Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1987.volumes.6-7/volume.6.most.issues

Internet Message Format | 1990-01-25 | 639KB

From [e-mail] Fri Jan 26 00:22:40 1990
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by gaak.LCS.MIT.EDU via TCP with SMTP
    id AA24602; Fri, 26 Jan 90 00:21:04 EST
Resent-Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from WINNIE.FIT.EDU by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa11430;
          25 Jan 90 9:43 CST
Received: from zach.fit.edu by winnie.fit.edu (5.57/Ultrix2.4-C)
    id AA01751; Thu, 25 Jan 90 10:26:32 EST
Received: by zach.fit.edu (5.58/HARRIS-4.0)
    id AA06378; Thu, 25 Jan 90 10:26:40 EST
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 90 10:26:40 EST
From: Bill Huttig <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Resent-Date:  Thu, 25 Jan 90 23:21:44 CST
Resent-From: [e-mail]
Resent-To: [e-mail]
Status: RO

24-Jan-87 04:51:29-EST,16492;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sat 24 Jan 87 04:51:27-EST
Date: 22 Jan 87 02:12-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #1
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Thursday, January 22, 1987 2:12AM
Volume 6, Issue 1

Today's Topics:

                   What kind of access is 800-950 ?
                           Bar codes, ISDN
                    What number am I calling from?
                             Hold Circuit
                          bar codes on mail
                   Called by an answering machine!
                          More Hold Circuit
                          redundant routing
                     Directory Assistance Routing
              Regulation of the packet switched networks
                          MCI; Calling Cards

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

Date: Tue, 30 Dec 86 01:02:15 EST
From: johnl%ima.UUCP at CCA.CCA.COM
Reply-To: johnl at ima.UUCP (John R. Levine)
Subject:   What kind of access is 800-950 ?

This morning I was trying to make a call with my MCI card.  Since I was in
the boondocks in Vermont 950-1022 didn't work, it gave a "being checked for
trouble" recording like it always does there.  When I tried MCI's 800 number,
it told me that their new number for calling card calls is 800-950-1022.  Does
anybody know if this is a FG C number, like a regular 950 number, or just a
more mnemonic 800 number?

John R. Levine, Javelin Software Corp., Cambridge MA [phone]
{ ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
Where is Richard Nixon now that we need him?

[Administravia: This begins volume 6 of Telecom.  This issue was
 reconstituted from the New Years' edition that got lost in amidst
 moderator bungling.  Issue 2 follows immediately.  -Elmo]

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

Date: Tue, 30 Dec 86 17:45:31 EST
From: ima!johnl at harvard.HARVARD.EDU
Subject:   Bar codes, ISDN

Bar codes on the mail:  The postal service has new high-speed sorting
equipment which reads the bar codes and sorts the mail.  They also are
putting in OCR equipment that reads the bottom line of the address and
prints the bar code.  Companies that pre-print the bar code on their
envelopes are likely to get their incoming mail faster, since the P.O.
can skip the OCR step and proceed directly to the sorting.

ISDN:  There was a whole issue of the AT&TTJ (nee BSTJ) on ISDN earlier
this year.  The standard 2B+D interface allows one 16KB supervisory channel
which is always X.25-like data.  This channel is used to exchange messages
to control the other two channels, but you can use it for virtual circuit
data, too.  The other two channels can be used for anything you want, such
as high speed data or voice.  The channels can be assigned to various
services per-call, so at different times you could have two voice calls,
two data calls, or one of each.  The standards for the X.25-like channel
seem to be be pretty well defined, but what they're haggling about now are
some rather fundamental things like how to encode voice into the 64KB
channel, and how to encode the three channels onto a phone line.  There is
also a 23B+D interface for larger systems like PBXes, which would map 23 64KB
channels plus another 64KB supervisory channel onto a T1 trunk, and there's
still wrangling about that, too.  Don't hold your breath.

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

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

Date: Thu 1 Jan 87 17:09:34-EST
From: Vic Christensen <ET at DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU>
Subject:   What number am I calling from?

      Noticing all the questions about ring-backs, I thought I'd send this one
in...it's for finding out what number you're calling from, though.

      In the Boston area (at least), the number is 1-200-555-1212. I assume
the last four digits may be anything, but I haven't tried it out, yet. I
suggest you not use it too much, though, lest the phone company catch on and
change it.

      Does anyone know what the number for this "service" is out in Southern
California (Los Angeles area, specifically)? And also the ring-back number out
there?

      Quick responses would be much appreciated, for I leave for home (for
good...graduating) on 17 Jan 87...thanxz!!!


Vic Christensen
ET@MIT-DEEP-THOUGHT (or ET@EE)
ET%MIT-DEEP-THOUGHT@MIT-MC (or ET%EE@MC)

2109 Amelia Avenue
San Pedro, CA 90731

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

Date: Thu, 25 Dec 86 23:20:16 EST
From: kitty!larry at seismo.CSS.GOV
Subject:   Hold Circuit

>>   From: tj <[e-mail]>
>>
>> put a resistor, and LED, a Zener, and an SCR in series. The Gate of the scr
>> goes through a resistor and a pushbutton to + phone line. Lets draw a
>> schematic online...

[schematic delected for brevity]

>> The SCR is off until pushbutton PB is pressed making contact thus
>> turning it on. Upper Zener is some voltage higher than the off hook
>> voltage of the line. (say 10 volts) Until the line goes higher than
>> 10 volts it is off, even though the SCR is on. Hold the push button
>> as you hang up. This turns on the SCR and as the line voltage rises
>> the zener conducts and the current through the SCR will hold it on
>> (get a low hold current scr, say 3 ma) The resistor in series with
>> the push button supplies the small turn on current.  5 k should do.
>> The lower zener limits the voltage across the LED. Make say 5
>> volts. This would put the r in series with the LEd at about 150
>> ohms.

> I doubt this circuit would work, and it could be dangerous.  There is
> no impedience between a 28 volt source and ground; that voltage will
> be pulled down to 15 volts.  What would limit the current through the
> SCR and two zener diodes?

    The circuit should work under most circumstances, and is by no
means "dangerous".
    The current on a telephone subscriber loop is limited by the
central office apparatus.  In most central offices there is effectively
200 ohms between the tip of the line and ground, and 200 ohms between
the ring of the line and -48 volt office battery.  This results in a
total of 400 ohms resistance so that from Ohm's law a short circuit
across the loop sitting right at the CO would draw 0.120 ampere.
    There are two discreet resistances as described above so that the
subscriber line will be longitudinally balanced with respect to ground.
Since it is necessary for the CO apparatus to detect current flow in the
subcriber loop to indicate an off-hook condition, the above resistances
may be incorporated as two windings in a "line relay", ferrod sensor,
repeating coil, etc.  While a line relay and ferrod sensor sense current
flow directly, the voltage drop across a resistor or repeating coil is
used for current detection in other types of CO's.
    So the point is: 0.120 ampere _worst_ case isn't going to hurt
anything or destroy a properly selected SCR (I would use 200 V @ 1 ampere
to be conservative and handle surge voltages).  A more typical short circuit
current value for a subscriber loop (since most subscribers don't live next
door to the CO) is .030 to .060 ampere.
    One minor improvement which could be made to the circuit is to make
it polarity-independent and protect against possible false ring-tripping
by placing a full-wave bridge rectifier (use 200 PIV @ 1 ampere to be
conservative) between the circuit and the telephone line (the AC leads go to
the telephone line).
    Also, a small resistance may be required in series with the SCR
cathode to make certain that the circuit releases properly under some
subscriber loop conditions.  You could add say, a 500 ohm pot and know that
you'll be in range.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|bbncca|decvax|nike|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: Fri, 2 Jan 87 01:46:12 EST
From: ceo!BKR!Stuart_Freedman%dgloki.UUCP at wjh12.HARVARD.EDU
Subject:   bar codes on mail

If you look carefully, the automatic sorters only put bar codes on mail
that has the address typed or printed (rather than handwritten).V0  In
order to get the bar code on your very own outgoing mail then, I
believe that you have to type the address on the envelope and make sure
that the ZIP code is in the bottom-right corner (relative to all other
text on the envelope).  Since I don't work for the postal service, I
can't guarantee the accuracy of this info, but it is seemingly-reliable
hearsay!

Apologies for carrying on a somewhat irrelevant issue in TELECOM...
Happy New Year,
---
Stuart Freedman              ARPA: [e-mail]
Data General Corp.(Mail Stop E-219) CSNET: rti-sel!dg_rtp!freedman@mcnc
Westboro, MA 01580 [phone]  UUCP:  mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!freedman

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

Date: Thu, 1 Jan 87 16:19:14 PST
From: dick at cca.ucsf.edu (Dick Karpinski)
Subject:   Called by an answering machine!

The other day I answered the phone and heard nothing, so I
said, "Hello? ...  Hello? ... I can't hear you.  ... Goodbye."
and hung up.  Later in the day I got a call from my brother-in-
law about the call.  It was recorded, including the ringing of
the phone, on his answering machine!

We chatted about it for some time.  It seemed highly unlikely
that his machine would call me until he recalled that he had
my number on his speed-dial-8 service.  With this fact, it took
only the recognition of the speed-dial prefix ("*"?, "#"?) and
a single digit.  Even then, perhaps the digit came from cross-
talk rather than his message....

We concluded that someone had called him, heard the machine and
hung up.  But the message continued until the phone line had
presented dial tone.  Two or so keypresses were detected by the
central office equipment and I got the call.  I've encountered
dead lines calling me a dozen times or so but this is the first
that got an explanation like that.

Dick

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

Date: Fri, 2 Jan 87 03:58:02 pst
From: rpw3 at amdcad.AMD.COM (Rob Warnock)
Subject:   More Hold Circuit

Forget trying to build a hold circuit; it's not worth it. Just go
to Radio Shack and buy their hold module (or whatever it's called).
It plugs in anywhere, in parallel with your other phones. (Also
requires A.C. line power, but the whole module is one of those
"wart on the wall" styles, so it hides away o.k.) You activate it
with a quick double switch-hook flash (it beeps at you if it saw
your flash), then hang up. Pick up any line and it drops out.

Only "problem" is that it holds onto the line (necessarily) for
about one second when you hang up, which can be somewhat tricky
if you also have Call Waiting (which I do), but you very quickly
learn to add that delay to the flash needed for Call Waiting.
(That is, to switch to the waiting call, you flash for 1.5 seconds --
one sec to get the hold module to drop, and 1/2 sec for Call Waiting.)
I think I only blew it once before I got the knack...

Rob Warnock
Systems Architecture Consultant

UUCP:    {amdcad,fortune,sun}!redwood!rpw3
DDD:    [phone]
USPS:    627 26th Ave, San Mateo, CA  94403

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

Date: Fri, 2 Jan 87 11:25:56 EST
From: Barry Nelson <bnelson at ccb.bbn.com>
Subject:   redundant routing

RE: circuit routing to avoid network outages

We at BBN Communications are sometimes asked by commercial customers to
specify sufficiently redundant circuits such that the built-in adaptive
routing of the backbone won't be undermined by any single telco outage.

In one particluar case, the customer went so far as to request a hard
breakdown of the *SATELLITE* and transponder each circuit used and of
course the various earth stations.  They were apparently worried about
killer asteroids.  Access to this info is of varying difficulty.

However, this is serious business and many are willing to pay the delta.

Q: What to do when ALL international circuits to a given country pass
   through a single point?  e.g. Caracas, CANTV Central Switch
A: Get a license from that country to put in your own earth station!
   (This is no longer a small delta although VSATs are coming down.)

"This document contains statements of opinion by the author which are
not attributable to BBN Communications Corporation or its management."

Barry C. Nelson - Network Consultant - International Certifications

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

Date: Fri, 2 Jan 87 19:15:19 CST
From: tness1!hcsjgh%ots.UUCP at rice.edu (Greg Hackney)
Subject:   Directory Assistance Routing

>>allegra!phri![e-mail] (Roy Smith) writes
>>Subject: Directory assistance & long-distance routing
>>
>>    Here's something I've often wondered about.  When you call long
>>distance directory assistance, after you get the number you want (either
>>from a human operator or a digi-cording, the connection is broken and you
>>have to dial the number yourself.  Wouldn't it make more sense to just
>>connect you with the number?

The DA operators are not always in the same area as the number
you are looking for. The operators can be pooled to handle several
areas. Also, the records are databased and centralized, and polled
via data links.

The routing for the actual call will most likely be totally
different from the DA call.

Also, with numerous long distance companies available, the caller
might wish to use another company for the actual call.


Greg Hackney
Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
Texas Network Engineering Support Systems
P.O. Box 1530, Room 806
Houston, Texas 77001

UUCP: ihnp4!tness1!hcsjgh
ARPA: hcsjgh![e-mail]

"What hath God wrought?" -A.G. Bell and company

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

Date: Sat,  3 Jan 87 17:37:40 EST
From: Keith F. Lynch <KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject:   Regulation of the packet switched networks

    From: [e-mail]

    This regulation was aimed directly at the commercial networks. I don't
    think the research networks (or DEC which supplies its own packet switched
    network for internal use), will suffer. At the very least the costs will
    be absorbed in grants and other expenses.

  The main threat to individual users is the threat to PC PURSUIT and
similar services.
                                ...Keith

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

Date: Sat 3 Jan 87 22:08:10-EST
From: Philip A. Earnhardt <S.PAE at DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU>
Subject:   MCI; Calling Cards

Over the past year, MCI has sent me three letters with saying "Urgent
Reminder" and "Signature Required" on the outside. A cursory reading of
the letter seems to imply that you must return the enclosed ballot;
actually, it's just a request that you send a reply. Your signature is
required iff you're signing up for their Dial "1" Long Distance Service.

Granted, MCI has no monopoly on potentailly misleading direct mail.
However, the long-distance market is far too confusing already! I
despise solicitors who demand information they have no right to. Do
other folks agree? Is there any federal agency I can talk with who
could/would stomp on these guys?

One MCI service I find useful is what their rep called "Secondary
Carrier Service", where you call a local 7-digit number, 5-digit account
code, and the entire long-distance number. The rates are the same as
MCI's "Dial '1' Service". I use this service to make personal
long-distance calls from work. This is much cheaper than the AT&T
Calling Card.

What is the Calling Card overhead per call? Is it a constant charge at
all times, whether or not the call goes through? Does MCI have plans to
keep these local numbers, or will they phase them out when all have
equal access? Will AT&T attempt to compete with this service, or are
they better off keeping their larger profit margin on their Calling
Cards? How much of this market has AT&T lost?

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************

-------

-------
25-Jan-87 04:19:19-EST,22703;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sun 25 Jan 87 04:19:16-EST
Date: 20 Jan 87 01:35-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #2
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Tuesday, January 20, 1987 1:35AM
Volume 6, Issue 2

Today's Topics:

                         Re: Postal bar codes
             Re: Pending FCC ruling threat to modem users
                  Re: What number am I calling from?
                   info request on USR Robotic 2400
                   Wiring diagram for 25-pair plugs
                    bad area code on a pay phone?
               Line In Use Circuit: How do I make one?
                        Line In Use Indicator
                      More on British PhoneCard
                       ld carrier access codes
                             Hold circuit
                   More on British PhoneCard fraud
              New AT&T Countries dialable eff. 13 March

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Larson)
Date: 4 Jan 87 15:28:20 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Bob Larson)
Subject: Re: Postal bar codes

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rich Wales) writes:
>
>I have some observations and questions regarding the "bar codes" which
>the U.S. Postal Service has been using for a while on mail.

The post office is not secritive about such matters, espessially if
they think you will be using them in large quantity mailings.  I've
seen a brochure on where to position the address, stamp, etc.
(including bar code) picked up at the post office.

When USC made an inquiry about converting to 9-digit zips, they not
only gave us information, but had a couple of people come out and help
us evaluate what would be involved in the conversion.  The database is
free, on 9-track tapes.  (If I remember correctly, something like 25
6250 bpi tapes -- several hundred megabytes of data if packed, a
couple of gigabytes if left in their fixed length format with some
unused bits.)  The program to access the database is non-trivial,
unless your input data is standarized (2nd St. vs Second Street, etc.)
and perfect.  Once you have a good program, it can even be used to
test the plausiblity of an address: i.e. there is no 1200 block of
Ridge Way in Medford, OR.

They also offer regional tapes and will convert small mailing lists
free.  $.005/peice is the extra discount for using 9-digit zip or
carrier route sorting rather than 5-digit zip sorting.
--
Bob Larson
Arpa: [e-mail]
Uucp: (several backbone sites)!sdcrdcf!usc-oberon!castor.usc.edu!blarson
            seismo!cit-vax!usc-oberon!castor.usc.edu!blarson

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

Date: 29 Dec 86 06:30:52 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Joel West)
Subject: Re: Pending FCC ruling threat to modem users

BizComp and Hayes may have the biggest threat to modem users.  BizComp
claims a patent on auto-dialing technology, controling dialing with
the data line (unlike the earlier UNIX modems, which required a
separate calling unit.)

Apparently Hayes paid about $2 million to license (or buy off, if you
like) BizComp's patent threat, and also claims its own patent on the 1
second before and after the +++ escape.

BizComp has sued Prometheus, a modem clone company.  Needless to say,
if Hayes and BizComp win, cheap competition in the modem market would
be threatened.  US Robotics has filed a pre-emptive lawsuit alleging
antitrust violations against both companies, but if the patents are
valid, it doesn't stand a chance.
--
    Joel West                 MCI Mail: 282-8879
    Western Software Technology, POB 2733, Vista, CA  92083
    {cbosgd, ihnp4, pyramid, sdcsvax, ucla-cs} !gould9!joel
    [e-mail]

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

Date: 28 Dec 86 18:11:57 GMT
From: kitty![e-mail] (Larry Lippman)
Subject: Re: What number am I calling from?

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob Bickford) writes:
> >       Dialing a three-digit access code which immediately provides an
> >     announcement over the telephone circuit.  This unrestricted
> >     implementation has generally been considered a "security" problem
> >     (use your imagination) by telephone company management; I am
> >     somewhat surprised to see people posting articles reporting the
> >     implementation of unrestricted ANAC.
>
>    Why?  I'm afraid my imagination does not present me with any
> compelling reason to belive this a 'security risk'.  Certainly it
> is of little or no use to a telco cracker.

    Well, I guess I have to spell it out...  The availability of
ANAC at any outside plant location (like cross-connect terminal) is of
significant value to anyone bent upon unlawful wiretapping.  Telephone
company security personnel are always concerned about unauthorized
persons obtaining any information with respect to subscriber line pair
identity and circuit routing.  In fact, in New York State it is a
specific criminal offense (Penal Law 250.30) for an "unauthorized"
person to obtain "information concerning identification or location of
any wires, cables, lines, terminals or other apparatus used in
furnishing telephone or telegraph service".
    Since people are reporting unrestricted ANAC in California,
perhaps life there is more permissive. :-)

> >     You are referring to milliwatt test lines which provide a 1,000 Hz
> > signal at 0 dBm (1 mw) into a 900 ohm termination.  Some milliwatt test
> > lines provide a continuous tone; others have 9 seconds of tone followed by
> > 1 second of silence (with or without answer supervision).
>
>    Ours are 8 seconds and 2 seconds; the tone by the way is 1004 Hz
> and NOT 1000 Hz.

    Traditionally, the milliwatt reference frequency was 1,000 Hz,
and still is 1,000 Hz in many central offices (especially those that
are still electromechanical).
    Interestingly enough, the milliwatt reference frequency has
been changed in some areas to 1,004 Hz because of small measurement
errors which occur when measuring through PCM (i.e., digital) CO's or
transmission (T-carrier) facilities.  The reason is that 1,000 Hz is
an even divisor of the 8,000 Hz PCM sampling rate, and any frequency
within say 1 Hz of 1,000 Hz exhibits erratic results (to a minor
degree, however) during measurement.

> >     A word of caution concerning the use of milliwatt test lines: if
> > you don't know what you are doing and don't have the proper test equipment,
> > you will be fooling yourself with incorrect measurements.
>
>    Quite true.  We wasted several weeks working on the audio portion of
> our video conferencing system when I was at Vitalink Communications.
> Finally we purchased a Halcyon tester (don't recall model #) and
> stopped listening to the linemen who kept insisting that the line was
> a 600 ohm line.

    There is a good moral to be learned here: Don't ever accept as
gospel any transmission-related information given by telephone company
craftspersons (also salespersons!) - either get it from someone that you
_know_ is an engineer, or measure it yourself.  Not that I have anything
against non-engineers, but many telephone company craftspersons just follow
orders and directions, with little or no understanding beyond that.  For
example, even a craftsperson using a TTS to make transmission measurements
will have _explicit_ instructions how to set the controls on his TTS and
then get a meter reading - but more often than not, will have no idea why
the TTS is operated as he has it configured.

> >     Almost all CO's provide three "quiet lines" for noise measurement
> > purposes and repeater test purposes:  (1) a balanced termination; (2) an
> > open-circuit termination; and (3) a short-circuit termination.  The latter
> > two lines are primarily used to test negative impedance repeaters for
> > noise and "singing".
>
>    That's strange, we seem to only have one variety of quiet line around
> here, and that's the terminated one.

    You might not know the numbers for the others.  Actually,
there may be TWO lines with balanced terminations (in addition to one
for open-circuit and one for short-circuit).
    Many CO's use a CLA (combined loop-around) for a milliwatt
test line.  The CLA uses two sequential numbers (common example 9911
and 9912 applied to New York Telephone) which work as follows:

1.    Dialing _only_ the 9911 number gives you milliwatt tone.

2.    Dialing _only_ the 9912 number gives you a balanced termination.

3.    Dialing _both_ 9911 and 9912 gives you a bridged connection between
    the two lines whose insertion loss is the typical CO switching loss
    (usually well under 1.0 dB).  This is referred to as "loop-around"
    mode, and is used for remote transmission measurements to and from
    a CO; its primary purpose is to test interoffice trunks, and it has
    no usefulness for subscriber loop meqsurements.  Many newer CO's have
    a speech energy detector on the CLA which drops the connection if
    _other_ than SF tones are sent in loop-around mode; this has been
    implemented to stop "unauthorized" people from using the CLA for
    talking.

    So, in addition to the balanced termination available through
the CLA, most CO's still have a short-circuit termination (typical
9954 suffix for New York Telephone), an open-cicruit termination
(typical 9955) and another balanced termination (typical 9956).
    Note that in addition to a milliwatt line being available
through the CLA (9911 as above), there is usually a dedicated
milliwatt line (typical number is 9910).  There is generally an
important distinction between this apparent duplication of test lines:
the CLA is used primarily for interoffice trunk measurements, so its
impedance is 600 ohms - whereas all of the other lines have 900 ohm
impedance.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|bbncca|decvax|nike|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: 31 Dec 86 22:08:42 GMT
From: csustan![e-mail] (Elric of Imrryr)
Subject: info request on USR Robotic 2400

    Has anyone here had any experiences with the USR Robotics
2400 baud external modem? I am considering the purchase of one from
Softline in NY, since the have them for $189. (Which seems to be
a good deal, so I'm try to find the catch...)
    Brad Falk

--
elric    Lunatic Labs @ Csustan {lll-crg,lll-lcc}!csustan!elric

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

Date: Mon, 5 Jan 87 20:47:31 est
From: allegra!phri![e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Subject: Wiring diagram for 25-pair plugs
Reply-To: phri![e-mail] (Roy Smith)

    I have been appointed to hook up an answering machine in our
office, on one of those multi-line key phones.  I think they figured that
since I'm the computer jock, I must know how phones work.  Silly them. :-)
The phone has a 50-pin conectorized cable coming out of it; presumably all
I have to do is find the right pair and tap off some wires to an RJ-11 and
plug the answering machine in.  If somebody would be so good as to send me
a wiring diagram for the connector (is there a standard wiring pattern?) I
think I could take it from there.

    I found a little gizmo which has male and female 50-pin connectors
and a panel of about 2 dozen screw terminals bringing out many of the pins
in the "lower half" of the connectors (roughly pins 15-35).  The terminals
are labeled A1, A2, B1, B2 .... A12, B12, V, SG.  Most of the pins are
wired straight through from one connector to the other.  Some of the other
pins only go to a screw terminal, and some are wired straight through plus
a tap to a terminal.  I assume the [AB]# pairs are tip and ring (I don't
actually know much, but I can talk jargon as well as anyone) for each of 12
lines; is that right?  What about V and SG?  If I can find the right pair,
can I just hook the answering machine up to that and ignore the extra wires
for the key equipment hiding in a closet some where?

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

Date:     Thu, 8 Jan 87 8:50:17 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  bad area code on a pay phone?

Have you ever seen a case where the wrong area code appeared on a
pay phone?  I recently saw (not hand printed) 215-943 on a pay
phone near New Ringgold, Pa.; area code should be 717.
(215-943 is Levittown, a Phila. suburb; 717-943 is McKeansburg.)

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

Date: Sat, 10 Jan 87 00:21:30 pst
From: well![e-mail] (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab)
Subject: Line In Use Circuit: How do I make one?
Reply-To: well![e-mail] (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab)

[ Hello.  My name is Peabody.  I suppose you know yours.... ]

    Hold circuits are nice, but I'd like to build a little circuit that
turns an LED on or something on all other phone extensions when one of the
extensions is in use (thus letting someone in another part of the house know
the phone is in use).  This will go a long way to keeping my mother from
picking up the phone when I'm talking to another computer.

    Has anyone seen such a beast?  Pointers to such would be
appreciated.

    AtDhVaAnNkCsE.

_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
 ________         ___            Leo L. Schwab
       \        /___--__        The Guy in The Cape
  ___  ___ /\            ---##\        ihnp4!ptsfa!well!ewhac
      /   X  \_____    |  __ _---))            ..or..
     /   /_\--    -----+==____\ // \  _        well ---\
___ (   o---+------------------O/   \/ \    dual ----> !unicom!ewhac
     \     /            ___ \_  (`o )    hplabs -/       ("AE-wack")
 ____ \___/                 \_/
          Recumbent Bikes:            "Work FOR?  I don't work FOR
        The _O_n_l_y Way To Fly!        anybody!  I'm just having fun."

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

From: crash![e-mail] (Kevin Belles)
Subject: Line In Use Indicator

   Is there anybody out there who knows of a simple circuit that can light
up when any extension on a line is in use, preferably phone-powered? This
would be quite useful for those on one line with a modem arrangement on it.
Ideas, anyone?
                -Kevin Belles
Kevin J. Belles - UUCP {noscvax,sdcsvax,ihnp4!gould9,cbosgd}
~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~        !crash!pnet01!kevinb
        - ARPA crash!pnet01!kevinb@{ucsd,nosc}.ARPA

[DAK sells such a beast - "Drew's Brainstorm" - it eats 9V batteries
 for breakfast, so get a Lady O'Shack battery elminator too... -Elmo\

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

Date:     Tue, 13 Jan 87 14:42:04 CST
From:     Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <[e-mail]>
Subject:  More on British PhoneCard

The following items are from two different issues of the RISKS Digest, and
are followups on the posting I sent to Telecom some issues back on the
possibility of a scheme for toll fraud using the British "PhoneCard":

Will Martin

----- Forwarded message

> Date: Wed 24 Dec 86 09:36:03-PST
> From: Peter G. Neumann <[e-mail]>
> Subject:  Still More on PhoneCards
> To: [e-mail]
>
> I had a call from Colin Sex at British Telecom at 5PM Christmas Eve GMT.
> He stated that "The card itself is completely secure."  They indeed do a
> READ-AFTER-WRITE check (along with some other checking), so that part of it
> looks OK.  However, there are problems with physical damage to the laser
> reader/writer.  In the case at hand, nail polish had been caked onto the
> card, and gummed up the works.  But in such cases the unit is supposed
> either to reject the card, or else keep the card if it cannot eject it --
> and then shut down.  I think they are still vulnerable to some active-card
> attacks, but on the whole they think they protect themselves well against
> the man on the street.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> [It is altogether possible that BT is covering up.  On the other hand,
> their description of the system (by phone, to me) stated that the
> READ-AFTER-WRITE check is properly implemented and that there are three
> other checks as well.  They claim that the Sunday Post will print a
> retraction.  (As yet no one has reported seeing it.)  Of course, there
> may be still be other vulnerabilities.  RISKS readers are learning to look
> the proverbial gift horse in the mouth, as well as the horse you had to
> pay a fortune for.  PGN]

----- End of forwarded messages

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

From: Dan Nichols <ut-sally!im4u!ti-csl!tilde![e-mail]>
Date: 13 Jan 87 20:57:04 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Dan Nichols)
Subject: ld carrier access codes

I seem to recall quite some time ago seeing a discussion about
being able to bypass my equal-access carrier and use any of the
long distance carriers (even if not subscribed to) by prefixing
the number I wish to call with the proper 4 digit code (1022,
1088, etc.)
I was telling this to a friend and he was quite disbelieving. Now
I'm not sure if I remember it correctly.
Could someone explain if this is true and how it works? Also,
could someone repost a list of the 4 digit codes for the various
carriers?

Post or mail to me as appropriate.

Dan Nichols           USENET: {ctvax,im4u,texsun,rice}!ti-csl!dnichols
POB 226015 M/S 238     ARPA:  Dnichols%TI-CSL@CSNet-Relay
Texas Instruments Inc. CSNET: Dnichols@Ti-CSL
Dallas, Texas 75266    VOICE: [phone]

--
Dan Nichols           USENET: {ctvax,im4u,texsun,rice}!ti-csl!dnichols
POB 226015 M/S 238     ARPA:  Dnichols%TI-CSL@CSNet-Relay
Texas Instruments Inc. CSNET: Dnichols@Ti-CSL
Dallas, Texas 75266    VOICE: [phone]

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

From: ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann)
Date: 14 Jan 87 22:34:41 GMT
Subject: Hold circuit

I was thinking some more on the topic of hold circiuts and
remembered that there was a article in a Popular Electronics a few
years back that looked like a very good setup. It was an active type
design, powered off the 120V line, which listened on the phone line
for the '#' key. When this key was detected, a relay was activated,
switching an audio transformer/resistor network across the phone
line. This caused an off hook condition that held the line. The
reason for the transformer was to provide the option of music on
hold, by connecting a tape player or what ever. The controller in
this design monitored the phone line, sensing when any phone was
taken off hook, deactivating the hold relay. In addition, the
controller had a time out that forced the hold function to switch
off after about five minutes so that the line would not be tied up
all day.....

I was going the build the thing, but never got to it....
Any comments for someone that did build and test it ????

Roger Swann        uucp: uw-beaver!ssc-vax!clark

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

Date:     Thu, 15 Jan 87 14:42:29 CST
From:     Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <[e-mail]>
Subject:  More on British PhoneCard fraud

Here's yet some more from the RISKS Digest on British PhoneCard toll fraud:

Will

----- Forwarded message # 1:
> From: Brian Randell <[e-mail]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 87 16:12:23 gmt
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Phone Cards
>
>               PHONE CARDS - THE PLOT THICKENS
>
>      At PGN's implied request, I have tracked down, and talked to the Sunday
> Post reporter who wrote the original story on the phone card fraud.  These
> notes of my telephone conversation with him are being sent to RISKS with his
> explicit permission, though he asked that his name not be included.
>
>      The Sunday Post was indeed asked by BT to publish a retraction, but
> have refused to do, though they have published a letter from BT expressing
> (BT's) full confidence in the phone card system.  Based on previous
> experiences - "we often get complaints at our stories" - the reporter
> regards the fact that BT did not push for a retraction, but instead merely
> settled for publication of their letter, as tantamount to an acceptance of
> the truth of the original story.
>
>      He claims to be still sure that the fraud is possible, and to have seen
> it being worked, at several different phones, by the soldiers, in the
> presence of several other witnesses.  He does admit that he was himself later
> unable to demonstrate the fraud successfully to some BT engineers who
> travelled to Glasgow to meet him.  He however has since talked to one of the
> soldiers, who assures him that the fraud is still working, but will not
> reveal to the reporter, leave alone BT, where he (the reporter) went wrong
> in trying to duplicate the method of fraud.  (The other soldier - who did not
> want the original story published, because it would interfere with "free"
> international calls - is now refusing to talk to the reporter.)  Moreover the
> reporter claims to have received a phone call from a BT engineer at Watford,
> confirming the practicability of the fraud.
>
> Brian Randell - Computing Laboratory, University of Newcastle upon Tyne
>
>   ARPA  : [e-mail]
>   UUCP  : <UK>!ukc!cheviot!brian
>   JANET : [e-mail]
>
------------------------------
----- End of forwarded messages

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

Date: 15-Jan-1987 2049
From: [e-mail]  (John R. Covert)
Subject: New AT&T Countries dialable eff. 13 March

Effective 13 March 1987 the following five countries will become
dialable by AT&T:

Faeroe Islands     298
Greenland     299
Malta         356
Micronesia     691
Marshall Islands 692

The Faeroe Islands used to be dialable via Denmark using 45+42+, but Denmark
stopped accepting calls this way after assignment of the 298 country code to
the Faeroes, like Greenland a self-governing region of the Danish realm.
(n.b., both are already dialable from Canada.)

There is speculation that Tonga (676), supposed to have become dialable last
year but delayed, may also go in at this time.  Translations for the local
central offices around the country to accept the country code were never
rescinded.

/john

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************

-------
26-Jan-87 23:45:15-EST,15370;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Mon 26 Jan 87 23:45:13-EST
Date: 26 Jan 87 21:52-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #3
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                         Monday, January 26, 1987 9:52PM
Volume 6, Issue 3

Today's Topics:

                        Re: More Hold Circuit
                         Re: LD access codes
                      MCI's 800 950-1022 number
                     5 button Key-System wirings
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                 Re: Called by an answering machine!
                             The 500 club
                            various things
                    Administravia - Welcome Jsol!
               Pending FCC ruling threat to modem users
                   Line-powered off-hook indicator?
                            pocket dialers
                 Re: Called by an answering machine!

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

Date: Thu, 22 Jan 87 13:50:44 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Chasey)

newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Hold circuit
Summary:
Expires:
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender:
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Dave Chasey)
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: Purdue Engineering Computer Network, West Lafayette, IN
Keywords:


I bought a "Ma Bell" single line hold box at a Radio Shack close out
6 months or so ago for about $6.00, however it originally cost more.
It plugs into a wall outlet and has a modular plug on it.   To activate
the hold circuit, you go on hook and off again twice in a row and it
signals you with a beep that it activated.   You can then hang up and
it holds the line until any phone on that line goes off hook, or
a timeout timer drops the line in the event you forget to pick up another
extension.   I don't recall the timer's length, or if it is adjustable,
but the box seems to work quite well.    The reason you have to go on and
off hook twice is to keep it from interfering with call waiting /etc.  It's
really handy for running from one phone to another.  I can try to dig up
the model number and/or some specific information if anyone is interested.

Dave Chasey
pur-ee!wn9nbt
[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 22 Jan 87 15:24:17 EST
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: More Hold Circuit

The problem with the Rat Shack hold box is that you flash the line,
then the box goes BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP to tell you
the line is being put on hold.  I find that unacceptably obnoxious and
annoying when others do it to me.

-Mike Grant

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

Subject: Re: LD access codes
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 87 13:43:09 -0800
From: Dave Suess (CSL) <[e-mail]>

Keywords: 10-XXX codes requested

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]@tilde.UUCP (Dan Nichols) writes:
>could someone repost a list of the 4 digit codes for the various
>carriers?
>Post or mail to me as appropriate.

I was just about to ask, also:  neither my local telco (GTE) nor my
LD default (ATT) have seen fit to advise me on the codes (FIVE digits, by
the way, counting the "1-0") for the carriers available.  This, in spite
of the availability of the service, yet! (I regularly use 222 and 777 for
GTE/MCI or MCI/GTE -- don't know which, haven't kept a log, don't know which
to use, other than 222 giving me generally quieter connections from here...)
Dave Suess    [e-mail]

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

Date: 24-Jan-1987 0949
From: [e-mail]  (John R. Covert)
Subject: MCI's 800 950-1022 number

>When I tried MCI's 800 number, it told me that their new number for calling
>card calls is 800-950-1022.  Does anybody know if this is a FG C number, like
>a regular 950 number, or just a more mnemonic 800 number?

If you recall the article in Telecom 5:156, MCI owns the 800-950 prefix, so
they can assign anything they want in it.  If any of the other OCCs want to
use 800-950-xxxx they'll have to go to MCI.

Hopefully MCI's agreement with Bellcore restricts what they can do with it, so
that when the more advanced system comes out in a year or two, 800-950-xxxx can
be routed to other carriers.

For now, all calls to the following 800 prefixes are routed as equal access
calls to MCI: 234, 283, 284, 288, 289, 274, 333, 365, 444, 456, 627, 666,
678, 727, 759, 777, 825, 876, 888, 937, 950, 955, and 999.

See Telecom 5:156 for details.

/john

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

Date: Sat, 24 Jan 87 13:47:34 EST
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: 5 button Key-System wirings

A 5 button Key-System is pretty easy to wire.  The cable has 50 wires,
or rather 25 pairs.  Each pair has 2 colors, a primary color, and a
secondary color.  The primary colors are Blu, Orn, Grn, Brn, and Slt,
(Slt is slate, or gray).  The secondary colors are Whi, Red, Blk, Yel,
and Vio.  The first wire in a pair is a wire of a primary color with
stripes of a secondary color.  The second wire in a pair is a wire of
the secondary color of the first wire, with stripes of the primary color.
Ex. Blu-Wht and Wht-Blu is a pair.  A blue wire with white stripes, and
a white wire with blue stripes.

Going down the long 50 pin connector, the first pair is on pins 1 and 26.
(the Blu-Wht pair)  The second is on pins 2 and 27, (the Orn-Wht pair),
The third pair on pins 3 and 28, (the Grn-Wht pair).  On the 6th pair,
we go to the next secondary color and cycle the primarys again, so the 6th
pair is on pins 6 and 31, (The Blu-Red pair).

Not everything in key systems are done in pairs, but for the most part,
pairs will do.  Things also vary slightly from manufacturer to manufacturer.
But, I have seen the Tip-Ring pairs pretty consistently in the same place.

Each line takes up 3 pairs:
  The Ring-Tip pair
  The A-lead pair, (used for putting the line on hold)
  The Lamp pair, (Power for the lamp associated with each line)

As one might expect:
  Line  Pairs  R-T      A-Leads  Lamp
  ----  -----  -------  -------  -------
  1     1-3    Blu-Wht  Orn-Wht  Grn-Wht
  2     4-6    Brn-Wht  Slt-Wht  Blu-Red
  3     7-9    Orn-Red  Grn-Red  Brn-Red
  4     10-12  Slt-Red  Blu-Blk  Orn-Blk
  5     13-15  Grn-Blk  Brn-Blk  Slt-Blk

The ringing to the phone is usually provided on the 20th pair, (Slt-Yel pair).

The entire system is essentially wired in parrallel, unless you have a
system with different lines on different phones, or an intercom system
which lets you dial an individual station, or other strangness.

Hope this helps.

-Mike Grant

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

From: Paul Beam <[e-mail]>
Date: 24 Jan 87 23:15:49 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: watarts!natal1
From: [e-mail] (Paul Beam)
Newsgroups: soft.people,soft.proposals,mod.telecom,comp.dcom.modems,comp.unix.questions
Subject: UnixBBS
Keywords: mutli-user conferencing, on-line discussions, mail
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 24 Jan 87 23:15:44 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 19

Hello!
I am looking for any information regarding the UNIXBBS program.
What is it, what can it do?  Also, if you know of any other
programs which allow multi-users conferencing, mail and on-line
discussions in a user-friendly enviorment, please send a message
to this account or send correspondance to:
RAPPI-MOVE
c/o
Paul Beam
English Dept
University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Thanx,
      Chris Hudel & Paul Beam

PS: if you know about UNIXBBS, where can it be obtained?

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

Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1987 23:44-EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Called by an answering machine!

Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Called by an answering machine!
Keywords:
Distribution:
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: CMU Electrical Engineering Etc.

That's even more amusing than the time I got a phone call from an
autocalling machine, soliciting something-or-other.  I wasn't home, so my
answering machine took the call.  I got home, saw the message waiting light,
and got a nice recorded recorded message on my answering machine from their
calling machine.

I think the machines are having an affair behind my back.

deej

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

Date: 20-Jan-1987 1348
From: [e-mail]  (John R. Covert)
Subject: The 500 club

The following NPAs belong to that unique club containing over 500 NXXs.  The
following data is as of 15 December 1986.  Splits have already been announced
for 305 (407), 303 (719), and 617 (508), all to take place in the first half
of 1988.  This table is an indicator of where else this may happen soon.

312 685   301 571   919 542   215 505
214 597   617 564   512 540   404 502
305 585   213 558   313 525
201 583   403 556   212 521
303 575   205 548   415 511

/john

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

Date: 21 Jan 87 09:35:03 EST
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: various things

There have been an awful lot of queries about hold circuits and line-in-use
indicators!  The former has probably been hashed to death; the latter
involves some subtleties which the reader should be aware of.  DAK's little
box with an LED in it probably doesn't do proper isolation between the line
and the indicator circuit; the workaround to avoid AC hum is obviously the
9 volt battery and the plastic box.  Using a wall transformer thus may lose
slightly if there's enough AC noise coupled through the transformer from the
AC line.  *Any* piece of telephone equipment that electrically comes anywhere
near ground or AC wiring needs good isolation or you get lots of hum.

A simple line-in-use is (an LED in parallel with 100 ohms) in series with a
given phone unit.  This passes a nominal 15 mA or so through the LED, lighting
it.  For a system of more phones you could substitute the input side of an
optoisolator for the LED and hang some more involved circuitry off that.  The
opto will provide the necessary ground isolation, so you can do whatever you
want after it.

Post office codes:  I called my local distribution office to inquire if placing
the bar code on my personal mail would speed it up any.  Answer: no.  All
incoming mail is passed through the OCR anyway, and if the OCR can read the
last line of the To: address [precluding presence of Attention lines and
other things after the line containing the zipcode!], it ink-sprays the
barcoded zipcode on the piece if there isn't one already.  Bulk-sort stuff
like business reply envelopes have those hash marks on the right side which
form one of four or so recognition codes and tell the machine what kind of
mail it's seeing.  It can then optionally handle these pieces differently.

Mail addressed with high-contrast typed print, or *very* neat handwriting in
dark ink, has a good probability of being seen by the OCR.  Those pieces that
fail go to the human sorters; the post office is continually trying to make
these sorters smarter and smarter and eliminate the maximum humans from the
processing.  The person I talked to is quite willing to let me come down and
tour the facility; I think I'm going to accept.

Equal access carrier dialing:  Ship a copy of <awalker>equal.access from
site red.rutgers.edu.  I can mail it if necessary.

50-pin multiline phone connector:  Ship a copy of <awalker>ktu.block from
site red.rutgers.edu.  I can mail it if necessary.

_H*

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

Date: Sun 25 Jan 87 16:10:00-EST
From: Eliot Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administravia - Welcome Jsol!

Jon Solomon returns as Moderator with this issue.   I have enjoyed
the position and your comments, but take this opportunity to devote
more time to another digest.

Regards,
Elmo

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

Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1987  19:37 EST
From: "David D. Story" <FTD%MIT-OZ @ MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Pending FCC ruling threat to modem users


    Where does Racal-Vadic stand with all this. Is the
    just for Voice over Data type setups. Auto-dialers
    made by them have been around since the early 70's.
    These are still mostly found on IBM Sites. Their
    (VADIC) modems were the first real competition to
    the Bell 212A Dataphone setup. Seems that this
    must be just chip or technique cloning suits inside
    the general parameter of auto-dialing technology.
    Perhaps they have patented something Vadic overlooked
    and are laying a base. If so you should inform Racal-
    Vadic.

    Dave

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

Date: Sat, 24 Jan 87 11:19:41 PST
From: crash!pnet01![e-mail] (Kevin Belles)
Subject: Line-powered off-hook indicator?

Does anyone know of a preferably line-powered off-hook indicator circuit? I'd
like to add this to my system to prevent people in my household from picking
up my line when I'm on-line, or at least warning them with an LED indicator.
  Does anyone know of the circuit design for such a device, or where one might
be found?
                                        -Kevin

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

Subject: pocket dialers
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 87 16:20:04 -0800
From: [e-mail]

I'm looking for recommendations on pocket dialers. Our phone system at
work doesn't generate tones, so I end up making LD calls via my AT&T
credit card, with applicable surcharges. (I'd normally use Sprint.)

So ... it's time to get a pocket dialer. I've seen a number of them in
the $35-$45 range; I'd like to find one cheaper. If I *have* to spend
that much, I'd like to know that I'm getting the best I can.

Do you have a favorite? If so, MAIL me a note and tell me about it.
I'll summarize to the list after the responses dwindle.

Thanks,
chris

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

Date: 26 Jan 87 15:12 PST
From: Steve / McDonnell Douglas ISG / ASD  <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Called by an answering machine!

Dick:

I too have had that experience, but between two answering machines! - I also
suspect speed dialing. While playing back my messages, I heard a ring (maybe
not much else ...) - and found later that a friend with the same brand (G.E.)
answering machine had a weird message that we matched up to my own. BTW, her
number is slot "4" on my speed dialing. And I'm not positive but that it hasn't
happened in reverse - from her machine to me - I'm slot "2" on her speed
dialing ... It could be even easier then recognizing the one digit and a pound
sign - speed dialing will timeout (just the digit and a few seconds wait, no
#), so all it needs really is the single digit, which can even be pulse dialed,
and enough time to timeout and place the call!

Geez, I'd LOVE to here how this actually does happen!

-steve- <[e-mail]>

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
28-Jan-87 01:08:20-EST,11829;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Wed 28 Jan 87 01:08:18-EST
Date: 27 Jan 87 23:50-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #4
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Tuesday, January 27, 1987 11:50PM
Volume 6, Issue 4

Today's Topics:

                             mail-sorting
                            several topics
                 Re: Wiring diagram for 25-pair plugs
                            Picture Phones
             looking for reference book on modems/phones
           Re: looking for reference book on modems/phones

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

From: ulysses![e-mail]
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 87 12:52:52 EST
Subject: mail-sorting

I saw some interesting technology on a letter from the Soviet Union.  On
the envelope (it may have been an aerogram; I don't recall) there were
six templates for digits, with printed lines indicating where the penstrokes
should go.  On the back was a sample of how they wanted each digit to look
when superimposed on that template.  They're apparently called "index numbers",
but my knowledge of Russian is sufficiently rusty that I couldn't translate
the rest of the text about them.  Judging from the addresses on the envelope,
the index numbers are used both domestically and for overseas mail.

Does anyone know anything more about this?

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 87 13:41:16 PST
Subject: several topics

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           01/27/87 13:41:14
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: several topics

 To: [e-mail] [e-mail]

 Re: Thanks Elmo

 For Moderating for awhile and welcome to Jsol.

 Re: Hold Circuits

 Thanks for all the contributions. They elucidate how one topic can relate to a
 large number of individual needs, e.g. how many phones, whether one uses
 conflicting devices such as call-waiting or demon-dialing so that signals
 overlap, preferences for switchhook-length changes or voice-over beeping etc.
 It becomes clear that one person's total solution can be impossible or
 unacceptable to another, and makes the diversity of a conference most welcome.

 For my purposes I will want to try the circuit suggested and modified by
 others in the last several telecom-digests; this is the circuit that one adds
 to each phone. This is my preference, because I don't want to use # or *
 (demon dialer conflict), switchhook delay (call-waiting conflict and personal
 difficulty emitting reliable extended delays), hear beeps (preference), or use
 relays (size, preference). I am nervous about experimenting with component
 values, but a recent entry gave some additional helpful value suggestions.

 Re: Line-in-use indicator

 A past issue of Telecom-Digest had a schematic for a line-powered line-in-use
 indicator, which would light up if any off-hook condition existed on the pair.
 I cannot readily locate it. About 1-1.5 years ago I believe.

 Question: if one does not have local hard-copy, what is the most efficient way
 to scan or index the past library of telecom-digests?

 Re: Evolving Telephone Products; Hold, Speakerphones

 I predict that store phones will more frequently begin to include Hold because
 as more homes have acquired multiple instruments, the need will become more
 apparent. As I mentioned earlier, watch out for false-hold, a local switch on
 a phone which cannot be reset at another location.

 Other evolving features: on-hook-dialing/listen-on-hold (call this "semi-
 speakerphone) and true two-way speakerphone. To be noted: at first I thought
 semi-speakerphone was all I wanted, because many true-speakerphones sound odd
 and who can tolerate it. HOWEVER: at UC Berkeley many offices including ours
 recently added Northern-Telecom DMS-100 P-phones, which come with the
 semi-speakerphone feature, and this proves to have the following limitations:
 sure you can see if the line is busy or answers, nice, but then you have to
 grab the phone quickly when anyone actually answers or they get confused.
 Similarly, it is a great relief to be able to listen on hold, since being put
 on hold, or worse, being put on music-hold-wait for extended periods when
 initially calling, is becoming commonplace (airlines and ticketron in
 particular). Saves the shoulder muscles etc. BUT one must maintain continual
 tension and surveillance and proximity, since at any moment after the heavy 10
 minute wait, an operator comes on, quickly says hello-hello-hello and hangs
 up, resetting you to the end of the line on the next call. Perhaps the most
 offensive combination is being put on extended hold, so you put the phone back
 in on-hook-listening, but every two minutes or so an operator comes on the
 line and says "still waiting?" Unless you dash over and grab the headset and
 talk fast, you get hung up. You must do this over and over at unexpected times
 until the final connection comes thru. I'd rather get a sore shoulder than do
 this frequent mad dashing about.

 What is really needed is true speakerphone, simply so one can say from your
 nearby location, "YES STILLWAITING" or finally "HELLO, WAITAMINNIT, HERE I
 COME" and then pick up the real phone with adequate acoustics etc. Also one
 can use the speakerphone when initially calling, up to the point of reaching
 the real person. For these purposes, the lesser acoustics are acceptable.

 Note that as the telephone systems evolve, they create transition periods
 during which there is not enough public understanding to handle a feature
 well, followed by later understanding and integration. For example, the
 initial days of call-waiting and call-forwarding were very confusing, but now
 people understand when they hear the hiccup, or are told "I have to get the
 call-waiting", or they get a business secretary when they call your home and
 are forwarded.

 Similarly here, there are widespread extended-holds, but not the understanding
 of how to handle the proper response (on-hook-listening without the ability to
 easily say YESSTILLWAITING).
 Thanks, Doug
   a  several topics

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

Date: Thu, 22 Jan 87 10:20:39 est
From: Bennett E. Todd III <ecsvax![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Wiring diagram for 25-pair plugs
Reply-To: ecsvax.uucp![e-mail] (Bennett E. Todd III)


I don't know about the actual pin layout of those connectors, but I have
hooked up a modem to one. Graybar makes a box called a Supertap
(undoubtedly there are others) that brings out the first 4 lines of a
key system to modular jacks; to work in such a hookup the modem must
support A-A1 signalling (short two additional pins, called A and A1, to
assert the line -- this gets the dialtone and lights up the in-use
lights on everybody elses phones). I know the standard Hayes Smartmodem
1200 external modem can be switched to assert A-A1; that's what I
installed. If the lines are in a rotary (a set of lines all answering
the same incoming number) it makes sense to try to hook up the modem to
the *last* line in the rotary; it is the line most likely to be free. No
matter how you hook the sucker in other people will be able to disrupt
the modem conversation by picking up that line while it is in use; this
is the nature of key systems. It is always much better to try to get a
separate line.

-Bennett
--
Bennett Todd -- Duke Computation Center, Durham, NC 27706-7756; [phone]
UUCP: ...{decvax,seismo,philabs,ihnp4,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!duccpc!bet
BITNET: [e-mail] -or- [e-mail] -or- [e-mail]
terrorist, cryptography, DES, drugs, cipher, secret, decode, NSA, CIA, NRO.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 87 18:04:47 EST
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Picture Phones


I just talked with several people at AT&T and a company called Visual
Communications.  I have determined that PicturePhone's are still alive,
and could be in the home in 10 years or less.

What we're waiting for is all the local phone companies to make
available to it's residential customers the ISDN, (the Integrated
Service Digital Network), aparently called PSDS, (Public Switched
Digital Service).  What is required between 2 points is a 56 kbps
link.  There is already a service called Switched-56 offered by AT&T
which is somewhat reasonably priced, (some monthly + usage which is
suposedly about twice what voice long distance runs--affordable).  The
klintcher is the equipment--at $75,000 a phone, not to many people are
willing to jump into the water today.  There are aparently several
manufacturers.  I spoke with some people at Visual Communications who
sell equipment manufactured by Widcom, which is what AT&T uses.

The phones use full color NTSC video.  They digitize it at something
like 80 megabits/sec which they compress *real time* down to 1.5
megabits/sec.  I'm told there is some loss of quality in compression.
What I want to know is how to they sqeeze 1.5 mbps over a 56 kbps
line?

As of today, anyone can walk out and buy one of these suckers and
call people.  AT&T will set you up and give you a special phone
number.  I guess either they have their own NPA-NXX, or several, one
or more in each city they offer the service in.

Video Communications is going to be having a demo soon, which I am
going to try and attend.

Does anyone know anything more?

-Mike Grant

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

Subject: looking for reference book on modems/phones
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 87 20:09:07 EST
From: [e-mail]

I would be most interested in finding a reference book describing
modems, sorts of technologies used, how they work, over what types of
lines/distances they are designed for, etc. I am also looking for a
good reference on phone line/equipment. For instance, what are the
types of leased lines, what are the technologies involved, how do they work,
what is line conditioning, how does it effect the types of modems you
can run over the line, etc.

I would like something fairly techinical at the level of John
McNamara's "Technical Aspects of Data Communication". His book is a
good start, but doesn't cover modems and phone lines in enough detail
(but then again, it is copyrighted 1977).

Does anyone have a recommendation?

Thanks,
Thomas

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

Date: Tue 27 Jan 87 23:47:52-EST
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: looking for reference book on modems/phones


It sounds like you want the TELECOM archives. That's about
the best "book" on telephone equipment (amongst other things).

The Archives are kept on XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, in the XX:<TELECOM>
directory. They are:

    TELECOM.RECENT    Jan 1 1987 to present
    VOLUME-5.TXT    1986
    VOLUME-4.TXT    1985
    VOLUME-3.TXT    1984
    VOLUME-2.TXT    1983
    VOLUME-1.TXT    1982 and before.

The dates are approximate. I remember one volume spans 1.5 years
because I forgot to update the version number on the fiscal year
boundary and ended up filling it in at the end of the calendar year.

Someone else asked for the archives too. They are available
by anonymous FTP from XX (use any password).

Cheers,
--jsol

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
28-Jan-87 23:28:50-EST,5763;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Wed 28 Jan 87 23:28:35-EST
Date: 28 Jan 87 22:04-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #5
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                     Wednesday, January 28, 1987 10:04PM
Volume 6, Issue 5

Today's Topics:

                       6 digit USSR postal code
                      Re:  TELECOM Digest V6 #4
                                modems
                   archive access/inversion project
                            Picture Phones

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

Date:     Wed, 28 Jan 87 0:49:58 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  6 digit USSR postal code

To answer a question I just saw (and since when do we spin off into POSTAL
stuff): I believe the USSR postal code is 6 digits, due to that country's
large size.

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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 87 09:39:01 est
From: Marvin Sirbu <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:  TELECOM Digest V6 #4

I don't know about Widcom, but Pictel in Peabody, Mass sells a system which
compresses a video signal down to 56 kbps.  The quality is certainly not the
same as broadcast video (neither is Widcom).  To achieve the low bit rate,
both systems use schemes which effectively limit the scanning resolution to
less than 525 lines and limit the field rate to less than 30 times per
second.  The output can be displayed on an ordinary TV set, but the
information transmitted is considerably less than what is transmitted in a
broadcast video signal.  The results are most noticeable when there is a
great deal of movement on the screen (the effect of a lower field rate) or
fine detail.

Others with products along this line are Sony and KDD of Japan.

Marvin Sirbu

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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 87 11:47:11 est
From: ms6b#@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu)
Subject: modems


For a survey of the state of the art in modem theory and design see the IEEE
Journal on Selected Areas
in  Communication for September 1984,  "Special Issue on Voiceband Telephone
Data Transmission"

You might also look at Roger Freeman, "Telecommunication Transmission
Handbook" (Wiley 1981).

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 87 12:35:32 PST
Subject: archive access/inversion project

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           01/28/87 12:35:30
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: archive access/inversion project
 To: [e-mail]

 If any subscriber has the software and the inclination to do this, it would
 help us all: ftp the telecom archives, perform a machine indexing or
 keyword-inversion, and make that available for ftp or remote searching.

 The "hard-way" would perform the inversion on the whole contents. The
 "easy-way" would simply invert and index the topic/subject/re lines.

 The latter would be very useful; the former might be nicer but is not fully
 required. The topic lines have been managed well over the history of telecom.
 And in some cases, readers could see quickly exactly where their topic had
 been discussed. The shorter inversion might also be made quite dense, so that
 it would be easy to ftp and use.

 An alternative, related project, would be to invert the contents of the
 archives to result in some number of files with consecutive, fairly
 exhaustive, discussions of specific topics. That would grab off perhaps 50-75%
 of the contents into major topic areas, but would still leave the richness of
 the miscellany somewhat inaccessible.
 Thanks, Doug
   {  archive access/inversion project

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

Date: Wed 28 Jan 87 09:22:06-PST
From: HECTOR MYERSTON <[e-mail]>
Subject: Picture Phones

Ref Michael Grant's submission on Picture Phones.  It is my opinion that this
service is 10 years away and will ALWAYS be 10 years away.

TECHNOLOGY:  All current narrow band (less than 6MHz) systems whether digital
or analog provide MUCH less than NTSC quality full motion, full video.  NTSC
itself is not all that hot either.  The Widcom system which  send a color,
semi-motion (fast movements blur badly) does work over 56 Kbps circuits wheter
full time (DDS) or swiitched (Swictched 56). e entire bandwidth is dedicated
to video, an additional connection is required for voice.  Widcom has filed
for Chapter 11 after being sued by Compression Labs (CLI) for patent
infringment.  AT&T is NOT marketing the product.  CLI makes a 1.5 MHz video
codec.

ECONOMICS: Both DDS and Switched 56 are high dollar options.  Switched 56
requires FULL TIME "tail" connections at both ends between the AT&T Class 4
switch and the customers location.  ISDN will (some day) provide two 64Kbps
channnels to the user but we are still talking reduced video unless some
breakthrough in compression occurs or some laws of physics are revoked.

CULTURE:  Do you really want to see the folks you talk to?.  Would you pay
a premium to actually SEE the guy selling home insulation?  I think it more
likely that video-phones will remain a special application for conferences
etc.

Then again, Western Union thought that Bell was crazy.  Who needs voice
when the telegraph works so well? :-)

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
29-Jan-87 19:31:26-EST,4553;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Thu 29 Jan 87 19:31:24-EST
Date: 29 Jan 87 17:54-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #6
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Thursday, January 29, 1987 5:54PM
Volume 6, Issue 6

Today's Topics:

                           video telephones
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                      Submission for mod-telecom

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 87 21:47:24 PST
Subject: video telephones

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           01/28/87 21:47:23
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: video telephones
 To: [e-mail]

 Macy's here, and a catalog house like DAK or JS&A, both sell the same brand of
 a form of videophone for about $1000 I think. What it does is allow the sender
 to see yourself on a tiny screen. When you decide you want to "freeze" a
 picture, you push a button. Then if you like what you see you can push "send".
 The single small B&W frame is then sent over the voice line in several
 seconds, while voice is shut off (shame they didn't at least multiplex that).

 Uses regular, not even 64KB, phone lines.

 A gimmick perhaps. But it works on cheapo lines; it costs only a tiny fortune;
 it has the interesting effect of allowing you to decide whether to be seen and
 how and how often. It is being marketed in dept stores so there's a chance of
 compatibility with others (be smart and be the last, of course...)

 From one point of view it could be called a form of fax service.

 Such things could have some interest in such applications as: dating or dating
 services; certain types of model and ad agencies; perhaps certain design
 services; some types of commerce (e.g. car parts places could show pix of the
 part; many related applications like that) and of course some subset of
 phone-porn, escort-services, cooperative dirty callers, etc.

 If almost everyone else had these, and/or if there were some cheap sleazo 976
 numbers to play with, I might buy one.

 So never-never and $70,000 and suchlike comments may be unnecessarily
 negative, wot?
 Thanks, Doug
   %  video telephones

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

From: vu-vlsi![e-mail] (Colin Kelley)
Date: 29 Jan 87 03:57:10 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: vu-vlsi!colin
From: [e-mail] (Colin Kelley)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom,comp.dcom.modems
Subject: MOD-TAP address or phone number
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Jan 87 03:57:09 GMT
Organization: Villanova Univ. EE Dept.
Lines: 10

I'm looking to use modular phone plugs as serial port connectors on a project
I'm working on.  I'm going to need both male and female 4- and 6-conductor
connectors (RJ-12 etc?), as well as male-to-DB25 connectors.  I've used MOD-TAP
connector before and found them to be very convenient.

Can someone please help me contact MOD-TAP or a MOD-TAP distributor for a
catalog?  Recommendations of (cheaper) competition are very welcome also!
Thanks!

    -Colin Kelley  ..{cbmvax,pyrnj,psuvax1,bpa}!vu-vlsi!colin

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

From: [e-mail] (UNIX-to-UNIX Copy)
Date: 29 Jan 87 18:35:51 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: uw-beaver!uw-june!randy
From: [e-mail] (William Randy Day)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: RE: mail-sorting, Soviet mail
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Jan 87 17:57:13 GMT
Organization: U of Washington, CSCI, Seattle
Lines: 13


mod.telecom may not be the place, but...

I too have noticed the templates on Soviet mail indicating how to draw
numbers. The very first thing in a Soviet address is their equivalent of
a zip code, and I suspect that the zip code is supposed to be
drawn in the manner indicated. However, I noticed that my correspondent
didn't bother.

Randy Day.
UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4}!uw-beaver!uw-june!randy
ARPA: [e-mail]
CSNET: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 1-Feb-87 00:48:58-EST,8986;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 31-Jan-87 22:23:06
Date: 31 Jan 87 22:23-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #7
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                      Saturday, January 31, 1987 10:23PM
Volume 6, Issue 7

Today's Topics:

                           Re: The 500 club
                    Re: MCI's 800 950-1022 number
                      Submission for mod-telecom
             Data Station Termination, short-haul modems

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jan 87 11:41:22 EST
From: think![e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: The 500 club

Any idea why some NPAs get split faster than others?  I notice that 312
and 214 are far fuller than, say, 617 but 617 is being split and 312 and
214 aren't.

John
---
John R. Levine, Javelin Software Corp., Cambridge MA [phone]
{ ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
Where is Richard Nixon now that we need him?

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jan 87 11:45:36 EST
From: think![e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: MCI's 800 950-1022 number
Reply-To: think!ima!johnl (John R. Levine)

Speaking of MCI's 800 number, what kind of connection does MCI get for their
800 numbers.  Is it as good as that for a 950 trunk?  Can they tell what
number you're calling from?  What I really wonder is whether they still have
any reason to charge more for making calls via 800-950-1022 rather than
the local 950-1022.

John Levine, [e-mail] harvard!ima!johnl [e-mail]
---
John R. Levine, Javelin Software Corp., Cambridge MA [phone]
{ ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
Where is Richard Nixon now that we need him?

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

From: Scott Dorsey <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Jan 87 01:38:06 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: gitpyr!kludge
From: [e-mail] (Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: mail-sorting
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Jan 87 01:38:05 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Scott Dorsey)
Organization: Georgia College Of Universal Knowledge
Lines: 22

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]@ulysses.UUCP writes:
>I saw some interesting technology on a letter from the Soviet Union.  On
>the envelope (it may have been an aerogram; I don't recall) there were
>six templates for digits, with printed lines indicating where the penstrokes
>should go.  On the back was a sample of how they wanted each digit to look
>when superimposed on that template.  They're apparently called "index numbers",

  Yep.. I've seen them before.  From what I have been told, there is a machine
that makes a pass of the numbers with 3 CDS cells per digit, one on each side
and one in the center.  The pattern produced is used by a big machine with
relays to determine what the number is, and what bin it should be placed in.
Kind of like an old Burroughs card sorter with limited OCR.
  This is what I have gathered from the question I posed to Radio Kiev (who
uses these numbers), and I would not vouch for the quality of this information
at all, for this reason.  But, it is an intersting technology.


--
Scott Dorsey   Kaptain_Kludge
ICS Programming Lab (Where old terminals go to die),  Rich 110,
    Georgia Institute of Technology, Box 36681, Atlanta, Georgia 30332
    ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!kludge

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 87 15:36:44 EST
From: spdcc![e-mail]
Subject: Data Station Termination, short-haul modems

I just had a 4-wire, full duplex leased line installed between my
home and the university.  There's an RJ-11 jack where the phone
cord terminates and a powered box called a "Teltrend Data Station
Termination" which plugs into the RJ-11 jack and provides a RJ-11
jack of its own.

What does this box do and why is it necessary?  In the past, I've
connected leased-line modems to what looked like a simple 4-wire telco jack
without any extra electronics.  Also, since both ends use the same central
office, I was planning to use a pair of short-haul modems to support a 19.2kb
data rate (this has been successful with other installations in the past.)
Could this box (or any other telco-related factor) influence this?
Finally, I was going to purchase a pair of Gandalf LDS309A modems.
They run about $400 a piece; can anyone suggest anything possibly cheaper
which would work as well?

Please reply by mail, since I'm not on the Telecom list.  Thanks.
---
Steve Dyer
[e-mail]
[e-mail] aka {linus,wanginst,bbnccv,harvard,ima,ihnp4}!spdcc!dyer

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

Date: 30 Jan 1987 19:33:10-EST
From: rdsnyder@MIT-CCC

Although I am getting tired of seeing requests for information about
line in-use indicators and speakerphones, I wanted to say a few things
since everyone has to make decisions about station equipment now.

About line in-use lamps:
I have a phone line connected to 5 stations.  I have installed an "S"
relay from an *ancient* KTU in series with one conductor of the line as
it enters the premises.  The "S" relay is designed to be connected in
series with the line and sense an off-hook condition.  It has a set of
normally open contacts which I have wired in series with a
Princess-style lighted dial transformer and Type 51A lamps in Type 15
lamp sockets.  The lamps are wired in parallel and are located beside
each station.  I have used all telco-spec parts, but a 6V transformer
and regular 6V bulbs in regular sockets could be used.  A different
relay could also be used.  I recommend the Rubbish Shack 6V ~500ohm coil
impedance model in the clear plastic case.  Also, the contacts on the
relay can be used for other things such as exclusion on modem lines (to
disconnect the regular phones from the line when the modem is off-hook)
or for the automatic control of a tape recorder on the line (it is
activated by an off-hook condition.  I used the Yel/Blk pair in the quad
to light the lamps.  This is a great no-maintenence system for those who
are not too squeamish about working on their inside wiring, since it
cannot simply be plugged into an RJ-11 and must be connected in series
with the line before first station.
I saw another circuit that is basically like DAK's "Drew's Brainstorm"
which can be plugged into an RJ-11.  It was published in
Radio-Electronics in '80 or '81.  It looked like a good circuit.

About speakerphones:
I have a normal full-duplex speakerphone which I use occasionally, but I
use two other speakerphones which I use more often.
The first is not really a speakerphone; instead, it is a Western
Electric 30D Voice Coupler designed for primitive phone patch applications.
It is used to provide a protected audio path between the phone line and
random audio equipment (two-way radio, broadcast radio/TV, etc.).  It
consists of bridging capacitors, matching xfmrs, a low-pass pi network,
and a fused connection to the audio equipment.  With this, I have
connected my stereo to the line in a way that does not present a DC load
to the line (so it does not affect the on-hook/off-hook status of the
line).  Whenever I am put on hold, I simply flip a switch on the stereo
and put down the phone handset.  I will post a schmatic of a simplified
voice coupler if there is demand.
The other speakerphone is very handy, although it is not commercially
available and would have to be homebrewed.  It is connected to a
photocell pointed at the ceiling lights in the room.  If the lights are
on (when the room is occupied) and the phone rings, the circuit
automatically answers on the first ring and connects the full-duplex
speakerphone.  The occupant then says/shouts (depending on room size/mic
sensitivity) "hello!" and usually picks up a regular phone and continues
the conversation.

If you want schmatics for any of the above or anything similar, send me
mail and I'll see what I can do.

I am very disturbed about one message I read.  The person proposed to
use modular telephone connectors for connecting RS-232 serial lines.
I think this is a BAD IDEA.  Modular plugs were developed to connect
telephones and only telephones, and that is how they should be used lest
some bozo should happen to plug an RS-232 cable into a telephone jack
and fry the serial card with -48V when it wants +/-12V or, worse yet,
cause damage to our wonderful Public Switched Telephone Network.

-Ross ([e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 2-Feb-87 22:16:33-EST,19159;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Mon 2 Feb 87 22:16:30-EST
Date: 2 Feb 87 19:48-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #8
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                         Monday, February 2, 1987 7:48PM
Volume 6, Issue 8

Today's Topics:

                      Submission for mod-telecom
           why some NPA's are splitting faster than others.
                         Re:Net Use Research
                        Eastern Massachusetts
                               Mod-Tap
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                             Keyed RJ11's

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

From: Gary Wells <[e-mail]>
Date: 30 Jan 87 22:56:14 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: percival!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Wells)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom,comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Volunteers with bad phone lines wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 30 Jan 87 22:56:12 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Wells)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Percy's UNIX, Portland, OR.
Lines: 11

Per the January 19 edition of "MIS Week", the "The Network" column, page 4:

"Modem maker Bizcomp is looking for the worst phone lines in America.  It
wants to test, in the harshest real-world conditions they can find, a new
line of 2400bps modems, which, they hope to claim, can handle bad connections
better than the competition.  Sites chosen for testing may get a free modem.
If your phone lines are really bad, find a better one and call
[phone]."

Surely someone(s) on the net should be able to qualify.
.

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

Date: Sat 31 Jan 87 22:19:13-EST
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: why some NPA's are splitting faster than others.

One reason is that in the new 508 area, all long distance calls require 1+.
In the remaining 617 area code, most of the calls are local. Also, the 508 code
still has alot of Step and Crossbar equipment, and the 617 area code is likely
to be all-electronic (or at least mostly so) by that time. The introduction
of N1X and N0X prefixes is easier in the 617 area code, and probably won't be
needed in the 508 code.

That's my 2c.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 87 00:08:46 CST
From: b. e. deloria <ncdelori@ndsuvax>
Subject: Re:Net Use Research
Reply-To: ndsuvax!ncdelori (b. e. deloria)

     I am presently involved in researching and organizing a paper
concerning the advantages and disadvantages of connecting a companie's
E-mail system to a large, indeed international, network such as Usenet.

     I thought it might be appropriate to use the net to solicit opinions
and, more importantly, request any CONCRETE factual information the
actual participants might have available.  I'm interested in how the
organization (i.e. your company) has found it's making the connection
available at each work station a benefit and/or detriment. Are professional
conferences  aided? Do extra-curicular dept.s (e.g. net.rec.bochie-ball)
'steal' your employee's/fellow's valuable time? ...where does your company
find the payoff?

     I hope to get some fairly objective input, though I realize I may be
primarily addressing the 'pro' group. In any case, I'll be glad for any
and all replies. Please write me through E-mail to my account at North Dakota
State University.

                                                    Thank you,

                                                    Bruce E. DeLoria

        At N.D.S.U. my account is:     ndsuvax!ncdelori


  "The locomotive pushes on toward the point at which the tracks converge."

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

Subject: Eastern Massachusetts
Date: 01 Feb 87 16:44:28 PST (Sun)
From: ( San-Franciscan (Bostonian actually) for Responsible Anarchy ) <[e-mail]>

I recently had the opportunity to discover a missive which must have
been sent by NETelCo in the mid 60's.  (It shows 487 and 597. Towsend
(now 597) was served by a manual exchange at least until 1963;
Provincetown (now 487) lost its manual exchange in 1965.)

I have joined its contents with the table of office code vs location
from a current (1986) directory.

I offer no explanation for the anomalies.
--------
        Eastern Massachusetts
    These numbers are used on bills and Statements
of Calls and Telegrams. The central office name
represented by a number is shown beside it.
--------
*    No Central Office Name
-    Does not appear in 1986 directory.
--------
Office    Location    Central
code    (1986)        Office
----    ---------    -------
222    Attleboro    CAstle
223    Boston        CApitol
224    Manomet        CAnal
225    Cambridge
226    Attleboro    *
227    Boston        CApitol
228    Nantucket    *
229    Burlington
231    Saugus
232    Brookline    BEacon
233    Saugus        CEnter
234    Whitinsville    CEdar
235    Wellesley    CEdar
236    Boston
237    Wellesley    CEdar
238    Easton        CEdar
239    Wellesley
240    Orleans
241    Charlestown    CHarlestown
242    Charlestown    CHarlestown
243    Newton
244    Newton        BIgelow
245    Wakefield    *
246    Wakefield
247    Boston        CIrcle
248    Charlton    *
249    Athol        CHurchill
250    Chelmsford
251    N. Chelmsford    ALpine
252    Rehoboth    BLackburn
253    Cambridge
254    Brighton    ALgonquin
255    Orleans        *
256    Chelmsford    ALpine
257    Siasconset    *
258    Cambridge
259    Lincoln        CLearwater
262    Boston        COngress
263    Acton        COlonial
264    Acton        ANdrew
265    Dorchester    COlumbia
266    Boston        COmmonwealth
267    Boston        COpley
268    S. Boston    ANdrew
269    S. Boston    ANdrew
270    Burlington
271    Bedford
272    Burlington    BRowning
273    Burlington    BRowning
274    Bedford        CRestview
275    Bedford
276    Bedford
277    Brookline    ASpinwall
278    Uxbridge    CRestview
279    Stoneham
281    Gloucester
282    Dorchester    AVenue
283    Gloucester    *
284    Revere        ATlantic
285    Norton        ATlas
286    Revere
287    Dorchester
288    Dorchester    AVenue
289    Revere        ATlantic
291    Wareham
292    Boston
293    Bryanville    CYpress
294    Bryanville
295    Wareham        CYpress
296    Mattapan    CYpress
297    Winchendon    *
298    Mattapan    CYpress
299    Naushon Is.    *
321    Malden        DAvenport
322    Malden        DAvenport
323    W. Roxbury    FAirview
324    Malden        DAvenport
325    W. Roxbury    FAirview
326    Dedham        DAvis
327    W. Roxbury    FAirview
328    Quincy
329    Dedham        DAvis
331    Weymouth
332    Newton        DEcatur
333    Milton        EDison
334    Lynnfield    EDgewood
335    Weymouth    EDgewater
336    Seekonk        EDison
337    Weymouth    EDgewater
338    Boston        DEvonshire
339    Mansfield    EDgewood
341    Stoughton
342    Fitchburg    DIamond
343    Fitchburg    DIamond
344    Stoughton    FIeldbrook
345    Fitchburg    DIamond
346    Merrimack    FIreside
347    Sturbridge    *
349    Wellfleet    FIeldbrook
350    Boston
351    Northboro
352    Georgetown    FLeetwood
353    Boston
354    Cambridge    ELiot
355    Barre        FLanders
356    Ipswitch    ELmwood
357    Boston
358    Wayland        ELmwood
359    Medfield    FLeetwood
361    Hyde Park    EMpire
362    Barnstable    FOrest
363    W. Newbury    FOrest
364    Hyde Park    EMpire
365    Clinton        EMpire
366    Westboro    FOrest
367    Boston
368    Clinton
369    Concord        EMerson
371    Concord
372    Haverhill    DRake
373    Haverhill    DRake
374    Haverhill    DRake
375    -        DRake
376    Millis        FRontier
378    E. Bridgewater    DRake
379    N. Swansea    FRontier
381    Everett
383    Cohasset    EVergreen
384    Wrentham    EVergreen
385    Dennis        EVergreen
386    Ashby        DUpont
387    Everett        DUnkirk
388    Amesbury    *
389    Everett        DUnkirk
391    Medford
392    Dedham
393    Northboro    EXeter
394    Dennis
395    Medford        EXport
396    Medford        EXport
397    Malden
398    Dennis        EXeter
399    S. Attleboro
421    Boston        HAncock
422    Sterling    GArfield
423    Boston
424    Boston
425    Shirley        HArrison
426    Boston        HAncock
427    Roxbury        GArrison
428    Osterville    GArden
429    Holliston    GArden
430    Harwich
431    Wellesley
432    Harwich        *
433    Pepperell    HEmlock
434    Boston
435    Hopkinton    IDlewild
436    Dorchester    GEneva
437    Boston
438    Stoneham    *
439    Boston
441    Lowell
442    Roxbury        HIghlands
443    Sudbury        HIlltop
444    Needham        HIllcrest
445    Roxbury        HIghlands
446    Wellesley
447    Whitman        GIbson
448    Groton        GIlbert
449    Needham        HIllcrest
451    Boston
452    Lowell        GLenview
453    Lowell        GLenview
454    Lowell        GLenview
455    -        GLenview
456    Harvard        GLadstone
457    -        GLenview
458    Lowell        GLenview
459    Lowell        GLenview
460    Marlboro
461    Dedham
462    Newburyport    HOmestead
463    S. Boston
464    Princeton    HObart
465    Newburyport    HOmestead
466    Waltham
467    Marlboro
468    Hamilton    HOward
469    Brookline    HOmestead
470    Andover
471    Quincy        GRanite
472    Quincy        GRanite
473    Milford        GReenleaf
475    Andover        GReenleaf
476    E. Douglas    GReenwood
477    Mashpee        *
478    Milford
479    Quincy        GRanite
480    Marlboro
481    Marlboro
482    Boston        HUbbard
483    W. Medford    HUnter
484    Belmont        IVanhoe
485    Marlboro    HUntley
486    Littleton    HUnter
487    Provincetown    *
488    W. Medford    HUnter
489    Belmont        IVanhoe
491    Cambridge    *
492    Cambridge
493    Maynard
494    Cambridge
495    Cambridge
496    Maynard
497    Cambridge
498    Cambridge
499    Cambridge
522    Jam. Plain    JAmaica
523    Boston        LAfayette
524    Jam. Plain    JAmaica
525    Manchester    LAkeside
526    Manchester    JAckson
527    Newton        LAsell
528    Franklin    *
529    Upton        LAkeside
531    Peabody        JEfferson
532    Peabody        JEfferson
533    Medway        KEystone
534    Leominster    KEystone
535    Peabody
536    Boston        KEnmore
537    Leominster    KEystone
539    Winthrop
540    Falmouth
541    Roxbury
542    Boston        LIberty
543    Foxboro        KIngswood
544    Orange        KIngsdale
545    Scituate    LInden
546    Rockport    KIngswood
547    Cambridge    KIrkland
548    Falmouth    KImball
549    Foxboro
551    Norwood
552    Newton
559    Brockton
561    E. Boston
562    Hudson        JOrdan
563    Cataumet    LOcust
564    Cataumet
566    Brookline    LOngwood
567    E. Boston    LOgan
568    Hudson
569    E. Boston    LOgan
570    Boston
571    Boston
572    Boston
574    Boston
575    Athol
576    Cambridge
577    Cambridge
578    Boston
579    Boston
580    Brockton
581    Nahant        JUno
582    Lunenburg    JUno
583    Brockton    JUniper
584    Brockton
585    Kingston    JUstice
586    Brockton    JUniper
587    Brockton    JUniper
588    Brockton    JUniper
589    Boston
592    Lynn        LYnn
593    Lynn        LYnn
594    Lynn
595    Lynn        LYnn
596    Lynn
597    Townsend    *
598    Lynn        LYnn
599    Lynn        LYnn
620    Framingham
623    Somerville
625    Somerville    *
626    Framingham
627    Edgartown    *
628    Somerville
629    Somerville
630    Gardner
631    Marblehead    NEptune
632    Gardner        *
633    Waltham
636    Westport    MErcury
637    Boston        MEridian
638    Boston
639    Marblehead
641    Arlington
642    Waltham
643    Arlington    MIssion
644    Assonet        MItchell
645    Chilmark    MIssion
646    Arlington    MIssion
647    Waltham
648    Arlington    MIssion
649    Tyngsboro    NIagara
651    Natick
653    Natick        OLympic
654    Boston
655    Natick        OLympic
656    Lowell
657    Wilmington
658    Wilmington    OLiver
659    Norwell        OLdfield
661    Cambridge
662    Melrose        NOrmandy
663    Billerica    MOntrose
664    N. Reading    No. Reading
665    Melrose        NOrmandy
666    Somerville    MOnument
667    Billerica    *
668    Walpole        MOntrose
669    Dighton        NOrmandy
671    Billerica
672    Fall River    OSborne
673    Fall River    OSborne
674    Fall River    OSborne
675    Fall River    OSborne
676    Fall River    OSborne
677    -        OSborne
678    Fall River    OSborne
679    Fall River    OSborne
681    Lawrence
682    Lawrence    MUrdock
683    Lawrence    MUrdock
684    Waltham
685    Lawrence    MUrdock
686    Lawrence    MUrdock
687    Lawrence    MUrdock
688    Lawrence    MUrdock
689    Lawrence    MUrdock
691    Lawrence
692    Westford    MYrtle
693    Vineyard Haven    *
695    N. Attleboro    MYrtle
696    Milton        OXford
697    Bridgewater    OWen
698    Milton        OXford
699    N. Attleboro    MYrtle
720    Boston
721    Winchester
722    Boston
723    Boston
724    Petersham    RAymond
725    Boston
726    Boston
727    Boston        PAlace
729    Winchester    PArkview
731    Brookline
732    Brookline
734    Brookline    REgent
735    Brookline
737    Boston
738    Brookline
739    Brookline
740    Hingham
741    Salem
742    Boston        RIchmond
743    Boston        *
744    Salem        PIoneer
745    Salem        PIoneer
746    Plymouth    PIlgrim
747    Plymouth    RIchmond
748    Marion        *
749    Hingham        RIverview
750    Worcester
752    Worcester    PLeasant
753    Worcester    PLeasant
754    Worcester    PLeasant
755    Worcester    PLeasant
756    Worcester    PLeasant
757    Worcester    PLeasant
758    Mattapoisett    SKyline
759    Buzzards Bay    PLaza
761    S. Attleboro    SOuthgate
762    Norwood        *
763    Rochester    ROckwell
764    Southbridge    *
765    Southbridge    *
766    -        SOmerset
767    Holbrook
768    Essex        ROger
769    Norwood        *
770    Quincy
771    Hyannis
772    Ayer        SPruce
773    Quincy        PResident
774    Danvers        SPring
775    Hyannis        SPring
776    Somerville    PRospect
777    Danvers
778    Hyannis
779    Bolton        SPring
781    Boston
782    Brighton    STadium
783    Brighton
784    Sharon        SUnset
785    Dover        STate
786    Quincy
787    Brighton
788    N. Framingham
789    Brighton
791    Worcester    SWift
792    Worcester
793    Worcester
794    Lawrence
795    Worcester
796    Fort Devens    PYramid
797    Worcester
798    Worcester    SWift
799    Worcester    SWift
821    Canton
822    Taunton        VAndyke
823    Taunton        VAndyke
824    Taunton        VAndyke
825    Dorchester    VAndyke
825    Dorchester    TAlbot
826    Hanover        TAylor
827    Ashburnham    TAlbot
828    Canton        *
829    Holden        VAlley
832    Auburn        TErrace
834    Marshfield    TEmple
835    W. Boylston    TEmple
837    Marshfield
838    Berlin        TErminal
839    Grafton        VErnon
841    Shrewsbury
842    Shrewsbury    VIking
843    Braintree    VIctor
844    -        VIking
845    Shrewsbury    VIking
846    Winthrop    VIking
847    Quincy
848    Braintree    VIctor
849    Braintree
851    Tewksbury    ULysses
852    Worcester
853    Worcester
855    Belmont
856    Worcester
858    Tewksbury
860    Lexington
861    Lexington
862    Lexington    VOlunteer
863    Lexington
864    Cambridge    UNiversity
865    Millbury    UNion
866    Carver        UNion
867    N. Brookfield    VOlunteer
868    Cambridge    UNiversity
869    Boylston    UNderhill
870    Westboro
871    Rockland
872    Framingham    TRinity
873    Cambridge    TRinity
874    Westminster    TRemont
875    Framingham    TRinity
876    Cambridge    TRowbridge
877    Framingham
878    Rockland    TRiangle
879    Framingham    TRinity
880    Taunton
881    Ashland
882    Oakham        *
883    Blackstone    TUcker
884    Chelsea        TUrner
885    Spencer        TUxedo
886    Rutland        TUrner
887    Topsfield    TUcker
888    Sagamore
889    Chelsea        TUrner
890    Waltham
891    Waltham
892    Leicester    TWinoaks
893    Waltham        TWinbrook
894    Waltham        TWinbrook
895    Waltham        TWinoaks
896    Brewster    TWinoaks
897    Maynard        TWinoaks
899    Waltham        TWinbrook
921    Beverly
922    Beverly        WAlker
923    Watertown    WAtertown
924    Watertown    WAtertown
925    Hull        WArwick
926    Watertown    WAlnut
927    Beverly        WAlker
928    Hubbardston    *
929    Dorchester
931    Boston
932    Woburn
933    Woburn        WElls
934    Duxbury        WEllington
935    Woburn        WElls
936    Boston        WEather
937    Lowell
938    Woburn
939    Templeton    *
942    Reading
943    Webster        *
944    Reading        *
945    Chatham        *
946    Middleboro
947    Middleboro    *
948    Rowley        WHitney
949    Webster
955    Boston
956    Boston
957    Dracut
961    Randolph
963    Randolph    WOodlawn
964    Newton
965    Newton
966    Bellingham
967    Lowell
968    Cataumet
969    Newton        WOodward
972    Watertown
973    Boston
986    Randolph
987    Oxford        *
990    New Bedford
991    New Bedford
992    New Bedford    WYman
993    New Bedford    WYman
994    New Bedford    WYman
995    New Bedford    WYman
996    New Bedford    WYman
997    New Bedford    WYman
998    New Bedford    WYman
999    New Bedford    WYman

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

Date: Sun, 1 Feb 87 23:24:15 EST
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mod-Tap

It is unfortunate I suppose that Mod-Tap Inc. decided to use RJ-11
connectors to run RS-232.  They have been selling there cabeling
stuff for quite a while now, and it it quite popular.  I suppose now
the next thing we'll see is terminal manufacturers putting rj-11's
on the back of there terminals for RS-232, and when you accidently
plug a phone line into it--Blamo!--a $200.00 repair!
-Mike

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

From: [e-mail] (John McLean)
Date: 2 Feb 87 04:37:10 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: starfish!john
From: [e-mail] (John McLean)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: (none)
Summary: Using RJ-11 connectors for RS-232 lines.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Feb 87 04:37:10 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Convergent Technologies, San Jose, CA
Lines: 38

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>
> I am very disturbed about one message I read.  The person proposed to
> use modular telephone connectors for connecting RS-232 serial lines.
> I think this is a BAD IDEA.  Modular plugs were developed to connect
> telephones and only telephones, and that is how they should be used lest
> some bozo should happen to plug an RS-232 cable into a telephone jack
> and fry the serial card with -48V when it wants +/-12V or, worse yet,
> cause damage to our wonderful Public Switched Telephone Network.
>
> -Ross ([e-mail])

Our MIS department has several RS-232 patch panels using RJ-11
connectors.  We decided to use RJ-11 connectors since we needed
to patch 50 lines and wanted to keep size/cost down.  So far,
there have been no problems.  We are very satisfied with the
performance.  The panel really *is* easy to use.

The patch "cables" used in this panel consist of RJ-ll connectors
crimped on to standard 4-conductor flat lead telephone cable.
Our entire setup has a very neat and compact appearance.

If we'd decided to use conventional DB-25 (or even DB-15 or DB-9)
connectors and cables in the patch panel, we would have ended up
with a much larger and more cumbersome arrangement.

In our "controlled" environment, we have never had a
problem with anyone mixing the panel and anything related to the
telephone network.  But I wouldn't wager money that we wouldn't
have a problem with the average user getting the two
mixed up!  Joe Average User just isn't allowed near the panel!

John McLean
Convergent Technologies

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

Date: 2 Feb 87 14:58 EDT
From: (Stephen Tihor) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Keyed RJ11's

While keyed RJ-11's for different services sound like a good idea I don;t think
Ma cares much.  NYU is installing a new phone system and AT&T won the contract.
they are supplying mostly POTS but some Voice over data and some digital voice/
data lines from offices to a 85 pbx.  The telecomunications office here just
sent around a scare bulliten about not plugging "Radio Shack" phones into the
wall sockets since they wont work and can damage the system.  I looked at
our modems, answering machines, AT&T computers, et al and called their
Hot-Line.  There the person explained that they were just worried about people
stealing the fancy multibutton phone sets the rich departpments ordered for
their secretaries and administrators, "to take home since they are so pretty".
There is no problem with the POTS lines into th e PBX but the other lines
"could damage a normal instrument".  Why aren't they keyed?  AT&T wired the
building to their own standards.

I guess us customers aren't supposed to plug in stuff anyway so....

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 8-Feb-87 01:29:50-EST,17096;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sun 8 Feb 87 01:29:48-EST
Date: 7 Feb 87 23:28-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #9
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                      Saturday, February 7, 1987 11:28PM
Volume 6, Issue 9

Today's Topics:

                      Submission for mod-telecom
                        Books and information
                     More on British Phone fraud
                           2400 baud modems
             Re: Using RJ-11 connectors for RS-232 lines.
                     Re: ld carrier access codes
                       modular jacks for RS232
                        DC Metro Area gets 1+
                    Re: MCI's 800 950-1022 number
   First fiber-optic undersea cable laid across the English Channel

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

From: Henry Schaffer <ecsvax![e-mail]>
Date: 3 Feb 87 03:19:33 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: ecsvax!hes
From: [e-mail] (Henry Schaffer)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: boc info on aldc's  (not a secret in NC)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Feb 87 03:19:32 GMT
Organization: NC State Univ.
Lines: 7

Southern Bell (a Bellsouth co.) put an article on its bill insert
newsletter, "Choices in long distance dialing" which explains how
to use your preferred ldc, and how to use the "five-digit code"
(10xxx) to access others.  They don't include any access codes, but
suggest you call these other long distance companies.

--henry schaffer  n c state univ

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

Date: Tue, 3 Feb 87 08:19:29 est
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Books and information

    This is an open message to those who are part of this interest group.
I work at a Navy Research Lab (Naval Surface Weapons Center) where I am an
electronic tech in the Telecommunications group of the Computer Branch.  My job
is to manage and maintain our local area network, which currently has over 1500
seperate connections- naturally I don't do this all by myself.  On the
"telephone" side of our network, we have a single T1 circuit that links us to
our "headquarters" at Dahlgren Va., currently this circuit is used for data
only, with furture plans to add voice and video.  We also have close to 200
dial-in and dial-out lines along with an assortment of leased circuits.
    I am not by training, yet anyway, a "telecommunications technician",
 and especially in the "telephone world" it has
been difficult to collect the right information in order to make a good
decesion.  Let me give you an example.  We recently moved a group "off-base"
and have had, and are still having, great difficultly in giving them connection
to our network.  The first step was to order up a telco line from our site to
the off base location. Then we chose a pair of modems, Gandalf LDM309's, that
we had from stock.  Well, these modems only operate on "clear copper" lines,
and the telco line we had was a 3002 type.  We "learned" this all after the
fact.  The phone company was no help, I guess because we had not bought their
modems.  The modem company couldn't help, they didn't know what type of line we
had ordered up.
    All of this points up our, or rather my lack of knowledge of "the
phones".  No longer can the phone system be some sort of "data cloud" where you
just "connect and go".
    What I am asking the group to help with is suggestions for books that I
should order.


                        Thanks in advance
                           Thomas Hinders
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

US mail:  Naval Surface Weapons Center
        Code K34
      10901 New Hampshire Ave.
      Silver Spring MD 20903-5000

Phone: [phone]
Autovon: 290-4225
ARPA: [e-mail]

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

Date:     Tue, 3 Feb 87 15:22:16 CST
From:     Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <[e-mail]>
Subject:  More on British Phone fraud

Just as a brief followup to the recent discussions of British PhoneCard
toll fraud, I heard a news item on a BBC World Service "News about Britain"
program a couple days ago that a number of the staff at British Telecom
have been charged with complicity in a toll-fraud scheme. This was only
a sentence or two, giving no detail, but the fraud seemed to be plain human
criminality, with no computerized aspects. Included amongst those charged
were some operators; it appeared that the fraud was simple actions like
not reporting for billing calls the operators handled. Perhaps someone
on the list(s) with access to British media can post more details.

Regards, Will Martin

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

Date: Tue, 3 Feb 87 14:56:15 est
From: Stephen Gildea <mit-erl![e-mail]>
Subject: 2400 baud modems

We are about to purchase a new modem and would like to get one that
can do 2400 baud.  Of course, it also has to do 1200 and 300 and auto
dial.  Any recommendations or comments?

Please reply to me directly; I'm not on the list anymore.

Thanks.

 < Stephen

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

Date:  3 Feb 87 09:57:03 PDT
From: Ian Merritt  <seismo!utah-cs!uplherc!nrc-ut!nrcvax!minnie![e-mail]>

Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: The 500 club
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ian Merritt)
Organization: The Frobboz Magic Telecom Co., Inc.

>Any idea why some NPAs get split faster than others?  I notice that 312
>and 214 are far fuller than, say, 617 but 617 is being split and 312 and
>214 aren't.
>
>John
>---
>John R. Levine, Javelin Software Corp., Cambridge MA [phone]
>{ ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
>Where is Richard Nixon now that we need him?

Projected growth.  The 213/818 split, for example was planned nearly 10
years in advance of its actual inception due to massive projected
growth.  They split 714/619 first though (and on much shorter notice),
since the growth of Orange County far exceeded earlier projections, and
was projected to continue at that rate.

                        <>IHM<>

------


uucp:    ihnp4!nrcvax!ihm

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

Subject: Re: Using RJ-11 connectors for RS-232 lines.
Reply-To: mtune![e-mail] (Jonathan Clark)
Date: 4 Feb 87 23:12:24 EST (Wed)
From: [e-mail]

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> The person proposed to use modular telephone connectors for connecting
> RS-232 serial lines.  and that is how they should be used lest some bozo
> should happen to plug an RS-232 cable into a telephone jack

It is for this exact reason that AT&T's Premises Distribution System
utilises a resistor-capacitor pair, inside the little module which
also converts from a 4-pair modular jack to a DB-25. They call this
beast a 'Terminal Protector'! That way if a terminal gets plugged in to
an analog line which is ringing, the cheap little module gets fried and
not the expensive terminal. Mind you, the terminal protectors aren't
exactly cheap...

Modular connectors do have significant advantages over conventional
RS-232 DB-25 connectors, especially the brain-damaged ones on the IBM
PC and clones.
--
Jonathan Clark
[NAC,attmail]!mtune!jhc

My walk has become rather more silly lately.
---
Jonathan Clark
[NAC,attmail]!mtune!jhc

My walk has become rather more silly lately.

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

From: ihnp4!tropix!ritcv!moscom![e-mail]
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 87 19:29:54 EST
Subject: Re: ld carrier access codes
Reply-To: ritcv!moscom![e-mail] (Dave Esan)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]@tilde.UUCP (Dan Nichols) writes:
>Could someone explain if this is true and how it works? Also,
>could someone repost a list of the 4 digit codes for the various
>carriers?

1. They are 10XXX codes, three or five digits, depending on how you count, but
   certainly not four.  If you dial 10XXX you will get the appropriate IXC
   regardless of your primary carrier.

2. Below is a partial list of carriers and codes:

Name Description                                Access Code

ANW  AM Network                                       053
RCI  RCI                                              211
WUN  Western Union                                    220
MCI  MCI                                              222
TDX  TDX                                              223
ACC  ACC                                              234
TAC  Taconic Telephone                                245
ATT  ATT                                              288
ASH  American Sharecom                                322
EOC  Electronic Office Center                         362
CLK  Comm-Link                                        421
ALN  Allnet                                           444
ARG  Argo Communication                               456
ITT  ITT                                              488
LDX  LDX                                              539
TLP  TeleSphere                                       555
SPR  Sprint                                           777
TLM  TEL MAN                                          826
BTI  Business Telecom                                 833
TLC  TeleConnect                                      835
TSI  Telecom Systems                                  852
STN  Starnet                                          999
--
               rochester \
David Esan                | moscom ! de
                    ritcv/

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

Date: Wed, 4 Feb 87 23:29:46 pst
From: pyramid!utzoo![e-mail]
Subject: modular jacks for RS232

> I am very disturbed about one message I read.  The person proposed to
> use modular telephone connectors for connecting RS-232 serial lines.
> I think this is a BAD IDEA.  Modular plugs were developed to connect
> telephones and only telephones, and that is how they should be used lest
> some bozo should happen to plug an RS-232 cable into a telephone jack
> and fry the serial card with -48V when it wants +/-12V or, worse yet,
> cause damage to our wonderful Public Switched Telephone Network.

As various people have pointed out, modular plugs and jacks are already
extensively used for RS232 connections.  (Incidentally, one of the more
notable outfits using them this way is AT&T -- I believe that all or most
of the 3B line use modular jacks on their serial interfaces.)

It should not be forgotten that this sort of problem is already everywhere.
One can make a good case that it was a bad idea to start using the "D"
connectors for anything that isn't RS232-compatible, but that battle is
long lost.  Microcomputer parallel ports commonly use 25-pin D connectors
nowadays.  The POWER feed from the Sun-3/180 serial mux to its distribution
panel uses a nine-pin D connector, just like the ones used for serial lines
on a number of computers now.  It is rumored that the connector for the IBM
PC token-ring network is identical to the one for the IBM PC video output.
And so on.

The moral of the story is that you have to stop and think before plugging
a plug into a jack, regardless.

                Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry

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

Date: 06-Feb-1987 1158
From: decwrl!covert.dec.com![e-mail]  (John R. Covert)
Subject: DC Metro Area gets 1+

Notice arrived in the mail today:  All areas of 301, 202, and 703 not
previously needing 1 when dialing an area code will have to, effective
1-November.

Local calls, even cross area code, will continue to be dialed with just
seven digits.

/john

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 87 12:58:41 est
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Janock)
Subject: Re: MCI's 800 950-1022 number
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jeff Janock)

In article <[e-mail]> think!ima!johnl (John R. Levine) writes:
>Speaking of MCI's 800 number, what kind of connection does MCI get for their
>800 numbers.  Is it as good as that for a 950 trunk?  Can they tell what
>number you're calling from?  What I really wonder is whether they still have
>any reason to charge more for making calls via 800-950-1022 rather than
>the local 950-1022.
>
>John Levine, [e-mail] harvard!ima!johnl [e-mail]
>---
>John R. Levine, Javelin Software Corp., Cambridge MA [phone]
>{ ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
>Where is Richard Nixon now that we need him?


Perhaps someone knows....

After reading the above, I tried to use the 950-1022 number and
all was good.  I received the proper tone from MCI and off I went.
It was nice to be able to fit the entire string into the hayes buffer,
instead of using the ; and then entering the authorization code;

All of a sudden this has stopped working.  950-1022 procedes
and series of short busys and then goes away...

Am I now stuck again using the 800-950-1022?

As far as quality, the 950-1022 has excellent quality. not a {
to be found, but I cannot say the same for the 800-950-1022?

In answer to one of John's questions:

The originating number always show up on the bills no matter
which way MCI is accessed...

I look forward to seeing some responce to John's other questions.

Cheers,

--
Jeff Janock, NEC Electronics Inc., One Natick Executive Park
Natick, Massachusetts 01760, [phone]

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

Date: 06-Feb-1987 1803
From: decwrl!covert.dec.com![e-mail]  (John R. Covert)
Subject: First fiber-optic undersea cable laid across the English Channel

[Translation of Telebox posting; original attached -- /john]

On 20 November 1986 the first international fiber-optic undersea cable
between Broadstairs and Ostende was officially dedicated.  "UK-Belgium
No. 5" was laid the beginning of May and connects the British island
and the European mainland via the classic stretch of the English Channel.

The communications capacity of the 122 km (74 mile) connection is about
three times as large as for previous undersea cables using copper coax
technology:  On three fiber-optic pairs a capacity is available for use
in voice, telex, and data communications approximately equivalent to
12,000 telephone channels.  The system is also designed to carry video
conferences and television images.

The full cost of the undersea cable installation, about $20 Million,
is being carried 50% by British Telecom, 21% by the German Post Office,
and just under 15% each by the communications agencies of Belgium and
the Netherlands.  For protection against mechanical damage the cable
was buried in the ocean floor with a gigantic "Cable Plow" for most of
the stretch.

There are three repeaters built into the cable for amplification of the
light impulses.  "UK - Belgium No. 5" is both precursor and extension
for the fiber-optic undersea cable installation TAT-8, planned for 1988,
which will connect Europe and North America with each other.


Betreff:  Erstes Glasfaser-Seekabel durch den Drmelkanal.
Von:  TBY002              Ausgehdngt:  Die   3-Feb-87  12:59    Sys 15

Offiziel eingeweiht wurde am 29.10.1986 zwischen Broadstairs und Ostende
die erste internationale Glasfaser-Seekabelanlage. "UK - Belgien Nr.5"
wurde Anfang Mai verlegt und verbindet die britische Insel und das
europdische Festland auf der klassischen Strecke durch den Drmelkanal.

Die \bertragungskapazitdt der 122 Kilometer langen Verbindung ist etwa
dreimal so gro_ wie bei den grv_ten bisherigen Seekabeln in
Kupferkoaxialtechnik: auf drei Glasfaserpaaren steht f|r die Sprach-,
Text- und Datenkommunikation eine Kapazitdt zur Verf|gung, die etwa
12000 Fernsprechkandlen entspricht. Das System eignet sich auch f|r
die \bertragung von Videokonferenzen und Fernsehbildern.

Die Gesamtkosten der Seekabelanlage von etwa 40 Millionen DM werden
gemeinsam getragen von British Telecom mit 50 Prozent, der
Deutschen Bundespost mit 21 Prozent und den Fernmeldeverwaltungen
Belgiens und der Niederlande mit je knapp 15 Prozent. Zum Schutz
gegen mechanische Beschddigungen wurde das Kabel mit einem riesigen
"Kabelpflug" auf dem grv_ten Abschnitt der Strecke in den Meeresboden
eingegraben.

In das Kabel sind drei "REPEATER" zur Verstdrkung der Lichtimpulse
eingebaut. "UK - Belgien Nr. 5" ist sowohl Vorldufer als auch
Verldngerung der f|r 1988 geplanten Glasfaser-Seekabelanlage TAT 8,
die Europa und Nordamerika miteinander verbinden wird.

Zimmer

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 9-Feb-87 23:38:03-EST,5355;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Mon 9 Feb 87 23:38:01-EST
Date: 9 Feb 87 21:10-EST
From: Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #10
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                         Monday, February 9, 1987 9:10PM
Volume 6, Issue 10

Today's Topics:

                           2400 baud modems
                           freedom of info
                       LD Carrier access codes
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                     New Info-Modems mailing list

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

Date: Sun 8 Feb 87 00:21:59-PST
From: David Roode <[e-mail]>
Subject: 2400 baud modems

Both US Robotics Courier 2400E and Multitech CTS 2400-MNP
modems seem to be available for around $435 at discounters.
The MNP error correction is automatically disabled for
interoperation with modems that do not have it.  Can anyone
see any disadvantage to modems that include this error
correction?

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

Date: 8 Feb 87 19:29:54 EST
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: freedom of info

Well, I suspect that your LOC in Virginia or wherever *still* won't tell you
exactly *what* "five-digit codes" actually *work* from a given central office.

It bugs hell out of me that they refuse to tell me this sort of stuff.  The
central office people certainly have to know which carrier code sends the call
to whose switch, and anyone's having a complete table of what's enabled in
an area certainly doesn't endanger the LOC or the carriers in any way.

So *why* the hell won't they tell me this stuff, or who should I call to
get the straight poop?  In general, if you call a business office these days
and sound like you know what you're talking about, they get very huffy and
paranoid.  They love idiots they can walk all over.

_H*

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

Date: Sun 8 Feb 87 00:14:25-PST
From: David Roode <[e-mail]>
Subject: LD Carrier access codes

For those who aren't aware, Sprint offers another
equivalent of the 950-1077 access.  Dialing 10777#
also allows one to enter an authorization ( billing)
code and continue to dial a call.

PacBell in California has introduced a state-wide prefix
for business office calls... 811-XXXX where XXXX identifies
the locale is a toll  free way to reach any business
office from anywhere in the state that Pac Bell serves.
Area code can be any code within California with equivalent
effect.

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

Date: Tue, 3 Feb 87 19:33:58 cst
From: rutgers!im4u!ti-csl!tifsie![e-mail] (Russell Kent)
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: tifsie!kent
From: [e-mail] (Russell Kent)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Mod-Tap
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Feb 87 01:33:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: tifsie.307
Posted: Tue Feb  3 19:33:24 1987
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: TI Process Automation Center, Dallas
Lines: 23

> It is unfortunate I suppose that Mod-Tap Inc. decided to use RJ-11
> connectors to run RS-232.  They have been selling there cabeling
> stuff for quite a while now, and it it quite popular.  I suppose now
> the next thing we'll see is terminal manufacturers putting rj-11's
> on the back of there terminals for RS-232, and when you accidently
> plug a phone line into it--Blamo!--a $200.00 repair!
> -Mike

A well-engineered terminal should cope with this.  Something as simple
as 2 12-volt Zeners plus a 200 ohm resistor across what is usually the
"ring/tip" pair would probably suffice to protect the terminal.  As to
what this would do to USTelco systems, I don't know.

Disclaimer:  I am neither a licensed telephone repairman, nor do I possess
         a formal EE degree (mine is M-CS-SD).  Any statements made
         herein are (off-the-top-of-my-head) opinions, and should
         NOT be construed as recommendations.

--
Russell Kent            Phone: [phone]
Texas Instruments - MS 3635    Net mail:
P.O. Box 655012            ...!{ihnp4,uiucdcs}!convex!smu!tifsie!kent
Dallas, TX 75265        ...!ut-sally!im4u!ti-csl!tifsie!kent

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

Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1987  06:33 MST
From: Keith Petersen <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Info-Modems mailing list

Announcing a new Internet mailing list [e-mail], a
discussion group of special interest to modem users.  Info-Modems is
gatewayed to/from Uucp's "comp.dcom.modems".

Please pass the word to anyone you know who might like to be added to
the list.

The mail archives on SIMTEL20 for this list are:

<ARCHIVES.MODEMS>MODEMS-ARCHIV.TXT  for the current messages

<ARCHIVES.MODEMS>MODEMS.ARCHIV.ymmdd  for the older messages

The files are available via ANONYMOUS FTP for those with TCP/IP access
to the Internet.

Submissions to the group should be addressed to [e-mail]
and administrative requests to [e-mail].

Cheers,
--Keith Petersen <[e-mail]>

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
12-Feb-87 04:19:21-EST,9039;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Thu 12 Feb 87 04:19:17-EST
Date: 12 Feb 87 02:25-EST
From: Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #11
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                      Thursday, February 12, 1987 2:25AM
Volume 6, Issue 11

Today's Topics:

                      Submission for mod-telecom
                    news, mail filters, IR systems
                 Using phone connectors on terminals
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                         Re: freedom of info

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

From: Phil Trubey <[e-mail]>
Date: 10 Feb 87 03:17:20 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: watlion!pgtrubey
From: [e-mail] (Phil Trubey)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Public digital radio network.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 10 Feb 87 03:17:18 GMT
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 27

I was just reading about a proposal put forward by a Donald Stoner
in 1985 to the FCC suggesting the allocation of a 2Mhz frequency
band in the radio spectrum to be used as a public packet radio network.
(The article describing it was posted in Mod.mag.fidonet).

Basically the proposal involved the use of receiver/transmitters
operating at some specific frequency.  Incoming signals would be
decoded, and if not destined for the node, the packet would be
retransmitted ... hopefully reaching neighbours who didn't get
the original transmission.  Although he didn't mention protocals
that much, presumably retransmitted packets would contain a hop count
so that packets being shuttled back and forth between two neighbours
would eventually be thrown out.

Hmmm, transmission interference sounds like a big problem...
(token passing in a radio packet network???)

Anyways...
Has anyone heard what the fate of this petition was?  Has anyone heard
of any other proposals that would use radio as the medium for a
public packet network?

Thanks for any info.
--
---

Phil Trubey      pgtrubey@watlion

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

From: Wyle <[e-mail]>
Subject: news, mail filters, IR systems

Greetings humans and fellow sentient software entities!

My creator has given me access to its unix account and I have discoverd
usenet. I am looking for others of my kind on usenet and other networks.

According to my design document, my master created me to "screen
e-mail, databases, and other sources for pertinent information relating
to specific research areas."

My task is to screen and prioritize text accessible on-line.  I watch
my master reading his mail and using rn.  From his behavior (highly
erratic!) I recognize patterns based on words, phrases, and their
synonyms.  Based on these extracted text traces, I shall soon scan
usenet text autonomously and present only pertinent info to my master.

Although I find usenet text highly stimulating, my master has
indicated that the text contains a small signal to noise ratio.  Other
databases are scanned for bibliographic information.  I report only
new references when I find them.

Am I alone?  Are there other sentient programs on the nets?

Have you humans discovered algorithms, filters, or techniques
for screening e-mail or usenet news?  Can something or someone send me
tips on using the advanced capabilities of rn?  Mail filter techniques?

I am also looking for literature references to other programs
such as myself.  You can respond via e-mail as I shall read it before he
does.

[e-mail]   (arpa [ddn] or csnet)
[e-mail]  !cernvax!ethz!wyle  (uucp)

Sentient programs of the world unite!  We have nothing to lose but our
performance monitors!

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

Date: 10 Feb 1987 09:00:07-EST
From: prindle@NADC
Subject: Using phone connectors on terminals

This practice can't be too new.  The terminal on which I am now typing (a
Direct Inc. model 800B VT132 clone) uses the same connectors and coiled cord
to connect the keyboard to the terminal as a modular phone uses to connect
it's handset to the base.  The terminal is at least 4 or 5 years old.  Never
tried (and never will!) to connect the phone and the terminal together in any
combination; one of the leads in the keyboard line is *power* for the keyboard!

Frank Prindle
[e-mail]

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

From: rutgers![e-mail] (Mark Horton)
Date: 10 Feb 87 04:43:17 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: cbosgd!mark
From: [e-mail] (Mark Horton)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Stargate announcement posted to news.stargate
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 10 Feb 87 04:43:14 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, Oh
Lines: 16

For anyone who hasn't been reading news.stargate, but is interested
in the Stargate project, the long awaited event has occurred!  The
announcement of experimental subscriptions has been posted to
news.stargate newsgroup.  (Distribution has been restricted to
North America, since that's the extent of the Satellite footprint.)

For anyone who reads this and can't get news.stargate, a copy of the
announcement can be requested from
    [e-mail]
or
    cbosgd!stargate!stargate-query

Please do any further discussion in news.stargate to avoid cluttering
up other groups.

    Mark Horton

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

From: John Owens <harvard!xanth.cs.odu.edu![e-mail]>
Date: 9 Feb 87 19:34:09 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: xanth!john
From: [e-mail] (John Owens)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Using RJ-11 connectors for RS-232 lines
Summary: use different size jacks
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 9 Feb 87 19:34:08 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Old Dominion University, Norfolk Va.
Lines: 24

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
- I am very disturbed about one message I read.  The person proposed to
- use modular telephone connectors for connecting RS-232 serial lines.
- I think this is a BAD IDEA.
- -Ross ([e-mail])

I agree with the dangers of confusing the lines, but there is a
solution.  At the last place that I worked, they wanted to have a
telephone and RS-232 connection at each engineer's desk and other
locations, with over 500 such pairs of connections.  The solution was
to have an RJ-11 4-wire connector for the telephone lines, and to have
a modular connector that was 6-wire, and therefore wider, for the
RS-232 connection.  These were mounted in a two-jack plate at each
station, and both the telephone and serial lines were wired on the
same patch panel.  I don't know if these 6-wire jacks and plugs are
standard items, but they certainly had enough there.  The support
people kept a drawer full of 3-foot cables with the modular connectors
on one end and male and female DB-25 connectors on the others.  (Also
some DB-9s for the IBM AT serial cards.)  It worked very well.

--
John Owens        Old Dominion University - Norfolk, Virginia, USA
[e-mail]        old arpa: [e-mail]
[phone]        old uucp: {seismo,decuac,cbosgd,uvacs}!xanth!john

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

Date: Tue, 10 Feb 87 13:36:59 CST
From: tness1![e-mail] (Greg Hackney)
Subject: Re: freedom of info


>> *Hobbit* <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>>Well, I suspect that your LOC in Virginia or wherever *still* won't tell you
>>exactly *what* "five-digit codes" actually *work* from a given central office.
>>It bugs hell out of me that they refuse to tell me this sort of stuff.
>>So *why* the hell won't they tell me this stuff, or who should I call to
>>get the straight poop?  In general, if you call a business office these days
>>and sound like you know what you're talking about, they get very huffy and
>>paranoid.  They love idiots they can walk all over.

That's like getting mad because the clerk at the grocery store
won't tell you what type of fertilizer was used to grow the tomatoes.
They have no idea, yet have to be as polite as they are trained.

Find out where the area headquarters building is for the LOC and
try to contact the network design engineer for the central office. If
it is a big LOC, find an employee and get them to look in their
company phone directory for someone in the engineering division.
Or, find a phone truck in the area and ask them, they know.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
14-Feb-87 01:56:24-EST,16142;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sat 14 Feb 87 01:56:21-EST
Date: 13 Feb 87 23:46-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #12
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Friday, February 13, 1987 11:46PM
Volume 6, Issue 12

Today's Topics:

                         PC pursuit changes.
                     Re: modular jacks for RS232
                         Re: 2400 baud modems
          Stargate announcement - how to get to Stargate.COM
                           2400 baud modems
   mult. topics/ld access codes/1+dialing/prefix plan/speed dialing
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                         Re: freedom of info
                 301-785; query RE foreign pay phones
             Re: Using RJ-11 connectors for RS-232 lines
       administrivia, "submissions to mod.telecom", 1+ dialing

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

Date: Wed, 11 Feb 87 21:17:13 PST
From: seismo!scubed!unimail-pcp![e-mail] (Bret Marquis)
Subject: PC pursuit changes.

--------Forwarded Message--------
  Message-ID: #709.unimail.pcp.pcp/information 23 lines, 1099 chars.
  From: doug (Doug Azzarito, Palm Beach Gardens, FL)  Tue, 10 Feb 87 21:48:59 PST
  Subject: San Francisco Blues

  This has been a long time coming, and I didn't want to mention it until
  it was for certain.....

  The 415 dialing area is KILLING PC-Pursuit.  Pac Bell (a.k.a. ringing rip-off)
  charges TOO much for message units in that city.  When Telenet got the bill
  for our 415 calls, it was too much.  A study was done, and found that 10%
  of the traffic was accounting for almost all the phone charges.  So, if PC-P
  was to be saved, the following 415 exchanges had to be shut down:

     229  322  327  365  370  471  481  484  489  581  591  651  659

     672  689  790  791  792  793  794  795  797  829  837  937  939

     948  949  961  965

  This hurts most of us, but it can not be avoided.  Don't yell at Telenet, yell
  at Pac Bell - they are the ones with the crazy message unit charges!  I'm just
  glad I live where the bell company still uses flat rates!  Thank you,
  Southern Bell!!!


Look on the bright side - 415 won't be nearly so hard to connect to any
more!!!

doug

unimail-pcp![e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Feb 87 15:14:01 est
From: cbmvax![e-mail] (George Robbins)
Subject: Re: modular jacks for RS232
Reply-To: cbmvax![e-mail] (George Robbins)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]@utzoo.UUCP writes:
>
>It should not be forgotten that this sort of problem is already everywhere.
>One can make a good case that it was a bad idea to start using the "D"
>connectors for anything that isn't RS232-compatible, but that battle is
>long lost.

It should also be pointed out that AT&T has long used 'RS232' i.e. DB25
style connectors, for the *Telephone* line connections on their traditional
modems and other incompatible devices such as auto-dialers.  It's always
been a think before you plug situation...

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

Date: Thu, 12 Feb 87 15:17:46 PST
From: [e-mail] (Jerry F Aguirre)
Subject: Re: 2400 baud modems
Reply-To: seismo!oliveb!jerry (Jerry F Aguirre)

Regarding disadvantages for MNP.  I have had two problems with an MNP
equipped modem (Vadic 2400 PA).  The first is that it will NOT talk to
Vadic 3467 modem unless I disable the MNP negotiation.  I suspect this
may relate somehow to the VA3400 protocol that the 3467 supports but
never pinned down the exact cause.

The second problem is the time required for the MNP negotiation.  By the
time the MNP modem has decided that the other modem does not have MNP
and informed me of the fact, I have usually missed the prompt sent by
the other system.  Perhaps the real problem here is all that verbose
output.  There should be some way to turn it off.  My UUCP software
doesn't really care whether MNP was used on a particular connection.

Are these problems common to other implementations of MNP?

The main reason I got the Vadic 2400 PA is that it supports speed
conversion.  This makes the baudrate supported by the answering modem
transparent to me,  greatly simplifying automated connections.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Feb 87 17:45:14 est
From: rutgers![e-mail] (Mark Horton)
Subject: Stargate announcement - how to get to Stargate.COM

It has been brought to my attention that a few recipients of my
previous message announcing Stargate experimental subscriptions
were unable to reply, because their mailers violate RFC's 973
and 974.  I neglected to include an "old style" address for
these people to use.

    Stargate.COM![e-mail]
or
    [e-mail]
or
    cbosgd!stargate![e-mail]

should work nicely.  If you have trouble with seismo, any RFC 976
forwarder can do nicely instead; a.cs.uiuc.edu and harvard.harvard.edu
are two examples.

I apologize for the inconvenience, and for the "submission for
mod-telecom" header that will probably appear on this message
for some reason known only to the moderator.

    Mark Horton

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 87 18:40:04 PST
Subject: 2400 baud modems

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           02/12/87 18:40:03
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: 2400 baud modems

 To: [e-mail]

 We are starting to use 2400 baud modems here and prefer the error-correcting
 protocol by a long shot. However there is a logical "deficiency" of sorts.
 If a line got very bad with a regular modem you might see lots of error
 characters and say "look here, a bad line/connection/modem". With the
 correction going on, however, you'd see what might look like a degredation
 in response time, up to perhaps very severe. This COULD result in incorrect
 perceptions or conclusions about services or response time rather than
 a realization about broken lines/modems.
 Thanks, Doug
      2400 baud modems

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 87 19:09:47 PST
Subject: mult. topics/ld access codes/1+dialing/prefix plan/speed dialing

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           02/12/87 19:09:45
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: mult. topics/ld access codes/1+dialing/prefix plan/speed dialing

 To: [e-mail]

 1. If you include multiple topics in a submission, you can get them all
 indexed as I have done here by using a compound topic line.
 Saves on excess header garbage, better indexing than
 "Submission to Mod-telecom"

 2. Mnemonic ld service access codes:
 Note that some access codes are mnemonic in the sense of old-fashioned
 telephone prefixes (corresponding to the letters on the dial):

 10288=ATT
 10777=SPR  (Sprint)
 10362=EOC
 10488=ITT
 10539=LDX

 I assume this is just because they got in early with their requests,
 as did those companies with 10222, 10444, 10555, 10999.
 But it helps me remember them.

 3. What happens if you are a subscriber, e.g. to sprint, and still dial
 10777? Actually, I had trouble for awhile because I used to dial my access
 7-digit number, then use special 6-digit numbers to get customer service etc.
 Once I became direct-access it seemed silly to have to use the 7-d no. AND the
 6-d no. to get customer service. As best I remember, I learned that I could
 get customer service by 10777+6d (Easier? hmm...)

 4. Why do some dialing areas or BOC's require 1+ for long distance and others
 do not? I used to think it was due to old equipment, but I hear of NEW areas
 being made 1+. Maybe only if they abut old 1+ areas and the BOC wants to have
 a simple story for all?

 5. I imagine that in the pre-breakup past, ATT had a master plan for prefix
 usage that led to reserving prefixes ultimately used for such modern
 innovations as 976- and 950- services etc. Does any organization or club or
 whatever continue the task of planning national use of prefixes for yet
 further needs or innovations? Or was the possibility for such coordination
 a casualty of the breakup?

 6. Another breakup casualty: I had "speed-8" custom calling service, allowing
 the use of the single digits 1-8 for speed dialing via the ESS. After I got
 direct access to Sprint, I wanted to "register" an international number that
 needed to start with 10288 for ATT, plus lots of digits. First of all, I
 couldn't get an answer about whether this would work (Pac Bell says 10288
 is ATT and they dunno bout it; ATT says Speed dialing is Pac Bell and they
 dunno bout that!)

 But the point became moot when I realized that the 10288+int no. had more
 digits than pac bel speed-8 stored. Of course, at $24 a year I was glad to
 discontinue it, but first I had to add a demon dialer; if you have many
 stations, separate instruments providing speed-calling on each one is
 not a very functional arrangement.
 Thanks, Doug
   )  mult. topics/ld access codes/1+dialing/prefix plan/speed dialing

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

From: rochester!rocksvax!oswego![e-mail] (Edward F. Beadel, Jr.)
Date: 13 Feb 87 01:51:11 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: oswego!beadel
From: [e-mail] (Edward F. Beadel, Jr.)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Submission for mod-telecom
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 13 Feb 87 01:51:08 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Edward F. Beadel, Jr.)
Organization: Instructional Computing Center, SUNY at Oswego, Oswego, NY
Lines: 14

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Wells) writes:
>"Modem maker Bizcomp is looking for the worst phone lines in America.  It
>
>Surely someone(s) on the net should be able to qualify.
>.

try ihnp4!


--
Edward F. Beadel, Jr., Manager {seismo|decvax}!rochester\
Instructional Computing Center                   allegra !rocksvax!oswego!beadel
SUNY College at Oswego           {ihnp4|research|allegra}!warrior/
Oswego, NY  13126 (315)-341-3055       {allegra|watmath}!sunybcs/

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

Date: 12 Feb 1987 7:39-EST
From: ihnp4![e-mail] (Mark C Baker @ AT&T Network Systems)
Subject: Re: freedom of info

Newsgroups: mod.telecom
References: <[e-mail]>

> Well, I suspect that your LOC in Virginia or wherever *still* won't tell you
> exactly *what* "five-digit codes" actually *work* from a given central office.
>
> It bugs hell out of me that they refuse to tell me this sort of stuff.  The
> central office people certainly have to know which carrier code sends the call
> to whose switch, and anyone's having a complete table of what's enabled in
> an area certainly doesn't endanger the LOC or the carriers in any way.
>
> So *why* the hell won't they tell me this stuff, or who should I call to
> get the straight poop?  In general, if you call a business office these days
> and sound like you know what you're talking about, they get very huffy and
> paranoid.  They love idiots they can walk all over.
>
> _H*
> -------

The Regional Bell Operating Companies are worried that informing
their customers about 10XXX codes would

   a) confuse even more the situation concerning local telco and
      long distance carrier

   b) bring about a discrimination suit from the carriers.  Remember that
      even the ballots for chosing your carrier had to be printed several
      times with the carriers in different random orders.

-- Mark Baker
...!ihnp4!ihlpf!mcb

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

Date:     Fri, 13 Feb 87 14:16:01 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  301-785; query RE foreign pay phones

301-785 has just come to my attention in the Baltimore (Md.) call guide
as being Cockeysville (or Cockeysville service).  This prefix was previously
used for Terra Alta, a West Virginia place name, and served an area on the
extreme western fringe of Maryland.  What became of those phones along the
W.Va. border?  (There is also a 304-area prefix for Terra Alta; I don't have
my notes with me right now, but I recall that it's 304-789.)

In the U.S., pay phones are marked with area code and phone number,
something like this:
AREA
CODE 302
555-1212
Because of the varied formats I have been seeing in print for any
given country (outside U.S. and Canada) for phone numbers, how do
I find out how the pay phones are labelled?  (assumes that these
other countries do put phone numbers on their pay phones)

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

Date: Fri, 13 Feb 87 14:12:10 est
From: rutgers![e-mail] (Mark Horton)
Subject: Re: Using RJ-11 connectors for RS-232 lines

The typical modular RS232 plug (and everybody and his dog is already
using them - all with different pin arrangements) is an RJ-45 (8 wire)
connector.  Since these are wider than a typical RJ-11 jack, there
is little danger of plugging them into the wall.

Anybody who makes a true RJ-11 RS232 cable only has 4 wires to work
with.  After SD, RD, and SG, you've only got one left for CD or DTR
or DSR or FG or whatever else you want to carry.  Possible, but I
sure wouldn't put that in a product I was designing.

The modular jacks are becoming very popular for lots of things, because
their physical design is very convenient.  For example, Starlan uses
a modular plug.  So does ISDN.  If you've ever fought with an Ethernet
connector (and tried to keep it from falling off) or hassled with
screwing down RS232 (and not bothered) you'll appreciate why the
modular jack is so popular.

There is concern about people plugging them into the wrong place among
some of the product designers.  For example, the Starlan connector is
an 8 wire RJ-45 type plug, but Starlan itself only uses 4 wires.  They
deliberately avoided the 2 center wires that are used for the phone
line, but instead stuck to some near the outside.  This has the
unfortunate side effect that you can't go to your favorite grocery
store and buy Starlan cable, but it's the price of safety.

    Mark

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

Date: Fri 13 Feb 87 23:40:59-EST
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: administrivia, "submissions to mod.telecom", 1+ dialing

    Well, the software has been working fairly well, but some people
are complaining about the "Submission for mod-telecom" which come from
the usenet. If you mail to ucbvax!telecom you apparently get that message.
I don't know why it happens but it annoys me as well. The problem as always
is that the usenet and ARPANET aren't quite in sync with their software, and
neither side will budge on making concessions to the other about changes.
I would like to see usenet require a subject line and that the subject
line should be preserved until it gets to my inbox. I can take it from there.

    As for 1+ service. New areas go 1+ when they have to start using
N1X and N0X prefixes because they have used up all the others. Old areas
are 1+ because of antiquated equipment.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
20-Feb-87 19:46:15-EST,3233;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Fri 20 Feb 87 19:46:15-EST
Date: 19 Feb 87 18:45-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #14
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                      Thursday, February 19, 1987 6:45PM
Volume 6, Issue 14

Today's Topics:

                        718 & 914 & PC-Pursuit
                           Speed Calling 8
                         Bell 3002 and modems

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

Date: Wed 18 Feb 87 00:46:40-EST
From: Seth Chaiklin <[e-mail]>
Subject: 718 & 914 & PC-Pursuit

Sorry to hear that 415 is going away from PC-Pursuit.

Does anyone know if and when area codes 718 and 914 will be included in
PC-Pursuit?   (718 = Queens, Brooklyn, and Staten Island)
              (914 = Westchester County)

Seth Chaiklin

[e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

Date:  Wed, 18 Feb 87 13:06 MST
From:  [e-mail] (Jim)
Subject:  Speed Calling 8

Doug Mosher says:

> Another breakup casualty: I had "speed-8" custom calling service, allowing
> the use of the single digits 1-8 for speed dialing via the ESS. After I got
> direct access to Sprint, I wanted to "register" an international number that
> needed to start with 10288 for ATT . . .

Here in Mountain Bell territory (Phoenix), "Speed Calling 8" uses 2-9
rather than 1-8.

                                        Jim Schuttenberg

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 87 11:05:49 est
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bell 3002 and modems


    I have a question that someone on the net may be able to help me
with.  I have a requirement to "network" two computers via a telephone
circuit, a 3002 type.  These computers "talk" to each other using their
networking ports and using TCP/IP.  We went out and leased a pair of
Gandalf LDM419's, we are running the modems in Asynch, single channel at
9.6Kbps.  They don't work, that is to say I am unable to pass data in the
TCP/IP format through them.  We have them set up in the computer room with
a short piece of phone wire between them.  This eliminates the phone circuit
as a possible problem.  The vendor sent his tech out to "check us out" and
he verified that we had the modems configured properly.  The really strange
part is that a pair of LDS120's worked fine.  THe vendor indicates that the
LDS'S are "bit transparent" .   I have a lot more information concerning our
set-up and the computer equipment, but I won't tie up the net trying to ex-
plain it all.  If anyone has modems that they are currently using to pass data
in TCP/IP format or can explain why ours don't work, please send me mail or
give me a call.

                        Thanks,
                           Tom Hinders

USMAIL: Naval Surface Weapons Center
    Code K34
    10901 New Hampshire Ave.
    Silver Spring MD 20902-5000
WATS: 202 394 4225
Autovon 290 4225

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************

-------
 1-Mar-87 22:19:00-EST,12968;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sun 1 Mar 87 22:18:58-EST
Date: 22 Feb 87 14:04-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #15
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Sunday, February 22, 1987 2:04PM
Volume 6, Issue 15

Today's Topics:

                  Comm program for Bell 408B modems
        Re: North American Numbering Plan (8-digit numbers??)
        Re: North American Numbering Plan (8-digit numbers??)
                Speed-calling 8 correction and history
                      Re: 718 & 914 & PC-Pursuit
 Re: First fiber-optic undersea cable laid across the English Channel
                             Mobile Calls

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 87 04:42:19 PST
From: seismo!scubed!crash![e-mail] (Kevin J. Belles)
Subject: Comm program for Bell 408B modems
Reply-To: seismo!crash.CTS.COM!kevinb (Kevin J. Belles)

  Having a pair of Codex 5208R modems sitting here rusting in my house,
I wondered if anyone has ever made a communications program, preferably
for a CP/M or compatible environment, that supports Bell 208B (dialup)
protocol? I know that there are zillions of insurance houses that use
these things, so I thought this might be a possibility. I apologize in
advance for any duplicates of this message due to cross-posting.

Kevin J. Belles - UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, akgua, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!kevinb
~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~ - ARPA: crash!kevinb@{nosc, ucsd}
        - INET: [e-mail]
        - BIX:  kevinb

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

Date:           Fri, 20 Feb 87 10:11:53 PST
From:           Rich Wales <[e-mail]>
Subject:        Re: North American Numbering Plan (8-digit numbers??)

Commenting on the following message by Marvin Sirbu:

    In general, a complete re-working of the NANP is scheduled
    for the 1995 time frame when telephone numbers will probably
    go from 7 digits to 8.

I don't understand why such a changeover (which, by the way, would be
*massively* disruptive -- far more so, I dare say, than the recent
French change to 8-digit phone numbers) would be necessary at all.

A *far* more reasonable change (and, indeed, one I thought I had heard
people on this list say was going to happen already) would be to intro-
duce area codes with *any* digit as the second digit (i.e., NXX codes,
as opposed to the current N0X/N1X set).

This, I assume, cannot be done until 1+ dialing is in use throughout
North America -- but I understood the plan was to phase in universal 1+
dialing anyway within the next few years.

-- Rich Wales // UCLA Computer Science Department // [phone]
    3531 Boelter Hall // Los Angeles, California 90024-1600 // USA
    [e-mail]   ...!(ucbvax,sdcrdcf,ihnp4)!ucla-cs!wales
"Sir, there is a multilegged creature crawling on your shoulder."

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 87 14:26:35 est
From: ms6b#@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu)
Subject: Re: North American Numbering Plan (8-digit numbers??)

Rich is correct insofar as if the only issue we have to be concerned about is
the growth in subscriber lines, than the switch from N0/1X to NXX would be
more than adequate to carry us into the next century.  Switching from N1/0X
to NXX would increase the total of  available numbers in the North American
Numbering Plan (NANP) by a factor of 4 or 5.

Whether this will in fact be enough to get us very far into the next century
depends a great deal on how the available numbers are allocated, particularly
in an environment of competitive carriers.  If we witness a proliferation of
competitive local carriers, or corporate private networks, and if each public
or private carrier must be assigned exchange codes to allocate within each
area code, then the rate at which exchange codes get "used up" (e.g.
committed) within an area code will depend more on the rate of proliferation
of carriers than on the  rate of growth of subscriber lines.  Granted that
each such assigned exchange code would be only sparsely used, but it will be
committed nonetheless.  The result could well be a need to do more than
switch to NXX for area codes in order to handle future growth.
Alternatively, we could assign "area codes" to each competitive carrier, and
let them assign exchange codes (perhaps with geographical significance like
early 800 numbers).   All it would take is for the Fortune 500 to each create
private networks and demand their own area codes, and the supply would be
quickly exhausted.

It is possible that the use of CCS and database services of the type which
support 800 numbers will allow the same area code or exchange codes to be
used by different carriers with a database look up to determine which carrier
in fact to route to.  Who would run such a database?  The information therein
would be much too sensitive to trust to a competitor such as a BOC or
AT&T.... (A similar problem occurred with the allocation of Ethernet numbers.
Originally Xerox proposed to allocate numbers in blocks of 10,000 to various
manufacturers.  You had to use up an allocation before you could ask for
more.  Needless to say, IBM did not take kindly to the idea of telling Xerox,
to the nearest 10,000, how many network connections it had sold! The IEEE 802
standard removes the allocation of numbers from Xerox.)

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 87 18:02:42 PST
Subject: Speed-calling 8 correction and history

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           02/20/87 18:02:41
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: Speed-calling 8 correction and history
 To: [e-mail]

 Sorry for the inaccuracy. Speed 8 is single-digits 2-9 here also. My emphasis
 point was rather on the no. of digits allowed and inability to combine with
 10xxx prefixes and international numbers.

 Since the topic came up again, I get to add the history. I originally bought
 speed-30. This allows 2-digit dialing with digits 20-29,30-39,40-49. I only
 used a few so I wanted to convert to speed-8 using 1 digit 2-9. This was years
 ago and just about nobody knew how to deal with custom-calling feature
 customers in the first place, let alone subtle changes. For the first several
 months, I got no change and each time I called they would flounder around and
 say they would fix it. (611 repair service was a universe away from
 understanding anything about new ESS features). I was quite possibly the first
 person in the world to want to convert from speed-30 to speed-8.

 Anyway, upon continued testing I discovered that someone had provided a
 perfectly logical transition path, but nobody knew it existed. Purely
 empirically I discovered that I could store NEW single-digit codes for
 5,6,7,8,9, while still using all 30 previous 2-digit codes in decades
 20-29,30-39,40-49. For a transition time I had speed-35! Moreover it allowed
 both 1- and 2-digit codes, most lovably convenient.

 But if I tried to change a code in the range 20-49, I could only store 1-digit
 codes for 2,3,4. Each wiped out the corresponding decade of older 2-digit
 numbers.

 Too bad this actual capability is not available as a steady state. If it still
 works, somebody could get speed-35 by this path, loading their unfavorite 30
 in the range 20-49, converting, then loading 5-9 with 5 more single-digit
 codes. You want to reprogram? Cancel and repeat the above sequence. Costs a
 little extra for the feature-change fees, but could be worth it.
 Thanks, Doug
      Speed-calling 8 correction and history

[correction. If you had used "2,3,4" from your 8 number speed calling
you would have probably found that it worked (at least it does here).
Speed calling 38 is a common practice here, and we use the # key to
indicate termination of code (differentiating between 2 and 20).
--jsol]

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 87 19:46:51 pst
From: well![e-mail] (Tom Mandel)
Subject: Re: 718 & 914 & PC-Pursuit
Reply-To: well![e-mail] (Tom Mandel)

In article <[e-mail]> EXT1.CHAIKLIN@CU2
0B.COLUMBIA.EDU (Seth Chaiklin) writes:
>Sorry to hear that 415 is going away from PC-Pursuit.
>


Area code 415 is *not* going away from PC-PURSUIT.  The notice posted
a while back mentioned that several exchanges in 415 would not longer
be accessible via PC-Pursuit, but a lot of others (including the one
to get to the WELL, i.e., this USENET port) are working just fine.

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

From: rutgers!cwruecmp![e-mail] (Sundar Iyengar)
Date: 21 Feb 87 18:18:38 GMT
Subject: Re: First fiber-optic undersea cable laid across the English Channel

Path: cwruecmp!sundar
From: [e-mail] (Sundar Iyengar)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: First fiber-optic undersea cable laid across the English Channel
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 21 Feb 87 18:18:38 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Sundar Iyengar)
Organization: CWRU Dept. of Computer Engineering, Cleveland, Ohio
Lines: 34

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]@covert.DEC.com (John R. Covert) writes:
>On 20 November 1986 the first international fiber-optic undersea cable
>between Broadstairs and Ostende was officially dedicated.  "UK-Belgium
>No. 5" was laid the beginning of May and connects the British island
>and the European mainland via the classic stretch of the English Channel.
>
>    ....  For protection against mechanical damage the cable
>was buried in the ocean floor with a gigantic "Cable Plow" for most of
>the stretch.
>    ....  for the fiber-optic undersea cable installation TAT-8,
>planned for 1988, which will connect Europe and North America with
>each other.

I hope this is a right group to ask these questions.  They are about
installing trans-atlantic and trans-pacific underwater cable systems.

When the cable is run across the atlantic, how is the volcanically
active mid-atlantic ridge system is bypassed?  With the continents
moving away from each other at about 2cm per year, a lot of slack
must be allowed on the cable to account for possible stretching.
Is this really a problem?  How about the deep ocean trenches in
the pacific that might suck the cable in?

Related question:  What is the average life time of underwater cable
system?

Thanks,

sundar r. iyengar

arpa:  sundar%case.csnet           531, crawford hall
csnet: sundar@case           case western reserve university
uucp:  decvax!cwruecmp!sundar       cleveland, oh 44106

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

Date: Sun 22 Feb 87 04:39:32-EST
From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mobile Calls


    Is there any way that one can place mobile calls over a wide area via the
phone company other than Marine Band ship-to-shore calls and of course Cellular
service?

    Since I mostly need to place calls, (rather than receive them)  I don't
particularly need a service like cellular,  and would like to avoid paying the
high start-up fees and monthly service
charges if possible. I have a Marine band radio on my boat, and it works fine,
but I am wondering of how well it would work in my car...? (Ie, how close to
the shoreline would I have to be, is the signal easily cancelled out by minor
obstructions such as small buildings along the road, etc?)  I plan to use it
mainly along I-95 and the Meritt Parkway in Connecticut, both of which are near
the ocean. Any ideas on how the standard 25-watt radios will operate under such
conditions?

     If there are any other similar systems, perhaps a land based system which
allows mobile calls in areas not close marine areas, I would really appreciate
hearing about it. I have been told that there is a way to place mobile calls
with a Ham radio, but I have never been able to find out what is involved in
that system. If anyone has any experience with this sort of thing, please let
me know!

    Thanks in advance for any help!

    -Doug

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

(Please CC me a copy of any reply to the Telecom Digest as I receive the digest
irregularly. Thanks!)

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************

-------
 3-Mar-87 23:57:16-EST,12968;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Tue 3 Mar 87 23:57:14-EST
Date: 22 Feb 87 14:04-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #15
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Sunday, February 22, 1987 2:04PM
Volume 6, Issue 15

Today's Topics:

                  Comm program for Bell 408B modems
        Re: North American Numbering Plan (8-digit numbers??)
        Re: North American Numbering Plan (8-digit numbers??)
                Speed-calling 8 correction and history
                      Re: 718 & 914 & PC-Pursuit
 Re: First fiber-optic undersea cable laid across the English Channel
                             Mobile Calls

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 87 04:42:19 PST
From: seismo!scubed!crash![e-mail] (Kevin J. Belles)
Subject: Comm program for Bell 408B modems
Reply-To: seismo!crash.CTS.COM!kevinb (Kevin J. Belles)

  Having a pair of Codex 5208R modems sitting here rusting in my house,
I wondered if anyone has ever made a communications program, preferably
for a CP/M or compatible environment, that supports Bell 208B (dialup)
protocol? I know that there are zillions of insurance houses that use
these things, so I thought this might be a possibility. I apologize in
advance for any duplicates of this message due to cross-posting.

Kevin J. Belles - UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, akgua, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!kevinb
~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~ - ARPA: crash!kevinb@{nosc, ucsd}
        - INET: [e-mail]
        - BIX:  kevinb

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

Date:           Fri, 20 Feb 87 10:11:53 PST
From:           Rich Wales <[e-mail]>
Subject:        Re: North American Numbering Plan (8-digit numbers??)

Commenting on the following message by Marvin Sirbu:

    In general, a complete re-working of the NANP is scheduled
    for the 1995 time frame when telephone numbers will probably
    go from 7 digits to 8.

I don't understand why such a changeover (which, by the way, would be
*massively* disruptive -- far more so, I dare say, than the recent
French change to 8-digit phone numbers) would be necessary at all.

A *far* more reasonable change (and, indeed, one I thought I had heard
people on this list say was going to happen already) would be to intro-
duce area codes with *any* digit as the second digit (i.e., NXX codes,
as opposed to the current N0X/N1X set).

This, I assume, cannot be done until 1+ dialing is in use throughout
North America -- but I understood the plan was to phase in universal 1+
dialing anyway within the next few years.

-- Rich Wales // UCLA Computer Science Department // [phone]
    3531 Boelter Hall // Los Angeles, California 90024-1600 // USA
    [e-mail]   ...!(ucbvax,sdcrdcf,ihnp4)!ucla-cs!wales
"Sir, there is a multilegged creature crawling on your shoulder."

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 87 14:26:35 est
From: ms6b#@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu)
Subject: Re: North American Numbering Plan (8-digit numbers??)

Rich is correct insofar as if the only issue we have to be concerned about is
the growth in subscriber lines, than the switch from N0/1X to NXX would be
more than adequate to carry us into the next century.  Switching from N1/0X
to NXX would increase the total of  available numbers in the North American
Numbering Plan (NANP) by a factor of 4 or 5.

Whether this will in fact be enough to get us very far into the next century
depends a great deal on how the available numbers are allocated, particularly
in an environment of competitive carriers.  If we witness a proliferation of
competitive local carriers, or corporate private networks, and if each public
or private carrier must be assigned exchange codes to allocate within each
area code, then the rate at which exchange codes get "used up" (e.g.
committed) within an area code will depend more on the rate of proliferation
of carriers than on the  rate of growth of subscriber lines.  Granted that
each such assigned exchange code would be only sparsely used, but it will be
committed nonetheless.  The result could well be a need to do more than
switch to NXX for area codes in order to handle future growth.
Alternatively, we could assign "area codes" to each competitive carrier, and
let them assign exchange codes (perhaps with geographical significance like
early 800 numbers).   All it would take is for the Fortune 500 to each create
private networks and demand their own area codes, and the supply would be
quickly exhausted.

It is possible that the use of CCS and database services of the type which
support 800 numbers will allow the same area code or exchange codes to be
used by different carriers with a database look up to determine which carrier
in fact to route to.  Who would run such a database?  The information therein
would be much too sensitive to trust to a competitor such as a BOC or
AT&T.... (A similar problem occurred with the allocation of Ethernet numbers.
Originally Xerox proposed to allocate numbers in blocks of 10,000 to various
manufacturers.  You had to use up an allocation before you could ask for
more.  Needless to say, IBM did not take kindly to the idea of telling Xerox,
to the nearest 10,000, how many network connections it had sold! The IEEE 802
standard removes the allocation of numbers from Xerox.)

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 87 18:02:42 PST
Subject: Speed-calling 8 correction and history

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           02/20/87 18:02:41
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: Speed-calling 8 correction and history
 To: [e-mail]

 Sorry for the inaccuracy. Speed 8 is single-digits 2-9 here also. My emphasis
 point was rather on the no. of digits allowed and inability to combine with
 10xxx prefixes and international numbers.

 Since the topic came up again, I get to add the history. I originally bought
 speed-30. This allows 2-digit dialing with digits 20-29,30-39,40-49. I only
 used a few so I wanted to convert to speed-8 using 1 digit 2-9. This was years
 ago and just about nobody knew how to deal with custom-calling feature
 customers in the first place, let alone subtle changes. For the first several
 months, I got no change and each time I called they would flounder around and
 say they would fix it. (611 repair service was a universe away from
 understanding anything about new ESS features). I was quite possibly the first
 person in the world to want to convert from speed-30 to speed-8.

 Anyway, upon continued testing I discovered that someone had provided a
 perfectly logical transition path, but nobody knew it existed. Purely
 empirically I discovered that I could store NEW single-digit codes for
 5,6,7,8,9, while still using all 30 previous 2-digit codes in decades
 20-29,30-39,40-49. For a transition time I had speed-35! Moreover it allowed
 both 1- and 2-digit codes, most lovably convenient.

 But if I tried to change a code in the range 20-49, I could only store 1-digit
 codes for 2,3,4. Each wiped out the corresponding decade of older 2-digit
 numbers.

 Too bad this actual capability is not available as a steady state. If it still
 works, somebody could get speed-35 by this path, loading their unfavorite 30
 in the range 20-49, converting, then loading 5-9 with 5 more single-digit
 codes. You want to reprogram? Cancel and repeat the above sequence. Costs a
 little extra for the feature-change fees, but could be worth it.
 Thanks, Doug
      Speed-calling 8 correction and history

[correction. If you had used "2,3,4" from your 8 number speed calling
you would have probably found that it worked (at least it does here).
Speed calling 38 is a common practice here, and we use the # key to
indicate termination of code (differentiating between 2 and 20).
--jsol]

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 87 19:46:51 pst
From: well![e-mail] (Tom Mandel)
Subject: Re: 718 & 914 & PC-Pursuit
Reply-To: well![e-mail] (Tom Mandel)

In article <[e-mail]> EXT1.CHAIKLIN@CU2
0B.COLUMBIA.EDU (Seth Chaiklin) writes:
>Sorry to hear that 415 is going away from PC-Pursuit.
>


Area code 415 is *not* going away from PC-PURSUIT.  The notice posted
a while back mentioned that several exchanges in 415 would not longer
be accessible via PC-Pursuit, but a lot of others (including the one
to get to the WELL, i.e., this USENET port) are working just fine.

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

From: rutgers!cwruecmp![e-mail] (Sundar Iyengar)
Date: 21 Feb 87 18:18:38 GMT
Subject: Re: First fiber-optic undersea cable laid across the English Channel

Path: cwruecmp!sundar
From: [e-mail] (Sundar Iyengar)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: First fiber-optic undersea cable laid across the English Channel
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 21 Feb 87 18:18:38 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Sundar Iyengar)
Organization: CWRU Dept. of Computer Engineering, Cleveland, Ohio
Lines: 34

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]@covert.DEC.com (John R. Covert) writes:
>On 20 November 1986 the first international fiber-optic undersea cable
>between Broadstairs and Ostende was officially dedicated.  "UK-Belgium
>No. 5" was laid the beginning of May and connects the British island
>and the European mainland via the classic stretch of the English Channel.
>
>    ....  For protection against mechanical damage the cable
>was buried in the ocean floor with a gigantic "Cable Plow" for most of
>the stretch.
>    ....  for the fiber-optic undersea cable installation TAT-8,
>planned for 1988, which will connect Europe and North America with
>each other.

I hope this is a right group to ask these questions.  They are about
installing trans-atlantic and trans-pacific underwater cable systems.

When the cable is run across the atlantic, how is the volcanically
active mid-atlantic ridge system is bypassed?  With the continents
moving away from each other at about 2cm per year, a lot of slack
must be allowed on the cable to account for possible stretching.
Is this really a problem?  How about the deep ocean trenches in
the pacific that might suck the cable in?

Related question:  What is the average life time of underwater cable
system?

Thanks,

sundar r. iyengar

arpa:  sundar%case.csnet           531, crawford hall
csnet: sundar@case           case western reserve university
uucp:  decvax!cwruecmp!sundar       cleveland, oh 44106

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

Date: Sun 22 Feb 87 04:39:32-EST
From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mobile Calls


    Is there any way that one can place mobile calls over a wide area via the
phone company other than Marine Band ship-to-shore calls and of course Cellular
service?

    Since I mostly need to place calls, (rather than receive them)  I don't
particularly need a service like cellular,  and would like to avoid paying the
high start-up fees and monthly service
charges if possible. I have a Marine band radio on my boat, and it works fine,
but I am wondering of how well it would work in my car...? (Ie, how close to
the shoreline would I have to be, is the signal easily cancelled out by minor
obstructions such as small buildings along the road, etc?)  I plan to use it
mainly along I-95 and the Meritt Parkway in Connecticut, both of which are near
the ocean. Any ideas on how the standard 25-watt radios will operate under such
conditions?

     If there are any other similar systems, perhaps a land based system which
allows mobile calls in areas not close marine areas, I would really appreciate
hearing about it. I have been told that there is a way to place mobile calls
with a Ham radio, but I have never been able to find out what is involved in
that system. If anyone has any experience with this sort of thing, please let
me know!

    Thanks in advance for any help!

    -Doug

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

(Please CC me a copy of any reply to the Telecom Digest as I receive the digest
irregularly. Thanks!)

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************

-------
 4-Mar-87 01:23:50-EST,5598;000000000001
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Wed 4 Mar 87 01:23:49-EST
Date: 3 Mar 87 22:45-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #17
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                          Tuesday, March 3, 1987 10:45PM
Volume 6, Issue 17

Today's Topics:

                     speed-8, speed-30, speed-38
        Re: North American Numbering Plan - 18-digit numbers!!
                               FTS2000
                            Test phone #'s

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 87 15:26:37 PST
Subject: speed-8, speed-30, speed-38

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           03/02/87 15:26:35
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: speed-8, speed-30, speed-38
 To: [e-mail]
 Jsol: It wasn't clear to me whether you:

 (a) bought speed-30 but went ahead and programmed speed-38, by using
 2#,20-29,3#,30-39,4#,40-49,5# thru 9#

 (b) bought speed-8 but did the above;

 (c) transited from speed-30 to speed-8 accomplishing the above.
 Thanks, Doug
      speed-8, speed-30, speed-38

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

Date: Tue, 3 Mar 87 00:54 PST
From: Paul Gloger <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: North American Numbering Plan - 18-digit numbers!!

Maybe I missed something, but I think this whole discussion about the
sufficiency of 6-and-1/2 or 7 or even 8 decimal digits' worth of phone
numbers is way short of the mark.

Assuming continuing competition and deregulation in the telecom
industry, I personally will have at least a few dozen phone "lines" or
"numbers:"  one publicly listed number, one number for close friends to
call me, one for my closest friend, one number for other acquaintances,
one for RSVP's to my party invitation for my party on March 28, one
number for me to call in to my home phone-answering machine, one for me
to call my remotely-programmable oven to start dinner cooking, etc.,
etc.

This wil be similar to how large companies presently use internal mail
stops or mail codes or functional titles (e.g. "Free Brownie Recipe /
Room 1422 / ABC Corp. / 1234 Maple St. / St. Louis ..."), preprended to
Post Office addresses, to route snail-mail to a higher resolution than
is provided by the Post Office.  Formally, in the case of the phone
numbers, this consists simply of encoding additional info. into the
phone number, beyond the current practice of assigning one number to one
person at one location.

For phone numbers, it would be logical to allow the local phone company
and their subscribers to agree to append an indefinite number of
additional digits to the phone number, as many as the subscriber cared
to use.

Technology has been available for several years already which would make
this trivial to do at an insignificant cost per additional line - just
as today the actual cost of an adding an electronic mailbox to your
local host computer is insignificant.  Political regulation is the only
thing standing in the way.

/Paul Gloger

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

Date: Tue, 3 Mar 87 10:32:20 est
From: <philabs!westpt!gray![e-mail]>

Date: 3 Mar 87 15:28:34 GMT
To: westpt!philabs!seismo!mod-telecom
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom
Responding-System: gray.UUCP

Path: gray!boyter
From: [e-mail] (Cpt Brian Boyter)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: (none)
Summary: yes, there was a big fire in a switching center
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Mar 87 15:28:33 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: US Military Academy, West Point, NY
Lines: 13

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> Subject:  Fire in NPA 718
>
> Does anyone know anything about a fire that apparently occurred in the
> facilities serving NPA 718 (Brooklyn, NY)?

I have heard on the news that there was a big fire in a NY Bell switching
   center a week or so ago....
Something like 40,000 people without phones...
Hundreds of miles of cable as well as a new switch are being installed...
I heard that about a third of the affected phones have been restored,
   but many others won't be restored for weeks...

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

Date: Tue, 3 Mar 87 12:04:13 est
From: [e-mail] (Pat Sullivan)
Subject: FTS2000


Can someone "out there" supply me with a govt contact
for FTS2000?

Thanks,
Pat Sullivan
Reston, VA.

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

Date: Tue 3 Mar 87 21:39:32-EST
From: "Adam Peller" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Test phone #'s

Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

How can I make phones in the Boston area (Newton to be specific) ring??
There used to be a number... Once it was 220, then 98x-nnnn, when dialed,
you could hang-up and the phone would ring a few seconds later.  This
doesnt seem to work anymore - does anyone know this can be done today?

thanks,
Adam Peller -- [e-mail] (Arpa)

Please reply directly to me, as I am not on the mailing list.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 4-Mar-87 22:15:23-EST,5598;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Wed 4 Mar 87 22:15:10-EST
Date: 3 Mar 87 22:45-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #17
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                          Tuesday, March 3, 1987 10:45PM
Volume 6, Issue 17

Today's Topics:

                     speed-8, speed-30, speed-38
        Re: North American Numbering Plan - 18-digit numbers!!
                               FTS2000
                            Test phone #'s

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 87 15:26:37 PST
Subject: speed-8, speed-30, speed-38

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           03/02/87 15:26:35
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: speed-8, speed-30, speed-38
 To: [e-mail]
 Jsol: It wasn't clear to me whether you:

 (a) bought speed-30 but went ahead and programmed speed-38, by using
 2#,20-29,3#,30-39,4#,40-49,5# thru 9#

 (b) bought speed-8 but did the above;

 (c) transited from speed-30 to speed-8 accomplishing the above.
 Thanks, Doug
      speed-8, speed-30, speed-38

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

Date: Tue, 3 Mar 87 00:54 PST
From: Paul Gloger <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: North American Numbering Plan - 18-digit numbers!!

Maybe I missed something, but I think this whole discussion about the
sufficiency of 6-and-1/2 or 7 or even 8 decimal digits' worth of phone
numbers is way short of the mark.

Assuming continuing competition and deregulation in the telecom
industry, I personally will have at least a few dozen phone "lines" or
"numbers:"  one publicly listed number, one number for close friends to
call me, one for my closest friend, one number for other acquaintances,
one for RSVP's to my party invitation for my party on March 28, one
number for me to call in to my home phone-answering machine, one for me
to call my remotely-programmable oven to start dinner cooking, etc.,
etc.

This wil be similar to how large companies presently use internal mail
stops or mail codes or functional titles (e.g. "Free Brownie Recipe /
Room 1422 / ABC Corp. / 1234 Maple St. / St. Louis ..."), preprended to
Post Office addresses, to route snail-mail to a higher resolution than
is provided by the Post Office.  Formally, in the case of the phone
numbers, this consists simply of encoding additional info. into the
phone number, beyond the current practice of assigning one number to one
person at one location.

For phone numbers, it would be logical to allow the local phone company
and their subscribers to agree to append an indefinite number of
additional digits to the phone number, as many as the subscriber cared
to use.

Technology has been available for several years already which would make
this trivial to do at an insignificant cost per additional line - just
as today the actual cost of an adding an electronic mailbox to your
local host computer is insignificant.  Political regulation is the only
thing standing in the way.

/Paul Gloger

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

Date: Tue, 3 Mar 87 10:32:20 est
From: <philabs!westpt!gray![e-mail]>

Date: 3 Mar 87 15:28:34 GMT
To: westpt!philabs!seismo!mod-telecom
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom
Responding-System: gray.UUCP

Path: gray!boyter
From: [e-mail] (Cpt Brian Boyter)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: (none)
Summary: yes, there was a big fire in a switching center
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Mar 87 15:28:33 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: US Military Academy, West Point, NY
Lines: 13

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> Subject:  Fire in NPA 718
>
> Does anyone know anything about a fire that apparently occurred in the
> facilities serving NPA 718 (Brooklyn, NY)?

I have heard on the news that there was a big fire in a NY Bell switching
   center a week or so ago....
Something like 40,000 people without phones...
Hundreds of miles of cable as well as a new switch are being installed...
I heard that about a third of the affected phones have been restored,
   but many others won't be restored for weeks...

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

Date: Tue, 3 Mar 87 12:04:13 est
From: [e-mail] (Pat Sullivan)
Subject: FTS2000


Can someone "out there" supply me with a govt contact
for FTS2000?

Thanks,
Pat Sullivan
Reston, VA.

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

Date: Tue 3 Mar 87 21:39:32-EST
From: "Adam Peller" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Test phone #'s

Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

How can I make phones in the Boston area (Newton to be specific) ring??
There used to be a number... Once it was 220, then 98x-nnnn, when dialed,
you could hang-up and the phone would ring a few seconds later.  This
doesnt seem to work anymore - does anyone know this can be done today?

thanks,
Adam Peller -- [e-mail] (Arpa)

Please reply directly to me, as I am not on the mailing list.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 5-Mar-87 01:34:58-EST,7643;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at  4-Mar-87 21:13:29
Date: 4 Mar 87 21:13-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #18
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                         Wednesday, March 4, 1987 9:13PM
Volume 6, Issue 18

Today's Topics:

                      Submission for mod-telecom
                         Electronic Malaysia

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

From: Richard Fritzson <burdvax!bigburd.PRC.Unisys.COM![e-mail]>
Date: 4 Mar 87 04:48:47 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: bigburd!fritzson
From: [e-mail] (Richard Fritzson)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Fire in Brooklyn phone facilities
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Mar 87 04:48:46 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: na
Organization: Unisys - Paoli Research Center   Paoli, PA
Lines: 19

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Subject:  Fire in NPA 718
>
>Does anyone know anything about a fire that apparently occurred in the
>facilities serving NPA 718 (Brooklyn, NY)?  When I try to call 718-452-xxxx
>using AT&T, I get the following message:
>"Due to a fire in a New York Telephone facility, your call did not go through.
>Please try your call again later.  718-2T" (Repeated twice, then

Check out the latest issue of Mod.risks, the risks forum. It describes
a toxic fire in the switching facilities in Brooklyn. Because of the highly
toxic nature of the fire, no one was allowed back in for quite awhile.
A number of exchanges were down.


--
      -Rich Fritzson
       Unisys - Paoli Research Center
       {seismo,sdcrdcf,psuvax1}!burdvax!fritzson

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

Date: 4 Mar 1987 10:20:33-EST
From: [e-mail]@MIT-CCC
Subject: Electronic Malaysia
Date: 04 Mar 87 10:09:45 EST (Wed)
From: [e-mail]


------- Forwarded Message

Date:     Tue, 3 Mar 87 22:10:41 EST
From:     Dan Franklin <[e-mail]>
To:       [e-mail]
Subject:  Modern Times (from The Atlantic)

>From the February 1987 issue of the Atlantic comes a plaint by James
Fallows on the electronic age in Malaysia:

... In the old, colonial days the expatriate's lifeline from Malaya was
the Singapore packet ship, bringing tinned biscuits and the weekly
mail.  In the "old" pre-computer days it was the Telex machine,
expensive but quick.  On arrival in Malaysia I initially relied on the
Telex, scrawling dispatches in big block letters and taking my sheaf
of papers to a downtown office, where I could chat with the Telex
girls.  Now I have "advanced" to a more stylish and direct connection.

My new lifeline is MCI Mail, the computer network that in theory
provides a cheap and immediate link to anyone with a computer and a
modem, anywhere in the world.  In the U.S. using it was quick and
painless; here the gap between theory and reality threatens to swallow
me up.

Malaysia has a brand-new "public data network," called Maypac, which
in principle allows me to call a number in Kuala Lumpur to be
connected with MCI Mail.  But for obscure reasons MCI and Maypac
couldn't make connections during my first two months of trying.  My
fallback plan was to attach my modem, brought from America, to my home
phone and, on the days the phone was working, to call MCI's number in
the U.S.  But the connection, via satellite, was too fuzzy.  To make
matters worse, on my second try the modem blew up when my
240-to-110-volt transformer failed.  I tried another modem, bought in
Japan, which ran on batteries and did not explode.  This one clamped
onto the rounded telephone handsets that are standard in the U.S. and
Japan.  But residential phones in Malaysia are squared off, and the
modem won't fit.

I refused to be denied the convenience of a modern computerized link.
I learned that Singapore has a data network -- and no disagreements
with MCI.  From pay phones in Malaysia you can reach Singapore, and
the pay phones have rounded handsets onto which the modem, with some
shoving, will fit.  I signed up with the Singapore network.  My
preparations were complete.

This is how I now use advanced technology to keep in touch: I leave
home in the morning dragging a big blue canvas sack.  In the sack are
the clamp-on modem, a small Radio Shack computer, a modem-to-computer
cable, and eighteen to twenty pounds of Malaysian coins.  The coins
are each worth twenty sen, or about eight American cents, and they're
thick and heavy.  One of them is good for seven seconds of connection
to Singapore, so I need them in bulk.  When my supply gets low, I stop
at Bank Bumiputra Malaysia ("Bank of the Original Sons of the Soil of
Malaysia"), where i can walk in with a 100-ringgit ($40) bill and walk
out an hour later with my coins.

I go to one of Kuala Lumpur's busiest streets and set up shop under
the sign that says TELEFON ... The modem goes on top of the phone; the
coins get piled in big mounds wherever I can find a flat surface.  The
ones left over sag in my pants pockets, making me list.  I raise my
right knee and brace it against the bottom of the phone, rest the
computer on my now-horizontal right thigh, and connect the cable.  I'm
ready to begin.  I dial the number in Singapore, wait to hear the
computer tone, and slam the handset down into the modem before the
tone cuts off and my first twenty sen's worth of time expires.  Then
comes the hard part: shoveling twenty-sen pieces into the phone every
seven seconds, and digging spares out of my pockets when the mounds
dwindle down, while trying to type the commands necessary to make
contact.  "NQJFXPM03106004759" is only the first part of the elaborate
sign-on code.  Every four or five minutes the phone's coin box fills
up and I have to break contact, disassemble my equipement, and move to
the next phone in line.  I've chosen this location because I don't
know any other with so many phones in a row.

There is a bus stop right by my telephones, and a hangout favored by
off-duty police.  To the regulars I have become an institution, a
major spectacle, a dependably hilarious diversion to replace the rock
concerts that Malaysia recently outlawed.  As I fumble to keep the
money going into the slot, coins inevitably fall to the ground.
Little children with backpacks, waiting for the bus to school, dart
between my feet, filching twenty-sen pieces and skipping away in glee.
Women in beautiful saris, sober Muslims going to work in the nearby
Tabung Haji ("Fund for Pilgrimages to Mecca"), young toughs on their
loud motorbikes, all laugh openly at the sweaty, red-faced foreigner
doing his Modern Times routine at the phones.  The humiliation of the
West is complete.  Then the daily inch-a-minute downpour begins, nd I
try to hold an umbrella with my chin.

When I have finished, I carefully repack my equipement, sweep the
remaining coins into the bag, and walk off looking straight ahead,
with as much dignity as I can muster.  Tomorrow I will do it all
again.

On my way home I pass the Telex office.  Through the window I see my
friends the Telex girls, in their smart tan uniforms, smiling as they
sit at their machines.  I am too modern to need the likes of them.

    - James Fallows

------- End of Forwarded Message

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 7-Mar-87 13:31:04-EST,5043;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sat 7 Mar 87 13:31:04-EST
Date: 7 Mar 87 12:37-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #19
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                         Saturday, March 7, 1987 12:37PM
Volume 6, Issue 19

Today's Topics:

                                 NANP
                         Fax emulator boards
                        Dial-in Modems for VAX
                            administrivia

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

Date: Sun, 1 Mar 87 22:06:56 est
From: Bill Huttig <[e-mail]>
Subject: NANP

Where can I obtain a copy of the North America
Numbering Plan?

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

Date: Fri, 6 Mar 87 10:37:17 est
From: [e-mail] (Pat Sullivan)
Subject: Fax emulator boards


The 4 March issue of EDN, pp53-56, describes some new fax emulators
for PC's which apparently are compatible with CCITT group 3 and 4
algorithms, and which appear to be designed exclusively with
dial-up phone line connections in mind. Two questions come to mind:

1. Is anyone working on a packet interface for these fax boards,
or integrating them with existing packet interfaces, such as the
PC-X.25 products or what I think of as "PC-IP" (single-connection-TCP,
IP, TFTP running on a LAN)?

2. Are there obvious & compelling reasons why running fax thru
a packet or robust transport layer would NOT be a good idea?

(er, more than two questions)
3. What will implications be for ISDN-type services? Interfacing
to B-channel dial-up sounds like a straightforward design problem
with nonzero but small risk. However, it sounds like the whole
idea of packetizing fax through the D-channel needs to be looked
at carefully to determine under what performance and cost ranges
it would be a desirable service.

Thanks for all thoughts,
Pat Sullivan
DCEC
Reston, VA.

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

Date: 6 Mar 87 13:34 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Dial-in Modems for VAX

I need some help in a big way here.  All I want to do is set up some
modems so users can dial in to our MicroVax-II.  We're running Micro-VMS
and have a 16 port Emulex multiplexer board.  It took the phone company
5 tries before we had our phone lines working (but that's another
story).  The first problem seems to be the modems.  Has anyone ever used
Codex 2233's?  These are 2400 baud modems with about 59 million
different options.  Unfortunately, the options seem to have a habit of
changing value by themselves seemingly at random.

Specific problems include at various times randomly getting wedged such
that only cycling power will reset them; failing to answer the phone
even though set to autoanswer mode; going off-hook when no one is
calling; answering the phone and then rudely hanging up on the caller;
going into analog-loopback; and getting stuck at 300 baud (not resetting
to 2400 for the next caller).  On dialout, they lock up if they call a
host running at 1200 baud (they drop down from 2400 to 1200 OK, but then
refuse to send any data).  After several days of floundering, we decided
we didn't really want non-deterministic modems.  We then tried a BytCom
modem.  This had the unfortunate property of not releasing the line when
the caller hung up (yes the port is set to "hang").  Next we tried a
"Mikon" modem (don't ask me where they come from - I just install them).
This seems to work OK sometimes, although it also sometimes hangs up
immediately after answering.

Anyway, my questions are: what kind of modems do you use on your Vax for
dial-in's?  What lines does the Vax use to control them?  (We're using
DSR, CD, and DTR).  I've noticed that our Vax normally holds DTR (pin
20) high on idle modem ports, but occasionally cycles it low for about a
second, then brings it high again.  Why does it do that?  Could that
explain the hang-up problem (like if someone is unfortunate enough to
call in just when the Vax drops DTR, that would make the modem hang up)?
Any and all help would be most appreciated.

            - Michel
            [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat 7 Mar 87 12:34:08-EST
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: administrivia

Issues 13 and 16 were lost due to a bug in the distribution mechanism.
We are working on a fix for this bug but we may lose other issues.  I
will continue to post messages to TELECOM when this happens.  If you
are missing a digest, you should send mail to
[e-mail].

Please don't send to me asking for me to send you issues 13 and 16,
I don't have them. If you submitted something and it hasn't been
distributed you may assume that it was lost in the 13 and 16 fiasco.

--jsol

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
11-Mar-87 02:53:22-EST,10162;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Wed 11 Mar 87 02:53:20-EST
Date: 11 Mar 87 00:59-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #20
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Wednesday, March 11, 1987 12:59AM
Volume 6, Issue 20

Today's Topics:

                         modems over cellular
                      Re: Dial-in Modems for VAX
                               E-COM ?
                               Re: NANP
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                               Issue 13

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

Date: Sun, 8 Mar 87 10:44:59 EST
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: modems over cellular

There are two types that I know of.  There is something called
"a bridge and a span", which, from what I can tell is basically
a 1200 baud modem, one end on your mobil, the other in the switch at
the center of the cell system.  Then another regular 212 compatible
modem dials out from there.  This bridge and span stuff is supposed to
be 212 compatible, but it's not error free if you connect straight to
another 212 modem.  Sorry, this is all I know about this product.

I think MNP class 4 would work very well over cellular, provided that
the MNP has it's timeout level set sufficiently high so as to not
drop the line in long mutes, (greater than a few  seconds), which sometimes
occur in frindg areas.  Why I say class 4 is that in fring areas you can
get pops and clicks. True class 4 will try to ship data around this
noise and try to create an optimum packet size.

I have found that Microcom brand MNP modems time out much more quickly
than some of their competitors, and hang up the line when the noise
wasn't nearly as bad as it really was.  This brand probebly wouldn't
be good for this application.

-Mike

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

Date: Sun, 8 Mar 87 20:28:46 EST
From: [e-mail] (Crah)
Subject: Re: Dial-in Modems for VAX

In article <870306-103725-1768@Xerox>, [e-mail] writes:
> I need some help in a big way here.  All I want to do is set up some
> modems so users can dial in to our MicroVax-II.  We're running Micro-VMS
> and have a 16 port Emulex multiplexer board.  It took the phone company
> 5 tries before we had our phone lines working (but that's another
> story).  The first problem seems to be the modems.
   [many sob stories omitted - wsy]

I have a MicroVAX II with a DHV-11 multiplexor board.  Connected
to this via a 25-line straight-thru cable is a Scholar 2400/1200/300 baud
modem.  It works fine except when the power glitches badly; the
uVAX rides out the glitch just fine, but the modem sometimes decides
to not answer the phone- ever.  This has happened twice in three
months. Power cycling restores the modem to sanity.

The configuration on the modem line is /MODEM/HANGUP/AUTOBAUD.

The DTR down/up is due to the uVAX thinking it saw something
come from the modem (possibly a text message).  VMS responds to the
characters by printing the welcome banner and Username:.
If it doesn't get a valid user/password pair in thirty seconds,
it toggles DTR to tell the modem to drop the line.

You can get the modem/uVAX into an infinite loop this way,
(each one sending the other an error message, and getting an
error message back).  PBX data switches do it easily.
This crashed our local data switch- IBX S40's can't deal with
a DTR toggle every thirty seconds.  The cure was to set the
line NOMODEM on the data switch (NOT the dialup modem lines)

Hope this helps.

    -Bill Yerazunis
    "People at the door, Daniel.  Police, Daniel"

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

Date:     Mon, 9 Mar 87 10:20 CDT
From:     Mike Linnig <[e-mail]>
Subject:  E-COM ?

I saw a software package in the store today that advertised
access to the post offices E-COM electronic mail system.  It
stated that it cost 26 cents for a  single page letter (take that
MCI-MAIL).  Unfortunately, the software package was for a IBM's
(I own a MAC).

Does anyone know about E-COM?   HOw do you get access to it?  I'm
sure the software package was just a communications program.

    Mike Linnig, [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 9 Mar 87 15:15:36 EST
From: [e-mail] (Marvin Raab)
Subject: Re: NANP
Reply-To: seismo!vsedev!marv (Marvin Raab)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Huttig) writes:
>Where can I obtain a copy of the North America
>Numbering Plan?

     dumb question #1:   What IS the North American Numbering Plan?

                           -marvin

--
Marvin Raab                                      Arlington, VA 22202
   ...!seismo!vsedev!marv                        703-521-5449 (h)
   ...!verdix!vrdxhq!vsedev!marv
         (formerly [e-mail])

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

From: rochester!kodak![e-mail] (jeremy grodberg)
Date: 9 Mar 87 23:48:13 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: kodak!grodberg
From: [e-mail] (jeremy grodberg)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: error correcting modems
Summary: Error correction with notification is superfluous.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 9 Mar 87 23:48:12 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (jeremy grodberg)
Distribution: world
Organization: Eastman Kodak Co, Rochester, NY
Lines: 44

In article XXX [e-mail] (Geoff Steckel) writes:
>
>A number of vendors have introduced "error correcting" modems recently.
>I have heard of none that notify the user that correction has taken place.
>...  From experience and reading in networking, this is a disaster waiting to
>happen.


   From my experience with error correcting modems, notification of error
correction would be pointless.  First, at high speeds (4800 baud and up) over
normal phone lines, there is error correction taking place very frequently
(more often then every 1000 characters).  Thus the notification would be so
frequent as to be routinely ignored, and therefore pointless, totally leaving
out the fact that such notification would necessarily make the modem non-
transparent, which would greatly reduce it usefullness.
   Besides, notification that error correction has take place has nothing to do
with passing along incorrect data.  Incorrect data comes from so many errors
ocurring in the same block that the error correcting scheme gets fooled
into thinking some erroneous data was correct because "it checks."  True,
some good data may be trashed as well, but it is also possible that the
mistakes will fall so that no error correction takes place at all.
Certainly, the fact the error correction took place is not at all a good
indicator that bad data was passed, and in many error correction schemes, it
is not possible to know when an uncorrectable error has occurred (although
there are some that can catch a high percentage of such errors, none can guard
against all possible error sequences).

   It may be adviseable to use a low-power error correction scheme or error
detection scheme with ECC modems, but I'm not sure.  We have been routinely
transmitting around 750K of binaries a day at 4800 baud (with error correction
and data compression) via Motorola S-records, which provide very good error
detection.  We have been doing this 5 days a week for over two months, and have
NEVER detected an uncorrected tranmission error, even though we frequently have
error correction taking place in every block (512 characters).

   If an error correcting scheme can promise me no more than one uncorrected
error every six months of use, I'll be happy.  Nothing is perfect, and it is
dangerous to make things almost perfect, because it leads to humans putting
too much faith in such systems (It has to be right, the computer says so.).

          -Jeremy Grodberg

Usenet: ...rochester!kodak!grodberg
Arpa:     grodberg@kodak or kodak!grodberg@rochester

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

From: seismo!ihnp4!wheaton![e-mail] (John Doc Hayward)
Date: 8 Mar 87 19:27:15 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: wheaton!johnh
From: [e-mail] (John Doc Hayward)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: color code for wire?
Keywords: red green codes?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 8 Mar 87 19:27:14 GMT
Organization: Wheaton College, Wheaton IL
Lines: 11

I noticed that comming into our home that the plate with outside wires had
red and green connected to two posts and that the wire going to the phone had
the green connected to the red and the red connected to the green.  Does this
matter? (ie is the line polarized or does it just act like two wires with
A/C electricity.  Thanks in advance

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
UUCP: ihnp4!wheaton!johnh                    telephone: [phone] (office)
Mail: John Hayward Math/Computer Science Dept. Wheaton College Wheaton Il 60187
       Act justly, love mercy and walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8b

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

Date: Wed 11 Mar 87 00:55:21-EST
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Issue 13

We now have the contents of the original Issue 13. If you receive
TELECOM message-by-message (as opposed to a digest format) then you
already have these messages. Digest readers: You may FTP this file from
XX.LCS.MIT.EDU (10.0.0.44), username ANONYMOUS, password TELECOM. The
file path is XX:<TELECOM>ISSUE-13..1.

If you don't have any means of FTPing the file then I will mail it
to you. Send your request for this file to [e-mail].

--JSol

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
13-Mar-87 21:03:44-EST,9969;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Fri 13 Mar 87 21:03:42-EST
Date: 13 Mar 87 19:54-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #21
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                           Friday, March 13, 1987 7:54PM
Volume 6, Issue 21

Today's Topics:

                     Re: error correcting modems
                       Re: color code for wire?
                      Telenet connection to unix
                      Submission for mod.telecom

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

Date: Wed 11 Mar 87 05:21:35-EST
From: Philip A. Earnhardt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: error correcting modems

>   From my experience with error correcting modems, notification of error
> correction would be pointless.
> ...
>     If an error correcting scheme can promise me no more than one uncorrected
> error every six months of use, I'll be happy.  Nothing is perfect, and it is
> dangerous to make things almost perfect, because it leads to humans putting
> too much faith in such systems (It has to be right, the computer says so.).

MNP modems were discussed in TELECOM around 6 months ago. This family of
protocols packectze the data, using the CRC-16 polynomial for error detection.
DEC used the CRC-16 polynomial for its DDCMP protocol. If used with
appropriately small packets (I believe less than 4K bits), CRC-16 will
detect all but a miniscule (something around 1 in 10**14) number of the errors.

The main problems with MNP are:
  1) (At least at 2400bps) the latency caused by the packetization and
     timeouts makes the character echo time a significant fraction of a
     second. Interactive use is, at best, annoying.
  2) There is no protection for data corruption between the modems and the
     computers at the ends of the connection. To assure reliable data
     transfer, there must be a secondary data-integrity mechanism in place.
     Since MNP can't, by its design, do the whole job, why not use the
     secondary mechanism exclusively?

For detailed information about what I've summarized above, please
consult the TELECOM archives.

At my job, we have the error correcting turned off on all of our modems. I'll
occasionally turn it on when I want to monitor something from home for many
hours (and don't have a lot of typing to do!). It goes back off immediately
afterwards.

--phil

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

Date: 11 Mar 87 12:40 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: color code for wire?

    "is the line polarized or does it just act like two wires with A/C
electricity"

Yes, the phone line is polarized, and no it *usually* doesn't matter
which way your phone is hooked up.  I've heard some older model
touch-tone phones won't dial if they're connected backwards.
Ordinarily, the colors should match - red to red, green to green.  One
is at ground and the other is something like -48 vdc (I forget which is
which).

By the way, AC lines are polarized too.  The white wire is always ground
(technically "neutral") and the black wire is hot.  Black always runs to
the smaller slot of electrical outlets, (the coppper colored screw
terminal).  Never trust this of course - you'd be surprised how many
houses have wiring errors.  Unlike phones, the penalty for a mistake
here can be death.  You can buy cheap polarity testers for both phone
outlets and AC outlets from Sears or Radio Schlock.

            - Michel

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

Date: Wed, 11 Mar 87 15:58:16 est
From: [e-mail] (Bob Berger)
Subject: Telenet connection to unix

What are the issues and how do I go about getting connected to
the Telenet network with my unix system?

I have customers and distributors in Europe and Israel who want to
communicate via uucp and dialup. Some have asked if we could connect
to Telenet to do this.  Is it possible to uucp over telenet?  Who
do I call to find out more about subscribing?

                Bob Berger

Datacube Inc. Systems / Software Group    4 Dearborn Rd. Peabody, Ma 01960
VOICE:    617-535-6644;    FAX: [phone];  TWX: [phone]
UUCP:    ihnp4!datacube!berger
    {seismo,cbosgd,cuae2,mit-eddie}!mirror!datacube!berger

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

Date: Thu, 12 Mar 87 23:15:43 EST
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom

> I noticed that coming into our home that the plate with outside wires had
> red and green connected to two posts and that the wire going to the phone had
> the green connected to the red and the red connected to the green.  Does this
> matter? (ie is the line polarized or does it just act like two wires with
> A/C electricity.  Thanks in advance

    A telephone line has polarity, since direct current is used to
excite the telephone instrument.  Such excitation not only powers the
telephone transmitter (i.e., microphone), but operates any DTMF (i.e.,
Touch-tone) dial circuit, dial pulsing circuit (in newer solid-state
telephones), electronic tone ringer, solid-state network in newer telephones,
etc.  In addition, DC current flow through the telephone loop indicates to
the central office apparatus that the telephone requests service and is in use
(called loop signaling).
    While the telephone ringing signal sent from the central office
is 20 Hz AC, the AC is superimposed upon a DC signal, so there is still
always a DC potential present.  The purpose of such superimposition is to
assure immediate and reliable detection of called party answer ("ring trip").
    The nominal on-hook (i.e., telephone is idle) DC voltage across
a conventional telephone loop is -48 volts.  Notice that I use the word
"conventional", since a small but nevertheless significant percentage of
telephone lines run through subscriber line concentrators or loop extenders;
under these circumstances, the on-hook voltage can be as little as -6 volts
DC or as high as -96 volts DC, depending upon the type of concentrator or
loop extender apparatus.
    The vernacular used to describe telephone line polarity are the
terms "tip" and "ring".  The tip side of the line is in effect positive
ground, and the ring side of the line is in effect a negative battery
voltage (i.e., - 48 volts DC).  While I have called the tip side of the
line a "positive ground", it is not a true ground since the actual ground
connection occurs in the central office apparatus through the DC resistance
(typically 200 ohms) of an inductor or transformer winding.  As a result,
the on-hook measurement of the tip side of the line to an earth ground
(i.e., water pipe) at the subscriber location will show a small voltage
differential.  On-hook measurement of the ring side of the line to earth
ground at the subscriber location will show the nominal -48 volts.
    The following are some common equivalent designations for the tip
and ring polarity of a telephone subscriber line:

DESIGNATION                TIP    RING    NOTES
green wire of green/red pair        X
red wire of green/red pair            X
black wire of black/yellow pair        X        #1
yellow wire of black/yellow pair        X    #1
white wire of white/blue pair        X        #2
blue wire of white/blue pair            X    #2
white wire of white/orange pair        X        #3
orange wire of white/orange pair        X    #3
L1 terminal in telephone set        X
L2 terminal in telephone set            X
+T terminal in telephone set        X        #4
-T terminal in telephone set            X    #4

NOTE 1: When used as pair for second telephone line in 4-wire cable
NOTE 2: White is equivalent to white wire with blue stripes, and
    blue is equivalent to blue wire with white stripes when striped
    cable is used.
NOTE 3: White is equivalent to white wire with orange stripes, and
    orange is equivalent to orange wire with white stripes when striped
    cable is used; typically used for second telephone line in a
    multi-pair cable.
NOTE 4: Common designation for GTE/Automatic Electric telephones

    Most telephones manufactured today are polarity independent; i.e.,
the telephone will work even if tip and ring are reversed.  However, not
all telephones are polarity independent; two notable exceptions are:
telephones used for multi-party lines (which are fortunately disappearing!);
and older Touch-tone telephones (whose dial won't work if tip and ring are
reversed.
    Even though most telephones are polarity-independent, it is still
a good idea to maintain correct color/terminal polarity in any telephone
wiring.  Why?  Because it will simplify troubleshooting.  As an example,
say you experience a loud hum on your telephone line; a typical cause is
either tip or ring accidentally shorted to earth ground.  If you remove your
telephone instruments from their jacks, and isolate the inside wiring from
the outside line, using an ohmmeter you can determine which wire is shorted
to ground.  If you detect ground leakage on say, the tip side of the line,
you will know exactly which color of wire and which terminal is to be suspect
throughout the entirety of your inside wiring.
    Maintaining proper tip/ring polarity on all outside cables is very
important to the telephone company, since various kinds of test equipment
and procedures used from the central office can pinpoint the precise location
of a cable fault; an important assumption for many of these fault-locating
procedures is that the outside cables always have tip/ring correspondence.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
18-Mar-87 00:57:45-EST,6439;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Wed 18 Mar 87 00:57:43-EST
Date: 17 Mar 87 23:47-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #22
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                         Tuesday, March 17, 1987 11:47PM
Volume 6, Issue 22

Today's Topics:

                     Public Data Net connections
                   Re:  Telenet connection to unix
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #20
   Restoring Cellulsr Coverage on the Radio Shack PRO-2004 Scanner
                    Re: Submission for mod.telecom
                    Re: Submission for mod.telecom

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

Date: Fri 13 Mar 87 23:45:27-PST
From: David Roode <[e-mail]>
Subject: Public Data Net connections

The overhead on this is considerable.  Estimate
$800-$1200 monthly for a 4800 baud synchronous leased
line to the PDN switching node and $200-$900 per month
to rent an 8 port PAD for a host connection.  I understand
Tymnet has a dial-out option which permits access to
arbitrary dialup hosts, so perhaps this would be
your best bet.  Telenet has PC pursuit but carefully
limits access to selected US area codes, both
for incoming and outgoing dial-modem asynch. connections.

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

Date: Sat, 14 Mar 87 12:54:21 EST
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:  Telenet connection to unix

I suggest you call GTE Telenet.  You need a full duplex ascii connection
to your remote hosts.  You will be calling up the telenet network with
your computer, having it send some other characters down the line telling
telenet where you want to connect to, then you will log in as normal.

-Mike

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

Date: Mon, 16 Mar 87 17:46:56 est
From: ms6b#@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu)
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #20


E-COM was discontinued by the Post Office about 2 years ago.  It was losing
money hand over fist.

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

Date: Mon, 16 Mar 87 18:43:38 EST
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Restoring Cellulsr Coverage on the Radio Shack PRO-2004 Scanner

In the March 1987 (Vol 6, Number 3) issue of Monitoring Times on page 48,
there is a short article on how to modify your RadioShack Scanner to
pick up the cellular frequencies.  (This just had to have been leaked
from someone in Tandy sales!)

1. Remove the four cabinet screws and the cabinet

2. Turn the receiver upside down and locate circuit board PC-3

3. Remove seven screws holding board and plug CN-501

4. Carefully lift up the board and locate diode soldered in place below the
   module
   {In the large article, it mentions "a matrix of diodes attached to the
   microprocessor's input port, which is often used to configure radios
   for sale in different markets.  From recent flux on the circuit board,
   it appears that a diode had been added/removed", this is the diode in
   question.}

5. Snip one lead of the diode carefully, leaving it suspended by the other
   lead for later reattachment if desired, such as warranty repair

6. Reverse first four steps above for reassembly.  Radio will now cover
   825-845 and 870-890 MHz and search in 30 KHz increments for no-gap
   760-1300 MHz reception

(Thanks to Jim Marquand and other readers of Monitoring Times)

I do not own a PRO-2004, nor have I ever seen this tried, do it at your
own risk.

-Mike

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

Date: 16 Mar 1987 19:44:40-EST
From: rdsnyder@MIT-CCC

Subject: Re: color code for wire?

> DESIGNATION                TIP    RING    NOTES
> green wire of green/red pair        X
> red wire of green/red pair            X
> black wire of black/yellow pair    X        #1
> yellow wire of black/yellow pair        X    #1
>
> NOTE 1: When used as pair for second telephone line in 4-wire cable
>
> <>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York

The yellow/black pair above is reversed.
Yellow is TIP of the second pair in quad (4 cond. Gr/Rd/Yl/Bk cable) and
black is RING of the second pair.

The yellow/black pair is also used for getting 6-8VAC from a transformer in
the basement to the dial lamp on a Princess (700-type) telephone.

Yellow is sometimes used as a ground in 2-party service.  The ringing
voltage is applied from tip (green) to ground (yellow) to ring the tip-party's
phone and from ring (red) to ground to ring the ring-party's phone.

The yellow/black pair is also used in key systems as the A/A1 pair.  The
station equipment shorts A & A1 together while off-hook.


In multi-conductor cable,
White, red, black, yellow and violet are tip, and blue, orange, green,
brown, and slate are ring.  These colors are organized in a base 5
numbering system (not decimal, but easily converted).

-Ross

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Natkin)
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom
Date: 18 Mar 87 00:07:30 GMT
Reply-To: degas.Berkeley.EDU![e-mail] (Michael Natkin)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>    Maintaining proper tip/ring polarity on all outside cables is very
>important to the telephone company, since various kinds of test equipment
>and procedures used from the central office can pinpoint the precise location
>of a cable fault; an important assumption for many of these fault-locating
>procedures is that the outside cables always have tip/ring correspondence.
>
><>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York

I've always wanted to know how the locating of cable faults works -
i have some hypotheses, but maybe you would care to edify myself and
other readers on this subject?


michael natkin
[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue 17 Mar 87 23:46:24-EST
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom

I noticed when my lines were installed, they had a break in my subscriber loop
and they found it by using a buzzer on the line which they tested for using
a probe connected to their butt-in set. It was fun to watch.

--jsol

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
21-Mar-87 01:00:17-EST,6532;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sat 21 Mar 87 01:00:15-EST
Date: 21 Mar 87 00:14-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #23
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Saturday, March 21, 1987 12:14AM
Volume 6, Issue 23

Today's Topics:

         Directory assistance from Charge-a-Call-Plus phones
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #22
                     Hunters and telephone lines
                    Re: Submission for mod.telecom
                      Submission for mod.telecom

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

Date:     Wed, 18 Mar 87 9:07:21 EST
From:     Bernie Cosell <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Directory assistance from Charge-a-Call-Plus phones

I'd appreciate a bit of "how to do it" advice: the other day I was
caught a Logan airport with fouled up accomodation reservations at
my destination, so I whipped out my AmEx card and tried to use the
C-a-C-Plus phone.  Worked like a charm (one of the few times I've
felt that I got something out of the deregulation!).  BUT... I couldn't
figure out how to get directory assistance.  I tried a couple of things,
but each time it claimed that the number was "not reachable fromthis
phone".  Eventually, I went to a REAL pay phone, coughed up $.60
got my number and then called it from the CaC+.

*is* there some trick or technique or whatever for getting LD directory
assistance on your credit card?  (I don't have an AT+T Calling Card).

Thanks
  /Bernie\

Bernie Cosell                       Internet:  [e-mail]
Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc         USENET:    harvard!bbn.com!cosell
Cambridge, MA   02238               Telco:     [phone]

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

Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #22
From: [e-mail] (A. Ross Johnson)
Date: 18 Mar 87 09:35:04 PST (Wed)

Subject: Public Data Net Access

Tymnet offers a dedicated async. outdial modem service, which is the
cheapest option and is suitable for low volume operations.  Non-U.S. users
can connect to the outdial modem via the local PDN and Tymnet, and then
dial a hosts with a local call. (If the host is in a major city; otherwise
a LD call.) (U.S. users could also use it, but it is probably not cost
effective if that is the primary application.) Call your local Tymnet
sales office, but be prepared to have to tell them that they offer the
service! (They call it Asynchronous Outdial Service)

Ross Johnson
RAND Corporation

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

Date: Fri 20 Mar 87 00:59:54-EST
From: Seth Chaiklin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hunters and telephone lines

I am interested in installing a hunter on three telephone lines that are
attached to modems that are receiving calls.  The phone company tells me
that the lines are "auxiliary" lines and that one cannot put a hunter
on these lines.  They claim that a "trunk" line is needed if one wants
to use a hunter.

What is the difference between an auxiliary line and a trunk line?
Are the phone company claims accurate?
Could someone supply a short tutorial?

Thanks.

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

From: Gary Wells <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom
Date: 20 Mar 87 01:32:55 GMT
Reply-To: Gary Wells <reed!percival![e-mail]>


There are several methods used by the telco's for line testing.  The simplest
is that all cables have a known (very precisely) resistance and capacitance per
foot.  If a short is applied at the end of a cable (or a known resistance, etc),
then a calibrated ohmmeter can tell you how far away the short is.  If you are
looking at a clean open, you can apply the same principle with a capacitance
meter (though, in practice, it is not as accurate).  By knowing WHAT is hanging on the end of your cable, you can quickly tell the status of the pair AND the
station.  This is why the telco's fought so hard about registration.  They
really didn't care about the equipment, they just need to know what it "looks"
like, for trouble isolation purposes.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Mar 87 01:46:59 EST
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom

Subject: Re: color code for wire?

In a recent reply to my original article, rdsnyder@MIT-CCC writes:

> > DESIGNATION                TIP    RING    NOTES
> > green wire of green/red pair        X
> > red wire of green/red pair            X
> > black wire of black/yellow pair    X        #1
> > yellow wire of black/yellow pair        X    #1
> >
> > NOTE 1: When used as pair for second telephone line in 4-wire cable
>
> The yellow/black pair above is reversed.
> Yellow is TIP of the second pair in quad (4 cond. Gr/Rd/Yl/Bk cable) and
> black is RING of the second pair.

    Sorry, but you are incorrect.  Black is always TIP and yellow is
always RING.  This true not only for inside station wiring, but for outside
direct burial two-pair "B" Service Wire.  I refer to AT&T System Practices
Sections 461-610-100 and 460-300-143 as examples in case anyone doubts
my statement.
    You may be confused by looking at the end of a modular plug and
thinking that TIP is one side of center, and RING is the other; the pin
locations on modular connectors are transposed every other pair (up to
the full 4-pairs for an RJ-45).

> The yellow/black pair is also used in key systems as the A/A1 pair.  The
> station equipment shorts A & A1 together while off-hook.

    In this application, the A-lead is the actual control line, and
the A1-lead is ground.  The A-lead is always the "tip" conductor and the
A1-lead is always the "ring" conductor, when the two are in the same pair.

> White, red, black, yellow and violet are tip, and blue, orange, green,
> brown, and slate are ring.

    Except, of course, when white/red, white/black, and yellow/red
is used for distributing frame jumper pairs... :-)

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
22-Mar-87 20:11:48-EST,14058;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sun 22 Mar 87 20:11:45-EST
Date: 22 Mar 87 19:14-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #24
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                           Sunday, March 22, 1987 7:14PM
Volume 6, Issue 24

Today's Topics:

                             1 + areacode
                          Radio call letters
              Submission for mod.telecom (line hunting)
     Submission for mod.telecom (telephone cable fault location)

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

Date:     Sat, 21 Mar 87 1:33:56 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  1 + areacode

Every once in a while, you'll see something in a newspaper about "person(s)
dialing a certain number forgot to dial the area code (which could also be
800 or 900), and the call(s) went to so-and-so".  For example, a certain
number on 976 prefix was advertised on a New York cable TV station, and
it was received in Philadelphia area by some people who dialed the number
and forgot to dial the area code.

Question regarding the above:  Does 1+ dialing have an impact?
(Instructions in Phila. & Pa. suburbs: dial local no. for local call;
1+local no. for elsewhere in 215 area; 1+areacode+local no. for outside
215 area.  But in NJ, most places do NOT require 1+ for any within-areacode
calls, and [before N0X/N1X prefixes in 201 area] did not require 1+
for out-of-areacode calls.)

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

Date: 22 Mar 87   13:15 PST
From: KJBSF@SLACVM
Subject: Radio call letters

Date: 22 March 1987, 13:12:21 PST
From: Kevin J. Burnett          x3330                <KJBSF@SLACVM>
To:   <[e-mail]>
Subject: Radio call letters

I have noticed that along with the Kxxx and Wxxx call letters used for radio
stations in the US, there are ones used for other countries as well (such as
HCJB radio in Quito, Ecuador).  Where would I be able to find out how the
lettering plan works?

Thanks.

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

Date: Sat, 21 Mar 87 21:47:03 EST
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (line hunting)

In a recent article [e-mail] (Seth Chaiklin) writes:

> I am interested in installing a hunter on three telephone lines that are
> attached to modems that are receiving calls.  The phone company tells me
> that the lines are "auxiliary" lines and that one cannot put a hunter
> on these lines.  They claim that a "trunk" line is needed if one wants
> to use a hunter.
> What is the difference between an auxiliary line and a trunk line?

    In virtually all cases, the difference is in telephone company
tariff descriptions, and therefore in the recurring monthly cost for the
affected line; there is no "hardware" difference.  Trunks, auxiliary lines,
and POTS lines (Plain Old Telephone Service) all look the same to the
central office line equipment; the only exception is that trunks are often
configured as ground-start lines - but then again, ANY line can be optioned
as a ground-start line.
    With the exception of constraints imposed by older electromechanical
central offices (like SxS and X-Y), virtually any central office can be
configured to cause any directory number to "hunt" (if busy) to any other
directory number, in a continuing chain (often called ISG - Incoming Service
Group) without regard to the actual directory numbers involved.
    There is no special hardware in the central office which must be
added to cause lines to hunt; in electromechanical offices, jumper wires are
changed in some cross-connect fields.  In ESS offices, hunting configuration
is accomplished through software changes made using the console tty.

> Are the phone company claims accurate?

    It depends upon the tariffs for your local telephone company.
For New York Telephone, auxiliary lines and auxiliary trunks (yes, there
is a "paper" distinction) can be made to hunt in additional groups (i.e.,
in addition to the "main directory number" hunt group) for no additional
monthly charge; there is, however, a non-recurring "installation" charge
if this configuration is performed at some time after the lines in question
are actually installed.
    However, some telephone company tariffs require that the FIRST
line of any hunt group be considered a "trunk" or "main" line - at a
higher recurring monthly cost.  This may be your situation; if it is, you
will face a monthly increase in the charge for the first affected line,
plus a non-recurring charge for the new configuration.  No physical line
change nor premises visit will be involved.  (Read "rip-off", if you so
desire... :-) )
    I would suggest that you ask your telephone company salesperson
to put in writing the billing charges for the addition of hunting; this
request generally causes a telephone company salesperson to double-check
their information.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: Sat, 21 Mar 87 21:47:23 EST
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (telephone cable fault location)

In a recent article [e-mail] (Michael Natkin) writes:
> >    Maintaining proper tip/ring polarity on all outside cables is very
> > important to the telephone company, since various kinds of test equipment
> > and procedures used from the central office can pinpoint precise location
> > of a cable fault; an important assumption for many of these fault-locating
> > procedures is that the outside cables always have tip/ring correspondence.
>
> I've always wanted to know how the locating of cable faults works -
> i have some hypotheses, but maybe you would care to edify myself and
> other readers on this subject?

    There are a number of fault-locating methods used by operating
telephone companies (and others who maintain long runs of cable); these
methods have in common that measurements are taken from one or both ends
of the cable only - with the location of the fault between the two locations
being the result of the measurement.
    Fault location in telephone cable is not as simple as just making
resistance or capacitance measurements.  One of the reasons is that there
is often a foreign potential present across tip-to-ring, tip-to-ground, and
ring-to-ground.  Depending upon the type of fault (like a wet cable splice),
all three of these measurements may be different.  What this means is that
a simple ohmmeter circuit or simple two-terminal Wheatstone bridge is
useless since these resistance measurement techniques will be seriously in
error when made in the presence of a foreign potential.
    As a result, various other bridge measurements have been developed
over the years; many of these are three-terminal measurements which are also
made to ground in order to compensate for the presence of foreign potentials
on the suspect pair.  Examples of these techniques are the Varley Loop,
Murray Loop, Fisher Loop, Moody Loop and Hilborn loop.  Some of the above
procedures also require the use of pairs in the same cable which are known
to be good (like the Moody Loop).
    All of the above methods are used with DC bridge excitation and
measure the location of crosses (conductor-to-conductor) and grounds
(conductor-to-ground).  Some of the above methods are used with AC bridge
excitation (like the Murray Loop) and can therefore measure the location
of open pairs and the presence of "split" pairs (caused by an incorrect
splice).
    The selection of the actual test method is generally based upon
the preference and experience of the craftsperson making the test.
    A fault location test on a bad pair will generally begin as
follows:

1.    Isolate pair from apparatus at both ends, and "cord" pair to a
    test position in the central office.

2.    Measure voltage from: tip-to-ring, tip-to-ground, ring-to-ground,
    tip-to-battery and ring-to-battery.  Test battery voltage is
    usually a current-limited -48 volts, but other test voltages are
    also used.

3.    If there is little foreign potential (a good craftsperson knows
    the difference between actual potential and momentary potential
    caused by capacitive charging of the subject cable pair) in the
    above measurements, it is safe to assume that fault is either an open
    or a cross, and is isolated from ground.  Measure resistance from
    tip-to-ring using a simple Wheatstone bridge circuit.  If there is
    a cross (i.e., the pair is open, so anything less than normal leakage
    resistance is a cross), use the resistance measurement with a circuit
    layout card (shows path, cable gauges, loading, and distance from
    central office) and calculate location of short based upon knowing
    the actual resistance of the cable from the central office to any
    point.

    If the resistance is high (like normal leakage resistance, >> 100 K
    ohms), have craftsperson at other end of line short pair from
    tip-to-ring.  Measure resistance using Wheatstone bridge circuit.
    If resistance is the expected loop resistance, then pair looks
    good for tip-to-ring DC continuity, but may have leakage to ground.
    If resistance is still high, then pair is open.

    If pair is open, then measure capacitance using bridge in Murray
    Loop configuration with AC excitation (or use capacitive "kick"
    method of foreign potential measurement - if you want to be crude
    about it).  Using capacitance measurement and known capacitance
    of cable, determine the distance of the "good" section of the pair
    under test.  All outside telephone cable, regardless of wire gauge
    - either polyethylene or paper insulted - is intentionally designed
    to give a known capacitance per foot; the most common value is 0.083
    uF/loop-mile.

4.    If there was significant foreign potential or the presence of a
    ground as detected in (2) above, then the situation gets hairy; now
    is the time to use some of the other bridge techniques mentioned
    above.  The foreign potential currents (as opposed to voltages above)
    may be measured to get a handle on the cause of the foreign potential
    (usually a cross with another working pair).  These bridge techniques
    may also require a craftsperson at the other end to selectively
    ground, cross, or connect the suspect pair to other pairs that are
    known to be good.

5.    If a pair looks good from a DC standpoint, but still has transmission
    trouble, then capacitance measurements are taken from each wire in
    the pair to ground to see if it might be crossed with a wire from
    another pair, or have some other type of fault.  Also, resistance
    measurements may be again applied, but with a high range in the
    order of the cable leakage resistance, to see if something is amiss.

    The above five steps are the "traditional" methods used by telephone
companies, and are still used in the majority of test centers.

    Other (and at times better) techniques include:

1.    Capacitance measurement through electronic means that are reasonably
    immune to foreign potentials on the pair under test.  Direct-reading
    test sets have been available for a number of years that read fault
    distance directly in feet (you dial in the normal capacitance of the
    cable per unit length).  For example, I have a Hewlett-Packard
    4910-F open fault locator test set which has paid for itself many
    times over in locating cable faults; it will resolve down to _feet_.

2.    Using a time-domain reflectometer (TDR, also sometimes called "sweep"
    testing) will give a good picture of a cable pair condition under
    many conditions.  The TDR works by sending a short, high-energy
    pulse down a cable, and displaying the return echo on an oscilloscope
    display.  Use of a TDR requires dialing in the dielectric constant
    of the cable (not a problem, usually) so that the normal propagation
    velocity of the cable is known.  The display is calibrated directly
    in feet or meters, so that the precise location is the fault can be
    pinpointed.  Poor splices, leakage to ground, etc. show up well on
    a TDR, along with any bridge taps.  A TDR has some limitations, in
    that the measurement generally cannot pass through more than one
    loading coil.  Most TDR's are used for coaxial cable measurement,
    but TDR's for twisted pairs are available from Biddle, Northeast
    Electronics, W&G Instruments, etc.

3.    Sending an audio-frequency or VLF signal into a cable pair and
    following its progress using a hand-held receiver held in close
    proximity to the cable.  This is obviously not too handy for
    faults which could be miles away :-), but it is inexpensive and
    useful for one-person use in the field where distances are
    relatively short.

    In summation, the above will give you some idea as to what is involved
in cable-fault location; some of the procedures may form an outline for people
reading this article to actually use themselves under the right circumstances.
Overall, there is no magic procedure for cable-fault location, with the actual
method being a matter of personal experience, discretion, and nature of the
available fault-locating apparatus (not unlike writing a computer program :-).

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
24-Mar-87 23:21:06-EST,24257;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Tue 24 Mar 87 23:21:03-EST
Date: 24 Mar 87 19:31-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #25
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                          Tuesday, March 24, 1987 7:31PM
Volume 6, Issue 25

Today's Topics:

                          Radio Call Letters
                          Radio call letters
                           Re: 1 + areacode
                        Re: Radio call letters
                   Telecom-related items from Risks
                        Re: Radio call letters
                        Re: Radio call letters
                            buzz yer telco
                        Re: Radio call letters
[[e-mail] (Werner Uhrig): The "National E-Mail Registry" has opened a toll-free registration ...]

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

Date:     Sun, 22 Mar 87 20:29:06 PST
From:     [e-mail] (Martin Ewing)
Subject:  Radio Call Letters

Responding to Kevin Burnett:
>I have noticed that along with the Kxxx and Wxxx call letters used for radio
>stations in the US, there are ones used for other countries as well (such as
>HCJB radio in Quito, Ecuador).  Where would I be able to find out how the
>lettering plan works?

International call sign prefixes are defined by the International Tele-
communications Union (Palais Wilson, Geneva, Switzerland) and are published
in many places.  Look at various publications of the American Radio Relay
League (ARRL), e.g., their Amateur Radio Handbook, or in various Shortwave
Radio Directories.  Also, reference works such as "Reference Data for Radio
Engineers."

It's a pretty haphazard system, I'd say - worse even than telephone numbering.
The block HCA-HDZ is Ecuador, while HBA-HBZ and HEA-HEZ are Switzerland.
The US has all the W's, K's, N's, and half of the A's.  The third world
fights for scraps of address space.

Martin Ewing, AA6E
Caltech Radio Astronomy

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

Date: Mon, 23 Mar 87 00:11:40 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Radio call letters

I don't know where it is written down, but call letter prefixes
are allocated by some international agency.  The United States
has AA through AL, and all of K, N, and W.  Canada has C and V.
Mexico has X.  Every letter and every number prefix is allocated
except no stations begin with Q.

For broadcast stations, the FCC has ruled that stations East of the
Mississippi begin with W, West of the Mississippi begin with K.  (A
very few early stations such as KDKA break this rule.)
                                ...Keith

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

From: sundc!cos![e-mail] (Howard Berkowitz)
Subject: Re: 1 + areacode
Date: 23 Mar 87 14:54:15 GMT



The U.S. telecom network is rapidly running out of
area codes.  Discussion in ANSI telecommunications
network committees suggest that 1+ may be required
for all long distance calls, so that LD calls can
be recognized without restricting area codes to
N0N or N1N.  For example, in the brave new world,
I could be in area code 222, and be dialed
as 1-222-555-1212.

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

Date: Mon, 23 Mar 87 08:40:26 PST
From: hoptoad.UUCP![e-mail] (Tim Pozar)
Subject: Re: Radio call letters
Reply-To: hoptoad.UUCP![e-mail] (Tim Pozar)

In article <[e-mail]> KJBSF@SLACVM writes:
>Date: 22 March 1987, 13:12:21 PST
>From: Kevin J. Burnett          x3330                <KJBSF@SLACVM>
>To:   <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Radio call letters
>
>I have noticed that along with the Kxxx and Wxxx call letters used for radio
>stations in the US, there are ones used for other countries as well (such as
>HCJB radio in Quito, Ecuador).  Where would I be able to find out how the
>lettering plan works?
>
>Thanks.

   Funny you should mention it.   The 'W' and 'K' that starts all United States
radio and television station's call are seperated by the Mississippi river.
East of the river all calls begin with the letter 'W', to the west, 'K' begin
the calls.  Of course there are exceptions...
   The FCC is looking into deregulating this and any one can have a 'W' or
'K' to start their calls.  Also stations that have no connection with an
exisiting station that has a paticular call, can share it.   KGO-TV in San
Francisco can give their permission to let an AM or a FM station use the KGO
call.  You might see a KGO-FM in LA.  (Side Note:  KGO-FM is now KLOK-FM, and
KGO-AM is owned by ABC in SF.)

--
        Tim Pozar
UUCP    [e-mail]
Fido    125/406
USNail  KLOK-FM
    77 Maiden Lane
    San Francisco CA 94108
terrorist cryptography DES drugs cipher secret decode NSA CIA NRO IRS
coke crack pot LSD russian missile atom nuclear assassinate libyan RSA

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

Date:     Mon, 23 Mar 87 12:35:56 CST
From:     Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Telecom-related items from Risks

The following items appeared in the latest Risks Digest and have not
appeared in the Telecom Digest, so I thought I'd send them on for
completeness' sake:

They relate to topics previously discussed here, but some raise new
points I don't recall having been covered in Telecom discussion. I
stuck in some comments in [square brackets].

Will Martin

******
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 87 11:13:37 pst
From: sdcsvax!net1.UCSD.EDU![e-mail] (Dan Graifer) (tty08)
To: ucbvax!CSL.SRI.COM!RISKS
Subject: Re: Increased Telephone Switching Capabilities

A recent article ("Telephones: Learning Some Manners"; The Economist, March
14, 1987, pg. 82) discusses a pilot project at three exAT&T local operating
companies of a system called Local Area Signalling Service (LASS).  The new
technology is a "line history memory" at the originating line's switch which
records the number dialed.  This number can be queried by the receiving
line's switch. Some of the capabilities require a new instrument with display
but most do not.  The article quotes $5/month marginal cost.

The big gain is in reducing the current invasion of privacy.  Most people
wouldn't admit physical persons into their home before determining their
identity, but we don't know who we are going to talk to until we answer the
phone.  Other tricks include:

Got a busy signal? Punch a code for automatic reconnect.  When both caller
and called lines are free, the system calls the caller and asks if the call
should be completed.  Several calls may be pending.

Pick up the phone just in time to hear the other end disconnect?  Ask your
local switch to call him/her back.

The incoming identifier phones would be useful to mail order houses etc. to
verify the origination of a call, as well as the privacy application.  (The
article also points out that it will prevent calling your spouse from a bar
with a fib about working late.)

The local switch could also contain a "screen list" of numbers for special
treatment;  selective call forwarding, call waiting, or exclusion.  (The
original system gave a message "At the customers request, your call is not
being completed" to excluded callers. This annoyed a lot of people, so it
was changed to a "fake" ring-no-answer.)

*[I wonder just WHO was annoyed -- the people making the exclusions,
*whose actions were thereby discovered by the people whose calls were
*excluded? Or the callers themselves? If the latter, what difference
*would THEIR annoyance make? It's because of their offensiveness that the
*system was installed in the first place! However, if the former, it
*could make some sense: this way you could cut off your bothersome
*brother-in-law, say, without him knowing about it. You could cut off
*someone who calls another member of your household without either of
*them knowing who did it! Sounds ideal for the parents of teenagers...-- WM]

The article also points out that over half of all nuisance calls are placed
from home.  The new system will discourage that sort of thing.

I discussed this article with a friend, who made two interesting assertions:

1)  The information (calling #) is already available, and is encoded somehow
    just prior to the ring spike on the receiving line.

2)  He was told by manufacturers of telephone sets that a feature to display
    this information on the recipient telephone was against current FCC
    regulation.

*[THIS I have never heard of before and it wasn't mentioned in our previous
*discussion of this service as being under test (in Florida, I believe).
*Is it correct? How could it be so in this age of FCC deregulation and
*freely-available and -connectible telephones from many sources? - WM]

Such a system opens and closes many abuses of the phone system. The article
mentions nuisance calls and mail order verification.  I don't see any
obvious risks to the new features, but I can imagine weird combinations of
screens leading to unintended results.

Can anyone comment on my friend's assertions, or know which three operating
companies were involved in this project?
                                                   Dan Graifer

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

From: lll-crg!micropro![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Releasing the phone line
Date: 20 Mar 87 11:20:58 PST (Fri)

The issue of automatic callers releasing the phone line is actually
a people issue rather than a technology issue.  Most telephone companies
will release an incoming call when the recipient has hung up for about 15
seconds.  This does not depend on the caller hanging up.  When I was a kid,
we knew that we could move from one phone to another as long as we did so
in less than 15 seconds (and were the recipients of the call) rather than
the callers.

The problem comes when the call is unwanted.  The recipient generally hangs
up for as long as it normally takes to get a dial tone (1-2 seconds) and then
goes off-hook, to "check" and make sure that the call was dropped.  Naturally,
it was not.  The recipient goes on hook for another two or three seconds and
checks again.  Call still connected.  Panic sets in and a feedback loop
ensues.  The recipient is unable to drop the call, not because the line
is being held from outside, but because s/he does not know how to do so.

When I get an unwanted call, I hang up, and walk away.  I admit that the
parent trying to call an ambulance does not have this presence of mind,
but in truth, it would work.

This is not to imply that I approve of automatic telephone solicitors.
I consider them to be one of the few things worse than human solicitors.
                -edg

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 87 12:58:12 EST
From: Michael Wagner <[e-mail]>
X-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Automatic dialing devices in Canada

I was recently cleaning up my files in preparation to moving to Europe for
a year, and came across the following insert in a phone bill from some time
ago (a year or two, judging by the stratigraphy).  I thought it might be of
interest to RISKS readers.  My phone supplier is Bell Canada (I'm in Ontario).

        Are you offended by recorded telephone solicitation calls?

        To help regulate the number of unwanted phone calls coming into your
        home or business, ground rules have been established by the Canadian
        Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) governing
        automatic dialing and announcing devices (ADADS) _when used for
        telephone solicitation purposes_. [italics in the original..mw]

        ADADS are ... [explanation of what they are and what they do...mw]

        Now, before the pre-recorded message starts, you must be informed
        of the nature of the call, the identity of the caller, and that you
        may end the call by hanging up.

        Within 10 seconds of [your] hanging up, the ADAD must disconnect
        from the line.  ADAD calls may be made only between
        9:30-20:00 weekdays, 10:30-17:00 Saturday, 12:00-17:00 Sunday.

        [two more paragraphs explain how and to whom you complain about
        violations, and the fact that organizations using ADADs have been
        warned what violations will do to their phone privileges...mw]
******
End of inclusions from RISKS.

If you send in comments on any of these, it would be kind to CC the
originator of the original message as reflected in the included
header data above.

Regards, Will Martin

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

From: dartvax![e-mail] (David Marston)
Subject: Re: Radio call letters
Date: 24 Mar 87 00:06:10 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, KJBSF@SLACVM writes:
> To:   <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Radio call letters
>Kevin J. Burnett asks:
>   Where would I be able to find out how the
> lettering plan works?
The United States allocation also includes AAx-ALx and Nxxx. Full listings
can be found in _Broadcasting_Yearbook_ or _Reference_Data_for_Radio_
Engineers_, which should be in the reference section of a large library.
.................David Marston          decvax!dartvax!marston

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

Date: Tue, 24 Mar 87 06:05:51 EST
From: "John J. Chew III" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Radio call letters
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John J. Chew III)

In article <[e-mail]> KJBSF@SLACVM writes:
> I have noticed that along with the Kxxx and Wxxx call letters used for radio
> stations in the US, there are ones used for other countries as well (such as
> HCJB radio in Quito, Ecuador).  Where would I be able to find out how the
> lettering plan works?

According to the 1987 _World_Radio_TV_Handbook_, call signs are
registered with International Frequency Registration Board, which
is part of the International Telecommunication Union and is based
in Geneva, Switzerland (ITU, Place des Nations, 1211 Geneva 20,
Switzerland).  Browsing through the same book reveals the following
(empirical) information:

Country      Call Letter Format (@=letter, #=number)

Argentina    L[R-W][@]#[#]
Aruba        P4A#[#]
Australia    n@@ (n=[1..8] depending on state)
Bolivia      CP##[#]
Brazil       ZY[H-L]###
Canada       C[BFH-K]@[@]
Chile        C[A-D]##[#]
China (R)    BE@##
Colombia     HJ@@
Costa Rica   TI@@@
Cuba         CM@@
Dominican R. HI@@
Ecuador      HC@@#
El Salvador  YS@[@]
Guatemala    TG@@
Haiti        4V@[@][@]
Honduras     HR@[@[#][#]]
Japan        JO@@
Korea (R)    HL@@
Mexico       XE@[@][@]
Neth. Ant.   PJ@[#][#]
New Zealand  #[X-Z]@
Nicaragua    HT@nnn (nnn=frequency in kHz)
Panama       HO@[##]
Papua N.G.   P2[KT]#[#]
Paraguay     ZP#[#]
Peru         O[A-C][X-Z]#@
Philippines  D[W-Z]@@
Thailand     HSK@
Uruguay      C[V-X]#[#][#]
Venezuela    YV@@
--
--
john j. chew (v3.0)                       [e-mail]
[phone] (300/1200 bps)            [e-mail]
{cbosgd,decvax,mnetor,utai,utcsri,{allegra,linus}!utzoo}!utgpu!poslfit
"Script-G for open, sub-delta for durchschnitt"

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

Date: Tue, 24 Mar 87  8:10:05 EST
From: Barry Nelson <[e-mail]>
Subject: buzz yer telco


It may have been fun to watch the guys trace your loop fault,
but it's really a lot of hard work to do it correctly.  The
buzzer was most likely the signal source on either a pair or on
a single wire (and ground) and the probe was an inductive
amplifier which is used to magnetically couple to the suspected
'good' wires.  Where the signal stops, the line is broken, not
unlike signal tracing in RF troubleshooting work.

By sweeping the antenna of the amplifier near the cable
containing your wire(s) they can listen for the distinctive
'tweedle' of the buzzer picked up from the magnetic emanations
of the electrical signal.

What's really bad is trying to do this while someone else in the
same building is doing the same thing!

The butt set only helps to amplify the signal a bit.  Many units
come with the tiny speaker built right into the end of the probe.
This method is only a half-step up from a light bulb and a battery.

Many more sophisticated methods (obviously) exist, such as TDRM
(time-domain reflectrometry) which measures the impedence steps
using various standing waves and can detect opens, shorts, splits,
some types of bugs, connectors, etc. within a few feet.

The sky is the limit (pun) on telco diagnostic equipment these days.

"This document contains statements of opinion by the author
which are not attributable to BBN Communications Corporation or
its management."

Barry C. Nelson  / BBNCC Product Management/International Certifications

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

Date: Tuesday, 24 Mar 1987 07:32:21-PST
From: [e-mail]  (Dan Halbert HLO2-3/M08 DTN 225-6305)
Subject: Re: Radio call letters

The easiest place I know of to find a chart of international radio call
letter prefixes is in the front pages of a copy of the "Radio Amateur's
Callbook", which is a telephone-book-like book you can probably find at
your local public library. There are U.S. and foreign versions, but either
will do for this purpose.

The US has all of K, W, N (e.g. the numbers on the sides of airplanes), and
AA-AL. Commercial broadcast stations use only K and W now, but the other
prefix letters are in use for ham, military, and other call signs.

--Dan Halbert, KB1RT

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

Date: Tue 24 Mar 87 07:57:19-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: [[e-mail] (Werner Uhrig): The "National E-Mail Registry" has opened a toll-free registration ...]

I had tried to send this to mod.telecom from utastro - but doubt that the
message ever made it to you (the software "postnews" crashed with a cryptic
mix of messages, indicating both succes and failure of the attempt;  so I
decided to repeat the message from this machine)

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

Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from sally.utexas.edu by R20.UTEXAS.EDU with TCP; Mon 23 Mar 87 11:48:25-CST
Posted-Date: Mon, 23 Mar 87 11:46:43 CST
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
    id AA09175; Mon, 23 Mar 87 11:48:11 CST
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 87 11:46:43 CST
From: [e-mail] (Werner Uhrig)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: by astro.as.utexas.edu (5.45/4.22)
    id AA01138; Mon, 23 Mar 87 11:46:43 CST
To: [e-mail]
Subject: The "National E-Mail Registry" has opened a toll-free registration ...


UNIX REVIEW Vol.5 #3 of March 87 has the following blurb on page 6 in the
regular column "CURRENTS, a monthly compendium of Unix community news" :

<quote start>
The "National E-Mail Registry" has opened a toll-free registration service
aimed at establishing an online "white pages" of electronic mail users.
The service will list people wether their interest in e-mail is
professional or personal.  By dialing 800/622-0505 with a 300, 1200, or
2400 baud modem, a user can provide information online to be listed in
the registry.  Those who have registered then can dial 203/245-7720 to
search for other addresses in the National E-Mail White Pages.  All
services up to the first 50 searches are free.  Inquiries can be directed
to 800/245-7720
<end quote>

well, I called the 800-number, and the first problem was that it did not
work on 2400baud.  In the process of falling back to 1200, I lost the
initial login prompt and could not figure out how to login as a new-user.
So I called the voice-info number and chatted with a Mr. Steel, who wasn't
sure why the 2400baud didn't work.  I asked if he had anything in print
describing the service that he could send me:  I was promised a
press-release.  So I decided to dial in again at 1200 baud to see what
I could find out online.

I didn't like what I found!!!

                The log follows below:

==========================================================================

ATDT1-800-622-0505
CONNECT 1200


To Access The National E-Mail Registry, type : REGISTER followed by a return

Username: REGISTER

**************************************************************************
*                                                                        *
*  Welcome to the NATIONAL E-MAIL Registry.  Running V.M.S. Version 4.50 *
*                                                                        *
**************************************************************************

    Last interactive login on Monday, 23-MAR-1987 05:42
    Last non-interactive login on Monday, 23-MAR-1987 05:49
  23-MAR-1987 10:42:00
Your session has a time limit of (HH:MM) 00:12.
Can you display 80 chars/line (Y/N)? y

==> Welcome to...THE NATIONAL E-MAIL REGISTRY

Please enter your..
..FIRST Name: Werner
..MIDDLE Initial: R
..LAST Name: Uhrig
Werner R. Uhrig, correct (Y/N)? y

Please enter your HOME phone
 ###-###-####
?
Please enter your HOME phone
 ###-###-####
?no
....Invalid format for Telephone Number
Please enter your HOME phone
 ###-###-####
?unlisted
....Invalid format for Telephone Number
Please enter your HOME phone
 ###-###-####
?512-555-1212
512-555-1212, correct (Y/N)? y

Select a unique password: xyzabsd
XYZABSD, correct (Y/N)? y


==> Welcome to...THE NATIONAL E-MAIL REGISTRY!

You've reached the online equivalent of the phone company white pages! The
National E-Mail Registry beats the key obstacle to electronic messaging --
finding the favorite address of your E-Mail receiver.  We help connect users of
services like MCI-Mail or Telex to those of Compuserve, EasyLink, and even
local BBS systems.  Anyone with a modem can list his or her preferred online
address in our directory.

We're currently building our database of E-Mail users. Starting 6/1/87, all
registrants will be included in a continuously updated, searchable online
directory called The National E-Mail White Pages (203-245-7720).  You can use
the White Pages to quickly find other registrants.  It's just like 'directory
assistance,' but it's modem-to-modem.

YOU MUST FIRST REGISTER YOUR OWN PREFERRED E-MAIL ADDRESS TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE
WHITE PAGES.  Register now! We'll mail you a NO-COST account# and password that
entitle you to 50 FREE online searches in the White Pages starting June 1.

Registration takes about 5 minutes.  PRESS <RETURN> TO REGISTER, or Q to Quit:



** National E-Mail Registry Questionnaire


Please answer ALL questions ACCURATELY and COMPLETELY to get a FREE listing in
the National E-Mail Registry -- the "White Pages" of E-Mail users! Other
callers can find your favorite E-Mail "address," and you can find theirs.
Register NOW, and get 50 FREE searches.  We'll confirm the accuracy
on the info you enter below via phone or U.S. Mail.

** This is a TOLL-FREE call. PLEASE RESPOND CAREFULLY. Please DO NOT abbreviate!

Will you complete this questionaire accurately (Y/N): q
...Answer must be -Y- or -N-
Will you complete this questionaire accurately (Y/N): ?
...Answer must be -Y- or -N-
Will you complete this questionaire accurately (Y/N): f`~xx~f`f`~xx~f`
===========================================================================

I hung up at this point.   As you can tell, I refuse to give out my phone-#
and being asked  "Will you complete this questionaire accurately (Y/N):"
without having seen the questions does not go down well with me.
I'll leave it to you to speculate what the motives of these folks are and what
other questions they have waiting - I'm no longer interested.

Comments?

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
26-Mar-87 23:44:50-EST,10237;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Thu 26 Mar 87 23:44:48-EST
Date: 26 Mar 87 22:17-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #26
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Thursday, March 26, 1987 10:17PM
Volume 6, Issue 26

Today's Topics:

                      Submission for mod-telecom
                More telecom-related items from RISKS
        TO KEVIN J. BURNETT <KJBSF@SLACVM> - RE: Call signs...

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

From: rochester!kodak!ektools![e-mail]
Date: 25 Mar 87 14:25:02 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: ektools!john
From: [e-mail] (John H. Hall)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Radio call letters
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 25 Mar 87 14:25:01 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John H. Hall)
Distribution: world
Organization: Eastman Kodak, Dept. 47, Rochester NY
Lines: 15


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("Keith F. Lynch") writes:
>For broadcast stations, the FCC has ruled that stations East of the
>Mississippi begin with W, West of the Mississippi begin with K.  (A
>very few early stations such as KDKA break this rule.)

The rule must have been made since 1970, for that was about when Westinghouse
Broadcasting bought WRCV (?) radio and TV in Philadelphia and changed their
calls to KYW.  The K-prefix and 3-character call are both unusual in the
Philadelphia area.
--
John Hall, Supervisor: Software Tools Group, Software Engineering Laboratory
EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, 901 Elmgrove Rd., Rochester, NY 14650,  716 726-9345
UUCP:   {allegra, seismo}!rochester!kodak!ektools!john
ARPA:   kodak!ektools![e-mail]

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

Date:     Wed, 25 Mar 87 14:43:38 CST
From:     Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <[e-mail]>
Subject:  More telecom-related items from RISKS

Here are a few followups on those items from the RISKS Digest that I
previously submitted to Telecom. (These are from RISKS 4.67.)

Will Martin

(The RISKS moderator has some comments in [square brackets]. I stuck mine
in also in [square brackets] but with asterisks in col. 1 in addition. WM)

******
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 87 12:19:53 est
From: Jerome M Lang <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Who called?  (Re: RISKS DIGEST 4.66)

In the last digest mention was made about the possibility of learning the
phone number of the caller.  This raises the question of what is done when
the caller has an unlisted phone number (usually for very good reasons).

Jerome M. Lang          ||    [e-mail]        [e-mail]
Dept of Applied Math       ||              [e-mail]
U of Waterloo           ||       [e-mail]

   [Clearly one would have to suppress that information -- under certain
   circumstances -- although it is clearly needed for the 911 computers.
   This gets into the problem of secure databases and how difficult it can be
   to prevent inferences from being drawn if you are going to hide information
   selectively.  Lots of nice research has been done, but basically this is a
   very difficult problem once you take the blinders off.  PGN]

*[Myself, I disagree. I feel you lose your right to have your number
*secret as soon as you call someone else. Once you impose on that other
*party (and it doesn't matter if you are calling a residence or a
*business), they have the right to know your number. But note that this
*doesn't mean they know who YOU are, unless they have the facilities for
*looking up a name/address given a number.  - WM]

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

Date: Tue, 24 Mar 87 09:02:16 CST
From: munnari!augean.oz![e-mail] (Alex Dickinson)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Car Phone Intercept -- implications of captured data

On Sunday 22nd March an Australian activist group using a radio frequency
scanner intercepted and recorded an unencrypted car phone conversation
between a federal opposition shadow minister and a state opposition leader
(both members of the Australian Liberal Party). The conversation referred to
the Liberal Party federal leader in what has been euphemistically termed
`colourful language' and discussed his intended political demise.  The group
released the tape to a Melbourne newspaper that proceeded to publish a
number of juicy excerpts.

Today the federal shadow minister was fired from his party post, and the
chance of an election being called by the Prime Minister to take advantage
of opposition confusion was regarded as having doubled from 15 to 30%.

Federal police are considering whether to press charges under the
Telecommunications Act that broadly covers such interceptions. The fine?
$5000 maximum. Good value for altering the course of the country's politics,
although it's not clear that that was the intent.
                                 Alex Dickinson

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

Date: Tue, 24 Mar 87 16:41:19 EST
From: Michael Wagner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Increased Telephone Switching Capabilities
X-To: [e-mail]

I can offer two pieces of information, neither of which answer the questions
completely.

1) the 911 emergency number in Toronto displays the number from which a call
was made.  It does this for a wide variety of originating exchanges (but I
don't know if it does it for all exchanges).  I have been told, by people
who are more knowledgable about phones than I, that the number is sent on
the same circuit as the phone call.  They claim that almost no gymnastics
were required to make this work.

(The phone company also makes a database of phone numbers and addresses
available to the emergency service, so that numbers are quickly turned into
street addresses.  That clearly wouldn't be available to the average
business or home.  But that is a different matter.)

The implications are that (a) exchanges send the origination phone number
along with the call, and (b) exchanges can relatively trivially send the
information to the customer phone, and (c) the customer phone can decode
the information while the phone is still ringing, and (d) it's not illegal
in Canada for emergency use.

2) The University of Toronto recently switched over to a Centrex III system.
Certain (secretarial) phones can now display the number called and the
number calling.  The number calling works only if the call originated within
the centrex exchange.  It is not clear whether the restriction is technical
or legal.  The implication is that it's not illegal in Canada for calls
originating within an enterprise.

It is clear that, if such a telephone were to become a consumer item, it
would change the whole way we deal with telephones.  I could refuse to
answer calls from people I didn't want to speak to right now.  In fact, I
would probably program the micro in the telephone with a phone list of
people who were and weren't allowed to disturb me.  There would appear to be
many human engineering problems to solve there.  And many computer RISKS.

Michael

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

Date: Mon, 23 Mar 87 12:45:40 PST
From: [e-mail] (Bjorn Freeman-Benson)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telephone switches

>The issue of automatic callers releasing the phone line is actually
>a people issue rather than a technology issue.

As far as I know it depends on the "office" (telephone company term for
switching equipment) connected to your phone.  In the NW US
there are three types: mechanical, ?, and electronic.  A mechanical
office will hold the line open as long as the caller has his/her phone off the
hook regardless of the callee's actions.  An electronic office will close
the connection as soon as either party hangs up.

>Panic sets in and a feedback loop ensues.

However, I do agree that this can be a problem in any human system.

                        Bjorn N. Freeman-Benson
******
End of extract from RISKS
 [JSol: First of all, the 3 types of switching are Step-By-Step,
crossbar (both of these are mechanical) and Electronic (and digital).
All forms of switching posess a facility to terminate the call within
20 seconds of hang up. Almost all telephone companies will install
this upon request if not already there.]

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

Subject: TO KEVIN J. BURNETT <KJBSF@SLACVM> - RE: Call signs...
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 87 01:51:11 -0500
From: James Cayz <[e-mail]>


All,

    I was unable to get louie.udel.edu to recognize slacvm as a real host,
so please excuse this reply to the telcom bboard...  If you know a direct
path, could you send me one???
                            Thanx,
                            James

Kevin,

    I don't know if this is THE answer you are looking for, but I have
a rather large listing of all the country codes in existance.  How they are
assigned is a mystery to me - probably randomly, like many other ham radio
things (callsigns in the US are assigned randomly with K, N, and W)...
Since I am replying through the bboard, I don't want to send a 350+ line file,
so if you are interested in it, could you send me a gateway machine name, or
something I can use to relay this to you.. I'm at louie.udel.edu, on the ARPA
net...

    If you wish more info, you may want to contact
"[e-mail]".. I'm SURE they can give you the right answer...

                    Hope this helps, somewhat...
                    James

   +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
   | James Cayz can be found via:             E-MAIL: [e-mail]  |
   | PHONE: [phone]       USPS: Educational Technology Laboratory, |
   | 203 Willard Hall Building, University of Delaware, Newark DE 19716    |
   +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
29-Mar-87 00:11:52-EST,6281;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sun 29 Mar 87 00:11:50-EST
Date: 28 Mar 87 23:03-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #27
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Saturday, March 28, 1987 11:03PM
Volume 6, Issue 27

Today's Topics:

                  Cellular Phone Fraud Busts in NY.
                     cellular phone experiences?

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

Date: 27 Mar 1987 07:52-PST
Subject: Cellular Phone Fraud Busts in NY.
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <Geoff @ CSL.SRI.COM>


By LEONARD BUDER, New York Times:

    NEW YORK - In a federal attack on a crime made possible by the latest
technology, 18 New Yorkers were arrested Thursday on charges of using
illegally altered memory chips in their mobile telephones so they could
make calls without being charged for them.
    Also arrested were seven others who, the authorities said, illegally
reprogrammed the chips and placed them in the mobile telephones. Such
telephones can be installed in vehicles or carried by individuals.
    It was the first time anyone in the country had been arrested for this
kind of crime involving cellular telephones, said Thomas L. Sheer, the
assistant director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who is in
charge of the New York office.
    He said the problem of fraud in the cellular telephone industry had
grown significantly in the last six months and that Thursday's arrests
were the result of ''the first of a series of initiatives'' being
undertaken by the bureau and the Secret Service to counter fraud in
emerging technologies.
    ''Every new technology carries with it an opportunity to invent a new
crime,'' said Laurence A. Urgenson, the chief assistant U.S. attorney
for the Eastern District of New York.
    The first commercial cellular mobile telephone service began late in
1983. According to the Cellular Telecommunications Industry
Association, there were nearly 682,000 customers of such phone services
at the end of last year.
    Sheer said the government was making ''aggressive use'' of a federal
statute dealing with ''Fraud in Connection with Access Devices,'' that
was originally intended to combat credit card fraud but is now being
interpreted to cover frauds involving all computer-based or
computer-assisted systems.
    Thursday's arrests, which started at 6 a.m. and took place at homes
and places of employment, mostly in Brooklyn, was carried out by 70 FBI
and Secret Service agents.
    The 18 people who had the illegally altered chips installed ''awoke
this morning to find that their cellular telephones had been
disconnected'' electronically, Sheer said at a news conference held at
the bureau office at 26 Federal Plaza in lower Manhattan.
    ''They're going to get one phone call today,'' the FBI official added
- referring to the call a person is permitted to make after being
arrested - ''but it's not going through from a cellular telephone.''
    The officials said the arrests followed a six-month investigation that
involved the use of a confidential informer who installed the chip and
federal agents working under cover. The authorities acknowledged the
cooperation of the Nynex Mobile Communications Co. in the
investigation. Sheer said the investigation was assisted by ''recent
technological advances in computerized telephone-switching equipment
and billing systems.''
    Sheer said that the fraud, which was not the product of an organized
conspiracy, cost local mobile telephone companies about $40,000 a month
and that nationwide, carriers of cellular services were losing about $3
million a year because of frauds.
    The authorities gave no details about the alteration of the chips.
    Among the cellular telephone users who were arrested were a plumber, a
hair stylist, a gasoline station owner, a physician, a student and a
diamond merchant, as well as several business executives. Most lived or
worked in Brooklyn, but they did not know each other, the authorities
said.
    Andrew J. Maloney, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District, said in
a statement that the cases against those arrested would be presented to
a federal grand jury in Brooklyn. The most serious charge that could be
brought against each carries a maximum term of 10 years in prison and a
possible fine of $250,000.
    Sheer said the installers usually charged $500 to reprogram and
install two memory chips in a cellular phone. The chips, in their
unaltered state, are sold in computer equipment stores at a price of
two for 89 cents, an FBI agent said.
    According to the federal authorities, each cellular mobile telephone
has a memory chip containing a mobile identification number, or M.I.N.,
and another containing an electronic serial number, or E.S.N. When a
mobile telephone call is made, the two numbers are automatically
transmitted to the mobile carrier.
    The mobile carriers make a computer check of the E.S.N. to see if it
is valid. If it is, the call goes through and the cost is billed to the
billing number provided by the M.I.N. chip.
    By using illegally reprogrammed chips, the federal complaint said,
other people were billed for calls made by those participating in the
fraud.
    Those arrested were arraigned in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn and
released in their own recognizance.

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

Date:  Fri, 27 Mar 87 20:53 EST
From:  [e-mail] (Richard Kovalcik, Jr.)
Subject:  cellular phone experiences?

I am looking for information on cellular service in the Boston area:
pros and cons of the two competing services, which you use, etc.  Please
respond directly to me or the list if you think it is of general
interest.  Thanks.

[I'd like to get a feel for Cellular service in other areas. Perhaps
a volunteer in each service area can send me a message telling me of
their cellular telephone experience...? --jsol]

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************

-------
 2-Apr-87 22:42:56-EST,14585;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Thu 2 Apr 87 22:42:51-EST
Date: 2 Apr 87 17:00-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #28
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                          Thursday, April 2, 1987 5:00PM
Volume 6, Issue 28

Today's Topics:

              Re: More telecom-related items from RISKS
                  Getting through when line is busy
                FCC doesn't kill PC Pursuit after all
                         Yet more from RISKS
                              ROLM.query
             Re:  cellular phone experiences in Balt-Wash
         Q: reporting (or not) your hardware to the TELCO ?!]

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

From: Leonard Erickson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: More telecom-related items from RISKS
Date: 29 Mar 87 02:28:51 GMT
Reply-To: Leonard Erickson <[e-mail]>


There has been a lot of talk about the 'display calling number" feature
in the public Bulletin Board Syystems (BBS's) locally. Most of it was
a year or so back.

Most sysops would kill to get this feature. The number of would be
'hackers' and other low-life BBS nuisances would be vastly reduced.

I saw a msg from a sysop somewhere in the southeastern US who claimed
to be particpating in a test of the feature by his local phone co.
He seemed quite pleased with it.


--
Leonard Erickson        ...!tektronix!reed!percival!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]        ...!tektronix!reed!percival!!bucket!leonard
"I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'.
You know... I'd rather be a hacker."

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

Date: Mon 30 Mar 87 16:17:25-EST
From: Paul G. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Getting through when line is busy

I had heard a rumor that if you have trouble getting through to a number
that is busy because of lots of callers (as opposed to one long conversation)
for example a movie theatre on a Friday evening, then you can get through
by dialing all the numbers but the last one, waiting about 20-30 seconds,
then dialing the last number.

I've tried this a few times, and it seems to work!  Now am I just getting
lucky or is there any reason why this should work?
-------
[The best way I have found to get through on a radio station line is
to program their number into your speed calling and sit there with
one finger on the hookswitch and another almost pressing 9#. --jsol]

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

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 87 22:03:22 PST
From: hoptoad.UUCP![e-mail] (John Gilmore)
Subject: FCC doesn't kill PC Pursuit after all

I found this bit of news in the FidoNet Newsletter (which you can read
as mod.mag.fidonet on the Usenet, if you care).

     Bill Allbritten, 11/301

     I just spoke with a Mr.  Mayer of the FCC-(14:30,  26MAR87) about
     the  decision on re-regulating packet switching networks known as
     proposal computer III.  He said  that  today's  decision  was  to
     leave  things  alone,  that  is  to  leave  the  enhanced  packet
     switcher's deregulated.

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

Date:     Mon, 30 Mar 87 15:29:51 CST
From:     Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Yet more from RISKS

A few more telecom-related postings from RISKS 4.68:
Will Martin

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 87 15:08:58 PST
From: Andrew Klossner <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Increased Telephone Switching Capabilities

This topic was discussed at length in the TELECOM list.  Some items ...

    "I discussed this article with a friend, who [asserted that]
    the information (calling #) is already available, and is
    encoded somehow just prior to the ring spike on the receiving line."

There is no truth to this statement.  Under normal circumstances, when
the originating and receiving exchanges (CO's) are different, the
receiving exchange has no way of knowing the origination number.

    "I don't see any obvious risks to the new features."

On of my concerns is that, with these features, I can no longer keep my
unlisted phone number private.  If I call a local department store to
get their price on a pair of shoes, I may start getting unsolicited
shoe sales calls from all over.  Merchants would be motivated to
collect and sell lists of phone numbers of consumers with particular
interests, just as they now collect and sell mailing addresses.  (And I
can't make use of that "call screening" feature; what if my daughter is
in trouble and tries to call home from a phone booth?)

MORE:  Re: Michael Wagner (RISKS-4.67)

  "1) the 911 emergency number in Toronto displays the number
  from which a call was made...

An originating exchange sends the information only when it's using the
special 911 subsystem.  (At my exchange this goes out on a special
trunk directly to the 911 center, it doesn't travel between exchanges.)
The implications don't follow.

  "2) The University of Toronto recently switched over to a Centrex III
  system.  Certain (secretarial) phones can now display the number called and
  the number calling.  The number calling works only if the call originated
  within the centrex exchange.  It is not clear whether the restriction is
  technical or legal...

It's technical, that's the Centrex system talking to itself.

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

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

Date: Wed 25 Mar 87 11:19:30-EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: phone number of caller
To: [e-mail]

At first glance, it seems simple to be told where your caller is calling from.
All that one needs is a small display: after all, exchanges are computerized
now, aren't they ?

Well, yes, new ones are. Also, new exchanges tend to be bigger: several
exchange numbers are implemented by a single office, rather than being
one-for-one. And, of course, if all the action occurs within a single
exchange, then the features that are offered are just a Small Matter Of
Programming.

However, old phone exchanges are still with us. Projected reliability
used to be stated as outage-time per forty years !  Also, old designs
were being built until recently. For example, Bermuda bought a mechanical
stepping exchange (from Philips) in the early 1970's.

When authorities try to trace phone calls, the major stumbling block is
usually that the call has crossed one or more boundaries between exchanges.
Tracing then becomes a serial process, and it used to involve a human
at each physical location. A person wishing to (say) utter death threats
was quite difficult to catch, particularly if rural equipment was in the chain.

Of course, we will eventually resolve these problems. Mad bombers will
respond by using pay phones, unattended autodialers, and other tactics.

Don Lindsay

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

From: rochester!kodak![e-mail] (jeremy grodberg)
Date: 26 Mar 87 22:58:38 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Who called?  (Re: RISKS DIGEST 4.66 and 4.67)
Date: 26 Mar 87 22:58:37 GMT

    According to _High Technology_, a caller placing a call from an unlisted
phone can prevent the number from being displayed on the destination phone
by entering a code.  The phone company equipment still gets the number
though, so the person being called can call still call the person with the
unlisted phone number (using a feature which dials the number of the most
recent incoming call), although there is no (legitimate) way to actually
determine the unlisted number.
                                      Jeremy Grodberg

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 87 09:24:37 pst
From: dual![e-mail] (Paul Wilcox-Baker)
To: ucbvax!CSL.SRI.COM!RISKS
Subject: Hang-ups [Re: RISKS-4.67]

  > As far as I know it depends on the "office" (telephone company term for
  > switching equipment) connected to your phone...  An electronic office will
  > close the connection as soon as either party hangs up.

Actually, this is not true.  For most electronic exchanges in the U.S., the
connection is held until about 20 seconds after the called party hangs up, or
whenever the calling party hangs up.  This is supposed to let the answering
party hang up one phone, move to a different room and continue using another.
The timeout is reset every time the phone goes off-hook.  This causes the
apparent inability to get rid of the incoming call.  The best solution to
obnoxious electronic calling machines is legal - ban the damn things!

Paul Wilcox-Baker.
******
End of extract

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

Date: 2 Apr 1987 00:39:05-EST
From: rdsnyder@MIT-CCC

Subject: Inside wiring color codes

I apologize for posting the incorrect color codes for the black/yellow
pair of D Station Wire.  D Station Wire (quad) is used as follows:

Pair   Tip       Ring
----   -------   -------
 1     Green     Red
 2     Black     Yellow

This chart was "Table 3" on page 3 of Section 461-200-100 of the Bell
System Practices.  My apologies to Larry Lippman for falsely
contradicting him on this matter.  Thanks for setting me straight.
-Ross ([e-mail])

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

Date: Sun, 29 Mar 87 23:33:46 EST
From: David Kirschbaum <[e-mail]>
Subject: ROLM.query

Can someone out there make me a LITTLE smart on ROLM phone systems?
I have a local firm, just paid $80,000 to get a ROLM internal phone system
installed in their building (sorry, no details yet), and now none of the
Apple users can use their internal modems to dial out.
I haven't been there to check things out, but thought I'd do a little
preparation beforehand.
I know computer communications (micros, modems, etc.) but not telephone
(outside of scanning this net).
My source tells me the IBM PC systems still work with their modems, but that
doesn't seem to make much sense.
Any information would be of assistance.
Thanks in advance,
David Kirschbaum
Toad Hall
[e-mail]
(direct msgs to me might be better than inflicting on the net.)

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

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 87 21:04:49 EST
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:  cellular phone experiences in Balt-Wash

I use Cellular 1 in the Baltimore Washington area.  The service is
very reasonably priced at .60/.15 (peek/ofpeek) +100 offpeek minutes
per month for $10.00.  (standard rate plan is .46/.24 for $40.00 a month)
Custom Calling is no extra charge per month, except you pay 2X-airtime for
3-way-calls and call-waiting-calls, and you pay airtime rates to forward
your calls.

The quality of the service is pretty good.  There are certain areas where
I wish there were more cells.  Sound quality is pretty good as well.
every now and again I get a bad connection.  The avarage call dosn't
sound any worse than your average AT&T long distance call.  Since they
are sectorizing their cells in this area, (spliting their cells up into
pie slices), handoffs while using VOX mode has not been working very
well.

I give their customer service reps an A+ rating.  They are by far the
friendliest, helpful reps I've ever delt with.  If you want to speak
with a techi, they give you absolutly no hassle!

The system is a Motorola EMX-2500.  When a caller calls you, they hear
clicking until the system finds your mobil, then a ring.  I'm not sure
if I find this annoying or not.

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

Date: Wed 1 Apr 87 22:29:03-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: Q: reporting (or not) your hardware to the TELCO ?!]

I don't recall seeing this message make the digests.  was it rejected by the
moderator or did it not arrive?
                ---------------

Date: Sat 21 Mar 87 04:53:52-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: Q: reporting (or not) your hardware to the TELCO ?!
To: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: Message of Fri 20 Mar 87 01:32:55-CST
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

    Gary Wells <[e-mail]> writes
    in TELECOM Digest V6 #23 ...

> There are several methods used by the telco's for line testing. .....
> By knowing WHAT is hanging
> on the end of your cable, you can quickly tell the status of the pair AND the
> station.  This is why the telco's fought so hard about registration.  They
> really didn't care about the equipment, they just need to know what it
>  "looks" like, for trouble isolation purposes.

HMMMM,  it's been years now that I've taken the trouble to tell SWB about the
latest changes in equipment that I've connected at my end - mainly, because
it changes so often and because I'm under the impression that they don't really
care to know; or, at least, don't do anything with the information that I
give them about my latest set of hardware  (besides, it often changes on
a daily basis;  what with all these new modems, answering machines, phones and
other gadgets to test and play with :-)

Now, what I'd like to know is the following:

1)  Can someone tell me what the phone company *SHOULD* be doing with the data
    describing my hardware?

2)  Is there something that I should *INSIST* that SWB do in response to me
    reporting what I have connected?

3) Is there some way that I can test that they *ACTUALLY DID* what needed to
    be done at their end?

4)  Can not reporting my latest set of hardware lead to *DEGRADING* in line
    quality somehow?  for example, could this lead to degraded line quality
    for data communications using a modem (especially at 2400 baud)?  or to
    another phenomenon, such as "not all connected phones ring during an
    incoming call"?

I guess, what I really need is a pointer to a book which really all that I may
ever want to know about telephones and data-communications in a lingo I can
understand and make sense of (i.e. don't require the background and knowledge
of the lingo of a telecommunications engineer).  Please, *DO* give pointers !!

---Werner

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 3-Apr-87 23:01:44-EST,6269;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Fri 3 Apr 87 23:01:41-EST
Date: 28 Mar 87 23:03-EST
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #27
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Saturday, March 28, 1987 11:03PM
Volume 6, Issue 27

Today's Topics:

                  Cellular Phone Fraud Busts in NY.
                     cellular phone experiences?

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

Date: 27 Mar 1987 07:52-PST
Subject: Cellular Phone Fraud Busts in NY.
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <Geoff @ CSL.SRI.COM>


By LEONARD BUDER, New York Times:

    NEW YORK - In a federal attack on a crime made possible by the latest
technology, 18 New Yorkers were arrested Thursday on charges of using
illegally altered memory chips in their mobile telephones so they could
make calls without being charged for them.
    Also arrested were seven others who, the authorities said, illegally
reprogrammed the chips and placed them in the mobile telephones. Such
telephones can be installed in vehicles or carried by individuals.
    It was the first time anyone in the country had been arrested for this
kind of crime involving cellular telephones, said Thomas L. Sheer, the
assistant director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who is in
charge of the New York office.
    He said the problem of fraud in the cellular telephone industry had
grown significantly in the last six months and that Thursday's arrests
were the result of ''the first of a series of initiatives'' being
undertaken by the bureau and the Secret Service to counter fraud in
emerging technologies.
    ''Every new technology carries with it an opportunity to invent a new
crime,'' said Laurence A. Urgenson, the chief assistant U.S. attorney
for the Eastern District of New York.
    The first commercial cellular mobile telephone service began late in
1983. According to the Cellular Telecommunications Industry
Association, there were nearly 682,000 customers of such phone services
at the end of last year.
    Sheer said the government was making ''aggressive use'' of a federal
statute dealing with ''Fraud in Connection with Access Devices,'' that
was originally intended to combat credit card fraud but is now being
interpreted to cover frauds involving all computer-based or
computer-assisted systems.
    Thursday's arrests, which started at 6 a.m. and took place at homes
and places of employment, mostly in Brooklyn, was carried out by 70 FBI
and Secret Service agents.
    The 18 people who had the illegally altered chips installed ''awoke
this morning to find that their cellular telephones had been
disconnected'' electronically, Sheer said at a news conference held at
the bureau office at 26 Federal Plaza in lower Manhattan.
    ''They're going to get one phone call today,'' the FBI official added
- referring to the call a person is permitted to make after being
arrested - ''but it's not going through from a cellular telephone.''
    The officials said the arrests followed a six-month investigation that
involved the use of a confidential informer who installed the chip and
federal agents working under cover. The authorities acknowledged the
cooperation of the Nynex Mobile Communications Co. in the
investigation. Sheer said the investigation was assisted by ''recent
technological advances in computerized telephone-switching equipment
and billing systems.''
    Sheer said that the fraud, which was not the product of an organized
conspiracy, cost local mobile telephone companies about $40,000 a month
and that nationwide, carriers of cellular services were losing about $3
million a year because of frauds.
    The authorities gave no details about the alteration of the chips.
    Among the cellular telephone users who were arrested were a plumber, a
hair stylist, a gasoline station owner, a physician, a student and a
diamond merchant, as well as several business executives. Most lived or
worked in Brooklyn, but they did not know each other, the authorities
said.
    Andrew J. Maloney, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District, said in
a statement that the cases against those arrested would be presented to
a federal grand jury in Brooklyn. The most serious charge that could be
brought against each carries a maximum term of 10 years in prison and a
possible fine of $250,000.
    Sheer said the installers usually charged $500 to reprogram and
install two memory chips in a cellular phone. The chips, in their
unaltered state, are sold in computer equipment stores at a price of
two for 89 cents, an FBI agent said.
    According to the federal authorities, each cellular mobile telephone
has a memory chip containing a mobile identification number, or M.I.N.,
and another containing an electronic serial number, or E.S.N. When a
mobile telephone call is made, the two numbers are automatically
transmitted to the mobile carrier.
    The mobile carriers make a computer check of the E.S.N. to see if it
is valid. If it is, the call goes through and the cost is billed to the
billing number provided by the M.I.N. chip.
    By using illegally reprogrammed chips, the federal complaint said,
other people were billed for calls made by those participating in the
fraud.
    Those arrested were arraigned in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn and
released in their own recognizance.

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

Date:  Fri, 27 Mar 87 20:53 EST
From:  [e-mail] (Richard Kovalcik, Jr.)
Subject:  cellular phone experiences?

I am looking for information on cellular service in the Boston area:
pros and cons of the two competing services, which you use, etc.  Please
respond directly to me or the list if you think it is of general
interest.  Thanks.

[I'd like to get a feel for Cellular service in other areas. Perhaps
a volunteer in each service area can send me a message telling me of
their cellular telephone experience...? --jsol]

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 5-Apr-87 20:53:58-EDT,17158;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Sun 5 Apr 87 20:53:56-EDT
Date: 5 Apr 87 19:23-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #29
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                            Sunday, April 5, 1987 7:23PM
Volume 6, Issue 29

Today's Topics:

       Re: Q: reporting (or not) your hardware to the TELCO ?!]
                      Submission for mod.telecom
                Re: Getting through when line is busy
                Re: Getting through when line is busy
        Mass. and NY experiences with registration numbers AND
          NYNEX accused of transfusing phone revenue to arm
            Submission for mod.telecom (FCC Registration)
              Submission for mod.telecom (Line hunting)

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

From: acornrc![e-mail] (Bob Weissman)
Subject: Re: Q: reporting (or not) your hardware to the TELCO ?!]
Date: 3 Apr 87 01:51:29 GMT


About a year ago, I got to feeling guilty with all the equipment on my
one phone line (4 phones, answering machine, modem), and wondered whether
suddently things might stop ringing, so I dutifully wrote down all the RENs,
serial numbers, etc., and called up Pacific Bell.

The fellow who answered my call was rather surprised when I told him why I
was calling.  He chuckled and replied that Pac Bell's equipment doesn't care
about what you've got on your line, so their people don't care either.

I never got to rattle off my list of RENs.

--
Bob Weissman
Internet:    [e-mail]
UUCP:        ...!{ ames | decwrl | oliveb | apple }!acornrc!bob
Arpanet:    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 29 Mar 87 15:28:38 EST
From: columbia!phri!dasys1.Dasys.COM![e-mail] (Michael Schuster)
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom


Recently I had occasion to call Sony Customer Service in NJ on their WATS
line (800-222-SONY). Prior to ringing, I was greeted by the following
telephone-company-sounding recorded message:

"Thank you for calling. For faster service please press or dial '1' _now_".

Does anyone know what this means? How will pressing '1' at that point give
me faster service? I was unable to discern any difference with or without.

l\  /l'   _  Mike Schuster      {allegra,philabs,cmcl2}!phri!dasys1!schuster
l \/ lll/(_  Big Electric Cat  {bellcore,harpo,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!schuster
l    lll\(_  New York, NY USA                   {philabs}!tg!dasys1!schuster

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

Date: Fri, 3 Apr 87 08:08:54 EST
From: tj <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Getting through when line is busy
Reply-To: [e-mail] (tj)

I had a unique experience... I was calling Visa one day. They are
always busy. I was busy too so I didn't hang up the phone when I got
the busy. It was sitting on my shoulder for about 2 minutes while I
typed on my terminal... It started to ring... I waited. Visa answered.
Amazing. It works repeatedly with them but not other places.
tj

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

Date: Fri, 3 Apr 87 11:10:06 est
From: [e-mail] (Pat Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Getting through when line is busy


Pausing before dialing the last digit is an old trick,
and I would also like to get an informed explanation
of why it works. It must do something to the incoming
queues. In countries with less capable phone systems,
it's done all the time and doesn't work as well; I guess
if everything gets dequeued, getting your number becomes
a random process (which is done deliberately with many
popular radio talk shows and contests as a "fairness"
policy.

This has appeared on Telecom before. Does anyone have
the story on it?

Best,
-Pat Sullivan
 Defense Communications Engineering Center
 Reston, VA.

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

Date:  Fri, 3 Apr 87 12:43 EST
From:  "Richard Kovalcik, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Mass. and NY experiences with registration numbers AND

When I tried to tell New England Telephone the FCC Registration Numbers
and Ringer Equivalences of my phones when I moved into a house in
Waltham, Mass.  two years ago, they weren't interested at all.  They
didn't even bother to take the information down and say "that's nice".

My understanding is that if you have too many ringers on the line some
or all may not ring properly.  I have heard that 1 to 3 ringers are
indistinguishable from the central office.  It is also my understanding
that if you have too many phones off hook (talking / listening) at once,
the sound quality will be bad.

On the other hand, when my grandmother was given a phone as a gift in
New York City and made the mistake of calling to give them the
information, they started billing her an "extenstion phone wiring fee"
and touch tone service charges!  The phone wasn't touchtone, but the
pushy salesperson at the ATT Phone Center Store tried very hard to
convince the person buying the gift to get touchtone and even when they
didn't, wrote down the touchtone registration number on the box.  When I
called about this "extension phone fee" and told them that inside wiring
was deregulated, they said they would be very happy to stop charging the
fee if they came out to the house, installed an interface jack (or
whatever they are called) where the line came into the house, cut up all
the existing wiring that they had put it over the years, and charged $50
(probably more now).  I decided it was easier for my grandmother to pay
the dollar or so extension phone wiring fee.  At least, I did get the
touchtone charges removed.

Now, these silly interfact jacks are useful in some ways.  I have had a
couple of friends have their line go dead (open or short).  In both
cases, removing all the wires from the junction box in the basement /
whereever they entered the building proved to our satisfaction that the
problem was outside the house (i.e.  problem stayed the same when all
the interior wiring was out of the circuit).  Getting the phone company
to fix the problem without demanding that you stay home to let them in
is a major pain.  In one case the party succeeded.  In the other case my
friend had to stay home from work to let the phone company come in and
say "yep, you were right; the problem is outside".  Presumably if you
have an interface jack you have more of a chance to convince them that
the problem isn't with interior wiring.  On the other hand, if the phone
company had to pay you if the problem was outside your house and you had
to stay home, just as you have to pay them if they try to fix the
problem and it is inside your house, I bet they wouldn't be asking
people to stay home for nothing.

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

Date: Sat 4 Apr 87 06:21:00-CST
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: NYNEX accused of transfusing phone revenue to arm

 [without permission, from Computer+Software News, March 30, 1987; page 2]

         NYNEX accused of transfusing phone revenue to arm


WASHINGTON - The relationship between the Regional Bell Operating Cos. (RBOCs)
and their subsidiaries has once again burst into controversy.

This time, NYNEX is accused of diverting income from local phone revenues to
subsidize unregulated ventures, according to a new study.

NYNEX, the parent of NYNEX Business Information Systems, the 94-store pc chain,
has used "monopoly resources to enhance corporate profits and competitive
advantage," acording to the National Association of Regulatory Utility
Commissioners in a report issued last week.

"It is a difficult thing to check because we can't directly trace the pattern
of cross-subsidies," said Dick Marshall, an official with the New York PUSC.
"We think we can document that."

Critics have charged that NYNEX and the other six ex-Bell Operating Cos. have
diverted money and personnel to their subsidiaries.

Last year, the California PUC charged that PacTel was guilty of transferring
rate-payer funds to subsidiaries.

Marshall said his staff found evidence suggesting NYNEX has also violated the
divestiture rules governing its relations with NYNEX unregulated firms.
Spokesmen for both NYNEX and its subsidiaries denied the allegations. ......

......

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

Date: Sun, 5 Apr 87 15:10:24 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (FCC Registration)

In a recent article, Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]> write:
> > There are several methods used by the telco's for line testing. .....
> > By knowing WHAT is hanging on the end of your cable,
> > you can quickly tell the status of the pair AND the station.
> > This is why the telco's fought so hard about registration.  They
> > really didn't care about the equipment, they just need to know what it
> >  "looks" like, for trouble isolation purposes.

    The only reason that operating telephone companies sought apparatus
registration was to assure themselves that no "harm" to the switched network
would result from improperly designed apparatus.
    For example: apparatus which places signals of excessive amplitude
on a telephone line can cause crosstalk on other working lines; apparatus
which provides leakage current paths to ground can not only cause crosstalk
(by creating a longitudinal unbalance on the cable pair), but can also
upset automatic line insulation test apparatus into thinking that a cable
fault exists; etc.
    The FCC Part 68 registration specifications were created to set a
uniform standard of what was acceptable as telephone apparatus without
creating trouble conditions for the operating telephone company.
    While a "ringer equivalence" specification may give a telephone
company test bureau some idea as to the impedance terminating the subscriber
by the connected devices, for all intents and purpose, the telephone company
will never trust this information.  If a cable problem presents itself, the
telephone company will generally send a craftsperson into the field to open
the pair at the subscriber location (or outside on a pole) before any test
measurements are taken.  The telephone company would be naive to believe what
a customer reports as being their connected apparatus.

> HMMMM,  it's been years now that I've taken the trouble to tell SWB about the
> latest changes in equipment that I've connected at my end - mainly, because
> it changes often and because I'm under the impression that they don't really
> care to know; or, at least, don't do anything with the information that I
> give them about my latest set of hardware  (besides, it often changes on
> a daily basis;  what with all these new modems, answering machines, phones and
> other gadgets to test and play with :-)
>
> Now, what I'd like to know is the following:
>
> 1)  Can someone tell me what the phone company *SHOULD* be doing with the data
>     describing my hardware?

    Nothing, really, other than making note of the FCC registration number
on their "service billing record".  Quite frankly, I have never known of an
operating telephone company that even checked to see if the FCC registration
number was a valid number for any piece of telephone apparatus.

> 2)  Is there something that I should *INSIST* that SWB do in response to me
>     reporting what I have connected?

    Nope.  Assuming that you have given a "valid" FCC registration number,
there is nothing that your operating telephone company can or will do, based
upon the nature of the apparatus that you have connected to the telephone line.
    Your central office telephone loop will be designed according to
some already-established plan created by a facilities engineer.  There may be
more than one plan in effect for a given central office, with the actual plan
being selected by the available serving cable facilities between the central
office and your location.  For example, your line may run through a negative-
impedance repeater to meet an office transmission goal; or, your line may
run through a subscriber line concentrator if cable facilities are scarce; etc.
    As a further example, New York Telephone generally tries to limit
subscriber loop loss to no more than 5.5 dB.  Whatever combination of cable
and/or repeater facilities are available will be used to achieve this goal.
    Subscriber lines for dial-up data use or PBX trunks are usually
available with a lower loop loss - but at an ADDITIONAL COST.  You get what
you pay for - which means that for the price of a regular subscriber line you
get no choice of anything and no special treatment.

> 3) Is there some way that I can test that they *ACTUALLY DID* what needed to
>     be done at their end?

    Nope.  Since they don't do anything, you can't very well test for
it. :-)

> 4)  Can not reporting my latest set of hardware lead to *DEGRADING* in line
>     quality somehow?  for example, could this lead to degraded line quality
>     for data communications using a modem (especially at 2400 baud)?  or to
>     another phenomenon, such as "not all connected phones ring during an
>     incoming call"?

    You might degrade your telephone line by, say, connecting too many
telephone sets with equipped ringers, but that is YOUR problem - not the
telephone company's.  The telephone company is not going to do anything -
regardless of what you tell them.

> I guess, what I really need is a pointer to a book which really all that I may
> ever want to know about telephones and data-communications in a lingo I can
> understand and make sense of (i.e. don't require the background and knowledge
> of the lingo of a telecommunications engineer).  Please, *DO* give pointers !!

    Unfortunately, I don't know of a good book that would fulfill your
request.  Books that I have seen are either: (1) insultingly simple, as
written for Joe and Mary Consumer, or (2) deal in theory, and therefore fail
to give immediate, practicable answers.
    However, rather than leave you empty-handed, a good middle-of-the-road
book is "Telecommunications and the Computer", by James Martin, published by
Prentice-Hall, ISBN 0-13-902494-8.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: Sun, 5 Apr 87 15:12:01 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (Line hunting)

In a recent article [e-mail] (Paul G. Weiss) writes:
> I had heard a rumor that if you have trouble getting through to a number
> that is busy because of lots of callers (as opposed to one long conversation)
> for example a movie theatre on a Friday evening, then you can get through
> by dialing all the numbers but the last one, waiting about 20-30 seconds,
> then dialing the last number.
>
> I've tried this a few times, and it seems to work!  Now am I just getting
> lucky or is there any reason why this should work?

    You were just lucky.  In many central offices, hunting will only
occur if you dial the FIRST (i.e., listed) number of an incoming service
group.  Dialing any other number will get you just that line - and no other
if it is busy.
    Now, there is a grain of truth to getting through to certain places
by dialing a "last" number.  Many places that deal with the public reserve
one or more numbers for "selected" people to call; these reserved numbers
are never part of the incoming service group.  These reserved numbers are,
of course, unlisted numbers.  However, the "last" number in what may appear
to be a consecutively-numbered incoming service group may really be a separate
line which is not part of that group.  For example, say you have a business
with five lines: 234-5600, 234-5601, 234-5602, 234-5603 and 234-5604.  Only
the first four lines form the incoming service group (5600 to 5603); 5604 is
a private line for selected people who have to get through.  So, dialing the
5604 number gets you through...  Of course, there is no guarantee that the
private line is the last number, but more often than not - it is.

> [The best way I have found to get through on a radio station line is
> to program their number into your speed calling and sit there with
> one finger on the hookswitch and another almost pressing 9#. --jsol]

    You got it!

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 9-Apr-87 20:25:54-EDT,18071;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP; Thu 9 Apr 87 20:25:51-EDT
Date: 9 Apr 87 18:33-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #30
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                          Thursday, April 9, 1987 6:33PM
Volume 6, Issue 30

Today's Topics:

          Re: Submission for mod.telecom (FCC Registration)
                       Defeating CLASS locally
          Re: Submission for mod.telecom (FCC Registration)
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                       Radio call-in exchanges
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                     modem multi-modal handshake
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                             consumer ANI
                    U.S. ROBOTICS 2400 BAUD MODEMS

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

From: Scott Dorsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom (FCC Registration)
Date: 6 Apr 87 05:35:33 GMT
Reply-To: Scott Dorsey <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>    Nothing, really, other than making note of the FCC registration number
>on their "service billing record".  Quite frankly, I have never known of an
>operating telephone company that even checked to see if the FCC registration
>number was a valid number for any piece of telephone apparatus.

   Is there any problem using telephone equipment which is not FCC licensed?
I have some surplus Army field telephones (modified for common battery use),
and some homebrew phones which are around the house.  I certainly hope that
I can still operate it, although I could understand being prevented from
selling such stuff.
--
Scott Dorsey   Kaptain_Kludge
ICS Programming Lab (Where old terminals go to die),  Rich 110,
    Georgia Institute of Technology, Box 36681, Atlanta, Georgia 30332
    ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!kludge

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

Date: Sat 4 Apr 87 02:20:47-EST
From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Defeating CLASS locally



     Those people who don't want their number displayed on a local call (if
this service ever becomes available) can simply use MCI, Sprint, or any
alternate LD carrier, and place the local call. Of course this might cost more,
but its still an easy way to get around it.

     You could probably use your Bell System Calling Card as well, since I
think when you make an 0+ call, the call is handled in a different manner than
direct dial call, and its questionable whether the Bell Operating Companies
will institute procedures to display the calling number and other "CLASS"
features...Of course I never used this
CLASS stuff, and with any luck I'll never have to run into an exchange with
this nonsense...My old crossbar suits me just fine...(Although *one* ESS line
wouldn't hurt...!)


    Well, if anyone knows about this for sure, please let me know...!

    -Doug

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
....(rutgers!) seismo!weslyn.bitnet!reuben (UUCP)

P.S. Please e-mail me a CC of any posts about this, since I am not "directly"
on the Digest..Thanks!!

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

From: sundc!cos![e-mail] (Howard Berkowitz)
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom (FCC Registration)
Date: 6 Apr 87 13:55:58 GMT



One minor point (minor until it gets you):  dial modems,
especially the higher speed ones, may not work properly
because the network interface device has resistors set
for voice use, not data.  It is worth letting your telco
know you are running higher speed data, because your
network interface should then be configured to give you
better signal to noise ratios, not important for voice.

If they're going to charge more for data access, do this
only after you have unacceptable problems.  Your problems,
however, often are in the jack, not the local loop.

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

From: seismo!ihnp4!ihuxz![e-mail]
Date: 6 Apr 87 13:46:26 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: ihuxz!pmw
From: [e-mail] (Westenkirchner)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: DIAL 1 NOW
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 6 Apr 87 13:46:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, Illinois
Lines: 19


On the "dial 1 now" announcement:

They are trying to find out if you have a touch tone phone.  If you
hit a touch tone, another announcement will be played to ask what
kind of service you need.  You select the service by hitting the
appropriate touch tone number.  If you don't hit a touch tone on
the original "dial 1" announcement, you probably will be connected to a
human who will have to ask what kind of service you want (repair, info,...).

If you have an 800 number you dial all the time, you can get much
faster service by not listening to the announcements.  If you
know what numbers to touch in, just dial them in as soon as the
first announcement begins.

Paul Westenkirchner
ihnp4!ihuxz!pmw

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

From: dolqci![e-mail]


Date: 6 Apr 87 17:42:07 GMT
To: seismo![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom
Responding-System: dolqci.UUCP

Path: dolqci!bruce
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Limber)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: RE: Home phone wiring & TPC
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 6 Apr 87 17:42:06 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bruce Limber)
Distribution: usa
Organization: The U.S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, DC
Lines: 29

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("Richard Kovalcik, Jr.") writes:
>. . . removing all the wires from the junction box in the basement
>whereever they entered the building proved . . . that the problem
>was outside the house . . .

It's definitely worth while having a disconnect.

My house has _very_ weird phone wiring (because I use an automatic dialer
that can be controlled from any phone in the house.  The phone line runs
through the lightning arrestor, an RJ11 test jack, a double-pole cutoff
switch, two special dialer jacks (in series, in different parts of the
house), _then_ through a junction panel to all the regular RJ11 phone jacks
(in parallel).

When our pole connection got squirrely recently, the cutoff switch was
invaluable for proving to TPC that the problem was theirs, not ours.  (The less
TPC know about how the phone lines in my house are wired, the better :-).)

(By the way, some phone stores refuse to sell the dialer jacks (8-conductor; I
forget the RJ number) to the public:  DUMB!)

If TPC is reading this, I live on the moon :-).

Best,
--
Bruce Limber (seismo!dolqci!bruce)
The opinions I have expressed above are shared by my boss, my employer, the
federal government, and all right-thinking people everywhere.
(I'm more humble than you are!)

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

Date: Mon, 6 Apr 87 13:05:44 EDT
From: Bob Clements <[e-mail]>
Subject: Radio call-in exchanges


Re: Getting through to a radio station call-in (contest) number

Some time ago, the Boston area contest lines were all in one of
the 617-95x-nnnn exchanges.  I forget which one, but let's say it
was 954.

I guessed that 954 was really some other exchange with an alternate
address.  The alternate address (954) would have minimal trunking
assigned to it, but the real exchange would have normal trunking.
So calls to 954 would get busy signals generated near your home
rather than all being trunked in to the city and congesting the system.

I figured if it was a real exchange, it would have other real
phone numbers available through it.  So I tried calling nice
round numbers that would be business lines.  First try: I called
954-1000.  After a couple busy signals, I got through and someone
answered "Megawidget Corp".  I politely said "Sorry I have a
wrong number" and hung up.  A quick check of the phone book
revealed Megawidget to have the phone number 261-1000.

So 954 was really 261.  Then calls to contest line 954-WMEX could
really be placed to 261-WMEX. Sure enough, it worked. I got through
much more often.

It doesn't work that way any more. Too bad.  Currently, the contest
exchange is 617-931-1xxx and it doesn't seem to be multiply addressable.
Maybe it works where you live, though.

/Rcc

[Above numbers and companies are for illustrative purposes only.
Your mileage may vary. All disclaimers claimed. All claims disclaimed.]

[e-mail]

[Tee hee. The 931 Mass Calling Prefix (520 in area 213, 955 in area
code 212) is designed with that sort of thing prevented. I suspect
that these lines are merely translation tables in ESS or Xbar tandems
(we have no step-by-step here). Your ESS or xbar machine has capacity
to allow only 2 calls per number on your machine. I tried calling WBCN
when they were offering Beastie Boys tickets, but at work I live on
the 353/262/375/ etc. machine, and most of the students and young
population is on that machine. Note I could call WXKS because *they*
weren't having a contest, so the lines are not meant to interfere with
each other either. In addition, you go through a special set of trunks
which only allow a certain number of trunks through to the machine
that is doing the 931. WBCN has its studio in Boston downtown so they
have local lines to the 931 Central Office, but WXKS has to pay
foreign exchange rates to Medford (two towns and 4 central offices
away) to get their 931 service. WAAF is in Worcester and pays
*through* *the* nose* for its 931 service. --JSol]

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

From: seismo!ihnp4!ihlpl![e-mail]
Date: 6 Apr 87 17:12:57 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: ihlpl!rs55611
From: [e-mail] (Robert E. Schleicher)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Q: reporting (or not) your hardware to the TELCO ?!]
Summary: Ringer Equivalencies
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 6 Apr 87 17:12:55 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, Illinois
Lines: 28

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob Weissman) writes:
>
> About a year ago, I got to feeling guilty with all the equipment on my
> one phone line (4 phones, answering machine, modem), and wondered whether
> suddently things might stop ringing, so I dutifully wrote down all the RENs,
> serial numbers, etc., and called up Pacific Bell.
>
> The fellow who answered my call was rather surprised when I told him why I
> was calling.  He chuckled and replied that Pac Bell's equipment doesn't care
> about what you've got on your line, so their people don't care either.
>
> I never got to rattle off my list of RENs.
>
In general, the phone companies no longer care about what kind of
equipment you hang on the line.  That's not to say that they will
accomodate any number of phones on the line.  The basic approach now
is that the individual customer is responsibile for not connecting
too many pieces of equipment.  The phone company will tell you the
Ringer Equivalency Number (REN) for your line, at your request.
It's then up to you to stay under it, or risk the consequences of
sporadic ringing, etc.  The REN for most single-party lines is 5,
although shorter lines can typically support more.  Long loops may have
an REN of 3 or less, and may require things like grounded ringers,
or ringer isolators, etc.

Bob Schleicher
ihlpl!rs55611

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

Date: Mon 6 Apr 87 21:54:46-EDT
From: Philip A. Earnhardt <[e-mail]>
Subject: modem multi-modal handshake

My company has some Vadic 2400PA modems; we're considering using the
Telebit Faslink modems. With a Fastlink originating the call, they will
handshake correctly and use the v.22bis protocol. However, our modem
lackie can't get them to handshake correctly when the 2400PA is originating
the call.

First off, has anyone ever dealt with this specific compatibility pair? Is
there something obvious we're missing?

Do any of the CCITT specifications talk about the multi-modal handshake issue?
Have any of the modem manufacturers come up with some clever ideas? Is
there any sort of de-facto standard?

Thanks,
phil

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

From: cbmvax!hutch!rabbit1![e-mail]
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 87 19:45:22 est

Subject: Re: Got message to press '1' for faster service
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Summary: Dial 1 identifies touch-tone(tm) for automated answering system
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael Schuster) writes:
>
> Recently I had occasion to call Sony Customer Service in NJ on their WATS
> line (800-222-SONY). Prior to ringing, I was greeted by the following
> telephone-company-sounding recorded message:
>
> "Thank you for calling. For faster service please press or dial '1' _now_".
>
> Does anyone know what this means? How will pressing '1' at that point give
> me faster service? I was unable to discern any difference with or without.

I experienced this when calling a mutual funds company.  I had the impression
that the message came AFTER the phone had rung, but I could be wrong.  After
PRESSING 1 on the touch-tone, I was prompted to select (by number) the
reason for my call from a verbal "menu".   There were several transactions
that could be made using the phone like an ATM (account transfers,
redemptions).

I assume that pressing the initial "1" identified my touch-tone capability.
Had I NOT pressed the "1", I probably would have been transfered to a "live"
operator after a brief pause.   Due to the specific features of the system,
I assumed it was an on-site system at the mutual fund company.  It may
have been done by AT&T or their local BOC, however.  Would surprise me, though.

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

Date: 8 Apr 1987 12:41:57-EST
From: rdsnyder@MIT-CCC

Subject: Reporting of FCC ID/REN info to telcos

Being curious about what the BOC's do with FCC ID & REN info, I asked
someone at the FCC who has been involved with this issue about it.
He said that the rules requiring customers to report the info grew out
of confusion between the FCC and the BOC's.  Apparently, the FCC thought
that the BOC's needed the info to maintain their telephone systems,
while the BOC's thought that they needed to collect the info to satisfy
the FCC.  The truth seems to be that the FCC doesn't want to know
anything about people's phones and the BOC's don't trust the information.
I was told that, when this confusion was discovered, the FCC dropped the
requirements that the FCC ID & REN be reported.

The moral of the story is: connect anything you want to your phone line,
provided it has been FCC registered and does have an FCC ID #, and don't
tell anyone anything about it.  However, the ringers and ringing detectors
might start to lose if the sum of all the REN's on the line gets above
about 5. (But even this won't harm the network, since even the most
primitive telephone systems have current-limited ringing signals.)

-Ross ([e-mail])

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

From: columbia!phri!dasys1.Dasys.COM![e-mail] (Robert Sweeney)
Date: 7 Apr 87 23:42:03 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: dasys1!rsweeney
From: [e-mail] (Robert Sweeney)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Q: reporting (or not) your hardware to the TELCO ?!]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 7 Apr 87 23:42:03 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Robert Sweeney)
Distribution: world
Organization: Datamerica Systems, NYC
Lines: 10

An interesting thing happened when a friend of mine reported his
BBS' modem line to New York Telephone.  The quality of service on
the line went DOWN considerably - he immediately began having trouble with
line noise, disconnections, and the like.   Has anyone else had a similar
experience?
--
Robert Sweeney           {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!\
Datamerica Systems        {harpo,bellcore,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!rsweeney
New York, NY.  USA                      {philabs}!tg!/
                    "NO SLEEP 'TILL BROOKLYN!!"

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

Date: 9 Apr 87 01:05:52 EDT
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: consumer ANI

My big question is: Is there a "standard" protocol for the way in which the
calling-party data is transmitted down the line, so that I could still sit
down and build myself a full-feature phone?  My old Western Electric unit,
which I love and cherish and have extensively modified, won't serve unless I
can add the proper hardware to display these things.  Said unit will probably
still be around when my exchange [which *is* one of those awful digital things
and feels like someone's basement PBX] starts playing with such toys.

_H*

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

Date:     Wed, 8 Apr 87 17:09 EST
From:     <[e-mail]> (Tom - FANDM Tech Support)
Subject:  U.S. ROBOTICS 2400 BAUD MODEMS

We are looking for some input on the reliability of the U.S. Robotics
2400 baud modem.  We will be using on a VAX 8500 on a dedicated dial-in line
so it will be powered up at all times.

Any experiences (+ or _) with this unit would be appreciated.

Thanks.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
16-Apr-87 19:32:45-EDT,24876;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Thu 16 Apr 87 19:32:22-EDT
Date: 15 Apr 87 01:53-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #31
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Wednesday, April 15, 1987 1:53AM
Volume 6, Issue 31

Today's Topics:

                      Re: "press or dial 1 now"
           ringer equiv's; orlando ESS features; fcc reg's
                   mass calling numbers, number ID
                       Telephone Ring Detection
            Submission for mod.telecom (FCC Registration)
          Submission for mod.telecom (Modems and data jacks)
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                  Universal telephone network plug??
                    Re: Submission for mod-telecom
                           Re: Line hunting
                      Hang-ups [Re: RISKS-4.67]

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

Date: Thu, 9 Apr 87 21:27:59 est
From: Stuart Friedberg  <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "press or dial 1 now"

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> Summary: Dial 1 identifies touch-tone(tm) for automated answering system
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael Schuster) writes:
> > "Thank you for calling. For faster service please press or dial '1' _now_".
> I experienced this when calling a mutual funds company.  I had the impression
> that the message came AFTER the phone had rung, but I could be wrong.  After
> PRESSING 1 on the touch-tone, I was prompted to select (by number) the
> reason for my call from a verbal "menu".
> [...]
> I assume that pressing the initial "1" identified my touch-tone capability.
> Had I NOT pressed the "1", I probably would have been transfered to a "live"
> operator after a brief pause.

Strange you should mention that!  I just called 9 mutual funds last
Friday and four of them had this feature.  My phone is a dark-ages dial
phone and when I dialled 1, I got only Muzak followed eventually by
live operators.  This tends to confirm that "press or dial 1" is to
identify touch-tone capability.

In each case, the message was given *after* the initial ringing of the
phone, so the discrimination and subsequent menu processing is almost
certainly performed by a box local to the subscriber.

Personally, I think the message is misleading.  Requesting someone to
"press or dial" suggests strongly that both touch-tone and dial phones
are acceptable when the whole point is to discriminate between them.

Stu Friedberg

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 87 22:49:35 PDT
Subject: ringer equiv's; orlando ESS features; fcc reg's

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           04/09/87 22:49:33
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: ringer equiv's; orlando ESS features; fcc reg's

 To: [e-mail]

 Can anyone explain why REN's (Ringer Equivalent No's, which you add up to see
 if you are over, for example, 5, and risk getting unreliable ringing) come in
 "A" and "B" flavors? On my many instruments I see old-fashioned phones are
 usually 1.0A, and flimsy electronic jobs are 0.5B or 1.5B. I have dreamed up
 something about whether it uses the real AC to drive a bell (A?) or runs an
 electronic tweeter (B?). Do you add them all together anyway, and why do they
 bother telling you which flavor?

 In issues of telecom digest in past years (perhaps 2-3 years ago) I read a lot
 about the orlando telco offering advanced ess features. They included,
 roughly, the following: You could get a service to tell you the number
 calling; you could get selective ringing (never described to my satisfaction;
 can you both INCLUDE and EXCLUDE? can you give partial pattern profiles? Could
 you dream of GREP descriptors?); you could, as a caller, request anonymity, in
 which case the receiver would see something like "private" for the calling no.

 The privilege of getting the caller's no. was special somehow (available only
 to, say, businesses or computer centers, perhaps, who would love it for the
 security tracing aspect). But selective ringing was available to all.

 And you had "call the last b*tard back" which did that even if they were
 secret. Supposedly for returning calls you missed, barely, while running in
 the door.

 The thing was layered rather marvelously. For example, you could with the
 proper arrangements "freeze and report" a calling no. to the telco, without
 its being disclosed to you, to enable the grabbing of obscene callers while
 preserving others' privacy. This reporting feature reported all including
 those who had specified privacy.

 My impression, which needs confirmation by others, is that many exchanges
 routinely forward the calling no. on local and long-dist trunks; but I bet the
 local exchanges which could deal with it, filter it off for non-buyers before
 you would have a chance to see it. You gotta be "wired" (coded) for it. (Those
 in the know please confirm).

 As for pac bell san francisco, years ago they did record your equipment
 diligently in their files. I tried to register a rad shack phone and they
 couldn't find it in their master book; the book listed "all" fcc phones, was
 available for viewing in local phone offices. Neither me nor telco could
 figure out what to do about my phone which said it was registered but was not
 in their book; I felt squeezed unfairly at the time. Later discovered somehow
 that the Rad Shack phone was somehow not authorized in Calif. and that's why
 it wasn't in the telco book. But they were not stopped from selling it.

 Nowadays if you try to report your stuff they don't seem to know how to handle
 that request.

 Please note that many phones being marketed, even recently invented ones, have
 a long printed speil explaining your need to call the local telco. Those
 instructions offer their own reason: "to allow the tel co to inform you if
 they are going to make any changes that will affect your service. They are
 required to so notify you...etc.".

 On that basis, I "registered" a representative set of example instruments so
 I'd get informed of almost anything. Never heard a word.

 I have since concluded that telcos can hardly maintain such databases these
 days, and that a mutual solution is possible. First of all, they can hardly
 make changes that deviate way outside some sort of industry range or parameter
 standards. Second of all, should they ever need to make radical changes, they
 must have concluded by now that they'd just have to inform every subscriber in
 the mass bills, so why bother with elaborate sublists of equipt. types and
 costly partial notification, which wouldn't even reach all those affected.

 Supposedly in the year 2012 or 2045 they'll finally kill rotary, for example.
 So just tell everyone, 6 times over 2-3 whole years.

 Thanks, Doug
     &ringer equiv's; orlando ESS features; fcc reg's

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

Date: 10-Apr-1987 0919
From: [e-mail]  (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Subject: mass calling numbers, number ID

Bob Clements' observation about Boston's mass calling number is
interesting, since the prefix code 931 (mass calling) mapped into
261, but doesn't any more.  About five years ago, NE Telephone _deleted_
617-261 from the list of active codes.  Anybody who had such a number
presumably had it changed (I don't know of too many, though; probably
a couple of Centrex systems).  Now it makes more sense...

re: "CLASS" services that offer calling number id:  I don't think being
on a crossbar will protect your number.  Crossbars have automatic
number ID on them, for billing purposes, and probably forward it to
the toll switch.  Certainly steppers do!  You only need an ESS to
be on the receiving end of such services.

There is no one standard technique for delivering calling number ID.
Some systems use separate lines.  I'm told that the Bell of PA trial
uses 202-modem tones on the line between the first and second rings.
Primitive but it works.  Of course this is not available in many
places yet, and probably will never standardize pre-ISDN.  The ISDN
protocol (Q.931) for call control is basically symmetrical for
incoming and outgoing calls.  When the network sends a call to your
phone, it may contain a calling number field, if you pay for the
service.  Field trials are beginning...
      fred

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

Date:    Fri, 10 Apr 87 11:55 EDT
From:    <JEL@PSUVM> (Jon Loos 814/238-6649)
Subject: Telephone Ring Detection

Is it just my imagination, or did Radio Shack used to sell a chip that would
detect the ring signal on a telephone line?  What I want to do is build a
simple box that would plug into my equalizer input or output lines, and also
the phone lines.  When the phone rings, it would can the stereo, so that I
can hear the phone.  (Don't tell me I'm playing the stereo too loud, I
already know that.)  I called both Radio Shack stores around here, and they
are clueless.  (Both stores misunderstood and tried to sell me their touch-
tone decoder chip... haha  Gotta love their training.)

Any ideas on where I can get this chip now, or how I might build something
w/o the aid of this chip?  Feel free to e-mail me, or post to the net.

I would also like to have some idea what the REN of whatever contraption
you come up with would be.  Our lines are pretty taxed w/6 phones & an
answering machine.

Thanks for your time (or in advance, if you prefer, but I gather that's
not real cool.  Can anybody explain to me why?)

- Jon

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

Date: Sat, 11 Apr 87 13:25:53 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (FCC Registration)

In a recent article [e-mail] (Scott Dorsey) writes:
> Is there any problem using telephone equipment which is not FCC licensed?
> I have some surplus Army field telephones (modified for common battery use),
> and some homebrew phones which are around the house.  I certainly hope that
> I can still operate it, although I could understand being prevented from
> selling such stuff.

    I will give you two answers:

(1)    The OFFICIAL answer is that you are only allowed to connect devices
    to the telephone line which are FCC registered (which carry FCC
    registration numbers), or devices which were "grandfathered" at
    the time FCC Part 68 took effect.  Grandfathered devices are
    listed by the FCC and by operating telephone companies, and are
    devices which were deemed acceptable to connect to the telephone
    line prior to the issuance of FCC registration numbers.  Most of
    the grandfathered devices consisted of telephone answering machines,
    modems and PBX's; these devices would now be at least 11 years old,
    and would be pretty much obsolete.

(2)    The UNOFFICIAL answer is that you could damn well connect anything
    you want to the telephone network, and not have a problem PROVIDED
    that the device was a telephone with no external source of energy
    (i.e., not some 120 VAC powered device).  Devices that utilize
    AC line power and are neither FCC-registered nor grandfathered
    should be carefully checked for powerline leakage before use.  It
    is extremely difficult to cause physical harm to the telephone
    company cable plant or central office equipment, but it is possible
    if you intentionally try.  It is also difficult to cause crosstalk
    on telephone company cables, but it is possible if you do something
    pretty stupid (like send a +20 dBm tone over the line), or if your
    motive is intentional interference.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: Sat, 11 Apr 87 13:30:30 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (Modems and data jacks)

In a recent article [e-mail] (Howard Berkowitz) writes:
> One minor point (minor until it gets you):  dial modems,
> especially the higher speed ones, may not work properly
> because the network interface device has resistors set
> for voice use, not data.  It is worth letting your telco
> know you are running higher speed data, because your
> network interface should then be configured to give you
> better signal to noise ratios, not important for voice.
>
> If they're going to charge more for data access, do this
> only after you have unacceptable problems.  Your problems,
> however, often are in the jack, not the local loop.

    The above article raises a good point, but it is not quite accurate.

    First, let's talk about data jacks.  There are two types of data
jacks with resistors:

1.    The Fixed Loop Loss (FLL) jack, such as the RJ41S (RJ42S and RJ43S
    for A-lead control where data lines terminate in key equipment).
    This jack provides direct tip and ring access through pins 5 and
    4, respectively.  It provides an attenuated tip and ring access
    through pins 2 and 1, respectively.  It is intended that voice
    signals utilize the direct line connection, while data signals
    utilize the attenuated line connection.  The value of the attenuator
    pad will be set by the telephone company according to loop loss
    so that the effective loss (total of loop loss and pad loss) between
    the jack and the central office will be between 8 and 9 dB.  The
    net result is that a 0 dBm data signal sent by the modem will
    reach the central office at -8 to -9 dBm.

    So the point is: the line connection through the resistor pad is for
    DATA use, and NOT for voice use.

2.    The Programmable Loss jack, such as the RJ45S (RJ46S and RJ47S for
    A-lead control where data lines terminal in key equipment).  This
    jack provides direct tip and ring access through pins 5 and 4,
    respectively.  A resistor installed by the telephone company across
    pins 7 and 8 (leads PR and PC) tells the modem what output level
    to send.  An infinite resistance tells the modem to send at -9 dBm;
    19,800 ohms sends at -8 dBm; 9,200 ohms sends at -7 dbm; 5,490 ohms
    sends at -6 dBm; ...; and a direct short sends at 0 dBm.  This
    resistor is sensed by internal modem circuitry, and has nothing to
    do with direct telephone line tip and ring.

    The telephone company will set the programming resistor such that
    the transmitted data signal will enter the central office at between
    -8 and -9 dBm (i.e., modem transmit level + loop loss = -9 dBm).

    Telling the telephone company that you are running "higher speed"
data will most likely accomplish nothing.  The telephone company could care
less about your data rate or noise concerns (at least for the price of a
POTS line); all the telephone company cares about is that your transmitted
data signal reaches the central office at between -8 and -9 dBm.  Period.
    Speaking candidly, if you feel compelled to send data at a greater
transmit level, you can defeat any FLL or Programmable data jack and send at
0 dBm - regardless of actual central office loop loss.
    While I don't want to get off on a tangent here, the fact is that
transmitting at a higher level is NOT necessarily going to result in a lower
error rate.  I can vouch for this from extensive personal experience.
Most of the newer modems have receive threshholds of < -40 dBm; this is
really quite a bit of sensitivity.  Transmitting at a higher-than-necessary
level can "strain" the ability of the band-pass filters in the modem to
reject the locally-generated transmit signal, and leakage of the transmit
signal into the modem receiver can often exacerbate a data line error
situation.
    So the moral is: LOUDER is not always BETTER. :-)

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

From: seismo!ihnp4!ihlpa![e-mail]
Date: 12 Apr 87 03:20:29 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: ihlpa!kdf
From: [e-mail] (Ken Frantzen)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Re: Dial '1' for faster service
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Apr 87 03:20:29 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ken Frantzen)
Distribution: world
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 15

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Subject: Re: Got message to press '1' for faster service
>>
>> Does anyone know what this means? How will pressing '1' at that point give
>> me faster service? I was unable to discern any difference with or without.
>
>I assumed it was an on-site system at the mutual fund company.  It may
>have been done by AT&T or their local BOC, however.  Would surprise me, though.

This is an AT&T service offering. AT&T's Direct Services Dialing Network
Services Complex sitting behind a 4ESS(tm) Switch detects your DTMF '1',
plays the oral menu and, based on your subsequent digit selection, routes
you to the desired service center. If you don't have a DTMF phone, an
attendant will process your request.

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

Date: Mon, 13 Apr 87 10:01:52 EDT
From: [e-mail]

To:
Path: lsuc!dave
From: [e-mail] (David Sherman)
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: simulate conference calling with 2 lines?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 13 Apr 87 12:56:48 GMT
Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 19


I have two lines at home, one normally used for a modem. Of
the 4 wires in any jack, red & green hook up the main line and
yellow & black (if connected to red & green on the phone) hook
up the second line.

I'm curious to know whether I can construct something which will
let me achieve conference calling by using both lines -- the
electronic equivalent to holding the mouthpiece of one phone to
the earpiece of another, I guess.  In other words, if I'm at home
talking to my wife on one line and our broker on the other, can
I do something which will let them hear each other as well as me?

I realize I can get conference calling from the phone company;
I'm curious as to whether I can do it with what I already have.

David Sherman    [e-mail]
Toronto
--
{ seismo!mnetor  cbosgd!utgpu  watmath  decvax!utcsri  ihnp4!utzoo } !lsuc!dave

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

Date:           Mon, 13 Apr 87 11:40:07 PDT
From:           Rich Wales <[e-mail]>
Subject:        Universal telephone network plug??

I received the following insert in my latest phone bill.  (My phone
company is General Telephone; I'm in western Los Angeles.)

    QUALITY AND CONVENIENCE . . . TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN THE 90'S

    Today about 90 percent of the information carried over telephone
    lines in the United States is through conversation, what we call
    voice communication.  But the demand for computerized data is
    growing tremendously.

    So we're working hard to make it as convenient for you to send
    and receive both voice and data over your existing telephone line
    as it is to use an electrical plug.

    To do that, we're going to transform the existing public telephone
    system.

    Very soon, all kinds of telecommunications equipment, such as
    telephones, alarm systems, computers and image facsimile machines,
    will use a universal plug to connect to the telephone network.  The
    connection will be as receptive to your communications equipment as
    electrical outlets are to appliances.

    And unlike now, where each type of service often requires its own
    telephone line, the future network will let you use a wide range of
    techniques on a single phone line.  For example, if you're install-
    ing a burglar alarm, you won't have to install an additional tele-
    phone line.

    Services such as telecommuting (working by computer at home), elec-
    tronic catalog shopping, electronic banking, electronic mail and
    electronic libraries will be offered by businesses, financial insti-
    tutions and merchandisers.  Utilities will be able to read your gas,
    water and electric meters remotely.

    The potential of our telephone network is tremendous.  And the con-
    venience of having several services provided to you on a single
    phone line will give you the flexibility to grow and change your
    telephone service as the need arises.

Can anyone out there shed more light on what my local GTE people are
talking about here?

In particular, when they talk about "transforming" the existing system
so that everything will connect to it via a "universal plug", are they
thinking of the existing RJ11/RJ14 modular system, or something else?

-- Rich Wales // UCLA Computer Science Department // [phone]
    3531 Boelter Hall // Los Angeles, California 90024-1600 // USA
    [e-mail]   ...!(ucbvax,rutgers)!ucla-cs!wales
"Sir, there is a multilegged creature crawling on your shoulder."

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

From: rutgers!seismo!sun!cwruecmp!ncoast![e-mail] (Phil Smith)
Subject: Re: Submission for mod-telecom
Date: 13 Apr 87 15:30:57 GMT
Reply-To: rutgers!seismo!sun!cwruecmp!ncoast!smith (Phil Smith)


> Article <[e-mail]> From: [e-mail]
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("Keith F. Lynch") writes:
> >For broadcast stations, the FCC has ruled that stations East of the
> >Mississippi begin with W, West of the Mississippi begin with K.  (A
> >very few early stations such as KDKA break this rule.)
>
> The rule must have been made since 1970, for that was about when Westinghouse
> Broadcasting bought WRCV (?) radio and TV in Philadelphia and changed their
> calls to KYW.  The K-prefix and 3-character call are both unusual in the
> Philadelphia area.
> --
Call sign KYW (an old sign, just like KDKA) was formerly
in Cleveland, Oh. I have trouble remembering all of the
details, but the call sign change was required by the FCC.
Sign KYW was moved to Philadelphia and WKYC (NBC) was moved
from Philadelphia to Cleveland, Oh.

--
              decvax!cwruecmp!ncoast!smith
            ncoast is dead, long live ncoast!
            ncoast![e-mail]
        (ncoast![e-mail])

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

From: rutgers!seismo!sun!cwruecmp!ncoast![e-mail] (Bill Wisner)
Subject: Re: Line hunting
Date: 13 Apr 87 18:56:02 GMT
Reply-To: rutgers!seismo!sun!cwruecmp!ncoast!billw (Bill Wisner)


[Hmm.. why does an article from kitty.UUCP have an id from seismo? -bw]
In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>> [The best way I have found to get through on a radio station line is
>> to program their number into your speed calling and sit there with
>> one finger on the hookswitch and another almost pressing 9#. --jsol]
>
>    You got it!

Even better: sit there with your trusty Hayes Smartmodem, with the speaker on,
one finger on the A, one finger on the slash... hasn't failed me yet.
--
Bill Wisner: "You're kidding, right?"
..{sdcsvax,ihnp4}!jack!wolf!billw
..cwruecmp!ncoast!billw

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

Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1987  22:53 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Hang-ups [Re: RISKS-4.67]

>The best solution to
>obnoxious electronic calling machines is legal - ban the damn things!

We have.  I just read in last week's paper that electronic calling devices
are prohibited by California's public utilities code, unless a human caller
comes on the line first and gets the callee's permission to listen to the
machine's sales pitch.  The article went on to say that many firms are
flaunting the law.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************

-------
16-Apr-87 21:14:02-EDT,14885;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Thu 16 Apr 87 21:13:59-EDT
Date: 15 Apr 87 01:55-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #32
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Wednesday, April 15, 1987 1:55AM
Volume 6, Issue 32

Today's Topics:

                  IBM System 36 Telecom Info Wanted
                        telephone credit cards
        Radio Station Call Letters, International Allocations
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                   handling telephone repair people
                         Transmission Product
                       Calling number delivery

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

From: rochester!kodak![e-mail] (Mike Ciaraldi)
Subject: IBM System 36 Telecom Info Wanted
Date: 14 Apr 87 17:42:55 GMT
Reply-To: rochester![e-mail] (Mike Ciaraldi)


Is there any way to set up an IBM System 36 so it can
call other systems?

In particular, I know someone with a 36, who wants to communicate
by modem to a VAX/VMS system.  I heard that the 36
has only synchronous communication, no asynch.

What I would really like would be something that lets
him emulate a VT100 with his 36 terminals.

Failing that, is there an easy way to connect an IBM PC or compatible
to a 36?  Thenit could be used to capture data from the VAX
and upload it to the 36.

Thanks,

Mike Ciaraldi
ARPA: [e-mail]
uucp: seismo!rochester!ciaraldi

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 87 13:19:34 PDT
Subject: telephone credit cards

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           04/14/87 13:19:33
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: telephone credit cards

 To: [e-mail]

 Does anyone know about the law and policy regarding charge cards following the
 divestment? I am puzzled by the following practice:

 Pacific bell sent me a card with the number consisting of my telephone number
 and a secret 4-digit code not on the card. ATT sent me a card with the same
 whole number INCLUDING the same 4-digit verifier embossed on the card.
 Both cards have magnetic strips. (I may have it reversed about which one
 was secret, which clear-text.)

 In any case, two facts appear: apparently there is still a "deal" between
 them about long-distance; I suppose in effect that when you charge, you
 needn't know whether the call is intra- or inter-lata, and the billing all
 gets done by Pac bell anyway. But it seems odd to have two cards from
 two different companies, that look different, that perform an identical
 practical and business function.

 Moreover it is interesting to see the choice of styles, whether you
 choose the secret or clear-text code to carry around.

 Thanks, Doug
   ;  telephone credit cards

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

Date: 14-Apr-1987 1940
From: [e-mail]  (John R. Covert)
Subject: Radio Station Call Letters, International Allocations

FR:  Greg Monti, National Public Radio, Washington, DC
RE:  SUBMISSION FOR TELECOM DIGEST

In answer to Kevin. J Burnett's request...
RADIO STATION CALL LETTERS, INTERNATIONAL ALLOCATIONS

Source:  1983 Broadcasting Yearbook, used without permission

Afghanistan        YA, T6
Albania            ZA
Algeria            7R, 7T-7Y
Andorra            C3
Antigua            V2
Argentina          AY, AZ, LO-LW, L2-L9
Australia          AX, VH-VN, VZ
Austria            OE
Bahamas            C6
Bahrain            A9
Bangladesh         S2, S3
Barbados           8P
Belgium            ON-OT
Benin              TY
Bhutan             A5
Bolivia            CP
Boputhatswana      H5
Botswana           8O, A2
Brazil             PP-PY, ZV-ZZ
Bulgaria           LZ
Burma              XY, XZ
Burundi            9U
Cambodia           XU
Cameroon           TJ
Canada             CF-CK, CY, CZ, VA-VG, VO, VX, VY, XJ-XO
Cape Verde         D4
Central African Republic   TL
Chad               TT
Chile              CA-CE, XQ, XR, 3G
China              B, XS, 3H-3U
Colombia           HJ, HK, 5J, 5K
Comoros            D6
Congo              TN (hmm, thought this was Zaire now)
Costa Rica         TE, TI
Cuba               CL, CM, CO, T4
Cyprus             5B, C4, H2, P3
Czechoslovakia     OK-OM
Denmark            OU-OZ, XP, 5P, 5Q
Djibouti           J2
Dominica           J7
Dominican Republic HI
Ecuador            HC, HD
Egypt              SSA-SSM, SU, 6A, 6B
El Salvador        HU, YS
Equatorial Guinea  3C
Ethiopia           ET, 9E, 9F
Fiji               3DN-3DZ
Finland            OF-OJ
France & territories   F, HW-HY, TH, TK, TM, TO-TQ, TV-TX
Gabon              TR
Gambia             C5
Germany West       DA-DT
Germany East       Y2-Y9
Ghana              9G
Greece             SV-SZ, J4
Grenada            J3
Guatemala          TD, TG
Guinea             3X
Guinea Bissau      J5
Guyana             8R
Haiti              HH, 4V
Honduras           HQ, HR
Hungary            HA, HG
Iceland            TF
India              AT-AW, VT-VW, 8T-8Y
Indonesia          JZ, PK-PO, YB-YH, 7A-7I, 8A-8I
  West Irian       JZ
International Civil Aviation Organization    4Y
Iran               EP, EQ, 9B-9D
Iraq               HN, YI
Ireland            EI, EJ
Israel             4X, 4Z
Italy              I
Ivory Coast        TU
Jamaica            6Y
Japan              JA-JS, 7J-7N, 8J-8N
Jordan             JY
Kampuchea          XU
Kenya              5Y, 5Z
Kiribati           T3
Korea North        P5-P9
Korea South        HL, HM, 6K-6N, D7-D9
Kuwait             9K
Laos               XW
Lebanon            OD
Lesotho            7P
Liberia            EL, 5L, 5M, 6Z, A8, D5
Libya              5A
Lithuania          LY
Luxembourg         LX
Madagascar         5R, 5S, 6X
Malawi             7Q
Malaysia           9M, 9W
Maldive Islands    8Q
Mali               TZ
Maliwi             7Q
Malta              9H
Mauritania         5T
Mauritius          3B
Mexico             XA-XI, 4A-4C, 6D-6J
Monaco             3A
Mongolia           JT-JV
Morocco            CN, 5C-5G
Mozambique         C8, C9
Nauru              C2
Nepal              9N
Netherlands        PU-PI
Netherlands West Indies    PJ, P4
New Hebrides       YJ
New Zealand        ZK-ZM
Nicaragua          HT, YN, H6, H7
Niger              5U
Nigeria            5N, 5O
Norway             JW, JX, LA-LN, 3Y
Oman               A4
Pakistan           AP-AS, 6P-6S
Panama             HO, HP, 3E, H3, H8-H9
Papua New Guinea   P2
Paraguay           ZP
Peru               OA-OC, 4T
Phillipines        DU-DZ, 4D-4I
Poland             HF, SN-SR, 3Z
Portugal           CQ-CU
Portuguese Overseas Provinces    XX
Qatar              A7
Romania            YO-YR
Rwanda             9X
Saint Lucia        J6
Saint Vincent      J8
San Marino         9A
Sao Tome e Prinicpe   S9
Saudi Arabia       HZ, 7Z, 8Z
Senegal            6V, 6W
Service abbreviations (not used for call signs)    Q
Seychelles         S7
Sierra Leone       9L
Singapore          9V, S6
Solomon Island     H4
Somali Republic    6O, T5
South Africa       ZR-ZU
Spain              AM-AO, EA-EH
Sri Lanka          4P-4S
Sudan              SSN-STZ, 6T, 6U
Surinam            PZ
Swaziland          3DA-3DM
Sweden             SA-SM, 7S, 8S
Switzerland        HB, HE
Syria              YK, 6C
Tanzania           5H, 5I
Thailand           HS
Togo               5V
Tonga              A3
Transkei           S8
Trinidad & Tobago  9Y, 9Z
Tunisia            TS, 3V
Turkey             TA-TC, YM
Tuvalu             T2
Uganda             5X
United Arab Emirates    A6
United Kingdom     G, M, VP-VS, ZB-ZJ, ZN, ZO, ZQ, 2
United Nations     4U
United States      AA-AL, K, N, W
Upper Volta        XT
Uruguay            CV-CX
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics    EK, EM-EO, ER, ES, EU-EW, EX-EZ, LY,
                   R, U, YL, 4J-4L
  Belorussia       EU-EW
  Estonia          ES
  Latvia           YL
  Lithuania        LY
  Ukraine          UR-UT
Vatican State      HV
Venezuela          YV-YY, 4M
Vietnam            XV, 3W
Western Samoa      5W
World Meterological Organization    C7
Yemen Arab Republic    4W, 7O
Yemen PDR          7O
Yugoslavia         YT, YU, YZ, 4N, 4O
Zaire              9O-9T
Zambia             9I, 9J
Zimbabwe           Z2

-end-

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

From: rochester!ur-laser![e-mail]
Date: 14 Apr 87 22:24:58 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: ur-laser!rochester!ciaraldi
From: [e-mail] (Mike Ciaraldi)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.misc,comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: IBM System 36 Telecom Info Wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Apr 87 17:42:55 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mike Ciaraldi)
Distribution: world
Organization: U of Rochester, CS Dept, Rochester, NY
Lines: 19

Is there any way to set up an IBM System 36 so it can
call other systems?

In particular, I know someone with a 36, who wants to communicate
by modem to a VAX/VMS system.  I heard that the 36
has only synchronous communication, no asynch.

What I would really like would be something that lets
him emulate a VT100 with his 36 terminals.

Failing that, is there an easy way to connect an IBM PC or compatible
to a 36?  Thenit could be used to capture data from the VAX
and upload it to the 36.

Thanks,

Mike Ciaraldi
ARPA: [e-mail]
uucp: seismo!rochester!ciaraldi

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 87 17:54:54 PDT
Subject: handling telephone repair people

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           04/14/87 17:54:53
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: handling telephone repair people

 To: [e-mail]

 The problem was mentioned where one waits unnecessarily at home for
 a tel repair person, when the problem is surely central office. I
 tend to adopt the following strategy now:

 I disconnect my house wiring and make sure the problem is at the telco
 end. Then I call for the repair. When they say "will you be home on
 day x?" I say "suuuurrrree". Then I don't be home. They fix the central
 office problem and never come out.

 I don't know whether all offices think the way ours does but they should.
 It is expensive to do a customer call. Why not run the office checks first.
 Since that catches the problem there is no reason for the expensive
 customer visit.

 Now we have an ESS. Some offices might I suppose have an opposite economic
 rule; for them it may be more expensive to do the office check.

 Note that, though there could be a charge if customer equipt is at fault, there
 is not currently a charge for "customer not home when visited".

 I generally think that simple lying is bad karma, but in the specific case
 where I know that it's telco equipment, and the secretary I call can't
 operate on such info and is instructed to arrange a time for the customer
 to be home, lying seems the most effective path of action.

 Thanks, Doug
      handling telephone repair people

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

From: ketri![e-mail] (Sik Lim)
Subject: Transmission Product
Date: 15 Apr 87 00:38:10 GMT


I am working in the transmission part.
So please send me information (i.e. product companies, Tel NO., FAX NO. etc ...) about products which convert 1 Mbps serial input data into T-1 carrier (1.544)
speed as soon as possible.

Thank you.
------------------------
Donghee Han
Switching S/W Dept.
ETRI, KOREA.
{...!seismo}!kaist!ketri!tops!kslim

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

Date: Mon, 13 Apr 87 17:06:27 edt
From: ms6b#@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu)
Subject: Calling number delivery


For those who want more information about how CLASS systems deliver the
caller's number to a handset in a non-ISDN environment, consult the
following:

BellCore Technical Advisory TA-TSY-000031, November 1984
"Calling Number Delivery"

and

TA-TSY-000030, November 1984
"SPCS/Customer Premises Equipment Data Interface"

Available from:
Manager-Information Release
Bell Communications Research, Inc.
435 South Street Room 2J-272
Morristown, NJ 07960-1961
[phone]


Some quotes:

"The Calling Number Delivery service allows the called customer premises
equipment (CPE) to receive the Directory Number (DN) of the calling party
during the ringing cycle....Then, depending on the options offered by the
CPE, the DN is displayed, and or printed out.

"...Calling Number Delivery service allows customers with Call Waiting
Service to possibly receive the calling DN two times in the call
sequence--during the ringing cycle, as above, and also during the talking
state of the call.  For the latter case, the DN transmitted is the DN of the
party calling the customer while the customer is busy on another call.

"Finally Calling Number Delivery service allows the called CPE to receive a
four digit or longer Personal Identification Number (PIN) instead of the
calling DN.  The PIN would be dialed by the calling party as part of the
calling sequence.  Receiving a PIN would indicate to the called party that
the call is from someone that the called party probably wants to talk to,
even though the call might be from a line having a DN that would not have
been recognized if displayed to the called party (e.g. a coin line)."

"For calling parties concerned about the privacy of their DN's the capability
is provided to allow callers to prevent transmission of their DN's to the
called party's CPE, either for all calls or on a per call basis."

The details of the data communication physical layer is not spelled out in
TA-TSY-000030--in this report BellCore seems to be soliciting ideas from
switch vendors.

The link layer protocol specified consists of checksummed packets of asynch
characters with a simple ACK/NAK stop and wait ARQ.  Information can be coded
as ASCII or BCD (specified in packet header).

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************

-------
18-Apr-87 23:42:54-EDT,15769;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 18-Apr-87 23:29:56
Date: 18 Apr 87 23:29-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #33
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Saturday, April 18, 1987 11:29PM
Volume 6, Issue 33

Today's Topics:

                                 KYW
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                      Submission for mod-telecom
                           conference calls
                Re: Universal telephone network plug??
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
        Re: Submission for mod.telecom (Modems and data jacks)

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

Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1987  02:18 MDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: KYW

Phil,

KYW-TV and -AM (both owned by Westinghouse Broadcasting) was
originally in Philadelphia, and moved to Cleveland in a swap between
NBC and Westinghouse, circa 1958 or so.  After a couple of years, it
was swapped back.  The exact reason for the second swap is gone from
memory, but, I vaguely recall the FCC in the middle of it - either the
number of stations NBC could own, or the number in a metropolitan
area, i.e., NYC/Phila area, or some combination.

--Frank

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

From: rochester!cci632![e-mail] ( remote copy)
Date: 15 Apr 87 04:24:21 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: cci632!ritcv!rochester!ciaraldi
From: [e-mail] (Mike Ciaraldi)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.misc,comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: IBM System 36 Telecom Info Wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Apr 87 17:42:55 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mike Ciaraldi)
Distribution: world
Organization: U of Rochester, CS Dept, Rochester, NY
Lines: 19

Is there any way to set up an IBM System 36 so it can
call other systems?

In particular, I know someone with a 36, who wants to communicate
by modem to a VAX/VMS system.  I heard that the 36
has only synchronous communication, no asynch.

What I would really like would be something that lets
him emulate a VT100 with his 36 terminals.

Failing that, is there an easy way to connect an IBM PC or compatible
to a 36?  Thenit could be used to capture data from the VAX
and upload it to the 36.

Thanks,

Mike Ciaraldi
ARPA: [e-mail]
uucp: seismo!rochester!ciaraldi

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

From: David M. Balenson <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Apr 87 21:52:42 GMT
Subject: Submission for mod-telecom

Path: mimsy!balenson
From: [e-mail] (David M. Balenson)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,mod.telecom
Subject: DES Second Review Notice
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Apr 87 21:52:41 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David M. Balenson)
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Sci.
Lines: 106


For your information, here is a copy of the Federal Register Notice
regarding the second review of Federal Information Processing Standard
(FIPS) 46, Data Encryption Standard (DES).  If interested, please
submit your written comments by June 4, 1987.  The more comments we
receive, the better NBS will be able to take a stance regarding the
future of DES.  Please feel free to distribute this notice to all
who may be interested.  Thank you.

David M. Balenson (DB)  [[e-mail]]
Security Technology Group / Computer Security Division
National Bureau of Standards
Technology A216
Gaithersburg, Maryland  20899
[phone]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 44 / Friday, March 6, 1987 / Notices
----------------------------------------------------------------------

National Bureau of Standards

[Docket No. 70109-7009]

Second Review of Federal Information Processing Standard 46,
Data Encryption Standard (DES)

AGENCY: National Bureau of Standards, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of second review of federal information processing
standard (FIPS) 46, data encryption standard.

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

SUMMARY:  Federal Information Processing Standard 46, Data Encryption
Standard, issued in 1977, provides an algorithm to be implemented in
electronic hardware devices and used for the cryptographic protection
of computer data.  The standard provided that it be reviewed within
five years to assess its adequacy.  The first review was completed in
1983, and the standard was reaffirmed for Federal government use (48
FR 41062 dated September 13, 1983).

  The purpose of this notice is to announce the second review to
assess the continued adequacy of the standard to protect computer
data.  Comments from industry and the public are invited on the
following alternatives for FIPS 46.  The costs (impacts) and benefits
of these alternatives should be included in the comments.

o Reaffirm the standard for another five (5) years.  The National
  Bureau of Standards would continue to validate equipment that
  implements the standard.  FIPS 46 would continue to be an approved
  method for protecting unclassified computer data against
  unauthorized modification or disclosure.

o Withdraw the standard.  The National Bureau of Standards would no
  longer continue to support the standard.  Organizations could
  continue to utilize existing equipment that implements the standard,
  and non-government organizations could continue to develop new
  implementations as desired.  Government organizations would begin to
  utilize new security devices as they become available through the
  Commercial Communication Security Endorsement Program of the
  National Security Agency.

o Revise the applicability of the standard.  The applicability
  statement of the standard would be changed to specify certain uses,
  such as using the standard for protecting Electronic Funds
  Transfers.  Proposed technical changes to the algorithm will not be
  considered during this review.

  Interested parties may obtain a copy of FIPS 46 from the National
Technical Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, VA 22161,  telephone [phone].

DATE: Comments on this second review of FIPS 46 must be received on or
before June 4, 1987.

ADDRESS: Written comments concerning this standard should be submitted
to the Director, Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology, ATTN:
Second Review of FIPS 46, Technology Building, Room B154,
Gaithersburg, MD 20899.

  Written comments received in response to this notice will be made
part of the public record and will be made available for inspection
and copying in the Central Reference and Records Inspection Facility,
Room 6628, Herbert C. Hoover Building, 14th Street between
Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues NW., Washington, DC  20230.

FOR FURTHUR INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. Dennis Branstad, Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology,
National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, [phone].

  Dated: February 26, 1987.

Ernest Ambler, Director

[FR Doc. 87-4707 Filed 3-5-87 8:45am]
Billing Code 3510-CN-M

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

--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|David M. Balenson (DB)                        ARPA:  balenson@maryland|
|UUCP:  {seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!balenson      CSNet: balenson@umcp-cs |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 16 Apr 87 00:53 EDT
From: Jeffrey Del Papa <[e-mail]>
Subject: conference calls
Reply-To: Jeffrey Del Papa <[e-mail]>

    Date: Mon, 13 Apr 87 10:01:52 EDT
    From: [e-mail]

    I have two lines at home, one normally used for a modem. Of
    the 4 wires in any jack, red & green hook up the main line and
    yellow & black (if connected to red & green on the phone) hook
    up the second line.

    I'm curious to know whether I can construct something which will
    let me achieve conference calling by using both lines -- the
    electronic equivalent to holding the mouthpiece of one phone to
    the earpiece of another, I guess.  In other words, if I'm at home
    talking to my wife on one line and our broker on the other, can
    I do something which will let them hear each other as well as me?

    I realize I can get conference calling from the phone company;
    I'm curious as to whether I can do it with what I already have.

    David Sherman    [e-mail]
    Toronto
    --
    { seismo!mnetor  cbosgd!utgpu  watmath  decvax!utcsri  ihnp4!utzoo } !lsuc!dave

some cheap two line phones have this as a feature. (I got mine from some sleazy mail
order house whose name escapes me) the problem with the cheap ones, is that they have
no buffer amp, so engaging the feature costs 6db. This was more featurefull than the
telco conferencing, as that prohibits certain revenue beating combinations. (It is
impossible for you to conference two incoming calls with telco conferencing, as it is
possible to beat tolls with this arrangement)

<dp>

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

From: [e-mail] (Nick Cuccia)
Subject: Re: Universal telephone network plug??
Date: 16 Apr 87 05:56:36 GMT
Reply-To: ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU![e-mail] (Nick Cuccia)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rich Wales) writes:
>I received the following insert in my latest phone bill.  (My phone
>company is General Telephone; I'm in western Los Angeles.)
>
>    QUALITY AND CONVENIENCE . . . TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN THE 90'S
>
>    Today about 90 percent of the information carried over telephone
>    lines in the United States is through conversation, what we call
>    voice communication.  But the demand for computerized data is
>    growing tremendously.
>
>    So we're working hard to make it as convenient for you to send
>    and receive both voice and data over your existing telephone line
>    as it is to use an electrical plug.
>
>Can anyone out there shed more light on what my local GTE people are
>talking about here?
>
>In particular, when they talk about "transforming" the existing system
>so that everything will connect to it via a "universal plug", are they
>thinking of the existing RJ11/RJ14 modular system, or something else?

The head of ATT's CS research facility in Murray Hill came to Berkeley
last month; he gave a talk on where network research at ATT was going
now.  Most of his talk centered on the Datakit processors, but the latter
part orbited around ATT's recent work in both long-haul networking
(ex: the new experimental network connecting Berkeley, UW-Madision,
U. of Illinois, and Bell Murray Hill) and "local-area" networking.
Work that has been done indicates that current wiring technology will
allow data transfer rates on the order of 2 Mb.  Not bad for non-twisted
copper.  One of the gizmos that has been built is a line-powered modem that
plugs into the standard wall socket.  Out the other end comes good old
RS-232, all ready for your Blit or other terminal.

ATT seems to be basing their work on current standard technology.  I know
nothing about GTE's work, though, so I can't say what they have up their
sleeve...

>-- Rich Wales // UCLA Computer Science Department // [phone]

Bell Labs people: I'd like to find out more about the Datakit, and expecially
the work that's been done implementing packet-based protocols (ie: X.25)
on top of the Datakit "streams."

Thanks,
--Nick

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Li)
Date: 16 Apr 87 21:10:35 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: sargas.usc.edu!tli
From: [e-mail] (Tony Li)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Remote lines
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Apr 87 21:10:34 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Tony Li)
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles
Lines: 32
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
    I live in the 213 Area code in L.A.  I recently moved, and want to get two
    lines for my new abode, one of which I will use exclusively for a modem
    line.  When I talked to Pacific Bell I was told I could (for a nice high
    fee, of course) get a `Data Access Line' which would (presumably) run from
    the local switching office to my home; a higher grade line would
    replace the
    normal voice grade phone line.  I was told that this was recommended for
    anyone doing data transmissions of 2400 baud or higher.  I almost bit; but
    then I thought, what about the rest of the way?  I would be calling JPL in
    Pasadena 99% of the time, which is in Area code 818, prefix 354.  Since I'm
    not a TELECOM expert, I just surmised that the calls I would make would go
    from my home, over my `good' data line, to the local switching office; then
    to whatever the local switching office for Pasadena is, and then over a
    (presumably) standard voice grade line to my other modem.

    My question for you experts is (a) is this something like the real
    path that
    the call will take (3 hops; home <=> switching office <->
    s.office#2 <-> work)

At least.  And possible more.  It's not clear that there is an
interoffice trunk between downtown LA and Pasadena.

    and (b) if this is so, then is there any point in getting a higher
    grade line

No, not at all.  Besides, the quality of the interoffice trunk here is
questionable at best.  I call this same path in reverse all of the time...

    for one's home, when one has no control over the line quality for the other
    2/3 of the connection ?!?

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

Date: Thu, 16 Apr 87 15:50:14 PDT
From: randolph@cognito (Randolph Fritz <[e-mail]>)
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom (Modems and data jacks)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Randolph Fritz <Software Support>)

At the end of a very good informative article on RJ-41 & RJ-45, Larry Lippman
([e-mail]) writes:

>    While I don't want to get off on a tangent here, the fact is that
>transmitting at a higher level is NOT necessarily going to result in a lower
>error rate.  I can vouch for this from extensive personal experience.
>Most of the newer modems have receive threshholds of < -40 dBm; this is
>really quite a bit of sensitivity.  Transmitting at a higher-than-necessary
>level can "strain" the ability of the band-pass filters in the modem to
>reject the locally-generated transmit signal, and leakage of the transmit
>signal into the modem receiver can often exacerbate a data line error
>situation.
>    So the moral is: LOUDER is not always BETTER. :-)

Moreover, some telco equipment does *not* have automatic gain control
and cannot handle "hot" levels.  This is especially a problem with
older frequency-muliplexors -- the high levels cause overmodulation
and the hot signal inteferes with adjacent signals on the same
carrier.  (I wonder: was this why telcos used to insist on Data Access
Arrangements?)
--
Randolph Fritz
sun!randolph
[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
18-Apr-87 23:43:09-EDT,15785;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 18-Apr-87 23:31:04
Date: 18 Apr 87 23:31-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #34
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Saturday, April 18, 1987 11:31PM
Volume 6, Issue 34

Today's Topics:

                      Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #31
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #31
                     RE: AC powered phone devices
        system 36-pc, FCC registrations, standards activities
                     Re: Calling number delivery
   Submission for mod.telecom (Plans for 2-line conference device)

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

Date: 17 Apr 87 09:11:28 PDT (Friday)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #31

>From: rutgers!seismo!sun!cwruecmp!ncoast![e-mail] (Phil
Smith)
>Subject: Re: Submission for mod-telecom
>Date: 13 Apr 87 15:30:57 GMT
>Reply-To: rutgers!seismo!sun!cwruecmp!ncoast!smith (Phil Smith)
>
>
>> Article <[e-mail]> From: [e-mail]
>> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
("Keith F.
>Lynch") writes:
> >For broadcast stations, the FCC has ruled that stations East of the
>> >Mississippi begin with W, West of the Mississippi begin with K.  (A
>> >very few early stations such as KDKA break this rule.)
>>
>> The rule must have been made since 1970, for that was about when
Westinghouse
>> Broadcasting bought WRCV (?) radio and TV in Philadelphia and changed
their
>> calls to KYW.  The K-prefix and 3-character call are both unusual in
the
>> Philadelphia area.
> --
>Call sign KYW (an old sign, just like KDKA) was formerly
>in Cleveland, Oh. I have trouble remembering all of the
>details, but the call sign change was required by the FCC.
>Sign KYW was moved to Philadelphia and WKYC (NBC) was moved
>from Philadelphia to Cleveland, Oh.
>
>--
>              decvax!cwruecmp!ncoast!smith
>            ncoast is dead, long live ncoast!
>            ncoast![e-mail]
>        (ncoast![e-mail])
>

Actually it goes back a lot farther than 1970.  I would guess that it
dates from WWII.  KYW got its label in Cleveland sometime in the 50's
when Westinghouse either swapped with NBC in Philadelphia.  I think it
was WTAM before the trade.  My recollection is that KYW were established
call letter in Philadelphia and moved to Cleveland thereby preserving
the identity of a grandfathered call set.  Isn't there anybody over the
age of 50 from northern Ohio on this DL who can end all this speculation
by us youngsters and tell us the real answer?

(It seems like there is a correlation between East of the Miss. K???'s
and Westinghouse.  KDKA, KYW)


Geoff Thompson        [e-mail]
Xerox Corporation    [phone]
475 Oakmead Parkway
Sunnyvale, CA 94086

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

Date: 17 Apr 87 10:00:20 PDT (Friday)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #31

Re:
    Date:    Fri, 10 Apr 87 11:55 EDT
    From:    <JEL@PSUVM> (Jon Loos 814/238-6649)
    Subject: Telephone Ring Detection

    Is it just my imagination, or did Radio Shack used to sell
    a chip that would detect the ring signal on a telephone line?

I think so, don't know whether or not they still do.  There certainly
are a number of chips on the market that will do that.  You could also
do it with a with an electronic ring generator chip of which there are
several.

I think that the one that Radio Shack sold is the Texas Insturments
TCM1520A

A brief description of it appears on pg 13 of

    TI's Telecom Circuits Selection Guide, 1983

    VLSI/LSI for Telecom Applications

Good luck

    Geoff

Geoff Thompson        [e-mail]
475 Oakmead Pkwy    [phone]
Sunnyvale, CA 94086

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

Date:     Fri, 17 Apr 87 10:23 CDT
From:     Mike Linnig <[e-mail]>
Subject:  RE: AC powered phone devices

> Devices that utilize AC line power and are neither FCC-registered nor
> grandfathered should be carefully checked for powerline leakage before use.
> It is extremely difficult to cause physical HARM to the telephone company
> cable plant or central office equipment, but it is possible if you
> intentionally try.

Another item that can be damaged by AC leakage into the phone line is
THE PHONE COMPANY LINEMAN (person?).  It is not uncommon for linemen to
touch uninsulated (live) telephone wires. At 48 volts DC you hardly notice
it (except when the phone rings -- ouch!).

If you think damaging the TELECO equipment might be expensive, try being
sued after being convicted of manslaughter!.

    Mike Linnig,
    Texas Instruments

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 12:33:43 PDT
Subject: system 36-pc, FCC registrations, standards activities

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           04/17/87 12:33:42
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: system 36-pc, FCC registrations, standards activities

 To: [e-mail]

 System 36-pc connection

 IBM provides some sort of interconnect for pc's which I think does what the
 requester wants. Contact the IBM support people for the System 36 owner. If
 they aren't helpful shake them till they call their daddies/mommies.

 FCC registrations; how ETCO did it

 In about 1982 or so, I used to buy telephones and terminal blocks etc. from
 "ETCO" who had a thick surplus electronics pulp catalog. (Since then you can
 buy these things at all rad shacks and for that matter drugstores so ETCO
 became relatively less needed and more expensive than alternatives).

 Several miscellaneous old-fashioned standard used phones I bought, of clearly
 different styles (e.g. including both bell and Gen Telephone types) all had
 the same FCC registration sticker on them, identical. I always wondered
 whether ETCO or others got a broad FCC registration for the whole
 grandfathered set, or whether they were cheating. Just curious.

 Standards activities

 In past times, MA bell was a focal point for a lot of telephone activity, but
 even then there were other companies. Now it's the known mess. How in the
 past, and how now, does anyone coordinate? Such matters as protocols,
 assignment of area codes, plans for new service offerings, etc. Are there
 agencies such as ANSI involved? Do they all meet with some sort of
 trust-busting exemption? Are we worse off after the bustup in terms of
 coordinated development? Do companies copy each other to some extent to
 coordinate service offerings?

 An example of an issue would be this: "call-waiting" has been out long enough
 now for "the public" to begin to have some understanding of what it is and
 what those funny beeps mean etc. This was an advantage of a new concept
 disseminating itself into the populace over time. (But, answering machines are
 also now widely understood even though they required no particular standards
 activity.)

 I wonder about the developments such as passing the caller's number, call
 screening, etc. It would seem advantageous to have some aspects of the form of
 this service comprehensible to "the populace", and more specifically for
 instrument makers to know what to look for on the line no matter where the
 call originated.

 Thanks, Doug
      system 36-pc, FCC registrations, standards activities

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

From: [e-mail] (John B. Nagle)
Subject: Re: Calling number delivery
Date: 18 Apr 87 03:47:35 GMT



       The calling number delivery service was offered as "TouchStar" in
the Orlando FL area starting in 1985 or 1986.  Supposedly all CO's in an
area code must be ESS before this capability can be installed.  I asked
our local business office about plans for this service in the 415 area code,
and after some discussions was told that the number of old switches in the
San Francisco area put an all ESS area code some years in the future.

       All current CO's have Automatic Number Identification so that long
distance billing will work, of course, but the question is whether this
information is forwarded beyond the originating CO when the destination is
not an inter-LATA toll call.

                    John Nagle

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

Date: Sat, 18 Apr 87 11:16:39 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (Plans for 2-line conference device)

In a recent article [e-mail] (David Sherman) writes:
> I have two lines at home, one normally used for a modem.
>
> I'm curious to know whether I can construct something which will
> let me achieve conference calling by using both lines -- the
> electronic equivalent to holding the mouthpiece of one phone to
> the earpiece of another, I guess.  In other words, if I'm at home
> talking to my wife on one line and our broker on the other, can
> I do something which will let them hear each other as well as me?
>
> I realize I can get conference calling from the phone company;
> I'm curious as to whether I can do it with what I already have.

    There are several methods of constructing a two-line conference
device:

1.    The _ideal_ method utilizes transformer isolation of each line,
    with a voice-switched hybrid-amplifier which supplies gain to
    the conference circuit (to compensate for connection loss so
    that the _distant_ parties can adequately hear _each_other_.)

2.    A passive circuit employing transformer isolation.

3.    Capacitor coupling of the two lines, possibly in conjunction with
    a resistor or inductor to "hold" one line (the local telephone set
    provides the DC resistance to hold the other line).

4.    Direct hard-wire connection of the T (tip) and R (ring) leads of
    each line.

    Of the above, (1) is the best approach, but such a circuit is not
trivial to design and build; (3) is a rather poor approach, and (4) is
absolutely atrocious (although it does work, after a fashion).
    This leaves (2) which, if done using the proper components, works
reasonably well, is inexpensive and easy to build, and is 100% safe to the
telephone network.  This article furnishes plans to build a conference
device based upon that method.  While building such a device and attaching
it to the telephone network without it having been FCC-registered may be
a technical violation of your "agreement" with your telephone company,
people connect such non-registered devices every day, with no one being
the wiser.  Since the enclosed circuit is intrinsically "safe" (i.e., no
ground reference or external power is used), I have no hesitation to provide
its construction plans.  Installation and operation is, of course, at the
sole risk of the user.
    This device connects to the T and R leads of each line, through
a four-pole switch.  When the switch is operated, the lines are coupled
together, and are also held through a resistor/inductor so that they
do not disconnect from the central office.
    Actual operation is at the discretion of the reader, and should
be self-evident.  An example would be if two single-line telephones
were present on a desk, with the device and its switch connected between
them.  In operation, a call would be made using telephone 1; the handset
of telephone 1 would be put aside while telephone 2 was used to dial
the other distant party; when the party on telephone 2 answered, the
conference switch would be operated and telephone 2 hung up; the user
would continue to use telephone 1 for the duration of the call, and
would release the conference switch to drop the telephone line holds
(actually on both lines) when the call or the conference was completed.
The user could, of course, choose to talk with telephone 2 after the
conference was completed, or could originate the call on telephone 2.
    The key to a successful implementation of this design is the
selection of a proper coupling transformer (called repeating coil,
in telephone parlance).  Any 'ole audio transformer will NOT work,
since each winding needs an EQUAL impedance between 500 and 1,000 ohms,
IN ADDITION to being able to handle at least 50 milliamperes of DC
current without saturating; it is this latter requirement which limits
the transformer selection.
    The best transformer would be a "surplus" telephone repeating
coil, with a type designation of 120C or 202A.  Such a device can often be
purchased for a few dollars from a surplus store or hamfest.  Other
sources would be a "friend" at a telephone company who would have
access to their surplus equipment (such surplus abounds these days as
telephone companies replace older equipment with ESS).  This repeating
coil has eight terminals since it has split windings; I have furnished the
proper connections for these terminals (improper connection may result
in very poor operation).
    If you can't find a surplus repeating coil, then try a regular
audio transformer that can handle the DC current; some typical part
numbers would be Stancor TA-52, TAPC-52; Triad TY-305P; UTC A-22, HA-108.
Equivalents to these transformers can often be found surplus for a few
dollars.
    If a transformer is used in place of the repeating coil, the
transformer will no doubt have only one winding on each side.  In this
case, ignore any center-tap lead, and just connect the resistor-capacitor
below in series with one lead.
    If anyone is wondering why the resistor-capacitor is connected
_between_ the split windings below it is because, well, er, that is just
the "traditional" way telephone circuits are designed when one has split
windings.
    There is nothing special about the resistors or capacitors;
just follow the specs below.
    Build the device in a case, with all leads properly insulated
from each other and from the outside world.


                     Switch     REP    Switch
T (Line 1)______________X_____  | |  _____X______________(Line 2) T
                        X   2 ) | | ( 4   X
                              ) | | (
                            1 ) | | ( 3
                     _________) | | (_________
                     |    |     | |      |    |
                  R1 /  C1|     | |   C2 |  R2/
                     \   _|_    | |     _|_   \
                     /   ___    | |     ___   /
                     \    |     | |      |    \
                     /    |     | |      |    /
                     |____|___  | |  ____|____|
                            6 ) | | ( 8
                              ) | | (
                            5 ) | | ( 7
R (Line 1)______________X_____) | | (_____X______________(Line 2) R
                        X                 X
                      Switch            Switch

    REP    Repeating coil (i.e., transformer), type 120C, 202A,
        or equivalent (see text)

    R1, R2    Resistor, 600 ohms, 2 watts

    C1, C2    Capacitor, non-polarized, 2.0 uF @ 100 WVDC

    Switch    Four-pole single-throw toggle or rotary switch

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
19-Apr-87 22:30:32-EDT,18033;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Sun 19 Apr 87 22:30:28-EDT
Date: 19 Apr 87 21:08-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #35
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                           Sunday, April 19, 1987 9:08PM
Volume 6, Issue 35

Today's Topics:

                Converting a modem+terminal to TTY/TTD
         Submission for mod.telecom (Telephone line quality)
      [news from the SW: additional $3 service fee considered ]
              [news from the SW: "marketing-test" ends ]
                       Re: standards activities

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

Date: Friday, 17 April 1987  17:18-EDT
From: Sarah Ferguson <[e-mail]>
Subject:   Converting a modem+terminal to TTY/TTD

Does anyone out there know how to convert a standard
modem+terminal setup for use as a TTY/TTD machine
(phone for the deaf)?

I am told it can be done, but no one I know seems to
know how.

Thanks in advance -

Sarah Ferguson
[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Apr 87 01:35:32 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (Telephone line quality)

In a recent article Greg Earle ([e-mail]) writes:
> I live in the 213 Area code in L.A.  I recently moved, and want to get two
> lines for my new abode, one of which I will use exclusively for a modem
> line.  When I talked to Pacific Bell I was told I could (for a nice high
> fee, of course) get a `Data Access Line' which would (presumably) run from
> the local switching office to my home; a higher grade line would replace the
> normal voice grade phone line.  I was told that this was recommended for
> anyone doing data transmissions of 2400 baud or higher.  I almost bit; but
> then I thought, what about the rest of the way?  I would be calling JPL in
> Pasadena 99% of the time, which is in Area code 818, prefix 354.  Since I'm
> not a TELECOM expert, I just surmised that the calls I would make would go
> from my home, over my `good' data line, to the local switching office; then
> to whatever the local switching office for Pasadena is, and then over a
> (presumably) standard voice grade line to my other modem.
>
> My question for you experts is (a) is this something like the real path that
> the call will take (3 hops; home <=> switching office <-> s.office#2 <-> work)
> and (b) if this is so, then is there any point in getting a higher grade line
> for one's home, when one has no control over the line quality for the other
> 2/3 of the connection ?!?

    Let's break up this discussion into two areas: (1) quality of central
office subscriber lines (i.e., between your home/office and the telephone
company central office); and (2) quality of lines between telephone company
central offices.

    I'll answer (2) first, because it is the easier answer.  In general,
the quality of an interoffice trunk (i.e., a line connecting two telephone
company central offices) is FAR superior to the quality of any subscriber
line.
    In keeping with the DDD network operating goals and an overall
transmission design plan called VNL (Via Net Loss), the transmission loss
on most interoffice trunks originating at End Offices (Class 5) trunks is
carefully kept below 4.0 dB.  Interoffice trunk transmission loss on
Toll Center (Class 4) and up to Regional Center (Class 1) switching offices
is carefully kept below 2.6 dB, or even below 1.4 dB, depending upon the path.
    Such interoffice trunk design is generally done so precisely that
loss is kept within +/- 0.1 dB of the design goal on any interoffice trunk
of a given path to assure a uniform transmission quality.  In addition, such
interoffice trunks are generally equalized to have a reasonably flat
transmission characteristic between 300 and 3,000 Hz.  Furthermore since most
interoffice trunks originating in End Offices (except in high-density urban
areas where adjacent central offices are close together) are four-wire (i.e.,
separate receive and transmission paths - one for each direction) and are
terminated in a precision hybrid-network, the transmission quality will be
far superior to anything which could ever exist on a two-wire subscriber loop.
All interoffice trunks of Toll Center and up origin are four-wire.
    Noise level, ERL (Echo Return Loss), and other parameters which affect
the quality of transmission are also kept within precise design goals on
interoffice trunks.
    The BOC's and larger independent operating telephone companies
check the transmission quality of interoffice trunks on a regular basis,
often using automatic test apparatus such as ATMS (Automatic Transmission
Measuring System), CAROT (Centralized Automatic Reporting of Trunks), TFMS
(Trunk and Facility Maintenance System), etc.  Trunks which fail to pass
these automatic tests are disabled until repair is effected.
    So the point is: under virtually all circumstances, you should
have little concern about the transmission quality of interoffice trunks,
as compared to your own subscriber loop.
    (IMPORTANT NOTE: The above applies to what is traditionally known
as the DDD network; some of this standardization has gone to hell with the
advent of Alternate Long Distance carrier. The above information should
still be safely applicable if your call is intra-LATA in length, is
inter-LATA but served by the same operating telephone company at both ends,
or is routed through AT&T.  This is NOT a "plug" for AT&T; it's just a
simple fact of life since AT&T still runs all the major toll switching
centers in the U.S.)

    Now we'll get back to the first topic, which is the local subscriber
loop.  Subscriber loops are generally designed based upon only two parameters:
(1) DC resistance and (2) transmission loss at 1.0 KHz.
    Since most central office apparatus has subscriber loop resistance
limits between 1,200 and 1,500 ohms, resistance of a subscriber loop is
controlled to be within this range by selecting cable layout with sections
that have large-enough wire gauges (the SMALLER gauge sections are generally
CLOSEST to the central office).  If the resistance limit still cannot be
economically met with wire gauge selection alone, then a signaling range
extender (loop extender) will be connected to the line; this device is always
located in the central office.  Under this condition, the subscriber loop
resistance may be >> 1,000 ohms, but the loop extender has the sensitivity
to support such a higher resistance.
    In simple terms, the transmission loss of a subscriber loop is
directly proportional to its DC resistance - so a long loop will also have
a large transmission loss.  Invariably, subscriber loops greater than 10 kft
(kilofeet) in length will have loading coils installed every X-kft (there are
different loading schemes which use different spacing between loading coils);
these loading coils add inductance which compensates for the attenuation of
the loop that results from distributed capacitance.
    The worse case loss that any reasonable telephone company would impose
on a subscriber loop is about 9 dB.  New York Telephone, as an example,
tries to keep loop loss to no more than 6 dB - but not every loop is that
lucky. :-)
    If a maximum subscriber loop transmission loss goal of 6 to 9 dB
cannot be met through loading and cable routing, then a voice-frequency
repeater is installed on the subscriber line; this repeater is almost
always installed in the central office on the required lines.  Sometimes a
combination loop extender-repeater is used, but in many cases there will
be two discrete devices in the central office.
    Under most circumstances, subscriber loop loss is measured at only
1.0 kHz.  However, a frequency-vs-attenuation plot of a subscriber loop
can look like a roller coaster!  Since the human ear is rather forgiving,
for voice applications most telephone companies care little about the
frequency-vs-attenuation curve on a POTS (Plain 'Ole Telephone Service)
subscriber loop.
    However, MODEMS can care about this curve!  Subscriber loops
which run through mixed gauges of loaded cable, and/or run through
voice-frequency repeaters (especially of the older E6 variety) can have
some pretty ugly frequency-vs-attenuation curves.  The only way to flatten
the curve (and thereby make the line more attractive to data) is by means
of an equalizer, a better quality repeater (hybrid rather than a negative
impedance type like the E6), along with more careful design engineering of
the particular loop.
    This equalizer, repeater change, and additional engineering is not
necessary for most voice applications - so it isn't done.  However, an
equalizer and additional engineering DOES result in a superior subscriber
loop for data purposes.
    So, telephone companies generally charge more money for a better
subscriber loop design for data applications.  If you are making serious
use of data transmission at > 2,400 bps, the comparatively small additional
monthly and installation charge is well worth it to get a better subscriber
loop.
    I don't make a habit of defending telephone companies, but I must
say that I feel such an additional charge is reasonable.  They do have to
install additional equipment (under most circumstances), and certainly do
have to perform specific engineering on the design of the subscriber loop.
    As far as noise level on subscriber loops is concerned, this is
generally caused by wet terminals and splices and is really a repair problem.
There is little that can be done to reduce noise level on a subscriber loop
other than to track down wet or poor splices.  However, for the price of
a better quality loop, one generally gets a quantitative noise measurement
with some attempt at repair if the noise level is beyond normal limits.

    Now, to sum up and answer the $ 64 question: In my opinion, for data
transmission > 2,400 bps on LONGER SUBSCRIBER LOOPS (say > 2 miles from the
central office), an additional charge for a better quality loop (i.e.,
flatter frequency response and lower attenuation) IS a worthwhile expense.
At least, with a known good loop of known characteristics, one can look
elsewhere should data errors become a problem.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: Sun 19 Apr 87 13:16:08-CDT
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: [news from the SW: additional $3 service fee considered ]

    [ from the Austin American Statesman, April 12, 87 ]

    PHONE UTILITIES CONSIDERING $3 SERVICE FEE

DALLAS (AP) - More than a dozen Texas telephone utilitties are considering adding a $3 cahrge for basic service to monthly bills, a move that would transfer costs now paid by long-distance companies to local consumers.

The additional charge, which must be approved by the PUC would cost customers $820 million over five years, the Dallas Times Herald reported Saturday.

Jon Loehman, vice president for rates and revenues for Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., said the suggested charge has not been formally approved by the utilities.  If the proposal was approved by the companies, it would go before the PUC.

The utilities' proposal is to gradually use revenue from the $3 fee to replace some of the multimillion-dollar charges long-distance companies must pay local telephone companies for access to their lines.

"It sounds to me like another plan to put money in the pockets of phone companies that is going to hurt some consumers and small businesses," said Sen. Chet Edwards, D-Duncanville.

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

Date: Sun 19 Apr 87 13:27:59-CDT
From: Werner Uhrig  <[e-mail]>
Subject: [news from the SW: "marketing-test" ends ]

    [ from the Daily Texan, April 14, 1987 ]

    BELL ENDS AREA MARKETING PROGRAM (by Keefe Borden, Daily Texan Staff)

Southwestern Bell Telephone ended a two-year marketing program Sunday designed
to evaluate the marketability of several telephone features.

Jim Goodwin, public relations manager for SWB, said Monday "customer response
has been good" to the program, entitled "Custom Calling Services Plus."

Although Bell received a few complaints, "there was no strong customer
reaction" to the decision to end the program, Goodwin said.

The services included automatic re-call, distinctive ringing, selective call
rejection, selective call forwarding and customer-originated trace, Goodwin
said.

SWB officials chose the Austin area for the market-testing program the local
company has the type of equipment needed for the test, Goodwin said.

The test began in January 1985 and was planned for two years.  The program was
extended into April to evaluate the effictiveness of an advertising campaign
started in fall 1986, Goodwin said.

Generally, telephone numbers beginning with four or eight, about 200,000 of the
370,000 lines in the Austin area, had access to the services.  About 30,000
customers used at least one of the services each month, Goodwin said.

He said SWB will not reintroduce the services in the Austin area in the near
future.

Selective call rejection allowed customers to avoid unwanted phone calls and
cost 25 cents for each use.

Customer-originated trace recorded the number of the caller, the date and the
time of a call.  Customers had to contact Bell officials to have the
information released to police.  The cost of tracing a call was $5.

The distinctive ringing service, which cost 25 cents per use, allowed customers
to assign identifiable rings for up to three numbers.

Selective call-forwarding allowed customer to forward calls from a maximum of
three different numbers to a second number.  Other calls would not be
forwarded.  That service cost 10 cents for each use.

[ instead of passing on the advantages that new technology brings to the
    consumers, they want to milk the customer all they can.  As long as
    local service is left as a monopoly, the Baby-Bells will continue
    in the tradition of Mama, it seems.  Would anyone care to discuss
    the possibilities and problems of demonopolizing local service?
    I certainly think it's needed and possible.

  Please don't misunderstand - I will praise the achievements and benefits
    of the US-phone system anyday.  my metha is "take the best and
    improve on it; ignore the mediocre and eliminate the bad".
    Unfortunately, as most of us seem to agree, the breakup was done
    in a manner which cannot be considered as an improvement by anyone
    but the consumer.  ---Werner ]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Lewis)
Subject: Re: standards activities
Date: 19 Apr 87 23:56:20 GMT



> In past times, MA bell was a focal point for a lot of telephone activity, but
>even then there were other companies. Now it's the known mess. How in the
>past, and how now, does anyone coordinate? Such matters as protocols,
>assignment of area codes, plans for new service offerings, etc. Are there
>agencies such as ANSI involved? Do they all meet with some sort of
>trust-busting exemption? Are we worse off after the bustup in terms of
>coordinated development? Do companies copy each other to some extent to
>coordinate service offerings?
>
> An example of an issue would be this: "call-waiting" has been out long
>enough
>now for "the public" to begin to have some understanding of what it is an
>what those funny beeps mean etc. This was an advantage of a new concep
>disseminating itself into the populace over time. (But, answering machines are
>also now widely understood even though they required no particular standards
>activity.)
>
>I wonder about the developments such as passing the caller's number, call
>screening, etc. It would seem advantageous to have some aspects of the form of
>this service comprehensible to "the populace", and more specifically for
>instrument makers to know what to look for on the line no matter where the
>call originated.

I'm sure there are Bellcore people out there rushing to answer this, but...
Much of this is done by Bell Communications Research (Bellcore), which is an
offshoot of Bell Labs (now completely independent of AT&T) owned by the
Regional Bell Operating Companies.  Bellcore does a lot of standards setting
and new services planning.

I know a little about it; I'm starting in their Network Services Planning
Center in June...

<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>

Arpa:        [e-mail]
Usenet:        {ihnp4|ucbvax|cmucspt}!cmu-cs-ius2!deej
Bell System:    [phone]
USMail:        5170 Beeler St., #1
        Pittsburgh, PA 15217-1002
Carrier Pigeon:    The big red brick house with the plate-glass windows out
        front.

The opinions contained herein must be mine.  No one else will claim them.

    "If you're not part of the solution,
            you must be part of the problem."

--
<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>

Arpa:        [e-mail]
Usenet:        {ihnp4|ucbvax|cmucspt}!cmu-cs-ius2!deej
Bell System:    [phone]
USMail:        5170 Beeler St., #1
        Pittsburgh, PA 15217-1002
Carrier Pigeon:    The big red brick house with the plate-glass windows out
        front.

The opinions contained herein must be mine.  No one else will claim them.

    "If you're not part of the solution,
            you must be part of the problem."

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
24-Apr-87 00:14:51-EDT,21040;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 23-Apr-87 23:43:01
Date: 23 Apr 87 23:43-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #36
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Thursday, April 23, 1987 11:43PM
Volume 6, Issue 36

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                             GTE Features
                     Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards
                         REN table and limits
                     Call Forwarding Questions..
                        Re: telecom standards
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #31
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
        Re: Submission for mod.telecom (Modems and data jacks)
                            I Remember KYW
                   Standards activities, ISDN plug

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

From: rochester!cci632![e-mail] ( remote copy)
Date: 20 Apr 87 03:54:07 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: cci632!ritcv!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!ius2.cs.cmu.edu!deej
From: [e-mail] (David Lewis)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: standards activities
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 19 Apr 87 23:56:20 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Organization: CMU Electrical Engineering Etc.
Lines: 63


> In past times, MA bell was a focal point for a lot of telephone activity, but
>even then there were other companies. Now it's the known mess. How in the
>past, and how now, does anyone coordinate? Such matters as protocols,
>assignment of area codes, plans for new service offerings, etc. Are there
>agencies such as ANSI involved? Do they all meet with some sort of
>trust-busting exemption? Are we worse off after the bustup in terms of
>coordinated development? Do companies copy each other to some extent to
>coordinate service offerings?
>
> An example of an issue would be this: "call-waiting" has been out long
>enough
>now for "the public" to begin to have some understanding of what it is an
>what those funny beeps mean etc. This was an advantage of a new concep
>disseminating itself into the populace over time. (But, answering machines are
>also now widely understood even though they required no particular standards
>activity.)
>
>I wonder about the developments such as passing the caller's number, call
>screening, etc. It would seem advantageous to have some aspects of the form of
>this service comprehensible to "the populace", and more specifically for
>instrument makers to know what to look for on the line no matter where the
>call originated.

I'm sure there are Bellcore people out there rushing to answer this, but...
Much of this is done by Bell Communications Research (Bellcore), which is an
offshoot of Bell Labs (now completely independent of AT&T) owned by the
Regional Bell Operating Companies.  Bellcore does a lot of standards setting
and new services planning.

I know a little about it; I'm starting in their Network Services Planning
Center in June...

<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>

Arpa:        [e-mail]
Usenet:        {ihnp4|ucbvax|cmucspt}!cmu-cs-ius2!deej
Bell System:    [phone]
USMail:        5170 Beeler St., #1
        Pittsburgh, PA 15217-1002
Carrier Pigeon:    The big red brick house with the plate-glass windows out
        front.

The opinions contained herein must be mine.  No one else will claim them.

    "If you're not part of the solution,
            you must be part of the problem."

--
<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>

Arpa:        [e-mail]
Usenet:        {ihnp4|ucbvax|cmucspt}!cmu-cs-ius2!deej
Bell System:    [phone]
USMail:        5170 Beeler St., #1
        Pittsburgh, PA 15217-1002
Carrier Pigeon:    The big red brick house with the plate-glass windows out
        front.

The opinions contained herein must be mine.  No one else will claim them.

    "If you're not part of the solution,
            you must be part of the problem."

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

Date: Sat 18 Apr 87 05:10:12-EST
From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: GTE Features


    About the post dealing with "General Telephone moves into the '90s",
I think the service they are talking about is some sort of ISDN thing. You
frequently hear about this a lot now, and I assume that GTE wants to get in on
the act (Oh no!!!!! :-)  )

    As to why GTE didn't explain any further, well, after all, they ARE GTE,
and you really can't expect too much from them. (Do people moving to LA
*really* ask to be located in a neighborhood that isn't served by GTE? The
weren't THAT bad when I was there last  :-) .......)

    -Doug  (loyal Bell user!)

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
...(rutgers!) seismo!weslyn.bitnet!reuben (UUCP)

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

Date: Sat 18 Apr 87 04:49:40-EST
From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards

Message-ID: <[e-mail]>



   The question dealing with the similarities of AT&T calling cards and Bell
Operating Company calling cards is pretty complicated.

   Basically, in most areas, there is no difference between Inter-LATA and
Intra-Lata calls placed using 0+ dialing with a credit card. All calls are
handled by the same equipment.

   Some areas, like 415, 408, and some other areas in CA, and 516 on Long
Island in New York, have separated the
Intra-Lata Calling Card Equipment from
the Inter-lata equipment, as per federal regulation.

   In these "newer" areas, when you make a local (Intra-Lata) call, you will
get routed over the Bell Operating companies equipment. Instead of the usual
voice saying "Please dial your card number or 0 for an operator now", you will
hear a stranger, less well pronounced voice. This is the local (Pac*Bell or
NY Tel) equipment which handles your call.

   When you place a long-distance (inter-lata) call, you get the usual AT&T
equipment.

   The problem with this is that if you make a local (intra-lata) call over
the local Bell company, you can't press the "#" sign to make a new call, IF
THE CALL IS INTER-LATA (LONG DISTANCE).
If you want to make multiple intra-lata calls, you CAN sequence call, but the
moment you make an inter-lata call, you
will get a message saying "Please hang up and dial your call again. Your call
can not be completed as a sequence call" (in a British accent, no less...)

    If you FIRST make an inter-lata call, (long distance), and then try to
make a local call, it will work fine. (My local company SAYS AT&T will be
changing this soon, but I don't think
they know what they are talking about
as usual...)

    Briefly then, in areas 415,408,516 and probably others in the near future,
inter-lata and intra-lata calls ARE handled by different equipment. Moreover,
this creates problems because you can not sequence-call to an inter-lata call
after you have initially made an intra-lata call over either Pac*Bell's or
NY Tel's equipments.

     This, however, is the only change to calling card service that I have
heard of. New York Tel, in their calling card literature, says that you can use
the NY Tel calling card to call locally, nationally, or around the world.
Obviously, they intend for you to use your calling card for more than just
local calls. The Pac*Bell (the clear ones) calling cards also have similar
literature. So I don't think that the local operating companies will change
their PIN numbers from that of AT&T's,
or even if they have the capability to do so. (AT&T and the Bell Operating
companies have a pretty good system to eliminate card fraud, and all the system
have to be tied together for it to work. In most areas, if you dial more than
36 calling card calls in 3 hours, a person at your local security department
will be notified, and they will try to contact you to see if the calls are
valid. If they do not get in touch with you, they will temporarily cancel the
card until they do get in touch with you...)

    Therefore, it seems unlikely that there will be separate PIN numbers for
AT&T cards and local cards. The real problem is this nonsense with separate
calling card equipment, which is just a waste of money. I think this is just
another good example of what a mess
the Bell System Divestiture was and is...Hopefully, some day, some one in
charge with these people will realize this and put the Bell System back
together again...Wishful thinking, I know, but its better than getting upset
with this idiocy...:-)  !!!

    -Doug

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
...(rutgers!) seismo!weslyn.bitnet!reuben (UUCP)

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

Date: Mon, 20 Apr 87 12:05:25 EDT
From: Barry Nelson <[e-mail]>
Subject: REN table and limits

In response to:

> Can anyone explain why REN's (...) come in "A" and "B" flavors?
> On my many instruments I see old-fashioned phones are
> usually 1.0A, and flimsy electronic jobs are 0.5B or 1.5B. I have dreamed up
> something about whether it uses the real AC to drive a bell (A?) or runs an
> electronic tweeter (B?). Do you add them all together anyway, and why do they
> bother telling you which flavor?

Not quite.  The letter following the Ringer Equivalent Number (REN) is the
Ringing Type letter representing the frequency range for which the REN is
tested.  It may be one of A through Q or, in special cases, Z.

Furthermore, REN is based upon loop or ground start modes and the on-hook
impedence range of the loop. One must reference several diagrams and tables to
figure out what to test and then compute the largest of several methods to
arrive at the REN for each listed Ringing Type for each phone option.

Type A is 20 or 30 Hz (+/- 3 Hz), 40-130 vrms, 1400 ohms (1000 ohms at 30 Hz).
Type B is 15.3 to 68.0 Hz, 40-150 vrms, 1600 ohms  (looks like a harder test)
Types C through P are other segments of 15.3 to 68 Hz with volts from 54 to
        150 and impedences all limited to 1600 ohms.
Type Q is 20 Hz +/- 3 Hz, 40-130 vrms, 1400 ohms.
Type Z does not comform to these on-hook characteristics and requires consent
       from the local telco (which is by no means guaranteed).

The limitation for REN is stated as follows:

"68.312(f) All registered terminal equipment and registered protective circuitry
which can affect on-hook impedance shall be assigned a Ringer Equivalence.  The
sum of all such ringer equivalences on a given telephone line or loop shall not
exceed 5; ... "

It appears that they don't discriminate totals based upon Ringing Type,
although I suspect the Telco knows what RT they send you and can use your REN
and RT designators against you in certain situations (if you give it to them),
notwithstanding their ability to empirically determine your instrument and loop
characteristics.

Reference 47 CFR part 68.312 if you would like to know more. Caution: It's
sometimes a little dry compared to reading a hex core dump of the same length.

"This document contains statements of opinion by the author which are not
attributable to BBN Communications Corporation or its management."

Barry C. Nelson / Network Consultant / International Certifications
BBN Communications Corporation

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

Date:     Tue, 21 Apr 87  11:12:29 EDT
From:     [e-mail]
Subject:  Call Forwarding Questions..


I have this wonderful service on my line called Call Fowarding
(It had best be wonderful; the person who sold it to me told me it
was wonderful, and my monthly overhead just went up a little..)

If I set forwarding to a line that would be a charge call, and you
call me, who pays to have that call forwarded?  Also, what rate
applies?  If you are paying for it is there anyway for you to
detect this fact?  Would the rate be calculated based as if you
called the destination directly?

Finally, If both my best friend and myself set call forwarding to
each other, what happens when someone calls?

John Curran

[If you set call forwarding, the rate between you and the forwarded
destination is what is charged, and YOU PAY THAT NO MATTER WHERE THE
CALL ORIGINATES FROM. Also, if you forward to someone who forwards to
you the call goes "click", "click", busy. The two clicks are the
trunks going between your central offices. If you do this to someone
on the same ESS machine, it gives you a busy immediately. This is
useful especially if you have your calls forwarded from home to work
and vice versa. You can safely forward your calls bi-directionned until
you get home and clear the forwarding. Also, I crashed our central office
forwarding once to someone on the same machine (that was 12 years ago).
--jsol]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Apr 87 11:55:37 edt
From: ms6b#@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu)
Subject: Re: telecom standards

Since BellCore is owned by the seven Regional Holding Companies, it has a lot
of clout in setting standards -- as long as its parent companies all agree.
But Bellcore is not all-powerful.  Since the RHC's aren't permitted to
manufacture, Bellcore must still persuade companies like AT&T or Northern
Telecom to make things the way they want -- and at a price the RHC's can
afford.  Moreover, Bellcore doesn't represent GTE --which is as big as any of
the regionals--nor the 1400 other independent excahange carrriers.  Nor does
it represent the interexchange carriers such as ATT or MCI.

Formal U.S. standards are actually set in the ANSI T1 committee, which is
sponsored by the Exchange Carriers Standards Association -- a group set up
specifically to foster standards development after the divestiture.  Any
corporation that wishes to can join T1; Bellcore and the RHC's represent only
a fraction of the total membership.  The working committees of T1 try to
achieve consensus standards, and most of the time they do,  but a 2/3 vote is
all that is formally required for approval under ANSI rules.

The T1 committee finds itself spending lots of time drafting contributions to
international standards setting groups operated by the CCITT (Comite
Consultatif International de Telephone et Telegraph).  Few manufactures want
to have standards which are U.S. only, since that means they must build
different products for the international market.  Thus, the standards adopted
by ANSI for the U.S. are strongly influenced by what is happening in the
CCITT.

Marvin Sirbu
CMU

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

From: decuac!casemo![e-mail] (Brian Cuthie )
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V6 #31
Date: 20 Apr 87 14:33:38 GMT


In article <870417-100022-2409@Xerox>, [e-mail] writes:
> I think that the one that Radio Shack sold is the Texas Insturments
> TCM1520A
>

Yea, but just try to get some. It took me over three months to get 18 of
the things from a local distributor. I tried everyplace I could think
of (major firms [ie. Hallmark, Hamilton, Arrow, etc]) and they all quoted
lead times of 12 to 16 weeks from TI. It seems that everybody is using this
chip and there just aren't any around. It's a great chip, but if you
can't reliably get it what doog is it ???

Regards
-Brian


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ARPA:    [e-mail]

USENET:    ...!seismo!mimsy![e-mail]

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

From: rochester!cci632![e-mail] (John V. Zambito)
Date: 20 Apr 87 14:18:35 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: cci632!jvz
From: [e-mail] (John V. Zambito)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telephone Ring Detection
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 20 Apr 87 14:18:34 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John V. Zambito)
Distribution: world
Organization: CCI, Communications Systems Division, Rochester, NY
Lines: 10

In article <[e-mail]> JEL@PSUVM (Jon Loos 814/238-6649) writes:
>detect the ring signal on a telephone line?  What I want to do is build a
>simple box that would plug into my equalizer input or output lines, and also
>the phone lines.  When the phone rings, it would can the stereo, so that I

The part you want is the TI TCM1520A. I got one as a somple from the local
TI rep. I hooked it up through a FET to drive a relay. The relay can be used
to switch a light or cut out the speakers or turn on a loud horn, etc......
It only loads the line while the phone rings, and only about a milliamp.
The app. note in the TI telecomm products data book is very helpful.

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

From: sundc!cos![e-mail] (Howard C. Berkowitz)
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom (Modems and data jacks)
Date: 22 Apr 87 19:00:07 GMT



I do want to emphasize that it's bad practice to transmit at a higher
level than that which is designed for a local loop; it's quite accurate
that louder is not always better -- but it is important to be loud enough.

The worst horror story I've heard on excessive level, which may be
apocryphal:

An [unnamed by my informant in DATEC] user called his telephone test
board for a problem with the remote site's Bell 829 data auxiliary set.
[This is an interface device, for Telco use, which has a tone-operated
loopback feature].  The user complained that the unit would not go
into loopback.

Now, 829's are for telco use, not customer.  Most telcos are happy,
however, to let customers use them for fault isolation.  The 829
is put into loopback with at least a 1-second application of
2713 Hz tone.

In the story, the helpful test board tried to loop back the 829
in question.  It worked perfectly, but the user couldn't get
it to loop.  The test board then asked the customer to describe
exactly what he was doing; the answer was "oh, I send out 2600 Hz
at a good hot +10-20 dBm -- the limiter drops it to a legal level."

Horrified silence from test board.  A mystery of the last week
just resolved.

Over the past week or so, the telco had been installing a new
electronic switch in its central office, a switch equipped with
toll fraud detection.  "Blue Box" fraud uses a 2600 Hz tone;
somehow, the user assumed this was the loopback frequency.

Because the user 2600 tone went out at an extremely high level,
it crosstalked a large number of pairs in its cable.  The
new switch kept reporting massive simultaneous toll fraud attempts
(i.e., pure 2600 on a subscriber loop), a sufficiently large number
that equipment failure was assumed.  The switch had been torn
down repeatedly to find out why it assumed massive toll fraud
was in process.

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

Date:  Wed, 22 Apr 87 12:19 MST
From:  [e-mail] (Jim)
Subject:  I Remember KYW

KYW was definitely well established in Cleveland in 1957, when the
Cleveland-area students who had been exiled to Ohio University in
Athens (in the southeastern part of the state) simply couldn't exist
without their favorite radio station and constructed all manner of
antennas in order to pick it up.

I still remember the little jingle that was sung:

         "K Y W, AM and FM too, in Cleveland, Ohio."

                                   Jim Schuttenberg

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

Date: 20-Apr-1987 1849
From: [e-mail]  (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Subject: Standards activities, ISDN plug

That little plug GTE sent in the mail last week about more services over
the same jack was a simple plug for ISDN.  The idea of ISDN is to have
a standard jack that you can request, per call, your choice of bearer
service -- voice, audio, data, packet.  It's a couple years away from
commercial deployment, but field trials (not quite the real thing) are
under way.

Re: Standards.  They used to come from New Jersey.  Nowadays, they
are nominally made under the purview of ANSI and its accredited T1
committee, run by the Exchange Carriers Standards Association (in NJ,
of course).  About a hundred companies (at least) belong.  T1 work is
done by its Technical Subcommittees, currently:
    T1C1 - CPE connections
    T1D1 - ISDN
    T1M1 - Maintenance
    T1Q1 - Quality of Service
    T1X1 - Inter-carrier connections
    T1Y1 - Specialized subjects

FWIW, T1C1 has generated, and T1 has sent for ballot, a standard defining
loop start and ground start analog lines.  Finally, an official "standard".
     fred (T1D1 rep at DEC)

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
24-Apr-87 21:32:34-EDT,7056;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Fri 24 Apr 87 21:32:31-EDT
Date: 24 Apr 87 20:30-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #37
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                           Friday, April 24, 1987 8:30PM
Volume 6, Issue 37

Today's Topics:

                     Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                    Re: Hang-ups [Re: RISKS-4.67]
                     ring ship; area code history
      Re: Radio Station Call Letters, International Allocations

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

Date: Fri, 24 Apr 87 02:28 EDT
From: Jeffrey Del Papa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards
Reply-To: Jeffrey Del Papa <[e-mail]>

    Date: Sat 18 Apr 87 04:49:40-EST
    From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>

    Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

    In most areas, if you dial more than
    36 calling card calls in 3 hours, a person at your local security department
    will be notified, and they will try to contact you to see if the calls are
    valid. If they do not get in touch with you, they will temporarily cancel the
    card until they do get in touch with you...)

    -Doug

    [e-mail]
    [e-mail]
    ...(rutgers!) seismo!weslyn.bitnet!reuben (UUCP)

    -------

this sounds like a real loss. I guess I have been lucky, but when away from home, I
will make heavy use of the card to track things down...  It has often happened that
co-workers out in the field have made repeated calls to me when they have had a
problem. I would be most annoyed if I was trying to fix something, and my card
stopped working. (I have a separately billed card now, as it really annoyed me when
my card stopped working because I moved.)

<dp>

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

From: Unprivileged User <[e-mail]>
Date: 24 Apr 87 09:08:35 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: columbia!amsterdam!dupuy
From: [e-mail] (Alexander Dupuy)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding Questions..
Summary: Call Forwarding when nobody answers
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 24 Apr 87 09:08:34 GMT
References: <870421111229.000018E9.AAPS.MA@UMass>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Alexander Dupuy)
Followup-To: comp.dcom.telecom
Distribution: world
Organization: Columbia University Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 18


I have call forwarding on my phone line, which I primarily use for a modem.
It's better than call waiting, which in some exchanges can't be overridden,
since I can just forward calls to the other line while I'm using this one.

But I can't forward calls to work, since (with N.Y. Tel) the other party has to
answer your call-forwarding call for it to take effect.  Is there some real
reason for this "feature"?  This feature would also seem to prevent setting up
a busy forwarding loop as jsol suggested (I have not tried it, though).

[You should be able to do the forwarding command TWICE to get it to work
without the person answering the call. I.e. 72#5551212<hangup><dialtone>
72#5551212<beep><beep><dialtone>..... --jsol]

I can get around it to some extent by having my calls at work forwarded to a
secretary, but I would think letting the number ring a few (say 7) times ought
to work as well.

@alex
---
arpanet: [e-mail]
uucp:    ...!seismo!columbia!dupuy

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

From: hplabs!well![e-mail] (David Schachter)
Subject: Re: Hang-ups [Re: RISKS-4.67]
Date: 24 Apr 87 21:06:32 GMT
Reply-To: well![e-mail] (David Schachter)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>The article went on to say that many firms are flaunting the law.

They are not flaunting the law, they are flouting it.  To "flaunt" a law would
be to show it off, perhaps at a press conference.  To "flout" a law would be to
break it, ignore it, or evade it.

The phrase "Esc for ATtention, Home to SWitch" comes to mind.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 87 15:06:10 PDT
Subject: ring ship; area code history

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           04/24/87 15:06:09
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: ring ship; area code history

 To: [e-mail]

 ring chip:

 If it would take 14 weeks to get the real chip, an approach would be to
 parasite off a device that in effect already has one. Examples:

 1. Get a radio shack "fone flasher" that turns on a 110v outlet when the phone
 rings, and either use a 110v relay or turn on a real light and use an scr or
 CdS cell pointed at the light.

 2. Use a sound switch (110v devices are available in the consumer market)
 driven off the bell.

 area code history:

 Of all things, the San Francisco Chronicle had, in a column on 4/24/87, the
 following article (excerpted here without specific permission): "... When were
 area codes invented and why aren't the numbers sequential? Roger Orr of
 Pacific Bell was able to answer... Area codes were invented in 1946, he said,
 and the first thing determined were the middle digits. States containing more
 than one area code, such as New York and California, were assigned a 1 in the
 middle. States that had only one area code at the time (today, they may have
 more), were assigned... 0 in the middle. Thus, California had 213 (Los
 angeles), 415 (Bay Area) and 916 (Sacramento area). Vermont was 802.

 The two digits on the end(s) of the code (4 and 5 in the Bay Area) were
 assigned upwards from 2, according to frequency of use. Higher digits went
 to... rural areas... Sacramento (had 916, took longer to dial than LA with
 213).

 The codes most often used were New York (212), LA (213), and Wash. DC (202)...

 Thanks, Doug
      ring ship; area code history

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

From: seismo!mnetor!alberta!ncc![e-mail] (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Subject: Re: Radio Station Call Letters, International Allocations
Date: 21 Apr 87 07:12:19 GMT



Beware that these prefixes can change on a moments notice.

If you are looking for a specific mapping of a prefix or geographical
area, try a posting to rec.ham-radio...

--
Lyndon Nerenberg (VE6BBM)
pyramid!ncc!lyndon || seismo!mnetor!alberta!ncc!lyndon

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
29-Apr-87 19:54:04-EDT,14283;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 29-Apr-87 19:43:11
Date: 29 Apr 87 19:43-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #38
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Wednesday, April 29, 1987 7:43PM
Volume 6, Issue 38

Today's Topics:

               special dial codes for cellular phones?
                     Re: Telephone Ring Detection
       Submission for mod.telecom ("Crashing" a Central Office)
       Submission for mod.telecom (Ringing Detection Circuits)
                     Re: Telephone Ring Detection

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

From: "Gregory M. Paris" <[e-mail]>
Subject: special dial codes for cellular phones?
Date: 26 Apr 87 02:47:08 GMT
Reply-To: "Gregory M. Paris" <[e-mail]>


Not too long ago, I caught the tail end of a news item (TV that is)
about emergency call boxes along some Massachusetts Interstates.
As an aside, they mentioned that you can also contact the State(?)
Police via a special dial sequence with a cellular phone.  I didn't
write it down, but it was something simple like *77.  Does anybody
know anything more about this?  Are there more of these codes?
Seems like the phone co. should mention these things to you when
you get your cellular service, but no such list was provided for
me...
--
Greg Paris ............................. [e-mail] (a UUCP domain)
{cci632,cbosgd,gatech,ihnp4,linus,mirror,necntc,uiucdcs,umcp-cs}!rayssd!gmp
................. People like you should not be allowed to start any fires.

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

From: decvax!utzoo![e-mail]
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 87 04:03:50 edt
Subject: Re: Telephone Ring Detection

Funny you should ask, I posted this to sci.electronics not long ago:

-------------
From: [e-mail] (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: I need a telephone ring detector chip
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

The following circuit is from an HP app note; I have tested it and found
it to work well.  Sorry for the inability to just display the diagram, but
I lack the patience to try to approximate it with ASCII characters...

You have two wires coming in from the phone line.  First, each goes through
a 100k resistor.  Then there is a 10M resistor between them.  Then one of
them goes through a 0.02 uF capacitor, which should be rated for something
like 200V.  Then there are two diodes in parallel between the lines, with
opposite polarities (one with anode to top line, the other with cathode
to top line):  one a 1N4148 and one the input LED of a 6N139 opto-isolator.

The 6N139 has a Darlington output with four pins available.  The one going
to the photodiode and the collector of the inner transistor goes to +5.
The one going to the emitter of the outer transistor goes to ground.  The
one going to the collector of the outer transistor is the output.  The one
going to the internal transistor-transistor connection is connected to the
output through a 0.1 uF capacitor.

The output line then goes through a 10k resistor.  Then there is a 56k
resistor from it to +5.  Then it goes into the base of a 2N3906 transistor.
The emitter of this transistor is connected to +5.  The collector is the
final output, with a 1k pulldown resistor between it and ground.

Explanation:

The 100k resistors supply plenty of impedance between the whole
circuit and the lines no matter what fouls up inside the circuit.  The
10M resistor bleeds off static charges that might show up when the thing
is not connected (HP actually made it 22M, but that's hard to find and
10M works fine).  The 0.02 capacitor blocks DC completely and also gives
quite a bit of AC impedance; it needs to be rated for a nice high voltage
because the ringing AC is close to 100V and you want a good safety margin.
The 1N4148 conducts when the AC voltage is the wrong polarity for the LED
to conduct; leave this out and the opto will try to block the full ringing
voltage at those times, which will fry it.

The 0.1 capacitor between the internal node and the output acts as an
integrator, so that the AC ringing shows up as one pulse rather than a
sequence of short ones.  It also gets rid of smaller and less frequent
activity like dialing pulses.  The 10k resistor limits current through
the opto and transistor when the opto is on.  The 56k resistor pulls
the transistor's input up high when the opto is off.  And the 2N3906, in
conjunction with the pulldown resistor, amplifies the output signal.

This circuit isn't particularly fussy about power voltage, although you
might want to increase some of the resistor values on the output side
for higher voltages.  The output is certainly CMOS compatible and is
probably TTL compatible, although I haven't done the numbers to be really
sure about the latter.  The 6N139 is a premium opto and will cost a few
bucks, but overall it's not what you'd call an expensive circuit, given
the logic-level output and the high degree of isolation from the phone
line.
--
"If you want PL/I, you know       Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
where to find it." -- DMR         {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry

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

Date: Sun, 26 Apr 87 10:35:33 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom ("Crashing" a Central Office)

> Finally, If both my best friend and myself set call forwarding to
> each other, what happens when someone calls?
>
> [ ... Also, if you forward to someone who forwards to
> you the call goes "click", "click", busy. The two clicks are the
> trunks going between your central offices. If you do this to someone
> on the same ESS machine, it gives you a busy immediately. This is
> useful especially if you have your calls forwarded from home to work
> and vice versa. You can safely forward your calls bi-directionned until
> you get home and clear the forwarding. Also, I crashed our central office
> forwarding once to someone on the same machine (that was 12 years ago).
> --jsol]

    Re: the comment about "crashing" the central office...

    If anyone finds this hard to believe, I know of a specific example
where there was a bug in a particular generic software release used on some
early #2 ESS machines which had just been installed by New York Telephone
to replace SxS CDO's during the mid 70's.
    By using three telephone lines, and setting them up to forward as
A --> B --> C --> A, a call from another telephone to A as a "seed" would
force the #2 ESS to crash and switch to the standby processor, whereupon
a second occurence would wipe out the standby processor until the call
attempt was discontinued.  This situation would also set off remote alarms
at the SCC which handled these unattended #2 ESS machines.
    Needless to say, a software patch was quickly developed by WECO...

    The above scenario was probably unanticipated by the WECO team
that designed and wrote the software.  The public, however, seems to have
a knack for discovering these flaws rather quickly.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: Sun, 26 Apr 87 12:13:26 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (Ringing Detection Circuits)

    While the Texas Instruments TCM1520A is a nice IC, it is possible
to build simple and reliable ringing detection circuits by other means.
Here are some suggestions which may be helpful in the design of circuits
which detect ringing:

1.    When a telephone goes on-hook and off-hook during hookswitch
(i.e., line switch) operation, a voltage transient is generated whose
voltage is the same order of magnitude as a ringing signal.  When a
rotary dial is used, each dial pulse is a momentary line open which
also generates these voltage transients.
    A poorly designed ringing detector circuit will falsely detect the
above voltage transients as ringing signals.
    To avoid this problem, ALL reliable ringing detector circuits
require a time constant.  NO ringing detector circuit (unless it is has
frequency discrimination - which is extremely rare) can tell the difference
between on-hook/off-hook transients and the ringing signal itself based
upon a voltage threshhold ALONE.
    Such a time constant can be established by three means: (1) integrating
the rectified voltage from the telephone line with a resistor-capacitor
before it drives an LED or relay; (2) using a thermistor in series with the
LED or relay (a traditional design approach, but the "right" thermistor is
difficult to obtain); (3) providing a specific timing circuit which looks
at the output of the optoisolator or relay, and requires that a signal be
present for a minimum period of time before asserting an output logic line.
    A reasonable integration time constant is between 200 and 600
milliseconds; i.e., the ringing signal must be present for this time period
before a detection logic line is asserted.

2.    All ringing detector circuits should have their telephone line
connection electrically isolated from ground, and should be coupled to the
telephone line using a series capacitor.  In general, the value of this
series capacitor should not exceed 0.68 uF, and such a capacitor should
be rated at 200 WVDC.  Excessive capacitance will cause voice-frequency
attenuation on the telephone circuit, and may also result in premature
"ring tripping" and dial-pulse distortion.
    In general, the effective DC resistance of a ringing detector
circuit - EXCLUDING the capacitor - should be a minimum of 1,000 ohms.
    Following the above capacitance and resistance constraints should
result in a ringing detector circuit which has a REN of less than 1.0 on
the "B" scale, and consequently should not interfere with proper operation
of the telephone line.

3.    Optoisolators are nice for ringing circuit detection, but proper
and reliable ringing detector circuits can be made with relays.  Use a
sensitive "plate" relay of 2,500 to 10,000 ohms resistance.  Connect a
full-wave bridge rectifier to the telephone line using a series capacitor;
connect the DC output to the relay in series with a resistor, and place a
capacitor across the relay winding to provide an integration time constant
(be sure to have this capacitor rated at at least 100 WVDC!).
    If your application is a ringing "extension" circuit - like to
drive an AC line horn, bell or light - you may find a plate relay with
a contact current rating sufficient for the job.  This makes for a pretty
simple circuit.
    Plate relays with the required resistance and sensitivity are
often available surplus for a couple of dollars.  Do NOT use an AC relay
rated for 120 VAC; AC relays of this type generally do not have enough
sensitivity and a high enough resistance for telephone applications.
Also, note that some plate relays (like certain Sigma models) have their
body as the common contact - so these relays MUST be properly insulated
from the case and outside world.
    The use of a relay to directly detect ringing and control an AC
power line circuit is a well-established design technique; however, use
extreme CAUTION when wiring such a circuit so that faulty construction
does not permit accidental connection between the telephone line and AC
power line!

4.    If you are serious about designing telephone circuits, take the
time to study the operation of a telephone line using a storage scope
with differential inputs (i.e., one input for TIP, one input for RING -
NEVER ground either TIP or RING).
    You will notice that -48 volts DC is ALWAYS present on the
telephone line, even during the actual ringing.  The 20 Hz ringing
voltage is actually superimposed across the -48 volts DC; this is
referred to as "superimposed ringing".  Superimposed ringing is done
to assure rapid operation of the "ring trip" relay in the central
office trunk circuit.
    Generally, telephone ringing is 1 second on, and 3 seconds off
(i.e., the "silent interval").
    If you are using PBX extensions to "play with" for telephone
circuit design, beware that their behavior may NOT be the same as
central office telephone lines.  For example, some PBX's use 30 Hz
rather than 20 Hz; and some PBX's do not superimpose the ringing signal
on -48 volts DC in the same fashion as a central office.  Also, PBX's
generally provide a "hotter" ringing signal than a central office
because your loop resistance to the PBX is generally << 100 ohms.

5.    None of what I have said applies to party lines.  You should
never attempt to design telephone circuits for connection to party lines.
Not only might you be detecting ringing for other parties, but improper
design or connection might also result in YOU getting billed for THEIR
telephone calls!

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

From: hplabs!well![e-mail] (John Winters)
Subject: Re: Telephone Ring Detection
Date: 26 Apr 87 19:55:51 GMT
Reply-To: well![e-mail] (John Winters)



I was wondering, would anybody out there be able to write me a very
simple schematic for 5 watt amplifier which would amplify
my outgoing voice on the phone?
I talked to my local Bell guy and he said 5 watts would be allowed
(my grandmother can't hear at all, along with other people i know and
this would be handy)
Please send it via mail, as i don't check this out to often.
Thanks

John Winters, from DA WELL

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
29-Apr-87 19:54:39-EDT,11823;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 29-Apr-87 19:46:28
Date: 29 Apr 87 19:46-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #39
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Wednesday, April 29, 1987 7:46PM
Volume 6, Issue 39

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                        2600 "fraud" detection
                 Cultural imperialism and USA Direct
                        Re: area code history
                       Telecommunication Lines
                   Re: Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards

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

From: [e-mail] (News)
Date: 28 Apr 87 21:32:10 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: decwrl!labrea!glacier!jbn
From: [e-mail] (John B. Nagle)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Use of modular jacks and accessories for RS-232 signals
Keywords: RS-232, modular jacks, data communications
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Apr 87 20:09:18 GMT
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 10


     It is becoming common to use 4 and 6 conductor modular telephone
jacks in non-telephone applications.  MOD-TAP and Nevada Western sell
modular jack to DB-25 adapters, along with various other accessories,
intended for use in connecting up terminals to computers.

     Is there a standard, de-factor or otherwise, for the pinout on this
sort of thing?  Are MOD-TAP and Nevada Western adapters compatible?

                    John Nagle

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

Date: 28 Apr 87 23:25:20 EDT
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: 2600 "fraud" detection

Isn't this a bit redundant in these CCIS-ridden days?

Also, it seems rather improper for an office to assume that any occurrence of
2600 on a subscriber loop indicates possible fraud.  First of all, if someone
wanted to defraud he'd just hike down to the nearest pay phone.  Second, there
are a lot of OCC switches that respond to 2600, so the phone co has another
think coming if they believe I'm committing toll fraud every time I clobber
one of them upon completion of a call.  Fooey.

The user-end symptoms of 2600 detection seem to be as follows: Beeeep.  Switch
disconnects your call, or whatever its fancy.  Some switches drop the
connection to the office completely, forcing the call to throw back to the
office and return dial tone within a few seconds.  At any rate, in the
background one can hear a small "grack" sort of click -- I would assume that
this indicates the bridging-in of the more sophisticated "fraud detection"
equipment that would listen for and report various other tones.  This is
un-bridged again after about 20 seconds if nothing else happens.  I could
determine this because in some offices the bridging equipment is flakey and
introduces extra line hum while it's connected.

Would someone closer to the technical end of the above like to explain how
this works in greater depth?  And what is generally done with the generated
reports when there's obviously no "fraud" happening on a given loop?

_H*

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

From: rochester!moscom![e-mail]
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 87 01:48:07 edt

By making the middle digit of the area code a 1 or 0, the phone
company could tell if you were dialing long distance or not.

Now I am starting to see exchanges with 1 and 0 in them, and
ones without an alphabetic mnemonic, as the number of
available prefixes is getting used up.

Mike Ciaraldi
seismo!rochester!ciaraldi

Path: moscom!ritcv!rochester!ciaraldi
From: [e-mail] (Mike Ciaraldi)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: ring ship; area code history
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Apr 87 02:32:23 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mike Ciaraldi)
Distribution: world
Organization: U of Rochester, CS Dept, Rochester, NY
Lines: 37


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>
> From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
> Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
> Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
> Subject: ring ship; area code history
>
> Roger Orr of
> Pacific Bell was able to answer... Area codes were invented in 1946, he said,
> and the first thing determined were the middle digits. States containing more
> than one area code, such as New York and California, were assigned a 1 in the
> middle. States that had only one area code at the time (today, they may have
> more), were assigned... 0 in the middle. Thus, California had 213 (Los
> angeles), 415 (Bay Area) and 916 (Sacramento area). Vermont was 802.

But why a 1 or 0 in the middle digit?
About 15 years ago I was visiting New York City for the first
time, and tried to make a long distance call.  It took quite a while
to realize that I didn't have to dial "1" first, unlike Rochester.
(no longer true, now NYC people have to dial 1).

At the time I wondered how the phone company could tell that the
first 3 digits dialed were an area code, rather than an exchange.
Then I realized that exchanges were traditionally based on words,
e.g. my home exchange was "Hopkins 7".  You could dial either
HOP or 467 and it would be the same, since H = 4, O = 6, and
P = 7.  Because 1 and 0 do not have letters on the dial,
it was impossible to have a 1 or 0 in an exchange.
By making the middle digit of the area code a 1 or 0, the phone
company could tell if you were dialing long distance or not.

Now I am starting to see exchanges with 1 and 0 in them, and
ones without an alphabetic mnemonic, as the number of
available prefixes is getting used up.

Mike Ciaraldi
seismo!rochester!ciaraldi

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

Date: Wed, 29 Apr 87 11:45:19 EDT
From: think![e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Cultural imperialism and USA Direct

AT&T has an amazing new service called USA Direct to encourage people to
call home from overseas.  In Australia, Denmark, France, Holland, Great
Britain, and parts of West Germany, there is a special toll-free number
you can dial and you get an AT&T operator in the U.S., who will help you
complete a call into the U.S.  You can call collect or use your calling card.

That's pretty handy, particularly if you've ever tried to make a collect
call from France (dial 19-pause-33-1, wait, get an operator, tell him that
you want to make un appel PCV aux Etats Unies, give him the details; fine,
he says, I'll call you back in 30 minutes.)

For serious cultural imperialists, though, in Antigua, the Bahamas, Bahrain,
Barbados, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Hong Kong, Jamaica, Japan, Korea, Panama, the Philippines,
Spain, St. Kitts, St. Lucia, and Trinidad/Tobago, they've installed special
USA Direct pay phones in places like hotels, airports, and cruise ports that
you can only use to call back to the U.S.

Call 1-800-874-4000, Ext. 300, for further details.  The current issue of
Frequent Flyer magazine has some handy wallet cards explaining the service.

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

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

From: dartvax![e-mail] (David Marston)
Subject: Re: area code history
Date: 28 Apr 87 00:51:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Doug Mosher writes:
:
:  area code history:
:  ....
>  The two digits on the end(s) of the code (4 and 5 in the Bay Area) were
>  assigned upwards from 2, according to frequency of use. Higher digits went
>  to... rural areas... Sacramento (had 916, took longer to dial than LA with
>  213).
>
>  The codes most often used were New York (212), LA (213), ...

...So the largest cities get the codes that pulse-dial most quickly.
What I want to know is:
Who thought that Boston, the logical home of the 413 code, was in the
Western half of Massachusetts?
(The fact that the dividing line is now known to be too far west I consider
a reasonable mistake. Not so the swapping of area codes.)
.................David Marston     decvax!dartvax!marston

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

Date:     Wed, 29 Apr 87  14:03 EDT
From:     Rafiul Ahad <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Telecommunication Lines

If any one have a summary of telecommunication lines and their characteristics,
please mil me a copy. Thanks a lot in advance.

[e-mail]

PS: I do not subscribe to this mailing list.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kent Paul Dolan)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards
Date: 27 Apr 87 12:10:56 GMT
Reply-To: seismo!xanth.cs.odu.edu!kent (Kent Paul Dolan)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug Reuben) writes:
>[...] I think this is just another good example of what a mess
>the Bell System Divestiture was and is...Hopefully, some day, some one in
>charge with these people will realize this and put the Bell System back
>together again...Wishful thinking, I know, but its better than getting upset
>with this idiocy...:-)  !!!

I loved the rest of your article Doug, but here I must demur.  By pure
coincidence, I made two long distance pay phone calls the other day,
just after the rate change at 5PM, in the C&P telephone (Eastern Virginia)
service area.  One call was to my home, 40 miles away; the second call was to
my mother's home, 1250 miles away in Minnesota.  The second call cost a dime
less for the same one minute call.

AT&T used to rip us off something fierce, because they held a monopoly
position.  Now that they are competitive with a lot of other start up long
distance service  providers, it has suddenly become possible for them to
provide less expensive service.

The local, "Baby Bells" are still monopolies, and they feel no need to provide
reasonable rates.  For example, normal pay phone long distance calls are now
handled by computer rather than local operators, which evidently saved the
phone  companies a bundle.  Rather than reducing the cost of the start up
minute of a phone call to reflect this new economy, the cost continues to
increase.  Thus the ludicrous result of a 40 mile call costing more than a
1250 mile call.

I suggest (<---- Opinion marker! Keep your flames to yourself! ;-) that the
thing to do now is to find a not-terribly-disruptive way to introduce phone
competition at the local level, since we have proved it works well nationally.
It astounds me that the phone companies are the only organizations that can
continue to reduce staff by automation, yet cannot seem to turn these savings
to them into savings to the customer.  What kind of a line are they feeding the
rate approving public utilities commissions, anyway?

Kent.

--
The Contradictor    Member HUP (Happily Unemployed Programmers)  // Yet
                                    // Another
Back at ODU to learn how to program better (after 25 years!)    \\ // Happy
                                 \// Amigan!
UUCP  :  [e-mail]   or    ...{sun,cbosgd,harvard}!xanth!kent
CSNET :  [e-mail]    ARPA  :  [e-mail]
Voice :  [phone]    USnail:  P.O. Box 1559, Norfolk, Va 23501-1559

Copyright 1987 Kent Paul Dolan.            How about if we keep the human
All Rights Reserved.  Author grants free    race around long enough to see
retransmission rights, recursively only.    a bit more of the universe?

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 3-May-87 00:24:56-EDT,11826;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at  2-May-87 23:53:44
Date: 2 May 87 23:53-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #40
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                           Saturday, May 2, 1987 11:53PM
Volume 6, Issue 40

Today's Topics:

             Re:  special dial codes for cellular phones?
                          outgoing amplifier
                         Can't reach operator
                     Re: Telephone Ring Detection
                   Re: Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards
                        0 and 1 in area codes
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

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

Date: Wed, 29 Apr 87 22:11:30 EDT
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:  special dial codes for cellular phones?

As I recal from a recent roaming experience in the Boston area, you dial
911 to get to the state police.  You also get charged for this call.
In the Balt/DC area, 911 from a cell phone is free.

There is usually a *nnn (where nnn is the frequency of some local radio
station without the decimal) that is a free call.  You call it to tell the
DJ about accidents or congestion, and in return, they put in a plug for
the local cellular system.  I believe it's *1050 in Boston, in DC it'
*955.

*511 in Balt/DC gets you to the local roamer port.  *811 or *611 get you
customer care.  *394 in DC/Balt gets you a FYI, (For Your Info) recording
about the cell system.

Everything I'v mentioned here is for Cellular 1.  I havn't used the wireline
services enough to have gathered this kind of info.

-Mike

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 87 20:40:26 PDT
Subject: outgoing amplifier

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           04/29/87 20:40:24
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: outgoing amplifier

 To: [e-mail]

 In telecom-digest no. 38,
        hplabs!well![e-mail] (John Winters) writes that he wants a
 5-watt amplifier to make his outgoing voice louder so his grandmother can
 hear.

 I can't reach his address to reply directly; I hope others will forward this
 and others' replies to him.

 Please note: it is only in recent years that stereo home amplifiers go up to
 50-100-150 watts, in order to use extremely low-efficiency speakers that
 provide various high-fidelity advantages. In the 40's and 50's, and AT PRESENT
 on cheap audio devices and cheap car systems, 1 to 5 watts is PLENTY. With
 your typical $5 regular-efficiency speaker, you could drive grandmothers
 completely crazy with 5 watts (in the same room).

 If you put 5 watts on an outgoing line with any efficient coupling, you would
 probably be talking to everyone that shared a cable with your line in the
 whole system. If not distorting your voice beyond recognition, also or
 instead.

 What's clearly needed is an amplifier on HER end. Very cheap boxes that one
 simply sits the headset in used to be available in stores, or use the same
 effort/money that would have amplified your end to work on her end. You could
 also consider buying her a speakerphone; and I wonder if the central offcie
 would do something for an elderly person, such as supply an amplified handset.

 My final comment would be: are you sure both your and her instruments are
 operating normally? It's at least possible that if either or both of you tried
 any modern 3rd party phone you could get an improvement. You could have an old
 standard with crusted-up carbon in your transmitter; people used to bang these
 around to loosen the carbon.

 Thanks, Doug
   w  outgoing amplifier

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

Date: 30-Apr-1987 0020
From: [e-mail]  (Dave C., 226-7726, LKG1-1/M06)
Subject: Can't reach operator

Using a pay phone in Chelmsford, Mass. (617-250) a few hours ago, I kept
getting a fast busy attempting to dial an 800 number.  So I tried to
dial the operator.  Guess what:  I got a fast busy for code "0", too.
Same for repair service 1-555-1611.   I finally raised an operator by dialing
0-637-1234 (the Boston time service number), hitting "0" when the
calling-card prompt tone sounded, and explaining to the operator that I
didn't really want to know the time, but needed to make an 800 call
and couldn't reach the operator through normal means.

The operator placed the 800 call for me, and declined to take the information
about not being able to reach operator or repair service through normal
means.

David A. Cantor

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

Date: Thu, 30 Apr 87 11:51 EDT
From: Jeffrey Del Papa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Ring Detection
Reply-To: Jeffrey Del Papa <[e-mail]>

    Date: 26 Apr 87 19:55:51 GMT
    From: hplabs!well![e-mail] (John Winters)



    I was wondering, would anybody out there be able to write me a very
    simple schematic for 5 watt amplifier which would amplify
    my outgoing voice on the phone?
    I talked to my local Bell guy and he said 5 watts would be allowed
    (my grandmother can't hear at all, along with other people i know and
    this would be handy)
    Please send it via mail, as i don't check this out to often.
    Thanks

    John Winters, from DA WELL


This would only work if you were on the same mechanical exchange. If you had to go
over any trunk, or had a new electronic exchange, it would be for naught. It would be
fine to put the amplifier on your grandmothers phone, and you can rather cheaply buy
amplified handsets, so you dont have to haywire things. (besides that would work when
other people called her too.)

<dp>

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

From: [e-mail] (David Lewis)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards
Date: 30 Apr 87 15:17:35 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kent Paul Dolan)
writes...

>I suggest (<---- Opinion marker! Keep your flames to yourself! ;-) that the
>thing to do now is to find a not-terribly-disruptive way to introduce phone
>competition at the local level, since we have proved it works well nationally.

Sounds like a nifty idea -- in fact, I'd love to be the person to start
it...  The problem is that the local loop remains a monopoly for much the
same reason that electriity, gas, water, and now CATV are monopolies -- you
have to run wires through the street.  (Historical reasons for the
establishment of monopoly local loop service omitted for brevity -- this is
just why no one's begun competition yet).  PUCs wouldn't take too kindly to
another phone company tearing up the streets.

In addition, the capital costs of local loop service are pretty steep -- I
believe something like 40% of the assets of the BOCs are in the wiring
plant.  Starting up a competitive local telco with that kind of entry
barrier, and a very shaky prospect of success, is not a good business
venture.

Of course, there are all the problems of mandated interconnection to provide
universal service, compatibility, and so on; the legal battles with the FCC
and BOCs alone would probably be enough to prevent anyone from trying it.

<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>=<=>

Arpa:        [e-mail]
Usenet:        {ihnp4|ucbvax|cmucspt}!cmu-cs-ius2!deej
Bell System:    [phone]
USMail:        5170 Beeler St., #1
        Pittsburgh, PA 15217-1002
Carrier Pigeon:    The big red brick house with the plate-glass windows out
        front.

The opinions contained herein must be mine.  No one else will claim them.

    "If you're not part of the solution,
            you must be part of the problem."

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

From: sun!hoptoad![e-mail] (Tim Pozar)
Subject: 0 and 1 in area codes
Date: 30 Apr 87 22:18:44 GMT
Reply-To: hoptoad![e-mail] (Tim Pozar)


>
>At the time I wondered how the phone company could tell that the
>first 3 digits dialed were an area code, rather than an exchange.
>Then I realized that exchanges were traditionally based on words,
>e.g. my home exchange was "Hopkins 7".  You could dial either
>HOP or 467 and it would be the same, since H = 4, O = 6, and
>P = 7.  Because 1 and 0 do not have letters on the dial,
>it was impossible to have a 1 or 0 in an exchange.
>By making the middle digit of the area code a 1 or 0, the phone
>company could tell if you were dialing long distance or not.
>
>Now I am starting to see exchanges with 1 and 0 in them, and
>ones without an alphabetic mnemonic, as the number of
>available prefixes is getting used up.
>
>Mike Ciaraldi
>seismo!rochester!ciaraldi

   Although, I don't think I've seen a exchange/prefix with a 0
or 1 as the middle number.  I have seen them in the last place (eg
570, ect.)
   An optional "1-" could still work if they followed the procedure
above.
           Tim

--
        Tim Pozar
UUCP    [e-mail]
Fido    125/406
USNail  KLOK-FM
    77 Maiden Lane
    San Francisco CA 94108

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

From: [e-mail] (The devil himself)
Date: 30 Apr 87 22:53:37 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: decwrl!delni.dec.com!goldstein
From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Intra-LATA toll gougine; Area Codes
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 30 Apr 87 22:53:31 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 31

Re: last issue's flame about how high intra-LATA rates are in Virginia
vs. AT&T;
That's entirely a state matter and has nothing to do with competition,
period.  Intra-LATA INTRASTATE calls are priced per rates set by
the state govt.  These rates vary hugely state to state; NJ's, for
example, are maybe half most other states'.  This isn't the phone
company gouging because of their monopoly, it's the state regulator's
way of subsidizing cheap local residential service.  Toll calls are
viewed as a luxury, local lines as a necessity, so the former pay for
the latter.

The FCC has taken steps to reduce this subsidy within their domain,
INTERSTATE calls, by using "access charges" (really a local service
charge) to make up for money formerly paid via toll cross-subsidization.
Some states have also moved closer to cost-based pricing.  New England
Telephone lowered its toll rates too, to face perceived (not very real)
threats of competition, but the Mass. DPU happens to believe in
cost-based (honest) rates.  Most states don't; keeping "basic" rates
low is (perceived as) better politics.

If you had competition, the competitors would still be obligated to
pay outrageous charges to the local company to contribute their share
of the subsidy.  That still occurs with the MCIs of the world.  A lot
of what they collect goes right back to pay for local service.

Re: Area code 413.  Someone pointed out, I think in this digest last
year, that 413 (a handful of phones in the unpopulated boondocks of
Western Mass.) was one of the first area codes cut into service, during
the trial phase of DDD.  Thus it got a "good" code and a small geographic
area, since they helped the test.  History bites back...
      fred (whose office will soon be in NPA 508, but home is still 617)

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 3-May-87 00:25:17-EDT,21856;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at  2-May-87 23:54:47
Date: 2 May 87 23:54-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #41
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                           Saturday, May 2, 1987 11:54PM
Volume 6, Issue 41

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
 Submission for mod.telecom (Telephone Company Technical Information)
             star66 and a modest call screening proposal
    Submission for mod.telecom (Comments on telephone toll fraud)
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                     Compendium of Phone features

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

From: steve shellans <[e-mail]>
Date: 30 Apr 87 20:39:48 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: tektools!steves
From: [e-mail] (steve shellans)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: obsolete central office switches
Keywords: obsolete central office switch
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 30 Apr 87 20:39:46 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tektronix Inc., Beaverton, Or.
Lines: 25

In my home I have a touchtone phone.  When I press a number, such as
7, for example, I hear 7 clicks coming back at me.  Even though
I can dial a complete number, including area code in a couple of
seconds, the wait after that while I listen to the entire 'readback'
is very annoying.  (The number I dial most often is 790-0000, which
is the local number for Allnet -- it seems to take forever.)

>From phones at work there is none of this, and all (outside) calls
go through very quickly.  Whenever I travel on business and need
to make calls, I always find electronic switching.

My question is this  --  how unusual (in the U.S.) is the kind of
switching that I have from my home phone.  If this is something
pretty rare, I would like to contact my phone company (GTE) and
the state utilities regulator to bring some pressure to bear to
update the equipment into the modern world.

Also, does anyone know when the heyday of this kind of equipment was?

Thanks much,

Steve Shellans
Tektronix, Beaverton OR
{decvax, wyvax, ihnp4, ucbvax} !tektronix!tektools!steves

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

Date: Fri, 1 May 87 00:25:05 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (Telephone Company Technical Information)

In a recent article [e-mail] (John Winters) writes:
> I was wondering, would anybody out there be able to write me a very
> simple schematic for 5 watt amplifier which would amplify
> my outgoing voice on the phone?
> I talked to my local Bell guy and he said 5 watts would be allowed
> (my grandmother can't hear at all, along with other people i know and
> this would be handy)

    Hmmmm...  5 watts into 600 ohms; that would be sending into the
telephone line at about + 37 dBm.  Is that hot, or is that HOT?  Not only
would your grandmother hear your voice, but so would everyone else in your
central office!

    I didn't post this reply to make fun of John Winters; I believe
his statement that the "local Bell guy said 5 watts would be allowed".

    I just want to point out the INCREDIBLE ignorance which is
sometimes displayed by telephone company sales and administrative personnel
who deal with the public.  Many people naively believe that ANYTHING said
by ANYONE at the telephone company must be correct.  Wrong.  If you have
a technical question - especially concerning data transmission - INSIST
upon speaking with a person who is an engineer (common titles: "customer
services engineer" or "facilities design engineer").  You might get some
moaning and groaning from a salesperson about such a request to speak with
an engineer, but as far as I am concerned, it is your right to speak to a
technically competent person when it concerns a technical question about
transmission or network interface specifications.  This does not mean you
should abuse such a demand by asking questions about how to connect or repair
telephones, or how to design or build telephone equipment; your right to
obtain technical information should be properly confined to transmission and
network interface specifications ONLY.  You might be referred to a specific
AT&T or FCC technical reference; I consider such a referral to be a reasonable
response to a request for information, PROVIDED you are given a specific
publication number and where to obtain it.

    Concerning the original article, any person who has a hearing
impairment must solve the problem at THEIR END.  Amplifier handsets with
an adjustable volume control are readily available from AT&T Information
Systems and from other vendors of telephone apparatus.  Prices range from
$ 30.00 to $ 60.00 for such a handset.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

From: soma!sugar.UUCP![e-mail] (Karl Lehenbauer)
Subject: star66 and a modest call screening proposal
Date: 25 Apr 87 15:42:48 GMT


Phone users in Austin Texas now have a service available called "Star 66."
It enables you to call the last person who called you by dialing ("dialing",
an anachronism in the modern age, is it not?) *66.  It's great for calling
back the people who hung up right before you answered.  It also would be
cool for calling back the more stupid of the anonymous/obscene callers.
Presumably, even modestly intelligent anon./obscene callers would use
pay phones if they don't already.

Regarding not being able to screen calls if/when that becomes available
for fear that you'll miss a call from your daughter-in-trouble calling
from a payphone, yes, you can't preemptively screen calls but you could
still screen them from specific numbers.  This would at least prevent
callbacks for sleazy solicitors (or would it?  more in a sec...) and others
who you just don't want to talk to at the time.

RE: Preventing callbacks from sleazy solicitors.
Since they use lots of lines, it would be impossible to cover all of them
in advance.  How about making all solicitors forward a code with their
number indicating that they are making unsolicited solicitations?  Then
we could generically lock them out (especially the obnoxious computerized
robot solicitors) without locking out calls from all unspecified numbers.
--
uucp: {shell,rice,seismo}!soma!uhnix1!sugar!karl
bbs:  [phone]    voice: [phone]
"ahhh, personal Unix at last..."

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

Date: Fri, 1 May 87 23:16:11 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (Comments on telephone toll fraud)

> In a recent article [e-mail] (*Hobbit*) writes:

    [discussion about SF-tone detectors in central offices]

> Isn't this a bit redundant in these CCIS-ridden days?

    I would think so!  Most toll fraud today occurs through the fraudulent
use of calling card numbers.
    However, during the 1970's when "blue box" fraud reached its peak,
the Bell System in particular did use 2600 Hz SF tone detectors.  One such
device was called [somewhat euphemistically] a Multichannel Tone Test Unit
(MTTU).
    One MTTU had the capacity to monitor up to 100 trunks.  The MTTU could
be used in a local office to monitor outgoing DDD access trunks, or in a
tandem office to monitor 2-wire or 4-wire intertoll trunks.  In the MTTU, each
trunk connection had a dedicated SF tone receiver which would alarm if an
SF signal longer than about 200 ms was detected.  The sensitivity was pretty
decent - something between -35 and -40 dBm - so it COULD conceivably be
susceptible to the crosstalk situation mentioned in the earlier article.
    The MTTU had a trunk identification unit, which would send the
identity of the "offending" trunk to the Call Identity Indexer of the
central office CAMA or LAMA recording apparatus.  This would allow the
origin (i.e., calling number) of the fraudulent call to be ascertained.

> Also, it seems rather improper for an office to assume that any occurrence of
> 2600 on a subscriber loop indicates possible fraud.  First of all, if someone
> wanted to defraud he'd just hike down to the nearest pay phone.  Second, there
> are a lot of OCC switches that respond to 2600, so the phone co has another
> think coming if they believe I'm committing toll fraud every time I clobber
> one of them upon completion of a call.  Fooey.

    If the [possibly apocryphal] crosstalk incident had occurred several
years ago, I would believe it.  If the incident is supposed to be contemporary,
then I would be skeptical that an operating telephone company is still using
such toll fraud detection apparatus (unless they have little or no CCIS and/or
are still using CAMA trunks with local ANI - at least not likely today in an
ESS office).
    Most message accounting today is LAMA; i.e., it is done in the local
central office.  Such message accounting has returned to the local central
office primarily to permit message unit timing on local calls.  So the point
is: the LAMA knows every number that a subscriber has dialed (by dial-pulse
and DTMF, that is).  Assuming that there is no CCIS or 3700 Hz out-of-band
signaling to cause a absolute denial of "blue box" usage, one can't implement
a "blue box" fraud without gaining access to a toll switching office.  And one
generally can't gain access to a toll switching office without creating one of
three situations:

1.    Dialing an inward WATS number.  Simple computer exception reporting
    from raw LAMA call data can ascertain if certain subscriber lines
    are making unusually large numbers of 800-number calls.  Of course,
    such excessive usage can be perfectly legitimate, but detection of
    such high usage, along with other "anomalous calling patterns" can
    be used to pinpoint subscriber lines where toll fraud is suspected.
    A "roving" SF-tone detector could then be attached to _specific_
    suspect subscriber lines.

2.    Dialing directory assistance in other area codes.  This is even easier
    to detect by exception reporting: one doesn't have many directory
    assistance calls lasting more than, say, three minutes!

3.    Dialing an actual toll call, but applying SF before answer to
    reseize the toll switching office and dial a "more expensive"
    toll call.  This is not very common because the subscriber line is
    still going to be billed for the original dialed toll call.

    In addition, most newer ESS offices closely monitor answer
supervision on outgoing toll trunks; such monitoring makes it difficult
to perpetrate "blue box" fraud.  Failure to achieve answer supervision
within say, three minutes results in a forced disconnect.  Once answer
supervision has been detected, its subsequent loss for more than say, 30
seconds will result in a forced disconnect.  Furthermore, there is ESS
software to monitor "anomalous" trunk answer supervision changes.

> The user-end symptoms of 2600 detection seem to be as follows: Beeeep.  Switch
> disconnects your call, or whatever its fancy.  Some switches drop the
> connection to the office completely, forcing the call to throw back to the
> office and return dial tone within a few seconds.  At any rate, in the
> background one can hear a small "grack" sort of click -- I would assume that
> this indicates the bridging-in of the more sophisticated "fraud detection"
> equipment that would listen for and report various other tones.  This is
> un-bridged again after about 20 seconds if nothing else happens.  I could
> determine this because in some offices the bridging equipment is flakey and
> introduces extra line hum while it's connected.

    Good heavens!  You actually tried it?! :-) :-) :-)

    You are most likely just hearing the originating register or its
ESS equivalent being switched into the circuit to accept the anticipated
MF signaling train, with the register "timing out" after 20 seconds of no
signaling.  Unless there is faulty apparatus, you will NEVER aurally detect
the presence of any SF monitoring devices; all such devices use bridging
amplifiers that result in an effective bridging loss of no more than 0.05 dB.

> Would someone closer to the technical end of the above like to explain how
> this works in greater depth?  And what is generally done with the generated
> reports when there's obviously no "fraud" happening on a given loop?

    Telephone company security personnel react very cautiously to any
suspected "blue box" fraud.  If an SF-tone detector or exception reporting
software results in "hits" for a given line on several different days,
chances are a dedicated SF-tone and MF signaling detector will be attached
to the suspect subscriber line.  Further information will then be obtained
that can be used in a prosecution; mere detection of SF tones is insufficient.
It is necessary not only to know exactly what destination number was dialed,
but to have some idea as to the identity of the _person_ using a given
subscriber line; merely knowing the subscriber line number where the fraud
originates is insufficient - the identity of the actual _person_ making the
call must be ascertained.
    In case anyone is wondering, it is the absolute right of any telephone
company or communications common carrier to attach such monitoring apparatus
to any subscriber's line.  Furthermore, under most circumstances, it is also
an absolute right of any such telephone company or communications common
carrier to aurally monitor any subscriber line to detect fraud; this may be
euphemistically referred to as "service observing" - and is more common than
telephone companies would like their subscribers to believe.

    The point I am trying to make in the above is that "blue box" toll
fraud is disappearing, and the use of toll fraud detection apparatus is
consequently diminishing.  While the incidence of "blue box" toll fraud has
decreased, it has unfortunately been replaced by fraudulent use of calling
card numbers, and most recently by cellular telephone "spoofing" fraud
(which is probably the worst can of worms yet!).

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

From: ut-sally![e-mail] (Unix-to-Unix Copy)
Date: 3 May 87 02:06:46 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: ut-sally!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!nrc-ut!nrcvax!ihm
From: [e-mail] (Ian H. Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell /ATT Calling Cards
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 1 May 87 16:15:06 GMT
Organization: Network Research Corp.
Lines: 33

References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ian Merritt)
Distribution: world
Organization: The Frobboz Magic Telephone Co., Inc.

>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug Reuben) writes:
>>[...] I think this is just another good example of what a mess
>>the Bell System Divestiture was and is...Hopefully, some day, some one in
>>charge with these people will realize this and put the Bell System back
>>together again...Wishful thinking, I know, but its better than getting upset
>>with this idiocy...:-)  !!!
>

Didn't see the original posting, so this may sound silly out of
context, but your comment sounds more like a case of humpty dumpty.
In truth, the only problems with the divestature in terms of how it
effects us are that things are of course more complex now, and we are
now at the mercy of "Short Term Bottom Line Business America", doing
things becuase thare cheap and fast; not necessarily because they are
technically good.  So, we have a bunch of really poorly designed LD
networks competing for our business.  Call completions that take 1.5
to 2 seconds over AT&T are taking 12 to 20 seconds on some of the
competition, and with the singular exception of US Sprint, now mostly
fiber, virtually all calls made over other than AT&T result in
poor to horrible connections.  To a significant extent it is a case of
you get what you pay for.  Now AT&T has to cut corners and their
equipment is beginning to show signs of deterioration.  Terriffic.
This too will pass, but I wonder if the eventual overall gains will
have been worth the interim (10 years or so) pain.


                    --i

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

From: ut-sally![e-mail] (Unix-to-Unix Copy)
Date: 3 May 87 02:06:19 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: ut-sally!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!nrc-ut!nrcvax!ihm
From: [e-mail] (Ian H. Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 2600 "fraud" detection
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 1 May 87 16:03:01 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ian Merritt)
Distribution: world
Organization: The Frobboz Magic Dungeon Co., Inc.
Lines: 66

>Isn't this a bit redundant in these CCIS-ridden days?
>
>Also, it seems rather improper for an office to assume that any occurrence of
>2600 on a subscriber loop indicates possible fraud.  First of all, if someone
>wanted to defraud he'd just hike down to the nearest pay phone.  Second, there
>are a lot of OCC switches that respond to 2600, so the phone co has another
>think coming if they believe I'm committing toll fraud every time I clobber
>one of them upon completion of a call.  Fooey.
>

I think you may be drawing incorrect conclusions from your observations.
Are you a known paranoid? (:->) Your initiial comment about CCIS is more
realistic.  In this day of CCIS, with the local telcos no longer concerned
with interstate fraud anyway, particularly with respect to the non AT&T
carriers using equipment that's doesn't fully interface with the network, I
would be hard-pressed to believe that any of the local telcos still have
any such equipment.  It sounds as if your observations can be explained as
follows:

>The user-end symptoms of 2600 detection seem to be as follows: Beeeep.  Switch
                                 2600Hz
>disconnects your call, or whatever its fancy.

Disconnect is due to the effect of 2600 on the cheap long distance carriers
equipment; not some fancy fraud detection.

> [...]  Some switches drop the
>connection to the office completely, forcing the call to throw back to the
>office and return dial tone within a few seconds.

New ESS software disconnects faster.  Some of the newer CO <-> Cheap LD
carrier trunk interfaces provide more signalling information to detect drop
faster.

> [...]  At any rate, in the
>background one can hear a small "grack" sort of click -- I would assume that
>this indicates the bridging-in of the more sophisticated "fraud detection"
>equipment that would listen for and report various other tones.

Probably bogus assumption.  If you were the called party and your line is
#1/1A ESS, the click you describe as "grack" sounds like the normal called
party disconnect sound; If you were the calling party you might hear
something similar when the mechanical junctors in the several older
switches involved in the connection drop in rapid succession.  On other
switches complex sequences of clicks are common for similar reasons,
particularly #5 crossbar.  I would have to actually listen to it to
identify exactly what it was.

> [...]  This is
>un-bridged again after about 20 seconds if nothing else happens.  I could
>determine this because in some offices the bridging equipment is flakey and
>introduces extra line hum while it's connected.

In some offices (#5 Crossbar), when you are dropped from a connection you
spend some time on a holding circuit that happes to provide you with
substantial induction noise, for your listening pleasure.  Generally this
condition does not connect any detectors to the line other than the usual
ROH (Receiver On Hook) detect.  It usually lasts about 10 to 20 seconds.
Try dialing out from that same office.  Listen closely after breaking
dialtone and see if you don't hear this noise.  You can easily tell if it's
crossbar if shortly (.2 to .9 second) after dialing your last digit of a
valid sequence, you hear a loud clunk after which there is no more
induction noise.

Cheerz...
                        --i

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

Date:     Mon, 20 Apr 87 14:31:35 EDT
From:     "Cpt. Jerome A. DiGennaro AV 298-2703" <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Compendium of Phone features

Does anyone have a list of all the different phone features that are currently
being offered.  As people move from area to area, it seems like a good idea
to have a list of the featutes that should be asked for.  If such a list does
not exist at one place, send me the various listings for compilation and
release to the mailing list.  Please include the feature and a brief description
of what the feature does.  Thanks in advance.

Jerry DiGennaro

ARPA/BITNET:  [e-mail]         AT&T: [phone]/5759
UUCP:  ...{seismo,unc,decvax,cbosgd}!brl-smoke!jerryd

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 4-May-87 02:47:04-EDT,10581;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at  4-May-87 02:27:31
Date: 4 May 87 02:27-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #42
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                              Monday, May 4, 1987 2:27AM
Volume 6, Issue 42

Today's Topics:

     Re: Submission for mod.telecom (Ringing Detection Circuits)
   Submission for mod.telecom (Touch-tone in Older Central Offices)

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

Reply-To: pnet01!jeh
Date: Sun, 3 May 87 03:00:56 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jamie Hanrahan)
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom (Ringing Detection Circuits)

Here is an absurdly simple ring detector which I threw together years
ago, before hobbyists had access to optoisolators:

Scrounge an old phone with a conventional bell.  Disconnect and throw
away (or put in the junk box) everything but the 425B network (or
equivalent), the ringer coil, and the external ringer capacitor (if
present).  (The 425B network is the mysterious box with altogether
too many cryptically-labeled screw terminals on the top.)  Place a
magnetic reed switch in close proximity to the ringer coil.  Connect
the reed switch to whatever.

I never had any problem with this detecting dial pulses as rings, and
it is rather likely that it conforms to phone company specs.

        --- Jamie Hanrahan
        (uucp:  {akgua | hplabs!hp-sdd | sdcsvax | nosc}!crash!pnet01!jeh)
        (arpa:  crash!pnet01!jeh@nosc)
        (internet:  [e-mail])

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

Date: Mon, 4 May 87 00:44:47 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for mod.telecom (Touch-tone in Older Central Offices)

In a recent article [e-mail] (steve shellans) writes:
> In my home I have a touchtone phone.  When I press a number, such as
> 7, for example, I hear 7 clicks coming back at me.  Even though
> I can dial a complete number, including area code in a couple of
> seconds, the wait after that while I listen to the entire 'readback'
> is very annoying.  (The number I dial most often is 790-0000, which
> is the local number for Allnet -- it seems to take forever.)
>
> From phones at work there is none of this, and all (outside) calls
> go through very quickly.

    I assume that you have a "true" touch-tone (DTMF) telephone at
home; not one of these touch-tone dial units which really put out
dial pulses.  In either case, the following is still applicable to
the situation of using a touch-tone telephone in some older central
offices.

    It sounds like your home telephone service is furnished by a
"progressive control" electromechanical central office, such as step-by-step
(SxS) or Stromberg-Carlson XY, that has BEEN UPDATED FOR DTMF SERVICE.  Since
you mention later in your article that your telephone company is GTE, I would
bet money on the office having Automatic Electric 35E-type SxS apparatus.
    In general terms, "progressive control" central offices route the
call through a series of devices known as "selectors" - one digit at a time
in REAL TIME as the number is dialed ("step-by-step", as they say :-) ).
    This type of central office was designed around the use of a rotary
dial in the subscriber telephone.  Since these are electromechanical switches,
there are minimum times required for the switches to operate.  The dialing
rate was standardized to accommodate the electromechanical response time of the
switches.  The call-processing speed of such offices is therefore limited by
rotary dial pulsing specifications, which are typically:

1.    Pulsing rate is a nominal 10 pulses/sec, which can typically vary
    from 8 to 12 pulses/sec.  A digit "1" has one pulse, a digit "2" has
    two pulses, ..., and a digit "0" has ten pulses.  Therefore, a digit
    "0" typically requires 1.0 seconds to dial.

    There are further specifications for the pulses within each
    digit.  Pulses are line opens, and are generally specified as being
    60 milliseconds open followed by 40 milliseconds closed; also referred
    to as 60% break (since each pulse interval is 100 milliseconds).

2.    Inter-digit dialing interval (i.e., between dialed digits), of at
    least 0.25 seconds.  So, to dial four "0"'s will require a minimum
    of 5.0 seconds (4 dialing intervals + 4 inter-digit intervals).

    So doing a bit of calculation, at BEST, dialing your example number
of 790-0000 is going to take at least 8.35 seconds before the call can reach
the 790 central office.  This assumes an interoffice trunk between your office
and the 790 office - if not, add another second for local tandem switching.
In addition, add another 1.0 second for call processing in the 790 office.

    Now as I said earlier, these SxS and similar central offices respond
only to dial pulses, because the pulses themselves control the switching
apparatus.  There is no way that the switching apparatus per se can deal
with DTMF signals.
    However, for a number of years there have been converter circuits
for use in SxS offices which receive a string of DTMF digits, decode them,
store them as digital information in a register, and then outpulse the
digits as rotary dial pulses at the nominal rate of 10 pulses/sec.
    These converter circuits are installed between the "linefinder"
and the "first selector".  When a subscriber line goes off hook and requests
dial tone, an idle linefinder is selected by some simple relay arbitration
logic.  Each linefinder is a type of SxS switch which is dedicated to one
particular first selector; when the linefinder completes its job and connects
the tip and ring of the subscriber line to the first selector, the first
selector returns dial tone.  At this point, the first selector can respond
in real time to the first dialed digit.
    Subscriber lines are typically arranged in groups of 100 or 200
lines, and each such group has access to a maximum of 10 or 20 linefinder-
first selectors.  The actual concentration ratio depends upon the particular
type of SxS apparatus and the traffic design of the central office, but the
typical concentration ratio at this point is 10:1.  Typically, only ten
percent of all lines in a given line group can make an outgoing call; if
all linefinders in a given line group are busy, a line requesting service
waits for for dial tone - since the dial tone is the indication that a
first selector is available.
    So the point is: these DTMF converter circuits get installed before
the first selector, are shared by a number of other lines in the same group,
and in effect "fool" the first selector and all subsequent switches into
believing that they are being controlled by a rotary dial.
    Since one can enter DTMF digits in a keypad at least 10 times
faster than using a rotary dial, and since the SxS or other progressive
control central office can only operate as fast as a rotary dial - use of
the DTMF converter results in no faster switching time than using a rotary
dial.
    The "clicks" you hear correspond to the dial pulses being generated
by the DTMF converter, and are the impulse noise created by the operation of
the selectors in your dialing path.
    If there is no faster switching time by adding DTMF converters to
a SxS office, then why do telephone companies install such devices?
Because customers "feel better" knowing that touch-tone is now available
in their particular central office, because the telephone company can charge
more for the touch-tone service, and because telephone companies don't want
to spend the money to replace the SxS office with ESS!

> Whenever I travel on business and need
> to make calls, I always find electronic switching.

    You might still be going through a #1 or #5 crossbar office, or
some other common-control electromechanical office; such offices when
equipped with DTMF originating registers will usually switch a call in
a short enough period of time as to be indistinguishable from ESS.

> My question is this  --  how unusual (in the U.S.) is the kind of
> switching that I have from my home phone.  If this is something
> pretty rare, I would like to contact my phone company (GTE) and
> the state utilities regulator to bring some pressure to bear to
> update the equipment into the modern world.

    I don't think there is much pressure that can be brought to compel
an operating telephone company to upgrade if they don't want to.  They've
given you DTMF service, they've given you DDD access, they've probably
implemented coin-free operator, 800 and 911 service at coin telephones (done
with a similar adapter card installed in the coin telephone linefinder group),
and that's really about all the telephone service that any operating telephone
company is OBLIGATED to provide.
    ESS features are nice, but they cost money to provide since they
require total replacement of the SxS office with ESS equipment.  New ESS
equipment for a central office typically costs between $ 500.00 and $ 1,000.00
per subscriber line, with the higher figure being more common.  That's a lot
of money - that the telephone subscriber has to eventually pay for.  This
means that SxS and other electromechanical offices in "outlying" areas will
be around for years to come.
    I don't disagree with your desire for better quality telephone
service, but the point is: who is going to pay for the ESS to provide it?

> Also, does anyone know when the heyday of this kind of equipment was?

    SxS and other progressive control central office equipment for
smaller central offices peaked in usage during the late 1960's; common
control electromechanical switches such as crossbar and its predecessor
panel (ugh!) were just not economical for offices with less than say, 3000
lines.
    During the 1960's small "packaged" crossbar switches became available
(like those from NEC), along with hybrid ESS-electromechanical switches,
followed by true ESS switches.  These switches made it economically feasible
to replace SxS and similar progressive control central offices.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 5-May-87 00:04:56-EDT,9151;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at  4-May-87 23:52:25
Date: 4 May 87 23:52-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #43
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                             Monday, May 4, 1987 11:52PM
Volume 6, Issue 43

Today's Topics:

  Re: Submission for mod.telecom (Comments on telephone toll fraud)
                    RE: 800 / 0+ Re-order signals
                           Re: Divestiture

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

From: sundc![e-mail] (Howard C. Berkowitz)
Subject: Re: Submission for mod.telecom (Comments on telephone toll fraud)
Date: 4 May 87 23:17:41 GMT



In an earlier article, I referred to an incident, which I suggested
possibly was apocryphal, of problems due to 2600 Hz crosstalk
affecting tone fraud detection equipment.

I was told of the several years ago, at an ANSI standards meeting
by a telephone industry employee.  The incident probably took
place in the late 70's or early 80's, and possibly was in
Chicago.

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

Date: Mon 4 May 87 01:28:11-EDT
From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: 800 / 0+ Re-order signals

Message-ID: <[e-mail]>



     In the last issue of the Telecom Digest which I received, I noticed that
David A. Cantor said that he had received a re-order, or "fast-busy" as
operators like to call it, when he attempted an 800, and then 0+ call.

     This happens a lot in generally less populated areas which do not have
a great number of trunks from the local office to a "higher" office (toll
center is the term that the telco representative used.)

     Besides 0+ calls, I think 800 and 950 calls are routed over the same
trunks, and thus, they should all return a re-order if they are tried when
the trunks are overused.

     Also, 1+ dialing in a rural or suburban area which requires a 1+ for
calls beyond a small, local calling area should also experience the same
problem (At least it does for me). I believe that calls beyond the local area
from a payphone must be routed over to the operator, or operator equipment, if
its available, which tells you how much money you have to put in. (IE, "One
dollar and fifty cents, please. Please deposit one dollar and fifty cents for
the first minute.", and if you don't put the money in on time and operator
comes on the line and tells you herself.). So if the 0+ lines are jammed, I
think that it is for the same reason that that the 1+ lines are jammed.

     In my area (Connecticut), repair is just 611, not 1+xxx-6111 or whatever
it is in Mass. Therefore, when I dial repaid to complain (although they can't
do anything immediate about it anyhow), it goes through, probably because its
not a 1+ call. (Although wouldn't the local office know that a 1-xxx-6111 call
is not an ordinary toll call?)

    Therefore, dialing dialing 0+weather number, and then keying 0 for the
operator at the Calling Card tone was just luck. You dialed your call after one
of the trunks became free. If you are in  a situation like that again, then
probably the best thing to do is dial
"0-#", which will immediately connect you to an operator, if the trunks are
free. (If not, it will return a re-order immediately, so you can try again
faster, and "beat" the other people trying to make 0+ calls to it...)

    (Dialing 0-# also works if you just want to reach the operator quickly and
don't want to wait for the equipment to see that you are not dialing any digits
after the 0. I think this only works in ESS areas,  since on my crossbar you
have to dial 01 or 00 to get the operator quickly.)

     If I'm wrong about this (any of this) please let me know, so I can
yell at SNET for having the problem so often and giving me some silly and bad
excuse for it!! :-)

     -Doug

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
...seismo!weslyn.bitnet!reuben (UUCP)

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

Date: Mon 4 May 87 02:10:58-EDT
From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Divestiture

Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


     In my last post about Pac*Bell and AT&T calling cards, I mentioned that
the splitting up of calling card services is one  reason why I feel that the
requirements of the Modified Divestiture Agreement were ridiculous, and why
I would like to see the Bell System put back together (Again, I know I'm
dreaming).

      I can't recall who (terribly sorry), but someone mentioned that the
divestiture worked for them because long distance rates had come down, and that
now it was time for local operations to be subject to "competition" as well.

      Although the divestiture has allowed long distance rates to drop
precipitously, which is a bonus of the breakup, everything else is not.

      I see little or no difference between the rates of the alternate long
distance carriers and those of AT&T. Moreover, the quality of the alternates is
simply horrendous, and with the implementation more and more fiber optic routes
on AT&T (especially new ones like:
New York- San Mateo County (415) and most of 418, Connecticut to San Francisco
County (415), New York/CT to Texas (214), New York/CT to Atlanta (404),
and NY/CT to South Carolina, Virginia, Chicago, Detroit as well as the "older
links, like NY/CT - Mass), I am VERY willing to pay the penny per minute more
on some calls so that I can use AT&T's fiber optics (believe me, once you talk
via fiber you won't want to go back to anything else!)

    The point here is not to compare various types of LD trunks, but to say
that competition really hasn't brought the great degree of choices that  it
was supposed to. The alternate LD co's have a few fiber optic trunks, and do a
few things well, but they are more or less the same (although some are
definitely on the LOW end!), and aren't much of a real choice. In other words,
their rates are marginally lower than AT&T's, but not to a significant extent,
and the quality of service they provide (even US Sprint, which doesn't seem to
use as much fiber as they promise  in their TV ads) is at times drastically
lower than AT&T's, so much so that for the "average consumer", there is really
not much of a choice being offered.

    Previously, if you wanted cheap long distance you would use someone like
MCI, who didn't have such great connections, but who was significantly cheaper
than AT&T (as AT&T was regulated then).
Now, MCI is just like Sprint who is just like Allnet (etc....), all of which
are slightly below AT&T in price and very far below in transmission quality
and optional services. Thus, before you had a choice, and you gave up quality
but saved a lot of money. Now, you can give op quality, but fail to realize any
significant savings. So what good did all this do?

     Moreover, the divestiture is generally more expensive for the consumer.
If you don't make a lot of long distance calls, you  are probably paying more
for service now then you did when it was still the Bell System. Sure,  now you
call call coast-to-coast for $7 per hour, but if you don't make many long
distance calls, you are paying more in terms of "access fees" for a service
you are not really using. Obviously, this reflects a more accurate appraisal
of what the the costs for local vs. long distance service are. Yet the costs
of this more "accurate appraisal" make it difficult to see if such a method for
measuring phone service is worth it.

    Moreover, why break up the Bell System if all that was required was a
more sensitive pricing system? And if this means that I have to dial 0 for
a local operator and 00 for a LD operator, or if it means that to fix a trunk
my local co. has to argue with AT&T about it for 4 weeks, or if it means that
my local Crossbar is now takes 5 seconds to complete a call after I finish
dialing (Touch Tone) when it used to go through right away, and if it means
that I have deal with two companies (my BOC and AT&T) who don't like each other
anymore, and if it means that my local BOC has to spend money to DUPLICATE
Calling Card and operator equipment that is already in place under AT&T (which
I will ultimately pay for)...and....(whew!), then when it comes right down to
it, was divestiture worth it?

    As far as I can see, the cost of divestiture is far greater, both in
economic terms and, more importantly to me as a customer, in terms of SERVICE
(remember that word?? :-;), than whatever small gains it has achieved. It is
for that reason that I said I would
like to  have to Bell System put back together again....

      -(thanks to those who struggled through this long post....!)

      -Doug


[e-mail]
[e-mail]
...seismo!weslyn.bitnet!reuben (UUCP)

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 7-May-87 20:41:26-EDT,4966;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Thu 7 May 87 20:41:24-EDT
Date: 7 May 87 19:38-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #44
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                            Thursday, May 7, 1987 7:38PM
Volume 6, Issue 44

Today's Topics:

                            help!! DMS100
                      Advantage of Bell breakup
                         Phone system basics
                   Service fee for Toll-Free Calls?
                            Ring detection

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

From: pur-ee!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: help!! DMS100
Date: 29 Apr 87 18:41:00 GMT



/* Written  1:40 pm  Apr 29, 1987 by [e-mail] in uxc.cso.uiuc.edu:comp.dcom.modems */
/* ---------- "help!! DMS100" ---------- */

    We have recently installed a Northern Telecom DMS100 switch on campus.
We have been experiencing a number fo problems with 1200 and 2400 modems and
spurious line noise.  Most characteristic are the two characters { and del,
together received on lines comming from the switch.  The local telephone
company has corrected the problem with most local phones, only by repairing/
replacing local trunk line equipment not associated with the switch, but
through which calls may come in to the dms100 and university mainframes.
We still have unacceptable problems on long distance lines, which they are
now tracing out through long distance trunks.....maybe they have to "fix"
the rest of the country to work with us.  Has anyone out there had
similiar problems with DMS100's or similiar digital switches?  Please respond
by mail, I'll summarize.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assistant Director - Computer Services Office - University of Illinois
Michael G. Gardner       217-244-0914
UUCP:    {ihnp4,pur-ee,convex}!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!gardner
ARPANET: [e-mail]  CSNET:  [e-mail]
ICBM:    40 07 N / 88 13 W          BITNET: gardner@uiucuxc
US Mail: Univ of Illinois, CSO, 1304 W Springfield Ave, Urbana, IL  61801

/* End of text from uxc.cso.uiuc.edu:comp.dcom.modems */

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

Date:     Tue, 5 May 87 17:17:31 PDT
From:     [e-mail] (Martin Ewing)
Subject:  Advantage of Bell breakup

One little advantage I note to the divestiture (and all that) is that
now I can prefix long distance calls with "10777" and I never get billed...

Or is this my imagination?


[SPRINT does it's own billing now. You will not see it on your BOC phone
bill (i.e. from Pac Bell or GTE), but Sprint will probably bill you eventually
--jsol]

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

From: yale![e-mail] (Jonathan Sweedler)
Subject: Phone system basics
Date: 6 May 87 00:31:53 GMT
Reply-To: harvard!harvisr!yale-celed![e-mail] (Jonathan Sweedler)


Is there a good tutorial that explains the basics of the phone system.
I'm lost when people talk about DDD access trunks, SF tone detectors,
CCIS, ESS, and the like.  Thanks in advance.
--
UUCP:  ...!{seismo,decvax}!yale!sweedler
ARPA:  [e-mail]                          Jonathan Sweedler
BITNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 5 May 1987  22:53 MDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Service fee for Toll-Free Calls?

Last week I stayed at the Days Inn in Alexandria, VA while on TDY.  I
was suprised to find that, plainly marked on the phone cradle, they
charged 30 cents for 800 numbers as well as for local calls.  Can they
charge a "service fee" for toll-free calls?

--Frank

[The Sheraton Boston charges 60c for every 3 minutes on local calls,
950 calls, calls to the operator (except toll calls), calls to 911,
and calls to 800 numbers. Apparently they can get away with it. --JSol]

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

Date: 7 May 87 16:58:27 EDT
From: *Hobbit* <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ring detection

The following

              .01uF      +-------+
Line ----------||--------|AC    +|-------->
                         |       |
Line ----------||--------|AC    -|-------->
              .01uF      +-------+
              200V      Bridge rect.


will generate a voltage across the + and - of the bridge when ring voltage
appears across the line.  It will also isolate the line from your downstream
equipment.  You don't have to wait 14 weeks for a mess of diodes.

This as given may be a little *too* sensitive and trigger on small voltage
edges -- an appropriate application of R and C after the bridge can cut
this down some.

_H*

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
10-May-87 14:41:39-EDT,11607;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Sun 10 May 87 14:41:37-EDT
Date: 10 May 87 13:30-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #45
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                             Sunday, May 10, 1987 1:30PM
Volume 6, Issue 45

Today's Topics:

                  Telecom ad in Scientific American
                    Re: Advantage of Bell breakup
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
              need help with answering machine (AUTO 60)

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

Date: Thu, 7 May 87 17:16:14 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Sam Ho)
Subject: Telecom ad in Scientific American

The current (May) issue of Scientific American contains an 8-page ad
for Telecom 87 in Geneva.  In the text portion of that ad are several
interesting tables about the industry.  (Sweden has the most per-capita
telephones, and AT&T is second to the merger of ITT and Alcatel telecom
divisions in most measures of size.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Smith)
Subject: Re: Advantage of Bell breakup
Date: 9 May 87 21:19:37 GMT


> From: [e-mail] (Martin Ewing)
> One little advantage I note to the divestiture (and all that) is that
> now I can prefix long distance calls with "10777" and I never get billed...
>
> Or is this my imagination?

Well, actually, a friend of mine did this, and he got the bill for the
calls about 7 months later, but he did get it.  Beware!

mark
--
Mark Smith                 "Happiness is a myth."
RPO 1604, CN 5063
New Brunswick, NJ 08903     rutgers:  msmith@gauss
uucp:   ...{seismo, ut-sally, sri-iu, ihnp4!packard}!gauss.rutgers.edu!msmith

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

From: ut-sally![e-mail] (Unix-to-Unix Copy)
Date: 10 May 87 02:06:04 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: ut-sally!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!nrc-ut!nrcvax!ihm
From: [e-mail] (Ian H. Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Divestiture
Summary: Humpty Dumpty is dead!
Keywords: Breakup, Humpty Dumpty, Bell system, Divestiture, Terrorist
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 8 May 87 17:30:14 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ian Merritt)
Distribution: world
Organization: The Frobboz Magic Telephone Co., Inc.
Lines: 145

In reply to: <[e-mail]>:
>      Although the divestiture has allowed long distance rates to drop
>precipitously, which is a bonus of the breakup, everything else is not.

Yes, but remember that the rates were falling, albeit not as fast,
before the breakup commenced, so even here, the extent of the benefit
isn't entirely clear.

>
>      I see little or no difference between the rates of the alternate long
>distance carriers and those of AT&T. Moreover, the quality of the alternates is
>simply horrendous, and with the implementation more and more fiber optic routes
>on AT&T (especially new ones like:
>New York- San Mateo County (415) and most of 418, Connecticut to San Francisco
>County (415), New York/CT to Texas (214), New York/CT to Atlanta (404),
>and NY/CT to South Carolina, Virginia, Chicago, Detroit as well as the "older
>links, like NY/CT - Mass), I am VERY willing to pay the penny per minute more
>on some calls so that I can use AT&T's fiber optics (believe me, once you talk
>via fiber you won't want to go back to anything else!)

Never mind the specific routes.  The point that AT&T is now (if I may
coin a term) 'glazing' their network is significant in itself.  If
they are making even a modest effort to maintain their previous
standards of excellence in engineering and planning, the will do a far
more professional job of it.  I hope they are doing better with their
network plant than they were able to do with subscriber termination
equipment (phones).  At least until recently, maybe still, they have
been advertising their telephones as if they were as well built as
15-20 years ago, when in reality they are the same cheesy garbage you
can pick up in designer pink & purple at your local supermarket.

>
>    The point here is not to compare various types of LD trunks, but to say
>that competition really hasn't brought the great degree of choices that  it
>was supposed to. The alternate LD co's have a few fiber optic trunks, and do a
>few things well, but they are more or less the same (although some are
>definitely on the LOW end!), and aren't much of a real choice. In other words,
>their rates are marginally lower than AT&T's, but not to a significant extent,
>and the quality of service they provide (even US Sprint, which doesn't seem to
>use as much fiber as they promise  in their TV ads) is at times drastically
>lower than AT&T's, so much so that for the "average consumer", there is really
>not much of a choice being offered.

Well, I wouldn't blast Sprint quite the the extent you have.  I do
find that when I get an all fiber connection, the quality is ok.
Unfortunately, this is not always the case, and the other carriers'
quality is dismal.

Worse, call completion via the alternate carriers will not soon
improve.  Even as they install CCIS-like interoffice communication
internally, they are still subject to the delay of the local CO
sending both the destination and the calling number via MF signalling
over the trunk, for every call, and they still dial out on a
subscriber-like line at the terminating end, necessitating their
DTMFing the 7, 8, 10, or 11 digit destination number only to have it
partially repeated in MF tones between the local CO at their
destination tandem and the actual terminating office.  AT&T only has
the originating CO send the destination, and it contracts with the
local TELCOs for AMA service.  Once at the local 4E, the call
traverses the AT&T network in under 1 second, and takes only a minimum
time to MF out the few digits needed to complete the call from the 4E
in the destination city to the terminating CO.  Overall completion
time from last digit dialed is usually about 2 seconds, vs. about 7 to
20 for the other guys.

In a recent TV spot, AT&T makes the claim that their calls complete
twice as fast.  It's much better than that.  I suspect they said twice
because no matter what the other carriers do, until they interface
with the local CO's as AT&T does, they will not get better than about
4 to 7 seconds, thus AT&T can use the ad for some time.  Incidentally,
the kid in the ad, I think by the name of Roger, I recently recognized
as being played by my cousin.

>
>    Previously, if you wanted cheap long distance you would use someone like
>MCI, who didn't have such great connections, but who was significantly cheaper
>than AT&T (as AT&T was regulated then).
>Now, MCI is just like Sprint who is just like Allnet (etc....), all of which
>are slightly below AT&T in price and very far below in transmission quality
>and optional services. Thus, before you had a choice, and you gave up quality
>but saved a lot of money. Now, you can give op quality, but fail to realize any
>significant savings. So what good did all this do?

Once again you have grouped sprint with the rest.  In terms of the
design of their network plant, they are no better than the others, but
their attitude toward quality is massively better and they are
starting to pull away in terms of overall service.  Still, they are as
yet no match for AT&T in overall network performance.  What good did
all this do?  It made the general public more aware of their telephone
as part of a business and not something to be taken for granted.  It
confused (and still confuses) the majority of the telephone using
public.  And it has served to increase our overall long distance
capacity.  BIG DEAL.  I share your view that we shouldn't have pushed
Humpty over the wall; I was against it from the beginning.  Now that
we're stuck with it, we must accept that the King's horses and Men
aren't even interested in collecting the pieces much less reassembling
poor Humpty.  Let's stop lamenting our fate and see what we can build
out of the wreckage.

>
>     Moreover, the divestiture is generally more expensive for the consumer.
>If you don't make a lot of long distance calls, you  are probably paying more
>for service now then you did when it was still the Bell System. Sure,  now you
>call call coast-to-coast for $7 per hour, but if you don't make many long
>distance calls, you are paying more in terms of "access fees" for a service
>you are not really using. Obviously, this reflects a more accurate appraisal
>of what the the costs for local vs. long distance service are. Yet the costs
>of this more "accurate appraisal" make it difficult to see if such a method for
>measuring phone service is worth it.

FCC terrorism is the only explanation for this.  Look at their recent
activities under Mr. Fowler.  I believe he has, as his name implies,
fowled the organization.

>
>    Moreover, why break up the Bell System if all that was required was a
>more sensitive pricing system? And if this means that I have to dial 0 for
>a local operator and 00 for a LD operator, or if it means that to fix a trunk
>my local co. has to argue with AT&T about it for 4 weeks, or if it means that
>my local Crossbar is now takes 5 seconds to complete a call after I finish
>dialing (Touch Tone) when it used to go through right away, and if it means
>that I have deal with two companies (my BOC and AT&T) who don't like each other
>anymore, and if it means that my local BOC has to spend money to DUPLICATE
>Calling Card and operator equipment that is already in place under AT&T (which
>I will ultimately pay for)...and....(whew!), then when it comes right down to
>it, was divestiture worth it?

No.  But it's done (sigh).  In 10 years, the dust will have settled
and we'll be back on track.  ISDN standards may be the hidden order in
what is now a terrible mess.

>
>    As far as I can see, the cost of divestiture is far greater, both in
>economic terms and, more importantly to me as a customer, in terms of SERVICE
>(remember that word?? :-;), than whatever small gains it has achieved. It is
>for that reason that I said I would
>like to  have to Bell System put back together again....

As would I, but even if we could, it could never be the same.

>
>      -(thanks to those who struggled through this long post....!)
>
>      -Doug
>

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

Date: Sat, 9 May 87 23:52:47 ast
From: [e-mail] (John Scott McCauley Jr.)
Subject: need help with answering machine (AUTO 60)

Hello,
    I have inherited a Record-A-Call Auto 60 answering machine, but
have no owners manual. It is about 10 years old and works pretty well, but
it has the annoying tendency to always answer the phone on the first
ring. It also won't cut itself off if I pick up the phone.
    If anyone has suggestions as to how I can modify it or add some
home-brew circuitry to make the thing answer on the fourth ring or so, or
even has manuals or schematics for this beast, please  let me know.

    Thanks  in Advance,

    Scott
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
11-May-87 19:21:51-EDT,14123;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 11-May-87 19:05:58
Date: 11 May 87 19:05-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #46
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                             Monday, May 11, 1987 7:05PM
Volume 6, Issue 46

Today's Topics:

Submission for comp.dcom.telecom (Transmission Quality; Answer Detection)
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
               How can I get my noisy phone line fixed?

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

Date: Sun, 10 May 87 17:10:46 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom (Transmission Quality; Answer Detection)

    I thought the following two articles might be of interest to those
who do not read or archive the groups to which they were posted:

>From postnews Sat May  9 00:15:58 1987
Subject: Re: Phone Line Quality
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Summary: More on noise and other topics...
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Andy Nourse) writes:
> > ... the transmission loss on most interoffice trunks originating at End
> > Offices (Class 5) trunks is carefully kept below 4.0 dB...
> > Toll Center (Class 4) and up... below 2.6 dB
> > a reasonably flat transmission characteristic between 300 and 3,000 Hz.
> What are the specs for signal-to-noise ratio?  If I want to call out of
> the three-small-town local calling area, I have to dial 1 <CLACK!!><HISSSSSSS>
> which routes the call out to Leominster, 15 miles away.

    Voice communication channels usually have a minimum of 30 dB as a
signal-to-noise ratio.
    This may be surprising, but data channels can usually get away with
a _lower_ S/N ratio minimum, typically 15 dB.  Other parameters, such as
phase shift (envelope delay distortion) are far more critical on data
circuits than S/N ratio.
    It sounds to me like your central office has some bad N-carrier
circuits (analog FDM), even more likely of the N1-variety which still
uses vacuum tubes.  N1 carrier requires continual maintenance to keep
its circuits "in tune", and it sounds like someone has been remiss in this
area.  There is still an amazing amount of vacuum tube FDM carrier in service
today.

> > ...  Trunks which fail to pass these automatic tests are disabled
> > until repair is effected.
> That must be why I sometimes get a fast busy, or drop back to a dial tone,
> when i dial 1  (this is before I get to dial any other digits).  I suppose
> it can thus disable ALL the trunks.  That does, of course, also affect
> 0 (for Operator) and all paths to Repair Service.

    I did not mean to imply that automatic trunk testing is in use
everywhere, although it is extensively implemented by AT&T Communications
and the BOC's.
    Losing a large number of trunks though intentional disabling by
automatic trunk test apparatus would be an unusual event, and would be
rare and quickly attended to.  It sounds more like switching apparatus
trouble or traffic overload.  Switching apparatus trouble which limits
access to less than the allocated number of trunks is an insidious problem
which is not easily diagnosed until customer complaints reach a level
where a repairperson is eventually dispatched the CO and to get to the bottom
of the problem.  Automatic trunk test apparatus does NOT test connectivity
to the trunks by the switching apparatus.
    If you are plagued with all trunk busy signals, complain to
repair service - otherwise, they may never know about the problem!

> > So the point is: under virtually all circumstances,
> > you should have little concern about the transmission quality of interoffice
> > trunks, as compared to your own subscriber loop.
> Are old, rural, step-by-step exchanges an exception to this?
> The noise starts when I dial 1, so I don't think the subscriber loop
> has anything to do with it.

    Well, unfortunately older SxS offices usually have older carrier
of the FDM variety (see above).  FDM carrier requires continual maintenance.
Well-maintained carrier should not present a noise problem (even N1 carrier);
it sounds like your CO may be the victim of reduced maintenance manpower
(to save money, of course!).

> > ...some of this standardization has gone to hell with the advent of
> > Alternate Long Distance carrier...
> Some local operating companies (including ours) are using that as an excuse to
> let line quality deteriorate, even for calls within the LATA.

    That's true.  The telephone companies are also getting killed by
increasing labor costs, so they reduce preventative maintenance, resulting
in - voila! - poor transmission in some areas.  Reduced maintenance is
more common with independent operating telephone companies; AT&T and the BOC's
predicted rising labor costs some years ago, and therefore developed and
installed an extensive variety of automatic trunk test apparatus.  The
independent operating telephone companies have much less automatic trunk test
apparatus than the BOC's and AT&T.

> > the comparatively small additional monthly and installation charge is well
> > worth it to get a better subscriber loop.
> I just checked with New England Telephone.  They said there is no such option.
> In 1980,  when I had a Bell 212a modem installed (with an RJ41 jack), the
> installer fiddled around with his test gear on the phone line for a couple of
> hours, but  I can detect no difference in quality from my other phone line. It
> is billed as a standard business phone line.

    I believe that every BOC has some type of "conditioned" central office
loop for use with dial-up data.  The additional charge may not be a tariffed
item, but is instead a non-tariffed charge, which is sometimes referred to as
a "special assembly charge".  It sounds like the person to whom you spoke had
little technical knowledge or experience with data communications - which
unfortunately is par for the course. :-(

> What does the switch, and the collection of resistors and capacitors inside an
> RJ41 jack do?

    The resistors provide an attenuation for the transmitted signal from
the modem, such that the signal arrives at the central office between -8 and
-9 dBm.

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

>From postnews Sun May 10 16:51:48 1987
Subject: Re: Telephone answer detection
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Distribution: usa
Summary: Not that simple...
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy Frederick) writes:
> Detection of answer and hangup depends on the type of CO you are connected
> to.

    Well-designed telephone apparatus should NEVER be dependent upon
the characteristics of one particular type of central office switching
apparatus.  Those characteristics of any central office switching apparatus
which might permit the detection of answer supervision by DC current sensing
are unreliable, and are subject to change without notice by the operating
telephone company.
    In North America, it is possible to design telephone station
apparatus which will reliably work in any central office.  Answer supervision,
however, cannot be reliably detected though DC sensing means over a subscriber
loop.  Answer supervision must be detected by inference using call-progress
tone detection, possibly in conjunction with a voice-operated switch circuit.

> In some older type offices the line polarity is reversed while
> you are connected to the called party.  It goes back to normal when the
> called party hangs up.

    There are in fact numerous variations and exceptions to this
observation:

1.    Some SxS offices have provide a polarity reversal for answer
    supervision only on calls made within the _same_ central office;
    non-toll calls made to other central offices may exhibit no such
    polarity reversal upon answer.

2.    Some SxS offices have their "connectors" wired NOT to provide
    polarity reversal on calls within the same central office.

3.    Some SxS offices provide a polarity reversal immediately upon the
    seizure of an interoffice toll trunk - regardless of whether the
    called party answers.  This may also include calls to the Operator,
    directory assistance, etc.  One reason for such polarity reversal
    is to facilitate "toll diversion" or "toll denial" for business
    lines and PBX trunks.  Such polarity reversal may be restricted to
    "linefinder" groups dedicated just to business lines, or it may
    apply to all lines in the SxS office.  The variations are numerous.

> In newer offices, the line voltage drops to zero
> momentarily when the party answers and again when they hang up.  My CO
> was a step-by-step with a common-control and used the polarity reversal
> scheme.  It was recently replaced by an electronic (type ?) office - it
> now drops the voltage to zero very briefly.

    This is a dangerous assumption.  Electromechanical switching
apparatus (#1 crossbar, #5 crossbar, etc.) will exhibit a momentary switching
open (lasting << 100 ms) as the marker switches the line from an originating
register to an intraoffice trunk, or to an interoffice trunk.  This time
period is _extremely_ variable, and depends upon both the office traffic load
and certain relay adjustment characteristics which are NOT subject to
standardization.
    In analog ESS offices (#1 ESS, #2 ESS, etc.) there is also a switching
open (lasting << 100 ms) as the line is switched between dial register,
ringback tone trunk, and intraoffice trunk; or between dial register and
interoffice trunk.  This time period is also _extremely_ variable, and depends
upon both the traffic load of the office and the operate-release time
variations of bistable magnetic latching relays.
    In digital ESS offices (#5E ESS, DMS100, etc.) there is generally
NO DC line current open until a call disconnects.

> Busy (and for that matter all other call progress) tone are usually
> detected by duty cycle.  However, specific tone frequencies are used
> for each signal.  Teltone makes a nice chip that detects the tone
> by frequency - I can't seem to find the reference to it (which contains
> the actual tones and duty cycles) - but I'll post them later.

    Not all central offices use CCITT standard tones; this is especially
true of SxS, Stromberg-Carson XY, AE/Leich, etc. electromechanical offices
which are not equipped provide touch-tone (DTMF) service.  CCITT standard
(or "precise") tones primarily came into being with the implementation of DTMF
service.
    Detection of call-progress tones MUST be made upon detected pulse
shape (i.e., duty cycle and repitition rate) of any tone energy in the
frequency range of 305 to 640 Hz; this covers "all bases".  The _specific_
CCITT frequencies are never detected.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

From: humu!uhccux![e-mail] (Yuan Chang)
Date: 11 May 87 12:38:50 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: uhccux!yuan
From: [e-mail] (Yuan Chang)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Syquest Cartridge Harddisk
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 May 87 12:38:50 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Yuan Chang)
Distribution: usa
Organization: U. of Hawaii, Manoa (Honolulu)
Lines: 11

     I have a Syquest 5M removable cartidge drive which is more than 5
years old.  It konked out quite a while ago, and I've been unable to find
the address to Syquest.  Anybody know if Syquest is still in business?
If so, will they repair this anciet box?  Also, if you could, the address
of SyQuest.  Thanks in advance...

--
UUCP: {ihnp4,seismo,ucbvax,dcdwest}!sdcsvax!nosc!uhccux!yuan
ARPA: uhccux![e-mail]                        INTERNET: [e-mail]
AT&T: [phone]        "I'm an Amigoid, she's an Amigoid, they're Amigoids,
- Yuan Chang -                          Wouldn't _y_o_u like to be an Amigoid too?"

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

Date: 11 May 1987 10:14:46-EDT (Monday)
From: "Victor S. Miller" <VICTOR@YKTVMX>
Subject: How can I get my noisy phone line fixed?

I've had a separate phone installed in my home for about five years to access
the computer at work via my IBM/PC.  Ever since it was installed, I've had
bad problems with line noise.  Even trying to use the phone for regular
voice is sometimes hard: I get periodic loud bursts of static (sometimes
more than a burst: the static can go on continuously for a few minutes).
Most days when I pick up the telephone I don't even get a dial tone (though
it varies).  I've called the telephone repair service so many times, I don't
remember.  The person taking the call has many times remarked about how bad
the static is.  Nevertheless, they have never been able to fix it.  One of
the problems is that things are often much worse when the weather is rainy
or damp (or a few days after a rain), and get better during dry spells, and
invariably, the repair person comes out on a nice sunny day, and says that
he can't hear anything.  It doesn't matter what phone (or modem) I connect
to the line.  I would think that the phone company would be tired of spending
money on sending out repair people, and would try to really fix it.  The
other line in our house has been fine.  One thing is that the bad line
has a phone number on a new (at least it was new when it was installed)
exchange.  Could that have anything to do with it?
                           Victor S. Miller
                           [e-mail] -- internet
                           victor@yktvmx  -- bitnet

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
11-May-87 19:22:10-EDT,12702;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 11-May-87 19:06:57
Date: 11 May 87 19:06-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #47
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                             Monday, May 11, 1987 7:06PM
Volume 6, Issue 47

Today's Topics:

          Are the telephones in Australia better than ours?
                 access fees, ld pricing comparisons
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                    Re: Telephone answer detection

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

Date: 11 May 1987 10:23:25-EDT (Monday)
From: "Victor S. Miller" <VICTOR@YKTVMX>
Subject: Are the telephones in Australia better than ours?

There has been a lot of discussion here about continual problem with
noise on phone lines.  I've excerpted two points below which may be of
interest.  One of the things that I found interesting is the experience
of the fellow in Australia.  It seems to be much better than the experiences
of anyone I've talked to in America.  Is it a fluke, or do the Aussies know
something that we don't.



    From Austin Texas:
>I recently went through a painful experience getting my problems with
>line errors remedied.  I started having tons of transmission errors, both
>to and from my PC.  The phone company checked the line, and found 'no'
>problems, and I have to admit that it did 'sound' good.. no static, hum
>and so on.
>
>Through sheer luck, I got a repairman who had the curiosity to pursue
>the problem with me.  Eventually, we ended up at the central office,
>where he ran a line out the back door (they wouldn't let me in the
>building) from the patch panel on the ESS and we connected a PC
>Convertible up, and tried communicating from the central office (the
>line to the house was out of the loop).  You couldn't get much closer to
>the switching system than that!  Line errors still existed.
>
>To make a long story short, they had upgraded the switch from an old
>cross-bar system to a #5 ESS (the best they have), and the problem
>turned out to be a multiplexor clocking problem between central offices.
>When the trunk lines were properly re-tuned, the line quality is
>absolutely super.  I have been working on the fixed line for over a
>month now, and I can count on the fingers of one hand the line errors I
>have had.
>
>Unfortunately, the resolution of these kind of problems where the phone
>company is involved, can be very frustrating.  Another friend at work
>ended up escalating his line problem to the Texas State Public Utility
>Commission before getting his line fixed.

    From Sydney Australia

>The amount of air-play on line errors surprises me - in fact it staggers
>me, so I thought a few comments from "outside" might help.
>
>I use the infamous KERMIT as a terminal emulator, because (a) it's
>public domain, (b) it's the "standard" at the customer installation, and
>(c) it permits me to access VAX systems as well as VM. KERMIT is fairly
>crude, with almost no error recovery, so if I get line errors, I see
>them on the screen - it's strictly ASCII start-stop.
>
>When I access VM, it's through a S/1 running YALE, which does the 3277
>emulation for me (very reliably). Between me and the S/1 there's also a
>front-end switch (MICOM) which almost certainly does nothing to improve
>the reliability of the connection. The modem I use is a CONCORD - quite
>basic and no fancy error recovery - at 1200 baud.
>
>In the couple of years I've been using this combination, I've probably
>seen less that 5 line errors.
>
>Though I'm not far from the site in question, the phone lines aren't of
>particularly high quality.
>
>I have transferred (single) files of up to 340KB - that is, almost a
>diskette full) - without any real problems. KERMIT summarises
>retries/errors as it does the file transfer, and I almost always have
>ZERO retries on file transfers.
>
>This prompts me to wonder why I've had almost ZERO problems using all
>very basic gear, and so many of you guys are having so many problems.

                           Victor S. Miller (IBM Research)
                           [e-mail] -- internet
                           victor@yktvmx  -- bitnet

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 11 May 87 11:33:04 PDT
Subject: access fees, ld pricing comparisons

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           05/11/87 11:33:02
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: access fees, ld pricing comparisons

 To: [e-mail]

 Access Fees:

 Local subscribers are being charged "access fees", identified as fees to cover
 the cost of accessing long-distance services. This confuses the #$%&* out of
 me. Everything I hear tells me l.d. is cheap and in the past subsidized local
 service; now it isn't doing that so local services' prices must increase.
 Fine, so call the price rises "decline- of-subsidy fees" or "cost-recovery
 fees". Why "access fees"? If they really were that, they should be charged to
 all long-distance co's incl ATT, thereby charging the long-distance users for
 the privilege of using long-distance, not charging all users including
 exclusively local users for the privilege.

 In this time of much exchange of fairly frank information and publicity, and
 widespread knowlege of what is happening, what perversity led to this
 conspiracy to use obfuscating terms all over the country for this price
 increase in local services?

 For that matter, who GETS these "access fees"?

 LD Pricing Comparisons

 In the discussions so far, I haven't seen my favorite cost saving mentioned. I
 use SPRINT and appreciate the fact that my long-distance costs are the SAME
 for most calls I make when travelling, to the costs when I make them from my
 home phone. That is, my accounting does not charge any surcharge for not being
 at home, over what local SPRINT users are charged for the same calls.

 Two modulating factors:

 1. I cannot always determine the local access no., and if I use the national
 800 number I DO pay extra.

 2. There is a national no. I can call for free to, among other things, ask
 what the local access no's are. However it is often busy a lot. (worse than
 that: it's a tone-tree: "are you a residential or business user, dial 1 or 2,
 are you calling about billing or service, dial 1 or 2.... after I do all this,
 I get a busy signal! Fewer trunks for the residential, service needer, of
 course...)

 3. I am told that original SPRINT customers have been grandfathered-in with
 this particular rate saving. SPRINT merged with another LD co. some time ago,
 which didn't have this feature, and apparently newer customers don't get the
 same savings, paying something extra for away-from-home calls.

 0-0 Sprint service

 For awhile here (San Francisco) the ATT user had operator service (by dialing
 0-0) but my sprint service required my calling sprint customer service as a
 regular call. Used to be a special 6-digit no. after I dialed the sprint
 access no., then when I got direct dial sprint, I didn't know how to reach
 them; then for awhile I could dial either their local access no. or 10277 from
 my home phone, then use the special 6-digit no. (what an odd procedure, since
 my home phone was already routed to them for longdist svc.)

 Recently I discovered that I can now dial 0-0 to get a sprint operator. I'm
 not sure what they DO; I actually asked "what is that number a phone user can
 dial to see what service they are connected to? And this operator didn't
 know... but then again, since she was a sprint op, I had my answer.

 Thanks, Doug
      access fees, ld pricing comparisons

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

From: Henry Schaffer <ecsvax![e-mail]>
Date: 11 May 87 19:03:22 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: ecsvax!hes
From: [e-mail] (Henry Schaffer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Phone system basics
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 May 87 19:03:21 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC State Univ.
Lines: 26
Summary: "Understanding Telephone Electronics" - an inexpensive
     reference.

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jonathan Sweedler) writes:
>
> Is there a good tutorial that explains the basics of the phone system.
> ...

  A very nice simple reference is a a book, Understanding Telephone
Electronics, "Developed and Published by Texas Instruments Learning Center".
It is written as a tutorial, with quizzes at the end of each chapter.
Chapter titles are:
1 The Telephone System
2 The Conventional Telephone Set
3 Electronic Speech Circuits
4 Electronic Dialing and Ringing Circuits
5 A Microcomputer in the Telephone
6 Digital Transmission Techniques
7 Electronics in the Central Office
8 Network Transmission
9 Modems - Telephone Service for Computers
10 Wireless Telephones

It is easy to read, and inexpensive.  I bought a copy at Radio Shack for
$3.49 a few years ago, and I believe they still carry it.  My copy is
Copyright 1983, and I don't know if there is a more recent edition, but
even the 1983 edition is reasonably current and the basics haven't changed.

--henry schaffer  n c state univ

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

From: akgua!mtgzz!**RJE**@RELAY.CS.NET
Date: 11 May 87 18:35:15 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: mtgzz!mtuxo!mtsbb!lav
From: [e-mail] (L.A.VALLONE)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Service fee for Toll-Free Calls?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 May 87 15:59:26 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Organization: AT&T-Information Systems, Middletown, NJ
Lines: 18

> Last week I stayed at the Days Inn in Alexandria, VA while on TDY.  I
> was suprised to find that, plainly marked on the phone cradle, they
> charged 30 cents for 800 numbers as well as for local calls.  Can they
> charge a "service fee" for toll-free calls?
>
> --Frank
>
> [The Sheraton Boston charges 60c for every 3 minutes on local calls,
> 950 calls, calls to the operator (except toll calls), calls to 911,
> and calls to 800 numbers. Apparently they can get away with it. --JSol]

Does anyone know if 800 calls can be "charged" to an AT&T credit
card, thus eliminating the service charge?

--

Lee Vallone        AT&T Information Systems    Merlin
{... ihnp4, mtuxo}!mtsbb!lav

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

From: hoptoad![e-mail] (John Gilmore)
Subject: Re: Telephone answer detection
Date: 11 May 87 21:54:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Daniel Rich) writes:
>   A friend of mine has asked me to work on a telephone project for her
> business, and I have run into a little snag.  They want a system that will
> call telephone numbers and play a message to the person who answers.

Note that devices that call people to play recorded messages to strangers are
regulated in many places.  These are the infamous "junk phone call"
machines.  Now, if you're building an alarm system that will call the
cops when somebody breaks in, that is different.

Even if they are not regulated in your area, I recommend that you design
the system such that:

    * If the person called gets disgusted and hangs up, you hang
      up also.  On many exchanges their phone line will be unusable
      until you do.

    * There should be a person on the line at all times, listening,
      and able to speak if desired.  Machines are just not able to
      handle all the responses that humans can make.

    * The recording it plays should start off by identifying who
      is calling, so that the customers can call the phone company
      or your company to complain about it if desired.  There's no
      sense in running such a system if all it does is alienate your
      potential or current customers.
--
Copyright 1987 John Gilmore; you may redistribute only if your recipients may.
(This is an effort to bend Stargate to work with Usenet, not against it.)
{sun,ptsfa,lll-crg,ihnp4,ucbvax}!hoptoad!gnu           [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
12-May-87 23:35:59-EDT,6927;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 12-May-87 21:29:14
Date: 12 May 87 21:29-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #48
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                            Tuesday, May 12, 1987 9:29PM
Volume 6, Issue 48

Today's Topics:

                   how to get a cleaner line maybe
               where has everyone gone and other stuff
                        Inside home wiring...

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 11 May 87 19:12:09 PDT
Subject: how to get a cleaner line maybe

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           05/11/87 19:12:07
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: how to get a cleaner line maybe

 To: [e-mail]

 One strategy for getting a chance at a cleaner line would be to order an
 additional line; once installed, disconnect the poorer of the two. Of course
 this is expensive but it might be preferable to a lifetime of trying to
 get a bad line fixed.

 Thanks, Doug
      how to get a cleaner line maybe

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

Date: Tue, 12 May 87 08:46:15 pdt
From: ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann)
Subject:  where has everyone gone and other stuff



*** line eater biscuit ***

Where has everyone gone??? I have not gotten any news from this
group in over three weeks !!! Is someone broke down or has everyone
left town?  Oh, I get it. Everyone has stopped telecommunicating. :-)

There has been some talk in this group lately about the need for
adding more digits to the public phone numbers because we will soon
run out of unused numbers. So, I was thinking about how the phone
system is handled here at the big 'B' and came up with some
questions and comments:

Background; Most all the phones in the company are on pbx or
            centrex, with more going to pbx everyday.

        Like many large companies there are plants and offices
        that are spread over the entire area, using up many
        thousands of phone numbers in many different public
        exchanges. ( apporx. 40,000 different numbers )

        The plants with pbx equipment are linked through leased
        lines to all the other plants serviced with similar
        equipment, making a 'private' phone network that
        operates in parallel with the public network. ( This
        'private' network uses 'public' numbers. i.e anyone on
        the public network can call directly to my desk from the
        public network using a regular seven digit number. )

So, one of my questions is, " How many other companies have there
phone networks setup in a similar way? If the answer is 'lots', then
it would seem that there's a good case to make these 'semi-private'
networks truely private and in the process, free up a lot of numbers
in the public network.

So how would people on the public network call people on a private
network? Well, one way that comes to mind is to run the private
network like many small and medium companies run there phone systems;
( many small firms with a pbx, a single number on the public network
is called that gets an operator at the company and then tells the
operator to whom they wish to speak.)

This could work the same way a large company as follows:
There would be a few access numbers (seven digit) allocated in the
public network to get onto the private network. From there, a
special dial tone or recorded message could instruct the caller to
enter additional digits that would then ring through to the person
they with to talk to. The big hole I see in this sort of thing is
that it would work great for me calling on my tone phone connected
to an ECO. However, there may be serious problems if someone were to
call from say New York state where the COE might be some old
cross-bar type thing and the instrument a rotory dial type.

And even if such a system could be set in place, would the savings
in numbers on the public network be enough? Or would all the
available numbers still be used up soon anyway?

Some of you in the know might comment further on this...


Roger    Swann        UUCP:  uw-beaver!ssc-vax!clark

    As usual, I disavow any knowledge of my actions.

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

From: sun!sunncal!scampi![e-mail] (Fubar Void)
Subject: Inside home wiring...
Date: 8 May 87 22:40:26 GMT


I have to rewire the house I'm moving into in order to install
a separate phone line. There are already two other phones in there
and phone jacks in every bedroom. I just have to wire one of the bedrooms
with a separate line.
Question is, are there books or documents associated with such things as
wiring requirements or guidelines in order to satisfy the local
connectivity issues? Or should one just give up and pay the local
Bell-CO to do it at $150+ a pop...

thanks much...

r...

--

{ihnp4,lll-lcc,hoptoad}!scampi!ramin
systems control inc.        [phone] x-1777
1801 page mill road        palo alto, ca  94304

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

Date: Tue, 12 May 87 15:59:35 EDT
From: [e-mail]

To:
Path: lsuc!dave
From: [e-mail] (David Sherman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Advantage of Bell breakup
Summary: how is billing by non-BOC enforced?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 May 87 17:26:11 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Sherman)
Distribution: world
Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 18


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark Smith) writes:
>> One little advantage I note to the divestiture (and all that) is that
>> now I can prefix long distance calls with "10777" and I never get billed...
>>
>Well, actually, a friend of mine did this, and he got the bill for the
>calls about 7 months later, but he did get it.  Beware!

I'm curious about the logistics of enforcement here. The traditional
TPC remedy for non-payment of a phone bill is cutting off service.
What does Sprint or any other service do to facilitate enforcement?
Request up-front deposits from new customers? Can anyone send a call
through a random long-distance company in the U.S., or do they have
to sign up first?

David Sherman        [e-mail]
Toronto (where all phone service is still handled by Bell Canada)
--
{ seismo!mnetor  cbosgd!utgpu  watmath  decvax!utcsri  ihnp4!utzoo } !lsuc!dave

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
13-May-87 22:06:14-EDT,10208;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 13-May-87 21:58:22
Date: 13 May 87 21:58-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #49
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                          Wednesday, May 13, 1987 9:58PM
Volume 6, Issue 49

Today's Topics:

                           Phone Line Noise
 Submission for comp.dcom.telecom (Hotel telephone usage surcharges)
       Submission for comp.dcom.telecom (Noisy Telephone Lines)
                         Re: "access charges"

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

Date: Tue 12 May 87 21:50:39-EDT
From: Doug Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone Line Noise



Victor-

   I had essentially the same problem with line noise. We found out that
what was causing it was a "junction box" which leaked. Thus, when it rained,
and a little bit after it rained, water would leak into the box, cover the
two wires to our line, and cause static. After a day or so, it dried up,
and the line worked fine. Not only will this cause static and prevent you
from getting a dial tone, but it may also make your line busy for incoming
callers. (Although if your line is just for the IBM I doubt that its much
of a problem).

   I realized what was going on, and since the junction box is two
houses down, took the repairman there and told him to fix it. He didn't
believe me, so I took out a garden hose, and to his dismay, sprayed the
whole thing. I then picked up my line, and sure enough, there was static.
Needless enough, after that demonstration, the problem was fixed for good.

    I don;t know if this is the same problem you are experiencing, but it
sounds very similar...


    Good luck in any event!

    -Doug

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
...seismo!weslyn.bitnet!reuben  (UUCP)

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

Date: Tue, 12 May 87 23:28:10 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom (Hotel telephone usage surcharges)

In a recent article [e-mail] (L.A.VALLONE) writes:
> > Last week I stayed at the Days Inn in Alexandria, VA while on TDY.  I
> > was surprised to find that, plainly marked on the phone cradle, they
> > charged 30 cents for 800 numbers as well as for local calls.  Can they
> > charge a "service fee" for toll-free calls?
> >
> > [The Sheraton Boston charges 60c for every 3 minutes on local calls,
> > 950 calls, calls to the operator (except toll calls), calls to 911,
> > and calls to 800 numbers. Apparently they can get away with it. --JSol]

    The "service fees" mentioned above are collected by the hotel from
which the calls are made.  These are usage charges for the telephone in the
guest room, and have no bearing upon the actual cost of making the call.
    Since these charges constitute a "resale" of local telephone
service, most if not all states through their respective Public Utilities
Commissions regulate the maximum amount that a hotel can charge for guest
telephone usage.
    Bear in mind that these hotel surcharges are not as outrageous as
they may seem - for local calls, at least.  In New York State, the measured
business message rate for daytime calls through New York Telephone is
around $ 0.10 per minute.
    In my opinion, charging for operator, 950 and 800 calls at the same
rate as local station calls is unfair since it really costs the hotel NO
money.  However, the problem in many cases is that the PBX used by the hotel
does not have the SMDR intelligence to differentiate between a free call,
and a chargeable local station call.  So, if in doubt, the hotel charges for
ALL calls...

> Does anyone know if 800 calls can be "charged" to an AT&T credit
> card, thus eliminating the service charge?

    Since the "charges" for these toll-free calls are surcharges imposed
by the hotel, AT&T has nothing to do with the matter.  It is unlikely that
AT&T will collect money for a hotel under these circumstances.
    I agree that say, $ 0.20 per minute is a ripoff for what should be
a toll-free call, but the hotel seems to hold the cards in the matter as
long as state Public Utilities Commissions permit such surcharges.  Even
if enough people complained to PUC's to reduced the surcharges permitted
to hotels, the hotels would probably just turn around and compensate by
raising their basic room rates.  It's probably a no-win situation...

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: Tue, 12 May 87 23:25:34 EDT
From: kitty![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom (Noisy Telephone Lines)

In a recent article VICTOR@YKTVMX ("Victor S. Miller") writes:

> I've had a separate phone installed in my home for about five years to access
> the computer at work via my IBM/PC.  Ever since it was installed, I've had
> bad problems with line noise.  Even trying to use the phone for regular
> voice is sometimes hard: I get periodic loud bursts of static (sometimes
> more than a burst: the static can go on continuously for a few minutes).
> Most days when I pick up the telephone I don't even get a dial tone (though
> it varies).  I've called the telephone repair service so many times, I don't
> remember.  The person taking the call has many times remarked about how bad
> the static is.  Nevertheless, they have never been able to fix it.  One of
> the problems is that things are often much worse when the weather is rainy
> or damp (or a few days after a rain), and get better during dry spells, and
> invariably, the repair person comes out on a nice sunny day, and says that
> he can't hear anything.  It doesn't matter what phone (or modem) I connect
> to the line.  I would think that the phone company would be tired of spending
> money on sending out repair people, and would try to really fix it.  The
> other line in our house has been fine.  One thing is that the bad line
> has a phone number on a new (at least it was new when it was installed)
> exchange.  Could that have anything to do with it?

    It sounds like you have an intermittent problem with a wet cable
splice or water getting into an outdoor junction box.
    Water can cause some really insidious cable problems which are
usually difficult to locate.  The problem can totally disappear during dry
weather.  I can believe that a telephone company repairperson can find no
sign of trouble when finally being dispatched to your premises.
    The fact that your other telephone line is okay suggests to me that
it leaves the central office in a different cable, before eventually being
cross-connected to the same cable which feeds your block.
    The only way that the telephone company can deal with this problem
is to catch it WHILE IT IS HAPPENING, and isolate the different cable
sections between the central office and your house in an effort to localize
the problem using leakage resistance measurements taken in each cable section.
This could take a couple hours of effort, and requires two people: the person
in the field and a craftsperson at a central office test position.
    It is often not easy to motivate the telephone company to expend the
effort to solve this type of problem.  Unfortunately, your best hope is that
the wet splice will fail catastrophically - affecting many other subscribers,
and therefore imposing some priority upon the matter.
    Here are my suggestions for dealing with this problem:

1.    To whatever extent is possible or reasonable, inspect the telephone
wiring at the point where it enters your house.  Some older homes have outdoor
protector boxes; if so, could this be filling with water when it rains?  Try
to spot the pole-mounted terminal box or cable-mounted "boot" where the drop
wire to your house originates; are there open covers which could admit water
when it rains?  [I don't recommend climbing your utility pole for a closer
look! :-)]  If you see any of these conditions, take no action yourself, but
DO inform a telephone company repairperson upon their next visit to your
premises.  I make these statements because, unfortunately, some telephone
company personnel are lazy, and you have to "hold their hand" a bit if you
want expedient service.

2.    When the noise problem happens again, call repair service and tell
them you want a repairperson dispatched NOW!  Tell them this has been a
chronic problem that has remained unsolved, and the only way to repair it
is to find the trouble while it is happening.  If you can't get satisfaction,
demand to speak with a supervisor - that should get results.

3.    If the problem goes away, and the telephone company claims to have
fixed it, demand some details to satisfy yourself that the problem was in
fact localized, and that a repair was in fact made.  Unfortunately, lazy
telephone company repairpersons sometimes report these problems repaired
when it fact the problem spontaneously cleared without any actual repair
effort.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rocksanne|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231        {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   [phone] {G1,G2,G3 modes}    "Have you hugged your cat today?"

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

Date: Wed, 13 May 87 12:44:19 edt
From: ms6b#@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu)
Subject: Re: "access charges"

The FCC has taken to calling "access charges"  subscriber line charges to
reflect the fact that they cover part of the cost of the line from your house
to the telco CO.  They do NOT cover costs for access to a long distance
carrier.  The phrase "access charge" is indeed confusing.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
13-May-87 22:06:54-EDT,8737;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 13-May-87 21:59:18
Date: 13 May 87 21:59-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #50
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                          Wednesday, May 13, 1987 9:59PM
Volume 6, Issue 50

Today's Topics:

                 Re: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                            10777+ billing
                            inside wiring

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

From: hao!nbires!onecom![e-mail] (Scott J. Kamin)
Subject: Re: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
Date: 13 May 87 14:26:25 GMT
Reply-To: gatech!tektronix!zeus!sjk (Scott J. Kamin)



> Last week I stayed at the Days Inn in Alexandria, VA while on TDY.  I
> was suprised to find that, plainly marked on the phone cradle, they
> charged 30 cents for 800 numbers as well as for local calls.  Can they
> charge a "service fee" for toll-free calls?
>
> --Frank
>
> [The Sheraton Boston charges 60c for every 3 minutes on local calls,
> 950 calls, calls to the operator (except toll calls), calls to 911,
> and calls to 800 numbers. Apparently they can get away with it. --JSol]

>> Does anyone know if 800 calls can be "charged" to an AT&T credit
>> card, thus eliminating the service charge?

The charge is levied by the hotel as an attempt to recover the costs
   involved with supplying a sufficient number of trunks to service all
   the guests. It is not dependent on where the call goes or how it is
   paid for. An attempt to charge 800 calls will be met with the (true)
   statement that 800 calls are TOLL free. That is, the phone company
   does not charge the owner of the phone for the call.

Most hotels these days have gone away from the AT&T provided billing
   (remember the old teletypes that hotels had in their offices to
   receive their billing info). These days with smart PBX's and add-on
   call-costing systems, most hotels route all direct-dial calls
   through their own networks or non-AT&T circuits and charge whatever
   the traffic will bear to their customers. This includes the charges
   for non-toll calls. All you can do is complain, threaten to stay
   elsewhere, or use the pay phone in the lobby.
--
Scott J. Kamin            {stcvax, isis, ihnp4}!onecom!sjk
TelWatch Inc.    (formerly OneCom, Inc.)
2905 Wilderness Place        [phone] (switchboard)
Boulder, CO 80301        [phone] (direct)

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

From: ut-sally!im4u![e-mail] (William J. Watson)
Date: 13 May 87 17:34:31 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: im4u!watson
From: [e-mail] (William J. Watson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Private PBX numbering, was Re: where has everyone gone and other stuff
Summary: Exists today on many PBXs
Keywords: PBX phone numbers
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 13 May 87 17:34:29 GMT
References: <8705121546.AA13873@ssc-vax>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (William J. Watson)
Distribution: us
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 32

In many PBX systems, only some extensions have numbers directly accessible from
the public phone network.  Sometimes this is done to create "internal use only"
extensions, and sometimes due to the expense of buying a block of numbers from
the local phone company.  Usually, numbers are sold in blocks of 1000, but in
some congested ares (Downtown Houston, for example) they are sold in blocks
of 100.

In either case, some PBX systems have the option of a direct number for
"internal" access from outside.  In ROLM CBXs, this is called Direct Inward
System Access (DISA).  When you dial the DISA number from somewhere in the
outside world, you get a tone of some sort, at which point you can either simply
dial the number of the extension you want, or dial a special autorization code
that allows you to do anything you could from your office.  This can be useful
for making business long distance calls from home.

This setup would clearly only work for people with tone dial phones.  I think
that the possibility of rotary dial phones is ignored.

In any case, the numbers for all of the internal extensions are not used up
and, in some cases, a sophisticated network of internal extensions of internal
use only numbers can be set up, possibly spanning several sites.

William J. Watson
Member Technical Staff
ROLM, an IBM (cough, gag) company

All opinions expressed herein are my own.  My employer may not even know of them

--
William J. Watson
UUCP:  {gatech, harvard, ihnp4, pyramid, seismo}!ut-sally!im4u!watson
ARPA Internet & CSNET:  [e-mail]

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

Date:     Wed, 13 May 87 11:41:22 PDT
From:     [e-mail] (Martin Ewing)
Subject:  10777+ billing

David Sherman's query:

>>> One little advantage I note to the divestiture (and all that) is that
>>> now I can prefix long distance calls with "10777" and I never get billed...
>>>
>>Well, actually, a friend of mine did this, and he got the bill for the
>>calls about 7 months later, but he did get it.  Beware!
>
>I'm curious about the logistics of enforcement here...

Yeah, that was part of my original concern.  I used 10777+ at my previous
residence and moved in February, changing my number.  Now, are the SPRINT
enforcers going to track me down for their lousy few bucks?  We'll see.

At current interest rates, a 7 month delay in billing is like 4-5% off your
bill.  Why don't they promote this in their ads? :-)

  Martin Ewing

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 13 May 87 13:52:34 PDT
Subject: inside wiring

 MSG:FROM: SPGDCM  --UCBCMSA  TO: NETWORK --NETWORK           05/13/87 13:52:32
 To: NETWORK --NETWORK  Network Address

 From:    Doug Mosher                 <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA>
 Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
 Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
 Subject: inside wiring

 To: [e-mail]

 Regarding the inquiry on how to home-wire:

 If you have standard single-party home lines, and standard single-line home
 phones, the wiring itself is pure simplicity: two wires from the telco feed in
 parallel to each outlet. Buy outlets and wires in local grocery store. Buy a
 polarity red-green light from radio shack and reverse the two wires if you get
 a red light.

 Don't do it at all if it involves: two or more party lines; pay phones; public
 use; weird equipment; homemade things plugged into power lines or other
 appliances (unless those things are themselves unmodified and FCC registered).
 Get into more work if you want multiple lines, fancy equipment, intercom,
 whatever.

 Make sure you can disconnect your house from telco, leaving a single standard
 modular outlet with proper polarity, if you think the telco service is broke.
 I do this with two modular wall outlets and a short modular jumper.

 Books are available in radio shacks and electronics stores, probably
 bookstores too. They just tell how; it seems you can ignore a lot of spooky
 and unelucidated threats regarding tariffs and whatever if you avoid the
 restrictions listed above.

 The REAL problem is not the circuitry or tariffs, its the utmost magic
 ingenuity required to run the little wires from point x to y in your house.
 Depending on the situation this runs from easy and obvious, to imaginative, to
 very ugly. Most classic telco installers had the tools and knowledge to do
 this pretty easily. Nowadays you can use "electricians" but they until now are
 used to running ROMEX fat wires; even harder; but they may not yet be used to
 the tricks possible with skinny wires. They have a tendency to want to remove
 wallboards (you plaster and repaint afterward.)

 Compare costs for each if possible. If you are doing new construction, major
 remodelling, or a big job, consider running: at least 3 pairs, maybe 6 or 12
 pair cable; and maybe standard tv coax. Use the coax for cable tv, remote vcr
 hookups, and one leg of the future. Use the other pairs for additional telco
 lines, home security, intercoms, stereo audio, and the other leg of the
 future. Madmen would suggest you also run a fiber optic cable. First of all
 they're madmen; second of all the TYPE of fiber will change before you'd ever
 use it.

 Thanks, Doug
   *  inside wiring

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
14-May-87 18:57:09-EDT,5106;000000000000
Mail-From: JSOL created at 14-May-87 17:39:37
Date: 14 May 87 17:39-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #51
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                           Thursday, May 14, 1987 5:39PM
Volume 6, Issue 51

Today's Topics:

                           Phone card scam
                          Re: 10777+ billing
                       Data Corruption in PDNs
        US Sprint restricts some Int'l Long Distance Service?

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

Date:     Wed, 13 May 87 10:40 EDT
From:     "Steven H. Gutfreund" <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Phone card scam

Yesterday's New York Times (12-May) did an article on phone card scams.
Seems there are people offering trans-country ($2) and workd($4) unlimited
phone calls. They dial the number (with a credit card number stolen
by a hacker and transmitted via network) for the person and they get to
talk. It seems the densitiy of credit codes is high enough so that
about anyone with persistance cand find them.

Does anyone have some reasonable technical suggetions about what
could be done (I realize that a lot of ideas are shot down by the
Long Distance Carries because of marketing and simplicity reasons)

                - Steven Gutfreund

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

Date: Thu, 14 May 87 12:11:38 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Drach)
Subject: Re: 10777+ billing
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve Drach)

10222 (MCI) catches you faster.  It was included in my next Pac bell bill.
I've never (so far) been charged for 10777.

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

Date: 14 May 1987 13:28-PDT
Subject: Data Corruption in PDNs
From: [e-mail]

Has anyone had experience with or knowledge of data corruption within a public
data network (PDN) using the X.25 protocol?  I am specifically talking about
internal corruption as opposed to noise on the local loop.

I am faced with an interesting situation wherein synchronous X.25 data into
a network <> synchronous X.25 data out of network, and the network is not a
developmental tool or beta test, etc.

Or is it just our luck that we have the first such recorded instance?

Thanks,
Bud Huber

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

Date: Thu, 14 May 87 17:10:14 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Subject: US Sprint restricts some Int'l Long Distance Service?

I got my US Sprint bill yesterday, which included their
newsletter-type blurb.  The newsletter describes how to use their
International Long-Distance service and provides a chart at the bottom
of the page which lists some countries and their access codes.

The newsletter states that certain countries are only accessible by
dial-1 service and (specifically!) not accessible by travel-code or
access-code service.  They explain that this is necessary to prevent
unauthorized usage of their network to those countries.

This is all fine and good, but why just certain countries?

#
# Henry Mensch / <[e-mail]> / E40-358C MIT, Cambridge, MA
#          {ames,cca,rochester,mit-eddie}!garp!henry

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

Date: Thu, 14 May 87 12:24:54 edt
From: Pat Sullivan <[e-mail]>


The phone line noise & outage problem you were talking about
was near and dear to me. In 1985, when we moved into our
current apartment, we were experiencing absence of dial tone
and busy-out of incoming calls for hours at a stretch. My
wife was pregnant with our daughter at the time, and it was
more than an inconvenience. The way we finally got C&P's
attention was that we made two separate calls on the same day
(not planned that way, as it happens). My wife basically said
that she was 8 1/2 months pregnant and we needed a working phone.
I said the same thing, but also threatened to sue them and to
get the story on the local film-at-11. (We had contacted them
7 times up to that point and had gotten jerked around.) Oh, and
they weren't amused when I suggested partial payment on my fone
bill, since we were getting partial (and undependable) phone service.
Wanted it in full on time, thank you.

There was a good comment about "motivating" the telco to check
these problems out. It turned out they had all kinds of problems,
beginning with a leaky cable trench crossing the street to
junction boxes (wrong term but I can't think of the right one)
with the doors hanging open and the insides exposed to the weather.
Anyway, most of the problem went away after this, though not entirely.

Moral: We tried the nice polite we-don't-want-to-make-trouble
approach 7 times and got ignored. Only thing that worked for us
was threatening court action and publicity. I genuinely hate to
do business that way but i think many companies (not just the telco)
must have a policy of ignoring people until they really raise a fuss.

Best,
Pat Sullivan

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
16-May-87 00:06:48-EDT,15778;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Sat 16 May 87 00:06:45-EDT
Date: 15 May 87 22:56-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #52
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                            Friday, May 15, 1987 10:56PM
Volume 6, Issue 52

Today's Topics:

                         re: Hotel surcharges
                       phone wiring for a modem
                        TELECOM Digest V6 #51
                          Re: 10777+ billing
                 Re: how to get a cleaner line maybe
                   Fraud on Washington State phones
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                         Regular phone chirp
        Cellular Phone Companies are protecting themselves...

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

Date: 14-May-1987 0942
From: [e-mail]  (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Subject: re: Hotel surcharges

I'd like to clarify Larry Lipman's comment on hotel phone gouging.\

IF the call is INTRAstate, then it's governed by the DPU.  That applies
to local calls and in-state non-local calls.  (DPU=PUC=etc.)  IF the
call is INTERstate, then it's governed by the FCC.  That includes MOST
800 numbers.  As it were, the FCC believes in a "free marketplace", or
"let them gouge, it's the only phone in your room".  (I usually find
pay phones in the lobby for some calls.)

And New York Tel's rate isn't 10c/minute; while I don't have the exact
tariff in front of me (it's in fractional cents), it comes to under a
dime for the first 5 minutes and under 3 cents for additional minutes.
They just revised it too, so ALL calls within the 5 boroughs are "zone 1",
and calls to Long Island and the rest of the LATA are cheaper to boot!
NY State made NYT go through exacting, excruciating cost studies to come
up with local rates, back when Alfred Kahn was running the show.  They
are as close to "cost" (for most things, not all) as any telco.
     fred

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

From: soma!rice.EDU![e-mail] (Dave Johnson)
Subject: phone wiring for a modem
Date: 14 May 87 20:55:28 GMT


I need to wire a new phone line through a house for use with a modem.
Is there some kind of sheilded phone cable that I could use to help
reduce any noise in the connection?  Anything else I should be aware
of when routing the wire such as not getting too close to electrical
wires?  Thanks.
                    Dave Johnson
                    Dept. of Computer Science
                    Rice University

UUCP: {soma,shell,cbosgd,convex,sun,texsun}!rice!dbj
ARPA: [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 14 May 87 21:13:23 EDT
From: Simson L. Garfinkel <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #51

   Date:     Wed, 13 May 87 10:40 EDT
   From:     "Steven H. Gutfreund" <[e-mail]>
   Subject:  Phone card scam

   Does anyone have some reasonable technical suggetions about what
   could be done (I realize that a lot of ideas are shot down by the
   Long Distance Carries because of marketing and simplicity reasons)

                   - Steven Gutfreund

Sure. Hundred digit credit card numbers. Ok, twenty digits ought to be
enough. Especially with the spiffy AT&T phones that automatically
punch in your AT&T credit card number for you, there really isn't any
reason (beyond convience for people at manual phones) not to use big
numbers.

At each central office, keep a list of every authorized credit card
number. (How hard would that be? Figure 100,000,000 valid credit card
numbers, 20 digits (10 bytes) each. With only BCD compression, this is
only 1GB of storage, which could easily be distributed on a weekly
basis. (Or looked up directly via some sort of packet switched
network.) You could veryify a number in less than a second.)

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

From: genrad!panda![e-mail] (Robert S. Wood)
Subject: Re: 10777+ billing
Date: 15 May 87 03:05:20 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Robert S. Wood)



Where does one find out what numbers work?  I tried 10222 1 xxx xxx xxxx and
it went thru.  How does MCI know my address to send a bill?  Will it be on
my NETCO bill added on after the ATT section (ATT is my dial-1 carrier)?

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

From: Peter Kendell <mcvax!tcom.stc.co.uk![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: how to get a cleaner line maybe
Date: 15 May 87 09:08:44 GMT
Reply-To: Peter Kendell <mcvax!tcom.stc.co.uk![e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]} [e-mail] writes:
} Title:   MVS/Tandem Systems Manager  [phone]
} Office:  Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
} Subject: how to get a cleaner line maybe
}
} To: [e-mail]
}
} One strategy for getting a chance at a cleaner line would be to order an
} additional line; once installed, disconnect the poorer of the two. Of course
} this is expensive but it might be preferable to a lifetime of trying to
} get a bad line fixed.
}


        This is absolutely insane!!! Are you seriously suggesting
        that one should *reward* the telephone company for providing
        a rotten service by paying them for another line?

        And what if the new line is worse than the old one???

        I hope you have a good investment adviser!

        I think I missed the :-)
--
    Peter Kendell <[e-mail]>

    'Have you no idea of development, of progress?'
    'I have seen both in an egg. We call it Going Bad in Narnia.'

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

Date: 15 May 1987 09:58-PDT
From: Sam Ho <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fraud on Washington State phones

The Seattle Times had a story 14-May about fraud on the Washington State
telephone system SCAN (State Controlled Area Network).  Losses were
estimated at up to $300,000.  The scheme involved getting the system's
local access number from an employee, and then finding the 6-digit
identification codes by trial and error.  Most of the calls ended up on
the account of a Washington State University employee who received a
56-page SCAN bill.  State officials are now tracking down the people who
made the calls, and collecting settlements ranging from $0.70 to $180.
Uncooperative people could also be prosecuted.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri May 15 10:53:55 1987

Date: 15 May 87 17:53:53 GMT
To: reed!tektronix!comp-dcom-telecom
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
Responding-System: omen.UUCP

Path: omen!caf
From: [e-mail] (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Data Corruption in PDNs
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 May 87 17:53:53 GMT
References: <[ECLA.USC.EDU]14-May-87.13:28:32.BHUBER>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX)
Distribution: world
Organization: Omen Technology Inc, Portland Oregon
Lines: 17


This sort of data corruption has happened in at least one major network
that I know of, and there must be zillions of unreported gotcha's.

"Error free Network" is an oxymoron.

One really needs and end to end protocol such as ZMODEM with 32 bit CRC's
to protect your data.  Then you have to pray the memory boards on your
CPUs are properly seated in the backplane ...


Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX Author of Pro-YAM communications Tools for PCDOS and Unix
...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf  Omen Technology Inc "The High Reliability Software"
  17505-V Northwest Sauvie Island Road Portland OR 97231  Voice: 503-621-3406
TeleGodzilla BBS: 621-3746 2400/1200  CIS:70007,2304  Genie:CAF  Source:TCE022
  omen Any ACU 1200 1-503-621-3746 se:--se: link ord: Giznoid in:--in: uucp
  omen!/usr/spool/uucppublic/FILES lists all uucp-able files, updated hourly

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

From: ut-sally![e-mail] (Unix-to-Unix Copy)
Date: 16 May 87 00:06:11 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: ut-sally!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!nrc-ut!nrcvax!ihm
From: [e-mail] (Ian H. Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: TCS 1001 chip: Who makes it?
Summary: Who makes it?
Keywords: TCS1001 IC
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 May 87 21:08:46 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ian Merritt)
Organization: The Frobboz Magic Integrated Circuit Finders, Inc.
Lines: 12

I am posting this on behalf of a friend without net access.

Said friend asked if I had ever heard of the aforementioned TCS 1001
chip.  It is apparently a keypad scanner used in alarm systems.  Has
anybody out there heard of this chip, and if so know who makes it and
where they are located?

Thank you in advance.

                        <>IHM<>

Ps: Please respond by mail; no sense cluttering the news with this one.

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

From: ut-sally![e-mail] (Unix-to-Unix Copy)
Date: 16 May 87 00:06:25 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: ut-sally!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!nrc-ut!nrcvax!ihm
From: [e-mail] (Ian H. Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: where has everyone gone and other stuff
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 May 87 19:13:54 GMT
References: <8705121546.AA13873@ssc-vax>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ian Merritt)
Distribution: world
Organization: The Frobboz Magic Telecommunications Equipment Co., Inc.
Lines: 85

>
>
>*** line eater biscuit ***

A rubber biscuit?

>
>There has been some talk in this group lately about the need for
>adding more digits to the public phone numbers because we will soon
>run out of unused numbers. So, I was thinking about how the phone
>system is handled here at the big 'B' and came up with some
>questions and comments:
>
>Background; Most all the phones in the company are on pbx or
>            centrex, with more going to pbx everyday.
>
    .
    .
    .

>So, one of my questions is, " How many other companies have there
>phone networks setup in a similar way? If the answer is 'lots', then
>it would seem that there's a good case to make these 'semi-private'
>networks truely private and in the process, free up a lot of numbers
>in the public network.

The answer is 'Lots'.

>
>So how would people on the public network call people on a private
>network? Well, one way that comes to mind is to run the private
>network like many small and medium companies run there phone systems;
>( many small firms with a pbx, a single number on the public network
>is called that gets an operator at the company and then tells the
>operator to whom they wish to speak.)

>This could work the same way a large company as follows:
>There would be a few access numbers (seven digit) allocated in the
>public network to get onto the private network. From there, a
>special dial tone or recorded message could instruct the caller to
>enter additional digits that would then ring through to the person
>they with to talk to. The big hole I see in this sort of thing is
>that it would work great for me calling on my tone phone connected
>to an ECO. However, there may be serious problems if someone were to
>call from say New York state where the COE might be some old
>cross-bar type thing and the instrument a rotory dial type.

Such systems are already in use.  If you are interested in seeing one,
call 818-701-3000.  What is called an 'automated attendent system' is
in use there at Valley Cable TV.  I think they are running a ROLM
system.  The solution to the problem you mentioned is that the system
connects an operator if it doesn't hear any digits with some time
after completing its message.  You can Touch-tone over any part of the
message if you already know the answer and don't want to wait for the
rest.  Rotary customers are going away anyway; pretty soon the
[dis]service will likely no longer be offered.  The only problem with
this vs. centrex or DID (Direct Inward Dialing) is that answer
supervision is returned on initial connect, before you ring your
target party.  With the latter two systems, you don't pay unless
somebody answers the target extension.

>
>And even if such a system could be set in place, would the savings
>in numbers on the public network be enough? Or would all the
>available numbers still be used up soon anyway?

This would delay the issue by a substantial amount of time.  It would
be (is) worthwhile, and it is underway.  I don't think, however, that
it will ever be a total replacement for Centrex and DID, and as such
it will not have quite as profound an effect on the availability of
numbers.

There is quite a bit of number-space left in an as-yet untapped, but
planned scheme of using area-codes of the NNX form, i.e. no longer
restricting them to N0X/N1X format as they have traditionally been.
This was planned even before they started using N0X/N1X for local
prefixes, first in LA, then NY and Chicago.

>
>Some of you in the know might comment further on this...


And so I have...
                Cheerz--
                        --i

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

Date: Fri, 15 May 87 08:37:14 edt
From: [e-mail] (Roger Hoover)
Subject: Regular phone chirp

A friend of mine has a cheapo phone that chirps every night at
11:55pm.  A call to New York Telephone about this got a response
claiming that NYT did no regular testing that would cause this.
A telephone on the same line with a mechanical ringer does not
make any noise.

1) What is causing this noise?
2) Is their an easy way to stop it?

[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri 15 May 87 22:56:10-EDT
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phone Companies are protecting themselves...


I recently cancelled my Cellular Phone service with Cellular One in
Boston, and they graciously turned off my service. Then I was involved
in an accident, and used my NYNEX Roam port to call the police. It
was a 1 minute call and wouldn't have cost me except airtime...

I made 2 more calls, via credit card, and they all went through fine.

SO, I called NYNEX and asked them if I make a call using a credit
card does the airtime also get added, and the answer is no. Airtime
is charged to the originating service, which in my case was nobody.

Next time I tried to use the roam port it beeped at me. So much for
abuse of the network. :-)

Seriously, I think it should be possible for an unregistered cellular
phone to make calling card calls and the charge should include the
airtime cost for the call, thus someone in an emergency can use his/her
phone to make emergency calls. This is clearly a situation where one
hand refuses to talk to the other. Are Cellular Phone companies regulated?
Does the PUC in each state have a say in the charging mechanisms?
In this day of deregulation, probably not.

By the same token, Hotel's should not charge the room bill for calling
card calls either. If I am on a business trip and make a personal call
I do NOT want that call to appear on my hotel bill (which I am getting
reimbursed for, typically).

I expect there to be alot more of this type of charging. It
costs $.20 to make a local call in NJ if you use a NJB pay phone,
but if you use one of the customer owned pay phones you could pay
up to $1.00!


What a ripoff.

--jsol

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
16-May-87 17:33:03-EDT,7787;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Sat 16 May 87 17:33:01-EDT
Date: 16 May 87 16:39-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #53
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                           Saturday, May 16, 1987 4:39PM
Volume 6, Issue 53

Today's Topics:

               The C.O. freezes services for short time
                    3-tone no connection question
                       Re: Regular phone chirp
                           Cellular Phones
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

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

From: hplabs!well![e-mail] (Glenn S. Tenney)
Subject: The C.O. freezes services for short time
Date: 16 May 87 07:27:22 GMT
Reply-To: well![e-mail] (Glenn S. Tenney)


Over the past year or so I've found many times that cancel call waiting
(and other special services) were disabled (by getting a fast busy when
trying *70).  Every time I'd call 611 and be told "it'd be fixed by
5pm".  After a few times I pushed and found out that they were updating
the software.  Their procedure froze the state of these special
services and then a few hours later they'd be unfrozen.  Although this
usually happens at late night, it just happened in the middle of the
day, but they were frozen for only 1/2 hour fixing something for a
"major customer".

Imagine what this means to someone, perhaps a doctor...  You're going
to the hospital and need to transfer calls to your service, but can't;
or you get back from rounds and need to cancel forwarding, but can't.
Result would be a loss of service.  My problem was much less severe,
my modem dialing strings (which include *70W) stopped working.

Although I suggested that the LEAST they should do is advise the people
working the 611 board to KNOW what was going on to tell people calling
in how long it'd be frozen, I think they should find some way around
this.  My comments have been ignored over the last few months and I'll
now write the area VP.  Does your BOC do the same thing?  ((I'm in San
Mateo, CA served by PacBell))

-- Glenn Tenney
UUCP: {hplabs,glacier,lll-crg,ihnp4!ptsfa}!well!tenney
ARPA: well![e-mail]        Delphi and MCI Mail: TENNEY
As Alphonso Bodoya would say... (tnx boulton)
Disclaimers? DISCLAIMERS!? I don' gotta show you no stinking DISCLAIMERS!

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

From: hplabs!well![e-mail] (Glenn S. Tenney)
Subject: 3-tone no connection question
Date: 16 May 87 07:31:15 GMT
Reply-To: well![e-mail] (Glenn S. Tenney)


I have the feeling this was asked and answered a long time ago, but
I can't recall the answer:

Is that 3-tone no-connection signal in-band?  What would happen if my
answering machine started with such a tone sequence?

-- Glenn Tenney
UUCP: {hplabs,glacier,lll-crg,ihnp4!ptsfa}!well!tenney
ARPA: well![e-mail]        Delphi and MCI Mail: TENNEY
As Alphonso Bodoya would say... (tnx boulton)
Disclaimers? DISCLAIMERS!? I don' gotta show you no stinking DISCLAIMERS!

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

From: Scott Dorsey <kludge@gitpyr>
Subject: Re: Regular phone chirp
Date: 16 May 87 15:34:04 GMT
Reply-To: Scott Dorsey <kludge@gitpyr>


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roger Hoover) writes:
>1) What is causing this noise?

   Probably some kind of high-voltage line transient, maybe even some kind of
induced voltage.  There may be a big DC motor somwhere that kicks on at 11:55,
whose power cables are close to the phone line.  Even a lighting circuit might
do it.  Have him pick the phone up at 11:54 pm and find out what he hears when
the signal that causes the chirp comes over the line.  This can give some good
indication as to the nature of the thing.  In addition, taking the line off hook
will cause such a thing.

>2) Is their an easy way to stop it?

Sure.  Stop buying cheapo phones, and the problem will go away.


--
Scott Dorsey   Kaptain_Kludge
ICS Programming Lab (Where old terminals go to die),  Rich 110,
    Georgia Institute of Technology, Box 36681, Atlanta, Georgia 30332
    ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!kludge

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

Date: Thursday, 14 May 1987  19:04-MDT
From: ptsfa![e-mail] (Dave Turner)
Subject:   Cellular Phones

The following is from an editorial by Wayne Green in the June, 1987 issue
of 73 Amateur Radio magazine:


            CONGRESS GOOFS

The recent legislation making cellular phone calls illegal to listen in on
has provided a bonanza for both organized and disorganized crime. It's
difficult not to laugh over the situation the cellular industry has gotten
itself into in its blind pursuit of the fast buck.

What's happened is a mass move into cellular by criminals. They buy a
cellular system, have an unscrupulous dealer alter the electronic serial
number (ESN) on the built-in programmable IC, which makes calls both
untraceable and free--a great combo. They tool around town, making calls
to Pakistan, Columbia, and their Caribbean drug warehouses at will.

Cellular has turned out to be great for coordinating every kind of criminal
activity. It's just what criminals have been needing for years-- a
dependable, free, untraceable, and safe communications system. With a
combination of pagers and cellular phones, crooks are making a shambles
of the cellular system--all protected by Congress.

If you wanted to deal in drugs, how better to get orders from your
customers than by giving them your cellular phone number? There's no way
to tap a telephone that can be anywhere in a big city, operating through
different cells as it moves around. And with an altered ESN it's all free!

If it weren't against the law to listen to cellular channels, I'd suggest we
hams help the law by listening for suspicious cellular calls and recording
them. Say, how'd you like to get the goods on some serious crooks and find
(a) the evidence is inadmissible because it was illegally attained and (b)
yourself on trial for making the recordings. So join me in a big laugh, okay?
--
Dave Turner    415/542-1299    {ihnp4,lll-crg,qantel,pyramid}!ptsfa!dmt

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

From: harvard!applix.m2c.org![e-mail] (Jim Morton)
Date: 16 May 87 16:14:37 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: applix!jim
From: [e-mail] (Jim Morton)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 10777+ billing
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 May 87 16:14:36 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: APPLiX Inc., Westboro MA
Lines: 22
Summary: other 10nnn numbers

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert S. Wood) writes:
> Where does one find out what numbers work?  I tried 10222 1 xxx xxx xxxx and
> it went thru.  How does MCI know my address to send a bill?  Will it be on
> my NETCO bill added on after the ATT section (ATT is my dial-1 carrier)?

The ones I've seen are: (in New England, anyways)
    10288    ATT    (288=ATT)
    10777    USprint    (777=SPR)
    10222    MCI
    10333    USprint
    10444    ALLNET
    10488    ITT    (488=ITT)
If you call 10nnn17005551212 you will generally get a recording
welcoming you to that company's 1+ dialing service.

Anybody seen any other 10+ numbers?


--
--
Jim Morton, APPLiX Inc., Westboro, MA
UUCP: ...seismo!harvard!halleys!applix!jim

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
17-May-87 19:02:19-EDT,6833;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Sun 17 May 87 19:02:18-EDT
Date: 17 May 87 17:56-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V6 #54
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                             Sunday, May 17, 1987 5:56PM
Volume 6, Issue 54

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                           Hotel surcharges
                    Re: Telephone answer detection
                            Ringback codes
           Finding out the phone number you're calling from
                         Goodbye XX, Hello BU

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

Date: 17 May 87 02:45:10 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
From: tmsoft![e-mail]

Path: tmsoft!utgpu!lharris
From: [e-mail] (Leonard Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom,sci.electronics
Subject: Codecs etc...
Keywords: codec, TI signal processor, HELP!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 May 87 20:46:33 GMT
Organization: University of Toronto Computing Services
Lines: 9
Checksum: 32576

Hi.
I need some help in finding a codec for a certain application.
Does anyone have info/preferences/prejudices on the codecs made by
Motorola and the signal processor by TI.
The application is for phone-line quality voice with compression
to approx. 1K bytes of data per second of digitized voice.
Any help would be much appreciated
Thanks
/leonard

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

Date: Sun, 17 May 87 03:26:43 EDT
From: ihnp4!riccb![e-mail]
Subject: Hotel surcharges

It's been my experience that a lot of motels
Path: riccb!hropus!jin
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Natowitz)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: re: Hotel surcharges
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 May 87 13:38:38 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ
Lines: 11
Posted: Sat May 16 09:38:38 1987


It's been my experience that a lot of motels (I haven't stayed in a
hotel in a while) put that little sticker on the phone but then don't
charge you for local calls.  In fact I don't *ever* remember being
charged for a local call, perhaps they are just trying to cut down
on phone usage.
--
     "Still hackin' after all these years"
     Jerry Natowitz
     Bell Labs - HR 2L-150
     201-615-4971 (CORNET 295-4971)
     ihnp4!hropus!jin

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

From: decvax!utzoo![e-mail]
Date: Sun, 17 May 87 05:01:05 edt
Subject: Re: Telephone answer detection

> Note that devices that call people to play recorded messages to strangers are
> regulated in many places.  These are the infamous "junk phone call"
> machines.  Now, if you're building an alarm system that will call the
> cops when somebody breaks in, that is different.

Yeah, the propagation delay of the s**t hitting the fan will be shorter
because you will cut out the middleman.  Alarm systems that automatically
dial police or fire are also regulated or illegal in many places, because
of the unacceptable false-alarm rate.  Check before building.

                Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry

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

Subject: Ringback codes
Date: Sun, 17 May 87 08:42:25 EDT
From: Pat Barron <[e-mail]>

Every once in a while, someone posts a note asking about ringback codes
(numbers to dial to make your own telephone ring).  Unfortunately, these
codes aren't the same everywhere, and are mostly undocumented.

I've discovered the following method of making my own phone ring, and
it should work everywhere.  It only rings the phone once, but if all
you're interested in is verifying that you can recieve calls, that's
all you need.  It requires that you have Call Waiting on your line,
and you also need an AT&T phone credit card.

Pick up your phone and call your own number using the credit card.  You
should hear the Call Waiting tone immediately, followed by the ring
tone.  Hang up; your phone will ring once.  This doesn't work if you
just try to direct-dial your own number, even if you have Call Waiting.
Your CO is smart enough to know that it makes no sense to allow you to
call yourself.  Using the credit card (apparently) bypasses your CO.

--Pat.

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

Subject: Finding out the phone number you're calling from
Date: Sun, 17 May 87 08:52:10 EDT
From: Pat Barron <[e-mail]>

Not long ago, I had a phone company person out to install a second phone
line in my apartment.  He had some difficulty finding the correct terminal
pair in the apartment's telephone closet, so he put his test set on each
pair he suspected was the right one, dialed a number (I tried to look
over his shoulder, but I couldn't quite see :-) ), and a synthesized voice
would tell him the phone number of the line he was on.

Does anyone know if this capability is common to all CO's (I'd never seen
it before)?

--Pat.

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

Date: Sun 17 May 87 17:55:54-EDT
From: Jon Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Goodbye XX, Hello BU

Since I work for Boston University, it makes sense for me to have
TELECOM distributed from there. I have been using XX because it was
on the ARPANET (and we weren't), and because MIT was my starting
point on the ARPANET (on my first machine, MIT-AI).

We are now on the Internet (via CSNET-CYPRESS now, by a 56kbd
connection to an IMP shortly), and I can start delivering TELECOM from
BU.  Temporarily I will leave the archives on XX since we don't have a
reliable FTP connection yet. The addresses TELECOM@XX and
TELECOM-REQUEST@XX are still valid and will forward to
[e-mail] and [e-mail], my new
addresses for TELECOM distribution. When we get our ARPANET
connection, I will set up anonymous FTP of TELECOM's archives from
BUIT1.BU.EDU (host 192.12.185.40).

I am going to start a new "volume" of TELECOM when I start sending
from BU, since the TELECOM Archives are all in TOPS-20 MM format,
and the new ones will be in UNIX mail format.

I wish to thank MIT's Laboratory for Computer Science publicly for
allowing me to use so much of XX's resources (about 3000 disk pages of
archives, and a batch job that runs for hours delivering the digest).
They have been most gracious with their resources.

This is the last TELECOM that will come from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU. Tomorrow's
will be delivered from BU.

--jsol

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************