 13:43:21-PDT
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 85 15:36:21 EDT
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
Reply-to: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #184
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 28 Apr 85 15:36:21 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 184

Today's Topics:
                        long distance carriers
                  re:  Surge Supressors for Telephones
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 85 16:41:41 pst
From: sdcsvax!sdcc7!li63sdl@Berkeley (DAVID SMITH)
To: -s@Berkeley, AT&T@Berkeley, Billing@Berkeley, PacTel@Berkeley,



Please post the following to telecom digest

---------------------------------------------------------------

    I recently had my telephone disconnected due to the fact that my
roommate had forgotten to pay the bill.  I have no dispute with the
billing, however, my question is: My PacTel bill was around $15.  We
had paid off $85 of our bill, leaving a balance of $82.  Therefore, I
would assume, we had paid our debt to PacTel and only owed money to
AT&T.  Now at the bottem of my monthly long-distance statement, it says
that the billing is only provided as a service to AT&T, with whom
Pacific Telephon has no connection.  If this is the case, under what
authority did they cut off my telephone service.  If I fail to pay my
MCI bill, would PacTel cut me off?  Shouldn't I just be cut off from
AT&T's lines, and collecting is their problem?  Just a little more
confusion resulting from the break-up.
                David L. Smith
                UC San Diego
                sdcsvax!sdcc7!li63sdl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
            Thanks,
            Dave



------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27-Apr-85 23:38:49 PST
From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: long distance carriers
To: [e-mail]

THIS IS ALL THAT COULD BE SAVED FROM ISSUE 184.

Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #185
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 30 Apr 85 04:14:54 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 29 Apr 85 23:58:21 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 185

Today's Topics:
                         Re: Surge Protectors
                      Re: Conferencing two lines
                LD directory assistance charges (AT&T)
                 lightning protection for phone lines
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ed Hall <edhall@rand-unix>
Date: 28 Apr 85 15:23:29 PDT (Sun)
To: TELECOM@bbncca
Cc: edhall@rand-unix
Subject: Re: Surge Protectors

I once (1966) lived in an older house which had carbon-arc surge
protectors across the phone lines.  These devices consisted of a a flat
piece of carbon next to a U-shaped piece of ceramic with a smaller
carbon cemented into it.  A small gap existed between the carbons, since
the second carbon was just slightly recessed into the ceramic.  The
whole thing was sandwiched in a spring-loaded holder with several of
these protecters, connecting across the line and to ground.

The idea was that a surge of >150 volts or so would start a low-
impedance carbon arc.  If the arc continued long enough, the cement in
the ceramic holder would melt and bring the carbons into contact,
forming a short.

These devices worked: we had a fair number of summer thunderstorms (this
was in Northern Ohio), and once after some particularly close lightning
strikes the phones stopped working.  As it turned out, one of the
protectors had shorted--the carbons were pitted and the cement had
melted.  But the phones were OK.

I've often wondered if a metal-oxide varistor or other ``newer
technology'' would have withstood this sort of surge.  With most phone
lines now underground, the opportunities for induced currents from
lightning are a lot less than they were then, so it might not make much
difference.

                -Ed Hall
                edhall@rand-unix

------------------------------

To: Ole Jorgen Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Conferencing two lines
Date: 28 Apr 85 15:39:58 PDT (Sun)
From: Einar Stefferud <stef@uci-icsa>

If you don't want to build your own, you can buy a nice little two line
with hold (with lights) and two line conference and redial last number
for around $50 or sometimes less.  It is the TeleConcepts Two Line
phone.  Available a in various discount stores that I have seen.  I
have three of them (two regular desk and one "dial-in-hand-set), and I
like them both.

I am not a stock holder.  Don't have any idea where they come from.

Cheers - Stef

------------------------------

Date: 29 Apr 1985 12:05:32-EDT
From: prindle@NADC
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: LD directory assistance charges (AT&T)


I live in the 215 (Philadelphia area) area code and made a directory assistan

        ce
call to 609 (South Jersey) to get an Atlantic City number, and then placed th

        e
call to the actual number.  The actual call naturally appeared on my AT&T
portion of the bill.  But the killer, is that the directory assistance call,
supposedly one of an allotment of 2 free DA calls via AT&T, came up as a $.50


charge on the Bell of PA portion of the bill!  Apparently, Bell of PA owns a
special exception to the inter-state rules and handles calls to 3 neighboring


NJ counties.  Since directory assistance is probably handled out of Trenton,
my DA call got handled and billed by Bell of PA.  You won't believe how AT&T
handles this situation - you have to call them up (1-800-222-0300) and they
look you up to make sure you made the equivalent required call, then credit
your AT&T account!  Since this is a totally manual operation, and since we
the public have never been told of this strange hack, chances are good that
Bell of Pa. is collecting gobs of half dollars which their customers really
do not owe; furthermore, when a watchful customer does go through the requisi

        te
manual process, it seems as if Bell of Pa. ends up with AT&T's money.  AT&T
also seems to be able to see the Bell of Pa portion of the bill on *their*
computer terminals.  Why do I get the impression that AT&T is not as severed
from the operating companies as they would have us believe?  hmmmm.....

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 29 Apr 85 22:58:36 edt
From: ulysses!smb@Berkeley (Steven Bellovin)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: lightning protection for phone lines

I wouldn't be that sanguine about modems being immune to lightning hits.
About 10 years ago, we lost not only a Bell data set (one of the old-style
clunkers), but the terminal attached to it.  It might be that we had
unusually severe storms there (Chapel Hill, North Carolina); at other times,
I had a TV set's RF input section get fried when the CATV line took a hit
(the balun also blew), a light bulb burn out, and a circuit breaker trip.
Even optoisolators can be blown by that sort of overvoltage; you may find
it more convenient to unplug (and replace/repair) a burned-out surge protecto

        r
than to do without your modem for a while.


                --Steve Bellovin

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #186
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 2 May 85 03:19:27 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 1 May 85 22:41:15 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 186

Today's Topics:
            The INSTRUCTION BOOKLET for a DEMON DIALER...
                      Pay phones and hearing Aids
                    Re: Phone line surge protection
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 30 Apr 85    8:23 EST
From:   James A. Dorf   <[e-mail]>
Subject: The INSTRUCTION BOOKLET for a DEMON DIALER...
To:  [e-mail]

-----
Hi folks.  I have the 92-memory-location DEMON DIALER which I can
definately recommend as a full-function auto-dialer but since it's
purchase a couple of years ago I have LOST the instruction booklet.

If anyone has a copy of this booklet, please simply reply with your
SNAIL-MAIL address and I will gladly mail you a postage-paid return
envelope plus photocopying costs (if necessary).

Please give this a high priority folken, I am rather desperate but
if no one has one around I can always just dig up the manufacturers
address and phone # and get it from them...

Thanks and warm regards/jad

p.s.  If anyone wants to hear about all the f a b u l o u s features
of the Demon Dialer, let me know...  I should be a salesman for them!/j
-----

------------------------------

Date:     Tue, 30 Apr 85 21:37 EST
From:      [e-mail]
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Pay phones and hearing Aids

        What has Bell done with their new Pay phones to keep me
from hearing dial tone and ring tone with my hearing aid?  I have
heard rumors that there was going to be trouble with magnetic
coupling to the telephone loops that most hearing aids have, but
I rarely use that (occasionally in noisy environments); I just
use regular acoustic coupling and always have got along fine.
But suddenly the last two times I have used a pay phone (in both
cases they looked new) I can't hear either tone (and for all I
know I can't hear the busy tone either).  Speech volume also
seems less than usual.  The first time I thought it was something
wrong with the phones and went down the whole bank of them, all
the same.
        Needless to say, I am angry.  Suddenly I am more
handicapped than I used to be.  Phones at home and the office are
fine.
                                Bruce Hawkins
                                bhawkins@umass-cs@csnet-relay

------------------------------

Date:     Tue, 30 Apr 85 21:43 EST
From:      [e-mail]
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Re: Phone line surge protection


> I just recently came across a data processing products catalog and saw
> an interesting gizmo, a phone surge suppressor.  Does anybody really use
> these type of devices?  If so, why?  Also, if I have a home computer
> that is always on and everything, should I consider purchasing one of
> these items?

        A year ago, I had a lightning strike a quarter-mile from
my house.  No damage was done to either computer (both were off
at the time), but it took out my modem (Anchor XII).  So when I
saw a phone-line surge suppressor for $19, I ordered it
immediately.  It seems to be invisible (inaudible?): it has not
introduced any problems that I am aware of.  I haven't had any
more lightning strikes, either, so I can't tell you how effective
it is.
                                Bruce Hawkins
                                bhawkins@umass-cs

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #187
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 4 May 85 04:14:47 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 3 May 85 23:36:26 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 187

Today's Topics:
                       Racal-Vadic Modem Query
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #186
                      Telephone wiring diagram?
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #185
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Racal-Vadic Modem Query
Date: 01 May 85 23:11:58 PDT (Wed)
From: larus%ucbdali@Berkeley

I have a Racal-Vadic VA3451 Auto Dial Modem at home.  When I dial into
Berkeley's computers, about half the time I get a "CONNECTED" message
and then nothing.  No manner of key pounding will get me a login
prompt.  However, hanging up and trying again usually works.  I am
begining to suspect that there is some sort of of incompatability
between R-V's triple protocol and the 201/212 modems on the computers.
Has anyone else seen this problem and know of a solution.

Thanks,
/Jim

------------------------------

From: ihnp4!ihopa!riccb!jmc@Berkeley
Date: 2 May 85 04:43:21 CDT (Thu)
To: ihopa!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #186

Regarding surge protecters for telephone lines.

Surge protectors, as the name implies, protect the equipment and user
on a telephone line from large voltage transients.  Normal telephone
equipment is transformer coupled to the line and if they meet REA spec's
should be able to handle 1000 V transients without burning.  To limit
lightening strikes Bell puts arrestors on the office end which limit
transients to about 400 V.  I believe arrestors are also used on the
customer premises but I'm not sure what the limits are.  $19 seems
outrageous since these things are nothing but gas discharge tubes.  I've
seen them go down to 90 V, anything below that will start firing on
ringing voltage.  REA standards say the equipment won't burn after so
many consecutive 1000 V strikes but does not imply that it must work
afterwards.

                                  Jeff McQuinn * Rockwell International




------------------------------

Date: Wed 1 May 85 20:01:31-PDT
From: Doug <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone wiring diagram?
To: [e-mail]

I have a old Trimline telephone that I'd like to get
wired correctly.  It is a '69 vintage unit that requires
a transformer for lighting the buttons.
I've managed to get the switch-hook wiring sort-of figured out,
but can't seem to get the bell to work properly.
The bell has five wires coming out of the bell, colored:
Red, Black, Blue, Slate, Slate/Red
The terminal plate has a capacitor between terminals K and A.
The rest of the terminals are marked L1, L2, 1, 3, 4, B, F, G, and C
The handset has 5 leads: Red and Green are Tip and Ring, Black and
White are the lighting circuit, and Yellow is ?

Does anyone have a wiring diagram?

                [e-mail]
-------


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1-May-85 22:20:26 PDT
From: vortex!dave@rand-unix (David H. Siegel)
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #185
To: randvax!telecom-request@bbncca
Cc: vortex!i@rand-unix

        Lightning is a wonderful display of nature.  It is so wonderful
that you do not have to be anywhere near it to lose eyour electronic
toys.  1.  Underground telco cables are not immune to hits.  Surges are
induced very well in burried cabl.  2.  Protectors only divert
"excess" voltages to ground... when they get around to it.  The idea is
to keep the amount of energy to the inside telset as low as possible.
3.  MOV's can only handle their rated power dissipations before they self-
distruct.  In sensibly designed equipment they are only used as secondary
protection.  (The protectors are the primary line of defense).  4.  The
best protection is obtained with a combination of devices:  Gas tube
protectors, premises equipment with good secondary protection to a good
earth ground and well grounded chassis.  For power a 3 mode surge arrester
is a good start (well grounded please).  For CATV drops grounding blocks
are a must.  A cheap 50 cent balun transformer on the back of your TV
can't hurt either.  5.  No kite flying during thunderstorms, or your
Telcom Digest will be cancelled.

                                        Dave Siegel


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #188
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 5 May 85 17:18:49 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 May 85 12:41:35 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 188

Today's Topics:
                  1985 Staten Island, NYC call guide
                                  DTN
                          Pay phone earpiece
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Sat, 4 May 85 9:54:31 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  1985 Staten Island, NYC call guide

Message unit zones, which formerly ran thru southern Westchester and
out to Amityville, Cold Spring Harbor & Farmingdale near the Nassau/
Suffolk border, now also include northern Westchester, Putnam, Rockland
and a small part of Orange (latter 2 across the Hudson!) and also
western Suffolk as far east as Bellport.

Goof in list of zones? It says dial 1+718 for Brooklyn, Queens, S.I.
(and 1+area code for 212,914,516 area points).

Calls within New York Metropolitan LATA (includes Greenwich & Byram in
Connecticut?) are billed by N.Y.Telephone, along with calls to 5 N.J.
counties: Passic, Bergen, Essex, Union, Hudson. (It has been noted else-
where that phone prefixes can cross county lines.)


------------------------------

Date:     Sat, 4 May 85 9:55:16 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  DTN

I saw DTN in a message header today.  Is that some sort of phone #?


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 4 May 85 07:53:32 pdt
From: schoch@Berkeley (Steve Schoch)
To: telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Pay phone earpiece
Cc:

I have an earpiece I got from a vandalized phone and noticed that the
terminals were connected to a coil of wire that goes around the whole thing
(the coil is made of thin wire 1 3/4 inch diameter).  At first I thought it
was the speaker coil, but when I disconnected this coil, the earpiece still
worked.

Does this coil have something to do with magnetic coupling devices that
might be attached to the phone?  I can't think of any other use for it as
it doesn't seem to affect the operation at all.

                                Steve Schoch
                                schoch@berkeley


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #189
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 9 May 85 21:10:45 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 May 85 16:37:07 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 189

Today's Topics:
                            Auto ringback
                                 DTN
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #187
                      Telephone wiring diagram?
                     Hearing on public telephones
        Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #187 -  Telephone wiring diagram
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 6 May 1985 11:31-EDT
Subject: Auto ringback
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]


Does anyone know a number to call to get automatic ringback (for testing
lines) in the Nynex area?  More specifically, in the New England Tel.
area?  More specifically, in the Boston area?

Tks,

- Bill Thompson
(WThompson@BBNF)


------------------------------

Date: Monday,  6 May 1985 09:13:36-PDT
From: [e-mail]  (Marshall R., PCSG LJ02/E4 DTN 282-232

        5)
To: telecom@bbncca
Subject: DTN

DTN (Digital Telephone Number) is Digital's internal telephone number prefix.


For our site, the internal DTN prefix is 282 but on the outside one
uses 486.

Marshall

------------------------------

Date: Tue 7 May 85 01:42:26-EDT
From: Robert Scott Lenoil <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #187
To: [e-mail]

     Date: Wed 1 May 85 20:01:31-PDT
     From: Doug <[e-mail]>
     Subject: Telephone wiring diagram?
     To: [e-mail]

     I have a old Trimline telephone that I'd like to get
     wired correctly.  It is a '69 vintage unit that requires
     a transformer for lighting the buttons.
     I've managed to get the switch-hook wiring sort-of figured out,
     but can't seem to get the bell to work properly.
     The bell has five wires coming out of the bell, colored:
     Red, Black, Blue, Slate, Slate/Red
     The terminal plate has a capacitor between terminals K and A.
     The rest of the terminals are marked L1, L2, 1, 3, 4, B, F, G, and C
     The handset has 5 leads: Red and Green are Tip and Ring, Black and
     White are the lighting circuit, and Yellow is ?

     Does anyone have a wiring diagram?

                     [e-mail]
     -------
You only need connect two of the wires from the ringer.  I forget which two,
but experimentation will quickly resolve that.  Anyways, one of these wires
should be connected to the terminal closest to the one labelled F.  This
terminal should be unused.  The next wire should go to the C terminal.  On
my phone, there are two terminals labelled C; I ran it to the one furthest
from the H terminal, as shown:

RR   C
          H
 C   B
 ^
 Connect here

Note that I arrived at this wiring via experimentation on my Princess phone,
which I no longer have with me, so I can't check on this.  (This was written
down though, not from memory.)

-Robert
-------


------------------------------

From: Miriam Clifford <[e-mail]>
Date:     6 May 85 10:23:44 EDT  (Mon)
Subject:  Hearing on public telephones
To: telecom%ucbvax%arpa@Berkeley

[]
The pay phones that are not hearing aid compatible may be a decision,
however thoughtless, of the local telephone company.
A protest could be lodged (presumably pay phones should be equally
accessable to all) and, at least, an educational campaign launched to
prevent such stupidity (if possible) and to correct such conditions
when they are found.  There is no valid reason not have ALL phones
hearing aid compatible, as far as I know.  Those that are, are equally
usable by the non-hearing-impaired, and have no disadvantages that I
am aware of.

A national organization exists to help hearing impaired persons help
themselves--I've forwarded the original message to them.  You might want to
support their efforts:

Self Help for the Hard of Hearing (SHHH)
7800 Wisconsin Ave
Bethesda, MD 27814
301-657-2248

{decvax,ihnp4,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!dmimi
Mimi Clifford
2535 Sevier St
Durham, NC 27705
919-489-4821  919-684-2854 (Wed)



------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 May 85 09:46:52 pdt
From: dual!paul@Berkeley (Paul Wilcox-Baker)
To: telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #187 -  Telephone wiring diagram

> I have a old Trimline telephone that I'd like to get
> wired correctly.  It is a '69 vintage unit that requires
> a transformer for lighting the buttons.
> I've managed to get the switch-hook wiring sort-of figured out,
> but can't seem to get the bell to work properly.
> The bell has five wires coming out of the bell, colored:
> Red, Black, Blue, Slate, Slate/Red

The bell is usually wired as follows:
Slate/Red to A
Slate to     K
Red to       L2
Black to     L1
The Blue wire I have never encountered before.  I would leave it
isolated.

> The terminal plate has a capacitor between terminals K and A.
> The rest of the terminals are marked L1, L2, 1, 3, 4, B, F, G, and C
> The handset has 5 leads: Red and Green are Tip and Ring, Black and
> White are the lighting circuit, and Yellow is ?

In Trimline phones all the speech circuitry is in the handset part.
The base seems to contain only the bell,  the terminal strip and
hook-switch.

Paul Wilcox-Baker.



------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #190
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 11 May 85 22:33:10 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 11 May 85 17:52:17 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 190

Today's Topics:
                              Ring-back
                           modem confusion?
                       Re: lightning protection
                      Re:  Boston area ringback
                 Verification of Equal Access Carrier
                        boston area ring back
                           sprint features
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Ring-back
Date: 09 May 85 19:05:41 EDT (Thu)
From: [e-mail]

Bill,

    on 646-xxxx, 981-xxxx works.  On some other numbers in this area, 982-xxx

        x
works.  It's the standard: call number, get tone, flash, wait for buzz, and
then hang up.

Dan

------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
Subject: modem confusion?
Date: 09 May 85 20:23:48 EST (Thu)
From: Christopher A Kent <[e-mail]>

Every once in a while, when dialed up from home, my connection seems to
get quite confused. The symptom is that it prints about 20 U
characters, then the connections goes into the state where everything I
type is echoed, but nothing gets accomplished. The only solution is to
hang up and connect again, at which point everything is fine.

I can't reproduce it, but it keeps happening. Does this sound familiar
to anyone? It seems to be related to one of the modems, but I can't be
sure which one.

Thanks,
chris
----------

------------------------------

Date:  9-May-85 17:35:39-PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: lightning protection
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]

      In the antenna world, where lightning strikes are a routine problem,
several layers of defenses are needed to protect equipment.  The first is
typically a spark gap followed by about a ten-turn coil of half-inch square
copper busbar.  The lightning spike is sharp enough that the inductance of
the coil forces most of the energy across the spark gap, which must connect,
via 000 copper or better, to a good solid ground such as a small
farm of 6' ground rods.  Heathkit used to sell such a unit, which looked
line an orange-juice can with coax connectors on both ends and a big
ground terminal on the side; this unit was rated as able to damp a direct
lightning strike down to 90 volts or less.
      With one of these out front, a MOV-type surge suppressor can probably
do the rest of the job, and the wire should melt down before your equipment
goes.

                                        John Nagle

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 May 85  8:55:09 EDT
From: Jim Berets <jberets@bbn-vax>
Subject: Re:  Boston area ringback
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]

A number that has worked for me in Belmont and Watertown is
981-(last 4 digits of phone dialed from).  If I remember
correctly, you get a dial tone after dialing this.  Flash,
and you will get a constant single-frequency tone.  Then,
hang up and you will be called back.  Hanging up again after
answering gets you back to the beginning.

Jim

------------------------------

Date: 10 May 85 20:23 PDT
From: M. D. Parker <[e-mail]>
To: telecom%bbncca@Nosc
Cc: mike@logicon
Subject: Verification of Equal Access Carrier

I recently read the following bulletin from a long distance carrier:

"
Equal Access customers are urged to verify their Equal Access carrier
after they have been notified of their activation date by simply dialing

0-700-555-4141.

This convenient feature is simply used to verify that your phone line
has been presubscribed by your 1+ carrier.
"

Has anybody tried this number.  I know that this number does not work
where I am at the moment.

Mike Parker
ARPA:  mike@logicon

PS:  Wasn't the 700 area code used previously by President James Earl Carter
        during his nationwide call in radio program "Talk to President
        Carter"?


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 11 May 85 17:48:14 EDT
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: boston area ring back
To: [e-mail]

981, 982, 983, 984, 985, 986, 987, etc. Plus last 4 digits. Also
if that doesn't work some places in Cambridge use 977+last 4.

Some areas don't have a ringback number, so if you don't find one,
it's not because you haven't looked.

--JSol


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 11 May 85 17:49:41 EDT
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: sprint features
To: [e-mail]

I almost don't want to publish this because they might take the features away


(assuming they aren't ready to announce).

If you dial 10777+1+areacode+number from a coin phone, you get prompted
with a sprint dialtone.  Dial your access code (and travelcode if needed)
and it completes the call. This sure beats credit card calls since they don't


charge extra for use of this feature.

Also, the sprint 950 number works in Boston. The Quality is not as good
as if you were using the "announced" dialin (which starts with 426),
but from a measured line or a pay phone it costs money to use that.

I hope Sprint announces the 10777 feature, because it sure is winning.

--Jsol


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #191
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 13 May 85 21:15:29 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 13 May 85 16:31:08 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 191

Today's Topics:
                             700-555-4141
         Modem ScrewUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUps
                          UUUUUU from modems
                           Modem confusion!
                           modem confusion?
                                Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 May 85 01:15:30 edt
From: Micheal A. Grant <mgrant@maryland>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: 700-555-4141

I tried it both preceded by a 0, 1, and nothing at all.  It rang once,
then a recorded female voice said, "You have reached the AT&T Long
Distance Network, thankyou for choosing AT&T."  Then silence.  The
message did not repeat.  We do not have Equal Access yet, it's not
expected for some time yet.
-Mike Grant

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 May 85 01:26:16 edt
From: Micheal A. Grant <mgrant@maryland>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Modem ScrewUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUps
Cc: [e-mail]

This is in reply to a modem problem, which mysteryously prints
a whole string of U's, then you're basically wedged.

I know just what your're talking about.  I've had the same damn thing
happen to me using the University of Merryland's computers.  I really
think it's the university's Gandalf box.  When it happens to me,
the modem dosn't hang up, it just sits there and echos back everything
you send it.  Chris, do you know if you use Gandalfs at Purdue?
-Mike Grant

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 May 85 07:54:10 pdt
From: [e-mail] (Brian Kantor)
To: cak@purdue
Subject: UUUUUU from modems
Cc: telecom@bbncca

Get whoever it is you are calling to flip the switch in HIS modem to turn
off the remote diagnostics - the UUUUU you are seeing is a test pattern.

Many modems would accidently drop into the test state from a burst of noise
while connecting or disconnecting.  On many, they first send the test pattern


and then go into loopback mode, which is what it sounds like you're
experiencing.

Usually there is a switch on the modem card to disable this ``feature''.

        Brian Kantor    UC San Diego

        decvax\         [e-mail]
        akgua  >---  sdcsvax  --- brian
        ucbvax/         Kantor@Nosc

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 May 85 20:18:00 cdt
From: [e-mail] (Ed Nather)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Modem confusion!


  >To: [e-mail]
  >Subject: modem confusion?
  >Date: 09 May 85 20:23:48 EST (Thu)
  >From: Christopher A Kent <[e-mail]>
  >
  >Every once in a while, when dialed up from home, my connection seems to
  >get quite confused. The symptom is that it prints about 20 U
  >characters, then the connections goes into the state where everything I
  >type is echoed, but nothing gets accomplished. The only solution is to
  >hang up and connect again, at which point everything is fine.
  >
  >I can't reproduce it, but it keeps happening. Does this sound familiar
  >to anyone? It seems to be related to one of the modems, but I can't be
  >sure which one.
  >
  >Thanks,
  >chris

I saw the same thing last night -- symptoms exactly as you describe.  I
thought it was the (Vax Unix 4.2bsd) system I was talking to, but I guess
it could be the modems.  Both ends use Ven-Tel [phone] baud model MD212.
Very disturbing.  I've seen it maybe 6 times in 3 years.


Ed Nather
Astronony Dept, U of Texas @ Austin
{allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather

------------------------------

Date: Sun 12 May 85 19:20:18-PDT
From: Doug <[e-mail]>
Subject: Thanks
To: [e-mail]

Thanks to all of you who answered my query about the
telephone wiring information, especially to David G. Cantor
<dgc@ucla-locus>, who recognized the unit from the description I
gave, answered, and mailed me a copy of the diagram.

The ringer has one coil only, with five connections.
The extra three; slate, slate-red, and blue, are used only for
party identification.

The unit is apparently a K2254, however, this identification is
NOWHERE to be found on the unit.

-------


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #192
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 14 May 85 21:26:24 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 14 May 85 16:46:40 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 192

Today's Topics:
                            Modem Madness
                    800-xxx-xxxx (except in sssss)
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #191
                       more about 700-555-1212
                        Re: UUUUUUUUUUU~i{gak!
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #191
                                Wiring
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 13 May 85 23:05:17 edt
From: Michael A. Grant <mgrant@gymble>
To: telecom@bbncca
Subject: Modem Madness

Refering to that long string of UUUUUU's, somone said it's a test
pattern.  The modems that we connect to are those bell vadic triple's.
Does anyone know how to get them out of the test mode once you've been
inadvertently dumped into it?  Or even, how to get into it?
-Mike
p.s. once in it, is the connection lost?

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 13 May 85 16:07:53 est
From: hadron![e-mail] (Joseph S. D. Yao)
To: seismo!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: 800-xxx-xxxx (except in sssss)

> Why is it that many of the 800 numbers advertised have an exception for
> a whole state? I assume that it's a regulatory/billing problem.

That state is the state within which the company's offices (at least
those answering the inward WATS line) are located.  Each state has its
own local WATS service, so you should always see this exception.
Inward WATS fees within the state are paid to the state telco.  After
this, then, there is a set of n (n ~= 4) concentric WATS areas around
the state for AT&T LongLines WATS.  The user pays a different fee,
depending on how far out he wants this inward WATS line to be valid.
Also depending on the state, this fee may or may not be more than the
in-state inWATS fee.

Warning: this explanation was good as of the last time I looked into
this, and should still be mostly valid; but that was before the
dismemberment of AT&T.

        Joe Yao         hadron!jsdy@seismo.{ARPA,UUCP}


------------------------------

Date: Mon 13 May 85 17:28:35-PDT
From: Doug <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #191
To: [e-mail]

The "UUUUUUUUUUUU" test pattern from 212 modems does sound like it's
going into remote test mode.  I had this problem from one and only one
user here once.  The Racal-Vadic modems I was using here apparently go
into self-test based on a short, timed interruption of carrier.
His telephone line caused exactly this to happen.  They rewired his
neighborhood shortly thereafter, I re-enabled remote testing on
the lines he used, and never saw the problem again.
-------


------------------------------

From: ima!johnl@bbncca
Date: Tue May 14 10:15:00 1985
Subject: more about 700-555-1212
To: bbncca!telecom

I tried it here in Cambridge, where equal access was recently turned on.
Due to slowness at the telco, my default carrier is still AT&T and, sure
enough, when I dialed it I got a recording thanking me for choosing AT&T.
Then I tried using other carriers' prefixes, e.g. 10222-1-700-555-1212.  That


worked also, and I got various recordings identifying the various carriers
I had connected to:

        10222 - MCI
        10288 - AT&T
        10333 - U S Tel
        10488 - ITT
        10777 - Sprint
        10888 - hmmn.  see below.

With a 10888 prefix, I got a recording at SBS that said my call coudn't be
completed or wasn't on the network.  Guess their equal access department hasn

        't
gotten around to that yet.  (SBS does know who I am and will complete normal
calls, by the way, which they won't if you haven't explicitly signed up.)

John Levine, ima!johnl or [e-mail]

------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: UUUUUUUUUUU~i{gak!
Date: 13 May 85 18:52:22 EST (Mon)
From: Christopher A Kent <[e-mail]>

Thanks to everyone that informed me that the UUUUUUU sequence, followed
by echo, indicates that one or both of the modems in my connection is
dropping into (remote) digital loopback. I'll get the test mode stuff
disabled at both ends and hope it goes away.

Cheers,
chris
----------

------------------------------

Date: Tue 14 May 85 11:39:16-PDT
From: Andrew Sweer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #191
To: [e-mail]

        Regarding the recent notes about receiving multiple UUUUUUs
as a test pattern, can one speculate that the character U was chosen
because its ASCII representation, namely 125 octal or 55 hex, contains
4 sets of alternating zeros and ones? i.e. 01010101.
-------

------------------------------

Date: 14 May 85 16:04:49 EDT
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wiring
To: [e-mail]

It's rather difficult to send out schematic diagrams to a network of people
using regular old ascii terminals, but since wiring inside most fones is
pretty standard, a description should do the trick.  This applies to *all*
WE phones and ITT phones that use the standard dial/ringer/network block/
handset configuration.  I've rebuilt lots of these suckers, and can
confidently say that they're all the same.

Everything basically talks to the network block.  The network block contains
the ringer capacitor, the induction coil that handles the handset, and very
little else save some spare screw terminals.  Left to itself, the network
block can function as a standard line load [it looks electrically like a
phone] when a line is connected across RR and C.  These are the inputs to
the coil.  The ringing capacitor is indeed across A and K as someone mentione

        d.
In addition, older blocks have a smaller capacitor across F and RR, to
decrease sparking across rotary dial contacts.

Handset:
Green and White: Earpiece leads.  These connect to net R and GN respectively.


Black and Red: Mike leads.  Connect to net B and R respectively.

Ringer [two-winding]:
Black and Red: To line.  Connect to L1 and L2 [or whever your line comes in].


Grey and Grey/red [these may vary; they are the ''other two'' wires, anyway]:


        Connect to net A and K.  The circuit thus formed runs from one side
        of the line to one ringer winding, thru the A-K cap, thru the other
        ringer winding, to the other side of the line.  This configuration
        has infinite DC resistance, but picks up the AC ring voltage.
Ringer [one-winding, rare]:  Connect the single winding [two wired] in
        series with the A-K capacitor somehow, and this whole thing across
        the line as above.

Rotary dial:
Blue and Green: Interruptor.  Connect to net F and RR.
White [2]: Earpiece suppress.  Connect to net B and GN if desired.

Touch-tone dial:
Green: + Line in.  Connect to net F.
Black: + Line out.  Connect to net RR.
Org/Blk: - Line in.  Connect to net C.
Red/Grn: output common.  Connect to net R.
Blue: output.  Connect to net B.
*Note: the above 5 connections will give you a ''bare-bones'' dial
configuration without features.  Features are mike disconnect, earpiece
suppress, etc which are done simply by routing leads to these through the
extra contacts on the dial instead of directly.  If you want the features,
modify the wiring as follows.  If your network block doesn't have the S and
T terminals, you have an old one designed for rotary dials, and you'll have t

        o
do kludges.
Earpiece mute:
Move Handset lead at White to net S.  Also connect Dial White-Blue to net S.
Connect Dial White to net GN.  This routes the earpiece through
the dial switching mechanism which resistifies the circuit on button press.
Mike disable:
Move Handset Red to T.  Also connect Dial Red to T.  This completely disables


the mike on button press.  Make sure Dial Red-Green is connected to R if you
do this mod!

Hookswitch:
You'll find many variants of this in different units; some configurations
switch both sides of the line, some only one, some switch out the ringer
when off-hook [which isn't necessary, really].  The following should work:
Yellow: Connect to net L2.  This is where the line enters.
Brown: Connect to net C.
Green: Connect to net L1.  This is the other side of the line.
White: Connect to F.  This is switched line power to the dial and the rest.
Red: Connect to R.  This, with Black, is shorting earpiece mute.
Black: Connect to GN.

Line in:
Green and Red connect to L1 and L2.  Try one polarity; if the touchtone dial
doesn't work, then flip them.  Rotary dials, of course, don't matter.

If someone sees errors in this, please notify the list with the correction...



_H*
-------

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #193
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 18 May 85 03:33:12 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 May 85 22:44:37 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 193

Today's Topics:
                             Call Waiting
                               Re: DTN
                            dumb question
            Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #191 212 modem UUUU-echo
                        Re:  Pay phone earpiece
                          Equal access idea
                          Telephone Innards
                           Close but .....
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue 14 May 85 15:56:13-PDT
From: Moshe Y. Vardi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call Waiting
To: [e-mail]

What happens when you have Call Waiting on a line that is connected to a mode

        m.
Is it possible to take the call without disconnecting your remote session?

Moshe Vardi
[e-mail]
-------

------------------------------

Date: Wednesday, 15 May 1985 08:44:22-PDT
From: [e-mail]  (B.J.)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: DTN

    DTN (Digital Telephone Number) is Digital's internal telephone number
    prefix.  For our site, the internal DTN prefix is 282 but on the outside
    one uses 486.

Some more information.  DTNs are 7 digit numbers and the first three
are based on the site.  Like the site mentioned above, the external
prefix of my site is 617-486.  However, our DTN prefix is 229 rather
than 282.  Furthermore, there are cases where the DTN prefix does not
uniquely specify the external prefix.  This means that a DTN is not
useful to people outside of DEC.
                                                B.J.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 May 85 13:28:47 cdt
From: [e-mail] (Ed Nather)
To: telecom@Berkeley
Subject: dumb question

A friend got a Hayes 1200B internal modem for his IBM PC, which he wants
to use to answer his office telephone at night, to permit Bulletin Board
access.  The modem works OK on dialout, providing one of his 3 lines is
selected via a pushbutton on a handset also attached, but refuses to
answer the phone when it rings.  The handset hooks to a wall outlet via
a "modular" plug, or to a similar plug in the back of his modem marked
"phone."  A separate modular plug connects the modem to the wall outlet.
Without the handset attached (and a line selected via pushbutton) the
modem can't dial out, either.

What are we overlooking?  Is there some way to designate which of the 3
available lines the modem will answer, assuming it can be made to answer
one of them?

Any help will be much appreciated.

Ed Nather
Astronony Dept, U of Texas @ Austin
{allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 May 85 08:22:42 pdt
From: decwrl!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!RDCF.SDC.UUCP!darrelj@Berk

        eley (Darrel VanBuer)
To: sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #191 212 modem UUUU-echo
Cc:

If you're lucky enough to have one of those old fashioned modems with a
front panel full of lights and buttons, you can get back out of this echo
state by manually turning on remote digial loopback for a few seconds, then
turning it off [the start test signal is ignored by the remote modem since
it's already in test, but the stop test signal works OK].
Darrel J. Van Buer, PhD
System Development Corp.
2500 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90406
[phone] x5449
...{allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,orstcs,sdcsvax,ucla-cs,akgua}
                                                            !sdcrdcf!darrelj
[e-mail]


------------------------------

Date:     Mon, 6 May 85 16:33:50 EDT
From:     Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  Pay phone earpiece

I suspect it is for coupling to hearing aids that have a telephone
switch.  You didn't need these before, since the speaker itself
had the coils.

-Ron

------------------------------

Date: 17 May 85 03:00:16 EDT
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: Equal access idea
To: [e-mail]

How tight is the code that keeps track of who has what carrier?  I envision
folks finding bugs that allow use of a random carrier and it not being able
to find a billable account for the call it just completed.

This is probably too simplistic, of course.   Although most carriers at some
point have left themselves wide open due to silly bugs, if there is a unified


''login'' protocol, things should be fairly secure.  They aren't so ''upstart

        ''
as they were in the early days, and have better people coding for them now!

_H* [not ''due'' til late '86 [aaaugh!!]]
-------

------------------------------

From: "Robert C. Lagasse" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Innards
Date: 17 May 85 13:23:23 GMT
To:       [e-mail]


  I'm sure everyone who reads this group has opened up a telephone to see
what's going on inside.  No, I'm not writing about the new high-tech
single-piece electonic pulse phones, I mean the good old all-American
Western Electric black rotary dial desk phone.  The kind that hard-wired to
a wall junction block (called a 42A) with three or four wires (third was
ground and fourth was lamp supply for lighted sets which used an accessory
transformer hiding somewhere in your cellar).  I believe it is called a
"model 500" set or something.  The guts of this phone are still used in
5-line with hold systems and also with DTMF dialing desk sets from W-E.
  The large coil block riveted in the base which I believe is called the
"network" has about fifty screw terminals and has got to be one of the most
confusing pieces ever invented.  In the first place, this thing is labelled
with numbers and letters most of which are meaningless unless you are an
installer.  Half of the terminals are jumpered to others underneath where
you can't see and the others connect to coil windings and .......caps??
Anyway, this network thing is filled with thick sticky goop either to keep
people like myself out of it or to seal it from moisture.
  The other strangeness in this phone is the number of contacts used in the
"hook switch".  This switch must be a million-pole double-throw.  It seems
that the only things that would be needed to be switched are the network
(completely out of circuit) and the bell with it's series cap (in circuit)
when the phone is "on-hook" and vice-versa for "off-hook".  Sounds as if a
SPDT switch would do just fine or maybe a DPDT if you need contacts for a
dial lamp.
  Now that all of the phone stuff is deregulated, none of this must be
top-secret anymore.  Does anyone know where I can get the training manuals
that they teach the installers from?  Those guys amaze me when they open up
these phones and actually figure out how do anything they want to with them.
Also, where do all of these new modular jack numbers come from (RJ-11,
RJ-35, etc.) ?  Is there a committee somewhere dreaming these up and do they
relate to ANYTHING?    Comments appreciated.


Bob Lagasse  biomed. eng. MGH

------------------------------

Date: Tue 14 May 85 14:38:49-PDT
From: HECTOR MYERSTON <[e-mail]>
Subject: Close but .....
To: [e-mail]

Re Joe Yao's reply in Issue 192.  This description is indeed the way things
were.  Today there IS such a thing as a nation-wide 800- number.  All 800-
numbers are basically psuedo numbers which are translated by the Nr 4 ESS
to actual, dialable numbers.  In the past the state in which the call was
answered was excluded since, as Joe points out, this intra-state service
is under a different tariff.  Today the same number can be used nationwide
although the customer gets two individual lines, one will receive inter
state, the other intra.
Next series of enhancements to 800 service lets the customer (provider)
provide for answering at different locations by time of day, traffic load
etc by DIRECTLY telling the network how to handle his calls.  The start
of the Software Defined Network.
+HECTOR+
-------

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #194
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 25 May 85 19:25:50 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 25 May 85 14:30:00 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 194

Today's Topics:
                             Call Waiting
                      Re : Call Waiting + Modem
                        Long Distance carriers
                             Call Waiting
              Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #193 (Call Waiting)
                     Are calling cards divested?
            Representation of International Phone Numbers
                         alternatives to ATT
        duration of ring and busy signals in various exchanges
             Call Waiting's new trick:  another feature!
                        Re: telephone innards
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 17 May 85 23:11:38 EST
From: Donald E. Hopkins <A2DEH@MIT-MC>
Subject:  Call Waiting
To: VARDI@SU-CSLI

Don't bother using a modem on a line with call waiting unless you also
have call forwarding, or you enjoy being disconnected every time some
bozoid calls to sell you storm windows or a newspaper subscription. If
you have call forwarding, just forward the line to somewhere else
before you use it.
        -Don


------------------------------

Date: Fri 17 May 85 23:23:11-EDT
From: Glen Daniels <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re : Call Waiting + Modem
To: [e-mail]

I sympathize...I have call waiting, and a modem, so a LOT of my
calls are interrupted. About ways around it, there are a few.
  1) Disable the call waiting. This is available in quite a few
LATA's now, and is called "selective call-waiting". It is used by
dialing *70 at the dialtone. You then get another tone, and from
this, you make your call. The call will not be interrupted (callers
get a busy signal).

  2) If you want the call waiting AND the modem, you got some problems.
All modems I know default to hanging up whenever a call-waiting
beep is heard, but this depends on the amount of time the
particular modem takes to disconnect without a carrier. If
the time is above that of the beep, you just get screen-garbage,
but you are still connected. As for taking the call waiting call
AND still keeping the modem call, this is basically impossible,
unless you get a modem that will sit there and wait until you
get back from your call and give it a carrier. This COULD be    done with som

        e fancy programming, but it would be a pain.

I despise having my precious net-connections ruined
by call-waiting, so I shut it off whenver I call OZ.


Glen Daniels

ARPA:GDaniels%OZ@MIT-MC
CHAOS:GDaniels@MIT-OZ

Knowledge is power!
-------


------------------------------

Date:     Sat, 18 May 85 11:34:23 EDT
From:     Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Long Distance carriers

I just received a group of files (from an anonymous source) which
compare long distance companies offering service in California.
These files would be of interest to those in California who are
trying to decide what carrier they want to use.  Note. We don't
recommend any of the carriers, that is not our intention.

The files are available for FTP from SRI-CSL in <TELECOM>LDISC.TXT,
<TELECOM>LDRATES.TXT, and <TELECOM>LDNOTES.TXT

If you are unable to FTP them, send mail to telecom-request and I will
mail them to you.

Cheers,
--JSol


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 18 May 85 17:41:23 edt
From: Michael A. Grant <mgrant@gymble>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Call Waiting
Cc: [e-mail]

As most of you may have experienced at one time or another, Call Waiting
does not work too well with a modem on the line.  It would be really
nice if there was a key sequence that could turn it off.  What I usually
do, since I have 2 phone lines, is to forward my modem line to the other
line when I use the modem.  For those of you who don't have 2 lines,
you could forward you phone to some constantly busy line.  All ESS
exchanges have many of these type numbers up in the test series
exchange - 99xx  (ie 730-9911)  (Infact, there are many interesting
numbers in this series such as dialups, recordings, back-doors to 911
etc.  Does anyone know if there is a standard mapping for these numbers?)
My favorite is to forward my phone to the recording, "I'm sorry, the
call you have placed requires a 20 cent deposit, Please hang up the
phone, deposit 20 cents, and try your call again."  when I don't want
to recieve any calls.

------------------------------

From: ihnp4!pesnta!peora!jer@Berkeley
Date: Monday, 20 May 1985 09:20-EDT
To: [e-mail]

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #193 (Call Waiting)
In-reply-to: USENET article <[e-mail]>

> What happens when you have Call Waiting on a line that is
> connected to a modem.  Is it possible to take the call without
> disconnecting your remote session?

> Moshe Vardi
> [e-mail]

In my experience, simply the tone signal produced to indicate that you have
an incoming call causes the modem to disconnect.  (Well, actually the loss
of carrier during the interval when the tone is produced).

Personally, I tend to agree with Judith Martin (Miss Manners), who pointed
out in a recent column that Call Waiting is essentially an attempt to force
"last come, first served" on the previous caller, and who subsequently
declared call waiting to be "rude".
--
Full-Name:  J. Eric Roskos
UUCP:       ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
US Mail:    MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC;
            2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642

            "Vg'f whfg guvf yvggyr puebzvhz fjvgpu urer... lbh thlf
             ner FB fhcrefgvgvbhf!"


------------------------------

From: ima!johnl@bbncca
Date: Tue May 21 18:09:00 1985
Subject: Are calling cards divested?
To: bbncca!telecom

My wallet was stolen a few weeks back, so among other things I called both
the local telco and AT&T to tell them that my card was stolen, could they
issue a new one.  A few days later, telco sent me a traditional calling
card (the handy thin kind that's just right for popping open cheap locks)
with a scrambled card number starting with 601.  About two weeks after
that, AT&T sent me one of their cards (the thick one with the magnetic
stripe on the back and the dramatic picture of the globe on the front) with
exactly the same number.  Hmmn.

Who assigns calling card numbers, anyway?  Before divestiture I know it was
the local telcos, since my uncle's tiny phone company in western Vermont did
and does make up the card numbers for his customers.  But does AT&T still
get card numbers from the BOCs?  Or what?  For that matter, if I dial
0+NXX-XXXX, I type in my calling card number and make an intra-Lata call,
handled by my BOC.  And then if I push # and dial a number with an NPA,
I have this sneaking suspicion that the call gets handed to AT&T.  Is there
really a difference between my AT&T card and my New England Tel calling card?



So anyway, when you dial 0+number, who is collecting the card number?

John Levine, [e-mail] or ima!johnl

PS:  For that matter, when does 0 get you a telco operator and when does
it get an AT&T operator?

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 May 85 16:21:31 EST
From:   Peter G. Capek  <[e-mail]>
To:  [e-mail]
Subject: Representation of International Phone Numbers

(The earliest TELECOMM digest I have access to here is Vol 4 No. 173.  Can
we get copies of the earlier ones?)

Does anyone know of a "standard" representation for telephone numbers that
is widely understood?  I'm looking for something which is succinct but
distinguishes country code, city code and local number.  Ideally, it would
be helpful to have a way to distinguish a DID (Centrex) number from an
operator number as well.

I'm involved with an effort having international telephone directories on
line in many countries and trying to minimize the amount of special-casing
to be done to show people a phone number in a form they'll understand.

Also, does anyone know of a reliable source for a machine-readable area code
and country+city code directory?

Peter Capek
IBM Research
Yorktown Heights, New York
914-945-1250

------------------------------

Date: 23 May 85 10:49:07 PDT (Thursday)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: alternatives to ATT
To: [e-mail]

Well here comes equal access to 714 (June 29 for 775 prefix).  I just
got my notice from Pacific Bell.  I suspected it was about that time
when GTE started sending me offers to sign up for Sprint on equal access
(and offers from ATT to NOT sign up for anyone else, for that matter)
before I had any information on which to make such a decision, in fact
before I was told I could make the decision.

Anyway what concerns me now is what those of you who subscribe to any of
these alternatives think about them in terms of 1) audio quality, 2)
cost, 3) cost and ease of using the service when not at home, 4) any
other factors you think are important.  Of the twelve options available
in my area, I ruled out, on various grounds of suitability, everybody
except Allnet, MCI, and Sprint.  If I made more calls per month, it is
clear that SBS Skyline (which has a $15 minimum per month) would be the
clear choice by price and quality over these three, which seem about
equally second best.

If you answer directly to me, I will submit a summary here later (unless
you ask me not to quote you in my summary).

/Don Lynn ([e-mail])

------------------------------

Date: Thursday, 23 May 1985 18:18:27 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: duration of ring and busy signals in various exchanges

I would like to know the exact duration of RING and busy and fast busy
signals. That is I am interested in the the time when sound is
present on the line and when no sound is present on the line and their sum.

I am told that these durations differ depending on various exchanges.  Can
anyone tell me what the values normally are and what the variation can be.
Else can you give me a pointer to where this information can be found.
                                        Thanks for the help.
                                                Sesh Murthy
uucp: seismo!rochester!cmu-ri-leg!ssm
arpa: ssm@cmu-ri-leg

------------------------------

Date: 23 May 85   22:35-EDT
From:   James A. Dorf   <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call Waiting's new trick:  another feature!
To:  [e-mail]

-----
Hi all!   By now most of us know about the new "Selective Call-Waiting"
feature...  A new twist I saw in some telco doc:  if you also have
"Three-Way-Calling" and dial *70 (or 1170) on your second-line, you
can shut off three-way on a call already in progress on your main.
When you dial the *70 (or 1170) it gives two quick beeps to confirm
and then clacks you back onto your primary line...

Cute/jad
-----

------------------------------

Date: 22-May-85 10:10:16-PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: telephone innards
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]

     One of the less-known capabilities of the old WE 600 series telephone
instruments is that automatic compensation is provided for losses in the
local loop; a varisistor driven by the DC level as seen at the instrument is
used to adjust the signal level.  This is not an audio compression circuit;
it's the long-term DC voltage (``battery'' in telco terminology) as
seen at the instrument that does it.
     Since a varisistor is a non-linear component, this makes a telephone
an RF detector in theory and sometimes in fact, and there was a fix kit for
RFI available for the model 600 at one time; later models had it built-in.
     This gives a little more insight into what's inside that potted network.



                                                John Nagle


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #194
From: [e-mail] (H.SILBIGER)
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!homxb!hrs
Date: 29 May 85 00:27:13 GMT

In response to the question on how to display international
telephone numbers:

The CCITT standard method for displaying telephone
numbers is as follows.
First example a number in the Netherlands

 National: (070) 75 11 11
--------------------------
 Internat:  [phone]

Second example a US number:

 National: 1 [phone]
----------------------------
 Internat: [phone]

Note that above the line is the normal way a number is
displayed within the country, and is the dialing sequence you
would use when you were there.
Below the line is how you would dial if you were in another
country dialing abroad.
Th sequence is: country code, area (or city) code, and local
number. It does not include the numbers you need for international
access, ie in the US 011 or 001.

I included the example from the Netherlands, because in the US
the country code is "1", and the access to the long distance network
also happens to be "1".

When displaying the international number, no dashes or parentheses
are used.

----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #195
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!ucbvax!telec
        om
Date: 1 Jun 85 02:20:13 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 31 May 85 16:33:43 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 195

Today's Topics:
                       SBS, Sprint, MCI, Allnet
                             Call Waiting
                          Vadics and UUUUUU
                    Be the first on YOUR block...
                   call waiting on cordless phones
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #194
                        Re: telephony signals
                             equal acces
             212/224's Remote digital loopback mechanism
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #194
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25-May-85 15:06:04 PDT
From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: SBS, Sprint, MCI, Allnet
To: [e-mail]

I've been doing some more research into the alternate carriers, and
can add more points about SBS, Sprint, MCI, and Allnet:

SBS: All calls tend to sound like they're routing through Mars.  Since
     the SBS system is almost totally based on satellites, you end up
     with fairly substantial amounts of circuit noise in almost all cases,
     and the usual satellite delay problems.  SBS is also less likely
     to be around in five years than MCI or Sprint.

Sprint: New problems for data users.  Lately, on many circuits, the
     calls have an approximately 1.5 second dropout about 3-5 seconds
     after the calling party answers.  Just enough to break down many
     connections.  You can program around it with a smart enough modem,
     but it hardly seems worth it given Sprint's other problems.

MCI: Nothing new.  Same old stuff.  Same billing irregularities due
     to lack of called party supervision.  In all fairness, Sprint is
     just as bad in this area.  Only with AT&T can you be SURE that
     billing will be based on actual call durations, though SBS is
     making strides in this direction, I'm told.

I guess I can add something about Allnet as well.  I haven't had a
chance to hear too many connections, but they appear to be in the
same situation (if not worse) as SBS when it comes to probability
of longevity.

The same old maxim applies.  If you find an alternate that gives
you consistently acceptable results, then you might as well use it.
But if you call many different points or make lots of data calls,
you're better off with AT&T.  One thing I learned is that many times
when you call people on alternates they don't bother mentioning to
you that the call sounds terrible--they just suffer along and try
be polite.  Especially with MCI and Sprint, the connection quality
often seems to vary tremendously between the two sides of the call.
Your side may sound great, but to the other person you're buried in
the noise.  Sometimes this difference is EXTREMELY great, for reasons
that aren't immediately obvious.

--Lauren--



------------------------------

Date: Sat 18 May 85 12:20:20-EDT
From: T.JOEL@MIT-EECS
Subject: Call Waiting
To: telecom@MIT-EECS


Call waiting does do some interesting things to phone lines that are hooked
up to a modem..At school, we have our own internal network (IBX) and it has
its own call waiting. If you are on the phone talking voice to someone, you
will here a little tone if someone is trying to call you. 1 tone for an insid

        e
call (one from within the college) and 2 tones for an outside call. Then one
can simply put your party on hold and talk to the new caller..

 But with a modem hooked up..I've found that these call waiting tones seem to


knock me off-line. They hang my modem up..It's because they interrupt the
carrier that you are connected to and the modem takes this as a hangup by the


other computer. This can be useful if you are hacking and still want to take
calls. We are able to forward our calls if what we are hacking is important.

You don't get any call waiting tones when you forward your calls..

Just as a sidenote..The computer system used at out school, RPI in Troy,ny is


and IBM running MTS software (Michigan Terminal Systems). I don't like it at
all but have to deal with it. Does anyone know anything about the MTSNET or
how one can send mail there???

Erb@oz
-------


------------------------------

Date: Mon 20 May 85 10:14:28-EDT
From: S.PAE@MIT-EECS
Subject: Vadics and UUUUUU
To: telecom@MIT-EECS

With the 1200 baud protocols, there needs to be a way of making sure
that the 2 modems are staying synchronized with each other. The modems
use signal transitions to get re-synchronized. (For qthe same reason
that the T1 lines discussed about 2 months ago need transitions.) To
maximize the number of transistions, the characters going across the line
are XORed(?) with the byte 01010101 (ASCII 'U'). This has the interesting
property that if your modem gets a bunch of U's in a row, it's getting
the minimum amount of synchronization information. On a Vadic protocol,
try sending yourself about 30 U's in a row at 1200 baud and see what happens.



I've heard that the 212 protocol (the other 1200-baud protocol) uses a
12-character sequence rather than just using the U. Can anyone describe
this system in more detail? Also, which system is used for the single
2400-baud protocol?
-------


------------------------------

Date: Thu 23 May 85 17:53:31-EDT
From: S.PAE@MIT-EECS
Subject: Be the first on YOUR block...
To: telecom@MIT-EECS

This is paraphrased from what I remember of an ad on a cable channel:

"The future is cellular phone technology. (Something about Billions and
Billions here...) Right now, people are getting in on the ground floor.
Unfortunately, getting a license to run the cellular technology takes
hundreds of pages of applications and reports. For a mere $5000, we will
do these reports for you...."

Has anyone else seen this? Is it for real or a scam? I thought each area
application would be unique and would certainly take more than $5000 of
research to generate.
-------


------------------------------

Date: 28 May 1985 09:49-PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: call waiting on cordless phones
To: [e-mail]

Anyone know of a cordless phone that can take a waiting call?  Does
dialing "1" and thereby interrupting the line for 100 ms do it?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 May 85 10:30:06 pdt
From: dual!paul@Berkeley (Paul Wilcox-Baker)
To: telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #194

The standard for representing international dialling codes recommended
in England is to have a "+" followed by the country code and internal
"area codes".  The "+" is replaced by the local international dialling
prefix, 011 in the U.S., 0101 in England & 001, I believe in Germany.
Most countries outside the U.S. have an initial digit for long distance
calls that has to be left off in the international case.  Here are
three numbers in that representation:

Within country             International
(0925) 34238    (England) [phone]
(0221) 38 68 49 (Germany) [phone]
[phone]  (U.S.A.)  [phone]



------------------------------

Date: 28 May 1985 12:05-EST
From: ihnp4!mcb@Berkeley (Mark C Baker @ AT&T Network Systems)
Subject: Re: telephony signals
To: ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley

In response to Sesh Murthy's request (TELECOM Digest V4 #194)
here are the pre-divestiture Bell System standard signals taken
from "Basic Electronic Switching for Telephone Systems" by David
Talley.

        Dial Tone       350 Hz and 440 Hz
        Audible Ring    440 Hz and 480 Hz (2 seconds on,
                                           4 seconds off)
        Busy Tone       480 Hz and 620 Hz (0.5 seconds on, 0.5 off)
        Fast Busy Tone  480 Hz and 620 Hz (0.25 seconds on, 0.25 off)
        Ringing         105 VAC at 20 Hz  (2 seconds on, 4 off)



------------------------------

Date: 29 May 1985 11:03-PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: equal acces
To: telecom@mc

Does "equal access" eventually require that a company wishing to
establish an 800 number be able to use any carrier offering such
service?  Does anyone know anything about this?


------------------------------

Date: Thu, 30 May 85 01:02:21 EST
From: Minh N. Hoang <[e-mail]>
Subject: 212/224's Remote digital loopback mechanism
To: [e-mail]


Recent messages indicated that quite a few modems are getting into remote
digital loops inadvertently so I poked around to find out how them modems
intentionally get into this.  The following comes from CCITT V.22bis
recommendation which specifies the 2400/1200 bps modem.  Except for the
answer back tone, the 1200 mode is 212-compatible, including the loop.

For reference, modem A is the instigator and modem B the one that loops
back data. (All the modems that see data echoed back are instigators.)
Here it goes:

*** Entering remote loopback ***

When modem A is instructed to instigate a remote loop, it shall transmit
an initiation signal of unscrambled binary one at the current operating
speed.  (If you happen to listen to this, you'd hear a tone instead of
the usual hiss-like noise.)

Modem B shall detect 154 - 231 ms. of the initiation signal, and then
transmit to modem A scrambled alternating binary 1 and 0. (And your modem
faithfully passes this to your terminal - hence the UUUUs).

Modem A shall detect 231 - 308 ms. of scrambled reversals, cease transmission


of the initiation signal, and then transmit scrambled binary 1.

Modem B shall detect the loss of initiation signal and activate the loopback.


(Now, everything modem A transmits will be "echoed").

Modem A after receiving 231 - 308 ms. of scrambled binary 1 (which it sent),
shall indicate to the terminal that it may begin sending test messages.
(Modem A will now send terminal's data as usual so you can see all you type).



*** Exiting remote loopback ***

When modem A is instructed to terminate the remote loop, the line signal
shall be suppressed for 77 +- 10 ms, after which transmission shall be
restored. (A very short simulated carrier loss).

Modem B detects the loss of signal in 40 - 65 and its reappearance within
155 +- 50 ms, after which modem B returns to normal operation.  (For most
modems, carrier loss of >300 ms may cause disconnect).

*** -+- ***

Thus, if you're inadvertently dumped into this loop and your modem doesn't
have a remote loop switch, it's kinda tough to get out without losing the
connection.

How does your modem initiate this loop?  (It's usually not modem B's
fault.)  A common cause is called scrambler lock-up.  These modems use a
scrambler of the form D_tx[n] = D_in[n] .XOR. D_tx[n-14] .XOR. D_tx[n-17]
and transmit the scrambled output.  If the scrambler's delay line happens
to be filled with 1's, then the modem effectively sends unscrambled 1's,
the initiation signal.  The other modem responds with UUUUs. You type a
few characters in panic and end the lock-up.  The other modem senses the
end of the initiation signal and voila... you're looping.

To prevent this, once the scrambler outputs 64 consecutive 1's, it
should invert the next input bit.  Sometimes, the modem doesn't
incorporate this detector-inverter because the situation is relatively
rare, supposedly.

Cheers,



------------------------------

From: ihnp4!homxb!hrs@Berkeley (H.SILBIGER)
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #194
Date: Tue, 28-May-85 20:27:13 EDT

In response to the question on how to display international
telephone numbers:

The CCITT standard method for displaying telephone
numbers is as follows.
First example a number in the Netherlands

 National: (070) 75 11 11
--------------------------
 Internat:  [phone]

Second example a US number:

 National: 1 [phone]
----------------------------
 Internat: [phone]

Note that above the line is the normal way a number is
displayed within the country, and is the dialing sequence you
would use when you were there.
Below the line is how you would dial if you were in another
country dialing abroad.
The sequence is: country code, area (or city) code, and local
number. It does not include the numbers you need for international
access, ie in the US 011 or 001.

I included the example from the Netherlands, because in the US
the country code is "1", and the access to the long distance network
also happens to be "1".

When displaying the international number, no dashes or parentheses
are used.





------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #196
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 4 Jun 85 04:10:48 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 3 Jun 85 16:23:47 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 196

Today's Topics:
                  Re: Be the first on YOUR block...
                        TELECOM Digest V4 #195
                         Telecom at MIT-MC*70
                           Microcom SX/2400
                            Microcom SX/2400
                      telephone standard source
                      Cellular Roaming Problems.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 85 10:01:05 est
From: [e-mail] (Dave Curry)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Be the first on YOUR block...


I haven't seen the television commercial, but around here (Indiana)
they have been running radio commercials with Mike Douglas of all
people hawking this stuff. Something about "for ONLY $5000 (!) we will
help you fill out the forms for much less than it would normally cost"
..... "get in on this potentially lucrative money opportunity"...

I just want to know (1) why it would cost me ANYTHING to fill out
the forms myself, and (2) what does Mike Douglas have to do with
it?

--Dave Curry
[e-mail]


------------------------------

Date: Sat,  1 Jun 85 15:00:56 EST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #195
To: [e-mail]

In order for 800 number calls to be routed over the carrier of the
RECIPIENT's choice (since the recipient is paying for the call) one
needs to have implemented common channel signaling in all the BOCs.
Unfortunatley, at the time of divestitute only AT&T Long Lines had
common channel signalling, so only AT&T can carry 800 number calls.  The
BOCs are hard at work on implementing their own CCS, but it will take
till 86-87 at least.

Marvin Sirbu


------------------------------

Date:  Sun, 2 Jun 85 00:14 EDT
From:  [e-mail]
To:  [e-mail]

Subject:  Telecom at MIT-MC*70

I noticed that *70 on the new DMS-100 exchange here gives a double beep,
but on the older ESS in Wellesley (next town over), it gives a fast
busy.  The operator and repair people don't know anything about it.

I suspect that NET got some new software that they don't know about.
What other goodies might I find in a brand new DMS-100?  (well, new as
of last December at least).

In response to the query about cordless phones and call waiting --
fancier cordless phones have a flash button to allow for switchhook
functions.



------------------------------

Date: 6 May 85 05:38:25 GMT
From: dlw%ucbtopaz.CC@Berkeley
Subject: Microcom SX/2400

I have just used a pair of Microcom "error correcting" 2400 baud async
dialup modems for a week and I'm hooked. The MNP protocol seems to
take care of all the line interference we have here, and the speed is
addictive.  There are odd pauses even at times when the line is clean
(errors are noted by the TST light flashing) but this anomaly is far
less annoying than the constant garbage I was getting with 212a
modems. (The interference was so bad and so consistent with 212 that I
set my flow control chars to DEL and { just so I could work.) I did
attempt to verify the salesperson's claim that "even without error
correction, the 2400 baud modulation technique is less sensitive to
line interference than 212a." I found this to be not so. With error
correction turned off, the SX/2400 was at least as sensitive to our
local interference. Furthermore the resulting garbage was much less
uniform than my 212a and thus my trick (above) was useless making the
situation totally intolerable.

I understand that Microcom has licensed the MNP protocol to other
manufacturers (Codex, Racal-Vadic, ...) so that we'll have a choice,
competition, etc. My congratulations to them for that! Also, public
networks such as Tymnet, Telenet, & Uninet offer MNP on their 2400
baud access indicating they think it'll catch on.

I'm convinced. "Don't leave $home without it." Any other views?

        David Wasley
        U C Berkeley
        ...!ucbvax!dlw

------------------------------

Date: Thursday, 9 May 1985  07:17-MDT
From: Sid Stuart <cmcl2!philabs!linus!sid@Seismo>
Subject:   Microcom SX/2400

        You didn't mention that with the Microcoms internal buffering,
the speed of the modem line and the speed of the rs-232 line are
independent.  I set my terminal up for 2400 baud on the serial port
and I don't have to change it even when I call into a 1200 baud line
and the modem autbauds... nice.  One complaint I do have, though I
don't know how much of a concern it is: When the modem is set to 2400
on the computer and a user dials in at 1200, it shifts to a citt
standard for 1200 baud, and not bell 212. I haven't tested this with a
bell 212 modem yet, so I don't know how much it affects the
transmission quality.

                                                sid

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Jun 85 11:10:06 EDT
From: Ken J Lebowitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: telephone standard source
To: [e-mail]

I'm interested in finding a source that describes what types of telephone
equiptment work can be used in different countries around the world.  In
particular, I am interested in what standards a phone must meet in order to
operate correctly in Israel.  I believe that their system was originally
installed by the French so they may use the same standards.

Thanks,

Ken Lebowitz
BBN Labs

ARPA:   [e-mail]
CSNET:  kjl%bbn-clxx@csnet-relay
UUCP:   ...!{decvax,ihnp4}!bbncca!kjl


------------------------------

Date: 21 May 1985 15:59-PDT
Subject: Cellular Roaming Problems.
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <[e-mail]>
To: telecom@BBNCCA




                                Before the
                   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                        Washington, D. C. 20554





In re                            )
                                 )
NEW ORLEANS CGSA, INC.           ) File No. 27012-CL-C-84
                                 )
Licensee of Domestic Cellular    )
Radio Telecommunications Service )
Station KNKA224, at New Orleans, )
Louisiana                        )

To: Chief, Common Carrier Bureau



                EMERGENCY PETITION FOR IMMEDIATE
              RELIEF FROM LICENSEE RULE VIOLATION
           IN REFUSING TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO ROAMERS
           -----------------------------------------

        Geoffrey S. Goodfellow and Dwight F. Hare, by their attorneys,
hereby petition for immediate emergency relief from New Orleans CGSA,
Inc.'s willful violation of Section 22.911(b) of the Commission's
Rules. 47 C.F.R. 22.911(b). In support hereof, the following is
respectfully shown:

                        Introduction
                        ------------

        Petitioners seek by virtue of this action immediate relief
from New Orleans CGSA's willful refusal to provide them with roamer
service on the cellular radio facilities of Station KNKA224 at New
Orleans, Louisiana, in violation of Section 22.911(b) of the Rules,
and contrary to the representation in New Orleans CGSA's application
for a construction permit that roamer service would be provided.


        Geoffrey S. Goodfellow is a computer security and networking
consultant in the Computer Science Laboratory at SRI International
Menlo Park, California. Mr. Goodfellow is a properly licensed
subscriber of the Cellular One cellular system in Washington, D.C. His
assigned cellular number is 202-288-6953. Dwight F. Hare is the
Manager of Research Operations for the Computer Science Laboratory at
SRI International, Menlo Park, California. Mr. Hare is a properly
licensed subscriber of the GTE Mobilnet cellular system in San
Francisco, California. His assigned cellular number is 415-385-3130.

        Both Mr. Goodfellow and Mr. Hare must be in New Orleans,
Louisiana on business for SRI International from May 25, 1985 to May
31, 1985, and require cellular radio service to properly discharge
their duties for their employer.

        During the week of May 13, 1985 Mr. Goodfellow contacted
BellSouth Mobility, Inc. (parent corporation of New Orleans CGSA,
Inc.) in Atlanta, Georgia (Tel No. 800-438-2430) in order to arrange
for roamer service on the New Orleans cellular system for himself and
Mr. Hare. He was informed by a customer service representative for
BellSouth Mobility that roamer service was not available on the New
Orleans cellular system.  Mr. Goodfellow stated that he believed that
New Orleans CGSA was obligated to provide roamer service, and his call
was then passed on to Mr.Tony Walker of BellSouth Mobility.
Mr.Goodfellow again requested roamer service on the New Orleans
system.  He was informed by Mr. Walker that New Orleans CGSA did not
offer roamer service. Mr. Walker stated that the reason such service
was not provided was because New Orleans CGSA's tariff, on file with
the Louisiana Public Service Commission, did not contain any
provisions for roamer service. Mr. Walker was able to offer Mr.
Goodfellow no date upon which roamer service would be made available
to the public on the New Orleans CGSA cellular system. Mr. Walker
offered to provide Mr. Goodfellow and Mr. Hare local subscriber
service for a minimum of one month, but stated that the provision of
such service would require the reprograming of their portable cellular
units.

                New Orleans CGSA Has Willfully Violated the
                            Commissions Rules
                            -----------------

        BellSouth Mobility's and New Orleans CGSA's absolute refusal
to provide roamer service to Mr. Goodfellow or Mr. Hare is a willful
violation of Section 22.911(b) of the Rules, and of the representation
contained in the licensee's cellular application that its cellular
system had been "designed with the capability of providing roaming
cellular radio users the ability to place and receive calls." (Exhibit
17 of Application, Attachment 1 hereto).

        Section 911(b) of the Rules provides under the heading
"Permissible Communications" that:

        (b) Base stations in this service are authorized to
        communicate with associate subscribers; base stations MUST
        also render service to properly licensed roamers. (emphasis
        added).


        The operative language of the rule with regard to roamer
service is that it "must" be provided. This language is a mandatory
direction and vests no discretion with the licensee.  Both
Mr. Goodfellow and Mr. Hare are properly licensed subscribers of their
home cellular carriers, as described above.  Accordingly, New Orleans
CGSA's failure to provide requested roamer service for them while they
are in New Orleans must be considered nothing less than a willful
failure to obey the dictates of the Commission's Rules.

        Moreover, New Orleans CGSA represented in its application for
a cellular construction permit at Exhibit No. 17, page 1, that its
cellular system had been designed with the capability of providing
roamer service to the public, as noted above. The Commission granted
New Orleans CGSA a construction permit on the strength of this
representation, among others. The licensee's willful failure to
provide roamer service therefore makes a mockery not only of the
Commission Rules, but also of the application and licensing procedures
employed by the Commission.

        The Commission should take immediate and definite steps to
force New Orleans CGSA to comply with Section 22.911(b) of the Rules.
The licensee's offer to provide petitioners with a minimum full month
of regular local subscriber service - which would require reprograming
their cellular units - does not meet the requirements of Section
22.911(b) of the Rules. It is respectfully requested that the
Commission promptly issue an order to New Orleans CGSA directing the
carrier to immediately make provision for the rendition of roamer
service to Mr. Goodfellow and Mr. Hare during the week of May 25,
1985.

        WHEREFORE the premises considered, it is requested that
the Commission grant this emergency petition and order immediate relief
from New Orleans CGSA's violation of the Commission's Rules.

                                        Respectfully submitted,

                                        GEOFFREY S. GOODFELLOW
                                        DWIGHT F. HARE

                                        by Arthur Blooston ____________

                                           John H. Myers   ____________
                                        their Attorneys

Blooston and Mordkofsky
2120 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037
Tel. [phone]

Dated: May 17, 1985

                        Attachment 1                     FCC FORM 401
                                                         EXHIBIT NO. 17
                                                         PAGE 1 OF 1
                                                              -    -


                Advanced Mobile Phone Service, Inc.
        Domestic Public Cellular Radio Telecommunications Service
                New Cellular System, New Orleans, Louisiana
                                Location J


Response to FCC Rule Section 22.913(a)(7): Service Proposals for local
----------------------------------------------------------------------
subscribers and roamers including methods for handling complaints.
------------------------------------------------------------------


Local Subscribers
-----------------

Subscriptions to cellular radio service will be afforded to the public
within the 39 dBu service contour of the initial system serving the New
Orleans metropolitan area.

The cellular radio system established in the New Orleans metropolitan
area will provide subscribers with the ability to place and receive
calls within the defined CGSA on a 24 hours per day, 7 days per week
basis.


Roamers
-------

Cellular radio systems have been designed with the capability of
providing roaming cellular radio service users the ability to place and
receive calls.


Complaint Process
------------------

All complaints will be acknowledged, investigated and resolved
expeditiously by the Corporation.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #197
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 4 Jun 85 21:39:41 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 4 Jun 85 16:24:17 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 197

Today's Topics:
                   Racal-Vadic VA3451 Modem Problem
                  2400 bps modems can be non-standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 31 May 85 13:39:20 pdt
From: ucdavis!bluebell!russell@Berkeley (Michael Russell)
To: CSNET-FORUM@CSNET-SH, INFO-CPM@AMSAA, INFO-MICRO@BRL-VGR, TELECOM@BBNCCA,


Subject: Racal-Vadic VA3451 Modem Problem
Cc: CIC@CSNET-SH, DDUSTMAN@CSNET-SH, LONG@CSNET-SH, MOOERS@CSNET-SH

In order to get connected to the CSNET PhoneNet, we bought a Racal-Vadic
VA3451 Auto-Dial modem.  The modem was delivered in early 1985, and the
manual that came along with it was entitled "VA3451 Modem Installation/
Operation Manual", "Initial Issue", "November, 1984".  There appears to
be an problem with the modem and an error in the manual.

After we put the modem into service, it occasionally got itself into a
funny state.  The modem was off-hook even though there was no connection,
and the modem was generating a carrier.  The lights that were lit were:
HS, DSR, and DTR.  Further, disconnecting the modem from its DTE by
removing the RS232 plug (thereby dropping DTR) did not cause the modem to
go on-hook.  Neither did unplugging the modem from the phone line.  It
was possible to force the modem to go on-hook either by toggling power or
by flipping the DA/VO/MA switch on the front panel away from VO and then
back.

I telephoned the Racal-Vadic Service Hotline, and we tried a several
months worth of different things, but nothing would make the problem go
away.

On Wednesday, 5/29/85, Diane Dustman, CSNET-CIC Technical Staff, phoned
me to tell me that our modem was off-hook.  She asked me to reset the
modem so that CSNET-RELAY could begin to call our host again.  I told
her that I knew about the problem and that I was working on it.  I asked
her if she often had to telephone site liaisons asking for a modem to be
reset.  She said that she sometimes did, but that it didn't strike her
as a widespread problem.  In any case, she mentioned my problem to Dan
Long, CSNET Technical Liaison, and it jogged his memory.  He sent on to
me something he had received in early 1984.

It was an article, signed by "--Lauren--", that had been distributed to
the INFO-MICRO, INFO-CPM, UNIX-WIZARDS, and TELECOM interest groups.
Charles Lindahl at "ti-csl" (Texas Instruments Central Research Labs in
Dallas) had forwarded the article to Dan Long.  Briefly, the article
described exactly the problem that we were experiencing with our modem.
The article said that the fix involved changing the strapping so that
the A1 switch was OFF.  The setting of the A1 switch is ignored, and A1
is considered as ON, if the modem is set to its "Standard Configuration"
via the A6 switch.  The article said that A6 should be set to ON in
order to turn off the "Standard Configuration", i.e., to enable all the
other switches.

I had set A6 to the non-"Standard Configuration" setting, but according
to my manual, that setting was achieved with A6 OFF, not ON as was
indicated in the article.  The fact that the manual I have is wrong was
verified by a Racal-Vadic Field Service representative.  I will forward
a copy of this to him, in order to be sure that the error in the manual
is corrected.

Unfortunately, I cannot tell you yet that, by setting A6 to ON and A1
to OFF, our problem has been solved.  I had mailed the modem back to
Racal-Vadic for repair just before I got the information from Dan Long.

In any case, I would like to express my thanks to Diane, Dan, Charles,
and Lauren for getting this information to me.

Michael Russell
[e-mail]
...!ucbvax!ucdavis!bluebell!russell
ucdavis!bluebell![e-mail]
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Wednesday, 8 May 1985  16:25-MDT
From: "Robert P. Cunningham" <ihnp4!islenet!bob@Ucb-Vax>
Subject:   2400 bps modems can be non-standard

[These are my notes on some problems with U.S.-made 2400 bps modems,
using information from a variety of different articles and discussions
with various vendors.  Clarifications and corrections welcome.]

2400 bps modems.  Twice the throughput of 1200 bps modems for less
than twice the price.  It sounds good, but many of the new 2400 bps
modems now on the market in the U.S. are not completely compatible
with similar models from other manufacturers.

There is no U.S. asynchronous dial-up 2400 bps standard in the same
sense that the Bell 212 modem set the standard for 1200 asynchronous
modems.

There are two European standards: "CCITT V.22 bis" and "CCIT V.26 ter".

These are written standards, while the Bell 212 was a complete working
product, with very well known operating characteristics.  A minor
difference in principle, but a tremendous difference in practice.

Not only are there loopholes in the CCITT standards that give each
manufacturer considerable room to be creatively different, but there
are some modifications that U.S. manufactures tend to make in order to
maintain some compatiblity with existing U.S. equipment.

The result is that many of the 2400 async dial-up modems are
incompatible with each other in various ways.

Most of the new U.S. made 2400 bps async dial-up modems follow the
V.22 bis standard.  They transmit and receive simultaneously by
splitting the available bandwidth in half, using half to receive and
the other to transmit, with a 16 point Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
(QAM) technique at 600 baud [precisely speaking, the baud rate is the
rate of change of the signal ... QAM and most other techniques provide
a way of encoding several bits into each change of the signal].

A few use an alternate CCITT specification -- V.26 ter.  Signal
cancelling (the receiver cancelling out the echo of its own
transmitted signal) allows the whole bandwith of a phone line to be
used.  V.26 ter uses a Differential Phase Shift Keying technique to
handle 2400 bps at 1200 baud.

V.22 2400 bps is probably less reliable than 212-type 1200 bps over
long-distance lines, V.26 ter is probably better than 212.

Of course V.22 bis and V.26 ter are completely incompatible.

While V.22 bis seems to be the preferred standard now, there is a good
chance it may eventually be superseeded by V.26 ter.  [Then again,
maybe not; the Vadic 1200 bps technique is -- in some ways -- more
effective than 212, but it's never really caught on.]

Now, about those loopholes in V.22 bis ...

The standard designates a fall-back speed, if the originate and answer
modems can't handle a 2400 bps connection.  However, the standard
doesn't specify how the connected DTE equipment (computer or terminal)
is to be notified of the fall-back.  The RS232C standard doesn't cover
it.

With V.22 bis, each U.S. manufacturer seems to have chosen a DIFFERENT
way of indicating a speed change when the modem falls back, using
various of the seldom-used secondary control pins on the RS232C
connector.

Chances are that the typical DTE device you hook up your 2400 bps
modem to will ignore the speed change signal.  Then, when you obtain a
dial-up connection that's a bit noisy, the modem falls back.  It sets
up and maintains the connection nicely, but not at the baud rate your
computer or terminal expects.  This can tie up the equipment at each
end indefinitely.

V.22 bis specifies the CCITT V.22 format for 1200 bps fallback.
Unfortunately, that's incompatible with Bell 212.  To allow V.22 bis
modems to be used together with regular 212 modems, many (but not all)
of the U.S.  manufacturers have chosen to make 212 rather than V.22
the fallback.

As a convenience, some (but, again not all) of the U.S. makers who
provide 212-type 1200 bps fallback also provide a further 103-type 300
bps fallback from 1200 bps.  Nice feature, but definitely not in V.22
bis.

There's still another common "Americanization" that U.S. manufacturers
have adopted.  V.22 bis assumes that the European standard 2,100 Hz
answer tone be sent by the answering modem during initial connection
handshaking.  Many U.S. manufacturers have instead adopted the regular
U.S. 2,225 Hz answer tone -- again for 212-type compatibility.

Unfortunately, this means that many U.S.-made V.22 bis modems won't
handshake at all with a European V.22 bis modems.

V.22 bis specifies V.25 (or V.25 bis) autodialing.  U.S. makers prefer
their own variation of the Hayes autodialing commands (or the Concord
technique, or the AT&T technique, or Cermatek ... there's definitely
no effective U.S. standard for autodialing commands).


Summary & recommendations:

If you want a 2400 modem that will talk to European-made modems make
sure it uses the 2.1 kHz answering tone, and has V.22 (not 212)
fallback.  Find out whether the other end uses V.22 bis or V.26 ter.

If you need point-to-point 2400 bps dialup in the U.S., choose your
favorite manufacturer, but you'll have more consistent results of you
have the same model from the same company at the other end.
Otherwise, don't be surprised when your modem "hangs".  In any case,
may expect to see more "phone line hits" -- especially over
long-distance lines -- than you get with your 1200 bps modem.

--
Bob Cunningham   ..{dual,ihnp4,vortex}!islenet!bob
Honolulu, Hawaii

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #198
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 10 Jun 85 21:52:22 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 10 Jun 85 15:48:33 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 198

Today's Topics:
                   Pacific Bell (unlocked B-boxes)
                       Who handles card calls?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 9-Jun-85 15:51:21 PDT
From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Pacific Bell (unlocked B-boxes)
To: [e-mail]

One thing I've noticed PacBell doing lately that really irks
me is leaving B-boxes (local loop distribution boxes) unlocked!
More and more I'm seeing the new style (wide and low) boxes which
are bolted closed but without a lock in the hasp.  I don't much
care for the concept that any jerk with the right wrench could
come along and fiddle around in there.  I saw one in Hollywood
that wasn't even bolted closed--it was sitting there with one
door swung open and no telco people in the vicinity.
How about some security on the outside plant, Pacific?

--Lauren--




------------------------------

Date: 10 Jun 85 12:39:30 EDT
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: Who handles card calls?
To: [e-mail]

It's been my experience that when I call very locally using my card, I
go through an awful lot of switching to get there.  I'm talking tandems.
Sometimes I'm lucky enough to get a non-CCIS one, and hear all the MF
routing.  I suspect that what's happening is that the call is passed to
some AT&T office that would handle inter-LATA calls, which gives me the
MCCS tone and accepts the card number, and then routes the call back
into the LATA for completion.

Now, if the AT&T switch, the destination, and I all happen to be in the
same LATA, and AT&T completes the call, is this in violation of something
because AT&T is completing an intra-LATA call???

_H*
-------

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #199
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 11 Jun 85 22:05:05 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 11 Jun 85 17:07:48 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 199

Today's Topics:
                      Electronic Vaults' UPTA 96
                 Cellular phones and confidentiality
               Re: Cellular phones and confidentiality
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 11 Jun 1985 00:47:45 PDT
Subject: Electronic Vaults' UPTA 96
From: Eliot Moore <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Communications Week of June 10 fields an article concerning a
"Hayes-compatible" half-duplex (buffered for pseudo-full-duplex, i presume)
9600bps error-correcting async dialup modem, available as an internal
card for the ibmpc at $795 or standalone for $895.

This type of product at this price is long overdue, much as Microcom's
error-correcting 212's were.

Given the inevitability of V.32 modems on the market in 1985, is
anyone going to buy these things?

Regards,
Elmo
-------

------------------------------

From: "Bob Parnass, AJ9S" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular phones and confidentiality
Date: 9 Jun 85 03:20:35 GMT
To:       [e-mail]

x
George Chao, a cellular phone user, provided  this  article,
published  in  the May 1985 'Ameritech Connection' by Ameri-
tech Mobile Communications, Inc.  for its Chicago/Gary  area
cellular telephone users:


           Confidentiality Could Be A Three-Way Street

     "One of the differences between  cellular  service  and
     conventional  mobile  telephones  is  that  cellular is
     'private-like.' Each side of every  cellular  conversa-
     tion  is  assigned its own private radio channel by our
     computerized system, so there  is  no  operator  to  go
     through and there are no party lines to share."

     "However, in the last six months,  sophisticated  elec-
     tronic scanners able to monitor cellular radio frequen-
     cies have become available, and Ameritech  Mobile  cau-
     tions  you about conversations of a highly confidential
     nature held over your mobile telephone."

     "Scanners are only able to lock onto one channel  at  a
     time and can not simulate our computerized network.  In
     fact, they can ONLY detect one  side  of  the  cellular
     conversation  and  ONLY  for  a  brief  period of time.
     That's because our  computer  routinely  switches  your
     call  from one channel to another to keep the transmis-
     sion quality of your conversation at a  high  level  as
     you drive through the cellular service area."

     "While scanners are expensive and not routinely used by
     the   general   public,   be   careful   in  discussing
     proprietary or very personal  issues  when  using  your
     mobile  telephone.   Remember  the  airwaves are public
     property."

--
=============================================================================

        ==
Bob Parnass,  Bell Telephone Laboratories - ihnp4!ihu1h!parnass - (312)979-54

        14

------------------------------

Date: 11 Jun 1985 09:52-PDT
Subject: Re: Cellular phones and confidentiality
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <[e-mail]>
To: parnass%ihu1h.uucp@BRL
Cc: info-hams@SIMTEL20, telecom@BBNCCA

well, it's good to see that yet another regional arm of The
Telephone Company is still very well versed in NewsSpeak!

People have been able to hear both sides of the conversation by
monitoring the land-to-mobile frequency, do to the talk-back that
exists.

It doesn't take "sophisticated electronic(!)" scanners or any
high technological acts of chicanery as i'm sure the readership
of both info-hams and telecom are aware.  What with the stories
emanating out of chicago and other areas with people tuning into
cellular phone conversations thru the varactors on their VCRs or
TV sets.

"ONLY for a brief period of time" (my ass).  People have been
know to hold very long stationary conversations in which you're
not a candidate for hand off, although i have experienced hand off
when stationary myself.

In summary, the "American Connection" is full of it.  If you take
Personal Communications, keep your eyes peeled for an upcoming
articled, "Cellular Swiss Cheese", of which I'm co-authoring on
the subject.  I'd be happy to send a copy to Info-Hams and/or
Telecom if enough interest warrants.

g

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #200
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 12 Jun 85 22:31:39 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 12 Jun 85 17:28:24 EDT    Volume 4 : Issue 200

Today's Topics:
                  Administrivia - TELECOM is moving
                     Re:  TELECOM Digest V4 #199
               Need help stopping telephone harrassment
                  RFI Interference and 1200-bps Modems
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 85 17:24:15 EDT
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia - TELECOM is moving
To: [e-mail]

TELECOM is moving from its current address on BBNCCA to MIT-XX.
The pointer on MIT-MC will reflect this change, and so will
the BBNCCA (or any BBN unix system) pointer, but if you use some
other pointer it might not work.

TELECOM-REQUEST@MIT-XX and TELECOM@MIT-XX have been created.
The software is not completely ready to support generating digests
so if you do send mail to MIT-XX right now, I will probably forward it
to BBNCCA and continue to process TELECOM from there. Watch for
the new location in the header of the digest, and when it is ready
I will send out another administrivia note.

If you send something to either address and you don't see it in
three days time published in the digest, please resend the mail.


------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 85 19:38:49 edt
From: Michael Grant <mgrant@gyre>
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA
Subject: Re:  TELECOM Digest V4 #199

Regarding privacy on cellular phones, I'd be interested to hear about the
new digital coding techniques that the cellular phone companies are
talking about adding soon.  They say that it would be an additional
plug in module to the already existing units.  Would it be possible to
overhear a key, and decode a conversation?  What kind of encoding would
they be doing?
-Mike

------------------------------

Date: Thursday, 6 June 1985  05:55-MDT
From: Donn Seeley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need help stopping telephone harrassment

I have a friend (who shall remain nameless, for reasons that will
become obvious below) who has been subjected to some very
sophisticated telephone harrassment.  He doesn't have net access and
has asked me to try to use some of the immense combined experience of
the net to help him get to the bottom of his problems.

My friend has a son of high school age who likes to play with
computers.  The family has an Apple computer and a modem at home, and
the son uses it to dial in to various bboards in the area of his
suburban home in California.  It seems that one day the son attempted
to bluff his way onto a phone phreak bboard.  This was a mistake --
the boy was in way over his head, and when the bboard operators
learned this, they decided to teach him a lesson.  My friend's long
distance access code very rapidly propagated around the state and some
ridiculous charges began appearing on his monthly bills.  At the same
time he began receiving harrassing phone calls -- the phone would ring
during dinner or in the middle of the night, and when someone answered
it, no one would be on the other end.

After a couple months of this, my friend asked Pac Tel to trace the
harrassing phone calls.  The nature of the calls changed; perhaps the
son bragged about it to classmates or acquaintances on bboards, but
the bad guys heard about it and the callers began to say things.  They
said that they would vandalize my friend's property and that they
would assault his son, and eventually they began making death threats.
Pac Tel stalled on the traces; in the end they said that they couldn't
release the information that they had gathered because regulations
required that at least three of the calls had to originate from the
same number, and somehow this was not the case.  My friend was puzzled
about the rule, but he was even more puzzled about the fact that the
calls seemed to come from different numbers...  He and his family
began to get rather nervous, although the violence remained verbal.

My friend decided to do some investigating of his own and called up
some of the numbers that appeared on his long distance bill.  Many of
them turned out to be recordings of various kinds, such as
'dial-a-porn'; a few of them turned out to be homes with teenagers,
and the latter readily admitted that they had been given the access
code and told to 'get this guy', and to spread the number far and
wide.  Since it was clear that the original perpetrators could not be
traced through the long distance company, my friend changed his access
code and managed to convince the company to forgive the bogus charges.
Following this move the problems with long distance went away.

At about this time the harrassing phone calls stopped too.  My friend
isn't sure whether this was a result of the bad guys hearing about his
investigation through the grapevine, or whether Pac Tel was getting
warm, but he was grateful regardless.  Unfortunately this wasn't the
end of his problem.  When he got his phone bill at the end of the
month, he discovered that he was being charged for hundreds of dollars
worth of bogus toll calls through Pac Tel, all made in his local area
code.  Apparently all of the many numbers called were recordings, so
there was no one on the other end who could be asked about the calls.
Pac Tel said that the calls originated from his residential phone, but
it was quite clear that no one in the household could possibly be
doing it.  The family kept logs of where all its members were for
periods of weeks at a time, and these showed that the calls were being
made when the house was empty, or when the family was eating dinner
and so on.  Peculiarly, some of the numbers were called as many as 8
times in a single minute, which suggested that the caller was using an
auto-dialer (my friend does not own one) and that the calls were being
made to accumulate charges rather than to listen to the recordings.
On the basis of this evidence Pac Tel traced the house's local loop,
but could find no indication that it had been compromised in any way.
Pac Tel now steadfastly maintains that there is no other way of making
a call appear to originate from the residence's phone.  After several
months of wrangling, Pac Tel sent its own investigator to look at the
case.  After one phone call to my friend and three days of
'investigation', Pac Tel's man announced that my friend's son was
responsible for all the calls, and that my friend was liable for the
thousands of dollars worth of bogus calls that had been made over the
previous eight months.

My friend, at his wits' end, tried contacting the FBI.  They heard him
out and told him that because none of the bogus calls at any stage of
the case had crossed state lines, they had no jurisdiction.  (My
friend's heart sank when he realized that that the bad guys must have
thought of this in advance...) The FBI suggested that my friend call
the PUC.  This turned out to be a joke -- my friend couldn't even get
past the secretary.  My poor friend is now at the stage of hiring a
lawyer and preparing for the inevitable...  Meanwhile the bogus calls
continue, taunting him.

My friend and I can use any information you might have on how a stunt
like this could be perpetrated -- how can you make calls appear to
come from another number?  We don't need or want precise details on
how to beat the system; we just need enough to convince Pac Tel (or
(sigh) a judge) that there is an alternative explanation for the
calls...

Any help you can give would be deeply appreciated,

Donn Seeley    University of Utah CS Dept    [e-mail]
40 46' 6"N 111 50' 34"W    [phone]    decvax!utah-cs!donn

PS -- If you have something you'd prefer to communicate in person, and
you'll be attending the Usenix conference, by all means contact me
there.


------------------------------

Date: Monday, 10 June 1985  11:32-MDT
From: Bob Russes <decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-argus![e-mail]>
Subject:   RFI Interference and 1200-bps Modems

*** HELP! ***

        I need advice in selecting a 1200-bps modem.  I need a modem
which is able to withstand the RFI interference from a 50,000 watt AM
broadcast station which is located approximately 1-2 miles from my
home.

        I currently have a Digital DF03 modem for use at home.
However, given the amount of RFI interference at my location, it is
effectively useless.

        Any suggestions would be **greatly** appreciated!!  Should you
need any other information, please ask!


                                                Bob

 Usenet:  decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-argus!russes
   USPS:  Bob Russes                     Telephone:  [phone]
          Digital Equipment Corporation
          67 Forest Street -- IND-3/C10
          Marlboro, MA  01752-9116

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
******************************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #200
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 14 Jun 85 00:32:21 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                          Thursday, June 13, 1985 7:28PM
Volume 4, Issue 200

Today's Topics:

               Cellular Roaming Problems (resolution).
      TELECOM Digest V4 #200 - Telephone Harassment - Revisited
[Thanks to SRA@XX we are running with new Digest software. Bugs to
TELECOM-REQUEST@MIT-XX. Note, TELECOM@XX and TELECOM-REQUEST@XX
are now the official addresses of TELECOM. Mail to BBNCCA will
be forwarded back here. --JSol]

----------------------------------------------------------------

From: ihnp4!pesnta!peora!jer@Berkeley
Date: Wednesday, 12 Jun 1985 16:52-EDT

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular phones and confidentiality
In-reply-to: USENET article <[e-mail]>

Aside from the fact that you CAN allegedly monitor cellular telephone
communications, is it legal to do so?  It had been my understanding that
a "Secrecy of Communications Act" existed which made it illegal to monitor
any radio communications other than those in the commercial and amateur
radio bands.  (The exact wording probably restricted it further, since
I first heard of it in reference to the alleged illegality of monitoring
subsidiary carrier broadcasts from commercial radio stations.)
--
Full-Name:  J. Eric Roskos
UUCP:       ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
US Mail:    MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC;
            2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642

           "Gnyx gb gur fhayvtug, pnyyre..."

----------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 13 Jun 1985 08:59-PDT
Subject: Cellular Roaming Problems (resolution).
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <[e-mail]>


                                Before the

                    FEDERAL COMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

                          Washigton, D.C. 20554


In re                                   )
                                        )
NEW ORLEANS CGSA, INC.                  ) File No. 27012-CL-C-84
Licensee of Domestic Cellular           )
Radio Telecommunications Service        )
Station KNKA 224, at New Orleans,       )
Louisiana

TO:    Chief, Common Carrier Bureau



                     REPLY TO EMERGENCY PETITION
                 FOR IMMEDIATE RELIEF FROM LICENSEE
                    RULE VIOLATION IN REFUSING TO
                      PROVIDE SERVICE TO ROAMERS
                      --------------------------


        New Orleans CGSA, Inc. and BellSouth Mobility Inc ( "BMI"),
parent corporation of New Orleans CGSA, Inc. (collectively,
"Respondents"), by their attorneys, hereby submit their response to
the above-styled Emergency ptition filed by or on behalf of Geoffrey
S. Goodfellow and Dwight F. Hare ( collectively, "Petitioners") in
this matter, dated May 17, 1985.  Respondents respectfully submit
that, contrary to the assertions of the Petitioners, there has been no
"willful refusal" to provide them with roamer service on the New
Orleans cellular system, and no "willful violation"" of Section
22.911(b) of the Commission's Rules.

        When Mr. Goodfellow contacted BMI seeking to arrange for
roamer service in New Orleans, he was correctly informed by both a
customer service representative and by Mr. Tony Walker that roamer
service (as it is presently conceived, i.e., via credit card or
automatic roaming intercarrier agreements) was not available in New
Orleans because of state regulatory considerations arising out of the
currently applicable tariffs adopted by the Louisiana Public Service
Commission governing the provision of cellular service in New Orleans.

        Implementig a separate roamer service offering is a vastly
complex undertaking and until very recently the various technical,
engineering, billig and administrative difficulties combined to
frustrate the development of the mechanisms necessary to support the
provision of roamer service as a separate and distinct category of
service offering.  Only within the past several weeks have enough of
these complicated billing, administrative and other hurdles been
overcome by BMI and some other cellular system operators so as to
permit BMI to begin executing intercarrier roamer service agreements
and implementing separate roamer service offerings in its various
cellular systems. Many other carriers around the country are still
unable to provide or support such separate roamer service.

        Back when the New Orleans cellular system became operational
and the tariffs relating thereto were filed and accepted by the
Louisiana Public Service Commission, these problems had not been
resolved and the cellular industry had not developed to the point
where the manner in which roamer service would ultimately be provided
could be adequately determined. As a result, the presently applicable
tariffs in New Orleans make no provision for roamer service as a
separate category from regular home subscriber service.

        Mr. Walker also correctly informed Mr. Goodfellow that
revisions to the applicable tariffs were being prepared and were
expected to be filed soon. Although the exact date of the projected
filing of these tariff revisions and their proposed effective date
were not known at the time of Mr. Walker's conversation with Mr.
Goodfellow, these tariff revisions were in fact filed with the
Louisiana Public Service Commission on May 21, 1985, and are proposed
to become ef fective on June 2, 1985.  In any event, as an interim
solution in an effort to accomodate the petitioners' desire to obtain
cellular service in New Orleans while remaining in compliance with the
applicable tariffs, Mr. Walker offered to arrange for service to be
provided to Petitioners essentially as if they were regular home
subscribers for the one month minimum period prescribed in the tariff.
Mr. Walker even offered to help arrange any reprogramming of the
Petitioners' cellular radiotelephone units which might be necessary.

        As the foregoing clearly demonstrates, there has been no
"willful" or "absolute" refusal by Respondents to provide service to
the Petitioners on the New Orleans cellular system.  Respondents
offered and remained willing to provide such service to Petitioners in
a manner which complies with state law and applicable tariffs.  Thus,
there has been no violation, willful or otherwise, of the Commission's
Rules.

        Furthemore, Respondents have been informed by the Louisiana
Public Service Commission ("LPSC" that the revised tariffs filed by
Respondents providing for a separate roamer service offering have been
accepted, to become effective June 2, 1985.  Respondents have asked
the LPSC to advance the effective date of the revised tariffs to May
25, 1985, and have been informed that the LPSC has agreed to that
request.  Written confirmation of the acceptance of the earlier
effective date is expected from the LPSC shortly and will be filed
with the Commission in this matter under separate cover.

        Therefore, roamer service can be provided to the ptitioners in
accordance with the revised tariffs during the time period requested.
As a result of these developments, the Emergency Petition is moot.

        For the reasons set forth above, the Petitioners are not
entitled to any of the relief sought in the and foresaid Emergency
Petition, and such petition should be dismissed.

                                        Respectfully submitted,

                                        NEW ORLEANS CGSA, INC.
                                        BELLSOUTH MOBILITY INC


                                        BY:_____________________
                                        Martin C. Ruegsegger

BellSouth Mobility Inc.
2030 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 500                               ________________________
Atlanta, Georgia 30339                  D. Scott Stenhouse
[phone]
                                        Attorneys for Respondents

Dated: May 23, 1985
----------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 13 Jun 85 09:41:18 PDT (Thursday)
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #200 - Telephone Harassment - Revisited
From: [e-mail]

Don,

If your friend's local loop terminates in an PAC-TEL ESS office,
(i.e. a computer driven Electronic Switch as opposed to a mechanical
switching arrangement), and given the aptitude of the parties involved,
it is entirely feasable that somebody knows the architecture of that
switch, and could therefore ~create~ phony calls, by merely telling the
switch to make the call.  This could be done from anywhere, if the person
or persons involved, knew enough about Pac-Tel's network architecture.
It's even more feasable, that no calls were ever actually made, and the
bogus billing reflects a simple data base compromise by the parties in
question.

One way to gather evidence that your friend did not make these calls,
is to order a second phone service.  The second service should be used
in place of the first for his/her daily requirements for phone service.
Have him order it under an assumed name and make sure it's unlisted.

Then short out the pair on the old service and leave it that way for
whatever period of time is necessary to prove that no use could possibly
have been originated from your friends house.  If your friend starts
seeing bogus charges on the new line, then that should indicate to PAC-TEL
that somewhere in their system, they have a few holes, and somebody found
them.  Of course, they already know this, but they can't admit it because
it would create mass unrest with all of their clients.

No computer system is 100% secure!
(But that's another subject...for another day...)

Good-luck,

  John
----------------------------------------------------------------
[End of TELECOM Digest]
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #201
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 19 Jun 85 00:03:09 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                           Tuesday, June 18, 1985 7:22PM
Volume 4, Issue 201

Today's Topics:

                    Cellular Phone eaves dropping
                   Responsibility of various telcos

[We experienced a small problem with the digestifying software that
prevented the previous digest from being undigestifiable using the
Babyl undigestifyer (and others). We hope this digest is up to
standard.  Please report any problems you have to
TELECOM-REQUEST@MIT-XX. --JSol]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Jun 85 18:42:20 pdt
From: Michael Peirce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phone eaves dropping

It seems that someone in the California Legislator has proposed
a bill that would ban scanners capable of picking up cellular
phone traffic.

The local amateur radio folks are mobilizing against it with
a letter writing blitz.

Michael Peirce

------------------------------

Date:           Tue, 18 Jun 85 11:30:54 PDT
From:           "Theodore N. Vail" <[e-mail]>
Subject:        Responsibility of various telcos

I just tried to dial a number in Cambridge, Massachussetts and received
the following recording:

    "The number you have reached XXXXXXX is not in service in area code
    607.  Please check the number and dial again."

I dialed long-distance information and was given the same number to dial
again, by "New England Telephone", even though I am in General Telephone
territory and my long-distance carrier is AT&T.

The amount is not large, however since I had the correct number, which
agreed with the telco's information service, why should I be charged
for long-distance information?  What is the responsibility of the telco
to provide accurate information service?  Are they permitted to charge
for incorrect information?  Do they have a responsibility to provide a
certain level of accuracy?  If so, what?

ted.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
***********************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #202
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!ucbvax!telec
        om
Date: 22 Jun 85 04:39:54 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                         Saturday, June 22, 1985 12:01AM
Volume 4, Issue 202

Today's Topics:

                      trouble with the archives
   Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #201 (long distance directory assistance)
                 Pointers to Microcom Modem & Vendor?
                Re:  Responsibility of various telcos
                             Penril woes
                             Easy Dialing

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri 21 Jun 85 16:25:17-EDT
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: trouble with the archives

SRI-CSL is in the process of upgrading its system from Tenex to
TOPS-20. During this time, the archives are in an unstable state.
I have moved TELECOM.RECENT from SRI-CSL to MIT-XX and will update
it as new digests are prepared. If you are looking for a recent
digest (i.e. within this volume), then please look in PS:<JSOL.TELECOM>
on MIT-XX. The other volumes are still on SRI-CSL in the <TELECOM>
directory. When SRI-CSL is fully up and running Tops-20, I will
move the archive back there.

Sorry for the inconvenience.
--Jsol

------------------------------

From: ima!johnl@bbncca
Date: Wed Jun 19 11:18:00 1985
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #201 (long distance directory assistance)

I gather that the charge you pay for long distance directory assistance
is for the long distance call to the D.A. operator rather than for the
information.  But if your call to Cambridge really was answered with a
message saying "not assigned in area code 607", it suggests that either
you or your General Tel exchange dialed 607 rather than 617.  (Also, all
of the Cambridge exchanges intercept a bad number by repeating back the
number you called and telling you that it's not in service at this time.)

But now I'm confused.  Who do directory assistance operators work for,
the local telcos or AT&T?  If I dial 213-555-1212, do I get Pacific
Bell operators, General Tel operators, or AT&T operators?  How about when
I dial 809-555-1212 and the operator says "what island, please?"  What's
particularly confusing is that apparently when you dial D.A. through
MCI, Sprint, or SBS, they route it to AT&T from whom they have bought
bulk D.A. service.

John Levine, ima!johnl or [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Monday, 17 June 1985  14:19-MDT
From: vax135!timeinc![e-mail]
Subject:   Pointers to Microcom Modem & Vendor?

There's been some discussion here about the 300/1200/2400 baud modem
offered by Microcom (Microcomm?) that implements the MNP (Microcom[m]
Networking Protocol) inside the modems' firmware.  I cannot seem to be
able to get any pointers to the company nor to the modem model number.
Can anyone help? Thanks!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


                --Dwight Ernest KA2CNN  \ Usenet:...vax135!timeinc!dwight
                  Time Inc. Edit./Prod. Tech. Grp., New York City
                  Voice: [phone] \ Compuserve: 70210,523
                  Telemail: DERNEST/TIMECOMDIV/TIMEINC \ MCI: DERNEST
"The opinions expressed above are those of the writer and do not necessarily
 reflect the opinions of Time Incorporated."

------------------------------

Date:     Wed, 19 Jun 85 9:20:01 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re:  Responsibility of various telcos

In the recording "...not in service in area code ___", you meant 617,
not 607, right?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Jun 85 14:31:28 edt
From: Don Saklad <dws@mit-eddie>

Subject: clicks and handset speakers
Newsgroups: fa.telecom
Distribution: usa

        Loud clicks not withstanding, how about the handsets which feed
the same individual's voice back into the same individual's ear at volume
which is too loud like clicks which are many times too painful.

        What's the term for that phenomenom--your voice fed back to your
own ear by your telephone handset.

------------------------------

Date: Tuesday, 18 June 1985  15:29-MDT
From: Mark Horton <[e-mail]>
Subject:   Penril woes

We have gobs and gobs of Penril auto-dial 212 modems.  They've worked
reasonably well on some old configurations (a Develcon dataswtch and a
DZ port) with some funny cabling, but we're just now discovering a
pair of misfeatures that are giving us fits.

We can't use the Penril as a dialup (e.g. 212 answer-only replacement)
because it asserts CD all the time.  (This isn't switch selectable.)
This causes UNIX to wake up the getty, which prints a banner.  The
banner contains a CR, which wakes up the penril, which greets the
getty.  The two then carry on a little conversation, eating up CPU,
repeatedly.  One trick is to set a switch and have RI wired to CD - it
will leave RI high during and after the ring.  (This is the funny
cabling mentioned above.)  This worked on the DZ, but when we moved to
a DH, we found out that RI doesn't emulate CD perfectly.  RI goes up
and down a few times before coming up for good.  This drives our DH
crazy, waking up the getty and immediately blowing it away with
SIGHUP.  We are also having this problem on a Bridge CS/1.

We can mostly use them as a dial-out, but they have an annoying habit
that if I have just connected up (within a few seconds) and type lots
of stuff fast, ending in CR, the modem fails to print 10 chars worth
of output and instead prints the 3 chars "CR LF >".  This drives our
UUCP crazy on some hosts, since it types fast and sends CR.  Often it
will expect login, get it, send uucp, expect ssword, and get neither
the echo of uucp nor the ssword, just a >.

Does anybody have any advice?  Can you confirm that these problems
(especially the > one) are really in the Penril?  Is there a fix?  We
have about 24 of these modems in 3 racks, an investment we hate to
lose or replace.

        Mark

------------------------------

Date: 21-Jun-85 15:09:12-PDT
From: [e-mail]

Does anybody out there have any information on possible
codecs for either Bell T-1 or CEPT Level 1 formats
which are devices? I am looking for an
IC, ideally, but would settle for a single-card
implementation, if required.  I would like to get into
and out of a level 1 TDM stream in as small a size as
possible.  Please mail any responses to me via e-mail at:
           matt@wdl1
Thanks in advance.
                Matthew Noall


------------------------------

Date:     Fri, 21 Jun 85 8:47:15 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Easy Dialing

Just saw "Easy Dialing" (another name for equal access?)
for 1st time.  That's the dialing of 1+areacode+number
regardless of your long-distance carrier.
(This was in C&P of Md. announcement.)

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
***********************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #203
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 23 Jun 85 04:40:14 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                           Sunday, June 23, 1985 12:06AM
Volume 4, Issue 203

Today's Topics:

                 Pointers to Microcom Modem & Vendor?
                 Pointers to Microcom Modem & Vendor?
                       Re: Terminology inquiry
                       U.S TRON repair question
                   Re: clicks and handset speakers
                    "sidetone" and "equal" access

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wednesday, 19 June 1985  15:09-MDT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Dyer)
Subject:   Pointers to Microcom Modem & Vendor?

> There's been some discussion here about the 300/1200/2400 baud
> modem offered by Microcom (Microcomm?) that implements the MNP
> (Microcom[m] Networking Protocol) inside the modems' firmware.
> I cannot seem to be able to get any pointers to the company nor
> to the modem model number. Can anyone help? Thanks!

Microcom can be reached at (617)-762-9310.  They are in Norwood, Mass.
The model number, I believe, is ZX2400.
--
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!sdyer
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Thursday, 20 June 1985  12:10-MDT
From: Dan Lorenzini <cmcl2!philabs![e-mail]>
Subject:   Pointers to Microcom Modem & Vendor?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Dyer) writes:
>>
>> There's been some discussion here about the 300/1200/2400 baud
>> modem offered by Microcom (Microcomm?) that implements the MNP
>> (Microcom[m] Networking Protocol) inside the modems' firmware.
>> I cannot seem to be able to get any pointers to the company nor
>> to the modem model number. Can anyone help? Thanks!
>
>Microcom can be reached at (617)-762-9310.  They are in Norwood, Mass.
>The model number, I believe, is ZX2400.
>--

The Microcom ZX/2400 is Hayes compatible but does not have MNP.  The
model number for the one with MNP is SX/2400.

Dan

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Henry N. Holtzman)
Date: 22 Jun 1985 0309-EDT (Saturday)
Subject: Re: Terminology inquiry


The signal fed back from the microphone to the earpiece is called side-tone.

-Hank

------------------------------

Subject: U.S TRON repair question
Date: 22 Jun 85 15:54:29 EDT (Sat)
From: cspencer@bbnccv

I have one of those funny looking U.S TRON phones, model
PL2000. Has anyone ever experienced problems with these
phones concerning static noise in the earpiece? The
static is so loud as to make the phone unusable.
                                        cliff
                                        cspencer@bbnccv



------------------------------

From: munnari!basser.oz!john@seismo
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 85 10:47:26 EST
Subject: Re: clicks and handset speakers

> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 85 14:31:28 edt
> From: Don Saklad <dws@mit-eddie>
>
>       What's the term for that phenomenom--your voice fed back to your
> own ear by your telephone handset.

Sidetone.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22-Jun-85 11:39:19 PDT
From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: "sidetone" and "equal" access

The part of the speaker's voice that is heard in his or her own
earphone is called "sidetone."  It's a result of imperfect hybrids,
plus the fact that without it people tend to SHOUT into their phones.

---

Man, was I ever disgusted with the payphones in Portand (at the
recent Usenix).  Equal access is turning into more of a joke
every day.  The "normal" pay phones (that took money) had no information
about dialing interlata calls.  The charge-a-call phones were even
worse.  They had big labels telling you how to reach all the
"lightweight" carriers, but nothing obvious about using AT&T.  As it turned
out, the access numbers for the non-AT&T carriers just dialed a local
number to access that service--you couldn't DO anything after that
unless you happened to have an account on that particular service.

Could you call using AT&T from these phones?  What if you didn't
HAVE an account on any of the others?  YES, you could.  Both the
charge-a-call and coin phones would accept the normal 0+NPA+7D sequences.
But if you didn't know this sequence, where would you find it?
On the phone of course.  But where?  It turned out that the
AT&T dialing instructions WERE on the phones--in about 2 point
non-contrasting type printed across the bottom fold of the
information card.  As close to invisible as anything could be.

Total madness.

--Lauren

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #204
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 25 Jun 85 07:36:36 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                           Tuesday, June 25, 1985 2:54AM
Volume 4, Issue 204

Today's Topics:

              Re:  Verification of Equal Access Carrier
                       Md./DC area miscellanea
                         Mystery phone number
                            2503 telephone

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Mon, 24 Jun 85 8:18:07 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re:  Verification of Equal Access Carrier

President Carter's call-in used area code 900, not 700.

------------------------------

Date:     Mon, 24 Jun 85 9:21:17 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Md./DC area miscellanea

At BWI (Balt.-Wash. International Airport), there are 2 prefixes
on the pay phones: 859 for Baltimore area, 621 for Washington area.
Charge-Call phones are on 859.  (However, the phone books there had
general flight info at 261-1000; either reversed digits or that's an
ANNAPOLIS number, which doesn't make sense if it's at BWI.)

Latest DC phone book has 692,694,695,696,697 in DC but has 693 as
Dept. of Defense, Va.

1971-72 Baltimore area directory has some things different from now:
363 Owings Mills (Pikesville rates) and 356 Owings Mills (Reisterstown
rates); these have not changed except for the words used to describe
them.
723 Crofton (Severna Park rates); now 793?
787 Sykesville; now 549?
951 Silver Spring; 951 is now Bethesda?
932 Bowie-Glenn Dale; 932 is now Waldorf?
875 Bel Air; 875 is now Westminster (Sykesville service)?

Md. pay phones I see in Baltimore LATA are now charging 25 cents,
although 621 mentioned above charged 20 cents when I saw it in May.
(Earlier, I saw 577 charging 25 cents close to DC.) A pay phone in
Bel Air (301-838) announces C&P, a Bell Atlantic Co.

------------------------------

Date: 24 Jun 1985 11:35-EDT
Subject: Mystery phone number
From: [e-mail]


Once upon a time, there was a phone number which allowed the good
people of the land to determine what phone number they were
calling from.  By dialling this magic number, a voice would come
back, reciting the digits of the originating caller's line.

Now when I try this magic number [[phone]], alas, I get a
fast busy.  [phone] also fails.  Does anyone know of a
number that works?

William Thompson

------------------------------

From: crash![e-mail]
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 85 20:29:24 PDT
Subject: 2503 telephone

Hello Everyone,

        Does anyone have any documentation for a Western Electric 2503
exclusion key telephone?  I would like to either borrow, or have a
specific configuration relayed to me.

                                Thanks..

---Scott O'Connell              crash!scotto@ucsd
                                {ihnp4, cbosgd, sdcsvax}!crash!scotto

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #205
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 26 Jun 85 00:34:54 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                           Tuesday, June 25, 1985 7:57PM
Volume 4, Issue 205

Today's Topics:

                             Penril woes
                   Ven-Tel Modem schematics needed
                       Phone dialers and modems
                   single line dial in/out on Altos
            Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #202 Clicks and Handsets

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Friday, 21 June 1985  07:33-MDT
From: Steven Taylor <decvax!mcnc!ecsvax![e-mail]>
Subject:   Penril woes

There are at least 3 prom sets for the Penril autodialers in question.
The "vanilla" prom set does indeed keep cd high (as best I remember)
in order to keep terminals happy.  (It was designed to be used with
dumb crt's as an outgoing device.)

A second version was designed specifically to work with Develcon
dataswitches in a bidirectional mode.  That is, they could be used on
the switch for outgoing calls or incoming calls on the same port.  I
KNOW that this prom set does not keep cd high, but brings it up in
response to DTR coming high.  (Remember, the dataswitch does not bring
dtr high until it is trying to initiate a call.  This difference may
be the root of the problem mentioned.)  If you need more detailed info
on this, I'll be glad to discuss this firmware in detail.

Finally, there is also, I understand, a "Hayes compatible" firmware
set available now as well.

Your Penril rep should be willing to work with you on getting a prom
that will work, but you may have to get hin to do some investigation
before he will admit that the three version (minimum) really exist.

Steven Taylor
Distributed Networking Associates
Charlottesville, VA 22901
[phone]

------------------------------

Date: Saturday, 22 June 1985  22:00-MDT
From: John Ruschmeyer <vax135!petsd!moncol![e-mail]>
Subject:   Ven-Tel Modem schematics needed

Monmouth College is in need of the schematics (or any other technical
information) for the Ven-Tel MD 212 PLUS modem (specifically, one of
the older models in the black case).

Recent lightning strikes have disabled two such modems. Ven-Tel's only
suggestion is to send the modems to them for service. Based on a
previous dealing with them, however, the repair would cost more than
replacement.

Any pointers to a schematic, therefore, will be appreciated.  Thanks
in advance.....

--
Name:           John Ruschmeyer
US Mail:        Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764
Phone:          [phone] x366
UUCP:           ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john    ...!princeton!moncol!john
                                                   ...!pesnta!moncol!john

------------------------------

Date: Monday, 24 June 1985  17:05-MDT
From: [e-mail] (Marty Sasaki)
Subject:   Phone dialers and modems

I have this cheapie phone that has a last-number-redial button. I
connect the phone to my modem, and the modem to the telephone line.
Everything is fine when I'm using my phone normally. The fun comes in
when I push the "data" button on the modem. This seems to disconnect
the phone from the line. Unfortunately, the memory for the
last-number- redial seems to need power; it forgets when I push the
"data" button.

I've been thinking of getting a better phone (one of Panasonic's
"Easa-phones") that has a bunch of remembered numbers, and was
wondering whether I would have the same problem of forgetting numbers?
Is there some way around this?

I used to have the phone and the modem in parallel and would sometimes
have problems with noise, especially when I hung up the phone.

----------------
  Marty Sasaki                          net:   sasaki@harvard.{arpa,uucp}
  Havard University Science Center      phone: [phone]
  One Oxford Street
  Cambridge, MA 02138

------------------------------

Date: Saturday, 22 June 1985  20:02-MDT
From: Randy Suess <ihnp4!wlcrjs![e-mail]>
Subject:   single line dial in/out on Altos

For all you Altos 586 owners out there that have been stymied by your
lack of ability to use a single modem/port for dial in and dial out,
be unhappy no more.  I have finally got it going using the new ARK
2400 baud modem.  The problem has always been that the Altos requires
cd (pin 8) to be always hi for dial out, but to only be hi on carrier
detect for dial in.  On a DCHayes, for instance, you had to have the
switch 6 up for dial in and down for dial out.  The ARK modem uses a
"intelligent" cd pin.  There is a wiring change to be done on the
cable.  Pin 6 on the Altos goes to pin pin 5 on the modem.  You then
of course have to modify the various programs used with the line.  I
use it on my system for uucp dial out and in.  I just replaced
/usr/lib/uucico with a shell script that tests for usage, disables the
port, then calls a renamed uucico.  After uucico finishes, it
re-enables the port for dial in.  I have been receiving news and
polling other sites with it with no problems.

The ARK's are the best 2400 baud modem going for the price.  They have
built in mnp protocol, and list for $595.

Hope this has been of some help.

--
.. that's the biz, sweetheart ..
Randy Suess
Chi-Net - Public Access UN*X
[phone] (h) [phone] (system)
{ihnp4|ihldt}!wlcrjs!randy

------------------------------

From: ihnp4!ihopa!riccb!jmc@Berkeley
Date: 25 Jun 85 08:12:49 CDT (Tue)
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #202 Clicks and Handsets

In regards to hearing your voice back in your ear via the phone line,
in a 2W circuit this is called TRANSHYBRID LOSS (or lack of it as it were),
in a 4W circuit this is called SIDETONE.  It was orginally there as a
function of the 2W to 4W hybrid circuit on a two wire line.  People now
associate this with the phone working.  If a 4 wire line terminates in
a handset or headset then a certain portion of voice is bleed back to
the ear intentionally.
                                     Jeff McQuinn just VAXing around

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #206
From: [e-mail]
Path: watnot!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 28 Jun 85 01:01:43 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                          Thursday, June 27, 1985 5:11PM
Volume 4, Issue 206

Today's Topics:

                 Quality of 1+ vs. 10xxx; voting hack
                     Panasonic Phones and Modems
                        equal access confusion
                       Also need MD212+ schemos
                   Re:  Panasonic Phones and Modems
                     AT+T Communications billing
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #204
          news:  IBM sells SBS to MCI for stock and options

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue 25 Jun 85 20:19:31-EDT
From: S.PAE@MIT-EECS
Subject: Quality of 1+ vs. 10xxx; voting hack

According to MCI's customer service representatives, calls going
through 10xxx service will have the same quality that I would get if I
chose MCI as my primary carrier (for 1+ service).  Is this
correct--does New England Telephone just do a lookup when I dial 1+ to
get my primary carrier, but then use exactly the same mechanism to
establish the circuit that 10xxx service uses?

The representative I talked with had NEVER had anyone ask her a question
about connection quality. Either most customers are oblivious to the issue
or everyone aware enough to ask knows to not trust the answers they give.

For folks who are presently using Expressphone (AMEX MCI) service, the
only screw of 10xxx/1+ access is that the billing for those will come
through your local carrier. Charges coming through this mechanism will
not be added in with your other Expressphone charges for volume discounts.
Unless you want the discounts, 10xxx/1+ sounds like the right way to access
MCI from your billing telephone.

There seem to be some not-yet-discussed problems with equal access.
Do the carriers have data about how many customers in a given area
they can reasonably expect to service adequately? What happens if they
get too many subscribers? What criteria do these companies have to
have before they can be on an area's equal access ballots? What if all
the hackers in an area conspire to go with the most baroque (least
desirable) carrier in an area just to hack the people who don't vote?

------------------------------

Date: Tue 25 Jun 85 22:26:44-EDT
From: Bob Soron  <Mly.G.Pogo@MIT-OZ>
Subject: Panasonic Phones and Modems


I've used two Panasonic "ITS Easa-Phones" with my Timecor
modem (I'm not proud) and have had very few problems.  The
Panasonic phones use batteries and even without either
batteries or phone line connection have kept the numbers
in memory for four or five hours.  The KX-2220, which had
sixteen-phone-number memory and auto-redial, stopped working
with the modem when I moved from Arlington to Watertown; I
attributed it to the higher ringer equivalence of that phone
(1.6).  The 2340 works fine on these lines, although it
doesn't have auto-redial, which I miss since the Timecor
modem has nothing in the way of features.  (Its REN is 1.0.)

In short, if my experience holds you should have no trouble
combining your modem with a Panasonic ITS/Easa-phone...

...Bob

------------------------------

Date:  Wed, 26 Jun 85 09:44 EDT
From:  [e-mail] (Richard Kovalcik, Jr.)
Subject:  equal access confusion

I had been trying to call a 900 number for the last week and kept on
getting a fast busy.  In a fit of inspiration this morning I decided to
try a long distance credit card call.  (This itself would have presented
some problems, since New England Telephone has for the third time gotten
my ATT calling cards for both of my home phone lines messed up.  It
seems that they have a lot of trouble with people who move.)  This (the
credit card call) also gave me a fast busy.  I then realized that they
had probably switched me over to my chosen equal access carrier
(Sprint).  I called the business office and asked what was going on and
what the ATT access code was.  They couldn't tell me.  They suggested I
call ATT.  I called the Operator.  She couldn't tell me either and
suggested I call ATT (for the access code).  I called ATT.  They told me
their access code (10ATT) and tried to convince me to switch back to
ATT.  I called Sprint.  They told me the 700 test number to see if I was
connected to them.  (700-555-4141).  That gets a fast busy too.  At this
point I tryied a normal long distance call and that got a fast busy.  I
know that I had been making long distance calls over the last week, but
they were all apparently to 800 numbers.  So, it now appears that I have
a phone where the only long distance call I can make with out dialing a
special equal access prefix is an 800 call.  I wonder how long it will
take them to get this straightened out.

It seems to me that the local access companies and ATT are making this
considerably harder than it has to be.

-Rick (my equal access carrier is limbo) Kovalcik

------------------------------

Date: 26 Jun 85 17:18:14 EDT
From: Stephen Carter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Also need MD212+ schemos


>Monmouth College is in need of the schematics (or any other technical
>information) for the Ven-Tel MD 212 PLUS modem (specifically, one of
>the older models in the black case).


I am also in the same position, so if any other kind person out there
has schemos and a user manual for these things, I would appreciate
a copy also....  A user's guide would be most helpful.

thanks
SCarter

        Arpa:  [e-mail]
        uucp:  ...{seismo,allegra,ihnp4!packard}!topaz!scarter
        AT&T:  201-932-2260
        USnail:  Rutgers State University
                 Lab for Computer Science Research
                 Hill Center Room 605, Busch Campus
                 Piscataway, NJ   08854

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jun 85 09:44:12 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Marty Sasaki)
Subject: Re:  Panasonic Phones and Modems

Thanks for the very specific advice. I'll probably go and claim
my rain-check for the phone this afternoon.

                        Marty Sasaki

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jun 85 18:04:22 EDT
From: Jim Berets <jberets@bbn-vax>
Subject: AT+T Communications billing

Perhaps this has already been discussed when I wasn't paying attention...

I recently got my New England Telephone bill.  While in California,
I made a number of calls on my calling card.  Among them:

Berkeley, CA (415) to CT (203) on the AT+T Communications billing page
Palo Alto, CA (415) to West LA, CA (213) on the AT+T Communications page
Mill Valley, CA (408) to Sunnyvale, CA (415) on the NET page
Redondo Beach, CA (213) to West LA, CA (213) on the NET page

Are parts of (408) and (415) in the same LATA, making the Mill Valley
to Sunnyvale call "local"?

Jim

------------------------------

From: ecsvax![e-mail]
Date:     26 Jun 85 9:24:07-EDT (Wed)
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #204

Re: Operators - most work for AT&T; I don't know what the BOC's have
done, but GTE still operates a few class 4 switches and is leasing those
switches and attendant operators' services to AT&T.  I assume that the
other independents (Centel, United, etc) still have operators?

Re: Calling # identification - Is an option which varies with telco
and site; I have seen XXX-9999 and many 3-digit ones such as 538 & 711.

     Michael Auman

------------------------------

Date: Thu 27 Jun 85 15:43:27-CDT
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: news:  IBM sells SBS to MCI for stock and options

[ from Austin American Statesman - June 26, 1985 ]

    IBM to acquire major stake in MCI
    =================================
(David Sanger - NY Times)  ...IBM announced it is buying 18% of MC with an
option to expand its holding to 30%.

The acquisition instantly makes IBM one of the biggest players  in the
turbulent long distance market at a time, when AT&T is struggling to enter
IBM's territory.  IBM's investment in MCI comes less than 8 months after the
world's largest computer company completed its acquisition of the Rolm Corp.,


a maker of complex telephone switching ecquipment that had been another major


rival of AT&T.

Under the terms announced Tuesday, MCI will get virtually all assets of one o

        f
its competitors, Satellite Business Systems, a long-distance telephone servic

        e
started in 1975 by IBM, Comsat, and Aetna.  Comsat dropped out of the
money-losing venture last year, and IBM said Tuesday that, as part of the
financial arrangements, it was buying out Aetna's share.

If the Justice Dept and the FCC approves, IBM will swap SBS's assets for 45
million newly issued shares of MCI common stock - worth about $427 million at


Tuesday's closing price.  IBM will also receive warrants entitling it to buy

        7
million more shares of MCI common for $15 a share.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #207
From: [e-mail]
Path: water!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 29 Jun 85 04:41:57 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                         Saturday, June 29, 1985 12:00AM
Volume 4, Issue 207

Today's Topics:

                             MCI/IBM/SBS
                Re: long distance directory assistance
                             Penril woes
                    AJ-4800 modem catches ctrl-S?
                    autodial on synchronous modems
                    LATA billing on calling cards
                               Various

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27-Jun-85 16:09:35 PDT
From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: MCI/IBM/SBS

My personal opinion is that this is the best thing that could have
happened for AT&T at this point!  It seems counter-intuitive, but
it's true.  MCI was going to go ahead and get funding from somewhere
to continue their current plans--and their recent disappointment with the
award in their suit against AT&T forced them to go along with a substantial
buyout by IBM.  But the point is that they would have found funding
somewhere, and even IBM isn't an infinite purse of money (as MCI
will no doubt learn).  IBM also makes its share of rather "questionable"
business/pricing decisions, as we also all know.

Now, the end result of all this is that the push for full deregulation
of AT&T will be greatly enhanced.  Already there are murmurings from
the Commission on this point--that with IBM in the game there isn't
much reason to worry about problems when AT&T is fully deregulated.
In fact, the regulatory approval cycle for AT&T had been shortening
anyway--but this can't help but speed up the process--to AT&T's
ultimate advantage.  An unleashed AT&T might be interesting to
behold in the competitive marketplace.

The real losers in all this will almost certainly be the smaller
carriers--maybe even up to and including GTE Sprint.  What ends
up happening, of course, is that we end up with two giant corporations
selling both telecommunications and computers, when originally
we had, uh, two giant corporations selling telecommunications
and computers (but each was only involved in one aspect, not both).

The little guys will really suffer, though.

--Lauren--


------------------------------

From: dual!islenet!bob@Berkeley
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 85 02:45:16 pdt
Subject: Re: long distance directory assistance

John Levine asks "Who do directory assistance operators work for ..
How about when I dial 809-555-1212 and the operator says 'what island,
Please'".

The local telcos.

For example, if you call 808-555-1212 (and you'll also be asked "which
island?", but it's Hawaii, not the Carribean), you'll be talking to a
directory assistance operator working for Hawaiian Telephone Company
downtown here on Bishop Street.  Happens to be a GTE subsidiary.  HawTel
will be reimbursed by AT&T (or whoever) for handling your query, AT&T (or,
again, whoever you placed the call thru) keeps track of the fact that you
placed the call and charges you (perhaps thru your local telco).

A considerable fraction of the cost of directory assistance here is
reimbursed this way.

I believe that non-AT&T long-distance carriers often tend to use AT&T for
directory assistance calls rather than set up separate agreements and
connections with the local telcos involved ... not too sure about this
last, though.

------------------------------

Date: Friday, 21 June 1985  07:33-MDT
From: Steven Taylor <decvax!mcnc!ecsvax![e-mail]>
Subject:   Penril woes

There are at least 3 prom sets for the Penril autodialers in question.
The "vanilla" prom set does indeed keep cd high (as best I remember)
in order to keep terminals happy.  (It was designed to be used with
dumb crt's as an outgoing device.)

A second version was designed specifically to work with Develcon
dataswitches in a bidirectional mode.  That is, they could be used on
the switch for outgoing calls or incoming calls on the same port.  I
KNOW that this prom set does not keep cd high, but brings it up in
response to DTR coming high.  (Remember, the dataswitch does not bring
dtr high until it is trying to initiate a call.  This difference may
be the root of the problem mentioned.)  If you need more detailed info
on this, I'll be glad to discuss this firmware in detail.

Finally, there is also, I understand, a "Hayes compatible" firmware
set available now as well.

Your Penril rep should be willing to work with you on getting a prom
that will work, but you may have to get hin to do some investigation
before he will admit that the three version (minimum) really exist.

Steven Taylor
Distributed Networking Associates
Charlottesville, VA 22901
[phone]

------------------------------

Date: Monday, 24 June 1985  21:42-MDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Weiser)
Subject:   AJ-4800 modem catches ctrl-S?

I have an Anderson-Jacobson 4800 baud modem which uses the ordinary
phone lines.  It works pretty well, except for one thing.  It seems to
interpret ctrl-S and ctrl-Q.  I have not found this documented
anywhere in the manuals, but it is obviously happening.  After a
ctrl-S typed at my keyboard (in emacs, naturally), no other chacacters
appear until a ctrl-Q is typed.  But then, the ultimate strangeness:
The ctrl-S HAS been passed on from my terminal to emacs, and so has
the ctrl-Q!

This has got me baffled.  How in the world can a modem get away with
interpreting ctrl-S/ctrl-Q, and then passing them on as well?  Am I
misinterpreting something?  Is there a way to turn this off, other
AJ-4800 baud owners out there?

On a related note, I can't seem to get 8=bit data through the AJ.  My
terminal has a meta-key which turns on the 8th bit on all characters.
By the time these characters get through the AJ modem they have
somehow been transformed to have proper parity, which is a disaster.
Any way to turn off this mode?

Thanks in advance.
        -mark
--
Spoken: Mark Weiser     ARPA:   mark@maryland   Phone: [phone]
CSNet:  mark@umcp-cs    UUCP:   {seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!mark
USPS: Computer Science Dept., University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742

------------------------------

Date: Monday, 24 June 1985  16:22-MDT
From: Mark Roddy <harvard!talcott!panda!enmasse![e-mail]>
Subject:   autodial on synchronous modems

I'm faced with a design question on implementing autodial for low speed
synch modems (i.e. 4800 bps.)

The only synchronous modem I've got a spec for is a UDS 4800 model.
Dialout is accomplished by:
        1) driving pin 12 high;
        2) driving DTR high;
        3) waiting a specified time;
        4) raising pin 25 high for 3.5 seconds;
        5) providing high and low pulses on pin 25 corresponding to bell
           standard pulse dial signals.

The questions are:

1) does anyone manufacture synchronous modems with some analogy  to the
Hayes protocol for async dial out?

2) Is UDS's method done by anyone else? (i.e. is this a standard?)

3) If the answer to question 2 is no, then is there a standard?

4) If the answer to 2 and 3 is no, then what dialout interface do
other netlanders provide for their intelligent comm boards?

5) In fact, even if the answer to 2 or 3 is yes, I'd be interested
in knowing how other people provide autodial for comm. boards.

Please send mail, if there is interest I will post a summary of responses
to the net.

Thanks.
--
                                        Mark Roddy
                                        (harvard!talcott!panda!enmasse!mroddy

        )

------------------------------

Date: Friday, 28 Jun 1985 06:02:59-PDT
From: [e-mail]  (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: LATA billing on calling cards

Re: V4I206;  Sunnyvale and Mill Valley are both in the same LATA
(Bay Area), so PacBell carries the call.  Area codes have no particular
relationship to LATAs except in New England, or where states are LATAs.
All of 415, most of 408 and a some of 707 are in one LATA.

When a calling card call is intra-LATA, the BOC who owns the call
passes the bill to the cardholder's BOC, hence the call appears on the
"New England Telephone" page.  When the call is inter-LATA, AT&T keeps
the billing under their own aegis.  Technically, one could have viewed
the call as "Pacific Bell", but New England Tel doesn't have a page
for them! ;-)

Fred

------------------------------

Date: Fri 28 Jun 85 12:28:40-PDT
From: HECTOR MYERSTON <[e-mail]>
Subject: Various

        Multi-NPA LATAS.  Some LATAS, more correctly, Serivice Areas, do
indeed split NPAs.  The SF Bay service area includes all of NPA 415 and
most, though not all of NPA 408.  Part of 408 is in the Monterey Ca serice
area.
        The last I heard the split on operators is as shown below.  Substitut

        e
your local telco for Pacbell.

 Operators.................. AT&T ................... PacBell.............

Dial 0- Calls         Handle, charge Pacbell

Dial 0+ Calls         Handle

411 Calls                                             Handle

555-1212                                              Handle, charge AT&T (*)



...........................................................................

0 - = Regular Operator Assisted calss
0+  = 0+NPA NXX XXXX (ie credit card calls
*   = Other IEC may also contract with LEC for 555-1212 service

    Reference equal access.  Those who believe carrier sales pitches that
"With equal access we will have the same quality as AT&T" should examine
the question of what constitutes an end-to-end connection.  No amount of
improvement in the local acess will compensate for badly engineered
networks, satellite delays or kludgy compression techniques designed to
wring the Nth channel out of a marginal system.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
----------kgd
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #208
From: [e-mail]
Path: water!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Date: 1 Jul 85 05:23:22 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]

From: Moderator <[e-mail]>

TELECOM Digest                            Monday, July 1, 1985 12:41AM
Volume 4, Issue 208

Today's Topics:

                            AJ-4800 modems
                Re: AJ 4048 in TELECOM Digest V4 #207
                 2400 baud modems available cheap(er)
                          Re: AJ-4800 modems
                     missing direct access option
                         Anonymous submission

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 85 13:39:41 edt
From: ulysses!smb@Berkeley (Steven Bellovin)
Subject: AJ-4800 modems

I also have an AJ 4800 baud modem, but I've had no problems with it
interpreting ^S or any other character.  Nor does it seem to have trouble
with the 8th bit -- I use a Teletype 5620 and download it often, which would
not work if the modem did anything weird with any characters.  However --
some models of the modem have an error-correcting board; this board (which ca

        n
be disabled) might do such things.  We don't use them because they cause
annoyingly long echo delays.

------------------------------

From: vax135!timeinc!dwight@Berkeley
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 85 19:44:36 edt

To: vax135!houxm!ihnp4!cbosgd!ulysses!ucbvax!telecom
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #203
Newsgroups: fa.telecom
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Time, Inc -- New York
Cc:


Re: Pointers to Microcom

I found Microcom and a nearby distributor. The writer on fa.telecom
who mentioned that the SX/2400 is the modem that implements MNP,
and that the ZX/2400 is Hayes compatible, but without MNP, was wrong.
I am using one of the ZX/2400 modems right now, in MNP mode,
with our Unix host, from home. It's Hayes compatible with MNP.
The SX/2400 also has MNP, but I am given to understand that it
does NOT have Hayes compatibility.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


                --Dwight Ernest KA2CNN  \ Usenet:...vax135!timeinc!dwight
                  Time Inc. Edit./Prod. Tech. Grp., New York City
                  Voice: [phone] \ Compuserve: 70210,523
                  Telemail: DERNEST/TIMECOMDIV/TIMEINC \ MCI: DERNEST
"The opinions expressed above are those of the writer and do not necessarily
 reflect the opinions of Time Incorporated."

------------------------------

Date: Sat 29 Jun 85 12:36:56-PDT
From: Doug <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AJ 4048 in TELECOM Digest V4 #207

About the AJ4048: I am composing this using a 4048, from home, running
EMACS on a DEC20, using a hacked H19 with a META key, and the META
key, ^S (incremental search), and ^Q (single character quote) work
just fine.  The trick is, I think, is that AJ sells a version of the
unit that includes error correction, by packetizing, and checking, and
retransmitting them, if necessary.  I suspect that's what you've got,
and since I have the other, I don't know how to disable the EC, but I
suspect that's what you have to do.
  We've got a couple of 4048's on our security dial-back unit in Palo
Alto, and four at people's homes.  I have, here in Oakland, 50 miles
from PA, the RJ45, and sometimes get an intolerable connection the
first one or two tries, and often see a small number of noise
characters during a several hour session.  The other three units are
using a RJ11 permissive connection, and at least two of them, closer
to PA, are reportedly working quite well.

------------------------------

Date: Thursday, 27 June 1985  10:42-MDT
From: Scott Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject:   2400 baud modems available cheap(er)

Racal-Vadic 2400 baud modems are available directly from Racal-Vadic
for an educational discount price of $415. The constraints are that
the order must total at least $1000 and the PO must come through an
educational institution. The list price for their Maxwell 2400 is
$795.

Call 1-800-4-VADICS for more info.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: AJ-4800 modems
Date: 29 Jun 85 23:35:13 EDT (Sat)
From: Mark Weiser <mark@umd-markssun>

Any idea how to turn off the error-correcting board?
        -mark

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Jun 85 17:25:53 EDT
From: Doug Hirsch <[e-mail]>
Subject: missing direct access option

Re: the message of Rick (my equal access carrier is limbo) Kovalcik
>Date:  Wed, 26 Jun 85 09:44 EDT
>From:  [e-mail] (Richard Kovalcik, Jr.)
>Subject:  equal access confusion

Rick is disheartened that he has no direct access for the time being.  I woul

        d
like to get this feature!  Right now my phone is vulnerable to long distance
phone calls by anyone who happens to be in my apartment or tap onto my line.
My roomate and I each have our own common carrier with separate bills to
simplify accounting.  I had a roomate (since moved out) who caused some
surprize charges on the phone bill which wouldn't be there if he were force t

        o
use his own account.  I would like to see "none of the above" as one of the
direct access options.  Obviously this won't happen because "none of the abov

        e"
has an inadequate lobbying staff in Washington.

Doug (liable for the phone bill) Hirsch

------------------------------

Date: Mon 1 Jul 85 00:37:06-EDT
From: The Moderator <TELECOM-REQUEST@MIT-XX>
Subject: Anonymous submission


Computer and Business Equipment Manufacturers Association
311 First St. NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC  20001

Release:  immediate--June 3, 1985

``INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF COMPUTER ASSOCIATIONS
  OPPOSES OECD PLANS TO MONITOR AND POSSIBLY TAX
  INTRA-COMPANY TELECOMMUNICATIONS''

WASHINGTON--The International Information Industry Congress
(IIIC), meeting in Tokyo, took strong exception to plans by the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to
study data flow in multi-national companies, with the probable
end result of taxing certain kinds of information going from one
subsidiary to another.

Vico E.  Henriques, president of the Computer and Business
Equipment Manufacturers Association (CBEMA), which represented
the U.S. at the IIIC meeting, called ideas to tax information
"unprecedented and irresponsible.  A tax on transferring
information from one subsidiary to another would seriously
hamper common business practices that are in the best economic
interests not just of companies but also of the countries in
which they do business."

The plan that has caused the opposition is part of a draft
agenda for a meeting of the Working Party on Transborder Data
Flows.  The IIIC members agreed to discourage this direction
through their countries' representatives to the meeting.

In a related action, the IIIC adopted a statement against
generalized, far-reaching governmental restrictions on the flow
of information across borders.  The organization advocated:

-  Making sure that "national security" restrictions on
   information flow apply only to "data having national security
   implications rather than taking the form of any general
   restrictions" on commercial, financial, and non-military
   technical information.

-  Developing consistent international practices to safeguard
   personal privacy.

-  Demonstrating that easy flow of information across borders
   does not necessarily lead to more centralization in
   multi-national corporations.  (There is a fear among some
   that such centralization could make a multi-national
   corporation's subsidiaries less responsive to local cultural,
   political, or economic needs.)

-  Demonstrating the economic benefits of transborder data flow
   to both national and multi-national corporations.

The IIIC, founded in 1982, includes computer trade associations
from the following countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada,
Denmark, Germany, France, Ireland, Italy, Japan, New Zealand,
Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the U.S.A.  Its purpose is to
strengthen the industry by advancing public understanding and by
providing a forum for the resolution of common concerns.

The OECD is an inter-governmental organization of 24
industrialized countries (including the United States) that
seeks to sustain economic growth by coordinating economic
policies.

For copies of the IIIC transborder-data-flow paper, contact
Cheryl Bush at CBEMA (202-737-8888).

                        ###

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************