Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1988.volume.8/vol8.iss140-189

Text File | 1989-08-01 | 725KB | 17,802 lines

11-Sep-88 18:31:54-EDT,6882;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Sun 11 Sep 88 18:31:52-EDT
Date: 11 Sep 88 17:53-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #140
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Sunday, September 11, 1988 5:53PM
Volume 8, Issue 140

Today's Topics:

                  Kenwood TS-520 Ham Radio For Sale
                         British 0898 numbers
                              microfiche
                          G3 FAX information
                   non-AOS Hotel phone charge scams
                 Re: an interesting license plate...
                  Re: X.25 Packet Switch Info Wanted

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

From: Evan Corstorphine <[e-mail]>
Subject: Kenwood TS-520 Ham Radio For Sale
Date: 7 Sep 88 16:06:16 GMT


****************************************************************

I have a Kenwood TS-520 Ham Tranceiver that needs a new home

Spec's:
     10,15,20,40 and 80 meters in USB, LSB and CW

     CW filter installed

     Extra set of final's (S2001A's)

     Morse code key

     Microphone

     Heathkit Cantenna Dummy-Load

      RF Watt/Modulation/F.S meter

      Manual with schematics

      ~75 watts output on tuned antenna


      I used the radio while studying for my license, and it works
      really well.  I'm selling it because I'm not pursuing Ham
      radio anymore.

      I bought it for $350 without the CW filter or the other stuff,
      and I'm asking $265 for all.


      Evan Corstorphine
      Sequent 526-4007
      evanc

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

Date: Wed, 07 Sep 88 12:15:33 PST
From: "Kevin J. Burnett"                              <[e-mail]>
Subject: British 0898 numbers

In Telecom vol8i139, [e-mail] writes:

> I also tried calling the weather in London and it appears to have been
>changed to a U.S.-type private provider system. When you call 44-224-8091
>you get a recording telling you to call "0898-654-600" for the recording
>nearest you. Calling 44-1-246-8091 gives you a recording with the number
>0898-600-290, which is a service provided by Cablecom. (The one in
>Scottland sounded like it was operated by a system called "Grandpa",
>but I may have missed the real name due to the accent or the static...)
>The recordings let you know that British Telecom stopped their own
>weather service on June 30th.
>-
>I can't seem to reach the 898 numbers, and I have tried 011-44-1-0898m
>as well as 011-44-1-898, and just 011-44-898-xxx-xxx. Maybe it's
>restricted to the U.K. only?
0898 is the UK version of all the 976-xxxx, 900-xxx-xxxx, etc. numbers
we have in the US.  Also, recalling from when I was last there, 0800
is like 800 here in the US.

If you think the phone company here is obnoxious, you haven't had the
experience of dealing with British Telecom.  For instance, it has taken
relatives of mine in N. Ireland upwards of 6 months just to get a phone
installed.  How's that for service...

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

Date:     Thu, 8 Sep 88 16:04:43 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  microfiche

Near where I live, I am seeing more use of microfiche for telephone
directories in libraries.  There is one case that just came up where
I'll have to go back to the paper directory, because some phone prefixes
shown on a map in the call guide are blurred in the microfiche copy and
are not readable there.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Sep 88 09:40:23 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Chris Rohrer)
Subject: G3 FAX information


Erik Skovgaard, Director of Research and Engineering at Sydney Development
Corp in  Vancouver, BC may be able to help with details of the G3 FAX
protocol and its documents.

His address is

   [e-mail]  or

   uunet!relay.ubc.ca!erik%sydney.cdn

Or you can call the company at [phone]





Chris (Chris Rohrer @ Corporation for Open Systems)
        -- [e-mail]
        -- [e-mail]
        -- {uunet, sundc, decuac, hqda-ai, hadron}!cos!chris

"Opinions expressed herein are mine and not necessarily shared by COS"

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

Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1988 23:00-EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: non-AOS Hotel phone charge scams

[this experience gleaned from my recent vacation in CA.]

This may be well-known, but calling from a hotel room phone and verifying
that the AT&T operator is there the call may still not guarantee an
AT&T rate.  Hotels apparently can charge whatever the market will bear,
by calling it a 'service charge'.  I hope the AOS backlash/crackdown
will deal with this outrage as well.

One call (<10 minutes, placed after 11pm) from the Days Inn at Oakland (CA)
Airport, cost $5.45.  Even though dialing '00' (the convention for getting an
LD operator) yielded the happy response "AT&T operator, may I help you?"

Motel 6, on the other hand, still offers free local calling (no hassling over
950 number access), since they have no capability to add phone charges to the
room bill.

                    - Ralph

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

From: sun!athsys![e-mail] (Jim Becker)
Subject: Re: an interesting license plate...
Date: 9 Sep 88 20:47:51 GMT


>>      C CRUNCH
>>
>
> That person may be *claiming* to be 'the' Captain Crunch, but I am certain that
> the individual in question - *the* Captain Crunch - lives in the East Bay of
> The San Francisco Bay Area
>
> -- richard
>

        The original Capt'n Crunch is John Draper, who lives in the
East Bay.  He has had a low profile lately (some legal troubles of
magnitude), and there is very little chance that this is him. Last I
heard he still was trying to get his 60s VW bus running... I doubt
that he would be on the other coast and in a new car.


-Jim Becker

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

From: ccicpg!arnold![e-mail] (Dave Arnold)
Subject: Re: X.25 Packet Switch Info Wanted
Date: 11 Sep 88 15:17:39 GMT


[e-mail] writes:
>
< Are you a packet switch equipment vendor?
> [...] much stuff deleted
>
> - 4:1 ratio between incoming 56k lines and outgoing 19.2
> - v.35 interface for high speed 56k link
> - program via async command port (terminal)
[...]

If anybody knows of such a beast, could you please post the
information?  Our company need something like this, and so far
we have been unable to find one.
I suspect it's going to be expensive.
--
Dave Arnold
[e-mail]    {cci632|uunet}!ccicpg!arnold!dave

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
14-Sep-88 00:48:03-EDT,13636;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Wed 14 Sep 88 00:48:01-EDT
Date: 13 Sep 88 23:55-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #141
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                     Tuesday, September 13, 1988 11:55PM
Volume 8, Issue 141

Today's Topics:

                         0898 and UK services
                    X.25 Packet Switch Info Wanted
                       Calling number delivery
                  Re: X.25 Packet Switch Info Wanted
                          Re: cordless phone
                               COCOTS?
                    Microfiche/On Line Directories

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

From:         [e-mail] (S I Khokhar)
Subject:      0898 and UK services
Date:         11 Sep 88 21:53:57 GMT


In a previous article a reder mentions the unavailability of the uk 0898
services outside the UK, well 0898 is not an area code but refers to a
premium rate service, charged at an extortionate 38p per min peak and
25p per min off peak.  I think this is similar to the US prtyline type
rate??

In London, to get the speaking clock, we can dial 123.  I think you should
be able to get the South Western England weather on Exeter 8091, i.e.

[phone], where 392 corresponds to 0392 for Exeter.

I'll check on that.  Also dialling Exeter 8061 ([phone]) will give the
loacl commercial radio station on air number - i.e. you hear the station
exactly as it is heard here in the South West!

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

Date: Sun, 11 Sep 88 23:47:44 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
Subject: X.25 Packet Switch Info Wanted

Here's a list of X.25 equipment Vendors.  This info is given without
warranty.  Your milage may vary.  I'd be interested to know any others
not listed, or any errors.

Amdahl Communications Systems
2200 North Greenville, Richardson, TX 75081
[phone]

Amnet, Inc.
1881 Worcester Rd., Framingham, MA 07920
[phone]

BBN Communications Corp
70 Fawcett St. Cambridge, MA 02238
[phone]

Digital Communications Associates
1000 Alderman Dr. Alpharetta, GA 30201-4199
[phone]

Doelz Networks, Inc.
9501 Jeronimo Rd., Irvine, CA 92718
[phone]

Dynapac Systems
991 Anapolis Way, Woodbrige, VA
[phone]

EDA Instruments, Inc.
4 Thorncliffe Park Dr., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4H 1H1
[phone]

Ericsson, Inc.
7465 Lampson Ave., Garden Grove, CA  92641
[phone]

Harris Corp.
P.O. Box 1700
Melbourne, FL 32901
[phone]

Huges Network Systems, Inc.
11717 Exploration La., Germantown, MD  20874
[phone]

Infinet, Inc.
40 High St., North Andover, MA 01845
[phone]

Memotec Data Inc.
600 McCaffery, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H4T 1N1
[phone]

Micom Systems Inc.
4100 Losangeles Ave., P.O. Box 8100, Simi Valley, CA 93062-8100
[phone]

Netrix Corp.
380 Herndon Pkwy., Herndon, VA 22070
[phone]

Northern Telecom Inc.
2100 Lakeside, M-100
Richardson, TX 75081
[phone]

Paradyn Corp.
P.O. Box 2826, Largo, FL 34294
[phone]

Plantronics
Frederick MD
[phone]

Protocol Computers Inc.
26630 Agoura Rd., Calabasas, CA 91302-1988
[phone]

Siemens Data Systems Inc.
110 Ricefield, La., Hauppage, NY  11788
[phone]

Stratacom Inc.
3175 Winchester Blvd., Campbell, CA  95008
[phone]

Telefile
17131 Daimler St., Irvine, CA  92714
[phone]

Telematics International Inc.
1415 NW 62nd St., Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33309
[phone]

Telenet
12490 Sunrise Vally Drive, Reston, VA 22096
[phone]

Tellabs Inc.
4951 Indiana Ave., Lisle, IL 60532
[phone]

Timeplex Inc.
400 Chesnut Ridge Rd., Woodclif Lake, NJ 07675
[phone]

Tymnet
2560 N. First St., P.O. Box 49019, San Jose, CA 95161
[phone]

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

Date:     12 Sep 88 08:18:00 EDT
From:     John (J.) McHarry <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Calling number delivery

     This is a copy of a note I submitted to Risks Digest.
It might also be of interest here.  I should add that
'CLASS' is a Service Mark of Bell Communications Research.

     The telephone feature of delivering the calling number to
the terminating line is part of a group of features called
'CLASS', although there are other ways it could be done in certain
special cases.  There are a number of Bellcore publications that
describe it in some detail.  Among these are TR-TSY-000031 on the
basic feature,  (TA) 000030 on the signalling between office and
customer terminal, 000391 on the feature to block delivery of the
calling number, 000218 on selective call reject, and (TA) 000220,
also related to selective call reject.  TAs are an early version
of TRs.  If you don't find one in a reference,look for the other.
There are several other TRs that relate to these features, but this
list should sate most of us.
     Calling number delivery, selective call reject, and calling
number delivery blocking are all involved with the 'Signalling
System 7' which is just beginning to be deployed amongst local
exchanges, although some of the long distance carriers are much
farther along.  Among other advantages, SS7 enables the transfer of
much more information between network nodes than was previously
generally available.  This should allow the introduction of many
new network services in the near future.  On the other hand, CLASS
and calling number delivery in particular will not likely become
common until large areas are cut over to SS7, since otherwise they
would not work much of the time.  (Only within the local switching
office, or among those that had already implemented SS7)
     It looks to me like a subscriber to calling number delivery
gets telemetry intended to allow display of the number calling
concurrently with ringing.  I suppose proper customer premise
equipment could pick this off and feed it into a computer or use
it to determine what to do with the call, eg. route to an answering
machine only if not long distance.  If the number isn't available,
as would be the case if the originating and terminating offices
were not linked by SS7, the telemetry sends ten 0s.  If the number
is available but the originator is blocking delivery, it sends ten
1s.
     Calling number delivery blocking is itself a CLASS feature that
can be set on by a service order or, depending upon the tariffed
offering, turned on or off on a per call basis.  How it is offered,
if at all, is up to the local telco and PUC.  The TR makes it look
to me like it is not available to party line subscribers.  I think
there is a technical reason for this.
     Selective call reject allows the subscriber to set up a list of
up to N directory numbers (N might be on the order of 6 to 24) that
would be sent to 'treatment' instead of ringing the subscriber's
phone.  A caller using blocking could be put on this list after one
call by using a control that says, in effect, add the last caller to
my list, but that number could not be read from the list by the
subscriber.  It doesn't look to me like the blocking code itself
can be put on the list;  maybe somebody else knows a way or has tried it.
Call reject can be turned on or off also, and can be maintained from
either a DTMF or dial phone.
     There might be something here for everybody.  If I can block
delivery of my number and Mr. Townson can send me to treatment we
would be almost as well off as with Internet addressing from Bitnet
to Portal.
     The foregoing opinions and interpretations are mine, not my
employer's.  My interpretations of the referenced documents are based
on a cursory reading.  They probably contain some errors.

     John McHarry   [e-mail] (Bitnet)
                    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon Sep 12 10:56:50 1988
From: mcvax!pyrltd![e-mail]

To: ukc!comp-dcom-telecom
Path: slxsys!jpp
From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: London Recorded Numbers (was  no title )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Sep 88 09:56:49 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Specialix International, London, UK.
Lines: 25


The 0898 xxx-xxxx numbers in the uk offer a similar range of
`services' to the US 976 numbers.   Thay are charged at about UKL .045
per min (UKL = approx 1.7 USD).   They are not available outside the
UK.

There are 6 special prefixes that I know of:

0898 - recorded message service
0077 - as above but london only.
0836 - cell phones (Cellnet)
0837 - cell phones (Vodaphone)
0800 - similar to US 1-800
0345 - like 0800 but you pay as if making a local call (free local
calls - you must be kidding :-)

and just when you thought you understood it time in london is reached
by just dialing 123.

John Pettitt
Specialix International
--
John Pettitt, Specialix, Giggs Hill Rd, Thames Ditton, Surrey, U.K., KT7 0TR
{backbone}!mcvax!ukc!pyrltd!slxsys!jpp            [e-mail]
Tel: [phone]       Fax: [phone]         Telex: 918110 SPECIX G
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

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

From: [e-mail] (Haller)
Subject: Re: X.25 Packet Switch Info Wanted
Date: 13 Sep 88 14:11:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, ccicpg!arnold![e-mail] (Dave Arnold) writes:
> [e-mail] writes:
> > - 4:1 ratio between incoming 56k lines and outgoing 19.2
> > - v.35 interface for high speed 56k link
> > - program via async command port (terminal)

A box doing what you want is made by Telematics, costing in the range
of between 20-50K, depending on the base box.  Port cards are extra,
with 4 V.35 or 8 RS-232 ports per card. Async/sync can be mixed on the
RS-232 cards for programming.  You really need the $2000 training course
for 2 weeks to figure out how to use the thing.  There is also optional
software to use this box as a PAD (async, 3270, or SNA) if that is
desirable.  It has a 68010, 4-16MB of memory, and a microprogramed
communications processor.  Certified for use on Accunet(r) Packet Service,
Telenet(r), and Tymnet(r), amoung others.  AT&T is selling this
product on an OEM basis.

    Telematics [phone], or your AT&T account representative

John Haller
AT&T Bell Laboratories

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

From: pyrnj![e-mail] (John Kurzman)
Subject: Re: cordless phone
Date: 13 Sep 88 19:07:05 GMT
Reply-To: pyrnj![e-mail] (John Kurzman)


A request was made for a cordless phone that could go a long distance
(1000 feet almost made it).

Megatronics International sells cordless phones with ranges from

3 miles to 40 miles!

They are not for use in the U.S.  These are not cellular phones. They would
compete with Cellular in the US if they were legal here.
They give you wide range for your own phone number without extra $ to the
phone companies.
FCC wouldn't be too pleased either.

Ham operators can also get an attachment for their phone line so they can
'ham' to their phone (or vice-versa).  A friend of mine used his from the
LIRR moving train to his home >30 miles away with no problem. (But he had
a license)

The key ingredient in finding a long range cordless phone is legal
issues for the radio transmission.  The technology clearly exists.
COMB had a long-range phone (greater than current legal limit) in their
catalog for a while about a year or so ago.

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

From: dowjone!dowjone.sun.com![e-mail] (Greg_Baber)
Subject: COCOTS?
Date: 1 Sep 88 20:20:52 GMT
Reply-To: dowjone![e-mail] (Greg_Baber)


Mr. Moderator
    Could you please take a second and fill me in on what a COCOT is?
    I think that it stands for Coin-operated something or other, but
    I'm new to this newsgroup.   Thanks,
                            gregb

--
Reply to: Gregory S. Baber        Voice:    [phone]
      Dow Jones & Co., Inc.        E-mail:    ..princeton!dowjone!gregb
      Box 300
      Princeton, New Jersey 08543-0300

[Anyone want to answer this message? --JSol]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Microfiche/On Line Directories
Date: Sun Sep 11 19:16:23 1988

A recent correspondent discussed the use of microfiche directories in the
library. An offering of Illinois Bell for about four years now has been
"Directory Express", an online version of the 555-1212 service for the
312 area.

I have very few details about it. I think they charge something like $100
per month for starters, which gets you a certain number of *hours* on the
system each month. The service is mainly good for things like collection
agencies, telephone sales organizations, and other firms making extensive
use of directory assistance.

I think Directory Express is only tariffed for business customers. You
provide the modem and the terminal; Bell provides a password and account on
the system. What you are doing is tapping the data base used by Directory
Assistance operators. It is updated nightly about 3:00 AM.

Patrick Townson

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
15-Sep-88 00:32:09-EDT,7314;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Thu 15 Sep 88 00:32:07-EDT
Date: 14 Sep 88 23:49-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #142
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                   Wednesday, September 14, 1988 11:49PM
Volume 8, Issue 142

Today's Topics:

                       RISKS Discussion of ANI
                  Re: X.25 Packet Switch Info Wanted
                     Re: Calling number delivery
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V8 #141


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

Date:     Wed, 14 Sep 88 00:26:06 EDT
From: [e-mail]

Don-
   Thanks for your response in regards to my posting about AT&T COCOTS.
-
   Actually, the AT&T COCOTS (and most other 'modern' ones) block off
almost all access at the phone itself. The AT&T COCOT which I was referring
to, for example, blocks the call after you dial10X. It won't even let
you complete the last 2 digits of the equal access code, before it cuts
the caller off, immediately, and says "That is not a valid number. Please
hang up and try again". It does the same with 950 calls, so in effect one
must use the AOS the COCOT is programmed to call.
-
   AT&T COCOTs, and most other COCOTs, are quite programmable, and let
you program things from access numbers to block out to how long the
Touch Tones are, etc. One recent COCOT which I found which was borken
allowed me to set the access code to the COCOT to something new, so
that in effect only I can program it now. (The code used to be 1234,
which I just happend to dial when playing with it, and to my
surprise, ti worked!)
-
   Most COCOT lines don't go blocking out lots of services. Indeed,
in New York and New Jersey, at least, COCOT lines onlt block out 0-700
calls (basically AT&T Alliance, which most COCOTS let through...).
All other services, including 900, 550, 540, 970, 976 and international
dialing are all allowed, although it's possible that a COCOT owner
may ask the local Bell Co. to block calls for these as well. (I'm not
sure if Bell will block calls on a COCOT line). A COCOT line also
indicates to the local Bell operator that it is a COCOT line, so she
can be REALLY rude to the customer using it! ;-)
-
   In short, although it should be possible to block out 10xxx and other
calls from the local switch, it seems that generally COCOTs are quite
programmable (unfortunately!) and do a very good job of blocking all
by themselves...!
-
   Thanks again for writing back to me...
   -Doug
-
   [e-mail]   (temp.)
-
re:  Don Ritchey   /   [e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

Date:     Wed, 14 Sep 88 12:48:03 CDT
From:     Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI <[e-mail]>
Subject:  RISKS Discussion of ANI

The following is a collection of all the postings that have appeared in the
RISKS Digest over the past couple weeks on the subject of Automatic Number
Identification and related telecom issues. I thought it was worthwhile to
get this info into the Telecom archives in addition to its being in RISKS.
It appears the discussion has ended on RISKS, so I'm sending this now.

There's enough of it that the moderator may want to make it an FTP-able
file instead of sending out to the list.

Regards, Will Martin
*********
[Yes, it is definitely too much to send out in a digest, so I have
made it a FTP file on XX.LCS.MIT.EDU in the file
XX:<TELECOM>PIZZA.ANI.1. --jsol]

[If you want a copy and can't access the Internet directly, then you
should send mail to [e-mail] for a copy. --jsol]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Taylor)
Subject: Re: X.25 Packet Switch Info Wanted
Date: 14 Sep 88 19:09:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:
> Here's a list of X.25 equipment Vendors.  This info is given without
> warranty.  Your milage may vary.  I'd be interested to know any others
> not listed, or any errors.
>
> Amdahl Communications Systems
> 2200 North Greenville, Richardson, TX 75081

For what it's worth, we make a large, powerful (and expensive) switch.
I don't know whether it meets the original requestor's needs, but it
is probably worth the inquiry. The phone is (800)-433-0075 or
(214)-699-9500. I know I should mail this but I don't have the original
request. Sorry.
--
Mike Taylor                               ...!{hplabs,amdcad,sun}!amdahl!mat

[ This may not reflect my opinion, let alone anyone else's.  ]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Murray)
Subject: Re: Calling number delivery
Date: 14 Sep 88 19:45:56 GMT


Another recent entry in Risks Digest described how a chain of pizza houses
in Washington state was gathering data (including the calling number) on
orders which were phoned in. Aside from the obvious business reasons, a
justification given was to trap pranksters ordering unwanted pizzas for
innocent people. The system was criticized because the business had the
potential to use such data for follow-up sales calls, or to sell it to
other organizations for similar purposes.

Aanyone who receives obscene calls, junk calls, etc. would probably agree
that the "callee" is entitled to know the number of the caller's phone,
but this seems to be a case where the caller's privacy needs to be pro-
tected. Perhaps the rules should be different for business lines and for
private residential ones (i.e., residences can get the caller's number,
but businesses can't).

- John Murray
  (My opinions, etc.)

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

Date: 14 Sep 88 13:19:07 PDT (Wednesday)
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V8 #141
From: "joseph_gerber.ROCH"@Xerox.COM

Hello out there, I'm a new subscriber and am interested in knowing if any one
has implemented an on-line directory with extended functionality. E.g.
organization, job function, supervisor name and telephone, geo area. If yes (
and i suspect this has been done) what environment and  are there any graphic
assist tools ( point and click, etc)

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

Subject:
Date: Tue Sep 13 17:27:13 1988
From: cmcl2!cpmain!mikej@mergvax (Michael R. Johnston)

To: dasys1!hombre!rutgers!comp-dcom-telecom
Path: cpmain!mikej
From: [e-mail] (Michael R. Johnston)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,comp.unix.xenix,comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Looking for script driven comm program for *nix
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 13 Sep 88 21:27:11 GMT
Organization: Career Employment Service, Westbury, NY
Lines: 8


I have recently had the need to perform script driven communications
on an Altos 2086 under Xenix. Can anyone recommend a particular program
for a Xenix box that will handle this? Please email responses and I'll
summarize.

--
                Michael R. Johnston - @NET: [e-mail]
...{cmcl2!phri!,uunet!}dasys1!cpmain!mikej || ...philabs!mergvax!cpmain!mikej

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
16-Sep-88 22:58:24-EDT,5668;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Fri 16 Sep 88 22:58:22-EDT
Date: 16 Sep 88 22:19-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #143
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                      Friday, September 16, 1988 10:19PM
Volume 8, Issue 143

Today's Topics:

                Sprint lines .. sorry ma bell, me too
                      301-642 changed operation?
                              Protocols
                     301-378 "standardized", too
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
          1+ long distance service changed (without request)

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

From: elroy!suned1![e-mail] (Everett F. Batey II)
Subject: Sprint lines .. sorry ma bell, me too
Date: 15 Sep 88 09:44:59 GMT
Reply-To: elroy!suned1![e-mail] (Everett F. Batey II)



Are there any public administrative remedies for one little local phone
company refusing to let me use my AT&T calling card from a residence phone?

Thought that the reason the tarriffs allowed calling cards was to allow me /
my employer to obtain reasonable rates in placing calls when away from home.

It wasn't so long ago Sprint offered my family their card *for use while away
from home*... then took the liberty of redefining themselves as our EXCLUSIVE
toll service provider.  NOW, I find it is not possible to use others phones
to place calls with my preferred carrier.

I would appreciate suggestions as to any known administrative remedies ... I am
frankly shocked by their conduct.
--
 suned1![e-mail]   sun!tsunami!suned1!efb   [e-mail]
    Any statements / opinions made here are mine, alone, not those of the
    United States, the DoD, the Navy, the Congress, the Judiciary, nor ...

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

Date:     Thu, 15 Sep 88 9:47:14 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  301-642 changed operation?

I made a local call from a pay phone in Perryville, Md. (301-642)
yesterday.  This is one of the exchanges where on the payphones
you had to wait for the call to be answered before you deposited
the money.  Not so with that call I made on it yesterday; I put
the money in at the outset.  Apparently that "strange" feature
tripped up a lot of people (me once) who are from other exchange
areas.  Still have not checked 301-378 Port Deposit, a neighboring
exchange.

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

From: lotus![e-mail]
Subject: Protocols
Date: Thu Sep 15 21:01:40 1988

There seem to be two major sources of billing problems.  One is that each
participant in placing a call wants to make money off the call.  The other is
that there is no billing protocol other than looking up data in one's own tables
and guessing how much to charge based on the number called.

Does anyone know if there are billing protocols in ISDN that would allow an
intelligent instrument and/or a service provider know the cost of a call as it
is being placed?



Full name: Bob Frankston

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

Date:     Fri, 16 Sep 88 16:22:59 EDT
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  301-378 "standardized", too

As I just reported regarding 301-642, 301-378 pay phone now has
the "standard" deposit-money-before-dialing instruction.
This is in western Cecil County, Maryland.

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

From: [e-mail] (The devil himself)
Date: 16 Sep 88 20:59:28 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: sdcsmb!samsun!darrelj
From: [e-mail] (Darrel VanBuer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Microfiche/On Line Directories
Message-ID: <l=D4!)[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Sep 88 20:57:28 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Darrel VanBuer)
Organization: Unisys Santa Monica
Lines: 7

I recently called University Microfilms to enquire about a microfiche
phone directory (as found in Libraries), but got good news and bad
news:
They wanted only $9 for a Sonoma county directory.
They had a minimum order for $250 of directories.

Pacific Bell sold me one (in paper, not fiche) for $12 or so delivered.

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

From: [e-mail] (Alexander Dupuy)
Subject: 1+ long distance service changed (without request)
Date: 16 Sep 88 17:11:09 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Alexander Dupuy)


Recently I received from US Sprint, a "Foncard" and a notice saying that my
"1+" service would now be billed directly by Sprint.  The odd thing about
this is that I never asked for a Foncard, or for 1+ service from Sprint.

I had been using 10777 to access Sprint for some time, and now, looking back at
my phone bills, it seems that Sprint has been my default LD carrier since the
beginning of the year.  I'm not really upset about this, since I've been quite
happy with the line quality (I tried MCI and found it unacceptable), but I'm
puzzled that N.Y. Telephone would change my default carrier without notifying
me, or charging the $5-10 they usually charge to change the default LD service.

Is this part of the agreement whereby random blocks of subscribers were to be
assigned to non AT&T LD carriers?

--
inet: [e-mail]
uucp: ...!rutgers!columbia!dupuy

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
17-Sep-88 20:50:49-EDT,4618;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Sat 17 Sep 88 20:50:48-EDT
Date: 17 Sep 88 20:10-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #144
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                     Saturday, September 17, 1988 8:10PM
Volume 8, Issue 144

Today's Topics:

                        The Meaning of COCOTS
                   Our New Big Brother: TELECONNECT

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: The Meaning of COCOTS
Date: Thu Sep 15 17:24:36 1988

While some people think it means Certainly Obnoxious Coin Operated Telephone,
the *real* meaning is <C>ustomer <O>wned <C>oin <O>perated <T>elephone. The
correct usage in plural would be COCOTs -- not COCOTS as is often seen.

Bear in mind that all of these instruments can be programmed right from the
touchtone pad on the front if you know what to enter, and most can be
programmed remotely by the touchtone pad *on your home phone* if you know
the number of the COCOT and what to do when it answers the line.

They can be programmed, for example to give local calls of unlimited duration
for a nickle, and long distance calls for a dime....or give all their services
away free...or whatever.

Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Our New Big Brother: TELECONNECT
Date: Fri Sep 16 18:58:17 1988

We have a new Big Brother out there, folks.... the name is TELECONNECT, and
its purpose is to provide interstate long distance service *to those phone
numbers it deems appropriate*.

TELECONNECT, based out of Cedar Rapids, Iowa is just another in the growing
number of OCC's out to make a buck. Maybe you have heard of them, and maybe
not.

They came to my attention through a message left by Bruce Wilson, active BBS'er
and sysop in Des Moines, IA. His board number is 515-280-9107.

Unlike MCI or Sprint, who will not connect to 976 unless/until they work out
their chronic disputes with the local telcos on billing for these calls,
TELECONNECT will not connect to *any BBS line if it thinks the BBS is a board
for phreaks or hackers*. Bruce found this out when repeated efforts to call
a couple BBS lines in Iowa consistently failed to go though when the modem
(with speaker turned off; i.e no way to hear the intercept) dialed via
TELECONNECT. When the same calls were attempted via AT&T or Sprint, they
always completed just fine. Curious, the call was dialed manually via
TELECONNECT and an intercept recording stated that 'we will not connect to
the number you have dialed at this time'.

Management at TELECONNECT refused to discuss the matter except to say that
'it was their business who they were willing to connect with or not...', this
despite a reading of applicable federal laws to the executives of the firm.
Only when an informal complaint was filed with the authorities in Iowa did
TELECONNECT bother to respond at all, and then to say that they 'suspected'
the BBS lines in particular were being used to pass illegal information
regards telephone access codes on the TELECONNECT network. Even though they
had no proof of this, they said they simply would not admit calls to those
numbers.

When asked for specifics and particulars about the 'illegal information being
passed around', TELECONNECT requested the right to provide this information
to the Commission in secret, and the Commission granted this request, meaning
the exact nature of TELECONNECT's complaints against the BBS' in particular
will not be revealed to the public -- or even the victim of the complaints --
any BBS line this carrier chooses not to admit to its network.

According to Bruce Wilson, formal complaints have been or will be soon filed
with the Federal Communications Commission, citing appropriate federal law
and asking that the firm be ordered to comply with the law and pay a fine for
its previous non-compliance.

This is the first time I have ever heard of an OCC refusing to terminate a
call on its network on the phone number(s) of persons or businesses it
perceives to be engaged in fraud.

I'll repeat the phone number for Bruce Wilson's BBS:  515-280-9107. Read the
text files there for yourself. You may wish to download them for distribution
elsewhere.

Patrick Townson

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
23-Sep-88 19:54:38-EDT,17119;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Fri 23 Sep 88 19:54:36-EDT
Date: 23 Sep 88 18:06-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #145
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Friday, September 23, 1988 6:06PM
Volume 8, Issue 145

Today's Topics:

             Re: London Recorded Numbers (was  no title )
                     Re: Calling number delivery
        Re: 1+ long distance service changed (without request)
                           The vanishing Q
                NEWS Posting (to Newsgroup Moderator)
                 The Amazing British Phone System ...

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

From:         [e-mail] (S I Khokhar)
Subject:      Re: London Recorded Numbers (was  no title )
Date:         18 Sep 88 16:37:08 GMT



Yes the recorded message services here in the UK ARE a mess, as for dialling
123 for the time, this only refers to London, elsewhere the code is usually
8081, but this CAN vary.  Most 4 digit numbers starting with 80 are this type
of service, eg 8091 is the wheather forcast in some areas, dialling 0073 is the
code to call a radio pager.  In some areas 1267 makes the phone ring back
while in others 175 will start an automated line test - the exchange calls
back with the result - dialling tone means all OK, but you might get 'Faulty
dial pulses' (this ones great if you're on a MF dialling line!), 'Low resistance
A to B wire'  and 'High loop resistance' are possible messages.  If this all
100 for the operator 151 fo faults 192 for directory enquiries and 191 for
general enquiries.

There may be other specialist numbers that someone can tell me about.  One that
intrigues me is if I dial 0800 891 017, I get a toll free USA number, asking me

[This message was truncated as shown above. Sigh. --JSol]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Calling number delivery
Date: Sun Sep 18 22:58:34 1988

From: [e-mail] (John Murray)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Submissions-To: [e-mail] (Mailing List Coordinator)
>Another recent entry in Risks Digest described how a chain of pizza houses
>in Washington state was gathering data (including the calling number) on
>orders which were phoned in..........

We have it here at MCI. It's called call detail. It's only with our 800
service, though.

>                     .......Aside from the obvious business reasons, a
>justification given was to trap pranksters ordering unwanted pizzas for
>innocent people. The system was criticized because the business had the
>potential to use such data for follow-up sales calls, or to sell it to
>other organizations for similar purposes.

Most businesses quoted in "Communcations Week" magazine said that that
was their main, and usually only intent for ANI call detail. It is
usually policy of the IEC's who offer call detail to deny credit for
crank calls, just because of the type of service they are offering.

>Aanyone who receives obscene calls, junk calls, etc. would probably agree
>that the "callee" is entitled to know the number of the caller's phone,
>but this seems to be a case where the caller's privacy needs to be pro-
>tected. Perhaps the rules should be different for business lines and for
>private residential ones (i.e., residences can get the caller's number,
>but businesses can't).

I would have agreed with maybe the first part of your message only just
on personal views I have, but this is where I will differ from your view.
I have always held the point that equal access meant just that, equal
access. And I felt equal access should be applied all across the board.
There would be other people that would differ from you point of view by
saying residential customers should not have ANI available (now that is
is becoming a reality coutesy of SS#7/CLASS), and just businesses, since a
business customer would be more liable for their actions, and have more to lose
than a revengeful residential customer, whose actions COULD be more careless
than a business's. I would certainly hate to accidently call a person, who
has just had a string of crank calls, and my ANI would pop up on their
phone and they (being already pissed) assume that I was another crank call,
start calling me with a string of crank calls. I would prefer a business
that would (hopefully) handle it in a more professional manner.

When I use to work in Trouble Reporting for MCI (I am in a different dept now),
we use to get numerous crank calls, some of which were humorus (like the
person who use to call up and call HIMself "Madonna", and tell us his
life story), and some of which were very disturbing (like teenagers that
want to discuss their sexual fantasies, which I found very disturbing). It
would be very easy to get their numbers they are calling from, and either
write nasty letters, or (worse), pass it on to the "proper authorities". We
choose to ignore it, just saying that it's part of the job. (BTW, we dont
use call detail on out customer service numbers just because of the sheer
amount of calls that come in to those numbers, and the reams of paper/tape
that it would generate).

I am both looking for to, and dreading the implementation of CLASS.

>- John Murray
>  (My opinions, etc.)

The same applies to myself. They definitely do not represent the views
of MCI, etc....

Robert Michael Gutierrez
<[e-mail]><[e-mail]>
      <ucbvax!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!r-michael>

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 1+ long distance service changed (without request)
Date: Sun Sep 18 23:03:52 1988

From: [e-mail] (Alexander Dupuy)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>Recently I received from US Sprint, a "Foncard" and a notice saying that my
>"1+" service would now be billed directly by Sprint.  The odd thing about
>this is that I never asked for a Foncard, or for 1+ service from Sprint.

When I called Sprint to inquire about service, they said that the Foncard was
available ONLY with Dial-1 (1+, or technically FGD service), and was not avail
as a "stand-alone" service. MCI (where I work) does offer stand-alone calling
cards, but you have to specifically ask for stand-alone card service.

>I had been using 10777 to access Sprint for some time, and now, looking back at
>my phone bills, it seems that Sprint has been my default LD carrier since the
>beginning of the year.  I'm not really upset about this, since I've been quite
>happy with the line quality (I tried MCI and found it unacceptable), but I'm
>puzzled that N.Y. Telephone would change my default carrier without notifying
>me, or charging the $5-10 they usually charge to change the default LD service.
>
>Is this part of the agreement whereby random blocks of subscribers were to be
>assigned to non AT&T LD carriers?

Questions I have: Did you have a 1+ carrier already??  If you did not have a
1+ carrier, then Sprint took the 1st choice option you had. You can make a
"1st choice" L.D. carrier, which is usually when you initially install your
phone, without a "PIC" charge (Primary Interexchange Carrier), but any
subsuquent changes will incur a PIC charge, which ranges (for us here in
California) from $5.26 (Pacific Bell), $8.52 (Nevada Bell), $9.51 (Hawaiian
Telephone), $12.00 (Centel-Las Vegas), and $13.00 (GTE-California).

The scenario you have above, though, is a common one I have run across. The
local bell companies do have to provide 10XXX (ten-triple-x) service for
all L.D. companies that make service available to that central office your
phone is hooked up to, but not necessarly provide a means for billing. When
a local BOC sees a certain amount of traffic (calls) going to a particular
L.D. carrier, they will force that carrier to establish an account so that
the BOC does not have to continue to bill that traffic as 10XXX billing.
Lets try this another way. When you use 10777, the BOC passes the call,
along with you ANI to Sprint, and Sprint completes the call and makes a call
detail record. When the call detail record (CDR, for short) is processed by
their billing center, they would not be able to match that ANI to an exisiting
Sprint account, and they designate that CDR as so-called "random traffic".
Then, at an end of a billing cycle (usually every month), all the "random"
CDR's are gathered up by Sprint, dumped on a mag tape, and shipped to the
respective bell operating company for billing on the appropriate BOC bills.

What the BOC don't like on the above scenario is they have to process the
bills for these L.D. companies (including the so-called AOS's, or Alternative
Operator Services), and they charge the L.D. carriers for 10XXX billing with
the understanding that it would be only 10XXX billing, not billing for the
L.D. carriers "regular" customers. From time to time, the BOC's will analyze
a specific customer's L.D. calls to a specific L.D. company, and if it exceeds
a certain limit (no doubt, programmed in a computer), the the BOC will
"refuse" to bill 10XXX calls anymore. In reality, they dump the 10XXX
caller's name-address-other pertinent info on a tape and send that tape to
the L.D. comapny to set up an account that the L.D. company would bill
directly.

MCI *does* have so-called BOC billing, just like AT&T, for our regular
customers, but we've only been able to negotiate that with just a couple of
local carriers.

BTW, does anybody know when AT&T is planning to go to seperate billing. When
I called customer service (800-222-0300), they say it might be in the future,
but no set dates yet.


Robert Michael Gutierrez
(The above does *not* refelect the views of MCI, or its subsidiaries, etc.)

<[e-mail]><[e-mail]>
      <ucbvax!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!r-michael>

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

From: [e-mail] (Scot E Wilcoxon)
Subject: The vanishing Q
Date: 19 Sep 88 20:00:37 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Scot E Wilcoxon)


One morning last week, WCCO-AM radio ran into trouble in its attempt to
use its daily touch-tone telephone survey to sample Minnesota's view of
the major-party vice presidential candidates.  The question posed to
listeners was: Do you favor Lloyd Bentsen or Dan Quayle for veep?  To
answer, listeners were instructed to call a number and touch B on their
phones for Bentsen, Q for Quayle.  It seemed reasonable enough, but moments
later, the survey was scrapped.

The problem: Touch-tone telephone buttons don't include a Q.

(From Mpls Star Tribune, Sept 19 1988)

Yes, I know some phones around the world have a "Q".  This is a USA story.
(Someone earlier mentioned data entry standards as well, although I could not
get E-mail to them to get details)
--
Scot E. Wilcoxon  [e-mail]    {amdahl|hpda}!bungia!datapg!sewilco
Data Progress      UNIX masts & rigging  [phone]    uunet!datapg!sewilco
   "When Hurricane Gilbert comes through, I'll stay here to experience it."
   CBS:"What if you experience death?" "Well, I'll worry about that later."

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

Date: Mon, 19 Sep 88 09:22 +200
From: "Robert Olsson datoravd, EMC tfn 018-172581" <[e-mail]>
Subject: NEWS Posting (to Newsgroup Moderator)

Path: eva!robert
From: [e-mail] (Robert Olsson datoravd, EMC tfn 018-172581)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: videotexemulator in the PD?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 19 Sep 88 09:19:23 +200
Organization: SLU, Swedish university of agricultural sciences
Lines: 8


 We are considering getting a Videotex viewer for our VAX using VMS
 Is there a public domain Videotex emulator that givs Prestel or
 CEPT on VT100 or VT200?

        Robert Olsson
        Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

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

From:       Jon Davies <[e-mail]>
Subject:    The Amazing British Phone System ...
Date:       Tue, 20 Sep 88 18:32:48 BST


Since there seems to be some confusion about what the British phone system
provides in the way of services, I thought I would write down some general
info about what is and isn't there. I don't guarantee any of it to be
correct, but I'm pretty sure it is.

Basically, there are 2 phone companies - BT (British Telecom) and Mercury.
Because of the way the system works, only BT can put lines into subscriber's
homes/offices etc. This means that Mercury have to have their exchanges
connected to BT's ones, but this doesn't cost them anything because BT's
licence says something on the lines of 'because Mercury aren't allowed to
put lines into buildings, you must give them a line anywhere they ask for
one'. What's more, the number to access Mercury is the same everywhere (131).

A bit about BT's network:
There are basically 3 types of exchange -
 1) the old mechanical click-click-whizz-burr type,
 2) a newer electronic version of 1, and
 3) System X (which goes wrong a lot).

The mechanical and 'electronic' exchanges only work with loop-disconnect
(click-click) dialling. And do very little other than let you chat to
someone else. System X is supposed to be much better, and when it's
felling happy it'll let you ask it to ring back after a call and tell you
how much it cost, give you a reminder call (every day until yo cancel it),
bar incoming/outgoing calls, make 3-way calls and lots of other exciting
things. Of course, BT charge you for these. The first two cost 5p and 10p
respectively, and the rest about #4 a quarter extra on your line rental
(IF # isn't a pound sign, then pretend it is).
Incidentally, system X uses touchtones as well as loop-disconnect.

Mercury seem to have managed to get the best of everything. They don't have
the hassle of installing lines to subscribers, and just build a network
between BT's exchanges. However, their customers get the hassle instead.
To access Mercury you have to dial 131, wait for mercury's dial tone, and
then dial a 10 digit access code before dialling the number of the person
you want to call. For example, if I want to phone my parents through
mercury, then I have to dial 26 digits! Of course, there is a simple answer
to this - use a phone with number memories.  Mercury will sell you a
phone with a 'Mercury button' - just another memory - in which you can
store your access code, and the phone then dials everything up to the number
you want to dial off one button. They charge #52 for this phone. (about $73).
Alternatively you buy yourself a cheaper phone and program one of the
memories on it to dial everything.

How they charge you for everything is quite simple. Sometimes. (well, most
of the time actually.) BT aren't allowed to charge you for access to
Mercury, so making a call through them is just billed by them. BT sell
time in blocks - one unit costs 5.06p (exactly!), and lasts anything from
8 minutes for a local call at cheap rate (ie in the evening) to about
3 seconds to somewhere like Kenya. If you use any of a unit, then you get
charged for the whole unit. In other words, a 9 minute call to your friend
in the same town/city costs the same as a 15 min call.

Mercury do things differently. They charge different amounts for different
distances (not surprisingly) and charge you only for the time you actually
spent connected. Generally, they are slightly cheaper for long distance
calls, and more expensive for local calls, but your bill has to be around
#80 a year to save the #8 it costs for an access code. If I remember
correctly, Mercury are ownde by AT&T, and calls to the USA cost less than
through BT because of this.

There are a number of other services provided by BT which anyone can use:

0800 calls - these are free
0345 calls - these cost the same as a local call
FreeFone calls - these are routed through the operator (ie dial 100 and ask
             for Freefone whatever) and are free (surprise, surprise ...)

Calls to mobile phones and the like cost more than anything else, but cost
nothing (extra) to the person who owns the mobile phone. Calls from them
cost a flat (expensive) rate wherever you are in the country.

This conculdes a pretty bad summary of the British phone service, but after
all, it's pretty bad too. It is improving though. And System X is a lot
better than I've made it out to be - the only problem is that there are
only System X exchanges in the larger cities - why Bradford has one I
don't know.

                                 Jon.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
25-Sep-88 23:51:48-EDT,8273;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Sun 25 Sep 88 23:51:44-EDT
Date: 25 Sep 88 22:57-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #146
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                      Sunday, September 25, 1988 10:57PM
Volume 8, Issue 146

Today's Topics:

                     Sprint FONCARD distribution
                        RE: Mercury in the UK
                       Cellular Phone Question
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                          Venture 1 Headset
          Info and sources wanted for "auditory" microphones

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Sprint FONCARD distribution
Date: Fri Sep 23 19:26:47 1988

R. Michael Gutierrez responded to Alexander Dupuy in Digest v8, #145:

*When I called Sprint to inquire about service, they said that the Foncard was
*available ONLY with Dial-1 (1+, or technically FGD service), and was not avail
*as a "stand-alone" service. MCI (where I work) does offer stand-alone calling
*cards, but you have to specifically ask for stand-alone card service.

When I had two U.S. Sprint accounts, of which only one included 1+ service
(I had only one telephone number, after all), Sprint issued FONCARDs on
both.  I checked again tonight with their customer service department
(it was after hours, so I got the DFW office instead of the Chicago region
office), I was assured that (1) FONCARDs most certainly ARE available on
dial-up accounts [the FONCARD system is the only dial-up service they have
now, so there is no other way!] but that (2) upon opening a dial-up account
and again upon any request for additional FONCARDs, the customer service
representative would probably ask the customer to consider switching his or
her 1+ carrier to U.S. Sprint.

Possibly Sprint has different rules for business and residential customers?
Possibly the Sprint customer service rep misunderstood Mr. Gutierrez?

*any
*subsequent changes will incur a PIC charge, which ranges (for us here in
*California) from $5.26 (Pacific Bell), $8.52 (Nevada Bell), $9.51 (Hawaiian
*Telephone), $12.00 (Centel-Las Vegas), and $13.00 (GTE-California).

In the Chicago LATA, Illinois Bell charges $5.00 (last I heard) and Centel
charges $5.82, which for some reason is one of Centel's favorite prices.

[e-mail]  ||  sun!portal!cup.portal.com!david_w_tamkin

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

Date: Sat, 24 Sep 88 08:20:07 edt
From: rja <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Mercury in the UK


Someone speculated in the last digest that Mercury was owned by AT&T and that
was why they were cheaper than british Telecomm when calling the US from the UK.

Not True.  Mercury, which is a UK long-distance carrier similar to Sprint or
MCI here in the US, is owned by Cable & Wireless PLC.  Cable & Wireless
operates local phone companies in UK territories around the world (Hong Kong
Telephone is controlled by Cable & Wireless for example.)  C&W is perhaps
AT&T's biggest competitor.  They own pieces of trans-Atlantic and
trans-Pacific telephone cables and are also trying to get a piece of the
action in Japan where KDD (the former Int'l telephone service monopoly) will
soon be getting a competitor.  The competitor will be a joint-venture of many
companies -- I think that Pacific Telesis was trying to get involved also.

British Telecomm, newly privatised I hear, is like AT&T before the infamous
breakup since they control ALL local loops as well as being the default
long-distance carrier.  There is no concept of 'equal-access' yet in the UK
either.
______________________________________________________________________________
         [e-mail]      or      ...uunet!virginia!edison!rja
     via Internet (preferable)          via uucp  (if you must)
______________________________________________________________________________

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

Subject: Cellular Phone Question
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 88 10:39:13 EDT
From: Chuck Weinstock <[e-mail]>

If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is.  I
can think of two possible answers:

1. Periodically each cellular phone emits a "here I am" which is
   received by the nearest cells and recorded in a database.

2. When a call for a particular phone comes through all cells in the system
   broadcast a "where are you" and the cellular phone responds.

If anyone knows the details of the protocol used I'd appreciate
hearing from them.

Chuck Weinstock

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

From: Gerry Wheeler <[e-mail]>
Date: 23 Sep 88 16:00:23 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: mks!wheels
From: [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: sensitive relay wanted
Keywords: line pickup relay
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 23 Sep 88 16:00:22 GMT
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems, Waterloo, Ont.
Lines: 24


I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay.  It didn't affect the phone operation too much,
but wouldn't quite pull in.  If I pressed the armature in, it would
latch.  Close, but no cigar.

Perhaps I should describe what I'm up to.  I want to share a phone line
between a fax machine and a phone or modem.  Only the fax will receive
incoming calls.  I want to put a relay coil in series with each device.
Its normally closed contacts will be in series with the *other* device.
Thus, when one is in use, the other is excluded.

So, what type of relay should I be looking for (impedance/current).  Is
such a thing commonly available? Will this scheme work? Does ringing
current cause any problems?

Our site doesn't receive this group, so direct email would be
appreciated.
--
     Gerry Wheeler                           Phone: [phone]
Mortice Kern Systems Inc.               UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!wheels
   35 King St. North                             BIX: join mks
Waterloo, Ontario  N2J 2W9                  CompuServe: 73260,1043

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Venture 1 Headset
Date: 25 Sep 88 05:45:13 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)


I have a Northern Telecom Venture 1 headset that I've never gotten any
use out of due to a strange problem.  Plantronics Starsets in
identical service do not have this problem.

Specifically, my Venture headset always picks up a local radio
station.  When I moved from San Rafael to San Jose, the station
changed, but it still picks up a radio station.

I've changed the telephone that I'm using with the headset, but to no
avail.  As I said above, if I change the headset to any one of several
StarSets there is no noise.

Any suggestions out there in net land?
                    -edg

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

Date: Sun, 25 Sep 88 16:12:05 PST
From: Phil Lapsley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Info and sources wanted for "auditory" microphones

Radio Shack has just introduced another 49 MHz FM walkie-talkie set.
Something that interests me about this one, though, is that it uses
an "auditory microphone" -- that is, the ear piece is the microphone
as well, picking up voice through the auditory canal.

It seems to work "ok".  The speech is intelligible, but not as good as
it would be with a regular microphone.

I'm wondering how well known or mature this technology is.  Have
auditory mics existed for a long time?  If so, can somebody point me
towards a source for them?  I'd hate to have to pay $80 for R.S. stuff
just to cannibalize the walkie-talkies for the mics if I could get
better mics from someplace else for less.

    Phil Lapsley    [e-mail]    ucbvax!phil

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
28-Sep-88 19:21:53-EDT,10685;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Wed 28 Sep 88 19:21:51-EDT
Date: 28 Sep 88 17:34-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #147
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                    Wednesday, September 28, 1988 5:34PM
Volume 8, Issue 147

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
  Re: "auditory" microphones & is this going to the correct address?
            Local Telco refuses to allow use of AT&T card?
                       Local Taxes on LD Calls
                            Re: Protocols
                           Local Tax in CA
              Re: Sprint lines .. sorry ma bell, me too
                      Re: sensitive relay wanted

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

Date: 26 SEP 88 10:33-
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

I was wondering if someone could offer me some advice.  I am a college student
who lives in a dormitory.  Here, every room has a phone, but every phone
is hooked into a PBX.  Therefore, we are not directly billed for our calls
and we can't choose a long distance service (or even make long distance
calls) without a Calling Card, FON Card, etc.  I have been using a calling
card, but I've found that the 80 cent surcharge (and I believe additional
per minute charges for the first 3 minutes) have been most un-reasonable.
I want to be able to use a long distance service that 1] won't force me
to change my equal access default carrier at home (thus resulting in a
$10+ surcharge from Rochester Telephone) 2] won't force me to make a
minimum number of calls (like spend $10/month.)  3] will provide decent
service, a good savings over the Calling Card (preferably no surcharge).
I primarily make long distance calls to Connecticut, Texas, and California.
Oh, by the way, I'm calling from Rochester, NY.  I hear sprint is probably
the best bet, but I have a feeling they wont give me a FON card unless I
switch my home line over.  Any suggestions.  If you know of anything, please
include a telephone number of where to call to apply.

Thanks in advance,
Daniel Greenberg

DMG4449@RITVAX [BITNET]

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

Date: 27 Sep 88 01:32:02 PDT (Tuesday)
Subject: Re: "auditory" microphones & is this going to the correct address?
From: "hugh_davies.WGC1RX"@Xerox.COM

Is this going to the right place? Last time I tried I sent it to
[e-mail] but it got redistributed straight away rather than being
digestified????
[Yes, this is the correct address. --JSol]

In V8 #146, Phil Lapsley ([e-mail]) asks about "auditory"
microphones. Well, Phil, there ain't no such thing. Any electromagnetic
transducer of sound will work in either direction. The only thing that is
different is the efficiency with which it will do it. Small loudspeakers work
fairly well as loudspeakers and  microphones, and hence are referred to in that
mode as 'speaker/mikes'. If you want to buy one, go and speak to your nearest
ham radio store, as most ham 'walkie-talkies' have a speaker/mike option. If you
want to build something, try using a small speaker, say between 1" and 2"
diameter.

Hugh.

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 27 Sep 88 12:02
Subject: Local Telco refuses to allow use of AT&T card?

Everett Batey claims that his local telco is not permitting use of AT&T cards
from his residence:

>From: elroy!suned1![e-mail] (Everett F. Batey II)
>Date: 15 Sep 88 09:44:59 GMT

>Are there any public administrative remedies for one little local phone
>company refusing to let me use my AT&T calling card from a residence phone?

How are they refusing this?  If Sprint has made themselves your default
carrier, all you have to do is dial 10288-0+NPA-NXX-XXXX to use your AT&T
card.

Everett further writes:

>It wasn't so long ago Sprint offered my family their card *for use while away
>from home*... then took the liberty of redefining themselves as our EXCLUSIVE
>toll service provider.  NOW, I find it is not possible to use others phones
>to place calls with my preferred carrier.

It's not clear from the above what your problem is.  What Sprint has done
in telling your telco that they are primary carrier on your own line has
nothing to do with what happens when you make calls from other phones.

The situation is as follows:

Each phone has a default carrier.

Whenever placing any call, you may modify the default by using the desired
carrier's access code.  Access codes are 10XXX-1+ for 1+ calls and 10XXX-0+ for
a few carrier's charge-to-other-account services, although most except AT&T have
a special number to dial.

>I would appreciate suggestions as to any known administrative remedies ... I am
>frankly shocked by their conduct.

Shocked by whose conduct?  Sprint or your local Telco?  If the problem is that
you never wanted Sprint to be your primary (1+) carrier, you can have your Telco
undo it if you tell them Sprint changed you from your previous default to Sprint
without permission.

/john

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

Date: Mon, 26 Sep 88 12:16:06 PDT
From: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Subject: Local Taxes on LD Calls



L.A. has a 10% tax on phone service. GTE bills this tax on all calls I
make including LD calls to other states and countries.

Any calls which are billed directly by a long distance carrier do
not include this tax.

Does anyone know if this is correct treatment?  I have tried to find
out from GTE, but they claim they do not know anything about the
tax.  I find it incredible, but when I remember it is GTE, not so much.

David Gast

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

From: [e-mail] (Chip Rosenthal)
Subject: Re: Protocols
Date: 24 Sep 88 21:18:32 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Chip Rosenthal)


In article <[e-mail]> lotus![e-mail] writes:
>Does anyone know if there are billing protocols in ISDN that would allow an
>intelligent instrument and/or a service provider know the cost of a call as it
>is being placed?

I assume the question being asked is "would the D-channel support
automatic call cost information?"

Not really.  The types of messages which go through the D-channel are
more along the lines of call service requests (i.e. setup, connect,
disconnect, release) and acknowledgements.  (There are some neat extensions,
though.)  It is not well suited for this sort of thing.

However, there is nothing which prevents your local carrier from providing
you such a service.  You would need some intelligence built into your
telephone so that it would go out and inquire the carrier's database for
billing information, and then proceed to connect the call.
--
Chip Rosenthal     [e-mail] | I've been a wizard since my childhood.
Dallas Semiconductor   214-450-0486 | And I've earned some respect for my art.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Sep 88 15:55:46 PDT
From: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Subject: Local Tax in CA


I recently sent in a posting concerning the fact that GTE has billed
me 10% LA city tax on out of state calls.  When I first tried to ask
GTE about this, they told me that they did not know anything about
LA city taxes and that I had to ask the city of Los Angeles.

I tried calling today, and the GTE representatives knew all about
LA city taxes.  They told me that the 10% tax does not apply to
out of state calls.  All of my bills, however, include city tax
on out of state LD calls.  They are going to look into this (they
assured me it hadn't happened to anyone else) and I presume issue
a credit within 5 days.

You may want to look at your phone bills as well--particularly if
you are a GTE customer.  If you are in the state of CA, you can
include a copy of your bill in a letter to

    Mrs. Van Buren; PUC;
    Public Utilities Commission State of California
    State Office Building
    107 S. Broadway
    Los Angeles, CA 90012
    1-800-548-9919

Anyone have any idea what GTE does with these funds?  Do they actually
turn them over to the city or do they just pocket the tax they have
collected incorrectly?  Is there anyone familiar with the accounting
package used by GTE and/or other telcos?

David Gast
[e-mail]
{uunet,ucbvax,rutgers}!{ucla-cs,cs.ucla.edu}!gast

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Cohen)
Subject: Re: Sprint lines .. sorry ma bell, me too
Date: 28 Sep 88 05:17:43 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Robert Cohen)


In article <[e-mail]> elroy!suned1![e-mail] (Everett F. Batey II) writes:
->Are there any public administrative remedies for one little local phone
->company refusing to let me use my AT&T calling card from a residence phone?
Haven't been keeping up with this group, but are you sure you're dialing
102880 before placing your att credit card call from a non att 1+ phone?
you might check with your local business office or Operator.

--

Robert Cohen San Ramon, California {att,bellcore,sun,ames,pyramid}!pacbell!rhc
415-823-1460            [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 28 Sep 88 15:07:41 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:

>I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
>open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
>a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay.  It didn't affect the phone operation too much,
>but wouldn't quite pull in.  If I pressed the armature in, it would
>latch.  Close, but no cigar.

You want to use a voltage comparator IC to measure the voltage between the
wires (through a full wave bridge rectifier, so you don't have to care which
way you hook it up).  Open circuit (on-hook) voltage is about 48, off-hook
voltage is about 1-2 volts.  I am not sure what "hold" voltage is, but it is
higher than 2 volts.  Simpler, for a single phone, is to see if the phone has
a spare set of contacts on the hook switch (many do), and use them.

Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
30-Sep-88 17:41:23-EDT,10924;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Fri 30 Sep 88 17:41:22-EDT
Date: 30 Sep 88 16:43-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #148
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Friday, September 30, 1988 4:43PM
Volume 8, Issue 148

Today's Topics:

                         Residential Hunting
                        state and local taxes
                          answering machines
                   Need Small Business Phone System
                      Re: sensitive relay wanted
  Re: "auditory" microphones & is this going to the correct address?
                    MCI Calling Cards restriction
                             In use light

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

Date: Wed 28 Sep 88 19:11:32-CDT
From: Clive Dawson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Residential Hunting

I thought you folks would be amused by the letter I just received
from my friendly local phone company:

******************
                    September 26, 1988

Dear Customer:

Southwestern Bell Telephone Company has filed a tariff with the Public
Utilities Commission (PUC) of Texas which, if approved, will affect
the hunting line feature you currently have with your telephone
services.  The PUC has assigned Docket 8256 to this tariff filing.

Hunting line service, also called "hunting," "rotary" or "companion
line" lets incoming calls to customers with two or more premise lines
"hunt" for the first available line which isn't busy.

Except for select El Paso territory "hunting" lines which were
transferred from Mountain Bell to Southwestern Bell in 1982, the PUC
has not authorized us to provide hunting line service to residence or
message rate business customers.

Therefore, your account is one where Southwestern Bell Telephone has
been providing hunting line service in error.  This service has been
provided to you at no additional charge.

In Docket 8256, Southwestern Bell has asked the PUC to allow the
company to continue to provide hunting line service to its
single-party residence and message-rate business customers.  We have
proposed a monthly rate of $.50 per month per line for "Series Hunt"--
in addition to the applicable line rates.  Series Hunt is the most
common form of hunting and is the service you currently have.
Southwestern Bell has also requested tariffs for other enhanced
hunting arrangements.

The company also proposes that, after the hunting tariffs are
approved, our customers would be given the option of continuing the
service and paying the additional monthly rate.  You will not,
however, be charged for service connection or installation fees if you
retain the hunting line service in your present service arrangement.

Under the company's proposal, if you choose not to retain the hunting
line service, or if you do not make a choice, your hunting service
will be discontinued and you will not pay the additional monthly rate.
There will be no charge if you discontinue the hunting line service.

These proposed changes will not occur until the PUC makes a decision
on our tariff filing.  If the PUC does not approve hunting line
service for message rate business or residence customers, Southwestern
Bell Telephone Company proposes to disconnect your hunting service at
no charge.  In that event, you may retain hunting service by
subscribing to flat rate multi-line business service.

If you wish to intervene in this proceeding you should contact the PUC
of Texas, 7800 Shoal Creek Blvd., Suite 400N, Austin, Texas, 78757,
[phone] or [phone], teletypewriter for the deaf, no later
than October 27.

Once the PUC has made a final decision on this tariff filing, we will
notify you of your service options.  If you would like more
information about the proposed changes in your hunting line service,
please call your local business office.

                    Southwestern Bell
                    Telephone Company

************
I'm considering the idea of attending the PUC hearings to give my
views on this.  Any tips about how this service works in other
states and what typical fees are would be helpful.  This is a perfect
example of a feature (like Touch-Tone) which effectively is controlled
by one or more bits inside the ESS system, and which has worked very
nicely for several years.  Now that the bean counters have found
out about it, it may very well disappear.  By the way, an amusing
side light to this that when I moved into my house and ordered two
phone lines with the hunting feature, the installation charges were
actually CHEAPER than if I had ordered two completely independent
lines!

Cheers,

Clive

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: state and local taxes
Date: Wed Sep 28 20:34:19 1988

In Telecom Digest, v8, #147, David Gast asks (colons) and answers (asterisks):

: L.A. has a 10% tax on phone service. GTE bills this tax on all calls I
: make including LD calls to other states and countries.

: Any calls which are billed directly by a long distance carrier do
: not include this tax.

: Does anyone know if this is correct treatment?  I have tried to find
: out from GTE, but they claim they do not know anything about the
: tax.  I find it incredible, but when I remember it is GTE, not so much.

Here in Illiois the regular 5% state sales tax is charged by all carriers on
calls billed to addresses in Illinois.  I could never figure out the home rule
tax rates, so for all I know, inter-LATA calls billed by local telcos get hit
for home rule taxes too.  The additions to sales tax for most tangibles (local
and possibly transit) are not applied, only the raw state tax.

This has been the law in Illinois for several years now.  Long-distance
carriers charge and collect the state sales tax on bills that they issue,
something that Gast noticed NOT to happen with the Los Angeles city tax.

Gast continues, later in v8 #147:

[On his second call to GTE, they admitted the error and hinted that he'd
get a refund.]

* Anyone have any idea what GTE does with these funds?  Do they actually
* turn them over to the city or do they just pocket the tax they have
* collected incorrectly?

In Illinois, all local and long-distance telephone service providers
are required to file sales tax returns and remit the greater of the
correct tax on their taxable sales or the amount of tax collected from
customers.  But as I said, I don't know whether inter-LATA calls billed
by local telcos fall prey to careless software and get charged home rule
taxes in error.

[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu 29 Sep 88 09:19:49-EDT
From: William E. Weihl <[e-mail]>
Subject: answering machines

I'm thinking of getting an answering machine, and I thought I'd
get recommendations from other people first.  I'd appreciate any
information you might have about different brands, models, features,
etc.

Thanks,
Bill Weihl

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

From: dartvax!eleazar![e-mail] (Steve Ligett)
Subject: Need Small Business Phone System
Date: 29 Sep 88 18:26:32 GMT
Reply-To: dartvax!eleazar![e-mail] (Steve Ligett)


I'm looking for a phone system for a small business.  I need 4 Central
Office lines, and 8 to 10 extensions.  All I know about this sort of
stuff is from a little Panasonic catalog.

Who makes systems like this?  Where do I buy them?  Are Panasonic systems
good?  Are there systems to stay away from?  What else should I know?

I'll post a summary of reqponses that I receive.
   Steve Ligett     [e-mail] or
(decvax harvard ihnp4 linus)!dartvax!steve.ligett

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

From: [e-mail] (Kirk Bellar)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 29 Sep 88 21:44:28 GMT



Teltone sells a relay for this purpose, called the M-949.  It closes a
1 form A (SPST) contact if loop current is 20 mA or better.

You can contact Teltone Ltd. in Markham for particulars:

Teltone Ltd.
183 Amber Street, Markham, Ont. L3R 3B4
[phone]

Good luck with your project!

---
  Kirk Bellar    KE7TN         Teltone Corp.      (Tones `R' Us)
  uw-beaver!tikal!kirk        Kirkland, Wa. USA  [phone]

  "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to conceive..."

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

Date: Thu, 29 Sep 88 18:20:56 PDT
From: [e-mail] (David Hsu)
Subject: Re: "auditory" microphones & is this going to the correct address?

>In V8 #146, Phil Lapsley ([e-mail]) asks about "auditory"
>microphones. Well, Phil, there ain't no such thing.
>
>Hugh.

I beg to differ.  Earmikes are gaining popularity again in applications
where a boom would be inconvenient, and in noisy environments.  If Phil
is reduced to cannibalizing something like the Radio Shack unit he mentions,
I would suggest contacting a motorcycle discussion like rec.motorcycles;
they periodically discuss helmet communicators (like the Maxon), places to
shop, and prices, some of which I'm certain are less than $80.

-dave

--
David Hsu
[e-mail]            <standard disclaimer>

"Rock rock, rock'n roll high school"

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

Date: Wed, 28 Sep 88 18:15:30 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
Subject: MCI Calling Cards restriction

MCI calling cards have an "around town" feature which you do not get
charged a $0.55 surcharge per call if you use the calling card within
a local call to your home phone.  I just learned that this is only
offered on a few exchanges.  So, if you are using this feature, be
careful that your card is on one of these magic exchanges!

-Mike Grant

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

Date: Fri, 30 Sep 88 15:21:15 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
Subject: In use light

A long while ago someone posted a question about how to build a simple
circuit which would light a LED (or a simple lamp) when an extension
was lifted elsewhere in the house.  The requirements are:

  - The LED lights when another extension is lifted, showing that it
    is in use.
  - The LED must be powered off the phone line.
  - No extra wires must be run to the telephone.
  - The circuit should be reasonable small so that it can fit inside a
    desktop style phone.

No one was able to come up with a simple schematic to do this that
worked.  The upshot was that one could buy such a device for about $30
off the shelf.  Having let some time pass, anyone want to give a stab
at this?

-Michael Grant

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 1-Oct-88 19:43:25-EDT,11664;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Sat 1 Oct 88 19:43:23-EDT
Date: 1 Oct 88 18:57-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #149
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Saturday, October 1, 1988 6:57PM
Volume 8, Issue 149

Today's Topics:

                     COCOT until proven innocent
                 New England Telephone advertisements
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                     Re: Cellular Phone Question
                        Re: MCI "Around town"

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: COCOT until proven innocent
Date: Thu Sep 29 21:52:38 1988

The COCOTs are taking over in metropolitan Chicago.  More and more
shells of what were Illinois Bell public telephones now contain
COCOTs, and an untrained eye could never tell the difference.

It has come to the point that a pay phone is a COCOT by default:
Illinois Bell is replacing the markers that flag their outdoor pay
stations, the ones that used to say simply "Phone" in white with a
white silhouette of a handset on a blue background, with markers that
include the Illinois Bell's logo (the bell shape that the
pre-divestiture Bell System used) and name.  If the marker says just
"Phone" with the handset silhouette anywhere in Illinois Bell's
territory, the telephone is pretty likely a COCOT.

Some other ways to tell are the absence of the Illinois Bell logo from
the dialing instructions, 211 or a seven- or eleven-digit number (or
no number at all) listed for service instead of 611, and [not very
reliably] a fourth digit of 7 or 8 instead of the traditional 9 (some
Illinois Bell pay phones do have 8 as the fourth digit), though many
COCOTs do not list their own number at all, because the owner does not
want the telephone tied up with non-revenue-generating incoming
calls.

Probably the surest way to tell a COCOT from a telco pay phone (though
not as fast as reading the face of the instrument) in metropolitan
Chicago is to dial the operator.  Illinois Bell and Centel phones will
both be answered "Illinois Bell, Ms./Mr./Miss/Mrs. __________, may I
help you?"  (Centel retains Illinois Bell to provide its operator
services in northeastern Illinois.)  If dialing the operator connects
you to an AOS, whose operator is very unlikely to give a company name
or a personal name, just "Operator" and/or "May I help you?", you KNOW
you are at a COCOT [AOS implies COCOT], and to the best of my
knowledge all the COCOTs here are hooked up to AOS's [COCOT usually
implies AOS].

Illinois Bell's advertising to push the use of pay telephones in
general now specifies "an Illinois Bell public phone" in its jingles.
In the September, 1988, issue of _Telebriefs_ (the insertion with
Illinois Bell's bills), the following article appears for the benefit
of the bill-paying public at large.  [There are no copyright notices
anywhere on the article nor on this issue of _Telebriefs_.]  Words
that I have surrounded with underscores are italicized in the
original:


      Many public phones may look alike; they don't act alike

  Things that _seem_ similar can have some very real differences.
That's why we rely on brand names, labels, and experience to guide us
to those products and services that have served us well in the past.
  At first glance all public phones may look alike, but there are real
differences.  Differences that can be very important to you.
  A case in point: If you need help completing a call when using an
Illinois Bell public phone, you'll receive assistance from an Illinois
Bell operator at charges regulated by the Illinois Commerce
Commission.  You'll find these charges listed in the Customer Guide
Pages of your local directory or you can ask your Illinois Bell
operator at the time you place your call.
  However, if you need an operator's help when making a call from a
_non_-Illinois Bell public phone, you may be assisted by one of
several new companies that provide alternative operator services
(AOS).  AOS companies provide operator assistance for calling card,
collect or third-number calls made from pay phones operated by some
companies other than Illinois Bell.
  Charges for alternative operator services can and do vary widely
since these companies are unregulated and allowed to set their own
rates.  These charges are very often higher than Illinois Bell's.
  You can identify an Illinois Bell public phone by the Illinois Bell
name and logo on the instruction card on the face of the phone.  In
addition, most of our outdoor public phones are accompanied by a blue
sign displaying the Illinois Bell logo.
  But if you have any doubts, you can ask the operator what company he
or she represents and what rates will be charged before placing an
operator-assisted call.
                                *  *  *

In the portion of the Chicago area served by Centel, the outdoor
markers still say "Phone".  Centel's pay telephones have a distinctive
brown housing, and I have not yet seen any of them reused for COCOTs;
COCOTs in Centel's service area are relatively rare compared to their
saturation in Illinois Bell's territory as well as being easy to tell
from Centel coin phones on sight.


[e-mail]  ||  sun!portal!cup.portal.com!david_w_tamkin

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

Subject: New England Telephone advertisements
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 88 13:57:48 EDT
From: [e-mail]


Why does New England Telephone bother advertising on TV and radio?
They have a whole bunch of very professional comercials which give you
nice warm-n-fuzzy feelings, but the bottom line is that they have no
competition (for local service) and the commercials are a waste of
money.

Their jingle "We're the one for you New England, New England
Telephone", really ought to be "We the *only* one for you New England..."
I guess that wouldn't rhyme.

I can't complain too much about N.E.T., their service is reasonably
priced, and who else gives you Net 45 to pay your bill.  I just seems
to me that the money could be better spent elsewhere.  Maybe I'm
missing something obvious.

Ted Ede -- [e-mail] -- The MITRE Corporation -- Burlington Road
| linus!mbunix!ted -- Bedford MA, 01730 -- Mail Stop B015 -- [phone] |
|                   - this line intentionally left blank -                  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

From: Gerry Wheeler <[e-mail]>
Date: 30 Sep 88 13:57:40 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: mks!wheels
From: [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Summary: voltage measurement won't do
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 30 Sep 88 13:57:39 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems, Waterloo, Ont.
Lines: 25

I originally asked about using a sensitive relay to detect which of two
devices (phones, faxes, whatever) was offhook.  (I didn't phrase it that
way, but that was the gist of it.) In my situation, one will be a modem,
and the other a fax.

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman) writes:
> You want to use a voltage comparator IC to measure the voltage between the
> wires.

I thought about that originally, but it won't work.  It will tell me if
either device is offhook, but not which one because they're wired in
parallel.

> Simpler, for a single phone, is to see if the phone has
> a spare set of contacts on the hook switch (many do), and use them.

Agreed.  I think some Hayes type modems include an extra pair of
contacts to be used on the A-A1 lines of a key system.  However, it's
not so easy to do with a fax.  Unfortunately.

--
     Gerry Wheeler                           Phone: [phone]
Mortice Kern Systems Inc.               UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!wheels
   35 King St. North                             BIX: join mks
Waterloo, Ontario  N2J 2W9                  CompuServe: 73260,1043

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

From: westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Question
Date: 1 Oct 88 01:21:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
> If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
> cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is...

When you dial a number assigned to a cellular mobile telephone, all
of the cell-sites in the mobile phone user's home region broadcast
the incoming call alert.  The mobile unit periodically scans the page
channels upon which such a message can be broadcast, and locks on
the one with the strongest signal.  Thus the mobile, while not busy,
locates itself wrt the cellular network, and decides which cell-site
to monitor for incoming calls.  When it hear's its own number in the
data-stream it receives on the page channel, it transmits an
acknowlegement on the access channel specified in the page channel's
message.

When a mobile phone user originates a call, the mobile phone
transmits a service request on this same access channel, and expects
to receive a channel-assignment in reply.

Once a call is in-progress, the mobile telephone switching office
(MTSO) decides which channel on which cell-site station will handle
the call, and directs the appropriate hand-offs.

In summary, idle cellular telephones locate themselves.  Busy
cellular telephones are located by the MTSO.

--
Dave Levenson
Westmark, Inc.        The Man in the Mooney
Warren, NJ USA
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave

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

Date: Fri, 30 Sep 88 23:04:27 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lars J Poulsen)
Subject: Re: MCI "Around town"

> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 88 18:15:30 EDT
> From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
> Subject: MCI Calling Cards restriction
>
> MCI calling cards have an "around town" feature which you do not get
> charged a $0.55 surcharge per call if you use the calling card within
> a local call to your home phone.  I just learned that this is only
> offered on a few exchanges.  So, if you are using this feature, be
> careful that your card is on one of these magic exchanges!

Your MCI card call is considered to be "around town" if it enters the
MCI network at the same gateway as calls from home. In some metropolitan
areas, where there are many MCI gateways, this aea may be quite small.
In other areas, it may be an entire LATA.

I think this is one of the best reasons to get an MCI card.
My wife and I got an MCI card in order to cut down on our long distance
costs. Her mother is out-of-town but in-state. My parents are overseas
in a country to which MCI has service. Mostly, MCI saves us 10%. But the
"around-town" feature lets us call our respective parents from work
without charging the call to the company and without incurring an
"operator-assist surcharge". We like that a lot.

We have had none of the billing problems that so many Sprint customers
have reported, and the circuits are okay. What more can I say ?

/ Lars Poulsen
  Advanced Computer Communications

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 4-Oct-88 19:37:56-EDT,13012;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Tue 4 Oct 88 19:37:49-EDT
Date: 4 Oct 88 18:15-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #150
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                         Tuesday, October 4, 1988 6:15PM
Volume 8, Issue 150

Today's Topics:

           Disabling callwaiting while on line with a modem
                        TELECOM Digest V8 #149
                     Re: Residential Hunt Groups
        Re: Info and sources wanted for "auditory" microphones
          Re: Local Telco refuses to allow use of AT&T card?
                       Re: Residential Hunting
                          MCI "Around town"
            Phone advertising (Re: TELECOM Digest V8 #149)
                          FRG phone numbers
                      Re: sensitive relay wanted
                           Re: In use light

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

From: "Michael A. Shiels" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Disabling callwaiting while on line with a modem
Date: 2 Oct 88 19:06:54 GMT
Reply-To: "Michael A. Shiels" <[e-mail]>



Is there a way to have callwaiting disabled for a while??  I can't seem to
get a straight answer from bell.
--
  Michael A. Shiels
  [e-mail]
UUCP: ...path...!watmath!mshiels

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

Date: Sun, 2 Oct 88 04:48:48 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #149

Most payphone calls are a minute or two in length (calling for a ride,
asking what so-and-so wanted you to pick up, etc.), which leads to one
of the best things about the MCI card's Around Town feature... You can
make payphone calls for an average of $.10, and you don't need to carry
change.  What a deal...

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

Date: Fri, 30 Sep 88 22:51:13 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lars J Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Residential Hunt Groups

> Date: Wed 28 Sep 88 19:11:32-CDT
> From: Clive Dawson <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Residential Hunting
>
> Any tips about how this service works in other
> states and what typical fees are would be helpful.  This is a perfect
> example of a feature (like Touch-Tone) which effectively is controlled
> by one or more bits inside the ESS system, and which has worked very
> nicely for several years.  Now that the bean counters have found
> out about it, it may very well disappear.

When I added a second line to my residential service in order to
accomodate a line for my modem to use, I asked to have to the two lines
joined as a hunt group. Of course the sales person at the desk did not
know what I was talking about, and kept insisting it was impossible.
The only way anything ever moved forward was that every time we were stuck,
I said "Go ask your supervisor!".

Eventually, we wound up with two lines, each forwarding to the other
one if busy. A note saying that carrier frequency multiplexing was not
acceptable, no listing for the second line, all billing consolidated
under the main number. Secondary line is "pulse only" and thus does not
carry the extra $1.00/month charge for "touch tone calling".

There is no surcharge for the hunting. But one of these days I'm going
to go down and pay them $5.00 to take it off, because it's really a nuisance.
the only times we ever get a ring on the second line are
(a) a telephone solicitor is running down all numbers (I'd rather not
    get those calls) or
(b) my wife is talking to her mother, and my parents call from Denmark,
    and we have to call them back after we get off the phone, anyhow.

This is a GTE service area, and I'm sure it just has not occurrred to
GTE that they need to file a tarriff in order to do this. (GTE is
not normally shy about asking for money).

Tell your PUC how screwed up SW Bell are to charge for this.

/ Lars Poulsen
  ACC Customer Service

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

From: uiucdcs!bilver![e-mail] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Info and sources wanted for "auditory" microphones
Date: 1 Oct 88 21:00:23 GMT
Reply-To: uiucdcs!bilver![e-mail] (Bill Vermillion)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Phil Lapsley) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>Something that interests me about this one, though, is that it uses
>an "auditory microphone" -- that is, the ear piece is the microphone
>as well, picking up voice through the auditory canal.
>
(stuff deleted....
>I'm wondering how well known or mature this technology is.  Have
>auditory mics existed for a long time?  If so, can somebody point me
>towards a source for them?  I'd hate to have to pay $80 for R.S. stuff
>just to cannibalize the walkie-talkies for the mics if I could get
>better mics from someplace else for less.
>
Don't know about cheaper but surely better.  Maybe too good for what you want.
The company is B&K - Bruell & Kjaer Instruments, Inc.  They make measurement
microphones for just about everything.

One of their pieces of printed literature I read a few years ago was
discussing measurement in the auditory canal.  They put a microphone in the
ear and a tranmitter - a miniature loudspeaker - in the nose.  Then they were
able to measure transmission losses, etc from the outer ear to the inner ear -
or something similar.  The technology is mature, and is well known in
specialized circles.

'87/'88 issue of "The Electronics Industry Telephone Directory" shows them as
being in Marlborough MA - [phone].

Hope this helps.  You probably have a local rep for them.

--
Bill Vermillion - [e-mail]

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

From: lotus![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Local Telco refuses to allow use of AT&T card?
Date: Sun Oct  2 23:12:38 1988

10xxx overrides the default temporarily but does NOT change it for future calls.




Full name: Bob Frankston

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

From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: Residential Hunting
Date: 2 Oct 88 20:21:37 GMT
Reply-To: roy@phri (Roy Smith)


    [e-mail] (Clive Dawson) tells about how SWBTL wants to
start charging for hunting on his residential phone on the excuse that they
are no longer allowed to provide the service for free.  My God, that's the
most absurd thing I've ever heard; "We'd like to keep giving you this
service which for free, especially since it doesn't cost us anything, but
the PUC won't let us".  Friggin' laywers!

    Anyway, when I moved into my apartment in Brooklyn (New York
Telephone, or is it NYNEX now?), we asked for two lines and they
voluntered that we could get hunting for free.  And this isn't even on an
ESS CO where providing the service is just flipping some bits; since they
said the second number had to be greater than, but close to, the first
number, I'm assuming we're on some sort of mechanical switch.  The fact that
touch-tone doesn't work tends to confirm this, I think.

    Give 'em hell!
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

Date: Sun, 2 Oct 88 23:39:46 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
Subject: MCI "Around town"

I reiterate, I talked to MCI on Wednesday last week.  They told me
that the MCI Around Town Feature is only available on certain select
exchanges in larger metropolitan areas.

The reason this discussion came up is that I had recently moved and
called MCI to get a new MCI card.  They told me that in my new
residence, I could have an MCI card, but *every* call on it would ring
up a $0.55 surcharge, no matter where the card was used, from home,
locally, or the other side of the country.

I moved 10 miles, from one part of the Washington DC area to another.
My local calling area is nearly identical.  The MCI Customer
[Dis]service representitive could not tell me what distinguished
between an Around-town exchange or not.

-Mike Grant

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

Date: Mon, 3 Oct 1988 13:02-EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Phone advertising (Re: TELECOM Digest V8 #149)

Your PUC would probably be interested in your opinions on advertising by
monopolies, but everybody else (cable, gas & electic companies) seems to do it.

The Bell of PA (Bell Atlantic territory) ads seem to be oriented toward
pushing 'enhanced services'.  They don't make much sense, but they
push the following services:

0) Customer service: business office types & linepeople
big deal, unless you get to talk with someone who was on TV. (I know you!)
I want to see an anti-COCOT ad.

1) the Yellow Pages (kid only has 60-seconds of comercial time to look
up the number for a Pizza delivery service & make the call) I'm suprised
they didn't push speed calling on this one.  I prefered the 'Dragnet'-style
ads myself.

2) Custom calling service (call forwarding - pushy lady forwards her phone
to her neighbors house & receives her job offer while there.)
[Call waiting (police call a lost boy's mother, interrupting her conversation
with grandmother (granmda 'lost' Jonnie); but police can easily get
emergency break-ins when a line is busy.]

I'll be glad when they can build all of these into the instruments, I
hate the idea of monthly charges for ESS bit flipping.

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

Subject: FRG phone numbers
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 88 22:38:19 EDT
From: David Lesher <c3pe![e-mail]>
Reply-To: cvl![e-mail]


While in Frankfurt last week I noted that phone numbers varied in
length from 4 to 10 digits, maybe more. The longer ones seemed
to be DID into PBXs.
How does the CO know when it has all the digits?  Does it time
out, or do prefixes carry implicit lengths?

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

From: [e-mail] (Kekatos)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 3 Oct 88 20:51:01 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (55624-Kekatos,T.G.)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
| I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
| open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
| a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay.  It didn't affect the phone operation too much,
| but wouldn't quite pull in.  If I pressed the armature in, it would
| latch.  Close, but no cigar.
| So, what type of relay should I be looking for (impedance/current).  Is
| such a thing commonly available? Will this scheme work? Does ringing
| current cause any problems?

Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
draw enough current from the phone line.  You must use a
circuit that has a few transistors to SENSE the activity on the
phone line, and another transistor and 9volt battery to drive a
relay, if you still want relay contacts.  This is really the RIGHT
way to do it.  There ARE products on the market that do this
kind of thing. You will have to shop around.


Ted G. Kekatos
UUCP: ..!att!ihuxv!tedk                     [phone]
AT&T Bell Laboratories, Indian Hill South, IX-1F-460
Naperville & Wheaton Roads - Naperville, Illinois. 60566 USA

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

From: [e-mail] (jetzer)
Subject: Re: In use light
Date: 3 Oct 88 19:43:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:
> A long while ago someone posted a question about how to build a simple
> circuit which would light a LED (or a simple lamp) when an extension
> was lifted elsewhere in the house.  The requirements are:

>   - The LED lights when another extension is lifted, showing that it
>     is in use.
>   - The LED must be powered off the phone line.
>   - No extra wires must be run to the telephone.
>   - The circuit should be reasonable small so that it can fit inside a
>     desktop style phone.

> No one was able to come up with a simple schematic to do this that
> worked.  The upshot was that one could buy such a device for about $30
> off the shelf.  Having let some time pass, anyone want to give a stab
> at this?


I would also be interested in such a device - my roommate has this
nasty habit of picking up the phone while I'm using my modem.

Actually, I'd be happy even if it required some extra wires or external
power - just as long as it would detect any phone on the line being
in use.

I might even be willing to let $30 for such a device (maybe).  Where is
one available?


--
Mike Jetzer
"Hack first, ask questions later."

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 4-Oct-88 22:09:05-EDT,12312;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Tue 4 Oct 88 22:09:02-EDT
Date: 4 Oct 88 21:28-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #151
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                         Tuesday, October 4, 1988 9:28PM
Volume 8, Issue 151

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                 why New England Telephone advertises
                       generating a busy signal
                     equal access for phonecards?
                      Institutional Phone Cards
                     Local Telco and Credit Card

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

From: David Daemon <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Oct 88 13:57:44 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: mcnc!unccvax!dya
From: [e-mail] (York David Anthony @ WKTD, Wilmington, NC)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Oct 88 13:59:06 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Univ. of NC at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC
Lines: 20

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
> I originally asked about using a sensitive relay to detect which of two
> devices (phones, faxes, whatever) was offhook.  (I didn't phrase it that
> way, but that was the gist of it.) In my situation, one will be a modem,
> and the other a fax.

    What you want are two optoisolator IC's.  You may bridge the internal
LED with the passive element of your choice (all you need is a few mA to
light the lamp).  Place the diode so that it is forward biased in either tip
or ring.  You'll want to provide reverse voltage protection to the LED; and
perhaps even a nice, large mylar capacitor (say, a few uFd) to keep ringing
transients out of the fairly timid LED inside the optoisolator.

    The transistor on the other side connects to the logic of your choice.

    When the phone is off hook, the LED lights, optically biasing the
transistor into conduction.

York David Anthony
DataSpan, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Ofsevit, 293-5062, BXB1-1/D03)
Date: 4 Oct 88 10:00
Subject: why New England Telephone advertises


    In Telecom 8/149, Ted Ede asks why New England Telephone bothers to
    advertise when it has no (or little) competition.

    NET is a business, and they can increase their volume and thus their
    profits by getting people to use more of NET's services.  It's one
    thing to just put the system out there and expect people to use it;
    it's another to do sales and advertising to make customers more aware
    of what's available and use it more.  For instance, lately there's been
    a heavy sell of FAX; I get the impression that a lot of businesses are
    not really aware of FAX, and NET is increasing the awareness of
    business people (who do watch the news, sports, etc.).

            David Ofsevit

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

From: ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann)
Subject: generating a busy signal
Date: 4 Oct 88 18:02:17 GMT


I just got through making a phone call from my office here in
Seattle to our plant in Huntsville, AL. The hardware at each end
should be a #5ESS (I am told). The routing of the call should
normally be over private, leased circuits and should NOT be going
onto the public network. It turned out that the phone I was trying
to reach in Huntsville was busy for several tries. Each time, an
audio circuit was opened and the busy signal was generated at the
far end. Now with that background, here is the my question:
Why wasn't the busy signal generated by the PBX equipment at my end?
I thought that the system did some talking over a data link before
opening the audio path anyway. If so, the 'busy' should be signaled
over the data link and the local equipment would take care of it
Now I could see the above happening (remote busy signal) if on the
public network where all the required hooks my not be available.
Perhaps someone could give some insight on how a call path might
be setup, briefly.

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

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

From: [e-mail] (MJSchmelzer)
Subject: equal access for phonecards?
Date: 3 Oct 88 23:15:59 GMT
Reply-To: hscfvax![e-mail] (R00100@MJSchmelzer)


I got a calling card from NJ Bell last year, and all I had to do to use
it was dial 0-then my number, then wait for the tone and dial my calling
card number (my home phone + 4 digits). For long distance calls, the card
used AT&T.
Isn't this contrary to equal access? (I used Sprint as my primary
carrier at home.)
    Now that I`ve moved and gotten a phone from New England Telephone,
I've  (automatically) gotten a Foncard from Sprint. Fine, except for the
fact that I have to dial an 800 number, then the number I'm calling,
then my 14 digit foncard number (which, incidentally, has nothing to do
with my home phone number, therefore it's more stuff to memorize. grrr.)
    Why doesn`t Sprint`s foncard enjoy the same 0-xxx-xxx-xxxx access that
my NJ Bell card did? Why didn`t they issue me a more mnemonic number?

(And finally WHAT ARE THE RATES FOR MY FONCARD??? The only inkling of
info concerning this was some fine print on the cardboard: "A surcharge
may apply for each use of the card." or somesuch.)

    Thanks for any and all light you can shed on this.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Institutional Phone Cards
Date: Fri Sep 30 17:45:35 1988

Daniel Greenberg asks about obtaining a phone credit card which can be used
while at school and without any obligation to change his home (apparently
parent's) phone's default long distance carrier.

I suggest he ask for the good old standby, now almost a hundred years in the
business, AT&T.

AT&T offers a 'non subscriber' credit card which allows for calls to be billed
to a billing number with no reference to any specific telephone. They make
this card available to military personnel stationed around the world who do
not want/are not permitted to charge their calls to the local switchboard.
They make these cards available to students in universities.

Actually, I think it is Cincinnatti Bell which issues the cards and handles the
billing, under contract with AT&T, but that's a trivial point. Daniel would
apply for the card through the AT&T customer service line at 1-800-222-0300.
If the home phone (I believe he said it was Rochester Telephone Co) is in
fact defaulted to AT&T long distance, then it will be a simple matter to
establish credit for the new card. If not, then some credit references may
be requested.

If the home phone is on AT&T now, stress that you are supplying that number
for credit purposes but want an institutional type card with separate billing
not connected to that number, and linked only for reference/contact purposes.

Not all the AT&T representatives are as knowledgeable about this offering as
they should be, so insist that they review it with their supervisor if they
are not immediatly aquainted with it.

The card that you get will consist of an 'area code' (funny looking one!) and
a seven digit 'phone number' plus the four digit PIN. It is used in the same
way as any other AT&T Credit Card.

There is a surcharge for each call made, but you will have the flexibilty of
using the card from pay phones or the private phones of other people;
something you cannot do now with the service provided at your school.

Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Local Telco and Credit Card
Date: Fri Sep 30 18:15:47 1988

This discussion about the use of an AT&T Credit Card at the local telco
level is confusing to me. I do not think, strictly speaking, there is any
such thing as an "AT&T Card" or a "Sprint FONcard", etc. What there *is* is
PINS, or Personal Identification Numbers, which are programmed into the
computers of the various local telephone companies which indicate that the
person using the PIN has established credit with some telephone company
somewhere. The design on the front of the card, whether it be AT&T, Sprint,
or the very attractive one I have which says "Illinois Bell Credit Card"
is merely an advertisement for the company which set up the account.

The PIN is assigned and maintained at the local telephone company level,
regardless of the issuing carrier. How else could the local switch process
your calls? Your card from AT&T/local Bell can be used both for local calls
and interstate long distance calls. For example, let's say you have a card
issued by Sprint. The only thing that makes this different than the one you
got from AT&T is the PIN on the end, is it not? If you go to a pay phone and
place a credit card call, and insert that PIN on the end, the call will
go through, even if the payphone itself defaults to AT&T (assuming you are
using the payphone which belongs to the local telco.) If you make a local
call in the community, using the credit card you are going to be billed
by the local telco for the call on the number associated with the FONcard.

I can see two possible problems which is causing Correspondent to get his
billing requests rejected. If he is using a phone which defaults to Sprint,
then he should note that dialing "0" will fetch the local telco operator
but dialing "00" will fetch the Sprint operator. In most areas, to make a
credit card call -- local area or long distance -- you do NOT one plus the
number, but rather you zero plus the number, meaning it may be the Sprint
Operator who is getting the AT&T billing number and refusing it, rather
than the local telco operator.

Another possibility is that the PIN, while valid, was somehow never installed
in the computer of the local telco he is using. It does happen sometimes that
small local telcos make mistakes, just like the Bells make mistakes. In
other words, they are telling him they will not accept the billing, not
because they do not accept AT&T, but rather, because the PIN appears to
them to be invalid.

I think the only way to solve this for our Correspondent is with specifics
about the calls, etc. Perhaps he will send email to me with the following
specific information --

1. What area code and number are you calling FROM? Always the same one?
2. What area code and number are you trying to call? Always the same one?
3. Tell me exactly, digit by digit, what you dial. Do not assume I know
the appropriate dialing sequence, etc..
4. Do you know the name of the local telephone company serving you?
5. Have you tried the card from within the territory of some other telco?
6. Have you discussed this with AT&T, and asked them specifically if the
PIN was valid, or if there was some problem?
7. Does the local telco accept calls via 10288-1-AC-NUMBER? What happens
when you attempt to put the call through that way?

I feel rather certain Correspondent is not being victimized by some local
telephone company nearly as much as he is being victimized as all of us are
by the massive confusion caused when Judge Greene made the 'right choice'
a few years ago.

I would refer Correspondent to my own story, posted here a few months ago
entitled, "We Get Our New PIN" for information on how the phone companies and
AT&T manage to mess this up.

[e-mail]

[Actually, only ATT has access to the PIN database (and of course the local
companies). The other carriers make the PIN up. That's why you can't use your
sprint FONCARD when placing an ATT call. If the PIN database included SPRINT
(and SPRINT had the appropriate cross-billing agreement with ATT), then you
wouldn't need to have calling cards for each carrier. --jsol]

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 5-Oct-88 20:51:49-EDT,14668;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Wed 5 Oct 88 20:51:47-EDT
Date: 5 Oct 88 19:07-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #152
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                       Wednesday, October 5, 1988 7:07PM
Volume 8, Issue 152

Today's Topics:

                    "Phone Company, Inc" gets sued
                References on Telephone Systems Wanted
         RE: Disabling callwaiting while on line with a modem
                 RE: European variable length numbers
                     Re: Cellular Phone Question
                      Re: sensitive relay wanted

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: "Phone Company, Inc" gets sued
Date: Sun Oct  2 21:49:25 1988

A telephone repair company operating in Chicago agreed to curtail operations
last week after State's Attorney Richard M. Daley sued the firm, charging
that it mislead the public into believing that it was connected with Illinois
Bell Telephone Company.

The firm, known as Phone Company, Inc. and a sister firm, Phone First, Inc.
were soliciting people to sign up for the repair service they offered. Sales
people from the Phone Company were using telemarketing methods to call people
in the Chicago area to sign them up for the service. When they called, they
would identify themselves as calling 'from the Phone Company', which, while
technically correct, was misleading, according to the suit filed.

The telemarketing people were explaining that under the changes made in recent
years, Illinois Bell was no longer permitted to repair telephone sets, or
wiring within your home without charging a special fee for doing so. (this is
true). So, said the salespeople from the Phone Company, the Phone Company is
now offering a 'monthly maintainence plan' which will cover the cost of
repairing or replacing any telephone set in your home which is out of order.
If you would like to have the Phone Company handle your repairs, *as Illinois
Bell was doing in the past*, all you have to do is tell us you want to sign
up for the monthly maintainence program....

You will note they carefully did not ever refer to themselves as Illinois
Bell, and they always referred to their own service as 'The Phone Company'.

Of 400,000 Chicago area Illinois Bell customers solicited, about 170,000 had
indicated they wanted to sign up for this monthly maintainence program, and
bills had been sent out to about 100,000. The bills *very closely* resembled
the monthly bills sent out by Illinois Bell, even to the extent that they
used such verbiage as "Other Charges and Credits", and had the invoice laid
out looking exactly like the front page of our telephone bill, including
the slogan 'Phone First' in one corner, a group of numbers representing an
'accounting office code', and other artifacts.

Illinois Bell Telephone Company does not have a copyright, or any exclusive
use of either the phrase 'phone company' or the phrase 'phone first', although
they use the latter frequently in their own advertising.

Apparently where they tripped up was in a call to Kenneth Miller at his home.
Mr. Miller is a district security manager for Illinois Bell, but was not known
as such to the telephone solicitor who called him. The solicitor began the
conversation by saying, "This is the Phone Company calling," and then asked
if he wanted his phones fixed in his home, or by taking them to a Phone First
office, according to the suit filed.

Miller asked the solicitor if this was a service offered by Illinois Bell, and
if it was approved by Illinois Bell, and both times the solicitor replied yes,
the suit said. Miller already knew this to be false, according to the suit.

State's Attorney Daley alleges that the Phone Company mailings were deceptive
also, and made to resemble telephone bills, leading the public to believe that
the firm had a contractual arrangement with Illinois Bell.

The deal offered by the Phone Company was simple enough: If you signed up
for their service, which apparently does exist and is honored when needed,
you would pay a fee up front, about $15, to be 'enrolled', and then $4.95
per month -- forever, I assume -- for the privilege of using the Phone
Company's repair services; either in your home, or at their repair facilities
which they called Phone First.

The proprietor of the Phone Company, Mr. William Jackson, has agreed with
State's Attorney Daley and officials of the State of Illinois Consumer Fraud
Unit that he will halt operations for the time being. Jackson further agreed
that when his business resumes, no bills will be mailed out without approval
from the Consumer Fraud Unit as to their form and content. Any money collected
from consumers who do not wish to engage the firm's services will be refunded
under the agreement.

The name, "the Phone Company" will not be used in any mailings, literature
or phone solicitations. No further telephone solicitations will be made
without the script previously being approved by the Consumer Fraud Unit.

Since Jackson does in fact hold title to the phrase "Phone Company, Inc"
under corporate law in Illinois, and that name was allowed by the Secretary
of State under a lawful application for same, I do not really see how
another arm of the government can prevent him from calling his business by
its lawful name....but State's Attorney Daley claims he can do it, and has
obtained a restraining order from Judge Sophia H. Hall in Cook County Circuit
Court. Illinois Bell Telephone has stated that while they dislike Jackson's
use of that phrase, they cannot stop it as such. On the other hand, Illinois
Bell has claimed an infringment of their advertising slogan 'phone first' by
Jackson in his reference to his repair facility which uses that name.

You'd think people would know the difference between The Phone Company and
Illinois Bell, particularly after how many years now of educational efforts
by the various Bells, the OCC's and the utility commissions to advise folks
about the post-divestiture scene. But I guess people are as unsophisticated
about their phone service as they always were.

To Daley's credit, he has also started making rumbling noises about the
COCOTS and the AOS businesses....but why he feels one guy (Jackson) trying
to run a telephone repair/replacement business is any more of a fraud
operator than the companies who are taking over Illinois Bell payphone shells
with look-alike phones is beyond me. The public is certainly decieved by
those evil instruments also, to hear Illinois Bell complain about the number
of complaints *they* receive from people who accuse *them* of ripping off
their money.

Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Subelman)
Subject: References on Telephone Systems Wanted
Date: 3 Oct 88 20:34:05 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ed Subelman)


I would like to obtain information on the design and operation of the
telephone system in the USA, both from the network and the user's point of
view.  Buzzwords such as Centrex, PBX, DID, currently baffle me.  My
background includes engineering and software so the technical details don't
scare me.
Can some kind soul recommend one or two solid references to get into this
area quickly.

Thanks.
--
Ed Subelman            [e-mail]
Citicorp(+)TTI            {csun|philabs|psivax}!ttidca!subelman
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.
Santa Monica, CA  90405        [phone], x2972

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 4 Oct 88 19:48
Subject: RE: Disabling callwaiting while on line with a modem

>Is there a way to have callwaiting disabled for a while??  I can't seem to
>get a straight answer from bell.

In my No 2 ESS disable call waiting is interchangeably any of the following
codes: 70#, *70, or 1170.

You obtain dial tone and then dial the desired number.  Call waiting is
disabled for the duration of the new cal

Some (but not all) exchanges permit you (if you have 3-Way-Calling) to flash,
dial 70#, and return to your existing call, which now has call waiting disabled
for the remainder of the call.

/john

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 4 Oct 88 19:52
Subject: RE: European variable length numbers

>While in Frankfurt last week I noted that phone numbers varied in
>length from 4 to 10 digits, maybe more. The longer ones seemed
>to be DID into PBXs.
>How does the CO know when it has all the digits?  Does it time
>out, or do prefixes carry implicit lengths?

Neither.  The exchange begins processing the call after some short number
of digits (as few as one or as many as four, depending on the exchange type
and local dialing plan) and continues to send digits to the distant exchange
until you stop dialing, the call is answered, or some significantly large
maximum is reached.

This allows the operator at at PBX to be, for example, 9591-0, and for there
to be four digit extensions such as 9591-2323.

Europeans think we are weird for insisting on a fixed length numbering plan.

/john

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Question
Date: 5 Oct 88 03:40:55 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
>cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is.  I

[stuff deleted]

Your second guess was correct.  When a call comes in, if the cellular phone
in question is already involved in a conversation, then the matter is simple.
Otherwise, the entire system sends out a page for the phone. When the phone
answers, it's location is determined and it is sent a command to ring.

In most Cellular One (tm) systems, the clicking you here when you call a cell
phone, is designed to keep you on the line while the system pages the phone.
Ringback is only heard if the phone is actually located.

In typical Bell systems, ringback is given immediately.  Then if the phone
doesn't answer by the second page, you are transfered to the intercept.
Personally, I like the Cell One approach.  I would rather not hear "ringing"
unless the phone is actually ringing.

One trick I sometimes use is to set my Motorola 8000X (the best phone ever
made) into the mode where it will not answer pages.  Instead, it beeps like
a pocket pager.  Since it doesn't answer the page the caller gets transfered
to the voice-mail system.  I know I've gotten a message because the phone
beeps.  Then I can call at *my* convenience.


-brian

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 5 Oct 88 03:51:22 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
>open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
>a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay.  It didn't affect the phone operation too much,
>but wouldn't quite pull in.  If I pressed the armature in, it would
>latch.  Close, but no cigar.
>

All you really need to do is use an Opto-Isolator.  It is a good idea to either
use an AC opto-isolator, or to use a full wave bridge rectifier in front of it.,Also, bypass the diode with a 470 ohm 1/2 watt resistor.  This technique
works quite well.

If you need more info just call me.  I hate trying to write a novel.

-brian

(301) 381 - 1718

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

Date: Tue, 04 Oct 88 13:08:55 -0700
From: Steve Lemke  <comdesign!ivucsb![e-mail]>

To: comdesign!uunet!comp-dcom-telecom
Path: ivucsb!steve
From: [e-mail] (Steve Lemke <steve>)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: answering machines
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Oct 88 20:08:51 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve Lemke <steve>)
Organization: The Audio Club at UCSB, Isla Vista, California
Lines: 28


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (William E. Weihl) writes:
>I'm thinking of getting an answering machine, and I thought I'd
>get recommendations from other people first.  I'd appreciate any
>information you might have about different brands, models, features, etc.

Well, I've always been a fan of the Panasonic stuff, so I'll put in the
good word for them.  I've had my Panasonic machine for three years now, and
I've not had any problems with it - they seem to have a decent amount of
features (I love features, bells, and whistles, etc.) and a fair price (well,
actually, they dropped the price about six months after I got it, but such
is life).  Anyway, I think mine is a KTX-1421 or something like that.  They
don't make it anymore, but the ones that have replaced it are even better.
I'm thinking of one that offers toll-saver (answers on 2 rings if you have
messages to retrieve, else 4 rings), auto-shutoff (like if you pick up any
phone in the house and the machine has already kicked on, it shuts off),
1 minute, 3 minute, or unlimited incoming message length, with VOX (automatic
hang-up detection), and a list of things you can do from any touch-tone phone
when you call your machine (like change the outgoing message, etc.).  I'm
thinking of selling this one sometime and replacing it with another Panasonic,
perhaps one of the ones with a phone built in - some of their phones are
pretty slick, too!


----- Steve Lemke ------------------- "MS-DOS (OS/2, etc.) - just say no!"
----- Internet: [e-mail]; [e-mail]   AppleLink:  LEMKE
----- uucp:     pyramid!comdesign!ivucsb!steve       CompuServe: 73627,570
----- alt.uucp: {decwrl!}sun!apple!lemke             GEnie:      S.Lemke
----- Quote:    "What'd I go to college for?"   "You had fun, didn't you?"

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 6-Oct-88 21:26:49-EDT,12772;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Thu 6 Oct 88 21:26:47-EDT
Date: 6 Oct 88 20:28-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #153
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Thursday, October 6, 1988 8:28PM
Volume 8, Issue 153

Today's Topics:

               RE: New England Telephone advertisements
                    Equal Access for Calling Cards
                     Local Telco and Credit Cards
                             In use light
                      Re: sensitive relay wanted
                       Re: Residential Hunting
                 special numbers for cellular phones
                 Re: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                            Crossbar Blues
[We are running about a day or so behind in traffic. I will try to send
out a second digest tonight. --jsol]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 5 Oct 88 08:21
Subject: RE: New England Telephone advertisements

In Telecom 8/149, Ted Ede asks why New England Telephone bothers to
advertise when it has no (or little) competition.

David Ofsevit mentions that the advertisements help NET increase their volume
by making people more aware of services (and prices).

But most importantly, the things N.E.T. advertises most, long distance calling
withing the N.E.T. Calling Area (L.A.T.A.) and CENTREX service, are two areas
where N.E.T. does have fairly stiff competition.

Massachusetts permits other common carriers to provide long distance service
within New England Telephone's calling areas -- I could call from Acton to
Boston on Sprint, MCI, or First Phone (but not AT&T because AT&T hasn't filed
an intra-LATA tariff).

CENTREX competes directly with PBXs provided by other companies.

N.E.T. is also facing competition in the local exchange plant -- other carriers
can now provide tie trunks between buildings in Boston.

/john

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 5 Oct 88 08:29
Subject: Equal Access for Calling Cards

MJSchmelzer and others ask about equal access for calling cards.

AT&T and the local operating companies share access to the calling card
database.  Sprint has signed agreements with some Bell companies to also
have access to the database -- my latest Sprint bill had an insert telling
me to call them to see if I could use my local telephone company's calling
card when calling on Sprint.

If your default carrier is Sprint, all of your inter-LATA calls, whether
dialed 1+ or 0+ should go to Sprint.  Sprint doesn't currently have automatic
entry of calling cards, but I just dialed 0+NPA-XXX-XXXX and then gave the
Sprint operator my calling card.  No need to give them the number I dialed,
so the local telco is obviously providing full equal access -- it's Sprint
that doesn't have the equipment to accept a calling card number after 0+ is
dialed.

From a payphone, you should be able to dial 10333+0+number and get a Sprint
Status: O

operator and speak your calling card, call collect, or 3rd person.

Another level is supposedly coming -- 0+ from payphones will first go to the
local telco for entry of your calling card.  The local telco will check the
database for your primary carrier and ship the call to the right L.D. company.

/john

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

Date: Wed, 5 Oct 88 08:38:48 PDT
From: HECTOR MYERSTON <[e-mail]>
Subject: Local Telco and Credit Cards

    [e-mail] provides a very clear and
erudite theory on credit cards and PINs.  Unfortunately it is also about
100% inaccurate.  There is no such thing as a "universal data base" of
credit cards and PINs, in fact there is an incredible mumbo-jumbo of
numbers, carriers, verification systems and access methods.
    For example, the card numbers issued by the LEC and AT&T are
often (up to to now) the same.  This means that if you punch the numbers
in or pass verbally to the operator they are interchangeable.  HOWEVER,
the mag strips on the back are neither the same nor universally accepted.
    Also the international card number is no longer provided on the
cards issued in California by PacBell.  If you want both you must go to
AT&T.
    This whole area is one of casualties of the breakup.  One of the
biggest irritants to any one who travels or provides the service to others.

hom

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

Date: Tue, 4 Oct 88 23:54:23 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
Subject: In use light

For $24.95, Hello-Direct makes a device called the "Privacy Device" on
Page 8 of their Fall catalog.  It has an annoying "feature" though...

    "Make sure no one is listening in on your calls."

        "You're assured of privacy when the Silent Patrol is on duty on
    your single-line telephone.  Just plug it in between your phone and
    the wall and it will let you know any time someone is listening in on
    an extension or tapping your line.  In the event of either of these
    invasions of your privacy your line will go dead and an LED will give
    you a visual warning.  Just press an over-ride button if you want to
    resume your conversation without clearing the line.  An On/Off switch
    lets you activate/deactivate the device."

Part No. 1039-A
Hello-Direct's number is: 1-800-444-3556 in the USA.

I am not associated with Hello Direct in any way.

-Mike Grant

p.s. There's got to be an easy way to build something similar.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kekatos)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 5 Oct 88 15:17:36 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (55624-Kekatos,T.G.)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
>I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
>open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
>a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay.  It didn't affect the phone operation too much,
>but wouldn't quite pull in.  If I pressed the armature in, it would
>latch.  Close, but no cigar.
>Perhaps I should describe what I'm up to.  I want to share a phone line
>between a fax machine and a phone or modem.  Only the fax will receive
>incoming calls.  I want to put a relay coil in series with each device.
>Its normally closed contacts will be in series with the *other* device.
>Thus, when one is in use, the other is excluded.


My comments about using a single relay coil to detect loop-current,
that would not work because you can not draw enough  current from
the phone-line, were if the
relay is connected in parallel with the phone line.
                      --------

I have several phone extensions in my home, and several other devices
that use the phone lines (modems). I wanted to build a device that
detects off-hook and lights a LED on each phone.  (The modem are smart
enough to check for dial-tone).

The only circuit that worked (and worked quite well) is a circuit
with several transistors and a battery to light the LEDs. I use one of
those self-blinking LEDs  from Radio shack.

I never tried connecting a reply coil in series with a single phone.
                                         ------


Ted G. Kekatos
UUCP: ..!att!ihuxv!tedk                     [phone]
AT&T Bell Laboratories, Indian Hill South, IX-1F-460
Naperville & Wheaton Roads - Naperville, Illinois. 60566 USA

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

From: encore!cloud9![e-mail] (Daniel Senie)
Subject: Re: Residential Hunting
Date: 5 Oct 88 03:45:21 GMT



[Discussion of hunting on residential lines]

New England Telephone does not charge any fee for hunting and will
provide it to residential customers.

The cheapest phone service in my area is about $5. With call waiting
costing at least $3 (I can't get it -- more later) it makes much more sense
to get two lines and the hunt. Of course installation of the second line
does cost something...

This is basically the only option in my town as we have a step-by-step
exchange. The old mechanical dinosaur does not handle touch-tones (it takes
forever for the modem to dial...) and needs to have its contacts cleaned
every few weeks. N.E. Tel. Has informed me that they will put an ESS into
service on Nov. 3, 1990. It seems kind of odd that they know the precise day,
but that's typical of them.

--
Daniel Senie               UUCP: harvard!ulowell!cloud9!dts
Stratus Computer, Inc.     ARPA: anvil!cloud9![e-mail]
55 Fairbanks Blvd.         CSRV: 74176,1347
Marlboro, MA 01752       TEL.: 508 - 460 - 2686

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

From: ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann)
Subject: special numbers for cellular phones
Date: 5 Oct 88 17:22:29 GMT


I have heard some ads on the radio recently indicating there are
abbreviated phone numbers when using a cellular phone. An example
is an ad for a concert or similar entertainment, saying to call
Ticket Mater (the local entertainment clearing house ) giving a
standard seven digit number for wired phones and for cellular phone
use, dial: TXX

Another example of this was discovered in Portland, OR recently when
the radio station KXL (I think), was advertising for motorists to call
the station with road reports using their cellular phones to dial: 231
'this is a free call'  (Maybe someone in Portland can confirm this)

So can someone explain these three digit phone numbers???

Why not just dial the full seven digits?

If the deal is free calling, then why not just program the cellular
controller to use the seven digit number, but reverse bill or
however it is to be charged?

And yes, I thought of using three digits to make it easier on the
driver using the cellular phone. However, if the driver is too busy
driving to dial seven digits, then he/she shouldn't be using the
phone.

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ruth Watson)
Subject: Re: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
Date: 30 Sep 88 20:40:00 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ruth Watson)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>I want to be able to use a long distance service that 1] won't force me
>to change my equal access default carrier at home (thus resulting in a
>$10+ surcharge from Rochester Telephone) 2] won't force me to make a
>minimum number of calls (like spend $10/month.)  3] will provide decent
>service, a good savings over the Calling Card (preferably no surcharge).
>include a telephone number of where to call to apply.

I may be regarded as biased on the subject, but if you would like to compare
calling cards as the one described above AT&T has a card called(I think) the
Non Subscriber Card.  My husband has such a card seperate from our home phone
calling card.  The card comes to you free and has no monthly charge.  The
number to call to inquire about this would be 1-800-CALL-ATT.  I don't know
what your phone bills run, but I think this card is limited to $100 per month
usage fee.  It may be able to be extended if needed to be.  Call the rep.  The
800 number is also free.  I'm not sure how the rates compare so no flames
please.
                        Good luck,
                            Ruth

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

From: [e-mail] (Len Rose)
Subject: Crossbar Blues
Date: 6 Oct 88 06:33:54 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Len Rose)




I recently moved to a somewhat less advanced part of
Maryland. After getting 3 lines installed for this site
we started to experience periods when we could not raise
dialtone for hours at a time. We called C&P repair service
at least 10 times and they checked out the local lines and
at the C.O. with nothing amiss. When the lines die,they
are open or "busy" .. Is there anything I can do to solve the
problem from my end,or suggest to the local repair office?

I have heard that they are getting ESS #5 next year so I
suppose my problems will be resolved then,but this is
really damaging my uucp traffic.

BTW, we are not the only ones experiencing this problem
in the area,so it pretty much eliminates on-site trouble.

Thanks for any positive suggestions..Meanwhile I am biding
my time.


Len Rose - Netsys,Inc.
[e-mail]  or [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 7-Oct-88 21:19:48-EDT,9642;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Fri 7 Oct 88 21:19:45-EDT
Date: 7 Oct 88 20:30-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #154
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                          Friday, October 7, 1988 8:30PM
Volume 8, Issue 154

Today's Topics:

                            FONcard rates
                           RJ 45 Wall Mount
                          off hook indicator
                   Another Cellular Phone Question
                             phone patch
                        TELECOM Digest V8 #150
                            Call Waiting.
                       jack wiring info wanted
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                     ISDN Plans for Los Angeles??
            [We are all caught up with this issue. --JSol]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: FONcard rates
Date: Wed Oct  5 23:02:59 1988

MJSchmelzer asks in Digest v8, #151, what the FONcard rates are.

For dialed calls via 1-800-877-8000, Sprint charges 55c over the
direct dial rate from a telephone whose long distance carrier is
US Sprint.

If you dial 1-800-877-8000 and time out on sending more tones,
or 00 from a phone whose carrier is US Sprint, or 1033300 or
1077700 from any other equal access phone, you will reach a
Sprint operator for calls that require operator assistance (collect,
third-party, or calls on Sprint lines charged to non-Sprint PINs,
or FONcard calls from pulse-only telephones).

Patrick Townson and I discovered that whereas 102880 + timeout was
enough to reach an AT&T operator from a telephone whose carrier is
not AT&T, US Sprint required the third zero.

The contents of this submission are applicable, as far as I know,
only to calls originating within the fifty United States or the
District of Columbia.

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Len Rose)
Subject: RJ 45 Wall Mount
Date: 6 Oct 88 06:20:13 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Len Rose)


Hi..

 I am looking for a source of RJ45 wall mount receptacles.
 We are installing some data terminals in a new building and I
 want to prewire using 8 conductor cable and RJ45 wall connectors.

 Thanks for any info

Len

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

Date:      6 Oct 88 11:44:00 EDT
From:     John (J.) McHarry <[e-mail]>
Subject:  off hook indicator

     Some years ago I saw a nifty way of putting a 'busy light'
on a phone.  Normal phone systems have the tip wire grounded
and the ring hooked to -48v.  (Some systems fail to provide a
ground reference.)  The trick is that both -48 and ground are
applied through about 200 ohms.  When a phone on the loop is
off hook, tip and ring are nearly shorted together, and appear
at about -25v to ground.  An led hooked through a resistor to
the tip side will come on if anyone is off hook.  Of course,
there is a catch or two:  1)  You have to make sure the ground
wire is connected and not just tip and ring.  You may have to
hook it up at the building entrance block.  2)  This will
likely introduce a large ground loop and a lot of hum.  I haven't
tried this, but old ringers are usually rigged with two windings
having a blocking cap between them.  Going from the tip side
winding to ground might stifle the hum.  Alternatively, a good
sized choke in series with the led ought to kill it also.  The
resistor is 25k / (number of mils to light the led).
     In addition to the usual disclaimers, I am not Drano:  your
pipes are on their own.
    John McHarry  [e-mail]

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

From: ektools![e-mail] (John H. Hall)
Subject: Another Cellular Phone Question
Date: 6 Oct 88 17:26:15 GMT
Reply-To: eckert![e-mail] (John H. Hall)


In article <[e-mail]> westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
>> If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
>> cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is...
>
>When you dial a number assigned to a cellular mobile telephone, all
>of the cell-sites in the mobile phone user's home region broadcast
> ...description of how cellular phones work in their "home region" deleted ...

Okay, what's a home region?
    My city?
    My state?
    My LATA?
    Any place in any cell run by the cellular service I subscribe to?

While my home and business are stationary, my car is mobile.

Assume I live in Rochester NY, and drive to Florida on vacation.
If someone in Rochester calls me at my cellular phone:

    1. How does it get routed to the cellular system (home region?)
       through which I happen to be driving?

    2. Does the caller have any way of knowing that he's
       making (and presumably paying for) a long-distance call?

The cellular vendors advertise that their phones can be used any place in
the country (world?) that has cellular service.  That obviously covers
the turf of many different cellular systems.  Who acts as the "long
distance carrier" between cellular systems, and how do they keep the
"directory" telling where my cellular phone is RIGHT NOW?
--
John Hall, Supervisor: Software Tools Group, Product Software Engineering
EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, 901 Elmgrove Rd., Rochester, NY 14650,  716 726-9345
UUCP:   {allegra, rutgers}!rochester!kodak!ektools!john
ARPA:   kodak!ektools![e-mail]

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

Date:     Wed, 5 Oct 88 15:04
From:     <[e-mail]>
Subject:  phone patch


does anyone have a quick (meaning EASY) circuit out there that will do the
following:

person calls in on telephone line #1 if no one answers line one the
call is automatically picked up and connected to line #2 which should
be just a dial tone.
when the caller complets using the dialtone from line #2 and hangs up his
phone the circuit should disconnect both lines and wait for
the next call.

thanks for any help ya can give me
ted demko

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

Date: Thu, 6 Oct 88 03:42:44 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #150

T. Kekatos: This summer, I had two relays connected to my phone line so that
when one phone was lifted in one room (these were separate dwelling units...),
the other would be disconnected, and vice versa.  It worked satisfactorily,
though there was the slightest buzzing noise in the background.  But for the
unfamiliar with less kludgy solutions, could you provide a schematic for
your transistor plan?

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

Date: Thu, 6 Oct 88 10:13 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Call Waiting.

All this talk about call waiting makes me ask my question.  Call waiting
is fine on outgoing calls, I like it.  However, it's worse than useless
on incoming calls because a non-answer makes the caller think I'm not
even home.  Some solutions I'd accept (I don't know how practical they
are): on the third non-answered ring, caller gets a busy signal;
punching *70 during a call cancels call waiting; punching *70 on a call
waiting interrupt cancels it.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 88 23:03:11 EDT
Subject: jack wiring info wanted

I'm interested in the wiring of the 50-pin jack for for 5-line keyset
telephones (2565HKM, if it matters).  So far, I've learned  that
there are 3 pairs allocated to each line, with 1 pair being tip and
ring, and the third pair being A and A1.  I'm especially interested
in pins that are activated by the hold button, especially per-line
hold signals.

        --Steve Bellovin
        [e-mail]
        {att,ucbvax}!ulysses!smb

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

From: pedsga![e-mail]
Date: 7 Oct 88 20:03:30 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: pedsga!loo
From: [e-mail] (Lou Califano)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans,comp.dcom.modems,comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: tcp/ip test suite
Keywords: tcp/ip
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 7 Oct 88 20:03:28 GMT
Organization: Concurrent Computer Corp. Tinton Falls, N.J.
Lines: 18



I'm looking for some type of test suite for a TCP/IP. It might be in
the form of interactive procedures for file transfer, telnet, mail, etc.,
and test programs for the protocol interface library which allows
user written applications.

Responses should be mailed to the following path:



             ...!rutgers!petsd!pedsga!loo

Thanks.

Lou Califano
Manager, Systems Development
Concurrent Computer Corp.

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

Subject: ISDN Plans for Los Angeles??
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 88 16:58:21 PDT
From: [e-mail]


   Would anybody know, or know where to find out, Pacific Bell's plans
for introducing ISDN services into the Los-Angeles region -- Van Nuys,
specifically?  How about GTE's into the Marina area?  I'd love to work
at home.


Thanks much,


A. R. White
USC/Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina Del Rey, California
90292-6695
[phone], x162
[phone]  facsimile

ARPA:  nomdenet @ ISI.edu

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
 8-Oct-88 22:34:31-EDT,8394;000000000000
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Sat 8 Oct 88 22:34:29-EDT
Date: 8 Oct 88 21:45-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #155
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]

TELECOM Digest                        Saturday, October 8, 1988 9:45PM
Volume 8, Issue 155

Today's Topics:

               RE: Cellular: How wide an area is paged
                     Re: Cellular Phone Question
                 Re: Another Cellular Phone Question

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 7 Oct 88 21:32
Subject: RE: Cellular: How wide an area is paged

>>When you dial a number assigned to a cellular mobile telephone, all
>>of the cell-sites in the mobile phone user's home region broadcast
>Okay, what's a home region?
>    My city?
>    My state?
>    My LATA?
>    Any place in any cell run by the cellular service I subscribe to?

This is one of the current problems with Cellular.

Your home region is defined by your cellular carrier.  In most cases it is only
the physical system providing your local service, which usually covers a single
"cellular geographic service area (CGSA)" and sometimes covers several adjacent
CGSAs.  CGSAs were defined by the FCC and make about as much sense as LATA
boundaries (but don't have anything to do with each other).

In some cases, if the system serving your home CGSA crosses LATA boundaries your
home area might be smaller than the system.  This was true with Denver/Colorado
Springs (served by one switching machine) until recently, when U.S. West got
permission to carry the inter-LATA traffic (from someone dialing into the
system on your Denver number reaching you automatically while you were in
Colorado Springs).

In some cases, adjacent independent switching systems, sometimes even belonging
to different companies, have been networked and your home area crosses those
boundaries.  These arrangements, where they involve Baby Bells, require approval
from the Justice Department (waivers from Judge Greene).  MCI has filed protests
in cases where the companies involved are Baby Bells.  This is harder for the
"B" carriers, since most of them are Baby Bells, than for the "A" carriers, but
even some of the "Cellular One"s are owned by Baby Bells.  Cellular One in both
Washington, DC and Boston are owned by Southwestern Bell.  Thus the A carriers
are networked from Connecticutt to Delaware, but not into Boston or Balto-Wash.

In Canada, there are large interconnections on both A and B stretching from
Windsor, Ontario to Quebec City.

When you are outside the area where you have automatic paging, a caller must
dial a "roamer access number."  This number answers with either a dial tone or
other indication.  You must then enter the home number of the mobile telephone
with Touch-Tone.  This is complicated to explain to people and prevents call
forwarding.  Also, your callers get charged for a call even if you don't
answer, because the roamer port answered.  Originally, roamer ports did not
return off-hook unless the phone was reached, but AT&T implemented receive only
transmission until off-hook, which made this no longer work.

Roaming is the major nightmare of cellular.  The rates you may be charged
when roaming are sometimes exhorbitant.  $2-$5 daily fees (charged if you
make one or more calls) are common, as are $0.60 to $0.75 per minute charges.
Roamers are often required to place all of their long-distance calls on calling
cards, further increasing the cost of using the phone.  Your company may or may
not have an automatic roaming agreement with the company you are visiting.  If
not, you can sometimes sign up for "credit card roaming" -- sign up fees of $15
to $25 for each 30 day period are sometimes found.  Sometimes credit card
roaming does provide a significant benefit -- a temporary local number avoiding
the inconvenience of the roamer port.

The cellular system used in the U.S. is compatible with systems in Canada, the
British Virgin Islands, Bermuda, Hong Kong, South Korea, Australia, Israel and
a few other countries.  The U.K. system uses the same hardware but slightly
different frequencies and protocols.  Except for Hong Kong, none of the
countries with compatible systems outside North America and the Caribbean
allow you bring your own phone with you.  Rentals are available in the U.K.

/john

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

From: Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter <idis!cisunx![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Question
Date: 4 Oct 88 16:20:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:
>When you dial a number assigned to a cellular mobile telephone, all
>of the cell-sites in the mobile phone user's home region broadcast
>the incoming call alert.  The mobile unit periodically scans the page
>channels upon which such a message can be broadcast, and locks on

This leads me to ask a question I have always wondered about.  If I
have a cellular phone in Pittsburgh, and go to Philadelphia, can I use
it there?  Can people call me when I am there?


    jeff
--
Jeffrey J. B. Carpenter, University of Pittsburgh, Computer Center
USMAIL: 110 Old Engineering Hall, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260
[e-mail] | AT&T 412 624 9356 | [e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Schnoebelen)
Subject: Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
Date: 8 Oct 88 18:20:25 GMT
Reply-To: u-word![e-mail] (Eric Schnoebelen)


In article <[e-mail]> eckert![e-mail] (John H. Hall) writes:
>
>Okay, what's a home region?
>    My city?
>    My state?
>    My LATA?
>    Any place in any cell run by the cellular service I subscribe to?

    My understanding is that your "home region" is the immediate
contiguous service area of your Cellular service, usually your city, and
perhaps as large as your lata.

>While my home and business are stationary, my car is mobile.
>
>Assume I live in Rochester NY, and drive to Florida on vacation.
>If someone in Rochester calls me at my cellular phone:
>
    They get a intercept that tells them your celluar phone is
outside the calling region or is turned off.  If someone knows what
region your phone is in, they can all an access number in that region,
and at a prompt, enter the full 10 digit phone number of your cellular
phone in its home region.  The local system then sends out a page for
that set, and if it is not found, issues an intercept.

>    1. How does it get routed to the cellular system (home region?)
>       through which I happen to be driving?
>
>    2. Does the caller have any way of knowing that he's
>       making (and presumably paying for) a long-distance call?
>
>The cellular vendors advertise that their phones can be used any place in
>the country (world?) that has cellular service.  That obviously covers
>the turf of many different cellular systems.  Who acts as the "long
>distance carrier" between cellular systems, and how do they keep the
>"directory" telling where my cellular phone is RIGHT NOW?

    Any calles made by your phone in a 'foriegn' region will be
billed back to you in your home region ( probably at a higher rate ).
The phones are all paged by their 10 digit phone number and also pass it
along on all outbound calls.

>--
>John Hall, Supervisor: Software Tools Group, Product Software Engineering
>EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, 901 Elmgrove Rd., Rochester, NY 14650,  716 726-9345
>UUCP:   {allegra, rutgers}!rochester!kodak!ektools!john
>ARPA:   kodak!ektools![e-mail]

Disclaimer: all of the above holds for the Dallas-OKC-Tulsa-Wichita regions.

    Eric Schnoebelen
    John W. Bridges & Associates, Inc.
    Lewisville, Tx.
    u-word![e-mail]

John W. Bridges & Associates, Inc.  is a provider of network design
software and a network design consulting firm specializing in voice and
wide area data networks.

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

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
From jsol  Tue Oct 18 00:08:05 1988
Received:  by bu-cs.bu.edu (5.31/4.7)
    id AA20283; Tue, 18 Oct 88 00:08:05 EDT
Date:  Tue, 18 Oct 88 00:08:05 EDT
From: jsol (Jon Solomon)
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
To: telecom-outbound
Subject: TELECOM list currently out of commission

The mailer on XX blew up and won't deliver any more TELECOM digests.
I am in the process of moving the list to BU-CS.BU.EDU (closer to
the machine I actually work on), but I have to get permission to do that,
and I have to do some mailer hacking to make it work.

Meanwhile, I urge you all to vote on Election Day, and
sit back and drink some coffee for me.

--jsol

From [e-mail]  Tue Oct 18 08:13:50 1988
Received:  by bu-cs.bu.edu (5.31/4.7)
    id AA20518; Tue, 18 Oct 88 08:13:50 EDT
Received: by eneevax.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
    id AA25886; Tue, 18 Oct 88 08:13:16 ]Io
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 88 08:13:16 ]Io
From: Douglas Humphrey <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Re:  TELECOM list currently out of commission
Status: O

My sincere wishes for smooth and easy mailer hacking go out to you.
Good Luck!
Doug

MEMO FOR ARCHIVES- I BEGAN MODERATING TELECOM DIGEST AS OF ISSUE 156.
THERE WAS A TWO WEEK INTERVAL (APPROXIMATE) BETWEEN 155 AND 156 AS PER
THE TWO MISCELLANEOUS NOTES ABOVE. ISSUES BETWEEN 156 AND 162 ARE
UNFORTUNATLY *VERY* MIXED UP. THERE WAS NO ISSUE 158 WHICH WAS COMPLETELY
MISSED. ISSUES 159-160-161 GOT ISSUED SOMEWHAT OUT OF ORDER AND IN
DUPLICATE.

WE USED BU-IT5 TO MAIL THE FIRST FEW ISSUES WHICH FOLLOW, THEN SWITCHED
TO BU-CS. THERE WERE NUMEROUS MAILING PROBLEMS BETWEEN ISSUES 156 AND (AT
LEAST) ISSUE 185 WHICH IS THE POINT WE ARE AT NOW AS OF THIS WRITING
WHICH I HAVE INSERTED TO THE FILE AS OF 11-26-88. THERE MAY STILL BE SOME
DUPLICATES BETWEEN HERE AND THE END OF VOLUME 8iss140-189 WHICH COVERS TO THE
END OF NOVEMBER, 1988.     PATRICK TOWNSON

------------------------------------------------------------------------
From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Thu Oct 27 23:15:44 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA02858; Thu, 27 Oct 88 23:15:44 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA18764; Thu, 27 Oct 88 23:15:18 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810280315.AA18764@buit5>
Date: 11 Oct 88 18:20-EDT
From: The Moderator (JSol) <[e-mail]>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #156
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Status: O

TELECOM Digest                        Tuesday, October 11, 1988 6:20PM
Volume 8, Issue 156

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
 Detecting a remote call-waiting interrupt. (Was: Re: Call Waiting.)
                      Re: sensitive relay wanted
                 Re: European variable length numbers
                     Re: jack wiring info wanted
                 Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
              Looking for Mark DiVecchio (PC-VT Author)

[This digest is being used to test out the new mail system on
BU-CS.BU.EDU. TELECOM and TELECOM-REQUEST are now officially open. The
mail that has been sent to [e-mail] has been saved and
will be sent out as soon as we know that the mail system on
BU-CS.BU.EDU can handle the load. --JSol]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phri!dasys1![e-mail] (Richard Segal)
Date: 8 Oct 88 23:52:58 GMT
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom

Path: dasys1!jailbait
From: [e-mail] (Richard Segal)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: AT&T model 5500 Answering System
Summary: What are the power requirements of this thing?
Keywords: ATT 5500 voltage amperage ac/dc etc.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 8 Oct 88 23:52:56 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Richard Segal)
Followup-To: comp.dcom.telecom
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Big Electric Cat
Lines: 18

Briefly, I recently got a model 5500 phone/answering machine. It didn't come
with a power supply box.
Now, as I am a inquisative sort, I tried plugging 12 VDC into the plug where
it says it should be getting 16 VAC, 12VA. The only immediately obivous
problems in operation was that there wasn't enough power to generate correct
TT tones. Other than that, and the fact that I don't have an endless loop tape
to test the answering machine, it SEEMS (I say it SEEMS) to be working fine.
    The question is, what does this machine actually want?
Yeah, If I can't get a good response here, I will end up going to AT&T, but I'd
rather avoid that - too much hassle.
Anyway, many thanks in advance,
JB
(PS, no, I don't know if the thing really works - we'll get to that later.)
--
Richard Segal                                NYU Student, Rev., Looney at Large
Big Electric Cat Public UNIX                      ARPA:[e-mail]
..!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!jailbait                        BITNET:[e-mail]
"Bob", Eris, Norton I, Mal-2, Jailbait.   Doesn't it have a nice ring to it?

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

From: amdcad!crackle.AMD.COM![e-mail] (Jim Hayes)
Subject: Detecting a remote call-waiting interrupt. (Was: Re: Call Waiting.)
Date: 9 Oct 88 09:09:17 GMT
Reply-To: amdcad!crackle.AMD.COM![e-mail] (Jim Hayes)


[e-mail] writes in article <[e-mail]>:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>All this talk about call waiting makes me ask my question.  Call waiting
>is fine on outgoing calls, I like it.  However, it's worse than useless
>on incoming calls because a non-answer makes the caller think I'm not
>even home.

Where I lived in Los Angeles and San Diego I could always tell when
I was generating a call-waiting beep on the dialed party's line. (For
local calls only.)

The ring that "generated" the distant call waiting beep would be much
longer than the rest.  Typically, the first ring would be long, three
normal rings, then another long one.

I liked that feature because I could at least "apologize" to the called
party for interrupting their conversation and ask them if I could call
back later.

The Dimension 2000 and Merlin 85 phone systems at AMD generate a "beep"
before the first ring indicating that the called party is currently engaged
and has been notified of my presence.   Why don't normal Telco's adopt this?

[The software modification is trivial...]


-Jim Hayes                         Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., Sunnyvale CA.
                                   [e-mail]
/earth: file system full           {ucbvax|sun|decwrl}!amdcad!hayes
                                   These are not opinions of AMD.

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

From: westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 10 Oct 88 01:11:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kekatos) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
> | I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
> | open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
> | a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay...
>
> Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
> draw enough current from the phone line.

Yes, this _can_ be done with a relay.  1A, 1A1, and 1A2 key
telephone systems all operate with relay coils in series with the
telephone loop.  You need a relay with less than 100 ohms, and one
which will operate on less than 10 mA for reliable operation.  To do
it right, it should have two coils, of ~50 ohms each, and you should
put one in series with Tip, and the other in series with Ring, to
preserve line balance.  To debug your existing circuit, place a D.C.
milliampmeter in series with your loop and measure the loop current
with your telephone set offhook.  Try it with your relay in the
circuit.  The loop current should be 15 - 25 mA or so.  The exact
amount, of course, depends upon the kind of telephone set you use,
and the length of the loop (miles to your central office).  Get a
relay that will operate on the current you measured.

--
Dave Levenson
Westmark, Inc.        The Man in the Mooney
Warren, NJ USA
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave

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

From: westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: European variable length numbers
Date: 10 Oct 88 01:29:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John R. Covert) writes:
...
> Europeans think we are weird for insisting on a fixed length numbering plan.

While variable-length numbering plans are convenient for number
assignments, they are very expensive for the PTT or telephone
company.  When you are dialing a variable-length number, your local
central office must send it to the distant office one digit at a
time.  This means that you occupy an inter-office digit-sender for
as long as it takes you to finish dialing.  In the Bell System, the
fixed-length number is registered in the originating central office,
buffered, and then sent as a complete address to the far end.  This
reduces occupancy of the interoffice sender equipment, requiring far
less such equipment per central office.

--
Dave Levenson
Westmark, Inc.        The Man in the Mooney
Warren, NJ USA
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave

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

From: westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: jack wiring info wanted
Date: 10 Oct 88 02:01:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> I'm interested in the wiring of the 50-pin jack for for 5-line keyset
> telephones (2565HKM, if it matters).  So far, I've learned  that
> there are 3 pairs allocated to each line, with 1 pair being tip and
> ring, and the third pair being A and A1.  I'm especially interested
> in pins that are activated by the hold button, especially per-line
> hold signals.
>

The first pair is tip and ring.  The second is A and A1.  The third
is L and LG -- they light the line lamp.  The hold command is sent
by the phone to the KTU using the A and A1 pair.  This pair is
normally open.  It is closed when the handset is offhook and the
line button is selected.  If you hang up (by placing the handset
onhook or by releasing the line button by selecting another line)
the tip and ring circuit opens before the A and A1 circuit.  If you
push the HOLD button, the A and A1 circuit opens before the Tip and
Ring circuit.  The KTU senses this timing and decides what the lamp
state should be, and what to do about the hold relays.

After using 3 pair per line (on the 2565 set) there is a pair for
the ringer (common audible or CA pair) a pair for the buzzer (CA-1),
several pair used for on-hook dialing when the set is associated
with a type 3 or 4A speakerphone, a pair for the lamp under the HOLD
key (seldom used), three pair for the exclusion key (the optional
pull-up plunger that replaces one of the switchhook buttons) and a
couple of pair for "locally engineered circuits".

--
Dave Levenson
Westmark, Inc.        The Man in the Mooney
Warren, NJ USA
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave

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

From: westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
Date: 10 Oct 88 01:52:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, ektools![e-mail] (John H. Hall) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:
> >In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
> >> If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
> >> cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is...
> >
> >When you dial a number assigned to a cellular mobile telephone, all
> >of the cell-sites in the mobile phone user's home region broadcast
> > ...description of how cellular phones work in their "home region" deleted ...
>
> Okay, what's a home region?
>     My city?
>     My state?
>     My LATA?
>     Any place in any cell run by the cellular service I subscribe to?
>
> While my home and business are stationary, my car is mobile.
>
> Assume I live in Rochester NY, and drive to Florida on vacation.
> If someone in Rochester calls me at my cellular phone:
>
>     1. How does it get routed to the cellular system (home region?)
>        through which I happen to be driving?
>
>     2. Does the caller have any way of knowing that he's
>        making (and presumably paying for) a long-distance call?
>
> The cellular vendors advertise that their phones can be used any place in
> the country (world?) that has cellular service.  That obviously covers
> the turf of many different cellular systems.  Who acts as the "long
> distance carrier" between cellular systems, and how do they keep the
> "directory" telling where my cellular phone is RIGHT NOW?


What you are asking about is called "Roam" mode or "Roamer Service"
by the cellular industry.  The "home area" is defined by the
cellular service provider.  It is the area in which you will receive
a call dialed to your cellular number with no other arrangements,
and it is also the area in which you do not pay a "roamer surcharge"
for the services you use.

When your mobile phone is in any area other than your home area, you
are "roaming".  In this mode, you can originate calls without any
special action on your part, if there is a reciprocal billing
arrangement in place between your cellular service provider and the
company serving the area in which you're roaming.  If not, you
probably have to call the local mobile operator and establish a
temporary account -- generally these are billed to a major credit
card.  For others to call you, you must give them the "roamer access
number" for the area in which you're travelling.  They call this
number (a toll call to a number in that area) and then dial your
mobile number (from touchtone only, please) to call you.  You pay
the normal charge for incoming calls, plus a roamer surcharge.  They
pay for the call to the roamer access number. (The roamer access
number is often (AAA) 777 ROAM, where AAA is the area code in which
the roamer is located.)

A few cellular service providers now offer to let the roamer dial a
call-forwarding-like feature access code from a roaming area, and
have calls forwarded there, by the home system, at the roamer's
expense.  This will probably become the standard.

Cellular companies serving ajoining areas sometimes provide
transparent automatic roaming service to each other's subscribers.
Here in Northern NJ, we get service from MetroOne, the non-wireline
carrier serving the New York City area.  Central Jersey is served by
Cellular One.  I drive between these two areas almost every day.
The ROAM icon on my mobile phone blinks on and off as I cross the
border between the two companies, but the service is totally
transparent.  Without any surcharge or special action, I can place
calls in either area, receive calls in either area, and drive
accross the border while talking, and get handed off inter-system!
The inter-system handoff seems to take a few milliseconds longer
than normal intra-system handoffs, but is otherwise unnoticable.
Ideally, this will become the standard between all ajoining service
providers.

--
Dave Levenson
Westmark, Inc.        The Man in the Mooney
Warren, NJ USA
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Limoncelli)
Subject: Looking for Mark DiVecchio (PC-VT Author)
Date: 10 Oct 88 13:32:01 GMT



I am looking for Mark C. DiVecchio, the author of PC-VT.  If you know
his net address please write to me at any of the addresses in my
.sigature.  (@drunivac is preferable).

Tom
--
       Tom Limoncelli -- Drew University, Box 1060, Madison, NJ 07940
  [e-mail] -- [e-mail] -- VoiceMail [phone]
 Drew College of Liberal Arts: male/female ratio: 2:3  student/pc ratio: 1:1
       "The opinions expressed are mine... just mine."

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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Fri Oct 28 22:00:40 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA16690; Fri, 28 Oct 88 22:00:40 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA19841; Fri, 28 Oct 88 22:00:14 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810290200.AA19841@buit5>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 88 21:49:49 EDT
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #157
To: [e-mail]
Status: O


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 28 Oct 88 21:49:49 EDT    Volume 8 : Issue 157

Today's Topics:

                           Re: In use light
                           Re: In use light
              Re: References on Telephone Systems Wanted
                        I need a second line...
                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
[We are attempting to refine and debug mailer problems at BU-CS.
Please bear patiently with us, and notify us of duplicates and other
problems. Thank you for your patience during our recent hiatus due to
problems with XX.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Oct 88 08:20:17 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Tim Pozar)
Subject: Re: In use light
To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Michael Grant) wrote:
> For $24.95, Hello-Direct makes a device called the "Privacy Device" on
> Page 8 of their Fall catalog.  It has an annoying "feature" though...
>
>     "Make sure no one is listening in on your calls."
>
>         "You're assured of privacy when the Silent Patrol is on duty on
>     your single-line telephone.  Just plug it in between your phone and
>     the wall and it will let you know any time someone is listening in on
>     an extension or tapping your line. [and so on...]

    This device will not work for a proper phone tap.  If some
    one bridges across your lines with a high impeadence phone
    tap, these devices will not notice the change in current or
    impeadence.
         Tim


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

To: [e-mail]
From: Steve Shellans <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: In use light
Date: 10 Oct 88 20:33:04 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>For $24.95, Hello-Direct makes a device called the "Privacy Device" on
>Page 8 of their Fall catalog.  It has an annoying "feature" though...
>
>    "Make sure no one is listening in on your calls."
>
>        "You're assured of privacy when the Silent Patrol is on duty on
>    your single-line telephone.  Just plug it in between your phone and
>    the wall and it will let you know any time someone is listening in on

I can readily understand how one of these devices would work if someone
clips on a low-impedence handset (or phone) on your line.  You can usually
hear a drop in volume when someone picks up an extension phone, and
this condition should be pretty easy to detect electronically.  But suppose
someone has a very high-impedence input to an amplifier, puts this
across your line, and then just amplifies the signal as necessary.

Can these privacy devices detect this situation, and if so, how?

Steve Shellans
Tektronix, Beaverton OR
[e-mail]


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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: References on Telephone Systems Wanted
Date: 11 Oct 88 01:33:51 GMT



One good reference was published by AT&T and called "Notes on the Network."  I
don't think this book is available (if it is, please let me know, I'd like
one).  Barring that, the following is a little out of date, but pretty
comprehensive:  "Engineering and Operations in the Bell System" also published
bye Western Electric.

-Ron

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

To:
From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
Subject: I need a second line...
Date: 11 Oct 88 01:40:35 GMT



I am trying to get my modem @ home to talk to the outside world.  I am
currently time-multiplexing it, so that the modem can use the line at
night.  I would like to have a separate line for the modem.  I called
Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order request.
It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
There are two reasons why this is unacceptable.  First, they want $45 for
the first fifteen minutes, and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after
that (make a rough guess how long it takes :-)  Second, I don't see that
I should foot the bill for this apartment to have two lines.  As an option,
I know I can move, but would like a better reason than that.

My question is, does anyone know of a way of solving this?  It seems to
me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
PacBell said no.  Any comments?  I'm sure this is a common problem, but I've
not seen anything on it recently.
                        - Der
--
Reply:    [e-mail]        (Der Tynan @ Tynan Computers)
    {mips,pyramid}!sultra!dtynan
    Cast a cold eye on life, on death.  Horseman, pass by...    [WBY]

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

From: kitty![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: kitty![e-mail]
Date: 9 Oct 88 12:12:30 EDT (Sun)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (J.)
writes:

>      Some years ago I saw a nifty way of putting a 'busy light'
> on a phone.  Normal phone systems have the tip wire grounded
> and the ring hooked to -48v.  (Some systems fail to provide a
> ground reference.)

    ALL telephone systems are designed to provide a "ground reference",
and for certain, ALL central offices would be installed in this manner.
The only exception to the above is a PABX which was incorrectly installed
(it certainly wasn't designed that way!) without a ground connection.

> The trick is that both -48 and ground are
> applied through about 200 ohms.  When a phone on the loop is
> off hook, tip and ring are nearly shorted together, and appear
> at about -25v to ground.  An led hooked through a resistor to
> the tip side will come on if anyone is off hook.  Of course,
> there is a catch or two:  1)  You have to make sure the ground
> wire is connected and not just tip and ring.  You may have to
> hook it up at the building entrance block.  2)  This will
> likely introduce a large ground loop and a lot of hum.

    A loud hum, eh?  What we have here is, ahem, a classic example
of what is properly called "longitudinal imbalance".  You won't get
FCC Part 68 certification with that design! :-)

> I haven't
> tried this, but old ringers are usually rigged with two windings
> having a blocking cap between them.  Going from the tip side
> winding to ground might stifle the hum.  Alternatively, a good
> sized choke in series with the led ought to kill it also.  The
> resistor is 25k / (number of mils to light the led).

    I would suggest not trying ANY variation of the above scheme.
There is NO WAY to design an acceptable circuit based upon the above
technique.  There is never any justification to sense line status
(i.e., on-hook, off-hook) by means of any external ground reference,
regardless of how high a bridging impedance is placed across tip and
ring.  The only exception to this statement involves ground-start
PABX trunks or coin telephone lines - which is not exactly what we are
talking about.
    There are numerous ways to sense line status by means of
ISOLATED sensing of series loop current, or by high-impedance (> 100,000
ohms) briding across tip and ring to sense loop voltage.  No ground
reference is needed in either of these techniques.

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

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

From: kitty![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: kitty![e-mail]
Date: 9 Oct 88 11:49:02 EDT (Sun)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kekatos) writes:
> | I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
> | open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
> | a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay.  It didn't affect the phone operation too much,
> | but wouldn't quite pull in.  If I pressed the armature in, it would
> | latch.  Close, but no cigar.
> | So, what type of relay should I be looking for (impedance/current).  Is
> | such a thing commonly available? Will this scheme work? Does ringing
> | current cause any problems?
>
> Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
> draw enough current from the phone line.

    This is incorrect.  Since the beginning of time :-), relays have
been available which operate on series telephone loop current.  Typical
off-hook loop current ranges from a low of 0.020 A (long CO loop) to
0.1 A (sitting next to a PABX).
    In the "traditional" key telephone system world, the 6-type
KTU (Key Telephone Unit) has been around for at least 50 years.  This
device consists of a single WECO B-type relay wired to screw terminals
on a small mounting bracket.  I don't have the exact relay specs handy,
but the relay picks up at somewhat less than 0.010 A and has an internal
resistance of around 20 ohms.  The relay will withstand at least 0.2 A
of overcurrent with no damage.
    There are various types of non-polar relays which exhibit this
degree of sensitivity.  In the past 25 years, reed relays have been
particularly popular for loop current detection, since a reed relay is
sealed and requires no adjustment.
    With respect to the article by the original poster, a relay with
a series resistance of 200 ohms introduces too much series resistance
for a "good design".  A series resistance of less than 75 ohms should
be used.  A common circuit design practice is to place a non-polarized
capacitor (0.5 to 2.0 uF) across the relay winding to minimize voice
frequency attenuation.
    While the 200 ohm relay used by the original poster has an
undesirable high resistance, it SHOULD have still worked in a normal
telephone loop.  If it did not work as described, that it was either
maladjusted, damaged or did not in fact have a sensitivity of 4.5 mA.
    Bear in mind that I am not advocating the use of relays in
place of solid-state device (like the opto-isolator).  I am merely
pointing out that relays will in fact work, and for some applications,
a scrounged up 6C KTU is still the simplest solution.

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


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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sat Oct 29 22:51:57 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA20088; Sat, 29 Oct 88 22:51:57 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA20987; Sat, 29 Oct 88 22:51:31 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810300251.AA20987@buit5>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 88 22:36:56 EDT
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #159
To: [e-mail]
Status: O


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 29 Oct 88 22:36:56 EDT    Volume 8 : Issue 159

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                           Re: In use light
                Re: special numbers for cellular phones
                         Re: RJ 45 Wall Mount
[YOU DID remember to set your clocks back one hour Saturday night, I
assume.... We are now sending out literally dozens of messages which
had gathered here during the forced hiatus. At least one Digest per day
and perhaps two will be issued until the backlog has been reduced. You
should note our new address is [e-mail]. The old address
of XX.LCS is *not* to be used, regardless of it appearing in some of the
messages appearing herein.  Thanks, P. Townson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: kitty![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: kitty![e-mail]
Date: 9 Oct 88 13:19:24 EDT (Sun)


In article <[e-mail]> ssc-vax!clark (Roger Clark Swann) writes:

> I just got through making a phone call from my office here in
> Seattle to our plant in Huntsville, AL. The hardware at each end
> should be a #5ESS (I am told). The routing of the call should
> normally be over private, leased circuits and should NOT be going
> onto the public network. It turned out that the phone I was trying
> to reach in Huntsville was busy for several tries. Each time, an
> audio circuit was opened and the busy signal was generated at the
> far end. Now with that background, here is the my question:
> Why wasn't the busy signal generated by the PBX equipment at my end?

    It sounds like you have some variant of Centrex service,
with some type of tie line network.  Whether the tie lines are
"conventional", furnished by CCSA (Common Control Switching Arrangement),
or part of an ETN (Electronic Tandem Network), the switching behavior
using today's technology is all the same: the call is still physically
completed to the far end switch.  The far end switch provides the
supervisory tone indications of busy, ringing or recorded intercept,
and connects the call if possible.  Typical busy signal "holding time"
is so short (a few seconds), that there is no significant advantage
in immediately dumping a tie line call and furnishing busy tone from
a trunk within the near end switch.  This situation may change in
the future as switching systems become more sophisticated and exchange
high-speed digital information prior to setting up a talk circuit -
would would occur ONLY if voice connection were in fact needed.

> I thought that the system did some talking over a data link before
> opening the audio path anyway.

    If you are referring to CCIS, then the information pertains
only to the dialed digits and originate/answer supervision.  As far
as existing CO and PABX equipment is concerned, a no-answer (i.e.,
ringing at the far end) and a busy condition is the same.  The
"audio path" is opened with virtually no delay as you complete dialing
of the last digit of the access code(s)+telephone number.  The far
end switch is responsible for returning all supervisory tones,
except when no tie trunks are available from your site or an
intermediate switching center.

> If so, the 'busy' should be signaled
> over the data link and the local equipment would take care of it

    This may become commonplace in the future, but I would be
extremely surprised if your organization had equipment which operated
in this manner.  I know that work has been done by AT&T, Northern Telcom,
and Rolm with respect to more sophisticaled digital signaling protocols
over a true digital data link, but the only implementations that I
have seen pertain to CAS (Centralized Attendant Service).

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


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

From: kitty![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: kitty![e-mail]
Date: 9 Oct 88 09:44:52 EDT (Sun)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman) writes:

> >I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
> >open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
> >a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay.  It didn't affect the phone operation too much,
> >but wouldn't quite pull in.  If I pressed the armature in, it would
> >latch.  Close, but no cigar.
>
> You want to use a voltage comparator IC to measure the voltage between the
> wires (through a full wave bridge rectifier, so you don't have to care which
> way you hook it up).  Open circuit (on-hook) voltage is about 48, off-hook
> voltage is about 1-2 volts.  I am not sure what "hold" voltage is, but it is
> higher than 2 volts.  Simpler, for a single phone, is to see if the phone has
> a spare set of contacts on the hook switch (many do), and use them.

    A few words of advice on the design and construction of such a
circuit:

1.    In general, it is good practice to isolate any voltage comparator
    circuit by using a 100,000 ohm resistor in series with the tip
    lead and the ring lead (i.e., two resistors, 200 K effective
    impedance across telephone line).  This means that the voltage
    comparator circuit needs to have a high input impedance to
    function with such a high input series resistance.  This is
    really not a problem for a well-designed circuit.  The input
    circuit to the comparator or op amp (i.e, following the two
    100 K resistors) MUST be protected against voltage transients
    caused by ringing voltage, dialing pulses, etc.  Such protection
    can readily be accomplished with a pair of back-to-back zener
    diodes.  In addition, a parallel capacitor should also absorb
    some transients and prevent spurious signals.  While the
    capacitor will result in a time constant when used in conjunction
    with the 100 K series resistors, this is desirable - a time
    constant between 300 and 600 ms should be fine since the
    output of the voltage comparator does NOT want to follow rotary
    dial pulsing in a status indicator application.

2.    The use of the 100 K series resistors protects both your equipment
    and the telephone network.  Under these circumstances, a short
    between the comparator or op amp input and Vcc or ground will
    cause neither harm nor appreciable degradation of voice signal.

3.    The statement above that "off-hook voltage is about 1-2 volts"
    is not correct.  Off-hook DC voltage typically ranges between
    6 and 25 volts, depending upon the resistance of your CO loop
    and the internal resistance of your telephone set.  From a
    realistic standpoint, a threshhold of 35 to 40 volts (some
    hysterisis is desirable to prevent transients from causing
    spurious signals) is reasonable for the design of a voltage
    comparator circuit.

4.    A well-designed status indicator circuit is polarity insensitive.
    You can do this with a full-wave bridge rectifier prior to the
    voltage comparator, or with multiple comparators (may be more
    convenient when using quad comparators or op amps).

5.    In general, DC holding resistors range between 200 and 400 ohms
    so that "hold" voltages approximate those of off-hook voltages.
    A realistic range is 5 to 25 volts.

6.    Higher off-hook voltages will usually be present if you are
    using the above status circuit on a PABX extension.  In general,
    -48 volt battery and ground is still fed through a total of
    400 ohms (or electronically current-limited to an equivalent
    value), but there is very little loop resistance.  So, a
    500-type telephone set as a PABX extension will generally
    show an off-hook voltage between 20 and 25 volts.

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


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

From: kitty![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: kitty![e-mail]
Date: 9 Oct 88 12:45:04 EDT (Sun)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:

> A long while ago someone posted a question about how to build a simple
> circuit which would light a LED (or a simple lamp) when an extension
> was lifted elsewhere in the house.  The requirements are:
>
>   - The LED lights when another extension is lifted, showing that it
>     is in use.
>   - The LED must be powered off the phone line.
>   - No extra wires must be run to the telephone.
>   - The circuit should be reasonable small so that it can fit inside a
>     desktop style phone.
>
> No one was able to come up with a simple schematic to do this that
> worked.  The upshot was that one could buy such a device for about $30
> off the shelf.  Having let some time pass, anyone want to give a stab
> at this?

    Bear in mind, that we appear to be discussing a means which
bridges across tip and ring, and which operates by sensing loop voltage,
and NOT loop current in series with an off-hook telephone set.
    There is NO WAY to properly design a circuit as you describe
which will not run the risk of interfering with the proper operation
of the telephone line.
    Proper telephone circuit design practice dictates that a bridging
impedance across a telephone loop must never be less than 100,000 ohms.
This means that the MOST current that one can draw is 50/100000 = 0.0005 A.
One can't light an LED on 1/2 mA!  The situation is really worse than the
above, since we want to light the LED in an off-hook condition, where the
loop voltage at the telephone set is between 6 and 25 volts.  Even taking
the "best" value of 25 volts, 25/100000 = 0.00025 A, which means that
only 1/4 mA could be available off-hook to light an LED!
    Under many conditions, one can fudge the 100,000 ohms bridging
impedance to 50,000 ohms without loop interference.  However, for the
above purposes, there is still an insufficient amount of current which
can power the LED (1/2 mA off-hook at best).  Trying to bridge a lower
resistance across the loop to create more energy to light the LED is
an invitation to trouble in the form of: (1) interferring with rotary
dial pulsing by causing pulse distortion; (2) false tripping of incoming
ringing signals; and (3) generation of trouble reports by automated
central office equipment (both ALITS and ESS test procedures).
    I'm afraid that we have to hang up on this idea.  Voltage sensing
across tip and ring is okay - but the indicator power is going to have
to come from a source other than the telephone line.

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

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (A. Mossberg)
Subject: Re: In use light
Date: 11 Oct 88 14:25:30 GMT



Mike said:
>I might even be willing to let $30 for such a device (maybe).  Where is
>one available?

There's a device in the most recent DAK catalogue (I don't have it
handy, but you can call 800 information for their number) which looks
like a standard rj-11 y-connector, but with 2 leds on top.  One jack is
a priority jack, lifting anything on that line will kill anything on the
other, and the other is blocked if the priority circuit is in use.
I believe it was under $15 for this unit.  They're primarily selling it
for use with answering machines (pick up the phone, machine is
disconnected from line) but mention these other uses..

(I's just a customer, no kickbacks here!)

aem

--
a.e.mossberg    -    [e-mail]    -    [e-mail] (3.91)
Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.
                            - Lewis Carroll

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

To: utzoo!utai!watmath!comp-dcom-telecom
Date:     Tue, 11 Oct 88 05:24:35 EDT
From: Evan Leibovitch <telly!evan>


To: utzoo!utai!watmath!comp-dcom-telecom
Path: telly!evan
From: [e-mail] (Evan Leibovitch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: special numbers for cellular phones
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 Oct 88 13:24:32 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: System telly, Brampton, Ontario
Lines: 18


In article <[e-mail]>, ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann) writes:
> Another example of this was discovered in Portland, OR recently when
> the radio station KXL (I think), was advertising for motorists to call
> the station with road reports using their cellular phones to dial: 231
> 'this is a free call'  (Maybe someone in Portland can confirm this)
>
Don't know about Portland, but Toronto radio station CFTR certainly does
have a 'free' number for exactly this purpose. (They must take their
traffic reports rather seriously - they also have two Cessnas airborne
each rush hour.) Callers press "*680" (the station's frequency).

I also believe that cellular calls to 911 and the auto club are free.

> Roger Swann        uucp: uw-beaver!ssc-vac!clark
--
 Evan Leibovitch, SA of System Telly, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
[e-mail] (PENDING: [e-mail]) / {uunet!attcan,utzoo}!telly!evan
                           Don't worry - Be happy.



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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: RJ 45 Wall Mount
Date: 10 Oct 88 16:11:49 GMT



[e-mail] (Len Rose) writes:
> I am looking for a source of RJ45 wall mount receptacles.  We are installing
> some data terminals in a new building and I want to prewire using 8
> conductor cable and RJ45 wall connectors.

    Mod-Tap is a big player in this field, making every imaginable sort
of modular wiring gizmo for data lines, including RS-232 to RJ-11/RJ-45
adapters, punchdown blocks, and cabling.  Our local distributor is Glasgal,
in Northvale, NJ.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sun Oct 30 00:15:46 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA25903; Sun, 30 Oct 88 00:15:46 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA21158; Sun, 30 Oct 88 00:15:19 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810300415.AA21158@buit5>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 88 23:10:12 EDT
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #161
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 29 Oct 88 23:10:12 EDT    Volume 8 : Issue 161

Today's Topics:

                  special numbers for cellular phones
                                switch
                         FAX & Voice on 1 Line
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                     Answering maching vs. wiring
                  Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
[This is the second issue of the Digest in as many hours. We will con-
tinue to release these with one or two more on Sunday evening until
the backlog of messages has been cleared. We are aware that some of
you are receiving duplicate copies; this is a bug yet to be rooted out
of the program. JSol is an excellent teacher, considering that UNIX is
not -- uh -- one of my strong points!  Enjoy this issue!  PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 88 01:19:06 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: ssc-vax![e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: special numbers for cellular phones


According to Cellular One Baltimore/Washington, cellular telcos
accross the contry are trying to come up with dialing conventions.
(ha!  That'll be the day!)  One convention is that a number that
begins with a *1 is supposed to be a free call to the subscriber.
For instance, *1FYI (*1394) is a free call which gets you information
about what's happeing with the local cellular system.  *1198 is a free
call to some local radio station that you can report accidents, (and
sometimes win prizes!)

There are other numbers that begin with * like *611 and *811 that are
also free that get you in touch with Cellular One.

All these numbers seem to have a 7 digit translation that does show up
on my bill as "no-charge".  One can dial them from the outside as
well.

-Mike

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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 88 01:07:47 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: mks![e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: switch


The Sharper Image sells a thing-a-ma-gig for about $10 which looks
exactly like a telephone "Y" adaptor.  It has 2 sockets, one marked
"phone", the other makred "ans. mach."  When another extension is
lifted anywhere in the house, the answering machine is cut off.  The
ad also states that if you put one of these suckers on each phone in
your home except your modem or fax machine, the phone is dead when the
modem or fax machine is off hook.

It looked like there were 2 LEDs on this device, but there was no
explanation what they were for.

This sounds like what you are looking for.

-Mike

p.s. I have no connection with The Sharper Image.


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

From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: FAX & Voice on 1 Line
Date: Mon Oct 10 10:44:04 1988


Someone was asking for a way of automatically sharing FAX and Voice
on 1 line or something similar. I just received a catalog from a
company called HELLO DIRECT that sells such a device. From the
description, it is available in 2 flavors. One requires you to
key a 3 digit code to get the fax or modem, it defaults to voice.
The other automatically listens for the calling Faxes tone, and then
switches to the FAX machine. Anyway, their number is 1-800-444-3556.
(I have no conection with them and cannot verify the device works as
described.)

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

From: Gerry Wheeler <mks!wheels>
Date: 11 Oct 88 19:44:20 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: mks!wheels
From: [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Summary: relay found (maybe)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 Oct 88 19:44:19 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems, Waterloo, Ont.
Lines: 37

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kekatos) writes:
> Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
> draw enough current from the phone line.
>
> Ted G. Kekatos
> AT&T Bell Laboratories, Indian Hill South, IX-1F-460

I have to disagree with this.  I've seen several items which draw enough
line power to run a relay.  One was a Radio Shack box which sensed line
current to close a relay which could be wired to the A-A1 control leads
of a key system.  It allowed an answering machine to be used and to give
an indication on all the sets. (In fact, if Radio Shack still sold this
one, I would get it and use the relay. Sigh.)

I received a mail msg the other day on this, as follows:

> From: [e-mail] (Kirk Bellar)
> Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
> Date: 29 Sep 88 21:44:28 GMT
>
> Teltone sells a relay for this purpose, called the M-949.  It closes a 1
> form A (SPST) contact if loop current is 20 mA or better.
> ---
>   Kirk Bellar    KE7TN         Teltone Corp.      (Tones `R' Us)
>   uw-beaver!tikal!kirk        Kirkland, Wa. USA  [phone]

I called my closest Teltone rep, and they are going to send me one as
soon as they can get it from the office in Kirkland. (They kindly
offered to waive the usual $100 minimum order.) So, I'll let you know
what happens.

Thanks for all the replies.
--
     Gerry Wheeler                           Phone: [phone]
Mortice Kern Systems Inc.               UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!wheels
   35 King St. North                             BIX: join mks
Waterloo, Ontario  N2J 2W9                  CompuServe: 73260,1043

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Wendy Thrash)
Subject: Answering maching vs. wiring
Date: 12 Oct 88 00:29:50 GMT



I'm the formerly happy owner of a Panasonic answering machine similar to one
described in a recent article here.  A week ago I moved to San Francisco.
My phone line is the third one in the apartment, and the wires were apparently
run by a friend of my roommates rather than by Pac Bell.  My phone works OK
in the new apartment, but my answering machine will not work; it answers the
phone, jiggles its tapes a couple of times, and hangs up.

I think the machine believes that another extension has been taken off hook,
and courteously relinquishes the line.  This would be a feature if, in fact,
another extension had been taken off hook, but there is no other extension
on the line.

My answering machine works fine on my roommates' lines.  Their answering
machines work on my line.

Short of trading machines or lines with one of my roommates, what can I do?
Is my off-hook guess plausible?  If so, how does the machine decide that
another extension is off-hook; is there a possible wiring error that could
confuse it?  Is this a problem I'm likely to be able to fix (with some guidance
from someone on this list)?  Is it a problem the phone company is likely to
be able to fix?  (or willing, since they aren't doing interior wiring)?

Thanks for any information/advice.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 12 Oct 88 03:32:48 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (55624-Kekatos,T.G.) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
>| I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
>| open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
>
>Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
>draw enough current from the phone line.  You must use a
>circuit that has a few transistors to SENSE the activity on the
>phone line, and another transistor and 9volt battery to drive a
>relay, if you still want relay contacts.  This is really the RIGHT
>way to do it.  There ARE products on the market that do this
>kind of thing. You will have to shop around.
>

Well, while I agree with you in principal, I must comment that AT&T then has
been doing it incorrectly for *many* years.   They have been using relays to
sense loop current in 1A2 key systems for as long as I can remember.  It is
also not too uncommon to see C.O. equipment which relies on a relay of sorts.

One point that noone has mentioned yet is that of longitudinal imbalance.  You
should always keep the line balanced.  This means you should always do the same
thing to *both* sides of the line.  This is why the teltone relay is a four
wire device.

regards,
brian



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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
Date: 12 Oct 88 04:10:07 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> eckert![e-mail] (John H. Hall) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>In article <[e-mail]> westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
>>> If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
>>> cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is...
>>
>>When you dial a number assigned to a cellular mobile telephone, all
>>of the cell-sites in the mobile phone user's home region broadcast
>> ...description of how cellular phones work in their "home region" deleted ...
>
>Okay, what's a home region?
>    My city?
>    My state?
>    My LATA?
>    Any place in any cell run by the cellular service I subscribe to?

     ^^^^^^^ BINGO !

>
>While my home and business are stationary, my car is mobile.
>
>Assume I live in Rochester NY, and drive to Florida on vacation.
>If someone in Rochester calls me at my cellular phone:
>
>    1. How does it get routed to the cellular system (home region?)
>       through which I happen to be driving?
>
>    2. Does the caller have any way of knowing that he's
>       making (and presumably paying for) a long-distance call?
>


It's actually much simpler than you would imagine.  To call a cellular phone
in system that is not it's "home" system, you must dial the "roamer" port.
A phone is said to be "roaming" when it has latched on to a system that is not
the same as the one programmed into the phone.  This is what causes the ROAM
light on the phone to be activated.

To place a call to a roaming phone, you dial the roam port for the system
in which the phone is currently active.  You will usually then get a second
dial-tone.  At the tone, you dial the full 10 digit number of the phone when
it is in it's home system.  The system then pages the phone and the rest
works as normal.

It makes more sense when you realize that the phone is programmed with it;s
home system ID and it's home NPA and phone number.  Thus, let's assume I live
in baltimore maryland and my cell phone number is 301 555-1234.  If I were
in phila and I was on the Cell One system there it's roam port is 215 350-ROAM.
To place a call to me while I was in phila you would do the following:

    1.    dial 1-215-350-7626.
    2.    wait for tone
    3.    dial 301-555-1234
    4.    things work as normal from here.

You can see from this example that the long distance charges are paid by the
caller.  He of course knows it's a toll call when he dials it.  Incidentally,
the big problem with roaming is that you must know what city I'm in (usually
not too big a problem, unless traveling) and you must know which system I am
using (since most market areas are served by two systems).

There is, of course, a LARGE security problem since the system in which you
are roaming has no way of validating your phone's ESN.  This is left as
an excersize for the ambitious student (ie, don't expect me to spill the
beens to the world).

cheers,
brian




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

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


From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sun Oct 30 01:09:49 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA29344; Sun, 30 Oct 88 01:09:49 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA21215; Sun, 30 Oct 88 01:09:24 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810300509.AA21215@buit5>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88  0:43:56 EDT
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #161
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Oct 88  0:43:56 EDT    Volume 8 : Issue 160

Today's Topics:

                      Re: jack wiring info wanted
                         Re: FRG phone numbers
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                        Looking for fax modems
                          302/215 ; touch-tone
                         Re: MCI "Around town"
                      Anyone from Middletown CT?
[This is our third issue this weekend. Issues 160-161 were issued out of
sequence; you should have already received 161. Just a reminder again
about those clocks: We are now on Standard Time and clocks should be set
back one hour. If you send submissions to us, please bear in mind we are
still backlogged with enough material for five or six more Digests. Be
patient in waiting for your article to appear. Our new address which
*must* be used henceforth is [e-mail]. Enjoy this issue!
PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: jack wiring info wanted
Date: 12 Oct 88 04:18:44 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>I'm interested in the wiring of the 50-pin jack for for 5-line keyset
>telephones (2565HKM, if it matters).  So far, I've learned  that
>there are 3 pairs allocated to each line, with 1 pair being tip and
>ring, and the third pair being A and A1.  I'm especially interested
>in pins that are activated by the hold button, especially per-line
>hold signals.
>
>        --Steve Bellovin
>        [e-mail]
>        {att,ucbvax}!ulysses!smb


Actually, in a 1A2 key system (that's what those five button phones are used
for) the hold button works a little differently.

When a phone is off hook, the KSU module detects loop current and the A1 lead
activated by the button.  So long as A1 is present with the loop current the
line is considered to be active.  However, if there is loop current but no
A1 the line is placed on hold until A1 is present again or the loop current is
dropped by the CO (usually indicating the the distant caller hung up).

Thus, the hold button actually interrupts the A1 lead just prior to releasing
the line key on the phone.  This presents the condition described above and
thus places the call on hold.  This is also why answering machines and modems
without A1 leads will leave a 1A2 system line on hold.  Terminating a call
normally requires that loop current be dropped along with A1.

Cheers,
brian



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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 88 14:07:53 PST
From: motsj1![e-mail]


To: hplabs!comp-dcom-telecom
Path: motsj1!rnv
From: [e-mail] (Ron Voss)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: FRG phone numbers
Summary: what i know
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 10 Oct 88 17:24:11 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Motorola Microcomputer Division, San Jose Ca.
Lines: 36


In article <[e-mail]>, c3pe![e-mail]
(David Lesher) writes:
> While in Frankfurt last week I noted that phone numbers varied in
> length from 4 to 10 digits, maybe more. The longer ones seemed
> to be DID into PBXs.
> How does the CO know when it has all the digits?  Does it time
> out, or do prefixes carry implicit lengths?

Prefixes carry implicit lengths, mostly, although numbers can be
"data sensitive".  However, there are no prefixes as we know them,
althought they technically exist.   The "Post" doesn't advertise
prefixes, and doesn't list or give out numbers in that way.
For example, a phone number may be written 12 34 56 or 123 456
(Germany generally uses " " instead of "-" as a delimiter),
whatever seems to be easier to remember, or however a particular
person has always done it.  Technically, all numbers beginning
with the "hidden" prefix (in my example, you can't tell what it is:
1? 12? 123?) will be six digits long.

I've seen phone numbers within an area code of four to eight digits.  Area
codes are two to four digits long.  Generally, the shorter your phone
number, the smaller your town, and, the shorter your area code, the
larger your town.  They don't use the British trick of having the
target area code dependent on the caller's location.

Large companies are often given a "prefix" of usually four digits.
Then they do what they want, like 1234 0 for the switchboard
and 1234 5678 for extensions, where internally the extension is
5678, just like here.

The net will, as always, I hope, correct any factual errors.

--
Ron Voss, Motorola Microcomputer Div
hplabs!motsj1!rnv      CIS 73647,752
408-991-7390        Opinions: My own


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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 88 18:16:28 EDT
From: fciva![e-mail]
To: uunet![e-mail]


Date: 12 Oct 88 22:18:44 GMT
To: uunet!comp-dcom-telecom
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
Responding-System: fciva.FRANKLIN.COM

Path: fciva!zab
From: [e-mail] (Zachary A. Bumpus)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom,comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Looking for fax modems
Keywords: fax Fax facsimile
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Oct 88 22:18:42 GMT
Organization: Franklin Capital Investments, McLean, Va.
Lines: 15

I am looking for a fax modem and software to allow me to
send a single document to a arge list of recipients.  Unix
or MS-Dos based would be fine.  The best I've seen so far is
Lists of length 10.  Is there anything better?

    Thanks in advance
    Zack

Zachary A. Bumpus        Franklin Mortgage Capital Corp.
uunet!fciva!zab            7900 Westpark Drive, Suite A-130
[phone]            McLean, VA 22102





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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 88 12:31:22 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Chris Rohrer)
To: uunet!rutgers.edu!westmark![e-mail]
Cc: uunet!XX.LCS.MIT.EDU![e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> I'm interested in the wiring of the 50-pin jack for for 5-line keyset
> telephones (2565HKM, if it matters).  So far, I've learned  that
> there are 3 pairs allocated to each line, with 1 pair being tip and
> ring, and the third pair being A and A1.  I'm especially interested
> in pins that are activated by the hold button, especially per-line
> hold signals.
>



Here is what I have on 2565 (5 line plus hold with touchtone dial) wiring



Bl/W  1   1R  line 1 Ring             W/Bl    26  1T line 1 Tip
O/W   2   IB  A1 lead (ground supply  W/O     27  1H line 1 A lead
              for all control lines)
G/W   3   L1  line 1 lamp             W/G     28  LG line 1 lamp ground
Br/W  4   2R  line 2 Ring             W/Br    29  2T line 2 Tip
S/W   5       insulated and stored    W/S     30  2H line 2 A lead

Bl/R  6   L2  line 2 lamp             R/Bl    31  LG line 2 lamp ground
O/R   7   3R  line 3 Ring             R/O     32  3T line 3 Tip
G/R   8       insulated and stored    R/G     33  3H line 3 A lead
Br/R  9   L3  line 3 lamp             R/Br    34  LG line 3 lamp ground
S/R   10  4R  line 4 Ring             R/S     35  4T line 4 Tip

Bl/Bk 11      insulated and stored    Bk/Bl   36  4H line 4 A lead
O/Bk  12  L4  line 4 lamp             Bk/O    37  LG line 4 lamp ground
Gn/Bk 13  5R  line 5 Ring             Bk/Gn   38  5T line 5 Tip
Bn/Bk 14      insulated and stored    Bk/Bn   39  5H line 5 A lead
S/Bk  15  L5  line 5 lamp             Bk/S    40  LG line 5 lamp ground

Bl/Y  16   2                          Y/Bl    41   1
O/Y   17   4                          Y/O     42   3
Gn/Y  18  LH  HOLD button lamp        Y/Gn    43   LG HOLD lamp ground
Bn/Y  19  SG                          Y/Bn    44   L2 (on network)
S/Y   20  RR  ringer Ring             Y/S     45   RT ringer Tip

B/V   21  ER                          V/Bl    46   ET
O/V   22  EB                          V/O     48   EH
Gn/V  23   9 (Ring of selected line)  V/Gn    48   RR (on network-- Tip of
                                                       selected line)
Bn/V  24   8                          V/Bn    49    7
S/V   25  L1 (on network-- grounded   V/S     50    N (grounded when off-hook)
              when on-hook)

Bl = Blue  O = Orange  Gn = Green  Br = Brown   S = Slate (grey)

W = White  R = Red     Bk = Black  Y = Yellow   V = Violet


Power (actually ground) comes to the phone on the W/O wire, lands on terminal
'IB' then goes to the center position of a SPDT Switchhook contact via a
yellow wire.  When off hook, this connects to a Brown wire leading to terminal
'N' which feeds the HOLD button first on the center position (of this
SPDT momentary switch) feeding further (through the normally-closed contacts)
to a yellow wire screwed to terminal 'M'.  The five line buttons get their
A lead supply from this terminal.

On the other side of the HOLD button contacts (the normally-open side) there
is a connection available but it is not normally used so it is safely connected
back to 'N' thus having no effect when the button is pressed.  In the phone
I got all this from (a rotary dial phone -- 565HK -- by the way), this is
an O/Bk wire.  Note that things may have changed a bit since I did this
investigation 20 years ago (but not by much) and that some details will be
different for TouchTone keypad phones (2565).

Each line button is 3PST, two contacts for Tip and Ring, and one for
the 'A' (control) lead.

When you depress the HOLD button, you interrupt current on the A lead while
you *still* have current flowing through the CO loop (Tip and Ring).  The
1A, 1A1 or 1A2 KTU (equipment on the wall of the phone closet) senses this
condition and throws a relay coil across the phone line to hold it so that you
can hang up or select another line. Contacts on this relay and others
cause the light to either be steady, flash (when incoming call arrives) or
wink (on hold).

Because of this mode of operation, the switchhook and the line buttons
*must* break their Tip and Ring connections before the A lead, otherwise
calls would go on hold every time you hung up or switched lines.

Note that the ringer (bell) is on its own pair.  You can select which line
you want to connect it to, or have it ring whenever a call comes in for
any line (if you have the right equipment -- like a local ring current
generator) -- the CA (common audible) feature).

The other connections are for use with other devices like a speakerphone
or a buzzer or the exclusion key or for anything else you may want to do.
(See Dave Levenson's message)

Additionally, if you unscrew the screw that you can see move up and down
when you operate a line button, it makes it momentary contact and will not
cause other buttons to pop up.  If you further dismantle things, you can
remove little pieces of metal that move sideways to cause pressing one
button to pop up the others.  By doing that you can conceivably tie several
lines together to have your own conferencing capability. This requires care
since the phone lines will be directly connected together when more
than one button is pressed.  You have to watch out for maintaining
consistent polarity (Tip to Tip and Ring to Ring).






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

Date:     Thu, 13 Oct 88 14:19:04 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  302/215 ; touch-tone


1. I got my phone bill yesterday and it had an insert telling me of a new
prefix (234) being implemented in Hockessin, Del. (area 302).  It already
has a 239 prefix.  I believe there's a 234 in a distant part of the (next-
door) 215 area in Pennsylvania, but no 239 there.  Of the other Delaware
points local to parts of 215:
Newark 368 and 453 are duplicated in distant parts of 215, but other Newark
prefixes are not duplicated in 215 at all, nor are any of the Newport,
Wilmington, or Holly Oak prefixes.
(Also, I have noticed that the NJ prefixes in Trenton and neighboring Ewing--
both in 609 area--are local to parts of 215 and aren't duplicated in 215.)

2. I have an order form in front of me.  It shows:
   Touch-tone only
   Pulse (compatible with both rotary and touch-tone dialing systems)
As far as I can guess, either is OK for ordinary converstaion.  But what
applications would require compatibility with rotary systems?  You may
post answers to me directly ([e-mail]), and I can summarize.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: William Tsai <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI "Around town"
Date: 13 Oct 88 21:12:36 GMT



Does MCI charge EVERYBODY surcharge for calling cards??  One of my
friends get one thru the university (therefore is like a business
account) and did not ever get charged $.50 or $.55 surcharge.
What's going on??

                -< Bill >=-


--
       Bill Tsai
University of Delaware CIS        ARPA:  [e-mail]
     [phone]    " The computer doesn't hate everybody - just you... "

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

Date: Thu, 13 Oct 88 21:48:18 EDT
From: [e-mail] (*Hobbit*)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Anyone from Middletown CT?


I was there last weekend and 10333+ doesn't seem to be defined in the LOC's
tables.  10777 [the old one] isn't either.  Do they not talk to Sprint?

_H*

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

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



From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sun Oct 30 01:32:56 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA25903; Sun, 30 Oct 88 00:15:46 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA21158; Sun, 30 Oct 88 00:15:19 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810300415.AA21158@buit5>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 88 23:10:12 EDT
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #161
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 29 Oct 88 23:10:12 EDT    Volume 8 : Issue 161

Today's Topics:

                  special numbers for cellular phones
                                switch
                         FAX & Voice on 1 Line
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                     Answering maching vs. wiring
                  Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
[This is the second issue of the Digest in as many hours. We will con-
tinue to release these with one or two more on Sunday evening until
the backlog of messages has been cleared. We are aware that some of
you are receiving duplicate copies; this is a bug yet to be rooted out
of the program. JSol is an excellent teacher, considering that UNIX is
not -- uh -- one of my strong points!  Enjoy this issue!  PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 88 01:19:06 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: ssc-vax![e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: special numbers for cellular phones


According to Cellular One Baltimore/Washington, cellular telcos
accross the contry are trying to come up with dialing conventions.
(ha!  That'll be the day!)  One convention is that a number that
begins with a *1 is supposed to be a free call to the subscriber.
For instance, *1FYI (*1394) is a free call which gets you information
about what's happeing with the local cellular system.  *1198 is a free
call to some local radio station that you can report accidents, (and
sometimes win prizes!)

There are other numbers that begin with * like *611 and *811 that are
also free that get you in touch with Cellular One.

All these numbers seem to have a 7 digit translation that does show up
on my bill as "no-charge".  One can dial them from the outside as
well.

-Mike

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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 88 01:07:47 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: mks![e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: switch


The Sharper Image sells a thing-a-ma-gig for about $10 which looks
exactly like a telephone "Y" adaptor.  It has 2 sockets, one marked
"phone", the other makred "ans. mach."  When another extension is
lifted anywhere in the house, the answering machine is cut off.  The
ad also states that if you put one of these suckers on each phone in
your home except your modem or fax machine, the phone is dead when the
modem or fax machine is off hook.

It looked like there were 2 LEDs on this device, but there was no
explanation what they were for.

This sounds like what you are looking for.

-Mike

p.s. I have no connection with The Sharper Image.


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

From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: FAX & Voice on 1 Line
Date: Mon Oct 10 10:44:04 1988


Someone was asking for a way of automatically sharing FAX and Voice
on 1 line or something similar. I just received a catalog from a
company called HELLO DIRECT that sells such a device. From the
description, it is available in 2 flavors. One requires you to
key a 3 digit code to get the fax or modem, it defaults to voice.
The other automatically listens for the calling Faxes tone, and then
switches to the FAX machine. Anyway, their number is 1-800-444-3556.
(I have no conection with them and cannot verify the device works as
described.)

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

From: Gerry Wheeler <mks!wheels>
Date: 11 Oct 88 19:44:20 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: mks!wheels
From: [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Summary: relay found (maybe)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 Oct 88 19:44:19 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems, Waterloo, Ont.
Lines: 37

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kekatos) writes:
> Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
> draw enough current from the phone line.
>
> Ted G. Kekatos
> AT&T Bell Laboratories, Indian Hill South, IX-1F-460

I have to disagree with this.  I've seen several items which draw enough
line power to run a relay.  One was a Radio Shack box which sensed line
current to close a relay which could be wired to the A-A1 control leads
of a key system.  It allowed an answering machine to be used and to give
an indication on all the sets. (In fact, if Radio Shack still sold this
one, I would get it and use the relay. Sigh.)

I received a mail msg the other day on this, as follows:

> From: [e-mail] (Kirk Bellar)
> Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
> Date: 29 Sep 88 21:44:28 GMT
>
> Teltone sells a relay for this purpose, called the M-949.  It closes a 1
> form A (SPST) contact if loop current is 20 mA or better.
> ---
>   Kirk Bellar    KE7TN         Teltone Corp.      (Tones `R' Us)
>   uw-beaver!tikal!kirk        Kirkland, Wa. USA  [phone]

I called my closest Teltone rep, and they are going to send me one as
soon as they can get it from the office in Kirkland. (They kindly
offered to waive the usual $100 minimum order.) So, I'll let you know
what happens.

Thanks for all the replies.
--
     Gerry Wheeler                           Phone: [phone]
Mortice Kern Systems Inc.               UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!wheels
   35 King St. North                             BIX: join mks
Waterloo, Ontario  N2J 2W9                  CompuServe: 73260,1043

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Wendy Thrash)
Subject: Answering maching vs. wiring
Date: 12 Oct 88 00:29:50 GMT



I'm the formerly happy owner of a Panasonic answering machine similar to one
described in a recent article here.  A week ago I moved to San Francisco.
My phone line is the third one in the apartment, and the wires were apparently
run by a friend of my roommates rather than by Pac Bell.  My phone works OK
in the new apartment, but my answering machine will not work; it answers the
phone, jiggles its tapes a couple of times, and hangs up.

I think the machine believes that another extension has been taken off hook,
and courteously relinquishes the line.  This would be a feature if, in fact,
another extension had been taken off hook, but there is no other extension
on the line.

My answering machine works fine on my roommates' lines.  Their answering
machines work on my line.

Short of trading machines or lines with one of my roommates, what can I do?
Is my off-hook guess plausible?  If so, how does the machine decide that
another extension is off-hook; is there a possible wiring error that could
confuse it?  Is this a problem I'm likely to be able to fix (with some guidance
from someone on this list)?  Is it a problem the phone company is likely to
be able to fix?  (or willing, since they aren't doing interior wiring)?

Thanks for any information/advice.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 12 Oct 88 03:32:48 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (55624-Kekatos,T.G.) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
>| I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
>| open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
>
>Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
>draw enough current from the phone line.  You must use a
>circuit that has a few transistors to SENSE the activity on the
>phone line, and another transistor and 9volt battery to drive a
>relay, if you still want relay contacts.  This is really the RIGHT
>way to do it.  There ARE products on the market that do this
>kind of thing. You will have to shop around.
>

Well, while I agree with you in principal, I must comment that AT&T then has
been doing it incorrectly for *many* years.   They have been using relays to
sense loop current in 1A2 key systems for as long as I can remember.  It is
also not too uncommon to see C.O. equipment which relies on a relay of sorts.

One point that noone has mentioned yet is that of longitudinal imbalance.  You
should always keep the line balanced.  This means you should always do the same
thing to *both* sides of the line.  This is why the teltone relay is a four
wire device.

regards,
brian



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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
Date: 12 Oct 88 04:10:07 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> eckert![e-mail] (John H. Hall) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>In article <[e-mail]> westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
>>> If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
>>> cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is...
>>
>>When you dial a number assigned to a cellular mobile telephone, all
>>of the cell-sites in the mobile phone user's home region broadcast
>> ...description of how cellular phones work in their "home region" deleted ...
>
>Okay, what's a home region?
>    My city?
>    My state?
>    My LATA?
>    Any place in any cell run by the cellular service I subscribe to?

     ^^^^^^^ BINGO !

>
>While my home and business are stationary, my car is mobile.
>
>Assume I live in Rochester NY, and drive to Florida on vacation.
>If someone in Rochester calls me at my cellular phone:
>
>    1. How does it get routed to the cellular system (home region?)
>       through which I happen to be driving?
>
>    2. Does the caller have any way of knowing that he's
>       making (and presumably paying for) a long-distance call?
>


It's actually much simpler than you would imagine.  To call a cellular phone
in system that is not it's "home" system, you must dial the "roamer" port.
A phone is said to be "roaming" when it has latched on to a system that is not
the same as the one programmed into the phone.  This is what causes the ROAM
light on the phone to be activated.

To place a call to a roaming phone, you dial the roam port for the system
in which the phone is currently active.  You will usually then get a second
dial-tone.  At the tone, you dial the full 10 digit number of the phone when
it is in it's home system.  The system then pages the phone and the rest
works as normal.

It makes more sense when you realize that the phone is programmed with it;s
home system ID and it's home NPA and phone number.  Thus, let's assume I live
in baltimore maryland and my cell phone number is 301 555-1234.  If I were
in phila and I was on the Cell One system there it's roam port is 215 350-ROAM.
To place a call to me while I was in phila you would do the following:

    1.    dial 1-215-350-7626.
    2.    wait for tone
    3.    dial 301-555-1234
    4.    things work as normal from here.

You can see from this example that the long distance charges are paid by the
caller.  He of course knows it's a toll call when he dials it.  Incidentally,
the big problem with roaming is that you must know what city I'm in (usually
not too big a problem, unless traveling) and you must know which system I am
using (since most market areas are served by two systems).

There is, of course, a LARGE security problem since the system in which you
are roaming has no way of validating your phone's ESN.  This is left as
an excersize for the ambitious student (ie, don't expect me to spill the
beens to the world).

cheers,
brian




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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sun Oct 30 01:02:53 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA20088; Sat, 29 Oct 88 22:51:57 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA20987; Sat, 29 Oct 88 22:51:31 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810300251.AA20987@buit5>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 88 22:36:56 EDT
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #159
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 29 Oct 88 22:36:56 EDT    Volume 8 : Issue 159

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                           Re: In use light
                Re: special numbers for cellular phones
                         Re: RJ 45 Wall Mount
[YOU DID remember to set your clocks back one hour Saturday night, I
assume.... We are now sending out literally dozens of messages which
had gathered here during the forced hiatus. At least one Digest per day
and perhaps two will be issued until the backlog has been reduced. You
should note our new address is [e-mail]. The old address
of XX.LCS is *not* to be used, regardless of it appearing in some of the
messages appearing herein.  Thanks, P. Townson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: kitty![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: kitty![e-mail]
Date: 9 Oct 88 13:19:24 EDT (Sun)


In article <[e-mail]> ssc-vax!clark (Roger Clark Swann) writes:

> I just got through making a phone call from my office here in
> Seattle to our plant in Huntsville, AL. The hardware at each end
> should be a #5ESS (I am told). The routing of the call should
> normally be over private, leased circuits and should NOT be going
> onto the public network. It turned out that the phone I was trying
> to reach in Huntsville was busy for several tries. Each time, an
> audio circuit was opened and the busy signal was generated at the
> far end. Now with that background, here is the my question:
> Why wasn't the busy signal generated by the PBX equipment at my end?

    It sounds like you have some variant of Centrex service,
with some type of tie line network.  Whether the tie lines are
"conventional", furnished by CCSA (Common Control Switching Arrangement),
or part of an ETN (Electronic Tandem Network), the switching behavior
using today's technology is all the same: the call is still physically
completed to the far end switch.  The far end switch provides the
supervisory tone indications of busy, ringing or recorded intercept,
and connects the call if possible.  Typical busy signal "holding time"
is so short (a few seconds), that there is no significant advantage
in immediately dumping a tie line call and furnishing busy tone from
a trunk within the near end switch.  This situation may change in
the future as switching systems become more sophisticated and exchange
high-speed digital information prior to setting up a talk circuit -
would would occur ONLY if voice connection were in fact needed.

> I thought that the system did some talking over a data link before
> opening the audio path anyway.

    If you are referring to CCIS, then the information pertains
only to the dialed digits and originate/answer supervision.  As far
as existing CO and PABX equipment is concerned, a no-answer (i.e.,
ringing at the far end) and a busy condition is the same.  The
"audio path" is opened with virtually no delay as you complete dialing
of the last digit of the access code(s)+telephone number.  The far
end switch is responsible for returning all supervisory tones,
except when no tie trunks are available from your site or an
intermediate switching center.

> If so, the 'busy' should be signaled
> over the data link and the local equipment would take care of it

    This may become commonplace in the future, but I would be
extremely surprised if your organization had equipment which operated
in this manner.  I know that work has been done by AT&T, Northern Telcom,
and Rolm with respect to more sophisticaled digital signaling protocols
over a true digital data link, but the only implementations that I
have seen pertain to CAS (Centralized Attendant Service).

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


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

From: kitty![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: kitty![e-mail]
Date: 9 Oct 88 09:44:52 EDT (Sun)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman) writes:

> >I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
> >open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
> >a 200 ohm 4.5 mA relay.  It didn't affect the phone operation too much,
> >but wouldn't quite pull in.  If I pressed the armature in, it would
> >latch.  Close, but no cigar.
>
> You want to use a voltage comparator IC to measure the voltage between the
> wires (through a full wave bridge rectifier, so you don't have to care which
> way you hook it up).  Open circuit (on-hook) voltage is about 48, off-hook
> voltage is about 1-2 volts.  I am not sure what "hold" voltage is, but it is
> higher than 2 volts.  Simpler, for a single phone, is to see if the phone has
> a spare set of contacts on the hook switch (many do), and use them.

    A few words of advice on the design and construction of such a
circuit:

1.    In general, it is good practice to isolate any voltage comparator
    circuit by using a 100,000 ohm resistor in series with the tip
    lead and the ring lead (i.e., two resistors, 200 K effective
    impedance across telephone line).  This means that the voltage
    comparator circuit needs to have a high input impedance to
    function with such a high input series resistance.  This is
    really not a problem for a well-designed circuit.  The input
    circuit to the comparator or op amp (i.e, following the two
    100 K resistors) MUST be protected against voltage transients
    caused by ringing voltage, dialing pulses, etc.  Such protection
    can readily be accomplished with a pair of back-to-back zener
    diodes.  In addition, a parallel capacitor should also absorb
    some transients and prevent spurious signals.  While the
    capacitor will result in a time constant when used in conjunction
    with the 100 K series resistors, this is desirable - a time
    constant between 300 and 600 ms should be fine since the
    output of the voltage comparator does NOT want to follow rotary
    dial pulsing in a status indicator application.

2.    The use of the 100 K series resistors protects both your equipment
    and the telephone network.  Under these circumstances, a short
    between the comparator or op amp input and Vcc or ground will
    cause neither harm nor appreciable degradation of voice signal.

3.    The statement above that "off-hook voltage is about 1-2 volts"
    is not correct.  Off-hook DC voltage typically ranges between
    6 and 25 volts, depending upon the resistance of your CO loop
    and the internal resistance of your telephone set.  From a
    realistic standpoint, a threshhold of 35 to 40 volts (some
    hysterisis is desirable to prevent transients from causing
    spurious signals) is reasonable for the design of a voltage
    comparator circuit.

4.    A well-designed status indicator circuit is polarity insensitive.
    You can do this with a full-wave bridge rectifier prior to the
    voltage comparator, or with multiple comparators (may be more
    convenient when using quad comparators or op amps).

5.    In general, DC holding resistors range between 200 and 400 ohms
    so that "hold" voltages approximate those of off-hook voltages.
    A realistic range is 5 to 25 volts.

6.    Higher off-hook voltages will usually be present if you are
    using the above status circuit on a PABX extension.  In general,
    -48 volt battery and ground is still fed through a total of
    400 ohms (or electronically current-limited to an equivalent
    value), but there is very little loop resistance.  So, a
    500-type telephone set as a PABX extension will generally
    show an off-hook voltage between 20 and 25 volts.

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


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

From: kitty![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: kitty![e-mail]
Date: 9 Oct 88 12:45:04 EDT (Sun)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:

> A long while ago someone posted a question about how to build a simple
> circuit which would light a LED (or a simple lamp) when an extension
> was lifted elsewhere in the house.  The requirements are:
>
>   - The LED lights when another extension is lifted, showing that it
>     is in use.
>   - The LED must be powered off the phone line.
>   - No extra wires must be run to the telephone.
>   - The circuit should be reasonable small so that it can fit inside a
>     desktop style phone.
>
> No one was able to come up with a simple schematic to do this that
> worked.  The upshot was that one could buy such a device for about $30
> off the shelf.  Having let some time pass, anyone want to give a stab
> at this?

    Bear in mind, that we appear to be discussing a means which
bridges across tip and ring, and which operates by sensing loop voltage,
and NOT loop current in series with an off-hook telephone set.
    There is NO WAY to properly design a circuit as you describe
which will not run the risk of interfering with the proper operation
of the telephone line.
    Proper telephone circuit design practice dictates that a bridging
impedance across a telephone loop must never be less than 100,000 ohms.
This means that the MOST current that one can draw is 50/100000 = 0.0005 A.
One can't light an LED on 1/2 mA!  The situation is really worse than the
above, since we want to light the LED in an off-hook condition, where the
loop voltage at the telephone set is between 6 and 25 volts.  Even taking
the "best" value of 25 volts, 25/100000 = 0.00025 A, which means that
only 1/4 mA could be available off-hook to light an LED!
    Under many conditions, one can fudge the 100,000 ohms bridging
impedance to 50,000 ohms without loop interference.  However, for the
above purposes, there is still an insufficient amount of current which
can power the LED (1/2 mA off-hook at best).  Trying to bridge a lower
resistance across the loop to create more energy to light the LED is
an invitation to trouble in the form of: (1) interferring with rotary
dial pulsing by causing pulse distortion; (2) false tripping of incoming
ringing signals; and (3) generation of trouble reports by automated
central office equipment (both ALITS and ESS test procedures).
    I'm afraid that we have to hang up on this idea.  Voltage sensing
across tip and ring is okay - but the indicator power is going to have
to come from a source other than the telephone line.

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

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (A. Mossberg)
Subject: Re: In use light
Date: 11 Oct 88 14:25:30 GMT



Mike said:
>I might even be willing to let $30 for such a device (maybe).  Where is
>one available?

There's a device in the most recent DAK catalogue (I don't have it
handy, but you can call 800 information for their number) which looks
like a standard rj-11 y-connector, but with 2 leds on top.  One jack is
a priority jack, lifting anything on that line will kill anything on the
other, and the other is blocked if the priority circuit is in use.
I believe it was under $15 for this unit.  They're primarily selling it
for use with answering machines (pick up the phone, machine is
disconnected from line) but mention these other uses..

(I's just a customer, no kickbacks here!)

aem

--
a.e.mossberg    -    [e-mail]    -    [e-mail] (3.91)
Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.
                            - Lewis Carroll

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

To: utzoo!utai!watmath!comp-dcom-telecom
Date:     Tue, 11 Oct 88 05:24:35 EDT
From: Evan Leibovitch <telly!evan>


To: utzoo!utai!watmath!comp-dcom-telecom
Path: telly!evan
From: [e-mail] (Evan Leibovitch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: special numbers for cellular phones
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 Oct 88 13:24:32 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: System telly, Brampton, Ontario
Lines: 18


In article <[e-mail]>, ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann) writes:
> Another example of this was discovered in Portland, OR recently when
> the radio station KXL (I think), was advertising for motorists to call
> the station with road reports using their cellular phones to dial: 231
> 'this is a free call'  (Maybe someone in Portland can confirm this)
>
Don't know about Portland, but Toronto radio station CFTR certainly does
have a 'free' number for exactly this purpose. (They must take their
traffic reports rather seriously - they also have two Cessnas airborne
each rush hour.) Callers press "*680" (the station's frequency).

I also believe that cellular calls to 911 and the auto club are free.

> Roger Swann        uucp: uw-beaver!ssc-vac!clark
--
 Evan Leibovitch, SA of System Telly, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
[e-mail] (PENDING: [e-mail]) / {uunet!attcan,utzoo}!telly!evan
                           Don't worry - Be happy.



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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: RJ 45 Wall Mount
Date: 10 Oct 88 16:11:49 GMT



[e-mail] (Len Rose) writes:
> I am looking for a source of RJ45 wall mount receptacles.  We are installing
> some data terminals in a new building and I want to prewire using 8
> conductor cable and RJ45 wall connectors.

    Mod-Tap is a big player in this field, making every imaginable sort
of modular wiring gizmo for data lines, including RS-232 to RJ-11/RJ-45
adapters, punchdown blocks, and cabling.  Our local distributor is Glasgal,
in Northvale, NJ.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sun Oct 30 01:32:52 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA25903; Sun, 30 Oct 88 00:15:46 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA21158; Sun, 30 Oct 88 00:15:19 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810300415.AA21158@buit5>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 88 23:10:12 EDT
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #161
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 29 Oct 88 23:10:12 EDT    Volume 8 : Issue 161

Today's Topics:

                  special numbers for cellular phones
                                switch
                         FAX & Voice on 1 Line
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                     Answering maching vs. wiring
                  Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
[This is the second issue of the Digest in as many hours. We will con-
tinue to release these with one or two more on Sunday evening until
the backlog of messages has been cleared. We are aware that some of
you are receiving duplicate copies; this is a bug yet to be rooted out
of the program. JSol is an excellent teacher, considering that UNIX is
not -- uh -- one of my strong points!  Enjoy this issue!  PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 88 01:19:06 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: ssc-vax![e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: special numbers for cellular phones


According to Cellular One Baltimore/Washington, cellular telcos
accross the contry are trying to come up with dialing conventions.
(ha!  That'll be the day!)  One convention is that a number that
begins with a *1 is supposed to be a free call to the subscriber.
For instance, *1FYI (*1394) is a free call which gets you information
about what's happeing with the local cellular system.  *1198 is a free
call to some local radio station that you can report accidents, (and
sometimes win prizes!)

There are other numbers that begin with * like *611 and *811 that are
also free that get you in touch with Cellular One.

All these numbers seem to have a 7 digit translation that does show up
on my bill as "no-charge".  One can dial them from the outside as
well.

-Mike

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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 88 01:07:47 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: mks![e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: switch


The Sharper Image sells a thing-a-ma-gig for about $10 which looks
exactly like a telephone "Y" adaptor.  It has 2 sockets, one marked
"phone", the other makred "ans. mach."  When another extension is
lifted anywhere in the house, the answering machine is cut off.  The
ad also states that if you put one of these suckers on each phone in
your home except your modem or fax machine, the phone is dead when the
modem or fax machine is off hook.

It looked like there were 2 LEDs on this device, but there was no
explanation what they were for.

This sounds like what you are looking for.

-Mike

p.s. I have no connection with The Sharper Image.


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

From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: FAX & Voice on 1 Line
Date: Mon Oct 10 10:44:04 1988


Someone was asking for a way of automatically sharing FAX and Voice
on 1 line or something similar. I just received a catalog from a
company called HELLO DIRECT that sells such a device. From the
description, it is available in 2 flavors. One requires you to
key a 3 digit code to get the fax or modem, it defaults to voice.
The other automatically listens for the calling Faxes tone, and then
switches to the FAX machine. Anyway, their number is 1-800-444-3556.
(I have no conection with them and cannot verify the device works as
described.)

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

From: Gerry Wheeler <mks!wheels>
Date: 11 Oct 88 19:44:20 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: mks!wheels
From: [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Summary: relay found (maybe)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 11 Oct 88 19:44:19 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems, Waterloo, Ont.
Lines: 37

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kekatos) writes:
> Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
> draw enough current from the phone line.
>
> Ted G. Kekatos
> AT&T Bell Laboratories, Indian Hill South, IX-1F-460

I have to disagree with this.  I've seen several items which draw enough
line power to run a relay.  One was a Radio Shack box which sensed line
current to close a relay which could be wired to the A-A1 control leads
of a key system.  It allowed an answering machine to be used and to give
an indication on all the sets. (In fact, if Radio Shack still sold this
one, I would get it and use the relay. Sigh.)

I received a mail msg the other day on this, as follows:

> From: [e-mail] (Kirk Bellar)
> Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
> Date: 29 Sep 88 21:44:28 GMT
>
> Teltone sells a relay for this purpose, called the M-949.  It closes a 1
> form A (SPST) contact if loop current is 20 mA or better.
> ---
>   Kirk Bellar    KE7TN         Teltone Corp.      (Tones `R' Us)
>   uw-beaver!tikal!kirk        Kirkland, Wa. USA  [phone]

I called my closest Teltone rep, and they are going to send me one as
soon as they can get it from the office in Kirkland. (They kindly
offered to waive the usual $100 minimum order.) So, I'll let you know
what happens.

Thanks for all the replies.
--
     Gerry Wheeler                           Phone: [phone]
Mortice Kern Systems Inc.               UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!wheels
   35 King St. North                             BIX: join mks
Waterloo, Ontario  N2J 2W9                  CompuServe: 73260,1043

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Wendy Thrash)
Subject: Answering maching vs. wiring
Date: 12 Oct 88 00:29:50 GMT



I'm the formerly happy owner of a Panasonic answering machine similar to one
described in a recent article here.  A week ago I moved to San Francisco.
My phone line is the third one in the apartment, and the wires were apparently
run by a friend of my roommates rather than by Pac Bell.  My phone works OK
in the new apartment, but my answering machine will not work; it answers the
phone, jiggles its tapes a couple of times, and hangs up.

I think the machine believes that another extension has been taken off hook,
and courteously relinquishes the line.  This would be a feature if, in fact,
another extension had been taken off hook, but there is no other extension
on the line.

My answering machine works fine on my roommates' lines.  Their answering
machines work on my line.

Short of trading machines or lines with one of my roommates, what can I do?
Is my off-hook guess plausible?  If so, how does the machine decide that
another extension is off-hook; is there a possible wiring error that could
confuse it?  Is this a problem I'm likely to be able to fix (with some guidance
from someone on this list)?  Is it a problem the phone company is likely to
be able to fix?  (or willing, since they aren't doing interior wiring)?

Thanks for any information/advice.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Date: 12 Oct 88 03:32:48 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (55624-Kekatos,T.G.) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
>| I'm looking for a relay to place in series with a telephone which will
>| open (or close) when the set is offhook.  The closest I've come is with
>
>Sorry, This can not be done with a ONLY a relay. You just can not
>draw enough current from the phone line.  You must use a
>circuit that has a few transistors to SENSE the activity on the
>phone line, and another transistor and 9volt battery to drive a
>relay, if you still want relay contacts.  This is really the RIGHT
>way to do it.  There ARE products on the market that do this
>kind of thing. You will have to shop around.
>

Well, while I agree with you in principal, I must comment that AT&T then has
been doing it incorrectly for *many* years.   They have been using relays to
sense loop current in 1A2 key systems for as long as I can remember.  It is
also not too uncommon to see C.O. equipment which relies on a relay of sorts.

One point that noone has mentioned yet is that of longitudinal imbalance.  You
should always keep the line balanced.  This means you should always do the same
thing to *both* sides of the line.  This is why the teltone relay is a four
wire device.

regards,
brian



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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: Another Cellular Phone Question
Date: 12 Oct 88 04:10:07 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> eckert![e-mail] (John H. Hall) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>In article <[e-mail]> westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
>>> If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
>>> cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is...
>>
>>When you dial a number assigned to a cellular mobile telephone, all
>>of the cell-sites in the mobile phone user's home region broadcast
>> ...description of how cellular phones work in their "home region" deleted ...
>
>Okay, what's a home region?
>    My city?
>    My state?
>    My LATA?
>    Any place in any cell run by the cellular service I subscribe to?

     ^^^^^^^ BINGO !

>
>While my home and business are stationary, my car is mobile.
>
>Assume I live in Rochester NY, and drive to Florida on vacation.
>If someone in Rochester calls me at my cellular phone:
>
>    1. How does it get routed to the cellular system (home region?)
>       through which I happen to be driving?
>
>    2. Does the caller have any way of knowing that he's
>       making (and presumably paying for) a long-distance call?
>


It's actually much simpler than you would imagine.  To call a cellular phone
in system that is not it's "home" system, you must dial the "roamer" port.
A phone is said to be "roaming" when it has latched on to a system that is not
the same as the one programmed into the phone.  This is what causes the ROAM
light on the phone to be activated.

To place a call to a roaming phone, you dial the roam port for the system
in which the phone is currently active.  You will usually then get a second
dial-tone.  At the tone, you dial the full 10 digit number of the phone when
it is in it's home system.  The system then pages the phone and the rest
works as normal.

It makes more sense when you realize that the phone is programmed with it;s
home system ID and it's home NPA and phone number.  Thus, let's assume I live
in baltimore maryland and my cell phone number is 301 555-1234.  If I were
in phila and I was on the Cell One system there it's roam port is 215 350-ROAM.
To place a call to me while I was in phila you would do the following:

    1.    dial 1-215-350-7626.
    2.    wait for tone
    3.    dial 301-555-1234
    4.    things work as normal from here.

You can see from this example that the long distance charges are paid by the
caller.  He of course knows it's a toll call when he dials it.  Incidentally,
the big problem with roaming is that you must know what city I'm in (usually
not too big a problem, unless traveling) and you must know which system I am
using (since most market areas are served by two systems).

There is, of course, a LARGE security problem since the system in which you
are roaming has no way of validating your phone's ESN.  This is left as
an excersize for the ambitious student (ie, don't expect me to spill the
beens to the world).

cheers,
brian




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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sun Oct 30 02:02:53 1988
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA29344; Sun, 30 Oct 88 01:09:49 EDT
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA21215; Sun, 30 Oct 88 01:09:24 EDT
Message-Id:  <8810300509.AA21215@buit5>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88  0:43:56 EDT
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #160

To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Oct 88  0:43:56 EDT    Volume 8 : Issue 160

Today's Topics:

                      Re: jack wiring info wanted
                         Re: FRG phone numbers
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                        Looking for fax modems
                          302/215 ; touch-tone
                         Re: MCI "Around town"
                      Anyone from Middletown CT?
[This is our third issue this weekend. Issues 160-161 were issued out of
sequence; you should have already received 161. Just a reminder again
about those clocks: We are now on Standard Time and clocks should be set
back one hour. If you send submissions to us, please bear in mind we are
still backlogged with enough material for five or six more Digests. Be
patient in waiting for your article to appear. Our new address which
*must* be used henceforth is [e-mail]. Enjoy this issue!
PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: jack wiring info wanted
Date: 12 Oct 88 04:18:44 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>I'm interested in the wiring of the 50-pin jack for for 5-line keyset
>telephones (2565HKM, if it matters).  So far, I've learned  that
>there are 3 pairs allocated to each line, with 1 pair being tip and
>ring, and the third pair being A and A1.  I'm especially interested
>in pins that are activated by the hold button, especially per-line
>hold signals.
>
>        --Steve Bellovin
>        [e-mail]
>        {att,ucbvax}!ulysses!smb


Actually, in a 1A2 key system (that's what those five button phones are used
for) the hold button works a little differently.

When a phone is off hook, the KSU module detects loop current and the A1 lead
activated by the button.  So long as A1 is present with the loop current the
line is considered to be active.  However, if there is loop current but no
A1 the line is placed on hold until A1 is present again or the loop current is
dropped by the CO (usually indicating the the distant caller hung up).

Thus, the hold button actually interrupts the A1 lead just prior to releasing
the line key on the phone.  This presents the condition described above and
thus places the call on hold.  This is also why answering machines and modems
without A1 leads will leave a 1A2 system line on hold.  Terminating a call
normally requires that loop current be dropped along with A1.

Cheers,
brian



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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 88 14:07:53 PST
From: motsj1![e-mail]


To: hplabs!comp-dcom-telecom
Path: motsj1!rnv
From: [e-mail] (Ron Voss)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: FRG phone numbers
Summary: what i know
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 10 Oct 88 17:24:11 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Motorola Microcomputer Division, San Jose Ca.
Lines: 36


In article <[e-mail]>, c3pe![e-mail]
(David Lesher) writes:
> While in Frankfurt last week I noted that phone numbers varied in
> length from 4 to 10 digits, maybe more. The longer ones seemed
> to be DID into PBXs.
> How does the CO know when it has all the digits?  Does it time
> out, or do prefixes carry implicit lengths?

Prefixes carry implicit lengths, mostly, although numbers can be
"data sensitive".  However, there are no prefixes as we know them,
althought they technically exist.   The "Post" doesn't advertise
prefixes, and doesn't list or give out numbers in that way.
For example, a phone number may be written 12 34 56 or 123 456
(Germany generally uses " " instead of "-" as a delimiter),
whatever seems to be easier to remember, or however a particular
person has always done it.  Technically, all numbers beginning
with the "hidden" prefix (in my example, you can't tell what it is:
1? 12? 123?) will be six digits long.

I've seen phone numbers within an area code of four to eight digits.  Area
codes are two to four digits long.  Generally, the shorter your phone
number, the smaller your town, and, the shorter your area code, the
larger your town.  They don't use the British trick of having the
target area code dependent on the caller's location.

Large companies are often given a "prefix" of usually four digits.
Then they do what they want, like 1234 0 for the switchboard
and 1234 5678 for extensions, where internally the extension is
5678, just like here.

The net will, as always, I hope, correct any factual errors.

--
Ron Voss, Motorola Microcomputer Div
hplabs!motsj1!rnv      CIS 73647,752
408-991-7390        Opinions: My own


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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 88 18:16:28 EDT
From: fciva![e-mail]
To: uunet![e-mail]


Date: 12 Oct 88 22:18:44 GMT
To: uunet!comp-dcom-telecom
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
Responding-System: fciva.FRANKLIN.COM

Path: fciva!zab
From: [e-mail] (Zachary A. Bumpus)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom,comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Looking for fax modems
Keywords: fax Fax facsimile
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Oct 88 22:18:42 GMT
Organization: Franklin Capital Investments, McLean, Va.
Lines: 15

I am looking for a fax modem and software to allow me to
send a single document to a arge list of recipients.  Unix
or MS-Dos based would be fine.  The best I've seen so far is
Lists of length 10.  Is there anything better?

    Thanks in advance
    Zack

Zachary A. Bumpus        Franklin Mortgage Capital Corp.
uunet!fciva!zab            7900 Westpark Drive, Suite A-130
[phone]            McLean, VA 22102





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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 88 12:31:22 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Chris Rohrer)
To: uunet!rutgers.edu!westmark![e-mail]
Cc: uunet!XX.LCS.MIT.EDU![e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> I'm interested in the wiring of the 50-pin jack for for 5-line keyset
> telephones (2565HKM, if it matters).  So far, I've learned  that
> there are 3 pairs allocated to each line, with 1 pair being tip and
> ring, and the third pair being A and A1.  I'm especially interested
> in pins that are activated by the hold button, especially per-line
> hold signals.
>



Here is what I have on 2565 (5 line plus hold with touchtone dial) wiring



Bl/W  1   1R  line 1 Ring             W/Bl    26  1T line 1 Tip
O/W   2   IB  A1 lead (ground supply  W/O     27  1H line 1 A lead
              for all control lines)
G/W   3   L1  line 1 lamp             W/G     28  LG line 1 lamp ground
Br/W  4   2R  line 2 Ring             W/Br    29  2T line 2 Tip
S/W   5       insulated and stored    W/S     30  2H line 2 A lead

Bl/R  6   L2  line 2 lamp             R/Bl    31  LG line 2 lamp ground
O/R   7   3R  line 3 Ring             R/O     32  3T line 3 Tip
G/R   8       insulated and stored    R/G     33  3H line 3 A lead
Br/R  9   L3  line 3 lamp             R/Br    34  LG line 3 lamp ground
S/R   10  4R  line 4 Ring             R/S     35  4T line 4 Tip

Bl/Bk 11      insulated and stored    Bk/Bl   36  4H line 4 A lead
O/Bk  12  L4  line 4 lamp             Bk/O    37  LG line 4 lamp ground
Gn/Bk 13  5R  line 5 Ring             Bk/Gn   38  5T line 5 Tip
Bn/Bk 14      insulated and stored    Bk/Bn   39  5H line 5 A lead
S/Bk  15  L5  line 5 lamp             Bk/S    40  LG line 5 lamp ground

Bl/Y  16   2                          Y/Bl    41   1
O/Y   17   4                          Y/O     42   3
Gn/Y  18  LH  HOLD button lamp        Y/Gn    43   LG HOLD lamp ground
Bn/Y  19  SG                          Y/Bn    44   L2 (on network)
S/Y   20  RR  ringer Ring             Y/S     45   RT ringer Tip

B/V   21  ER                          V/Bl    46   ET
O/V   22  EB                          V/O     48   EH
Gn/V  23   9 (Ring of selected line)  V/Gn    48   RR (on network-- Tip of
                                                       selected line)
Bn/V  24   8                          V/Bn    49    7
S/V   25  L1 (on network-- grounded   V/S     50    N (grounded when off-hook)
              when on-hook)

Bl = Blue  O = Orange  Gn = Green  Br = Brown   S = Slate (grey)

W = White  R = Red     Bk = Black  Y = Yellow   V = Violet


Power (actually ground) comes to the phone on the W/O wire, lands on terminal
'IB' then goes to the center position of a SPDT Switchhook contact via a
yellow wire.  When off hook, this connects to a Brown wire leading to terminal
'N' which feeds the HOLD button first on the center position (of this
SPDT momentary switch) feeding further (through the normally-closed contacts)
to a yellow wire screwed to terminal 'M'.  The five line buttons get their
A lead supply from this terminal.

On the other side of the HOLD button contacts (the normally-open side) there
is a connection available but it is not normally used so it is safely connected
back to 'N' thus having no effect when the button is pressed.  In the phone
I got all this from (a rotary dial phone -- 565HK -- by the way), this is
an O/Bk wire.  Note that things may have changed a bit since I did this
investigation 20 years ago (but not by much) and that some details will be
different for TouchTone keypad phones (2565).

Each line button is 3PST, two contacts for Tip and Ring, and one for
the 'A' (control) lead.

When you depress the HOLD button, you interrupt current on the A lead while
you *still* have current flowing through the CO loop (Tip and Ring).  The
1A, 1A1 or 1A2 KTU (equipment on the wall of the phone closet) senses this
condition and throws a relay coil across the phone line to hold it so that you
can hang up or select another line. Contacts on this relay and others
cause the light to either be steady, flash (when incoming call arrives) or
wink (on hold).

Because of this mode of operation, the switchhook and the line buttons
*must* break their Tip and Ring connections before the A lead, otherwise
calls would go on hold every time you hung up or switched lines.

Note that the ringer (bell) is on its own pair.  You can select which line
you want to connect it to, or have it ring whenever a call comes in for
any line (if you have the right equipment -- like a local ring current
generator) -- the CA (common audible) feature).

The other connections are for use with other devices like a speakerphone
or a buzzer or the exclusion key or for anything else you may want to do.
(See Dave Levenson's message)

Additionally, if you unscrew the screw that you can see move up and down
when you operate a line button, it makes it momentary contact and will not
cause other buttons to pop up.  If you further dismantle things, you can
remove little pieces of metal that move sideways to cause pressing one
button to pop up the others.  By doing that you can conceivably tie several
lines together to have your own conferencing capability. This requires care
since the phone lines will be directly connected together when more
than one button is pressed.  You have to watch out for maintaining
consistent polarity (Tip to Tip and Ring to Ring).






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

Date:     Thu, 13 Oct 88 14:19:04 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  302/215 ; touch-tone


1. I got my phone bill yesterday and it had an insert telling me of a new
prefix (234) being implemented in Hockessin, Del. (area 302).  It already
has a 239 prefix.  I believe there's a 234 in a distant part of the (next-
door) 215 area in Pennsylvania, but no 239 there.  Of the other Delaware
points local to parts of 215:
Newark 368 and 453 are duplicated in distant parts of 215, but other Newark
prefixes are not duplicated in 215 at all, nor are any of the Newport,
Wilmington, or Holly Oak prefixes.
(Also, I have noticed that the NJ prefixes in Trenton and neighboring Ewing--
both in 609 area--are local to parts of 215 and aren't duplicated in 215.)

2. I have an order form in front of me.  It shows:
   Touch-tone only
   Pulse (compatible with both rotary and touch-tone dialing systems)
As far as I can guess, either is OK for ordinary converstaion.  But what
applications would require compatibility with rotary systems?  You may
post answers to me directly ([e-mail]), and I can summarize.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: William Tsai <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI "Around town"
Date: 13 Oct 88 21:12:36 GMT



Does MCI charge EVERYBODY surcharge for calling cards??  One of my
friends get one thru the university (therefore is like a business
account) and did not ever get charged $.50 or $.55 surcharge.
What's going on??

                -< Bill >=-


--
       Bill Tsai
University of Delaware CIS        ARPA:  [e-mail]
     [phone]    " The computer doesn't hate everybody - just you... "

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

Date: Thu, 13 Oct 88 21:48:18 EDT
From: [e-mail] (*Hobbit*)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Anyone from Middletown CT?


I was there last weekend and 10333+ doesn't seem to be defined in the LOC's
tables.  10777 [the old one] isn't either.  Do they not talk to Sprint?

_H*

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

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



From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sun Oct 30 22:14:26 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA12616; Sun, 30 Oct 88 22:14:26 EST
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-it.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA04002; Sun, 30 Oct 88 21:58:10 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA22441; Sun, 30 Oct 88 21:58:08 EST
Message-Id:  <8810310258.AA22441@buit5>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88 21:46:04 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #162
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Oct 88 21:46:04 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 162

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                      Re: sensitive relay wanted
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                           Re: In use light
                       comp.dcom.telecom posting
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                           Re: In use light
                         Re: RJ 45 Wall Mount
                        Ship-to-shore telephone
            True or false DIGITAL service procludes modems
[First attempts at any new project are rough! YES, we know there were
many duplicates sent out of issues 159-160-161. These are/were bugs in
the mailing program we are still striving to correct. Additionally, in
the confusing days of the first issues from our new location, issue 158
did not get sent out. There is no #158 - don't look for it!  PTownson]
---------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Michael Sleator <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Oct 88 06:32:15 GMT
To: uunet![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: ardent!sleat
From: [e-mail] (Michael Sleator)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: sensitive relay wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Oct 88 06:32:14 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael Sleator)
Organization: Ardent Computer
Lines: 40

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (55624-Kekatos,T.G.) writes:

>My comments about using a single relay coil to detect loop-current,
>that would not work because you can not draw enough  current from
>the phone-line, were if the
>relay is connected in parallel with the phone line.

I beg to differ.  A long time ago, I wanted to record all activity on a
phone line (never mind why! :-)).  I didn't have much time to mess around,
so I simply took what was known in the old days as a "plate relay", hooked
it across the line (with a resistor in series, I think), and hooked the
normally closed contacts up to the tape recorder.  It worked fine.  I don't
remember the exact coil resistance, but the pull in current was certainly
less than 2mA.  I think that it might have been a 10kOhm coil, hence the
resistor.

Historical Note:  A "plate relay" was so termed not because of any
pecularities in the construction of the relay, but because it was intended
to go in the plate (anode) circuit of a vacuum tube.  Since tubes tend
toward higher voltages and lower currents than transistors, a high resistance,
low current relay was called for.


>I never tried connecting a reply coil in series with a single phone.

It ought to work just fine.  In the off-hook state a phone draws somewhere
around 30-40mA, which is plenty to trip a small relay.  You might want to
bypass the relay coil with a capacitor so that the inductance doesn't further
roll off the high frequencies.  On the other hand, in this case you want
as low a coil resistance as you can get, so the inductance might not be
significant at 3kHz or whatever the top end of the phone system is these
days.

I agree that active circuits are a much more desireable way to go, but I
just wanted to point out that it is possible with a relay.

Michael Sleator
Ardent Computer
...!{decwrl | hplabs | ubvax | uunet}!ardent!sleat


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

From: Michael Sleator <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Oct 88 06:51:18 GMT
To: uunet![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: ardent!sleat
From: [e-mail] (Michael Sleator)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: In use light
Summary: try an exclusion circuit instead
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Oct 88 06:51:17 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael Sleator)
Organization: Ardent Computer
Lines: 30

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (jetzer) writes:

[discussion of indicator light to show phone off hook]

>I would also be interested in such a device - my roommate has this
>nasty habit of picking up the phone while I'm using my modem.

Seems to me that maybe what you need is an "exclusion circuit".  You can
buy these (from Radio Smack?) or make one with an SCR, a Zener diode, and
a resistor.  It works as follows:  The circuit is put in series with a phone
or modem.  If the line is in the on-hook state and the phone goes off-hook,
the phone is connected as normal.  However, if the line is already off-hook,
then the phone is completely dead.  As a side effect (at least with the
circuit I use), if the line is off-hook and the phone is taken off-hook,
and then the other load that was holding the line off-hook goes on-hook,
the previously dead phone gets the line before it goes on-hook.  (If you
can follow that description...)  Thus, hanging up the phone that was on the
line immediately transfers the line to the waiting phone without dropping
the call.  I also tend to put a bypass switch on a phone when I install
one of these, so that if I deliberately want to break in, I can.

I put these things on phones and modems whenever they share a line so that
people don't trash the data and so that when uucp fires up it doesn't blast
people off the line.  Works like a charm.


Michael Sleator
Ardent Computer
...!{decwrl | hplabs | ubvax | uunet}!ardent!sleat


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

Date: Fri, 14 Oct 88 17:42:23 EDT
From: nvuxh![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: comp.dcom.telecom posting


Mr. Moderator:
I'm having trouble with this posting; our vnews doesn't seem to
know what to do with it, so I'm mailing it directly.  Hope this
isn't a difficulty.

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (jetzer) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:
> > A long while ago someone posted a question about how to build a simple
> > circuit which would light a LED (or a simple lamp) when an extension
> > was lifted elsewhere in the house.  The requirements are:
>
> >   - The LED lights when another extension is lifted, showing that it
> >     is in use.
> >   - The LED must be powered off the phone line.
> >   - No extra wires must be run to the telephone.
> >   - The circuit should be reasonable small so that it can fit inside a
> >     desktop style phone.
>

When I was in college a friend & I built a circuit to do just
this --- as I recall, it used a Zener diode (9V I believe) which
shorted the LED at the higher voltage when the phone was
on-hook, but stopped conducting at off-hook voltage, causing
current to go through the LED.  Just put the Zener in series
with the LED and a resistor, and insert that in series on
the line (not sure if tip or ring, or if it makes any
difference).  If that doesn't make sense, I have the schematic at home;
if anyone really wants it I could attempt to post it (could be
a challenge).

I must admit that it was my friend that thought up the
circuit (Chuck, are you out there?).


Steve Reinhardt

Bell Communications Research
Red Bank, NJ


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

From: Michael Sleator <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Oct 88 00:44:52 GMT
To: uunet![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: ardent!sleat
From: [e-mail] (Michael Sleator)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: In use light
Summary: minor correction of advertising hype
Keywords: privacy, phone tapping
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Oct 88 00:44:51 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael Sleator)
Organization: Ardent Computer
Lines: 29

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:
>For $24.95, Hello-Direct makes a device called the "Privacy Device" on
>Page 8 of their Fall catalog.  It has an annoying "feature" though...
>
>    "Make sure no one is listening in on your calls."
>
>        "You're assured of privacy when the Silent Patrol is on duty on
>    your single-line telephone.  Just plug it in between your phone and
>    the wall and it will let you know any time someone is listening in on
>    an extension or tapping your line.  In the event of either of these
     [etc.]         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ don't believe it!


I hate advertising hype, so I just wanted to correct this.  Sure, you can
build a device that detects another load such as a phone, but anyone who
knows anything about electronics can tap a subscriber loop in such a way that
nothing will be able to distinguish the minute effect of the tap from normal
effects.  (Hint: imagine clamping an oscilloscope current probe around one
of the conductors.)

Anyone who tries to sell you something with the claim that it will detect
"any" tapping on the line is most likely lying.



Michael Sleator
Ardent Computer
...!{decwrl | hplabs | ubvax | uunet}!ardent!sleat


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

To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 88 22:05:18 -0700
From: Steve Lemke  <comdesign!ivucsb![e-mail]>


To: comdesign!uunet!comp-dcom-telecom
Path: ivucsb!steve
From: [e-mail] (Steve Lemke <steve>)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: RJ 45 Wall Mount
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Oct 88 05:05:14 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve Lemke <steve>)
Organization: The Audio Club at UCSB, Isla Vista, California
Lines: 19


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Len Rose) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
> I am looking for a source of RJ45 wall mount receptacles.
> We are installing some data terminals in a new building and I
> want to prewire using 8 conductor cable and RJ45 wall connectors.

You might call ORA Electronics at [phone].  They carry flush mount
8 pin wall jacks (both single and double on a plate).  They also have surface
mount 8 pin jacks, and lots of other phone, cable tv, computer, and cellular
phone accessories.  They are a wholesaler, meaning they sell to resellers as
opposed to end users (but if you're a business you can probably get their
catalog anyway - it's really a cool catalog).  Hope this helps.

----- Steve Lemke ------------------- "MS-DOS (OS/2, etc.) - just say no!"
----- Internet: [e-mail]; [e-mail]   AppleLink:  LEMKE
----- uucp:     pyramid!comdesign!ivucsb!steve       CompuServe: 73627,570
----- alt.uucp: {decwrl!}sun!apple!lemke             GEnie:      S.Lemke
----- Quote:    "What'd I go to college for?"   "You had fun, didn't you?"

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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Ship-to-shore telephone
Date: 15 Oct 88 01:35:27 GMT



    This past weekend, I was on a boat with a marine VHF radio.  One of
the things you can do with this is to call (on channel 22?) the marine
operator and ask her (NOTE: all written references that I've seen refer to
the marine operator as "her") to place a call for you.  Presumably, you
either have to call collect or charge the call to a calling card.

    Who handles the call?  Does AT&T have all the marine operator
service?  Can you get to an alternate long distance carrier if you want to?
Are there marine AOSs?  Is there any way to receive an incomming call (i.e.
initiated by a shore station, calling a vessel at sea)?
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

To: elroy!ames![e-mail]
From: elroy!suned1![e-mail] (Everett F. Batey II)
Subject: True or false DIGITAL service procludes modems
Date: 17 Oct 88 07:29:35 GMT



Not long ago we had threats that would have ended UUCP and local host fast
dialins .. we were told.  More recently ( first plans fell thru, usual bureau-
cracy ) we hear rumors that GTEL will be furnishing us an ALL DIGITAL phone
system.

Can anyone tell me what the likelihood is of fast UUCP ( 9600 - 19200 ) being
able to survive the didital dial lines or fast user host dial in out being
possible without buying separate analog lines.  I understand analog / digital
lines is frequently used losely to describe COs as well as local equipment
and MUXing facilities.  All I know is the above and I urgently need educating
as the Phone-Czars are playing national_secret.  help .. thanks /Ev/

--
 suned1![e-mail]   sun!tsunami!suned1!efb   [e-mail]
    Any statements / opinions made here are mine, alone, not those of the
    United States, the DoD, the Navy, the Congress, the Judiciary, nor ...

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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Sun Oct 30 23:34:41 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA17631; Sun, 30 Oct 88 23:34:41 EST
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-it.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA07465; Sun, 30 Oct 88 23:19:14 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA22623; Sun, 30 Oct 88 23:19:11 EST
Message-Id:  <8810310419.AA22623@buit5>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88 23:07:56 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #163
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Oct 88 23:07:56 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 163

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                           Re: In-use light
                   "Customer Line Charge (Federal)"
                           Re: In use light

[We have made some changes in the way mail is sent out and we hope the
nuisance of duplicate and triplicate copies of the same issue is over.
We are still processing quite a backlog of mail; another four or five
Digests are to be released in the next two or three days. PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Mon, 17 Oct 88 04:54:32 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]


I've noticed in recent Telecoms that there was mention of allowing
alternate long distance carriers to access the AT&T/Bell calling
card database, so that alternate LD customers can use the same
0+ dialing system that Bell Calling Cards use...
-
Such a system would seem to make placing a calling card call even
more difficult than it has recently become. (And it is ESPECIALLY
difficult for people who travel from state to state).
-
For example, when I dial a inter-late (roughly "long distance") calling
card call from a Bell payphone, the call goes to AT&T and thus AT&T's
billing/calling card equipment. I believe that all Bell Operating
Companies (and perhaps even the GTE and other "lesser" ( :-) )
operating companies) use AT&T as the default carrier for all
1+ and 0+ calls from their own payphones. Ie, New York Tel or Pac*Bell
will connect you to AT&T is you were to dial Chicago from one of their
payphones, unless you specify another carrier with a 10xxx/950/800 number.
-
Therefore, if you were to dial 0+312-555-1212 from, lets say, Los
Angeles, you get put through to AT&T's equipment. Now if you have
an AT&T account, fine; the call will go through with no problem. But
let's say the customer has a Sprint account, and is trying to use his
Sprint card instead. (This assumes that Sprint has some arrangement
to have AT&T Card like digit formats, with a PIN number that identifies
the caller as a Sprint customer.) Should the AT&T Calling Card system
pass the call over to Sprint, to let Sprint handle the call? Should
AT&T proccess the call, and then bill Sprint? And at what rates?
-
The problem appears to be that once the customer dials 0+ number, the
call automatically goes over to the local Bell Co. or AT&T, and THEN
takes the PIN number, after it has reached the final carrier's calling
card equipment. It would be foolish to have a call go to AT&T, and THEN
have AT&T send the call back to Sprint once AT&T realized it was a Sprint
calling card number which was being used.
-

Morever, I think that AT&T is not allowed to provide intra-lata
calls in some areas, such as Mass, New York or Connecticut. (Or AT&T
hasn't asked to do so...) So if a Sprint customer wanted to call
from Boston to Lexington (both in the 617 LATA) , and wanted to use
the Bell 0+ method (not the 800 FONcard number or 950-1033), then
he would have to go over New England Tel's Calling Card system,
which would see the Sprint number, and then hand it over to Sprint.
But once it did so, a customer would be able to make a second call
(a "sequence call") without hanging up to ANYWHERE else he wanted to,
since Sprint does both intra and inter-LATA calls. IE, after calling
from Boston to Lexington, I want to call LA on the same call.
Under some terribly stupid divestiture rule, I can no longer do
this on my AT&T/Bell card. Since I made a local call first, I am on
New England Tel's equipment, so I have to hang up and dial
0+213-555-1212 to get LA over AT&T's equipment. In other words,
there are two calling card systems - One which the local Bell uses
for it's calls, and the other which AT&T uses. Some areas don't have
this (like CT) and some will eventually get it (like New York City),
while most of the larger metro areas allready do. However, Sprint
presently does both - I can sequence call from local to long distance
back and forth as manyt times as I want. This of course is over
their 800/950 number, but if Sprint were to be allowed to make use
of Bell's/AT&T's 0+ system, they would have the advantage of
unrestricted sequence calling which AT&T customers, unfortunately,
do not.
-
All in all, it seems both too cumbersome and too unfair to allow
Sprint, MCI and all the others have 0+ access. Interestingly, if
Green had allowed Bell Calling Card/operator system to remain
the same (ie, not splitting up services between AT&T and the Bells)
then it would seem to be easier to institute alternate long distance
carriers' use of the 0+ system. If there was only one system, which
would be operated by the local Bells, then the local Bell could determine
who would handle the call by the PIN number, and hand the call off
to the appropriate carrier. (Very much like 10xxx dialing is now...Of
course I don't know too many people who ever use it, but that's
another story...) Even this would be complicated, but it
would be less complicated than doing so under the current "dual"
system.
-
If I've made any mistakes please let me know...This stuff is in
my thesis and I'd like to get it right! :-)
-
   -Doug
[e-mail] (temp)

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

From: nvuxr![e-mail] (l.j.lang)
To: [e-mail]
Date: 15 Oct 1988  17:00 EDT
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom


Moderator of comp.dcom.telecom:

Please post this to the newsnet.
Please let me know if there's any problem.

Thanks,
Larry Lang

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Subject: Re: In-use light
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Summary: I built something like this (More or less)
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (jetzer) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:
> > A long while ago someone posted a question about how to build a simple
> > circuit which would light a LED (or a simple lamp) when an extension
> > was lifted elsewhere in the house.  The requirements are:
>
> >   - The LED lights when another extension is lifted, showing that it
> >     is in use.
> >   - The LED must be powered off the phone line.
> >   - No extra wires must be run to the telephone.
> >   - The circuit should be reasonable small so that it can fit inside a
> >     desktop style phone.
>
> > No one was able to come up with a simple schematic to do this that
> > worked.  The upshot was that one could buy such a device for about $30
>
> I would also be interested in such a device - my roommate has this
> nasty habit of picking up the phone while I'm using my modem.
> Actually, I'd be happy even if it required some extra wires or external
> power - just as long as it would detect any phone on the line being in use.
> I might even be willing to let $30 for such a device (maybe).  Where is
> one available?
>
> Mike Jetzer


I built something like this once.  It consisted of an outboard box,
essentially a continuity tester, with a power supply and LED.
The LED would light up whenever an extension
(besides my own) was lifted.  The way it worked is simple:
Phone cable has four wires, two active (red and green)
and two inactive (yellow and black).
When you lift a phone off-hook, several switches change position,
some open, some close.  I took apart every phone in the house,
found terminals connected to a switch that closed
when the switch hook was lifted, and connected the black and yellow wires
to those terminals.  Then I hooked my detector box
to the yellow and the black wires near my phone.
When any rewired switch hook was lifted, the LED lit up.
[I didn't rewire the switch hook of the phone in my room,
since I only wanted to know when remote phones were lifted.
I was a lot more secretive in those days. :-)]

Thus, the circuit looked like this:
                    Off-hook    On-hook
                    Extension    Extension
                    (Switch        (Switch
                    closes)        still open)

                    __>|        __>  |
                    |  |        |    |
                    |  |        |    |
    Black    --------|---------------|--)------------|----)-----
            |           |             |
            |           |             |
    Yellow    --------)---------|--------|-----------------|-----
            |      |
            |      |
            |-9V--LED-|
               (Lights up)
            Detector Box

Some comments:

1. You must rewire every phone where you want to detect off-hook.
This shouldn't be too difficult, especially if you have phones
with spade lug internal connections,
rather than screw terminal or (worse) soldered connections.
Also, most phones come with pretty good schematics,
which is convenient, though you can just use a continuity tester
(such as the detector box) to find a close-when-off-hook switch
by trial and error.

2. The black and yellow wires must run to every phone.
You'll want to check for their continuity before you begin this project.
(Yellow can be especially dubious-it didn't run every where in my house.)

3. It requires external power.
I just didn't want to mess with the 48 VDC power from the phone line.
Too many problems with incoming and outgoing signals (e.g. ~90 VAC ring).

4. I doubt the phone company would approve.
I make no claims about this, except that I used it without incident
for several years.  I never checked it with NJ Bell, the FCC,
Underwriters' Lab, or even my parents.  I can't see why it would
cause any problems, but if it does, don't say I didn't warn you.

5. I only used one detector box.
I don't know what the implications would be of using more than one.

This is a pretty cheap solution.  I spent less than $20,
and I used a fancy project box for the detector.

If you like the Larry Lang Extension Detector (LLED),
I would gladly accept the $30 Mike and Mike said
they'd each be willing to pay!

Let me know if you use this, or if you have any questions.

Cheers,
Larry Lang

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
bellcore!nvuxr!larryl
Room NVC 1G-410, 331 Newman Springs Road, Red Bank, NJ 07701

My employer (Bellcore) has nothing to do with this idea.
I designed it before I came here,
so they didn't buy it for their $1 patent fee.

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

From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: "Customer Line Charge (Federal)"
Date: Sat, 15-Oct-88 08:18:29 PDT


Following divestiture the local telephone companies were given by
the FCC a rate increase of, I think at first, $1.00 per telephone
line connection.  This was to compensate the local companies for
loss of "revenue" from AT&T and was to increase over time.

Without going into such esoteric matters as the justification for
this rate or its amount, which I believe is presently scheduled to
increase again, although there appears to be some small amount of
organized consumer resistance against such, what is the PRESENT
rate?  I thought the line charge rose to $2.00 and then to $2.50,
hence this question.

Here in OK Southwestern Bell (SWB) charges $2.60, which is itemized
separately on the bill as "Customer Line Charge (Federal)" in an
obvious attempt to make people think, at best, it is a tax which
goes to the federal government, i.e., not SWB, and at the least, it
is not "really" a part of your phone bill.

(BTW, in the Oklahoma City local calling area, approximately 35
miles in diameter, a residential single user pulse line costs
$17.18, including taxes.  The same type line when designated as a
business line costs $45.16.  Tone dialing is extra.)

-- Mark V. Miller
-- [e-mail]

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

To: munnari![e-mail]
From: munnari!stcns3.stc.oz.au![e-mail] (Dave Horsfall)
Subject: Re: In use light
Date: 18 Oct 88 05:47:48 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>,
    [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:

[ An "in-use" LED for a telephone extension ]

A local electronics hobbyist magazine "Silicon Chip" published such
a circuit, involving monitoring the line voltage and triggering
an LM3909 LED flasher when it drops to around 12v or so.  There was
also a companion circuit, which blocked other extensions when one
was picked up - useful!  This worked on a similar principle, and it
fires an SCR across each extension instead.  The device has gone
a long way to keeping my wife off the phone when I'm on the modem...

I see no reason why an Australian design should not work elsewhere;
they merely compared the line voltage (50v on-hook) against a reference
zener, and did its magic when it dropped (about 12v off-hook).  A diode
bridge supplied the power, and the LM3909 is quite an efficient flasher.

The diagrams won't reproduce too well on a terminal screen, so I'll
send photocopies of the articles to anyone who wants them, although
I'd prefer not to be inundated...  Perhaps the first few enquirers
(assuming there are any :-) can supply others in their country.

Oh, and Telecom get stroppy when they find you connecting non-approved
devices to their network, so y'all are warned.

--
Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU),  Alcatel-STC Australia,  [e-mail]
[e-mail],  ...munnari!stcns3.stc.OZ.AU!dave
    PCs haven't changed computing history - merely repeated it

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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Mon Oct 31 02:10:06 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA27723; Mon, 31 Oct 88 02:10:06 EST
Received: from buit5 (BUIT5.BU.EDU) by bu-it.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA14271; Mon, 31 Oct 88 02:00:36 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA22813; Mon, 31 Oct 88 02:00:35 EST
Message-Id:  <8810310700.AA22813@buit5>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88  1:45:50 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #164
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 31 Oct 88  1:45:50 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 164

Today's Topics:

                         Re: FRG phone numbers
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                   Circuit for ringing/inuse light.
                   Re: Local Telco and Credit Cards
                                301-250
                   telephone controlled theromstats
                       Tape Recording Legalities
              Re: More Houston bbs's vs Southwestern Bell

[In this issue, our European correspondent discusses 'non-standard' num-
bering systems and J. Eric Townsend discusses the proposed business phone
rates in SWBTel territory. I understand since this was submitted, SWB
has since backed off. Sorry to be late with this report, but we are still
a few days backlogged. Enjoy your reading!  PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 Oct 88 10:32:55 PDT
From: [e-mail] (UNIX-to-UNIX Copy)
To: ent for longer than block.With equal [e-mail],

Path: decwrl!hplabs!hpl-opus!hpccc!hp-sde!hpcuhb!hpqtdla!peter
From: [e-mail] (Peter Locke)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: FRG phone numbers
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Oct 88 17:06:22 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: HP, Queensferry Telecomms (UK)
Lines: 32


>How does the CO know when it has all the digits?  Does it time
>out, or do prefixes carry implicit lengths?

Neither, really, for most of the European networks.

The old mechanical networks operated step-by-step signalling. This means
that as you dial, different exchanges in the network interpret the
digits you are dialling to determine the route, they connect you through to
the next exchange and ignores the dialling. The next exchange now
continues this interpretation until the end exchange rings the phone
and - usually - any further dialled digits are lost. In the UK, for
PBX direct extension dialling, the PTT fits a 'balck-box' in the end
exchange which 'stores' further digits and then passes them on when
the PBX connects - I don't know how they tell how many digits are
needed.

For the new CCITT SS#7 networks, as found in most European countries to
some degree ( and all of Germany ), a call can be either step-by-step
or block. We are used to step-by-step and it's benefits to us as users (
the network can give busy or bad number indications immediately, it doesn't
wait till the whole number is dialled in ) and the CCITT#7 protocol has a
Subsequent-Address-Message defined to ease implementation. ANSI does
*not* have the SAM, so I guess either you're 'stuck' with block.

So, in summary, we do not need time-outs to know if the user has entered
all the digits. Effectively, the network 'finds out' by trying it. And
no they do not need to be fixed length for the same reason.

Now, when our national PTTs have *serious* competition, I think this will
all change as the astute might have realized that step-by-step ties up
equipment for longer than block. With equal access, the trunk providers
will not be happy with step-by-step. I'm holding my breath !

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

From: phri!dasys1![e-mail] (Richard Segal)
Date: 19 Oct 88 02:58:41 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: dasys1!jailbait
From: [e-mail] (Richard Segal)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Circuit for ringing/inuse light.
Summary: Wanted - such a circuit.
Keywords: ringing in use telltale
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 19 Oct 88 02:58:40 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Richard Segal)
Followup-To: comp.dcom.telecom
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Big Electric Cat
Lines: 21

I'm looking to build a box (2 actually - In use by one phone, ringing far from
both phones) to tell me (okay, so I'm getting repetative) 1) when the line is
in use (so no one picks up on the modem) and 2) when the phone is ringing
quite a distance and alot of noise from where I'm sitting.
What  do I need for these? Do either (both) exist commercially? Etc.

Also, I want to hook up a tone dialer to a rotary dial phone.  Where can I
get a steady voltage to power the dialer?
  MAny thanks for all answers.
Rich.






--
Richard Segal                                NYU Student, Rev., Looney at Large
Big Electric Cat Public UNIX                      ARPA:[e-mail]
..!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!jailbait                        BITNET:[e-mail]
"Bob", Eris, Norton I, Mal-2, Jailbait.   Doesn't it have a nice ring to it?

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

To: comp-dcom-telecom
From: hp-sdd![e-mail] (Peter Locke)
Subject: Re: Local Telco and Credit Cards
Date: 16 Oct 88 17:24:53 GMT



>The PIN is assigned and maintained at the local telephone company level,
>regardless of the issuing carrier. How else could the local switch process
>your calls?

My understanding of the US network is that currently everyone pays AT&T
to handle this. When such a call comes to a local exchange, a message
is sent to an AT&T Control Point in the network which returns whether
valid and how to bill etc. This is one of the reasons for the SS#7
Common Channel Signalling push in the Operating Companies. With their
own SS#7 networks thay can easily provide this themselves with their
own SCPs and hence make even more profit as they won't have to pat
AT&T for the service, other than when it's an out of area call and I
pity all you poor subscribers when they decide how they're gonna
rip you off for that feature.

PS: 1-800 numbers likewise is currently serviced by AT&T, lots of
  money their and SS#7 will enable the Operating Companies to make
  even more profits on it and offer whizzier services like free-phone
  numbers for just a small geographic area for one day.

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

Date:     Wed, 19 Oct 88 15:31:07 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  301-250


Apparently within the last 2 years, there has been a 250 prefix in
area 301 in Ocean City, Md., implemented.  I was in the area recently
and noticed that 250 was on pay phones AND in local businesses.
It looks like 301-250 is a new geographic area of service (broken out
of 524, which has the same calling area).

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

To: [e-mail]
From: rocksanne![e-mail] (Lee Moore)
Subject: telephone controlled theromstats
Date: 20 Oct 88 13:35:37 GMT



I like the idea of time controlled (automatic setback) house theromstats.
Unfortuately, my lifestyle is far to erratic for anything based on
a clock.  I have heard of a thermostat that can be called on the telephone
and told to change its setting.  This would be ideal because then I could
call it when I leave work and things would be warm before I get home.

Does anybody have any pointers to such a device?  How stable is this
technology?  I would hate for it go hairwire on me.

On a related topic, does anybody know of a telephone front end that I could
stick more than one phone controlled device on the same phone line?  I have
heard of a device that sits between the phone jack and the answering machine.
Normally it operates in pass-through mode but after the phone is picked
up (typically by the answering machine) it listens for a command code
which allows you to connect to some other device instead.

thanks in advance!

Lee

--
Lee Moore -- Xerox Webster Research Center
UUCP:    {allegra, decvax, cmcl2, rutgers}!rochester!rocksanne!lee
Arpa Internet:    [e-mail]
DDN:        [phone]

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

To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Tape Recording Legalities
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 88 17:29:17 -0700
From: [e-mail]


Is it legal (in California?) to record my own phone conversation
with a single caller without informing the other party that the
conversation is being recorded?
Furthermore, is it legal to tape a meeting in my office (not on the phone)
with a visitor (or my boss) without informing him/her that the conversation
is being recorded?

Alex Odyniec
[e-mail]

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

To: uunet![e-mail]
From: flatline![e-mail] (j eric townsend)
Subject: Re: More Houston bbs's vs Southwestern Bell
Date: 22 Oct 88 18:21:42 GMT
There are a lot of Usenet nodes in Texas -- with quite a few being
bbses, I think.  (I guess I could go count [u,d].usa.tx.*  Nah... :-)

Anyway, how will it affect us?  The way I interpret SWB's decision,
we're in trouble as well, as soon as they find out about us.

Maybe we could get the PUC addicted to Usenet, then they'd stick up for
it.  :-)
--
"Imitation is the sincerest form of Television." - Mighty Mouse (and R. Bakshi)
J. Eric Townsend                  smail: 511 Parker #2, Houston, Tx, 77007
Inet: [e-mail]             UUCP:  uunet!nuchat!flatline!erict
Bitnet: [e-mail]            ..!bellcore!tness1!/

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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Wed Nov  2 02:50:21 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA07392; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:50:21 EST
Received: from BUIT5.BU.EDU by bu-it.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA13765; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:37:52 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA25280; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:37:49 EST
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA24061; Tue, 1 Nov 88 00:56:52 EST
Message-Id:  <8811010556.AA24061@buit5>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88  0:43:10 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #165
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 1 Nov 88  0:43:10 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 165

Today's Topics:

                More Houston bbs's vs Southwestern Bell

[This issue of the Digest is devoted to the single subject of business
telephone rates for BBS' and similar computer services. SWBTel has
made this an issue with sysops in the Houston, TX area recently. The
letters which follow describe the problem in more detail. Your replies
and rebuttals are encouraged. My own opinion is that like any other
'service' -- profitable or not -- BBS's are used by the public, and do
not qualify for 'residential' rates. What do you think?  PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: moray!judy (Judy Scheltema)
Subject: More Houston bbs's vs Southwestern Bell
Date: 22 Oct 88 03:49:29 GMT




The following are transcripts of letters on file with the PUC as of
10/19/88.  My thanks to ESTEBAN for going down, copying them, and
posting them on Flight:

Mr. Coyle Kelly
Executive Director
Public Utility Commission of Texas
7800 Shoal Creek Boulevard
Suite 400N
Austin, Texas 78757

Re:  Service  Classification of Computer Bulletin Board Service Providers and
     Amateur Radio Autopatches

Dear Mr. Kelly:

          This letter is to advise you that Southwestern Bell is making a
concerted effort to uniformly enforce its interpretation of the
residence/business service distinction related to local exchange access line
service provided to Computer Bulletin Board Service ("BBS") providers and
Amateur Radio Autopatches.

          Basically, any subscriber requesting local exchange access lines
which will be used to provide, supply, and or disseminate,  any
data/information or any other "service" to or for others (not just
themselves), will be considered a business class local exchange customer.
This is not a change in Southwestern Bell's previous policy, but simply an
interpretation which is consistent with the proper enforcement of Southwestern
Bell's existing tarrifs.  This interpretation will allow consistent treatment
of accounts which have been misclassified by the business office.  In this
regard, it should be noted that not all BBS providers and Autopatches are
currently receiving the service at business rates, but some are currently
classified as and paying residential rates.  Accordingly, this interpretation
will result in uniform treatment for all such subscribers in the state.

          The rationale for this decision is that neither the BBS providers
nor the Autopatches use their telephone service for personal, residential use.
Instead, it is Southwestern Bell's understanding that the BBS providers and
autopatches essential share their local exchange access lines with non-family
members, who would not otherwise have access to such lines, in providing
services.  Specifically, Southwestern Bell understands that a BBS provider
operates a computer database type service for other coputer operators in the
exchange.  The BBS system is programmed to answer incomming calls and provide
whatever information services which the customer has elected to provide.  The
Autopatch works much like a cellular IMTS telephone and allows amateur radio
operators in their automobiles and other locations to place local telephone
calls via Southwestern Bell's network through the telephone service provided
to the Autopatch.  By transmitting an access code on a radio frequency, an
amateur radio operator can access a repeater which essentially takes the
telephone receiver off hook so that the repeater becomes a mobile telephone.
The amateur radio operator in his automobile is then able to place telephone
calls over the telephone line through the repeater.

          In both instances, the BBS providers and Autopatches are using their
local exchange access lines to provide services to computer owners and amateur
radio operators who are not the customer of Southwestern Bell's service.  The
fact that the BBS and the Autopatch may be a hobby of the customer or the
group which has subscribed to Southwestern Bell's telephone service does not
make the customer eligible for a residential rate.  It is immaterial why the
customer has requested the telephone service.  The distinction of whether the
service is residential or business depends on the "use of the service" and
whether the service is primarily for personal, residential use.  In the case
of both the BBS provider and the Autopatch, the use of the telephone service
is *not* primarily for personal, residential use, and should be considered as
more of a business nature rather than of a residence nature.

          Southwestern Bell's interpretation *does not* affect the rates which
individuals having a home computer attached to a telephone line with a modem
will pay, when the use of such line is primarily for residential use.  If,
however, the home computer is attached to a telephone line is used for
commercial purposes, then business rates would apply.  Further Southwestern
Bell's interpretation does not apply to amateur radio operators who are not
operating an Auotpatch, but are operation from their residence and who do not
allow the use of their line by others who would not normally have access to
such line (i.e., persons other than members of their household or family).
Amateur radio clubs or associations would be subject to business rates, as has
always been the case.

          Sothwestern Bell is proceeding to reclassify the accounts of both
the BBS providers and Autopatches consistent with the foregoing
interpretation.

                                  Very truly yours,

                                  John R. Loehman

cc:  Mr. John Costello, Telephone Division, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)
     Mr. Bruce Penny (U. S. Mail)
     Mr. David Featherston, Telephone Division, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)
     Mr. Don Laub, Telephone Division, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)
     Mr. Martin Schell, Telephone Division, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)
     Ms. Betty Suthard, Information Specialist, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)




Ms. Martha Hinojosa-Nadler
Division Staff Manager
Revenue Requirements
SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
1610 Guadalupe, Room 310
Austin, Texas 78701

RE:  Increase in Rates for BBS Operators and Amateur Radio Autopatches

Dear Ms. Hinojosa-Nadler:

As a result of information provided to this office (copy of letter to Mr.
Coyle Kelly from Mr. John Loehman) that Southwestern Bell planned to uniformly
enforce its tarrif concerning proper classification of service for Bulletin
Board Service providers and Amateur Radio Autopatches and individual notices
that have been sent to these customers that their rates would increase, I feel
the need to exercise extreme caution.

I am aware that Mr. Jim Lydon of your organization put out a news release that
a change in classification *would not affext all the customers*.  However,
I am fully aware of the confusion that can be encounterd with correct
information reaching the appropriate personnel in knowing whether or not to
apply the "new rate".  Consequently, I am asking Southwestern Bell to notify
this office of any customer who incurrs a change in his/her rates beginning
with the first billing cycle where this change was anticipated.
Additionally,  I am asking that any customer account that reflects an increase
in rates, that Southwestern Bell investigate the matter as if was a normal
complain filed through this office.  The response to this office with the
results of the investigation needs  to include information on how the service
is being used that would support the company's position that a change in rate
classification is warranted.

I have spoken with a number of customers about this matter as a result of the
newspaper articles and subsequent calls into Southwestern Bell's business
office and my information to them has been---if your bill reflects a change in
rates *pay the old rate only at this time*, dispute the increase and to
provide this office with a copy of the bill and a letter so that a complaint
can be filed with the company.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.  If I need to clarify my
concerns further, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Betty A. Suthard
Information Specialist

bas

cc:  Mr. Bill Dunn


 143: More Information
  By: ESTEBAN  [335]
Date: 16:42  10/19/88

Today I went to personally talk to Ms. Suthard at PUC.  She was very kind in
giving me a photocopy of the above letters.  She said that she has received a
few letters and phone calls on this, but I was only the second person to
mention that SWB was planning to put up their own Pay BBS System and the rumor
that this was the reason for the rate hike on all of us, to knock out the
competition.
  That statement warranted a sizable chunk of her calendar as she noted this
information and promised that she will soon be sending SWB another letter
concerning this (their Pay BBS System).  To paraphrase, she was giving the
idea that the motivation behind the rate hike and the correlation of their Pay
BBS serious thought.

She also stated that if anyone out there gets a change in billing, she wants
the bill to be paid at the old rate, a letter stating that the bill was being
paid as is `in protest' and a copy of it sent to her desk.

It would appear that we have a symathetic defender out there.  But that is no
reason to sit back and relax.  Rev up them Printers and compose those Letters.
If you want to submit your `beef' in person, here are directions to PUC.

Andrson Lane to Shoal Creek.  Turn South onto Shoal Creek.
The offices of PUC are in the Office Block on the West side of Shoal Creek,
   right behind the Co Co's on the corner.
The office block is arranged in a right-angle fasion.  Park in the parking lot
   between the Block and Co Co's.
Walk to the courtyard in the angle of the right angle.  In the courtyard is a
   fountain.  From the fountain, enter the building at the entrance on the NW
   side of the Courtyard.
Inside will be a staircase leading up and the door to the Offices of PUC will
   be on your immediate left before the staircase.
Inside, go through the doorway on the left, Betty Suthard's office is the
  second one on the opposite wall beside a floor to ceiling map of Texas.

Other than that, all I have to say is...
                                     ... copy this information people and
spread it as far and wide as possible.  It's not just Houston and Austin that
are targets, but the whole state of Texas.

Esteban

--
Judy Scheltema                |                     uunet!nuchat!moray!judy
Houston, Texas                |                  bellcore!tness1!moray!judy


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

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


From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Wed Nov  2 03:14:46 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA08962; Wed, 2 Nov 88 03:14:46 EST
Received: from BUIT5.BU.EDU by bu-it.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA14464; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:55:31 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA25296; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:55:25 EST
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA24099; Tue, 1 Nov 88 01:11:36 EST
Message-Id:  <8811010611.AA24099@buit5>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88  1:07:09 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #166
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 1 Nov 88  1:07:09 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 166

Today's Topics:

              Telecom gear distributors needed (Teltone?)
                           Re: In-use light
                           Re: In-use light
                       Re: I need a second line
                           Cellular roaming
                           Roamer Validation

[This issue and #165 before it were actually prepared late Monday night
and submitted to the mailer early Tuesday morning. Due to (hopefully)
one final problem, they bounced, and I had to remail them early Wednes-
day morning instead. I realize you are getting them about 24 hours
later than you should, based on the dating, etc.

Our backlog is about finished; beginning with the next issue we will be
printing current submissions. Please remember, there was NO issue 158,
and you MUST use our new addresses to get things to us. We are operating
from BU-IT.BU.EDU. Submissions go to [e-mail] and requests
for list maintainence, etc go to TELECOM-REQUEST at the same site. Enjoy
this issue, and begin sending submissions to us again!  PTownson]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:     Tue, 25 Oct 88 01:46:38 EDT
From: Doug Scott <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]


Hello everyone!
-
One quick question:  How are directory assistance (DA) calls handled
                     in one state but between two separate LATA's?
-
I was under the impression that the Bell Operating Company (or whatever
GTE/Telecom/etc.) was allowed to handle those calls, as well as certain
types of 'customer service' calls such as the 811 system with Pac*Bell.
-
Yet recently I tried to make a calling card call from White Plains
(area code 914) to Albany (area codes 518) which are both served by
New York Telephone, but are in two different LATA's. When you make
any sort of In-State DA call from a payphone, all such calls are
free (both intra- and inter-LATA, as long as they are in the same
state), and hence I assumed that they were handled by the local
Bell. But when I was in White Plains, I was at a friend's house, and
had to make a Calling Card call so he wouldn't be charged. I
dialed 0+518-555-1212, entered my card, and got "Thank you for
using AT&T"!  A few days later, I tried calling from Ludlow, Mass
(near Springfield, area code 403) to Weymouth, Mass (617), which
are also in two separate LATA's. I dialed 617-555-1212 for DA in
Weymouth, and also got "Thank you for using AT&T".
-
I assume this means that AT&T carriers these calls, but the question
is why? Does AT&T pick up the tab for these calls from payphones?
If so, can I also dial 10333+1+617-555-1212 from Western Mass and
have Sprint do the same?
-
I'd appreciate any info on this, and I'll summarize any responses
mailed to me.
-
Thanks,
-Doug


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

To: seismo![e-mail]
From: esosun![e-mail] (Keith Pilotti)
Subject: Telecom gear distributors needed (Teltone?)
Date: 27 Oct 88 21:35:35 GMT



A few weeks ago someone posted an address for Teltone Ltd. in Canada.
I wrote to them for a catalog, however the mail was returned
undelivered (they apparently have moved).

Does anyone have a current address/phone for Teltone, and/or any other
distributor of telephone gear.

***

I also would like to know where I can get a schematic for a ~15 year old
Western Electric speaker phone.  This is one of those standalone
speakers with the separate switch/microphone switches, originally
designed for use with multi-line pbx.  I'd like to re-wire it for use
on a single line.  Sorry, I don't know the exact model number
off-hand.  Any information will be appreciated!

Thanks...
+Keith Pilotti
--
Science Applications International Corporation
10260 Campus Point Drive, M/S-32, San Diego, CA 92121

[phone]    {sun!suntan,seismo}!esosun!sol!keith
                 [e-mail]


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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Edward M. Embick)
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 28 Oct 88 16:40:08 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chip Rosenthal) writes:
>I built something like this once.  It consisted of an outboard box,
>essentially a continuity tester, with a power supply and LED.
>The LED would light up whenever an extension
>(besides my own) was lifted.  The way it worked is simple:
>Phone cable has four wires, two active (red and green)
>and two inactive (yellow and black).
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The second pair of wires are normally used for a second phone line,
such as sysops have installed for their BBS's.  This solution is NOT
one that would maintain the integrety of you phone system!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Embick (If God wanted me to write legibly, He wouldn't have invented email)
Computer Sciences Corporation                               ____   ____   ____
4045 Hancock St.         MILNET:  [e-mail]    //     //     //
San Diego, CA 92110                                        \\___  ___//  \\___
[phone] x287

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

To:
From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 29 Oct 88 01:43:26 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chip Rosenthal) writes:
-
- The LED would light up whenever an extension
- (besides my own) was lifted.  The way it worked is simple:
- Phone cable has four wires, two active (red and green)
- and two inactive (yellow and black).
- When you lift a phone off-hook, several switches change position,
- some open, some close.  I took apart every phone in the house,
- found terminals connected to a switch that closed
- when the switch hook was lifted, and connected the black and yellow wires
- to those terminals.  Then I hooked my detector box
- to the yellow and the black wires near my phone.
- When any rewired switch hook was lifted, the LED lit up.
-
- Larry Lang
-
- My employer (Bellcore) has nothing to do with this idea.

Aeeesh!!! This is *deadly*.  Beware this fix.  The phone company often, if
not always, uses the black and yellow wires for a second phone line.
Connecting them together in a telephone is BAD NEWS.  One day you install a
second line, lift up the receiver and bang!  There goes one exchange interface.
                        - Der
--
Reply:    [e-mail]        (Der Tynan @ Tynan Computers)
    {mips,pyramid}!sultra!dtynan
    Cast a cold eye on life, on death.  Horseman, pass by...    [WBY]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 29 Oct 88 00:42:00 PST
Subject: Re: I need a second line
To: "telecom" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "sultra!dtynan" <sultra![e-mail]>, "lars" <lars@salt>


> From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
> Reply-To: [e-mail]
> Subject: I need a second line...
> Date: 11 Oct 88 01:40:35 GMT
>
> ...  I would like to have a separate line for [my] modem.  I called
> Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order request.
> It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
> short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
> ... they want $45 for the first fifteen minutes [of installation time],
> and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after that.        ... It seems to
> me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
> exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
> PacBell said no.  Any comments?

Have I got comments !!!! This is outrageous !!!!

This is a request for residential phone service: The tariff probably
does not allow them to charge you by the hour for installing the
access wiring (which after installation will be owned by the phone
company).

Some phone companies have tried to claim that all modem lines are
business service rather than residential service. If this is what
they are trying, talk to the PUC and explain why this is personal
use, not business use. I have heard PUCs that will allow that a BBS is
business service, but even that is the exception.

The bandwidth of a metallic circuit is probably more like one megabit;
this is why we are moving towards IDSN: 2 twisted pairs is 1544 kbps =
24 voice channels.

In analog land, one twisted pair subscriber loop will carry two phone
services, but this may already have been exploited, so this is none of
your business. (The line belongs to PacBell, so YOU can't multiplex it;
they can.)

Santa Barbara, where I live, is GTE land, and we complain a lot, but they
have NEVER tried to pull stunts like this one.

/ Lars Poulsen
  Advanced Computer Communications
  (Customer Service).
My opinions are none of my employer's business if I express them after
hours...


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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 31 Oct 88 14:09
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular roaming


>A few cellular service providers now offer to let the roamer dial a
>call-forwarding-like feature access code from a roaming area, and
>have calls forwarded there, by the home system, at the roamer's
>expense.  This will probably become the standard.

Can you please provide examples of carriers who have actually implemented
this?  I certainly hope this does not become the standard; it's not very
good human engineering to require the cellular user to "do something" whenever
crossing from one system to another, or when getting off a plane in another
city or when returning to the home city.

Unless special trunks are installed between the two systems, the call-forwarded
call will probably have to be routed via the existing roamer access ports, which
go off-hook even when you don't answer.  If this "follow-me" forwarding becomes
the standard, lots of people are going to be annoyed by charges for unknown
incomplete calls.  Can you imagine how annoyed you would be if you had set up
follow-me forwarding, and then went into a poor service area.  Someone starts
persistently trying to call you on your home number, which is forwarded to you
via the roamer port.  They get charged for n calls to your number, even though
you didn't answer (and they didn't know they were calling a number that charges
with no answer), and you get charged for n long-distance calls from your home
system to the roamer access port.  And none of them completed calls.

>Cellular companies serving ajoining areas sometimes provide
>transparent automatic roaming service to each other's subscribers.

This has got to be what becomes the standard, not just to adjoining systems,
but throughout North America.  Currently it's only done with adjoining companies
because no one is taking advantage of the feature in the protocol which allows
a system to solicit sign-ons from telephones arriving in the area and because
there is no underlying signalling network to carry the calls.

Subscriber volume, especially of people with portables which they carry with
them cross-country, is what is needed to make this happen.  The number of
cellular subscribers doubled from 1 Million to 2 Million during the past year;
it is hoped to reach 18 Million by 1992.  Subscribers shouldn't have to put
up with what we "pioneers" have to do to use our phones when outside our home
areas.  It is unreasonable for me to have to give my secretary a list of twenty
or forty different numbers to try to reach me if I'm driving from Bangor to
Miami.  It's also unreasonable for me to dial a "follow-me" code every time I
cross an invisible system boundary.  My normal ten-digit cellular phone number
should work no matter where I am in North America.

/john

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 31 Oct 88 15:40
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Roamer Validation


>There is, of course, a LARGE security problem since the system in which you
>are roaming has no way of validating your phone's ESN.

ESN = Electronic Serial Number
MIN = Mobile Identification Number (the telephone number)
MTSO = Mobile Telephone Switching Office
MSO = Mobile Service Operator

This *was* a large security problem.  However, there are now at least two
positive validation computer networks operating nationwide (with a gateway
between them) which keep a list of the correct ESN/MIN combinations as well
as bandit ESNs and allow MTSOs to deny calls to suspect telephones.

The systems are PVS (operated by GTE Data Services) and PRV.  Generally "B"
or wireline carriers use PVS and "A" or non-wireline carriers use PRV.  This
distinction is not 100% correct, since Southwestern Bell is the wireline
carrier in Kansas City but the non-wireline (Cellular One) carrier in Boston
and Balto-Wash and PacTel is the wireline in L.A. but the non-wireline in
Atlanta (and so on).

Not all MSOs are using the validation systems yet, but MSOs who aren't are
finding that they are increasingly unable to establish any roaming agreements
for their customers, since many MSOs are now refusing to establish roaming
agreements with MSOs not served by a validation system.

Random side note:  It's legitimate for one ESN to have multiple MINs, but a
MIN may have one and only one ESN.  Thus you can have a phone which supports
multiple numbers/systems, but you can't have the same number programmed into
more than one phone.

/john

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

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


From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Wed Nov  2 03:39:25 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA10541; Wed, 2 Nov 88 03:39:25 EST
Received: from BUIT5.BU.EDU by bu-it.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA15702; Wed, 2 Nov 88 03:25:31 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA25340; Wed, 2 Nov 88 03:25:28 EST
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88  3:11:44 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 v#167
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 2 Nov 88  3:11:44 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 167

Today's Topics:

                           Re: In-use light
                      In-use indicator from AT&T
                             tap detectors
                        Re: Houston vs SW Bell
                Re: special numbers for cellular phones

[The Southwestern Bell controversy warms up! Should BBS operators have
to pay business rates for their phones? You tell us! Enjoy your read!
By the way, this is as good a place as any to say I am extremely grate-
ful to JSol for his continued assistance with the Digest.  PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 17:24:25 PST
From: ll-xn!ucsd!sdsu!polyslo![e-mail] (Pete Bowden)
Subject: Re: In-use light
To: [e-mail]


I have wired an "in-use" light into a 9-line key telephone so that I
can tell if any telephone units (or mostly modems in my case) were in use
(I have 9-lines in my residence -- 7 of which going into a BBS).  Anyway,
I didn't design the circuit and I don't have it right here -- but if you
wish to experiment here's what it included...
  1) 10 micro ferad capacitor
  2) a zener diode (around 10 volts if I am remembering)
  3) a light (whatever the light is in the standard key telephone is what
   I am using)
On the positive wire (if it doesn't work on the first wire, try the second)
before the telephone units which you wish to have light up the light install
the capacitor and diode in parallel with the line, along with the light.
We'll TRY a drawing...

           ----LIGHT----
           |           |
           --Capacitor--
           |           |
           ----Zener----
           |           |
+------------------------------------X
       (Telephone line...)          > Telephone Unit(s)
 ------------------------------------X
-
  This circuit does use a slight amount of power and you may have problems
if you try to run several lights -- but it doesn't seem to affect the quality
of my line in any noticable amount.  A friend who IS more into the electronics
recommended the use of an optal isolator in place of the Capacitor and Zener
but didn't go into detail.
    ___
 -'/   >      /       |"Pete" Bowden, P.O. Box 905, Santa Maria, CA 93456-0905
  /___/___ --/--___   |    Sysop--LOIS BBS  805-928-6969 (4 public dialups)
 /    /___> /  /___>  |
/   _/\____/\_/\____/ |            ...{csun,sdsu}!polyslo!pbowden
You have PLENTY of time to finish this assignment.
   What do you mean you have other classes?

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

Date: Mon 31 Oct 88 22:12:18-PST
From: Ole J. Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: In-use indicator from AT&T
To: [e-mail]



Folks,
    You can buy a really GOOD line monitor from AT&T for about $20
if my memory serves me right. This is expensive, but they work
well, and run several years on a single 9V battery. The trick
is using a FLASHING LED rather than a steady glow one.  I have
several of these boxes, and the only bug I've found is that the
LED flashes merily away when the box is disconnected from the
phone line, but that's a minor problem. I'm afraid that AT&T might
be the right choice, check out your friendly Death Star Store.

Ole
-------

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

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 01:57:03 EST
From: [e-mail] (*Hobbit*)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: tap detectors


Some of the better tap detectors claim they can detect a tiny voltage drop
when a high-impedance device is bridged across the line.  Of course if it's
already there, TFB.  Professional tap detectors normally fire a bunch of
test tones down the line and compare what they get back against what they
think a "clean" line is.  Having a TDR helps too...

_H*

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

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 03:25:54 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]


First, in response to Alex Odyniec's recording question:

I recently spoke with a lawyer about that very question (at least the
first one).  Here's how I now understand it... You are free to tape a
phone conversation as long as the ONLY people who ever hear or can hear
the tape are people who were privy to the conversation in the first place;
you can listen to the tape and transcribe it at your leisure, or send it
to the person you were talking to, but that's it...  What I don't know
is if that's the actual legal (i.e., on the books) rule or if it's just
what's accepted by the courts for reasons of practicality.

But here's my real question.  I have a 5-line Touch-Matic phone, and
removed the end of the 50-pin plug and connected my (our) two phone
lines to the first 2 line buttons, by trial and error.  I also took
out one of the little triangular things in the button mechanism so I
can conference with two lines at once.  But I would really like
for it to ring on either line.  I haven't been able to get it to
do that except in a way that when you're on one line and a call comes
in on the other, you hear horrible clicking in the earpiece.  Is there
a way around this?

Thanks,
Miguel Cruz
[e-mail]

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

To: [e-mail]
From: idis!formtek!eklektik!prapc2![e-mail] (Paul Raulerson)
Subject: Re: Houston vs SW Bell
Date: 29 Oct 88 15:33:58 GMT



Possibly I should get a pair of fitted abestos underware for this but here
goes:

As I understand it, SWB is going to charge on the order of $40 per month
for BBS lines instead of $16.  This rate increase does seem excessive,
but instead of trying to keep BBS lines as residential, which they truely
are not, why not try for a compromise?  Most folks could afford a $10 per
month increase, and for that increase you could get the phone company to
give you business class service on the lines.  Commercial systems, like
pay-for-play BBS's, can and should pay the full commercial rate. After all,
the owner is going to use the phone line as a business expense on his
taxes ....

You might find several advantages to this:
    Business class service can help you deal with noisy lines:
    THe phone company(s) maintain special operators to help business
       class customers.
    If you decide to go commercial, most regional operating companies
       will provide you with free (or nearly so) advice, which is a
       BIG help sometimes.

This is just a suggestion, as they haven't hit up here yet, why should they?
Noral residential phone service up here costs over $40 per month to have
unlimited dialing area. (*sigh*).

Take care, and remember, that those folks at the phone company are
people too, and would probaly like to come to a reasonable conclusion
without hard feelings or other such stuff.

Good Luck!



--
Paul Raulerson & Paul Raulerson & Associates   +---------------------------+
Data/Voice: 1+215-275-2429 / 1+215-275-5983    | Always Aim To Please ...  |
Cis: 71560,2016   Bix: paulr                   |  Always Aim High ...      |
UUCP: ...!rutgers!lgnp1!prapc2!paulr           +---------------------------+

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

From: sdrc![e-mail] (Scott_Klosterman)
To: uunet![e-mail]
Subject: Re: special numbers for cellular phones
Date: 1 Nov 88 14:02:41 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Evan Leibovitch) writes:

> I also believe that cellular calls to 911 and the auto club are free.

    Somehow I doubt that calls to 911 are FREE seeing as how I pay
    twenty three (23) cents a month whether I use it or not!!

--
\o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o\
 \ Structural Dynamics Research Co.                  Scott Klosterman    \
  \ Cincinnati Oh.                                 uunet!sdrc!crscott     \
   \     Your typical city involved in a typical daydream ...              \
    \-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-\

------------------------------
LATE BULLETIN FROM MODERATOR: Late Tuesday evening, I had a *horrible* fight
with Telenet about my PC Pursuit billing. If they do not get it taken care
of *early* Wednesday, I will tell you all the lurid details in a day or two.
Patrick Townson


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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Wed Nov  2 05:23:30 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA17322; Wed, 2 Nov 88 05:23:30 EST
Received: from BUIT5.BU.EDU by bu-it.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA13765; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:37:52 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA25280; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:37:49 EST
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA24061; Tue, 1 Nov 88 00:56:52 EST
Message-Id:  <8811010556.AA24061@buit5>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88  0:43:10 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #165
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 1 Nov 88  0:43:10 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 165

Today's Topics:

                More Houston bbs's vs Southwestern Bell

[This issue of the Digest is devoted to the single subject of business
telephone rates for BBS' and similar computer services. SWBTel has
made this an issue with sysops in the Houston, TX area recently. The
letters which follow describe the problem in more detail. Your replies
and rebuttals are encouraged. My own opinion is that like any other
'service' -- profitable or not -- BBS's are used by the public, and do
not qualify for 'residential' rates. What do you think?  PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: moray!judy (Judy Scheltema)
Subject: More Houston bbs's vs Southwestern Bell
Date: 22 Oct 88 03:49:29 GMT




The following are transcripts of letters on file with the PUC as of
10/19/88.  My thanks to ESTEBAN for going down, copying them, and
posting them on Flight:

Mr. Coyle Kelly
Executive Director
Public Utility Commission of Texas
7800 Shoal Creek Boulevard
Suite 400N
Austin, Texas 78757

Re:  Service  Classification of Computer Bulletin Board Service Providers and
     Amateur Radio Autopatches

Dear Mr. Kelly:

          This letter is to advise you that Southwestern Bell is making a
concerted effort to uniformly enforce its interpretation of the
residence/business service distinction related to local exchange access line
service provided to Computer Bulletin Board Service ("BBS") providers and
Amateur Radio Autopatches.

          Basically, any subscriber requesting local exchange access lines
which will be used to provide, supply, and or disseminate,  any
data/information or any other "service" to or for others (not just
themselves), will be considered a business class local exchange customer.
This is not a change in Southwestern Bell's previous policy, but simply an
interpretation which is consistent with the proper enforcement of Southwestern
Bell's existing tarrifs.  This interpretation will allow consistent treatment
of accounts which have been misclassified by the business office.  In this
regard, it should be noted that not all BBS providers and Autopatches are
currently receiving the service at business rates, but some are currently
classified as and paying residential rates.  Accordingly, this interpretation
will result in uniform treatment for all such subscribers in the state.

          The rationale for this decision is that neither the BBS providers
nor the Autopatches use their telephone service for personal, residential use.
Instead, it is Southwestern Bell's understanding that the BBS providers and
autopatches essential share their local exchange access lines with non-family
members, who would not otherwise have access to such lines, in providing
services.  Specifically, Southwestern Bell understands that a BBS provider
operates a computer database type service for other coputer operators in the
exchange.  The BBS system is programmed to answer incomming calls and provide
whatever information services which the customer has elected to provide.  The
Autopatch works much like a cellular IMTS telephone and allows amateur radio
operators in their automobiles and other locations to place local telephone
calls via Southwestern Bell's network through the telephone service provided
to the Autopatch.  By transmitting an access code on a radio frequency, an
amateur radio operator can access a repeater which essentially takes the
telephone receiver off hook so that the repeater becomes a mobile telephone.
The amateur radio operator in his automobile is then able to place telephone
calls over the telephone line through the repeater.

          In both instances, the BBS providers and Autopatches are using their
local exchange access lines to provide services to computer owners and amateur
radio operators who are not the customer of Southwestern Bell's service.  The
fact that the BBS and the Autopatch may be a hobby of the customer or the
group which has subscribed to Southwestern Bell's telephone service does not
make the customer eligible for a residential rate.  It is immaterial why the
customer has requested the telephone service.  The distinction of whether the
service is residential or business depends on the "use of the service" and
whether the service is primarily for personal, residential use.  In the case
of both the BBS provider and the Autopatch, the use of the telephone service
is *not* primarily for personal, residential use, and should be considered as
more of a business nature rather than of a residence nature.

          Southwestern Bell's interpretation *does not* affect the rates which
individuals having a home computer attached to a telephone line with a modem
will pay, when the use of such line is primarily for residential use.  If,
however, the home computer is attached to a telephone line is used for
commercial purposes, then business rates would apply.  Further Southwestern
Bell's interpretation does not apply to amateur radio operators who are not
operating an Auotpatch, but are operation from their residence and who do not
allow the use of their line by others who would not normally have access to
such line (i.e., persons other than members of their household or family).
Amateur radio clubs or associations would be subject to business rates, as has
always been the case.

          Sothwestern Bell is proceeding to reclassify the accounts of both
the BBS providers and Autopatches consistent with the foregoing
interpretation.

                                  Very truly yours,

                                  John R. Loehman

cc:  Mr. John Costello, Telephone Division, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)
     Mr. Bruce Penny (U. S. Mail)
     Mr. David Featherston, Telephone Division, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)
     Mr. Don Laub, Telephone Division, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)
     Mr. Martin Schell, Telephone Division, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)
     Ms. Betty Suthard, Information Specialist, PUC
          (Hand Delivered)




Ms. Martha Hinojosa-Nadler
Division Staff Manager
Revenue Requirements
SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
1610 Guadalupe, Room 310
Austin, Texas 78701

RE:  Increase in Rates for BBS Operators and Amateur Radio Autopatches

Dear Ms. Hinojosa-Nadler:

As a result of information provided to this office (copy of letter to Mr.
Coyle Kelly from Mr. John Loehman) that Southwestern Bell planned to uniformly
enforce its tarrif concerning proper classification of service for Bulletin
Board Service providers and Amateur Radio Autopatches and individual notices
that have been sent to these customers that their rates would increase, I feel
the need to exercise extreme caution.

I am aware that Mr. Jim Lydon of your organization put out a news release that
a change in classification *would not affext all the customers*.  However,
I am fully aware of the confusion that can be encounterd with correct
information reaching the appropriate personnel in knowing whether or not to
apply the "new rate".  Consequently, I am asking Southwestern Bell to notify
this office of any customer who incurrs a change in his/her rates beginning
with the first billing cycle where this change was anticipated.
Additionally,  I am asking that any customer account that reflects an increase
in rates, that Southwestern Bell investigate the matter as if was a normal
complain filed through this office.  The response to this office with the
results of the investigation needs  to include information on how the service
is being used that would support the company's position that a change in rate
classification is warranted.

I have spoken with a number of customers about this matter as a result of the
newspaper articles and subsequent calls into Southwestern Bell's business
office and my information to them has been---if your bill reflects a change in
rates *pay the old rate only at this time*, dispute the increase and to
provide this office with a copy of the bill and a letter so that a complaint
can be filed with the company.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.  If I need to clarify my
concerns further, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Betty A. Suthard
Information Specialist

bas

cc:  Mr. Bill Dunn


 143: More Information
  By: ESTEBAN  [335]
Date: 16:42  10/19/88

Today I went to personally talk to Ms. Suthard at PUC.  She was very kind in
giving me a photocopy of the above letters.  She said that she has received a
few letters and phone calls on this, but I was only the second person to
mention that SWB was planning to put up their own Pay BBS System and the rumor
that this was the reason for the rate hike on all of us, to knock out the
competition.
  That statement warranted a sizable chunk of her calendar as she noted this
information and promised that she will soon be sending SWB another letter
concerning this (their Pay BBS System).  To paraphrase, she was giving the
idea that the motivation behind the rate hike and the correlation of their Pay
BBS serious thought.

She also stated that if anyone out there gets a change in billing, she wants
the bill to be paid at the old rate, a letter stating that the bill was being
paid as is `in protest' and a copy of it sent to her desk.

It would appear that we have a symathetic defender out there.  But that is no
reason to sit back and relax.  Rev up them Printers and compose those Letters.
If you want to submit your `beef' in person, here are directions to PUC.

Andrson Lane to Shoal Creek.  Turn South onto Shoal Creek.
The offices of PUC are in the Office Block on the West side of Shoal Creek,
   right behind the Co Co's on the corner.
The office block is arranged in a right-angle fasion.  Park in the parking lot
   between the Block and Co Co's.
Walk to the courtyard in the angle of the right angle.  In the courtyard is a
   fountain.  From the fountain, enter the building at the entrance on the NW
   side of the Courtyard.
Inside will be a staircase leading up and the door to the Offices of PUC will
   be on your immediate left before the staircase.
Inside, go through the doorway on the left, Betty Suthard's office is the
  second one on the opposite wall beside a floor to ceiling map of Texas.

Other than that, all I have to say is...
                                     ... copy this information people and
spread it as far and wide as possible.  It's not just Houston and Austin that
are targets, but the whole state of Texas.

Esteban

--
Judy Scheltema                |                     uunet!nuchat!moray!judy
Houston, Texas                |                  bellcore!tness1!moray!judy


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

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


From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Wed Nov  2 05:51:01 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA19084; Wed, 2 Nov 88 05:51:01 EST
Received: from BUIT5.BU.EDU by bu-it.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA15702; Wed, 2 Nov 88 03:25:31 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA25340; Wed, 2 Nov 88 03:25:28 EST
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88  3:11:44 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #167
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 2 Nov 88  3:11:44 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 167

Today's Topics:

                           Re: In-use light
                      In-use indicator from AT&T
                             tap detectors
                        Re: Houston vs SW Bell
                Re: special numbers for cellular phones

[The Southwestern Bell controversy warms up! Should BBS operators have
to pay business rates for their phones? You tell us! Enjoy your read!
By the way, this is as good a place as any to say I am extremely grate-
ful to JSol for his continued assistance with the Digest.  PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 17:24:25 PST
From: ll-xn!ucsd!sdsu!polyslo![e-mail] (Pete Bowden)
Subject: Re: In-use light
To: [e-mail]


I have wired an "in-use" light into a 9-line key telephone so that I
can tell if any telephone units (or mostly modems in my case) were in use
(I have 9-lines in my residence -- 7 of which going into a BBS).  Anyway,
I didn't design the circuit and I don't have it right here -- but if you
wish to experiment here's what it included...
  1) 10 micro ferad capacitor
  2) a zener diode (around 10 volts if I am remembering)
  3) a light (whatever the light is in the standard key telephone is what
   I am using)
On the positive wire (if it doesn't work on the first wire, try the second)
before the telephone units which you wish to have light up the light install
the capacitor and diode in parallel with the line, along with the light.
We'll TRY a drawing...

           ----LIGHT----
           |           |
           --Capacitor--
           |           |
           ----Zener----
           |           |
+------------------------------------X
       (Telephone line...)          > Telephone Unit(s)
 ------------------------------------X
-
  This circuit does use a slight amount of power and you may have problems
if you try to run several lights -- but it doesn't seem to affect the quality
of my line in any noticable amount.  A friend who IS more into the electronics
recommended the use of an optal isolator in place of the Capacitor and Zener
but didn't go into detail.
    ___
 -'/   >      /       |"Pete" Bowden, P.O. Box 905, Santa Maria, CA 93456-0905
  /___/___ --/--___   |    Sysop--LOIS BBS  805-928-6969 (4 public dialups)
 /    /___> /  /___>  |
/   _/\____/\_/\____/ |            ...{csun,sdsu}!polyslo!pbowden
You have PLENTY of time to finish this assignment.
   What do you mean you have other classes?

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

Date: Mon 31 Oct 88 22:12:18-PST
From: Ole J. Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: In-use indicator from AT&T
To: [e-mail]



Folks,
    You can buy a really GOOD line monitor from AT&T for about $20
if my memory serves me right. This is expensive, but they work
well, and run several years on a single 9V battery. The trick
is using a FLASHING LED rather than a steady glow one.  I have
several of these boxes, and the only bug I've found is that the
LED flashes merily away when the box is disconnected from the
phone line, but that's a minor problem. I'm afraid that AT&T might
be the right choice, check out your friendly Death Star Store.

Ole
-------

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

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 01:57:03 EST
From: [e-mail] (*Hobbit*)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: tap detectors


Some of the better tap detectors claim they can detect a tiny voltage drop
when a high-impedance device is bridged across the line.  Of course if it's
already there, TFB.  Professional tap detectors normally fire a bunch of
test tones down the line and compare what they get back against what they
think a "clean" line is.  Having a TDR helps too...

_H*

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

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 03:25:54 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]


First, in response to Alex Odyniec's recording question:

I recently spoke with a lawyer about that very question (at least the
first one).  Here's how I now understand it... You are free to tape a
phone conversation as long as the ONLY people who ever hear or can hear
the tape are people who were privy to the conversation in the first place;
you can listen to the tape and transcribe it at your leisure, or send it
to the person you were talking to, but that's it...  What I don't know
is if that's the actual legal (i.e., on the books) rule or if it's just
what's accepted by the courts for reasons of practicality.

But here's my real question.  I have a 5-line Touch-Matic phone, and
removed the end of the 50-pin plug and connected my (our) two phone
lines to the first 2 line buttons, by trial and error.  I also took
out one of the little triangular things in the button mechanism so I
can conference with two lines at once.  But I would really like
for it to ring on either line.  I haven't been able to get it to
do that except in a way that when you're on one line and a call comes
in on the other, you hear horrible clicking in the earpiece.  Is there
a way around this?

Thanks,
Miguel Cruz
[e-mail]

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

To: [e-mail]
From: idis!formtek!eklektik!prapc2![e-mail] (Paul Raulerson)
Subject: Re: Houston vs SW Bell
Date: 29 Oct 88 15:33:58 GMT



Possibly I should get a pair of fitted abestos underware for this but here
goes:

As I understand it, SWB is going to charge on the order of $40 per month
for BBS lines instead of $16.  This rate increase does seem excessive,
but instead of trying to keep BBS lines as residential, which they truely
are not, why not try for a compromise?  Most folks could afford a $10 per
month increase, and for that increase you could get the phone company to
give you business class service on the lines.  Commercial systems, like
pay-for-play BBS's, can and should pay the full commercial rate. After all,
the owner is going to use the phone line as a business expense on his
taxes ....

You might find several advantages to this:
    Business class service can help you deal with noisy lines:
    THe phone company(s) maintain special operators to help business
       class customers.
    If you decide to go commercial, most regional operating companies
       will provide you with free (or nearly so) advice, which is a
       BIG help sometimes.

This is just a suggestion, as they haven't hit up here yet, why should they?
Noral residential phone service up here costs over $40 per month to have
unlimited dialing area. (*sigh*).

Take care, and remember, that those folks at the phone company are
people too, and would probaly like to come to a reasonable conclusion
without hard feelings or other such stuff.

Good Luck!



--
Paul Raulerson & Paul Raulerson & Associates   +---------------------------+
Data/Voice: 1+215-275-2429 / 1+215-275-5983    | Always Aim To Please ...  |
Cis: 71560,2016   Bix: paulr                   |  Always Aim High ...      |
UUCP: ...!rutgers!lgnp1!prapc2!paulr           +---------------------------+

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

From: sdrc![e-mail] (Scott_Klosterman)
To: uunet![e-mail]
Subject: Re: special numbers for cellular phones
Date: 1 Nov 88 14:02:41 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Evan Leibovitch) writes:

> I also believe that cellular calls to 911 and the auto club are free.

    Somehow I doubt that calls to 911 are FREE seeing as how I pay
    twenty three (23) cents a month whether I use it or not!!

--
\o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o\
 \ Structural Dynamics Research Co.                  Scott Klosterman    \
  \ Cincinnati Oh.                                 uunet!sdrc!crscott     \
   \     Your typical city involved in a typical daydream ...              \
    \-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-\

------------------------------
LATE BULLETIN FROM MODERATOR: Late Tuesday evening, I had a *horrible* fight
with Telenet about my PC Pursuit billing. If they do not get it taken care
of *early* Wednesday, I will tell you all the lurid details in a day or two.
Patrick Townson


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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Wed Nov  2 06:20:40 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA20921; Wed, 2 Nov 88 06:20:40 EST
Received: from BUIT5.BU.EDU by bu-it.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA14464; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:55:31 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA25296; Wed, 2 Nov 88 02:55:25 EST
Received:  by buit5 (4.0/4.7)
    id AA24099; Tue, 1 Nov 88 01:11:36 EST
Message-Id:  <8811010611.AA24099@buit5>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88  1:07:09 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #166
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 1 Nov 88  1:07:09 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 166

Today's Topics:

              Telecom gear distributors needed (Teltone?)
                           Re: In-use light
                           Re: In-use light
                       Re: I need a second line
                           Cellular roaming
                           Roamer Validation

[This issue and #165 before it were actually prepared late Monday night
and submitted to the mailer early Tuesday morning. Due to (hopefully)
one final problem, they bounced, and I had to remail them early Wednes-
day morning instead. I realize you are getting them about 24 hours
later than you should, based on the dating, etc.

Our backlog is about finished; beginning with the next issue we will be
printing current submissions. Please remember, there was NO issue 158,
and you MUST use our new addresses to get things to us. We are operating
from BU-IT.BU.EDU. Submissions go to [e-mail] and requests
for list maintainence, etc go to TELECOM-REQUEST at the same site. Enjoy
this issue, and begin sending submissions to us again!  PTownson]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:     Tue, 25 Oct 88 01:46:38 EDT
From: Doug Scott <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]


Hello everyone!
-
One quick question:  How are directory assistance (DA) calls handled
                     in one state but between two separate LATA's?
-
I was under the impression that the Bell Operating Company (or whatever
GTE/Telecom/etc.) was allowed to handle those calls, as well as certain
types of 'customer service' calls such as the 811 system with Pac*Bell.
-
Yet recently I tried to make a calling card call from White Plains
(area code 914) to Albany (area codes 518) which are both served by
New York Telephone, but are in two different LATA's. When you make
any sort of In-State DA call from a payphone, all such calls are
free (both intra- and inter-LATA, as long as they are in the same
state), and hence I assumed that they were handled by the local
Bell. But when I was in White Plains, I was at a friend's house, and
had to make a Calling Card call so he wouldn't be charged. I
dialed 0+518-555-1212, entered my card, and got "Thank you for
using AT&T"!  A few days later, I tried calling from Ludlow, Mass
(near Springfield, area code 403) to Weymouth, Mass (617), which
are also in two separate LATA's. I dialed 617-555-1212 for DA in
Weymouth, and also got "Thank you for using AT&T".
-
I assume this means that AT&T carriers these calls, but the question
is why? Does AT&T pick up the tab for these calls from payphones?
If so, can I also dial 10333+1+617-555-1212 from Western Mass and
have Sprint do the same?
-
I'd appreciate any info on this, and I'll summarize any responses
mailed to me.
-
Thanks,
-Doug


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

To: seismo![e-mail]
From: esosun![e-mail] (Keith Pilotti)
Subject: Telecom gear distributors needed (Teltone?)
Date: 27 Oct 88 21:35:35 GMT



A few weeks ago someone posted an address for Teltone Ltd. in Canada.
I wrote to them for a catalog, however the mail was returned
undelivered (they apparently have moved).

Does anyone have a current address/phone for Teltone, and/or any other
distributor of telephone gear.

***

I also would like to know where I can get a schematic for a ~15 year old
Western Electric speaker phone.  This is one of those standalone
speakers with the separate switch/microphone switches, originally
designed for use with multi-line pbx.  I'd like to re-wire it for use
on a single line.  Sorry, I don't know the exact model number
off-hand.  Any information will be appreciated!

Thanks...
+Keith Pilotti
--
Science Applications International Corporation
10260 Campus Point Drive, M/S-32, San Diego, CA 92121

[phone]    {sun!suntan,seismo}!esosun!sol!keith
                 [e-mail]


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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Edward M. Embick)
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 28 Oct 88 16:40:08 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chip Rosenthal) writes:
>I built something like this once.  It consisted of an outboard box,
>essentially a continuity tester, with a power supply and LED.
>The LED would light up whenever an extension
>(besides my own) was lifted.  The way it worked is simple:
>Phone cable has four wires, two active (red and green)
>and two inactive (yellow and black).
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The second pair of wires are normally used for a second phone line,
such as sysops have installed for their BBS's.  This solution is NOT
one that would maintain the integrety of you phone system!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Embick (If God wanted me to write legibly, He wouldn't have invented email)
Computer Sciences Corporation                               ____   ____   ____
4045 Hancock St.         MILNET:  [e-mail]    //     //     //
San Diego, CA 92110                                        \\___  ___//  \\___
[phone] x287

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

To:
From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 29 Oct 88 01:43:26 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chip Rosenthal) writes:
-
- The LED would light up whenever an extension
- (besides my own) was lifted.  The way it worked is simple:
- Phone cable has four wires, two active (red and green)
- and two inactive (yellow and black).
- When you lift a phone off-hook, several switches change position,
- some open, some close.  I took apart every phone in the house,
- found terminals connected to a switch that closed
- when the switch hook was lifted, and connected the black and yellow wires
- to those terminals.  Then I hooked my detector box
- to the yellow and the black wires near my phone.
- When any rewired switch hook was lifted, the LED lit up.
-
- Larry Lang
-
- My employer (Bellcore) has nothing to do with this idea.

Aeeesh!!! This is *deadly*.  Beware this fix.  The phone company often, if
not always, uses the black and yellow wires for a second phone line.
Connecting them together in a telephone is BAD NEWS.  One day you install a
second line, lift up the receiver and bang!  There goes one exchange interface.
                        - Der
--
Reply:    [e-mail]        (Der Tynan @ Tynan Computers)
    {mips,pyramid}!sultra!dtynan
    Cast a cold eye on life, on death.  Horseman, pass by...    [WBY]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 29 Oct 88 00:42:00 PST
Subject: Re: I need a second line
To: "telecom" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "sultra!dtynan" <sultra![e-mail]>, "lars" <lars@salt>


> From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
> Reply-To: [e-mail]
> Subject: I need a second line...
> Date: 11 Oct 88 01:40:35 GMT
>
> ...  I would like to have a separate line for [my] modem.  I called
> Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order request.
> It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
> short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
> ... they want $45 for the first fifteen minutes [of installation time],
> and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after that.        ... It seems to
> me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
> exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
> PacBell said no.  Any comments?

Have I got comments !!!! This is outrageous !!!!

This is a request for residential phone service: The tariff probably
does not allow them to charge you by the hour for installing the
access wiring (which after installation will be owned by the phone
company).

Some phone companies have tried to claim that all modem lines are
business service rather than residential service. If this is what
they are trying, talk to the PUC and explain why this is personal
use, not business use. I have heard PUCs that will allow that a BBS is
business service, but even that is the exception.

The bandwidth of a metallic circuit is probably more like one megabit;
this is why we are moving towards IDSN: 2 twisted pairs is 1544 kbps =
24 voice channels.

In analog land, one twisted pair subscriber loop will carry two phone
services, but this may already have been exploited, so this is none of
your business. (The line belongs to PacBell, so YOU can't multiplex it;
they can.)

Santa Barbara, where I live, is GTE land, and we complain a lot, but they
have NEVER tried to pull stunts like this one.

/ Lars Poulsen
  Advanced Computer Communications
  (Customer Service).
My opinions are none of my employer's business if I express them after
hours...


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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 31 Oct 88 14:09
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular roaming


>A few cellular service providers now offer to let the roamer dial a
>call-forwarding-like feature access code from a roaming area, and
>have calls forwarded there, by the home system, at the roamer's
>expense.  This will probably become the standard.

Can you please provide examples of carriers who have actually implemented
this?  I certainly hope this does not become the standard; it's not very
good human engineering to require the cellular user to "do something" whenever
crossing from one system to another, or when getting off a plane in another
city or when returning to the home city.

Unless special trunks are installed between the two systems, the call-forwarded
call will probably have to be routed via the existing roamer access ports, which
go off-hook even when you don't answer.  If this "follow-me" forwarding becomes
the standard, lots of people are going to be annoyed by charges for unknown
incomplete calls.  Can you imagine how annoyed you would be if you had set up
follow-me forwarding, and then went into a poor service area.  Someone starts
persistently trying to call you on your home number, which is forwarded to you
via the roamer port.  They get charged for n calls to your number, even though
you didn't answer (and they didn't know they were calling a number that charges
with no answer), and you get charged for n long-distance calls from your home
system to the roamer access port.  And none of them completed calls.

>Cellular companies serving ajoining areas sometimes provide
>transparent automatic roaming service to each other's subscribers.

This has got to be what becomes the standard, not just to adjoining systems,
but throughout North America.  Currently it's only done with adjoining companies
because no one is taking advantage of the feature in the protocol which allows
a system to solicit sign-ons from telephones arriving in the area and because
there is no underlying signalling network to carry the calls.

Subscriber volume, especially of people with portables which they carry with
them cross-country, is what is needed to make this happen.  The number of
cellular subscribers doubled from 1 Million to 2 Million during the past year;
it is hoped to reach 18 Million by 1992.  Subscribers shouldn't have to put
up with what we "pioneers" have to do to use our phones when outside our home
areas.  It is unreasonable for me to have to give my secretary a list of twenty
or forty different numbers to try to reach me if I'm driving from Bangor to
Miami.  It's also unreasonable for me to dial a "follow-me" code every time I
cross an invisible system boundary.  My normal ten-digit cellular phone number
should work no matter where I am in North America.

/john

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 31 Oct 88 15:40
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Roamer Validation


>There is, of course, a LARGE security problem since the system in which you
>are roaming has no way of validating your phone's ESN.

ESN = Electronic Serial Number
MIN = Mobile Identification Number (the telephone number)
MTSO = Mobile Telephone Switching Office
MSO = Mobile Service Operator

This *was* a large security problem.  However, there are now at least two
positive validation computer networks operating nationwide (with a gateway
between them) which keep a list of the correct ESN/MIN combinations as well
as bandit ESNs and allow MTSOs to deny calls to suspect telephones.

The systems are PVS (operated by GTE Data Services) and PRV.  Generally "B"
or wireline carriers use PVS and "A" or non-wireline carriers use PRV.  This
distinction is not 100% correct, since Southwestern Bell is the wireline
carrier in Kansas City but the non-wireline (Cellular One) carrier in Boston
and Balto-Wash and PacTel is the wireline in L.A. but the non-wireline in
Atlanta (and so on).

Not all MSOs are using the validation systems yet, but MSOs who aren't are
finding that they are increasingly unable to establish any roaming agreements
for their customers, since many MSOs are now refusing to establish roaming
agreements with MSOs not served by a validation system.

Random side note:  It's legitimate for one ESN to have multiple MINs, but a
MIN may have one and only one ESN.  Thus you can have a phone which supports
multiple numbers/systems, but you can't have the same number programmed into
more than one phone.

/john

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

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


From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Thu Nov  3 21:57:02 1988
Received: from buit5.bu.edu by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA18357; Thu, 3 Nov 88 21:57:02 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA00578; Thu, 3 Nov 88 21:56:27 EST
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 21:33:20 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #168
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Nov 88 21:33:20 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 168

Today's Topics:

                Maryland LATA's/Area Code Correction
                  Telehelper Single Line Hold (AT&T)
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                Re: special numbers for cellular phones
                      Re: Sensitive relay wanted
                     Re: second line in your flat
                      Re: Ship-to-shore telephone
                       Re: I need a second line

[YES, we are aware of the duplicates of issues 165-166-167. NO, we do
not know the answer yet. JSol is investigating this in great detail. If
you do not mind, send us a note regards your duplicates because he is
tracing/auditing the mailer and routings involved. We would rather keep
the Digest coming to you -- even multiple copies -- than not at all
while tracking down this annoying problem.

For next: We have had complaints about some of you not receiving #163.
We will soon send it out again. If you get an additional copy, or get
it several days after the fact, you will now understand why. PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Wed, 2 Nov 88 10:24:16 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  Maryland LATA's/Area Code Correction


I am trying to respond to Doug Scott in Telecom V8 no. 166.
That is: Doug Scott <[e-mail]>
I cannot get my mailer to accept address to "rpi" systems.
Here is the message:

Maryland is split between 3 LATA's but has only one area code (301),
ignoring that 202 can also be used for DC area suburbs.  Directory
assistance is reached via 411 for local calls and 1-301-555-1212
(charges may apply) for other parts of Maryland.  (0+ and 1+ calls
within Maryland do now require the area code.)  I don't know who
handles such calls.

By the way, your item in Telecom referred to area code 403 in western
Massachusetts.  That should be 413.

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

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88 08:22:21 EST
From: [e-mail] (Frank Prindle)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Telehelper Single Line Hold (AT&T)


Since I have 6 phones scattered about my home, I grabbed up a device being
sold at a local computer show called "Telehelper Single Line Hold" by AT&T.
It plugs into the wall (AC) and any modular jack (phone line), and provides
a hold service by interpreting two successive hookswitch depressions (in
the range 1/4 second to about 1 second each) as a request for hold.  At this
point, it beeps (much like a Dimension system when you successfully enter
an auto call-back request).  The next time you press the hookswitch, the box
seizes the line for up to 6 minutes or until you pick up the phone elsewhere.

Now all this works exactly as advertized, and very well indeed.  But the
box has one very strange side effect:  when people call my phone, and
nobody answers, they get disconnected after 8 rings!  It is definitely the box,
because I have repeatedly tried disconnecting it (it then rings indefinitely),
and reconnecting it (it then cuts off after 8 rings).  From the calling
end, after the eighth ring, there is just a slight click, then nothing. Calling
back produces 8 more rings, indicating that the line hasn't been seized by
the box (otherwise, it would remain busy for 6 minutes).

The most curious thing is that I brought it to work and tried it on
my desk phone (Dimension PBX) and it didn't cut off the ringing at all.  It
only does it at home!

Now I realize that if nobody has answered by 8 rings, chances are nobody will,
(so it's not really a major problem), but I still think it's odd.  Folks at
AT&T seem reluctant to talk technical about it, preferring to just read to me
from the little manual that comes in the package.  Does anybody else have
one of these?  It this some kind of unadvertized "feature"?

Sincerely, Frank Prindle
[e-mail]

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

From: <dukeac![e-mail]>
Date: 2 Nov 88 14:08:14 GMT
To: mcnc![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: dukeac!klg
From: [e-mail] (Kim Greer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: special numbers for cellular phones
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Nov 88 14:08:14 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Kim Greer)
Organization: Academic Computing, Duke University, Durham, NC
Lines: 22

In [e-mail]+ [e-mail] (Evan Leibovitch)  writes:
+X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
+
+In <[e-mail]+, ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann) writes:
++ Another example of this was discovered in Portland, OR recently when
++ the radio station KXL (I think), was advertising for motorists to call
++ the station with road reports using their cellular phones to dial: 231
++ 'this is a free call'  (Maybe someone in Portland can confirm this)
++
+Don't know about Portland, but Toronto radio station CFTR certainly does
+have a 'free' number for exactly this purpose. (They must take their
+traffic reports rather seriously - they also have two Cessnas airborne
+each rush hour.) Callers press "*680" (the station's frequency).
+
  I saw one the other day on I-85 near Hillsborough -- "DIAL *HP" to
get the Highway Patrol.

--
Kim L. Greer
Duke University Medical Center        try: [e-mail]
Div. Nuclear Medicine  POB 3949            dukeac!klg@ecsgate
Durham, NC 27710  919-681-2711x223      ...!mcnc!ecsgate!dukeac!klg                   fax: [phone]


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

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88 09:58:30 EST
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Tubbs)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Sensitive relay wanted


Radio Shack used to sell a $4.95 adapter to control A and A1 leads for 1A2
key systems - all it was was a relay coil in series with the phone line.
Worked very well, except when trying to pick up a line that was on hold,
because the hold circuit in the KSU diverted enough current to prevent the
adapter relay from picking.
---
Kevin Tubbs, 5152 Upson, Cornell University, Ithaca NY, 14853  [phone]
[e-mail]  {uunet,rochester}!cornell!calvin!kevin

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Date: 2 Nov 88 09:46
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: second line in your flat


Lars Poulsen writes,

>>Date: 29 Oct 88 00:42:00 PST
>>Subject: Re: I need a second line
>> From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
>> Reply-To: [e-mail]
>> Subject: I need a second line...
>> Date: 11 Oct 88 01:40:35 GMT
>>
>> ...  I would like to have a separate line for [my] modem.  I called
>> Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order request.
>> It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
>> short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
>> ... they want $45 for the first fifteen minutes [of installation time],
>> and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after that.        ... It seems to
>> me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
>> exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
>> PacBell said no.  Any comments?
>
>Have I got comments !!!! This is outrageous !!!!
>
>This is a request for residential phone service: The tariff probably
>does not allow them to charge you by the hour for installing the
>access wiring (which after installation will be owned by the phone
>company).

Dear Readers and Lars:  This is not 1976, it is 1988.  Some years ago,
residential inside wiring was "deregulated" and removed from the
telephone company rate base.  This means that the telco is responsible
to bring the wire to a "demarcation" point inside your building, to
be negotiated (usually in the basement, though!), and you the resident
are responsible for the rest.

I myself moved last spring, and paid for a couple of 15 minute segments
to have the NETelco man do a little wiring for me, after he put in a
new protector at the demarc.  I could have done it myself or hired
somebody else.

>Some phone companies have tried to claim that all modem lines are
>business service rather than residential service. If this is what
>they are trying, talk to the PUC and explain why this is personal
>use, not business use. I have heard PUCs that will allow that a BBS is
>business service, but even that is the exception.

This is totally irrelevant:  Business and residence both pay for their
own inside wiring.  Frankly I'm amazed that there's not a latent second
pair, though, in the apartment's inside wire.

>The bandwidth of a metallic circuit is probably more like one megabit;
>this is why we are moving towards IDSN: 2 twisted pairs is 1544 kbps =
>24 voice channels.

Have you priced out a multiplexor or access device for using a Primary
Rate Interface or T1 circuit?  ISDN's Basic Rate needs only 1 pair
to send 144 kbps (includes 2 voice channels) but the chips aren't in
production yet.  You DO live within 18 kilofeet of the CO, I hope.

>In analog land, one twisted pair subscriber loop will carry two phone
>services, but this may already have been exploited, so this is none of
>your business. (The line belongs to PacBell, so YOU can't multiplex it;
>they can.)

I can't believe you people read the same Telecom Digest (aka. various)
that I do.  Remember the cries of horror when the apartment resident
got AML (analog mux) instead of a second local loop?  Muxing is NOT a
good way to go here:  Active components reduce reliability and degrade
the audio.  Modem over a two-line mux?  Horrors!  (Lars is right, Der;
the muxing is their business up to the point of demarc.  A hundred feet
of two-pair costs a lot less than ANY mux, though.)

>Santa Barbara, where I live, is GTE land, and we complain a lot, but they
>have NEVER tried to pull stunts like this one.

Wanna bet?  It's not a stunt.  It's a federal regulation.  See 47CFR68.

Anyway, Der, here's the bottom line:  STOP KVETCHING AND PULL YOUR OWN
WIRE.  Or pay somebody.  The phone company isn't a charity any more;
if you think their labor rates are high, call a plumber.  If you want
to be rich, you're in the wrong line of work.
       fred

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

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88 10:23:38 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Ship-to-shore telephone


In article <[e-mail]> roy@phri (Roy Smith) writes:
>    This past weekend, I was on a boat with a marine VHF radio.  ...
>    Who handles the call?  ...

A very interesting question.  When I have called home in Boston via the
Camden ME marine operator, the call showed up on the local telco part of the
bill even though it was an inter-lata call.  Hmmn.  I have the impression that
marine telephone, like IMTS, is a stepchild of deregulation.

>...  Is there any way to receive an incomming call (i.e.
>initiated by a shore station, calling a vessel at sea)?

Yes, you can call the marine operator, tell her what vessel you want, and
she'll page them. If they don't answer, as is usually the case, you can leave
your name and number. A few times a day at well-known times the operator lists
the names of vessels for whom she is holding traffic, and the vessel can then
call in to get the message. The official way to get the marine operator from
shore is to place the call through your local operator. It turns out, though,
that the marine op has a regular local number and if you know that number you
can just call it and you won't be charged the marine surcharge.

In many places the marine phone system is badly overloaded, and many boats
now have cellular phones.  Some cellular systems such as the one in the
Virgin Islands probably handle more boats than cars.
--
John R. Levine, IECC, PO Box 349, Cambridge MA 02238-0349, [phone]
{ bbn | think | decvax | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
Rome fell, Babylon fell, Scarsdale will have its turn.  -G. B. Shaw

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

To: [e-mail], TELECOM
Subject: Re: I need a second line
Cc: ames!pyramid!sultra!dtynan
Date: 2 Nov 88 11:03:48 EST (Wed)
From: harvard!jetson.upma.md.us!john (John Owens)


> > It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
> > short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
> > ... they want $45 for the first fifteen minutes [of installation time],

> This is a request for residential phone service: The tariff probably
> does not allow them to charge you by the hour for installing the
> access wiring (which after installation will be owned by the phone
> company).

This doesn't sounds like they are charging for installing the wiring which
will be owned by the phone company, but the wiring which will be owned by
the customer.  The Baby Bells (like PacBell) have a "delineation point"
that separates telco-owned-and-maintained lines from customer-owned-and-
maintained lines.  They should be quite happy to give you a second line,
up to and including a "network interface unit" box, for the standard order
processing charge.  What they're talking about charging you for is for
installation of customer-premises ("inside") wire.  If you can do that
yourself somehow, they won't charge you for it.

Before you go too far with it, make sure that they're right about your
existing wiring.  If your apartment building was wired in the last
decade or so, it would be very strange for it not to have 4-conductor
cable.  (I don't think anyone even sells 2- or 3-conductor telephone
cable anymore.)  If you do have 4-conductor cable (red, green, yellow,
and black conductors), you can indeed run two lines on the cable.
Just connect yellow to the red of the second line and black to the
green of the second line.  [Sorry, I don't remember which is tip and
which is ring.]  If you do all this yourself and just have them put in
the NIU, you'll save their service charges.

In an apartment building, there might be other considerations, such as
whether or not you can get physical access to the service area.  Good
luck....

On the subject of multiplexing:

> In analog land, one twisted pair subscriber loop will carry two phone
> services, but this may already have been exploited, so this is none of
> your business. (The line belongs to PacBell, so YOU can't multiplex it;
> they can.)

Along the same lines, if you could multiplex the line that you use, then
divide it out into two lines at the NIU, that wouldn't be any of their
business (as long as you could find a line multiplexer FCC-approved for
customer-premises use).  It seems much easier to run a phone cable out
your window and down a conduit if necessary, which is probably what they
would do for their (overinflated) labor charges.  (But they don't charge
you for parts!)

Again, good luck!

--
John Owens        [e-mail]        uunet!jetson!john
[phone]        [e-mail]

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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Thu Nov  3 23:10:14 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA21146; Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:10:14 EST
Received: from BUIT5.BU.EDU by bu-it.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA09178; Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:24:40 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA00617; Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:24:28 EST
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:08:09 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #169
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:08:09 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 169

Today's Topics:

          Re: True or false DIGITAL service procludes modems
                            Re: Voice Money
                 Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
            Re: intrastate inter-LATA directory assistance
                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                           Re: In-use light
                         Re: Smart box wanted

[Please remember to use our new address when writing, as shown above.
Some mail is still being forwarded from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU. And if you
please, Digest sumissions ONLY to TELECOM. All other mail, including
your greatly appreciated notice of duplicates to TELECOM-REQUEST.
Thanks, and enjoy this issue!   PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: cbw1![e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: True or false DIGITAL service procludes modems
Date: 2 Nov 88 19:00:49 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> elroy!suned1![e-mail] (Everett F. Batey II) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 8, issue 162, message 7
>
>Not long ago we had threats that would have ended UUCP and local host fast
>dialins .. we were told.  More recently ( first plans fell thru, usual bureau-
>cracy ) we hear rumors that GTEL will be furnishing us an ALL DIGITAL phone
>system.
>

If you are describing a DIGITAL SWITCH then you will likely not see the
difference.  Although, some of the early DMS-100 installations had problems
with bit slip because they were not synchronized correctly to a master
clock.  To my knowledge this has been fixed.

If what you are describing is what is know as DIGITAL LOOP service then you
may run into some difficult problems (although I don't know of any digital
loop services actually in use other that PBXs).

Many newer PBXs use digital loops.  In a digital switch, incoming analog
(read normal) phone lines are PCM encoded.  Then, the data is switched onto
PCM highways (really high speed buses).  This is the wave of the future since
switching is done in time domain rather than space domain.

Some newer switches allow the PCM data to be extended all the way to the
phone.  The advantage is that the phone, it's nice display and buttons are
all powered by the loop.  Also, since the PCM CODEC is in the phone, high
quality audio may be acheived by using decent microphones in the handset.

The problem is that any equipment (read: modem) that expects a normal phone
line WILL NOT WORK.  If you plan to use a modem through such a switch it is
necessary to either get an analog line or to use a modem pool.

Many well equiped digital switches take advantage of the digital loop, which
often has bandwidth in excess of 256Kbps, to pass user data as well as PCM
voice and control.  These systems usually allow a < $200 option to be added
to the phone which presents a normal DCE connector.  Modems are then
"pooled" at some central location.  Users needing to place outside data
calls are routed to an available modem and the call is placed for them.

-brian

--
Brian D. Cuthie                                 uunet!umbc3!cbw1!brian
Columbia, MD                                    [e-mail]


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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Peter Desnoyers)
Subject: Re: Voice Money
Date: 2 Nov 88 17:25:37 GMT



I am trying to find an answer to the following question - neither
AT&T's Q.931 spec nor an ANSI draft I have give any helpful
information.

How do you do keypad terminal to terminal signalling in ISDN? In other
words, what happens when you press a key on a voice-only ISDN phone
during an active call?

If you have one of the few ISDN lines Illinois Bell has installed, and
you dial an 800 number on the public network, what happens when you hear
"press 1 if you have a touch-tone phone"? If you can use this service,
where is the DTMF tone produced? The terminal? The local switch or
the interworking point? If so, what Q.931 message conveys the keypad
information? Will this message be carried end-to-end within an ISDN to
allow the same signalling without generating DTMF?

[if you post, please e-mail to remind me to read it.]

                enquiring minds want to know...
                    Peter Desnoyers

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

To: ames![e-mail]
From: zodiac![e-mail] (John L. Shelton)
Subject: Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
Date: 3 Nov 88 00:02:52 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John R. Covert) writes:
>
>Random side note:  It's legitimate for one ESN to have multiple MINs, but a
>MIN may have one and only one ESN.  Thus you can have a phone which supports
>multiple numbers/systems, but you can't have the same number programmed into
>more than one phone.

Why is it not legitimate to have two phones with the same phone
number?  I would very much like to add a second mobile phone (for my
wife) but am unwilling to spend the extra monthly charge.

Random question:  What are current cellular rates around the country?
In SF Bay area, wireline, I can choose:

Plan A:  45c/min day, 20c/min night/wknd  $45/month
Plan B:  90c/min day, 20c/min night/wknd  $25/month

Plan B was introduced 6 months ago.  Otherwise, there has been no
change in rates since service began 3 years ago.

=John=




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

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88 21:35:44 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: intrastate inter-LATA directory assistance


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug Scott) writes:
>One quick question:  How are directory assistance (DA) calls handled
>                     in one state but between two separate LATA's?

They are handled like any other toll call, e.g. they're passed to your
long distance company who charge whatever they charge.  Intrastate
directory assistance may cost the same or different from interstate DA,
depending on your state's tarriffs.

That being the theory, let me comment on the practice.  Here in Massachusetts,
I've occasionally called DA for the other LATA, with SBS the calls showed up
on the bill but were marked "free", now with Sprint they charge me.  I've
never figured out who was right.

Furthermore, DA service areas and LATAs do not necessarily coincide. In
southern New Jersey, the 609 NPA is divided into two LATAs, one including a
tiny strip along the shore, the other being the rest of 609. (Why they divided
609 but not the much larger 201 is a mystery to me. The two 609 LATAs together
have about half the phones of 201.) Anyway, from my beach house near Atlantic
City I can dial 411 and for free get numbers for anywhere in 609 because NJ
Bell has a single DA bureau for all of 609. Calling 201 DA costs money.

My parents live in Princeton NJ, which is in 609 but allows free local calls
to several 201 prefixes. I haven't yet seen whether I can get free DA for the
free local 201 prefixes, but I doubt it. Princeton has one of the more arcane
dialing setups I've seen. Various seven-digit numbers can get you:

  -- a local (free) intra-LATA call
  -- a local (free) inter-LATA call (to nearby 201)
  -- a toll intra-LATA call (e.g. to Camden)
  -- a toll inter-LATA call (e.g. to Atlantic City)
--
John R. Levine, IECC, PO Box 349, Cambridge MA 02238-0349, [phone]
{ bbn | think | decvax | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
Rome fell, Babylon fell, Scarsdale will have its turn.  -G. B. Shaw

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

From: harvard!cs.buffalo.edu!kitty!larry
To: harvard!bu-cs!telecom
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: sunybcs!kitty!larry
Date: 2 Nov 88 00:03:42 EST (Wed)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wendy Thrash) writes:
>
> I'm the formerly happy owner of a Panasonic answering machine similar to one
> described in a recent article here.  A week ago I moved to San Francisco.
> My phone line is the third one in the apartment, and the wires were apparently
> run by a friend of my roommates rather than by Pac Bell.  My phone works OK
> in the new apartment, but my answering machine will not work; it answers the
> phone, jiggles its tapes a couple of times, and hangs up.
>
> I think the machine believes that another extension has been taken off hook,
> and courteously relinquishes the line.  This would be a feature if, in fact,
> another extension had been taken off hook, but there is no other extension
> on the line.
>
> My answering machine works fine on my roommates' lines.  Their answering
> machines work on my line.

    I doubt that improper wiring is the problem; otherwise you would
be having other noticeable problems like hum or crosstalk.

    Based upon the manner in which you have swapped machines and lines,
and your results, my guess is that YOUR line may be served through some
type of subscriber line carrier or concentrator device.  While "normal"
telephones will work on subscriber line carrier devices, the tip and ring
voltage is often MUCH less than that supplied through a "normal" line.  In
the case of analog FDM systems like the Continental AML variety, on-hook
voltage is ONLY 6 VOLTS!  The older WECO 1-type concentrator used 24 volts,
rather than the usual 48.  So, your telephone answering machine may not get
sufficient off-hook loop current following ring-trip and answer, and
therefore think that an extension has been picked up.
    Subscriber line carrier or concentrator devices are used to effect
"pair gain" in rapidly growing areas where there are insufficient cable
pairs to service the subscribers; i.e., the apparatus multiplexes through
analog FDM or digital PCM additional subscriber lines on one physical pair.
    To find out for certain about the status of your telephone line,
measure the on-hook voltage with a digital voltmeter.  If it is less
than 48 volts, then you have just confirmed the problem.  Newer WECO
subscriber line concentrator systems (like the SLC-96) present 48 volts,
and should not cause a problem.  It sounds like you are probably served
by an older device of some sort.
    In general, you have no "right" by virtue of telephone company
tariffs to insist that your telephone line be a "physical" pair rather
than multiplexed.  However, you can politely ask.  If all else fails,
you can always drive the telephone company repair service nuts by
repeated calls complaining about line noise; multiplexed circuits are
almost always noisier than physical circuits, and they may change your
pair to a physical one just to shut you up. :-)

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

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 1 Nov 88 22:26:00 GMT




That's really pretty excessive.  The polarity of the phone line changes
when any phone is off-hook.  It's not too hard to build a circuit that
takes that into account.  I've built them before - but they require
external power.  I'll try to remember to bring in a schematic.  It
should cost under $ 5 in parts.

            Mike Berger
            Science, Technology, and Society
            University of Illinois

            [e-mail]
            {convex | pur-ee}!uiucuxc!clio!berger


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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Smart box wanted
Date: 1 Nov 88 22:37:00 GMT




I have a box that does straight call forwarding and doesn't generate special
tones or require a tone every so often to keep it on-line.  I got it surplus
from a phone company.  The drawback is that it pulse dials, and takes
20-30 seconds to forward the call, so the caller doesn't know what's
going on during that time.  There's no "security" - it always forwards
the call.  Of course, it requires two lines.

            Mike Berger
            Department of Statistics
            University of Illinois

            [e-mail]
            {convex | pur-ee}!uiucuxc!clio!berger


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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Thu Nov  3 23:33:59 1988
Received: from buit5.bu.edu by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA22669; Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:33:59 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA00700; Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:33:25 EST
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:14:30 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #170
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:14:30 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 170

Today's Topics:

                    Election Day and Telecom Issues
                    Favorable Tax Ruling in Chicago
             Time-Domain Reflectometry (was: tap detectors)
                           Re: tap detectors
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date:  Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:39:59 EST
From: ptownson
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
To: telecom-incoming
Subject: Election Day and Telecom Issues

Next Tuesday, many of you will go to the polls in your community to vote for
your choice of the presidential candidates. Now it would open a can of worms
to get into *that* discussion here, and besides, this is not talk.politics.
misc, so no editorial comment from me about the various (de)merits of Mssrs.
Bush and Dukakis.

What I will suggest, however, is that you take a few minutes over the weekend
and review your various local candidates for office and your congessional
leaders to detirmine where they stand on issues of importance to the telecom
industry. What do they think/know/want to do about matters of concern to BBS
sysops, for example. What has been their attitude toward your local telco in
the past? Has it been a cozy relationship, or an adversarial one? Would they
sponsor or participate in legislation regulating COCOTs and AOS outfits?
How do they feel about 'dial-porn' and the various 900 services?

Your vote by no means should be based strictly on the above, but when there
are two or more equally competent people for the same job, why not select
the one who has at least a basic knowledge of this industry and a desire to
be fair when establishing regulations and guidelines?

And if you registered to vote, please do so.

                                                Patrick Townson
                                                Moderator, Telecom Digest

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


Date:  Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:03:11 EST
From: ptownson
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
To: telecom-incoming
Subject: Favorable Tax Ruling in Chicago

As a result of the favorable decision of the Appellate Court of Illinois,
telephone subscribers here are entitled to a refund of a portion of monies
that were collected from them by order of the Court from the period January 1,
1984 through May 31, 1988. Customers of Illinois Bell Telephone Company with
phone service on the Chicago Exchange during that period of time will be
soon receiving an automatic credit on their telephone bill.

The exact formula for detirming the refund will be calculated by the Court
in the near future. It is possible some persons or businesses will not
receive the refund to which they are entitled, due to having moved, changed
accounts or telephone numbers since January 1, 1984.

If you have maintained the same address/telephone number/billing account since
January 1, 1984, you need do nothing, unless you wish to be excluded from
participating in the automatic credit. If you HAVE changed one of the above
items, then you should notify the Trustee promptly.

Include this information:
Your Name
Current Telephone Number
Address, City, State, Zip
Billing Name(s) or Title(s) that appeared on your telephone bill 1/84 to 5/88.
Provide all Chicago telephone numbers issued to you from 1/84 to 5/88.
Describe the type of service you had (residence, business, centrex, WATS, etc).
Give the approximate dates of service for each of the above.
If you are no longer a customer of the Illinois Bell Telephone Company, i.e.
an automatic credit to your Chicago telephone account is not possible, then
instruct the Trustee accordingly.

Contact (in writing only!) -
ACCURATE ACCOUNTING LIMITED
6006 West 159th Street
Oak Forest, IL 60452

Mark your envelope "Illinois Bell Refund", and mail it in a timely fashion
so it is received by the Trustee prior to the close of business December 9,
1988. The Court will disgard any claims presented after that date.

Contact ONLY the above address. Do not write or telephone the Court. Do not
write or telephone Illinois Bell Telephone Company or inquire of its service
representatives.

[I am told for large business customers the refund will average several
hundred dollars. For residence customers, the refund will be smaller, but
pleasing.   PTownson]


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


Subject: Time-Domain Reflectometry (was: Re: tap detectors)
Date: 3 Nov 88 07:43:55 CST (Thu)
From: cs.utexas.edu!romp!ks (Kurt F. Sauer)
To: cs.utexas.edu!vector!telecom-request

The discussion now centers around telephone line security, where, in
article <[e-mail]> hobbit@topaz writes:

>Some of the better tap detectors claim they can detect a tiny voltage drop
>when a high-impedance device is bridged across the line.  Of course if it's
>already there, TFB.  Professional tap detectors normally [...]
>                       [...]  Having a TDR helps too...

Well, my 2 cents are that having a TDR is very useful iff you have the
right type of TDR and know what you're looking for.  Clearly, the results
of a TDR sweep of a telephone line are useless except for historical review.
That is, a TDR will show you the reflectometry at the moment; it does not
point out "bugs."  Therefore, you take a baseline (hopefully clean) sweep
and compare it to later sweeps for changes.

The TDR, with a skilled operator, might help locate on-premises tampering
(and just about every single legitimate change to the wiring, too; if
you use TDRs on-premesis, you MUST use STRICT wire configuration control).
The TDR generally won't help you locate tampering off-premesis because of
the distance involved (and because the wires are owned by the common
carrier and you have no ownership or control of work performed on wires
which you don't own).

In short, the TDR is useful for many things--but I find it's really useful
just for protected wireways.  (In this sense, a protected wireway is simply
a red circuit in some protected environment, and which, if tapped, would
directly provide sensitive data of some degree or other.)

Really, folks, if you're thinking of using/having a TDR, think more seriously
about investing in good voice or data encrypting hardware like STU-III
Type 1 or 2 (available in cellular telephone models by Motorola), or the
various DES-based telephones, or (the list is seemingly endless).  Remember
that telephone lines are inherently insecure, and resign yourself to the
fact that NOTHING CAN BE DONE to secure them short of active measures.
My point may be arguable, but if you make this assumption at all times,
then your risk of improper disclosure is very low.

Question for the mailing list:  To what degrees are companies setting
policies about using or not using the telephone to discuss sensitive
corporate matters?  I know some companies require the use of encryption
for voice or data when the passed information is at a certain sensitivity
level or other, but I don't know to what degree this practice is instituted.

Kurt F. Sauer
Austin, TX


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


Posted-Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 07:05:06 EST
From: cs.utexas.edu!cs.buffalo.edu!sbcs!root
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 07:05:06 EST
To: cs.utexas.edu!texbell!vector!telecom-request
Subject: Tap Detectors
Date: 3 Nov 88 12:01:50 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 17

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (*Hobbit*) writes:
> think a "clean" line is.  Having a TDR helps too...

    I've TDR'ed my phone line on occasion just for kicks.  I have
    to wonder whether it is really possible to spot anything but
    a bug that is grossly mismatched to the phone line, as the
    average line is so junky that you would be astounded.  I can
    spot things like the transition from internal wiring -> interface,
    maybe phone poll wiring, but not much else.  A bug that is
    capacitively coupled into the line would be most difficult to
    see on the TDR (especially if placed near the interface); it would
    also slip by the DC level detector type "tap spotters".


                    Rick Spanbauer
                    SUNY/Stony Brook


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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Fri Nov  4 01:15:53 1988
Received: from buit5.bu.edu by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA22669; Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:33:59 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA00700; Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:33:25 EST
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:14:30 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #170
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:14:30 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 170

Today's Topics:

                    Election Day and Telecom Issues
                    Favorable Tax Ruling in Chicago
             Time-Domain Reflectometry (was: tap detectors)
                           Re: tap detectors
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date:  Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:39:59 EST
From: ptownson
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
To: telecom-incoming
Subject: Election Day and Telecom Issues

Next Tuesday, many of you will go to the polls in your community to vote for
your choice of the presidential candidates. Now it would open a can of worms
to get into *that* discussion here, and besides, this is not talk.politics.
misc, so no editorial comment from me about the various (de)merits of Mssrs.
Bush and Dukakis.

What I will suggest, however, is that you take a few minutes over the weekend
and review your various local candidates for office and your congessional
leaders to detirmine where they stand on issues of importance to the telecom
industry. What do they think/know/want to do about matters of concern to BBS
sysops, for example. What has been their attitude toward your local telco in
the past? Has it been a cozy relationship, or an adversarial one? Would they
sponsor or participate in legislation regulating COCOTs and AOS outfits?
How do they feel about 'dial-porn' and the various 900 services?

Your vote by no means should be based strictly on the above, but when there
are two or more equally competent people for the same job, why not select
the one who has at least a basic knowledge of this industry and a desire to
be fair when establishing regulations and guidelines?

And if you registered to vote, please do so.

                                                Patrick Townson
                                                Moderator, Telecom Digest

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


Date:  Thu, 3 Nov 88 23:03:11 EST
From: ptownson
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
To: telecom-incoming
Subject: Favorable Tax Ruling in Chicago

As a result of the favorable decision of the Appellate Court of Illinois,
telephone subscribers here are entitled to a refund of a portion of monies
that were collected from them by order of the Court from the period January 1,
1984 through May 31, 1988. Customers of Illinois Bell Telephone Company with
phone service on the Chicago Exchange during that period of time will be
soon receiving an automatic credit on their telephone bill.

The exact formula for detirming the refund will be calculated by the Court
in the near future. It is possible some persons or businesses will not
receive the refund to which they are entitled, due to having moved, changed
accounts or telephone numbers since January 1, 1984.

If you have maintained the same address/telephone number/billing account since
January 1, 1984, you need do nothing, unless you wish to be excluded from
participating in the automatic credit. If you HAVE changed one of the above
items, then you should notify the Trustee promptly.

Include this information:
Your Name
Current Telephone Number
Address, City, State, Zip
Billing Name(s) or Title(s) that appeared on your telephone bill 1/84 to 5/88.
Provide all Chicago telephone numbers issued to you from 1/84 to 5/88.
Describe the type of service you had (residence, business, centrex, WATS, etc).
Give the approximate dates of service for each of the above.
If you are no longer a customer of the Illinois Bell Telephone Company, i.e.
an automatic credit to your Chicago telephone account is not possible, then
instruct the Trustee accordingly.

Contact (in writing only!) -
ACCURATE ACCOUNTING LIMITED
6006 West 159th Street
Oak Forest, IL 60452

Mark your envelope "Illinois Bell Refund", and mail it in a timely fashion
so it is received by the Trustee prior to the close of business December 9,
1988. The Court will disgard any claims presented after that date.

Contact ONLY the above address. Do not write or telephone the Court. Do not
write or telephone Illinois Bell Telephone Company or inquire of its service
representatives.

[I am told for large business customers the refund will average several
hundred dollars. For residence customers, the refund will be smaller, but
pleasing.   PTownson]


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


Subject: Time-Domain Reflectometry (was: Re: tap detectors)
Date: 3 Nov 88 07:43:55 CST (Thu)
From: cs.utexas.edu!romp!ks (Kurt F. Sauer)
To: cs.utexas.edu!vector!telecom-request

The discussion now centers around telephone line security, where, in
article <[e-mail]> hobbit@topaz writes:

>Some of the better tap detectors claim they can detect a tiny voltage drop
>when a high-impedance device is bridged across the line.  Of course if it's
>already there, TFB.  Professional tap detectors normally [...]
>                       [...]  Having a TDR helps too...

Well, my 2 cents are that having a TDR is very useful iff you have the
right type of TDR and know what you're looking for.  Clearly, the results
of a TDR sweep of a telephone line are useless except for historical review.
That is, a TDR will show you the reflectometry at the moment; it does not
point out "bugs."  Therefore, you take a baseline (hopefully clean) sweep
and compare it to later sweeps for changes.

The TDR, with a skilled operator, might help locate on-premises tampering
(and just about every single legitimate change to the wiring, too; if
you use TDRs on-premesis, you MUST use STRICT wire configuration control).
The TDR generally won't help you locate tampering off-premesis because of
the distance involved (and because the wires are owned by the common
carrier and you have no ownership or control of work performed on wires
which you don't own).

In short, the TDR is useful for many things--but I find it's really useful
just for protected wireways.  (In this sense, a protected wireway is simply
a red circuit in some protected environment, and which, if tapped, would
directly provide sensitive data of some degree or other.)

Really, folks, if you're thinking of using/having a TDR, think more seriously
about investing in good voice or data encrypting hardware like STU-III
Type 1 or 2 (available in cellular telephone models by Motorola), or the
various DES-based telephones, or (the list is seemingly endless).  Remember
that telephone lines are inherently insecure, and resign yourself to the
fact that NOTHING CAN BE DONE to secure them short of active measures.
My point may be arguable, but if you make this assumption at all times,
then your risk of improper disclosure is very low.

Question for the mailing list:  To what degrees are companies setting
policies about using or not using the telephone to discuss sensitive
corporate matters?  I know some companies require the use of encryption
for voice or data when the passed information is at a certain sensitivity
level or other, but I don't know to what degree this practice is instituted.

Kurt F. Sauer
Austin, TX


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


Posted-Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 07:05:06 EST
From: cs.utexas.edu!cs.buffalo.edu!sbcs!root
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 07:05:06 EST
To: cs.utexas.edu!texbell!vector!telecom-request
Subject: Tap Detectors
Date: 3 Nov 88 12:01:50 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 17

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (*Hobbit*) writes:
> think a "clean" line is.  Having a TDR helps too...

    I've TDR'ed my phone line on occasion just for kicks.  I have
    to wonder whether it is really possible to spot anything but
    a bug that is grossly mismatched to the phone line, as the
    average line is so junky that you would be astounded.  I can
    spot things like the transition from internal wiring -> interface,
    maybe phone poll wiring, but not much else.  A bug that is
    capacitively coupled into the line would be most difficult to
    see on the TDR (especially if placed near the interface); it would
    also slip by the DC level detector type "tap spotters".


                    Rick Spanbauer
                    SUNY/Stony Brook


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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Fri Nov  4 01:44:47 1988
Received: from buit5.bu.edu by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA18357; Thu, 3 Nov 88 21:57:02 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA00578; Thu, 3 Nov 88 21:56:27 EST
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 21:33:20 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #168
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Nov 88 21:33:20 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 168

Today's Topics:

                Maryland LATA's/Area Code Correction
                  Telehelper Single Line Hold (AT&T)
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                Re: special numbers for cellular phones
                      Re: Sensitive relay wanted
                     Re: second line in your flat
                      Re: Ship-to-shore telephone
                       Re: I need a second line

[YES, we are aware of the duplicates of issues 165-166-167. NO, we do
not know the answer yet. JSol is investigating this in great detail. If
you do not mind, send us a note regards your duplicates because he is
tracing/auditing the mailer and routings involved. We would rather keep
the Digest coming to you -- even multiple copies -- than not at all
while tracking down this annoying problem.

For next: We have had complaints about some of you not receiving #163.
We will soon send it out again. If you get an additional copy, or get
it several days after the fact, you will now understand why. PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Wed, 2 Nov 88 10:24:16 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  Maryland LATA's/Area Code Correction


I am trying to respond to Doug Scott in Telecom V8 no. 166.
That is: Doug Scott <[e-mail]>
I cannot get my mailer to accept address to "rpi" systems.
Here is the message:

Maryland is split between 3 LATA's but has only one area code (301),
ignoring that 202 can also be used for DC area suburbs.  Directory
assistance is reached via 411 for local calls and 1-301-555-1212
(charges may apply) for other parts of Maryland.  (0+ and 1+ calls
within Maryland do now require the area code.)  I don't know who
handles such calls.

By the way, your item in Telecom referred to area code 403 in western
Massachusetts.  That should be 413.

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

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88 08:22:21 EST
From: [e-mail] (Frank Prindle)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Telehelper Single Line Hold (AT&T)


Since I have 6 phones scattered about my home, I grabbed up a device being
sold at a local computer show called "Telehelper Single Line Hold" by AT&T.
It plugs into the wall (AC) and any modular jack (phone line), and provides
a hold service by interpreting two successive hookswitch depressions (in
the range 1/4 second to about 1 second each) as a request for hold.  At this
point, it beeps (much like a Dimension system when you successfully enter
an auto call-back request).  The next time you press the hookswitch, the box
seizes the line for up to 6 minutes or until you pick up the phone elsewhere.

Now all this works exactly as advertized, and very well indeed.  But the
box has one very strange side effect:  when people call my phone, and
nobody answers, they get disconnected after 8 rings!  It is definitely the box,
because I have repeatedly tried disconnecting it (it then rings indefinitely),
and reconnecting it (it then cuts off after 8 rings).  From the calling
end, after the eighth ring, there is just a slight click, then nothing. Calling
back produces 8 more rings, indicating that the line hasn't been seized by
the box (otherwise, it would remain busy for 6 minutes).

The most curious thing is that I brought it to work and tried it on
my desk phone (Dimension PBX) and it didn't cut off the ringing at all.  It
only does it at home!

Now I realize that if nobody has answered by 8 rings, chances are nobody will,
(so it's not really a major problem), but I still think it's odd.  Folks at
AT&T seem reluctant to talk technical about it, preferring to just read to me
from the little manual that comes in the package.  Does anybody else have
one of these?  It this some kind of unadvertized "feature"?

Sincerely, Frank Prindle
[e-mail]

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

From: <dukeac![e-mail]>
Date: 2 Nov 88 14:08:14 GMT
To: mcnc![e-mail]
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: dukeac!klg
From: [e-mail] (Kim Greer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: special numbers for cellular phones
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Nov 88 14:08:14 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Kim Greer)
Organization: Academic Computing, Duke University, Durham, NC
Lines: 22

In [e-mail]+ [e-mail] (Evan Leibovitch)  writes:
+X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
+
+In <[e-mail]+, ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann) writes:
++ Another example of this was discovered in Portland, OR recently when
++ the radio station KXL (I think), was advertising for motorists to call
++ the station with road reports using their cellular phones to dial: 231
++ 'this is a free call'  (Maybe someone in Portland can confirm this)
++
+Don't know about Portland, but Toronto radio station CFTR certainly does
+have a 'free' number for exactly this purpose. (They must take their
+traffic reports rather seriously - they also have two Cessnas airborne
+each rush hour.) Callers press "*680" (the station's frequency).
+
  I saw one the other day on I-85 near Hillsborough -- "DIAL *HP" to
get the Highway Patrol.

--
Kim L. Greer
Duke University Medical Center        try: [e-mail]
Div. Nuclear Medicine  POB 3949            dukeac!klg@ecsgate
Durham, NC 27710  919-681-2711x223      ...!mcnc!ecsgate!dukeac!klg                   fax: [phone]


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

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88 09:58:30 EST
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Tubbs)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Sensitive relay wanted


Radio Shack used to sell a $4.95 adapter to control A and A1 leads for 1A2
key systems - all it was was a relay coil in series with the phone line.
Worked very well, except when trying to pick up a line that was on hold,
because the hold circuit in the KSU diverted enough current to prevent the
adapter relay from picking.
---
Kevin Tubbs, 5152 Upson, Cornell University, Ithaca NY, 14853  [phone]
[e-mail]  {uunet,rochester}!cornell!calvin!kevin

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Date: 2 Nov 88 09:46
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: second line in your flat


Lars Poulsen writes,

>>Date: 29 Oct 88 00:42:00 PST
>>Subject: Re: I need a second line
>> From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
>> Reply-To: [e-mail]
>> Subject: I need a second line...
>> Date: 11 Oct 88 01:40:35 GMT
>>
>> ...  I would like to have a separate line for [my] modem.  I called
>> Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order request.
>> It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
>> short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
>> ... they want $45 for the first fifteen minutes [of installation time],
>> and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after that.        ... It seems to
>> me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
>> exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
>> PacBell said no.  Any comments?
>
>Have I got comments !!!! This is outrageous !!!!
>
>This is a request for residential phone service: The tariff probably
>does not allow them to charge you by the hour for installing the
>access wiring (which after installation will be owned by the phone
>company).

Dear Readers and Lars:  This is not 1976, it is 1988.  Some years ago,
residential inside wiring was "deregulated" and removed from the
telephone company rate base.  This means that the telco is responsible
to bring the wire to a "demarcation" point inside your building, to
be negotiated (usually in the basement, though!), and you the resident
are responsible for the rest.

I myself moved last spring, and paid for a couple of 15 minute segments
to have the NETelco man do a little wiring for me, after he put in a
new protector at the demarc.  I could have done it myself or hired
somebody else.

>Some phone companies have tried to claim that all modem lines are
>business service rather than residential service. If this is what
>they are trying, talk to the PUC and explain why this is personal
>use, not business use. I have heard PUCs that will allow that a BBS is
>business service, but even that is the exception.

This is totally irrelevant:  Business and residence both pay for their
own inside wiring.  Frankly I'm amazed that there's not a latent second
pair, though, in the apartment's inside wire.

>The bandwidth of a metallic circuit is probably more like one megabit;
>this is why we are moving towards IDSN: 2 twisted pairs is 1544 kbps =
>24 voice channels.

Have you priced out a multiplexor or access device for using a Primary
Rate Interface or T1 circuit?  ISDN's Basic Rate needs only 1 pair
to send 144 kbps (includes 2 voice channels) but the chips aren't in
production yet.  You DO live within 18 kilofeet of the CO, I hope.

>In analog land, one twisted pair subscriber loop will carry two phone
>services, but this may already have been exploited, so this is none of
>your business. (The line belongs to PacBell, so YOU can't multiplex it;
>they can.)

I can't believe you people read the same Telecom Digest (aka. various)
that I do.  Remember the cries of horror when the apartment resident
got AML (analog mux) instead of a second local loop?  Muxing is NOT a
good way to go here:  Active components reduce reliability and degrade
the audio.  Modem over a two-line mux?  Horrors!  (Lars is right, Der;
the muxing is their business up to the point of demarc.  A hundred feet
of two-pair costs a lot less than ANY mux, though.)

>Santa Barbara, where I live, is GTE land, and we complain a lot, but they
>have NEVER tried to pull stunts like this one.

Wanna bet?  It's not a stunt.  It's a federal regulation.  See 47CFR68.

Anyway, Der, here's the bottom line:  STOP KVETCHING AND PULL YOUR OWN
WIRE.  Or pay somebody.  The phone company isn't a charity any more;
if you think their labor rates are high, call a plumber.  If you want
to be rich, you're in the wrong line of work.
       fred

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

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88 10:23:38 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Ship-to-shore telephone


In article <[e-mail]> roy@phri (Roy Smith) writes:
>    This past weekend, I was on a boat with a marine VHF radio.  ...
>    Who handles the call?  ...

A very interesting question.  When I have called home in Boston via the
Camden ME marine operator, the call showed up on the local telco part of the
bill even though it was an inter-lata call.  Hmmn.  I have the impression that
marine telephone, like IMTS, is a stepchild of deregulation.

>...  Is there any way to receive an incomming call (i.e.
>initiated by a shore station, calling a vessel at sea)?

Yes, you can call the marine operator, tell her what vessel you want, and
she'll page them. If they don't answer, as is usually the case, you can leave
your name and number. A few times a day at well-known times the operator lists
the names of vessels for whom she is holding traffic, and the vessel can then
call in to get the message. The official way to get the marine operator from
shore is to place the call through your local operator. It turns out, though,
that the marine op has a regular local number and if you know that number you
can just call it and you won't be charged the marine surcharge.

In many places the marine phone system is badly overloaded, and many boats
now have cellular phones.  Some cellular systems such as the one in the
Virgin Islands probably handle more boats than cars.
--
John R. Levine, IECC, PO Box 349, Cambridge MA 02238-0349, [phone]
{ bbn | think | decvax | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
Rome fell, Babylon fell, Scarsdale will have its turn.  -G. B. Shaw

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

To: [e-mail], TELECOM
Subject: Re: I need a second line
Cc: ames!pyramid!sultra!dtynan
Date: 2 Nov 88 11:03:48 EST (Wed)
From: harvard!jetson.upma.md.us!john (John Owens)


> > It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
> > short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
> > ... they want $45 for the first fifteen minutes [of installation time],

> This is a request for residential phone service: The tariff probably
> does not allow them to charge you by the hour for installing the
> access wiring (which after installation will be owned by the phone
> company).

This doesn't sounds like they are charging for installing the wiring which
will be owned by the phone company, but the wiring which will be owned by
the customer.  The Baby Bells (like PacBell) have a "delineation point"
that separates telco-owned-and-maintained lines from customer-owned-and-
maintained lines.  They should be quite happy to give you a second line,
up to and including a "network interface unit" box, for the standard order
processing charge.  What they're talking about charging you for is for
installation of customer-premises ("inside") wire.  If you can do that
yourself somehow, they won't charge you for it.

Before you go too far with it, make sure that they're right about your
existing wiring.  If your apartment building was wired in the last
decade or so, it would be very strange for it not to have 4-conductor
cable.  (I don't think anyone even sells 2- or 3-conductor telephone
cable anymore.)  If you do have 4-conductor cable (red, green, yellow,
and black conductors), you can indeed run two lines on the cable.
Just connect yellow to the red of the second line and black to the
green of the second line.  [Sorry, I don't remember which is tip and
which is ring.]  If you do all this yourself and just have them put in
the NIU, you'll save their service charges.

In an apartment building, there might be other considerations, such as
whether or not you can get physical access to the service area.  Good
luck....

On the subject of multiplexing:

> In analog land, one twisted pair subscriber loop will carry two phone
> services, but this may already have been exploited, so this is none of
> your business. (The line belongs to PacBell, so YOU can't multiplex it;
> they can.)

Along the same lines, if you could multiplex the line that you use, then
divide it out into two lines at the NIU, that wouldn't be any of their
business (as long as you could find a line multiplexer FCC-approved for
customer-premises use).  It seems much easier to run a phone cable out
your window and down a conduit if necessary, which is probably what they
would do for their (overinflated) labor charges.  (But they don't charge
you for parts!)

Again, good luck!

--
John Owens        [e-mail]        uunet!jetson!john
[phone]        [e-mail]

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

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

From [e-mail]@bu-cs.BU.EDU  Fri Nov  4 06:31:59 1988
Received: from bu-it.BU.EDU by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA19960; Fri, 4 Nov 88 06:31:59 EST
Received: from BUIT5.BU.EDU by bu-it.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA09178; Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:24:40 EST
Return-Path:  <[e-mail]>
Received:  by buit5.bu.edu (5.58/4.7)
    id AA00617; Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:24:28 EST
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:08:09 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #169
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Nov 88 22:08:09 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 169

Today's Topics:

          Re: True or false DIGITAL service procludes modems
                            Re: Voice Money
                 Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
            Re: intrastate inter-LATA directory assistance
                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                           Re: In-use light
                         Re: Smart box wanted

[Please remember to use our new address when writing, as shown above.
Some mail is still being forwarded from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU. And if you
please, Digest sumissions ONLY to TELECOM. All other mail, including
your greatly appreciated notice of duplicates to TELECOM-REQUEST.
Thanks, and enjoy this issue!   PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: cbw1![e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: True or false DIGITAL service procludes modems
Date: 2 Nov 88 19:00:49 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> elroy!suned1![e-mail] (Everett F. Batey II) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 8, issue 162, message 7
>
>Not long ago we had threats that would have ended UUCP and local host fast
>dialins .. we were told.  More recently ( first plans fell thru, usual bureau-
>cracy ) we hear rumors that GTEL will be furnishing us an ALL DIGITAL phone
>system.
>

If you are describing a DIGITAL SWITCH then you will likely not see the
difference.  Although, some of the early DMS-100 installations had problems
with bit slip because they were not synchronized correctly to a master
clock.  To my knowledge this has been fixed.

If what you are describing is what is know as DIGITAL LOOP service then you
may run into some difficult problems (although I don't know of any digital
loop services actually in use other that PBXs).

Many newer PBXs use digital loops.  In a digital switch, incoming analog
(read normal) phone lines are PCM encoded.  Then, the data is switched onto
PCM highways (really high speed buses).  This is the wave of the future since
switching is done in time domain rather than space domain.

Some newer switches allow the PCM data to be extended all the way to the
phone.  The advantage is that the phone, it's nice display and buttons are
all powered by the loop.  Also, since the PCM CODEC is in the phone, high
quality audio may be acheived by using decent microphones in the handset.

The problem is that any equipment (read: modem) that expects a normal phone
line WILL NOT WORK.  If you plan to use a modem through such a switch it is
necessary to either get an analog line or to use a modem pool.

Many well equiped digital switches take advantage of the digital loop, which
often has bandwidth in excess of 256Kbps, to pass user data as well as PCM
voice and control.  These systems usually allow a < $200 option to be added
to the phone which presents a normal DCE connector.  Modems are then
"pooled" at some central location.  Users needing to place outside data
calls are routed to an available modem and the call is placed for them.

-brian

--
Brian D. Cuthie                                 uunet!umbc3!cbw1!brian
Columbia, MD                                    [e-mail]


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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Peter Desnoyers)
Subject: Re: Voice Money
Date: 2 Nov 88 17:25:37 GMT



I am trying to find an answer to the following question - neither
AT&T's Q.931 spec nor an ANSI draft I have give any helpful
information.

How do you do keypad terminal to terminal signalling in ISDN? In other
words, what happens when you press a key on a voice-only ISDN phone
during an active call?

If you have one of the few ISDN lines Illinois Bell has installed, and
you dial an 800 number on the public network, what happens when you hear
"press 1 if you have a touch-tone phone"? If you can use this service,
where is the DTMF tone produced? The terminal? The local switch or
the interworking point? If so, what Q.931 message conveys the keypad
information? Will this message be carried end-to-end within an ISDN to
allow the same signalling without generating DTMF?

[if you post, please e-mail to remind me to read it.]

                enquiring minds want to know...
                    Peter Desnoyers

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

To: ames![e-mail]
From: zodiac![e-mail] (John L. Shelton)
Subject: Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
Date: 3 Nov 88 00:02:52 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John R. Covert) writes:
>
>Random side note:  It's legitimate for one ESN to have multiple MINs, but a
>MIN may have one and only one ESN.  Thus you can have a phone which supports
>multiple numbers/systems, but you can't have the same number programmed into
>more than one phone.

Why is it not legitimate to have two phones with the same phone
number?  I would very much like to add a second mobile phone (for my
wife) but am unwilling to spend the extra monthly charge.

Random question:  What are current cellular rates around the country?
In SF Bay area, wireline, I can choose:

Plan A:  45c/min day, 20c/min night/wknd  $45/month
Plan B:  90c/min day, 20c/min night/wknd  $25/month

Plan B was introduced 6 months ago.  Otherwise, there has been no
change in rates since service began 3 years ago.

=John=




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

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 88 21:35:44 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: intrastate inter-LATA directory assistance


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug Scott) writes:
>One quick question:  How are directory assistance (DA) calls handled
>                     in one state but between two separate LATA's?

They are handled like any other toll call, e.g. they're passed to your
long distance company who charge whatever they charge.  Intrastate
directory assistance may cost the same or different from interstate DA,
depending on your state's tarriffs.

That being the theory, let me comment on the practice.  Here in Massachusetts,
I've occasionally called DA for the other LATA, with SBS the calls showed up
on the bill but were marked "free", now with Sprint they charge me.  I've
never figured out who was right.

Furthermore, DA service areas and LATAs do not necessarily coincide. In
southern New Jersey, the 609 NPA is divided into two LATAs, one including a
tiny strip along the shore, the other being the rest of 609. (Why they divided
609 but not the much larger 201 is a mystery to me. The two 609 LATAs together
have about half the phones of 201.) Anyway, from my beach house near Atlantic
City I can dial 411 and for free get numbers for anywhere in 609 because NJ
Bell has a single DA bureau for all of 609. Calling 201 DA costs money.

My parents live in Princeton NJ, which is in 609 but allows free local calls
to several 201 prefixes. I haven't yet seen whether I can get free DA for the
free local 201 prefixes, but I doubt it. Princeton has one of the more arcane
dialing setups I've seen. Various seven-digit numbers can get you:

  -- a local (free) intra-LATA call
  -- a local (free) inter-LATA call (to nearby 201)
  -- a toll intra-LATA call (e.g. to Camden)
  -- a toll inter-LATA call (e.g. to Atlantic City)
--
John R. Levine, IECC, PO Box 349, Cambridge MA 02238-0349, [phone]
{ bbn | think | decvax | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, [e-mail]
Rome fell, Babylon fell, Scarsdale will have its turn.  -G. B. Shaw

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

From: harvard!cs.buffalo.edu!kitty!larry
To: harvard!bu-cs!telecom
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Cc: sunybcs!kitty!larry
Date: 2 Nov 88 00:03:42 EST (Wed)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wendy Thrash) writes:
>
> I'm the formerly happy owner of a Panasonic answering machine similar to one
> described in a recent article here.  A week ago I moved to San Francisco.
> My phone line is the third one in the apartment, and the wires were apparently
> run by a friend of my roommates rather than by Pac Bell.  My phone works OK
> in the new apartment, but my answering machine will not work; it answers the
> phone, jiggles its tapes a couple of times, and hangs up.
>
> I think the machine believes that another extension has been taken off hook,
> and courteously relinquishes the line.  This would be a feature if, in fact,
> another extension had been taken off hook, but there is no other extension
> on the line.
>
> My answering machine works fine on my roommates' lines.  Their answering
> machines work on my line.

    I doubt that improper wiring is the problem; otherwise you would
be having other noticeable problems like hum or crosstalk.

    Based upon the manner in which you have swapped machines and lines,
and your results, my guess is that YOUR line may be served through some
type of subscriber line carrier or concentrator device.  While "normal"
telephones will work on subscriber line carrier devices, the tip and ring
voltage is often MUCH less than that supplied through a "normal" line.  In
the case of analog FDM systems like the Continental AML variety, on-hook
voltage is ONLY 6 VOLTS!  The older WECO 1-type concentrator used 24 volts,
rather than the usual 48.  So, your telephone answering machine may not get
sufficient off-hook loop current following ring-trip and answer, and
therefore think that an extension has been picked up.
    Subscriber line carrier or concentrator devices are used to effect
"pair gain" in rapidly growing areas where there are insufficient cable
pairs to service the subscribers; i.e., the apparatus multiplexes through
analog FDM or digital PCM additional subscriber lines on one physical pair.
    To find out for certain about the status of your telephone line,
measure the on-hook voltage with a digital voltmeter.  If it is less
than 48 volts, then you have just confirmed the problem.  Newer WECO
subscriber line concentrator systems (like the SLC-96) present 48 volts,
and should not cause a problem.  It sounds like you are probably served
by an older device of some sort.
    In general, you have no "right" by virtue of telephone company
tariffs to insist that your telephone line be a "physical" pair rather
than multiplexed.  However, you can politely ask.  If all else fails,
you can always drive the telephone company repair service nuts by
repeated calls complaining about line noise; multiplexed circuits are
almost always noisier than physical circuits, and they may change your
pair to a physical one just to shut you up. :-)

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

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 1 Nov 88 22:26:00 GMT




That's really pretty excessive.  The polarity of the phone line changes
when any phone is off-hook.  It's not too hard to build a circuit that
takes that into account.  I've built them before - but they require
external power.  I'll try to remember to bring in a schematic.  It
should cost under $ 5 in parts.

            Mike Berger
            Science, Technology, and Society
            University of Illinois

            [e-mail]
            {convex | pur-ee}!uiucuxc!clio!berger


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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Smart box wanted
Date: 1 Nov 88 22:37:00 GMT




I have a box that does straight call forwarding and doesn't generate special
tones or require a tone every so often to keep it on-line.  I got it surplus
from a phone company.  The drawback is that it pulse dials, and takes
20-30 seconds to forward the call, so the caller doesn't know what's
going on during that time.  There's no "security" - it always forwards
the call.  Of course, it requires two lines.

            Mike Berger
            Department of Statistics
            University of Illinois

            [e-mail]
            {convex | pur-ee}!uiucuxc!clio!berger


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

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

From [e-mail]  Sat Nov  5 15:25:02 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA25887; Sat, 5 Nov 88 15:25:02 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 88 15:18:59 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #171
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 5 Nov 88 15:18:59 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 171

Today's Topics:

                          Area Code 508 woes
                           Re: In-use light
                         Re: Smart box wanted
                 Re: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                      Re: Ship-to-shore telephone
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                 Re: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 3 Nov 1988  19:05 EST
From: "Paul G. Weiss" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Area Code 508 woes


I am "fortunate" enough to be located in the new area code 508 in
Massachusetts.  For three months after conversions, calls in the old
617 area code were allowed to go through, but now that the grace
period is over, you must dial the new area code.

The problem is that we have learned that there are parts of the
country that are unable to reach us on the new area code.  They get
one ring-back and then nothing.  We called New England Telephone and
then AT&T and got the following story:

AT&T told us that the fault lies with the various "baby bells"
located throughout the country.  Apparently, "turning on" a new area
code is an expensive process, and each individual company needs to
do it in order to allow their users to reach the area code.  AT&T
said that it often takes them months to get around to doing it, as
they will often wait until they have several new area codes to
enable.

Can this really be legit?  If so, then we need to contact each baby
bell to complain that their users can't reach us.  This is really
awful, as we are a business that lives and dies on the telephone.
Any suggestions as to how to approach this.

(By the way, I understand that the town of Dover,MA has successfully
sued to be placed back in the 617 area code).

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 1 Nov 88 22:26:00 GMT




That's really pretty excessive.  The polarity of the phone line changes
when any phone is off-hook.  It's not too hard to build a circuit that
takes that into account.  I've built them before - but they require
external power.  I'll try to remember to bring in a schematic.  It
should cost under $ 5 in parts.

            Mike Berger
            Science, Technology, and Society
            University of Illinois

            [e-mail]
            {convex | pur-ee}!uiucuxc!clio!berger

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Smart box wanted
Date: 1 Nov 88 22:37:00 GMT




I have a box that does straight call forwarding and doesn't generate special
tones or require a tone every so often to keep it on-line.  I got it surplus
from a phone company.  The drawback is that it pulse dials, and takes
20-30 seconds to forward the call, so the caller doesn't know what's
going on during that time.  There's no "security" - it always forwards
the call.  Of course, it requires two lines.

            Mike Berger
            Department of Statistics
            University of Illinois

            [e-mail]
            {convex | pur-ee}!uiucuxc!clio!berger

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

To: [e-mail]
From: mibte![e-mail] (James Harvey)
Subject: Re: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Date: 3 Nov 88 13:28:32 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, kitty![e-mail] writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (J.)
> writes:
>
>>      Some years ago I saw a nifty way of putting a 'busy light'
>> on a phone.  Normal phone systems have the tip wire grounded
>> and the ring hooked to -48v.  (Some systems fail to provide a
>> ground reference.)
>
>     ALL telephone systems are designed to provide a "ground reference",
> and for certain, ALL central offices would be installed in this manner.
> The only exception to the above is a PABX which was incorrectly installed
> (it certainly wasn't designed that way!) without a ground connection.

The number Five ESS (AT&T) does NOT provide a ground reference
while in the talking condition.  Even for ground start lines!

>
>> The trick is that both -48 and ground are
>> applied through about 200 ohms.  When a phone on the loop is
>> off hook, tip and ring are nearly shorted together, and appear
>> at about -25v to ground.  An led hooked through a resistor to
>> the tip side will come on if anyone is off hook.  Of course,
>> there is a catch or two:  1)  You have to make sure the ground
>> wire is connected and not just tip and ring.  You may have to
>> hook it up at the building entrance block.  2)  This will
>> likely introduce a large ground loop and a lot of hum.
>
>     A loud hum, eh?  What we have here is, ahem, a classic example
> of what is properly called "longitudinal imbalance".  You won't get
> FCC Part 68 certification with that design! :-)
>

Very true, Part 68 requires 60 db of balance for certification.

>     I would suggest not trying ANY variation of the above scheme.
> There is NO WAY to design an acceptable circuit based upon the above
> technique.  There is never any justification to sense line status
> (i.e., on-hook, off-hook) by means of any external ground reference,
> regardless of how high a bridging impedance is placed across tip and
> ring.  The only exception to this statement involves ground-start
> PABX trunks or coin telephone lines - which is not exactly what we are
> talking about.
>     There are numerous ways to sense line status by means of
> ISOLATED sensing of series loop current, or by high-impedance (> 100,000
> ohms) briding across tip and ring to sense loop voltage.  No ground
> reference is needed in either of these techniques.


I believe the only solution is to buy a ground start line from
your local telco.  Might have to rig a special phone up to draw
dial tone properly.  This is the only way to ensure a ground on
your line when in use.  On the 5ESS, you have to sense the ground
and remember it because it goes away as soon as the switch
converts to the "Talking" state.

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

--

Jim Harvey                        |      "Ask not for whom the bell
Michigan Bell Telephone           |      tolls and you will only pay
29777 Telegraph                   |      Station-to-Station rates."
Southfield, Mich. 48034           |

ulysses!gamma!mibte!jbh


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

To: uunet![e-mail]
From: pdn![e-mail] (Larry Swift)
Subject: Re: Ship-to-shore telephone
Date: 4 Nov 88 14:02:42 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> roy@phri (Roy Smith) writes:
>    This past weekend, I was on a boat with a marine VHF radio.  One of
>the things you can do with this is to call (on channel 22?) the marine
>operator and ask her (NOTE: all written references that I've seen refer to
>the marine operator as "her") to place a call for you.  Presumably, you

I regularly hear and have talked with male operators (else they are women
with very low voices!)

>either have to call collect or charge the call to a calling card.

Or you can be pre-registered with the marine service company.

>    Who handles the call?  Does AT&T have all the marine operator
>service?  Can you get to an alternate long distance carrier if you want to?

No on both counts, in my experience.  And the far Southwest Florida service
is outrageously expensive.  The Tampa area is GTE and more reasonable.

>Are there marine AOSs?  Is there any way to receive an incomming call (i.e.
>initiated by a shore station, calling a vessel at sea)?

Marine operators broadcast for vessels that have in-coming traffic waiting
for them on channel 16.


Larry Swift                     UUCP: {peora,uunet}!pdn!larry
Paradyne Corp., LF-207          Phone: [phone]
P. O. Box 2826
Largo, FL, 34649-9981           She's old and she's creaky, but she holds!


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

From: gamma![e-mail] (UNIX-to-UNIX Copy)
Date: 3 Nov 88 15:07:52 GMT
To: ulysses!comp-dcom-telecom
Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom


Path: gamma!mibte!jbh
From: [e-mail] (James Harvey)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
Summary: grounds on phone lines
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Nov 88 13:28:32 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Michigan Bell Telephone Company
Lines: 71

In article <[e-mail]>, kitty![e-mail] writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (J.)
> writes:
>
>>      Some years ago I saw a nifty way of putting a 'busy light'
>> on a phone.  Normal phone systems have the tip wire grounded
>> and the ring hooked to -48v.  (Some systems fail to provide a
>> ground reference.)
>
>     ALL telephone systems are designed to provide a "ground reference",
> and for certain, ALL central offices would be installed in this manner.
> The only exception to the above is a PABX which was incorrectly installed
> (it certainly wasn't designed that way!) without a ground connection.

The number Five ESS (AT&T) does NOT provide a ground reference
while in the talking condition.  Even for ground start lines!

>
>> The trick is that both -48 and ground are
>> applied through about 200 ohms.  When a phone on the loop is
>> off hook, tip and ring are nearly shorted together, and appear
>> at about -25v to ground.  An led hooked through a resistor to
>> the tip side will come on if anyone is off hook.  Of course,
>> there is a catch or two:  1)  You have to make sure the ground
>> wire is connected and not just tip and ring.  You may have to
>> hook it up at the building entrance block.  2)  This will
>> likely introduce a large ground loop and a lot of hum.
>
>     A loud hum, eh?  What we have here is, ahem, a classic example
> of what is properly called "longitudinal imbalance".  You won't get
> FCC Part 68 certification with that design! :-)
>

Very true, Part 68 requires 60 db of balance for certification.

>     I would suggest not trying ANY variation of the above scheme.
> There is NO WAY to design an acceptable circuit based upon the above
> technique.  There is never any justification to sense line status
> (i.e., on-hook, off-hook) by means of any external ground reference,
> regardless of how high a bridging impedance is placed across tip and
> ring.  The only exception to this statement involves ground-start
> PABX trunks or coin telephone lines - which is not exactly what we are
> talking about.
>     There are numerous ways to sense line status by means of
> ISOLATED sensing of series loop current, or by high-impedance (> 100,000
> ohms) briding across tip and ring to sense loop voltage.  No ground
> reference is needed in either of these techniques.


I believe the only solution is to buy a ground start line from
your local telco.  Might have to rig a special phone up to draw
dial tone properly.  This is the only way to ensure a ground on
your line when in use.  On the 5ESS, you have to sense the ground
and remember it because it goes away as soon as the switch
converts to the "Talking" state.

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

--

Jim Harvey                        |      "Ask not for whom the bell
Michigan Bell Telephone           |      tolls and you will only pay
29777 Telegraph                   |      Station-to-Station rates."
Southfield, Mich. 48034           |

ulysses!gamma!mibte!jbh


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

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

From [e-mail]  Sat Nov  5 17:59:22 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA02124; Sat, 5 Nov 88 17:59:22 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88 23:07:56 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #163
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Oct 88 23:07:56 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 163

Today's Topics:

                   Submission for comp.dcom.telecom
                           Re: In-use light
                   "Customer Line Charge (Federal)"
                           Re: In use light

[NOTE: This issue is being resent since there have been several comp-
laints of non-receipt. If you already received 163 then please just
toss this one.  Patrick Townson]

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

Date:     Mon, 17 Oct 88 04:54:32 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]


I've noticed in recent Telecoms that there was mention of allowing
alternate long distance carriers to access the AT&T/Bell calling
card database, so that alternate LD customers can use the same
0+ dialing system that Bell Calling Cards use...
-
Such a system would seem to make placing a calling card call even
more difficult than it has recently become. (And it is ESPECIALLY
difficult for people who travel from state to state).
-
For example, when I dial a inter-late (roughly "long distance") calling
card call from a Bell payphone, the call goes to AT&T and thus AT&T's
billing/calling card equipment. I believe that all Bell Operating
Companies (and perhaps even the GTE and other "lesser" ( :-) )
operating companies) use AT&T as the default carrier for all
1+ and 0+ calls from their own payphones. Ie, New York Tel or Pac*Bell
will connect you to AT&T is you were to dial Chicago from one of their
payphones, unless you specify another carrier with a 10xxx/950/800 number.
-
Therefore, if you were to dial 0+312-555-1212 from, lets say, Los
Angeles, you get put through to AT&T's equipment. Now if you have
an AT&T account, fine; the call will go through with no problem. But
let's say the customer has a Sprint account, and is trying to use his
Sprint card instead. (This assumes that Sprint has some arrangement
to have AT&T Card like digit formats, with a PIN number that identifies
the caller as a Sprint customer.) Should the AT&T Calling Card system
pass the call over to Sprint, to let Sprint handle the call? Should
AT&T proccess the call, and then bill Sprint? And at what rates?
-
The problem appears to be that once the customer dials 0+ number, the
call automatically goes over to the local Bell Co. or AT&T, and THEN
takes the PIN number, after it has reached the final carrier's calling
card equipment. It would be foolish to have a call go to AT&T, and THEN
have AT&T send the call back to Sprint once AT&T realized it was a Sprint
calling card number which was being used.
-

Morever, I think that AT&T is not allowed to provide intra-lata
calls in some areas, such as Mass, New York or Connecticut. (Or AT&T
hasn't asked to do so...) So if a Sprint customer wanted to call
from Boston to Lexington (both in the 617 LATA) , and wanted to use
the Bell 0+ method (not the 800 FONcard number or 950-1033), then
he would have to go over New England Tel's Calling Card system,
which would see the Sprint number, and then hand it over to Sprint.
But once it did so, a customer would be able to make a second call
(a "sequence call") without hanging up to ANYWHERE else he wanted to,
since Sprint does both intra and inter-LATA calls. IE, after calling
from Boston to Lexington, I want to call LA on the same call.
Under some terribly stupid divestiture rule, I can no longer do
this on my AT&T/Bell card. Since I made a local call first, I am on
New England Tel's equipment, so I have to hang up and dial
0+213-555-1212 to get LA over AT&T's equipment. In other words,
there are two calling card systems - One which the local Bell uses
for it's calls, and the other which AT&T uses. Some areas don't have
this (like CT) and some will eventually get it (like New York City),
while most of the larger metro areas allready do. However, Sprint
presently does both - I can sequence call from local to long distance
back and forth as manyt times as I want. This of course is over
their 800/950 number, but if Sprint were to be allowed to make use
of Bell's/AT&T's 0+ system, they would have the advantage of
unrestricted sequence calling which AT&T customers, unfortunately,
do not.
-
All in all, it seems both too cumbersome and too unfair to allow
Sprint, MCI and all the others have 0+ access. Interestingly, if
Green had allowed Bell Calling Card/operator system to remain
the same (ie, not splitting up services between AT&T and the Bells)
then it would seem to be easier to institute alternate long distance
carriers' use of the 0+ system. If there was only one system, which
would be operated by the local Bells, then the local Bell could determine
who would handle the call by the PIN number, and hand the call off
to the appropriate carrier. (Very much like 10xxx dialing is now...Of
course I don't know too many people who ever use it, but that's
another story...) Even this would be complicated, but it
would be less complicated than doing so under the current "dual"
system.
-
If I've made any mistakes please let me know...This stuff is in
my thesis and I'd like to get it right! :-)
-
   -Doug
[e-mail] (temp)

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

From: nvuxr![e-mail] (l.j.lang)
To: [e-mail]
Date: 15 Oct 1988  17:00 EDT
Subject: Submission for comp.dcom.telecom


Moderator of comp.dcom.telecom:

Please post this to the newsnet.
Please let me know if there's any problem.

Thanks,
Larry Lang

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Subject: Re: In-use light
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Summary: I built something like this (More or less)
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (jetzer) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:
> > A long while ago someone posted a question about how to build a simple
> > circuit which would light a LED (or a simple lamp) when an extension
> > was lifted elsewhere in the house.  The requirements are:
>
> >   - The LED lights when another extension is lifted, showing that it
> >     is in use.
> >   - The LED must be powered off the phone line.
> >   - No extra wires must be run to the telephone.
> >   - The circuit should be reasonable small so that it can fit inside a
> >     desktop style phone.
>
> > No one was able to come up with a simple schematic to do this that
> > worked.  The upshot was that one could buy such a device for about $30
>
> I would also be interested in such a device - my roommate has this
> nasty habit of picking up the phone while I'm using my modem.
> Actually, I'd be happy even if it required some extra wires or external
> power - just as long as it would detect any phone on the line being in use.
> I might even be willing to let $30 for such a device (maybe).  Where is
> one available?
>
> Mike Jetzer


I built something like this once.  It consisted of an outboard box,
essentially a continuity tester, with a power supply and LED.
The LED would light up whenever an extension
(besides my own) was lifted.  The way it worked is simple:
Phone cable has four wires, two active (red and green)
and two inactive (yellow and black).
When you lift a phone off-hook, several switches change position,
some open, some close.  I took apart every phone in the house,
found terminals connected to a switch that closed
when the switch hook was lifted, and connected the black and yellow wires
to those terminals.  Then I hooked my detector box
to the yellow and the black wires near my phone.
When any rewired switch hook was lifted, the LED lit up.
[I didn't rewire the switch hook of the phone in my room,
since I only wanted to know when remote phones were lifted.
I was a lot more secretive in those days. :-)]

Thus, the circuit looked like this:
                    Off-hook    On-hook
                    Extension    Extension
                    (Switch        (Switch
                    closes)        still open)

                    __>|        __>  |
                    |  |        |    |
                    |  |        |    |
    Black    --------|---------------|--)------------|----)-----
            |           |             |
            |           |             |
    Yellow    --------)---------|--------|-----------------|-----
            |      |
            |      |
            |-9V--LED-|
               (Lights up)
            Detector Box

Some comments:

1. You must rewire every phone where you want to detect off-hook.
This shouldn't be too difficult, especially if you have phones
with spade lug internal connections,
rather than screw terminal or (worse) soldered connections.
Also, most phones come with pretty good schematics,
which is convenient, though you can just use a continuity tester
(such as the detector box) to find a close-when-off-hook switch
by trial and error.

2. The black and yellow wires must run to every phone.
You'll want to check for their continuity before you begin this project.
(Yellow can be especially dubious-it didn't run every where in my house.)

3. It requires external power.
I just didn't want to mess with the 48 VDC power from the phone line.
Too many problems with incoming and outgoing signals (e.g. ~90 VAC ring).

4. I doubt the phone company would approve.
I make no claims about this, except that I used it without incident
for several years.  I never checked it with NJ Bell, the FCC,
Underwriters' Lab, or even my parents.  I can't see why it would
cause any problems, but if it does, don't say I didn't warn you.

5. I only used one detector box.
I don't know what the implications would be of using more than one.

This is a pretty cheap solution.  I spent less than $20,
and I used a fancy project box for the detector.

If you like the Larry Lang Extension Detector (LLED),
I would gladly accept the $30 Mike and Mike said
they'd each be willing to pay!

Let me know if you use this, or if you have any questions.

Cheers,
Larry Lang

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
bellcore!nvuxr!larryl
Room NVC 1G-410, 331 Newman Springs Road, Red Bank, NJ 07701

My employer (Bellcore) has nothing to do with this idea.
I designed it before I came here,
so they didn't buy it for their $1 patent fee.

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

From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: "Customer Line Charge (Federal)"
Date: Sat, 15-Oct-88 08:18:29 PDT


Following divestiture the local telephone companies were given by
the FCC a rate increase of, I think at first, $1.00 per telephone
line connection.  This was to compensate the local companies for
loss of "revenue" from AT&T and was to increase over time.

Without going into such esoteric matters as the justification for
this rate or its amount, which I believe is presently scheduled to
increase again, although there appears to be some small amount of
organized consumer resistance against such, what is the PRESENT
rate?  I thought the line charge rose to $2.00 and then to $2.50,
hence this question.

Here in OK Southwestern Bell (SWB) charges $2.60, which is itemized
separately on the bill as "Customer Line Charge (Federal)" in an
obvious attempt to make people think, at best, it is a tax which
goes to the federal government, i.e., not SWB, and at the least, it
is not "really" a part of your phone bill.

(BTW, in the Oklahoma City local calling area, approximately 35
miles in diameter, a residential single user pulse line costs
$17.18, including taxes.  The same type line when designated as a
business line costs $45.16.  Tone dialing is extra.)

-- Mark V. Miller
-- [e-mail]

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

To: munnari![e-mail]
From: munnari!stcns3.stc.oz.au![e-mail] (Dave Horsfall)
Subject: Re: In use light
Date: 18 Oct 88 05:47:48 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>,
    [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:

[ An "in-use" LED for a telephone extension ]

A local electronics hobbyist magazine "Silicon Chip" published such
a circuit, involving monitoring the line voltage and triggering
an LM3909 LED flasher when it drops to around 12v or so.  There was
also a companion circuit, which blocked other extensions when one
was picked up - useful!  This worked on a similar principle, and it
fires an SCR across each extension instead.  The device has gone
a long way to keeping my wife off the phone when I'm on the modem...

I see no reason why an Australian design should not work elsewhere;
they merely compared the line voltage (50v on-hook) against a reference
zener, and did its magic when it dropped (about 12v off-hook).  A diode
bridge supplied the power, and the LM3909 is quite an efficient flasher.

The diagrams won't reproduce too well on a terminal screen, so I'll
send photocopies of the articles to anyone who wants them, although
I'd prefer not to be inundated...  Perhaps the first few enquirers
(assuming there are any :-) can supply others in their country.

Oh, and Telecom get stroppy when they find you connecting non-approved
devices to their network, so y'all are warned.

--
Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU),  Alcatel-STC Australia,  [e-mail]
[e-mail],  ...munnari!stcns3.stc.OZ.AU!dave
    PCs haven't changed computing history - merely repeated it

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

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

From [e-mail]  Sun Nov  6 13:50:40 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA08716; Sun, 6 Nov 88 13:50:40 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 88 13:13:25 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #172
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 6 Nov 88 13:13:25 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 172

Today's Topics:

                              Telephonica
                     Re: Tape Recording Legalities
                              800 services
                          Inside House Wiring
                     A Recent Experience with PCP
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Richard Marks)
Subject: Telephonica
Date: 5 Nov 88 03:01:31 GMT



Hi,

My friendly stock broker is pushing Telephonica, the Spanish telephone
company.  What info would you have about this firm.  Does it provide
quality service and products?

Thank you,
Richard Marks
[e-mail]


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

To: comp-dcom-telecom
From: hp-sdd![e-mail] (Roger Haaheim)
Subject: Re: Tape Recording Legalities
Date: 2 Nov 88 16:39:19 GMT



Aside from the potential legalities involved, what you propose is
unethical.

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

Date: Sun 6 Nov 88 07:01:56-EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 800 services
To: [e-mail]
From: "WRCTM / MCI ID: 356-4817" <[e-mail]>
TO:     * Intermail / MCI ID: 107-8239

>PS: 1-800 numbers likewise is currently serviced by AT&T, lots of
>  money their and SS#7 will enable the Operating Companies to make
>  even more profits on it and offer whizzier services like free-phone
>  numbers for just a small geographic area for one day.

I hate to burst your death star, but there are approximately 30 different
800 carriers that are assigned 800 prefixes. Each carrier that requested was
assigned their own 800 prefix(es). That is only an interim soultion until
a national 800 database is created, then the 800 numbers will be used by
the particular interexchange carrier on a first come/first serve basis.
If you have 800 service with AT&T, then real soon, you could switch over
to MCI, Sprint, et al, without switching the 800 number at all!!  Right
now, you have to change your 800 # to switch 800 carriers.


     Robert Michael Gutierrez
     MCI Telecommuncations
     Western Region Customer Trouble Management Center
     Hayward, California.

*The views expressed do not necessarly represent MCI, it's employees,
 management, or subsidiaries*
(Translation: Ya dont like what I sed, then ya have to take it up wit me
              and my Louisville Slugger........)


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

Date: Sun 6 Nov 88 07:01:44-EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Inside House Wiring
To: [e-mail]
From: "WRCTM / MCI ID: 356-4817" <[e-mail]>
TO:     * Intermail / MCI ID: 107-8239
From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)

>I am trying to get my modem @ home to talk to the outside world.  I am
>currently time-multiplexing it, so that the modem can use the line at
>night.  I would like to have a separate line for the modem.  I called
>Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order
request.
>It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines
(how
>short-sighted can you get!)............

That I find hard to believe. As far as I know, most apartment bldgs are
are prewired with 12 or 25 pair multiconductor. It is unusual that an
apartment bldg would not be prewired, those cases usually happen if the
bldg is real old, or you have 3 units or less.

>...........................PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
>There are two reasons why this is unacceptable.  First, they want $45 for
>the first fifteen minutes, and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after
>that (make a rough guess how long it takes :-)  Second, I don't see that
>I should foot the bill for this apartment to have two lines.  As an option,
>I know I can move, but would like a better reason than that.
>My question is, does anyone know of a way of solving this?  It seems to
>me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
>exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
>PacBell said no.  Any comments?  I'm sure this is a common problem, but I've
>not seen anything on it recently.

Yes, you could mux 2 lines on 1 pair (T-Carriers are usually 4 wire, and
since 1 pair is each direction, it is usually easier to mux those than
2 bi-directional carriers.)  Essentially, you would be muxing at the demarc
since that is where the local telco cable pairs are coming into you. BUT,
before you go through all this, look before you leap........

First, go find your entry point for the cable pairs from the pole/street, and
find the Network Interface, where the protectors are. If you already have a
line to your apartment, it HAS to be standard 4-conductor cable. If you do
find that, the all you have to do is just use the unused pair (yellow and
black) of wires, and then either seperate them in your apartment to 2 jacks
or combine them on the same jack that the RJ-11/RJ-13 jacks allow for. Pac
Bell WILL make sure you have dial tone at the Network Interface (or a 66 block
if you are in a large apartment bldg). From there, it's your line to do
whatever you want. Now this is if you are in a small apartment bldg with
recent wiring. In a large apartment bldg, just look for a similiar color pair
thats not being used at the interface, then in your apartment, take the
wallplate off, and look for the same colored pair you hooked up downstairs.

If you are in a large, old bldg, you most likely will have old 2-conductor
running from the basement. What you want to look for then is an airshaft,
and there are usually plenty in an old bldg. Then all you have to do is
run a new line from the basement to your aparment. You will need the owners
permission (you would anyway for Pac Bell to do it), because you most likely
be 2 apartments away from an air shaft (I have been luckly, so far. I always
ended up in an apt with a shaft next to the bathroom). What you do is run
the telephone wire on the hallway ledge, the drop it into your apt underneath
your door (run down from the ledge along your door, that way you dont need
to drill anywhere, and with old plaster, you would not want to.....).

I have been in enough apartments that one or the other HAS to apply. If
you are in a situation that the above does not apply, I would *love* to
hear about it.

I will say, though, houses are a lot easier to wire. I finally moved to
one, and I had it finished in 15 minutes, once they ran the 2nd cable
pair to the house for the 2nd line.


     Robert Michael Gutierrez
     MCI Telecommuncations
     Western Region Customer Trouble Management Center
     Hayward, California.

*(Of course) The above views do not represent my employers, ya-da
                                                                ya-da

ya-da.....

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

Date: Sat, 5 Nov 88 18:41:52 EST
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Townson)
To: telecom
Subject: A Recent Experience with PCP


The other day I alluded to a hostile incident with the folks at Telenet
regarding my own PC Pursuit account. I am pleased to report the matter was
resolved effeciently by Michael Perez in their billing department.

I am somehwat of a rarity on PC Pursuit in that I receive monthly invoices
from Telenet and submit a check from time to time in payment. This is an
option which was available in the very early days of that program -- like
about four years ago -- but is no longer offered. I've had a PCP account
since the first week the service was offered. According to Perez, there are
just a few of us, less than a dozen subscribers, still on the direct billing
program.

What had happened was that from April, 1988 through August, 1988 I had only
received one invoice. On inquiring at Telenet, I was told I was paid in full,
which seemed unlikely to me, but I took their word for it. Then later, I
spoke with Marilyn Schaeffer in the billing department who told me I owed
<five> months of service!  Well I immediatly sent a check to her attention
for most of that, then last month I sent another check to be totally up to
date. Somehow their remittance service (a bank in Philadelphia) was very late
getting the check credited. My password was cut for non-payment! Perez took
all the details, researched the matter and had me back on line shortly.

Despite the problems people report with billing and file transfers, PC Pursuit
is still one of the best bargains in computer networking available. The best
long distance rates available to me are the AT&T Reach Out Plans, at $7.55 per
hour - or about 12.5 cents per minute - after the first hour. My calls are
generally from my home here in Chicago to Portal in San Jose, CA and to
Boston University, where TELECOM DIGEST is now housed. If I had to pay long
distance rates, the cost would be prohibitive.

Despite the various complaints I've heard from other PCP users regarding the
quality of service, etc, my personal opinion is that the Telenet network is
essentially being given to us for free at night, less the cost of some
administrative functions. You get what you pay for!

Which brings me to my next point, and you should all listen up now: There are
dark hints -- ugly rumors -- that PCP is being 'restructured' by the
folks at Telenet, and that the $25 per month days are soon to end. Have you
heard anything about this? I'm told they plan to raise the rates -- perhaps
by doubling them -- and greatly expand the service in the process. They
will probably increase the number of reachable (or Pursuitable) locations,
as well as increase the number of outdial ports available. And there are some
other new features planned, I am told.

Worse yet, according to my source there, they *fully expect* to lose a large
number of customers when the change is made, but gain a new group of customers
in the process among folks who have asked for other features, and fewer
time constraints, etc.

Considering my own traffic, I'd probably go with $50 a month in exchange for
the additional features, if it came to that, but I know many of you would
probably discontinue your account.

More news when I hear it, and if you have anything to add, please send along
your notes.

Patrick Townson

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

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

From [e-mail]  Tue Nov  8 01:01:45 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA27958; Tue, 8 Nov 88 00:59:24 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 88  0:35:28 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #173
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 8 Nov 88  0:35:28 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 173

Today's Topics:

                  Re: Favorable Tax Ruling in Chicago
                              Re: switch
                      Re:  Sending digits on ISDN
                          not out of 508 yet
                           Re: In-use light
                       Re: I need a second line

[Good morning! Here is another Digest for you. I assume you took a few
minutes out of your busy schedules to vote today, or you plan to do so
before the polls close this evening.  PT]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 6 Nov 88  16:45:51 CST
From: Paul Fuqua <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Favorable Tax Ruling in Chicago [TELECOM Digest V8 #170]


    Date: Thursday, November 3, 1988  10:03pm (CST)
    From: ptownson
    Subject: Favorable Tax Ruling in Chicago [TELECOM Digest V8 #170]

    If you have had the same address/telephone number/billing account since
    January 1, 1984, you need do nothing, unless you wish to be excluded from
    participating in the automatic credit. If you HAVE changed one of the above
    items, then you should notify the Trustee promptly.

I'm not quite clear on what you mean here.  My girlfriend has had one
continuous account with Illinois Bell since early 1987, but has had to
change numbers three times as she moved from Arlington Heights to
Willowbrook to Lisle.  Is it necessary for her to write in, just a good
idea, or unnecessary?

                              pf

Paul Fuqua
Texas Instruments Computer Science Center, Dallas, Texas
CSNet:  [e-mail] (ARPA too, sometimes)
UUCP:   {smu, texsun, cs.utexas.edu, im4u, rice}!ti-csl!pf

[Moderator's note: I would be inclined to do just what was instructed, and
send them all pertinent information. I used to run a BBS here in Chicago
for two years during the period in question. I'm sending a form to be sure
I get the tax refund on that line also.    Patrick Townson]

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

From: ferris![e-mail] (Matt Goldman)
Date: 5 Nov 88 08:45:45 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Subject: re; Switch device
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Matt Goldman)
Organization: Cray Research, Inc., Mendota Heights, MN
Lines: 18

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael Grant) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>The Sharper Image sells a thing-a-ma-gig for about $10 which looks
>exactly like a telephone "Y" adaptor.  It has 2 sockets, one marked
>"phone", the other makred "ans. mach."  When another extension is
>lifted anywhere in the house, the answering machine is cut off.

In Minnesota we can also get the item at Target.  I have one, it works
rather nicely.  Your milage may vary.



--
Matthew Goldman            but I can post news...

I dream of ancient days...
.... ..   - .... . .-. .   .-.-.

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Date: 7 Nov 88 09:29
To: [e-mail]
Subject: re:  Sending digits on ISDN


[e-mail] (Peter Desnoyers) writes,
>Subject: Re: Voice Money
>Date: 2 Nov 88 17:25:37 GMT

>I am trying to find an answer to the following question - neither
>AT&T's Q.931 spec nor an ANSI draft I have give any helpful
>information.
>
>How do you do keypad terminal to terminal signalling in ISDN? In other
>words, what happens when you press a key on a voice-only ISDN phone
>during an active call?

In ISDN, the human interface (things like buttons on the phone) is not
standardized; the electrical interface (line and signaling protocols)
is standardized.  Thus "key" is simply an artifact.  And a mighty handy
way to tell the cpu in your telephone set what you want to do.

There are two ways a call can be initiated in DSS1/Q.931.  En-bloc
sending means the call is initiated by a SETUP message with all of the
digits included in the called party number information element.  Overlap
sending means you don't have any/enough digits in the SETUP, so
subsequent INFO messages carry the keypad digits, until they're all
done.  En-bloc sending is more efficient for machine dialing; overlap
is mainly for plain olde telephony.

These are all out-of-band messages, on the D channel.  NO tones are
every sent.  Now if you want to send tones down the line, you have to
think of them as more like modem tones than as dialing tones.  Again
two options theoretically exist.  You phone can generate them (internal
modem, for convenience -- touch-tone generators are cheap enough to make
this viable, though it's certainly not required by ISDN), or if your
phone company sees a market for it, they can offer a supplementary
service by which they generate tones for you, in response to some
keypad digits.  I wouldn't count on the latter, though.

The moral of the story:  TOUCH-TONE IS OBSOLETE.  Since ISDN does NOT
use tones, applications shouldn't be built around it.  Voice recognition
is a lot more reasonable for commercial applications.  You may find
touch-tone generators in many ISDN installations, but they may not be
as convenient as they are now.

BTW there's also ISDN "User to User Signaling", a D-channel low-volume
packet delivery service of sorts, which may in some cases supplant
in-band tones.  But it too may carry a fee.
      fred
_________
These views are mine and not those of DEC, ANSI T1S1, CCITT, ITU, WATTC,
ACLU, MSPCA, RSFSR, or anyone else, unless it's their choice, not mine.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Ofsevit, 293-5062, BXB1-1/D03)
Date: 7 Nov 88 10:20
To: [e-mail]
Subject: not out of 508 yet



    In TELECOM 8:171 Paul Weiss mentions concerning area code 508:

> (By the way, I understand that the town of Dover,MA has successfully
> sued to be placed back in the 617 area code).

    They may have sued, but they certainly haven't been successful in being
    placed back in 617.

    Many of the communities on the 617-508 border have complained about
    being "exiled."  What's different about Dover?  It's the second
    wealthiest town in the state, with highly exclusionary zoning and no
    business district of its own.  It's mainly a bedroom community for
    executives who work in 617, and they and their families are *terribly*
    (emphasis added to indicate dripping sarcasm) put out at having to
    punch 4 extra digits.  Rich folks really are different from you and me,
    and they can't imagine having ever having to be treated equally.  When
    in doubt, they sue.  Only this time, they're up against an even
    wealthier adversary.

    By the way, I don't mean to make light of the real problems in the 508
    startup, as Paul noted.

                David Ofsevit

    [The above message clearly represents my opinions only, I hope.]

[Moderator's note: We are experiencing the very same thing here with
the prospect of area code 708 coming to the Chicago suburbs next year.
Some suburbanites are oh-so-put-upon by the idea they will have to dial
eleven digits to reach the city. I am not enamored of dialing the same
number to reach someone three blocks west of me in Lincolnwood, IL either,
but that's life. 312 will continue to serve the city only. 815 will keep
it's present boundaries. 708 will take over the rest of 312.  P.Townson]
------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 7 Nov 88 17:59:13 GMT



By his own definition the second pair would not be hooked to
the second line since he intercepts it for the signalling.
Assuming anything is on the second pair is risky, since the
phone company has used all number of things on the line from
power to special local hacks.  If the idea of accidentally
shorting a second line bothers you, use a 100 ohm resistor in
the loop.  This should be innocous even if the modified phone
was plugged into a two line jack.

-Ron

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: I need a second line
Date: 7 Nov 88 18:01:25 GMT



The bandwidth on a typical metallic phone line is dependent
on the distance.  T1 is only speced for 3000 feet.  We know
for a fact that it fails in less than twice that distance
do to our hardware loopback behaviour.

-Ron

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

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

From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  9 02:13:24 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA08233; Wed, 9 Nov 88 02:13:24 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 88  1:59:24 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #174
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 9 Nov 88  1:59:24 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 174

Today's Topics:

               Special phone needed for disabled person
                            DMS-100 problem
                           Not just cocots...
              Re: References on Telephone Systems Wanted
                          Who Is Phone Base?

[To [e-mail]: I *did* add you to the list. Your
postmaster says you do not exist! Please clarify your status. P.Townson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Special phone needed for disabled person
Date: Thu,  3-Nov-88 20:01:59 PST


I need to find a special piece of phone equipment for my aunt who is in a
wheelchair. Right now, she has a Muraphone with a voice synthesizer that
can automatically dial 911 emergency by pressing a button on the transmitter.
Unfortunately, Muraphone is no more...

She needs to find another phone with a voice synthesizer (no tapes please!)
that can also automatically dial for help if a "panic button" is pushed.
This should be a company that is able to provide repair service if
necessary, etc. without having to send the unit back to Japan or wherever.
Also, would anyone have a source for the Muraphone transmitters, so she
could have a backup?

                                             Thanks,
                                             Paul McGinnis
                                             [e-mail]
                                             [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 1988 09:06 EST
To: arpa!bu-cs.bu.edu!telecom
Subject: DMS-100 problem


I remember reading about a known problem with DMS-100s.  It had to
do with a synchronization problem with one of the cards in
the switch.  The manifestation of the problem is an "occasional"
single bit error that makes it barely tolerable to use a 1200 baud
modem over the line and nearly impossible to use a 2400 baud.
Unfortunately, the error rate is so low that it's undetectable using
the "standard" tests that the craftperson performs in response to
noisy line complaints.

Apparently it's quite easy for the craftperson to figure out that
card in question is flakey *IF* you can tell them the particular
card to check.  Then, it's just a simple matter of a board swap
and you're back in business at 2400 baud.

A friend recently moved to a new exchange and found that his modem
won't hold carrier for more than 5 minutes at 2400 baud and gets lots
of curly brackets (another symptom of the DMS problem) at 1200 baud.
Repeated calls to Ohio Bell about noisy lines have gotten him nowhere
("But sir, when our technician listened to the line, he didn't HEAR
any noise.") except that he was told that the switch in question was
a DMS-100.

Any info would be appreciated.


            Thanks,
                Jeff
---
Jeff Frontz                                              Work:     614/860-2797
AT&T-Bell Labs (CB 1C-356)                               Cornet:       353-2797
att!cblpe!jhf         [e-mail]          Home:     614/794-3986

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

Date:  Tue, 8 Nov 88 15:14 MST
From: [e-mail]
Subject:  Not just cocots...
To: [e-mail]


   I was surprised to find a payphone that would not let me use the pad
after completion of my 800 call The instrument was supplied by NJBell
and was located on the Atlantic City Expressway.  Usually NJB phones
don't do this (though many other company payphones down here do).  And
on the Expressway, you can't just run down the street and select another
payphone.  I got no help from the operator(s), but the repair service
supervisor connected me such that my pad was workable.
     I recommend that anyone else who gets bashed this way by a BOC be
persistent in ensuring that they can access their alternative carrier
without hindrance from a super-sophisticated payphone.  If enough people
bug the repair people about these "broken" phones, they will report the
problem and complain about the cost of handling this situation.
    If I had my own tone pad, I probably could have gotten around this.
The other payphones I have used (not NJB) go so far as to cut you off if
you tone the line after getting connected.  This is refusal to provide
the service paid for because of mechanical censorship.  I hope we can
look forward to disabling legislation/regulation for these cretins.
Before they get computers that can make out words as well as tones, eh,
big bro.?

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

To: [e-mail]
From: mibte![e-mail] (James Harvey)
Subject: Re: References on Telephone Systems Wanted
Date: 7 Nov 88 22:10:27 GMT



In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ron Natalie) writes:
> One good reference was published by AT&T and called "Notes on the Network." I
> don't think this book is available (if it is, please let me know, I'd like
> one).  Barring that, the following is a little out of date, but pretty
> comprehensive: "Engineering and Operations in the Bell System" also published
> by Western Electric.
>
> -Ron

Notes on the Network is now TR-NPL-000275.  It is available from
Bell Core and costs about $150.00 (better check your library
first).  My Bellcore catalog lists 201-699-5800 as the ordering number.
--

Jim Harvey                        |      "Ask not for whom the bell
Michigan Bell Telephone           |      tolls and you will only pay
29777 Telegraph                   |      Station-to-Station rates."
Southfield, Mich. 48034           |

ulysses!gamma!mibte!jbh


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

Date: Tue, 8 Nov 88 01:43:07 EST
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Townson)
To: telecom
Subject: Who Is Phone Base?


An organization has been advertising lately which bills itself as "the world's
most advanced long distance and voice messaging system....designed especially
for the frequent business traveller..."

They claim to offer these services -

   Send/recieve voice messages to anyone, anywhere in USA - 24 hours daily.
   Take advantage of reduced long distance rates.
   A personal 800 number if desired.
   Place conference calls without operator assistance.
   Forward your calls to any telephone, including cellular.
   Remote call forwarding.
   Recording of conversations from any phone to any other phone(s).
   Weather reports for major cities and current stock market reports.

They do not give rates in their advertising except to say that they believe
you will be so impressed with their service they are willing to give the first
ten dollars worth away free -- your choice of the various services, I assume --
to help you get aquainted with them.

Charges after the first ten dollars worth will be billed to a credit card,
so if you intend to investigate this, you will want to be judicious in your
use of the service until you have a complete understanding of the rates and
policies, etc.

It appears to me to be an answering service, albiet a fancy one, which is
national in scope rather than limited to a certain community or geographic
area.

They do not give an address in their advertising. The phone number to call
for information and to sign up is 1-800-289-1500, and you are to ask for
'extension 545', which apparently is keyed to the November 14 issue of
[Insight Magazine].

If any of you take them up on their offer of ten bucks worth of free service
and/or subscribe, please summarize your experience in a message here.
Thanks.

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

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

From [e-mail]  Thu Nov 10 01:15:10 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA17632; Thu, 10 Nov 88 01:15:10 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88  0:53:29 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #175
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 88  0:53:29 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 175

Today's Topics:

                     Re: Second pair/yellow-black
                          Re: DMS-100 problem
                         splitting area codes
                           Re: In-use light
                      Connecting Telephone Lines
                           Re: Phone Base
                     phone # [phone] for dir.asst.
               re: Telephone needed for disabled person
                           Metallic circuits
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
Date: 9 Nov 88 02:11:08 PST (Wed)
From: ucla-an!bongo![e-mail] (julian macassey)



     There has been a fair amount of discussion about what you will
     find on the second pair of phone wires in a residence. Here is a
     list of what you might/could find:

The first pair will always carry a regular phone line. These wires are
usually Red and Green, they can be White with a Blue Stripe and Blue
with a White stripe. They are referred to as Tip and Ring. The Green or
White/Blue wire is Tip and the Red or Blue/White is Ring. Tip is
Positive and Ring is negative. ( Yes I know the voltage thingy is more
complex than that, this is not for experts. For folks with Rat Shack
meters, what I have said is true)

Ok, now the first pair is out of the way, let's look at the second
pair. They are usually Black and Yellow or White/Orange and
Orange/White. These wires can have several things happening to them,
but not all at once.

First of all, there can be nothing on the wires, and they may not be
connected anywhere.

Next, the Yellow wire can be grounded. This is rare these days, but you
will find it on old installations.

Another old thing you will find is AC voltage for lighting the dials of
old Princess phones. If you look around, you will find a wall
transformer wired into the Yellow and Black wires. If the transformer
says, "Bell System Property" etc. That's it. If you no longer have a
rotary dial Princess with a lighted dial, pull it.

Talking of old, old style multiline "business" phones. Yes, the ones
with the buttons that light up and flash, they needed a hard wire
signal to know that a line was off hook. This was known in "Telco speak"
as "A-Lead control". If a single line phone was used as an extension on
one of these systems also known in "Telco speak" as "1A2", the second
pair (Yellow and Black) were shorted together when the phone went "off
hook" to let the system know that a line was in use so all the right
blinky lights came on. If you used a phone without A-Lead control, it
went into hold when you hung up - most inconvenient.

These days, if the telco uses the second pair, it is usually for a
second line. Looking back to the first paragraph, the Black wire is Tip
and the Yellow wire is Ring, usually known as Tip 2 and Ring 2. Yup,
that makes the first pair (Red&Green) Tip 1 and Ring 1.

Now, when discussing PBXs and modern "Key Systems", the second pair can
often carry "data", stuff controlling the phones.

Hope this helps.

Yours Julian Macassey

Why should we let the Government do anything? They can't even deliver
the mail.


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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Date: 9 Nov 88 12:07
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: DMS-100 problem


In issue 174, someone at AT&T asked about a synchronization problem
with the DMS-100.  To the best of my knowledge, this is not a DMS-100
problem per se, as similar problems occur in other exchanges where
T1 carrier is in use between switches (many or most).  The problem
is that every line is supposed to be synchronized to a master clock
in a heirarchy.  The DMS is supposed to be slaved to one line (with
another as backup), and all of the incoming T1 lines are also
supposed to be slaved, eventually, from the master.  (There's a
multi-strata set of rules for this.)

Since you can't _hear_ slips, telco people get sloppy and sometimes
don't set up things right.  It's possible, then, that one of the T1
lines is not synchronized to the switch.  This "plesiochronous"
operation ($10 word for "just out of sync") usually results in a
very regular (every n seconds) error on modems.  You have to pester
the telco to get it fixed; it matter what exchange the call is to/from,
since it's usually on the interexchange trunks.
      fred

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 88 12:27:30 EST
To: [e-mail]
Subject: splitting area codes


A few years ago, when they split New York City into 212 and 718, there
was a lot of fuss.  The city even found a consultant who was willing to
testify that N.Y. Telephone should have gone to 8-digit numbers instead...

[You would think these people would read, if nothing else, the front few
pages of their telephone directory which in almost every case says quite
plainly that the subscriber has *NO* property rights in their telephone
number, and that the number can be changed by the telephone company at any
time in the conduct of the Company's business.    Patrick Townson]


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

Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 17:26:07 PST
From: killer!killer!lll-crg!csusac!polyslo![e-mail] (Pete Bowden)
To: vector!telecom
Subject: Re: In-use light
Organization: Cal Poly State University -- San Luis Obispo

I have wired an "in-use" light into a 9-line key telephone so that I
can tell if any telephone units (or mostly modems in my case) were in use
(I have 9-lines in my residence -- 7 of which going into a BBS).  Anyway,
I didn't design the circuit and I don't have it right here -- but if you
wish to experiment here's what it included...
  1) 10 micro ferad capacitor
  2) a zener diode (around 10 volts if I am remembering)
  3) a light (whatever the light is in the standard key telephone is what
   I am using)
On the positive wire (if it doesn't work on the first wire, try the second)
before the telephone units which you wish to have light up the light install
the capacitor and diode in parallel with the line, along with the light.
We'll TRY a drawing...

           ----LIGHT----
           |           |
           --Capacitor--
           |           |
           ----Zener----
           |           |
+------------------------------------X
       (Telephone line...)          > Telephone Unit(s)
 ------------------------------------X
-
  This circuit does use a slight amount of power and you may have problems
if you try to run several lights -- but it doesn't seem to affect the quality
of my line in any noticable amount.  A friend who IS more into the electronics
recommended the use of an optal isolator in place of the Capacitor and Zener
but didn't go into detail.
    ___
 -'/   >      /       |"Pete" Bowden, P.O. Box 905, Santa Maria, CA 93456-0905
  /___/___ --/--___   |    Sysop--LOIS BBS  805-928-6969 (4 public dialups)
 /    /___> /  /___>  |
/   _/\____/\_/\____/ |            ...{csun,sdsu}!polyslo!pbowden
You have PLENTY of time to finish this assignment.
   What do you mean you have other classes?


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

From: [e-mail]
To: vector!telecom
Subject: Connecting Telephone Lines
Date: Mon, 31-Oct-88 20:35:16 PST


I am looking for information about connecting two telephone lines
together simulating 3-way calling. I have done this by connecting
the wires directly together, and there is a very bad loss of
sound quality between people on other ends of the lines. I have
attempted to hook up very simple amplifier circuits up, and attempting
to separate the signals on the lines into 2 wire pairs for each line.
However I have not had any luck whatsoever, although I believe I've
blown a number of components when someone calls while I'm working on
this. I dont have a super knowledge of electronics, although I do have
enough to put together simple circuits, follow schematics, and not kill
myself in the process. Any suggestions, references, or maybe even
someone who's put together a circuit to do this and is willing to share
the wealth, would be greatly appreciated. I do have 3-way calling on
both lines, but have times when having more than 2 other people on at
once would be conveinent, so suggestions such as "get 3-way calling" are
of no help.
                   Thanks, Dave Archer, [e-mail]


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

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 88 13:09:42 EST
From: harvard!cos.com!mgrant (Michael Grant)
To: telecom
Subject: Re: Phone Base


They're in Vienna, VA.  Their phone number is [phone].

The trick to getting to talk to a human is to dial the number,
(800-289-1500, X545), then choose choice 3, (inquire about corporate
accounts).

I'm having info sent to me, I'll summarize when I get it.

-Mike

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

Date:     Wed, 9 Nov 88 10:42:19 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  phone # [phone] for dir.asst.

976-1411 turned up as a directory assistance number somewhere in the
Shenandoah valley area in Virginia (a little more specifically, between
Strasburg and Harrisonburg).

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

From: [e-mail] (David Ofsevit, 293-5062, BXB1-1/D03)
Date: 9 Nov 88 15:25
To: [e-mail]
Subject: re: Telephone needed for disabled person


    In Telecom 8:174, Paul McGinnis asks about a phone with a panic button.
    I believe that Lifeline Systems specializes in just such systems.  They
    are located in Watertown, MA:  [phone].

    (Paul's message wasn't clear on exactly the functions needed, but
    having the panic button seemed his highest priority.)

            David Ofsevit

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Steve Dyer)
Subject: Metallic circuits
Date: 9 Nov 88 23:50:01 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>The bandwidth of a metallic circuit is probably more like one megabit;
>this is why we are moving towards IDSN: 2 twisted pairs is 1544 kbps =
>24 voice channels.

OK.  Here's my situation.  I've got a metallic (LADS) circuit between
my house and my Internet site.  I am presently running at 19.2kb with a
pair of Gandalf LDS309a limited distance modems.  What are my chances
of ekeing any additional bandwidth out of this line, and what
technology would be necessary to take advantage of it?  I have seen ads
for 56kb DSUs which are also claimed to work on twisted pair, but they
seem to refer to in-house private twisted pair and not metallic lines
from the TelCo.  Just what is the theoretical and practical maximum
bandwidth of a LADS circuit?

--
Steve Dyer
[e-mail]
[e-mail] aka {harvard,husc6,linus,ima,bbn,m2c,mipseast}!spdcc!dyer

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

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

From [e-mail]  Thu Nov 10 21:47:49 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA27547; Thu, 10 Nov 88 21:47:49 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 21:26:40 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #176
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 88 21:26:40 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 176

Today's Topics:

              Detecting unauthorized network connections
                     Chicago area / sequence calls
                   Re: Answering maching vs. wiring
                      Re: I need a second line...
                        Re: Area Code 508 woes
             Re: Special phone needed for disabled person
                      re:  Sending digits on ISDN
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 88 13:22:39 PST
From: ll-xn!ucsd!sdsu!polyslo![e-mail] (Mei-Ling L. Liu)
Subject: Detecting unauthorized network connections
To: [e-mail]


       *** Detecting Unauthorized Connections on Your Network ***

       I am anxious to hear from people who  have  looked  into  or  have
       implemented tools to detect unauthorized connections on their net-
       works.
       I  have  a  campus  network with a broadband backbone and ethernet
       basebands.   We are running XNS now but will soon be switching  to
       TCP/IP.    Users  are supposed to notify us (the Computing Center)
       before they hook anything up to the network, but naturally some of
       them conveniently overlook this rule.   Up to  now  we  have  been
       relying on everybody's decency to cooperate,  but now it seems in-
       evitable that we are going to have to police the network to  catch
       intruders.
       If you know of any software/hardware tool for what I need,  please
       respond.  Thanks.
       ******************************************************************
       Mei-Ling L. Liu, Coordinator, Network Administration
       Communications Services
       Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
       Internet: [e-mail]
       BITNET: mliu@calpoly
       ******************************************************************


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

Date:     Wed, 9 Nov 88 11:20:39 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  Chicago area / sequence calls


I have read the digest item mentioning upcoming 312/708 split.
In other words (correct me if it was wrong or taken wrong), 312 will
cover only the Chicago city exchanges when the split is done, right?
I take it Chicago is big enough to distinguish between city & suburban
prefixes, as is the case here on East Coast in Washington, Baltimore,
Philadelphia, and New York City.  In smaller cities, like Wilmington,
Del., even the "downtown" prefixes can be found in suburbs.

By the way, I had that "sequence call" experience while placing calls from
a phone in Westchester County, NY.  I believe I tried to dial an intra-LATA
call from there, then tried a call to Delaware, NOT allowed in that sequence,
because I was then on the New York Telephone carrier.

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


From: comdesign!ivucsb!steve (Steve Lemke)
Subject: Re: Answering maching vs. wiring
Organization: The Audio Club at UCSB, Isla Vista, California
Lines: 51
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 88 08:08:17 -0800


In Telecom Digest #161 yrps5.pyramid.com (Wendy Thrash) writes:

}I'm the formerly happy owner of a Panasonic answering machine similar to one
}described in a recent article here.  A week ago I moved to San Francisco.
}My phone line is the third one in the apartment, and the wires were apparently
}run by a friend of my roommates rather than by Pac Bell.  My phone works OK
}in the new apartment, but my answering machine will not work; it answers the
}phone, jiggles its tapes a couple of times, and hangs up.

There should be a switch on the bottom labeled "CPC" with two positions, "A"
and "B".  Normally, the machine is shipped (and works) with the switch in
the "A" position.  You might try switching it to the opposite position of
whatever it is in now (meaning probably switching it to "B").  According to
my Panasonic booklet for my KX-T1421, the switch is "Set to 'B' when some
incoming messages are not recorded up to the end."

}I think the machine believes that another extension has been taken off hook,
}and courteously relinquishes the line.  This would be a feature if, in fact,
}another extension had been taken off hook, but there is no other extension
}on the line.

If this line works differently with CPC, this might explain your problem,
and swapping the position of the CPC switch might solve it.

}My answering machine works fine on my roommates' lines.  Their answering
}machines work on my line.

Then again, maybe it's not the CPC.  But it's worth a try!

}Short of trading machines or lines with one of my roommates, what can I do?
}Is my off-hook guess plausible?  If so, how does the machine decide that
}another extension is off-hook; is there a possible wiring error that could
}confuse it? Is this a problem I'm likely to be able to fix (with some guidance
}from someone on this list)?  Is it a problem the phone company is likely to
}be able to fix?  (or willing, since they aren't doing interior wiring)?

If you decide you need more help, you can call [phone] (24 hours/day
7 days/week) to locate an Authorized Service Center in your area, or for
technical information you can contact the Service Administration office in
Cypress, CA at [phone].  Hope this helps!

}Thanks for any information/advice.

No problem!  Hope you can get everything working ok...

- ----- Steve Lemke ------------------- "MS-DOS (OS/2, etc.) - just say no!"
- ----- Internet: [e-mail]; [e-mail]   AppleLink:  LEMKE
- ----- uucp:     pyramid!comdesign!ivucsb!steve       CompuServe: 73627,570
- ----- alt.uucp: {decwrl!}sun!apple!lemke             GEnie:      S.Lemke
- ----- Quote:    "What'd I go to college for?"   "You had fun, didn't you?"

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


To: comdesign!vector.uucp!telecom
From: comdesign!ivucsb!steve (Steve Lemke)
Subject: Re: I need a second line...
Organization: The Audio Club at UCSB, Isla Vista, California
Lines: 47
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 88 08:07:29 -0800


In Telecom Digest #157 sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan) writes:

}I am trying to get my modem @ home to talk to the outside world.  I am
}currently time-multiplexing it, so that the modem can use the line at
}night.  I would like to have a separate line for the modem.  I called
}Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order request.
}It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
}short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
}There are two reasons why this is unacceptable.  First, they want $45 for
}the first fifteen minutes, and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after
}that (make a rough guess how long it takes :-)  Second, I don't see that
}I should foot the bill for this apartment to have two lines.  As an option,
}I know I can move, but would like a better reason than that.

Well, that's ok, because summer before last, I had a second line installed
in my apartment (for my junior year at UCSB), and it cost me something like
$100 to have the guy come out and put it in.  This included 15 minutes for
him to install the jack in my room, since the apartment didn't have four
conductor wire.  Then, this past summer, I moved again, and wanted to drag
my line with me.  This time, we had four conductor wire, so all they had to
do was bring the line up to the house, but it still cost about $75 or some-
thing like that.  Good old GTE!  They said if he came inside it would cost,
so I made it clear to him that he was to connect it outside the house to
the extra two wires, and I checked it inside as soon as he did, and it
worked.

}My question is, does anyone know of a way of solving this?  It seems to
}me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
}exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
}PacBell said no.  Any comments?  I'm sure this is a common problem, but I've
}not seen anything on it recently.

I've heard of people having multiplexors outside the house to get two lines
in cases where the wire to the phone company is underground or something like
that where they can't drag another one from the pole.  However, I've also
been warned to avoid it if possible.  Just let PacBell bring another line in
from the pole and be glad you aren't getting ripped off by GTE instead of
PacBell!


- ----- Steve Lemke ------------------- "MS-DOS (OS/2, etc.) - just say no!"
- ----- Internet: [e-mail]; [e-mail]   AppleLink:  LEMKE
- ----- uucp:     pyramid!comdesign!ivucsb!steve       CompuServe: 73627,570
- ----- alt.uucp: {decwrl!}sun!apple!lemke             GEnie:      S.Lemke
- ----- Quote:    "What'd I go to college for?"   "You had fun, didn't you?"

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: Area Code 508 woes
Date: 10 Nov 88 12:49:48 GMT



I don't know, I have enough problems getting the local cellular
companies and some of the bogus long distance carriers (notably
MCI) to route calls to my "214" exchange.  Nobody said exchances
would follow NNX forever.

-Ron

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: Special phone needed for disabled person
Date: 10 Nov 88 12:52:15 GMT



I don't know what part of the country you are from, but many of
the alarm companies provide a radio controlled push button to set
off a medical call for help.  This is a central station sort of alarm.
The 911 center where I used to live gave up on accepting the autodialled
synthesized alarms.

-Ron

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: re:  Sending digits on ISDN
Date: 10 Nov 88 12:59:30 GMT



I wouldn't go so far as to say they are obsolete.  Since ISDN
is still in the nebulous phase, TouchTone service is what we have.
Even my cellular car phone, which doesn't use TouchTones for dialing
either, generates tones when I push the buttons so I can play with
voice mailboxes and such.

-Ron


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

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

From [e-mail]  Thu Nov 10 21:46:49 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA27509; Thu, 10 Nov 88 21:46:49 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 21:26:40 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #176
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 88 21:26:40 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 176

Today's Topics:

              Detecting unauthorized network connections
                     Chicago area / sequence calls
                   Re: Answering maching vs. wiring
                      Re: I need a second line...
                        Re: Area Code 508 woes
             Re: Special phone needed for disabled person
                      re:  Sending digits on ISDN
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 88 13:22:39 PST
From: ll-xn!ucsd!sdsu!polyslo![e-mail] (Mei-Ling L. Liu)
Subject: Detecting unauthorized network connections
To: [e-mail]


       *** Detecting Unauthorized Connections on Your Network ***

       I am anxious to hear from people who  have  looked  into  or  have
       implemented tools to detect unauthorized connections on their net-
       works.
       I  have  a  campus  network with a broadband backbone and ethernet
       basebands.   We are running XNS now but will soon be switching  to
       TCP/IP.    Users  are supposed to notify us (the Computing Center)
       before they hook anything up to the network, but naturally some of
       them conveniently overlook this rule.   Up to  now  we  have  been
       relying on everybody's decency to cooperate,  but now it seems in-
       evitable that we are going to have to police the network to  catch
       intruders.
       If you know of any software/hardware tool for what I need,  please
       respond.  Thanks.
       ******************************************************************
       Mei-Ling L. Liu, Coordinator, Network Administration
       Communications Services
       Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
       Internet: [e-mail]
       BITNET: mliu@calpoly
       ******************************************************************


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

Date:     Wed, 9 Nov 88 11:20:39 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  Chicago area / sequence calls


I have read the digest item mentioning upcoming 312/708 split.
In other words (correct me if it was wrong or taken wrong), 312 will
cover only the Chicago city exchanges when the split is done, right?
I take it Chicago is big enough to distinguish between city & suburban
prefixes, as is the case here on East Coast in Washington, Baltimore,
Philadelphia, and New York City.  In smaller cities, like Wilmington,
Del., even the "downtown" prefixes can be found in suburbs.

By the way, I had that "sequence call" experience while placing calls from
a phone in Westchester County, NY.  I believe I tried to dial an intra-LATA
call from there, then tried a call to Delaware, NOT allowed in that sequence,
because I was then on the New York Telephone carrier.

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


From: comdesign!ivucsb!steve (Steve Lemke)
Subject: Re: Answering maching vs. wiring
Organization: The Audio Club at UCSB, Isla Vista, California
Lines: 51
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 88 08:08:17 -0800


In Telecom Digest #161 yrps5.pyramid.com (Wendy Thrash) writes:

}I'm the formerly happy owner of a Panasonic answering machine similar to one
}described in a recent article here.  A week ago I moved to San Francisco.
}My phone line is the third one in the apartment, and the wires were apparently
}run by a friend of my roommates rather than by Pac Bell.  My phone works OK
}in the new apartment, but my answering machine will not work; it answers the
}phone, jiggles its tapes a couple of times, and hangs up.

There should be a switch on the bottom labeled "CPC" with two positions, "A"
and "B".  Normally, the machine is shipped (and works) with the switch in
the "A" position.  You might try switching it to the opposite position of
whatever it is in now (meaning probably switching it to "B").  According to
my Panasonic booklet for my KX-T1421, the switch is "Set to 'B' when some
incoming messages are not recorded up to the end."

}I think the machine believes that another extension has been taken off hook,
}and courteously relinquishes the line.  This would be a feature if, in fact,
}another extension had been taken off hook, but there is no other extension
}on the line.

If this line works differently with CPC, this might explain your problem,
and swapping the position of the CPC switch might solve it.

}My answering machine works fine on my roommates' lines.  Their answering
}machines work on my line.

Then again, maybe it's not the CPC.  But it's worth a try!

}Short of trading machines or lines with one of my roommates, what can I do?
}Is my off-hook guess plausible?  If so, how does the machine decide that
}another extension is off-hook; is there a possible wiring error that could
}confuse it? Is this a problem I'm likely to be able to fix (with some guidance
}from someone on this list)?  Is it a problem the phone company is likely to
}be able to fix?  (or willing, since they aren't doing interior wiring)?

If you decide you need more help, you can call [phone] (24 hours/day
7 days/week) to locate an Authorized Service Center in your area, or for
technical information you can contact the Service Administration office in
Cypress, CA at [phone].  Hope this helps!

}Thanks for any information/advice.

No problem!  Hope you can get everything working ok...

- ----- Steve Lemke ------------------- "MS-DOS (OS/2, etc.) - just say no!"
- ----- Internet: [e-mail]; [e-mail]   AppleLink:  LEMKE
- ----- uucp:     pyramid!comdesign!ivucsb!steve       CompuServe: 73627,570
- ----- alt.uucp: {decwrl!}sun!apple!lemke             GEnie:      S.Lemke
- ----- Quote:    "What'd I go to college for?"   "You had fun, didn't you?"

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


To: comdesign!vector.uucp!telecom
From: comdesign!ivucsb!steve (Steve Lemke)
Subject: Re: I need a second line...
Organization: The Audio Club at UCSB, Isla Vista, California
Lines: 47
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 88 08:07:29 -0800


In Telecom Digest #157 sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan) writes:

}I am trying to get my modem @ home to talk to the outside world.  I am
}currently time-multiplexing it, so that the modem can use the line at
}night.  I would like to have a separate line for the modem.  I called
}Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order request.
}It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines (how
}short-sighted can you get!).  PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
}There are two reasons why this is unacceptable.  First, they want $45 for
}the first fifteen minutes, and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after
}that (make a rough guess how long it takes :-)  Second, I don't see that
}I should foot the bill for this apartment to have two lines.  As an option,
}I know I can move, but would like a better reason than that.

Well, that's ok, because summer before last, I had a second line installed
in my apartment (for my junior year at UCSB), and it cost me something like
$100 to have the guy come out and put it in.  This included 15 minutes for
him to install the jack in my room, since the apartment didn't have four
conductor wire.  Then, this past summer, I moved again, and wanted to drag
my line with me.  This time, we had four conductor wire, so all they had to
do was bring the line up to the house, but it still cost about $75 or some-
thing like that.  Good old GTE!  They said if he came inside it would cost,
so I made it clear to him that he was to connect it outside the house to
the extra two wires, and I checked it inside as soon as he did, and it
worked.

}My question is, does anyone know of a way of solving this?  It seems to
}me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
}exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
}PacBell said no.  Any comments?  I'm sure this is a common problem, but I've
}not seen anything on it recently.

I've heard of people having multiplexors outside the house to get two lines
in cases where the wire to the phone company is underground or something like
that where they can't drag another one from the pole.  However, I've also
been warned to avoid it if possible.  Just let PacBell bring another line in
from the pole and be glad you aren't getting ripped off by GTE instead of
PacBell!


- ----- Steve Lemke ------------------- "MS-DOS (OS/2, etc.) - just say no!"
- ----- Internet: [e-mail]; [e-mail]   AppleLink:  LEMKE
- ----- uucp:     pyramid!comdesign!ivucsb!steve       CompuServe: 73627,570
- ----- alt.uucp: {decwrl!}sun!apple!lemke             GEnie:      S.Lemke
- ----- Quote:    "What'd I go to college for?"   "You had fun, didn't you?"

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: Area Code 508 woes
Date: 10 Nov 88 12:49:48 GMT



I don't know, I have enough problems getting the local cellular
companies and some of the bogus long distance carriers (notably
MCI) to route calls to my "214" exchange.  Nobody said exchances
would follow NNX forever.

-Ron

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: Special phone needed for disabled person
Date: 10 Nov 88 12:52:15 GMT



I don't know what part of the country you are from, but many of
the alarm companies provide a radio controlled push button to set
off a medical call for help.  This is a central station sort of alarm.
The 911 center where I used to live gave up on accepting the autodialled
synthesized alarms.

-Ron

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: re:  Sending digits on ISDN
Date: 10 Nov 88 12:59:30 GMT



I wouldn't go so far as to say they are obsolete.  Since ISDN
is still in the nebulous phase, TouchTone service is what we have.
Even my cellular car phone, which doesn't use TouchTones for dialing
either, generates tones when I push the buttons so I can play with
voice mailboxes and such.

-Ron


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

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

From [e-mail]  Fri Nov 11 01:23:16 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA02038; Thu, 10 Nov 88 23:43:24 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 23:29:21 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #177
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 88 23:29:21 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 177

Today's Topics:

                        Getting back at COCOTS
                     Re: Sensitive Data Encryption
                  Adjunct frames in crossbar offices
                           Area 708/312/815
                           The Uncoin Phone
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Getting back at COCOTS
Date: 10 Nov 88 13:06:56 GMT



Are you sure it was an NJBell phone and not one of these silly
"ATT Pay Phones" that have been popping up around the state here.

My favorite pastime on these phones is to attempt to make various
calls using 10+ dialing on them.  My other trick is to make a standard
(presumably AT&T) long distance call, etner nonsense credit card numbers
("The card number you have enterd is not valid").  ATT will dump you after
the second try and then you will normally get a dial tone, unless the phone
is smart, which you can just dial what you want on.

-Ron

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

Date: 9 Nov 88 07:46:24 PST (Wednesday)
Subject: Re: Sensitive Data Encryption (8|170)
From: "Joseph_J._Gerber.henr801E"@Xerox.COM
To: [e-mail]


Mr Sauer   -- Sensitive data encryption.  On the voice networks we don't
employ encryption. Take more precautions with data. Our PBX's have been
penetrated on several occassions by hackers. Mostly for free usage.

My sense is that corporate America is talking about security but not making
the investment or putting much real weight behind standards for carriers.

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 03:47:39 EST
From: ll-xn!cmcl2!cucard!dasys1!ecorley (Eric Corley)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Adjunct frames in crossbar offices


My old antiquated crossbar central office is going equal access on
December 11. At first, I thought this meant we were going to a #5 ESS
or DMS-100 but no such luck. We're getting something called an adjunct
frame, which basically allows a crossbar office to emulate the equal
access aspect of an ESS office. Is anyone familiar with such setups?
For example, I was told that these systems could not place 10XXX
alternate carrier codes. However, since the system has started to
be installed (over the past two days my dial tone has been accepting
1's which were never required before), I've noticed that I get
different error messages if I dial 10288 or any other carrier code
followed by a phone number than if I dial an invalid carrier code.
So obviously, something is being cross checked. None of the phone
calls go through (yet) using this method, however I've found that
if I dial 10555, 10666, or almost any invalid carrier code, followed
by 0, I'll get a New York Telephone operator, two 0's and I get an
AT&T operator! Is this normal?

I'd like suggestions as to other experiments I should be trying in this
transitional period. And does anybody know if adjunct frames are REQUIRED
to provide 10XXX service? I've also noticed that invalid exchanges that
used to give me an error after 3d are now waiting for the full 7d.

Eric Corley
[e-mail]
phri!dasys1!2600@nyu

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 22:16:22 EST
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Townson)
To: telecom
Subject: Area 708/312/815


There have been questions from readers recently about the exact nature of the
312/708 split set for next year.

312 will serve ONLY the city of Chicago. The newly created 708 will serve all
the suburban communities which are presently in 312. 815 will retain its
present boundaries; i.e. roughly Joliet/Wilmington/Lemont IL on its northeast
corner and McHenry/Fox Lake, IL as the eastern boundary further north. Aurora
will be the western edge of the new 708 area. This is intended to give just a
rough idea of the boundary.

708 will be unique in that it will be the only area code in the United States
broken into three distinct parts not separated by a waterway. One part of
708 will be completely surrounded on all sides by 312. On the far south side
of Chicago, a tiny piece of 312 will protrude out into 708. The 312/708
division will literally follow the boundary lines of the city of Chicago, and
those boundary lines are very ragged and irregular in some parts of the
northwest side of the city. For example, two independent villages are located
within the city of Chicago: Harwood Heights and Norridge, IL. Both will be
708.

The area between Ohare Airport (considered part of the city of Chicago but
not geographically connected to the city proper) and the towns of Des Plaines,
IL and Park Ridge, IL will be especially strange. An unincorporated area
called 'Norwood Township' is now partly served by Illinois Bell and partly
served by Centel. Some phones there will be 312, and others will be 708.

I think Chicago is the only city in the United States to have two actual
telephone operating companies within the city limits. While Illinois Bell has
almost the entire city, a tiny section of the northwest side is served by
Des Plaines based Central Telephone Company (Centel). Centel will now have
most of its exchanges in 708, but a few in 312.

The Illinois Bell central office known as Chicago-Newcastle will actually
have prefixes for *both* area codes in the same office, as will Centel, which
will have both area codes in its office on Minor Street in Des Plaines which
serves its relative handful of Chicago subscribers.

No decision has yet been reached on the two or three prefixes which overlap
the city and suburbs. One such prefix on the city's west side, in the
Chicago-Austin central office reaches out like a finger into a small sliver
in the town of Cicero, IL.

There will be a three month grace period, during which calls between 312 and
708 will be honored with seven digits, but with a short recorded announcement
forced on the line reminding the caller, 'in the future, dial 1, plus 708,
and the desired number.'  Then there will be approximatly a six month
period in which no new exchanges will be created in either area code which
currently exist in the other area code. About a year following the actual
split, the separation will be considered official and final. The first phase
of the split is scheduled to begin midway through 1989.

Patrick Townson

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 23:18:54 EST
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Townson)
To: telecom
Subject: The Uncoin Phone


I have here the instructions for a device called 'The Uncoin Phone' but not
a single reference to who manufactures it or its cost. It seems like a
fabulous device, but all I have is the little reference card listing the
commands, etc.

What it seems to do is function as a very sophisticated call extender/call
forwarding device, as you will note from the features available. The picture
of the device shows a box about the size of an answering machine, with a
regular telephone instrument sitting on top of it. On the back side are
several modular jacks labeled 'line 1', 'line 2', 'local 1' and 'local 2'.
We are told to bring one CO line into 1 and ; to plug the local phone into
local 1 and the answering machine into local 2. The power supply plugs in
back there, and there are dip switch settings for gain, auto time out and
other functions.

The device can be configured to forward a call out prior to answering an
incoming call, or conversely to answer either line and extend its own
internal 'dial tone' to the caller. In this second mode, the first order of
business is to enter a four digit security code. Having done so, the dial
tone is returned, and the following commands apply --

# at any time, to regain control of device. If a call is patched out over
the second line, put the call on hold. A second # entered disconnects the
outgoing call on the opposite line.

*1 Connect to opposite CO line (or reconnect to call left holding there.)
*2 Send ringing voltage out local 1; converse with local party.
*3 Send ringing voltage out local 2; trigger answering machine to respond.
*4 Until further notice send all incoming calls, either CO line to local 1.
*5 Until further notice send all incoming calls, either CO line to local 2.
*6 Until further notice send all incoming calls, either CO line out on
   opposite CO line to number which follows, terminated by a # sign.
   Example: *6 1-312-555-2368#
*7 Answer either CO line on nth ring.
   Example: *7 1 5# would cause line 1 to answer on 5th ring.
            *7 2 0# would cause line 2 to NEVER answer.
            *7 3 cancels instructions; defaults both lines to answer 1st ring.
*8 Simulate a switch hook flash on line 1 or 2; Example *81 or *82, and
   reconnect to that line, i.e. to set up three way calling.
*9 Change password from nnnn to yyyy. Use # as a delimiter between passwords.
*0 Call back on this CO line to number which follows, terminated by # sign.
   Example: You are at a payphone where calls are timed, or a toll is
   involved. UnCoin Phone will ring you back, ask for your password, and
   permit you to continue your session.

You are cautioned against setting both lines to answer on zeroeth ring at
the same time, lest you lose control of the device until someone at the
base can reset it. It says to simulate a no-answer condition, set both lines to
answer on the 25th ring, or something equally ridiculous.

From the local station, no password is required to use the device, and *9
connects the local phone to an outside line. The password is set with pinwheels
on the back of the unit. The password entered from remote only overrides the
pinwheel settings until the next power up restores all defaults.

<<<  And that is all the information I have. I found this wallet size card in
the dumpster behind the IBM Plaza downtown. Obviously I did not find the
machine to go with it!  Any idea who manufactures this, or the price, etc?

Patrick Townson

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


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

From [e-mail]  Sat Nov 12 02:22:51 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA02651; Sat, 12 Nov 88 02:22:51 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 88  0:05:31 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #178
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 12 Nov 88  0:05:31 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 178

Today's Topics:

        need to contact Big Electric Cat communications service
                I need a second line/The rest of the story
                             DataLOCK 4000
                             Un-Coin Phone
                          Answering Machines
        Query: hardware for setting up internal 'phone network'
     Phone feature is offered by local telco, but not advertised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: uunet![e-mail]
From: rob![e-mail] ( Tom Luteran )
Subject: need to contact Big Electric Cat communications service
Date: 11 Nov 88 05:50:46 GMT





     Anyone know how to contact the Big Electric Cat communications
     service?  I need a phone number for more information and I haven't
     been able to get it from any directories.

     Please reply directly to me, only.  Thanks in advance!

     Tom Luteran
     uunet!rob!toml

     Merck Sharp & Dohme Research Labs                [phone]
     P.O.Box 2000
     Rahway, NJ 08801



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

To:
From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
Subject: I need a second line/How Everything Turned Out Okay!
Date: 11 Nov 88 03:54:32 GMT




OK, first let me say thanks to everyone who responded to my posting.  I got a
lot of replies.  So, I figured I'd post the results in case anyone was in a
similar predicament.

As of last friday evening, I had *two* (yes 2) lines into my apartment.  The
modem is now happily conversing across the planet.  One of the most helpful
replies was the least obvious.  Someone (sorry, can't remember names) said
to call the office again, and ask for the installation.  Also, I happened
upon a PacBell technician in the street, and grilled him.  I've always found
these guys helpful, and most of my telecom data has been gleaned from such
sources.  He also said to call the business office again.  Furthermore, he
said that if they still maintained a second line was impossible, I should
ask to speak to a supervisor.  He said that the *only* way one could find
out if it was possible to install a line, was by actually coming out and
checking the building.

So, I called them again.  THIS TIME, the operator/salesperson did the
order-entry right then.  No problem.  She even gave me the number.  She asked
if I was going to do my own wiring - I, of course, said yes.  On top of that,
she gave me a number to call if I had a problem with the installation.  Phew!

She said it would be turned on in two days (which it was).  Now to the next
problem.  The BIG difference between them turning on the line, and me getting
a dialtone on a second phone.  I pulled out the phonejack, expecting your
usual four-wire set, but no.  There were at least six wire-pairs.  I was
tapped into one of them.  The others are for different apartments.  This is
a BIG-TIME security hole.  I checked the voltage levels on all the wires.
Except for the line I was using, the rest were dead.  Great.  Now all I needed
was access to the Network Interface.  Naturally, the apartment manager was
NO help.  He "didn't know where it was".  I called the installation "hotline"
only to find out that there was going to be someone sent out from Pac Bell in
less than fifteen minutes.  I had assumed (incorrectly) that when they "turned
on the line", it was done at the exchange, and that there wouldn't be any
need for someone to come out.  When I found out, I was @ work, so a fast trip
home, and a long wait...

The guy who came out was as usual real helpful, and didn't seem to mind my
array of technical questions (of course, he wouldn't tell me what the test
codes were :-)  Unfortunately, he ruined my optimism.  He expressed doubts
that the line could be wired.  I told him there were extra lines in the
wall.  He gave me three choices.

1/  He could test the lines, and see if there were any free (again, this
    cost $45 for the first 15 minutes, and $12 for every 15 after that).
    He said he could probably check all the lines in about an hour, but
    that didn't mean that there would be any free.  Some are reserved for
    other apartments, some are destroyed by fires, etc, and some are used
    for power.  Also, since deregulation, he had no way of telling what
    the state of the lines was, because someone else may have worked on
    them.

2/  I could get an independant contractor out to do the installation.

3/  I could lay my own cable from the box to the apartment.  This wasn't
    really a solution, because the current wiring goes through the walls.
    Any additions would have to be external to the building, and there's
    no way the apartment management would agree to that.

I swallowed my pride, and went with option #1.  I figured, having forked
over the ~$35 for the actual exchange connection (which was NOT refundable),
I'd throw more money at it.  Well, it turned out that he connected the first
group he found (I told him that there was a red (& red/white) pair besides
my own, which is green & green/white), which was apparently free.  He found
the wiring, connected it at the interface, connected it at the phonejack on
the wall, and lo and behold!  It worked!  Elapsed time: 20 minutes or so.
He said that Pac Bell were *real* strict about the amount of time, and
that the 15 minutes was "or any portion thereof".  But, he only wrote it up
as 15 minutes!  Furthermore, while he did this, I bugged him with a load of
questions.  One thing I asked him, is if it makes a difference if you get
the polarity wrong on the line.  He said "No, not on the newer phones, but
some of the older phones had a problem with it, where the touchtones wouldn't
work".  Well, guess what.  I have an old "run-of-the-mill" phone that I paid
an arm and a leg for, in '82, when Pac Bell first introduced the idea of
selling the telephone.  Anyway, this beast hasn't worked in a while.  Yes,
that's right.  No tones from the keys!!!
It turns out I was using a cable from a modem, which has the red and green
swapped for some arcane reason.  I changed the cable, and the phone works
now.  As does the new number.

So, in summary, thanks for all the help, and I hope this helps someone else
get a second line.  By the way, as the technician was leaving, I asked him
if perhaps, the line-pair he had picked actually belonged to another apartment,
who didn't use it (ie, disconnected).  What would happen if they decided in
the future, to re-install their phone.  Or worse still, if they noticed their
line had been reactivated...  He didn't really have a good answer for that.
                        - Der
--
    [e-mail]  (Dermot Tynan @ Tynan Computers)
    {mips,pyramid}!sultra!dtynan

 ---  God invented alcohol to keep the Irish from taking over the planet  ---

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

Date:    Fri, 11 Nov 88 15:32:26 N
From: [e-mail] (Jacques Virchaux EPFL-SIC)
Subject: DataLOCK 4000
To: [e-mail]


As I don't want to reinvent the wheel, I try to find someone who
know the DataLOCK 4000 call-back unit from MicroFrame Inc.

We should like to have a management software on a Sun.

DO NOT ANSWER TO THE LIST (I'm not a member).

                                                Jacques Virchaux
                                        Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
                                             <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Fri, 11 Nov 88 10:32:17 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: uunet!bu-cs.BU.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Un-Coin Phone


There is a box which sounds VERY similar, (not quite the same) called
the Telexpander.  It has something it calls the "UnPay Phone" feature
which lets you do what you described.  The box is available from
Gray-Bar Electric, (check for your local listing).  It cost around
$500.00.

The one major differnce from what you described and the Telexpander is
that the Telexpander does all of it's stuff on just one by using call
forwarding and 3-way calling.

It can divert calls for you, (like forwarding). When someone calls it,
it answers the call, puts them on hold with 3-way calling and dials
the number that the box is diverted (forwarded) to.

You can stop it from diverting by pressing a key on your touchtone pad
when it initially answers and then type in a password.

Once you are in the box, you can make multiple calls by getting the
box to use the 3-way calling for you.  (This is what they call the
UnPay phone feature because long distance charges are on your home
phone bill.)

If you want, you can get the box to forward your phone with call
forwarding.  If you do this though, you won't be able to call the box
back.

There were some other features that I have forgotten.

-Mike Grant

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

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Answering Machines
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 88 11:26:03 EST
From: Chuck Weinstock <[e-mail]>


American Express is offering an answering machine by mail.  It appears
to be a Phonemate 7300R and according to the literature there is a 3
digit security code for the beeperless remote feature.  According to
the 800 number for Phonemate (800-247-7889) that model has a user
settable security code with 1000 different combinations.  Does anyone
out there have any experience with this model.

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

Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1988 12:04-EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Query: hardware for setting up internal 'phone network'


I have two lines  at our residence, and I'd like to be able to improve the
level of service available via our instrument(s).

We have pulse only service because its cheaper, and none of the custom
calling features.  If I could build an interface between our two lines
and some of our intruments (that would provide a psuedo dialtone and
other features)

line 1-----Apple Cat Modem #1---[audio/phone interface]--instrument(s)
                              +-[switching network]
line 2---- Apple Cat Modem #2-+

The computer would need to detect an off-hook condition (change in
resistance?) on the instrument and provide an 'internal' dialtone.

It also needs to send the 'ring' voltage (48v?) to the instrument when an
acceptable incoming call is being received.  (I imagine adding a call
screening feature to the system sometime in the future.) [I would leave one
instrument connected directly to the phone line as a backup in case of a power
failure or other system problem.]

So, I'm looking for plans for some additional hardware to accomplish this.
For example, will the Radio-Shack book  'Understanding Telephone Electonics'
give me enough info to accomplish this, or is it too out of date already?

Thanks.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: Steve Shellans <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone feature is offered by local telco, but not advertised.
Date: 11 Nov 88 21:44:04 GMT




My real question, which I will get to in a moment, is why does my local
phone company offer a service (tollpac) which they never advertise?  But
first, a little background.

I live in a town (Newberg, OR) that has two prefixes: 625 and 538.  However,
it is a long-distance call from one to the other, even if the phones are
just across the street from each other, which is frequently the case.
(BTW, they are both area code 503.)
I believe this is unusual, and I think that the reason is historical --
originally, these exchanges were operated by two different phone companies,
although both are now GTE (and have been for at least 15 years).

About 10 years ago, the local newspaper reported that GTE was offering a
new service that would allow subscribers in one prefix to buy a block
of time to the other prefix at a substantial discount from the normal
long distance rates.

A couple of years ago, they expanded this service (renamed "Tollpac") to
include other long-distance exchanges in the state.  Again I learned about it
from the local newspaper.

Now for the question.  If it is economically attractive to GTE to offer
tollpac, why don't they advertise it?  I have never received a flyer
with my bill, for example, although there are flyers for lots of other
things such as answering machines and phones.

If it is *not* ecnomically attractive for GTE to offer tollpac, why are
they doing it?  Before you reply that the PUC must have ordered it on
the basis of consumer outcry, I am not aware of any such outcry.  No
mention in the newspaper, no stories from neighbors, etc.  Perhaps I
am a cynical person, but I also believe that the PUC would not do this
on their own initiative for altruistic reasons.

Finally, let me say that their strategy, whatever the reason, seems to
be working -- I believe there are exceedingly few tollpac customers.
My reason -- from time to time, I get a bill that has gone bonkers..
When I call customer service,
their first response is that it is news to them.  Then, later, when
they call me back, they tell me that a new billing system was just
put in place, that the problem only affects tollpac customers, etc.
Apparently, there are so few tollpac customers, that the programmers
doing the billing system either don't know about its existence, or
feel that it is not worth the effort testing the new software against
tollpac accounts.

What's going on here?

Steve Shellans
Tektronix, Beaverton OR
[e-mail]

it will be corrected


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

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

From [e-mail]  Mon Nov 14 01:57:15 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA19649; Mon, 14 Nov 88 01:57:15 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 88  1:36:36 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #179
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 14 Nov 88  1:36:36 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 179

Today's Topics:

                           Re: In-use light
                        Re: Inside House Wiring
                        Re: Inside House Wiring
                              PC Pursuit
                  About Those Duplicates of 176-177-178
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To:
From: westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: In-use light
Date: 12 Nov 88 04:28:33 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> That's really pretty excessive.  The polarity of the phone line changes
> when any phone is off-hook...

No.  This is only true in a very small number of elderly
step-by-step central offices.  In most of the public switched
telephone network, Tip is positive w.r.t. Ring, all of the time.
You can pay extra, in some areas, for services that reverse the
polarity with the called party answers, or when the originating
party dials a toll call, etc..

--
Dave Levenson
Westmark, Inc.        The Man in the Mooney
Warren, NJ USA
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave


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

Date: Sat, 12 Nov 88 12:21 PST
From: ucla-an!denwa!jimmy (Jim Gottlieb)
To: vector!telecom
Subject: Re: Inside House Wiring


In article <[e-mail]>, Robert Gutierrez writes:
> That I find hard to believe. As far as I know, most apartment bldgs are
> are prewired with 12 or 25 pair multiconductor.

This was true back in the good old days when the local telco did the
pre-wire.  Unfortunately, it is now up to the builder to provide the
telephone wiring in the building.  And since most builders just see
this as one more expense, they often do it as cheaply as possible.
What do THEY care if they only put one or two pairs to each apartment.
I've even seen buildings using jumper wire.

I don't know what we can do about this problem.  I find it increasingly
difficult to locate an apartment with decent wiring.  ANY building
built within the last five years is out of the question.  Most of these
have two pairs and no crawl space or other way to run anything more.

I hope it comes back to haunt them (the builders) when more people like
me won't rent their apartments because of a lack of wiring.

--
Jim G.        E-Mail: <[e-mail]>  or  <[e-mail]>
^^^^^^    V-Mail: [phone]  Fax: [phone]  The-Real-Me: 824-5454


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

To: tikal!uw-beaver![e-mail]
From: mcgp1![e-mail] (Donn Pedro)
Subject: Re: Inside House Wiring
Date: 12 Nov 88 19:13:14 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> >I am trying to get my modem @ home to talk to the outside world.  I am
> >currently time-multiplexing it, so that the modem can use the line at
> >night.  I would like to have a separate line for the modem.  I called
> >Pacific Bell (the local phone company), expecting a simple order
> request.
> >It turns out that the apartment building is not wired for two lines

That is a distinct possability depending on the age of the building
and sthe type of IW ( inside wire ) installed in the building.

> (how
> >short-sighted can you get!)............
>
> That I find hard to believe. As far as I know, most apartment bldgs are
> are prewired with 12 or 25 pair multiconductor. It is unusual that an

Yes most are but, the multiconductor you will find in most apartment
jacks is called E-wire. It is looped through *all* the outlets on a
particular run. Therefore there can be *many* faults in the IW.
Combined with the fact that there is almost never enough good wire
to start with, you may not have that second pair available.
If you live in an older building than that you might very well have
one three conductor wire running to your apartment.

> >...........................PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.
> >There are two reasons why this is unacceptable.  First, they want $45 for
> >the first fifteen minutes, and (I think) $12 for every 15 minutes after
> >that (make a rough guess how long it takes :-)  Second, I don't see that
> >I should foot the bill for this apartment to have two lines.  As an option,
> >I know I can move, but would like a better reason than that.
> >My question is, does anyone know of a way of solving this?  It seems to
> >me, that if the phone line is ~5K bandwidth, and the actual line to the
> >exchange is maybe 10K, then I *should* be able to multiplex the line -
> >PacBell said no.  Any comments?  I'm sure this is a common problem, but I've
> >not seen anything on it recently.
>
> Yes, you could mux 2 lines on 1 pair (T-Carriers are usually 4 wire, and
> since 1 pair is each direction, it is usually easier to mux those than
> 2 bi-directional carriers.)  Essentially, you would be muxing at the demarc
> since that is where the local telco cable pairs are coming into you. BUT,
> before you go through all this, look before you leap........

Good advice about looking first. You might very well disrupt your neighbors
service by getting in that demark.

> First, go find your entry point for the cable pairs from the pole/street, and
> find the Network Interface, where the protectors are. If you already have a
> line to your apartment, it HAS to be standard 4-conductor cable. If you do
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ don't bet on it.

>
>      Robert Michael Gutierrez
>      MCI Telecommuncations
>      Western Region Customer Trouble Management Center
>      Hayward, California.

Mostly good advice from Robert deleted above.... but....
Just give the old Pac Bell man a try. He will show up for the work and after
inspecting the job, give you an estimate. It's not cheap but it might not
be as expensive as you think. If you don't like the price then cancel the order.
What the Customer Service clerk was telling you was that there are *currently*
no second service pairs hooked up to your apartment. That doesnt mean that
I couldn't get you hooked up in fifteen minutes.

If you need more information then e-mail for my telephone number.
I'll be glad to help out.


    Donn F Pedro  UUCP ...uw-beaver!tikal!mcgp1!donn
        Formerly:
        Business Services Technician
        Pacific Bell, California
        ( and dam* good at it too ) ;^)

            "You talk the talk. Do you walk the walk?"




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

To: [e-mail]
Subject: PC Pursuit
Date: 13 Nov 88 19:05:26 CST (Sun)
From: dcs!wnp (Wolf N. Paul)


Patrick,

Can you tell me what number to call to inquire re: Pursuit billing problems?
I can't find it anywhere, and my own Pursuit ID and passeword seem to have
been cancelled also.

Wolf Paul
[e-mail]

[Moderator's note: Certainly. Customer Service is 1-800-336-0437 (703-689-6400)
which is mainly for technical questions and to report troubled modems and
circuits. To open new accounts on PC Pursuit call 1-800-TELENET (703-689-5700)
during regular business hours weekdays. The Customer Service/trouble number is
24 hours per day. The main centrex number for all other departments at Telenet
is 1-703-689-6000.]

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

Date: Sat, 12 Nov 88 21:51:35 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
To: telecom
Subject: About those duplicates of 176-177-178

I am *very* concerned about the annoyance this sort of thing causes our
readers. All three issues were automatically remailed when Mailer-Daemon
*claimed* it was unable to process < output to the list. Now according to
Jon Solomon, trusted advisor to your Moderator, and technical advisor par
excellence, 'you can't be responsible for every mailier in the country'.
It would seem perhaps one of the various expansion lists we mail to is
timing out before completing the job, then sending a message back to ME
saying the output messed up.

I have a couple of control names/addresses in the list so that the Digest
will reach me at different mailboxes via circuitous routings, and likewise
Jon Solomon receives the Digest in his personal mailbox using the same kind
of routing technique. This now should enable me to spot duplicates as soon
as they are generated, but your reports of same to [e-mail]
are still greatly appreciated.

Patrick Townson
Telecom Digest Moderator

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

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

From [e-mail]  Wed Nov 16 01:08:02 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA06247; Wed, 16 Nov 88 00:31:02 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88  0:03:08 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #180
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 16 Nov 88  0:03:08 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 180

Today's Topics:

                      Moderator Stands Corrected!!
                        Re: Inside House Wiring
                          Nation wide paging
                        Touch tone compatibility
             Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
                         Telephone dialing devices
                             Call extender
                Anyone know the 900-NXX tariffs/rates?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Wed Nov 16 00:03:00 1988
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Alright Already!
From: [e-mail]


I was wrong in saying Chicago is the only city with two actual telephone
operating companies in the same town. I *knew* there were two companies in
the El Lay area; I did not know both physically operated within the City
of the Angels. I thought one had certain towns outside the city itself.
Thus far, six of you have written to correct me. Following this are two
letters representative of the bunch. Really, I should have known better.
                                                           Patrick Townson

Date: Sun Nov 13 18:25:07 1988
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Area 708/312/815
From: zygot![e-mail] (John Higdon)


On Nov 11 at  3:16, Patrick Townson writes:
>
> I think Chicago is the only city in the United States to have two actual
> telephone operating companies within the city limits. While Illinois Bell has
> almost the entire city, a tiny section of the northwest side is served by
> Des Plaines based Central Telephone Company (Centel).

Pacific Bell serves most of Los Angeles, however General Telephone
covers more than just a tiny section. This is in the city proper.

--
John Higdon
john@zygot   {pacbell|apple|sun!cohesive}!zygot!john

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

Date: 14 Nov 88 10:04:50 PST (Monday)
Subject: Re: Area 708/312/815
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]



Re: "I think Chicago is the only city in the United States to have two
actual
telephone operating companies within the city limits."

Not true.  The suburb of Los Angeles that I live in (Fountain Valley) is
split into a General Tel and a Pacific Tel area.  I believe that this also
occurs in many other nearby cities, including Los Angeles itself.  Since
the city boundaries of Los Angeles and its more than 100 suburb cities have
changed frequently, it would have been extremely impractical to keep the
division between General and Pacific from crossing some cities.

/Don Lynn

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

To: comp-dcom-telecom
From: [e-mail] (F. L. Charles Seeger III)
Subject: Re: Inside House Wiring
Date: 15 Nov 88 01:07:57 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> ucla-an!denwa![e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb) writes:
|In article <[e-mail]>, Robert Gutierrez writes:
|> That I find hard to believe. As far as I know, most apartment bldgs are
|> are prewired with 12 or 25 pair multiconductor.
|
|This was true back in the good old days when the local telco did the
|pre-wire.  Unfortunately, it is now up to the builder to provide the
|telephone wiring in the building.  And since most builders just see
|this as one more expense, [ -deleted- ]
|
|I don't know what we can do about this problem.  I find it increasingly
|difficult to locate an apartment with decent wiring.  ANY building
|built within the last five years is out of the question.  Most of these
|have two pairs and no crawl space or other way to run anything more.
|
|I hope it comes back to haunt them (the builders) when more people like
|me won't rent their apartments because of a lack of wiring.

Maybe we need something akin to the National Electric Code, which would
give individual states guidance in what to require in local codes.
This may be difficult or impossible in the current political climate,
especially since this isn't a matter of safety.  About the only other
idea that pops into my head is to do what I did, i.e. buy your own
house.

Do other countries, e.g. Canada, have a similar problem?

Chuck



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

To: uw-beaver![e-mail]
From: ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann)
Subject: Nation wide paging
Date: 13 Nov 88 22:58:54 GMT




Just reading the newspaper here and came across another one of those ads
for a NATION-WIDE paging service.  This one is from METROCAST (R) -
Nationwide Alphanumeric Paging. I have seen these ads many times in the
past and have wondered how they work. Surely the target receiver is not
paged all across the country...   Does the person initiating the page need
to know what city the receiver is in ?  What happens when the receiver is
on board an airplane, high in the sky?



    *****     *****    *****    *   *       *   *****
   *     *   *     *  *        *   * *     *   *        Roger Swann
  ******    *     *  *****    *   *   *   *   *   ***  The Boeing Co.
 *      *  *     *  *        *   *     * *   *     *   Aerospace Div.
*******     *****  ******   *   *       *     *****
   uucp:  uw-beaver!ssc-vax!clark     voice: 206/657-5810

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

Date:     Tue, 15 Nov 88 9:57:19 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Touch tone compatibility


To summarize what I have heard about touch tone phones:
Rotary-dial-compatibility is necessary in at least some non-electronic
exchanges.  I also understand that such a phone is still usable in an
electronic exchange.

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

From: osu-cis!bcd-dyn![e-mail]
Date: 15 Nov 88 14:46:02 GMT
Subject: Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
Lines: 17

Is there a commercially-available, inexpensive, device to prevent outgoing
long-distance calls?  I have a friend whose daughter runs up bills of
$500 per month.

The phone company says they can't help (or that it will cost big bucks,
depending on who she talks to).

If I had a circuit, I could build it.  She's willing to go all-tone on her
phones, if that would help.

Thanks.

--
Stanley F. Quayle      N8SQ @ W8CQK     [phone]
{ohio-state | osu-cis}!bcd-dyn!sfq      3375 Fisher Rd., Columbus, OH  43201
Internet: [e-mail]             Fido: Stanley Quayle, Node 1:226/610
My opinions are mine.  Besides, it doesn't matter anymore.


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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 88 22:05:20 EST
From: Christopher Chung <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone dialing devices
To: [e-mail]


Does anyone know of a device that can be hooked up to an alarm system
and dial any number that you program in when the alarm is triggered.
I remember seeing these things a long time ago when I wasn't looking for
one but now I can't see to find them anymore.  There are several out there
such as the one by Black & Decker but that is only programmed to dial
the Black & Decker phone number.  I want one that will be able to
dial any number.  Do these things still exist?

Thanks,
Chris

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

Date:     Tue, 15 Nov 88 15:54
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Call extender
To: [e-mail]



hi

does anyone have the schematics that they can post/describe/mail to me
for a call extender aka the gold box?

it does not have to be anything fancy- it should just be able to
1 pick up the phone when it rings and connect the caller to a second line
  which will be a campus restricted line on a pbx type system.


it would be nice if it were powered from the line but not nessessary.



thanks,

ted demko


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

From: harvard!cs.utexas.edu!uunet.UU.NET!unh!unhtel!paul
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 88 07:07:41 est
To: uunet.UU.NET!uunet!bu-cs![e-mail]
Subject: Anyone know the 900-NXX tariffs/rates?

Not all 900-NXX calls are .50 for the first minute and .35 for each additional
minute...  Is there a consistent pricing scheme by "exchange?"

Thanks.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Paul S. Sawyer              uunet!unh!unhtel!paul     [e-mail]
UNH Telecommunications
Durham, NH  03824-3523      VOX: 603-862-3262         FAX: [phone]



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

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

From [e-mail]  Thu Nov 17 01:43:00 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA24019; Thu, 17 Nov 88 01:43:00 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 88  1:36:00 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #181
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 17 Nov 88  1:36:00 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 181

Today's Topics:

                          Adminstrative Note
                      Re: Sending digits on ISDN
                     Telephone headset connections
                    re: Telephone dialing services
                        Re: Nation wide paging
          How to detect if phone is off-hook (and not in use)
                       Re: splitting area codes
                         Re: Metallic circuits
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 21:43:43 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
To: telecom
Subject: Adminstrative Note


Will whoever is servicing black@griffin please remove this name from their
list, or consult the appropriate postmaster for advice. The bad mail notices
are coming here; we do not have him on our list.  Thanks.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: "Norman S. Soley" <ontenv!soley>
Subject: Re: Sending digits on ISDN
Date:     Tue, 15 Nov 88 00:35:31 EST



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ron Natalie) writes:
> I wouldn't go so far as to say they are obsolete.  Since ISDN
> is still in the nebulous phase, TouchTone service is what we have.
> Even my cellular car phone, which doesn't use TouchTones for dialing
> either, generates tones when I push the buttons so I can play with
> voice mailboxes and such.

Does your phone make them or are they generated by cellular dialer to
DTMF converted somwhere at the interface between the celular net and
the regular phone system? I know that's what gets done in some digital
PBX's for exactly the same reasons you mention.


--
Norman Soley - Data Communications Analyst - Ontario Ministry of the Environment
UUCP:    uunet!attcan!lsuc!ncrcan!ontenv!soley    VOICE:    [phone]
OR:     [e-mail]
  " Stay smart, go cool, be happy, it's the only way to get what you want"


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

Date: 16 Nov 88 06:09:55 PST (Wednesday)
Subject: Telephone headset connections
From: "hugh_davies.WGC1RX"@Xerox.COM
To: [e-mail]


I have managed to scrounge an old BT 'Auralite' headset (the hearing-aid
sort with a tiny voice-pipe mike) which I want to use with radio gear.

Since the whole thing is sealed up (ultrasonic-welded, by the look of it)
it's not possible to get at its guts. What I want to do is make up an
interface unit with a standard BT 4-circuit jack socket (the headset is
fitted with a jack plug instead of the new cheapo plug) so that I can plug
in either this or a different handset of some variety. From the rig's point
of view it should look like a speaker-mike; from the headset's, the rig
interface should look like a phone socket.

Designing the interface obviously involves providing power for the headset
and extracting the mike signal at the same time as feeding the speaker
signal to the earpiece.

What I need to know is the pin assignments of the 4-circuit jack plug, and
the signals or voltages, etc.  that are expected on the 4 lines.

The Phone Man can't help; all he's trained to do is install the things
(thus demonstrating the value of Education over Training, I suppose). The
Phone Shop haven't a clue. I am at my wits' end with this. Any suggestions
will be gratefully received.

Thanks,

Hugh Davies

(P.S. 'BT = British Telecom')

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

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

From: [e-mail] (David Ofsevit)
Date: 16 Nov 88 10:13
To: [e-mail]
Subject: re: Telephone dialing services


    In Telecom 8:180, Christopher Chung inquires:

> Does anyone know of a device that can be hooked up to an alarm system
> and dial any number that you program in when the alarm is triggered.
> I remember seeing these things a long time ago when I wasn't looking for
> one but now I can't see to find them anymore.  There are several out there
> such as the one by Black & Decker but that is only programmed to dial
> the Black & Decker phone number.  I want one that will be able to
> dial any number.  Do these things still exist?

    Radio Shack sells such a box as an option to its home alarm systems.  I
    believe you can set it to call several different numbers with the same
    message.  It was about $100 in the most recent catalog.

                David Ofsevit

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Peter Desnoyers)
Subject: Re: Nation wide paging
Date: 16 Nov 88 17:24:52 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann) writes:
>
>Just reading the newspaper here and came across another one of those ads
>for a NATION-WIDE paging service. [...] Surely the target receiver is not
>paged all across the country...
   Some companies do.

>Does the person initiating the page need to know what city the receiver
> is in ?
   If paged in one city, yes. In return, you pay less for the page.

>What happens when the receiver is on board an airplane, high in the sky?
   You lose. I think.

                Peter Desnoyers

disclaimer - this has nothing to do with Apple.

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

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 10:43:35 pst
From: Doug Claar <ll-xn!ames!hplabs!hpda!dclaar>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: How to detect if phone is off-hook (and not in use)


(I hope I wasn't supposed to send to telcom-request--it didn't say
in the header)

I am wondering if there is a device commercially available--cheap, or
a circuit floating around somewhere that will detect when a phone is
off-hook and not in use. The phone company sends those loud tones, but
you don't always hear them. (You see, we have small children, who
occasionally knock the phone off-hook...) This circuit would be different
from the line-in-use circuit which has been discussed here, in that I
don't care if the line is "in use," unless nobody is using it.

Thanks,
Doug Claar
HP Information Software Division
UUCP: mcvax!decvax!hplabs!hpda!dclaar -or- ucbvax!hpda!dclaar
ARPA: [e-mail]

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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: splitting area codes
Date: 15 Nov 88 17:23:01 GMT



> A few years ago, when they split New York City into 212 and 718, there
> was a lot of fuss.

    Not only did people sue to try and prevent the split, but they sued
because it wasn't fast enough!  I think the cut-over day was supposed to be
Jan 1st.  Not surprisingly, it took a few days to get everything cut over
properly.  Some business people in Brooklyn (718) sued NY Telephone because
they were promised that the cut would be on Jan 1 and it wasn't!

    I don't remember if anything ever came of the suit; I assume it was
thrown out of court because by the time anything could have been done, the
job was long over.  It's not like these people were being denied phone
service; calls to 212 still went through.  Even today, several years after
the split, I still get "please dial 718 before your number" recordings when
I forget to do so.  BFD.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: Metallic circuits
Date: 15 Nov 88 17:31:39 GMT



> I've got a metallic (LADS) circuit between my house and my Internet site.
> I am presently running at 19.2kb with a pair of Gandalf LDS309a limited
> distance modems.  What are my chances of ekeing any additional bandwidth
> out of this line

    We have a LADC (is that the same as LADS?) circuit.  About a mile
total loop length of 26 gauge wire (2 pairs).  Using either Black Box
V.35-LDM's or Rad ASM-20's we manage to run 56 kbps with no problems (well,
no problems after many fights with NY Tel to get the bugs out of the line,
which included 2 bad house pairs and a pair with polarity not observed).
Actually, I think the LDM's are running at 64 kbps.  Rad supposedly has a
flavor of the ASM-20 which will run at 128 kbps, as does Black Box.  VIR
has a modem whch will supposedly do 230 kbps over that line, but we havn't
gotten it to work at anything faster than 19.2 kbps.

    Most of the units I mentioned are V.35 modems, but that's a trivial
problem.  I'm sure they can be bought with RS-232 interfaces, and if not,
RS-232 to V.35 converters are trivial.  All the above-mentioned modems are
about $600-700 each.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

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

From [e-mail]  Thu Nov 17 21:23:42 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA21220; Thu, 17 Nov 88 21:23:42 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 88 21:04:17 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #182
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 17 Nov 88 21:04:17 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 182

Today's Topics:

                              Phone Base
                         Re: Nationwide Paging
                   Outpulsing DTMF during a cellular call
  Re: Cellular Phone Rates, was Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
                        Re: Inside House Wiring
                       How To Obtain Back Copies

[Moderator's Note: Did YOU receive your copy of 181, issued early Thurs-
day morning? There was some indication on our end that sendmail was
very disturbed early Thursday morning for some reason. If you have not
received 181 by now, drop a note requesting a copy.  P. Townson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 15:26:16 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: uunet!bu-cs.BU.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Phone Base


Access #: [phone]  (an MCI toll free #, probably only works in USA)
          [phone]  (a local call within the Wash. DC area)

The Rates:
  Subscription fee:        $39.00 / year
  800 access charge:        $.35 / minute (if you called the 800 number)
  Local access charge:        $.10 / minute (if you called the 703 number)
  Completed Calls:        $.60 / call + Call Charges (see below)
  Message Exchange:        $.50 / message

  Call Charges:
    To anywhere in USA:        $.10 / minute (if you called the 800 number)
                $.25 / minute (if you called the 703 number)
    There is no extra charge to CALL a number in the Wash. DC area.

  Message Exchange:
    Check for messages:        No charge
    Automatic message delivery:    $.15 / attempt (upto $1.80 maximum)
    Message Storage:        $.10 / message / day after first 48 hours

  Bussiness Assistant:
    Monthly Service:        $1.75 / month
    Call Conferencing:        Standard Phone Base Rates
    Remote Call Forwarding:    Standard Phone Base Rates
    Call Recording:        $5.00 + $.75 / minute

  Other Services:
    Travel Guide:        Standard Phone Base Rates
    Market News and Quotes:    $.75 / minute
    Instant Gifts:        Priced per gift item

The "Standard Phone Base Rates" are The Rates and Call Charges above.
The "Other Services" are not available yet, but the Customer Service
Person told me that they would be available in 6 to 8 weeks time.

The Travel Service is supposed to get you information on resturants,
hotels, and weather in an area based on an areacode+exchange.

Note that if you are using Phone Base for a long distance service that
if you call the 703 number, a call anywhere in the USA will cost $.35
per minute, if you call the 800 number, a call anywhere in the USA
will cost you $.45 per minute.  Dialing direct, coast-to-coast on AT&T
durring the day only cost $.36 for the first minute and $.28 for each
additional minute, (Washington DC to San Fransisco).

These rates were effective 5/1/88.  For more information, call their
customer service at [phone].

I have no connection with Phone Base.  I'm not even a customer of theirs.

-Mike Grant

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

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 15:37:31 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: uunet!bu-cs.BU.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Nationwide Paging


  Does the person initiating the page need to know what city the
  receiver is in?

If you have a Metrocast pager, and you go to another city, you are
responsible to call an 800 number and tell it what area-code you are
in.  National Satelite Paging broadcasts the message throughout the
country.  I do not know how CUE does it.

  What happens when the receiver is on board an airplane, high in the
  sky?

With Metrocast and NSP, there is a way to replay previous pages over
this 800 number.

Last I looked, (about 6 months ago), NSP and Metrocast were the only 2
nationwide paging companies that really had systems working.  CUE has
a system up, but I'm told it's not very usable--lots of lost pages.

-Mike Grant

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 17 Nov 88 10:16
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Outpulsing DTMF during a cellular call


>> Even my cellular car phone, which doesn't use TouchTones for dialing
>> either, generates tones when I push the buttons so I can play with
>> voice mailboxes and such.
>
>Does your phone make them or are they generated by cellular dialer to
>DTMF converted somwhere at the interface between the celular net and
>the regular phone system?

The cellular phone generates them.

/john

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

To: [e-mail]
From: mipos3![e-mail] (Randal L. Schwartz @ Stonehenge)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Rates, was Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
Date: 14 Nov 88 23:16:52 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, zodiac!jshelton@ames (John L. Shelton) writes:
| Random question:  What are current cellular rates around the country?
| In SF Bay area, wireline, I can choose:
|
| Plan A:  45c/min day, 20c/min night/wknd  $45/month
| Plan B:  90c/min day, 20c/min night/wknd  $25/month
|
| Plan B was introduced 6 months ago.  Otherwise, there has been no
| change in rates since service began 3 years ago.
|
| =John=

Portland area, GTE Mobilnet:

Plan 9 :-) 31c/min day, 11c/min night/wknd, $15/month, 7c/min forwarding

Eat your heart out :-)

(Requires a two-year lease, but month-by-month rates are only 2-4c more.)
--
Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services [phone]
on contract to BiiN Technical Information Services (for now :-),
in a former Intel building in Hillsboro, Oregon, USA.
<[e-mail]> or ...!tektronix!inteloa[!intelob]!merlyn
SOME MAILERS REQUIRE <[e-mail]> GRRRRR!
Standard disclaimer: I *am* my employer!


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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: Inside House Wiring
Date: 17 Nov 88 04:02:02 GMT



> Unfortunately, it is now up to the builder to provide the telephone
> wiring in the building. [...] What do THEY care if they only put one or
> two pairs to each apartment.

    My building (In Brooklyn, NY) is essentially new construction about
2-1/2 years ago.  I assume NY Tel did the insider feeder wiring; there is a
25-pair cable for each line of 6 apartments (i.e. over 4 pairs per
apartment).  What's somewhat surprising is that the cable runs through a
closet in each apartment with a loop of the outer sheath cut away to expose
the individual pairs for 6 or 8 inches.  I could tap anybody's phone
(withing my vertical line) without leaving the comfort of my own home.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 88 01:57:07 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
To: telecom
Subject: How To Obtain Back Copies


Our archives here at [Telecom Digest] have been completely reorganized and
made available via ftp. We have almost every issue since Volume 1 #1 back
in the early 1980's, and lots of other interesting stuff to read.

If you are on Internet, then ftp bu-cs.bu.edu. Login anonymous, and give a
password. You would  cd /telecom-archives to reach our public files. Please
help yourself to some good reading.

Sorry, but time does not permit me to personally fill orders for anything
other than occassional back copies; usually the most recent dozen or so if
for some reason the mailer let us down. Get someone to do the ftp for you
if you cannot access it yourself.

My thanks to JSol for organizing the archives and making them available as
just one more way to assist me.

Patrick Townson
Telecom Moderator


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

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

From [e-mail]  Sun Nov 20 02:34:10 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA21529; Sun, 20 Nov 88 02:34:10 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 88  2:11:41 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #183
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 20 Nov 88  2:11:41 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 183

Today's Topics:

                   Building your own phone projects
                           Second phone line
                      Re: Cellular Phone Question
                      Re: I need a second line...
           Re: Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
                           Octothorpe source

[Did YOU get issues 181 & 182 issued Thursday and Friday? According to
JSol, sun.com was not working correctly part of the time those days. If
I get enough negative answers, I will have a general retransmittal of
those two issues. Otherwise, I will fill individual requests. P Townson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 88 07:05:40 EST
From: Ken Dykes <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Building your own phone projects


Someone asked if there was a way to "cross connect" two lines to get
a 3-way conference call effect.

Someone else asked if there was a way to restrict long-distance dialing.

Well, there is a book of do it yourself phone projects, while i personally
consider simplistic and definetely dated on what ICs are available,
will provide "functional" circuits for the above two problems and others
toys.                   ok, so i cant spell definitely
Its a "SAMS" project book.
   SAMS  Electronic Telephone Projects, 2nd edition
   by Anthony J. Caristi
   ISBN  0-672-22485-2

I found it at a local electronics parts store.
It has introductory chapters on "phone wiring" princicples (basic)

The back of the book says "To order"
call 800-428-SAMS
They appear to accept all major credit cards.
Other projects included:
  - replace bell ringer with electronic ringer
  - broadcast phone conversation to nearby FM radio
  - CB telephone patch
  - hearing impaired lamp for ringer
  - 32 number memory
  - convert single phone into a two-line model
and others.
 As i said, not great examples of electronic design, but functional,
and possibly provide ideas or avenues-of-thinking for you.

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 88 17:19:46 PST
From: ll-xn!ucsd!pnet03.cts.com!merlin (Merlin Rhoda)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Second phone line



I recently decided to add a second line.  When I called them up, they
informed me that since this was the 4th line for this address (not me,
but the physical address), I would have to go onto a waiting list...
When that finally came around, they gave me my number, and sent me on my
way.....  A few days later I came home only to find a note on my door
saying that they had missed me, and that they needed my signtature in order
to do the installation. Since they hadn't needed it for the the first line,
I became suspicious, and called 'em...  They told me that in order to do
an under-ground (gasp!) line, they would have to do all sorts of digging
and such forth..  Yeah - I would want an underground line all of a sudden
although all the ther lines here are arial? hahaha.. I dont know where they
got that idea....  They were planning on tearing up the canyon near here to
install phone cable for just one line.. why cant they be willing to do this
when we want them to?  And sheesh - I almost let them, not realising what
they wanted... At least it all worked out fine in the end...

merlin rhoda

UUCP: crash!pnet01!pnet101!pnet03!merlin
INET: [e-mail]

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

To: unido!unido![e-mail]
From: unido!iaoobel![e-mail] (Dieter Woerz)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Question
Date: 18 Nov 88 01:04:36 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
>cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is.  I
>can think of two possible answers:
>
>1. Periodically each cellular phone emits a "here I am" which is
>   received by the nearest cells and recorded in a database.

Here in Germany, the cellular phones emit a "here I am" on
administartive frequency, which is associated with the Cell-sender,
they hear the best. Then the Cell-sender returns a short message on
that channel together with some data on how good the reception of the
phone is at the sender. On this channel the connect requests and the
frequency changes during a call, while talking with in one cell or
while changing cells are negociated. I think, this takes only a short
packet of binary data to be transmitted.


>2. When a call for a particular phone comes through all cells in the system
>   broadcast a "where are you" and the cellular phone responds.
>
>If anyone knows the details of the protocol used I'd appreciate
>hearing from them.
>
>Chuck Weinstock

Hope this helps

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

Dieter Woerz
Fraunhofer Institut fuer Arbeitswirtschaft und Organisation
Abt. 453
Holzgartenstrasse 17
D-7000 Stuttgart 1
W-Germany

BITNET: iaoobel.uucp![e-mail]
UUCP:   ...{uunet!unido, pyramid}!iaoobel!woerz

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

Date: Fri, 18 Nov 88 11:35:17 PST
From: Jordan Hayes <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: I need a second line...


    PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.

Last time I had a bunch of lines put in, my apt. was (obviously) not
wired for it.  I put in two 8-wire jacks next to each other, connected
with a 6" length of connectorized cable, and told them "bring me 3
lines" and it cost me the minimum $45 to do it, since they didn't have
to install jacks or anything, and i drilled a hole through the wall
near the jack for them to run the wire to.  It took the guy all day to
do the job (his dime, not mine) because the main block on the apt.
building did not have enough capacity, and there also wasn't enough
capacity from the box on the street to my apt. building.

"Do it yourself and save $$$"

/jordan

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Roger Haaheim)
Subject: Re: Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
Date: 17 Nov 88 14:26:43 GMT



Why doesn't she just control her daughter rather than the
phone line?

[Moderator's note: Roger raises a very good point, worthy of discussion
in a forum devoted to parent/child relationships. The horror stories in
the local media here (Chicago Tribune) when the Nine Hundred Service
Corporation first started operation were unbelievable. Illinois Bell
wound up writing off several *million* dollars in uncollectibles as a
good will gesture for parents who were stuck with phone bills typically
in the hundreds of dollars because of their inability to discipline and/
or control their children. Now the various Bells offer 976/1-900 blocking
on request. Why can't the parents handle this? **PLEASE** no response
to this mini-flame required....at least not here!  Patrick Townson]


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

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Octothorpe source
Date: 19 Nov 88 15:25:08 PST (Sat)
From: ucla-an!bongo![e-mail] (julian macassey)


    I am looking for an authoritative reference for the term
OCTOTHORPE.

    An octothorpe is an # , which is what is usually referred to
as "the pound sign" or "the hash mark", sometimes as "the number
symbol". I know the correct term is octothorpe, I have seen
references to it in some Bell docs, I have even seen a news
clipping years ago that mentioned it.

    My problem is that every now and again, some smart Alec asks
me where it comes from. I have even been accused of making it
up. No dictionary I have seen has ever given me a definition.
Yes I have looked it up in the 24 Volume Oxford English
Dictionary. I have checked the encyc Brit and alleged
Telecommunications Dictionaries.

    I do know that Octo means eight and Thorpe means beam. So the
word has some roots.

    There is a good term paper here for someone.

Yours Julian Macassey


--
Julian Macassey, n6are       julian@bongo   voice [phone]

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

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

From [e-mail]  Tue Nov 22 03:33:04 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA19522; Tue, 22 Nov 88 03:33:04 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 88  3:15:13 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #184
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Nov 88  3:15:13 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 184

Today's Topics:

        Brief reponse to comment on parent/child relationships
                         Re: Area 708/312/815
                     Re: Telephone dialing devices
                      Re:  Sending digits on ISDN
                         Re: Octothorpe source
                         Re: Octothorpe source
                         Re: Metallic circuits

[Moderator's note: My technical advisor JSol seems to feel much of the
trouble with duplicates and missed issues in recent weeks has stemmed
from the size of our list and how it interacts with sendmail at bu-cs.
He has installed yet another version of sendmail, and our list has been
partitioned into *eight* smaller lists! According to my spiritual ad-
visor Murphy, anything that can possibly go wrong with this issue will
do so. If you did not get issues 180-181-182-183 please advise me, and
if enough of you do so, I will have a re-transmission on all. P.Townson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: Patrick Townson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Brief reponse to comment on parent/child relationships
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 88 14:24:17 PST
From: [e-mail]


I suspect you have never raised children or if you have, they weren't
"problem" chilren.

We were one of the horror stories in Los Angeles.  My teen-age son ran
up $1500.00 worth of 976 calls before we knew what was happening.  He
had (and has) serious psychiatric problems.  I won't detail them, but
they are severe.

In general, the law protects children (minors) and parents:

1. It limits liability against parents for damage by chilren to a
   relatively small amount and you can (and we have) purchase insurance
   for this (it usually comes with homeowner policies).

2. Contracts entered into by children are, in general, not enforcible.
   In particular, such contracts can't be enforced against the parents.

These laws were set up for DAMNED good reason!

Suddenly, the telco in cahoots with the FCC and the PUC invents a way of
violating (2), whereby a child enters into a "contract" (by dialing 976
numbers) with the telco and the 976 vendor and then the latter two want
to enforce this contract against the parents.

As I've said before, 976 service is NOT telephone service any more
than ordering from Sears Roebuck, reserving a room at the Holiday Inn,
subscribing to the Source (all done using the telphone) are.

If someone wants to risk phone orders from an unknown, let him, but
he shouldn't have any right to force the telephone subscriber to pay
(unless the subscriber agrees in advance).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Illinois Bell wound up writing off several *million* dollars in
    uncollectibles as a good will gesture for parents who were stuck
    with phone bills typically in the hundreds of dollars because of
    their inability to discipline and or control their children.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I very much doubt if it was "good will".  These cases have NEVER been
taken to court and lawyers to whom I have spoken have questioned whether
a court would enforce them.  It's quite likely that Illinois Bell and
the 976 vendors would have lost in court and that would have left them
in a much worse position.

The only reason that they have a ghost of a claim to collect on 976
calls is that the PUC "gave" them that right.  I have looked at the
California statute that set up the California PUC (probably the Illinois
statute is similar) and the PUC is given authority to regulate TELEPHONE
SERVICE (and various other utilities) NOT information services.

By the way, the 976 vendors are sleezy and they deliberately set out to
entrap sick, lonely people.  My son called the "party line" numbers.
What he doesn't know (ar at least believe) is that they are phony.  The
interesting people he talks to are shills hired by the 976 company to
keep the line "exciting".  (These jobs are advertised in the Los Angeles
Times.  They pay a few dollars an hour and can be done from home).  So
the 976 servce isn't giving what it claims.  The "sex" lines are even
more sleezy.  Thank god for them, however, otherwise the 976 service
wouldn't have been put on an optional basis so quickly!

The problem is, of course, that telphone service is essential in this
day and age.  I couldn't hold my job without telephone service at home.

You might ask yourself how many children do you know who get blank
signed checks from their parents or unlimited charge accounts, etc.

You might also ask yourself how you would prevent a mentally sick child
who lives at home from using the telphone to call 976 numbers.  What
would you do.  Lock him up (and make him sicker)?  Watch him 24 hours
a day (and not go to work)?  Lock up the telephone (not easy with a
teenager who knows how to do simple telephone wiring)?  Even though my
son is grown now, and away from home, I await your suggestions.  We
finally managed to buy adequate restrictors and put them in a locked box
where the phone-lines first enter my house.  Even these have problems.
The batteries run out without warning, they are painful to program, and,
in general a nuisance.

I know that long distance (especially foreign) poses, hypothetically, a
similar problem.  But for some reason, it doesn't occur, at least not
very much.

One final thought.  Whenever the telco people talk about charges, they
talk in terms of paying for services and for what you receive.  They
charge, for example, for touch-tone, as a service, even though using it
saves them money.  If there were any consistency or reason, they would
CHARGE a monthly fee for having 976 service available.

dgc

David G. Cantor
Department of Mathematics
University of California at Los Angeles
Internet:  [e-mail]
UUCP:      ...!{randvax, sdcrdcf, ucbvax}!ucla-cs!dgc

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 88 15:37:38-1795
From: Steven A. Minneman  <harvard!ames!fai!stevem>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Area 708/312/815


 In [e-mail]> [e-mail] (P. Townson) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 8, issue 177, message 4
>
>...
>I think Chicago is the only city in the United States to have two actual
>telephone operating companies within the city limits.

Although this article otherwise provided good info, this statement is untrue.
I know of at least one such other city. Novato, Ca in Marin county is on the
southern border of GTE territory.  The northern half of Novato is served by GTE
as part of 415 and the southern half of Novato is served by Pacific Bell (also
area code 415).  Interestingly, the remainder of the GTE territory in this part
of the state is 707 area code;  however, in order to keep Novato all in the
same area code, this part of GTE's service area is 415.


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

To: [e-mail]
From: mtsu!cskev (Kevin Slater)
Subject: Re: Telephone dialing devices
Date: 18 Nov 88 17:56:48 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Christopher Chung) writes:
> Does anyone know of a device that can be hooked up to an alarm system
> and dial any number that you program in when the alarm is triggered.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris

Chris Radio Shack sell a telephone caller that can be programed with up
to three numbers.  When it reaches a number it will play back your
pre-recorded message.  Although you will have to call the Police, Fire,
etc. {if thats who you want to call} to find out if its legal to call
them.  Its not legal to call these places, in some cities, with an
auto-dialer. Radio Shack has their 89 catalog out now I would suggest
going and picking one up to find the lastest prices.

Kevin Slater  [e-mail]

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

To: bu-cs.bu.edu![e-mail]
From: harvard!cs.utexas.edu!vector!chip (Chip Rosenthal)
Subject: Re:  Sending digits on ISDN
Date: 21 Nov 88 02:45:03 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Natalie) writes:
>I wouldn't go so far as to say they are obsolete.  Since ISDN
>is still in the nebulous phase, TouchTone service is what we have.

More specifically, I think the original author was saying that DTMF ("touch
tones") will be obsolete in the subscriber loop.  It is already obsolete
through the long-haul network.  Aside from the Coming ISDN Revolution(tm),
there is an impetus to move towards totally-digital equipment throughout
the network.  The changeover is starting in the business sector, and is
being driven by those who use digital PBX's rather than analog channel
banks.
--
Chip Rosenthal     [e-mail]    |      Choke me in the shallow water
Dallas Semiconductor   214-450-5337    |         before I get too deep.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (a.e.mossberg)
Subject: Re: Octothorpe source
Date: 21 Nov 88 14:52:27 GMT



In <[e-mail]>, <ucla-an!bongo![e-mail]> wrote:

>    An octothorpe is an # , which is what is usually referred to
>as "the pound sign" or "the hash mark", sometimes as "the number
>symbol". I know the correct term is octothorpe, I have seen
>references to it in some Bell docs, I have even seen a news
>clipping years ago that mentioned it.

Indeed, that's the same place I learned the term, but usually have to revert
to 'number sign' or 'pound sign'.

>    My problem is that every now and again, some smart Alec asks
>me where it comes from. I have even been accused of making it
>up. No dictionary I have seen has ever given me a definition.

Yep, same here.  I've never been able to find it in a dictionary, nor have
I been able to find the original reference from where I learned it.  I was
beginning to think I made it up in some frenzied nightmare. Perhaps Bell
invented it, and then changed their collective mind.

aem

a.e.mossberg    -    [e-mail]    -    [e-mail] (3.91)
Man is here for the sake of other men.            - Albert Einstein

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 88 09:19:28 PST
From: HECTOR MYERSTON <[e-mail]>
Subject: Octothorpe source
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]


    All my Bell System references call # The Number Sign (or Pound).
The only times I see it called an Octothrope is in Northern Telecom Inc
publications talking about Digipulse Dialing, "their name" for DTMF.
    The Japanese routinely call it a "Sharp".  Obscure to me, logical
to the musically inclined.

+HECTOR+
-------

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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: Metallic circuits
Date: 19 Nov 88 19:29:29 GMT



To update what I said earlier:
> VIR has a modem whch will supposedly do 230 kbps over that line, but we
> havn't gotten it to work at anything faster than 19.2 kbps.

    We tried the VIRs on another loop which is much shorter (we figure
about 2-3000 feet) and it seems to work fine at 144 kbps, but we still
can't get it to work at 230 kbps over any appreciable amount of wire.  VIR
admits that there is a problem with the modem (they have already modified
it a couple of times, although I have no idea what they did to it).  In
fact, on of the engineers at VIR admitted that RAD makes the best modems!
VIR says they will have a redesign of theirs out in a few months which
really should work at 230 kbps over 1-mile loops.

    To be fair, VIR has been very good to us.  They lent us 2 BERTs for
a few weeks so we could test the lines and help us convince NY Tel that
there really was something wrong.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

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

From [e-mail]  Wed Nov 23 01:49:11 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA21350; Wed, 23 Nov 88 01:49:11 EST
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 88 01:49:11 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Apparently-To: telecom-dis


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 16 Nov 88  0:03:08 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 180

Today's Topics:

                      Moderator Stands Corrected!!
                        Re: Inside House Wiring
                          Nation wide paging
                        Touch tone compatibility
             Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
                         Telephone dialing devices
                             Call extender
                Anyone know the 900-NXX tariffs/rates?

[Moderator's note: We are remailing 180-181-182-183 due to the fact that
several of you did not receive them because many network locations were
shut down during the de-worming process. All four issues will follow in
the next couple hours. Then 185 and 186 will be issued Thanksgiving Day.
If you already got these, accept my apologies and disgard them. PT]
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Wed Nov 16 00:03:00 1988
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Alright Already!
From: [e-mail]


I was wrong in saying Chicago is the only city with two actual telephone
operating companies in the same town. I *knew* there were two companies in
the El Lay area; I did not know both physically operated within the City
of the Angels. I thought one had certain towns outside the city itself.
Thus far, six of you have written to correct me. Following this are two
letters representative of the bunch. Really, I should have known better.
                                                           Patrick Townson

Date: Sun Nov 13 18:25:07 1988
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Area 708/312/815
From: zygot![e-mail] (John Higdon)


On Nov 11 at  3:16, Patrick Townson writes:
>
> I think Chicago is the only city in the United States to have two actual
> telephone operating companies within the city limits. While Illinois Bell has
> almost the entire city, a tiny section of the northwest side is served by
> Des Plaines based Central Telephone Company (Centel).

Pacific Bell serves most of Los Angeles, however General Telephone
covers more than just a tiny section. This is in the city proper.

--
John Higdon
john@zygot   {pacbell|apple|sun!cohesive}!zygot!john

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

Date: 14 Nov 88 10:04:50 PST (Monday)
Subject: Re: Area 708/312/815
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]



Re: "I think Chicago is the only city in the United States to have two
actual
telephone operating companies within the city limits."

Not true.  The suburb of Los Angeles that I live in (Fountain Valley) is
split into a General Tel and a Pacific Tel area.  I believe that this also
occurs in many other nearby cities, including Los Angeles itself.  Since
the city boundaries of Los Angeles and its more than 100 suburb cities have
changed frequently, it would have been extremely impractical to keep the
division between General and Pacific from crossing some cities.

/Don Lynn

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

To: comp-dcom-telecom
From: [e-mail] (F. L. Charles Seeger III)
Subject: Re: Inside House Wiring
Date: 15 Nov 88 01:07:57 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> ucla-an!denwa![e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb) writes:
|In article <[e-mail]>, Robert Gutierrez writes:
|> That I find hard to believe. As far as I know, most apartment bldgs are
|> are prewired with 12 or 25 pair multiconductor.
|
|This was true back in the good old days when the local telco did the
|pre-wire.  Unfortunately, it is now up to the builder to provide the
|telephone wiring in the building.  And since most builders just see
|this as one more expense, [ -deleted- ]
|
|I don't know what we can do about this problem.  I find it increasingly
|difficult to locate an apartment with decent wiring.  ANY building
|built within the last five years is out of the question.  Most of these
|have two pairs and no crawl space or other way to run anything more.
|
|I hope it comes back to haunt them (the builders) when more people like
|me won't rent their apartments because of a lack of wiring.

Maybe we need something akin to the National Electric Code, which would
give individual states guidance in what to require in local codes.
This may be difficult or impossible in the current political climate,
especially since this isn't a matter of safety.  About the only other
idea that pops into my head is to do what I did, i.e. buy your own
house.

Do other countries, e.g. Canada, have a similar problem?

Chuck



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

To: uw-beaver![e-mail]
From: ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann)
Subject: Nation wide paging
Date: 13 Nov 88 22:58:54 GMT




Just reading the newspaper here and came across another one of those ads
for a NATION-WIDE paging service.  This one is from METROCAST (R) -
Nationwide Alphanumeric Paging. I have seen these ads many times in the
past and have wondered how they work. Surely the target receiver is not
paged all across the country...   Does the person initiating the page need
to know what city the receiver is in ?  What happens when the receiver is
on board an airplane, high in the sky?



    *****     *****    *****    *   *       *   *****
   *     *   *     *  *        *   * *     *   *        Roger Swann
  ******    *     *  *****    *   *   *   *   *   ***  The Boeing Co.
 *      *  *     *  *        *   *     * *   *     *   Aerospace Div.
*******     *****  ******   *   *       *     *****
   uucp:  uw-beaver!ssc-vax!clark     voice: 206/657-5810

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

Date:     Tue, 15 Nov 88 9:57:19 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Touch tone compatibility


To summarize what I have heard about touch tone phones:
Rotary-dial-compatibility is necessary in at least some non-electronic
exchanges.  I also understand that such a phone is still usable in an
electronic exchange.

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

From: osu-cis!bcd-dyn![e-mail]
Date: 15 Nov 88 14:46:02 GMT
Subject: Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
Lines: 17

Is there a commercially-available, inexpensive, device to prevent outgoing
long-distance calls?  I have a friend whose daughter runs up bills of
$500 per month.

The phone company says they can't help (or that it will cost big bucks,
depending on who she talks to).

If I had a circuit, I could build it.  She's willing to go all-tone on her
phones, if that would help.

Thanks.

--
Stanley F. Quayle      N8SQ @ W8CQK     [phone]
{ohio-state | osu-cis}!bcd-dyn!sfq      3375 Fisher Rd., Columbus, OH  43201
Internet: [e-mail]             Fido: Stanley Quayle, Node 1:226/610
My opinions are mine.  Besides, it doesn't matter anymore.


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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 88 22:05:20 EST
From: Christopher Chung <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone dialing devices
To: [e-mail]


Does anyone know of a device that can be hooked up to an alarm system
and dial any number that you program in when the alarm is triggered.
I remember seeing these things a long time ago when I wasn't looking for
one but now I can't see to find them anymore.  There are several out there
such as the one by Black & Decker but that is only programmed to dial
the Black & Decker phone number.  I want one that will be able to
dial any number.  Do these things still exist?

Thanks,
Chris

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

Date:     Tue, 15 Nov 88 15:54
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Call extender
To: [e-mail]



hi

does anyone have the schematics that they can post/describe/mail to me
for a call extender aka the gold box?

it does not have to be anything fancy- it should just be able to
1 pick up the phone when it rings and connect the caller to a second line
  which will be a campus restricted line on a pbx type system.


it would be nice if it were powered from the line but not nessessary.



thanks,

ted demko


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

From: harvard!cs.utexas.edu!uunet.UU.NET!unh!unhtel!paul
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 88 07:07:41 est
To: uunet.UU.NET!uunet!bu-cs![e-mail]
Subject: Anyone know the 900-NXX tariffs/rates?

Not all 900-NXX calls are .50 for the first minute and .35 for each additional
minute...  Is there a consistent pricing scheme by "exchange?"

Thanks.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Paul S. Sawyer              uunet!unh!unhtel!paul     [e-mail]
UNH Telecommunications
Durham, NH  03824-3523      VOX: 603-862-3262         FAX: [phone]



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

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


From [e-mail]  Wed Nov 23 01:56:09 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA21869; Wed, 23 Nov 88 01:56:09 EST
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 88 01:56:09 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Apparently-To: telecom-dis

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 17 Nov 88  1:36:00 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 181

Today's Topics:

                          Adminstrative Note
                      Re: Sending digits on ISDN
                     Telephone headset connections
                    re: Telephone dialing services
                        Re: Nation wide paging
          How to detect if phone is off-hook (and not in use)
                       Re: splitting area codes
                         Re: Metallic circuits

[This is a special remail of 181. Kindly disgard duplicates. PTownson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 21:43:43 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
To: telecom
Subject: Adminstrative Note


Will whoever is servicing black@griffin please remove this name from their
list, or consult the appropriate postmaster for advice. The bad mail notices
are coming here; we do not have him on our list.  Thanks.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: "Norman S. Soley" <ontenv!soley>
Subject: Re: Sending digits on ISDN
Date:     Tue, 15 Nov 88 00:35:31 EST



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ron Natalie) writes:
> I wouldn't go so far as to say they are obsolete.  Since ISDN
> is still in the nebulous phase, TouchTone service is what we have.
> Even my cellular car phone, which doesn't use TouchTones for dialing
> either, generates tones when I push the buttons so I can play with
> voice mailboxes and such.

Does your phone make them or are they generated by cellular dialer to
DTMF converted somwhere at the interface between the celular net and
the regular phone system? I know that's what gets done in some digital
PBX's for exactly the same reasons you mention.


--
Norman Soley - Data Communications Analyst - Ontario Ministry of the Environment
UUCP:    uunet!attcan!lsuc!ncrcan!ontenv!soley    VOICE:    [phone]
OR:     [e-mail]
  " Stay smart, go cool, be happy, it's the only way to get what you want"


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

Date: 16 Nov 88 06:09:55 PST (Wednesday)
Subject: Telephone headset connections
From: "hugh_davies.WGC1RX"@Xerox.COM
To: [e-mail]


I have managed to scrounge an old BT 'Auralite' headset (the hearing-aid
sort with a tiny voice-pipe mike) which I want to use with radio gear.

Since the whole thing is sealed up (ultrasonic-welded, by the look of it)
it's not possible to get at its guts. What I want to do is make up an
interface unit with a standard BT 4-circuit jack socket (the headset is
fitted with a jack plug instead of the new cheapo plug) so that I can plug
in either this or a different handset of some variety. From the rig's point
of view it should look like a speaker-mike; from the headset's, the rig
interface should look like a phone socket.

Designing the interface obviously involves providing power for the headset
and extracting the mike signal at the same time as feeding the speaker
signal to the earpiece.

What I need to know is the pin assignments of the 4-circuit jack plug, and
the signals or voltages, etc.  that are expected on the 4 lines.

The Phone Man can't help; all he's trained to do is install the things
(thus demonstrating the value of Education over Training, I suppose). The
Phone Shop haven't a clue. I am at my wits' end with this. Any suggestions
will be gratefully received.

Thanks,

Hugh Davies

(P.S. 'BT = British Telecom')

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

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

From: [e-mail] (David Ofsevit)
Date: 16 Nov 88 10:13
To: [e-mail]
Subject: re: Telephone dialing services


    In Telecom 8:180, Christopher Chung inquires:

> Does anyone know of a device that can be hooked up to an alarm system
> and dial any number that you program in when the alarm is triggered.
> I remember seeing these things a long time ago when I wasn't looking for
> one but now I can't see to find them anymore.  There are several out there
> such as the one by Black & Decker but that is only programmed to dial
> the Black & Decker phone number.  I want one that will be able to
> dial any number.  Do these things still exist?

    Radio Shack sells such a box as an option to its home alarm systems.  I
    believe you can set it to call several different numbers with the same
    message.  It was about $100 in the most recent catalog.

                David Ofsevit

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Peter Desnoyers)
Subject: Re: Nation wide paging
Date: 16 Nov 88 17:24:52 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> ssc-vax![e-mail] (Roger Clark Swann) writes:
>
>Just reading the newspaper here and came across another one of those ads
>for a NATION-WIDE paging service. [...] Surely the target receiver is not
>paged all across the country...
   Some companies do.

>Does the person initiating the page need to know what city the receiver
> is in ?
   If paged in one city, yes. In return, you pay less for the page.

>What happens when the receiver is on board an airplane, high in the sky?
   You lose. I think.

                Peter Desnoyers

disclaimer - this has nothing to do with Apple.

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

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 10:43:35 pst
From: Doug Claar <ll-xn!ames!hplabs!hpda!dclaar>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: How to detect if phone is off-hook (and not in use)


(I hope I wasn't supposed to send to telcom-request--it didn't say
in the header)

I am wondering if there is a device commercially available--cheap, or
a circuit floating around somewhere that will detect when a phone is
off-hook and not in use. The phone company sends those loud tones, but
you don't always hear them. (You see, we have small children, who
occasionally knock the phone off-hook...) This circuit would be different
from the line-in-use circuit which has been discussed here, in that I
don't care if the line is "in use," unless nobody is using it.

Thanks,
Doug Claar
HP Information Software Division
UUCP: mcvax!decvax!hplabs!hpda!dclaar -or- ucbvax!hpda!dclaar
ARPA: [e-mail]

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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: splitting area codes
Date: 15 Nov 88 17:23:01 GMT



> A few years ago, when they split New York City into 212 and 718, there
> was a lot of fuss.

    Not only did people sue to try and prevent the split, but they sued
because it wasn't fast enough!  I think the cut-over day was supposed to be
Jan 1st.  Not surprisingly, it took a few days to get everything cut over
properly.  Some business people in Brooklyn (718) sued NY Telephone because
they were promised that the cut would be on Jan 1 and it wasn't!

    I don't remember if anything ever came of the suit; I assume it was
thrown out of court because by the time anything could have been done, the
job was long over.  It's not like these people were being denied phone
service; calls to 212 still went through.  Even today, several years after
the split, I still get "please dial 718 before your number" recordings when
I forget to do so.  BFD.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: Metallic circuits
Date: 15 Nov 88 17:31:39 GMT



> I've got a metallic (LADS) circuit between my house and my Internet site.
> I am presently running at 19.2kb with a pair of Gandalf LDS309a limited
> distance modems.  What are my chances of ekeing any additional bandwidth
> out of this line

    We have a LADC (is that the same as LADS?) circuit.  About a mile
total loop length of 26 gauge wire (2 pairs).  Using either Black Box
V.35-LDM's or Rad ASM-20's we manage to run 56 kbps with no problems (well,
no problems after many fights with NY Tel to get the bugs out of the line,
which included 2 bad house pairs and a pair with polarity not observed).
Actually, I think the LDM's are running at 64 kbps.  Rad supposedly has a
flavor of the ASM-20 which will run at 128 kbps, as does Black Box.  VIR
has a modem whch will supposedly do 230 kbps over that line, but we havn't
gotten it to work at anything faster than 19.2 kbps.

    Most of the units I mentioned are V.35 modems, but that's a trivial
problem.  I'm sure they can be bought with RS-232 interfaces, and if not,
RS-232 to V.35 converters are trivial.  All the above-mentioned modems are
about $600-700 each.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

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


From [e-mail]  Wed Nov 23 02:08:23 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA22676; Wed, 23 Nov 88 02:08:23 EST
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 88 02:08:23 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Apparently-To: telecom-dis

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 17 Nov 88 21:04:17 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 182

Today's Topics:

                              Phone Base
                         Re: Nationwide Paging
                   Outpulsing DTMF during a cellular call
  Re: Cellular Phone Rates, was Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
                        Re: Inside House Wiring
                       How To Obtain Back Copies


[This is a special remail of 182. Please excuse duplicates. PT]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 15:26:16 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: uunet!bu-cs.BU.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Phone Base


Access #: [phone]  (an MCI toll free #, probably only works in USA)
          [phone]  (a local call within the Wash. DC area)

The Rates:
  Subscription fee:        $39.00 / year
  800 access charge:        $.35 / minute (if you called the 800 number)
  Local access charge:        $.10 / minute (if you called the 703 number)
  Completed Calls:        $.60 / call + Call Charges (see below)
  Message Exchange:        $.50 / message

  Call Charges:
    To anywhere in USA:        $.10 / minute (if you called the 800 number)
                $.25 / minute (if you called the 703 number)
    There is no extra charge to CALL a number in the Wash. DC area.

  Message Exchange:
    Check for messages:        No charge
    Automatic message delivery:    $.15 / attempt (upto $1.80 maximum)
    Message Storage:        $.10 / message / day after first 48 hours

  Bussiness Assistant:
    Monthly Service:        $1.75 / month
    Call Conferencing:        Standard Phone Base Rates
    Remote Call Forwarding:    Standard Phone Base Rates
    Call Recording:        $5.00 + $.75 / minute

  Other Services:
    Travel Guide:        Standard Phone Base Rates
    Market News and Quotes:    $.75 / minute
    Instant Gifts:        Priced per gift item

The "Standard Phone Base Rates" are The Rates and Call Charges above.
The "Other Services" are not available yet, but the Customer Service
Person told me that they would be available in 6 to 8 weeks time.

The Travel Service is supposed to get you information on resturants,
hotels, and weather in an area based on an areacode+exchange.

Note that if you are using Phone Base for a long distance service that
if you call the 703 number, a call anywhere in the USA will cost $.35
per minute, if you call the 800 number, a call anywhere in the USA
will cost you $.45 per minute.  Dialing direct, coast-to-coast on AT&T
durring the day only cost $.36 for the first minute and $.28 for each
additional minute, (Washington DC to San Fransisco).

These rates were effective 5/1/88.  For more information, call their
customer service at [phone].

I have no connection with Phone Base.  I'm not even a customer of theirs.

-Mike Grant

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

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 15:37:31 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: uunet!bu-cs.BU.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Nationwide Paging


  Does the person initiating the page need to know what city the
  receiver is in?

If you have a Metrocast pager, and you go to another city, you are
responsible to call an 800 number and tell it what area-code you are
in.  National Satelite Paging broadcasts the message throughout the
country.  I do not know how CUE does it.

  What happens when the receiver is on board an airplane, high in the
  sky?

With Metrocast and NSP, there is a way to replay previous pages over
this 800 number.

Last I looked, (about 6 months ago), NSP and Metrocast were the only 2
nationwide paging companies that really had systems working.  CUE has
a system up, but I'm told it's not very usable--lots of lost pages.

-Mike Grant

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
Date: 17 Nov 88 10:16
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Outpulsing DTMF during a cellular call


>> Even my cellular car phone, which doesn't use TouchTones for dialing
>> either, generates tones when I push the buttons so I can play with
>> voice mailboxes and such.
>
>Does your phone make them or are they generated by cellular dialer to
>DTMF converted somwhere at the interface between the celular net and
>the regular phone system?

The cellular phone generates them.

/john

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

To: [e-mail]
From: mipos3![e-mail] (Randal L. Schwartz @ Stonehenge)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Rates, was Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
Date: 14 Nov 88 23:16:52 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, zodiac!jshelton@ames (John L. Shelton) writes:
| Random question:  What are current cellular rates around the country?
| In SF Bay area, wireline, I can choose:
|
| Plan A:  45c/min day, 20c/min night/wknd  $45/month
| Plan B:  90c/min day, 20c/min night/wknd  $25/month
|
| Plan B was introduced 6 months ago.  Otherwise, there has been no
| change in rates since service began 3 years ago.
|
| =John=

Portland area, GTE Mobilnet:

Plan 9 :-) 31c/min day, 11c/min night/wknd, $15/month, 7c/min forwarding

Eat your heart out :-)

(Requires a two-year lease, but month-by-month rates are only 2-4c more.)
--
Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services [phone]
on contract to BiiN Technical Information Services (for now :-),
in a former Intel building in Hillsboro, Oregon, USA.
<[e-mail]> or ...!tektronix!inteloa[!intelob]!merlyn
SOME MAILERS REQUIRE <[e-mail]> GRRRRR!
Standard disclaimer: I *am* my employer!


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

To: [e-mail]
From: roy@phri (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: Inside House Wiring
Date: 17 Nov 88 04:02:02 GMT



> Unfortunately, it is now up to the builder to provide the telephone
> wiring in the building. [...] What do THEY care if they only put one or
> two pairs to each apartment.

    My building (In Brooklyn, NY) is essentially new construction about
2-1/2 years ago.  I assume NY Tel did the insider feeder wiring; there is a
25-pair cable for each line of 6 apartments (i.e. over 4 pairs per
apartment).  What's somewhat surprising is that the cable runs through a
closet in each apartment with a loop of the outer sheath cut away to expose
the individual pairs for 6 or 8 inches.  I could tap anybody's phone
(withing my vertical line) without leaving the comfort of my own home.
--
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri![e-mail]
"The connector is the network"

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 88 01:57:07 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
To: telecom
Subject: How To Obtain Back Copies


Our archives here at [Telecom Digest] have been completely reorganized and
made available via ftp. We have almost every issue since Volume 1 #1 back
in the early 1980's, and lots of other interesting stuff to read.

If you are on Internet, then ftp bu-cs.bu.edu. Login anonymous, and give a
password. You would  cd /telecom-archives to reach our public files. Please
help yourself to some good reading.

Sorry, but time does not permit me to personally fill orders for anything
other than occassional back copies; usually the most recent dozen or so if
for some reason the mailer let us down. Get someone to do the ftp for you
if you cannot access it yourself.

My thanks to JSol for organizing the archives and making them available as
just one more way to assist me.

Patrick Townson
Telecom Moderator


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

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


From [e-mail]  Wed Nov 23 02:34:36 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA24385; Wed, 23 Nov 88 02:34:36 EST
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 88 02:34:36 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Apparently-To: telecom-dis

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 20 Nov 88  2:11:41 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 183

Today's Topics:

                   Building your own phone projects
                           Second phone line
                      Re: Cellular Phone Question
                      Re: I need a second line...
           Re: Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
                           Octothorpe source


[This is a special remail of 183. Numerous subscribers did not receive
180-181-182-183 due to network shutdowns last week during de-worming.
This concludes the remailing of the four issues. By now you should have
received 184 issued on Tuesday. We will resume with 185 tomorrow. PT]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 88 07:05:40 EST
From: Ken Dykes <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Building your own phone projects


Someone asked if there was a way to "cross connect" two lines to get
a 3-way conference call effect.

Someone else asked if there was a way to restrict long-distance dialing.

Well, there is a book of do it yourself phone projects, while i personally
consider simplistic and definetely dated on what ICs are available,
will provide "functional" circuits for the above two problems and others
toys.                   ok, so i cant spell definitely
Its a "SAMS" project book.
   SAMS  Electronic Telephone Projects, 2nd edition
   by Anthony J. Caristi
   ISBN  0-672-22485-2

I found it at a local electronics parts store.
It has introductory chapters on "phone wiring" princicples (basic)

The back of the book says "To order"
call 800-428-SAMS
They appear to accept all major credit cards.
Other projects included:
  - replace bell ringer with electronic ringer
  - broadcast phone conversation to nearby FM radio
  - CB telephone patch
  - hearing impaired lamp for ringer
  - 32 number memory
  - convert single phone into a two-line model
and others.
 As i said, not great examples of electronic design, but functional,
and possibly provide ideas or avenues-of-thinking for you.

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 88 17:19:46 PST
From: ll-xn!ucsd!pnet03.cts.com!merlin (Merlin Rhoda)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Second phone line



I recently decided to add a second line.  When I called them up, they
informed me that since this was the 4th line for this address (not me,
but the physical address), I would have to go onto a waiting list...
When that finally came around, they gave me my number, and sent me on my
way.....  A few days later I came home only to find a note on my door
saying that they had missed me, and that they needed my signtature in order
to do the installation. Since they hadn't needed it for the the first line,
I became suspicious, and called 'em...  They told me that in order to do
an under-ground (gasp!) line, they would have to do all sorts of digging
and such forth..  Yeah - I would want an underground line all of a sudden
although all the ther lines here are arial? hahaha.. I dont know where they
got that idea....  They were planning on tearing up the canyon near here to
install phone cable for just one line.. why cant they be willing to do this
when we want them to?  And sheesh - I almost let them, not realising what
they wanted... At least it all worked out fine in the end...

merlin rhoda

UUCP: crash!pnet01!pnet101!pnet03!merlin
INET: [e-mail]

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

To: unido!unido![e-mail]
From: unido!iaoobel![e-mail] (Dieter Woerz)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Question
Date: 18 Nov 88 01:04:36 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chuck Weinstock) writes:
>X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail] (USENET Telecom Moderator)
>
>If I call a number associated with a cellular phone, how does the
>cellular phone operator know which phone to ring and where it is.  I
>can think of two possible answers:
>
>1. Periodically each cellular phone emits a "here I am" which is
>   received by the nearest cells and recorded in a database.

Here in Germany, the cellular phones emit a "here I am" on
administartive frequency, which is associated with the Cell-sender,
they hear the best. Then the Cell-sender returns a short message on
that channel together with some data on how good the reception of the
phone is at the sender. On this channel the connect requests and the
frequency changes during a call, while talking with in one cell or
while changing cells are negociated. I think, this takes only a short
packet of binary data to be transmitted.


>2. When a call for a particular phone comes through all cells in the system
>   broadcast a "where are you" and the cellular phone responds.
>
>If anyone knows the details of the protocol used I'd appreciate
>hearing from them.
>
>Chuck Weinstock

Hope this helps

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

Dieter Woerz
Fraunhofer Institut fuer Arbeitswirtschaft und Organisation
Abt. 453
Holzgartenstrasse 17
D-7000 Stuttgart 1
W-Germany

BITNET: iaoobel.uucp![e-mail]
UUCP:   ...{uunet!unido, pyramid}!iaoobel!woerz

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

Date: Fri, 18 Nov 88 11:35:17 PST
From: Jordan Hayes <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: I need a second line...


    PacBell will put in a second line, if I want.

Last time I had a bunch of lines put in, my apt. was (obviously) not
wired for it.  I put in two 8-wire jacks next to each other, connected
with a 6" length of connectorized cable, and told them "bring me 3
lines" and it cost me the minimum $45 to do it, since they didn't have
to install jacks or anything, and i drilled a hole through the wall
near the jack for them to run the wire to.  It took the guy all day to
do the job (his dime, not mine) because the main block on the apt.
building did not have enough capacity, and there also wasn't enough
capacity from the box on the street to my apt. building.

"Do it yourself and save $$$"

/jordan

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Roger Haaheim)
Subject: Re: Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
Date: 17 Nov 88 14:26:43 GMT



Why doesn't she just control her daughter rather than the
phone line?

[Moderator's note: Roger raises a very good point, worthy of discussion
in a forum devoted to parent/child relationships. The horror stories in
the local media here (Chicago Tribune) when the Nine Hundred Service
Corporation first started operation were unbelievable. Illinois Bell
wound up writing off several *million* dollars in uncollectibles as a
good will gesture for parents who were stuck with phone bills typically
in the hundreds of dollars because of their inability to discipline and/
or control their children. Now the various Bells offer 976/1-900 blocking
on request. Why can't the parents handle this? **PLEASE** no response
to this mini-flame required....at least not here!  Patrick Townson]


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

To: [e-mail]
Subject: Octothorpe source
Date: 19 Nov 88 15:25:08 PST (Sat)
From: ucla-an!bongo![e-mail] (julian macassey)


    I am looking for an authoritative reference for the term
OCTOTHORPE.

    An octothorpe is an # , which is what is usually referred to
as "the pound sign" or "the hash mark", sometimes as "the number
symbol". I know the correct term is octothorpe, I have seen
references to it in some Bell docs, I have even seen a news
clipping years ago that mentioned it.

    My problem is that every now and again, some smart Alec asks
me where it comes from. I have even been accused of making it
up. No dictionary I have seen has ever given me a definition.
Yes I have looked it up in the 24 Volume Oxford English
Dictionary. I have checked the encyc Brit and alleged
Telecommunications Dictionaries.

    I do know that Octo means eight and Thorpe means beam. So the
word has some roots.

    There is a good term paper here for someone.

Yours Julian Macassey


--
Julian Macassey, n6are       julian@bongo   voice [phone]

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

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

From [e-mail]  Thu Nov 24 01:13:01 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA25809; Thu, 24 Nov 88 00:40:53 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 88  0:23:29 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #185
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 24 Nov 88  0:23:29 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 185

Today's Topics:

                        TV PAL/SECAM Convertors
              References needed for Signalling System #7
                        Re: Inside House Wiring
           Re: Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
                        Re: Nation wide paging
                        Remote Call Forwarding
                    CUE paging system (nationwide)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: [e-mail]
From: steve <mcvax!cs.kl.ac.uk![e-mail]>
Subject: TV PAL/SECAM Convertors
Date: 21 Nov 88 15:21:52 GMT




    Has anyone got design information , or the suppliers address of
low cost converters to enable SECAM recievers to accept PAL
transmissions?

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 88 14:40:05 EST
From: dcatla!sund![e-mail] (Jayant V. Ragde)
To: gatech!telecom
Subject: References needed for Signalling System #7


     I would like to learn about Signalling System #7 and
would like any pointers to any documents or books on this
subject.  I would appreciate any information.

     Thanks in advance,

Jayant Ragde    ..gatech!dcatla!enjvr   or  [e-mail]
Digital Communications Associates, Inc.
1000 Alderman Drive
Alpharetta, GA 30201

[Moderator's note: I suggest sending mail to this party since he does not
appear on our subscription list here. Send a copy of your reply here of
course for the rest of us. Thanks.  P. Townson]

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

To: [e-mail]
From: sultra![e-mail] (Der Tynan)
Subject: Re: Inside House Wiring
Date: 22 Nov 88 01:13:31 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>, roy@phri (Roy Smith) writes:
>
> [...]  What's somewhat surprising is that the cable runs through a
> closet in each apartment with a loop of the outer sheath cut away to expose
> the individual pairs for 6 or 8 inches.  I could tap anybody's phone
> (withing my vertical line) without leaving the comfort of my own home.

> Roy Smith, System Administrator

I found the same thing, when I recently had a second line installed.  I asked
the phone company technician about it, and he agreed.  He said, however, that
"most people don't know enough to be able to do anything with it".

Not only can you tap someone's phone (or vice versa), but you could make LD
calls on their ticket.
                        - Der
--
    [e-mail]  (Dermot Tynan @ Tynan Computers)
    {apple,mips,pyramid,uunet}!Tynan.COM!dtynan

 ---  If the Law is for the People, then why do we need Lawyers? ---

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 88 18:23:12 pst
From: Neal Woodall <daver!lynx![e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Need a device to prevent outgoing toll calls
Lines: 13


>Is there a device available which can be used to toll-restrict
>long-distance calls?  I have a friend whose daughter runs up bills of
>$500 per month.

Why doesn't she just tell her daughter to stop running up the phone bill? It
sounds to me like what she needs is to give her daughter a taste of some
kind of punishment, not some gadget to prevent outgoing phone calls.

BTW, things like this do exist, but I don't know where you can buy one.

Neal

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

From: fabscal![e-mail]
To: gatech!bu-cs.bu.edu!telecom
Date: Tue Nov 22 17:28:37 1988
Subject: re: Nationwide Paging
Lines: 43


>>Just reading the newspaper here and came across another one of those ads
>>for a NATION-WIDE paging service. [...] Surely the target receiver is not
>>paged all across the country...
>   Some companies do.
Most companies do.  I have used a couple of different nationwide paging
services.  The best working one was Cue system, which distributes the paging
data stream by satellite to a large number of cities.  In each of the cities,
the paging data stream is modulated on to a subcarrier of a large FM radio
station.  My pager would scan the FM band for a radio station with the
specific recognizable subcarrier and monitor the stream of data, listenening
for its number and page data.  If it couldn't find one, it would say so on
the display, so I would know I was out of range.

>
>>Does the person initiating the page need to know what city the receiver
>> is in ?
>   If paged in one city, yes. In return, you pay less for the page.
No, absolutely not.  You dialed an 800 number, entered the ID number of the
pager, and then entered the number you wanted displayed on the pager. All
pages go all places, but the data rate is good enough to handle it, plus
it buffers them up.  Sometimes, during busy parts of the day, a page could
wait in the queue for 15 or 20 minutes before going out.


>>What happens when the receiver is on board an airplane, high in the sky?
>   You lose. I think.

Well, that depends,...  I received quite a few pages while on cross country
flights.  The scanning action of the pager tends to lock on some FM station
it can find, and when it loses that one, it scans for another.  There are
dead spots, but it works pretty well.  Also, one of the technical folks for
the paging company told me that they actually send each page a couple of times
on 10 to 15 minute intervals, but that the pager can recognize a duplicate by
some undisplayed serial number, so it only beeps on the first hit of a given
page.  This way, a momentary dead spot doesn't wipe you out.


Alan Dorn Hetzel, Jr.
gatech.edu!fabscal!dorn


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

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 88 18:06:50 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: uunet!bu-cs.BU.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Remote Call Forwarding


I am involved in a trial for remote call forwarding in my area.  Bell
Atlantic calls the service "Ultra-Forwarding".  It allows me to dial a
number that answers with a computer voice, (sounds like a DEC-Talk).
The conversation goes like this:

I dial the remote access number which is a local number.

It answers and says:

"This is your remote access service, please use a touch tone telephone
only, you may now dial your home or office phone that has remote acces
service please dial now."

I dial my home phone number.

"The number you have dialed is nnn-nnnn, if this is correct, dial your
personal identification number if this is not correct dial the
asterisk (*) and enter a new number number."

I type my 4 digit PIN number.

"To active call forwarding dial 72#, to deactiveate call forwarding
dial 73#.  Please dial a feature code now."  (It pronounces the # as
"number sign".)

I dial 72#

"You have accessed the call fowarding activation feature, to confirm
this feature dial 1, to try a new feature dial 0 and another feature
code."

1

"This is your call forwarding service  please dial the number to
which you want your calls forwarded, if you must dial a 1 or an area code
to reach the number from your home or office then do so."

I dial the number I want my calls forwarded to.

"Your calls will be forwared to nnn-nnnn if this is correct dial 1 if
this is not correct dial 0 and enter a new number."

1

"Your request is being processed, please hold....please hold....please
hold....please hold....your calls will now be forwarded.  You may
hang up or dial another feature code now."

I hung up.

Currently the service is free as long as I have call forwarding.  It's
only available on certain exchanges in my area at the moment.

This all started when I order call forwarding and said, "boy, I sure
wish there was a way to remotely forward/unforward my phone".  The
customer service person told me that there was in certain areas.  She
proceeded to get me into the trial.  She did not know how much the
service would cost when it is actually marketed.

-Mike Grant



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

From: fabscal![e-mail]
To: gatech!bu-cs.bu.edu!telecom
Subject: CUE paging system (nationwide)
Date: Tue Nov 22 17:40:19 1988



I used this system for more than a year in 1986 and 1987 and found it
reasonably reliable and very usefull.  I was able to receive pages in
many cities and received quite a few while airborne cross country.
(I returned some of those from an Airfone, creating an interesting sort
of communication protocol)

Dorn


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

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

From [e-mail]  Fri Nov 25 00:36:36 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7)
    id AA28186; Fri, 25 Nov 88 00:36:36 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 88  0:20:38 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #186
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 25 Nov 88  0:20:38 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 186

Today's Topics:

                  Laser Beam  as a ethernet backbone
                         Re: Octothorpe source
                         Telephone restrictors
                           Toll Restriction
                    New Features For Custom Calling
                        Re: Cellular Phone Rates
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 23 Nov 88 00:14:34 GMT
To: ucdavis!comp-dcom-telecom
From: [e-mail] (James Kwong)
Subject: Laser Beam  as a ethernet backbone
Organization: California Department of Water Resources
Lines: 21


Laser Communications, Inc. sells a laser beam product that -
"Link Ethernet backbones atmospherically by laser beam to connect
site up to 1 kilometer apart without cables or FCC licensing".

The brochure says that speeds is  up to 10 megabits per second
in all weather. Low level output is harmless under even the
most unlikely operating conditions. The price is around $14,000
for two units.

Anyone has experience with this product or any similar
product that they might want to share with me.

Reply by e-mail would be fine.

Thanks

--
James Kwong  Calif. Depart. of H2O Resources, Sacramento, CA 95802
caldwr![e-mail](Internet) ...!ucbvax!ucdavis!caldwr!kwongj (UUCP)
The opinions expressed above are mine, not those of the State of California or the California Department of Water Resources.

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

To: [e-mail]
From: westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Octothorpe source
Date: 24 Nov 88 00:52:41 GMT



In article <[e-mail]>,(julian macassey) writes:
>
>     I am looking for an authoritative reference for the term
> OCTOTHORPE.
...
>     I do know that Octo means eight and Thorpe means beam. So the
> word has some roots.


      # #
      # #
    #######
      # #
    #######
      # #
      # #

Can't you see the eight beams here?

--
Dave Levenson
Westmark, Inc.        The Man in the Mooney
Warren, NJ USA
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave


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

To: telecom <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone restrictors
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 88 11:21:12 PST
From: [e-mail]


Original question:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Is there a device available which can be used to toll-
        restrict long-distance calls?  I have a friend whose
        daughter runs up bills of $500 per month.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response which barely addresses question, gives gratutitous advice, and
shows absolute lack of knowledge of dealing with chilren:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Why doesn't she just tell her daughter to stop running up the
      phone bill?  It sounds to me like what she needs is to give her
      daughter a taste of some kind of punishment, not some gadget to
      prevent outgoing phone calls.

      BTW, things like this do exist, but I don't know where you can buy
      one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Programmable restrictors are available, by mail order, from

    Comcor
    9 East 37th Street
    New York, NY 10016
    800-221-3085  (in New York: 212-481-4224)

They are item TS-1 in the Comcor catalogue and they list for $79.95,
plus shipping.  It is inserted in series with the telephone line
(preferably where it first enters the home) and serves any number of
phones on that line.  It runs on a 9-volt battery (in my experience the
standard mini 9-volt batteries, even alkaline, don't last much more
than a month)--I would try to rig up a supply using 6 alkaline D-cells
in series This should last for a couple of years.  One could also try a
rechargable 9-volt battery always connected to a charger--the problem is
that this may be unplugged by the person you are trying to limit.

It is programmable from any telephone connected to it.  It requires a
4-digit PIN (which can be changed by the user--a switch on the device
resets the PIN to the default).  You can "allow" certain prefixes,
disallow others, etc. in (seemingly) unlimited combinations.  It
contains an automatic dialer.  If you know the PIN you can, on a one-
call basis, completely override the device, without reprogramming it.

Problems:

1.  It is difficult, slow, fraught with errors, and time consuming to
    program.

2.  The manual contains ambiguities and unresolved situations.
    Determining what it does by trial and error is VERY time consuming.

3.  It only looks at the first 11 digits you dial.  This can be a
    problem if you use 10XXX dialing for other long-distance carriers
    (of course you can "allow" only one of these by, for example,
    disallowing 10XXX and then allowing 10288) or want to control
    certain long foreign-dialing sequences.

4.  To be secure it should be in a locked-box where the telephone line
    enters the home.  Such a box is NOT provided and is a nuisance to
    install.

5.  When the battery goes dead (which happens with no warning) it stops
    restricting.  It would be better if a dead battery disabled outgoing
    calls.

6.  It often creates difficulties for "legitimate" telephone users.

dgc

David G. Cantor
Department of Mathematics
University of California at Los Angeles
Internet:  [e-mail]
UUCP:      ...!{randvax, sdcrdcf, ucbvax}!ucla-cs!dgc

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

Date: Thu, 24 Nov 88 15:59:06 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Toll Restriction


One other solution to the problem of unwanted long distance calling is to have
the restriction done by telco in the central office. For example, when you
have service installed by Illinois Bell, you are requested to designate an LD
carrier. If you specifiy NONE (as opposed to simply not answering and being
defaulted to some company) then 1+ dialing will not work on your line. You
can still dial 10xxx+11D, but not a lot of folks are aware of this way to route
calls, and you as the owner of the line would just keep your mouth shut about
it. When no carrier is assigned here, calls via 1+ get re-order tone. Calls
via 0+11 digits also fail, as do calls to 00 (double zero). Naturally you can
go 10xxx plus 1 plus 10D or 10xxx plus 0 if the specified service has operators
to handle calls.

The success of this would depend on the lack of sophistication of the phone
user. Illinois Bell will also deny 10xxx calls if you request it. Other types
of restricted-use lines can be ordered here, but they are not advertised. You
have to specifically talk to a specialist at telco, and generally you have to
be a business subscriber instead of a residential subscriber, unless you can
give them a good reason for having the requested line treatment with  home
phone service.

Available are -
1) One way incoming line. NO outgoing calls. No dial tone on line.
2) Outgoing service only. Number for billing purposes only. If call is dialed
   to number, caller gets intercept "The number you dialed is not in service
   for incoming calls."
3) Long distance special billing calls only. NO local calls; no incoming calls.
   ALL outgoing calls MUST be made zero plus ten digits; even for local
   calls. This service is generally provided for inmate telephones in
   correctional centers. Typically the call must be made collect; no credit
   card numbers accepted and the operator IS aware of the caller's location.
4) No incoming or outgoing calls. Phone is only a local centrex extension and
   cannot place/receive calls from outside locations. A number is assigned
   for billing purposes, but caller gets intercept "The number you have dialed,
   123-456-7890 cannot be reached from outside the customer's premises."

Someone at IBT told me there will 'of of these days' be an arrangement where
all long distance calls must have a four digit trailing PIN, otherwise call
will be denied. It will be sort of like using a credit card but from your
home phone as an accounting code or security code to prevent unauthorized use.


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

Date: Thu, 24 Nov 88 16:18:29 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: New Features For Custom Calling


I've been told by a contact at IBT that some new features under consideration
for custom calling users here are as follows --

1) Music on hold for the person on the short end of the stick on your call
   waiting line. Choice of light classical music or pop. Nothing heavy. Cost
   will probably be fifty cents or one dollar per month.
2) Last number dialed, probably using *1. Redial those constant busies. Will
   probably cost $1 per month.
3) Call back when not busy. The dialed number is busy. Flash, dial *79 and
   hang up. Busy line will be tested periodically. When it is free, system
   will first ring you back and give you three or four rings before the call
   is abandoned. *After you answer* then system will automatically connect
   to desired number. Cost two or three dollars per month.
4) Reminder/wakeup service. Dial a code, and enter a four digit number
   followed by A or P, as in 0630A. Phone will ring at appointed time to
   wake you up, etc. Monthly charge plus *charge for each call*.
5) Store and Forward.  I cannot reach you (line busy, etc) and I cannot
   wait around any longer. Call the Store and Forward machine. Enter the
   desired number, and your voice message. Indicate if system is to attempt
   repeatedly if line is busy (every 15-20 minutes if line is DA) or if
   system is to deliver message at a specified time. When connection is made
   machine will announce a 'store and forwarded' call in its own voice,
   then play out your message in your own voice. Cost will be $8-10 per
   month. This machine will also be used as an answering machine or voice
   mailbox which you can forward to when out. Actually you will not call-
   forward to it in the conventional sense; but instead you will dial a
   two digit code like *77 which tells the central office to begin diverting
   you into the machine.

I wonder if anyone will actually subscribe to all these new services. They
sound like very attractive additions to custom calling.


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

To: [e-mail]
From: westmark![e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Rates, was Misc Cellular, was Roamer Validation
Date: 24 Nov 88 00:46:04 GMT



(Randal L. Schwartz @ Stonehenge) writes:
zodiac!jshelton@ames (John L. Shelton) writes:
> | Random question:  What are current cellular rates around the country?
...

New York City area, Non-wireline service:

    $29 per month
    $0.55 per minute daytime
    $0.35 per minute nights/weekends

This is the most popular rate.  There are others for high or low
volume users.

    Chargeable time begins when the called party answers, for
both incoming and outgoing calls.

--
Dave Levenson
Westmark, Inc.        The Man in the Mooney
Warren, NJ USA
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave


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

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

From [e-mail]  Wed Nov 30 21:01:49 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA29866; Wed, 30 Nov 88 21:01:49 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 88  0:23:56 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #187
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 29 Nov 88  0:23:56 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 187

Today's Topics:

                              Octothorpe
                         re: Octothorpe source
                         Re: Octothorpe source
                    Cordless Phone Recommendations
                 Re: Building your own phone projects
                          off-hook indicator
                   Converting T1 from #5 ESS to Analog

[Moderator's note: It has been a crazy couple of weeks. Jon Solomon has
experimented diligently with various versions of sendmail in an effort to
see to it that each of you receive one copy -- and one copy only -- of
the Digest. Our mailing list was so large the bu-cs send mail apparatus
belched everytime I logged on. We broke the large list down into many
smaller parts. Then, the sun.arpa > sun.com gateway apparently was out
of service for awhile. At least, we audited some copies going to Portal
and found they had sat in the gateway que for two days at a time.

Some machines are still disconnected from the net as a result of the
worm experience, and the end result of all this has been -- I'm almost
ashamed to say -- extremely poor and unreliable delivery of the Digest
since issue 180 until now. We received conflicting reports of delivery
on some issues (like 186), with Mailer-Daemon assuring us the copies had
NOT been delivered, only to remail them and find some of you got THREE
copies, etc.  For any of you where FTP can be used to aquire missing
issues, please use that method. FTP bu-cs.bu.edu and ls telecom-archives.
Then look at the file called telecom-recent. If you cannot FTP, then
let me know, and as time permits I will retransmit individual copies.

We -- jsol and I -- keep thinking this long nightmare is almost over. A
special program has been written to transmit the Digest beginning with
this issue we hope will do the job.             Patrick Townson]
---------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Octothorpe
Date: Sat, 26-Nov-88 09:52:20 PST


But...a # doesn't have eight beams...only 4...two really if you define
beam as being horizontal...just call it a pound sign...

which, I suppose, refers to some typewriter which have the British pound
sign over the 3...I just call it the number sign...I've also heard
it referred to as a ticktacktoe...

                            [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Repent! Godot is coming soon! Repent!)
Date: 28 Nov 88 14:17
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: re: Octothorpe source


According to legend, "octothorpe" is a name that the Bell people made
up for the # on the telephone keypad.  I suspect that they couldn't
agree as to whether it was a "pound sign", "sharp", or "number sign"
and eventually compromised (making everyone equally miserable).

Martin Minow
[e-mail]

[Moderator's question: I am wondering if our correspondent is related to
Newton Minow, well known FCC executive. Just curious. P. Townson]

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

To: [e-mail]
From: Henry Troup <bnr-fos!bnr-public!hwt>
Subject: Re: Octothorpe source
Date: 22 Nov 88 15:57:48 GMT



In article <[e-mail]> ucla-an!bongo![e-mail] (julian macassey) writes:
>
>    I am looking for an authoritative reference for the term
>OCTOTHORPE.
>
>Julian Macassey, n6are       julian@bongo   voice [phone]

I believe AT&T named the little beastie.  Anyone at AT&T wanted to
claim responsibility?

Henry Troup        utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!hwt%bnr-public | BNR is not
Bell-Northern Reseach   hwt@bnr (BITNET/NETNORTH)          | responsible for
Ottawa, Canada        [phone] (Voice)             | my opinions



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

Date: Fri, 25 Nov 88 14:56:18 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Cordless Phone Recommendations
Cc: [e-mail]




Can anyone make any recommendations on what moderately priced
cordless phone I should by?  My primary concerns are good voice quality
and hardware reliability, but a few extra features wouldn't hurt.
If you don't have any specific brand recommendations, maybe you can
tell me what features/capabilities to look for and why they are important.

I have seen an AT&T phone (model 4000 or 4100 I think) advertised locally
for about $80, but have no idea how good or bad it might be.  I would guess
that one of the less well-known brands might be cheaper, but I don't want
to get a lousy phone just to save $10-20.

Bruce Carlson
[e-mail]


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

Date: Mon, 28 Nov 88 04:13:08 EST
From: sco![e-mail]
To: uunet![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Building your own phone projects


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken Dykes) writes:
>Well, there is a book of do it yourself phone projects, while i personally
>consider simplistic and definetely dated on what ICs are available,
>will provide "functional" circuits for the above two problems and others
>toys.                   ok, so i cant spell definitely
>Its a "SAMS" project book.
>   SAMS  Electronic Telephone Projects, 2nd edition
>   by Anthony J. Caristi
>   ISBN  0-672-22485-2

Data books from IC manufacturers are another good source of
projects.  Many of them have "applications notes" containing
full schematics to illustrate the use of the chips they make.
The latest databook from Exar Corp. (2222 Qume Drive, San Jose,
CA 95131) has a circuit for a speakerphone using their
speakerphone IC, complete with schematic diagram, parts list,
and even a printed circuit board layout.  Also in the book
are full circuits for a pulse/touch tone phone, and several
modems.  Most databooks are free for the asking in single
quantities (Exar was handing out copies at a career fair).
Many IC makers also sell evaluation boards for engineers to
experiment with new chips.  This is a great way to experiment
with the latest technology.

Ross Oliver
uunet!sco!rosso


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

Date: Mon, 28 Nov 88 15:34:04 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: off-hook indicator


Dave Horsfall in Australia was kind enough to air-mail me a schematic
he found in a magazine called Silicone Chip.  The design is by John Clark
in the November 1987 issue.

It's totally line powered.  When an extension is off hook, it makes an
LED flash.  (At least that's what he claims it does on the Australian
phone network!  It looks like it'll work in the USA too.)

            D1-D4 (4) 1N4004                                          LED1
    +-------------+         +--------+--------+                       HB
    |             |         |        |    R4  >                +------->|--+
    o      +-->|--+-->|--+  |        |    10K >               6|           |
 Phone     |             |  |        |        >            +------+    R5  >
    o   +--+             +--+   R3   >        +--------+---|      |    560 >
    |   |  |             |  |   470K >        |        |  5|      |8       >
    |   |  +-->|--+-->|--+  |        >   ZD2  ~ C1     |+  | IC1  |--------+
    |   |         |         |        |   3.3V ^ 220uF ---  | LM   |  C2    |
    +-------------+     ZD1 ~        |        | 16VW  ---  | 3909 |  47uF ---
        |               12V ^        |        |        |  4|      |  16VW ---
        |                   |        | Q2    C+--------+---|      |        |+
        |                   |        | BC550|/         |   +------+        |
        |               R1  >        +------|          |      2|           |
        |              470K > Q1    C|     B|\         |       +-----------+
        |                   > BC549|/        Ev    ZD3 ~
        |                   +------|          |    56V ^
        |              R2   >     B|\         |        |
        |              120K >       Ev        |        |
        |                   >        |        |        |
        +-------------------+--------+--------+--------+

Parts List:
  IC1: LM3909 LED flasher/oscillator
  LED1: High Brightness Red LED                       ---
  Q1: BC549 NPN transistor                           /EBC\
  Q2: BC550 NPN transistor                           -----
  ZD1: 12V zener diode                            Bottom View
  ZD2: 3.3V zener diode                          of Transistor
  ZD3: 56V zener diode
  D1-D4: 1N4004 silicone diodes
  C1: 220uF 16VWW PC electrolytic capacitor
  C2: 47uF 16VW PC electrolytic capacitor
  R1: 470Kohm 1/4W resistor
  R2: 120Kohm 1/4W resistor
  R3: 470Kohm 1/4W resistor
  R4: 10Kohm 1/4W resistor
  R5: 560ohm 1/4W resistor

Notes:
  When an extension is off hook, the IC charges and discharges C2
flashing the LED.

  The article recommends that no more than 3 of these be used on a
phone line due to current draw.  "Current drain of each indicator is
around 200 microamps when all phones are 'on-hook' (ie with phone line
voltage at 50V).  With any phone 'off-hook' the current drain of each
indicator ranges from around 700 microamps at 9V to around 200
microamps at 2.5V."

  The articles also notes that no substitues should be used in place
of Q2, the BC550 transistor.  "This type has been specified to give
high current gain together with a high collector-emitter voltage rating."

  I have not tried this yet.  As usual, build this device at your own
risk.  Thanx to all those who replied to my first posting for info.

-Mike Grant

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

Date: Mon, 28 Nov 88 16:45:58 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Grant)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Configuring T1 Trunks from #5 ESS > Analog


Well, I just had C&P telephone solve my repetitive problem for me.
Once I got in touch with the right person, (a trunk trouble shooter),
it was easy.  He tells me that the problem presents itself when you
have a T1 trunk that goes from a #5 ESS all digital central office
into an analog central office.  The problem presents itself when they
forget to install, or improperly configure a board in the T1 carrier
system equipment (this is not the analog switch, but before the
switch) called an "OIU board".  He didn't know what OIU stood for, but
he tells me that it's fairly standard telco terminology.  He said that
this board provides the clocking for the link going from the analog
office to the digital office.  Without the board, the T1 carrier
system uses a different clocking source (presumably an internal clock
within the T1 equipment) which is not always quite in sync with the
correct source.  That's why things appear to work ok for voice, but
not for data.

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

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

From [e-mail]  Wed Nov 30 21:24:24 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA00832; Wed, 30 Nov 88 21:24:24 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 88 21:09:12 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #188
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 30 Nov 88 21:09:12 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 188

Today's Topics:

                      Cellular Follow Me Roaming

[Moderator's Note: I was pleased to receive a letter from George Gobel
discussing at length the handling of cellular calls for motorists who
are 'roaming' or out of their home region. This special issue of the
Digest is devoted entirely to Mr. Gobel's report, which includes an up
to date list of cities available.   Patrick Townson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 88 10:24:35 EST
From: [e-mail] (George Goble)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Follow Me Roaming


>>A few cellular service providers now offer to let the roamer dial a
>>call-forwarding-like feature access code from a roaming area, and
>>have calls forwarded there, by the home system, at the roamer's
>>expense.  This will probably become the standard.

>Can you please provide examples of carriers who have actually implemented
>this?  I certainly hope this does not become the standard; it's not very
>good human engineering to require the cellular user to "do something" whenever
>crossing from one system to another, or when getting off a plane in another
>city or when returning to the home city.

>Unless special trunks are installed between the two systems,the call-forwarded
>call will probably have to be routed by the existing roamer access ports,which
>go off-hook even when you don't answer. If this "follow-me" forwarding becomes
>the standard, lots of people are going to be annoyed by charges for unknown
>incomplete calls.  Can you imagine how annoyed you would be if you had set up
>follow-me forwarding, and then went into a poor service area.  Someone starts
>persistently trying to call you on your home number, which is forwarded to you
>via the roamer port.  They get charged for n calls to your number, even though
>you didn't answer (and they didn't know they were getting charged on a number
>with no answer), and you get charged for n long-distance calls from your home
>system to the roamer access port.  And none of them completed calls.

A couple of years ago, the roamer ports used to not go off hook until
the cell phone answered, but the operating companies (not the cell companies)
bitched so much, that they were changed into going off hook before
entering the roamer number.  I have recently talked to 3 cellular salesman,
and all of them said a call to a roamer port was "free" until the
cellular phone answered, which is incorrect. Two of them are not
selling cellular phones anymore.

The "follow-me" roaming was developed by GTE Mobilnet, Houston TX.
It is being licensed to others (Ameritec calls it "Fast Track").
GTE offers it for no monthly charge, ATT charges $5.00 or so
extra/month.

It isn't available everywhere yet, but it is spreading.

Here is the fall 88 status of Follow Me Roaming I got from GTE

MSA    CITY        STATE    OPERATOR    STATUS    ACTIVATE/DEACTIVATE
249    Anniston    AL    BMI        NOV88    *18/*19
 41    Birmingham    AL    BMI        NOV88    *18/*19
272    Gadsden        AL    BMI        NOV88    *18/*19
120    Huntsville    AL    BMI        NOV88    *18/*19
222    Tuscaloosa    AL    BMI        NOV88    *18/*19
 92    Little Rock    AR    ALLTEL        JAN89    *18/*19
126    Salinas-Seaside    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
126    Monterey    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
 27    San Jose    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
  7    San Francisco    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
  7    Oakland        CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
124    Santa Barbara    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
175    Santa Cruz    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
123    Santa Rosa    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
123    Petaluma    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
111    Vallejo-Napa    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
111    Fairfield    CA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
211    Bradenton    FL    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
137    Cocoa-Melbourne    FL    BMI        UP    *18/*19
137    Titusville    FL    BMI        UP    *18/*19
146    Daytona Beach    FL    BMI        UP    *18/*19
164    Ft. Meyers    FL    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
208    Ft. Pierce    FL    USCC        OCT88    *18/*19
192    Gainsville    FL    ALLTEL        JAN89    *18/*19
 51    Jacksonville    FL    BMI        UP    *18/*19
114    Lakeland    FL    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
 12    Miami        FL    BMI        UP    *18/*19
 12    Ft. Lauderdale    FL    BMI        UP    *18/*19
245    Ocala        FL    ALLTEL        JAN89    *18/*19
 60    Orlando        FL    BMI        UP    *18/*19
167    Sarasota    FL    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
 22    Tampa        FL    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
 72    West Palm Beach    FL    BMI        UP    *18/*19
261    Albany        GA    ALLTEL        FEB89    *18/*19
234    Athens        GA    BMI        UP    *18/*19
 17    Atlanta        GA    BMI        UP    *18/*19
138    Macon        GA    BMI        UP    *18/*19
 50    Honolulu    HI    GTEM        DEC88    *18/*19
217    Anderson    IN    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
282    Bloomington    IN    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
223    Elkhart-Goshen    IN    UTS        OCT88    *18/*19
 96    Ft. Wayne    IN    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
 28    Indianapolis    IN    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
271    Kokomo        IN    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
247    Lafayette    IN    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
236    Muncie        IN    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
129    South Bend    IN    UTS        OCT88    *18/*19
185    Terre Haute    IN    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
116    Lexington    KY    BMI        OCT88    *18/*19
116    Fayette        KY    BMI        OCT88    *18/*19
 37    Louisville    KY    BMI        OCT88    *18/*19
 80    Baton Rouge    LA    BMI        OCT88    *18/*19
174    Lafayette    LA    BMI        OCT88    *18/*19
 29    New Orleans    LA    BMI        OCT88    *18/*19
  5    Detroit        MI    AMCI        UP    *18/*19
 68    Flint        MI    AMCI        UP    *18/*19
278    Columbia    MO    USCC        DEC88    *18/*19
163    Springfield    MO    ALLTEL        FEB89    *18/*19
106    Jackson        MS    ALLTEL        JAN89    *18/*19
 61    Charlotte    NC    ALLTEL        JAN89    *18/*19
 52    Akron        OH    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
 87    Canton        OH    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
 23    Cincinnati    OH    AMCI        UP    *18/*19
 16    Cleveland    OH    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
 40    Dayton        OH    AMCI        UP    *18/*19
145    Hamilton    OH    AMCI        UP    *18/*19
145    Middletown    OH    AMCI        UP    *18/*19
158    Lima        OH    UTS        OCT88    *18/*19
136    Lorain-Elyria    OH    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
231    Mansfield    OH    UTS        OCT88    *18/*19
180    Springfield    OH    AMCI        UP    *18/*19
 48    Toledo        OH    UTS        OCT88    *18/*19
 66    Youngstown    OH    UTS        UP    *18/*19
260    Lawton        OK    USCC        NOV88    211/311
 45    Oklahoma City    OK    SWBM        OCT88    211/311
 57    Tulsa        OK    USCC        DEC88    211/311
 30    Portland    OR    GTEM        DEC88    *18/*19
148    Salem        OR    GTEM        DEC88    *18/*19
130    Erie        PA    GTEM        UP    *18/*19
238    Sharon        PA    UTS        UP    *18/*19
 95    Columbia    SC    BMI        NOV88    *18/*19
264    Florence    SC    BMI        NOV88    *18/*19
 88    Chattanooga    TN    BMI        UP    *18/*19
209    Clarksville    TN    BMI        UP    *18/*19
209    Hopkinsville    TN    BMI        UP    *18/*19
 36    Memphis        TN    BMI        UP    *18/*19
 46    Nashville    TN    BMI        UP    *18/*19
220    Abilene        TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
188    Amarillo    TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
 75    Austin        TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
101    Beaumont    TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
101    Port Arthur    TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
162    Brownsville    TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
162    Harlington    TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
287    Bryan        TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
287    College Station    TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
112    Corpus Christi    TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
  9    Dallas        TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
  9    Ft. Worth    TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
170    Galveston    TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
170    Texas City    TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
 10    Houston        TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
160    Killeen-Temple    TX    CENTEL        OCT88    211/311
206    Longview    TX    UTS        OCT88    211/311
206    Marshall    TX    UTS        OCT88    211/311
161    Lubbock        TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
128    McAllen        TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
295    Midland        TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
255    Odessa        TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
294    San Angelo    TX    W.CENT.CELL    OCT88    211/311
 33    San Antonio    TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
292    Sherman-Denison    TX    SWBM        UP    211/311
240    Texarkana    TX    Century        DEC88    211/311
237    Tyler        TX    UTS        OCT88    211/311
300    Victoria    TX    GTEM        UP    211/311
194    Waco        TX    CENTEL        OCT88    211/311
233    Wichita Falls    TX    USCC        OCT88    211/311

Note: The lack of L.A., Chicago, New York, SanDiego, etc.

How it works:
One has to the have call forwarding feature on his home service.
Upon entering the roaming area, the user dials "*18", gets a
series of beeps (Indy GTE, Cincinatti Ameritech), or a steady
800HZ tone (Miami, BellSouth), and hangs up (actually "END")
The roamer's MTSO (cellular switch) contacts the roamer's home
MTSO via dialup or GTE Telenet. A "temporary number" is setup
in the roamer's MTSO (not the roamer port #), and is passed back to
the home MTSO.  The home MTSO sets call forwarding (*72+temp number)
to this temp number.  The roaming MTSO calls the cell phone back in
5 to 10 mins to let him know everything has been setup.

Calls to the home cell phone number are transferred to the
remote temp number, and there is (currently) no charge if the roaming
phone does not answer or is out of range (wonder how long it will
be before the operating companies begin to bitch?)

Toll charges are handled by the home MTSO, show up as "FMR" (GTE)
on the bill and seem quite reasonable (.20/min from Indy to Miami
during peak). There is no "air time" charge in the home MTSO,
and the roamer gets hit with the standard local roaming charges.

To cancel, do a "*19", or return to home area and cancel
call forwarding (*720). One can roam in another area and
*18 there without *19'ing in the first area. Everything
times out at midnight (roamer's timezone) (was actually
12:10 AM or so) and cancels itself.. so another *18 is needed.
Some systems use 211/311 instead of *18/*19.

I think the whole system runs on a Compaq or similar PC.

Bugs and annoyances:
When FMR is canceled or times out, the original state of
the home call forwarding is not restored, it is cleared.
(I let GTE know my thoughts on that). I set my local cell
phone number to forward-on-no-answer to go to the voice mail
system (GTE Mobilnet has that also now). Call *9 or
call forward to *9 to get it. (no charge except airtime)
When the *18 comes in, calls go the roamer, but upon
leaving the roaming area, there is no fowarding to
voicemail to cover you until you enter the home area again.
It would be nice if the home MTSO had a landline number
(using your voice mail password) to let you set/clear
call forwarding (and voice mail) on your cell number
while out of town.

I got an airtime charge "incoming call" for the confirmation
call after doing a *18 at the Cincinatti Ameritech system.

It took over a day to get FMR working on my phone after a recent
trip (10/10/88) to Miami. Got the conf tone, but no callback.
Everything else was ok..Even 1+ dialing worked. (Cellmaps shows
this carrier, BellSouth Mobility, wireline, needs a credit
card for Roamers). FMR had only been up for a week then. Cust
service told me only 16 FMR's were possible in Miami! (B.S.??)
but still did not work when I *18'd right after midnight. Ended
up calling engineering at the Indy MTSO who
found the guy who wrote the code for FMR and had him talk to
chief engr at the Miami MTSO and things got fixed real quick then.

Turns out somebody had typo'd the "317" NPA in the MTSO.
After FMR worked, 1+ dialing didn't. Had to use 0+ instead
+ credit card. Cust svc said 1+ should never have worked.
I was billed normal DDD toll rates for the 1+ calls there.
Did notice the about 1/2 of the calls made to 317 NPA,
were listed as 305 (Miami) but NXX-YYYY were correct, and the
billing computer printed "Roamer call" instead of the correct
city where the NXX was not legal under 305! (but legal under 317)

As John says, it would be nice if the subscriber didn't have to do all
this..(like talking to Chief engineers, and finding the guy who
implemented FMR and getting him to beat on the roaming MTSO)
--ghg

Geo. Goble, Electrical Engineering, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN 47907
ARPA: [e-mail]  UUCP: {backbone}!pur-ee!ghg Phone: [phone]

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

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

From [e-mail]  Wed Nov 30 22:42:33 1988
Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (4.0/4.7)
    id AA03985; Wed, 30 Nov 88 22:42:33 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 88 22:07:38 EST
From: The Moderator <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #189
To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 30 Nov 88 22:07:38 EST    Volume 8 : Issue 189

Today's Topics:

                  AT&T's Call Delivery System Tested
                       Switched 56kbps services
                    Other Custom Calling Suggestions
                 Re: Laser Beam  as a ethernet backbone
                         Hyatt Signs With AT&T
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue 29 Nov 88 14:26:03-CST
From: Clive Dawson <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T's Call Delivery System Tested
To: [e-mail]


I've been meaning to tell you folks about this for sometime now, but
the message from our moderator about the store-and-forward feature
mentioned by Illinois Bell has finally prodded me into action.

My sister in Minneapolis was chosen to participate in a test-market
evaluation of ATT's new Call Delivery System.  By using her calling
code number, I've been able to play with this system from Texas.
Here's how it works:

    1.  Dial the 800 number which gives you access to the system.
    2.  Punch in your calling code.
    3.  The system asks whether you want to send a new message or
        review the status of previous messages.  (Press 0 or 1).
    4.  To send a new message, enter the area code and number of
        the destination.
    5.  Choose whether the message will be delivered to whoever
        answers, or whether you want personalized delivery (in this
        case, you are given a chance to speak the name of the person
        you want to reach, and when delivery is attempted, a human
        attendant will verify that the person is available before
        your message is delivered.)
    6.  Choose the date/time that you wish delivery to begin,
        and how long you want the attempts to continue.  (Default
        is NOW + 2 hours.  Anything other than the default is
        punched in via the keypad.
    7.  Choose whether you want the person to be able to record a
        1-minute response.
    8.  If so, choose whether you want this message to be delivered
        back to you.  If so, provide the call back number.  If not,
        you can still hear the response by dialing in later and
        checking the satus of your previous messages.
    9.  Record your message.

All in all this is pretty nice system, although they have several kinks
that will need to be ironed out.  The procedure outlined above is VERY
tedious, especially after you know what's going on.  Each item of info
is laboriously repeated, giving you a chance to confirm it ("We heard...
If this is correct, press 1; otherwise, press 0.")  Fortunately you
can "type ahead", although this sometimes messes up the default choices.

Delivery of the message happens like this:  when you answer, a voice
identifies ATT Call Delivery Service, and announces the message,
which is played twice.  (This is sometimes VERY aggravating.  It's
useful if you need to copy down and verify some information, but
there is no way to abort the second playing if you got it all the
first time.  Then, if the sender has chosen to let you record a response,
you are given a chance to do that.  If delivery is to a particular
person, a human attendant will ask whether X is available, where X is
the actual recording of the sender's voice speaking the recipient's
name.  When X comes to the phone, the message is played.  [We used
this feature in an interesting way:  my mother was in the hospital,
and we requested personalized delivery to "Room 635".  It worked fine.]

Calling in to check the status of previous messages works like this:
After dialing the 800 number and providing your calling code, you
press 0.  Each message that you (or anybody else using that calling
code) has recorded in the last 24 hours will be mentioned.  You will
be told whether the message was delivered, whether delivery is still
pending, or whether delivery failed within the specified window.  If a
response was recorded, you will hear it as well.  (Note that if you
requested a call-back, you will receive a phone call telling you of
any success or final failure, so the only reason for checking status
is to find out about messages which are still pending.)  Messages are
dealt with in reverse chronological order, and you can press # to skip
to the next message at any time.  We discovered a cute way to make use
of the status feature, useful when two people who are on the move need
to communicate.  Person A delivers a dummy message to him/herself.
When the dummy message is delivered, person A records a response which
is actually the REAL message intended for person B.  Person B can then
call the 800 number to check on the status of messages, and hear the
intended message.  (Note that original messages are not heard during
the status session; only responses are.)  This is all rather tedious,
but there have been times when this has come in very useful.

I've had a lot of fun with this system for the last 3 months or so,
in spite of the human interface problems which will hopefully get
solved in the production version.

Of course the whole thing has been totally free up to now.  I'll be
very interested to see how much they will actually charge for it when
the system becomes globally available.

Cheers,

Clive

P.S.  Anybody who wants more info should dial 1-800-33-TRIAL.
-------

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

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Brian Jay Gould)
Subject: Switched 56kbps services
Date: 29 Nov 88 16:14:30 GMT



I'm trying to get some information on switched 56kbps services
both by inter and intra-lata carriers.  I dn't think anyone
is using ISDN (right?), so the first question is..

1) How do they initiate a call?
   via keypad?
   AT command set?
   separate port into DSU?

I suspect that in most (all?) cases a dedicated link is
required between the CO and the customer.

2)  What kind of link is it?
   56kbps digital?
   64kbps digital?
   T1 required?

I check the group, but direct E-mail would also be appreciated.


==>  Any disclaimers made by me or anyone on my behalf, may or may not
accurately represent my failure to be representing myself or others.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Brian Jay Gould  :: INTERNET [e-mail]  BITNET gould@jvncc  -
-                     UUCP rutgers!njin!gould  Telephone [phone] -
- Sterling Software   220 Carnegie Center      Princeton, NJ  08540     -
------------------------------------------------------------------------s

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

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 88 03:07:46 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Other Custom Calling Suggestions


In response to the Moderator's list of possible/potential/rumored/planned new
phone services...

I have heard of most of those at one time or another from Bell people...
two others I heard tossed around quite a bit were call blocking (you
dial a code and can block out a certain number, or the person who called
you last (as in the case of a prank call where you don't know their
number..).  Supposed to cost $3-$5 per month plus fee for each # blocked),
and a deal where if you just miss a phone call (towel up and get out of
the shower and it stops ringing, you dial a code and it calls them back).

Looks like both of these would require for your exchange to know where
the call came from...  Way things are these days, it'll probably be
quite a while before we see some of these (pointless?) services.

-

How come some months my MCI and Sprint (I have one on each line) bills
come from the respective carriers, and other months they come on Michigan
Bell stationery with my regular bill?  The MCI one has become pretty
consistent, but the Sprint one has been frittering back and forth
for some months now.

Miguel Cruz
Miguel [e-mail]
University of Michigan

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


Date: Wed, 30 Nov 88 14:15:12 EST
From: cs.utexas.edu!iuvax.cs.indiana.edu!bsu-cs!dhesi (Rahul Dhesi)
To: cs.utexas.edu!texbell!vector!telecom
Subject: Re: Laser Beam  as a ethernet backbone
Organization: CS Dept, Ball St U, Muncie, Indiana

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Laser Communications, Inc. sells a laser beam product that -
>"Link Ethernet backbones atmospherically by laser beam to connect
>site up to 1 kilometer apart without cables or FCC licensing".

The FCC controls all broadcasting.  The difference between a beam of
light and a shortwave transmission is just the frequency (wavelength).

Does the Communications Act, or other legislation that gives the FCC
authority over broadcasting, specify the frequency beyond which the FCC
has no jurisdiction?  If not, shining any beam of light, unless
specifically authorized by the FCC, is probably illegal.  Not only
outdoor lasers, but also automobile headlights, are probably in
violation.
--
Rahul Dhesi         UUCP:  <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi


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

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 88 22:06:05 EST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Hyatt Signs With AT&T

A press release I received today says that Hyatt Hotels Corporation got tired
of listening to complaints from guests about the outrageous cost of phone
calls made through the <A>lternate <O>perator <S>ervice outfit which had been
serving the entire chain, and they dumped them effective immediatly in favor
of AT&T.

Gordon Kerr, vice president for management information systems at Hyatt's
corporate offices stated, "The reality is that the service was only [of]
acceptable to poor quality, there were often times delays in putting calls
through, and the charges were, frankly, outrageous."

Kerr went on to say that guests had complained repeatedly. He noted that
critics of the hotel industry especially dislike the way hotels try to make
a profit center out of their telephone service. He said the AOS companies,
"...mislead us to think that guests would receive good telephone service, and
pay no more than they do with AT&T......when they signed us up they did say
we would get 15-17 percent commission from their revenues on a fee basis.....
they said AT&T was a 'rip off'...."

Hyatt management said the increased commission was attractive (AT&T and local
Bell Companies do pay commissions to hotels, but less than what is offered
by the AOS'), but the press release concluded, "....we decided the level of
service offered, and the average 60 percent markup over AT&T was not acceptable
to us or our guests, whom we value. We are not going to subject our guests to
this any longer, so we have asked AT&T to take over, and have signed a contract
covering all of our properties nationwide."
                     ============================

An inquiry locally found that the conversion is in progress now; all Hyatt
properties will be routed through AT&T operators at AT&T prices by the end
of the year.

One by one, the prodigal children all return to the fold don't they? All the
bulljive in the world about 'AT&T rip-offs' and expensive service just does
not wash in the end. Next time you need to make a hotel reservation, you
might want to choose a place (like Hyatt) where you can make calls from your
room at a reasonable price.

See ya next time!
Patrick


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

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