Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1990.volume.10/vol10.iss401-450

Text File | 1990-06-23 | 920KB | 22,677 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24302;
          1 Jun 90 3:24 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa02599;
          1 Jun 90 1:28 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13466;
          1 Jun 90 0:23 CDT
Date:     Thu, 31 May 90 23:36:19 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #401
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 31 May 90 23:35:49 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 401

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Caller ID in Pennsylvania [TELECOM Moderator]
    TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line [Hank Nussbacher]
    British Telecom Pricing [Clive Carmock]
    Telephone Facility Management System [Craig A. Brown]
    Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Gabor [TELECOM Moderator]
    Three Lines in Residence [Alonzo Gariepy]
    Cincinnati Bell Ice-9 [Harvey Newstrom]
    One Ringer, N Phones [Otto Miller]
    Re: Why Texas Air Uses So Much Phone Service [John R. Levine]
    Re: Sprint WD40 Promotion [Henry Mensch]
    Re: 10XXX Bugs [Jon Baker]
    Unusual Telephone Service Call [Jody Kravitz]
    More ATM Stories (was Re: Last Laugh!) [Paul S. R. Chisholm]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 22:12:12 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID in Pennsylvania


Here at TELECOM Digest headquarters, I am getting *flooded* with
messages on the latest court ruling regards Caller*ID in Pennsylvania.
As everyone of you must know by now, a court there has ruled it is
illegal. The messages are coming in heavily ...

A special issue of the Digest this weekend will be devoted to those
messages. Watch for it probably Saturday afternoon or evening
sometime.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 10:47:32 P
From: Hank Nussbacher <[e-mail]>
Subject: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line


Bell Colorado has signed an agreement with the Ministry of
Telecommunications in the USSR to build a $500 million dollar trans
Siberian fiber optic line.  The line will be 13,000km long and will
support 565Mb between Japan and the USSR.  The line is expected to
become operational in 1994.  A special company has been set up called
Soviet Line Development Company.  The problem is that most of the
equipment is Cocom proscribed which Bell Colorado is trying to work
around.  Denmark, Britian, Italy, West Germany, Japan, Australia and
the USA have all backed this project.

There are expected to be three "branches" off of the Trans-Siberian cable:

1) To Copenhagen via the Baltic Sea
2) To Czechoslovakia and central Europe
3) To Italy via the Black Sea

The 565Mb is the first stage with stage two increasing the capacity to
2.5Gb and stage 3 to 10Gb.  ITU documents indicate that this will be
the longest fiber optic cable in the world.

Most of the cable will be laid along the Trans-Siberian rail.

West Germany has also informed the ITU that it too is building a fiber
link to Moscow - Frankfort-Berlin-Warsaw-Moscow.  There is a
possibility that it will connest to TSL with a spur off to Prague.
The German cable will cost $60 million and is called Centrale Strecke.

All this is to be a great leap forward for Russia.  Today, the only
fiber link they have is between Leningrad and Minsk running in
single-mode at 140Mb (most telecommunications fiber today is multimode
and is 1.7Gb).  That link is only 100km long.


Hank Nussbacher
Israel

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

From: Clive Carmock <[e-mail]>
Subject: British Telecom Pricing
Date: 31 May 90 20:36:28 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept. - University of Exeter. UK


I hear a rumour that BT is about to change their tarrifs for phone
lines.  I wonder if anyone could confirm or deny what I've heard:

Line installation will rise to 300 pounds.  Line rental will increase
by 25%, and Directory Enquiries will be charged for very soon.


Thanks,

C. Carmock
([e-mail])

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 15:55:40 CDT
From: "Craig A. Brown" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Facility Management System


My campus is looking into telephone facility management systems (TFMS;
call accounting, billing, cable/equipment tracking, etc, or parts
thereof) to upgrade the services offered by our campus telephone
office.

We anticipate utilizing a Novell-based LAN in the telephone office
itself, with a TCP/IP gateway to an IBM 4381 running CICS under MVS.

I would like to get information about any public domain TFMS that
might be available for LAN or mainframe based environments (or both).
If you know of any possibilities, please send me an e-mail.

Thanks in advance for your help.


Craig A. Brown
University of Arkansas
Office of Business Affairs
Adminstration Building Suite 321
Fayetteville, AR  72701
[phone]

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 22:32:36 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor


According to the {Washington Post}, Mitchell Kapor, inventor of Lotus
1-2-3, is considering backing a national effort to defend computer
hackers against prosecution resulting from Operation Sun Devil, a
two-year investigation of potential computer fraud.  The Secret
Service said the hackers who were the target of the probe are
individuals who had gained unauthorized access to company computer
systems -- including one at AT&T -- or had stolen and distributed
software programs that belonged to major corporations.  Kapor said he
thinks the government probe has been misdirected and damaging to
technological innovation and to dissemination of information.  Gary J.
Jenkins, assistant director of the Secret Service, said, "We will
continue to investigate aggressively those crimes which threaten to
disrupt our nation's business and government services."

Maybe if Mr. Kapor had his Lotus 1-2-3 ripped off good he might change
his tune. Anyone know other projects of his we might steal and start
handing out freely around the net?  After all, we wouldn't want to
'damage technological innovation or dissemination of information' now
would we? Please keep his attitude on this serious problem in mind the
next time you use or consider purchasing his software. If you can't
find a way to steal it outright, then borrow a pirated copy from
someone else.


PT

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

From: microsoft![e-mail]
Date: Wed May 30 21:02:09 1990
Subject: Three Lines in Residence
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA


I have a friend in Toronto, Ontario who wants to have three telephone
lines in her apartment, each with its own answering machine.  Two of
the lines will only be answered by machine.  The third is her personal
line.  The lines will have different answering messages.

Are there any angles here with respect to lines that are answered only
by machine?  Can anyone suggest some good (cheap) hardware that would
help to satisfy these requirements?  I suppose an answering service is
an option, but I expect it would be more expensive and less efficient
than a machine.  Does Bell offer machine-answered lines that are
cheaper and do not require extra circuits to the house (i.e., you call
up and retrieve messages with tone codes)?

What are the appropriate rules with regard to residence vs. commercial
lines?  One of the lines is for a non-profit charitable organization
and the other for a very small consulting business.

I can no longer keep up with the volume of the group, so I would like
any advice you can give me via email (uunet!microsoft!alonzo).  I will
summarize information of general usefulness to the net.

Thanks,

Alonzo Gariepy
alonzo@microsoft

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

From: [e-mail] (Harvey Newstrom)
Subject: Cincinnati Bell Ice-9
Date: 31 May 90 20:09:11 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Harvey Newstrom)
Organization: Harris Electronic_Systems Telecommunications Network_Engineering


I have been asked to come up with a solution to our cable plan
management problems.  One of the suggested solutions is a product
called Ice-9 from Cincinnati Bell.  According to the sales propaganda,
it does what we want.

Does anyone have experience with this product?  How well does it perform?
Any information at all would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance.


Harvey Newstrom   ([e-mail])   (uunet!x102c!hnewstrom)

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 08:55:49 EDT
From: Otto Miller <[e-mail]>
Subject: One Ringer, N Phones


I have a need in a high noise envirnment (my workshop... compressor,
saw, etc) that I am served by two residential lines.  I would like a
single loud ringer driven by both lines just to get my attention.  Any
ideas?  Thank you in advance!


                                       Sincerely,
Reachable by:                          Otto L. Miller
[e-mail]
       - or -
[e-mail]

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

From: "John R. Levine" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Why Texas Air Uses So Much Phone Service
Date: Thu, 31 May 90 02:28:57 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Segue Software, Cambridge MA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Will
Martin) writes:

>"Texas Air" is the holding company that owns not only the airline by
>that name, but also New York Air, Continental, and TWA.  ...
>Also, Northwest merged its reservations system into TWA's, so all those
>airlines' phone usage is merged under the "Texas Air" entry.

Texas Air operates Eastern, Continental, and a few small regional
carriers.  Their CRS is named System One.  TWA still belongs to Carl
Icahn, and TWA's CRS, which is indeed jointly owned with Northwest, is
called PARS.  It is unlikely that Texas Air could buy TWA even if they
wanted to, they're in hock up to their eyebrows.

On the other hand, AMR, the parent company of American Airlines, owns
a CRS called Sabre, which is used by a lot more travel agents than
System One or PARS is.  UAL, parent of United Airlines jointly owns a
CRS called Apollo.  AMR is somewhat larger than Texas Air in assets,
sales, and number of employees.  UAL is larger in sales, about the
same in assets and employees.  It's hard to believe that Texas Air has
a larger telecom budget than either UAL or AMR does.

I suspect that since there is no standard way to measure the size of
an organization's telecom budget, and since most organizations are
under no obligation to tell any outsider what their telecom budgets
are, the list that started this discussion in the first place has to
be considered no more than an educated guess.


John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, [phone]
[e-mail], {ima|lotus|spdcc}!esegue!johnl

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 03:15:45 -0400
From: Henry Mensch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sprint WD40 Promotion
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I got my first "one-time non-recurring charge" today.  Has anyone
dealt with this and received a final, reasonable answer?


# Henry Mensch    /   <[e-mail]>   /   E40-379 MIT,  Cambridge, MA
# <[e-mail]-relay> / <[e-mail]> / <[e-mail]>

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

From: Jon Baker <asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs
Date: 31 May 90 19:54:20 GMT
Organization: gte


In article <[e-mail]>, mailrus!citi!gatech!ukma!
corpane![e-mail] (Dan Lance) writes:

> I'm interested in how common this type of sleazy diversion is, and how
> Wisconsin Bell can get away with claiming that calls are routed by
> default through AT&T when in fact they go through MCI.

I wouldn't jump to conclusions about WisBell being sleazy.  They most
likely are just responding to a Greene requirement that equal access
be provided through pay phones.  WisBell probably had all pay phones
going through AT&T at one time, and has recently switched over a
certain number of them to use alternate carriers by default, while
still allowing the subscriber to select a carrier via 10XXX.

> Can my calls get routed through another long distance carrier when I
use 10288?

Not legally.

> If MCI had completed my call, would I have been liable for the charges?

I would suppose so.  But, when using a pay phone, I suggest always
using 10XXX carrier selection just so you know who you're dealing
with.

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 17:17:08 PDT
From: Jody Kravitz <foxtail![e-mail]>
Subject: Unusual Telephone Service Call


[Moderator's Note: Jody is a fairly new reader, and probably would not
have known that we've run this little blurb about once a year for a
few years now ... but that's okay, its always good for a laugh for new
readers who have not seen it before.  PT]


 Date: Mon, 8 Sep 86 16:03:35 PDT
 From: Dave Taylor
 Subject: Interesting Phone Calls

                    AN UNUSUAL TELEPHONE SERVICE CALL

This story was related by Pat Routledge of Winnipeg, Manitoba about an
unusual telephone service call he handled while living in England.

It is common practice in England to signal a telephone subscriber by
signaling with 90 volts across one side of the two wire circuit and
ground (earth in England). When the subscriber answers the phone, it
switches to the two wire circuit for the conversation. This method
allows two parties on the same line to be signalled without disturbing
each other.

This particular subscriber, an elderly lady with several pets called
to say that her telephone failed to ring when her friends called and
that on the few occasions when it did manage to ring her dog always
barked first.  Torn between curiosity to see this psychic dog and a
realization that standard service techniques might not suffice in this
case, Pat proceeded to the scene. Climbing a nearby telephone pole and
hooking in his test set, he dialed the subscriber's house.  The phone
didn't ring. He tried again. The dog barked loudly, followed by a
ringing telephone. Climbing down from the pole, Pat found:

        a.   Dog was tied to the telephone system's ground post via an iron
             chain and collar
        b.   Dog was receiving 90 volts of signalling current
        c.   After several jolts, the dog was urinating on ground and barking
        d.   Wet ground now conducted and phone rang.

Which goes to prove that some grounding problems can be passed on.

This anecdote excerpted from Syn-Aud-Con Newsletter, Vol 4, No 3, April 1977.

[Moderator's Note: This time at least, I caught the 'Winnepeg, Ontario error'
and changed it to Manitoba.  PT]

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

From: "Paul S. R. Chisholm" <[e-mail]>
Subject: More ATM Stories (was Re: Last Laugh!)
Date: 31 May 90 17:25:42 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


I passed the latest round of Telecom ATM stories on to a friend (my
boss when I was doing plastic card network software), who replied:

"It reminds me of another story related to the San Francisco
earthquake.  Seems someone called Tandem to request technical
assistance, because the earthquake had taken his Tandem system down --
literally.  The machine tipped over on its back, but was still
running.  He needed to know how to stand it back up without stopping
it.

"I guess you can't blame them for not covering that in the operations
manual."


Paul S. R. Chisholm, AT&T Bell Laboratories
att!pegasus!psrc, [e-mail], AT&T Mail !psrchisholm
I'm not speaking for the company, I'm just speaking my mind.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #401
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26236;
          1 Jun 90 4:13 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa16373;
          1 Jun 90 2:33 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab02599;
          1 Jun 90 1:29 CDT
Date:     Fri, 1 Jun 90 0:27:10 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #402
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 1 Jun 90 00:27:00 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 402

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: My List of World Wide Codes [David Tamkin]
    Re: My List of World Wide Codes [Jim Rees]
    Re: My List of North American Area Codes [Juan Valdez]
    Re: My List of North American Area Codes [David Tamkin]
    Re: My List of North American Area Codes [Mark Kallas]
    Re: My List of North American Area Codes [Michael A. Sheils]
    Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code [David E. A. Wilson]
    Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code [John Slater]
    Re: Another Clue to Possible E. German Prefixes [Peter J. Dotzauer]
    Re: I Want to Dial the Area Code Even on a Local Call [David Lewis]
    Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers [Subodh Bapat]
    Re: PacBell Dropping Charge for Touch-Tone Service [John Higdon]
    Re: PacBell Dropping Charge for Touch-Tone Service [Wally Kramer]
    Re: AT&T Special Promotion [Steve Elias]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 13:02 EST
From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of World Wide Codes


John Covert wrote in volume 10, issue 400:

|Colin Plumb asks which countries are part of the North American
|Intergrated Numbering Plan Area (code 1).  They are:

|   Canada, USA including Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, Jamaica,
|   Barbados, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Cayman Islands, British
|   Virgin Islands, Bermuda, Bahamas, Dominica, Dominican Republic,
|   Grenada, Montserrat, St. Christopher and Nevis, St. Lucia,
|   St. Vincent and the Grenadines [Bequia, Mustique, Prune (Palm) Island,
|   Union Island], Trinidad and Tobago.

|What you will note about this list is that it includes the USA plus all
|members of the British Commonwealth in the Caribbean and North Atlantic.
|This definitively (at least for now) answers the question of why some
|places are in +1 809 and why some have their own code.

If you want it to be definitive, even just for now, that rule will
have to be "the USA, the Dominican Republic, and all members of the
British Commonwealth in the Caribbean and North America."  The rule as
John stated it leaves the Dominican Republic out but includes the UK!
(If "North Atlantic" meant only islands such as Bermuda and the
Bahamas and not coastal countries on the continents, then the rule
didn't add the UK but it excluded both the Dominican Republic and
Canada.)  Anyone who considers Bermuda and the Bahamas not to be parts
of North America is welcome to specify them, and if Belize is in the
British Commonwealth, anyone who deems it in North America is equally
welcome to make a specific exception for it.

Ah well; the definitive rule didn't turn out so simple after all.

Peter Dotzauer wrote in the same issue, quoting Michael Shiels's
original article on the subject:

:>    670-    Mariana Islands
:>    688-    Tuvalu, Saipan

:Saipan is a part of the Mariana Islands.  Not only that, it comprises
:about ninety per cent of its population.  The rest is mainly on Tinian
:and Rota.  Why does Saipan, a part of the Commonwealth of the Mariana
:Islands, have an area code together with a relatively distant country of
:nine South Pacific atolls (Tuvalu), while the rest of the Marianas has
:another area code?

It doesn't.  Michael's list was in error.  Saipan is in country code
670 along with the rest of the Northern Marianas.


David Tamkin  P. O. Box 7002  Des Plaines IL  60018-7002  [phone]
MCI Mail: 426-1818   CIS: 73720,1570   GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: My List of World Wide Codes
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Thu, 31 May 90 17:48:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, "John R. Covert 30-May-1990 0816"
<[e-mail]> writes:

> And finally, though not confirmed, Bhutan has reportedly been assigned
> the code 975.  A backwards country from both a transportation and
> communications standpoint, it is not likely to be diallable soon.

In my experience, Bhutan is not diallable even from inside Bhutan.  I
did get through once by operator from New Delhi though.  I had to make
an appointment the day before.

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

From: Juan Valdez <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes
Date: 31 May 90 05:56:13 GMT
Reply-To:  <[e-mail]>
Organization: The George Washington University, Washington D.C.


In your message, you listed 1-200 as an unused area code.  Actually,
dialing 200-555-1212 (or I'm sure any combination after the 555 will
work) without a 1 before, will result in a recording reading back the
phone number of the line you are calling from.  I believe 811 will
work the same way in some areas.

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 13:05 EST
From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes


Doug Reuben wrote in volume 10, issue 400:

|Additionally, when we go to full 1+ dialing, where (almost) any three
|digits can be an area code, won't 1+xxx-xxxx dialing have to go away?
|I'd personally prefer, if it becomes necessary, to get rid of in-area
|code 1+ dialing over having to wait for a call to timeout ...

Eight-digit dialing will have to vanish.  Toll calls within one's own
area code will be dialed NXX-XXXX or 1-NPA-NXX-XXXX, depending on
whichever your telco picks.  (A few telcos do or will allow both.)

|Of course this is ALREADY a problem with 0+xxx-xxxx calls, but that can
|wait till another time!

In area codes where N[0/1]X prefixes are in use, 0+ calling within the
area code already needs all eleven digits.  That will be the case
throughout North America when NNX area codes go live.

On the topic of Michael Shiels's original submission with this
subject, I thought for sure Patrick would be bombarded with follow-ups
pointing out that area code 917 is not unassigned as Michael wrote but
rather reserved for the next split of area code 212.  But it's been
three or four days now and no one else has said it.


David Tamkin  P. O. Box 7002  Des Plaines IL  60018-7002  [phone]
MCI Mail: 426-1818   CIS: 73720,1570   GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN  [phone]

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

From: digi!mkallas%digi.lonestar.org (mark kallas)
Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes
Date: 30 May 90 13:39:11 GMT
Reply-To: digi!mkallas (mark kallas)
Organization: DSC Communications, Plano Tx.


If I remember correctly all N11 code are resevered for special
services such as 411 - directory assistance, 611 - trouble reporting,
and 911 - emergency service.

I heard San Francisco and Oakland are going to split the current area
code in two. Do you know when and what it will be?


Mark Kallas

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

Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes
Reply-To: "Michael A. Shiels" <tmsoft![e-mail]>
Organization: MaS Network Software and Consulting
Date: 31 May 90 21:59:38 EDT (Thu)
From: tmsoft![e-mail]


What happened was I posted a list of 416 DETAILED exchanges and a
North American area code list and a world wide area code list.  WHICH
TOGETHER make up a database file I use for some software.  The last
two were reposted by the Moderator but the first detailed 416 list has
been posted before so he didn't post it.

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

From: David E A Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code
Date: 31 May 90 05:23:45 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, University of Wollongong, Australia


[e-mail] (Jim Rees) writes:

>By the way, the USA country code still isn't given in any USA
>telephone directory I've ever seen.  Burkino Faso?  OK.  Vanuato?  No
>problem.  USA?  Forget it!                <a>                 <u>

Here in Australia we had the same problem. Ascension Is = 247, Austria
= 43.  NO Australia = 61. In my 1988 Wollongong directory it is at the
bottom of the page of IDD calling instructions. In 1989 it is missing.
In 1990 it is back on the IDD page.

Why it is not listed with all the other countries I don't know - that
is where I would look if I wanted to know it.


David Wilson

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code
Date: 31 May 90 11:29:13 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Guy Middleton) writes:

>Strictly speaking, isn't it true that neither the USA nor Canada have
>country codes?  Both countries are in Zone 1, I believe, and there is
>nothing else in Zone 1, so there is no real confusion.  All the
>country codes seem to be at least two digits long, so if codes are
>ever assigned, they could be 10 and 11.

Of course they have country codes! Otherwise how would it be possible
to dial the US and Canada from elsewhere? To dial US area code 415
from the UK, I dial 010 (international access code), then 1 (country
code for US), then 415 XXX XXXX. If I omit the "1", I'll get through
to somewhere in Switzerland (country code 41).

Anyway, what do you mean by "zone 1"? Surely this is just another way
of saying "country code 1".

The US/Canada country code is unusual in two ways : (1) it is the only
single-digit country code, and (2) it happens to be the same as the
code normally used for LD access in the US and Canada.


John

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

From: "Peter J. Dotzauer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Another Clue to Possible E. German Prefixes
Date: 31 May 90 15:37:04 GMT
Organization: Ohio State Univ IRCC


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (J. Stephen
Reed) writes:

>West German postal codes are normally four digits, ranging from 1000
>(West Berlin) to 7999.  An article in the Germany Philatelic Society
>magazine noted that according to a Deutsche Bundespost bulletin some
>years ago, the 8000s and 9000s are reserved for "other German
>regions".  The editor of the magazine investigated further and found
>that those numbers were, in fact, being held primarily for East

Does that mean that Bavaria regained its independence? Bavaria has
8000 codes (in fact Munich is 8000).


Peter Dotzauer, Analyt.Cart.& GIS, Dept.of Geogr., OSU, Columbus, OH 43210-1361
    TEL [phone]  FAX [phone]  FIDO 1:226/330  CCnet mapvxa::pjd
      INTERNET [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]    [128.146.1.5]
        BITNET pjd@ohstvmb       UUCP ...!osu-cis!hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu!pjd

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

From: David Lewis <nvuxr![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: I Want to Dial the Area Code Even on a Local Call
Date: 31 May 90 14:48:02 GMT
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David
Tamkin) writes:

[various introductory comments omitted]

> That is all the more reason that eleven-digit dialing should always be
> permitted, even when it is not required and seven or eight or ten
> digits would do.  Dialing 1-NPA-NXX-XXXX within the NANP is totally
> unambiguous and doesn't require a time-out, so there really is no
> justification that I can see for rejecting it.

According to _Notes on the BOC Intra-LATA Networks -- 1986_,
TR-NPL-000275, Issue 1, April 1986 (the most recent version of
_Notes_), 1+NPA-NXX-XXXX is either a "Permissive procedure.  May be
permitted in addition to recommended procedure" or a "Recommended
procedure" for all types of calls.  This includes locations with or
without non-common control switching systems (e.g.SXS); local-direct
dialed, toll-direct dialed, Home NPA, Foreign NPA, with or without
interchangeable CO codes.

Go figure.  It's that "may" that leaves room for interpretation.

Disclaimer: The fact that I work for Bellcore affects the content of
this posting only in that it means that I have a copy of _Notes_
sitting on my bookshelves.  _Notes_ Copyright C. American Telephone
and Telegraph, Inc., 1980, 1983; Copyright C. Bell Communications
Research, Inc., 1986.  All rights reserved.


David G Lewis                    ...!bellcore!nvuxr!deej
    (@ Bellcore Navesink Research & Engineering Center)
            "If this is paradise, I wish I had a lawnmower."

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

From: Bapat <mailrus!uflorida!rm1![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers
Date: 31 May 90 15:12:04 GMT
Organization: the boundary between UNIX and sanity


In article <[e-mail]>, gtisqr![e-mail].
washington.edu (Todd Inch) writes:

> [ Todd Inch posts a "tr"-based shellscript to do telephone keypad based
>   string->digits conversion ]

As it turns out, after my query for a program for the above, it was
pointed out to me that a pair of such programs (given string->digits
and given digits->multiple possible strings) had JUST been posted to
comp.sources.misc. Look for article v12i098 in that newsgroup for the
programs "telenum" and "telewords". I had fun playing with them - and
they'll be really useful for those wanting to ask for customized
numbers.


Subodh Bapat              [e-mail]     OR        ...uunet!rm1!bapat
MS E-204, P.O.Box 407044, Racal-Milgo, Ft Lauderdale, FL 33340  [phone]

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PacBell Dropping Charge for Touch-Tone Service
Date: 30 May 90 22:32:29 PDT (Wed)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


"Christopher J. Pikus" <[e-mail]> writes:

> Now I'm waiting for Pac Bell to charge a premium for using the pulse
> dialing "feature". :-)

No, they have already filed their rate increase to cover, among other
things, the loss of revenue from the elimination of touch tone
charges.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 11:52:06 PDT
From: Wally Kramer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PacBell Dropping Charge for Touch-Tone Service
Organization: Microwave & RF Instruments, Tektronix, Beaverton, Oregon


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Christopher J. Pikus) TELECOM Digest Volume 10, Issue 397, Message 8
of 12 writes:

> Today in my phone bill was a little leaflet saying that they
> will be eliminating the charge for touch tone.  ...

Perhaps the California PUC is afraid of catching the legal bug
drifting down from Oregon.  About 3 years ago our PUC ruled that then
Pacific NorthWest Bell couldn't charge extra for touch tone service.
For some reason Telephone Utilities still charged, I think, $0.55 per
month.

I, for one, was glad to get a retroactive credit for TouchTone service
which extended back for a few months (4?--too bad it wasn't for all
the touch tone service I ever paid for!).  The glee I experienced was
not one of "getting a premium feature for free" but freedom from the
tyranny of being charged for something which wasn't eligible for real
competition and obviously cost very little to provide.


[e-mail] (Wally Kramer) 503 627 2363
Contractor from Step Technology, Inc.  503 244 1239

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: ATT Special Promotion
Date: Wed, 30 May 90 14:09:21 -0400
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>


Our Moderator wrote:

>AT&T is doing this as a special promotion to start off the three day
>holiday weekend of reduced calling rates.

>Obviously, you know how to route your long distance traffic tonight.
>For more specifics and verification, call AT&T Customer Service at
>1-800-222-0300.

Obviously what?  Geez, Patrick, you ought to know me by now.  Even if
I had read the Digest on time, I still would have routed my calls via
Sprint Plus for about the same price as the "ATT Special Oh Wow
Promotion" rate.  And my connection probably would have been just
*that much* clearer and louder, depending on destination.

Did you ever see the movie _This is Spinal Tap_ ??

Use US Sprint and turn your connection up to ELEVEN.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #402
******************************











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28618;
          1 Jun 90 5:26 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19225;
          1 Jun 90 3:37 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab16373;
          1 Jun 90 2:33 CDT
Date:     Fri, 1 Jun 90 1:35:39 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #403
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 1 Jun 90 01:34:28 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 403

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog [Peter Weiss]
    Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog [Stephen E. Collins]
    Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog [Peter J. Dotzauer]
    Re: New Double-jack Wall Plates, Crosstalk? [Dave Levenson]
    Re: New Double-jack Wall Plates, Crosstalk? [Julian Macassey]
    Re: TDD Long Distance Discount [John Higdon]
    Re: TDD Long Distance Discount [Clayton Cramer]
    Re: TDD Long Distance Discount [Karl Denninger]
    Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues [[e-mail]]
    Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter" [Nigel Allen]
    Re: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line [Juha Heinanen]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thursday, 31 May 1990 08:06:54 EDT
From: Peter Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jon
Zeeff) says:

>In the "for what it's worth" department, the U of Michigan's card
>catalog is available online (for free).

There is a file stored on a [e-mail] (aka UNMVM.UNM.EDU)
called INTERNET LIBRARY.  Enter as the body of text in the RFC822 mail

         GET INTERNET LIBRARY

This is a comprehensive listing of Internet-accessible libraries.


Peter M.  Weiss | 31 Shields Bldg | University Park, PA USA 16802

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

From: "Stephen E. Collins" <plains!umn-cs.cs.cs.umn.edu![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.
Date: Thu, 31 May 90 18:37:51 GMT


[e-mail] (Jon Zeeff) writes:

>In the "for what it's worth" department, the U of Michigan's card
>catalog is available online (for free).

The University of Minnesota Card Catalog is also on-line, at internet
address lumina.lib.umn.edu.

I'd be most interested in learning of any other on-line card catalogs,
and I'd like to know if the Libary of Congress is on the internet.


Stephen E. Collins
University of Minnesota Microcomputer & Workstation Networks Center
[e-mail]  |  [e-mail]  |   FAX: [phone]

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

From: "Peter J. Dotzauer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog
Date: 1 Jun 90 01:59:13 GMT
Organization: Ohio State Univ IRCC


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jon
Zeeff) writes:

>catalog is available online (for free).  You can call [phone]
>(2400 bps) or telnet to hermes.merit.edu.  Enter "MIRLYN" as the Which

And so are numerous other library catalogs. An overview is given in
the file 'internet libraries', obtainable from listserv@unmvm (bitnet).


Peter Dotzauer, Analyt.Cart.& GIS, Dept.of Geogr., OSU, Columbus, OH 43210-1361
    TEL [phone]  FAX [phone]  FIDO 1:226/330  CCnet mapvxa::pjd
      INTERNET [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]    [128.146.1.5]
        BITNET pjd@ohstvmb       UUCP ...!osu-cis!hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu!pjd

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

From: Dave Levenson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New Double-jack Wall Plates, Crosstalk?
Date: 31 May 90 16:58:46 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Peter da Silva) writes:

> We just had new phone service hooked up, two lines: one for data, the
> other for voice...

> I presume they have hooked red-green up on one line, and yellow-black
> on the other ...  if they did this I should expect some  crosstalk.
> Has anyone else seen this setup? If there is a crosstalk  problem,
> what should I do?

If they really used the two pairs available in standard quad, as you
suggest, then you will probably experience crosstalk, if there's any
significant cable run.  It isn't caused by sharing a duplex jack, but
by the cable.

For two-line service, they should use a cable with two (or more)
twisted pairs.  If they did, they would probably have connected one
line to the blue-white pair and the other to the orange-white pair.
If they did that, you shouldn't experience crosstalk, regardless of
the connectors used.


Dave Levenson            Voice: 201 647 0900  Fax: [phone]
Westmark, Inc.            UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA            AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave
[The Man in the Mooney]

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

From: Julian Macassey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New Double-jack Wall Plates, Crosstalk?
Date: 31 May 90 15:47:03 GMT
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Peter da Silva) writes:

> We just had new phone service hooked up, two lines: one for data, the
> other for voice. Instead of designating one jack for data and hooking
> up the rest for voice, my wife let them install a new kind of
> wallplate with two lines at each point ...

    There is a certain amount of dejavu here: Quad wire in phone
installations causes crosstalk. The jacks that were installed will not
be the cause of the crosstalk. So you can't blame the Mrs. for this
one. Crummy wire could be a cause of crosstalk. You say that you have
Red, Green and Black, Yellow wire. This stuff is called quad wire. It
is not twisted pair wire. If you use quad wire you will get crosstalk
between the two pairs. The right wire to use is "Twisted pair". This
stuff has the following color code: White/Blue, Blue/White.
White/Orange, Orange/White. White/Green, Green/White. As a general
rule, the minimum number of pairs in twisted pair cable is three. Yes
there is two pair around, it is rare but I saw some yesterday at
Pacific Palisades - Surf was lousy though.

    The jacks are not the source of the crosstalk. I do this sort
of thing all the time. In about an hour I am going to an establishment
that has telephone and Appletalk sharing the same cable and coming out
to duplex jacks. It works because it is twisted pair.

    So, if you have twisted pair, no worries. If you have quad -
yuck.  But the quad may work.


Julian Macassey, n6are  [e-mail]  ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian
N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice [phone]

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TDD Long Distance Discount
Date: 30 May 90 23:15:39 PDT (Wed)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


Tad Cook <ssc![e-mail]> writes:

> RIPPED OFF???  Yeah, "screw all the deaf folks ... let the 'free
> market determine their fate!"

> You are just plain selfish.  These people are incredibly isolated, and
> now that a little bit is FINALLY being done to help, YOU CAN"T STAND
> IT!

I'm getting the impression that Mr. Cook and those who are setting up
the subsidized TDD service are of the conviction that Deaf = Poor.
Just so we don't misunderstand each other, years ago I worked with the
deaf in some of the poorest "hollers" of North Carolina. That was
POVERTY.

But just as in the community at large, so was there a spectrum of
accomplishment among the deaf community. With that exposure, I have
never had the impression that our deaf citizens are somehow unable to
provide for themselves. Indeed, the non-hearing persons I number among
my acquaintences are somewhat better off financially than I am.

As far as isolation goes, a person who is deaf can adjust his own
isolation. While there may be some who are content to sit back with
self-commiseration, there are many others, who like those in North
Carolina, will not let ANYTHING stand in their path toward
achievement.

BTW, what's the matter with some type of batched e-mail for the deaf?
What about devices (like this computer?) that allow the user to
compose and edit a message OFF LINE and then transmit it at high speed
to a destination? Why does TDD communication all have to be on line,
in real time? Hell, if I wrote and received my daily e-mail
interactively on line at even local rates, the bill would be
staggering.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: Clayton Cramer <optilink![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TDD Long Distance Discount
Date: 31 May 90 21:04:35 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA


In article <[e-mail]>, ssc![e-mail]
(Tad Cook) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Gilmore) writes:
# # Besides the general public being ripped off to pay the phone bills of
# # the deaf, there is also the topic of TDD design itself.  Years ago, a

# RIPPED OFF???  Yeah, "screw all the deaf folks ... let the 'free
# market determine their fate!"

Why assume that deaf people can't afford to pay for their own
services?  It's certainly true that deaf people, on average, have
lower incomes than hearing people -- but there are deaf people who
don't need the subsidy.

Hell, the TDD subsidy isn't even "From each according to his
abilities, to each according to his need" -- it's a subsidy that
benefits poor, middle class, and rich deaf people equally.

# # Oh yeah, while I'm ranting about bills, [various rants about the
# # California Relay Service, a "free" service that lets deaf people TDD
# # to the service which reads their message to hearing people and vice
# # verse.  By "free" I mean "you and I pay for it, not its users".]

# # Why isn't there a free relay service for email users to send to and
# # receive from fax machines?  I mean, we are at a severe disadvantage
# # when *everybody* has a fax machine except us!  Or howabout a

# Go buy a fax machine then!  Don't bellyache about the deaf!

You missed the whole point of the posting -- why do we have subsidies
for some groups, but not for others?

# # Personally I think helping people should be voluntary.  I don't like
# # the kind of "help" the government gives.

# Well, I have been doing voluntary work to help hearing impaired folks
# for quite some time now, and the volunteer efforts alone haven't cut
# it!  If you object to the rest of us getting the government involved,
# what have YOU been doing to help??

If the "rest of you" are any significant number of people, then there
should be no problem raising the money privately.  If not, why are you
forcing the rest of the society to fund it?

I have one deaf acquaintance.  He is a highly paid software engineer.
He doesn't need my help -- he's quite capable of taking care of
himself.


Clayton E. Cramer {pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!cramer
Disclaimer?  You must be kidding!  No company would hold opinions like mine!

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

From: Karl Denninger <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Alert: AT&T May Consider Removing TDD Long Distance Discount
Reply-To: Karl Denninger <[e-mail]>
Organization: MCSNet - Wheeling, IL
Date: Thu, 31 May 90 03:53:06 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> "Yossi (Joel" <joel%TECHUNIX.
[e-mail]> writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 391, Message 2 of 12

>>Please don't take this the wrong way, but what is the justification
>>for discounts for TDD customers?

>The rational is that the same phone call should cost the same to
>everyone.  For the same reason that folks with old switch equipment
>aren't charged extra for the additional upkeep costs, TDD users
>shouldn't be charged extra just because they have to converse at 48
>baud.

Well, by that reasoning I should pay less to use a 300 baud modem than
a 2400 baud one, or heaven forbid, a 19,200 baud one (ie: Telebit).

Of course, that is not the case.

Also of course, no one FORCES a deaf person to use a TDD to
communicate.  They can purchase a personal computer with a higher
speed modem, compose their text offline if they wish, and transmit to
other similarly equipped people.  If the additional bandwidth is an
issue, this is something these people should explore.

Note that I can easily read at 2400 baud; that is not difficult, I do
it every evening when logging in and reading the news from home.
Thus, I can effectively make use of 2400 baud transmission in >real
time<.  I am willing to bet that most deaf people can make use of at
least 1200 baud if not 2400 or more, should they be motivated to do
so.

The question becomes:

   Should a public utility be able to subsidise the use of a service by
   a disadvantaged (insert favorite of handicapped, minority, etc)
   group through the rates of those who are not as disadvantaged?

That I don't have a good answer for.  However, the issue is not
bandwidth, nor is it the information able to be transmitted per unit
of time.  It could be a matter of perceived public service, or any one
of a number of other factors.


Karl Denninger ([e-mail], <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Public Access Data Line: [[phone]], Voice: [[phone]]
Macro Computer Solutions, Inc.   "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 10:14:44 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael C.
Berch) writes:

> to be stuck with 45.5 baud forever?  I can't imagine that given
> today's miniaturization of components and automated manufacturing
> techniques, a device can't be built that will communicate at least 2
> orders of magnitude faster at an order of magnitude less cost than
> TDDs of the 1970s...

AT&T currently markets a device called the 1300+ for the TDD folks. It
supports 45.5 baudot up to 1200 baud asscii and everything in between.


[Moderator's Note: Could you please get us some pricing and ordering
information for this?  Thanks.  PT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 31 May 90  1:59:00 EST
Subject: Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter"


[e-mail] quotes Monty Python's Flying Circus:

>Sounds like the Cat Detector Van from the Ministry of Housing!

In Britain, at least at the time the Cat Detector Van sketch was
written, the operations of the British Broadcasting Corporation were
supported, at least in part, by a license fee imposed on television
sets and possibly on radios as well.  Any broadcasting receiver is
also a crude transmitter, and a mobile detection device (in a van)
could locate television or radio receivers, and get very nasty if a
tax officials found a television set for which no license fee had been
paid.

I've never seen a television or radio detector van, but I think they
must have existed at one point.  The cat detector van that could
pinpoint a purr at fifty yards was purely a creation of the Monty
Python troupe's fertile imagination, but you can see that a British
audience would have recognized the allusions to collecting television
license fees.

A long time ago, there were annual license fees on radios in Canada,
and perhaps even on television sets in the early days, but they were
abolished years and years ago. Now, grants to the Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation come out of the federal government's general
revenues.


Nigel Allen                   Telephone [phone]
52 Manchester Avenue          Fax [phone]
Toronto, Ontario M6G 1V3      [e-mail]
Canada

    MaS Relayer v1.00.00
 Message gatewayed by MaS Network Software and Consulting/HST
 Internet: [e-mail]
 UUCP:     ...tmsoft!masnet!f438.n250.z1.fidonet.org!nigel.allen

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 09:02:42 +0300
From: Juha Heinanen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line


Hank Nussbacher writes:

>All this is to be a great leap forward for Russia.  Today, the only
>fiber link they have is between Leningrad and Minsk running in
>single-mode at 140Mb (most telecommunications fiber today is multimode
>and is 1.7Gb).  That link is only 100km long.

Most telecom fiber today is single mode because it can support much
longer distances than multi mode fiber.  Multi mode fiber is usually
used at customer premises only.


Juha

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #403
******************************










Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14263;
          2 Jun 90 10:40 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04903;
          2 Jun 90 1:44 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa31493;
          2 Jun 90 0:40 CDT
Date:     Sat, 2 Jun 90 0:10:32 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #404
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jun 90 00:10:21 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 404

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ATT TDD Wimp Out [Steve Elias]
    Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues [Tad Cook]
    Re: TDD's and Faster Speeds [Alan Millar]
    TDD Technology (was Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues) [Joel Yossi]
    AT&T Removing Discounts [Robert Savery]
    Re: One Ringer, N Phones [Julian Macassey]
    1A/1E Call Forwarding and Multi-pathing [Marc O'Krent]
    Last Laugh! AT&T and Doomsday [Dave Horsfall]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: ATT TDD Wimp Out
Date: Wed, 30 May 90 14:09:21 -0400
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>


Regarding ATT'S TDD discount ... It's a sad state of affairs when
this sort of program has to be discontinued.  This LD carrier
competition is getting pretty harsh.  Mr. Berch posted that deaf phone
users should not get a discount.  I disagree.

The fact that the TDD user has such poor bandwidth communications is
cause for discount.  If ATT ends the discount, don't you think that
MCI or Sprint will capitalize with a PR coup?  How does TDD traffic do
on heavily stat-muxed channels?  Perhaps MCI ought to give a discount
  -- they were fiends for stat-muxing years ago.


/eli

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

From: Tad Cook <ssc![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues
Date: 1 Jun 90 07:20:04 GMT
Organization: very little


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael C.
Berch) writes:

> but are deaf people going
> to be stuck with 45.5 baud forever?  I can't imagine that given
> today's miniaturization of components and automated manufacturing
> techniques, a device can't be built that will communicate at least 2
> orders of magnitude faster at an order of magnitude less cost than
> TDDs of the 1970s...

Sure, it's EASY to use faster modems.  The problem is, you have to
communicate with all of the other TDDs that are out there.  For the
past few years they have tried to improve on this by adding 300 bps
ASCII modems to TDDs.  Of course, for keyboad-to-keyboard chatting,
this may be academic, as most folks don't type much faster than 45
baud (60 WPM) anyway.  ASCII has the advantage though of allowing full
duplex.

> Is anybody working on this, from the standards side, or the technology
> side?

EIA was working on it, but they gave up.  They found that Crown and
Ultratech are the only manufacturers, and they have been building
their stuff for years with no standards at all, other than nominal
frequencies (1.4 KHz Mark, 1.8 KHz Space) ... no tolerances for
the receiving or transmitting ends.

Last year I installed a 2400 bps modem in a new PC clone that a
hearing impaired friend bought.  Up until then she had been using 45
baud baudot, and ocasionally half-duplex 300 baud from her TDD to my
computer.

What a revealation for her when we communicated with split screen,
full duplex, and 2400 bps for the first time!  Instead of manually
switching from receive to transmit on the TDD, she could now see typed
text coming from me on the top of her screen, and she could type her
responses at the bottom.  Pretty soon we were both typing at full
speed simultaneously, and for the first time she experienced something
like a NORMAL conversation with a hearing person!

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy Smith) writes:

> with stylus (or a mouse) for sending simple drawings and a 512 x 512 x
> 1 bitmap screen for showing what is being drawn.  Such a device built
> today shouldn't cost any more than a Teletype(tm) did 20 years ago,

Remember that the Teletypes of 20 years ago weren't purchased new by
the hearing impaired ... they were old surplus machines that were
retired from service and given away.


Tad Cook   Seattle, WA    Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA   Phone: [phone]
MCI Mail: 3288544   Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW
USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad   or, [e-mail]

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

From: ames!ames!claris!portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]
Subject: Re: TDD's and Faster Speeds
Date: Fri,  1-Jun-90 01:18:14 PDT


I understand that making a dual purpose modem, with both 45bps BAUDOT
and 2400bps ASCII for example, is going to cost a little more, but I
do not believe it could cost very much.  I just bought a 2400bps modem
off the shelf of the local electronics store for $99.  They can make
modems cheap through mass-production, using standard modem chipsets.
If 45bps BAUDOT were added to the modem chipset, then it may add maybe
$20 to the cost of the modem.  So then it's $120 instead of $99; still
no big deal.

Think of what things would be like with dual-mode modems.  Service
providers could use dual-mode modems to accept calls from regular
modems or TDDs.  BBSs, Telenet, Tymnet, public-access Unix systems,
you name it.  That way, every deaf person could read the Telecom
Digest, and all the rest that the online world offers.  Next, deaf
people could start upgrading from regular TDDs to dual-mode modems.
The modem would be the only thing you'd have to spend money on,
because there are more than enough old glass TTYs that people are
trying to get rid of.  With the dual-mode modem, you could have
higher-speed access to online services, and still communicate with all
of the older TDDs.  Even on interactive conversations between two
TDDs, you could now have a faster conversation than before.

I would make the modem so that it would have a phone jack and an RS232
jack.  The RS232 side would always use ASCII, at a configurable baud
rate (1200 to 9600, for example).  You'd hook this up to an old VT100
or Televideo 920, if cost is an issue, or to a personal computer or
3B2 or whatever.  The phone side would talk ASCII or BAUDOT, depending
on what was on the other end.  If it was a BAUDOT connection, the
modem would automatically translate speeds and character sets.

This couldn't be that hard, so why doesn't it happen?  Is it simply
the lack of a large, money-laden potential customer-base that keeps
modem chip manufacturers from putting these features in?  Maybe if we
could convince other big modem users like Tymnet to want them, that
would start the ball rolling to mass produce them.

Just some food for thought.


Alan Millar   [e-mail]

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

From: "Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]>
Subject: TDD Technology (was Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues)
Date: 1 Jun 90 05:25:12 GMT
Reply-To: "Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. Tech., Haifa Israel


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael C. Berch)
writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 396, Message 12 of 12

>The obvious next question is, is there any hope in sight for changing
>the TDD standard to something more, uh, *modern* than 45.5 or 48 baud
                                                       ^^^^^^^^^^ I
think I may have inadvertantly started the 48 baud rumor with a typo.
I beleive the baud rate is 45ish.

>[...], but are deaf people going
>to be stuck with 45.5 baud forever?  I can't imagine that given
>today's miniaturization of components and automated manufacturing
>techniques, a device can't be built that will communicate at least 2
>orders of magnitude faster at an order of magnitude less cost than
>TDDs of the 1970s...

The logical thing to do would be to use standard 300 baud ASCII-type
modems.  (Most humans can't type 300 baud anyway).  They're readily
available, and very cheap.  But the problem is that the existing TDD's
are the existing TDD's, and no one wants to be the first on the block
to get the new, non-backwards comptable, technology.  Would you buy a
new phone that offered CD quality sound (suppose!), or, even,
Star-Trek like universal language translation, if it meant that the
only people you could call were people like yourself who had invested
in the new technology?  And that you could no longer call your
neighbor and ask for a cup of sugar?  I wouldn't.  Or, at least, I'd
buy both, but if financial constraints forced a decision, I'd stick
with what I had.


Joel
([e-mail] -or- [e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Curtis Reid, the reader who started this entire
thread several issues ago, has crafted a comprehensive reply to
several issues raised. It will be in a Digest on Saturday.   PT]

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 22:18:03 EDT
From: Robert Savery <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Removing Discounts
Reply-to: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha, Ne. 402-896-3537


>.....what is the justification for discounts for TDD customers.

My understanding is the discounts started years ago as part of AT&T's
nice guy image. The primary reasoning behind them is the relative
length of the calls. It takes a lot longer to type out a sentance than
it does to speak it. Also having to type out things hearing people
automatically pick up would add a tremendous amount of time to the
length of a call. For example, when I call my mom, I might say "HI Mom
! What's going on?" A TDD user would have to type out "Hi Mom ! It's
Bob. What's going on?" My mom would know it's me, but a deaf mom would
not have any idea who it is without the extra words.  I do not know if
technology has increased the speed of TDD conversations since the last
time I used it but on that occasion, it took me approx ten minutes to
ask a deaf employee of ours where the storeroom keys where!

If TDD conversations can now be conducted at the same speed as spoken
ones, then AT&T has a reason for dropping the discounts. However, I do
not think anyone ( other than maybe a professional transcriber ) can
type as fast as you can talk.

As someone who has used TDD before ( granted it was five years ago ),
I think AT&T should continue the discounts. I also think the FCC
should require all LD companies to offer them.

Perhaps at some point in the future, technology will make the
discounts unnecessary ( ie... videophones for signing or possibly a
system for people to send thought waves ...). But until such time,
TDD long distance discounts are as necessary as handicapped parking
spaces and ramps on curbs.


                               Bob

 [1:285/666@fidonet] DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha (1:285/666)

 --- Through FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390
[e-mail]

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

From: Julian Macassey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: One Ringer, N Phones
Date: 1 Jun 90 16:21:30 GMT
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Otto
Miller) writes:

> I have a need in a high noise envirnment (my workshop... compressor,
> saw, etc) that I am served by two residential lines.  I would like a
> single loud ringer driven by both lines just to get my attention.  Any
> ideas?  Thank you in advance!

    There are several ways to do this. But one you may consider is
the Viking Electronics "Loud Ringer/Auxiliary Paging Amplifier".

    From the blurb: "The PA-2A provides both loud ringing and
auxiliary paging for electronic keys systems, 1A2 systems, and
"KSU-less phones.  It will generate an adjustable loud warble from up
to six incoming C.O. lines or from a dry contact closure (TIE 612,
Comdial Executech).  Night bell transfer capabilities are built in.

    The PA-2A is easy to install and eliminates the installation
of multiple bells, relays and paging cards."

    You will need to add a PA Horn (Industrial strength
loudspeaker) to this. Sorry no surf report today. I think you also
have to supply a 13.  5 V AC (60 Hz) power supply to drive the bugger,
but check when you buy it. Get it from a telecom distributor, anyone
but Graybar. I recommend Alltel [phone] ask for Garth. They
will do COD.

    So, the Viking PA-2A Multi-Line Loud Ringer, $86.00 plus a
speaker will do the trick. Plus you get a paging amp as well for
hootin' an' hollerin' at the help. These items are very popular out
here in small machine shops and rag trade sweat shops.

    Yes, Esmerelda, there are other solutions, but this is
probably the neatest and cheapest under the circumstances.


Julian Macassey, n6are  [e-mail]  ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian
N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice [phone]

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

From: Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
Subject: 1A/1E Call Forwarding and Multi-pathing
Date: 1 Jun 90 07:09:18 GMT
Reply-To: Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
Organization: The Telephone Connection (Voice Mail), Marina Del Rey, California


We are having an argument with Pac*Bell and can't seem to get the same
answer out of them twice.  No great suprise there.

Here's the background: for some unknown reason, PB has decided that if
you want Centrex you *must* change your phone number.  They have been
refusing to grandfather in existing phone numbers for several months
now.

To console the destroyed business, they filed a provisional tarriff
called "Number Retention Service."  This turns out to be RCF with no
usage charge.  This allows the customer to "keep" their existing
number.  In fact the NRS (aks RCF) service forwards the calls to the
new (possibly hidden) Centrex number assigned to the customer.  The
NRS service costs $50 install for 1-10 paths on the initial order,
$50.00 per path install after initial order, plus $7.00/month/path and
no usage charges (kind gift, wouldn't you say!?).

Now this NRS can get quite expensive if the customer has say 10-20
existing lines and is in a CO where the switch doesn't do multi
pathing on Call Forwarding.  The conversation goes something like,

"You can have Centrex, Mr. Customer, but it will cost you $70-$140
per month to keep your existing number (#lines X cost/path)."

Some older ESS switches will multipath by default.  I thought it was
the 1A and the 1.  I have been told that it is the 1A, 1E and/or the
1.  I have a real customer in a 1E office where it does not work, but
telco is insisting that it does work.

Does anybody out there who might be reading this really know?  I would
certainly appreciate hearing from you.  Trials with DMS and 5ESS show
that multipathing does not exist.

(As a side note, the NRS tarriff is outrageous as far as I'm
concerned, and I would love to get some kind of protest going to force
PB to either revert back to number preservation, or if NRS is required
because of switch technical reasons, or planning, or whatever then PB
should be *required* to charge one monthly fee and give multipathing
as part of the service.  This type of tariff really hurts small
business the most ( <100 lines) ).


MOK

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

From: Dave Horsfall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Last Laugh! AT&T and Doomsday
Date: 1 Jun 90 03:23:15 GMT
Reply-To: Dave Horsfall <[e-mail]>
Organization: Alcatel STC Australia, North Sydney, AUSTRALIA


With the recent discussion on AT&T outages etc, I was tickled to see
the following cartoon in "The Institute"; which is an insert in IEEE's
Spectrum journal.  Apologies if you may have seen it before, but the
April issue only just arrived here in Australia.

Bearded man dressed in flowing garb on street corner, bearing aloft a
sign saying "Doomsday is coming."

Woman asks him: "How will that affect AT&T?"


Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU)  Alcatel STC Australia  [e-mail]
[e-mail]  ...munnari!stcns3.stc.oz.AU!dave

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #404
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15621;
          2 Jun 90 13:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ad16675; 2 Jun 90 12:10 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24695;
          2 Jun 90 3:02 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab04903;
          2 Jun 90 1:44 CDT
Date:     Sat, 2 Jun 90 1:35:37 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #405
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jun 90 01:35:16 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 405

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Mitch Kapor and "Sun Devil" [Joseph C. Pistritto]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor [Rich Zellich]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor [Bill Nickless]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor [Steve Flaherty]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor [Rick Farris]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor [Chris Johnson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Mitch Kapor and "Sun Devil"
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 10:17:36 MESZ
From: Joseph C Pistritto <[e-mail]>


> From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>

[some stuff about Kapor considering defending the "Sun Devil" crackers
deleted here - all factual data]

> Maybe if Mr. Kapor had his Lotus 1-2-3 ripped off good he might change
> his tune. Anyone know other projects of his we might steal and start
> handing out freely around the net?

Ahem.  Really now Patrick.  I know you're kidding, you know it,
probably every one of the intelligent people on this planet would know
it ... but DO YOU REALLY WANT TO HAVE A COMMENT LIKE THIS DISTRIBUTED
ON THE INTERNET???

> If you can't find a way to steal it outright, then borrow a
> pirated copy from someone else.

And how many people, not knowing the 'context' of your remarks, would
view this as a blatant invitation to piracy???

There can be valid concerns about possibly prosecuters overstepping
their authority and government abuse of power, etc. without condoning
either piracy or theft.  If these guys really ripped off source from
AT&T or elsewhere, then they deserve what happens next, on the other
hand, I can't really say that about people who run BBS systems that
merely have the message passed thru their system, unknowingly.  If the
result of this "Sun Devil" operation is that private BBS owners start
closing down their systems due to fear of prosecutors, and things like
FIDOnet disappear, then America will have lost a valuable resource
indeed, and Mr. Kapor may be correct in being concerned.  Note that
your article didn't say he 'decided' to support these folks, merely
that he was considering it.  Let's wait for him to make up his mind
before condemning, shall we?


Joseph C. Pistritto
([e-mail], [e-mail])
Ciba Geigy AG, R1241.1.01, Postfach CH4002, Basel, Switzerland
Tel: [phone] (work) [phone] (home)   GMT+2hrs!


[Moderator's Note: And what about people who pick up the {Washington
Post} for the first time in their life and see credence given to the
theory that burglary and theft are not really that at all, and that
government attempts to prosecute burglary and theft are 'damaging to
technical innovation and to dissemination of information'. Maybe you
should write a letter to the Post and complain about them spreading
that stuff all over the world in their paper. I doubt *they* would
give you the courtesy I have -- of printing your letter.  PT]

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 9:10:49 CDT
From: Rich Zellich <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor


Mr. Moderator - Please don't advocate ripping off commercial software,
even in sarcastic jest mode.

Being somewhat more charitable than PT, I assume two points in Mr.
Kapors favor:

   1)  So far, at least, there has been no monetary loss shown by the various
   federal prosecutors involved in Sun Devil; they have alleged much in their
   self-serving statements to the media but, as has been pointed out in this
   forum, no actual damage of any kind has yet been substantiated.

   2) I assume Mitch Kapor is reacting to the "witch hunt" atmosphere that
   seems to be pervading the LoD and Sun Devil busts - as witness the raid on
   Steve Jackson Games.  Clearly, *somebody* needs to help the less-well-
   funded witch-huntees caught in the government's fuzzily-conceived trap.

While it seems clear that there was some serious crackery going on, it
seems just as clear that a *lot* of innocent people are being harassed
by the authorities for no good reason except ignorance on the part of
those authorities, are having their systems seized (to the detriment
of some of the rest of us, in the case of e-mail relay systems), and
are going to have to spend a lot of their hard-earned dollars on
attorney fees just to point out the obvious in court.


[Moderator's Note: Whether or not there is a monetary loss is of
absolutely no relevance. If you don't think this is the case, then
kindly leave your door unlocked tomorrow while you are gone, so I can
come in and snoop around. I won't steal anything! I will just read
through your personal papers, etc.  Ah, you say, that is different!
Not a bit. Why are AT&T, Sprint, MCI and similar fair game for the
crackers and your home system -- or Mr. K's software is not?

Now you go on to say a *lot* (your emphasis) of people are 'being
harassed'. Name two or three; go ahead, I'll wait.  You want to use
Steve Jackson Games as one example?  Ha! That's rich ... more and more
news is coming out of that every day ... i.e. a little blurb in news
yesterday alleging a cracker (I think previously convicted) was/is on
his payroll. And you complain that innocent users on the net are being
harmed by the disruption in mail: why is that the government's fault?
Your complaint should be with the administrators of e-mail relays who
have *violated the trust of the net community* by getting wrapped up
in this stinking mess. If I were arrested for something today, would
you blame the government because TELECOM Digest did not get published
tomorrow?  PT]

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 09:18:10 CDT
From: Bill Nickless <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor


I can't believe it.  Our Moderator writes that Mitchell Kapor, in
offering to help some defendants in a court of law, is deserving of a
boycott against his well-designed and written software package.

Whether or not Mr. Kapor agrees with the actions of the people he
defends should not be an issue.  I have worked for a legal aid
society, funded primarily by the United Way.  Most of their casework
involved defending homemakers who were being divorced by their
breadwinning spouses and were in danger of losing everything,
including their children.  This is not because they were right or
wrong, it was because they didn't have the money to fight the spouse
with a job to pay the attornies.

I believe Mr. Kapor has seen that there are some dangers inherent in
the government's tactics in Operation Sun Devil.  These dangers
include the lack of common carrier protections for electronic mail and
bulletin board operators.  He has been (moderately :-) ) successful
with 1-2-3 and would like to use some of his well-earned resources to
ensure that the nationwide infrastructure of electronic mail and
bulletin boards is not horribly disrupted, especially in a court case
where the defendants do not have sufficient financial resources to
counter the government's nearly infinite capability to pursue the
matter.

Whether or not the defendants did anything wrong should be irrelevant
to this discussion.  That is for the courts to decide.  Mr. Kapor is
simply trying to ensure that these defendants receive a fair trial.

Bill Nickless


[Moderator's Note: He said nothing at all in the {Washington Post}
article about 'helping them get a fair trial' ... he said they did not
belong on trial at all!  Go back and read the article again. And
whether or not they 'did anything wrong' is most certainly relevant to
this discussion. It is what this whole discussion is about: whether or
not you can take activities like cracking and twist it around into a
wholesome, legitimate activity as Mr. Kapor suggests.  PT]

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 09:59:44 PDT
From: Steve Flaherty <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor


In comp.dcom.telecom you write:

>next time you use or consider purchasing his software. If you can't
                            ------------
>  find a way to steal it outright, then borrow a pirated copy from
   -----------------------------------------------------------------
>  someone else.
   --------------

Is this a serious suggestion, or are you poking fun at the situation?
If you are indeed serious about condoning piracy against a person or
organization that you personaly happen to disaprove, you deserve to be
right there in the defendants' seat the the so-called "crackers" that
you seem to abhor so vehemntly.  What seperates your call to steal
software on disk from the piracy of software (and other information)
via the phone system?  Is your moral ground so high?

Personally, I hope that your article was in jest, and that I am missing the
clues to its satirical intent.


Steve Flaherty


[Moderator's Note: What do you *really* see different about my article
versus the one in my competitor's rag other than the hoity-toity
language issued by some $50,000 a year reporter who probably knows
nothing about computers anyway?  They quote the divine Mr. K. saying
that the present government prosecution *of people who burglarize
computers and steal things therein* is 'damaging to technological
innovation and to dissemination of information'.  Now either that is a
true statement or it is bologna. All I suggested was let's take
Super K at his word ... and let his double-speak stand on its own
merits.  Was *he* serious when he made the quote attributed to him?  PT]

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

From: Rick Farris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 9:19:33 PDT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (TELECOM
Moderator) writes:

> Maybe if Mr.  Kapor had his Lotus 1-2-3 ripped off good he
> might change his tune.

Although Wordstar used to have the dubious distinction of 'the most
ripped off software in the world,' I suspect that in this day and age,
Lotus 1-2-3 holds that title.  At any rate, Mitch Kapor certainly has
first-hand experience at losing money to intellectual property
thieves.

I wonder why he sees this case differently.


Rick Farris   RF Engineering  POB M  Del Mar, CA  92014   voice [phone]
[e-mail]         ...!ucsd!serene!rfarris        serene.UUCP 259-7757

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 18:51:35 CDT
From: bungia![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor
Organization: Com Squared Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> you write:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 401, Message 5 of 13

[Moderator's Note: Quotes removed to conserve space. PT]

After all the discussion on this, I can't believe you have such a
bigoted, narrow-minded and short-sighted viewpoint!  I'm absolutely
astounded that you made such remarks, from many points of perspective.

For example, you seem to imply that Kapor is supporting the theft from
businesses, yet as we have seen, the Secret Service _ITSELF_ is guilty
of completely disrupting the business of Steve Jackson Games.  That
really makes Jenkins' remarks look like the self-serving lies that
they are.  "...Threaten to disrupt our nation's business and
government services"?  Give me a break.

If the situation was really that bad, and I honestly do not think it
is, then I still would _NOT_ support abridging the Bill of Rights to
crackdown on the criminals!  Yet that is exactly what the Secret
Service is engaged in doing.  (And even more horrifying is that this
sort of abuse of citizen rights and ignoring the laws of the land _by
government employees_ is becoming so damn commonplace, what with the
hysteria about "drugs" and the gross misapplication of RICO laws that
every DA and his brother is trying out.)  Furthermore, if there is a
real nationwide telecommunications problem with vulnerability to
criminals, it is most likely the lack of a good, national
telecommunications policy that is most at fault!  And that of course,
once again, falls onto the shoulders of our elected officials.  It may
well be, though, that we are getting all the government we deserve, as
someone so aptly put it -- electorate ignorance and apathy is so high
that we get morons and crooks for elected representatives.

To end that digression, though it is important, and to get back to
your comments: it's obvious that the Secret Service and whoever else
is involved is on a witch-hunt of the scale of that by the FBI during
the late 60's and early 70's against those damn anti-war hippies.
Even if the SS has caught up a number of extremely minor criminals in
its huge fishing net, it still doesn't justify what they are doing.
And this is` particularly true when the law regarding electronic
communications networks such as BITNET, Usenet, and Bulletin Board
Systems is so vaguely undefined at the moment.

Is the administrator/operator of some carrier of electronic
information completely responsible for every bit of data contained or
passing through his system?  The present legal answer is "No, well
maybe, we don't know yet."  We know the Phone Co. is not responsible.
They're a Common Carrier.  Are all Common Carriers exempt?  I don't
think so.  Where do we draw the line?  And here's where we run into a
lot of problems, again, regarding` policy.  Do we want to squeeze
BBS's and Usenet right out of existence?  We will, if we make the
operators of the involved hardware responsible for everything passing
through their system.  Or do we want to promote a global electronic
community with free speech and exchange of ideas and information?  Or
what?

And then your suggestion that we steal software from Lotus or anything
else which benefits Kapor financially is really a inflammatory
strawman argument.  Or a bad suggestion classing you with the worst of
the criminals and hypocrits if you were serious.  After all, there is
_NO_ evidence in your remarks that Kapor is supporting criminal
activity.  Rather it seems he is against a campaign of terror
orchestrated by the SS and AT&T and who knows who else directed at a
lot of mostly innocent technophiles.  Are you lily-white, impeccably
honest, Mr. Moderator?  I doubt it.  And even if you were, you ought
to be worried about the abuse of power that is taking place.

Ever heard this parable?  [paraphrased for brevity] A Methodist living
in Berlin just prior to WWII watches as first his Jewish, then Polish,
then non-Caucasian, then communist neighbors are rounded up and taken
away in the middle of the night by the Nazis.  Each time it happens,
he does nothing, since the Nazis leave him alone.  But when they
finally come for him, there is no one to help him or protest his
treatment, because they've already been taken.

Do I need to spell this out for you?  I hope not.  There's a couple
little clauses in the Bill of Rights regarding: innocence until proven
guilt, freedom from unwarranted searches and seizures, freedom of
speech, freedom to pursue happiness.  Surely you are familiar with
these.  Having the Secret Service show up at your house, confiscate
your computer, your media and what-not, and _NOT_ charge you with any
crime is ridiculous!

I'm not advocating theft.  I'm not advocating that phreaker/cracker
criminals go free.  But how about the law enforcement officials stick
to 2 simple rules: 1) follow the laws themselves, and 2) fit the
punishment and enforcement efforts to the crime.  Giving somebody a
felony conviction, a 10 year jail sentence and a $10,000 fine for
stealing something electronically (eg. the E911 operations manual)
that would have been petty theft, had they just walked into someone's
office at an RBOC and taken a printed copy off their desk, is
seriously deranged.

There seems to be a lot of hysteria involved here, and the popular
press is responsible for a lot of it.  But so are the ignoramuses, or
are they fascists?, in the law enforcement agencies.  We here
certainly don't need to add fuel to the fire.  How about level-headed
objective consideration of the problem in its broadest and narrowest
scopes?  (I say that because everyone deserves to be treated as an
individual, yet there is national telecommunication policy at issue
here.)

Oh, and incidentally: maybe it's a forgone issue now, but "hacker" is
not a criminal or delinquint by definition, or at least, not
originally, and not by most people who have pride in being one.  But
maybe the hysterics and popular press have abused this word for so
long that it no longer has its original meaning.  I regret that Mr.
Moderator saw fit to use it as he did, unless it was merely a result
of paraphrasing without thought some press release.


   ...Chris Johnson          [e-mail]   ..uunet!bungia!com50!chris
 Com Squared Systems, Inc.   St. Paul, MN USA   [phone]

[Moderator's Note: I am not ignoring you -- we are simply out of space
in this already oversize issue of the Digest. I'll reply soon.  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #405
******************************











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15768;
          2 Jun 90 13:38 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id af16675; 2 Jun 90 12:18 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa32065;
          2 Jun 90 4:30 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab24695;
          2 Jun 90 3:02 CDT
Date:     Sat, 2 Jun 90 2:15:49 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #406
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jun 90 02:15:41 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 406

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Data Access Lines [Thomas Lapp]
    Re: Jargon Overload [David Tamkin]
    Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code [[e-mail]]
    Re: AT&T Finally learns USA Country Code [Dolf Grunbauer]
    Re: Telebit vs. Sprint [Marc O'Krent]
    Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers [David L. Kindred]
    Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB [David L. Kindred]
    Hardware Hacking -- Simple Ring Generators [Jack Winslade]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 21:56:18 EDT
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Data Access Lines


David Tamkin wrote:

> If PEP is modulated only at 7.35 or 88.26 baud, it should be no
> difficulty for the local lines to carry it, unless shoving so many
> bits into so few bauds requires so many carrier pitches that local
> telco lines might not be reliably able to discriminate that fine.

Aren't we forgetting the fact that some of those 511 channels that the
Telebit uses are outside the frequency range that the telco promises?
I think the telco says that you'll have decent output at something like
300 Hz to 3000 Hz (or is it 2700Hz?).  I thought I read that the
Telebit tries to use more of the frequency spectrum (like maybe up to
4000 Hz?).  So if the channels outside the promised range are unusable,
the telco isn't doing anything wrong, and the modem may not (at 88.26
baud) be able to use enough channels in-band to send at the higher bit
rates.

Just a thought.

 - tom

internet     : mvac23![e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
uucp         : {ucbvax,mcvax,psuvax1,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas
Europe Bitnet: THOMAS1@GRATHUN1         Location: Newark, DE, USA
Quote   : The only way to win thermonuclear war is not to play.

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 22:50 EST
From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Jargon Overload


In volume 10, issue 389, I had responded to two answers to some
questions I'd submitted previously about REN's.

When Tad Cook left me still wondering something, I wrote,

DT> That question has been slid on past throughout this discussion under
DT> the assumption that everyone must already know.

but I still didn't know; and when Julian Macassey said,

JM> I think I covered this in an earlier posting, but then I could have
JM> glossed over it.

I responded that maybe he did cover it earlier, but when something is
stated in a way a non-techie cannot follow or is to be found so deep
in a technical discussion that a non-techie will have given up reading
it before getting to that part, it will reach only the other techies.

I asked,

DT> All you experts, please be tolerant if we ask for a re-explanation of
DT> something in more common terms or if we don't realize that a question
DT> is equivalent to one posed previously in thick jargon.

Later in that same issue, Isaac Rabinovitch wrote,

IR> My lack of experience in the telecom world leaves me without the
IR> vocabulary to follow many of the interesting and important discussions
IR> in this conference.  Could somebody post a lexicon for the benefit of
IR> folks like me?

Pat Townson replied:

PT> It would seem to me [that Isaac and David] have similar complaints,
PT> and the answer for both may be to obtain copies of the glossary files
PT> in the Telecom Archives.  Look for the file entitled
PT> 'phrack.glossary'.

Providing definitions of the words and expansions of the acronyms
cannot guarantee that everyone will understand the complete idea.  In
the questions I asked that led up to that submission and in the
earlier articles that lost me, the problems were the concepts and
assumptions, not the words or acronyms.  I knew the words but the
phrasing was ambiguous to my untrained eyes.  As a result, I couldn't
understand the answers as they were given.  When I asked again, people
repeated the same murky language.  That didn't help.

Finally (in one case very deep in other things I still couldn't
follow) the answers arrived: (1) the frequency of a voltage meant the
frequency at which the current is alternated; (2) REN's measure the
line load for a device to detect an incoming ring signal, not the line
load for its ringer to give out a sound, and therefore shutting the
sounding mechanism off doesn't remove the device's REN load; (3) the
REN limit of 5.0 per line is not a law and some lines can bear 6 or 7
REN's before ringer volume begins to weaken.  Even at that, #1 and #2
came in only when I guessed them, asked whether that was what the
writers meant, and was told yes.

Pat's answer (pun unintended, but what the hell) applies to Isaac's
problem but not really to mine.  Both in TELECOM Digest and in comp.
dcom.telecom, this forum is presented as a written medium.  If we
don't comprehend something, we can reread it until we've seen all the
words a dozen times.  If we still don't understand it, then the words
need to be *replaced*, not repeated as if this were a spoken medium
and perhaps we simply didn't hear you clearly the first time.

So when someone doesn't follow the engineering or telephony jargon and
asks for a re-explanation, it does no good to reuse the same type of
phrasing that didn't get the point across the first time, nor does it
help to fill the response with so much additional technical language
that the answer, no matter how easy to read by itself, is drowned out
by the new flood of jargon.  At least please answer the question first
(in different terms!) and *then* add the other highly technical
thoughts that it brought to mind and which you'd like to say now.

In the future, I'll try to make my requests for explanations multiple
choice instead of essay if I can and, when I need something restated,
to emphasize that I need it rephrased, not repeated.

PT> The Telecom Archives are FTP accessible at lcs.mit.edu, using
PT> anonymous login.

 ... or, for those of us without FTP access, through the BITFTP mail
server at Princeton.


David Tamkin  P. O. Box 7002  Des Plaines IL  60018-7002  [phone]
MCI Mail: 426-1818   CIS: 73720,1570   GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code
Date: Thu, 31-May-90 21:30:04 PDT


Next time, try asking for the country code of New Mexico  :-)


[Moderator's Note: Listen, that's not funny! Ask people living in New
Mexico sometime how often they have to fight the ignorance of credit
card clerks and mail order companies who try to tell them they do not
'do business outside the United States' ...  I had an Illinois Bell
operator one time try to find the 'international routing' to connect
me on a call there. What's worse these days, the American's pitiful
command of English or our abysmal lack of knowledge in geography?  PT]

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

Organization: Philips Information Systems, P.O. Box 245,
Subject: RE: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 15:55:32 MET
From: Dolf Grunbauer <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> John Slater <[e-mail]>
writes:

<The US/Canada country code is unusual in two ways : (1) it is the only
<single-digit country code, and (2) it happens to be the same as the
<code normally used for LD access in the US and Canada.

The USSR has country code 7.


Dolf Grunbauer      Tel: [phone] Internet [e-mail]
Philips Information Systems            UUCP     ...!mcsun!philapd!dolf
Dept. BS Software,  P.O. Box 245, 7300 AE Apeldoorn, The Netherlands


[Moderator's Note: And thanks also to Carl Moore <[e-mail]> for a
similar message pointing this out.  PT]

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

From: Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telebit vs. Sprint
Date: 1 Jun 90 06:52:28 GMT
Reply-To: Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
Organization: Cochran&Associates, Menlo Park, CA


In article <[e-mail]> Jim Gottlieb <[e-mail]>
writes:
>X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 379, Message 11 of 12

>In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <[e-mail]>
>writes:

>>As far as I am concerned, MCI is not a real player for serious long
>>distance users. While they may have lots of "suits" running around
>>schmoozing it up to their corporate customers, the service they
>>provide is substandard to either Sprint or AT&T by an amount far
>>exceeding any discount they provide.

>I must agree.  Unfortunately, I bet that most of the executive
>committees who decide to go with MCI do so based only on pieces of
>paper and never once actually pick up the phone to try the service.

>This is the same reason why PBX manufacturers can and do get away with
>stupid feature implementation.  The buying decisions are made after
>reading proposals in a cute binder.  But they never so much as spend
>ten minutes to see how the phone feels, sounds, etc.

I must disagree, regionally.  Like most telecommunications services
that belong to companies headquartered on the east coast, MCI has
followed the unfortunate pattern of making the West last.

As a former MCI employee in National Accounts, I can tell you that on
the east coast, MCI connection are as good if not better than Sprint
and/or AT&T. The reason for this is simple: MCI deployed their fiber
and digital switches primarily in the Northeast corridor.

MCI only has four major points at which calls are actually "switched"
with the balance of their terminals simply acting as repeaters or pass
throughs to one of the four switching centers.  MCI had more
subscribers per unit area on the east coast, and being a company hq'ed
there, chose to make the majority of the "digital" investment there.

I can still remember the analog microwave that was in service in
California.  Typical of being left to last, there was supposed to be
only something like 30 miles between each repeater.  Unfortunately,
MCI ran out of resources and so there was something more like 80 miles
between instead.  Every time the fog rolled in near San Jose, there
went the connections between LA and SF.  In fact, one engineer figured
that the signal was actually bouncing off the ground in between
repeaters.

Although there is fiber on the the California acquaduct, it is used
primarily for private line, DDS and the State of Calif.

There is supposed to be digital microwave from Richardson TX to the
west coast (Richardson is one of the four magic points), but I have
yet to get a digitial connection from Texas.

Out here, MCI is definetely not as good as Sprint or AT&T, but out
east it is as good technically.

(As a side note about the west getting features last, you might recall
an article that appeared here recently under the heading of "A piece
of ESS history." The article pointed at a 1965 ESS deployment of an
ESS machine *with* custom calling features available.  Althought the
first ESS was also deployed in LA in 1965, it wasn't untill about 1977
that custom calling was offered.  At least that was the first year we
were able to offer it to customers - I was also a Pac Bell service
rep.  --Excuse me, "Pacific Telephone.")


Marc O'Krent
The Telephone Connection
Internet: [e-mail]    MCIMail: mokrent
Voice Mail: [phone]

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

From: "David L Kindred (Dave" <moscom!pyrite.telesci![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers
Date: 31 May 90 23:06:40 GMT
Reply-To: telesci![e-mail]
Organization: Telesciences CO Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> gtisqr![e-mail].
washington.edu (Todd Inch) writes:

>echo "There's no Q or Z on the phone dial."

    Not strictly correct.  Phones I have seen from '40s have the Z
on the 0 (zero), and I have seen at least one phone that has the Q on
the 0 also.  I also recall seeing a modern phone with the Z on the 0,
but don't remember where...

    Anyone have any particulars on who/when/why the Z and Q have
been on/not on the Zero digit?


EMail: [e-mail] (...!princeton!pyrnj!telesci!kindred)
CI$: 72456,3226 ([e-mail])
Phone: [phone] x222
Snail: TeleSciences C O Systems, 351 New Albany Rd, Moorestown, NJ 08057-1177

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

From: "David L Kindred (Dave" <moscom!pyrite.telesci![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB
Date: 29 May 90 20:57:28 GMT
Reply-To: telesci![e-mail]
Organization: Telesciences CO Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> synsys![e-mail] (Jeff
Jonas) writes:

>I've seen ads in the PATH trains for the "New York Connection" where
>NY-NJ calls are handled via the local telco by dialing "NJB" or "NYT"
>prefixes.  Would someone please elaborate?

I'll try, see below.

>   1) A number to call for information ...
>   (my local rep didn't know what I was talking about)

If by local you mean Ulster County, they wouldn't, see below.

>   2) The EXACT name of the program (so I can ask for the right thing) ...

Not sure...

>   3) Why I can't get it here in Ulster county ...

You're too far from the NJ/NY Border, see below.

>   4) How the local telco got a waiver to give long distance service ...

It's not really "Long Distance" service.  New Jersey Bell and Bell of
PA offer the same service in Philadelphia County PA and Burlington,
Camden, and maybe Mercer Counties NJ.  The service area is what would
be considered "Local" if indeed "Local" and "Long Distance" were based
on Geography and not Political and historical boundries.  For this
reason, the NY/NJ service is restricted to New York City and the
adjacent counties in NJ only.  As far as the exact nature of the
tariffs, I suspect it's similiar to the rules that govern any "Local"
Inter-LATA service.  Since I don't know exactly, I would appreciate
the answer to this question myself.


EMail: [e-mail] (...!princeton!pyrnj!telesci!kindred)
CI$: 72456,3226 ([e-mail])
Phone: [phone] x222
Snail: TeleSciences C O Systems, 351 New Albany Rd, Moorestown, NJ 08057-1177

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

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 22:29:47 EDT
From: Jack Winslade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hardware Hacking -- Simple Ring Generators
Reply-to: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha, Ne. 402-896-3537


A few years ago, I had reason to construct a simple ringing generator
which would signal 'real' telephone bells, chirpers, and cause modems
to answer.  I tried a few things and here's a brief summary.

1. 60Hz line voltage through an isolation transformer.  This would ring the
   (500 series) real bells, although more faintly at a faster frequency.
   The chirper I tried would kind of squawk.  The modem (Hayes 1200) would
   answer, but when I added some nominal current-limiting resistors, it would
   fail to answer.

2. My second idea will sound like a real kludge -- it was.  I half-wave
   rectified the output of the isolation transformer, and then using a
   circuit consisting of an RC network and a SCR, I passed every third cycle
   to the load.  (I know this sounds exotic but it does work this way.) I
   level-shifted the output pulse to reverse-bias the gate of the SCR so that
   two of three pulses were blocked.  This resulted in 20 100-some volt
   pulses out to the load.  The chirper sounded fine, the modem answered, but
   the 'real' phone bell only tinkled a bit.  :-(  There obviously was not
   enough energy in the 20Hz portion of the spectrum to make it work
   properly.

3. My third attempt was to build a very simple two-transistor multivibrator
   using a center-tapped filament transformer backwards.  I pre-loaded the
   output and tuned it by ear.  (Scope -- manually selecting capacitors that
   gave a fairly stable 20Hz output.)  With a load resistor and despiking
   capacitor across the output, I had a reasonably clean 20Hz almost-square
   wave signal.  This worked with all three devices.  I still use this today
   in combination with a simple plugboard when I have to key modems when I
   am testing software.

With all of this conversation about ringers, I thought it might be
interesting to some of yu.


 --- Through FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390
[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #406
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id ab16840;
          2 Jun 90 15:06 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa29232;
          2 Jun 90 13:35 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa16912;
          2 Jun 90 12:31 CDT
Date:     Sat, 2 Jun 90 11:45:39 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #407
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jun 90 11:45:16 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 407

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Summary of Broadband Fiber Symposium [Jane M. Fraser]
    Sprint Billing Screwup ... or Bonanza? [Steve Elias]
    Genuine Bell vs Cocots [Todd Inch]
    Hacking/Phreaking/Cracking Tips From Cyberpunk Manual [J. Eric Townsend]
    Visitor From UK Needs Phone Help in USA [Nigel Roberts]
    Default Carriers on Payphones [Carl Moore]
    0+ Calls Where N0X/N1X in Use [Carl Moore]
    Measured Service in Rhode Island [Michael P. Deignan]
    Two Special Issues: UK Phones /Call*ID in PA [TELECOM Moderator]
    Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter" [Jon Baker]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 10:46:29 edt
From: "Jane M. Fraser" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Summary of Broadband Fiber Symposium


On May 15, CAST (the Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications,
Ohio State University) sponsored a one day symposium: Broadband Fiber
to the Home and Office: Economic, Political and Cultural Implications.

The following posting, written by Thom McCain, Associate Director of
CAST, summarizes the presentations.

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

The CAST Spring Symposium featured government, industry and academic
perspectives concerning Broadband Fiber to the Home and Office.  The
May 15, 1990 session focused on the economic, political and cultural
implications of fiber optics, coaxial cable and direct broadcast
satellites for home and small business use.

Participants were welcomed by symposium coordinator Thom McCain.  The
morning Keynote speaker was Robert Pepper, newly appointed Chief of
the Office of Plans and Policy, the Federal Communications Commission.
Pepper is also the author of the highly acclaimed background paper
``Through the Looking Glass: Integrated Broadband Networks, Regulatory
Policies, and Institutional Change."  Pepper reviewed the long and
short range issues for the major player and the stakes which they hold
in the development of integrated broadband networks.  The players
examined included: local exchange carriers, cable television
operators; broadcasters; program producers/distributors; regulators;
and users, including residential consumers.

Representatives from three of the key players with high stakes in the
future of telecommunications infrastructure each presented their
industries' vested interest.  All agreed that the primary use of
broadband will be centered on entertainment video.  Gary Nelson,
Senior Director, Broadband Technologies, Ameritech Services, presented
a compelling account of how broadband services will be brought to the
home with a combination of fiber trunk lines and coaxial cable for the
drop to the home. Brad Johnston, Senior Vice-President, Service
Operations, of Warner Cable Communications, presented Cable's view of
why their industry has the background and economic advantage to bring
entertainment programming to the home, provided they are not hampered
from doing so by restrictive regulation.  Chuck Sherman, Senior
Vice-President, Television, National Association of Broadcasters,
presented a provocative and challenging argument to the Cable and
telephone interests, noting that only Broadcasting has a legacy of
bringing free television programming to the home.  Sherman and the
other industry representatives agreed that local advertising and
programming will be part of whatever mix of technologies and players
eventually emerge.

In the short run all players were cautious about even the suggestion
of cooperative efforts.  The difference in their perspectives has much
to do with the experiences each industry has had as a regulated
industry, with varying degrees of monopoly status.  While broadcast,
telephone and cable service providers all see competition as central
to their futures, each sees different bumps in the road ahead.  These
various roadblocks or impediments are seen as affecting the race
unfairly for their own entry.  Each industry will be less wary as the
playing surface for this game finds its level.

The afternoon Keynote was provided by James Carey, Dean of the College
of Communications at the University of Illinois.  Carey provided a
stimulating and thoughtful charge to participants to reorient thinking
about broadband technologies to focus on individual and societal needs
and uses, rather than only commercial imperatives.  His lecture
``Framing the Cultural Issues - New Technologies in Old Bottles"
presented a series of concerns which communication professionals must
confront in order to be mindful of the relationship between good
citizenship, effective social relationships, educational needs and
consumerism.  As one participant put it ``Dr. Carey's comments puts
tekkies like myself back down to earth, and I mean EARTH."

The final sessions included a panel of experts representing a variety
of perspectives and expertise related to design, economics,
engineering, regulation, lobbying, marketing and education.  They all
used their experience to reflect on the future of integrated broadband
network, by reacting to a newspaper ``The CASTigator," published in
the year 2010.  panel members included: John Fraser,
Telecommunications Engineering Consultant, Christopher H. Sterling,
George Washington University and Editor, Communication Booknotes, Dale
Bring, Ohio Association of Broadcasters, Carol Caruso, Ohio Cable
Television Association, and Mary Brandt, Public Utility Attorney.

Available on request from CAST are:

 - Robert Pepper's background paper
 - Copies of overheads used by Gary Nelson
 - Copies of overheads used by Brad Johnston
 - The CASTigator

Posted by Jane M. Fraser
          Associate Director, CAST
          210 Baker Systems, 1971 Neil Avenue
          The Ohio State University
          Columbus, OH 43210
          614-292-4129
          [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Sprint Billing Screwup ... or Bonanza?
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 90 18:17:59 -0400
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>


Well, Sprint hosed up my billing again.  My calls have been going to
the "error file" ever since I signed up for SPrint Plus in February.
I just got a bill for $100, about 155 calls over four months.

The good news is that since they consolidated all those calls onto one
bill, i got a $17 rebate from their volume discount programs.

Somehow I don't think they'll go for it if I put their bill in my
"error file" and wait four months to pay it.


/eli


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

From: Todd Inch <gtisqr![e-mail]>
Subject: Genuine Bell vs Cocots
Reply-To: Todd Inch <gtisqr![e-mail]>
Organization: Global Tech Int'l Inc.
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 15:42:49 GMT


Lately, on the Seattle radio station I listen to, I've been hearing
quite a few commercials from US West (the major local telco, formerly
Pacific Northwest Bell) for "Genuine Bell pay phones" aimed at
retailers with lobby phones.

The ads say something to the effect of "you can't get a more
worry-free pay phone than genuine Bell from US West."

Sounds like good advice for the customer as well.


Todd Inch, System Manager, Global Technology, Mukilteo WA  [phone]
UUCP: {smart-host}!gtisqr!toddi    ARPA: gtisqr![e-mail]

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

From: "J. Eric Townsend" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hacking/Phreaking/Cracking Tips From Cyberpunk Manual
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 2:40:47 CDT


Well, I rushed out and bought GURPS Cyberpunk, in the hopes that my
money will help SJG with legal fees.  (Plus, I collect game stuff.)

On the front cover, in the SJG Illuminatus logo, it says: "The book
that was seized by the U.S. Secret Service! (see p. 4)"

Anyway ... (Assuming I know *nothing* about cracking/phreaking.  I
won't comment on my real knowledge.)  The following is a summary of
text from the GURPS Cyberpunk supplement, with a few direct quotes.

How Much Hacking Can I Do Based on the C-word manual: (From the
section entitled "Netrunning".)

0.  People use handles to hide their real identity (p62).

1.  You can uses sensitive devices to listen in on the signals being
sent to a computer monitor, and redisplay the image on your own screen
(p62).

2.  General info on ISDN.  (p64-64)

3.  Computer accounts can come in various levels, from specialty
logins (uucp) to "superuser" who has access to everything.  Some
programs can give you a higher level of access, equivalent to a
"better" account (p68).

4.  General info on back doors (p69).

5.  General info on chat systems (p69).

6.  A list of network names from around the world.  No clues as to which
are real.  For the US, the following are listed:

WUT, UDTS 2, Datel I & II, Telenet, Tymnet, ARPAnet, Infomaster, GraphNet,
TRT, FTCC, UniNet, Autonet, CompuServer, GENIE, AlaskaNet, JANET, Internet
(p 71).

7.  Passwords can be really obvious, or hard to remember random text strings
(p 72.)

8.  A program could possibly cause physical damage (p 72.)

9.  General Phreaking Info:

    -  Diverters:  go through a bunch of systems so that tracing takes
    a long time;

    -  Junction Boxing:  Just go down to the local junction box and tie in
    (p 76).

10.  Lots of networks use different protocols that are sometimes
incompatible (p 77).

11.  Ma Bell stuff:
     -  Existence of CN/A, and that Ma Bell can look you up in any way;

     -  Line Routing: "With access to the main phone switch computer,
     a hacker can control everything about a specific phone line.";

     -  Monitoring: a person could monitor calls with the right access;

     -  After Billing:  A person could change bills;
     (p 82).

12.  Trashing: Go through somebody's trash to find out all sorts of
interesting info about their computing equipment (p 86,87).  (13 and
14 are from the section "Attack and Defense Programs".  The programs
are obviously s-f software, but ...):

13.  Promote: "This program is executed from a normal user account on
a system.  If successful, the account is 'upgraded' to a superuser
account."

14.  Webster: "This is the standard icebreaker for use against
Password programs (see p 93.).  It acts as an extremely fast
'brute-force' hacker."  (p 92).

15. Credcard Crime: A false balance could be entered in an account.  A
device could be used to access somebody else's card without having the
correct password to get into the credcard (p 105).  [note: a credcard
is a self-contained debit card that can have anything from a password
to retina scan protection.]

And, um, that's about it.  Now that you've read that, you know how to break
into computer systems and do phone phreaking... 1/2 :-)


J. Eric Townsend -- University of Houston Dept. of Mathematics [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]
Bitnet: jet@UHOU
Skate UNIX(r)

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 03:51:25 PDT
From: Nigel Roberts [phone] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Visitor From UK Needs Phone Help in USA


    Crash-course in N. American telecom street-smarts wanted.
    ---------------------------------------------------------

I expect to be making a number of trips to N. America soon, starting in
a couple of months time. From readings of recent Digests it seems that
there's a lot to catch out the unwary European (AOS's, COCOTs' etc).

I regard myself as a fairly sophisticated telcoms user, but it sure
sounds like a jungle out there!

Can I ask DIGEST readers to summarize (briefly) any obvious
'self-defense' hints that would be useful. (I know about hotel
rip-offs -- Europe isn't much different in that respect).

Thoughts on the best and cheapest ways to contact Europe and to be
contacted (can you rent voicemail boxes short term, for example?)
while we are in N. America will also be most appreciated.

I currently have a British Telecom Chargecard and the usual 'major'
credit cards (MC/VISA/AMEX) -- are there any good deals to be had in
taking out U.S. based calling cards??

Thanks in advance for any ideas.


Nigel Roberts

voice     [phone]    &  [phone]
fax     [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 10:16:30 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Default Carriers on Payphones


Pay phones I have seen (supplied by Bell Atlantic in northern Delaware
and northeastern Maryland) state the long-distance carrier for
inter-LATA calls, but sometimes it doesn't match the default one I
actually get.

NTS (wasn't that cited w/r to some COCOTs?) appears as the default
carrier on some of the above.

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 10:30:43 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: 0+ Calls Where N0X/N1X in Use


Doug Reuben and David Tamkin write about 0+ calls in areas which have
N0X/N1X prefixes.  All such areas that I know of require 0+NPA+7D for
all 0+ calls--EXCEPT that 213 area (now 213/818) used to require only
0+7D for 0+ calls within NPA.  There, as I heard from this Digest way
back around 1981 when JSol was Moderator, you needed timeout to
distinguish between, say, 0-413-2345 and 0-413-234-5678.  But buried
in a recent Los Angeles area directory was 0+NPA+7D, apparently for
all 0+ calls.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Measured Service in Rhode Island
Date: 2 Jun 90 13:44:38 GMT
Organization: Anomaly - Rhode Island's Open Access *NIX - 1 [phone] PEP


In Rhode Island, the only way you can get measured service installed
in a home that has unlimited service is to have an "apartment".
NETEL's definition of an "apartment" is a living area with stove and
bathroom.

So... There is one Sysop of a local BBS here who has measured service
lines installed all the time. To accomplish this, whenever he calls
for measured service, when NETEL shows up to hook up his new line, he
takes the little propane grill out of storage and sets it up. And,
since his basement already has an extra bathroom, and his bedroom is
down there too... voila!  instant apartment.

MD

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 11:11:43 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Two Special Issues: UK Phones /Call*ID in PA


Saturday afternoon/evening two special issues will be transmitted to
you. One is a detailed report on phone service in the UK; the other is
a selection of messages received in the past few days on the court
ruling relating to Caller*ID in Pennsylvania. Included with that one
will be minutes of the meeting held recently in Florida, and announced
in the Digest.


PT

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

From: Jon Baker <asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter"
Date: 1 Jun 90 17:12:18 GMT
Organization: gte


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter Weiss)
writes:

> Does this mean they only install this stuff at dwellings that have
> telephone circuits installed?

I would presume so.

> Are there any implications on what kind of circuits?

Might not work with multi-party, but with most other common
residential connections it should work.  Wouldn't work on a pure data
line.

> What happens if a data call is in progress?

A call is a call.  If the line is siezed, the metering is aborted.  If
you have a data line (as opposed to voice line transmitting voice-band
data), I doubt this system would work.

> If measured service, who foots the cost of the call?

The utility, of course.  It is a service provided to the utility by
the telco.  The telco allows the utility to use their facilities for a
fee.

> Is there an implied theft of (telephone) service from the subscriber's
> point of view?

Why?  If you go off-hook during the metering process, the metering is
aborted.  There is no denial of service at any time to the subscriber.

> What does the FCC & PUC think of all this?

Ask 'em.  Since it's been going on for a while, I doubt they object.
The line up to your house is telco property, after all.

> If this is saving the utility money, will it be reflected back into
> the rates?

Are you kidding?  Why should it?

> I guess these are rhetorical questions since I don't really want to
> start a flame war.

No one does ...

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #407
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22992;
          2 Jun 90 20:07 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa23571;
          2 Jun 90 18:41 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27348;
          2 Jun 90 17:36 CDT
Date:     Sat, 2 Jun 90 16:42:36 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest Special: UK Phone System
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jun 90 16:41:00 CDT    Special: UK Phone System

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    UK Telephone System [Clive D.W. Feather]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Clive D.W. Feather" <ixi![e-mail]>
Subject: UK Telephone System
Reply-To: "Clive D.W. Feather" <[e-mail]>
Organization: IXI Limited, Cambridge, UK
Date: 29 May 90 15:23:14 GMT


This document is my attempt to describe the UK phone system (i.e.
those telephones within the +44 international area). It is based on
information I have picked up over the years, but is not guaranteed.

Telephone services in the UK are provided by the following
organizations:

    British Telecom
    Mercury Communications
    Hull Telephone Company
    Vodaphone
    Cellnet

For historical reasons, BT allocates area codes. This will change in a
couple year's time.

The bottom level of the BT system is the "Junction Exchange" (JX in
this document). A JX is a unit which handles 10,000 subscriber
numbers, numbered 0000 to 9999. A number may have several lines
attached to it (hundreds in some cases). These four digit numbers are
called LNs (Line Numbers) in this document.

In a few rural areas, some subscriber numbers are three digits. The
appropriate JX thus takes some LNs as being three digits, and some
(possibly none) as four. Such JXs are being phased out. [This should
be distinguished from the case where all LNs in a group of ten go to
the same subscriber, and are interconnected. For example, Basildon
hospital officially has the LN 2811. In fact, all of LNs 2800-2899 go
to the hospital switchboard, and the JX will route the call as soon as
it sees "28".]

JXs are grouped into "Area Codes" (AC). Each JX has a one or two digit
number within its AC - one digit numbers are being phased out. The
exception is in "all-figure areas", where each JX has a three digit
number. These numbers do not begin with 0 or 1.

Each area code has a number. For most area codes, this is three
digits, but for all-figure areas, it is two digits.

The "number-space" for area codes is used as follows.  All normal area
codes begin with a digit from 2-9. The area codes for the all-figure
areas are:

    Birmingham    21
    Edinburgh     31
    Glasgow       41
    Liverpool     51
    Manchester    61
    London inner  71 (new)
    London outer  81 (new)
    Tyne & Wear   91

Of the 720 three-digit codes, about 600-650 are in use (I do have a
complete table in numerical order, but it's not in machine-readable
form). Certain codes have special meanings:

    345  Calls charged at L rate irrespective of distance
    482  Hull Telephone Company
    800  Free calls
    831  Vodaphone
    836  Vodaphone
    839  Calls charged at m rate irrespective of distance
    860  Cellnet
    898  Calls charged at m rate irrespective of distance

Mercury has been allocated fifteen JXs in the 71 AC and the same
fifteen in the 81 AC. I believe that all Mercury subscribers have
numbers in this AC, irrespective of location.

Area code 1 was used for London (both inner and outer) until 0001 on 6th May
1990; I am unaware of any plans for it. Area code 10 is obscured by the
international access code. No area codes begin with 0 (but see below).

 From any BT subscriber, you can call any number by:

    0 + area code + JX number + line number

For example, anyone can call me by 0-954-78-0223. In addition, there are
certain special codes:

    010    international access
    0001   equivalent to 010 350 1  [Dublin]
    0055   from London only; calls charged at L rate
    0066   from London only; calls charged at a rate
    0077   from London only; calls charged at m rate

Service codes begin with a 1:

    100    operator
    144    BT credit-card calls
    151    fault reporting
    153    international directory
    155    international operator
    192    directory

Area codes are further grouped into "Charging Areas" (CA). For example:

    London CA:    71, 81
    Cambridge CA: 220, 223
    Madingley CA: 954

The exception is the Tyne and Wear AC, which is three CAs (JXs [24]??,
JXs 3??, and JXs 5??). This AC replaced three separate ACs (whose
numbers I have forgotten), each of which had its own CA.

BT has five charging rates for UK calls, and seven for international.
The UK rates, in increasing order of cost, are L, a, b1, b, and m (m
is more expensive than I, which is the cheapest international rate).
Rates also vary by time:

    peak     = M-F 0900-1300
    standard = M-F 0800-0900 and 1300-1800
    cheap    = all other times

(these do not apply to international calls).

All calls within a CA are at rate L, as are those to "neighbouring"
CAs. Each CA has a nominal centre. For all other calls, if the CA
centres are within 56km, the call is at rate a, and otherwise it is at
rate b. Rate b1 replaces rate b where BT feels under pressure from
Mercury (London CA to Cambridge CA is b1, but to Madingley CA is b).
Rate m ("mobile") is only used for calls to Vodaphone, Cellnet, and
the special area codes. Hull is treated as a normal CA. Calls from BT
to Mercury are charged as normal calls to the London CA.

The real complications (you thought this wasn't enough ?) come when
dialling calls other than by the full 0+ sequence. For this you need
to know the subscriber number (SN).

The one simple case is the all-figure areas. For each area, lines
within the area are identified by seven digits (JX+LN), and calls are
made by just dialling this number [in Tyne and Wear, calls *between*
ACs must be prefixed with 90; this is being phased out].

Everywhere else, we run into the "Named Exchange" (NE). An NE
comprises a set of JXs, usually, but not always, in the same AC. A
subscriber is identified by an exchange name followed by the SN, which
is the LN with a prefix. The prefix can be empty, the last digit of a
two digit JX, or the JX number. A catch to beware of is that sometimes
two NEs have the same name but are distinguished by number length. For
example, there is "Welwyn (six figure numbers)" and "Welwyn (four
figure numbers)". These cover the same geographical area, but may have
different ACs (these two don't). They are always in the same CA.

As an example, the Madingley CA consists of:

    AC  JX  NE                 Prefix
    954 78  Crafts Hill        78
    954 21  Madingley          21
    954 3   Swavesey           3
    954 6   Willingham         6
    954 5   Cottenham          5
    954 4   Caxton (4 digits)  none
    954 71  Caxton (6 digits)  71
    954 7   Elsworth           none

Calls to CAs other than at rate L are always dialled by the full 0+
method. To call a subscriber on the same NE, it is just necessary to
dial the SN. Other calls within the CA, and to CAs which are at the L
rate, may have an alternate dialling method (not necessarily:
Madingley to Huntingdon is rate L, but 0+ must be used; all calls from
AC 71 or 81 to any other (or each other) must be dialled as 0+).

Two alternate methods seem to be in common use: the "fan" method and
the "slave" method (my names).

The "fan" method is used at the main NE of a CA. Several prefixes in
its AC are not used, but instead become dialling codes from the NE.
For example, from Cambridge:

    8  -> AC 220 (same CA)
    91 -> AC 440 (different CA)
    92 -> AC 767 (different CA)
    93 -> AC 954 (different CA)
    94 -> AC 638 (different CA)
    95 -> AC 763 (different CA)
    96 -> AC 799 (different CA)
    98 -> AC 353 (different CA)

These are then followed by the JX and LN. All other NEs in the same AC
(not the same CA) can be called by dialling the JX and LN with no
prefix (there are no cases of this in AC 223).

[Amusing side-note. Someone blew it in specifying 8 -> AC 220. The JXs
that were in AC 220 (21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 5) did not occur in
AC223. So there was actually no need for the dialling code. All of
these except the last two have now been moved to Cambridge NE (and AC
223) by simply changing the SN, without changing the JX+LN
combination. The others will come soon (I have already seen people
using "Cambridge 29xxxx" phone numbers).]

The "slave" method is used at all other NEs in the same CA, and
possibly in other CAs (All of Madingley CA is a slave of Cambridge NE
in this sense).  Calls to the master NE are made by dialling a single
9 followed by the SN. All calls which are rate L, and which could be
made from the master NE with a dialling code, are made by dialling 9
followed by the sequence from the master NE.

For example, from ACs 220 and 954, the following dialling codes exist:

    9    -> AC 223
    9+8  -> AC 220 (also used from Teversham (220 5) to West Wratting (220 29))
    9+91 -> AC 440 (not available from AC 954)
    9+92 -> AC 767
    9+93 -> AC 954 (also see below)
    9+94 -> AC 638 (not available from AC 954)
    9+95 -> AC 763 (not available from AC 954)
    9+96 -> AC 799 (not available from AC 954)
    9+98 -> AC 353

In addition, a slave NE may also have other dialling codes not
beginning with a 9. For example, in AC 954, to dial from Caxton (six
digits), Cottenham, Crafts Hill, Madingley, Swavesey, and Willingham
to any number in the AC is done by JX+LN, without any code. On the
other hand, to dial from Elsworth to Caxton (four digits), or vice
versa, the route via Cambridge must be used (i.e.  9+93+JX+LN).

One final note. Slave exchanges have operator service provided by the
master exchange. This means that emergency service is "9+99". On
master exchanges, it is thus simply "99" (! for UK readers).


Clive D.W. Feather  | IXI Limited           | [phone] (v)
[e-mail]       | 62-74 Burleigh Street | [phone] (fax)
["x", not "ixi"]    | Cambridge  U.K.       |-----------------------------
 ...!uunet!ixi!clive | CB1  1OJ              | Silly quote being thought up

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

End of TELECOM Digest Special: UK Phone System
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25483;
          2 Jun 90 21:12 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13982;
          2 Jun 90 19:45 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab23571;
          2 Jun 90 18:41 CDT
Date:     Sat, 2 Jun 90 18:16:08 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest Special: Call*ID Illegal
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jun 90 18:15:00 CDT    Special: Call*ID Illegal

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Court Declares Caller*ID Illegal [Various Correspondents]

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

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Court Declares Caller*ID Illegal
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 17:30:00 CDT


This past week, a court in Pennsylvania ruled that the Caller*ID
service offered by telcos in that state was illegal. The telcos will
most likely appeal to higher courts, including perhaps the United
States Supreme Court for a final resolution. I received a huge number
of messages from readers on this topic. Many were reports as they
appeared in local newspapers around the country. In this special issue
of TELECOM Digest, I have culled through the messages received, and
present several. My thanks to all who wrote, and my apologies to the
several messages I could not include due to space limitations,
including but not limited to '[e-mail]' and Pete
Ferris <[e-mail]> who sent the story as it appeared on
the Associated Press wires.

   From: [e-mail]

[From the New York Times, Thursday 31-May-90, Page D1]

    Services Identifying Caller Held Illegal In Pennsylvania

By Keith Bradsher

A Pennsylvania court ruled yesterday that services that identify the
telephone numbers of callers represent an illegal invasion of privacy.

The verdict was the first in the nation on the legality of such
services.  The five judges of the Commonwealth Court, a mid-level
state appellate court, ruled unanimously that caller identification
services ... violate Pennsylvania's wiretap law.

All five judges found that the services violate the law even when
telephone companies allow some customers to block the release of their
telephone numbers.  And the court ruled by a 3-2 vote that the
services violate privacy protections offered by the Pennsylvania
Constitution.

"In the framework of a democratic society, the privacy rights concept
is much too fundamental to be compromised or abridged by permitting
Caller*ID," Judge Doris A. Smith wrote in the majority opinion....

But Bell of Pennsylvania criticized the ruling.  "Because of this
decision, Pennsylvanians are being denied a service they eagerly want
and badly need - a weapon against harassing, threatening or obscene
calls," [a spokesman said].

    Three Options for Panel

The Commonwealth Court hears appeals of decisions by state and local
administrative bodies in Pennsylvania, and its decisions may be
appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.  John F. Povilaitis, the
chief counsel of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, said his
office would review yesterday's decision and make a recommendation to
the commissioners within a few days.

[He] said the commission had three options: to ask [for a rehearing],
to file an appeal before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, or to allow
the decision to stand.

Bell of Pennsylvania was not named as a defendant in the case.  But
[it] said it qualified as a party [and could appeal if the PUC chose
not to].

Bell ... filed with the commission on June 18, 1989 for permission to
offer caller identification.  The commission approved the filing on
Nov. 9 and the company scheduled service to begin Jan. 9.  But a
Commonwealth Court judge blocked the service pending judicial review.

The suit was filed against the P.U.C. by the state's Office of the
Consumer Advocate, the [ACLU], the Pennsylvania Coalition Against
Domestic Violence and the Consumer Education and Protective
Association.

[Caller ID is now] widely available in [five states] and on a limited
basis in [three others] ... according to ... a spokesman for Bell
Atlantic Corporation, the parent of Bell of Pennsylvania.  Phone
companies in nine other states and Washington are seeking to introduce
caller identification.

Long-distance companies, including [AT&T], also offer caller
identification to some businesses with 800 and 900 numbers.
Yesterday's decision ... did not address whether long-distance
companies should stop providing information for Pennsylvania callers.

"We have to see how, if at all, this ruling affects AT&T," said ... a
spokesman for the company.

    Privacy Issue Cited

Bell Atlantic and other defenders of caller identification have argued
that the services discourage obscene callers and protect the privacy
of people receiving calls by allowing them the choice of not
answering.  But the court ruled explicitly that the privacy of people
making calls is more important.

The court found that caller identification services function as
call-tracing devices, which under the Pennsylvania wiretap statute may
be used only under certain circumstances.  The court noted that
Pennsylvania requires the consent of all parties before a telephone
conversation may be recorded.

As of December, there were fifteen other states with similar
requirements.  The remaining states and Federal law allow taping with
the consent of one party.  But [FCC] rules require that all parties to
an interstate or international call be aware they are being taped.

The Pennsylvania wiretap statute contains wording similar to the
Federal wiretap statute.  Bills are pending in the House and Senate
that would amend the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 to
make caller identification explicitly legal while requiring that
telephone companies give customers the option of blocking release of
their telephone numbers.  A subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary
Committee has scheduled a hearing for June 7 on caller identification.

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

Next, we have a report from the {Philadelphia Inquirer}:

   From: "Scott D. Green" <[e-mail]>

Yesterday, Commonwealth Court ruled that Caller ID violates the
state's Wiretap Act and the caller's constituional rights to privacy.
Judge Doris Smith ruled that obscene and annoying calls can be dealt
with using existing Bell services.  Bell of PA will study the ruling
to decide whether to appeal to the state supreme court.

Opponents of CallerID (ACLU, PA Coalition Gainst Domestic Violence, et
al) went to court only to get blocking for any customer who wanted it.
The decision said that CallerID violates the Wiretap Act, with or
without blocking.  Bell's VP for Ext. Affairs said, "Because of this
decision, Pennsylvanians are being denied a service they eagerly want
and badly need."

The company said that the ruling would force them to remove CallerID
from police and fire emergency lines.  [A threat, perhaps?? -sg].

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

David Gast makes an excellent suggestion, after paraphrasing the story
as it appeared in the {New York Times}:

   From: David Gast <[e-mail]>

The NYT reports in Thursday's (May 31, 1990) edition that a mid level
PA court has ruled that Caller Id is an illegal invasion of privacy.
All five of the justices found that the services are illegal under PA
wiretap laws even if some customors can block their phone numbers from
being sent.  The justices split 3-2 in favor of ruling that caller ID
violates the privacy protections of the PA state constitution.

An AT&T spokesmen said that he would have to look at the ruling to see if
it affects 800 and 900 caller identification programs.


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

P.S. Since I tried extremely hard to avoid editorializing (that is,
commenting on whether I believe the decision was good or bad), I
suggest that follow-ups be made to some other newsgroup like
misc.legal.

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

Wayne Correia sent this report from the {San Jose Mercury News}:

   From: Wayne Correia <[e-mail]>

5/31/90 SJ Mercury News

CALLER ID SERVICE BREAKS WIRETAP LAW, COURT SAYS

    PHILADELPHIA - A Pennsylvania court said flatly Wednesday that any
form of Caller ID, a proposed Bell of Pennsylvania service that would
allow customers to see the phone numbers of callers, violates the
state's Wiretap Act and callers' rights to privacy.

    Civil libertarians applauded the Commonwealth Court ruling - which
went further than Caller ID's most vocal critics had asked for - and
said it might spark challenges to the service elsewhere.

    Bell of Pennsylvania said it was "extremely disappointed" with the
decision and might appeal to the state Supreme Court.

    Caller ID has aroused fierce debate in Pennsylvania and other
states where it is being introduced, with both sides arguing that they
are trying to protect privacy.  The service permits phone customers
who pay a fee and who have the right piece of equipment to see the
numbers of callers before answering the phone.

    Telephone companies and others in favor of Caller ID say it is
like a peephole in a front door, letting customers decide whether to
answer their phones and protecting their privacy.  Others say it
sacrifices the privacy of people with unlisted numbers and might
discourage people from making anonymous call to the police or other
investigators or crisis hot lines.

    Consumer groups went to court to try to get number-blocking for
any customer who wanted it, which Bell said would defeat the purpose
of Caller ID.

    Other Bell companies are testing or introducing Caller ID in a
number of other states but often are running into the same debate that
surfaced in Pennsylvania.

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

[Wayne then added this personal note at the bottom of the newspaper story.]

I guess they don't know that organizations with Primary rate ISDN
trunks and Feature Group D 800 lines currently receive the CPID and
ANI respectively of the phone number calling them.

Maybe technology will win over emotion next time.

I wonder how much a PRI ISDN trunk and a corresponding Panasonic PRI
ISDN trunk card for my PBX would cost me? (if it were available!) :)


Wayne Correia
[e-mail]

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

A thread started recently in the Digest discussed 'self help' ways of
blocking Caller ID. Some replies have appeared in regular issues of
the Digest; here is one from Dave Levenson:

   From: Dave Levenson <[e-mail]>
   Subject: Re: Defeating 800 ANI & Caller*ID Using the "O" Operator
   Date: 31 May 90 04:17:47 GMT
   Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve L.
Rhoades) writes:

> On a related question: For those of you with Caller*ID, what happens
> when you get a call routed through the "O" operator ?  (the called
> party being someone that you would normally get a calling number from
> on your Caller*ID display).

In New Jersey, an operator-assisted call (any 0+, whether human or
MCCS-assisted) is displayed as OUT OF AREA.  This same display is used
for calls from non-SS7-connected CO switches, and for calls from
outside the LATA.


Dave Levenson            Voice: 201 647 0900  Fax: [phone]
Westmark, Inc.            UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA            AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave
[The Man in the Mooney]

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

   From: [e-mail]

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania (a mid-level state appellate
court) ruled 4-1 that Caller ID violates Pennsylvania's wiretap law,
reversing a November order by the PUC allowing Bell of Pennsylvania to
offer Caller ID.

The court said Caller ID was unacceptable even if offered with a
blocking device. The court also ruled 3-2 that Caller ID violated
privacy protections offered by the Pennsylvania Constitution.

The decisions of this court can be appealed to the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court. The PUC can also ask the court to hear the case again
within fifteen days or let the decision stand.

It's not clear how this will affect the 800 and 900 ANI services
offered by long distance companies. The decision said nothing about
preventing long distance companies from providing ANI on Pennsylvania
callers.


Eduardo Krell                   AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ

UUCP: {att,decvax,ucbvax}!ulysses!ekrell  Internet: [e-mail]

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

   From: mark kallas <[e-mail]>
   Organization: DSC Communications, Plano Tx.

I heard that Pennsylvania has outlawed Caller ID because it violates
the wire tapping laws. How many other states have taken action against
Caller ID?


Mark Kallas

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

   From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
   Subject: Summary of Florida PUC Meeting on Caller ID

Background:

SBT wants to start selling CID on 5 June for $7.50/month. They do NOT
want to supply blocking at all, but have relented for police officers
and domestic violence workers.

{Disclaimer: This is from memory. I did not take many notes, and so I
may have some names spelled incorrectly. A transcript is available
from Mr. Shreve's office.}

The 30 May meeting regarding Caller ID was slightly stormy. It was
called by Jack Shreve, the state Public Counsel. His office represents
utility consumers before the PSC. It was not well publicized, but
about fifty people attended. 'PRO' speakers included SBT, a Palm Beach
businessman who talked about the ability to monitor customer's buying
patterns by phone number and a woman from an organization called PATT
(I think), in Maryland. (I'm not sure who paid her travel expenses,
but the person next to me mentioned that she has been to several
states and on the Hill testifying about it.)

The first ANTI speaker was from the Florida Medical Association.  He
talked about the concern of the medical community in regards to
returning patient's after hours calls. He pointed out that all of the
alternatives SBT suggested (cellular, operator assisted, separate
outgoing line) would cost the subscriber extra. SBT suggested they may
offer a new blocked METERED outgoing line to MD's {note: to the best
of my knowledge, there are no metered/measured lines in the FL tariffs
at present)

Another ANTI speaker was from a volunteer group whose members are
appointed by a judge to represent the child in custody/abuse cases.
Mr. Ellington of SBT suggested she contact her HRS {ie state welfare
system} representative. {SBT has already offered HRS employees
blocking}. She pointed out that her organization has NO connection
with HRS at all, and in fact they often oppose HRS in these cases.

But the largest contingent was from the law enforcement community.
Mr. Ron Tudor of the Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement pointed out the
many problems involving the law enforcement community. He also talked
about the large amount of CID equipment being found in raids in other
states.  An Assistant State Attorney mentioned the fact that
prosecutors and judges face the same problems as police officers. {SBT
has NOT offered them blocking} Several other PD officers from various
agencies also spoke. {Mr. Tudor is on a FSLE committee that is
studying the entire problem. I gathered this study is a major effort.
I got this impression when he showed up with, and started quoting,
Bellcore spec's. No disrespect, but I work with lots of cops, and I
never before met one that knew Bellcore existed ;-( }

Mr. Robert Sherman, a free lance photojournalist, talked about the
similar situation he would face. He wondered if {Watergate's} Deep
Throat would have ever called the Post with CID around.

The meeting ran well over its time slot and concluded about 1900.  Mr.
Shreve announced he was considering holding more such meetings before
deciding his course of action.

Final notes:

a) The FLA PSC is supposed to decide on 5 May. I would *guess* that
they will stall.

b) There was some media coverage (2 rx people, and at least one rag)
the latter because there was a story was on B-1 of the Herald the next
day. The focus of the story was the controversy, and the differing
viewpoints.


[e-mail]
(305) 255-RTFM
pob 570-335
33257-0335

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

Further news developments will be reported of course, but as David
Gast suggested, misc.legal might be a good place for followups.


PT

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

End of TELECOM Digest Special: Call*ID Illegal
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05349;
          3 Jun 90 1:22 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06232;
          2 Jun 90 23:49 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa02342;
          2 Jun 90 22:45 CDT
Date:     Sat, 2 Jun 90 22:31:33 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #408
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jun 90 22:31:09 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 408

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Discounts For Deaf: My Solution [TELECOM Moderator]
    TDD Discount: My Response [Curtis E. Reid]
    Re: TDD Long Distance Discount [Ken Harrenstien]
    Re: TDD Technology (was Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues) [Mary Winters]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 22:05:20 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Discounts For Deaf: My Solution


I hope no one will be angry with me for drawing this topic to a close
at this time ... it has occupied a lot of bandwidth here in recent
days, and like so many 'political' problems relating to telecom, the
discussion could go on a lot longer.

My suggestion is that the discounts should continue, for perhaps a
maximum period of another eighteen months -- say, until January 1,
1992. During the interim period, an effort would be made to convert as
many TDD users as possible over to high speed modems and 'BBS like'
software, so that for all practical purposes they could participate in
the world with the rest of us. I'd even go so far as to say the money
presently allocated for relay services and the like could be partially
used to subsidize the purchase of inexpensive terminals with high
speed modems. For those deaf persons who already had computers and
modems, some software would be available at a reduced (if necessary)
price.

Then following the cut off date, no more discounts for slowness ... or
maybe, a much smaller discount at present, which would go on for a few
more months of the coversion, then a final end to it.

That's just my solution; it seems a fair way to end the costs others
are paying while still lending help to our deaf citizens.

To bring a close to this topic, this issue has three more final
comments, including one from the person who started the thread.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 16:36 EST
From: "Curtis E. Reid" <[e-mail]>
Subject: TDD Discount: My Response


I've been away on vacation and imagine my surprise the "flame war"
that I started!  :-)

Okay ... from the articles that were posted in several issues of
TELECOM Digest, it appears there are several major issues that were
raised in response to my concern that AT&T might discontinue the TDD
discount for deaf customers.  These issues that the readers brought up
are indirectly and directly related to the use of TDD discount.

Allow me to explain the reasoning why AT&T deaf customers have TDD
discount.  It is *not* a discount per se (like 50% etc.) but rather
use of time-of-day rate at the time of call made.  I.E., if I call
during the daytime (Day Rate), I get billed at the Evening Rate.  If I
call during the evening (and Evening Rate), I get the Night Rate.
Likewise, if I call during the Night Rate, I still get the Night Rate.
And, they are all direct-dialed.

The following schedule for direct dialed inter-state calls is pretty
common in many states:

        Time Actual Called    Rate Actual Billed

           Day Rate     --->   Evening Rate
           Evening Rate --->   Night Rate
           Night Rate   --->   Night Rate

Some states also offer similar rate schedule like above for intrastate
calls; although I do not know what PacBell, SouthWest, and other
companies offer.  I'd like to hear from readers who might know about
it in those areas.

And, the most common restriction regarding the TDD discount is that it
is offered only for one residential line.  So, if you have a couple
residential lines, you get the TDD discount only on one line.  If you
think you can get these discounts on multiple lines, forget it.  And,
AT&T must be your primary long distance carrier.

Another thing, you must fill out an application and have it signed by
an physician or audiologist to certify that you are hearing impaired,
you are unable to hear or speak well to communicate aurally, and you
rely on TDD.  The telephone company that processes your application
will call you on TDD to verify that you do indeed have a TDD to
answer.

These procedure may vary in some states and local telephone companies.
For example, Rochester Telephone Corp. is probably the most unique in
the country because it uses a calling card billing to give TDD users a
TDD discount.  Apparently, their billing system cannot handle the
discount on direct-dialed (1+a/c+nbr) so the workaround is to use the
calling card with a special prefix 534.  This practice has continued
for many years and it seems likely that Roch Tel will not modify their
system because AT&T will soon be doing its billing in July or so.

Back to my concern that I addressed earlier, I was concerned about the
news that AT&T might consider removing the TDD discount because no
other long distance carriers (MCI, Sprint, etc.) carries this
discount.  So, the idea is if they don't carry the TDD discount, why
should AT&T?  I contacted AT&T but they deny or plead ignorance so I
don't know whether it will be implemented when they do the billing
later this year.  I simply hope this is just a pure rumor.

To address other concerns of issue: Why should deaf customers who use
TDD get the discount?  Why don't they upgrade TDD units to 1200 or
higher bps?  Are deaf people really economically disadvantaged?  Is
the TDD discounts fair?  I think all these pretty sums it up what
readers have posted to TELECOM Digest.  I'll answer each questions and
you can tell me whether you agree or disagree but let's not start a
flame war, please.

Why should deaf customers who use TDD get the discount?  If you look
at the rate schedule I mentioned earlier, there isn't really any
additional discounts -- just a shift of the rate with time of the day.
But, the real answer, that some of you have already answered, is that
a communication via TDD takes two to four times longer depending on
the user's typing skills.  Even at 45 WPM is too slow for me but it is
the fastest TDDs are designed to handle.  Some people type slower than
45 WPM.  This is an equitable way to equalize the cost of a voice call
versus TDD call.

To give you an idea, if I spoke the following sentence "Mary had a
little lamb.", it will only take me five seconds to say it.  Now, if I
typed that on a TDD, it takes fifteen seconds.  Now, for fun exercise,
record a five-minute conversation with another person.  Just five
minutes.  When you are done, play back the conversation.  Repeat the
entire conversation by typing it into a computer or typewriter.
Record the time start and time end.  When you are done, figure how
long it is.  Add another twwo minutes for pausing and "GA"s.  That's
how long.  My guess it is between fifteen to twenty minutes or longer
if you speak fast.

Why don't they upgrade TDD units to 1200 or higher bps?  I encourage
the use of ASCII and higher speed.  Unfortunately, TDD is a 1960
technology which uses the outdated BAUDOT code (5-bit) and there is a
large installed base of approximately one million.  Many people have
invested in TDDs and consider purchase of a TDD to be significant.
So, residential TDD customers would rather keep their TDDs as long as
it is still working.  When it breaks down after five to seven years,
then they'll buy another TDD.  So, the cycle repeats.  I feel that
this will continue well into the 21st century.  Until they are willing
to use ASCII instead of TDD to communicate, TDD is here to stay.

Are deaf people really economically disadvantaged?  I would say
between 75%-80% are economically disadvantaged.  The rest are
well-to-do with good income.  But, for the most part, they live
between poverty and low middle income.  (I consider less than $13,000
to be poverty.)  So, they have to eat which takes up about 40% of
their income.  Rent and taxes are two other major expenses.  So, there
isn't much room for luxury items.  As far as I know, there isn't many
deaf managers in corporations or in executives.  Oh, I'll say there
are in high-level manager positions but it's few and far between.
Every penny counts.

Is the TDD discounts fair?  To regular customers like yourself?
That's a matter of opinion.  Some say it's not fair because it
subsidize deaf people.  Who is to say it's fair that blind people get
an extra exemption on their federal income tax return?  Who is to say
it's fair that the elderly gets LifeLine service?  Alas, the world is
not what we'd like it to be.  There are so much prejudice and bias
that the government has to assist those disadvantaged.  If *all* the
companies would hire blind, deaf, physically handicapped and others
equally and equitably then we won't have any problems with
subsidization.  Until that day that everyone would be treated equally
(and it is coming soon now that the Congress is close to passing a
civil rights bill for the handicapped that prevents discrimination in
employment and other places), subsidization is necessary.

Consider yourself.  What kind of job are you working?  Is this job
something a deaf person can do?  What about your friends?  Are they
receptive to deaf or handicapped people?  I can go on and on but I'm
sure you get the idea now.

I know I'm at the risk of starting a discussion on the merits of deaf
people versus other people and the use of subsidization.  Please bear
in mind that I'm writing in response to some of the comments/remarks
that some of you made.  What I have said earlier represents my views
and opinion and is in no way represents the opinions of *anyone* else.

Well, that's it from me.  TDD specs and history are in the Telecom
archives if you want to look further into it.

                 Curtis Reid
                 [e-mail]
                 [e-mail] (Internet)
                 [e-mail] (Not Reliable-NYSernet)

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 17:36:47 PDT
From: Ken Harrenstien <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TDD Long Distance Discount


I guess I should comment, although I'm not sure whether I can
adequately cover in one message all of the subtopics that are now
tearing off in all directions.  I tend to wax philosophical, so bear
with me...

As a professional, I agree with John Gilmore that rewarding
inefficient transmission with lower rates seems counter-intuitive, and
I can understand the appeal of Libertarian arguments to put everything
on a pure pay-for-yourself basis.

But Karl Denninger is correct when he writes that:

>However, the issue is not
>bandwidth, nor is it the information able to be transmitted per unit
>of time.  It could be a matter of perceived public service, or any one
>of a number of other factors.

It's simply impossible to consider technology in isolation; economic,
political, and moral considerations all contribute factors that are
almost always far more important.  I learned this many times over
while working on our Deafnet project and participating in the PUC
hearings for California's TDD distribution program, and got so
depressed and burned-out by this exposure to reality that for several
years afterwards I had no interest in bashing my head any further.

Technological:

High-speed data standards, batched e-mail, VLSI modems and other
technological fixes are fine and dandy, but the concepts were not new
twelve years ago when we demonstrated all of them.  Exercise for the
reader: Why do you think they haven't happened?  Analogous exercise:
why don't we have HDTV yet?

Economic:

Are the deaf economically disadvantaged?  In general, yes.  Anecdotal
evidence might work for Reagan, but not in this forum, I hope.
Regardless of many well-off deaf professionals you know, the data from
real surveys is not encouraging.  In general, the level of income for
deaf people is below that of the hearing population; for the
prelingually deaf the differences are more severe.  One of these
differences is a 6th-grade reading level, which is not exactly a
ticket to fortune (once again, movie stars notwithstanding).  While my
own experiences as a WODP must be considered equally anecdotal, they
are consistent with these surveys.  And were a rude shock, I might
add.

Political:

Why should some groups be subsidized?  A good question, which should
be applied to everything else such as local and rural telephone
services, hospitals, insurance, mass transit, PBS, and space
launchers.  Whether we like it or not, the representatives of our
society have already decided that subsidization is an acceptable
method to promote the greater good, and if you are arguing against
this concept, you are taking a radical position indeed.  In this
particular case, I believe some form of help for deaf telephone users
does indeed promote the greater good, but as for most other subsidies
it is hard to come up with definite proof of this.  We make do with
appeals to emotion, reason, and greed.

I don't know how the rate discount evolved.  I do know that the TDD
distribution plan in California was heavily influenced by TDD
manufacturers who expected to gain a windfall profit from sales to
telcos.  The situation of deaf people provided the emotional
sugarcoating that made the vendors' motives palatable to the
legislature and PUC.  Whether the equipment served the needs of the
deaf was secondary to whether it served the needs of the vendors, the
PUC, and the lobbyists thereof.  In retrospect, just normal politics.

Moral:

Modern western culture appears to have developed a general philosophy
that it is a Good Thing for advantaged people to help disadvantaged
people.  Aside from religious motives, this can be justified both on
the selfishly personal grounds that you never know when YOU will
become one of the disadvantaged, and the more noble but long-range
faith that it will contribute to society as a whole.  I use the word
"faith" because even when the economic numbers demonstrate the
advantages of things like subsidization, it's hard for most people or
businesses to think in such long-range terms.  Why should your money
support my telephone usage?  Why should my money support your PhD at
Enormous State University?  Why am I wandering off the subject?

In sum:

Personally I think that the additional traffic and business generated
by providing telephone access to the deaf will far compensate for the
"subsidization".  I don't think the rate discount is a particularly
well-conceived approach to the problem, but the other aspects (TDD
distribution and relay service) are essential.  The telephone has
become such an enormously important and crucial part of our society
today that any group which is prevented from using it, for any reason,
is indeed severely disadvantaged.

I just wish that it was easier to get technology out of the lab and
into the real world.


Ken

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

From: [e-mail] (Mary Winters)
Subject: Re: TDD Technology (was Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 17:03:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> "Yossi (Joel" <joel%TECHUNIX.BITNET
writes:

>>[...], but are deaf people going to be stuck with 45.5 baud forever?

>The logical thing to do would be to use standard 300 baud ASCII-type
>modems.  (Most humans can't type 300 baud anyway).  They're readily
>available, and very cheap.  But the problem is that the existing TDD's
>are the existing TDD's, and no one wants to be the first on the block
>to get the new, non-backwards comptable, technology.

In California, they have TDDs which have two operating modes: the
"normal" 45.5 baud/baudot code mode, and an ASCII/300 baud mode,
changeable by a simple flip of a switch. I saw one of these back in
1985 or so. I was told that these units were loaned to deaf people
free of charge. It seems like a very nifty way to sidestep the problem
you mention.


[e-mail]
Suffering from PMS (Presentation Manager Syndrome)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #408
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10452;
          3 Jun 90 3:29 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04693;
          3 Jun 90 1:53 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa01926;
          3 Jun 90 0:49 CDT
Date:     Sun, 3 Jun 90 0:00:52 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #409
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Jun 90 00:00:03 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 409

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Response, Re: TDD Discount [R. L. Buchwalter, ATT, via B. McGarry]
    Re: NN0-style NPAs and Order of Assignment [Marc O'Krent]
    Re: ATT Special Promotion [Bill Huttig]
    Re: Modem Connections While Camping [Jon Baker]
    Re: Defeating 800 ANI & Caller*ID Using the "O" Operator [Jon Baker]
    Re: Data Access Lines [Stephen J. Friedl]
    Re: PacBell Dropping Charge for Touch-Tone Service [Andy Behrens]
    Re: Another Clue to Possible E. German Prefixes [Jim Shankland]
    Re: Caller-ID Theory and Operation [Jon Baker]
    Re: Telebit vs. Sprint [John Higdon]
    Re: 0+ Calls Where N0X/N1X in Use [Douglas Scott Reuben]
    Re: 10XXX Bugs [Brian O'Donoghue]
    Re: One Ringer, N Phones [Nigel Allen]
    Re: My List of North American Area Codes [[e-mail]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Bill McGarry <decvax!bunker![e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Response, Re: TDD Discount
Date: 3 Jun 90 03:20:59 GMT
Reply-To: Bill McGarry <decvax!bunker![e-mail]>
Organization: The Handicap News BBS (1-203-337-1607)


[Moderator's Note: Just as the last issue on TDD Discounts was going
out the door here, the following arrived. Even though the discussion
had to be closed, I did want to share this important response.  PT]

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

Recently, Curtis E. Reid ([e-mail]) wrote an article
about AT&T considering removing the TDD Long Distance Call discounts.
I posted Curtis's article in misc.handicap (which is also gatewayed
with the ABLED and SILENTTALK conferences in Fidonet).  I received
various responses, including this from R. L. Buchwalter of AT&T.


            Bill McGarry
            [e-mail]

This article is from [e-mail] (Joan Bachenko):


This is from R.L. Buchwalter of AT&T, in response to the recent
mail about AT&T's TDD discounts.  Please address replies to either
the network or to [e-mail] and I will see that
your comments are passed along to AT&T.

Joan Bachenko

AT&T Policy on TDD Discounts:

Concerning the May 21 inquiry about changing the discounts for TDD
users, I can say AT&T has no current plans to change these discounts.
The level of TDD discounts is of the many price elements associated
with a long distance call.  We continually review our pricing relative to
market conditions but as stated above have no plans to change the
TDD pricing.


R. L. Buchwalter
AT&T Division Manager - LD Strategic Planning

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

From: Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NN0-style NPAs and Order of Assignment
Date: 1 Jun 90 06:33:48 GMT
Reply-To: Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
Organization: Cochran&Associates, Menlo Park, CA


In the list of "new" NPA, I didn't see *310* which is the area code we
will have here in LA after 2/92.  Just FYI.


Marc O'Krent    The Telephone Connection
Internet: [e-mail]    MCIMail: mokrent
Voice Mail: [phone]

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

From:  Bill Huttig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ATT Special Promotion
Date: 1 Jun 90 16:13:43 GMT
Reply-To:  Bill Huttig <[e-mail]>
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

 >Obviously what?  Geez, Patrick, you ought to know me by now.  Even if
 >I had read the Digest on time, I still would have routed my calls via
 >Sprint Plus for about the same price as the "ATT Special Oh Wow
 >Promotion" rate.  And my connection probably would have been just
 >*that much* clearer and louder, depending on destination.

I talked to a few AT&T customer service reps one hinted to a rate
reduction coming up soon.  Another one said that there would be more
"Specials" this summer but didnt know how much or when.  seems that
the LEX's have to reprogram their billing computers for each Special.

 >Use US Sprint and turn your connection up to ELEVEN.

    MCI Primetime is only 10.8333333 cents per minute $6.50 /hr and they
know how to bill.(Not as good as AT&T but better then US Sprint).

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

From: Jon Baker <asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Modem Connections While Camping
Date: 1 Jun 90 16:57:42 GMT
Organization: gte


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (J. Philip
Miller) writes:

> I have been contemplating how I can get my regular fix of
> comp.dcom.telecom while I am gone.

Get professional help.

> I have the usual assortment of modular phone cords with alligator
> clips and gizmoes to replace the mouthpiece of a standard phone, but
> think that these are unlikely to work from the pay phones which are
> usually about the best you can find in a campground.
> Suggestions?

There used be something called an 'acoustic coupler', or some such.
Should work fine from a garden-variety pay phone.  Maybe try Radio
Shack; they might still sell them.  If not, try your local Museum of
Electronic Gadgetry That's So Old Nobody Knows What It Does Any More.

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

From: Jon Baker <asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Defeating 800 ANI & Caller*ID Using the "O" Operator
Date: 1 Jun 90 19:09:01 GMT
Organization: gte


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve L.
Rhoades) writes:

> My question: Is this just a fluke ?  Is there some type of convention
> for TOPS to pass the calling number to the 800 service provider ?  Has
> anyone else tried this ?  Does it work elsewhere ?

Your number is being passed (via ANI) to TOPS.  TOPS *should* pass the
caller's number back to the originating CO via ANI.  If the
originating CO has SS7 or ANI trunks to the 800 carrier, then the
originating CO *should* forward your number to the 800 carrier.

Possible causes :

  1. TOPS is not passing the digits back to the CO;
  2. the originating CO does not have ANI/SS7 trunks to the 800 carrier;
  3. the originating CO does have such trunks, but for some reason is not
     forwarding your number.

Since your number does usually get passed on, that should rule out #2.
Someone who knows more about TOPS could address #1.  If you know what
type of CO you are served by, we might be able to address #3.  --

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

From: "Stephen J. Friedl" <mtndew![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Data Access Lines
Date: 1 Jun 90 14:26:50 GMT
Organization: VSIFAX Tech Center


> If PEP is modulated only at 7.35 or 88.26 baud, it should be no
> difficulty for the local lines to carry it, unless shoving so many
> bits into so few bauds requires so many carrier pitches that local
> telco lines might not be reliably able to discriminate that fine.

PEP is modulated at 7.35 or 88.26 baud PER CARRIER, and to get the
baud for the whole signal one must multiple by the number of carriers
in use.  A PEP line is easily thousands of baud for a clean line, and
for phone line requirements, the 7.35 or 88.26 number is meaningless.


Stephen J. Friedl, KA8CMY / Software Consultant / Tustin, CA / 3B2-kind-of-guy
[phone]  / [e-mail]  / {uunet,attmail}!mtndew!friedl

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

From: Andy Behrens <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PacBell Dropping Charge for Touch-Tone Service
Date: 1 Jun 90 20:48:35 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Christopher J. Pikus <[e-mail]> writes:

> Today in my phone bill was a little leaflet saying that they
> will be eliminating the charge for touch tone.  ...

Today I got a little leaflet too.  For its Vermont customers NYNEX is
lowering the charge for 3-way calling and call forwarding, but
*raising* the charge for touch tone!

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

Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 16:34:27 PDT
Subject: Re: Another Clue to Possible E. German Prefixes
Reply-To: mtxinu!Ingres.COM![e-mail]
Organization: The Eddie Group
From: Jim Shankland <mtxinu!llama.Ingres.COM![e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (J. Stephen
Reed) writes:

>West German postal codes are normally four digits, ranging from 1000
>(West Berlin) to 7999.  An article in the Germany Philatelic Society
>magazine noted that according to a Deutsche Bundespost bulletin some
>years ago, the 8000s and 9000s are reserved for "other German regions".

Not quite right.  Don't know about the 9000 series, but the 8000
series is used by Munich and surroundings (much of Upper Bavaria?).

jas

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

From: Jon Baker <asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Theory and Operation
Date: 1 Jun 90 17:21:41 GMT
Organization: gte


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Sameer
Siddiqui) writes:

> - Is it a propriatary service/product?

Do you mean is only AT&T allowed to manufacture equipment that offers
it, or is only <XYZ>Bell allowed to offer it?  No.  Anyone can
manufacture equipment that provides CID, and any telco can offer it.

> - Is it available or going to be available nationwide?

The capability to offer it will be available nationwide (i.e.
nationwide deployment of SS7).  It may not be available in some areas
due to regulatory or judicial intervention.  Certainly some backwater
areas will be slower to acquire the technology ...

> - Is it part of ISDN service?

No.

> - Do you need the decoder/display box or can you get a PC to do the work?

With the proper interfacing equipment, you could get a PC to do it.
Redcom in Rochester, N.Y., markets an interface that connects to
lines, trunks, T1, etc., and reports activity on such devices through
an RS-232.  This device does detect FSK tones, so could be used to
detect and report Caller ID.

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telebit vs. Sprint
Date: 2 Jun 90 11:54:56 PDT (Sat)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]> writes:

> Althought the
> first ESS was also deployed in LA in 1965, it wasn't untill about 1977
> that custom calling was offered.  At least that was the first year we
> were able to offer it to customers - I was also a Pac Bell service
> rep.  --Excuse me, "Pacific Telephone.")

That's odd. I remember the first Bay Area ESS cuts as being around the
very early '70s. (I started noticing the "precise" ringback tone, and
the funny way when someone answered, the RBT would stop almost a full
second before there was the clunk of the audio path being completed.)
Anyway, it was not more than a year before the first basic features
were offered: three-way, forwarding, and call-waiting. Speed calling
didn't become available until something like 1976, but there were
definately the other features available years before that.

This is extra odd, since it has been my experience that ALL
technological improvements in Pac*Bell (or Pacific Telephone,
depending on the era) come to the Southland years before anywhere else
in the state, including the Bay Area.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

Date: 2-JUN-1990 15:42:46.36
From: "DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 0+ Calls Where N0X/N1X in Use


[Moderator's Note: A response to a letter from Carl Moore.  PT]

Carl-

Actually, the 1/1AESS's in Queens and Brooklyn (718) New York allowed
1+ and 0+7 digit dialing for a while, and the same problem came up.

One could dial 0+403-9970, and the payphone would wait for a few more
digits.  (Or you could dial 0-403-555-1111 or whatever, and it went
straight through...)  I found that using the "#" sign at the end of
the seven digit number would tell the exchange to immediately process
the call, rather than wait for the timeout (I think someone on the
Digest mus have mentioned this allready, though..).

The odd thing was that you were also able to dial 1+ 7 digits for
local calls to SOME areas. IE, you could dial 1+336-9950 from a 718
1AESS in Queens to reach (then then 336 1XBar (?)) in Brooklyn, which
was a local call. Yet you weren't allowed to dial 1+ to reach other
exhanges nearby, ie also local (718-643, 398, etc...) Since I wasn't
too familiar with where any of the 'towns' in Brooklyn are, I assumed
that the 1+ calls were historically toll calls, and the ones which
refused 1+ were not. When I found out that some of the exchanges which
accepted 1+ before the seven digits were CLOSER to me than the ones
which did not, I called NY Tel to ask why this happened.

The rep said that they NEVER charged toll rates at any piont in time
to those areas (all of NYC, except Staten Island, was "local" since
the late 1940's, it seems...), and that it was a mistake that the
calls accepted a 1+ first.

A few weeks later, the 1+/0+ thing no longer worked, which I guess
shows you not to complain to NY Tel!

(You can still try the timeout thing though, by dialing 0+AC+#, after
the card # is accepted dial "#", and place a new call to 403-9950. The
Calling Card equipment will wait for a while to see if you time out,
and then put the call through to 403-9950. Of course, you can always
enter the "#" key before you hear the "Thank You" (no "...for using
AT&T" since it's local and it's a 'sequence call'...) which will put
the call through immediatly.

I think you can still do 0+7 digits in the 415 area (Bay Area/SF). But
then I'm not sure whether they have any exchanges that look like area
code in the 415 area yet (ie, N0X/N1X exhcanges)...


Doug

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 20:23:26 EDT
From: Brian O'Donoghue <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs
Reply-To: Brian O'Donoghue <[e-mail]>
Organization: C3 Incorporated, Herndon, VA


Jon Baker (asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]) writes:

> [When] using a pay phone, I suggest always using 10XXX carrier
> selection just so you know who you're dealing with.

I wish it were that easy.  In Delaware and Virginia, I have found BOC
payphones which reject 10xxx selection of the default carrier, with
the recording: "This call may be made using easy dialling.  Please
hang up, and dial again."  (Sigh)


[e-mail]    {decuac.dec.com,cucstud}!c3pe!br

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: One Ringer, N Phones
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Contact Public Unix BBS. Toronto, Canada.
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 10:46:40 GMT


Otto L. Miller wanted a loud ringer for his high-noise work environment.

I'd recommend a flashing light instead. Radio stations use them in
areas where a ringing bell might be heard on-air.

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 12:16 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes


Jim Breen <[e-mail]> writes, quoting our Moderator:

>[ lots of country codes deleted  ]
>>     974-    Qatar            976-    Mongolia
>>     977-    Nepal            98-     Iran

>> [Moderator's Note: The above are always prefaced with either 011 (for
>                                   ******

>Patrick, Patrick! PLEASE remember that your group is read all over the
>world. Your comment above is true for callers in the USA, and
>practically nowhere else. International access codes differ from

Similarly, Patrick, I really think that with respect to the list of US
area codes you posted, writing them all as "1-XXX" was inappropriate.
Aside from the fact the the "1" is an access code, and not part of the
phone number, it _certainly_ is the wrong access code for most parts
of the world.

To draw an analogy, that would be like saying that your e-mail address
for the archives is "FTP LOGIN anonymous/guest lcs.mit.edu."  That may
be what one user types to get to them, but the FTP LOGIN
ANONYMOUS/GUEST is not part of the internet node.  Of course, almost
everyone seems to treat the access code as if it were part of the
phone number, but that doesn't make it accurate.


[Moderator's Note: The 1- designation was in the list when it was
forwarded to me. As the compiler of that list already pointed out, it
was intended for a specific application on his computer. You are
correct that the 1- is not technically part of the phone number, but
there is a certain USA bias in this Digest, with between 85-90 percent
of our readers being in this country. Many articles here will be
phrased for the US readers, with no offense intended to others; it is
impossible to cover all possibilities all the time.  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #409
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06854;
          3 Jun 90 16:26 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13319;
          3 Jun 90 14:59 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa26461;
          3 Jun 90 13:55 CDT
Date:     Sun, 3 Jun 90 13:00:49 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #410
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 3 Jun 90 13:00:00 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 410

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Alberta Government to Sell Telephone Company [Nigel Allen]
    Ontario Communications Minister Resigns [Nigel Allen]
    Request For Suppliers Information [Steck Thomas]
    Call Guide Discusses Calling From 215 Area [Carl Moore]
    Re: UK Telephone System [Steve Hamley]
    Re: UK Telephone System [Linc Madison]
    Re: NN0-style NPAs and Order of Assignment [Linc Madison]
    Re: East/West German Telephone Area Codes and Postal Codes [Wolf Paul]
    Re: One Ringer, N Phones [Dave Levenson]
    Re: 0+ Calls Where N0X/N1X in Use [John Higdon]
    Re: My List of World Wide Codes [Linc Madison]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Alberta Government to Sell Telephone Company
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 6:34:40 EDT
From: Nigel Allen <contact![e-mail]>


For decades, telephone service in most of Alberta, one of Canada's
western provinces, has been provided by Alberta Government Telephones
(AGT), which is owned by the Alberta government.  On May 31st, Alberta
Premier Don Getty said the government would sell half of the company,
and it would offer Alberta residents the first chance to buy shares.
No more than ten percent of the shares could be owned by
non-Canadians.

Complete details (when, share prices, etc.) weren't announced.
However, the {Globe and Mail} (a Toronto newspaper with a strong
emphasis on business and political coverage from which I got most of
the information for this article) mentioned a value of $3 billion for
AGT.

Traditionally, AGT was regulated by the province. A recent Supreme
Court of Canada decision said that the federal government could take
over regulation of AGT (and of SaskTel and Manitoba Telephone System,
two other telephone companies owned by provincial governments) by
passing appropriate legislation.  Since the provincial government will
no longer have the ability to set rates and investment patterns for
AGT in the interests of whatever Alberta groups it wants to serve, the
need for Alberta to own its own phone company is somewhat diminished.

The only other phone company in Alberta is 'Edmonton Telephones', a
department of the City of Edmonton.  Unitel Communications Inc.
(formerly CNCP Telecommunications) competes with AGT for some
long-distance and enhanced services, but is not allowed to provide
message toll service (individual long distance calls).

The political opposition isn't impressed, calling the proposed
sell-off a mistake. New Democratic Party leader Ray Martin was quoted
in the {Globe and Mail} as saying that the sell-off would cause the
cost of telephone service to soar, and would cost AGT the tax-exempt
status it now has as a government-owned company.

I don't know whether the provincial governments in Manitoba and
Saskatchewan, or the city government in Edmonton, are considering
selling off their phone companies, but they'll obviously be watching
the AGT privatization with great interest.

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ontario Communications Minister Resigns
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Contact Public Unix BBS. Toronto, Canada.
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 11:33:36 GMT


Christine Hart, Ontario's Minister of Culture and Communications,
resigned Wednesday, May 30, after it became known that four junior
employees of Bell Canada had worked as volunteers in her campaign to
retain the Liberal nomination in the Toronto-area constituency of York
East, and that Cantel Inc., a unit of Rogers Communications Inc.,
supplied six cellular telephones for the campaign.

An opposition member of the Ontario legislature said that a week
before her resignation, Hart had asked the Ontario cabinet to support
Unitel Communications Inc.'s bid to compete in the long distance
service market.

On Wednesday, in explaining her decision to quit the cabinet, Hart
said it was a mistake to have anyone employed at a telecommunications
company working on her nomination. The potential for conflict of
interest might arise, she said, because her ministry (its
Communications Division, actually) acts as an indirect regulator when
it takes positions on issues with the CRTC.  She also said she did not
solicit help.

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

From: Steck Thomas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Request For Suppliers Information
Date: 2 Jun 90 14:29:29 GMT
Reply-To: Steck Thomas <[e-mail]>
Organization: Johns Hopkins University


I am attempting to compile a list of (mostly) national telecom-supply
dealers (lineman's sets, testers, etc...)

If anyone can contribute to this or has already done so, please e-mail
it to me.

Thanks,

Tom Steck

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 01:09:36 -0400
From: MOORE <[e-mail]>
Reply-to: [e-mail]
Subject: Call Guide Discusses Calling From 215 Area


The latest Allentown (Pa.) directory says to dial 1+201+7D for local
calls from, say, Easton to N.J., and that this was done because 215 is
running out of prefixes.  Also, the Western Delaware County (Pa.)
directory says the same thing regarding local calls to Delaware (i.e.
dial 1+302+7D), and adds that this measure provides "short term
relief" for 215-area prefix shortage.  But for as long as I could
remember, Kemblesville (215-255) dialed 1+368-xxxx for toll call to
Lansdale and 368-xxxx (now 1-302-368-xxxx) for local call to 368 in
Newark, Del.

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

From: Steve Hamley <tharr![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: UK Telephone System
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 17:06:53 BST


A few comments on Clive Feather's article on the UK telephone system:

> For historical reasons, BT allocates area codes. This will change in a
> couple year's time.

It already has. Following complaints from Mercury about BT's behaviour
towards them in allocating codes, Oftel now allocates all area codes.

Incidentally, current thinking is that area codes will cease to exist
when the UK phone network is completely digital. Users will then be
able to take their 10 digit telephone number anywhere in the country.

>     345  Calls charged at L rate irrespective of distance
>     482  Hull Telephone Company
>     800  Free calls
>     831  Vodaphone
>     836  Vodaphone

They're actually called Vodafone. The cost of a call to Vodafone or
Cellnet mobile phone numbers is determined by the digit after the area
code. For example 8361 is charged at 'a' rate (Vodafone customer
services, operator, etc.) whilst 8367 is charged at 'm' rate (actual
cellphones).

>     839  Calls charged at m rate irrespective of distance

These are Mercury revenue sharing services.

>     860  Cellnet
>     898  Calls charged at m rate irrespective of distance

These are British Telecom revenue sharing services. As with Mercury, a
proportion of the income from these calls is given to the service
provider. At present calls are charged at 25p / min peak and standard
rates and 38p / min cheap rate, including VAT. Of this, 17.5p,
excluding VAT, is passed on to the service provider. Vodafone also
carries revenue sharing services, using the 8364 prefix. Cellnet is
also licensed to do so, but doesn't because of its ties with BT.

> Mercury has been allocated fifteen JXs in the 71 AC and the same
> fifteen in the 81 AC. I believe that all Mercury subscribers have
> numbers in this AC, irrespective of location.

Mercury also has exchanges in other AFN areas. In some cases these
were originally old BT Strowger exchanges! Don't let them kid you
Mercury's all digital...

> Area code 1 was used for London (both inner and outer) until 0001 on 6th May
> 1990; I am unaware of any plans for it.

The 01 prefix is now almost certain to be used for variable charge
revenue sharing services - like the US 900 numbers. This cannot take
place until a greater proportion of the BT network is digital. Mercury
also plan to offer a similar service, probably using the same 839
prefix.

> For example, anyone can call me by 0-954-78-0223. In addition, there are
> certain special codes:

>     010    international access
>     0001   equivalent to 010 350 1  [Dublin]
>     0055   from London only; calls charged at L rate
>     0066   from London only; calls charged at a rate
>     0077   from London only; calls charged at m rate

0055 and 0066 have now been phased out, 0077 will shortly be too.
These were revenue sharing services. They weren't only available from
London, but any city with a Derived Services Network centre. This is a
network separate from the main BT network, which carries 345, 800 and
898 numbers. It has its origins as an early trunk network, I believe.

345 and 800 have now been switched over to the Digital Derived
Services Network from the old analogue DSN. This uses AT&T 5ESS
switches, allowing wide flexibility in call routing. Customers can
choose to receive a certain percentage of calls at a different
locations, changing depending on the time of day, for example. 898 is
currently undergoing conversion to the DDSN.


Steve Hamley
 ...ukc!axion!tharr!steve

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 03:46:24 PDT
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: UK Telephone System


Just a quick question for Clive Feather or anyone else: you mention
the new all-figure area code 91 for "Tyne & Wear"; what area does that
encompass?  Is it Middlesbrough and Newcastle or something like that?
(M'bro is/was 642).


Linc Madison   =   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 03:17:06 PDT
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NN0-style NPAs and Order of Assignment
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>In the list of "new" NPA, I didn't see *310* which is the area code we
>will have here in LA after 2/92.  Just FYI.

That's because 310 isn't an NNX area code: "N" represents digits 2-9,
so 310 is still an N1/0X, in standard jargon.  The list was only of
the NN0 codes they will assign.

It is still an interesting question, though, which N10 codes they're
going to use in what order after 510 here in Berkeley and 310 there in
L.A.  Will they use all eight of them before starting the NNX's, or
will they intermix them, like they did with 510/310 before 917/909?


Linc Madison  =  [e-mail]

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

From: wolf paul <iiasa![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: East/West German Telephone Area Codes and Postal Codes
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 23:18:24 MET DST
Organization: IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria


In TELECOM Digest V10 #397, J. Stephen Reed <[e-mail]>
writes:

> West German postal codes are normally four digits, ranging from 1000
> (West Berlin) to 7999.

I would not put too much credence to the exact wording of the article
you are quoting. All of Bavaria has postal codes starting with 8, with
Munich being 8000. Bavaria IS part of West Germany.

> according to a DBP bulletin some years ago, the 8000s and 9000s are reserved
> for "other German regions" ... primarily ... ("the so-called 'GDR'").

> (Digression: Note the word "primarily" in the last paragraph.  It
> seems obvious that not all Federal Republic bureaucrats have given up
> on getting back the territories now held by Poland ...

As for it being obvious what some German bureaucrats think about the
German/Polish border, the source document cited in the article seems
to date back several decades, when the German postal code system was
set up, and not reflect anyone's thinking today.  Mr. Reed even quotes
the magazine article referring to a DBP bulletin 'SOME YEARS AGO", and
if it uses the phrase, "so-called GDR", which has been out of official
use for some time, it would, as he himself pointed out, date back to
the 50s or 60s.

It has already been reported here that the DBP Telecom has area codes
(not codes for exchanges) set aside for the territory of the DDR.

Disclaimer: I am not German, and have no special interest in German
unification -- but neither in international fear mongering, which
seems very common in the context of potential German re-unification.
Anyone wanting my views on this subject in more detail is welcome to
ask by e-mail.


Wolf N. Paul, Int. Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Schloss Laxenburg, Schlossplatz 1, A - 2361 Laxenburg, Austria, Europe
PHONE: [phone]     FAX: [phone]      UUCP: uunet!iiasa.at!wnp
INTERNET: [e-mail]   BITNET: tuvie!iiasa![e-mail]

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

From: Dave Levenson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: One Ringer, N Phones
Date: 3 Jun 90 13:11:18 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Otto
Miller) writes:

> I have a need in a high noise environment (my workshop... compressor,
> saw, etc) that I am served by two residential lines.  I would like a
> single loud ringer driven by both lines just to get my attention.  Any
> ideas?  Thank you in advance!

Radio Shack sells a device that connects two lines to one answering
machine.  It connects its output to the last input on which ringing
was detected.  It can be used with their own or someone else's loud
bell, to do the same thing.  It costs about $20.

I use two of them, in cascade fashion, to share a Caller-ID display
unit among three incoming lines.


Dave Levenson            Voice: 201 647 0900  Fax: [phone]
Westmark, Inc.            UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA            AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re 0+ Calls Where N0X/N1X in Use
Date: 3 Jun 90 08:48:16 PDT (Sun)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


"DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN)" <[e-mail]> writes:

> I think you can still do 0+7 digits in the 415 area (Bay Area/SF). But
> then I'm not sure whether they have any exchanges that look like area
> code in the 415 area yet (ie, N0X/N1X exhcanges)...

In 408 you can; in 415 you cannot. There have been some N0X(ious)
prefixes here for some time. My favorite is 415/601 where all the
CLASS recordings live (601-00XX). Too bad we don't have CLASS.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 02:49:03 PDT
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of World Wide Codes
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


In article <[e-mail]> Patrick writes:

> [request for post of list of city codes worldwide]

>The long-distance carrier of your choice has lots of books, charts
>and printed reference materials you can order if you feel you must
>have a list of everything, everywhere. The front pages of your local
>phone book probably contain many city codes for starters.   PT]

Speaking of the local phone book, I've noticed something the last few
years: the list of foreign codes has gotten SHORTER and SHORTER each
year -- I guess the idea is that Pac*Bell doesn't get much revenue
*directly* from international calls, so they won't put much effort
into helping you.  For example, the Oakland book lists 38 country
codes and a total of about 83 city codes, for the entire world.  The
omissions are rather strange, too: Finland is listed but not Sweden.
Other notable omissions are Turkey, Egypt, Argentina, Thailand, and
all of Africa except South Africa.  Vatican City and Monaco rate
listings as country codes, but not Saudi Arabia.  Our Swedish friends
will be happy to know that they are the only country the San Francisco
directory adds to Oakland's list, with 5 city codes (second only to
UK).

Four years ago, my San Jose directory had 3.5 pages of listings for
country/city codes.  Why chop the list???


Linc Madison   =   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Maybe they found it as much a pain in the fingers
to type, edit, proof-read and respond to complaints about as I do.
Full scale lists of this size have little value for most people. If
they appear in some one single authoritative document someplace, let
it go at that.   PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #410
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07630;
          4 Jun 90 4:41 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa16765;
          4 Jun 90 3:09 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab08210;
          4 Jun 90 2:01 CDT
Date:     Mon, 4 Jun 90 1:28:17 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #411
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 4 Jun 90 01:28:09 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 411

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Kapor [TELECOM Moderator]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Kapor [[e-mail]]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Kapor [C. Irby]
    Re: My List of North American Area Codes [Linc Madison]
    Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code [Christopher Vance]
    US/Canada Only One Digit Code? [Steve Pershing]
    Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers [Nigel Allen]
    Re: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line [Tad Cook]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 2:11:58 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor


In one of the replies to mine, bungia![e-mail] writes:

>After all the discussion on this, I can't believe you have such a
>bigoted, narrow-minded and short-sighted viewpoint!  I'm absolutely
>astounded that you made such remarks, from many points of perspective.

>For example, you seem to imply that Kapor is supporting the theft from
>businesses,

That is what he said, assuming the Post quoted him correctly. He said
that these fellows were being hindered in their free exchange of
information. He does not think it was theft. He thinks their presence
on those computers was legitimate.

>yet as we have seen, the Secret Service _ITSELF_ is guilty
>of completely disrupting the business of Steve Jackson Games.  That
>really makes Jenkins' remarks look like the self-serving lies that
>they are.  "...Threaten to disrupt our nation's business and
>government services"?  Give me a break.

How come you want the crackers to be sure and have a fair trial before
anyone pronounces them guilty, yet you are happy to pronounce guilt
upon the Secret Service without any further ado? I don't know if the
Secret Service is guilty of anything or not, but what does that have
to do with the acts attributed to the crackers?
  .....

>It's obvious that the Secret Service and whoever else is involved is
>on a witch-hunt of the scale of that by the FBI during the late 60's
>and early 70's against those damn anti-war hippies.  Even if the SS
>has caught up a number of extremely minor criminals in its huge
>fishing net, it still doesn't justify what they are doing.  And this
>is particularly true when the law regarding electronic communications
>networks such as BITNET, Usenet, and Bulletin Board Systems is so
>vaguely undefined at the moment.

How defined do you want things to be? Just what would, in your
estimation, ever justify stopping people who break into computers?
You know, all the old cliches, i.e. witch-hunt, are getting pretty
tiresome in my estimation. I don't think you would ever be satisfied,
frankly, because I see in your message a considerable anti-government,
pro-cracker bias that no one would ever be able to overcome. We could
spend much bandwidth rehashing all the same, tired old issues.

>Is the administrator/operator of some carrier of electronic
>information completely responsible for every bit of data contained or
>passing through his system?  The present legal answer is "No, well
>maybe, we don't know yet."

That's right, he is. Either you have control over your computer(s) and
your telephone lines or you do not. Which is it?  I thought blaming
the computer for what went wrong went out of favor twenty years ago.
Do you remember when clerks in all big business places used to say the
computer had 'made an error' in something?  If you are not in a
position to run a big site responsibly, then don't do it. And where I
might have some sympathy for really huge sites, I don't buy the excuse
of some two-bit BBS sysop that he "can't possibly read everything on
his board ..."  No one is asking him to read it all ... just to
cultivate a responsible class of users and respond to problem postings.

>And then your suggestion that we steal software from Lotus or anything
>else which benefits Kapor financially is really a inflammatory
>strawman argument.  Or a bad suggestion classing you with the worst of
>the criminals and hypocrits if you were serious.

Uh, do I get a chance for a fair trial also, or is that out of the
question where you are concerned?  Kapor says its not really burglary
or theft, it is the dissemination of information. Townson says it is
burglarly and theft, but as long as Kapor says its okay, then go ahead
and steal from him.

>After all, there is
>_NO_ evidence in your remarks that Kapor is supporting criminal
>activity.  Rather it seems he is against a campaign of terror
>orchestrated by the SS and AT&T and who knows who else directed at a
>lot of mostly innocent technophiles.

Well, I would hope someone could successfully terrorize the little
snot-noses who like breaking into computers. And I have yet to see any
'innocent technophiles' get arrested for anything, or terrorized, for
that matter, unless it is someone who gets frightened easily, or
something.  And yes, he is supporting criminal activity, but doing so
by cleverly trying to redefine *what is, and is not crime*. Repeat: He
said they should not be on trial. He thinks activities like the
alleged are 'harmless' ... how many times must I repeat this?

>Are you lily-white, impeccably
>honest, Mr. Moderator?  I doubt it.  And even if you were, you ought
>to be worried about the abuse of power that is taking place.

Of course not. Whatever gave you the impression I said or thought I
was?  And as for the so-called abuse of power that occurs, there are
plenty of people like yourself to worry about it.

>Ever heard this parable?  [paraphrased for brevity] A Methodist living
>in Berlin just prior to WWII watches as first his Jewish, then Polish,
>then non-Caucasian, then communist neighbors are rounded up and taken
>away in the middle of the night by the Nazis.  Each time it happens,
>he does nothing, since the Nazis leave him alone.  But when they
>finally come for him, there is no one to help him or protest his
>treatment, because they've already been taken.

Ah yes ... Martin Niemoller; but it was Lutheran, not Methodist; and
you forgot to include the step where the Catholics all get taken away.
I heard the 'parable' originally, when he first used it in a sermon
back in the middle fifties. He was invited to preach at the Chapel
once a year or so. By the by, there were not any 'non-Caucasians'
mentioned in the story ... did you just make that part up? That poor
story is so abused, so mis-used for everything under the sun. I
suspect Martin is sorry he ever brought it up.

>Do I need to spell this out for you?  I hope not.  There's a couple
>little clauses in the Bill of Rights regarding: innocence until proven
>guilt, freedom from unwarranted searches and seizures, freedom of
>speech, freedom to pursue happiness.  Surely you are familiar with
>these.

Uh, no, I never heard of those things. I'm only an iggorant moderator.

>I'm not advocating theft.  I'm not advocating that phreaker/cracker
>criminals go free.  But how about the law enforcement officials stick
>to 2 simple rules: 1) follow the laws themselves, and 2) fit the
>punishment and enforcement efforts to the crime.

You may not be advocating theft, but you are trying to make one set of
circumstances offset another. There are ways to deal with errant
government officials just as there are ways to deal with crackers.

>Oh, and incidentally: maybe it's a forgone issue now, but "hacker" is
>not a criminal or delinquint by definition, or at least, not
>originally, and not by most people who have pride in being one.  But
>maybe the hysterics and popular press have abused this word for so
>long that it no longer has its original meaning.  I regret that Mr.
>Moderator saw fit to use it as he did, unless it was merely a result
>of paraphrasing without thought some press release.

I think I said 'cracker' -- not 'hacker' in my report when I used the
word myself. The newspaper article may have mis-used it. To summarize
my complaint, Mitch Kapor and I would disagree as to the nature of the
alleged acts. I call them theft and burglary. He calls them otherwise.

We both agree that everyone should have a fair trial; and that no one
is officially guilty until the court has so ruled. I beleive that
people who are found guilty of theft and/or burglary should be treated
like any convicted felon. Chris Johnson seems to think the government
should be punished instead for starting a witch-hunt.

>   ...Chris Johnson          [e-mail]   ..uunet!bungia!com50!chris
> Com Squared Systems, Inc.   St. Paul, MN USA   [phone]


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 00:09:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor
Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand

pt-) [Mr. Kapor offers legal assistance to accused e-burglars.  Pirate
pt-) his software.]

I was not aware that there had been any convictions in the case.  I
also was not aware that Mr. Kapor had advocated illegal activities.
Would that the latter were true of our moderator as well!

In article <[e-mail]> you write:

>  Was *he* serious when he made the quote attributed to him?  PT]

As a recent victim of a made-up quote in the paper, I can assure you
that there are times when newspapers are not entirely accurate.

 ...!{bikini.cis.ufl.edu allegra bpa uunet!cdin-1}!ki4pv!tanner

[Moderator's Note: Well, that is a very real consideration, and if Mr.
Kapor did not say what the newspaper claims he said, then he ought to
sue them, or at least force them to quote him correctly.   PT]

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

From: vaxb.acs.unt.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor
Date: 2 Jun 90 14:52:18 GMT


"The Moderator" notes:

>[ Now you go on to say a *lot* (your emphasis) of people are 'being
> harassed'. Name two or three; go ahead, I'll wait.  You want to use
> Steve Jackson Games as one example?  Ha! That's rich ... more and more
> news is coming out of that every day ... i.e. a little blurb in news
> yesterday alleging a cracker (I think previously convicted) was/is on
> his payroll.

Oh.  "Hire a hacker, lose your business?"
They have a cracker (ex-cracker, supposedly) on the payroll to help give
the game a little bit of realism, so they should have their equipment
taken away?  So if it turned out that *you* had hired, say, a drug user,
you should go to jail for dealing?  :)
More and more news every day?  Sorry... the only "news" there is that the
Feds are refusing to return the equipment, and they won't even make a
backup of the hard drives to allow the company to function... to a *big*
monetary loss... and there's your "two or three..." they had to lay off
half their staff... 7 or 8 people...

> And you complain that innocent users on the net are being
> harmed by the disruption in mail: why is that the government's fault?
> Your complaint should be with the administrators of e-mail relays who
> have *violated the trust of the net community* by getting wrapped up
> in this stinking mess. If I were arrested for something today, would
> you blame the government because TELECOM Digest did not get published
> tomorrow?  PT]

Naah... I think we ought to blame the government *if they blatantly broke
the law* in arresting you... for something you didn't do... or if they
confiscated your server because your organization had allowed a cracker
into its sacred ranks...

If they Feds are breaking their own rules, how can we trust them any more?


C Irby
[e-mail]
ac08@untvax

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 03:29:38 PDT
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 409, Message 14 of 14

>Similarly, Patrick, I really think that with respect to the list of US
>area codes you posted, writing them all as "1-XXX" was inappropriate.
>Aside from the fact the the "1" is an access code, and not part of the
>phone number, it _certainly_ is the wrong access code for most parts
>of the world.

Not nearly as inappropriate as you seem to want to make out.  Aside
from the simple defense Patrick offered (that's the way it was sent to
him), there is also the fact that you are just plain dead wrong when
you say "it _certainly_ is the wrong access code for most parts of the
world."  No, it _certainly_ is the RIGHT access code for the ENTIRE
world.  Additional access codes may be required ahead of it, but no
matter where you go in the world, "1" is the access code for the U.S.

You could, with equal validity, say that the city code for Amsterdam
is +31-20.


Linc Madison  =   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code
Date: 4 Jun 90 02:43:59 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, University of New South Wales,
 ADFA, Canberra, AUSTRALIA


[e-mail] (John Slater) writes:

| The US/Canada country code is unusual in two ways : (1) it is the only
| single-digit country code, and (2) it happens to be the same as the

Bzzztttt.  You forgot the USSR.

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

Subject: US/Canada Only One Digit Code?
From: Steve Pershing <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 90 15:28:48 PDT
Organization: The Questor Project


[e-mail] (John Slater) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> The US/Canada country code is unusual in two ways : (1) it is the only
> single-digit country code, and (2) it happens to be the same as the

I thought that the USSR was assigned country code 7 which is also a
single digit code.  There may be others.

There were some unique things done in Country Code 1.  Besides it
being the country code for the US and Canada, it also includes Bermuda
and many other island countries in that part of the world.  In
addition, there was at one time, an area code within country code 1
assigned to Mexico City, for more convenient dialling (?).  This is an
anomaly in the normal CCITT assignment, as Mexico has its own country
code.

I wonder if there are other "convenience" codes within other country
codes in other parts of the world?


Internet: [e-mail]          |POST: 1027 Davie Street, Box 486
Phones:  Voice & FAX:  [phone]     |      Vancouver, British Columbia
         Data/BBS:     [phone]     |      Canada  V6E 4L2

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Contact Public Unix BBS. Toronto, Canada.
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 01:17:09 GMT


David L Kindred (Dave) asks:

>"Anyone have any particulars on who/when/why the Z and Q have been
>on/not on the Zero digit?"

Perhaps those letters disappeared because they were used in the
channel designations for manual mobile telephone service.

I don't have a complete list of those channel designations, but the
Toronto telephone directory includes YL6-6709 and JS3-4438.

Neither number includes Z or Q, so my theory may not be valid.

A clarification: The channel number, I believe, is the first two
characters, so the channel designation is always two letters.

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

From: Tad Cook <ssc![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line
Date: 4 Jun 90 01:46:10 GMT
Organization: very little


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Hank
Nussbacher) writes:

> Bell Colorado has signed an agreement with the Ministry of
> Telecommunications in the USSR to build a $500 million dollar trans
> Siberian fiber optic line.  The line will be 13,000km long and will

WHAT is Bell Colorado???  I have heard of the old Mountain Bell (now
US West) but never Bell Colorado.  Is it a non-US firm?


Tad Cook   Seattle, WA   Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA   Phone: [phone]
MCI Mail: 3288544   Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW
USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad    or, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #411
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09664;
          5 Jun 90 3:06 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa08886;
          5 Jun 90 1:21 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa22920;
          5 Jun 90 0:17 CDT
Date:     Tue, 5 Jun 90 0:16:14 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #412
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 5 Jun 90 00:15:49 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 412

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Chinese Dissidents Relied on Telecom to Escape After June 4th [Shuang Deng]
    Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [Jerry Aguirre]
    ICC MPS48 Modem (Help) [Ian Matthew Smith]
    Voice Information in Calgary [Sam Ho]
    Screwy PUC Policies [John Higdon]
    RJ45 vs RJ11 [Tom Glinos]
    The Theory and Operation of REMOBS [pa2437]
    Still More on Kapor [TELECOM Moderator]
    Re: 10XXX Bugs [S. M. Krieger]
    Re: 10XXX Bugs [Jon Baker]
    Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB [John R. Levine]
    Re: TSL [Hank Nussbacher]
    Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code [Mark Lawrence]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Shuang Deng <[e-mail]>
Subject: Chinese Dissidents Relied on Telecom to Escape After June 4th
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 11:33:28 MDT


Hi, everyone;

Today is the anniversary of the June 4th Massacre in Beijing, China.
Telecommunications have played an important role in the democracy
movement in China.  Here are two stories, one is about a dissident
arrest tipped by his LD call, and the other is the escape of a
dissident thanks to telecommunication.


               Report One:
      A Trunk Call Led to A Prominent Chinese Dissident's Arrest
            ----------------------

No one knew exactly how Mr Wang Juntao, a prominent Chinese dissident
was arrest until one of his colleagues escaped from China to US
recently.  She told several newspapers the following story.

"Juntao hid in Beijing for a while following the 4 June incident. With
the situation getting tense, he finally decided to go south in an
attempt to establish contact with overseas rescue organizations.
However, we lost contact with him soon after his departure from
Beijing and were even unaware of his whereabouts. We eventually knew
about his arrest in Beijing from a classified bulletin circulating
within the provincial and army levels which noted that Wang Juntao, an
evil backstage manipulator of the rebellion, had been captured. The
classified bulletin also disclosed that Juntao fled to Changsha, the
capital of Hunan Province.  There he failed to get in touch with
members of the local student movement. He felt quite hopeless and made
a trunk call to Hong Kong rescue organization, at great risk, to
request rescue and for him to be sent the necessary travel documents."

"Before long, a self-claimed Hong Kong rescue organization rang
Juntao, saying that rescue work would start soon at a cost of about
10,000 yuan.  Juntao said he had only 8,000 yuan or so. His
counterpart said in reply that money was not so important and they had
to meet as quickly as possible to discuss how to flee. Both sides then
agreed that they would meet in a coach of a train bound from Changsha
to a certain place because Juntao did not tell his counterpart where
he was staying. When Juntao entered the coach on schedule, he
immediately noticed something wrong -- other coaches were very crowded
but there were only a few people in the coach he entered. When he
tried to open a window to jump out public security personnel in plain
clothes, hiding inside and outside the coach, all drew their pistols
from their pockets."

Apart from what she had learned from the classified bulletin, she
heard two other versions of Wang's arrest in Beijing. One was that the
the authorities had installed the most advanced tapping device in
Shenzhen, which can monitor all trunk calls from Hong Kong to the
mainland. The other was that Chinese special agents in overseas rescue
organizations divulged secret information.


                  Report Two
        A Direct Dial Call Rescued A Chinese Dissident
              ---------------------

A famous Chinese writer and dissident found his way fleeing out of
Beijing after the June 4th Massacre, and arrived at Guangdong
(Canton), a big city close to HongKong.  He tried his best to escape
to HongKong, but only found that all the roads were paroled by
soldiers around clock and check-points were set up at main
intersections.  Several weeks past while he was keeping desperately
looking for a way out to safety.  He dared not to call friends for
help as he realized all long distance calls at the public phones had
to go through operators who usually had the order to monitor the
conversations (mostly not for connection quality, but for
counter-revolutionaries).  One day on his move from one hiding place
to another, he was delighted to see a billboard at a new phonebooth
saying that, with the advanced techniques provided by a foreign
company, this particular phone could dial overseas directly without
operators.  So, he came back at night and called a friend in HongKong
who, he believed, must have contact with local democracy
organizations.  The next day, a person came from Hong Kong and took him
out to freedom.

This story was said by the writer himself at a meeting here at U of Alberta.


Shuang Deng ([e-mail])

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

From: Jerry Aguirre <[e-mail]>
Subject: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Date: 31 May 90 22:31:06 GMT


We are in the process of ordering DID, a 600 number block.  When
costing this out we were thinking of converting our existing trunks
over for DID use.  Now the local carrier, PacBell, is telling us that
DID lines are for incomming calls only; we can not use them for making
calls.

This is going to require us to keep a separate group of trunks for
outgoing calls with no overlap of the two groups.  That means the
total number of trunks will have to be larger to handle peaks in
incoming and outgoing calls and that means more trunk charges and more
trunk interfaces for our PBX.

So are DID lines really only for incomming calls?  Is there a
technical reason or is the carrier trying to charge more?


                Jerry Aguirre

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sunday, 3 Jun 1990 20:33:57 EDT
From: Ian Matthew Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: ICC MPS48 Modem (Help)


I have just gotten ahold of two 4800 baud modems.  The only name it
gives is on the front (ICC MPS48).  I hooled them up to a terminal,
and pluged it in, but I can't get any commands to work.  I pressed a
few buttons and got it into test mode, and it echoed my characters
back as I typed them.  But I cannot get it to accept any commands.
Does anybody have ANY information on this modem?  Even just
information on the company itself would be helpfull.  The things are
5" x 8" x 18" and *heavy*.

Thanks in advance for any information.


Ian Smith <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 17:15:03 PDT
From: Sam Ho <[e-mail]>
Subject: Voice Information Services in Calgary


Here are a few more numbers I picked up in Calgary, Alberta.

The telephone company (Alberta Government Telephones) runs a talking
yellow pages service, with the usual stuff on it,  403-521-5222.

The transit system runs what appears to be a DID-based automated bus
schedule.  One or two numbers are assigned for each bus stop, and a
synthesized voice reads back arrival information.  An example:
403-260-5281.  Others apparently lie in the 5000 and 6000 blocks of
the same exchange.  The transit system main information number is
403-276-7801.  This is not automated.


Sam Ho

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

Subject: Screwy PUC Policies
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: 4 Jun 90 11:27:40 PDT (Mon)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


In my CO there are eight prefixes of grossbar and four prefixes of
1ESS. I have just been informed that the 5ESS that is soon to be
installed in the office will replace only the X-bar, not the 1E.

Why? It turns out that anywhere else in the country the entire office
would be converted to the 5E, but not in California. The PUC seems to
be of the opinion that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." This
explains at least some of the backwardness of telephone technology in
California. "As long as the customer has dial tone, you're fine."

Obviously, Pac*Bell was able to convince the fools at the PUC that
unless the X-bar was replaced, customers might lose dial tone. After
all, the X-bar was installed in 1956 and one might think that 34 years
is sufficient service life. But the twenty-year-old ESS? Hell, that's
still cooking along just fine.

So while the rest of the country has ISDN, CLASS, and you-name-it, we
Californians get to pretend that we are in Bulgaria. Excuse me, that's
an unfair comparison. The Bulgarians realize it's bad and are trying
to do something about it.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: Tom Glinos <utstat![e-mail]>
Subject: RJ45 vs RJ11
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 17:20:36 GMT
Organization: Statistics, U. of Toronto


I'm looking for the advantages of RJ45 over RJ11.

Each cubicle that I'm planning will have two jacks.  The jacks will
either be phone or data in any combination.

The present data requirements are RS232 and Twisted Pair Ethernet.  (I
can't speculate about future requirements)

I'd prefer RJ45 but (bean counters and other bureaucrates) tell me
that RJ11 will suffice.


[e-mail]
utzoo!utstat!tg

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

From: pa2437 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Theory and Operation of REMOBS
Date: 4 Jun 90 18:41:09 GMT


This may have come up before but I missed it.  From a few different
people I have heard of the concept of a REMoteOBservation unit.

What it is:

Call your REMOB port. (TELCO EMPLOYEES ONLY) After tone enter your
Personal Identification Number.  Enter line you want to scan.  You
will passively be able to monitor the line you choose.  Well many
people have given me conflicting opinions on the existence of these
units. I have not heard if they were first used with the advent of ESS
or if they existed on CrossBar Switching systems.

Could someone please enlighten me to the truth if these exist and if
so a little history on them.  I believe that they were not used to
monitor conversations but instead to check if a certain line was
operating.


Thank You,
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 23:45:34 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Still More on Kapor


A few more replies have come in on my comment regards Mitch Kapor, and
in addition, a lengthy article appeared over the weekend in the {New
York Times} and elsewhere which I want to share with you which
discussed Kapor's plans in more detail, and added other observations
of interest.

These are busy days for the Digest!  I will probably run a special
issue in a day or two with the above, hopefully getting as good a
cross section of messages in as space permits, so that we can put the
issue to bed and move along.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Mon,  4 Jun 90 12:36:10 EDT
From: S M Krieger <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs
Organization: Summit NJ


In yesterday's (June 3) (Plainfield - Somerville, NJ) {Courier News},
there was a feature article on pay phone confusion and private pay
phones.  Among the points mentioned about private pay-phones were:

     1.    The warning about getting charged much higher rates than
    NJ Bell or United Telephone charges for calls within 201
    and what AT&T charges for other calls.

     2.    The status/legality concerning 10XXX selection.

     3.    Why private pay phones don't allow incoming calls.

Concerning 10XXX selection, one sentence in the article said that
where it was possible, there were cases where people could end up
making international calls and having it billed to the payphone owner
(I wonder if it's because the phone, seeing 10288-0, assumed it was an
operator assisted call, instead of looking for 10288-01).  Also, even
though customers have the right to choose an LD carrier, to the phone
owners, having their operator splash you over to an AT&T operator, or
having you have the local telco operator do it, is considered
sufficient; it doesn't mean they have to explicitly support 10XXX
dialing (or pushing).

One point raised on both 10XXX and incoming calls is that to the phone
owners, the phone is their business, and having to allow either of
these types of calls means that their business resource is being used,
and they aren't getting any revenue from it.  It was implied that if
they must support 10XXX from their phones, then they are entitled to
share in the revenue from the call.


Stan Krieger Summit, NJ
 ...!att!attunix!smk

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

From: Jon Baker <asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs
Date: 4 Jun 90 20:45:56 GMT
Organization: gte


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brian
O'Donoghue) writes:

> > [When] using a pay phone, I suggest always using 10XXX carrier
> > selection just so you know who you're dealing with.

> I wish it were that easy.  In Delaware and Virginia, I have found BOC
> payphones which reject 10xxx selection of the default carrier, with
> the recording: "This call may be made using easy dialling.  Please
> hang up, and dial again."  (Sigh)

A Greene ruling some time ago mandated that 10XXX carrier selection
(equal access) be allowed from all pay phones.  If not deployed yet in
your area, it should be soon.  You might contact your local telco or
Utility Comission for details.

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

Subject: Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB
Organization: Segue Software, Cambridge MA
Date: 4 Jun 90 01:38:41 EDT (Mon)
From: "John R. Levine" <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> you write:

>>   4) How the local telco got a waiver to give long distance service ...

>It's not really "Long Distance" service.  New Jersey Bell and Bell of
>PA offer the same service in Philadelphia County PA and Burlington,
>Camden, and maybe Mercer Counties NJ.

Au contraire, to the best of my knowledge it has never been a local
call from New Jersey to New York across the Hudson nor from New Jersey
to Philadelphia across the Delaware, even though the distances
involved are in both cases only a mile or so.  (No wonder Franklin
called New Jersey "a keg tapped at both ends.")  It was and is a local
call across the Delaware a few miles north of Philadelphia between New
Hope PA and Lambertville NJ.  Don't ask me why.

My recollection is that the telephone networks across the two rivers
were such a logistical nightmare that it was technically infeasable to
partition them and route all the traffic to LD carriers between the
time the Bell breakup was announced and the time it became effective.


Regards,
John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|lotus}!esegue!johnl

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

Date: Mon, 04 Jun 90 13:54:18 IST
From: Hank Nussbacher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TSL


>> Bell Colorado has signed an agreement with the Ministry of
>> Telecommunications in the USSR to build a $500 million dollar trans
>> Siberian fiber optic line.  The line will be 13,000km long and will

>WHAT is Bell Colorado???  I have heard of the old Mountain Bell (now
>US West) but never Bell Colorado.  Is it a non-US firm?

The article I am quoting (and translating into English) from, only
mentioned Bell Colorado.


Hank Nussbacher

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

From: Mark Lawrence <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code
Reply-To: Mark Lawrence <[e-mail]>
Organization: DRD Corporation, Tulsa, OK
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 20:53:39 GMT


[e-mail] (Jim Rees) wrote:

} I live in the USA.  Sometimes when I'm bored I like to call the
} operator and ask, "What is the country code for the USA?"

[stuff elided]

I don't know the answer (for sure), but I do know that when I dial
home from Japan using KDD, the *access code* is 001 and the country
code is 1 (then a/c,exchange and number).

[e-mail] {uunet,rutgers}!drd!mark [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #412
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11582;
          5 Jun 90 3:56 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21276;
          5 Jun 90 2:27 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab08886;
          5 Jun 90 1:22 CDT
Date:     Tue, 5 Jun 90 1:00:11 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #413
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 5 Jun 90 01:00:00 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 413

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: My List of World Wide Codes [Henry Troup]
    Re: My List of World Wide Codes [Jim Breen]
    Re: My List of World Wide Codes [Kee Hinckley]
    Re: My List of North American Area Codes [Robert M. Hamer]
    Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter" [Jim Anderson]
    Re: Stamford, CT Outage [Douglas Scott Reuben]
    Re: New Double-jack Wall Plates, Crosstalk [Peter da Silva]
    Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code [Russ Kepler]
    Licenses for Television in the UK [John Slater]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Henry Troup <bnrgate!.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of World Wide Codes
Date: 4 Jun 90 19:18:59 GMT
Reply-To: Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Linc
Madison) writes:

>Four years ago, my San Jose directory had 3.5 pages of listings for
>country/city codes.  Why chop the list???

The Ottawa/Hull Bell Canada (not a BOC, really) phone book has eight
pages, 145 Country codes (including Christmas Island, Vanuatu, etc.).

Yet another advantage to old-fashioned non-competitive monopoly
service!  And our local rates are lower, too.


Henry Troup - BNR
owns but does not share my opinions
 ..uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 or  [e-mail]

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

From: Jim Breen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of World Wide Codes
Organization: Chisholm Institute of Technology, Melb., Australia
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 23:21:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Linc
Madison) writes:

> Speaking of the local phone book, I've noticed something the last few
> years: the list of foreign codes has gotten SHORTER and SHORTER each
> year -- I guess the idea is that Pac*Bell doesn't get much revenue
> *directly* from international calls, so they won't put much effort
> into helping you.  For example, the Oakland book lists 38 country
> codes and a total of about 83 city codes, for the entire world.

The Telecom Australia directory in the larger cities has 165 country
codes and ~300 city codes. Perhaps there are some advantages in
monopolies after all (8-<)>.


   _______        Jim Breen ([e-mail]) Dept of Robotics &
  /o\----\\     \O         Digital Technology. Chisholm Inst. of Technology
 /RDT\   /|\   \/|   -:O____/  PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia
O-----O        _/_\    /\ /\      (ph) [phone] (fax) [phone]

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

From: Kee Hinckley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of World Wide Codes
Organization: asi
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 15:01:41 GMT


>>     977-    Nepal            98-     Iran

>> [Moderator's Note: The above are always prefaced with either 011 (for
>                                   ******
>> direct dialing) or 01 (for credit card, collect or third number
>> billing). Then a city code, comparable to a USA area code, follows the

Last time I tried (a few years ago) Iran didn't accept credit card
calls.  My paranoid guess is that it's because they can't easily track
who's calling; I know they listen in on most calls.

I discovered the credit card restriction by accident.  I was on
vacation in California with my wife (prior to our marriage) when the
Navy shot down the Iranian airliner.  We were calling to see if her
father had been piloting it (ulp, fortunately not).  The operator
tried a credit card call and it was refused, so we switched to billing
my home phone.  We then actually managed to get through to Iran (quite
a feat on a payphone) only to be interrupted by a rather irate
(American) operator, who had attempted to verify my third party call,
only to get my roommates answering machine telling her she had reached
the Arlington Insane Asylum.  That took at little straightening out!

            -kee

Alphalpha Software, Inc. | Voice/Fax: [phone] | Home: 617/641-3805
148 Scituate St.         | Smart fax, dial number. |
Arlington, MA 02174      | Dumb fax, dial number,  | BBS:  617/641-3722
[e-mail]     | wait for ring, press 3. | 300/1200/2400 baud

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 11:01 EDT
From: "Robert M. Hamer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes


On Sun, 3 Jun 90 03:29:38 PDT Linc Madison <[e-mail].
edu> writes:

(With respect to whether "1+" is part of the phone number (in this case,
the area code) or not:

>you say "it _certainly_ is the wrong access code for most parts of the
>world."  No, it _certainly_ is the RIGHT access code for the ENTIRE
>world.  Additional access codes may be required ahead of it, but no
>matter where you go in the world, "1" is the access code for the U.S.

I really am not sure this is worth going on about, because I don't
know if the rest of the Digest is interested in the topic or not,
but...  The point is that the "1+" is an access code, and not part of
the phone number.  In the US or elsewhere.  Actually, when I use my
Sprint FON card, a "1+" never plays a role in the dialing: it seems to
be "0+"; I don't know about other calling/credit cards.

And when I call from a hotel, using whatever rip-off system the hotel
has (Yes, I know, but my company will cheerfully pay large phone bills
billed to the hotel room, but has trouble with me telling them that I
called using my own Sprint card) as often as not, I dial "8+" or some
such code, getting me direct access to an LD trunk, from which I dial
the area code and phone number.  As a matter of fact, as I type this,
it occurs to me that in my office, I dial "8" to get a LD dial tone,
and then I dial just the area code, no "1+".

The point I am trying to make is that what we dial is divided into
access codes and phone number, and they are not one and the same.  We
ought to be clearer about stating what the phone number is when we
claim that what we are giving out is the phone number.

When I first started using the Internet, I had a terrible time
guessing what part of the From: or Reply-to: field was indeed the
actual user@node, and what was some sort of routing information the
various intermediate mailers had stuck on in an effort to provide me
with something that would work, even if much of it turned out to be
unnecessary.

Again, it may not be worth it to start a thread on it, but I would
assert that the "1+" is an access code, and the area code does not
include it, and neither does the phone number.

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

Subject: Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter"
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 90 21:17:00 CST
From: Jim Anderson <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>In the next two weeks, Boston Gas Company will be in your neighborhood
>to install a new meter reading system.
 ...
>We will then be able to read your meter accurately by radio signal
>from a computer equipped van as we drive down your street.
 ...
>Now, aside from not including very many details of this new system
>(does it continuously broadcast use?  If not, then how does it know to
>broadcast?  how is the signal encoded?  ...), one wonders what gives
>boston gas company the idea that I want them to install a radio
>transmitter in my home.

I had a tour of E. F. Johnson in Waseca, MN a few weeks ago, and they
showed me their product that does this.  Apparently, E. F. Johnson is
one of the major players in this market.  The gentleman giving the
tour described how this works.

Basically, the meter is built on a SMD style board, with a single
large chip, a few peripheral components, an antenna, and a lithium
battery.

The electronics track usage, and listen on the antenna for a trigger
signal.  This signal is given by a truck with a transmit/receive
antenna.  When it hears this signal, it transmits its preprogrammed
ID, and the current meter reading, then goes back to standby mode.

As far as the signal encoding goes, it probably is a relatively
unsophisticated code, as the transmission is only a burst transmission
and (my opinion) should only contain the current meter reading, not
the usage since the previous reading.

I hope this explains how this device works.  My understanding is that
the electric companies, gas companies, and other utility companies are
REAL excited about this meter.


Jim Anderson            [phone]
Anderson O'Brien, Inc        New mail:[e-mail]
2575 N. Fairview Ave.        Old mail:{rutgers,amdahl}!bungia!aob!jim
St. Paul, MN  55113        Lucifer designed MS-DOS to try men's souls.

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

Date: 4-JUN-1990 02:33:11.56
From: "DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Stamford, CT Outage


Hi-

A few weeks back during the ESS outage in Stamford, CT, I noticed that
Southern New England Telephone (SNET, the most-of-Connecticut "Bell"
Co.) did something rather odd.

 From their DMS exchanges, they managed to block off ALL calls to the
exchanges in Stamford which were affected. IE, you would dial
1+977-xxxx or 1+324-xxxx or any Stamford number, and it would be
blocked immediately. Depending on where you were calling from, it
would either give you a recorded message or a re-order. This would
happen INSTANTLY at the exchange you called from, not after taking
some time to get down to Stamford. Even 0+xxx-xxxx calls to Stamford
were blocked.

Is this some new local network feature that SNET and the rest of the
Bells have? I recall when the exchange in Brooklyn (NY) (There's a
Brooklyn, CT too, so just in case anyone got confused...:-) ) caught
fire that all calls were NEVER blocked locally, but only when they got
to (or "near") the damaged exchange.

The reason I ask is that SNET in many respects is a bit slow to
implement new developments in telephone technology. It still has a lot
of older Crossbars and Step-By-Steps, like the rest of New England.
SNET is just beginning to experiment with CLASS features, but only
Call*Block, and only in the Meriden area for at least the next 2
years. Most areas still allow 0+xxx-xxxx calls to be sequenced to AT&T
calls (out-of-state), altough they SAY this is supposed to be
prohibited. (Although I've noticed that in C&P Tel. territory, mainly
Washington DC, this works as well, ie, no difference between AT&T and
C&P Tel Calling Card equipment...)

Just wondering if SNET has a system to control their calls at the
local switches, or did they have someone at each office program it it
manually...!?


Doug

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
(and just plain old "dreuben" to locals...!  :-)  )

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: New Double-jack Wall Plates, Crosstalk?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 21:58:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
writes:

>     There is a certain amount of dejavu here: Quad wire in phone
> installations causes crosstalk. The jacks that were installed will not
> be the cause of the crosstalk. So you can't blame the Mrs. for this
> one. [ lots of detailed explanation of stuff I already know ]

Yes, yes, yes. I know all that. I didn't explain all my reasoning
because I assumed that folks here would know it all already. This is
an existing apartment, wired with (I presume, since all other
apartments I've been in have been wired this way) quad wire from the
network demark to each wall plate. Normally I'd have one line... quad
to the wall plate ... for the data line and the other wires... again,
quad to the wall plate ... for the voice lines. Each cable is now one
wire on quad. Crosstalk should be minimal, unless they run the quads
next to each other in the same conduit for any significant length.
With this setup, all the quads have both lines next to each other and
some crosstalk is to be expected. It's a small apartment, so it might
not be so bad.

Sigh. Next time I ask a question I'll be sure to include full
background on everything, my life history, and the whole shmeer...


`-_-' Peter da Silva. [phone].  <[e-mail]>
 'U`  Have you hugged your wolf today?  <[e-mail]>
@FIN  Dirty words: Zhghnyyl erphefvir vayvar shapgvbaf.

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

From: [e-mail] (Russ Kepler)
Subject: Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code
Date: 4 Jun 90 15:59:14 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Russ Kepler)
Organization: BASIS International, Albuquerque NM


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>Next time, try asking for the country code of New Mexico  :-)

OK - that does it.  We're taking all of those funny bombs, planes,
missiles, etc. that you USAians keep leaving laying around here and
secceeding... we'll create our own country, apply for out own country
code (OB telecom content) and go our own way.  We'll be better armed
than the country of Nebraska...

>[Moderator's Note: Listen, that's not funny! Ask people living in New
>Mexico sometime how often they have to fight the ignorance of credit
>card clerks and mail order companies who try to tell them they do not
>'do business outside the United States' ...  I had an Illinois Bell
>operator one time try to find the 'international routing' to connect
>me on a call there. What's worse these days, the American's pitiful
>command of English or our abysmal lack of knowledge in geography?  PT]

Actually it's kinda fun.  The New_Mexico_Magazine has a column called
One_of_Our_Fifty_is_Missing that is devoted to printing the, uhhh,
interesting things that refer to NM being a foreign country.  Little
things, mostly, like the geography teachers asking for posters,
phamplets and samples of our currency ... I did once have someone ask
me about the exchange rate on a flight here, ohh - the temptation.

But it's different in Europe.  All I have to do is show my passport
and they figure it out.


Russ Kepler -  Basis Int'l     SNAIL:  5901 Jefferson NE, Albuquerque, NM 87109
UUCP: bbx.basis.com!russ                                    PHONE: [phone]

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Licenses for Television in the UK
Date: 4 Jun 90 10:42:27 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, nigel.allen@f438.n250.z1.
fidonet.org writes:

>the operations of the British Broadcasting Corporation were
>supported, at least in part, by a license fee imposed on television
>sets and possibly on radios as well.

This is still the case. In fact the BBC is funded entirely by this
method (apart from a small income from overseas programme sales {yes,
that's how we British spell "program" when it's other that the
computer sort}, merchandising and so on).  Radio licenses were
abolished a long time ago (in the 1950's or 1960's, I think), as they
were too difficult and expensive to collect.

Television licenses cost (if memory serves) 71 pounds per year for
colour, and about 20 pounds for monochrome. There is a derisory
discount of 1.25 pounds for blind people on each of these figures.

Evasion is widespread, and personally I am deeply cynical about the
efficacy or even the existence of detector vans (I've never seen one).
I believe the authorities rely largely on non-renewed licences to
catch defaulters.

The money funds the BBC's two national television channels, including
local television opt-outs, *and* all its radio services - 4 national
services (5 soon) and numerous local stations. The BBC external
services, including the World Service and all the foreign language
services, are funded by the government, but are run by the BBC and are
editorially impartial (really. It works. Somehow she manages to keep
her hands away from it ...).

I thought you might be interested in a little more detail.


John Slater
Sun Microsystems, Gatwick, UK

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #413
******************************











ISSUE 414 APPEARS AFTER 416 DUE TO TRANSMISSION DELAY.

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13623;
          6 Jun 90 5:15 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab27881;
          6 Jun 90 3:41 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab11291;
          6 Jun 90 2:35 CDT
Date:     Wed, 6 Jun 90 2:05:41 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #415
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 6 Jun 90 02:05:13 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 415

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 1A/1E Call Forwarding and Multi-pathing [Ken Abrams]
    Re: Data Access Lines [Rob Warnock]
    Serial Line Errors [Aloys Roes]
    AT&T STREAMS Link Provider Interface Protocol [Jose Diaz-Gonzalez]
    GTD-5 and CLASS [John Higdon]
    Does This Feature Exist in a Telephone? [Darwin C. Weyh]
    References Needed Re New Nodes in Modern Networks [Michael Dawson]
    SW Bell Englobing New Zealand [St. Louis Post-Dispatch via Will Martin]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ken Abrams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 1A/1E Call Forwarding and Multi-pathing
Date: 4 Jun 90 14:20:50 GMT
Reply-To: Ken Abrams <pallas![e-mail]>
Organization: Athenanet, Inc.,  Springfield, Illinois


In article <[e-mail]> Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
writes:

>We are having an argument with Pac*Bell and can't seem to get the same
>answer out of them twice.  No great suprise there.

>Here's the background: for some unknown reason, PB has decided that if
>you want Centrex you *must* change your phone number.  They have been
>refusing to grandfather in existing phone numbers for several months
>now.

>To console the destroyed business, they filed a provisional tarriff
>called "Number Retention Service."  This turns out to be RCF with no
>usage charge.

[More good details deleted]

Although I personally don't agree with a lot of things that PacBell
comes up with, I think their basic decision in this matter was
correct.  The exact way that they implemented the whole package may
cast some doubt as to the underlying motives, however.

 From both the Telco's and the customer's perspective, the only
situation that lends itself well to "grandfathering of numbers" is a
conversion from PBX or DID where the customer already has a sufficient
number of contiguous numbers to accomodate the Centrex.  Creating a
Centrex with numbers scattered all over a prefix (or worse, over
several prefixs) does EVERYONE a disservice in the long run.  It
causes an administrative nightmare for Telco and customer alike.  I
wish I could convince my company that it is bad policy; so far, no
cigar.

On the other side of the coin, it appears that PB has chosen a method
of dealing with the old number that maximizes income rather than
customer satisfaction.  The system you mentioned should be ONE option
for the customer but not the only one.  Other options should be made
available; if this hasn't been done (have you asked?) then that is
most unfortunate.

Rest assured that a properly implemented RCF service DOES allow for
multiple paths in any variety of electronic switch that is in common
use by the BOCs today (1E,1A,5E,DMS,Siemens and I expect others, too).
Note, however, that variable call forwarding (the kind you establish
and remove yourself) does not offer multiple paths in many of the
switches under certain conditions.

Also keep in mind that the whole situation should not result in a
permanent expense to the company.  I would think that most should be
able to change their advertising, stationery, business cards, etc.
over a period of 12 - 24 months and migrate to the new numbers and
eliminate the additional expense.  With a little planning and
forethought, I would think this interval could be shortened to 6
months or less.


Ken Abrams                     uunet!pallas!kabra437
Illinois Bell                  [e-mail]
Springfield                    (voice) 217-753-7965

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 08:48:16 GMT
From: Rob Warnock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Data Access Lines
Reply-To: Rob Warnock <[e-mail]>
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA


In article <[e-mail]> mtndew![e-mail] (Stephen
J.  Friedl) writes:

| > If PEP is modulated only at 7.35 or 88.26 baud, it should be no
| > difficulty for the local lines to carry it, unless shoving so many
| > bits into so few bauds requires so many carrier pitches that local
| > telco lines might not be reliably able to discriminate that fine.

| PEP is modulated at 7.35 or 88.26 baud PER CARRIER, and to get the
| baud for the whole signal one must multiple by the number of carriers
| in use.  A PEP line is easily thousands of baud for a clean line, and
| for phone line requirements, the 7.35 or 88.26 number is meaningless.

Sorry, you have a slight misunderstanding of the term "baud". The
signaling rate in "baud" is defined as "the reciprocal of the smallest
signalling interval", that is, the peak number of "symbols" or state
changes per second.  All of the sub-carriers change at the same time.
Thus the PEP protocol is indeed 7 or 88 baud.

However, each sub-carrier is only using about (3000 - 300) / 511 =
5.28 Hz of bandwidth. (Pushing a 7 baud signal through a 5 Hz pipe is
quite good!  The theoretical maximum is 2 baud/Hz: one state for each
half-cycle of bandwidth.) Since each sub-carrier encodes 2, 4, or 6
bits per baud, or 14.7, 29.4, or 44.1 bits/second, respectively, at
the 7.35 baud rate, that is 2.78, 5.57, or 8.35 bits/second per Hertz
of bandwidth. From the Shannon limit:

    BitsPerSecond < Bandwidth * log2((S/N) + 1)

That implies that the signal-to-noise has to be at least:

                 bps/Hertz
    S/N (dB) > 10 * log(2      -   1)

or:

    S/N > 7.69 dB (min.), for 2 bits/baud (a 14.7 bit/s sub-channel)
    S/N >16.67 dB (min.), for 4 bits/baud (a 29.4 bit/s sub-channel)
    S/N >25.12 dB (min.), for 6 bits/baud (a 44.1 bit/s sub-channel)

Of course, these are theoretical minima, and don't account for noise
to to adjacent sub-channel interference, or loss due to imperfect
coding, so the line has to be a good deal better than this. Still, if
only 400 channels could get the highest rate, that's still 17,600
bits/second (before subtracting for the 20% CRC and packetizing
overhead).

In case anyone is still confused, note that sending 6 bits/baud means
that you have to be able to send any one of 64 (= 2^6) "symbols" at
each state change. Symbols can be encoded as amplitude difference,
frequency difference (although not in this case), or phase difference.
The PEP scheme, which is actually called DAMQAM or Dynamically
Adaptive Multicarrier Quadrature Amplitude Modulation at this level,
uses a combination of amplitude and phase modulation on each
sub-carrier.

Note that if you only used AM, 64 symbols means 64 different voltage
levels, which means that (*very* crudely speaking) to avoid error the
noise level has to be less than 1/2 the difference between two
adjacent levels, so the noise doesn't turn one into the other, or
1/128 the maximum level. Thus, you need a S/N of 20*log(128) or 42 dB.
(The "20" is because we are comparing *amplitude*, not *power*, as
above.) That this doesn't match the 25 dB "Shannon limit" given above
is due to (1) my example was crude indeed, (2) pure AM is not nearly
as efficient as QAM, and (3) the Shannon limit -- a *minimum* bound --
assumes that you are employing "perfect" encoding. The actual S/N
needed is somewhere between the two, and closer to the upper. Anyway,
you get the idea...

So the limit to PEP operation is the signal-to-noise of each of a
large number of very narrow, slow channels, any of which can be
down-graded or dropped from use if needed if *that particular*
sub-channel is too noisy. Non-linearities and phase-slopes which would
blow away a higher baud-rate modem are shrugged off, since they has
much less affect on a 5 Hz (sub)channel.

In case anyone's curious about the fact that the quantizing into
levels by PCM (T-carrier) puts an upper limit of something like
20*log(128/0.5) = 48 dB on the S/N if 7 bits/sample are being used,
note that at 7.35 baud there are 8000 / 7.35 = 1088 samples/baud.  A
lot of the quantizing noise can thus be averaged out.


Rob Warnock, MS-9U/510        [e-mail]        [e-mail]
Silicon Graphics, Inc.        [phone]        Protocol Engines, Inc.
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.
Mountain View, CA  94039-7311

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

From: Aloys Roes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Serial Line Errors
Date: 5 Jun 90 13:34:53 GMT
Organization: Philips Components - SERI, Eindhoven, The Netherlands


Please help us in solving the following problem:

We have a TCP/IP wide area network in place with 9.6, 14.4 and 64Kbps
lines. For the communication equipment we have standardized on cisco
TCP/IP routers.

Most lines show quite good performance however a few lines have
reasonable to high error counts. These error counts are stable and
seem independent of network load. With these error statistics we asked
our telecommunication people to improve the line quality. Of course
they doubted whether the errors were real. Therefore they started with
bit-error-rate tests. These tests show that the lines are 'perfect'
i.e. no single bit or block error in 24 hours. They used different bit
patterns but did not get any error.

The next thing we did was to install a PC with a 64K serial interface
in parallel to the cisco router on both ends of one 64K link. The
program in the PC analyzes the packets and monitors the link. And this
is where we really get confused. The PC also finds errors. However
these errors are of a different class and different amounts.

The link that we monitored has an average of 6000 to 10000 errors per
day on one end and a few dozens of errors on the other end. We are now
focused on the end with the high error count; according to the cisco
the errors are mainly frame errors. The PC reports mainly CRC (or FCS)
errors.

Can anyone help us getting this sorted out? What is the best way to
tackle this problem. Is there any equipment that we can put on the
line and realy trust the test results? Has anyone faced such a problem
before? Please respond to me directly. I will post a summary,

Thanks in advance,

     regards,

Aloys Roes, Philips Components, Building BC-136, |  Tel. : + 31 40 72 30 62
P.O.Box 218, 5600 MD Eindhoven, The Netherlands  |  Email: [e-mail]

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

From: Jose Diaz-Gonzalez <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T STREAMS Link Provider Interface protocol, where are you?
Date: 5 Jun 90 14:45:49 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Inc., Waltham, MA


Hello there!

This is the second time I am posting this question, and since I did
not get any replies I must assume that I either forgot to ask that you
reply directly to me (I don't subscribe to all the newsgroups where
this will be posted), or the AT&T Link Provider Interface protocol
mentioned in the arp(7) page of my TCP/IP manual for Interactive's
386/ix 2.0.2 must be a figment of ISC's imagination.  In any case,
here it goes again.  I need to find information (specs, manuals, etc)
for the above mentioned STREAM protocol.  Would anyone who knows about
this please contact me?  Cheers.


+    Jose Pedro Diaz-Gonzalez     +                                +
+    SrMTS                 +                    +
+    GTE Laboratories, Inc.       +       Tel:   [phone]    +
+    MS-46                          +       email: [e-mail]        +
+    40 Sylvan Rd.             +                    +
+    Waltham, MA 02254         +                    +
+                     +                    +

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

Subject: GTD-5 and CLASS
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: 5 Jun 90 12:43:23 PDT (Tue)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


After being soundly taken to task for criticizing the GTD-5, and being
told how state of the art capable it is, I decided to do a little
experimenting. I'm still unimpressed.

As most who participate in this forum know, a prerequisite to CLASS is
SS#7 between participating offices. Without that, the data required
for the handshake necessary for CLASS services cannot be sent. For
well over a year now, all Bay Area COs have been speaking SS#7 between
switches that are capable of it. Presumably, they want to be ready
when the PUC stops picking its teeth.

Actually, what I meant to say was, "All Bay Area COs except the three
in Los Gatos and the one in Morgan Hill." This is, of course, our
token GTE punishment area. (Doesn't everyone have to suffer with GTE
somewhere nearby?) These COs (all GTD-5) speak MF to each other and to
the outside world. No CLASS available here!

What this means to a telephone user, CLASS aside, is that a call from
a point in Los Gatos to a telephone a few blocks away takes NOTICABLY
longer to complete than a call from San Jose to San Francisco, a
distance of about 45 miles. Once again--the wonders of GTD-5.

I have received many kilobytes of material from GTE folks trying to
sell the virtues of GTD-5. But after my little experimentation, I'm
going to invoke my Jackson County, MO heritage: Show me!


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: ladwp![e-mail]
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 09:18:10 PDT
Subject: Does This Feature Exist in a Telephone?


I'm looking for a feature in a phone that will help me with the
following:

My wife and I have a infant child and sometimes when I call her she
has the baby in her arms and can't get to the phone.  I'd like to have
a speaker phone that she could answer without going over to the
device.  If it could be voice activated or if I could enter a secured
code to have the phone answer itself.  Also a built-in answering
machine would be nice.

Does such a thing exist?


Darwin C. Weyh -- Consultant for the Los Angeles Dept of Water and Power
POB 111 Rm 848   Los Angeles,   CA 90012  [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 13:17:03 EDT
From: Michael Dawson <[e-mail]>
Subject: References Needed Re New Nodes in Modern Networks


I am looking for pointers to papers or any other type of information
source that contains information on the function and services provided
by the new nodes in modern telephone networks.  The new types of nodes
I have heard of are the STP (sevice transfer point ?) and the SCP (a
data base of some sort ?)

I am also interested in any information on the development of the
digital cellular network.  I have noticed some discussion on the
security in the proposed scheme in the newsgroup, but I missed the
original postings.

Responses can be send to [e-mail]

Thanks in advance for your help,


                    Michael Dawson

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 15:49:44 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: SW Bell Englobing New Zealand


I append below an edited extract from an article in the May 30 issue of
the {St. Louis Post-Dispatch}:

BELL BIDDING FOR NEW ZEALAND FIRM

SW Bell plans to submit a bid to the New Zealand Commerce Commission
for up to 49.9% of that country's state-owned telephone company. NZ is
selling the telco to private investors as part of a privatization
program. The gov't hopes to raise at least $1.7 billion (US) from
selling the entire company (Telecom Corp. of New Zealand).

Telecom was part of the postal service until recently, when it was set
up as a separate company. It has 1.5 million telephone lines in NZ, a
nation of 3.3 million. The company also provides cellular and LD
service and sells telephone equipment.

NZ law allows one foreign investor or a consortium of private
investors to own up to 49.9% of the telco; the remaining 50.1% will be
sold through stock markets in NZ and elsewhere.

SW Bell's bid is not yet final; it is working with OTC Ltd.,
Australia's international LD company, and other entities on possible
joint bids. Bids are due June 6; the commission expects to choose a
buyer by late June or early July.

SW Bell already sells telephone equipment and computerized directory
publishing systems in NZ. An SW Bell subsidiary also sells Yellow
Pages advertising in five metropolitan areas of Australia.

Telecom Corp. of NZ had revenue of $1.24 billion for the year ended
Mar 31, '89, with a profit of $168 million and assets of $2.28
billion; it has 17,000 employees.


Regards, Will

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #415
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15262;
          6 Jun 90 6:11 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa32119;
          6 Jun 90 4:44 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac27881;
          6 Jun 90 3:41 CDT
Date:     Wed, 6 Jun 90 2:39:35 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #416
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 6 Jun 90 02:38:36 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 416

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Suspicions Confirmed [AT&T Consultant's Liason, via Don H. Kemp]
    Strange CO [David Barts]
    Menu-driven Answering Machines [Andy Rabagliati]
    Area Code 917 [Stan M. Krieger]
    917 NPA Proposal [John Cowan]
    NPA 917 to Serve Both Bronx and DID's in Manhattan [Edward Greenberg]
    New Bronx Area Code [Monty Solomon]
    Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB [Douglas Scott Reuben]
    Re: Stamford, CT Outage [John Higdon]
    Re: West German Cellular Phones in East Berlin [Wolfgang R. Schulz]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Suspicions Confirmed
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 10:38:32 EDT
From: Don H Kemp <[e-mail]>


Thanks to AT&T's Consultant Liason Program:

     AT&T NEWS BRIEFS
     [All items are today's date unless otherwise noted]

     Monday, June 4, 1990


     ABUSE CITED -- The FCC announced yesterday that it had documented
     widespread abuses in the operation of pay telephones and guest
     room phones at hotels and other institutions.  An FCC audit of 971
     such telephones nationwide found that more than 40 percent
     violated Federal regulations by failing to provide access to all
     long-distance carriers. ... The commission's staff will soon
     recommend that the five FCC commissioners overhaul current
     regulations to provide stricter enforcement and stiff fines. ...
     In many cases, a simple programming change in a hotel or motel's
     telephone computer system eliminates the potential for fraud, said
     Merrill R. Tutton, vp for consumer services at AT&T. ... New York
     Times, p. 36, 6/2.  Also Courier News [Central N.J.], p. 1, 6/3,
     AP, 6/2.  ... A bill that has cleared the U.S. House of
     Representatives and is awaiting action in the Senate ... would
     require all hotels and motels to provide their guests with access
     to any long-distance telephone company. ...[AT&T spokeswoman Gail
     Silver said] AT&T has agreed conditionally to pick up the cost of
     the modifications for each hotel. ... "The cost to modify PBX
     equipment is so nominal that we are proposing to underwrite the
     cost," [she said]. ... South Florida Business Journal, p. 1, 5/21.


Don H Kemp            "Always listen to experts.  They'll
B B & K Associates, Inc.         tell you what can't be done, and
Rutland, VT             why.  Then do it."
uunet!uvm-gen!teletech!dhk                         Lazarus Long

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 12:00:35 pdt
From: David Barts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Strange CO


Well, it's not all *that* strange, but it does deviate considerably
from any other CO I've used in the Southwest.  The CO serves White
Rock, New Mexico (505-672), and was installed in 1976 or 1977 (more on
this later).

White Rock itself is a strange place, in that it has has a population
somewhere between 6500 and 7000, which makes it a sizable city by New
Mexico standards, yet has no post office and does not appear on most
maps of New Mexico.  The reason for this is the unique way that Los
Alamos County is set up -- the city and county governments are the
same, thus the whole county (about 112 square miles) is also an
incorporated city, and White Rock is technically just a neighborhood
of Los Alamos, even though 10 miles of mesas and canyons separate it
from what most people think of as "Los Alamos."

Although it is not a distinct governmental entity, White Rock's
physical separation warrants its own CO, and LD calls to WR show up as
"WHITE ROCK, NM".  The local phone company is US West (formerly
Mountain Bell).

I just got back from a brief trip home, and found out some more odd
things about the CO that serves my parents' house (White Rock, New
Mexico, 505-672).

Ever since they installed the new CO in White Rock (sometime back in
1976 or 1977), it has been the *slowest* switch to disconnect a call
that I have ever used.  When you're finished talking, hang up the
phone and wait *five or ten seconds* before taking the phone off hook
or you will never get dial tone.

I just learned that my sister uses this slow-disconnect feature to her
advantage.  If she answers the phone in the family room, and finds out
it is a personal call for her and wants to talk in privacy, she can
hang up, run into another room, take the phone off hook, and the
calling party is still there!

Getting a dial tone is also slow.  Whenever I use my parents' phone, I
have to get used to picking up the receiver, *waiting five seconds or
so for dial tone*, and then dialing the number.  Kinda hard to break
the habit of automatically starting to dial as soon as the phone is
off hook, which works on normal CO's that return dial tone almost
instantly.

I have never used a CO anywhere that is as slow as this.  Before the
CO was `upgraded' (ha!) I remember getting almost instant dial tone
and disconnects.  (I think the old CO was an SXS CDO).

Despite its slowness, the CO is relatively modern; White Rock was (and
is) always one of the first areas in the state to get any new service
US West offers (measured service, custom ringing, alternative LD
carriers, direct international dialing, etc.)

Another strangeness: from every other semi-modern US West CO in NM I
have tried, you can get ringback by dialing 59y-xxxx, where y is some
digit (usually 3, 4, or 5) and xxxx is the last 4 digits of the phone
number.  Not in White Rock.

Before you ask, my parents are stingy when it comes to phone service,
so their line has *no* special features (CLASS, speed dialing, etc.)
They also refuse to pay extra for Touch-Tone, and DTMF will not break
dial tone.  However, pulsing is recognized at high speeds, and most of
their phones can be (and are) set to pulse at the fastest rate the
phone send out.

Back in '76 or '77, I remember the Los Alamos Monitor (the local
paper) doing a special article on White Rock's new CO.  Mountain Bell
was using an experimental new technique called `hot slide in' to
install the new hardware, which (I think) entailed activating the new
CO, removing the old CO from the building, and sliding the new CO
hardware into the building *while it was in use*.  I remember
something about a compressed air system (like hovercraft) being used
to levitate the new hardware so it could be gently moved into place.
I believe the article stated White Rock was the first place in
Mountain Bell territory (or the country) where this technique was
used.

 From what I have learned by reading this newsgroup and books on
telecom, I would guess that White Rock has a No. 2 (or is it 3?) ESS
with older, slower hardware than most 2ESS CO's.  You do hear clunking
sounds as it returns dial tone and as you are connected to a party.
Picking up the phone too fast after hanging up from a previous call
results in a mostly quiet line with a faint, erratic clicking in the
background.  Eventually, you get the loud signal that means `you left
the phone off hook, dum-dum!'.

I could speculate more, but this article is longer than I'd like
already and I'd rather turn this over to the net for comments.


David Barts            Pacer Corporation
[e-mail]        ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb

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

From: Andy Rabagliati <[e-mail]>
Subject: Menu-driven Answering Machines
Organization: INMOS Corporation, Colorado Springs
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 90 18:24:46 GMT


Our Theatre group has a need for an answering machine that will :-

Have a short message introduction,

Then give either ticket information, or social activities, or 'whats
on' in town. Ideally this could be switched by the caller from the
phone.

What (cheap?) systems can be bought to do this ?

Thank you,   Andy Rabagliati.

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

Date: Tue,  5 Jun 90 11:06:52 EDT
From: S M Krieger <[e-mail]>
Subject: Area Code 917
Organization: Summit NJ


I just heard on the news that NY Telephone plans to ask the NY Public
Utilities Commission to let them split area code 212 again.

Manhattan will retain area code 212; the Bronx will be assigned 917.
This change is planned for 1993.


Stan Krieger
Summit, NJ
 ...!att!attunix!smk

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

From: John Cowan <[e-mail]>
Subject: 917 NPA Proposal
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 15:16:02 EDT


According to {The New York Times} (5 June 1990, page B-1), New York
Tel has asked the Public Service Commission to activate NPA 917 for
the Bronx plus all cellular phones and pagers in Manhattan.
Currently, the Bronx and Manhattan share the 212 area code.

Approximately 500K Bronx lines and 100K Manhattan cellular/pager lines
would be affected.  The total number of lines is currently about 2.4
million, divided into 626 exchanges.  The maximum number of exchanges
in 212-land is 757, and they are being consumed at the rate of 33 per
year.

The NYPSC will hold public hearings later this year.  If the plan is
approved, permissive dialing would begin on 1 September, 1992, with
use of the new code made mandatory as of 2 January, 1993.

Three alternative plans were proposed but rejected as either too
costly, too confusing, or too short-term: dividing Manhattan into two
NPAs, placing new subscribers in the new NPA without regard to their
locations, or moving the Bronx to 718, the area code used by the rest
of New York City.


[e-mail]            (aka ...!hombre!marob!cowan)

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 15:05 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NPA 917 to Serve both Bronx and DID's in Manhattan


According to the {Wall Street Journal} (5 June 90, Page A8) NYNEX has
filed a plan with the New York State PSC to introduce Area Code 917.
This will service customers in the Bronx, but also all pagers and
cellular phones currently in the 212 area in New York City
(Manhattan.)

The implications of this are interesting.  If, for example, I have a
pager company with equipment located in Manhattan, will I have to pay
mileage to get my DID trunks in from the Bronx, or will it all be
transparent?

                 -edg

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jun 1990 17:21:38 MDT
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Bronx Area Code


According to an article in the 90Jun05 {Wall Street Journal}, Nynex
plans to establish a new area code, 917, for the Bronx and
all pagers and cellular phones currently in 212.

This change would go into effect in September 1992.

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

Date: 6-JUN-1990 02:38:30.47
From: "DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB


Right after Divestiture, and for some time afterwards, New York
Telephone's inserts in their monthly phone bills (they call it
"Hello") stated that there is a "special transit corridor" between New
York City and Northern New Jersey.

The insert said that all NON-equal access customers, ie, people in
older exchanges who could not get equal access, would have all their
calls to Northern New Jersey routed over New York Telephone via the
"special transit corridor", while those who did have equal access
would have their long distance company handle these calls.

Later on, during 1987, they started promoting the use of "10NYT", and
New Jersey Bell the use of "10NJB". Then, in 1989, New York Telephone
sent us a letter claiming to be able to save us money if we make over
$50 worth of calls to north Jersey via a long distance company, and
switched to NYT. It was sort of a WATS line to north Jersey, but from
what I gather they just program the switch to direct all calls to
north Jersey made from your phone to use New York Tel instead of AT&T.
I'm not sure how this actually works, so if anyone is interested, call
NY Tel. I'm sure they'd be glad to talk to you about it! :-)

Interestingly, from New York to New Jersey, using 10NYT will only work
as a 1+ call. IE, you can call from 212-686 to 201-322 by dialing
10NYT-1-201-322-9950. You can't dial a calling card call this way,
however, and must use AT&T for such a call. (And pay a $.80 rather
than a $.30 cent surcharge.) Moreover, you can't "sequence call" to
New Jersey either, ie, you can't make a call from 212-686 to 212-353
via a calling card, then press the "#" sign to make a new call, and
then call New Jersey 201-322.

BUT, from New Jersey, you CAN do this. You can make calling card calls
anywhere within the north Jersey LATA, as well as to New York City
(212/718).

Wonder why New York Tel. won't allow this as well ... They could make a
lot of money from locations such as Penn Station or the Port Authority
Bus terminal, both of which are commuter stops for the heavy
trans-Hudson traffic.


Doug

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
(and just plain old "dreuben" to locals...!  :-)  )

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Stamford, CT Outage
Date: 5 Jun 90 02:12:59 PDT (Tue)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


"Douglas Scott Reuben" <[e-mail]> writes:

>  From their DMS exchanges, they managed to block off ALL calls to the
> exchanges in Stamford which were affected. IE, you would dial
> 1+977-xxxx or 1+324-xxxx or any Stamford number, and it would be
> blocked immediately. Depending on where you were calling from, it
> would either give you a recorded message or a re-order.

> Is this some new local network feature that SNET and the rest of the
> Bells have?

Happens all the time here. Whenever the remarkably advanced, super
wonderful, all things to all people, greatest thing since sliced bread
(but unfortunately discontinued and abandoned by AT&T) GTD-5 switch in
Los Gatos crashes (at least once a year) the surrounding Pac*Bell COs
are really quick on the uptake. (Probably 'cause they are faced with
the problem in Los Gatos so much.)

Calls directed to Los Gatos are immediately intercepted by a recording
that says, "Due to telephone company difficulty, your call cannot be
completed at this time." GTE then usually sends someone up from
Thousand Jokes or Santa Monica who is usually able to get things
running within a day or two. (Remember, this is the town whose council
voted disapproval of GTE as the telco. Silly them, don't they know
they have the most advanced CO switching equipment in the world?)

Anyway, I feel the wording of the intercept recording is much too
charitable. If I were Pac*Bell, the script would be changed somewhat.
I leave it as an exercise for the reader to guess what that might be.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: "Wolfgang R. Schulz" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: West German Cellular Phones in East Berlin
Date: 5 Jun 90 02:12:59 PDT (Tue)


I had written an article about this subject here some days ago, to
bring some insider (as to location) background, to explain the
cellular telephone curiosity to use in East Berlin, but sadly enough
my follow-up posting on this subject (the first ever I wrote, beeing
new to the NEWS) never showed. I probably have to learn how to do it.

I had said also, and this is a correction to the foregoing article,
East and West German postal departments have agreed that it is fully
LEGAL to use a West German car or portable phone across the border,
simply because the East German telephone network is a DISASTER, and
business is almost IMPOSSIBLE if you have to rely on their system.
So to encourage the badly needed companies from the western world,
they even encourage people to use their wireless home phones in
East Berlin.

There is no charge for many months now if you wish to take your
wireless equipment from West to East Germany. Even CB is allowed, also
ham-radio. In that regard, the two Germanies are already united. So
really forget all those old restrictions.


Wolfgang

>>>German Television proudly presents:   NDR-TV<<<
>>>[e-mail]                    #1 in <<<
>>>gtc![e-mail]     Northern<
>>>[e-mail]                Germany<<

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #416
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16490;
          6 Jun 90 6:57 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27881;
          6 Jun 90 3:39 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa11291;
          6 Jun 90 2:35 CDT
Date:     Wed, 6 Jun 90 1:38:45 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #414
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 6 Jun 90 01:38:14 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 414

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [John Higdon]
    Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [Hector Myerston]
    Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [Fred R. Goldstein]
    Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers [John Slater]
    Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers [Mark Brader]
    Re: Licenses for Television in the UK [Martin Harriss]
    Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter" [Leonard P. Levine]
    Re: My List of North American Area Codes [Bob Goudreau]
    Re: Jargon Overload [Steve Wolfson]
    Re: Screwy PUC Policies [Jon Baker]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Date: 5 Jun 90 01:47:55 PDT (Tue)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


Jerry Aguirre <[e-mail]> writes:

> So are DID lines really only for incomming calls?  Is there a
> technical reason or is the carrier trying to charge more?

I'm afraid they are, and the reason is technical. A DID trunk is
actually a phone line in reverse. Your PBX becomes the CO and presents
48 volts back to the telco office. When a call is placed from outside
destined for an extension on your PBX, the telco trunk on which the
call comes in goes "off hook" or signals the PBX there is a call.
Depending on the selected protocol, telco pulses the extension number
(or uses DTMF) immediately or after receiving a wink from the PBX. (A
wink is momentary supervision.)

When the call is answered in the PBX, the battery voltage as presented
to the telco CO is reversed, signaling supervision back to the
network.  Since the whole setup is more or less the opposite of what
is the normal arrangement for CO/subscriber connections, there is no
way for the PBX to place an outgoing call on these lines.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 3 Jun 90  09:25 PST
Subject: Re:  Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Organization: SRI Intl, Inc., Menlo Park, CA  94025  [[phone]]


     Err... DID = Direct Inward Dialing.  DID allows inward calls to
                  a PBX to complete them to specific PBX stations
                  without attendant assistance.

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

From: "Fred R. Goldstein" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Date: 5 Jun 90 18:04:22 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jerry
Aguirre) writes...

>So are DID lines really only for incomming calls?  Is there a
>technical reason or is the carrier trying to charge more?

It's a technically valid reason.  Ordinary trunks use (typically)
ground-start signaling, which is a variation on traditional POTS.
They send a single pulse plus power ring to initiate ringing, and you
just "pick up" (draw current) to answer, and then billing begins.

DID trunks are a different kludge. Typically they send a wink (unless
they're immediate start, which I wouldn't recomment) and then, when
the wink is ack'd by the PBX, they send the digits.  No ring, of
course.  At this stage the connection is already established to the
caller, but the charging hasn't begun.  Your PBX is not allowed to
permit the talk path to open in the line->PBX direction until it sends
a supervision pulse which causes charging to begin.  (The PBX->line
path is open because the PBX, not the CO, sends the ring/busy/etc.
tones.)

This type of line is designed to be monodirectional; thus DID trunks
are one-way only.  And in any case tend to cost more than outgoing
trunks.  (At least they do here!)  Note that ISDN signaling does
permit DID on two-way trunks, since DID is handled by just an extra
information element in the incoming SETUP message, and ISDN inherently
handles call supervision.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
                 or [e-mail]
                    voice:  [phone]

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers
Date: 4 Jun 90 12:46:39 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


You may be interested to learn that the association of letters with
telephone digits works slightly differently in the UK. First of all
the assignment itself is different :

  1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9    0
      ABC  DEF  GHI  JKL  MN   PRS  TUV  WXY  OQ

The main difference from the American method is that O is assigned to
0 rather then 6. Also Q is assigned to 0. We too have no Z.

The other difference is that all this is ancient history! British
Telecom (or the GPO as it was then) changed to "all-figure dialling"
in the 1960's.  Occasionally I see an old dial with the letters on as
described above, but they are now very rare. The letters were used for
STD codes (see below), and previously for dialling other exchanges
within cities. For example, a number in the Mayfair district of London
would be written as MAYfair 1234 - one of the Mayfair exchanges is
still 629. I was interested to learn from the "coathanger" posting a
while back that the same system was used in the US.

Before "all-figure dialling", STD (subscriber trunk dialling, == long
distance) codes were alphanumeric - e.g. Blackpool was 0BL3 (all UK
STD codes start with zero, as in most parts of the world), whereas
Blackburn was 0BL4. Today they are 0253 and 0254 respectively. The
trailing digit was used simply to distinguish between codes for towns
with similar initial letters, never as a third letter (except by
chance).

This scheme extends also to the original six large metropolitan
districts which were allotted 3-digit STD codes and 7-digit numbers.
Apart from London (01 until the recent split into 071/081), the codes
are

   021   *B*irmingham
   031   *E*dinburgh
   041   *G*lasgow
   051   *L*iverpool
   061   *M*anchester

This was broken somewhat in the early 1980's by the introduction of
091 for the Newcastle/Sunderland/Durham area in the north-east.
Dialling within this area is a real can of worms, but I'll save that
for another posting.

Because most of the STD codes were assigned back in the 1950's, it
follows that, given an unknown STD code, one can make an intelligent
guess as to where it is. E.g. I come from an area in the north-west
with the code 0706. From the table, it can only be PO, RO or SO
(ignoring Q!). In fact the town is called Rochdale. This system is not
perfect, but it can help occasionally.

It's amazing how much of this stuff comes back to you when you start
thinking. All I was going to do was post the letter assignment table.
If anybody is actually interested in this STD code stuff, let me know
and I'll wrack my brains some more.

And I'm just an amateur observer and user of telecom services, with a
so-so memory, so there's no guarantee that this stuff is accurate.


John Slater
Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick office

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

From: Mark Brader <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Translating Alpha Phone Numbers
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 1990 21:32:19 -0400


I was waiting for someone else to point out this nonportability:

> if echo "$phnnum" | grep 'q\|Q\|z\|Z' > /dev/null
>   then
>     echo "There's no Q or Z on the phone dial."
>     exit 1
> fi

To work on all variants of UNIX, the grep pattern should be '[qQzZ]'.


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

From: Martin Harriss <cellar![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Licenses for Television in the UK
Date: 5 Jun 90 15:59:16 GMT
Reply-To: Martin Harriss <cellar![e-mail]>
Organization: Bellcore


In article <[e-mail]> John Slater <[e-mail]>
writes:

>Evasion is widespread, and personally I am deeply cynical about the
>efficacy or even the existence of detector vans (I've never seen one).
>I believe the authorities rely largely on non-renewed licences to
>catch defaulters.

Oh, the detector vans do exist - I've seen them, and read about them
in the telecom press.  But you're also right about using non-renewal
records to catch people.  This is what happens:

They (who *is* they these days? I don't thing it's BT) will target an
area of the country where they want to do some enforcement.  The
detector vans are sent there, and there is a local publicity campaign
sometime before the event.  The non-renewal records are consulted, and
the detector vans are sent by the houses of people who have not
renewed.  If a television is found operating there, the owner receives
a knock on the door.

I believe the idea is to scare the excrement out of people by
publicizing the enforcement campaign before sending the vans in.  I
bet it costs more than 71 quid to prosecute someone.


Martin Harriss (ex brit)
[e-mail]

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

From: Leonard P Levine <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter"
Date: 5 Jun 90 18:30:25 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


 From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Jim Anderson):

> As far as the signal encoding goes, it probably is a relatively
> unsophisticated code, as the transmission is only a burst transmission
> and (my opinion) should only contain the current meter reading, not
> the usage since the previous reading.

I had an interesting experience with a simpler meter some years ago.
The system was a municipal (shorewood Wisconsin) water meter with a
repeater outside the house so that the meter reader needed only read
the repeater without going into the basement.  The repeater failed
over a period of years, missing ticks, and finally quit.  I was asked
to allow the city to replace the repeater.  They did, and brought the
readings up to date.

Later I was billed for about ten years missed water service billings.
As I recall, the bill was for more than $200.00.  Some discussion with
the village manager convinced him that not all of the water had been
used this year, and that rates earlier did not include sewer service.
We negotiated a price.

With gas meters the same alarming thing may happen.  What is worse,
the numbers will be an order of magnitude larger.  Be very wary to see
that the REAL meter is read when you purchase a house, not just the
repeater, whatever the technological type.


| Leonard P. Levine                       e-mail [e-mail] |
| Professor, Computer Science             Office [phone] |
| University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee       Home   [phone] |
| Milwaukee, WI 53201 U.S.A.              FAX    [phone] |

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 17:49:47 edt
From: Bob Goudreau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert M.
Hamer) writes:

>  No, it _certainly_ is the RIGHT access code for the ENTIRE
> >world.  Additional access codes may be required ahead of it, but no
> >matter where you go in the world, "1" is the access code for the U.S.

> I really am not sure this is worth going on about, because I don't
> know if the rest of the Digest is interested in the topic or not,
> but...  The point is that the "1+" is an access code, and not part of
> the phone number.  In the US or elsewhere.  Actually, when I use my
> Sprint FON card, a "1+" never plays a role in the dialing: it seems to
> be "0+"; I don't know about other calling/credit cards.

> Again, it may not be worth it to start a thread on it, but I would
> assert that the "1+" is an access code, and the area code does not
> include it, and neither does the phone number.

No, you're completely missing his point: the "1" is INDEED part of
every phone number in the US, because the country code for the North
American Numbering Plan (US, Canada, much of Caribbean) is "1".  This
country code is not to be confused with the intra-NANP access code for
direct-dialed inter-area-code calls, which also happens to be "1" in
most areas of the NANP.  (In some, it's the null string, but that will
have to change in a few years with the advent of NXX area codes.)  But
in all direct-dialed calls into the NANP from outside of the NANP, the
country code is required.  In particular, the string "1" must be
dialed after the international access code (which varies from country
to country; many countries use "00") and before the area code and
local number.

So it's certainly valid to state that the ordered pair, say, "+1 802"
identifies the area code for Vermont, just as it's correct to note
that "+44 71" identifies the area code for inner London.


Bob Goudreau                [phone]
Data General Corporation
62 Alexander Drive            [e-mail]
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709    ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau
USA

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

From: Steve Wolfson <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Jargon Overload
Date: 5 Jun 90 15:20:59 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


[e-mail] (David Tamkin) writes:

>PT> It would seem to me [that Isaac and David] have similar complaints,
>PT> and the answer for both may be to obtain copies of the glossary files
>PT> in the Telecom Archives.  Look for the file entitled
>PT> 'phrack.glossary'.

>Providing definitions of the words and expansions of the acronyms
>cannot guarantee that everyone will understand the complete idea.  In
>the questions I asked that led up to that submission and in the
>earlier articles that lost me, the problems were the concepts and
>assumptions, not the words or acronyms.  I knew the words but the
>phrasing was ambiguous to my untrained eyes.  As a result, I couldn't
>understand the answers as they were given.  When I asked again, people
>repeated the same murky language.  That didn't help.

    Help is here (sort of) from AT&T.  I just received a mailing
from AT&T Business Communications Services for the following classes:

    VOICE COMMUNICATIONS I:

An Analysis of Voice Services and Applications     Course Code 26A

Audience: Communications managers, network adminstrators or
communications analaysts/specialists.

Topics:
    Communications Equipment (Key, PBX, Centrex, ACD)

    Local and long distance service
    (industry structure, jurisdiction, equal access, rate structure
     comparisons)

    Communications Services
    (WATS, 800, foreign exchange [FX], tie lines/trunks, off premises
     stations, remote call forwarding [RCF],T1.5)

    Networks
    (premises bases, enhanced private switched communications service,
     software defined network)

    Communications media (microwave, twisted pair, coaxial cable,
    fiber optics, satellite)


Fee: $1195 for a 4 day class.

Two other classes Data Communications I and II.  Cover more lower
level network type stuff.  Cost/length is the same.

The number listed for more info: 1 800 TRAINER (1 800 872-4637)

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

From: Jon Baker <asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Screwy PUC Policies
Date: 5 Jun 90 17:20:15 GMT
Organization: gte


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Higdon)
writes:

> would be converted to the 5E, but not in California. The PUC seems to
> be of the opinion that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

It probably has more to do with capital depreciation over the expected
life cycle of the equipment, but ...

> ... the X-bar was installed in 1956 and one might think that 34 years
> is sufficient service life. But the twenty-year-old ESS? Hell, that's
> still cooking along just fine.

Certainly 34 years is a sufficient time for the equipment to fully
depreciate.  One would also think that 20 years is sufficient for the
#1.  Typical depreciation on modern digital switches is 20 years.  The
telco can't get rid of it before then even if they want to.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #414
******************************











ISSUES 415-416 APPEAR BEFORE 414 DUE TO TRANSMISSION DELAY. 417 IS NEXT.

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10335;
          7 Jun 90 3:34 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24523;
          7 Jun 90 1:53 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13830;
          7 Jun 90 0:49 CDT
Date:     Thu, 7 Jun 90 0:07:23 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #417
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jun 90 00:07:03 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 417

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Licenses for Television in the UK [Mike Bell]
    Re: Licenses for Television in the UK [John Slater]
    Re: Licenses for Television in the UK [Piet van Oostrum]
    Re: Another Clue to Possible E. German Prefixes [Tom Hofmann]
    Re: References Needed Re New Nodes in Modern Networks [Peter Weiss]
    Re: Does This Feature Exist in a Telephone? [Bill Berbenich]
    Re: GTD-5 and CLASS [David Robbins]
    Re: GTD-5 and CLASS [Jon Baker]
    Re: Menu-driven Answering Machines [David Ptasnik]
    Re: 10XXX Bugs [Bill Fenner]
    Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [Ken Abrams]
    One-Piece Telephones [Robert M. Hamer]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mike Bell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Licenses for Television in the UK
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 08:37:00 EDT


[e-mail] (John Slater) writes:

>Evasion is widespread, and personally I am deeply cynical about the
>efficacy or even the existence of detector vans (I've never seen one).
>I believe the authorities rely largely on non-renewed licenses to
>catch defaulters.

Before all UK readers fail to renew their TV licenses, I can confirm
that TV detector vans do exist - I visited one on display at the East
of England show two years ago. The equipment inside looked about 1960
vintage.  The operator seemed rather unknowledgeable about the
principle of operation, but from what I surmised it is identical to
the methods described by Peter Wright in "Spycatcher" for identifying
enemy receivers listening to a particular frequency - ie. blip the
transmitter frequency and correlate it with secondary emissions on
other frequencies.

(Note that this distinguishes between a TV being used with a VCR and a
TV watching live transmissions - a license used not to be required for
the former, although I'm not sure if this is still the case).

The TV detector van gets fairly good range information from this
source. The antenna can be rotated to give bearing - but it wasn't
clear if it could be adjusted to give elevation.

The operator is given list of houses in the area which do not have TV
licenses from which to start...

Even if the equipment does not work, it is often reported that large
numbers of TV licenses are suddenly applied for in areas where it is
publicized that the vans are operating!


Mike Bell -- <[e-mail]>

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Licenses for Television in the UK
Date: 6 Jun 90 15:23:23 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, cellar![e-mail]
(Martin Harriss) writes:

>I believe the idea is to scare the excrement out of people by
>publicizing the enforcement campaign before sending the vans in.  I
>bet it costs more than 71 quid to prosecute someone.

Yes, but what about the (up to) 400 pound fine when they're prosecuted?


John

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

From: Piet van Oostrum <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Licenses for Television in the UK
Date: 6 Jun 90 16:27:37 GMT
Reply-To: Piet van Oostrum <[e-mail]>
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University, The Netherlands


In article <[e-mail]>, cellar!martin@bellcore (Martin
Harriss) writes:

|They (who *is* they these days? I don't thing it's BT) will target an
|area of the country where they want to do some enforcement.  The
|detector vans are sent there, and there is a local publicity campaign
|sometime before the event.  The non-renewal records are consulted, and
|the detector vans are sent by the houses of people who have not
|renewed.  If a television is found operating there, the owner receives
|a knock on the door.

In the Netherlands we have the same system. A few years ago there was
an April Fools joke on the TV where they told that a new system was
invented to detect non-licenced TV's by their radiation. The only way
to prevent detection was to wrap your TV in alumin(i)um foil. Guess
what happened.


Piet* van Oostrum, Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University,
Padualaan 14, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Telephone: [phone]   Uucp:   uunet!mcsun!ruuinf!piet
Telefax:   [phone]   Internet:  [e-mail]   (*`Pete')

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

From: Tom Hofmann <cgch![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Another Clue to Possible E. German Prefixes
Organization: CIBA-GEIGY AG, Basle, Switzerland
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 12:03:37 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> mtxinu!Ingres.COM![e-mail]
writes:

|In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (J. Stephen
|Reed) writes:

|>West German postal codes are normally four digits, ranging from 1000
|>(West Berlin) to 7999.  An article in the Germany Philatelic Society
|>magazine noted that according to a Deutsche Bundespost bulletin some
|>years ago, the 8000s and 9000s are reserved for "other German regions".

|Not quite right.  Don't know about the 9000 series, but the 8000
|series is used by Munich and surroundings (much of Upper Bavaria?).

As I heard from West German news two weeks ago, Germany is going to
have five-digits postal codes after the unification.  District
post-office numbers will then be integrated in the codes (West Germany
has always been an exception herein).


Tom Hofmann        [e-mail]

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wednesday, 6 Jun 1990 09:33:18 EDT
From: Peter Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: References Needed Re New Nodes in Modern Networks


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Michael Dawson) says:

>I am looking for pointers to papers or any other type of information
>source that contains information on the function and services provided
>by the new nodes in modern telephone networks.

Publications such as _Network World_ and _CommunicationsWeek_
regularly have such info.

Also, I suspect that Datapro's _Reports on Data Communications_ would
be a good source.


/Pete

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

From: Bill Berbenich <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Does This Feature Exist in a Telephone?
Date: 6 Jun 90 15:10:06 GMT
Reply-To: Bill Berbenich <eedsp![e-mail]>
Organization: DSP Lab, School of Electrical Engineering, Ga. Tech, Atlanta, GA


In article <[e-mail]> ladwp![e-mail] writes:

>I'm looking for a feature in a phone that will help me with the
>following:

>My wife and I have a infant child and sometimes when I call her she
>has the baby in her arms and can't get to the phone.  I'd like to have
>a speaker phone that she could answer without going over to the
>device.  If it could be voice activated or if I could enter a secured
>code to have the phone answer itself.  Also a built-in answering
>machine would be nice.

>Does such a thing exist?

Yes, Panasonic makes an answering machine/telephone with a feature
called "answer-back."  If you (the caller) know the code number which
has been set on the phone, you can make the phone go into the speaker
phone mode. I believe this same model that I am thinking of will allow
the phone to go off-hook into the speaker phone mode if someone at the
unit presses a certain button - in other words, the phone will ring
once and then answer itself. After your wife heard the first ring, she
could wait a second and then say (yell?)  Hello! across the room.

If your wife does not want the phone to answer itself, she can press
that-same-button again to toggle the auto-answer off. In any case, if
the caller knows the security code they can make the phone go into the
speaker phone (or answerback) mode on this particular Panasonic model.

I don't know the Panasonic model number, but it is a fairly small unit
(gray in color with an orange speakerphone button) which utilizes a
voice chip for the outgoing message and a single micro-cassette for
the incoming message and to backup the message on the voice chip in
case the power goes out. Most (many?)  consumer electronics stores in
the Atlanta area carry this particular model for something over
$200.  I have seen good pricing for it at Service Merchandise and
Pace. I may just buy one of them myself one day. :-)


William A. Berbenich | Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill   Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: David Robbins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GTD-5 and CLASS
Date: 6 Jun 90 16:02:54 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Inc., Waltham, MA


 From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (John Higdon):

> I have received many kilobytes of material from GTE folks trying to
> sell the virtues of GTD-5. But after my little experimentation, I'm
> going to invoke my Jackson County, MO heritage: Show me!

It may be that you are complaining about the wrong thing!  If my
information is correct, the GTD-5 itself is quite capable of doing SS7
and CLASS.  However, the operating company that buys the GTD-5 decides
whether or not to make use of its capabilities.  Your experimentation
has shown, quite convincingly, that GTE has not taken advantage of any
of the GTD-5's SS7 capabilities in your area.  This is pure
speculation, but it may be that the GTE operating company has not
worked out any arrangement with Pac*Bell to interconnect the systems
with SS7 (perhaps they haven't even *thought* of doing that ??).

The question here is who to blame for the conditions you describe.  Do
you blame the equipment manufacturer or the equipment operator?
Ultimately, the telephone service you receive depends most heavily
upon the operating company, for it is they who decide what equipment
to buy and which of the equipment's capabilities to offer to their
customers.

I don't feel any compulsion to defend either the GTD-5 or the GTE
operating companies, although I am a GTE employee.  I know nothing
about the commitment of the operating company to provide the service
its customers want.  All I can do is point out that the latest and
greatest switching technology, even if it is in the possession of the
operating company, won't do you any good if the operating company
chooses not to provide you the service.  From a practical point of
view, the technology might as well not exist if you are not permitted
to use it!

If enough customers rag on the telco to provide these neat services,
perhaps they will perceive that there is enough demand for the service
that it will be provided.  And the PUC, as a (supposed) servant of the
public, might be able to apply some pressure (although from what I
know of PUCs, this may or may not ever happen :-)).


Dave Robbins                    GTE Laboratories Incorporated
[e-mail]          40 Sylvan Rd.
 ...!harvard!bunny!drobbins      Waltham, MA 02254
CYA:  I speak only for myself; GTE may disagree with what I say.

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

From: Jon Baker <asuvax!gtephx!mothra![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GTD-5 and CLASS
Date: 7 Jun 90 00:34:07 GMT
Organization: gte


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> Actually, what I meant to say was, "All Bay Area COs except the three
> in Los Gatos and the one in Morgan Hill." This is, of course, our
> token GTE punishment area. (Doesn't everyone have to suffer with GTE
> somewhere nearby?) These COs (all GTD-5) speak MF to each other and to
> the outside world. No CLASS available here!

Please clarify your point here - are you claiming that CLASS is not
available in the Bay Area?  No argument there.  Are you claiming that
CLASS is not available on the GTD-5?  Argument there.  It is available
on the GTD-5, and has been deployed to, at the least, Santa Barbara
and Downey, for about ayear now.  It was first offered in the domestic
market on SVR 1631, which was not widely deployed.  Expanded CLASS
features are available on SVR1632, which only recently was standarized
for general deployment throughout GTE.  It should be deployed with
increasing frequency throughout GTE operating areas in California.  As
they say, 'coming soon to a site near you' ...

> I have received many kilobytes of material from GTE folks trying to
> sell the virtues of GTD-5.

Actually, just trying to defend it against scathing and undeserved
criticism.  I have yet to hear a GTD5/GTE bashing that does not apply
equally well to a 5ESS/RBOC.

> But after my little experimentation, I'm
> going to invoke my Jackson County, MO heritage: Show me!

Patience is a virtue ...

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

From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Menu-driven Answering Machines
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 9:28:49 PDT


In article 6574 of comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] (Andy
Rabagliati) writes:

>Our Theatre group has a need for an answering machine that will :-
>Have a short message introduction,
>Then give either ticket information, or social activities, or 'whats
>on' in town. Ideally this could be switched by the caller from the
>phone. What (cheap?) systems can be bought to do this ?

This sounds like a call for a standard voice mail/auto attd.  As you
are in Colorado, I suspect you can get the service on your existing
phone line for around $20.00/mo. from US West.  If you want to be
independent, there are a variety of PC boards from $500 - $2,000
readily available.  If you have a large phone system, a dedicated
system might be in order.  I personally like the Repartee system from
Active Voice.  Hope this helps.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 23:37 EST
From: Bill Fenner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs


I was playing around at a newly installed Bell o' PA phone the other
day, and got some funny responses:

10288-1-700-555-4141 gave the expected (ring ring) Thank you for using
AT&T.  1-700-555-4141 gave a slightly unexpected "Your call cannot be
completed as dialled."  10333-1-700-555-4141 gave an extremely
unexpected (ring ring) Thank you for using AT&T.

Um ... is this legal?  Could it have been a simple mistake because the
phone was recently installed, or am I giving Bell too much credit?
Should I try to do something about this?  I've had no luck getting a
FON card, 'tho I tried twice (once from WD40, once from a promotion at
a local mall; maybe I'm on their **it list), so I can't try dialling a
calling-card call with 10333 and see if it works...  Anyone have any
other suggestions as to what to try?


Bill

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

From: Ken Abrams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Date: 6 Jun 90 21:44:02 GMT
Reply-To: Ken Abrams <pallas![e-mail]>
Organization: Athenanet, Inc.,  Springfield, Illinois


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jerry
Aguirre) writes:

>So are DID lines really only for incomming calls?  Is there a
>technical reason or is the carrier trying to charge more?

The answers are yes, yes and probably not (in that order).

There probably is no technical reason why a two-way DID trunk couldn't
be made but, to the best of my knowlege, it just hasn't been done yet.
It would not be a simple change and there are some good reasons to
keep things separate.  As an example, an unusually heavy load of
incoming calls cannot prevent you from getting "outside" dial tone
because all your trunks are suddenly busy.


Ken Abrams                     uunet!pallas!kabra437
Illinois Bell                  [e-mail]
Springfield                    (voice) 217-753-7965

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

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 14:53 EDT
From: "Robert M. Hamer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: One-piece Telephones


Is it my imagination, or have the one-piece telephones (both
inexpensive and expensive) basically disappeared from sale?  I am
looking to buy a new phone for our upstairs, and the best phone to buy
would be one that I could just put down on a narrow ledge in the
hallway in order for it to be available.  I have a cheap, old phone
(about nine years old, cost about 10 bucks) called something like a
"Mura QuickPhone" there now, and I want to replace it.

A more expensive phone would be acceptable, but it would be nice if it
did not need some sort of cradle or holder in which to put it.  The
ledge is narrow, and wide enough for the phone, but an additional
piece that did nothing but hold the phone would be a loose pain in the
neck that I don't need.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #417
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12335;
          7 Jun 90 4:42 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12191;
          7 Jun 90 2:57 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab24523;
          7 Jun 90 1:53 CDT
Date:     Thu, 7 Jun 90 1:34:39 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #418
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jun 90 01:34:17 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 418

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Wisconsin Bell / AT&T Making Random Connections [Anton Rang]
    AT&T STU-III Information Center (ASIC) [Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton]
    One View of AT&T [Ken Harrenstien]
    Baud per Hertz [Henry Troup]
    Convenience Codes to Other Countries [Tom Hofmann]
    "NANP Codes" AND "I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call [J. Slater]
    Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code [Greg Monti, via John R. Covert]
    Re: Strange CO [Thomas Lapp]
    Re: MPS48 Modem Help [Donald E. Kimberlin]
    Hackers, Kapor and Len Rose [TELECOM Moderator]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 12:30:49 -0500
From: Anton Rang <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wisconsin Bell / AT&T Making Random Connections


I haven't seen this on the newsgroup, and thought readers might be
interested.

  For the last week or two, Wisconsin Bell has been having an odd
problem with their system: it's placing calls at random.  Only a few
people (all in Madison, so far as I know) have been affected so far.
They start receiving calls from other phones in the area, as well as
through AT&T's long distance network (including international calls).

  The most interesting thing about this is that these aren't just
"misdirected" calls; neither party initiates the call.  The phone just
rings at both ends.  One person in Madison was getting about eighty
calls per day through the weekend, including connections to several
other Madison numbers, and many international calls (Zaire, China, and
New Zealand, for instance).

  A Wisconsin Bell spokesman said that the company is trying to track
down the problem, with the help of AT&T.

  (Information from several newscasts and the Wisconsin State Journal.)


Anton

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

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 17:45 MST
From: "Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T STU-III Information Center (ASIC)


As distributed by AT&T at its STU-III demo at AFCEA 90 convention/
exhibition in Washington, DC, 5-7 June 1990:

               AT&T STU-III Information Center (ASIC)

- Is a free, on-line information center that you can call 24 hours a day,
  seven days a week using a modem and a PC (2400/1200 8N1)

- Is available on a toll-free number (1-800-331-1774)

- Contains STU-III Marketing, Customer Service, and Technical Information

- Allows you to read information on-line

- Allows you to download text files and software programs

- Allows you to send messages to and ask questions of our staff

- Allows you to participate in customer surveys by answering questions on-line

(I called the number and got a modem tone, but as I wasn't near my PC
at the time all I could do was whistle at it :-)


ras

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

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 19:02:34 PDT
From: Ken Harrenstien <[e-mail]>
Subject: One View of AT&T


While reading a book recently, I ran across a tidbit that I thought
readers of Telecom might appreciate.  Herewith, from "Win-Win
Negotiating" (1985) by Fred E. Jandt, p.265:

  Sometimes, hardballers operate on orders from above.  For example,
  it's no secret that you can resolve a complaint much more easily
  with IBM, whose management practices a win-win philosophy,
  than with AT&T, where, from the very top down, the propensity
  is to tell you, "That's our policy."  (Translation: "Go drown
  yourself.")
        ...
  "That's our policy" -- those are not only fighting words, they're
  words of consummate arrogance and defiance.  If the person who
  utters them is working for someone else, forget about rhetoric or
  other means of persuasion; you've got to go to the boss.  And if
  the person who utters the words *is* the boss, you've got to put a
  knife to his throat -- figuratively, of course -- and bring him to
  his knees before you can expect to reason with him.


This was five years ago.  Still true, I wonder?

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

From: Henry Troup <bnrgate!.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Subject: Baud per Hertz
Date: 6 Jun 90 16:04:40 GMT
Reply-To: Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd.


In article <[e-mail]> Rob Warnock <[e-mail]> writes:

>...(Pushing a 7 baud signal through a 5 Hz pipe is
>quite good!  The theoretical maximum is 2 baud/Hz: one state for each
>half-cycle of bandwidth.)...

I don't see a theoretical limit, not if you allow phase modulation.
For real phase discriminators and real lines there certainly are
limits, but in theory you could shift each half cycle by as fine an
increment as you could measure ... I guess Heisenberg limits that
somewhere, but not for a long time.

Still, in the real world 7 baud on 5 Hz is very good!


Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions
 ..uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 or  [e-mail]

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

From: Tom Hofmann <cgch![e-mail]>
Subject: Convenience Codes to Other Countries
Organization: CIBA-GEIGY AG, Basle, Switzerland
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 13:23:53 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve
Pershing) writes:

|In
|addition, there was at one time, an area code within country code 1
|assigned to Mexico City, for more convenient dialling (?).  This is an
|anomaly in the normal CCITT assignment, as Mexico has its own country
|code.

|I wonder if there are other "convenience" codes within other country
|codes in other parts of the world?

There are small parts of Austria which belong to the West German
customs territory.  These areas have both Austrian and West German
area codes (as well as two postal codes).

In Switzerland/Liechtenstein there are convenience codes along all
borders.  Example: Phone numbers in southern Alsace (France) have the
form 89.xx.yy.zz.  From north-western Switzerland (the adjacent area)
the convenience code for these numbers is 068 xx.yy.zz instead of 0033
89.xx.yy.zz.  However, 068 is intercepted in all other parts of
Switzerland/Liechtenstein.  Convenience-code calls are charged like
domestic calls between 50 and 100 km which makes them much cheaper
than regular international calls.


Tom Hofmann        [e-mail]

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: "NANP codes" AND "I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call"
Date: 6 Jun 90 15:59:44 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


In a perfect world I could dial "+44 81 676 XXXX" to reach my number
in London from *anywhere* in the world, including the UK (where +
means 010). Similarly it would be nice to be able to dial 011 1 415
XXX XXXX to reach San Francisco from anywhere in the US.

I was originally going to post this with lots of ":-)", but seriously
though folks, why should it be difficult with modern switches?

Just a thought.


John Slater
Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick office

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

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 16:27:07 PDT
From: John R. Covert  <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code (from Greg Monti)


   From: Greg Monti
   Subject: Re: AT&T Finally Learns USA Country Code

[e-mail] (Jim Rees)  writes:

> By the way, the USA country code still isn't given in any USA
> telephone directory I've ever seen.  Burkino Faso?  OK.  Vanuato?  No
> problem.  USA?  Forget it!

I found one.  A Lincoln Telephone & Telegraph (LTT) directory in
Lincoln, Nebraska (yes, that's an independent company), lists the
country code for United States as 1 with a footnote saying that it's
only for calling back to the US from other countries.  It's in the
ordinary list of country and city codes, correctly alphabetized.  Only
place I've ever seen it printed in USA.


Greg Monti, Arlington, Virginia; work [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 21:57:26 EDT
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Strange CO


> Back in '76 or '77, I remember the Los Alamos Monitor (the local
> paper) doing a special article on White Rock's new CO.  Mountain Bell
> was using an experimental new technique called `hot slide in' to
> install the new hardware, which (I think) entailed activating the new
> CO, removing the old CO from the building, and sliding the new CO
> hardware into the building *while it was in use*.  I remember

The time frame sounds about right.  In the local CO which covered the
area where I grew up (Morgantown, WV), they replaced a large SxS
switch (which took up the whole inside of a brick building) with a new
ESS switch.  The new switch was much smaller than the old, but there
was still no room in the building for the new switch.  So they built a
separate out-building which was butted up against the old one and
installed the new switch in it.  They then cut over to the new switch,
which was still located outside of the old building, and when they had
cleared enough of the old SxS system out, they did a 'hot slide' as
you describe, to put the new switch into the old building (after
knocking out the wall that separated the two buildings).  If I recall
correctly, the new switch had long enough cables so that it could
indeed be moved on compressed air while in use.

                         - tom

internet     : mvac23![e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
uucp         : {ucbvax,mcvax,psuvax1,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas
Europe Bitnet: THOMAS1@GRATHUN1         Location: Newark, DE, USA

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

From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ICC MPS48 Modem Help
Date: June 5, 1990
Responding to: Ian Matthew Smith <[e-mail]>  Sunday, 3 Jun 1990
Organization: Penn State University


Smith writes:

>I  have just gotten ahold of two (ICC MPS48) 4800 baud modems....
>.... But I cannot get it to accept any commands.
>.....Does anybody have ANY information on this modem?

Ian, you've got yourself a pair of a couple of real good "moldy
olides" there.  MPS48's have been the workhorse of many large,
farflung global networks for years.  The maker is Racal-Milgo, one of
the Big 3 on non-Bell modem makers for years.  You can try their
factory at Plantation (Ft. Lauderdale subuarb, NOT the Plantation in
the Keys), Florida, but they may not be interested in passing out free
help.  They have a LARGE worldwide service force to sell to you.
Better you call around the major banks near you, like Philly and get
to someone in the data network area, who get s one or two books for
each of the (truly!) HUNDREDS of MPS48s they use in their big machine
networks.

Here are three things to start you off:

1.) These are four-wire, full-duplex private line modems. That means
they work on TWO "two-wire" analog phone circuits, so hook up the
"transmit" terminals of one to the "receive" terminals of the other.
Those modems can send from across the room to across the ocean on such
circuits, so run them wherever you want to...just give them separate
"go" and "return" analog circuits.

2.)  Such modems in large machine networks are for sync data
terminals, and while PC clocks are getting so good nowadays you may be
able to just jam async at them and seem to work for a short time, you
will probably have trouble with data "slips" on long files unless you
run your terminals in "sync" mode and provide interface cables that
exchange clock between the terminals and modems. That means more wires
in the cables than the usual 3 or so of PC usage.  3.)  Such modems
transmit a full 0 dBm composite data signal, and expect a received
signal of -16 dBm.

Their receivers are very sensitive, and can function clear down to
about - 42 dBm.  In the case of a short wire circuit across the room,
or even across the campus, they will probably overload their
receivers. You need to either get an attenuator into the analog wire
circuit OR reduce the sending level (by means of internal hardware
options any tech can readily identify) to - 16 dBm to avoid receiver
overload, which occurs very rapidly even at - 12 or -13 dBm received
signal level on them.  4.) In big machine networks, the "smarts" are
all in the controller, a.k.a. DTE (Data Terminal Equipment).

 Thus, MPS-48s don't respond to Hayes commands from the keyboard.
They're just up on line all the time and transmit whatever you
send..if these are the classic "private -dedicated" line version most
people have.  IF they have two-wire dail-up interface boards added, they
expect you to have an external telephone with an "exclusion key"
transfer between voice and data, and you dial with the phone, then
switch to data connection .. .or perform the equivalent with an
electronic substitute.  But, I doubt you have that added hard- ware in
yours. If you do, the extra boards will be readily identifiable.  The
MPS-48s are VERY good, durable devices and you should expect good use
from them.  Some contacting people from large data-using firms and
getting a hep technician on them should get them working for you in
most any way you like.

 ...So what do you have?  A pair of the "workhorses" from that "other
galaxy" of data communications, the galaxy of the big mainframe
machines; it seems to be a place dial-up PC users have heard little
about, even though it sells a billion or more a year worth of those
modems!  Once you get a good tech on them, you'll find they are really
pretty simple.  Happy intergalactic datacomm!

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jun 90 0:21:34 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Crackers, Kapor and Len Rose


I have been deliberating holding messages on Kapor and the cracker
situation which have arrived this week. Thursday evening there will be
at least two special issues devoted to this topic, and I will be
picking several messages to include. I was going to have one special
issue, and that would have accomodated only a few letters. A second
issue will allow me to include a couple lengthy replies. Because the
topic is starting to stray far away from telecom and into areas of the
law and computer security, etc, this will be the last batch I can
print. Several of these items Thursday night will be replies to me,
which is the main reason I am running them ... and I won't even be
able to include all of them, so heavy is the flow.

Late Tuesday night, David Tamkin and I had a chance to speak at length
with someone close to the scene involving Len Rose. Some things were
off the record, at the request of Mr.  Rose's attorney, and I agreed
to honor that request.

Apparently the Secret Service seized *every single electronic item* in
his household -- not just his computers. I am told they even took away
a box containing his Army medals, some family pictures, and similar.
It is my understanding his attorney has filed a motion in court to
force the Secret Service to return at least *some* of his computer
equipment, since without any of it, he is unable to work for any of
his clients at all without at least one modem and computer.

I am told the Secret Service broke down some doors to a storage area
in the basement rather than simply have him unlock the area with a
key. I am told further that he was advised he could pick up his fax
machine (which had been seized, along with boxes and boxes of
technical books, etc), but that when he did so, he was instead
arrested and held for several hours in the County Jail there.

Mr. Rose believes he will be found innocent of charges (rephrased)
that he was the 'leader of the Legion of Doom', and that he had broken
into 'numerous computers over the years'.

I invited Mr. Rose and/or his attorney to issue a detailed statement
to the Digest, and promised that upon receipt it would be run
promptly. I don't think such a statement will be coming any time soon
since his attorney has pretty much ordered him to be silent on the
matter until the trial.

If the things he says about the Secret Service raid on his home are
detirmined to be factual, then combined with complaints of the same
nature where Steve Jackson Games is concerned I would have to say it
seems to me the Secret Service might have been a bit less zealous.

The revelations in the weeks and months ahead should be very
interesting. One of the items I will include in the special issues on
Thursday night is the report which appeared in the {Baltimore
Sun} last weekend. This case seems to get more complicated every day.


PT

------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V10 #418
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26347;
          7 Jun 90 23:51 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13702;
          7 Jun 90 22:05 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06908;
          7 Jun 90 21:01 CDT
Date:     Thu, 7 Jun 90 20:46:00 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest Special: LOD - Part I
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jun 90 20:45:00 CDT    Special: LOD - Part I

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    LOD/Kapor Debate Hits the Big Time [Jerry Leichter]
    Update: LOD Woes [[e-mail]  AND  [e-mail]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon,  4 Jun 90 09:28:29 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: LOD/Kapor Debate Hits the Big Time


Given the vehemence of the recent, um, debate between the Moderator
and many readers, I thought the following article - which appeared on
the front page of this Sunday's {New York Times} (3-Jun-90) - was of
interest.

        Drive to Counter Computer Crime Aims at Invaders
           Legitimate Users Voice Worries Over Rights

                By John Markoff

 From Los Angeles to Atlanta, Federal and state law-enforcement agents
have begun an intense battle against computer operators who break into
government and business data systems.

The agents, under mounting pressure from corporations and lawmakers,
say the crackdown is needed to halt a growing threat to commerce,
research and national security.

But increasingly, civil liberties experts and even some computer
industry executives say the crackdown is affecting computer users who
are not breaking the law.  These experts say such users are being
intimidated and are suffering illegal searches and violations of their
constitutional guarantees to free speech.

        Crimes `in the Blink of an Eye'

In many ways the computer crackdown parallels the campaign against
drugs, with officials responding to an outcry over a serious problem
only to confront another outcry over assaults on civil rights.

"It's a whole new era," said Stephen McNammee, United States Attorney
for Arizona, who has been a central figure in Government efforts to
counter computer crime.  "Computers are providing a new avenue for
criminal activities.  It is possible to transmit computer information
for an illegal purpose in the blink of an eye."

But Representative Don Edwards, a California Democrat, said the
authorities had gone too far.  "Every time there is a perceived
crisis, law-enforcement agencies and legislators overreact, and
usually due process and civil liberties suffer," Mr. Edwards said.
"The Fourth Amendment provides strict limits on rummaging through
people's property."

The largest of several investigations under way around the country is
a two year old Federal effort called Operation Sun Devil, in which
about 40 personal computer systems, including 23,000 data disks, have
been siezed from homes and businesses.

The siezures, resulting from 28 search warrents in 14 cities, halted
the oper- ation of some computer bulletin boards ... little or any of
the confiscated equipment has been returned.  In all, seven people
have been arrested so far.

One computer game maker who has not been charged says he is on the
verge of going out of business since investigators siezed his
equipment.

In related inquiries, the Secret Service has surreptitiously
eavesdropped on computer bulletin boards and telephone conversations,
and in the process agents have entered these networks posing as
legitimate users and traded information.

In an unrelated investigation of the theft of an important program
from Apple Computer Inc. last year, dozens of experts and hobbyists
have recently been interrogated by the [FBI].

Civil libertarians and some business executives have begun to organize
defenses.  Among them is Mitchel D. Kapor, creator of the nation's
most popular software program, the Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheet, who is
planning to help finance a legal defense fund of several hundred
thousand dollars for some of those accused.

        Legal Protections Are Unclear

Harvey Silverglate, a Massachusetts lawyer and civil rights expert who
is working with Mr. Kapor, said, "You have innocent people who are
being terrorized as well as investigations of people who have broken
the law."  He termed the Government actions a "typical American
solution: throw your best and brightest in jail."

Officials of the Secret Service, which since 1984 has been the primary
Federal enforces of computer fraud laws, believe that an alarming
number of bright young computer enthusiasts are using computers
illegally.

"Often," said Gary M. Jenkins, Secret Service assistant director, "a
progression of criminal activity occurs which involves
telecommunications fraud, unauthorized access to other computers,
credit card fraud, and then moves on to other destructive activities
like computer viruses."

A 1986 Federal law on computer fraud and abuse make it a crime to
enter computers or take information from them without authorization.

But Mr. Kapor of Lotus said he believe the danger posed by the
computer joy riders had been greatly exaggerated.  "Now that the
Communists aren't our enemies any more, the American psyche has to end
up inventing new ones," he said.

He and other experts are also alarmed by new investigative techniques
that employ computers.  The power of advanced machines multiplies the
risk of search and seizure violations, these experts say, because they
can perform so many simultaneous tasks and absorb and analyze so much
information.

Moreover, civil liberties advocates say the perils are greater because
legal precedents are not clear on how the First Amendment protects
speech and the Fourth Amendment protects against searches and seizures
in the electronic world.

        Goverment Surveillance

In response to a court-enforceable request under the Freedom of
Information Act, the Secret Service has acknowledged that it has
monitored computer bulletin boards.  In its answer to the request,
made by Representative Edwards, the agency said its agents, acting as
legitimate users, had secretly monitored communications on computer
bulletin boards.  The agency also disclosed it had a new Computer
Diagnostic Center, in which the data on computer disks siezed in raids
is evaluated by machines operating automatically.

Civil liberties specialists view such practices as potentially harmful.

"Computer mail unrelated to an investigation could be swept up in the
Govenment's electronic dragnet if the law is not carefully tailored to
a well-defined purpose," said Marc Rotenberg, Washington director for
the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility.

The Government's Operations Sun Devil was set up primarily to fight a
loose association of several dozen computer hobbyists, including
teen-agers, who referred to themselves as the Legion of Doom.  Members
in various cities stayed in touch through computer networks and
bulletin boards and exchanged technical information on how to break
into computer systems.

In February a Federal grand jury in Chicago indicted two members:
Craig Neidorf, 20 years old, and Robert J. Riggs, 21, for exchanging a
six-page document describing the operation of the Southern Bell 911
emergency system.

        Private Document Distributed

The indictment, under the 1986 computer fraud law charges that in
December, 1988,  Mr. Riggs broke into a company computer and stole the
document, which the company valued at slightly more than $76,000.  He
transferred it to Mr.  Neidorf by electronic mail on a bulletin board
in Lockport, Ill., the indictment said, and Mr. Neidorf later
reproduced it in an electronic newsletter.

Computer security experts say documents like the 911 description are
usually not taken for profit, but rather for the challenge of doing
it.  Some members of the computer undergournd creat elaborate manuals
on how to violate computer security as a sport or hobby.

But law-enforcement officials do not see it as a game.  Because modern
society has come to depend on computers for some much of its
government and commercial business, officials view intrusions as
threats not only to private property, but also to the very operation
of the systems.

In another part of the Sun Devil investigation, Secret Service agents
in March confiscated computers and other equipment from Steven Jackson
Games, a small Austin, Tex., company.

Mr. Jackson, the company's president, said the agents were seeking a
rule book for a fantasy game that deals with "cyberpunk," the science
fiction world where high technology and outlaw society intersect.

Mr. Jackson said he still did not know why his company had been
searched.  He said Secret Service officials had promised three times
to return his equipment and software but still had not done so.  He
said that he had been forced to lay off 8 of his 17 employees and that
the company was on the verge of going out of business.

"It raises First Amendment questions," said Mr. Jackson.  "It's a
frightening precedent.  I don't think they would have done it to
I.B.M."

Law-enforcement officials say they have difficulty returning seized
computers and software prompty; William J. Cook, an assistant United
States Attorney in Chicago, said thorough examination took a long time
because of the "levels of information you find in a computer."

        A Sweep in 14 Cities

The largest operation in the Sun Devil investigation came on May 8
when more than 150 Secret Service agents, plus state and local
law-enforcement officers, searved the 28 search warrants in 14 cities.
In all, seven people, including Mr. Riggs and Mr.  Neidorf, have been
arrested.

In a separate investigation, the F.B.I. has been searching for a year
for members of a group that stole basic programming information from
Apple Computer and mailed copies to people in the press and the
computer industry.  The group said it stole the software, which is
fundamental to the operation of Macintosh computers, to protest
Apple's refusal to let other makers copy the Macintosh.

The group calls itself the Nuprometheus League, from the character in
Greek mythology who stole fire from the gods.

Organizers of an annual West Coast computer meeting known as the
Hackers' Conference said at least a dozen of the several hundred
people who attended last year's event had reported being recently
questioned by F.B.I. agents about the Apple theft.

The Hackers' Conference began in 1984 after the publication of the
book "Hackers" by Steven Levy, Ahchor/Doubleday, an account of
computer industry pioneers at M.I.T. and in Silicon Valley.

There is no evidence that the Apple theft was linked to people who
attended the Hackers' Conference, and Leo Cunningham, assistant United
States Attorney in San Jose, Calif., would not comment on any facet of
the case.

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 16:43 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Update: LOD Woes


[Len Rose posted another article to comp.sys.att, which again might be
of interest to TELECOM Digest readers.  Disclaimer: I think this guy
is being accused of stealing my employer's software; I'm not speaking
for any person or organization, I'm just passing this along.  --Paul]


  From: [e-mail] (Len Rose)
  Newsgroups: misc.legal,u3b.misc,comp.sys.att
  Subject: Update: LOD woes
  Keywords: help mistake punishment torture
  Date: 4 Jun 90 05:17:13 GMT
  Reply-To: [e-mail] (Len Rose,Netsys)
  Followup-To: misc.legal
  Organization: Netsys in Exile


  I was indicted in Maryland.

 Because of articles in the Baltimore Sun, and Unix Today I have been
 branded a member of the Legion of Doom.

 "I am not now, nor have ever been a member of the Legion of Doom".

       I am not allowed to say much more than that.

 I would appreciate if a particular net persona not try to judge me
 without being fully informed.

 Here is the article in the Baltimore Sun that is based on a press release
 from the U.S. Attorney's office in Maryland.

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

Reprinted from an article in {The Baltimore Sun}


MARYLAND MAN INDICTED FOR COMPUTER HACKING

   by Karen Warmkessel

 A 31-year old Middletown man,who prosecutors said was part of an
illegal computer hackers' group known as the "Legion of Doom" was
indicted yesterday for alledgedly helping others break into computer
systems throughout the country.

 In addition to facing federal computer fraud charges, Leonard Rose
Jr.,a computer consultant, is charged in an alleged sheme to steal
and give out closely guarded software for AT&T Unix computer systems.

 Breckinridge L. Wilcox, the U.S. attorney for Maryland,said the
indictment - the third in a series of related prosecutions of the
Legion of Doom - had "far reaching" implications for the security of
computer systems in the United States.

 "The activities of this guy and his group are disturbing" Mr. Wilcox
said.

 He said the investigation, which started in Chicago, and expanded to
Georgia, and Maryland, had revealed that Mr. Rose and his confederates
gained access to computer systems belonging to federal research
centers,educational institutions and private businesses, but he
declined to name them.

 Mr. Wilcox said that because the hackers covered their tracks,
authorities had not yet determined whether any harm resulted. "We know
what computer systems were accessed," he said. "It may be very
difficult, if not impossible, to determine what, if any damage was
done.  "We don't know if it was done for fun,to see if it could be
done, or if it was done form some more malignant motive."

 One law enforcement source said there were indications that Mr. Rose
may have been paid for some programs but that he gave others to his
fellow hackers.

 Mr. Rose, who, according to authorities lives on Willow Tree Drive,
and used the name "Terminus," could not be reached for comment last
night. He is charged with two counts of computer fraud and three
counts of interstate transportation of stolen property.

 If convicted of all counts, he faces a maximum possible prison
sentence of 32 years and a maximum possible fine of $500,000.

 "He is a fairly sophisticated Unix user who decided to take advantage
of that knowledge to work his way into other people's systems" one law
enforcement said.

 The investigation is continuing,and others in Maryland reportedly
could be charged.

 The Unix program, originally developed by AT&T, is an "operating
system" that governs the core functions of a computer system. An AT&T
spokesman said yesterday that about one million Unix computers are in
use in the country, many of them on college campuses.

 David P. King, an assistant U.S. attorney, said that Mr. Rose not
only gave the stolen Unix software to others, but also used it to
develop two so called "Trojan horse" computer programs, with seemingly
innocuous functions that conceal their true purpose.

 One of these programs was alledgedly designed to collect "superuser"
passwords, which give the user unlimited access to computer
systems,including the ability to change the programs and insert new
programs.Another program which would have allowed users to use a
computer system without authorization.

 Mr. Rose allegedly used tthe programs himself and gave them to others
hackers in Michigan and Chicago.

 One of the men was a member of the Legion of Doom,according to Mr.
King .

 He said it was unclear where Mr. Rose had obtained the stolen Unix
software.

 There are other federal indictments pending that involve Legion of
Doom members in Atlanta and Chicago, Mr. King said.

 The assistant U.S. attorney said authorities believe that the Legion
of Doom is a "small" group of hackers nationally. He said he was
unable to estimate their numbers.

 The indictment alleges that the group used various methods to gain
access to computer systems such as masquerading as authorized
users, password scanning, and Trojan horse programs.

 It's members allegedly wanted to break into the system to steal
computer software from the companies that owned the programs; to use
computer time at no charge; to steal the original text of software and
other information; to make telephone calls at no charge; and to obtain
and use credit histories of individuals other than themselves, the
indictment said.

 This is the second computer fraud case to be brought by federal
prosecutors in Maryland. Mr. Wilcox said the other case was dismissed
by a federal judge.


[Moderator's Note: W. T. Sykes <[e-mail]> also forwarded the Len
Rose article and the {Baltimore Sun} article. My thanks to him. In the
next part of this special issue, several shorter messages pro and con
on the whole affair.  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest Special: LOD - Part I
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01056;
          8 Jun 90 1:48 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12693;
          8 Jun 90 0:09 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04638;
          7 Jun 90 23:05 CDT
Date:     Thu, 7 Jun 90 22:05:43 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest Special: LOD - Part II
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jun 90 22:00:00 CDT    Special: LOD - Part II

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Ayatollah Townson

    Cracker/Phreaker Crackdown [Frank Earl]
    Kapor and Crackers [Steve Elias]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor [Steven King]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor [Stuart Lynne]
    Kapor's Remarks, Moderator's Message, and My Reply [Chris Johnson]
    Law 101 (was Hackers,...) [Frank E. Carey]
    Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor [Kee Hinckley]
    Legion of Doom Summary Article Available [Billy Barron]
    Last Word! Who I am Preaching To [Ayatollah Moderator]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 3 Jun 90 09:38:00 CST
From: FRANK EARL <f_earl@etsuv2>
Subject: Cracker/Phreaker Crackdown


I have an intelligent question about this discussion-

Isn't the bust outside of the Secret Service's jurisdiction to begin
with?  I thought that this kind of crime was solely the FBI's
jurisdiction ... If that is the case, we had better watch out for
everyone's rights because the "police" organizations aren't doing the
jobs that they are supposed to and doing things they *AREN'T* supposed
to...


Frank C. Earl
BitNET: F_earl@etsuvax2
Internet: [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Kapor and Crackers
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 90 13:17:18 -0400
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>


Check my posting in the gdead group if you like, but the article in
the Boston paper said that Kapor and Barlow (gdead lyricist) are
setting up a legal defense fund for these "crackers".

I don't see anything wrong with this, Patrick.  A bit of due process
would sure be a change in all this McCarthyism crapola about "Just Say
No to X, Y, Z, and hacking."


/eli

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

From: Steven King <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor
Date: 4 Jun 90 22:47:28 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc. - Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (TELECOM
Moderator) writes:

>>Is the administrator/operator of some carrier of electronic
>>information completely responsible for every bit of data contained or
>>passing through his system?  The present legal answer is "No, well
>>maybe, we don't know yet."

>That's right, he is. Either you have control over your computer(s) and
>your telephone lines or you do not. Which is it?  I thought blaming
>the computer for what went wrong went out of favor twenty years ago.
>Do you remember when clerks in all big business places used to say the
>computer had 'made an error' in something?  If you are not in a
>position to run a big site responsibly, then don't do it. And where I
>might have some sympathy for really huge sites, I don't buy the excuse
>of some two-bit BBS sysop that he "can't possibly read everything on
>his board ..."  No one is asking him to read it all ... just to
>cultivate a responsible class of users and respond to problem postings.

Back up a moment, Pat.  I'm currently sysop of a two-bit BBS (not even
networked to anything!) and I can say that this is a tough one.  For
one, how do I "cultivate a responsible class of user"?  Is there some
way I can tell who is "responsible" and who isn't?  Is there some test
I can give to determine whether Joe Newuser is a phreak?  None that
*I* can think of, certainly!  Yes, I respond to problem postings.  I
have quashed budding discussions of piracy; I do *NOT* run a cracker
or phreak board on any level that I'm aware of!  But I don't read
email sent privately between users.  It would be possible for me to,
of course.  It would probably only take 15 minutes a day, given the
low amount of traffic I see there.  However, I feel that unless I
suspect something, I have no right to go through users' private mail.

So, let's say that Joe and Jane are model users.  They're lively in
discussions, and have never made me suspect they're anything but
moral, upstanding, law-abiding folks.  Suddenly the Secret Service
busts in to my apartment and confiscates my system.  They show me that
Joe sent the dreaded E911 documents to Jane via private email.  Why
should I be responsible for that?  Would you shut down the post office
if he had mailed hardcopy to her?

For the sake of discussion, let's say that I *am* liable for users'
private mail.  Should I also scan for crimes other than computer or
telecom related?  What if Joe tells Jane where she buy some drugs?  Am
I a dealer if I let that one slide?  What if Jane agrees to meet Joe
in some hotel in exchange for twenty bucks?  Am I now a pimp?

I thoroughly disagree with the proposition that a system operator is
or should be responsible for the entire content of his system.  It
seems utterly unreasonable that I should be any more responsible for
the content of messages than either the post office is for written
mail, or the phone company is for voice.  When it comes to that, why
should I be more responsible for illegal information on my board than
Illinois Bell is?  After all, THEY allowed it to be transmitted to me
in the first place!


Steve King, Motorola Cellular  (...uunet!motcid!king)

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

From: [e-mail] (Stuart Lynne)
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor
Date: 4 Jun 90 22:36:38 GMT
Organization: Wimsey Associates, Vancouver, B.C., Canada


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (TELECOM
Moderator) writes:

}According to the {Washington Post}, Mitchell Kapor, inventor of Lotus
}1-2-3, is considering backing a national effort to defend computer
}hackers against prosecution resulting from Operation Sun Devil, a
}two-year investigation of potential computer fraud.  The Secret
}Service said the hackers who were the target of the probe are
}individuals who had gained unauthorized access to company computer

Can't we be charitable (at least until more information is available)
and make the assumption that Mr. Kapor is reacting to some of the
reports on *HOW* the Secret Service is conducting this effort.

As a fairly disinterested observer I'm fairly amazed at the reports of
what the Secret Service is doing in the US. If the reports are even
only half true I'd still be pretty amazed at how they have conducted
themselves.

Anyway I don't think we need to jump off the deep end and suggest that
people perform illegal acts. Mr Kapor may have some legitimate
concerns over the free speech issues involved and or the way the
Secret Service is conducting the case which have nothing to do with
hacking and or phreaking.


[e-mail] ubc-cs!van-bc!sl 604-937-7532(voice)

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

From: Chris Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Kapor's Remarks, Moderator's Message, and my Reply
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 14:40:22 CDT


My initial (shall we say a bit hasty?) reply to the Moderators's
remarks on Kapor's statements were based solely on his article.  I had
no other sources of information about Kapor's position, and was
unaware of the {Washington Post} article about them, or containing them.

The additional information I've gained since then doesn't change my
position any, but it does moderate my dismay at and disagreement with
the Moderator.  One could say a somewhat cooler head now prevails.

I do agree with the Moderator's suggestion that Kapor's remarks within
a newspaper article could lend credence to the theory that burglary
and theft are ok, and that we ought to be writing indignant letters to
any and all other publications (eg. the Post).  In fact, I do so
regularly.  And, unfortunately, they never publish them.  That is one
advantage the TELECOM Digest has.


    ...Chris Johnson           [e-mail]   ..bungia!com50!chris
  Com Squared Systems, Inc.    St. Paul, MN USA   [phone]

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

Date: Tue,  5 Jun 90 10:45:58 EDT
From: F E Carey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Law 101 (was Hackers,...)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


The signal to noise ratio is becoming intolerable.  Let's go back to
FACTS and LOGIC.

Searches and seizures are authorized by warrants.  If anybody believes
that the government raids were done without warrants I'm sure we'd all
like to hear about it.  Whether warrants were obtained should be a
verifiable fact.

Warrants are issued by judges and are based on evidence.  Any
information suggesting that warrants were improperly issued or that
evidence was fictitious, falsified, illegally obtained, etc. would
probably be welcomed in this forum.  I think warrants are public
information.

If we can determine that searches were done with properly issued
warrants we would have a situation that would be closer to due process
than "abridging of First Amendment rights".

Indictments are handed down by grand juries - your peers.  Indictments
are based on evidence and are customarily (depending on jurisdiction)
judgments that the evidence, if not refuted, is sufficient for a
reasonable presumption of guilt.  INDICTMENTS ALSO SERVE TO PROTECT
THE ACCUSED AGAINST FRIVOLOUS PROSECUTIONS.  I don't know if all
indictments are public or whether the related evidence is public.
Somebody should be able to find out.  Once you have been indicted you
go to trial.  The indictment is not a guilty verdict!  It's hard for
me to conclude that indictment by grand jury constitutes harassment by
government.  If you don't like the grand jury process or you don't
trust your peers to evaluate evidence you've got a more fundamental
problem that probably belongs in net.politics.

Some postings imply that motive or resulting damage should be a factor
in these cases.  I think we need to read the law and look at the way
the courts apply the law.  It's not helpful to argue a case on the
basis of what you think the law should be.

Perhaps the biggest problem some of you have with the raids, seizures,
is that you don't like the law.  If that's the case go see your
congressman and stop flaming the law enforcement people.

The common carrier issue is one of the few lucid topics to surface
recently.  Indeed, we don't arrest the UPS guy for delivering a
package of stolen property and we don't sieze the mail truck when it
contains stolen documents being mailed.  Is the law weak on this
aspect of computer crime?  Should sysops be treated as common
carriers?  Would this solve some problems but create others?  I'd be
interested in opinions on this.


Frank Carey
AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail]

Disclaimer:  I'm not an attorney and I have no personal connection
with  any of the discussed cases.  My views may be colored by the
report in UNIX Today 5/28/90 that Leonard Rose was accused of
stealing source code from my employer.


[Moderator's Note: I would like to say however, in defense of the
indicted, that grand juries are *sometimes* nothing more than rubber
stamps for prosecutors; and in fairness, some judges issue warrants in
the same cavalier way. Sad but true. Otherwise I agree with you.   PT]

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

From: Kee Hinckley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crackers: Innocent and Misunderstood, Says Mr. Kapor
Organization: asi
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 90 14:45:04 GMT


>Maybe if Mr. Kapor had his Lotus 1-2-3 ripped off good he might change
>his tune. Anyone know other projects of his we might steal and start
>handing out freely around the net?  After all, we wouldn't want to
>'damage technological innovation or dissemination of information' now
>would we? Please keep his attitude on this serious problem in mind the
>next time you use or consider purchasing his software. If you can't
>find a way to steal it outright, then borrow a pirated copy from
>someone else.

Sometimes I wonder whether I'm in the right country.  I could have
sworn this was the United States of America.  Does "innocent until
proven guilty" ring a bell?  One of the people nabbed in this federal
grabbag was a BBS operator who promptly called the FBI when he
discovered stolen information on his BBS.  Another case was a game
designer who was writing a (non-computer) cyberpunk game.  They
confiscated all of his equipment because the game instructions were
taken literally and one of his employees had been in the "Legion of
Doom".  But who knows, possibily they are all guilty as hell - but
that doesn't make defending them a crime.  Why don't we let the courts
decide the guilt?

I'm more than a little sensitive about this.  I run a BBS myself, and
given the current legal situation I may have to shut it down.  As a
BBS operator it would appear that I have absolutely no protection.  If
people start using my BBS to transport stolen materials then the
FBI/SS can break in and confiscate every single piece of computer
equipment/software I own.  Sure, maybe I'll win in court (although no
case I know of has made it that far yet), but I have no desire to wait
several years to find out.  And just to complete the circle, it would
appear that even if I wanted (or had time) to examine what my users
were doing, I can't - since that would violate the Electronic Privacy
Act.

So yes, some of the people Kapor is helping to protect have probably
committed crimes.  But some of them probably haven't, and the last
time I checked this country wasn't supposed to be using the
crusade-style justice of "kill them all, let God sort them out".

            -kee

| Alphalpha Software, Inc. | Voice/Fax: [phone] |   Home: 617/641-3805   |
| 148 Scituate St.         | Smart fax, dial number. |                        |
| Arlington, MA 02174      | Dumb fax, dial number,  |   BBS:  617/641-3722   |
| [e-mail]     | wait for ring, press 3. |   300/1200/2400 baud   |

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

From: vaxb.acs.unt.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Legion of Doom Summary Article Available
Date: 7 Jun 90 14:46:02 GMT



An article summarizing the Legion of Doom incident happenings up to
the present has been written by Kevin Mullet, Data Communications
Analyst here at the University of North Texas.  His article is
available for anonymous FTP in the ARTICLES directory.  Several
different formats are present (ASCII, WordPrefect and Postscript).


Billy Barron                  Bitnet : BILLY@UNTVAX
VAX system manager            THENET : NTVAX::BILLY
University of North Texas   Internet : [e-mail]
                                SPAN : UTSPAN::UTADNX::NTVAX::BILLY

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jun 90 23:04:46 CDT
From: Ayatollah Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Last Word! Who I Am Preaching To


First, my thanks to everyone who wrote, and my apologies to the few
additional messages I could not squeeze in here, including two lengthy
items by Chris Johnson and Jerry Leichter. I did however include one
article by each in this two-part special issue. Then there were also
comments by Mike Perka and others sent not-for-publication, and a
couple people who said their item could be dumped if it was
essentially a repeat of others. Then one letter pointed out that the
word 'cracker' was sometimes used in a racially degrogatory way toward
white people. That I had never heard, but thanks for cluing me in.

Some time ago, a supplementary mailing list was run for awhile to
handle overflow messages on a related topic, and this might be a good
time to revive it. If the people who did it want to resume it for this
thread, please let me know.

Second, in a letter from Mike Perka came this little gem, and it seems
as good a way as any to wrap up this string of messages. Some say it
should be my personal philosophy as well:

>"I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person that
> I'm preaching to"  -- J. R. "Bob" Dobbs


Yours faithfully,

Ayatollah Townson / MODERATOR of the Universe  (wink!)

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

End of TELECOM Digest Special: LOD - Part II
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01151;
          8 Jun 90 1:51 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab12693;
          8 Jun 90 0:11 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac04638;
          7 Jun 90 23:06 CDT
Date:     Thu, 7 Jun 90 22:55:54 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #419
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jun 90 22:55:32 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 419

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: RJ45 vs RJ11 [Julian Macassey]
    Re: RJ45 vs RJ11 [Tom Glinos]
    Re: Licenses for Television in the UK [John Slater]
    Re: Licenses for Television in the UK [Andy Rabagliati]
    Re: Theory and Operation of REMOBS [Tad Cook]
    Re: GTD-5 and CLASS [Paul V. Flynn]
    Re: Baud per Hertz [C. D. Covington]
    Re: Baud per Hertz [Peter Desnoyers]
    Re: Caller-ID Theory and Operation [Roger V. Thompson]
    Re: Strange CO [Dick Jackson]
    Re: 10XXX Bugs [Carol Springs]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Julian Macassey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: RJ45 vs RJ11
Date: 7 Jun 90 05:18:56 GMT
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]>, utstat![e-mail] (Tom Glinos) writes:

> I'm looking for the advantages of RJ45 over RJ11.

> Each cubicle that I'm planning will have two jacks.  The jacks will
> either be phone or data in any combination.

> The present data requirements are RS232 and Twisted Pair Ethernet.  (I
> can't speculate about future requirements)

> I'd prefer RJ45 but (bean counters and other bureaucrates) tell me
> that RJ11 will suffice.

    First of all I assume you mean RJ25C not RJ11C. RJ11 is a
single pair of wires on a six conductor jack. RJ25C is three pairs of
wires on a six conductor jack.

    Under some circumstances you can run RS-232 type sigs on a
RJ25C. In fact DEC do I believe, and I have clients that run serial
printers and serial terminals on RJ25 set ups.

    But the price difference between four pair wire and RJ45s and
three pair wire and RJ25s is not that much. But it does give you more
flexibility. The labor is the same whether you pull three pair cable
or twelve pair. But if you don't pull the right cable the first time,
it costs much more to do it over. Once stuff is built and furniture is
replaced, it takes three times longer to run cable. Do it right the
first time. Yes, you can plug a RJ25 type plug into a RJ45 type jack,
so you could wire the RJ45s for regular POTs phones and plug 'em in
with no problems. Cable is about $40 a kilofoot (1,000 ft), labour is
$40.00 per hour minimum and some interconnects want $80.00 per hour to
come out and fix stuff. Yup, one less hour of labor buys another 1,000
feet of three pair or twenty jacks. Explain that to the suit dweebs.

    One way to handle the bean counter types is show them some
official looking docs on RJ45 use and say "See, it has to be this
way."

    There are some AT&T docs on sending RS-232 on RJ45Cs and there
is a DEC doc on sending RS-232 on RJ25s. I have never seen these docs,
but I am told they exist and I doubt they are an urban legend. I do
have AT&T "Data Services Reference Handbook", Vols I - V and see no
reference there, although there is lotsa stuff on DB-25s. I believe
the AT&T 3B2 docs cover RS-232 on an RJ45c.

    My motto: "Never pull less than six pair". And sometimes I
regret not pulling twenty-five pair.


Julian Macassey, n6are  [e-mail]  ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian
N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice [phone]

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

From: Tom Glinos <utstat![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: RJ45 vs RJ11
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 90 13:04:43 GMT
Organization: Statistics, U. of Toronto


I'm looking for the advantages of RJ45 over RJ11.

Each cubicle that I'm planning will have two jacks.  The jacks will
either be phone or data in any combination.

The present data requirements are RS232 and Twisted Pair Ethernet.  (I
can't speculate about future requirements)

I'd prefer RJ45 but (bean counters and other bureaucrates) tell me
that RJ11 will suffice.


[e-mail]
utzoo!utstat!tg

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Licenses for Television in the UK
Date: 7 Jun 90 11:14:31 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mike Bell)
writes:

>(Note that this distinguishes between a TV being used with a VCR and a
>TV watching live transmissions - a license used not to be required for
>the former, although I'm not sure if this is still the case).

As I understand the situation, an ordinary TV licence is required if a
tuner for receiving terrestrial transmissions is present is the
system.  You do *not* need a licence if you have a tuner-less TV (e.g.
a computer monitor with RGB or composite input) hooked up to a
tuner-less VCR (e.g. a camcorder or a playback-only model - most
recording models have their own tuners) or to a satellite receiver, or
of course to a computer. I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong about
this.

You used to need a special licence for satellite reception for a
once-only fee of ten pounds ("non-recurring charge" ??? :-), but I
think they got rid of that.


John Slater
Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office

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

From: Andy Rabagliati <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Licenses for Television in the UK
Organization: INMOS Corporation, Colorado Springs
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 90 20:05:58 GMT


A program in the UK (Not the Nine O'clock News ?) once did a spoof
on TV Licence payment :-

The program stopped after five minutes, and a message was put on the
screen to the effect that this television was found not to have a
licence.

Until this was rectified the television would not work.  The phone
number of the BBC collection service was left on the screen. It stayed
this way for five minutes (!!).

The BBC was deluged with calls, (I'm sorry, I forgot, please switch it
on again...)


Cheers,

Andy.

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

From: Tad Cook <ssc![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Theory and Operation of REMOBS
Date: 6 Jun 90 22:18:20 GMT
Organization: very little


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (pa2437)
writes:

> Call your REMOB port. (TELCO EMPLOYEES ONLY) After tone enter your
> Personal Identification Number.

This code is not "personal" in the systems I saw, but just a 4-digit
DTMF sequence.

> Enter line you want to scan.  You will passively be able to
> monitor the line you choose.

This depends on what it is connected to.  It may be connected to trunk
groups, and you can also set up the monitoring to begin only on
certain conditions, such as the first pair in a group to go off hook.

> Well many people have given me conflicting opinions on the existence
> of these units. I have not heard if they were first used with the
> advent of ESS or if they existed on CrossBar Switching systems.

The Teltone M240 units I encountered were connected to all kinds of
systems ... it had nothing to do with the switch type.  Some were in
COs, some in telco business offices, and some hooked to ACDs at
airlines.

> Could someone please enlighten me to the truth if these exist and if
> so a little history on them.  I believe that they were not used to
> monitor conversations but instead to check if a certain line was
> operating.

Some were used to monitor the "service" give by employees.  Telcos
used them at their business offices to make sure that they were giving
the customers the correct company image.

The Teltone units also could display dialed digits on the remote
observing consoles.  Some were set up so that only the first X-seconds
of a call were monitored.

There were some systems that were set up with greater security ...
when you dialed in you could not monitor ... all you did was give the
security code, which caused an internal dialer to dial back to a
hard-wired dedicated phone number where the person doing the
monitoring sat.  The person doing the security code and the person
doing the listening did not know each other, and may be in different
cities.


Tad Cook   Seattle, WA    Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA  Phone: [phone]
MCI Mail: 3288544   Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW
USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad   or, [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu,  7 Jun 90 09:44:38 EDT
From: Paul V Flynn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GTD-5 and CLASS
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Robbins) writes
in response to article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]
(John Higdon):

>Your experimentation
>has shown, quite convincingly, that GTE has not taken advantage of any
>of the GTD-5's SS7 capabilities in your area.  This is pure
>speculation, but it may be that the GTE operating company has not
>worked out any arrangement with Pac*Bell to interconnect the systems
>with SS7 (perhaps they haven't even *thought* of doing that ??).

I don't know how two local exchange carriers such as GTE and Pac*Bell
interconnect their systems with Signaling System 7, but when
interexchange carriers interconnect with local exchange carriers with
SS7, SS7 Network Interconnect is required.  One of the purposes of SS7
Network Interconnect is to perform gateway screening between the two
signaling networks to control the kinds of SS7 messages one carrier
can send into another carrier's network.  That's necessary (among
other reasons) to allay fears that one carrier could inadvertently
bring down someone else's SS7 network.  SS7 Network Interconnect
trials began in the last half of 1989 and are continuing this year.
I'm not directly involved with the SS7 Network Interconnect protocol
or its deployment, but the last I heard, it won't be until 1992 that
SS7 Network Interconnect is deployed widespread throughout the United
States.

It could be that GTE in the Bay Area must wait for SS7 Network
Interconnect before it can interconnect with Pac*Bell.  In the
meantime, if they only have three switches in the area to interconnect
with SS7, some of the CLASS services won't be very useful.  If that is
the case, John Higdon may be suffering from the fact that his local
carrier only serves a small area surrounded by another carrier, rather
from the fact that his local carrier is GTE.


Paul Flynn

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

From: "C. D. Covington" <uafhcx![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Baud per Hertz
Date: 7 Jun 90 15:08:49 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville


In article <[e-mail]>, bnrgate!.bnr.ca![e-mail]
(Henry Troup) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> Rob Warnock <[e-mail]> writes:

> >...(Pushing a 7 baud signal through a 5 Hz pipe is
> >quite good!  The theoretical maximum is 2 baud/Hz: one state for each
> >half-cycle of bandwidth.)...

> I don't see a theoretical limit, not if you allow phase modulation.

   Unlimited bandwidth if there is no noise.  We do not have that
privilege on analog lines.  Theoretical maximum rate of error free
information interchange is limited by signal to noise ratio of the
connecting channel.

   7 baud in 5 Hz is a conclusion based on assumed SNR.


C. David Covington (WA5TGF)  [e-mail]     [phone]
Asst Prof, Elec Eng          Univ of Arkansas        Fayetteville, AR 72701

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

From: Peter Desnoyers <codex![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Baud per Hertz
Date: 7 Jun 90 16:36:00 GMT
Organization: Codex Corp., Canton MA


bnrgate!.bnr.ca![e-mail] (Henry Troup) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> Rob Warnock <[e-mail]> writes:

>>...(Pushing a 7 baud signal through a 5 Hz pipe is
>>quite good!  The theoretical maximum is 2 baud/Hz: one state for each
>>half-cycle of bandwidth.)...

>I don't see a theoretical limit, not if you allow phase modulation.
>For real phase discriminators and real lines there certainly are
>limits, but in theory you could shift each half cycle by as fine an
>increment as you could measure ... I guess Heisenberg limits that
>somewhere, but not for a long time.

You can encode multiple bits per baud with amplitude and phase shift
keying, and in fact every modem above 300 bits per second does so.
The only limit here is Shannon's limit - bits/sec < 2*f*log2(S/N)
where S is the signal power, N is the noise power, and f is the
bandwidth.

However, a baud is not a bit. By the Nyquist theorem, you can only get
2f bauds per second. In practice high-speed modems such as V.32 run at
about 2500-3000 bauds/sec over lines with a 3000Hz bandwidth.

>Still, in the real world 7 baud on 5 Hz is very good!

9600bps over 3000 Hz is a good deal better, and is quite common.


                Peter Desnoyers

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

From: pyuxp!towernet!rigel![e-mail]
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 90 14:35:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Theory and Operation
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ


Caller ID, or whatever the local telephone company calls it, is not
specifically a part of ISDN, although ISDN has the same functionality
it works differently.  Caller ID is accomplished by transmitting the
calling number in FSK format between the first and second rings.  If
you pick up on the first ring, the calling number often is lost and
will not display.

My "box" is about 5 by 3 by 1/2 inches, flat, with a LCD display and
cost in the low $60 range.  It stores about 60 calls, I think, and
dates and time stamps the calls.  There are three buttons on the
display, scroll forward, scroll back, and delete number.

I don't know of any reason you could not use a modem and pc to display
the numbers, perhaps associating them with real names.  I've heard
units with RS-232 output are available.

The specification for this service has been published by Bellcore for
vendors to use.  I've never seen the documents, but they probably have
a lot of technical information.

I find Caller ID to be useful, but until it is more widely deployed,
it will have limitations.  For interoffice or interstate use,
Signalling System 7 is required to pass the number outside the call
path.  Another problem is political, the Pennsylvania courts have
found this the same as wire taps (I don't agree) and there are strong
opinions on both sides of the issue as to whose privacy is invaded.


Roger V. Thompson, P.E. ([e-mail]) (201)
758-2875 (Office) [phone] (Home) ARS AD5T 1184 Ocean Ave. D-1,
Sea Bright, NJ ) 07760

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

From: Dick Jackson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Strange CO
Date: 7 Jun 90 14:41:38 GMT
Organization: Citicorp/TTI, Santa Monica


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Barts) writes:

>From what I have learned by reading this newsgroup and books on
>telecom, I would guess that White Rock has a No. 2 (or is it 3?) ESS
>with older, slower hardware than most 2ESS CO's.  You do hear clunking

That reminds of a question that sometimes nags at me. Why don't we
hear about the 2ESS and 3ESS? Were they superceded by the 1A? Or what?


Dick Jackson

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

From: Carol Springs <drilex![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs
Date: 7 Jun 90 16:22:57 GMT
Organization: DRI/McGraw-Hill, Lexington, MA


Bill Fenner writes in Volume 10, Issue 417, about unexpectedly getting
a "Thank you for using AT&T" when he dials 10333-1-700-555-4141.  He
adds:

>I've had no luck getting a
>FON card, 'tho I tried twice (once from WD40, once from a promotion at
>a local mall; maybe I'm on their **it list), so I can't try dialling a
>calling-card call with 10333 and see if it works...  Anyone have any
>other suggestions as to what to try?

A Sprint FONcard number wouldn't work with 10333 anyway; these only
work when you've gone through the special 1-800 number.  If you have
an AT&T or BOC calling card, you can use 10333 along with that number.
If things work right then Sprint will bill you for the call via your
Bell of Pa. phone bill, the same way AT&T does.  Believe me, Sprint
will recognize a "standard" calling card number just fine.  If, having
entered such a number after dialing 10333 and the phone number you're
calling, you then hear a "Thank you for using AT&T," you'll know
you're in trouble.


Carol Springs                      [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #419
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04581;
          8 Jun 90 3:03 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12737;
          8 Jun 90 1:15 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac12693;
          8 Jun 90 0:11 CDT
Date:     Fri, 8 Jun 90 0:00:26 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #420
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 8 Jun 90 00:00:02 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 420

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: US/Canada Only One-Digit Code? [David Tamkin]
    Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on Local Call [M. Harriss]
    Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog [Billy Barron]
    Re: Does This Feature Exist in a Telephone? [Dahe Chen]
    Re: Baud per Hertz [Norman Yarvin]
    Re: 10XXX Bugs [Greg Monti via John R. Covert]
    Re: Discounts For Deaf: My Solution [Joel Yossi]
    Ascii--> TDD (was Re: TDD's and Faster Speeds) [Joel Yossi]
    Has This Answering Machine Feature Disappeared? [ssc-vax!UUCP!howie]
    CPUC Reviews COCOTs [John Higdon]
    Books on Telephony History [Kevin Clayton]
    Telenet USSR [Hank Nussbacher]
    Fun With Alpha Phone Numbers [Mark Harrison]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US/Canada Only One-Digit Code?
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 90 0:13:29 CDT


Steve Pershing wrote in volume 10, issue 411:

|I thought that the USSR was assigned country code 7 which is also a
|single digit code.  There may be others.

There aren't: 1 and 7 are the only single-digit codes.

|In addition, there was at one time, an area code within country code 1
|assigned to Mexico City, for more convenient dialling (?).  This is an
|anomaly in the normal CCITT assignment, as Mexico has its own country code.

Right.  905 is a pseudo-area code for Mexico's Area 5 and 706 is a
pseudo-area code for Mexico's Area 6.  Note that they end in the right
digit; originally 706 was area code 903, but it was changed to 706 so
as to end in 6.  Come 1995 if not sooner, these two area codes will be
disconnected from Mexico to be re-used in the United States or Canada.
903, of course, has already been reassigned for the part of 214 away
from metropolitan Dallas.

One of TELECOM Digest's shyer readers has told me that when the NANP
expands to NXX area codes, area codes 521 through 529 will be reserved
for dialing shortcuts to areas 1-9 in Mexico respectively.  Mexico's
country code is 52, so this will make it possible to dial Mexico from
the United States with 1 (instead of 011) + 52 + area + number.  He
didn't say whether that will work from Canada or the Caribbean.

|I wonder if there are other "convenience" codes within other country
|codes in other parts of the world?

The dialing shortcuts between the UK and Ireland (in both directions)
have been discussed in the Digest recently.  I imagine that there are
yet more examples across the globe, but I guess that actually sharing
the country code with neighbors as we do in North America is as far as
international dialing shortcuts can go.


David Tamkin  Box 7002  Des Plaines IL  60018-7002  708 518 6769  312 693 0591
MCI Mail: 426-1818  GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN  CIS: 73720,1570   [e-mail]

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

From: Martin Harriss <cellar![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "NANP codes" AND "I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call"
Date: 7 Jun 90 14:47:30 GMT
Reply-To: Martin Harriss <cellar![e-mail]>
Organization: Bellcore


In article <[e-mail]> John Slater <[e-mail]> writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 418, Message 6 of 10

>In a perfect world I could dial "+44 81 676 XXXX" to reach my number
>in London from *anywhere* in the world, including the UK (where +
>means 010). Similarly it would be nice to be able to dial 011 1 415
>XXX XXXX to reach San Francisco from anywhere in the US.

>I was originally going to post this with lots of ":-)", but seriously
>though folks, why should it be difficult with modern switches?

Actually, BT are kind of doing this now with the London area split.
In an exchange with old mechanical directors, when you dialled '0',
you would be connected to a register which would first pulse out the
code to get you to the outgoing STD center, then just repeat the
digits after the '0' to the STD center.  With the 071/081 split, this
would put an unworkable amount of traffic through the STD centers.

What has actually happend is that all director echanges in London have
processor controlled directors.  (I used to write software for these
beasts, but that's another story!)  If you dial '0', the director
looks at the following digits to see if the call is going to the other
London area.  If it is, the call is routed over the director area's
tandem network, just as if you were calling to your own part of
London.  Of course if the call is destined to go to another part of
the country, it is routed to the outgoing std center just as it always
was.


Martin Harriss

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

From: vaxb.acs.unt.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog
Date: 7 Jun 90 14:37:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Peter J. Dotzauer) writes:

> And so are numerous other library catalogs. An overview is given in
> the file 'internet libraries', obtainable from listserv@unmvm (bitnet).

Another list (with possibly a little different information) is
available via anonymous FTP on the node vaxb.acs.unt.edu.  The file is
called LIBRARIES.TXT.  It is updated two or three times yearly.


Billy Barron                  Bitnet : BILLY@UNTVAX
VAX system manager            THENET : NTVAX::BILLY
University of North Texas   Internet : [e-mail]
                                SPAN : UTSPAN::UTADNX::NTVAX::BILLY

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

From: Dahe Chen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Does This Feature Exist in a Telephone?
Date: 8 Jun 90 00:55:02 GMT
Reply-To: Dahe Chen <[e-mail]>
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept, New Haven CT  06520-2158


In article <[e-mail]> Bill Berbenich <eedsp!bill@gatech.
edu> writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 417, Message 6 of 12

In article <[e-mail]> ladwp![e-mail] writes:

>I'm looking for a feature in a phone that will help me with the
>following:

<I don't know the Panasonic model number, but it is a fairly small unit
<(gray in color with an orange speakerphone button) which utilizes a
<voice chip for the outgoing message and a single micro-cassette for
<the incoming message and to backup the message on the voice chip in
<case the power goes out. Most (many?)  consumer electronics stores in
<the Atlanta area carry this particular model for something over
<$200.  I have seen good pricing for it at Service Merchandise and
<Pace. I may just buy one of them myself one day. :-)

The model number is KX-T2432. I bought one from Crutchfield at the
price of $179 plus $2 process fee. Crutchfield pays for S/H fee. A
while ago, it had a sale price for $159. Phone number: 800-446-1640.

By no means I am affliated with Crutchfield. Just let them make some
profit out of my money.  I saw in its catalog that this model was on
sale for $159.


Dahe Chen
internet:   [e-mail]
        [e-mail]
bitnet:        dchen@yalevms

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

From: Norman Yarvin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Baud per Hertz
Date: 8 Jun 90 02:21:59 GMT
Reply-To: Norman Yarvin <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.
bnr.ca![e-mail]> writes:

>I don't see a theoretical limit, not if you allow phase modulation.
>For real phase discriminators and real lines there certainly are
>limits, but in theory you could shift each half cycle by as fine an
>increment as you could measure.

That would expand the frequency range of your signal.  Actually
staying within a bandwidth limit is not so easy; a series of pieces of
2000 Hz tones do not make a 2000 Hz tone.

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jun 90 19:40:57 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  07-Jun-1990 2243" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs (from Greg Monti)


  From: Greg Monti
  Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs

Bill Fenner <[e-mail]>  writes:

> I was playing around at a newly installed Bell o' PA phone the other
> day, and got some funny responses:

> 10288-1-700-555-4141 gave the expected (ring ring) Thank you for using
> AT&T....10333-1-700-555-4141 gave the unexpected (ring ring) Thank you
> for using AT&T.
> Um ... is this legal?

Far as I know, yes.  Unlike your home phone (or maybe LIKE your home
phone, dunno), BOC pay phones can have a DIFFERENT default LD carrier
for 1+ and 0+ calls.  Look carefully at the LD company references on
the instruction card(s) on that phone.  It probably says that 1+ out
of LATA toll calls are handled by AT&T and that 0+ out of LATA toll
calls are handled by either AT&T or someone else.

Far as I know, only one LD company allows (or has facilities for) cash
payment for 1+ calls: AT&T.

Try dialing 10333-0-700-555-4141 and I'll bet it will thank you for
using US Sprint.


Greg Monti, Arlington, Virginia; work [phone]

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

From: "Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Discounts For Deaf: My Solution
Date: 5 Jun 90 16:33:46 GMT
Reply-To: "Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. Tech., Haifa Israel


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (TELECOM
Moderator) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 408, Message 1 of 4

>My suggestion is that the discounts should continue, for perhaps a
>maximum period of another eighteen months -- say, until January 1,
>1992. During the interim period, an effort would be made to convert as
>many TDD users as possible over to high speed modems and 'BBS like'
>software, so that for all practical purposes they could participate in
>the world with the rest of us. I'd even go so far as to say the money

>Then following the cut off date, no more discounts for slowness ... or
>maybe, a much smaller discount at present, which would go on for a few
>more months of the coversion, then a final end to it.

I have to point out that the problem is >NOT< the baud rate of TDD's.
Most people don't type 60 WPM anyway.  The problem is the medium
itself.  It simply takes longer to type what you want to say than to
speak it.  Information normally encoded by intonation and stress, for
example, have to be spelled out.  Consider how many conventions we use
on the net: :-) *sigh* :-( >EMPHASIS< and how much longer it takes us
to type them that it would to utter them.

Written communication is never as fast as spoken communication, and so
if the discount is designed to compensate for slowness, moving to 1200
WPM machines is irrelevent.


Joel

p.s.  This is not to say that moving to better TDD's is not a great
idea, just that the original reasons for the discount still apply.

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

From: "Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ascii--> TDD (was Re: TDD's and Faster Speeds)
Date: 5 Jun 90 15:21:17 GMT
Reply-To: "Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. Tech., Haifa Israel


In article <[e-mail]> ames!claris!portal!cup.portal.
com![e-mail] writes:

>Think of what things would be like with dual-mode modems.  Service
>providers could use dual-mode modems to accept calls from regular
>modems or TDDs.  BBSs, Telenet, Tymnet, public-access Unix systems,
>you name it.  That way, every deaf person could read the Telecom [...]

In the meantime, was I'd really like to see is an ASCII-TDD relay on
the net somewhere.  Imagine if I could Telnet to CA and then use a
dial-out modem/TDD to place a call to a TDD!  Or use PCP or Tymnet for
the same purpose.  I think the real barrier is that no one who can
really wants to do it.  I tried to convince the Administration at
Brandeis Univ. to install a TDD/modem on their mainframe, so that the
whole campus would have TDD facilites.  They even bought the modem.
But no one would bother to install it!  Basically, it was killed in
the beaurocracy.  *sigh*


Joel

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

From: howie <ssc-vax!UUCP![e-mail]>
Subject: Has This Answering Machine Feature Disappeared?
Date: 6 Jun 90 16:38:27 GMT
Organization: Voodoo Graphics Project, Everett WA


What has become of the "Call Breakthrough" feature that was around for
a while?  I know of at least one General Electric answering machine
that had this feature, but I never see it adverstised with any of the
current models.

(BTW, the way it works is: in addition to a code for retrieving
messages from a remote location, another code will cause the machine
to emit fairly loud beeps, so that if anyone is home they will know to
pick up the phone.)


           howie
   uw-beaver!ssc-vax!voodoo!howie

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

Subject: CPUC Reviews COCOTs
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: 7 Jun 90 11:34:11 PDT (Thu)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


According to the {San Jose Mercury}, the CPUC announced yesterday that
some changes are to be made concerning COCOTs:

1. 800 calls will now be free from all payphones.

2. All local calls will be $0.20, not $0.25.

3. Local calls will be allowed at least fifteen minutes.

4. At the end of the time, the caller will hear a beep and be given the
option of inserting more money.

5. Ordered major phone utilities to offer "full coin class of service".
This could mean the end of "smart" payphones.

"Now no matter what phone you use, you should expect the same cost and
quality everywhere," according to commission spokesperson Dianne
Dienstein.

Snore...

We'll see.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: clayton <bbt![e-mail]>
Subject: Books on Telephony History
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 90 15:30:39 EDT
Reply-To: bbt![e-mail]


I need some help from the telcom book worms.

I am interested in getting titles of interesting books on the history
of telephony.  Everything from A. G. Bell biographies to the early
days of AT&T.

I would like to know which books are not be missed and those that I
should not waste my time on.

Please send title, author, and publishing company (to aid me in
finding it) directly to me or post.  If I get good response I will
foward a summary to PT.


                BroadBand Technologies, Inc.
Kevin Clayton            PO Box 13737
[e-mail]            Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3737

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

Date: Wed, 06 Jun 90 10:57:50 IST
From: Hank Nussbacher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telenet USSR


More Eastean European news:

Over 50 joint projects have been registered between USSR and the West
during the past year, two thirds of which are in the realm of
computers and telecommunications.  Among them are:

- Infocom - a joint Finnish-Russian company which will supply information
  services as well as communications to the West.

- Sprint has signed an agreement with The Central Telegraph of the
  Soviet Ministry of Post and Telecommunications to establish
  "Telenet USSR".  Sprint will retain a 50% share of the company
  that is forming.

Romania: France has offered Romania to set up a central digital
exchange (Alcatel equipment).  Romania has also requested permission
to join EUTELSAT.

Poland: Due to the advancement of the annual Cocom meeting from
September 1990 to May 1990, Alcatel has offered Poland a Signaling
System 7 which is Cocom proscribed.  The CEPT is currently deciding
whether to accept Poland and Hungary into their organization.


Hank Nussbacher
Israel

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

From: Mark Harrison <necssd![e-mail]>
Subject: Fun With Alpha Phone Numbers
Date: 7 Jun 90 15:09:50 GMT
Organization: NEC America Inc. SSD, Irving, TX


>echo "There's no Q or Z on the phone dial."

This is the basis for a very funny Aggie joke.  (Aggies are the
students at Texas A&M University.  They have the reputation of being
somewhat "slow" and are the target of much good humor.)

There is a new Aggie Joke hotline: just call 1-800-AGGIE-IQ.  New jokes
daily!

It works best if you tell the joke in a group and can convince
somebody to try dialing the number. :-)


Mark Harrison             [e-mail]
[phone]             {necntc, cs.utexas.edu}!necssd!harrison
standard disclaimers apply...

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #420
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25300;
          9 Jun 90 0:56 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa07293;
          8 Jun 90 23:24 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa07832;
          8 Jun 90 22:20 CDT
Date:     Fri, 8 Jun 90 21:26:05 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #421
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 8 Jun 90 21:25:34 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 421

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Ineffective "Call Control" Devices? [Will Martin]
    Is Analog Cellular Dead? [John Higdon]
    Cellular Telephones [David G. Cantor]
    Cracker in Wilimington, DE Area Sentenced [Thomas Lapp]
    Small Telephone Switches [Kari Hardarson]
    Experiences with Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems [Chuck Ritter]
    Area 903 Prefix List Wanted [Greg Monti via John R. Covert]
    Autodialer Hookup to Terminal Printer Port [John Alsop]
    Re: Wisconsin Bell / AT&T Making Random Connections [Jon Baker]
    Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB [Carl Moore]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Jun 90 9:41:39 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ineffective "Call Control" Devices?


I was looking thru the Hello Direct catalog to see if they sold
anything like the no-hands speakerphone Darwin Weyh wanted but didn't
find any device that would do that, which surprised me; I would think
such a unit would be standard equipment for disabled people. At least
something with a footswitch or a knee-bump pad or some other no-hands
phone answer mechanism, maybe that would be usable by a support-dog or
other disabled-helping trained animal. But no luck.

Anyway, whilst looking thru the Summer 1990 catalog, on page 25, I
noticed two "call control" devices to either retrict toll calls or
prevent all outgoing calls with a keyswitch. The former hangs on the
wall at the modular jack; the latter seems to be glued to the back of
the phone. Both of them appear to use ordinary modular cords; the
device has a jack on it, and a short modular cord coming out. On the
first, you plug the short cord into the wall socket and plug the phone
cord into the device. On the other, you stick the keyswitch block on
the back of your phone, plug the short cord into the phone's jack, and
the phone cord into the box.

What stops people from simply unplugging the modular cords from these
control devices and bypassing them by plugging the phone cord direct
into the wall jack or into the telephone, respectively? Am I missing
something? This appears trivial to bypass. If they had the security
"TelCord-Lok" connectors shown on page 38, at least this unplugging
and replugging would be difficult, but they don't.

By the way, does anyone out there use these "TelCord-Lok"
screw-secured modular plugs? The catalog illustration carefully avoids
showing just what kind of a screw they use, and they ask $10 for the
"special tool" to connect/disconnect these plugs, but it sort of looks
like a male Torx-type head screw in the side view they show. Is that
what it is? I think an ordinary socket-type nutdriver would work on
it, if so. Needle-nose pliers should do it in any case ... And a
scissors cuts the cord. :-)


Regards, Will
[e-mail] OR [e-mail]

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

Subject: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: 7 Jun 90 17:30:14 PDT (Thu)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


While shopping today in a local electronics emporium, the new Motorola
handhelds caught my eye. My venerable GE Mini is pushing three years
old now and is definitely dated. These Motorolas looked pretty neat
and could be carried much more easily than the old GE.

As I started to attract the attention of a salestype, the sinking
feeling hit. With the rush to develop digital cellular, buying any
currently available cellular radio would be a major mistake. The
question concerning its obsolescence is not "if" but "how soon?"

The cellular industry may be shooting itself in the foot. Just when
roaming agreements and other standardizations are beginning to make
mobile telephone service worthwhile, digital promises to undo all of
that. In an area such as LA, where digital will undoubtedly appear
early on, a customer could buy a radio that would be virtually useless
elsewhere (such as the Bay Area, where digital will be much slower in
coming.)

Or else we will have the standard electronics industry fix: make the
customer carry around a bulky "multi-lingual" radio until the
manufacturers and service providers decide just what they are going to
do and when they are going to do it.

Frankly, I am so put off by this sudden about face ("suddenly we can't
do without digital") that I may just keep my GE Mini until there is no
more analog service, and then just do without. I hope other cellular
users vote with their pocketbooks as well.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Telephones
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 90 21:07:35 -0700
From: "David G. Cantor" <[e-mail]>


A friend of mine wants to have two cellular telephones in two
different cars with the same telephone number.  Of course, he will use
only one at a time.  The telco won't set this up for him.  How does he
do it?


David G. Cantor
Department of Mathematics
University of California at Los Angeles
Internet:  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I think the only way it will work is if he is able
to convince the cellular carrier to not do its usual serial number
check as part of handling his calls. Either that, or find someone to
change the serial number on the new phone, which is illegal if the
cellular carrier is not made aware of it.  A better course of action
would be to have call forwarding on the new phone (whatever number it
is) and calls fowarded all the time to the other cell phone's number.  PT]

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

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 90 18:31:15 EDT
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cracker in Wilmington, DE Area Sentenced


Since we don't know the extent of the crackers ring that the secret
service has been going after, I don't know if there is any connection
between this case and those, but thought I would pass it along.

Below are some excerpts from a news article in the Wilmington
(Delaware) {News-Journal} of 9 June 90 under the title, "'Dropout'
Computer Hacker Sentenced to Finish School."

``A 16-year-old eighth-grade dropout, who was part of a
computer-hacking network that used pirated credit information to make
purchases will return to school by court order.

The Glascow-area youth was sentenced Thursday in Family Court on theft
and computer-misuse charges for his part in a ring that included teens
in Michigan and California, New Castle County police said.

In addition to requiring the boy to complete school, the court placed
him on probation until he turns 18 and ordered him to pay $3,049 in
restitution and $1,018 to the state victims' compensation fund.  The
court suspended a $6,790 fine.''

[The boy was arrested in May for receiving goods which were purchased
on credit card numbers which were stolen.  The News-Journal does not
publish names of youths who do not commit violent crimes, so his name
does not appear in the article.  Apparently the boy used several
rouses to get people to give him their credit card numbers over the
phone.  He then traded some of those numbers with a Michigan youth in
exchange for access codes and numbers to a national credit bureau, and
used those systems to get more numbers in his local area.  He then
charged purchases to those numbers and had them deliver to an empty
apartment which he arranged to be at.  Some of the other activities he
was involved with include:]

``* Using the [illegally obtained credit card numbers] to order computer
  equipment and have it delivered to vacant homes.  He also rented a
  limousine and charged the fee to the card.

* Trading some of the pirated information for computer software from
  hackers in Europe.

* Tapping into an '800' number and using it to make numerous long-distance
  calls.

* Giving credit-card numbers to a Los Angeles teen, who [used the information
  to also defraud the credit card companies].

Charges against the Delaware boy were forgery, theft, unlawful access
to computer systems, misuse of computer equipment and unlawful use of
credit cards.''

                  - tom

internet     : mvac23![e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
uucp         : {ucbvax,mcvax,psuvax1,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas
Europe Bitnet: THOMAS1@GRATHUN1         Location: Newark, DE, USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Kari Hardarson)
Subject: Small Telephone Switches
Date: 8 Jun 90 21:27:09 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Kari Hardarson)
Organization: University Of North Carolina, Chapel Hill


I work for a company that has ten employees, including the boss.  We
have a modem and a fax, and a Novell network. We started out with two
telephone lines and ordinary telephones. Needless to say, we quickly
bought a telephone switch. The manufacturer is a Japanese firm named
Kanda. It had five lines and a maximum of sixteen extensions. It
turned out not to be a wise choice -- after a while you get a craving
for all sorts of advanced features; this switch did not supply them
and it has no expansion capabilites. Right now we have four lines
connected to it, the fifth line is run throughout the building and
connected to ordinary phone sockets. If someone wants modem access, he
has to get the modem (physically) and plug it in. Same thing holds for
the answering machine.

So much for flaming. Here comes the question:
Has anyone seen a telephone switch which has the following features:

o  Cheap... < 5000$ (Why not? That should be possible...)

o  Hands-off-operation: speakers built into the handsets

o  Do-not-disturb: The Kanda switch required removing a link from the board..

o  Not too many wires in the connections to the phones. Also: standard
   type sockets: ours has three twisted pairs, star configuration.

o  Call-Forwarding, to an employee's home if neccessary

o  Makes the bell ring, first at the secretary's, then in preprogrammed
   locations one after another: Ours rings everywhere unless DND is on, and
   if it is the call cannot be forwarded there once someone else has answered.

o  Conference calls. Ours can make 2 to 1, 1 to 2.

o  Expandable for voice-mail

o  Allows RS-232 connections and/or Ethernet connections to be integrated,
   so that cables don't have to be run separately. I don't really know what
   I'm asking for here.. ;->

o  Knows about the existence of add-ons such as:
     Faxes,Modems,Answering Machines

o  Programmable from terminals, i.e. soft-configurable.
   I want to be able to say, for example: CALL JOHN. This would run a
   batch job that told the switch to make a call, and ring my phone when
   the connection is made. If I move, I don't want to open the switch
   and mess around with circuit boards.

o  Expandable to ISDN when the time comes? How does X.25 fit into this
   picture?

Am I missing some features? Am I being unrealistic?  I would
appreciate hearing from small companies, the pros&cons of their
switches. I will compile the results and post them, of course.

PS: I am working in Iceland, our phone system confirms to CCITT
standards, so BELL systems may not work there, I wouldn't know.


Kari Hardarson
217 Jackson Circle
27514 Chapel Hill, NC

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

From: chuck ritter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems
Organization: JAR Associates, Inc.
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 90 18:20:48 GMT


My company is replacing a fifteen year old six button Comkey system
because it is maxed out on lines. Our primary requirements are
reliability and longevity. We need eight lines and sixteen stations
now and don't anticipate explosive growth. Both the AT&T Spirit and
Northern Telecom Norstar Meridian systems meet our needs on paper. I
know that the Spirit isn't fully digital and the Meridian is; but they
are comparably priced - the Merlin II while digital is more
importantly substantially more money and has more expansion capacity
than I think we'll need in the next several years.

My company doesn't (yet) require the all the bells and whistles on
either system. But given that our last phone system was used for
fifteen years a secondary goal is a system that will allow us to take
advantage of new features as they become available locally. I don't
expect ISDN in our area for some time despite assurances otherwise.  I
would like to hear from people who have experience with either system
- what are your likes and dislikes in how the system operates? What is
your opinion of reliability and service responsiveness? How about
voice quality? Ease of use? etc, etc?


Chuck Ritter

[e-mail] Engineering Consultants Jordan Apostal Ritter
Associates ANSYS, Aries, Fidap Distributors Admin Bldg 7, North
Kingstown RI 02852 [phone] or [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 90 10:59:34 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  08-Jun-1990 1402" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Area 903 Prefix List Wanted (from Greg Monti)


   From:  Greg Monti
   Subject:  Area 903 Prefix List Wanted

Does anybody on the net have a list of the prefixes that will soon be
in the new 903 NPA in Texas?  I called Southwestern Bell Business
Office (214 464-4647) and all they could tell me was that exchanges
"east of Coffman and north of Prosper" were to be in 903.  I asked
whether a dial-in automated lookup service (like the one Illinois Bell
had for Chicago last year) would be available in Texas and the Bus Off
said they hadn't decided on that yet.


Greg Monti, Arlington, Virginia; work [phone]

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

From: John Alsop <seachg![e-mail]>
Subject: Autodialer Hookup to Terminal Printer Port
Date: 8 Jun 90 15:11:38 GMT
Organization: Sea Change Corp.,Mississauga,Ontario,Canada


We have a bunch of WYSE-85 and 185 terminals running a database
application. We would like to call up a customer file on the screen,
and in response to a function key, dial the customer's phone number.

To achieve this, I think we would need a device which would hook up
between the serial printer port on the terminal and the phone handset.
It would have to accept a phone number from the serial port, and then
dial the number.

I assume this type of device is readily available, and would
appreciate pointers to vendors.


Thanks,

John Alsop

Sea Change Corporation
1100 Central Parkway W., Suite 38
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5C 4E5
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
UUCP: ...!uunet!attcan!darkover!seachg!jalsop

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

From: Jon Baker <noao!xroads![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Wisconsin Bell / AT&T Making Random Connections
Date: 8 Jun 90 04:15:58 GMT
Reply-To: Jon Baker <noao!xroads![e-mail]>
Organization: Crossroads, Phoenix, AZ 85046


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Anton Rang) writes:

>The most interesting thing about this is that these aren't just
>"misdirected" calls; neither party initiates the call.  The phone just
>rings at both ends.  One person in Madison was getting about eighty

>A Wisconsin Bell spokesman said that the company is trying to track
>down the problem, with the help of AT&T.

We had this problem at our local (Chandler,AZ) exchange last year.
The problem was tracked down by 'experts from AT&T' to a bug in the 5E
(jab, jab, jab).  We didn't have international calls though - it was
just within the CO.  Got to chat with some very nice people ...


\  /  C r o s s r o a d s  C o m m u n i c a t i o n s
 /\   [phone] 300-2400,9600 PEP Baud 24 hrs/day
/  \  hplabs!hp-sdd!crash!xroads!bakerj

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

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 90 11:55:37 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB


John R. Levine <[e-mail]> writes:

>It was and is a local
>call across the Delaware a few miles north of Philadelphia between New
>Hope PA and Lambertville NJ.  Don't ask me why.

New Hope (Pa.) and Lambertville (NJ) are upstream of Trenton, and thus
not THAT close to Philadelphia.  The furthest south along the Delaware
River where calls across the river are local is at Morrisville (Pa.,
still toll from Phila.) and Trenton (NJ).

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #421
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25400;
          9 Jun 90 0:59 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab07293;
          8 Jun 90 23:27 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab07832;
          8 Jun 90 22:20 CDT
Date:     Fri, 8 Jun 90 22:17:45 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #422
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 8 Jun 90 22:17:29 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 422

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Baud per Hertz [Rob Warnock]
    Re: Baud per Hertz [Rolf Meier]
    Re: Baud per Hertz [Peter da Silva]
    Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues [Fred E.J. Linton]
    Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog [Adam M. Gaffin]
    Re: UK Telephone System [Colum Mylod]
    Re: Discounts For Deaf: My Solution [John Higdon]
    Re: RJ45 vs RJ11 [Wayne Correia]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 90 11:30:08 GMT
From: Rob Warnock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Baud per Hertz
Reply-To: Rob Warnock <[e-mail]>
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA


In article <[e-mail]> Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.
bnr.ca![e-mail]> writes:

| In article <[e-mail]> Rob Warnock <[e-mail]> writes:

| >...(Pushing a 7 baud signal through a 5 Hz pipe is
| >quite good!  The theoretical maximum is 2 baud/Hz: one state for each
| >half-cycle of bandwidth.)...
| I don't see a theoretical limit, not if you allow phase modulation.
| For real phase discriminators and real lines there certainly are
| limits, but in theory you could shift each half cycle by as fine an
| increment as you could measure ... I guess Heisenberg limits that
| somewhere, but not for a long time.

Please read what I said again: the theoretical limit is 2 *BAUD*/Hz
(the Nyquist limit), not two bits/Hz. And since Hertz == cycles per
second, your next statement, "you could shift each half cycle",
confirms this.  "Baud" == "symbols/second" == "state changes/second".
So if one changes something on each half-cycle, that *is* 2 Baud/Hz,
just as I said.

Now what you really seem to be talking about when you say "by as fine
an increment as you could measure" is how many states you can
differentiate from each other, or how big your symbol alphabet is. And
the limit there is not Heisenberg, particularly, but Shannon. The
channel (or system) noise which is added to the signal puts an upper
limit on how many states you can distinguish.

Whatever the method of modulation -- phase, amplitude, frequency -- at
some point in the receiver you will eventually need to decide which of
your finite set of states (symbols) to assign to the actual current
analog value of the received signal. The circuit for this is an
analog-to-digital converter (A/D), also called a quantizer or
"slicer". For each signaling interval (the length of which is
1/Baud_rate) you will get one digitized sample which purports to name
which symbol was sent during that interval. How many bits it takes to
name all the states is how many bits per symbol you have. And bits per
symbol times Baud rate is bits per second.

So *of course* if your phase discriminators (A/D's) are perfect, and
there is zero noise, you can discriminate as many distinct states as
you like, and send as many bits per symbol as you like, and therefore
as many bits-per-second per Hertz of bandwidth.

But real channels have noise -- they are *not* perfect, thus your
measurements will not be, either. And the theoretical limit to how
many different phases (or whatever) you can use effectively is just
the Shannon limit:

    C = W * log2(SNR + 1)        [Page 26 in reference given below]

The fundamental "channel capacity" C -- the upper limit on the number
of bits per second you can push through a channel with an error rate
"as low as you like" assuming you use a coding scheme that is "good
enough" -- is the bandwidth "W" in Hertz times the logarithm base-2 of
the signal-to-noise ratio SNR -- the *power* ratio (energy per time or
energy per bit) -- plus one.

The Nyquist theorem says that with perfect A/D's [which we actually
can come quite close to these days, at least as far as voice-grade
modems care] we can get all the information from a band-limited signal
by sampling at a Baud rate B = 2 * W (which is the same as your "each
half cycle", above), so if you send R bits/symbol we can equate C = R
* B, which gives:

    C = R * B = (B/2) * log2 (SNR + 1)

Simplifying, the maximum useful bits/symbol is:

    R = log2(SNR + 1) / 2        [Page 40 in reference given below]

This says if you have a signal/noise power ratio of 255 = 24.1dB
(which is a *voltage* ratio of just under 16), and you have a perfect
modulation/demodulation method and a perfect [actually, good enough]
error-correcting coding scheme, you can send 4 bits/symbol or 8 bps/Hz
of bandwidth. [For those who care about such details, this is ~15 dB
"Eb/N0", that is, energy per bit divided by noise power density per
Hertz.]

But in practice, modulation methods such as phase-shift modulation
(PSK) are *not* ideal, they "waste information". I don't have tables
for 16 bps/Hz, but I have a chart for coherent PSK that goes up to 10
bps/Hz [Ref: Fig 1.7].  In order to achieve a bit error rate of 1 in
10**5 (no error-correction code), you need the following SNRs (plus or
minus a few tenths of a dB for my chart-reading error):

                                                       Overall     Shannon
# of phases     bits/symbol  bps/Hz   Eb/N0 (dB)       SNR (dB)    Limit (dB)

 2 (0/180 deg)     1        2     9.5         9.5         0.0
 4 (0/90/180/270)  2        4    10.0        13.0         4.8
 8 (0/45/90/...)   3        6    14.0            18.8         8.5
16 (0/22.5/45...)  4        8    18.8            24.8        11.8
32 (0/11.25/...)   5           10    23.8            30.8        14.9

As you can see, multi-phase coherent PSK is roughly 10dB worse than
the Shannon limit, and is worse off at the higher bits/symbol end
(although asymptotically is within a constant factor of the Shannon
limit [Ref: p.41]).  The best way to use PSK seems to be with four
phases, where the excess loss is "only" 8.2dB, which is probably why
this version (a.k.a. QPSK) is quite popular in modems. Most higher
bit-rate modems use a combination of amplitude and phase modulation
(often called "QAM" whether or not the phase-modulation is really
"quadrature"), which gives better performance than either AM or PSK
alone.

[Reference: Michelson & Levesque, "Error-Control Techniques For
Digital Communication" (Wiley-Interscience 1985), pp.26-41.  Since
Figure 1.7 actually graphed Eb/N0 versus PsubM, the *symbol* error
rate, I had to extrapolate all the curves (except M=2) down below the
chart to get an Eb/N0 corresponding to a 1.0e-5 *bit* error rate. This
is the source of much of the "chart-reading error" mentioned above.]

In article <[e-mail]> codex![e-mail] (Peter
Desnoyers) writes:

| However, a baud is not a bit. By the Nyquist theorem, you can only get
| 2f bauds per second. In practice high-speed modems such as V.32 run at
| about 2500-3000 bauds/sec over lines with a 3000Hz bandwidth.

| >Still, in the real world 7 baud on 5 Hz is very good!

| 9600bps over 3000 Hz is a good deal better, and is quite common.

Oops! You fell in the trap, too! Those 9600 b/s modems use 4
bit/symbol modulation, and so actually run at 2400 baud. And 2400 baud
on 2700 Hz (3000 - 300) is not as good as 7 baud on 5 Hz.

On clean lines the Telebit will run 6 bits/symbol, so at 7.35 baud
that's 44.1 bits/sec in 5 Hz, or 8.8 bps/Hz. 9600/2700 is a mere 3.6
bps/Hz.


Rob Warnock, MS-9U/510        [e-mail]        [e-mail]
Silicon Graphics, Inc.        [phone]        Protocol Engines, Inc.
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.         Mountain View, CA  94039-7311

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

From: Rolf Meier <mitel!spock![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Baud per Hertz
Date: 8 Jun 90 14:32:09 GMT
Reply-To: Rolf Meier <mitel!healey![e-mail]>
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.
ca![e-mail]> writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> Rob Warnock <[e-mail]> writes:

>>...(Pushing a 7 baud signal through a 5 Hz pipe is
>>quite good!  The theoretical maximum is 2 baud/Hz: one state for each
>>half-cycle of bandwidth.)...

>I don't see a theoretical limit, not if you allow phase modulation.
>For real phase discriminators and real lines there certainly are
>limits, but in theory you could shift each half cycle by as fine an
>increment as you could measure ... I guess Heisenberg limits that
>somewhere, but not for a long time.

Not Heisenberg, but Shannon sets the limit.  The theoretical maximum is:

    max bit rate = bandwidth x log(2)(1 + S/N)

    where S/N is the signal to noise ratio
        log(2) is log base 2 (not 0.30103 :-))

For example, using a normal telephone line with a 3 kHz bandwidth and
a 60 dB (1000:1 for the formula) S/N ratio, you can in theory transmit
30,000 bits/sec.  You can use phase, frequency, or amplitude
modulation.  The maximum bit rate is reached when you can no longer
resolve the signal variation due to noise.


Rolf Meier
Mitel Corporation

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Baud per Hertz
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 90 13:31:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> codex![e-mail] (Peter
Desnoyers) writes:

> >Still, in the real world 7 baud on 5 Hz is very good!

> 9600bps over 3000 Hz is a good deal better, and is quite common.

Not really. Those 7 bauds at 6 bits per baud come to 42 bps over 5 Hz.
The highest rate I've heard of over the 3000 Hz band using PEP is something
like 24000 bps, or about 2.5 times as much as V.32. 18000 bps is not
terribly uncommon.


`-_-' Peter da Silva. [phone].  <[e-mail]>
 'U`  Have you hugged your wolf today?  <[e-mail]>
@FIN  Dirty words: Zhghnyyl erphefvir vayvar shapgvbaf.

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

Date: 8-JUN-1990 01:31:30.15
From: "Fred E.J. Linton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TDD Cost and Technology Issues


In article <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]> writes:

> AT&T currently markets a device called the 1300+ for the TDD folks. It
> supports 45.5 baudot up to 1200 baud asscii and everything in between.

to which the Moderator notes:

[Could you please get us some pricing and ordering information for this?]

I can point you to Anthony Curreri of AT&T, product (or marketing)
manager for the AT&T 1310, a similar device.  Both are, I suspect,
outgrowths of the AT&T 1300 "home banking terminal" I've mentioned
earlier here.

Curreri had, last time I checked, an AT&T Mail login, as (either)
<!curreri> (or perhaps <!acurreri>).  By his signature he seems to
call himself Tony.  He certainly had pricing / ordering / manuals data
for the 1310 at his disposal when I needed that somewhat over a year
ago, and _should_ be able to help with this 1300+ as well, even if
only to point you in the right direction.


Fred <[e-mail]> <attmail!fejlinton> <[e-mail]>

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

From: Adam M Gaffin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Online Access to Library Card Catalog
Organization: The World
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 90 11:26:20 GMT


For those who don't have access to telnet, I have a list of university
libraries in the Boston area that allow dial-in access to their
catalog systems. E-mail me if you'd like a copy.


Adam Gaffin    Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass.
[e-mail]    Voice: [phone]
Fred the Middlesex News Computer: [phone]

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

From: Colum Mylod <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: UK Telephone System
Date: 7 Jun 90 13:18:47 GMT
Reply-To: Colum Mylod <[e-mail]>
Organization: Oracle Europe, The Netherlands


In article <[e-mail]> "Clive D.W. Feather" <ixi!clive@
relay.eu.net> writes:

>certain special codes:
>010 international access
> 0001 equivalent to 010 350 1 [Dublin]

Correction: this is equivalent to 010 353 1 [Dublin], 350 is
Gibraltar.

> 0055 from London only; calls charged at L rate
> 0066 from London only; calls charged at a rate
> 0077 from London only; calls charged at m rate

To finish off this part completely a mention should be made of the
000? and 001? codes from Northern Ireland since this is part of BT's
fiefdom:

     0002  equivalent to 010 353 21 [Cork]
     0004  equivalent to 010 353 42 [Dundalk]
     0005  equivalent to 010 353 51 [Waterford]
     0006  equivalent to 010 353 61 [Limerick]
     0007  equivalent to 010 353 74 [Letterkenny]
     0009  equivalent to 010 353 91 [Galway]

     0011  equivalent to 010 353 41 [Drougheda]
     0012  equivalent to 010 353 46 [Navan]
     0014  equivalent to 010 353 47 [Monaghan]

There are also codes 0010/0015/0016/0017 but my memory fades. The
codes 0002 to 0009 were at one stage operative from G. Britain, but
disappeared around 1982 without any notice being given. They are
listed still for calls from N. Ireland to +353 land. Something else to
note is that although 0001 is equivalent to dialing 010 353 1 from GB
to IRL, 010 353 1 WILL NOT WORK! Yes, to call IRL from GB (except to
Dublin) you dial 010 353 <area code>, but trying that way to Dublin is
blocked. I am one of those people who try "illegal" codes to see what
happens.

As an aside, the European Commission has decided to try to have 00 as
a common international access code from all twelve states in the EEC.
This would mean the demise of all these 00- codes. The Dutch PTT is
committed to having 00 as its IDD code (currently it's 09), and
operator services are being moved from 00- to 06-04?? over the next
few years.

Your article was fascinating, Clive. How did BT manage to invent such
complexity ?


Colum Mylod      [e-mail]     The Netherlands     Above is IMHO

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Discounts For Deaf: My Solution
Date: 8 Jun 90 09:19:57 PDT (Fri)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


"Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]> writes:

> I have to point out that the problem is >NOT< the baud rate of TDD's.

> Consider how many conventions we use
> on the net: :-) *sigh* :-( >EMPHASIS< and how much longer it takes us
> to type them that it would to utter them.

Yes, but consider something else that goes on on the net -- batched,
high-speed data transfer. I understand that there is frequent need for
interactive "conversation", but a lot of the time someone just needs
to send a message and may or may not even need a reply.

When you or I sit down to spill our guts on this forum, or reply to
those who privately take issue with us, we sit down and type at our
leisure. Maybe we get up to have lunch, do other work, whatever. None
of this time is spent "on line".

Perhaps equipment for the deaf can be designed so that it offers the
option of interactive OR e-mail-style communications.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: Wayne Correia <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: RJ45 vs RJ11
Date: 8 Jun 90 23:18:03 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA


In article <[e-mail]> utstat![e-mail] (Tom Glinos)
writes:

>I'm looking for the advantages of RJ45 over RJ11.

>Each cubicle that I'm planning will have two jacks.  The jacks will
>either be phone or data in any combination.

>The present data requirements are RS232 and Twisted Pair Ethernet.  (I
>can't speculate about future requirements.)

>I'd prefer RJ45 but (bean counters and other bureaucrats) tell me
>that RJ11 will suffice.

Here at Apple Computer we run six RJ-45's to each and every cube.  We
don't run eight wires to every jack though, only four. It covers our
AppleTalk, twisted-pair Ethernet, proprietary PBX phones, analog phone
lines, and ISDN lines. Be advised that most twisted-pair Ethernet and
all ISDN basic rate interface lines I know of require an RJ-45 jack
even though they don't use all eight wires.

Our configuration is what I would call a minimum for any company that
had voice and data needs. I also agree with Julian's motto of at least
six pair and I also sometimes regret not pulling 25 pair.

In short, don't take no for an answer from those who don't understand
the real requirements.


Wayne Correia (N6RSC)
N&C Engineer
Developer Technical Support
Apple Computer, Inc.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #422
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00266;
          9 Jun 90 18:58 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa03413;
          9 Jun 90 17:32 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab15227;
          9 Jun 90 16:29 CDT
Date:     Sat, 9 Jun 90 16:25:53 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #423
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 9 Jun 90 16:25:38 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 423

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CLID ... A "New" Tread [John McHarry]
    Telephonic Regression [John Higdon]
    Diamond State Telephone to Offer Meter Reading Service [Thomas Lapp]
    Cracker/Phreaker Crackdown [Henry Mensch]
    AT&T SelectSaver(TM) Advertising Slime [Gordon Burditt]
    Culmination Magazine Wanted [Steve Huff]
    Re: Cordless Telephone Dies [Irving Wolfe]
    Re: NPA 917 to Serve Both Bronx and DID's in Manhattan [Andrew Boardman]
    Re: Update: LOD Woes - Part II of II [Andrew M. Boardman]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Friday, 8 Jun 1990 11:28:13 EST
From: John McHarry <[e-mail]>
Subject: CLID ... A "New" Thread


     In Volume 10: Issue 419 Paul Flynn <[e-mail]> discussed
some of the limitations on CLASS (I think CLASS is a Registered
Service Mark, or some such, of Bellcore.)  services due to the current
lack of SS7 interconnectivity between carriers.  This reminded me of a
similar issue I have been meaning to mention:

     Calling Line ID (CLID, "ANI", etc) is, as currently implemented
under the CLASS specifications (there are other extent ways to do it),
an SS7 based feature insofar as it operates between switches.  Since
interexchange carriers (IXCs) don't currently connect to the local
exchange carriers (LECs) via SS7 to any significant degree, CLID is
not available on inter-LATA calls.  Thus, I can't use it to
differentiate my mother calling me from the, more usual, boiler room
call.  Thus, it is not worth much to me, nor, I suspect, to a fair
number of potential customers.

     Of course, the people touting CLID are aware of this limitation
and are trying to remedy it by arranging for ANI spill from the IXCs.
Current trunking arrangements spill ANI from the LEC to the IXC, but
not vice-versa.  The LECs would like to convert their incoming IXC
trunks to deliver ANI.  This could be done via SS7 interconnectivity,
but I doubt that SS7 is required.

     Sound simple?  Au contraire: It appears that the IXCs are more
than willing to provide the information, but at a price.  I guess the
reasoning is that the LEC wants the calling number information in
order to sell it, so the provider, the IXC, should be paid also.  The
LECs seem to argue that what is good for the goose is good for the
gander.  They provide ANI to the IXC at "no" charge (ANI spill is
included in the tariff for the current interconnect trunks), so they
should get it from them for free also.  Of course, the IXCs need the
info for billing, but they also sell it to some of their customers.

     It is beginning to look like this may develop into an amusing
little brouhaha.  There have already been some positions put forward
at some of the standards meetings that appear subtly linked to this
issue.  At any rate, its outcome should have some interesting
implications.  For example, if the IXC is entitled to payment for the
information, by parity of reasoning, isn't the calling party entitled
to compensation also?  One, if one were an LEC, might argue that the
calling party is compensated in lower rates, but with price cap
regulation that is a harder case to make with a straight face.

#include disclaimer.standard

* John McHarry    [phone]             [e-mail] *

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

Subject: Telephonic Regression
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: 8 Jun 90 10:58:49 PDT (Fri)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


In the spirit of government over-zealousness, how many have noticed
(at least in California) the latest media attention to the role of
telephony in the matter of drug sales? It would appear that drug
warriors have just discovered that many drug deals are consumated with
the assistance of public telephones, pagers, and cellular equipment.

According to some of the stories (including a mention in this forum),
a number of the utility pay phones have been replaced with old rotary
dial models (so that pagers can't be activated) and some merged subset
of these phones have also been disabled from receiving calls. In the
Bay Area, there has even been talk about removing some pay phones
altogether, although Pac*Bell spokespeople have pointed out that
should be considered a last resort option.

So it appears that in the name of the War On Drugs, telephone service
is to be denied to a certain subclass of people. Disabling the TT pad
after the call is dialed (or installing rotary phones) eliminates the
use of many services, not just pagers. What we are in effect saying to
people who live and work in certain (arbitrarily selected) areas is,
"You are not entitled to have the convenience or utility afforded to
those in more upscale places." Not that drug use or trading doesn't
occur in Willow Glen (as an example), it's just that more money makes
possible a more sophisticated and covert methodology that isn't
obvious to residents or police.

Saying to people whose only telephone service might just be a public
telephone that they will have to do with less because of a current
hysteria is highly offensive. But I feel that more is on the way. In
the California legislature is a bill under consideration that would
make it a crime for anyone under the age of 18 to have a pager (Dougie
Howser--watch out!). I predict that in the forseeable future,
legislation will be considered that will require ALL users of pagers
and cellular phones to register with the state attorney general's
office, stating the use and purpose of the equipment. No registration,
no service.

It is sad that while we are seeing great advancements in both the
utility and convenience of telecommunications, congresscritters (and
others who depend upon re-election for their fat pay checks) feel the
need to artificially restrict citizens' use of technology in the cause
of "crowd pleasing". Do they really think that if you take away pagers
and pay phones that the "drug problem" will go away?


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

[Moderator's Note: The Chicago City Council is now on this same
tangent, thinking somehow that if Illinois Bell eliminates pay phones
in the housing projects (or makes them one-way outgoing, or removes
the touch-tone or some combination thereof), that the drug traffic
will slow down. Of course, the fact that these steps would be all the
more oppressive to people who live in Housing Authority properties and
are too poor to have a phone of their own and must rely on the single
outdoor (frequently out-of-order) payphone in front of the combination
liquor store / state lottery agent on the corner is never considered.  PT]

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jun 90 11:55:11 EDT
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Diamond State Telephone to Offer Meter Reading Service


There was recently discussion over reading utility meters either by
radio or via telephone.

A news article in the Saturday, 9 June 90 issue of the Wilmington
(Delaware) {News-Journal} indicates that Diamond State Telephone is
presently seeking approval to offer meter reading services to
utilities in its area.

The system is the same as has been discussed in these pages before:
the company calls your home with a method that does not ring your
phone, and the unit attached to the meter and phone line sends the
data requested.  As in the other system, if someone picks up the line
while the data transfer is going on, it is cancelled and the user has
access to his phone line.  The data request call is tried again later.

Some interesting points from this article that I had not seen in prior
postings:

"...the utility's computer sends its customers' telephone numbers into
the automatic meter-reading equipment, which in turn dials the
customer using a special line so the subscriber's phone doesn't
ring..."

"...A call takes only seconds and will be made between midnight and
6am,when calling volume is lightest, said [Douglas R.] Smith [manager
of regulartory matters for Diamond State]..."

"...Water companies have been the first to take advantage of the service
 ...but in the future, all metered utilities -- electricity, gas and
water -- could be hooked into the same system ... if all the utilities
work together...."

"...The system is working in New Jersey and in the trial stage in
Pennsylvania ... Hackensack Water Company is its [New Jersey Bell's]
largest customer with 170,000 meters attached to the service.  Four
other water companies are in the process of adopting the system..."

"...According to the application filed with the PSC, utilites would
pay a non-recurring charge of $1,500 for the central office special
access circuit, a monthly rate of $410, plus 3 cents a call in
off-peak hours..."

Two quick comments: I'm assuming that the "special access circuit"
between the utility and the central office would be a dedicated line.
I'd hate to think that it would be a switched circuit.  There probably
isn't a whole lot of info you could get from 'cracking' a utility
reading system, but if you take that datum with all the others you can
get on a residence, it might pose a security risk.  I know, rather
far-fetched, though.

The other thing is a little less serious.  If the utilities are
charged a non-recurring fee of $1,500, does this appear on their third
bill?  And does it continue to appear on other bills even when they
tell the phone company to remove the "extra non-recurring charges?" ;-)

                         - tom

internet     : mvac23![e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
uucp         : {ucbvax,mcvax,psuvax1,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas
Europe Bitnet: THOMAS1@GRATHUN1         Location: Newark, DE, USA

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jun 90 12:48:13 -0400
From: Henry Mensch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cracker/Phreaker Crackdown
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In reply to Frank Earl's note ... I would reckon one of the problems
is that most people don't know where the FBI's jurisdiction begins or
where the Secret Service's jurisdiction ends.  I had a visit on Friday
afternoon from an FBI agent and it seemed to be mostly reasonable,
except he identified himself as being from a unit that I wouldn't
associate with this sort of investigation.


# Henry Mensch    /   <[e-mail]>   /   E40-379 MIT,  Cambridge, MA
# <[e-mail]-relay> / <[e-mail]> / <[e-mail]>

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

From: Gordon Burditt <sneaky![e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T SelectSaver(TM) Advertising Slime
Date: 9 Jun 90 12:38:11 GMT


The ad in my mail says "A review of your AT&T Long Distance bill
indicates that you have the potential to save money by changing to the
AT&T SelectSaver Plan".

"A routine review of your AT&T account indicates that you are
currently being charged standard prices for your out-of-state,
direct-dialed AT&T Long Distance calls, and that you make the majority
of these calls to area code (717) in Pennsylvania."

"To benefit from this new plan you would need to increase your AT&T
Long Distance calling to your selected area code by about 10 minutes
per month."

On the basis of my bills, they decided that I would want to get a
special rate to area code 717 (.12/min evening/night/weekend, .20/min
day) plus 5% savings on all other out-of-state direct calls, for only
$1.90 a month.  (There are 3 calling rates based on distance.  From
817 (Fort Worth, Texas), I think everything is "medium" except Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.  The $1.90/month seems to
be fixed.)

Hmmm, how did they choose this?  Well, if they know I have two lines
billed on the same bill, since January, 1989 that was one evening-rate
717 25-minute call in December, 1989, and one evening 717 29-minute
call in February, 1990.  If they don't know about the second line,
then they only know about the first call.  If they went back much
further than November, 1989, they would have seen that night-rate 614
calls dominate the out-of-state bill in 1989.

Now, if I had gotten this plan in December, 1989 (on ONE line, and
made all the calls on that line), and made 1 10-minute evening-rate
call each month in addition to actual use, I would have paid $11.40 in
SelectSaver bills to date to save about $4.56 on calls, for a net loss
of $6.84.  And they are strongly implying that they LOOKED at my bills
and decided I could save money.  AAARRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!

If they want me to save money, the same plan applied to area code 214
(Dallas, which is in-state, adjacent, and intra-LATA, because unless
you use 10288, Southwestern Bell handles it and bills at a higher rate
than AT&T) might work, since I call there a lot more. I wonder if AT&T
wants the FCC to know you even CAN dial from 817 to 214 via AT&T.

One interesting feature: they say NOTHING about changing my
long-distance carrier (my default carrier is null) or having to have
it be AT&T.

        Gordon L. Burditt
        sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon

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

From: "Steve Huff, U. of Kansas, Lawrence" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Culmination Magazine Wanted
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services
Date: 9 June 90  00:00:00 CDT


Hope this doesn't offend anyone ... it's not telecom related.  But
this does seem to be a very knowlegable group!

Does anybody know if a magazine or review publication exists to
publish a culmination of important articles from different PC
magazines?  I am not looking for a clipping service, but somebody who
actually publishes their own work as a summary of other articles.  If
you have ever read _Bottom Line_, I'm trying to find something similar
in the computing area.

Thanks!

Steve Huff
Internet:  [e-mail]      EmCon:   K1TR or KW02
Bitnet:    [e-mail]
UUNet:     uunet!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu![e-mail]
Snail:     P.O. Box 1225, Lawrence, KS  66044-8225

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

From: Irving Wolfe <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cordless Telephone Dies
Date: 9 Jun 90 01:30:24 GMT
Reply-To: 0000-Irving Wolfe <[e-mail]>
Organization: SOLID VALUE, the investment letter for Benj. Graham's
 intelligent investors


Based on my own experience, Panasonic make good phones and answering
machines, good (and attractively priced) small business telephone
systems, and absolutely rotten (full of features but weak and
unreliable) cordless phones.  Welcome to the "snared by Panasonic's
reputation" club.  It sure doesn't extend to cordless phones; even
though their integrated phone/answering machines are probably the best
made, the cordless phones are among the worst!


 Irving Wolfe            [e-mail]              206/463-9399 ext.101
 Happy Man Corp.   4410 SW Pt. Robinson Road,  Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399
 SOLID VALUE, the investment letter for Benj. Graham's intelligent investors

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jun 90 00:57:17 EDT
From: "Andrew M. Boardman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA 917 to Serve both Bronx and DID's in Manhattan
Organization: Columbia University


In article <[e-mail]> Edward Greenburg wrote:

>The implications of this are interesting.  If, for example, I have a
>pager company with equipment located in Manhattan, will I have to pay
>mileage to get my DID trunks in from the Bronx, or will it all be
>transparent?

The idea from NYT seems to be that DID's in Manhattan will indeed
terminate in Manhattan CO's, and just have the 917 NPA.  Seemingly the
first setup of its kind.


Andrew Boardman
[e-mail]  ...rutgers!columbia!amb  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jun 90 01:32:27 EDT
From: "Andrew M. Boardman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Update: LOD Woes - Part II of II
Organization: Columbia University Department of Quiche Eaters


A piece of information, a waste of bandwidth to be published in more than
a moderator's note...

In article <[e-mail]> you write:

>Some time ago, a supplementary mailing list was run for awhile to
>handle overflow messages on a related topic, and this might be a good
>time to revive it. If the people who did it want to resume it for this
>thread, please let me know.

Actually, the mailing list is still alive and well.

/a


[Moderator's Note: Write to [e-mail] to request a
subscription to the Computer Underground Digest.    PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #423
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06549;
          9 Jun 90 22:08 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa14599;
          9 Jun 90 20:36 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab08155;
          9 Jun 90 19:33 CDT
Date:     Sat, 9 Jun 90 18:46:37 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #424
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 9 Jun 90 18:45:42 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 424

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead? [Steven King]
    Re: Two Cellular Phones, Same Number [John R. Covert]
    Re: Books on Telephony History [W. T. Sykes]
    Re: 10XXX Bugs [Andrew M. Boardman]
    Re: Are You a Phreak and/or Cracker? [TELECOM Moderator]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Steven King <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Date: 9 Jun 90 12:54:31 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc. - Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

>As I started to attract the attention of a salestype, the sinking
>feeling hit. With the rush to develop digital cellular, buying any
>currently available cellular radio would be a major mistake. The
>question concerning its obsolescence is not "if" but "how soon?"

Fear not, good gentle.  There is is HUGE base of people out there who
have analog phones.  Cellular operators can't expect them all to buy
new phones overnight.  They'll start by installing a few digital
channels and gradually phasing out the analog.  I suspect that you'll
still be able to get an analog channel anywhere you go for many, many
years.

>Or else we will have the standard electronics industry fix: make the
>customer carry around a bulky "multi-lingual" radio until the
>manufacturers and service providers decide just what they are going to
>do and when they are going to do it.

Give that man a cee-gar!  I suspect that in the near future you'll
have your choice of buying a pure-analog, a pure-digital, or a hybrid
mobile.  With the mixture of analog and digital channels available the
hybrid shouldn't be strictly necessary, but it has the advantage of
pure-digital in that you can enjoy the benefits of digital where
that's available and still be able to use it in service areas that
haven't upgraded yet.  (Yes, I know that the "benefits" of digital
from the user perspective are debatable.  Let's not open that up
again, eh?)

You sound like you don't like this idea.  Can you suggest an
alternative?  As I see it, a gradual phase-in is very much preferable
to an overnight switch to the new technology.

>Frankly, I am so put off by this sudden about face ("suddenly we can't
>do without digital") that I may just keep my GE Mini until there is no
>more analog service, and then just do without. I hope other cellular
>users vote with their pocketbooks as well.

Why the hostility here?  No one will be forcing you to go to digital,
at least not for a very long time.  As I said, I don't think the
operating companies can afford to blow off the huge installed base of
analog customers.  The main purpose of digital (as I see it, anyway;
yes, I am involved with cellular, but only tangentially with digital)
is to squeeze some extra channels out of a limited amount of
bandwidth.  A purely digital system has three times the number of
channels that an analog system does.  THAT'S why we "suddenly can't do
without digital".  The airwaves are getting full!


Steve King, Motorola Cellular  (...uunet!motcid!king)

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jun 90 07:25:33 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  09-Jun-1990 1015" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones, Same Number


>A friend of mine wants to have two cellular telephones in two
>different cars with the same telephone number.  Of course, he will use
>only one at a time.  The telco won't set this up for him.

This really isn't technically possible.  Even if he promises to never
turn power on to both of them at the same time, accidents do happen.
If power were on to both units at the same time, both units would
respond to commands from the cells, and bad things would happen, which
would generate trouble reports and possibly disturb other calls in the
system due to co-channel interference.

Although a single ESN may have an infinite number of telephone
numbers, each telephone number can have at most one ESN.  This is an
immutable part of the design of the AMPS system.  Although the
moderator suggests that the way around this would be to convince the
cellular carrier to not do its usual serial number check as part of
handling his calls, this has all the problems mentioned above, plus
the problem of making the roamer validation system not work.  Mr.
Cantor would be subject to fraud from anyone anywhere in the U.S. or
Canada who knew that his phone number had no ESN.

The only option is to have a portable which is carried from car to
car.  Some portables, especially NEC and Motorola portables, are
designed such that you can install a complete set of 3 watt
electronics in each car which are activated only when the portable,
which contains the number and ESN, are plugged into the socket in the
car.

This way, someone who drives two cars can have a single phone number
for each car.  Or, better yet, two people who share two cars can each
have their own portable and their own number will always be active in
the car they are driving.


/john

[Moderator's Note: Actually, Mr. Covert's suggestion, re use of
portables, makes a lot of sense. There are so many varieties now, and
the price has come down so much, it seems far more efficient to simply
transfer a hand-held unit from one vehicle to another ... and carry it
when you leave the vehicle, as I do. A couple portable units, combined
with call-forwarding as needed should be adequate.  PT]

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

Date: Fri,  8 Jun 90 14:28:46 EDT
From: W T Sykes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Books on Telephony History
Organization: AT&T Federal Systems Research and Development - Burlington, NC


In article <[e-mail]> bbt![e-mail] writes:

>I need some help from the telcom book worms.

>I am interested in getting titles of interesting books on the history
>of telephony.  Everything from A. G. Bell biographies to the early
>days of AT&T.

>I would like to know which books are not be missed and those that I
>should not waste my time on.

>Please send title, author, and publishing company (to aid me in
>finding it) directly to me or post.  If I get good response I will
>foward a summary to PT.

Patrick,

The following list and descriptions of books published by AT&T was
forwarded to [e-mail].  If suitable for the DIGEST you can use
them for publication.  It is not my intent to advertise for my
employer, but I feel these texts are germaine interests of the DIGEST.
All descriptions are lifted without permission from an internal guide,
but all the listed texts are available for sale to the general public
. (All typos are mine.)

    William T. Sykes
    AT&T Fed. Sys. R&D


_A HISTORY OF ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE IN THE BELL SYSTEM SERIES -

    THE EARLY YEARS (1875-1926)_;  This first volume offers a
    detailed overview of the first 50 years of telephone technology.
    The narrative goes well beyond a simple statement of events to
    deal with the "how" and "why" of technological innovation.
    1073 pgs. SELECT CODE 500-467        $47.00

_A HISTORY OF ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE IN THE BELL SYSTEM SERIES -

    NATIONAL SERVICE IN WAR AND PEACE (1925-1975)_;  This second
    volume focuses on the Bell System's contributions to
    national defense before and during World War II and in the cold
    war missle crisis that followed.  The central subject is
    engineering for urgent national defense and how the technology
    of communications was adapted quickly, and in many ways
    specifically for, the compelling needs of a nation at war.
    757 pgs. SELECT CODE 500-468        $47.00

_A HISTORY OF ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE IN THE BELL SYSTEM SERIES -

    SWITCHING TECHNOLOGY (1925-1975)_;  This third volume
    chronicles how switching evolved from early years characterized
    by manual switchboards to the complete automation of today.
    The major innovations that produced generations of switches
    operating at higher and higher speeds and handling functions of
    increasing complexity and flexibility are discussed.
    639 pgs.  SELECT CODE 500-469        $47.00

[DESCRIPTION OF 500-470 MISSING FROM MY CATALOG - wts]

_A HISTORY OF ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE IN THE BELL SYSTEM SERIES -

    COMMUNICATIONS SCIENCES (1925-1980)_;  This fifth volume
    covers those areas of scientific research having a direct
    bearing on communications.  The disciplines covered are
    mathematics, acoustics, picture communications, vacuum-tube
    electronics, radio and microwave research, waveguides,
    lightwave communications, switching, computer science,
    digital communications, behavioral science, and economics.
    521 pgs.  SELECT CODE 500-471        $47.00

_A HISTORY OF ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE IN THE BELL SYSTEM SERIES -

    ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY (1925-1975)_;  This sixth volume is a
    detailed view of the developments in electronics, from
    electron tubes through thin-film.  It also tells the story
    of devices and components developed at AT&T between 1925 and
    1975 and the major role they played in the expansion of
    telecommunications during the middle of the century.
    370 pgs.  SELECT CODE 500-472        $47.00

_A HISTORY OF ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE IN THE BELL SYSTEM SERIES -

     TRANSMISSION TECHNOLOGY (1925-1975)_;  This seventh and final
    volume is the story of transmission research and development
    as it evolved in the middle years of the 20th Century.
    812 pgs.  SELECT CODE 500-473        $47.00

_ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS IN THE BELL SYSTEM_;

        This second edition of the popular text, completely revised
        and restructured, offers a comprehensive view of the Bell
        System in 1982-1983 just before divestiture.  This book will
    be useful as a general reference for anyone interested in a
         first-level description of telecomunications networks and
     their elements.
    250 pgs.  SELECT CODE 500-478        $42.60

All of the above are published by AT&T and may be obtained from

    AT&T
    Customer Information Center
    Marketing Department
    2855 N. Franklin Road
    Indianapolis, IN  46209-1998

VISA, MasterCard, and American Express orders can be taken by voice at
1-800-432-6600, between 7:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. -EST (1-800-255-1242,
from Canada). Facsimile orders can be transmitted to: 1-317-352-8484.


William T. Sykes AT&T Federal Systems R&D  Burlington, NC att!winken!wts

[Moderator's Note: Thanks for this information. I am placing your
message in the telecom archives for reference by interested readers in
the future. File name will be: books.about.phones.    PT]

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jun 90 01:46:37 EDT
From: "Andrew M. Boardman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs
Organization: Columbia University Department of Quiche Eaters


In Volume 10, Issue 419, Message 11 of 11, Carol Springs wrote:

>A Sprint FONcard number wouldn't work with 10333 anyway; these only
>work when you've gone through the special 1-800 number.  If you have
>an AT&T or BOC calling card, you can use 10333 along with that number.

Sprint has created this service solely for the usage of *other*
companies calling cards?  Am I the only person who sees something
wrong with this?

This discussion has come up before, and like all TELECOM discussions,
will come up again (and again, and again, and again...) but I never
noticed an actual answer: will AT&T and the RBOC's ever have the
ability to keep their calling card numbers to themselves, and is the
availability of this information mandated by the FCC/MFJ/<favourite
TLA here>?


Andrew Boardman
[e-mail]  ...rutgers!columbia!amb  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jun 90 17:55:04 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are You a Phreak and/or Cracker


A couple weeks ago, I posted a survey asking questions about possible
illegal telecommunications/computer activities by readers. It looks
like the survey was flawed, due to an error in the way I set it up.

There have been several messages which pointed out that unless I was
aware of the dietary and banking habits of the readers, it would be
impossible to accurately give any meaning to the results.

To avoid embarassment or possible legal ramifications, readers were
asked to answer one set of questions or another set, based on the flip
of a coin. The two question sets were:

1)  1. Have you made one or more phraud calls in the past six months?
    2. Have you broken into a computer or gained unlawful access to
       a computer in the past six months?

2)  1. Have you eaten a hamburger for lunch in the past two weeks?
    2. Have you gone inside the bank you usually do business with in
       the past two weeks?

We know that as the number of coin tosses increases, the likelyhood is
that there will be an even number of heads/tails come up. So, we can
take the number of answers received, *assume that half were answering
the relevant questions and disgard half the results, evenly from all
possible answer groups*, getting some idea of how many of you are
naughty, and how many are nice.

But several of you wrote to point out that without knowing if a
preponderance of the readers here were vegetarians, or misers who did
not trust banks, the results would be difficult or impossible to
interpret. If no one eats hamburgers or visits banks, then a large
number of 'no-no' answers would appear. And, this is in fact what
happened when the results were tallied -- more on this later.

A better way of handling the survey, aiming for the highest possible
number of accurate answers while still allowing a relative anomynity
in posting would have been to ask but the first set of questions --
the relevant ones -- with the condition that if the coin toss was
heads, answer the questions accurately. If the coin toss was tails,
then flip the coin twice more: (1) heads/tails = yes/no on phraud calls;
then (2) heads/tails = yes/no on computer cracking.  In either event,
do not reveal the coin toss -- simply send along your answers.

Here are the results from the first time, although flawed. They are
presented for your amusement, and I hope you will answer the survey a
second time, using the more accurate collection techniques.


Total respondents:   636

36  (5.7%)  answered yes to both cracking and phreaking in the recent past.

78  (12.3%) answered no to phreaking and yes to cracking.

66  (10.4%) answered yes to phreaking and no to cracking.

456 (71.7%) answered no to both questions. No cracking or phreaking.

Percentages slightly over 100% due to rounding.

Of course, if we assume half the respondents were talking about their
lunch and financial matters, then the figures would decrease, but the
percentages would stay the same.

Still, as pointed out above, the results are suspect, so let's do it
over again:


Flip a coin. Heads, answer these questions honestly.

   1) Have you made one or more phraud phone calls in the past six
      months?

   2) Have you broken into a computer or gained unlawful access to
      someone else's account in the past six months?

If tails, flip the coin twice more:

 On the first flip, answer the first question:    heads = yes / tails = no.
 On the second flip, answer the second question:  heads = yes / tails = no.

Then, mail your results, with the subject header 'survey' to:

            [e-mail]


Your answers should take one of these forms:

1) Yes Yes
2) Yes No
3) No Yes
4) No No

Avoid the header 'questions' since some late responses to the first
survey are using this header. Do not reveal the coin toss(es) and do
not make other comments for which a reply is expected.  Results to
this hopefully more accurate version will appear in a couple weeks.


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Moderator

PS: And remember, Bob Dobbs explained it thus: " I don't practice what
I preach because I am not the kind of person I am preaching to!"  :)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #424
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01988;
          10 Jun 90 13:10 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15068;
          10 Jun 90 11:44 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa29230;
          10 Jun 90 10:39 CDT
Date:     Sun, 10 Jun 90 9:44:52 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #425
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 10 Jun 90 09:44:30 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 425

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Len Rose Needs Expert Witness [comp.unix.wizards via Norman Yarvin]
    ASCII-TDD Relay [Ken Harrenstien]
    Catalogs Available [TELECOM Moderator]
    Re: AT&T SelectSaver(TM) Advertising Slime [Dave Mc Mahan]
    Re: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems [Marc T. Kaufman]
    Re: Two Cellular Phones wit the Same Number [Jeff Wasilko]
    Re: Cordless Telephone Dies [John Higdon]
    Re: Discounts For Deaf: My Solution [Ken Harrenstien]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 9 Jun 90 20:01:14 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Len Rose Needs Expert Witness [from comp.unix.wizards]


>From: [e-mail] (len rose)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Expert Witness Needed.
Summary: Probable courtroom exposure.
Keywords: court unix witness
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 9 Jun 90 01:48:22 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Len Rose)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Netsys,Inc. in Exile.


Unix experts are needed in my defense. Please contact either Len Rose
301-371-4492 (until the end of June) or my attorney, Mr. Carlos Recio
at 202-785-4428.

My trial is scheduled for July 16, so expeditious responses are needed.

Expenses paid of course.

Len

Mitch Kapor and John Barlow deserve a note of approval.

 Thoughtful Quote:

  "I am not now, or ever have been a member of (organization here)"

[Moderator's Note: Mr. Yarvin suggested this message should be
circulated outside the newsgroup named, and I agreed to help. It may
be that telecom experts can also be of assistance. At this point, I am
not going to comment one way or the other on the case. I feel only
that since this forum was used to discuss his case in detail, it
should be available to him to aid in his defense. Everyone is entitled
to that much courtesy.  PT]

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

Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 03:17:32 PDT
From: Ken Harrenstien <[e-mail]>
Subject: ASCII-TDD Relay


>In the meantime, was I'd really like to see is an ASCII-TDD relay on
>the net somewhere.  Imagine if I could Telnet to CA and then use a
>dial-out modem/TDD to place a call to a TDD!

We did this in 1978 as part of the Deafnet project (PDP-11, V6.5 Unix,
Arpanet host #2, Vadic rack/dialer with custom 103/W modems).  It was
indeed very useful, but the dialout capability was restricted to
project staff (as opposed to normal users) since we had no easy way of
connecting the resulting bills with specific individuals, or
recovering the costs thereof.

The telco would have to provide billing info in some machine-readable
form before a third party could operate such a service.  Given that, a
commercial value-added-net (VAN) like Tymnet/Telenet could certainly
install relays if they wanted to.  So could the telco itself for that
matter, although you'd be paying by connect time rather than amount of
data.  Considering that the Calif Relay Service still has not
succeeded in setting up a billing system for interstate calls, it
doesn't look like anyone else will have much luck for the time being.

>I tried to convince the Administration at
>Brandeis Univ. to install a TDD/modem on their mainframe, so that the
>whole campus would have TDD facilites.  They even bought the modem.

Just curious, do you know what modem they bought?  Only a handful of
models have ever existed.


Ken

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

Date:Sun, 10 Jun 90 8:37:25 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Catalogs Available


Two recent mailings to me describe catalogs you might want to have in
your reference files. Write direct to the companies involved for your
copies or more information.

TIME MOTION TOOLS is a company which makes telecommunication tools and
equipment, quality tool kits, test equipment, work stations,
production aids, static control products, and maintainence/repair
tools.

They will send you a copy of their catalog by writing to:

Time Motion Tools
410 South Douglas Street
El Segundo, CA 90245

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

TROMPETER ELECTRONICS, INC deals with data cable distribution systems.
They claim to have the widest selection of connectors, cable

distribution panels, patchfields and cable assemblies available
anywhere. They offer over forty families of connectors for Coax,
Twinax and Triax EMI/RFI applications. Write or call and ask for the
new T-17 catalog. When writing, include your business card if
possible, and your business telephone number.


Trompeter Electronics, Inc.
31186 La Baya Drive
Post Office Box 5069
Westlake Village, CA 91359-9972
Phone: [phone]    TWX: 910-494-1210   FAX: [phone]


PT

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

From: Dave Mc Mahan <claris!netcom![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T SelectSaver(TM) Advertising Slime
Date: 9 Jun 90 23:36:52 GMT
Organization: Dave McMahan @ NetCom Services


In a previous article, sneaky![e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
writes:

>The ad in my mail says "A review of your AT&T Long Distance bill
>indicates that you have the potential to save money by changing to the
>AT&T SelectSaver Plan".

>Now, if I had gotten this plan in December, 1989 (on ONE line, and
>made all the calls on that line), and made 1 10-minute evening-rate
>call each month in addition to actual use, I would have paid $11.40 in
>SelectSaver bills to date to save about $4.56 on calls, for a net loss
>of $6.84.  And they are strongly implying that they LOOKED at my bills
>and decided I could save money.  AAARRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!

I too was given the 'opportunity' to save on my long distance calling
via an AT&T plan (I believe it was the "Reach Out America" plan).  I
reviewed my phone bills for the previous six months, and found that
based on their plan, I would also come out slightly behind unless I
raised the amount of time I spent on long distance minutes/month.  I
wouldn't have paid much more in absolute dollars, but the percentage
increase was about 20%.  Plus, it would have induced me to make more
LD calls in the future to take advantage of the plan.

I feel that it is just a clever marketting ploy on the part of AT&T.
I think they arrived at their rate structure by analyzing several
hundred thousand billings, selecting those that fall into the range of
a couple of hours per month, and then devise a plan where they can
drop the effective hourly rate but still make more due to service
charges, etc.  Plus, they would also have the benefit that the plan
would induce subscribers to who otherwise wouldn't have to spend more
time on the LD calls to justify the cost of the service.  It sounded
like a good way to go broke saving money.  In the end, I followed
Nancy Reagan's advice and just said 'No'.

Later in time, I again looked at my bills for the three months
following the period I would have started if I had selected the plan.
I found that my cost would have been even higher (percentage-wise)
because I made less calls than the previous six months which triggered
the solicitation.  I think I made the right choice.


    -dave

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

From: "Marc T. Kaufman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 00:29:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (chuck
ritter) writes:

-My company is replacing a fifteen year old six button Comkey system
-because it is maxed out on lines. Our primary requirements are
-reliability and longevity. We need eight lines and sixteen stations
-now and don't anticipate explosive growth. Both the AT&T Spirit and
-Northern Telecom Norstar Meridian systems meet our needs on paper.

One of my clients has the Meridian system.  I don't know if it's local
option or mandatory, but there is NO feedback on button presses.  Not
DTMF, not even a monotone beep, NOTHING.  I find it difficult to dial
long distance numbers with the system.


Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])

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

From: Jeff Wasilko <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 02:20:39 EDT
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones wit the Same Number


There are a few phones that have the NAM module in the handset, rather
than the transceiver. This allows the user to install two transceivers
(one in each car) and then carry the handset from car to car.

One of the phones is made by an English company, but I can't remember
their name right now. I do remember that it has the capability to
store up to 10 ESNs. Great for the traveler!


| RIT VAX/VMS Systems: |     Jeff Wasilko     |     RIT Ultrix Systems:     |
|BITNET: jjw7384@ritvax+----------------------+INET:[e-mail]|
|INTERNET: [e-mail]                |___UUCP:[e-mail]____|
|'claimer: I speak only for myself. Opinions expressed are NOT those of RIT.|

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cordless Telephone Dies
Date: 9 Jun 90 23:27:36 PDT (Sat)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


Irving Wolfe <[e-mail]> writes:

> Based on my own experience, Panasonic make good phones and answering
> machines, good (and attractively priced) small business telephone
> systems, and absolutely rotten (full of features but weak and
> unreliable) cordless phones.

I'm curious: in what way are they weak and unreliable? I have owned
five Panasonic cordless phones in the past ten years or so and have
found them to be entirely satisfactory. All of them are still in
service (though not necessarily by me). The two that I am still in
possession of are KX-T3900s. One of them has really been beat to sh*t:
dropped, stepped on, inadvertantly thrown across the room (not because
I was mad at it but it rang when I was asleep and I woke up
violently), dropped in the full sink, and dropped in the toilet. It
works as well as the day it was purchased, a little over a year ago.

How well does it work? Its audio quality is a shade inferior to an
AT&T 5500 that I also own, but has considerably more range. Standing
next to the base units the AT&T beats the Panasonic. But get about
twenty feet away and the AT&T starts deteriorating and at about 40
feet the Panasonic (whose audio quality seems to remain more constant
with increasing distance) surpasses the AT&T in audio quality.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 03:39:00 PDT
From: Ken Harrenstien <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Discounts For Deaf: My Solution


>Yes, but consider something else that goes on on the net -- batched,
>high-speed data transfer. I understand that there is frequent need for
>interactive "conversation", but a lot of the time someone just needs
>to send a message and may or may not even need a reply.

Some TDDs do have a "memory" option that allows users to store fairly
short messages (2000 chars or so) and send the text in a burst (at 6
or 30 cps, depending).  I doubt anyone knows whether this feature is
actually used much; I myself don't, but I probably type faster than
most people.

Instead of saying whether this is a good idea or not, let me just turn
the question around.  Why don't all you hearies invest a little money
in something to store your voice and play it back at high speed?  I
believe there are commercial devices for high-speed intelligible
playback, which some blind people use to maximize their information
input.  Or even better, add a compression encoder so that whenever you
call someone with the corresponding decoder, you can squeeze your
entire soliloquy into a three-second burst.  Add encryption for free.

I believe the arguments for and against such a scheme (cost,
convenience, compatibility, etc) are identical to those for and
against batched TDD data transfer.  Conclusions, if any, left as an
exercise.


Ken

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #425
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00875;
          11 Jun 90 2:27 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa05559;
          11 Jun 90 0:50 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27779;
          10 Jun 90 23:45 CDT
Date:     Sun, 10 Jun 90 22:51:38 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #426
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 10 Jun 90 22:50:45 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 426

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Mystery of Random Phone Calls Solved? [John G. Dobnick]
    "Columbo" TV Episode, 6/10/90 [Robert Gutierrez]
    Sverige Direkt [Dan Sahlin]
    Re: Baud per Hertz [Gary Segal]
    Re: CLID ... A "New" Thread [Peter da Silva]
    Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead? [Peter da Silva]
    Re: Two Cellular Phones with the Same Number [Dave Levenson]
    Re: Two Cellular Phones with the Same Number [John R. Covert]
    Re: Are You a Phreak and/or Cracker? [Marc Rotenberg]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 20:20:07 -0500
From: John G Dobnick <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mystery of Random Phone Calls Solved?


 From _The Milwaukee Journal_, Sunday June 10, 1990, page B3


           Arrest May End Mystery Phone Calls

Madison, Wis. -- AP -- A 23-year-old Madison man has been arrested in
a case involving mysterious phone calls that were created by
connecting Madison residents with strangers.

He is expected to be charged Monday with 27 misdemeanor counts of
unlawful telephone use, according to Madison Police Chief David
Couper.

Wisconsin Bell officials said they believed the man's arrest last week
had solved the mystery that had them searching for problems in their
computer software.

The man is accused of using the conference call capability of a
Madison business to connect residents and companies with each other
and possibly with people from other parts of the world.  The
mysterious calls began about two weeks ago.

Although some victims said they were connected to both men and women
speaking such languages as Hindi, Spanish and Japanese, authorities
speculated that the man may have talked to them himself, pretending to
be from another state or a different part of the world.

A tracer placed on one victim's telephone led authorities to the
suspect, who was arrested after calls made to the person's house
Tuesday and Wednesday were traced to the Madison company where he
works nights and weekends.

The suspect, who has a history of similar offenses, reportedly called
two numbers at once and listened silently to the conversation that
ensued as the two callers realized that neither had initiated the
call, said Jeff Potter, Wisconsin Bell's manager of corporate
communications.


John G Dobnick
Computing Services Division @ University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
INTERNET: [e-mail]  UUCP: uunet!uwm!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!jgd
ATTnet: [phone]

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

From: Robert Gutierrez <[e-mail]>
Subject: "Columbo" TV Episode, 6/10/90.
Date: 11 Jun 90 01:58:51 GMT
Reply-To: Robert Gutierrez <[e-mail]>
Organization: NASA Science Internet - Network Operations Center


Hello,

   There was an episode of "Columbo" that was aired on 6/10/90
(Saturday) which starred Patrick McGoohan and Arthur Hill.  It was
about an attorney who killed a friend-turned-nemisis who was asking
one too many favors.

   Why am I discussing TV shows in comp.dcom.telecom/TELECOM Digest?
Well, in tracking down clues to the killer (McGoohan), Peter Falk as
Lt. Columbo used and analyzed a number of TELECOM related items.

   First, the victim had faxed a letter to his wife, who was staying
at a Hawaiian hotel.  In asking the deceased's secretary when the fax
was sent, the fax log was printed out to show time/date/pages, etc.
Does anyone know which fax machine was used (out of curiosity?).  More
importantly, would there have been a way to forge a fax log,
internally, in the machine.  Is the "fact" that it is very hard to do
a forgery of that type convincing enough to a judge to have the fax
log admissable as evidence in a criminal case.  Is there any precident
pro or con?  (ie: does LEXUS or Westlaw have such a subject in their
database?).  I don't get alt.fax (or alt.anything here), so this is
the only other place I could think of asking.

   Second.  Lt. Columbo was amazed by the amount of buttons on the
phone of the victim's desk.  As a matter of fact, so was I.  I never
saw so many buttons on a Merlin set before (or what I _thought_ was a
Merlin).  Columbo wanted to know if there was a way to see what the
last call was made to (can you say: Last Number Redial?).  After
Columbo was (again) amazed by the latest TELECOM technology, the
viewing public got to see that the telephone set was....an AT&T ISDN
set! (a model 7352 or 7532 ?).  Yes, we know ISDN isn't available to
individuals, much less small businesses, but, is this what a typical
ISDN set is going to look like (or at least an AT&T vision of an ISDN
set)?  I mean, it has more buttons than a Northern Telcom SL-1
Operator's Console!  I would envision that a 'personal' ISDN set would
be less intimidating ... or maybe not?  Your views on this?

   Third (and last), Columbo was able to get the calling records of
the victim the very next day (local telco records, it appears).  The
suspect was amazed on how fast he got those records, and again, so was
I.  I seem to remember discussion here on how hard it was obtaining
telephone records (a court order and 10 levels of management were
mentioned), but in the case where the records involved were a victim's
(and a dead one's at that), is the telco more readily willing to make
those records available to a police agency "in the intrest of
justice", or some gobbledy-gook like that???


     Thanks.

   Robert Gutierrez
   Office of Space Science and Applications,
   NASA Science Internet Project - Network Operations Center.
   Moffett Feild, California.

"If cartoons were made for adults, they'd be shown during prime time."
                    (The Simpsons [4/29/90])

[Moderator's Note: Actually, the time-stamp on FAX messages is not
that hard to spoof. Whoever maintains the FAX machine (the 'key
operator', as we are sometimes called) in their office controls the
time clock inside the machine. Set it for whatever you like, as well
as the sender's ID, which is also programmed very easily.  Which makes
me wonder, are the FAX ID messages now illegal in PA in the wake of
the court's ruling?  Maybe some FAX user doesn't want to risk having
the recipient know who sent the message. PT]

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

From: Dan Sahlin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sverige Direkt
Organization: SICS, Swedish Inst. of Computer Science
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 15:13:30 GMT


Sweden has recently introduced a service called "Sverige Direkt"
(Sweden Direct) which is a list of free telephone number that you can
call from a number of countries and you will reach an operator in
Sweden. You can the ask for a telephone number in Sweden, and the
called party will be charged for the call.  I understand that Bell
already has a similar service operational.

The list of countries and numbers for "Sverige Direkt" are as follows

    Belgium           11 00 46
    Canada       1800 463 8129
    Finland        9800 1 0460
    Italy             172 0046
    Holland        06 022 0046
    New Zealand        000 946
    Spain          900 99 0046
    Great Britain 0800 89 0046
    USA          1800 345 0046

It is interesting to see the irregularity of the telephone numbers above,
which makes it almost impossible trying to remember them.

As I can understand there are two reasons for this irregularity:

1. There is no generally used "800-number". Some similar numbers are used in
   GB (0800) and Finland (9800). Although you can't see that from the above
   table, in Sweden we use 020 as our "800-number". We could change that
   into 0800 as 08 is the area code of Stockholm and no telephone numbers
   start with a 0, but I haven't heard about any such plans.

2. The telephone numbers for each national "800-number" are allocated
   locally, so it is not so probable that the same number can be used
   for the same purpose worldwide. Maybe it is too late now, but
   a portion of the telephone numbers under "800" could be allocated
   to a world wide number plan.

   In the numbers chosen above, I can see attempts in that direction
   by chosing numbers containing Sweden's country code 46. I wonder
   if I would reach a Danish operator by dialling 45 instead, or
   a Norwegian operator by dialling 47 instead.

An alternative solution that would make it possible to dial the same
number toll free anywhere in the world would be to introduce a pseudo
county number for toll free calls. The country code "800" seems to be
ideal for this purpose.

Finally a strange thing I noticed in the table above: why are there
different numbers from Canada and the USA?


    /Dan Sahlin

email: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The different numbers for Canada and the USA may be
because the operator in Sweden uses the inbound line to see where the
call came from in order to bill it correctly, and it may be there are
different rates from Canada to Sweden than from the USA to Sweden.  PT]

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

From: Gary Segal <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Baud per Hertz
Date: 10 Jun 90 18:21:20 GMT
Organization: Motorola INC., Cellular Infrastructure Division


[e-mail] (Rob Warnock) writes:

[Very in depth and useful analysis of noise and it's effects on analog
signals deleted]

>In article <[e-mail]> codex![e-mail] (Peter
>Desnoyers) writes:

>| However, a baud is not a bit. By the Nyquist theorem, you can only get
>| 2f bauds per second. In practice high-speed modems such as V.32 run at
>| about 2500-3000 bauds/sec over lines with a 3000Hz bandwidth.

>| >Still, in the real world 7 baud on 5 Hz is very good!

>| 9600bps over 3000 Hz is a good deal better, and is quite common.

>Oops! You fell in the trap, too! Those 9600 b/s modems use 4
>bit/symbol modulation, and so actually run at 2400 baud. And 2400 baud
>on 2700 Hz (3000 - 300) is not as good as 7 baud on 5 Hz.

True, V.32 modems can run at 4 bits/baud (16 symbols), but most are
usually run at 5 bits/buad (32 symbols) with trellis coding.  Trellis
coding provides a type of forward error correction (one extra bit for
every four data bits) at a very low level of data transfer.  (Is this
OSI layer 0.5??? :-).  In general, trellis coding gives the modem a
performace gain of about one to two db over the uncoded signal.  Note
that both run at 2400 baud, so that trellis coding sends 12,000 bps,
of which 20% is error correction.


Gary Segal    ...!uunet!motcid!segal        [phone]
Motorola INC., 1501 W. Shure Drive, Arlington Heights IL, 60004
The opinions expressed above are those of the author, and do not consititue
the opinions of Motorola INC.

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: CLID ... A "New" Thread
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 16:38:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John McHarry)
writes:

> CLID is not available on inter-LATA calls.  Thus, I can't use it to
> differentiate my mother calling me from the, more usual, boiler room
> call.  Thus, it is not worth much to me, nor, I suspect, to a fair
> number of potential customers.

I don't understand this point at all. I don't care about boiler-room
calls.  I can hang up on them, and they're not repeated. It's just not
a big deal.  The worst they can do is make my answering-machine run
out of tape. The real problem is repeated nuisance calls and casual
harrassment. And for that I need Caller-ID. I've never had to deal
with a big enough problem to get SWBell interested... besides, who
wants to sic the phone cops on a kid? Not me.


`-_-' Peter da Silva. [phone].  <[e-mail]>
 'U`  Have you hugged your wolf today?  <[e-mail]>
@FIN  Dirty words: Zhghnyyl erphefvir vayvar shapgvbaf.


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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 16:44:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> motcid![e-mail] (Steven
King) writes:

> A purely digital system has three times the number of
> channels that an analog system does.  THAT'S why we "suddenly can't do
> without digital".  The airwaves are getting full!

I thought one idea behind cellular was to push the cells closer together
when that happened. Put in more, smaller cells.

And do the digital phones have the same bandwidth as the analog ones?
Do they still give you a full-time 3 KHz channel, suitable for
modeming?


`-_-' Peter da Silva. [phone].  <[e-mail]>
 'U`  Have you hugged your wolf today?  <[e-mail]>
@FIN  Dirty words: Zhghnyyl erphefvir vayvar shapgvbaf.

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

From: Dave Levenson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones with the Same Number
Date: 10 Jun 90 13:39:23 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David G. Cantor)
writes:

> A friend of mine wants to have two cellular telephones in two
> different cars with the same telephone number.  Of course, he will use
> only one at a time.  The telco won't set this up for him.  How does he
> do it?

It would be less expensive to use a portable cellular telephone set,
and carry it between the two vehicles.  Most portables have
fixed-mounting arrangements to make them mobile.  But an extra one,
and an extra antenna, so the portable may be fixed-mounted in either
vehicle without time-consuming tool-intensive mechanical work.  It
carries its telephone number with it.


Dave Levenson            Voice: 201 647 0900  Fax: [phone]
Westmark, Inc.            UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA            AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave
[The Man in the Mooney]

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

Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 12:28:59 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  10-Jun-1990 1527" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones with the Same Number

>I do remember that it has the capability to store up to 10 ESNs.
>Great for the traveler!

I'm sure you mean up to ten MINs (Mobile Identification Numbers,
a.k.a. telephone numbers).  There's no reason for more than one ESN in
a single device; all multi-NAM (Number Assignment Module) phones I've
seen use the same ESN for all NAMs.


/john

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

Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 12:00:07 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Are You a Phreak and/or Cracker?


Pat,

It's interesting how important anonymity is for your survey on hacking
and phreaking.  Bob Dobbs aside, doesn't this example have some
bearing on the Caller ID debate?


Marc Rotenberg
CPSR Washington Office


[Moderator's Note: Mr. Rotenberg is the Director of the Washington, DC
office of Computer Professionals For Social Responsibility. His
address to USITA on September 13, 1989 entitled "Telephone Privacy in
the 1990's" was the subject of a special issue of TELECOM Digest on
December 3, 1989 by the same name. His message is available in the
Telecom Archives for interested persons. I disagreed with his
conclusions at that time, and still, I suspect, disagree, unless he
has changed his mind about Caller*ID. While some people feel the
privacy of the caller is supreme, others of us believe the privacy of
the called-party is more important. No one forced the caller to ring
our phone, after all. And as for doctors, lawyers and social-workers
who will no longer be able to call from home at their pleasure, while
hiding behind a third-number answering service when you call them:
isn't that a pity!  :)

To address Mr. Rotenberg's question above, yes, there certainly is a
relationship between the two. How many crackers or phreaks do you
think would answer honestly if there were not a way to avoid
answering?  And likewise, how many phreaks do you think would continue
to engage in phreaking if Caller*ID was universal?  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #426
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01859;
          12 Jun 90 3:46 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27629;
          12 Jun 90 2:14 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09870;
          12 Jun 90 1:08 CDT
Date:     Tue, 12 Jun 90 0:16:04 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #427
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 12 Jun 90 00:15:57 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 427

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Screwy PUC Policies [Subodh Bapat]
    Re: GTD-5 and CLASS [Marc O'Krent]
    Re: 1A/1E Call Forwarding and Multi-pathing [Jim Gottlieb]
    Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead? [Gary Segal]
    Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead? [Bruce Perens]
    Re: Two Cellular Phones, Same Number [Jim Rees]
    Re: Telenet USSR [Andy Rabagliati]
    Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call [Tom Gray]
    Re: Are You a Phreak and/or Cracker? [John Higdon]
    Re: Mystery of Random Phone Calls Solved? [Peter da Silva]
    Re: Telephonic Regression [David Ptasnik]
    Re: "Columbo" TV Episode, 6/10/90 [Edward Greenberg]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Bapat <mailrus!uflorida!rm1![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Screwy PUC Policies
Date: 11 Jun 90 14:01:45 GMT
Organization: the boundary between UNIX and sanity


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Higdon)
writes:

> So while the rest of the country has ISDN, CLASS, and you-name-it, we
> Californians get to pretend that we are in Bulgaria. Excuse me, that's
> an unfair comparison. The Bulgarians realize it's bad and are trying
> to do something about it.

While visiting my aunt in Alameda, CA, in the metro Bay area (415-865
exchange) I was surprised to find that I couldn't retrieve messages
from my answering machine at home. The reason? My aunt's phone
couldn't send out tones, as Alameda has no touch-tone service! It was
shocking to know that there still are parts of major metropolitan
areas which don't have tone yet.

Suppose it were possible for Pac Bell to upgrade technology and pay
for it solely on the basis of new, enhanced services offered, i.e.
without affecting the basic subscription rate for the majority of its
subscribers - why would that be a problem with the PUC?

On a slightly different tack, most companies use a period of three to
five years to depreciate new computer equipment down to zero. Does
anyone know how long the telcos take to depreciate, say, a 4ESS?


Subodh Bapat              [e-mail]     OR           ...uunet!rm1!bapat
MS E-204, P.O.Box 407044, Racal-Milgo, Ft Lauderdale, FL 33340  [phone]

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

From: Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GTD-5 and CLASS
Date: 11 Jun 90 03:44:05 GMT
Reply-To: Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
Organization: Cochran&Associates, Menlo Park, CA


It seems to me that I read sometime ago that GTE has *abandoned* the
GTD5's further development and/or something like decided to go with
the #5's from AT&T.  Some part of this is not coming back correctly,
but perhaps you could clarify.

There's no filing for CLASS by GTE of CA as far as I know.


Marc O'Krent
The Telephone Connection
Internet: [e-mail]    MCIMail: mokrent
Voice Mail: [phone]

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

From: Jim Gottlieb <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 1A/1E Call Forwarding and Multi-pathing
Date: 9 Jun 90 11:16:38 GMT
Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb <[e-mail]>
Organization: Info Connections, Tokyo, Japan


In article <[e-mail]> Ken Abrams <pallas!kabra437@
uunet.uu.net> writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> Marc O'Krent <[e-mail]>
>writes:

>>for some unknown reason, PB has decided that if
>>you want Centrex you *must* change your phone number.

>Although I personally don't agree with a lot of things that PacBell
>comes up with, I think their basic decision in this matter was
>correct.

I disagree.  We're not talking about some huge corporation that wants
thousands of lines of Centrex.  This even applies to a small business
with two or three lines that wants them converted to Centrex (i.e. so
that they can transfer calls to an off-site voice mail box).

I know it can be done.  I converted my two voice lines to Centrex for
this very reason, and GTE had no problem with letting me keep my same
two numbers.  In fact, if a number change had been required I would
not have signed up for the service.  And though I am not in the habit
of complimenting GTE, I must say that their Centrex is a pretty good
deal.  For $6 per month per line I get most every feature one could
want, including a DISA number.  Other packages are cheaper.  By the
way, this is on a 1AESS.  I wouldn't trust a GTD-5 with my calls.

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

From: Gary Segal <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Date: 11 Jun 90 16:19:59 GMT
Organization: Motorola INC., Cellular Infrastructure Division


[e-mail] (Peter da Silva) writes:

>I thought one idea behind cellular was to push the cells closer together
>when that happened. Put in more, smaller cells.

There is a limit to how small a cell can be.  Once that limit is
reached, the only way to increase capacity is to add more channels.
When you run out of channels, you have maxed out the system.  Digital
cellular will allow many more channels in a given cell.

>And do the digital phones have the same bandwidth as the analog ones?
>Do they still give you a full-time 3 KHz channel, suitable for
>modeming?

If you mean "can I put a modem on the phone?", the answer is "no".  If
you mean "can I still access analog data services?", the answer is
"yes", if the digital cellular system is properly designed.

A properly designed digital cellular system is best described as a
radio ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Netork), that has one B
(bearer) channel that is capable of transmitting data or compressed
voice.  Typical data rates on the B channel are anywhere from 6kbps to
24kbps, depending on the system.  To send voice down this pipe, it
must be compressed.  Because of the compression, it is impossible to
send most modem modulations down the B channel (300 buad Frequancy
Shift Keying [FSK] might work, but not 2400bps V.22bis or 9600bps
V.32).

In order to allow subsribers to access modem based data services,
these systems make provisions for a modem pool (again, much like an
ISDN) at the connection point to the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone
Network).  With a modem pool, the connection from the modem to the
mobile terminal is digital.  Data rates can be up to the maximum B
channel rate of the system.  In addition, the system can supply an
error correcting or error controlling protocol to run between the
modem pool and the mobile terminals, giving the subscribe a much
cleaner link then could ever be established in an analog cellular
enviroment.  In addition, connection to an ISDN is straight forward.

Digital Cellular will be a great improvent over analog cellular for
both the subscribers and the providers.  For providers, more
subsribers can be supported.  For subscribers, ISDN like data services
will be available from a mobile phone.

As an example of digital cellular done well, I suggest you watch what
is happening in Europe, with the Pan-Euorpean Digital Cellular
standard (also called GSM).


Gary Segal    ...!uunet!motcid!segal        [phone]
Motorola INC., 1501 W. Shure Drive, Arlington Heights IL, 60004
The opinions expressed above are those of the author, and do not consititue
the opinions of Motorola INC.

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

From: Bruce Perens <pixar![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Date: 11 Jun 90 17:05:16 GMT
Organization: Pixar -- Marin County, California


 From what I've seen of the digital cellular format, it seems to be a
way of ripping off the customer to reduce the carrier's overhead.  The
real fix for high-traffic zones is to add more cells, not increase the
capacity of the existing ones at the expense of fidelity and
reliability.

If there is to be a digital format, it should be able to handle DATA.
Using TDM between three moving transmitters on the same channel will
probably work poorly even for voice.

Would anyone like to help me petition the FCC on this one?


            Bruce Perens
            {ucbvax,sun}!pixar!bp


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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones, Same Number
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 14:17:10 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, "John R. Covert 09-Jun-1990 1015"
<[e-mail]> writes:

> >A friend of mine wants to have two cellular telephones in two
> >different cars with the same telephone number.  Of course, he will use
> >only one at a time.  The telco won't set this up for him.
> The only option is to have a portable which is carried from car to
> car.

What I envision is a smart-card that contains your ESN, phone number,
and billing info.  When you slide it in to any cell phone, that phone
becomes your phone.  It answers calls to your number and lets you make
outgoing calls which then get billed to you.

The same card could also be used at a payphone.  You could have it
demand a PIN for each use if you were security conscious.

On a related subject, I hope that when European unity comes we can
dispense with all those different phone cards and have one card that
works anywhere on the continent.  Unfortunately this doesn't seem very
likely, since the cards all seem to be physically different from each
other, at least the ones I've examined.

Can anyone tell me how the British card works?  On the French card you
can see the electrical contacts, but the British one doesn't seem to
have any.  Is it done electromagnetically?  Or with mirrors?

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

From: Andy Rabagliati <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telenet USSR
Organization: INMOS Corporation, Colorado Springs
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 02:17:28 GMT


According to the Colorado Springs, CO {Gazette Telegraph}, the
military (I presume COCOM) has prevented US West from going through
with their proposed Fibre-optic line across the USSR.


[Moderator's Note: Can you provide any more details on this?   PT]


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

From: Tom Gray <mitel!spock![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call
Date: 11 Jun 90 19:50:40 GMT
Reply-To: Tom Gray <mitel!healey![e-mail]>
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> John Slater <[e-mail].
sun.com> writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 418, Message 6 of 10

>>In a perfect world I could dial "+44 81 676 XXXX" to reach my number
>>in London from *anywhere* in the world, including the UK (where +
>>means 010). Similarly it would be nice to be able to dial 011 1 415
>>XXX XXXX to reach San Francisco from anywhere in the US.

>>I was originally going to post this with lots of ":-)", but seriously
>>though folks, why should it be difficult with modern switches?

The main problem with this proposal would be the size of the data base
required inside of each switch. Think of the routing problems which
would occur when any digit sequence could be used to identify a trunk
route. Each switch would be required to maintain the telephone number
of all of the subscribers in the world. Even small CDO's would require
gigabytes of disk storage.

In the SS7 network, translations of 800 numbers is done at a central
point called the SCP. This could provide a unique service which could
provide a lucrativve source of income for service providers. Instead
of vanity licence plates, subscribers could buy vanity telephone
numbers. Think of it, vanity numbers could be preceded by a
distinguishing code. BE the first one to get a naughty word past the
telco censors.

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are You a Phreak and/or Cracker?
Date: 11 Jun 90 03:21:45 PDT (Mon)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


On Jun 10 at 22:51, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> While some people feel the
> privacy of the caller is supreme, others of us believe the privacy of
> the called-party is more important. No one forced the caller to ring
> our phone, after all.

And now a little personal situation begs the question for those who
have maintained that Caller-ID is unnecessary because other methods
are available to catch nuisance callers.

I have, for a about a week now, received a call on my main private
line at about 3:00 am daily. I answer with a groggy "hello", then the
caller hangs up. It happens once per evening (morning). Pac*Bell's
suggestion is to change my private number, a course of action I find
unacceptable.  Since it happens only once per day, they don't feel
compelled to exert any effort on the matter (terminating traps, or any
of the other medieval methods to catch crank callers) so the onus is
on me.

They have even offered to change my number for free. Now that's really
nice of them, since in real terms it's a lot easier for them to type a
new number assignment into RCMAC than it is to trap the line (and then
have to deal with the results, if any.) With Caller-ID, however, this
entire situation would have been settled on the first day.

In the meantime, until I'm ready to change my number I guess I'll just
plan on waking up at 3am daily.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Mystery of Random Phone Calls Solved?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 11:22:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John G.
Dobnick) writes:

> The man is accused of using the conference call capability of a
> Madison business to connect residents and companies with each other
> and possibly with people from other parts of the world. ...

Another case that would never have come up if Caller-ID had been
implemented.  I've been victimized like this myself after I caused
trouble for some bozo who was charging calls to my phone number. I
suspect that he was using three-way calling in my case.


`-_-' Peter da Silva. [phone].  <[e-mail]>
 'U`  Have you hugged your wolf today?  <[e-mail]>
@FIN  Dirty words: Zhghnyyl erphefvir vayvar shapgvbaf.

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

From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephonic Regression
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 10:52:07 PDT


In article 6647 of comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] (John Higdon)
writes:

>According to some of the stories (including a mention in this forum),
>a number of the utility pay phones have been replaced with old rotary
>dial models (so that pagers can't be activated) and some merged subset
>of these phones have also been disabled from receiving calls.
>is to be denied to a certain subclass of people. Disabling the TT pad
>after the call is dialed (or installing rotary phones) eliminates the
>use of many services, not just pagers. What we are in effect saying to

This would only slow the dealers down momentarily.  There are little
hand held touch tone generators readily avialable at Radio Shack and
better stores.  You just hold the device up to the mouthpiece of the
rotary payphone, and can merrily beep away.  Most of these units have
speed dial capabilities, so dialing might become even easier.  They
start in price at less than $25.00.  Although drug dealers aren't
terribly bright as a group, I imagine that word of mouth would spread
this technology as quickly as the use of pagers spread.  As usual this
kind of move would not hurt the criminal as much as the average
citizen.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 11:03 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: "Columbo" TV Episode, 6/10/90


In-Reply-To: Message from {[e-mail]}:ugate:3Com of 6-10-90

>Which makes me wonder, are the FAX ID messages now illegal in PA in
>the wake of the court's ruling?  Maybe some FAX user doesn't want to
>risk having the recipient know who sent the message. PT]

I don't think so, since it's the sender who provides the number, not
the telco.  If you don't want your number sent, just don't program it.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #427
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02176;
          12 Jun 90 3:54 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab27629;
          12 Jun 90 2:17 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab09870;
          12 Jun 90 1:08 CDT
Date:     Tue, 12 Jun 90 1:07:39 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #428
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 12 Jun 90 01:07:23 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 428

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Latest Centrex Ad [John Higdon]
    T1 Over 48F Unshielded Twisted Pair [Jeff Spyker]
    Ameritech New "Free" Air Time [Steve Wolfson]
    Canada Direct [Ken Dykes]
    New Harris Privacy Survey / Caller ID [Marc Rotenberg]
    Telecom Masters Degree? [Ken Jongsma]
    Hashing For Phone Numbers [Rashmi Mukherjee]
    A Tour of the Primary Access Corporation [Jody Kravitz]
    Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [Jim Dunn]
    Re: Small Telephone Switches [David Ptasnik]
    Re: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems [David Ptasnik]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Latest Centrex Ad
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: 11 Jun 90 02:59:36 PDT (Mon)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


Bearing in mind that Pac*Bell offers no ISDN-type features with its
Centrex offerings, the latest TV ad is really a hoot:

The announcer intones, "Nothing hurts more than spending a lot of
money on a phone system, only to have it worth nothing after two
years. You grew and it couldn't. So now do what you should have done
in the first place..."

Meanwhile the video is showing people in an office ripping out old
2564 sets (six button, TT 1A2 key) and literally throwing them in the
wastebaskets. Then you see them unpacking nice, shiny (but
non-descript) electronic, skinny-wire key sets and plugging them into
wall mount RJ11C jacks.

In case the irony escapes you here, let me explain. Reality would be
exactly the reverse. If they (in the video) had bought a phone system
that they had outgrown, then they would be ripping out the electronic
sets and installing something simple and plain (like 1A2 key sets).
You don't suppose that they are trying to imply with the visual that
you can get real advanced Centrex features (such as those found
everywhere else in the country) here in California? Would Pac*Bell
mislead the public? Is the Pope Catholic?


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

Date: Monday, 11 Jun 1990 12:12:06 EST
From: Jeff Spyker <[e-mail]>
Subject: T1 Over 48F Unshielded Twisted Pair
Organization: Old Dominion University Computer Services


We are in the early stages of exploring the viability of running T1
speed data over 48F multi twisted pair.  This cable is non-loaded
metallic pairs running approximately 3500 feet.  Actually there are
two segments, the first being about 1000 feet, the second 2500 feet
long.

Is there anyone out there that has succesfully accomplished this
and/or has comments on the feasibility of this project?


| Jeffrey Spyker              |  Bitnet:    [e-mail]      |
| Senior Systems Engineer     |  Internet:  [e-mail]  |
| Technical Support Group     |  US Mail:   Hughes Hall - Room 128    |
| Old Dominion University     |             4900 Hampton Blvd.        |
| Phone: [phone]       |             Norfolk, VA  23529-0227   |


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

From: Steve Wolfson <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Ameritech New "Free" Air Time
Date: 11 Jun 90 15:18:24 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


I just got a notice from Ameritech. They are now giving me 40 "Free"
minutes of airtime on my VIP Plan. The VIP Plan is $29.95/month + 34
cents/min prime and 20 cents/min non-prime.  The new Security Plan is
14.95/month + 38 cents/min prime and 18 cents/min non-prime.  Well if
you compare the two plans, and use the value of 38/cents per minute,
40 minutes of air time is costs $15.20, add that to the base rate and
you get $30.15, so in reality a savings for the first 40 minute of 20
cents. Even a moderate amount of non-prime usage brings the cost of
the security plan below that of the VIP plan.

Of course if you go beyond that you get 4 cents per minute savings
with the VIP plan during prime time but lose 2 cents per minute in
non-prime time.  So unless your a real heavy duty user of Prime-Time
(in which case some of the other bulk minute plans are probably
better, go with the security plan (you know the one that used to be no
monthly charge). If you are 80% or greater non-prime time you start
saving money with the security plan.  If your usage pattern varies the
following table will give you savings based on 100 minutes of air
time.


              Prime/Non-Prime Minutes
        100/0     80/20  50/50  20/80   0/100

Security    38.00    34.00  28.00  22.00   18.00

VIP        34.00   31.20  27.00  22.80   20.00
        -----   -----  -----  -----   -----

Cheaper Plan    VIP    VIP    VIP    Sec     Sec

Savings        4.00    2.80   1.00   0.80    $2.00



Steve Wolfson
Motorola Cellular
uunet!motcid!wolfson


[Moderator's Note: I'm glad you were able to figure out the truth in
that brochure. I got a copy also, and read it several times without
being able to decide what the gimmick was. Did you notice they are
also giving about two hours 'free air time' if you take the package
which otherwise costs almost a thousand dollars per month?   PT]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 17:05:29 EDT
From: Ken Dykes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canada Direct


Well, I keep hearing about USA Direct and wondered why I hadn't heard
of a similar Canadian service ... Well I just heard of it - not through
my phone company but through my Royal Bank Visa newsletter!  (If
Can-Direct has been mentioned in this Digest, I missed it :-)

                        ----------

  Canada Direct, the service that puts overseas calls in direct
contact with Canadian telephone operators, is now available from 20
different countries.

 ...To call home from Tokyo, you just dial the Canada Direct number in
Japan and you're connected with an operator in Vancouver...

 ...If you were in Milan, you'd call the Italian number and reach an
operator in Montreal.

 ...you need are the appropriate numbers for the countries you're
visiting -- and Teleglobe Canada will be happy to send you a wallet
card listing all 20 countries if you call them at 1-800-561-8868.

I presume the 1-800 number is Canada only.  I just called them, they
asked me how many cards I would like, and "how did I get their 800
number".


 Ken Dykes, Software Development Group, UofWaterloo, Canada [43.47N 80.52W]
     [e-mail]  [129.97.128.1]        watmath!kgdykes
          [e-mail]       B8 s+ f+ w t e m r

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 17:16:22 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: New Harris Privacy Survey / Caller ID


    A survey conducted by Louis Harris & Associates and released
today reveals high levels of consumer concern about privacy
protection.  "The Equifax Report on Consumers in the Information Age"
surveyed 2,254 consumers and 916 business executives by telephone
during January through April, 1990.

    Among other findings, the poll revealed widespread public
concern about unrestricted Caller ID.  Though a 55-43% majority
believed that telephone companies should be allowed to sell Caller ID,
support for public regulation is clear: 48% say caller ID should be
permitted by regulators only if calling parties have the ability to
block the display of their number, just over a quarter (27%) say
Caller ID should be forbidden by law, and just under a quarter (23%)
say Caller ID should be available without any limitation.  The poll
also found that women "are considerably less likely than men to think
Caller ID should be allowed."

    More information on the Harris survey is available from the
Equifax Corporation in Atlanta, Georgia and the CPSR Washington
Office.


Marc Rotenberg
CPSR Washington Office
[e-mail]

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

Subject: Telecom Masters Degree?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 12:44:30 EDT
From: Ken Jongsma <wybbs![e-mail]>


Do you know of a school that offers a Masters Degree in Voice/Data
Communications? I'm interested in exploring this and would appreciate
any leads you could provide.

Someone suggested that Communications Week ran a list recently, I'll
run that down with the publisher. Rather than clutter up the digest
with individual replies, send them to me and I'll summarize in a few
weeks.

Thanks!

Ken Jongsma            [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 10:49:18 PDT
From: Rashmi Mukherjee <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hashing For Phone Numbers


Do you know of a hashing algorithm that has been optimized for phone
numbers?

Any pointers will be appreciated. Please email your replies to me.  If
there is enough interest, I will summarize the responses and post
them.

Thanks for your time,

Rashmi Mukherjee

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 18:35:16 PDT
From: Jody Kravitz <foxtail![e-mail]>
Subject: A Tour of the Primary Access Corporation


   This afternoon I had the pleasure of having the cook's tour of a
local firm called "Primary Access".  A friend of mine works there, but
was unable to give me the big picture of what they are doing over the
phone.  The cook's tour fixed that.  I was impressed enough by what
they are doing that I invited the the V.P. of Engineering (Jim Dunn)
to have a guest account on my system in the hopes that he will
participate in the TELECOM Digest.

   Imagine a computer service provider with racks full of hundreds of
modems.  All those pairs coming in from the CO are a maintenance
nightmare.  The computer service provider could bring in the lines as
T1, set up a T1-to-analog channel bank and hook his modems up to the
channel bank.  Less noise, less wires.  But modems process the signal
by PCM encoding the audio and applying a digital signal processor
(DSP) to the digitized audio.  We just took the PCM signal from the CO
(from the T1 line) and turned it into audio in the T1 channel
bank.....

   Primary Access makes T1 channel banks which have "DSP cards"
instead of standard audio "line cards".  When downloaded with the
correct software, the DSP cards become modems.  The PCM data from the
T1 line is sent directly to the DSP without ever turning it back into
audio.  Not only do they get superior noise immunity, but they can
also do things like ANI capture on the incoming calls.

   Their product line will include V.22bis and V.32 support, X-25 PAD,
and a whole bunch of other things; I've not read far enough into their
literature yet.  There are menu driven configuration and logging
functions available via an IBM PC or Clone. These functions can be
performed remotely. The system claims to be cost effective at 7 or
more ports, with a payback period of between three and eighteen
months.


Jody

Internet: foxtail![e-mail]
uucp:     ucsd!foxtail!kravitz


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for the introduction. In fact, Mr. Dunn sent
an article which is included in this issue.   PT]

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

From: Primary Access Corp <foxtail![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Date: 12 Jun 90 01:09:42 GMT
Organization: The Foxtail Group, San Diego, CA


DID trunks are, in fact, for inward calls only, although that's
strictly a marketing decision on the part of the telephone company.
There is no "real" technical reason why DID trunks (which in fact are
four wire E&M wink start trunks or two wire loop/reverse battery
trunks) can't be used for two way traffic. The phone company uses them
for two way internal applications all the time. (Actually, they uses
trunks of this type, not strictly DID trunks).


Jim Dunn

[Moderator's Note: Welcome to the Digest. Perhaps you might tell us a
bit more about your organization.  PT]

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

From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Small Telephone Switches
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 10:09:47 PDT


In article 6632 of comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail].
edu (Kari Hardarson) writes:

>Has anyone seen a telephone switch which has the following features:
>Cheap... < 5000$ (Why not? That should be possible...)
>Hands-off-operation: speakers built into the handsets
>Do-not-disturb: The Kanda switch required removing a link from the board..
>Not too many wires in the connections to the phones. Also: standard
>type sockets: ours has three twisted pairs, star configuration.

>Call-Forwarding, to an employee's home if neccessary
>Makes the bell ring, first at the secretary's, then in preprogrammed
>locations one after another: Ours rings everywhere unless DND is on, and
>if it is the call cannot be forwarded there once someone else has answered.
>Conference calls. Ours can make 2 to 1, 1 to 2.

Almost any good phone system can do the above, Northern Telecom,
Toshiba, Inter-Tel (Premier), and Iwatsu (Omega) can all handle these
needs.  The AT&T Merlin doesn't do the call forwarding, and would
really require re-wiring.

>Expandable for voice-mail

There are several ways to access voice mail.  The best way requires
that you be able to have single line telephones on the system.  This
generally takes extra cards, a ring generator and a touch tone
reciever.

Check with your dealer about cost at time of purchase, and after the
system has been installed.  These prices are usually different.  They
charge you more later, because they can.

>Allows RS-232 connections and/or Ethernet connections to be integrated,
>so that cables don't have to be run separately. I don't really know what
>I'm asking for here.. ;->

It is possible to integrate voice and data on the same cables.
Genreally it is consuidered too expensive and/or slow to do through a
telephone system.  If you are really interested in this you probably
need to look at a PBX rather than Key System.  This will almost
certainly exceed your price limit.  One possible exception is the
Tadiran family of products.  It starts with a small digital key
system, and using the same boards and phones can be expanded to a
multi-thousand station ISDN compatible PBX.

>Programmable from terminals, i.e. soft-configurable.
>I want to be able to say, for example: CALL JOHN. This would run a
>batch job that told the switch to make a call, and ring my phone when
>the connection is made. If I move, I don't want to open the switch
>and mess around with circuit boards.

>Expandable to ISDN when the time comes? How does X.25 fit into this
>picture?

Once again the Tadiran switches do these things.  They are
particularly terminal/network friendly.  For example, if your
receptionist takes a message, she can activate a light on your phone,
or place the full text directly into an internal E-mail.  Her PC
Console also tells her when people are in or out, and lets them leave
special messages for specific incoming callers.  They also database
phone numbers for outgoing calls and autodialing.  The whole thing is
done on two pair wiring.

>PS: I am working in Iceland, our phone system confirms to CCITT
>standards, so BELL systems may not work there, I wouldn't know.

Tadiran is an Israeli company, with an significant Euorpean market, so
should conform to all standards.

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

From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 10:27:21 PDT
Subject: Re: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems


In article 6633 of comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail]1.
com (chuck ritter) writes:

>My company is replacing a fifteen year old six button Comkey system
>Our primary requirements are reliability and longevity. Both the AT&T
>Spirit and Northern Telecom Norstar Meridian systems meet our needs on
>paper. they are comparably priced - the Merlin II while digital is
>substantially more money and has more expansion capacity

The Spirit is not the equal of the Meridian.  It is much more cheaply
built.  Most users I have seen with it are dissatisfied with the
quality.  The Meridian is on the same toughness level as the Merlin,
but appears to be substantially more feature rich than the Merlin.
The Merlin lacks such basics as station based call forwarding busy and
don't answer.  I will admit, though, that I have never been much of a
fan of AT&T from a price/value point of view.  I think that there are
many better deals and systems out there.  You might also consider an
Inter-Tel system (also marketed as the Premier, same mfg. but sold
thru supply houses).  This would be more equivalent to the spirit, and
would probably cost less.


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #428
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27483;
          13 Jun 90 3:15 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa18888;
          13 Jun 90 1:25 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa16861;
          13 Jun 90 0:22 CDT
Date:     Wed, 13 Jun 90 0:21:36 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #429
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 13 Jun 90 00:20:22 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 429

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    International Directory Assistance [John R. Covert]
    Uniform International Dialing [Bob Goudreau]
    Sverige Direkt and Canada Direct [Mark Anderson]
    Public Access to the Net? [Joel Yossi]
    V & H Coordinates to Latitude and Longtitude [Art Hsu]
    Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400 [Curt Squires]
    Tollfree Number Serves Continental US and Two Provinces [Carl Moore]
    US Phones in the UK and Vice Versa [Ole J. Jacobsen]
    Is Anyone On The Net a Member of EPSYS? [synsys![e-mail]]
    New York/Bell Atlantic/AT&T Service Guide [synsys![e-mail]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 12:30:35 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  12-Jun-1990 1528" <[e-mail]>
Subject: International Directory Assistance


This Digest has discussed international directory assistance in the
past, including the fact that CCITT recommendations provide that the
service should be provided by calling an operator in the country of
origin who will provide the connection; the CCITT recommendations also
specify that the numbers in the distant country should be blocked, so
that subscribers can't call them directly, and they usually are.

We also discussed the fact that AT&T provides an operator who answers
809-555-1212 (when called from the U.S.) and extends the call to the
correct operator in the destination country, but that the Canadian
International Carrier does not provide such a service; Canadians have
always had to dial their "0" operator and ask for D.A. in the 809
locations.

Well, I've recently visited Bermuda.  From phones in Bermuda, it is
possible to dial NPA-555-1212 for U.S. points, but to get Canadian
Directory Assistance, you have to call the "0" operator and ask to be
connected.


/john

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 10:11:59 edt
From: Bob Goudreau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Uniform International Dialing
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC


In article <[e-mail]>, mitel!spock![e-mail] (Tom
Gray) writes:

> >>In a perfect world I could dial "+44 81 676 XXXX" to reach my number
> >>in London from *anywhere* in the world, including the UK (where +
> >>means 010). Similarly it would be nice to be able to dial 011 1 415
> >>XXX XXXX to reach San Francisco from anywhere in the US.

> >>I was originally going to post this with lots of ":-)", but seriously
> >>though folks, why should it be difficult with modern switches?

> The main problem with this proposal would be the size of the data base
> required inside of each switch. Think of the routing problems which
> would occur when any digit sequence could be used to identify a trunk
> route. Each switch would be required to maintain the telephone number
> of all of the subscribers in the world. Even small CDO's would require
> gigabytes of disk storage.

Say what?

No one was proposing that arbitrary numbers be allowed for persons in
any part of the world.  All he was saying is that switches that are
smart enough to route direct-dialed international calls should also be
smart enough to recognize an "international" call to inside their own
country code, and handle this special case appropriately.  In the UK,
the telco would just translate a "010-44" prefix to a "0" prefix; in
the US, "011-1" would become simply "1".

However, I think this capability would be of little utility unless the
international access code were truly standardized world-wide;
otherwise, you still run into the same old problem of having to dial a
number differently depending on your current geographical location.
Another poster has already mentioned that "00" will eventually be
mandated in all of the EC (including, presumably, Britain).  Someone
else suggested several months ago that there was no technical reason
that the NANP couldn't also use "00" (with a timeout to distinguish a
call to the long-distance operator from an international call, similar
to the current setup for "0", which can either be a call to the local
operator or a prefix to an operator-assisted long-distance call).

Of course, another alternative is to add a "+" key and tone to
everyone's phone world-wide :-).


Bob Goudreau                [phone]
Data General Corporation
62 Alexander Drive            [e-mail]
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709    ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau
USA

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

Date: 12 Jun 90 21:25 -0700
From: Mark Anderson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sverige Direkt and Canada Direct


X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 426, Message 3 of 9

>[Moderator's Note: The different numbers for Canada and the USA may be
>because the operator in Sweden uses the inbound line to see where the
>call came from in order to bill it correctly, and it may be there are
>different rates from Canada to Sweden than from the USA to Sweden.  PT]

I used the Canada Direct service to call home last month when I was in
Europe.  When I called collect, the Canadian operator asked me where
(which country) I was calling from.  Is this always the case for
international collect calls (i.e. to tell the called party where the
call is coming from before charges are accepted)?  It seems to
indicate that the operator cannot tell where the call originates.

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

From: "Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Public Access to the Net?
Date: 12 Jun 90 14:10:38 GMT
Reply-To: "Yossi (Joel" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. Tech., Haifa Israel


Hello!  I'll be in New York for a while, not at a university, and
would like to find a site that offers e-mail and net.news.  FTP or
UUCP would be great, too.  I'm willing to pay a reasonable fee.

Is there anything that's a local call from (914) 967-xxxx?  If not,
how about something in (212)xxx-xxxx.

Please send replies to [e-mail], with the subject "for
Joel."

Thanks!


Joel

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

From: Art Hsu <[e-mail]>
Subject: V & H Coordinates to Latitude and Longtitude
Date: 12 Jun 90 14:56:36 GMT
Reply-To: Art Hsu <[e-mail]>
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA


Does anyone know of a formula to convert V & H coordinates to latitude
and longtitude, and vice-versa?

V & H (vertical and horizontal) coordinates are used by carriers in
the continental US and Canada to compute the distance (airline
mileage) between offices.


Art Hsu ([e-mail])

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 18:31:40 CDT
From: Curt Squires <[e-mail]>
Subject: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400


I'm looking for a replacement battery for an AT&T model 4400 cordless
phone.  The battery is 3.6v 270 mA (3 cells arranged in pyramid
fashion).  I'd like to find a mfg&model number and/or a place I could
order it by phone. (I haven't actually seen the phone, so I might not
have all the details.)  Thank you..

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jun 90 17:16:57 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Tollfree Number Serves Continental US and Two Provinces


I have seen a tollfree number listed as working from continental U.S.
AND from the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec.  (The specific
number: 800-225-TRIP, for Kentucky travel info.)

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

Date: Tue 12 Jun 90 07:25:23-PDT
From: "Ole J. Jacobsen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: US Phones in the UK and Vice Versa


I have just returned from the UK with a few toys in my bag:

You can now buy UK-style modular plugs in electronics shops (including
Tandy [Radio Shack]) in the UK. These can be attached quite easily to
a US linecord if you follow the instructions below. This will allow
you to attach a US phone to the UK network. While this is not legal of
course, I have verified that it works. Using a BT extension socket, I
have also made a UK test jack with a US "tail" so that UK phones with
the modular jacks can be plugged into US systems. This too is probably
not legal, but if you own your own PBX.

Note that the UK modular plugs cannot be had from British Telecom
shops, since this would allow you to plug non-approved apparatus into
their system, but run down the road to a Tandy or somesuch, and you're
all set. Extension cords and do-it-yourself jacks *are* available from
BT. The way you are supposed to install extra jacks is rather amusing.
The "master socket" is considered holy, so you plug a converter
(splitter) into it (rather than punching down your own cable) and run
cable to the extension socket(s), unless you have a "new style
linebox" in which case you *can* attach the wires directly. BT sells 9
different "kits" (including one which contains "50 cable cleats," we
call those "clamps" over here I think...)

To attach a UK modular jack to a US cord:

1. Remove about 1/2 inch of the outer insulation to
   expose the 4 wires: black, red, green, yellow

2. Cut the black an yellow wires away.

3. Spread the red and green into a V-shape and insert
   carefully into the UK plug. Note that the wires should
   go to pins 2 and 5, which, on all the plugs I was able to find,
   corresponds to the outer-most connectors.
   This is a bit surprising if you are used to US modular plugs. *

4. Using a vice, good pliers or similar, squeeze the plug together,
   so that the connectors crimp onto the wires. Some suppliers will
   include disposable "thingy" to aid you in this process. This
   "thingy" (die) also drives the strain-relief home. You could also
   buy an expesive tool for this purpose.

5. Assuming there is a US modular jack (and phone) at the other end
   of the cable, you are now ready to play.

* Note: This means that pins 1 and 6 are missing from the plug, and
according to a previous poster 1 and 6 are reserved for ISDN so that
makes sense. Also note that these plugs are impossible to find in the
US, but I wonder if you could order them through Radio Shack, since
the pack I got in Tandy has a proper Archer stock number.

** Note also: The above does not take into account any bell-tap
prevention for UK phones connected to US networks. See previous poster
on the use of capacitors etc. I have not found bell-tap to be much of
a problem since any other phone on the line would typically be
touch-tone and thus not generate much "spark".


Ole

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 00:54:13 -0400
From: synsys![e-mail]
Subject: Is Anyone On The Net a Member of EPSYS?


I just called the AT&T newsline and one of the items mentioned that
AT&T was awarded a contract by the Enhanced Private Switched
Communications Services User's Association also known as EPSCS
(pronounced EP-sys).

This association was formed in 1979 and consists of 14 companies that
are large customers of integrated voice and data networks.  With this
new system, a virtual network is formed that also uses their leased
lines with AT&T switches.

Is there a different newsgroup/mailing list for ISDN, X.25 or other
switched digital network users?  I'd like to know if anybody is
running IP over ISDN.  I've seen ISDN cards for the PC from 2 sources
now: AT&T/Micom, and Motorola.  Is anybody trying them?


uunet!synsys!jeffj
[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 00:54:16 -0400
From: synsys![e-mail]
Subject: New York/Bell Atlantic/AT&T Service Guide


New York Telephone has a recorded message system describing their
services.  Here's what I gathered from 1-800-EASY-NYT (327-9698) (this
mostly jives with information from the Bell Atlantic IQ services
information line at 800-365-5810).

First - navigate the menu with my touch-tone phone:
menu choices (after entering my area code and exchange)
 1  feature instructions
    11  custom calling services
        11  call forwarding
        12  3 way
        13  call waiting
        14  speed calling 8
        15  speed calling 30
    12  intellidial
        21  call transfer
        22  3 way calling
        23  call hold
        24  call pickup
        25  call waiting
        26  call forwarding
        27  speed dialing
        28  dial intercom
    14  ring mate
    15  phone smart
        31  call repeat
        32  call trace
        33  call return
 2  customer service
    41  lifeline
    42  special services for people with impairments
    43  special equipment for people with impairments
    44  N.Y.T. CCDC (communication center for disabled customers)
    45  NY relay service for hearing & speech impaired
    46  blocking
    47  silverline
    48  money saving tips
    49  more money saving tips
*   help
55  return to main menu
66  order the service


What I heard
31 ->    *66 activates repeat call (retry last number dialed)
    *86 disables that
32 ->    *57 activates call trace
33 ->    *69 activates call return (retry last number that called me)
    *89 disables that
44 ->    numbers to call for customer service
    In NYC and Long Island: 212-395-2400
    New York State:  800-482-9020
    New York State TDD:  800-342-4181
45 ->    A person relays voice/TDD at no additional charge.
    This is WITHIN New York State only.
    What about calls in/out of New York State?
    The operator said the originator should call information for
    the relay service.  This is a service of AT&T, and is currently
    not allowed to call across states.
    800-421-1220  voice
    800-662-1220  TDD

    The AT&T newsline (800 2ATT NOW) for Friday June 8 mentioned
    that the (Chicago) Illinois relay center opens June 10.
    It is the 4th, others being in
    New York, Alabama and California.

46 ->    restrict outgoing calls to pay services
        exchanges 540, 550, 970, 970
        area codes 700, 900
    This service is free of charge.
14 ->    ring mate allows you to add 1-2 additional numbers, each with
    a unique ring pattern (and call waiting beep)

my questions:
    Do you enter the # after the 74 or 75?
    These instructions don't say so (but the following ones do),
    and the operator at the New York business number
    800-942-1212 said that her card does not mention the #.


I called the Bell Atlantic IQ services information line at
800-365-5810.  It describes many of the advanced services, and even
gives the actual tones you hear.  It's a touchtone activated
recording, and you may dial ahead.  The menu is:

level 1:
1 for Washington DC
2 for NJ, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia
3 for Pennsylvania, Delaware
# to back up
* to start again


(the difference is that some features like Caller-ID are not
available in all areas, so their description is suppressed)
for selection 2 (NJ):

level 2:   level 3:
    1          1   call waiting
               2   ident-a-ring
               3   3 way calling
               4   caller i.d.
    2          1   speed calling
                   1 for 8 number memory
                   2 for 30 number memory
               2   repeat call
               3   return call
               4   priority call
    3          1   call forwarding
               2   select forwarding
               3   call block
               4   call trace

IQ service codes (this is probably on a card that you get when
ordering the advanced services)

*57  call trace
*60  start call block list management
*61  priority call list management
*63  select forwarding list management
*66  activate repeat call (retry last number for 30 minutes)
*69  activate return call (call last person who called you)
*70  tone block (prevent call waiting tone, useful for data calls)
*80  deactivate call block
*81  deactivate priority call
*83  deactivate select forwarding
*86  deactivate repeat call
*89  deactivate return call

n#   speed dial (n=2 to 9)
nn#  speed dial (nn=20-49)
72#  activate call forwarding
73#  deactivate call forwarding
74#  set speed dialing (8 numbers)
75#  set speed dialing (30 numbers)

You do not need to subscribe to call trace to use it.
I forgot the prefix code for rotary phones.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #429
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20419;
          14 Jun 90 2:24 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09596;
          14 Jun 90 0:36 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa30398;
          13 Jun 90 23:32 CDT
Date:     Wed, 13 Jun 90 23:06:47 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #430
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 13 Jun 90 23:05:12 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 430

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Screwy PUC Policies [Douglas Scott Reuben]
    Re: Screwy PUC Policies [Eric Varsanyi]
    Re: Screwy PUC Policies [Jon Baker]
    Subodh's Aunt (Was: Re: Screwy PUC Policies) [Hector Myerston]
    Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [John Higdon]
    Re: Mystery of Random Phone Calls Solved? [John A. Weeks III]
    Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [Macy Hallock]
    Re: Telephonic Regression [John Higdon]
    Re: "Columbo" TV Episode, 6/10/90 [Don H. Kemp]
    Re: Has This Answering Machine Feature Disappeared? [Jeffri H. Frontz]
    Re: GTD-5 and CLASS [Jon Baker]
    Re: Uniform International Dialing [Bill Huttig]
    Re: Autodialer Hookup to Terminal Printer Port [John Alsop]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 12-JUN-1990 02:35:35.36
From: "DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Screwy PUC Policies


In regards to the June 12th message about not having Touch Tone
service from the Alameda 415-865 exchange:

I just called the 415-865 exchange, and it seems to be an ESS or DMS
type exchange. Calling the semi-universal Bay Area busy code
(xxx-1999) yielded an ESS-type busy, and calling a random 99xx number
sounded like an ESS ring.

I've heard of really old exchanges that have been upgraded so that
they send out more "modern" busy/ring/reorder tones, but I didn't
tihnk that there were any in Pac*Bell's territory in the Bay Area...

Is it possible that the phone itself doesn't generate tone? Or maybe
that line just didn't pay for touch tone service?

I still can't tell what sort of electronic switch it is just by
hearing the busy/ring signals (ie, to distinguish between a DMS-100
and 200, for example), so maybe if anyone else knows they might be
able to help you figure out if it's an old (but "new" sounding) switch
or the just individual phone/line.


Doug

[e-mail] / @wesleyan.bitnet

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

From: Eric Varsanyi <boulder!pikes!craycos.com![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Screwy PUC Policies
Date: 13 Jun 90 02:06:26 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation


In article <[e-mail]> mailrus!uflorida!rm1!bapat
@uunet.uu.net (Bapat) writes:

>While visiting my aunt in Alameda, CA, in the metro Bay area (415-865
>exchange) I was surprised to find that I couldn't retrieve messages
>from my answering machine at home. The reason? My aunt's phone
>couldn't send out tones, as Alameda has no touch-tone service! It was
>shocking to know that there still are parts of major metropolitan
>areas which don't have tone yet.

I lived in 415-865 in 1989 and both of my phone lines most certainly
had touch tone service. They also offered all the Comm*Star (I think
thats what they called it) features (call waiting, call forwarding,
etc...).

Perhaps the phone itself wasn't working correctly?


Eric Varsanyi
Cray Computer Corporation
[e-mail]

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

From: Jon Baker <noao!xroads![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Screwy PUC Policies
Date: 13 Jun 90 04:46:32 GMT
Organization: Crossroads, Phoenix, Az


In article <[e-mail]>, mailrus!uflorida!rm1!bapat@
uunet.uu.net (Bapat) writes:

> five years to depreciate new computer equipment down to zero. Does
> anyone know how long the telcos take to depreciate, say, a 4ESS?

Typical depreciation of a central office would be about 20 years.


\  /  C r o s s r o a d s  C o m m u n i c a t i o n s
 /\   [phone] 300-2400,9600 PEP Baud 24 hrs/day
/  \  hplabs!hp-sdd!crash!xroads!bakerj

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 12 Jun 90  08:37 PST
Subject: Subodh's Aunt (Was: Re: Screwy PUC Policies)
Organization: SRI Intl, Inc., Menlo Park, CA  94025  [[phone]]


     The assertion that "Alameda does not have TT" is incorrect.  The
prefix quoted (415-865) is a 1AESS (I believe it is Alameda 11) which
of course, provides TT.  Whether an individual subscriber has DP-only
service is something else again.

     This subject comes up all the time.  When I did ESS software the
practice was to provide TT/DP >hardware< on all lines.  What happened
when a DP subscriber entered TT instead was controlled in >Software<
(Parameters).  The choices were (1) Deny service (2) Allow and print a
message on the Maint TTY or (3) Allow and do nothing.

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Date: 12 Jun 90 18:18:15 PDT (Tue)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


Jim Dunn <foxtail![e-mail]> writes:

> DID trunks are, in fact, for inward calls only, although that's
> strictly a marketing decision on the part of the telephone company.
> There is no "real" technical reason why DID trunks (which in fact are
> four wire E&M wink start trunks or two wire loop/reverse battery
> trunks) can't be used for two way traffic.

Yes for E&M trunks, no for two wire loop/reverse battery. Back when I
had my equipment vending operation, we had an office in San Jose and
in San Francisco. The two PBXs were connected via an E&M trunk. Users
in San Jose could call extensions in SF and make calls on the outside
lines there as well as SF users doing the reverse. This is the nature
of the E&M trunk: each end is the same in that there is no originating
or terminating end. This is, as Mr. Dunn points out, the classic
connection between telco central offices.

But on two wire, there is an originating and terminating end. Normally
the subscriber is the originating end, but in the case of DID the
subscriber becomes the terminating end. The telco literally places a
call on the subscriber's PBX. Since this is the circuit of choice for
virtually all DID installations in this neck of the woods, it is
accurate to say that it is not technically expedient to provide two
way calling on DID. There is, of course, the final argument: that's
the way it's specified in tariff.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 17:52:07 CDT
From: "John A. Weeks III" <newave![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mystery of Random Phone Calls Solved?


> He is expected to be charged Monday with 27 misdemeanor counts of
> unlawful telephone use, according to Madison Police Chief David
> Couper.

> The man is accused of using the conference call capability of a
> Madison business to connect residents and companies with each other
> and possibly with people from other parts of the world.

Why is this illegal?  Perhaps because he was stealing the phone usage?
If I were paying all of the phone costs, would it be illegal for me to
do this with my phone system?


John A. Weeks III               [phone]               [e-mail]
NeWave Communications                ...uunet!rosevax!bungia!wd0gol!newave!john


[Moderator's Note: Whether you pay for phone service or steal it is
not material here, although if he had stolen the service additional
crimes would have been committed. In any event, to answer your
question, yes, harassing phone calls are illegal. I mean, imagine
telling the court, "But judge, I paid for those calls!"   PT]

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

From: abvax!ncoast!fmsystm![e-mail]
Date: Mon Jun 11 16:08:07 1990
Subject: Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Organization: F M Systems, Inc.  Medina, Ohio USA  [phone]


In article <[e-mail]>:
>X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 417, Message 11 of 12

>>So are DID lines really only for incomming calls?  Is there a
>>technical reason or is the carrier trying to charge more?

>There probably is no technical reason why a two-way DID trunk couldn't
>be made but, to the best of my knowlege, it just hasn't been done yet.

Not really...

DID trunks are similar in operation to tie lines.  Two way tie lines
are a routine application, both in two wire and four wire operation,
using DX or E&M signalling.

Many CO's can accomodate two way tie line operation for Centrex
services.  1A and 5 ESS machines definitely can do this, I asked a
software engineer.

If the PBX to CO link is a T-1 span, then two way operation is also
easily supported.  AT&T has recently begun to offer Megacom WATS & 800
services in this fashion (in limited areas, and only if you ask).
Megacom 800 service is DID type service, only direct from the AT&T
switch, instead of the telco CO.

On non-Centrex equipped CO's, support for two way operation may not be
available, probably due to a lack of demand from the telco's.

>It would not be a simple change and there are some good reasons to
>keep things separate.

Call collision is possible, but careful software design prevents this.

Since the telco's are actively trying to compete against Centrex by
throwing as many obstacles in the PBX vendor's paths (and by foot
dragging) ... I do not see them making any effort to improve the
situation.


Macy M. Hallock, Jr.     [e-mail]         uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy
F M Systems, Inc. {uunet|backbone|usenet.ins.cwru.edu}ncoast!fmsystm!macy
150 Highland Drive    Voice: [phone] Ext 251  Fax: [phone]
Medina, Ohio 44256 USA  Cleveland:273-3000 Akron:239-4994 (Dial 251 @ tone)
(PLEASE NOTE:  the system name is "fmsystm" with no "e", *NOT* "fmsystem")

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephonic Regression
Date: 12 Jun 90 09:09:26 PDT (Tue)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


David Ptasnik <[e-mail]> writes:

> This [removing TT payphones] would only slow the dealers down
> momentarily.  There are little
> hand held touch tone generators readily avialable at Radio Shack and
> better stores.

Whenever you attack an effect of a problem rather than a cause (I'm
sure that TT payphones did not cause the "drug problem") you are lucky
to even slow something down. But in this case, you have to realize
that the mighty drug warriors are deadly serious. There has been
discussion concerning the installation of DTMF receivers on the
payphone lines in question. One DTMF digit transmitted during a call
and POOF, the call is disconnected.

Never underestimate the ingenuity of law enforcement! I'm sure that
congress feels that the best way to keep a fish from smelling is to
cut off its nose.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: Don H Kemp <uvm-gen!teletech![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Columbo" TV Episode, 6/10/90
Date: 12 Jun 90 13:29:31 GMT


 From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]
(Robert Gutierrez):

[Discussion of episode deleted]

>    Second.  Lt. Columbo was amazed by the amount of buttons on the
> phone of the victim's desk. ...

> Columbo was (again) amazed by the latest TELECOM technology, the
> viewing public got to see that the telephone set was....an AT&T ISDN
> set! (a model 7352 or 7532 ?).  Yes, we know ISDN isn't available to
> individuals, much less small businesses, but, is this what a typical
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dale Mullen, a Telecom Consultant in Englewood, CO, is going to be
very dissapointed to hear that.  Dale has been using two ISDN lines
(with AT&T 75xx phones) for about a year and a half now, and likes it
fine.

> ISDN set is going to look like (or at least an AT&T vision of an ISDN
> set)? ...

The ISDN sets that I've seen, from AT&T and NTI, are _very_ similar in
appearance and function to the manufacturer's multi-button sets for
their PBXs.

>Thanks.

You're welcome.


Don H Kemp
B B & K Associates, Inc.
Rutland, VT
uunet!uvm-gen!teletech!dhk

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 13:42:02 EDT
From: Jeffri H Frontz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Has This Answering Machine Feature Disappeared?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio


In article <[e-mail]> ssc-vax!UUCP![e-mail]
(howie) writes:

>(BTW, the way it works is: in addition to a code for retrieving
>messages from a remote location, another code will cause the machine
>to emit fairly loud beeps, so that if anyone is home they will know to
>pick up the phone.)

My AT&T 1330 answering machine has this feature, although I've never
really figured out a good use for it-- I'd rather listen to the caller
and then figure out whether or not to pick up the phone.


Jeff Frontz                                              Work:  [phone]
AT&T-Bell Labs (CB 1C-356)                               Cornet:       353-2797
att!jeff.frontz                                             [e-mail]

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

From: Jon Baker <noao!xroads![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GTD-5 and CLASS
Date: 13 Jun 90 04:49:41 GMT
Organization: Crossroads, Phoenix, Az


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marc O'Krent) writes:

> It seems to me that I read sometime ago that GTE has *abandoned* the
> GTD5's further development and/or something like decided to go with
> the #5's from AT&T.  Some part of this is not coming back correctly,
> but perhaps you could clarify.

GTE has abandoned development of ISDN features on the GTD5.  As of
this date, GTE has not completely abandoned all development on the
GTD5.  A small number of new features, and design maintenance,
continue.  GTE is pursuing 'other alternatives' for delivering ISDN to
GTE subscribers.  ONe such alternative is the 5ESS.


 \ /  C r o s s r o a d s C o m m u n i c a t i o n s
 /\   [phone] 300-2400,9600 PEP Baud 24 hrs/day
/  \  hplabs!hp-sdd!crash!xroads!bakerj


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

From:  Bill Huttig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Uniform International Dialing
Date: 13 Jun 90 12:35:06 GMT
Reply-To:  Bill Huttig <zach![e-mail]>
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bob
Goudreau) writes:

>that the NANP couldn't also use "00" (with a timeout to distinguish a
>call to the long-distance operator from an international call, similar
>to the current setup for "0", which can either be a call to the local
>operator or a prefix to an operator-assisted long-distance call).

>Of course, another alternative is to add a "+" key and tone to
>everyone's phone world-wide :-).

   Whats wrong with using the # key... ie.. 00# or a timeout.. The #
key is used this way in international calls.


[Moderator's Note: Actually, many central offices can do just that
right now. Here in Chicago, 00# times out fast for the long distance
operator, and PIN# forces a fast time out on credit card calls to the
number where the card is assigned.  PT]

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

From: John Alsop <seachg![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Autodialer Hookup to Terminal Printer Port
Date: 13 Jun 90 13:06:55 GMT
Reply-To: John Alsop <seachg![e-mail]>
Organization: Sea Change Corporation, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada


In article <[e-mail]> seachg![e-mail] I wrote:

>We have a bunch of WYSE-85 and 185 terminals running a database
>application. We would like to call up a customer file on the screen,
>and in response to a function key, dial the customer's phone number.

>To achieve this, I think we would need a device which would hook up
>between the serial printer port on the terminal and the phone handset.

Thanks to all who wrote with the obvious (in hindsight!) suggestion of
using a cheap external modem to do the dialing.

I had somehow had in mind something that Radio Shack might sell for
$29.95.


John Alsop   Sea Change Corporation  1100 Central Parkway W.,   Suite 38
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5C 4E5   Tel: [phone]   Fax: [phone]
UUCP: ...!uunet!attcan!darkover!seachg!jalsop

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #430
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22111;
          14 Jun 90 3:10 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21876;
          14 Jun 90 1:39 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab09596;
          14 Jun 90 0:36 CDT
Date:     Wed, 13 Jun 90 23:45:50 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #431
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 13 Jun 90 23:45:21 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 431

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Two Cellular Phones, Same Number [John R. Covert]
    Re: Cellular Telephones [T. Pryjma]
    Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead? [Mark Ahlenius]
    Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only? [Tom Gray]
    Re: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400 [Robert M. Hamer]
    Re: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400 [John R. Levine]
    Re: US Phones in the UK and Vice Versa [Mike Bell]
    Re: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems [Chip Salzenberg]
    Re: Cracker/Phreaker Crackdown [Mike Godwin]
    Re: RJ45 vs RJ11 [Macy Hallock]
    Last Laugh! Its Not a Bug, Its a Feature! [Macy Hallock]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 06:45:31 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  12-Jun-1990 0939" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones, Same Number


>What I envision is a smart-card that contains your ESN, phone number, ...

For those of you who have read the description of the German C-Netz
system which I translated and posted to the Digest a year ago, this is
already known.  That system provides exactly what you're suggesting.

Unfortunately, the AMPS protocol can't do what it really takes to make
this secure.  The German system has two serial numbers -- one for the
smart card and one for the phone itself.  If either the phone or the
card is stolen, it can be blocked from making further calls.

With the single ESN built into the AMPS protocol, if the smart card
contained the ESN, a stolen phone would have full market value.  If
the phone contained the ESN, you would have to change your phone
number (and never reuse it, using up numbers permanently) if the card
were lost, stolen, or damaged.

Since the U.S. seems to be firmly wedded to the AMPS protocol, so much
so that we'll not be adopting the CCITT standard Group Special Mobile,
which would have allowed U.S. <-> Europe roaming, you won't see any
changes that would require protocol changes.

But _hopefully_ our system will continue to get cheaper, both in the
cost of phones, calls, and cell-site construction, such that smaller
and smaller pocket portables can be expected to operate well enough
that the smart-card idea won't ever be necessary.  Why have a heavy 3
Watt phone when there's always a cell close enough to reach it with
600 mW or less?


/john

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

From: "T. Pryjma" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Telephones
Date: 13 Jun 90 07:15:43 GMT
Organization: UTCS Public Access


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

# A friend of mine wants to have two cellular telephones in two
# different cars with the same telephone number.  Of course, he will use
# only one at a time.  The telco won't set this up for him.  How does he
# do it?

What is wrong with having call forwarding from one phone to the other,
or for that matter have call forwarding from a land line to which ever
cell phone is in service at the time the call is to be received.


     Taras Pryjma
    uucp: [e-mail]
    internet: [e-mail]

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

From: Mark Ahlenius <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Date: 13 Jun 90 15:40:45 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


pixar![e-mail] (Bruce Perens) writes:

> From what I've seen of the digital cellular format, it seems to be a
>way of ripping off the customer to reduce the carrier's overhead.  The
>real fix for high-traffic zones is to add more cells, not increase the
>capacity of the existing ones at the expense of fidelity and
>reliability.

The problem is that there is a limit on how small you can make cells
and still retain "in-building" coverage.  Cell splitting (i.e. making
smaller cells out of larger ones to increase traffic capacity) can
only be done up to a limit.  Cell costs are high and so is the real
estate needed for the base station.  You just don't plop down cells
anywhere you have traffic problems and hope that solves your problems.
Added new cells or splitting existing ones has affects on the rest of
your systems frequency plan.  Thus you may have to retune existing
cells and/or shuffle channels around to permit the new cell to work
properly.  It is a complex problem.  There is also a limitation on the
number of radio channels that can be installed in a cell site - due to
the frequency reuse pattern (i.e. N=4, 7, 12, etc.).

Also the FCC has placed a limit on the present bandwidth allotted for
analog cellular.

Do you consider the (more expensive) pcm type trunks that MA bell has
installed across the country a rip off - because they can have 24, 48,
... conversations going across the same pair of wires?  I hope not -
they developed this technology for efficient use of a resource and
that is what digital cellular is also working towards.


Mark Ahlenius           voice:(708)-632-5346  email: uunet!motcid!ahleniusm
Motorola Inc.          fax:  [phone]
Arlington, Hts. IL, USA     60004

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

From: Tom Gray <mitel!spock![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are DID Trunks Incoming Only?
Date: 13 Jun 90 12:51:48 GMT
Reply-To: Tom Gray <mitel!healey![e-mail]>
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> foxtail![e-mail] (Primary
Access Corp) writes:
>X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 428, Message 9 of 11

>DID trunks are, in fact, for inward calls only, although that's
>strictly a marketing decision on the part of the telephone company.
>There is no "real" technical reason why DID trunks (which in fact are
>four wire E&M wink start trunks or two wire loop/reverse battery
>trunks) can't be used for two way traffic. The phone company uses them
>for two way internal applications all the time. (Actually, they uses
>trunks of this type, not strictly DID trunks).

The real technical reason that DID trunks are incoming only is cost.
DID trunks are indeed two wire OUTGOING loop trunks at the CO end.
There is no way for the CPE to originate a call toward the CO with
this type of trunk. The outgoing trunk mimics the operation of a
telephone set. It goes off hook and pulses into the PBX just like a
telephone set.

Two way loop trunks which can originate calls in both directions do
exist. They are much more expensive then one way trunks and are used
to handle the overflow from both incoming and outgoing trunk groups
For valid economic reasons the telco will divide their trunk groups
into two sections - one for incoming and one for outgoing with a few
two way trunks to handle the overflow from both groups. In this way,
the cost of each trunk is minimized.

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 09:30 EDT
From: "Robert M. Hamer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400


On Tue, 12 Jun 90 18:31:40 CDT Curt Squires <[e-mail].
umn.edu> writes:

>I'm looking for a replacement battery for an AT&T model 4400 cordless
>phone.  The battery is 3.6v 270 mA (3 cells arranged in pyramid
>fashion).  I'd like to find a mfg&model number and/or a place I could
>order it by phone. (I haven't actually seen the phone, so I might not
>have all the details.)  Thank you..

Having recently had a cordless phone die, and after asking the Digest
what might be the problem, and after having decided that the NiCad
Battery was the problem, I went looking for a replacement.  It is a
Panasonic cordless phone, and used a 3.6v 270 mA replacement.  The
original battery is flat, and consists of three cells, each about the
size of a very thick quarter, shrink-wrapped together in a pyramid
fashion.

I called Panasonic, and they gave me the name of a local electronic
shop that they said carried a replacement.  I went to the shop, and
they did not have a physically identically replacement, but they had a
3.6v 270 mA replacement that had three cylindrical barral-shaped
cells, each about 1 inch long and maybe half an inch thick, shrink-
wrapped together.  They assured me it would fit in the phone even
though it was not physically the same shape as the original.  I bought
it; cost about $12.  It fits.  And works.

Yesterday, I happened to be in an AT&T store, and saw the identical
battary pack for sale at $13.  Its packaging claimed to work in all
AT&T cordless phones.

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

Subject: Re: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400
Organization: Segue Software, Cambridge MA
Date: 13 Jun 90 10:44:57 EDT (Wed)
From: "John R. Levine" <[e-mail]>


AT&T sells a replacement battery that seems to fit all 4000 and 5000
series phones.  I got one at my local AT&T phone store, and they are
also available at places like K Mart that carry AT&T phones.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|lotus}!esegue!johnl

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

From: Mike Bell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Phones in the UK and Vice Versa
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 14:10:02 EDT


[e-mail] (Ole J. Jacobsen) writes:

>You can now buy UK-style modular plugs in electronics shops (including
>Tandy [Radio Shack]) in the UK. These can be attached quite easily to
>a US linecord if you follow the instructions below. This will allow
>you to attach a US phone to the UK network. While this is not legal of
>course, I have verified that it works. Using a BT extension socket, I

"It works" is a matter of interpretation. The mark/space ratios for
pulse dial phones differ (most of the UK is pulse dial only) and US
pulse dial phones will therefore give wrong numbers on some exchanges.
ie. this is an "it may work but don't rely on it" method.


Mike Bell -- <[e-mail]>

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

From: Chip Salzenberg <tct![e-mail]>
Date: Wed Jun 13 10:07:51 1990
Subject: Re: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems
Organization: ComDev/TCT, Sarasota, FL


I used to work at A T Engineering.  While I was there, we replaced a
piece of junk from GTE with a Meridian PBX.  We all loved it.  It
never gave us any trouble.  We especially liked the ability to program
the keys quickly according to personal preference.

Note: Be sure to get the hands-free sets.  I used to have long
conversations with a co-worker using the "voice call" feature.  He
smoked and I didn't like the smoke, so we ended up talking a lot more
that way than we would otherwise have done.


Chip, the new t.b answer man      <[e-mail]>, <uunet!ateng!tct!chip>

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

From: Mike Godwin <walt.cc.utexas.edu![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cracker/Phreaker Crackdown
Date: 13 Jun 90 16:11:21 GMT
Reply-To: Mike Godwin <walt.cc.utexas.edu![e-mail]>
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>In reply to Frank Earl's note ... I would reckon one of the problems
>is that most people don't know where the FBI's jurisdiction begins or
>where the Secret Service's jurisdiction ends.  I had a visit on Friday
>afternoon from an FBI agent and it seemed to be mostly reasonable,
>except he identified himself as being from a unit that I wouldn't
>associate with this sort of investigation.

Secret Service jurisdiction over computer crimes is set out in
18 USC 1030(d):

    The United States Secret Service shall, in addition to any other
    agency having such authority, have the authority to investigate
    offenses under this section. [18 USC 1030 is titled "Fraud and
    related activity in connection with computers.] Such authority
    of the United States Secret Service shall be exercised in
    accordance with an agreement which shall be entered into by the
    Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General.

There is a similar provision in 18 USC 1029, which concerns
"Fraud and related activity in connection with access devices."


Mike Godwin, UT Law School
Just another bar-exam nerd
[e-mail]
[phone]

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

From: abvax!ncoast!fmsystm![e-mail]
Date: Mon Jun 11 16:40:36 1990
Subject: Re: RJ45 vs RJ11
Organization: F M Systems, Inc.  Medina, Ohio USA  [phone]


In article <[e-mail]>:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 419, Message 1 of 11

>In article <[e-mail]>, utstat![e-mail] (Tom Glinos) writes:

>> I'm looking for the advantages of RJ45 over RJ11.
>> Each cubicle that I'm planning will have two jacks.  The jacks will
>> either be phone or data in any combination.

>    My motto: "Never pull less than six pair". And sometimes I
>regret not pulling twenty-five pair.

If a customer does not have any circustances that specifically
indicate installation of more pairs (such as an active network), then
we recomend these:

At each typical phone location: two each RJ-25 jack, three pairs wired
each, using two separate three pair cables.

At primary answering locations, message centers and data intensive
areas: three each RJ-25 jacks, three pairs, using three separate
cables.  (This is to accomodate DSS's, modems, fax's, attendant
consoles and such...all of which can be "pair hogs")

At known communications intensive locations: one each 25 pr. cable and
two each RJ-25's under separate three pair cable.  This is suggested
to allow the use of certain services that object to sharing a cable
with standard phone lines that ring with 100 VAC.  (Certain twisted
pair LAN's and other data types do not like the inducted transients
from ring generator in adjacent pairs).

We have found several vendors who make very nice double RJ-25 jacks in
surface and flush mount versions.

Getting a technophobic customer to agree to pay for all this wiring is
another matter entirely.  Many customers still do not understand that
the quality and quantity of the wiring is _far_ more important than
the way the phones look or feel ... or the name on the switch for that
matter ... Phone systems come and go ... wiring is forever (if you do
it right!)

Another free consulting service from...


Macy M. Hallock, Jr.     [e-mail]         uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy
F M Systems, Inc. {uunet|backbone|usenet.ins.cwru.edu}ncoast!fmsystm!macy
150 Highland Drive    Voice: [phone] Ext 251  Fax: [phone]
Medina, Ohio 44256 USA  Cleveland:273-3000 Akron:239-4994 (Dial 251 @ tone)
(PLEASE NOTE:  the system name is "fmsystm" with no "e", *NOT* "fmsystem")

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

From: abvax!ncoast!fmsystm![e-mail]
Date: Mon Jun 11 16:16:27 1990
Subject: Last Laugh! Its Not a Bug, Its a Feature!
Organization: F M Systems, Inc.  Medina, Ohio USA  [phone]


In article <[e-mail]>:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 418, Message 1 of 10

>  For the last week or two, Wisconsin Bell has been having an odd
>problem with their system: it's placing calls at random.

>  The most interesting thing about this is that these aren't just
>"misdirected" calls; neither party initiates the call.  The phone just
>rings at both ends.

Here's the real story: this is actually a test of a new CLASS feature:

                   "Automatic Call Creation"

It is intended to be used by telco's with measured (charge per call)
local service as a revenue enhancing feature.  It will be advertised
by the telco as a way to get to know your neighbors and a way to talk
to new/interesting people...kinda like those 900 lines you see on late
nite TV.

See, its not a bug, its a feature!  ;-)


Macy M. Hallock, Jr.     [e-mail]         uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy
F M Systems, Inc. {uunet|backbone|usenet.ins.cwru.edu}ncoast!fmsystm!macy
150 Highland Drive    Voice: [phone] Ext 251  Fax: [phone]
Medina, Ohio 44256 USA  Cleveland:273-3000 Akron:239-4994 (Dial 251 @ tone)
(PLEASE NOTE:  the system name is "fmsystm" with no "e", *NOT* "fmsystem")

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #431
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24325;
          14 Jun 90 4:20 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19007;
          14 Jun 90 2:44 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab21876;
          14 Jun 90 1:39 CDT
Date:     Thu, 14 Jun 90 1:12:39 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #432
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 14 Jun 90 01:12:04 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 432

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Caller*ID Random Thought [Johnny Zweig]
    Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls [John R. Covert]
    John's 3AM Call / Wrong Numbers [Steve Elias]
    Request For Information on Operation Sun Devil [Mitch Wagner]
    Cracker/Phreak/LOD Message Overflow [TELECOM Moderator]
    Dead BT Cordless Telephone [Gary Cook]
    AMIS Protocol Specifications Available? [Steve Hoffman]
    High Speed RS232 (RS562) Anyone? [Osvaldo Mesa]
    Modems for Baltic Republics [Ed I. Kizys]
    Problem With IRQ's Com Ports and MS Kermit 3.0 [Allen Smith]
    Information Needed About New York Teleport [Jane M. Fraser]
    Questions About Fujitsu Cellular Phones [Amanda Walker]
    Re: Measured Service [David Schachter]
    No Laughing Matter! (Was: Re: Are You a Phreak/Cracker? [Stephen Friedl]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Johnny zweig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller*ID Random Thought
Organization: IDA, Alexandria, VA
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 13:45:44 GMT


It just occured to me that it would probably not be too difficult to
program a PBX to accept incoming calls to a given set of numbers,
listen for dial strings on the incoming line (like when you call the
local MCI or Sprint access number and then type in the number you'd
like to call) and have it call out for you.  Presto! Johnny's
Caller*ID Buster Forwarding-service (tm).  Now anyone who wants to
place a Caller*ID-proof call can use my service (1-900-555-NO-ID) and
have an outgoing call appear only as my service rather than their own
number.

Of course, people would have to trust my service to be 100 % confident
of their anonymity -- but it would sure work for Dr. Jones who wants
to call patients from his home without disclosing his number.  And of
course, if I ever let out a customer's number nobody would use my
service anymore.  I trust K-mart enough to give them my VISA number
when I buy stuff, so it seems like a service that just might fly.

Or is there a law against it already? I mean, if there is no
reasonable expectation of privacy when placing a call, I guess I could
see some long-haired weirdo lawyer argue that a service which gives
you such privacy would undermine the fabric of society or something...


Johnny Random


[Moderator's Note: Actually, a couple such services have started
already, using 900 numbers.  PT]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 06:34:22 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  12-Jun-1990 0932" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls


I'm not sure why John Higdon thinks that Caller ID would be more
effective than other SS7 services in preventing his 3AM phone calls.

Call Trace would allow him to take legal action against the caller.

Incoming Call Block would stop the calls.  (For those of you
unfamiliar with Incoming Call Block, you can program up to five
numbers from which you do not wish to receive calls, and you can enter
the last number which called you using a feature code.)  John's 3AM
caller would be told that John was not accepting calls at this time if
he called again.

Caller ID would still cause the phone to ring, and John would still be
rousted out of his sleep.

All the privacy stuff aside, do not forget that the main purpose of
Caller ID is so that the phone company can sell YOUR number to
businesses who want to call you at home in the evening to try to sell
you things.


/john

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: John's 3AM Call / Wrong Numbers
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 13:42:39 -0400
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>


John, why not just unplug your ringer at night and leave an answering
machine or voice mail online?  I know that there's always the
possibility of those feared "emergency" calls late at night, but I get
so many wrong numbers (at *all* hours), that I usually leave my home
phone forwarded to voice mail.  I screen calls almost all the time
with this system.  It works well because I can receive incoming
messages even when I'm on another call.  And I sleep much better at
night, knowing that the wrong number bozos (and other obnoxious late
night callers) can only give me one short ring and that they get a
machine instead of sleepy me answering the phone.


/eli

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

From: Mitch Wagner <utoday![e-mail]>
Subject: Request For Information on Operation Sun Devil
Date: 12 Jun 90 16:16:49 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mitch Wagner)
Organization: UNIX Today!, Manhasset, NY


UNIX Today! is seeking the names, regular mail and/or email addresses
and phone numbers of anyone targetted with a search warrant in
connection with Operation Sun Devil or related "cracker"
investigations.

Information sent to us as a result of this query would be handled as
tips --- it would not be used unless independently verified by us.

Please forward the information to me, using any of the below phone,
regular mail or email channels.

Thank you.


                 Mitch Wagner, Senior Editor, Unix Today!
                 600 Community Drive, Manhasset, NY 11030
   Voice: [phone]    [e-mail]   or  uunet!utoday!wagner
    To subscribe, send mail to [e-mail] with "Subject: Request"

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 23:52:55 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cracker/Phreak/LOD Message Overflow


I've been referring most messages regards the LOD and associated
activities to the Computer Underground Digest, a mailing list made up
mainly of readers here who want continued discussion on the Legion of
Doom, and the recent federal crackdown on phreaks and crackers.

I've would suggest you subscribe if you want a lot of in-depth,
continued discussion on this topic. You will see some cross-references
there to messages which originally appeared here in TELECOM Digest.

For subscriptions, write [e-mail].


PT

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

From: Gary Cook <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dead BT Cordless Telephone
Date: 13 Jun 90 11:46:53 GMT
Reply-To: Gary Cook <[e-mail]>
Organization: STC Technology Limited, London Road, Harlow, Essex, UK


I have a BT Freeway cordless telephone which decided to stop working
after a call was cut off during lightning. At a geuss I would say that
the line protection circuit did its job and protected the rest of the
electronics, but blew itself up in the process.

I am a digital engineer, so all these upity downity signals with
little black components and capacitors confuse me. I have no circuit
diagram which makes it more difficult. I have traced the line circuit
to a couple of relays, through a zener back-toback pair and then a
choke.  The relays,chokes and zeners are OK but the unit still doesn't
work ... ie no dial tone when taken off-hook.

I think the cordless electronics are OK ... so I sort of think its the
protection bits ??

Any ideas or help would be greatly appreciated.


| Gary Cook  ,        | Tel: [phone] ext 2615
| STC Technology Ltd, | e-mail: [e-mail]
| London Road,
| Harlow,             | *Disclaimer* - The views/opinions expressed above are |
| Essex CM17 9NA, U.K.| not necessarily those adopted by STC Technology Ltd.  |

| Janet: [e-mail]          |    Bitnet: grc%stl.stc.co.uk@ukacrl     |
| Uunet: uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!grc    |    PSI%234237100122::grc                |

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 14:27:10 PDT
From: "Steve, MLO3-1, 223-7186" <[e-mail]>
Subject: AMIS Protocol Specifications Available?


Do you have a soft-copy of the current AMIS messaging protocol
specifications?  And if you do, can you mail me a copy?


Thanks,

Steve Hoffman
DEC/Maynard

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

From: Osvaldo Mesa <[e-mail]>
Subject: High Speed S232 (RS562) Anyone?
Reply-To: Osvaldo Mesa <[e-mail]>
Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 21:33:22 GMT


Has anybody out there implemented an RS232 type interface with data
rates in the 100 kbits/sec or higher? There is an interface spec soon
to come out (I think) RS562 which uses RS232 type interface with
speeds up to 64 kbits/sec synchronous.

I was looking into how you would implement this interface and it seems
to me that the available RS232 drivers/receivers could not meet the
timing requirements mainly due to slew rate limitation.

Slew rate is limited by RS232 to 30 V/microsecs. but is typically 6
V/microsecs. or less in RS232 drivers.

I am interested if anyone has had any experience related to this
implementation. Please email or call me and I will summarize to the
net if enough responses are received.


Thanks in advance.

Osvaldo A. Mesa             AT&T Paradyne
uunet!pdn!mesa          Mail Stop LG-132
[e-mail]     P. O. Box 2826
[phone]         Largo, FL USA 34649-2826

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

From: "Ed I. Kizys" <abvax![e-mail]>
Subject: Modems For Baltic Republics
Date: 13 Jun 90 16:43:33 GMT
Reply-To: "Ed I. Kizys" <abvax![e-mail]>
Organization: Allen-Bradley Company, Industrial Computer Division


I am looking for information about what types of modems, available on
the U.S.  market, could be used in the Eastern European Baltic
republics (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania). From conversations, I have
gathered that modems for U.S.  phone systems cannot be used there.

Also,

- What software would be of greatest use in utilizing the modems for
connecting to the western world (I assume they`d be using PC
compatibles running DOS).

- Is there software that would allow telex machine emulation.

Manufacturer names and model numbers would help a lot. Please e-mail
replies, post to BALT-L, or call by phone.


Thanks,

Ed Kizys    uucp: ...!{cwjcc,pyramid,decvax,uunet}!abvax!eik
        Internet: [e-mail]
        voice: 216-646-4488

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

From: Allen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Problem With IRQ's Com Ports and MS Kermit 3.0
Date: 13 Jun 90 10:40:56 GMT
Organization: UCSC - Slug Club


There is a student here who is having a problem setting up kermit 3.0.
He is using an Adtech SmartConnect24i with a generic 80286 I/O card..
He has his modem set to COM3:, but kermit says Device not available. He
uses another comm program that works fine on COM3 and 4..

Any suggestions?


Thanks,

Allen Smith   ([e-mail])

Please reply to: [e-mail]
                         or
                 [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 10:18:45 edt
From: "Jane M. Fraser" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Needed About New York Teleport


Can anyone tell me anything about the New York Teleport?

I believe it is a communications center in the financial district of
New York City.  It was (is?) owned by some investment company (Merrill
Lynch?) but I heard they recently decided to sell it off.

Obviously, any information will be an addition to what I know.

Thanks.


Jane M. Fraser   Associate Director
Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications
The Ohio State University
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Amanda Walker)
Subject: Questions About Fujitsu Cellular Phones
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Amanda Walker)
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation, Herndon, VA
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 23:51:27 GMT


I recently bought a Fujitsu 7300ST transportable cellular phone (at
$180+tax, it finally hit my price/performance decision point :-)), and
have been quite happy with it.  However, being a technoid, I quickly
came up with some questions about it that my local Cellular One people
couldn't (or wouldn't) answer, and so I'd be interested in
corresponding with anyone who knows stuff about these phones.  In
particular:

 - It is extremely obvious from inspection of this and other Fujitsu 7300
   series phones that they consist of separate modules that are put together
   into the standard configurations.  Is it possible to buy individual pieces,
   either from Fujitsu or through a dealer?  For example, I can see wanting
   to buy a battery pack or the handsfree handset at some point, but I have
   no interest in buying a whole new phone...

 - Through a strange set of circumstances, I was given (unsolicitedly) the
   magic keystroke sequence that puts the phone into "program mode."  This
   will no doubt come in handy if I move (since I can reprogram the phone
   number myself instead of paying far too much money for a dealer to do it),
   but I am now curious about what all the options actually are.  The NAM
   entries and the lock code are pretty obvious, but there are a bunch more
   in there.  They're probably useless, but hey...

Thanks.

Disclaimer: I have no connection with Fujitsu or Cellular One except
as an extremely satisfied customer.


Amanda Walker, InterCon Systems Corporation

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

From: [e-mail] (David Schachter)
Subject: Re: Measured Service
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Schachter)
Organization: Greenwire Consulting
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 06:55:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <[e-mail]>
writes:

>In Pac*Bell land, the only two firm requirements for hunting are that
>the numbers bear the same prefix and that the lines are billed to the
>same party.

Um, I have two lines in this apartment, connected in a one-way hunt,
billed to different parties.  Same billing address, though.  A few
weeks ago, I had the second line of the hunt converted to flat rate,
with various Kustom Kalling Area plans, pulse only.  The pilot line
remains measured, tone service.  No problems, no hassles, no quibbles.

    -- David Schachter
       llustig![e-mail]
       ...!uunet!mips!llustig!david
       [e-mail] (MAYBE)
       [phone]
       Palo Alto, California, USA

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

From: "Stephen J. Friedl" <mtndew![e-mail]>
Subject: No Laughing Matter! (Was: Re: Are You a Phreak and/or Cracker?)
Date: 13 Jun 90 14:28:13 GMT
Organization: VSI*FAX Tech Center


John Higdon writes:

> I have, for a about a week now, received a call on my main private
> line at about 3:00 am daily. I answer with a groggy "hello", then the
> caller hangs up.

and goes on to make a case for Caller-ID.  I have a related story...

My partner was trying to get uucp working from the office to his
house, working from his house.  It was kind of a casual project, and
it was just not working taking *days*.  Eventually he was in the
office late one evening trying to get it working, so after a few bad
attempts he went to a terminal by the modem pool and fired off a poll
after turning up the volume.  It dialed, answered, and a groggy female
voice pleaded "Please stop calling me".

Oops.  Wrong phone number in the uucp Systems file.  We debated
whether to try to track this person down and send her some flowers by
way of apology, but decided we had bothered her enough :-(


Stephen J. Friedl, KA8CMY / Software Consultant / Tustin, CA / 3B2-kind-of-guy
[phone]  / [e-mail]  / {uunet,attmail}!mtndew!friedl


[Moderator's Note: We had a similar instance of this in Chicago a few
years ago when a computer on the Fidonet tried *for over two weeks* to
connect with another computer in the area, not once, but several times
per night.  An elderly lady had the number it was calling. She was
understandably frightened and upset. Illinois Bell's Security
Department came to her assistance and located the offending computer
whose owner was not even aware of what his machine was doing at 2 AM
every day. He reached a 'gentlemans agreement' with IBT: He was not to
operate a modem or computer on IBT's lines during a three month period
of 'probation'. If he was caught doing so, IBT would sue him to
permanently disconnect his service.  The alternative was he could do
as he pleased and fight them, but they would supply his name to the
police and assist the elderly lady in filing formal charges.  Guess
which he chose.  His BBS went offline that day.  A harsh penalty?  I
don't think so.  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #432
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12764;
          14 Jun 90 13:36 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12278;
          14 Jun 90 11:52 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04411;
          14 Jun 90 10:48 CDT
Date:     Thu, 14 Jun 90 10:36:06 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #433
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 14 Jun 90 10:34:52 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 433

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers [Nigel Allen]
    Answer Call Service From C&P Telephone [Michael Dorrian]
    Census Bureau Taking Information by Phone [TELECOM Moderator]
    Subscribing to Multiple Cellular Services [Bill Nickless]
    Telecom in the Media [Andrew M. Boardman]
    Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead [Peter da Silva]
    Re: Choosing No Long Distance Carrier (was: I Have no LDC) [D. Schachter]
    Re: Uniform International Dialing [John Higdon]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Contact Public Unix BBS. Toronto, Canada.
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 90 10:39:03 GMT


Excerpted from {The Globe and Mail}, Toronto, June 7, 1990

Bell Cellular has developed a new scrambling service that will allow
its cellular radio-telephone subscribers to encrypt all their voice
and data communications.

   The optional service, dubbed Privacy Plus, will be available in
mid-July and will sell for $89.95 (Canadian) a month.

    Users of the service must install an encryption device in their car
that is affixed to the dash and plugs into the phone.

    The device contains the programs for scrambling and descrambling
messages.  It is made by Cycomm Corp., a unit of Sonatel
Telecommunications Corp. of Vancouver, British Columbia.

   Although Bell Cellular is targetting the defence and national
security market, the scrambling unit has not yet been certified that
it meets the rigid Tempest standards set by the U.S. National Security
Agency. Only equipment that meets the Tempest standards set by the top
secret communications spy agency can be used by NATO governments to
communicate classified military and intelligence information.

   Bell Cellular's new system is the first in North America to install
encryption equipment in its cellular network for use by subscribers.

    The system uses a powerful communications program that randomly
breaks up the frequency band used for cellular communications into
smaller bands and then jumbles up a message by randomly assigning
parts of a call to those bands.

    The message is then descrambled either at the Bell Cellular switch
if it is destined for a non-encrypted user or by another subscriber's
equipment if destined for a user who also has the encryption service.

   Bell Cellular is a subsidiary of Montreal-based BCE Mobile
Communications Inc., which in turn is a subsidiary of BCE Inc.,
formerly Bell Canada Enterprises.

It has 141,000 subscribers in Ontario and Quebec and provides service
in competition with Rogers Cantel Inc. of Toronto.

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 13:06 EST
From: Michael Dorrian <[e-mail]>
Subject: Answer Call Service From C&P Telephone


C&P Telephone, the offspring of those wonderful folks who brought you
Caller*ID, has continued its search for new revenue streams with
Answer Call, a CO-based answering machine feature.

I was able to discover the following based on my conversation with the
order taker on the 800 line:

No demo number was available (Yes, even though I suspected the answer
in advance, I had to ask the question anyway).

       Particulars include:

            o 30 or 45 Minute message Capacity
            o Call Forward - No Answer (CF-NA), user-defined "N" ring cycles
              or busy
            o System or Private Greetings
            o Up to 8 mailboxes available per line
            o Special Dial Tone on off hook for message waiting
            o Will answer if phone is in use. If phone is equipped with Call
              Waiting, using Tone Block will route additional incoming
              calls to Answer Call. Additional Calls will hear a busy signal.
            o Time/Date stamp on messages
            o Skip, replay, fast forward, erase or save messages

       Prices:
            o $10.80 connection fee, waived until 7/28
            o Message unit (if applicable) to forward or retrieve calls
            o Pricing as follows:
                 - Call Forwarding, No Answer/Busy $2.00 (Base)
                 - First Mailbox with 30 minute capacity $3.00 (Base)
                 - Additional 15 minutes capacity (max?) $1.00 (Option)
                 - Seven Additional mailboxes/passwords $2.00 (Option)

C&P Advert:

"Advanced phone company computers can now give your 12-button
touch-tone equipped telephone full-featured answering capability for
as little as $5 a month. Like an answering machine - _but better_!"

I believe "advanced phone company computers" to be Octel Aspen, but
this is not confirmed.

Service is only available for residential users and is accessed by
dialing home telephone number,"*" and password. Default password is
the last four digits of phone number, changeable to private 4 to 10
digit password. Didn't ask if password or ring settings could be set
remotely, which would mean that Touch-Tone on home phone is really
required. (or a pocket beeper).

This is the first time I've seen CF-NA made available outside of
Centrex. I'd much rather have it on my business line than the usual
call forwarding(CF), both for its capability and price ($2 vs. $4).
Instead of activating CF when I was going to leave the office, I'd
just leave CF-NA on all the time.

Unfortunately it's not available ('coming soon', *they* said).  And
probably only with C&P Answer Call.

CF is also available from C&P for residential customers , either
separately ($3.50/mo.) or with some combination of 3-way calling,
speed dialing and call waiting under Custom Calling Service (resulting
in an average cost as low as $2.42/mo.) .

Is it just me or does this sound like subsidization/bundling?

CF-NA is absolutely required to make Answer Call work. I can see
justification of a lower price for multiple custom calling options
since it is software selectable at the CO switch, but this flavor of
Call Forwarding is different from the version under Custom Calling.

When CF is activated, the talk path is never completed to the called
party, although their phone itself will go through several ring cycles
(If answered by the called party they receive dial tone).  The calling
party, meanwhile, is forwarded to the number specified by the called
party.

On the other hand CF-NA actually allows talk path completion to the
dialed party, and if the call is unanswered after a pre-selected
number of rings, returns to the CO where it is then forwarded in the
same manner as CF.

While the relative value of CF vs. CF-NA for the end user depends on
the application, it would seem more expensive to provide CF-NA than
CF.

And, of course, relative value shouldn't enter into the picture, since
utility pricing is based on cost recovery, not on what the market will
bear. :-)

The local phone company's provisioning of voice mail has tie ins with
other storylines in the Digest, such as sanctity/responsibility of
message content and the ability of this service to provide a
"community" voice bulletin board.

Of course the very viability of the service would be doubt if all
payphones are reverted to dial pulse.


Michael Dorrian   The RTP Group, Mid-Atlantic   Arlington, VA
             703-243-6000        MCI Mail 349-3915


[Moderator's Note: Call Forwarding on No Answer/Busy is available
here, but only to cellular customers. Landline users can't have it.  PT]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 1:23:28 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Census Bureau Taking Information by Phone


The Census Bureau is making a final effort to collect data for the
1990 United States Census, and I hope all of our United States
readers who for whatever reason have not yet 'Stood Up to be Counted'
will do so at this time by calling 1-800-999-1990.

If you lost your form (or never received one) --

If you were gone or unavailable when the Census taker came to your
home --

If you made an error in your report and want to correct it now --

Call today -- right now, please.   1-800-999-1990.


Thank you.

Patrick Townson

(A Census Taker in 1960 and 1970, and proud of it!  And, a person who
relies heavily on the 1860, 1870, 1880, 1900, and (recently opened)
1910 census for genealogical research. The census DOES remain
confidential for 75 years, however by federal law.)

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 09:30:46 CDT
From: Bill Nickless <[e-mail]>
Subject: Subscribing to Multiple Cellular Services


A couple months ago I related in this forum my experience signing up
with a second cellular service for my Nokia Mobira handheld.  I live
in Michigan but work during the week in Chicago.  I originally signed
up with Ameritech Mobile here in Chicago, but then signed up with
Cellular One of Berrien County, Michigan, for use on the weekends.
When I travel back and forth I reprogram my handheld for use with the
system I'm traveling into.

Recently I decided to spend some time in Indianapolis.  I contacted
the two cellular carriers in Indianapolis, and ended up signing with
GTE Mobilenet.  They charge a $25 signup fee, and a basic fee of
$15/month.  Peak airtime is .50/minute, off-peak .20/minute.  Detailed
billing is only $1.75/month.  I also asked for call forwarding at an
extra $2/month.

The person I spoke with, Natalie Newton, was very helpful and
accomodating.  There was no hesitation on her part to fulfill my
request for service without having my phone reprogrammed by GTE
Mobilenet.  I simply provided the ESN and she gave me my Indianapolis
number.  She also faxed me the Indianapolis NAM paramaters for that
system, as well as very complete instructions for reprogramming my
phone.  I did not have to sign up for a minimum usage per month, nor a
year-long contract.

In summary, I would recommend dealing with GTE Mobilenet if you wish
to avoid roaming charges in Indianapolis.  If someone else has had a
bad experience with GTE Mobilenet I'd like to hear about it, but for
now I am impressed with their customer service.

Disclaimer: I have no connection with GTE Mobilenet except as a
satisfied customer.


Bill Nickless
detour mail to [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 90 20:23:55 EDT
From: "Andrew M. Boardman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom in the Media


 ...or, Is Responsible Technical Reporting Dead?
             What the Real World sees of telecom...

I just caught the last half of a "news" program by the name of Inside
Edition which was looking at telephone crime, esp. in the New York
area.  This has got to be the National Enquirer of television shows;
after throwing around talk of multi-million dollar phone bills and
showing interviews with various telephone companies and the Secret
Service, (!)  they proceed to link telephone abuse with drug dealing,
arms dealers, and assasinations, and imply that this would all be
impossible without [calling cards|PBXen|voice mail|pagers|ad nauseam]
to abuse. (!!)  The entire thing was chock-full of technical "facts"
which are years outdated or just plain wrong.

And people wonder why there are movements to locally ban touch-tone or
whatever...


Andrew Boardman
[e-mail]  ...rutgers!columbia!amb  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 13:24:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> motcid![e-mail] (Gary
Segal) writes:

> If you mean "can I put a modem on the phone?", the answer is "no".

[ and goes on to suggest a solution ]

> In order to allow subsribers to access modem based data services,
> these systems make provisions for a modem pool (again, much like an
> ISDN) at the connection point to the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone
> Network).

And what do they have at that point? 2400 baud only? V.32 as well? How
about PEP? Ever hear of the Telebit Cellblazer? What about TDD
services?  There are too many different sorts of modems out there for
this to be a credible alternative.


`-_-' Peter da Silva. [phone].  <[e-mail]>
 'U`  Have you hugged your wolf today?  <[e-mail]>
@FIN  Dirty words: Zhghnyyl erphefvir vayvar shapgvbaf.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Schachter)
Subject: Re: Choosing No Long Distance Carrier (was: I Have no LDC)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Schachter)
Organization: Greenwire Consulting
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 90 07:16:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian
Litzinger) writes:

>Well, the PacBell representative I spoke with disagrees.  He said that
>I must choose a default long distance carrier.  He even showed my the
>form he was filling out, and under long distance carriers was: AT&T,
>MCI, Sprint ... However, None, was nowhere to be found.  There wasn't
>even a blank line or other field.

My apartment has two lines, billed to different parties and different
in most features, but connected in a hunt.  The second line (the
non-pilot line) has no 1+ Equal Access carrier (this has been verified
the hard way), just as I specified when I ordered service from
PacBell.

            -- David Schachter
               llustig![e-mail]
               ...!uunet!mips!llustig!david
               [e-mail] (MAYBE)

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Uniform International Dialing
Date: 14 Jun 90 01:39:40 PDT (Thu)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


On Jun 13 at 23:06, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Actually, many central offices can do just that
> right now. Here in Chicago, 00# times out fast for the long distance
> operator...

Are you sure that the "#" is necessary for timeout elimination for the
LD operator? "00" is unambiguous, in that no additional digits would
be expected by the switch. Indeed, when I dial "00" or "00#", the
timing is the same. On the other hand, if I dial "0#" rather than just
"0", the Pac*Bell operator answers much more quickly.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !


[Moderator's Note: Actually, you are correct. I meant 0# gets through
faster to the local IBT operator.  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #433
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15826;
          15 Jun 90 1:36 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa07811;
          15 Jun 90 0:03 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa14883;
          14 Jun 90 22:59 CDT
Date:     Thu, 14 Jun 90 22:41:28 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #434
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 14 Jun 90 22:40:03 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 434

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Using "#" As a Timeout [Douglas Scott Reuben]
    Interesting Statistics [Scott Shaffer]
    Very Long Distance Email ... a Question [Dean Riddlebarger]
    800 Service and Their Local Phone Numbers [Dannie Gregoire]
    AT&T 'COCOT' Style Payphones [Blake Farenthold]
    So Long LATA? [Ken Jongsma]
    Numbering (was Re: My List of North American Area Codes) [David Lewis]
    Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on Local Call [John Slater]
    Re: Uniform International Dialing [Bob Goudreau]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 14-JUN-1990 03:29:38.13
From: "DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Using "#" As a Timeout


Speaking of using the "#" (pound) sign to time out, you can also use
it on the "newer" AT&T Calling Card system to designate that you have
entered your desired number. Let me try to explain that...

Some areas have the "old" style Calling Card system - same system for
local and Long Distance calls. You usually will hear "<bong> AT&T" and
"Thank you for using AT&T" on AT&T calls, and the standard "<bong>"
and "Thank you" for local calls. (There might not even be a
distinction for local /AT&T) You can sequence-call (make multiple
calls using the "#" key) from local to LD and vice versa. I've noticed
this in the Washington, D.C. area, rural Pennsylvania, and some older
exchanges in SNET and NET territory.

Other areas, like New York and Califoria, have two calling card
systems: one for local calls (where you would hear "Thank you for
using Pac*Bell" or "New York Tel") and the other for AT&T calls, where
what you are really getting is the "old" system listed above, but
*without* the ability to sequence call to local numbers. IE, they
changed the "You may dial another call now" message to "You may dial
another AT&T handled call now." (And if you're bad and try a local
call, the AT&T computer gets mad, and sternly warns you: "You may ONLY
dial another AT&T call, now!!")  In this system, as in the "old"
system, if you press the "#" key for a sequence call, and then dial
Area Code + 7 digits, your *immediately* hear the "Thank you" and your
call is processed right away.

Finally, there seems to be a newer system that AT&T is using. The
"Thank you" voice is somewhat different from the old system. More
importantly, if you dial the "#" sign to make a sequence call, and
then dial the next call by dialing Area Code + seven digits, the
system *waits* for a timeout! IE, it doesn't seem to realize that an
Area Code + seven digits is a FULL number, and that it shouldn't wait
any longer. So, after you enter a complete number, you can expect to
wait four or five seconds before you hear the "Thank you" and have
your call go through.

Another difference in regards to the newer system is that when you
dial a sequence call, and enter an invalid number, (ie, 408-320-xxxx,
since there is no 320 prefix in 408, at least none that AT&T will let
you dial), the system *itself* tells you that it was an invalid
exchange which you dialed. On the older systems, your call would go
through to the standard AT&T intercept message for an invalid
exchange. IE, you would hear "Thank You", and then get the message
"<alert tones> Your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check
the number, and dial again. [NPA from where you are calling from]-2T".
On the newer system, you never hear this, and get the calling card
computer telling you that you have dialed an invalid number.

I initially thought that the delay on the newer AT&T system was due to
it checking to see if the exchange you dialed was valid in the area
code you were trying to reach, but if you hit the "#" sign to make the
Area Code + seven digit call go through immediately, you will get the
message from the calling card system (and NOT the general AT&T
message) that your call can not be completed. So it doesn't seem to
need to extra time to determine if the exchange is valid or not.

Why then is the system so much slower? Although four or five seconds
per sequence call is insignificant to most users, if all AT&T's
calling card calls were added up, this would result in a significant
amount of time that the network is tied up, seemingly unecessarily. It
is also much less convenient to the customers, since after a multiple
sequence calls, they could have lost a minute of so of their time.
(OK, well, it sounds like a little, but try just standing around a
payphone for a minute not doing anything...)

Sorry I can't be any more specific about the "new" vs. "old"
systems ... I know that SNET/Connecticut uses the newer system in some
of the more heavily populated areas of the state (Hartford), NY Tel in
Westchester, NE Tel in Metro Boston (Hingham 617-749, Milton 617-698),
C&P Tel in New Castle, DE (I think...). A good way of distinguishing
the "old" from the "new" system is that the "old" one, upon making a
sequence calls, would say "You may dial another call now" or "You may
dial another AT&T handled call now", while the new system says the
same thing, BUT, it pauses between "...another" and "AT&T...". IE, you
hear "You may dial another ...<pause>... AT&T handled call now." I
wondered why it did this, and then a few weeks ago on Staten Island
(NY), I made a local calling card call. Instead of the usual NY Tel
equipment, I heard: "You may dial another ...<pause>...local telephone
company call now". This sounds EXACTLY like the new AT&T system,
except it says "local telco" rather than "AT&T" call. Is AT&T letting
local telco's use its system?

One final thing - the "new" system says you can only sequence call to
"AT&T handled calls"..well, not really...I've always been able to
sequence call to local calls as well. I tried this from Croton Falls,
NY a few days ago, and it worked fine. However, you must be using the
"new" system - the older one that was "tweaked" to allow only AT&T
calls will not let you sequence call locally, as a general rule. Of
course, since each exchange seems to have its own slight variation of
how calling card calls are handled (my X-Bar ["old" system] is
different from my ESS ["middle" system] is different from my DMS
["new" system] ), deciding which system you are under can get quite
confusing!

If anyone (1) has any idea what I am talking about :-) ,and (2) knows
why the "new" system was designed as such, I'd appreciate hearing
about it.

Thanks,

Doug

[e-mail] / @wesleyan.bitnet

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

From: Scott Shaffer <cpqhou![e-mail]>
Subject: Interesting Statistics
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 15:43:18 CDT


A newspaper in my town recently released the following interesting
statistics:

According to Survey Sampling Inc:

Rank City      % of residential customers with unlisted numbers

1    Las Vegas    63%
2    Los Angeles  61%
3    Oakland      59%
21   Houston      41%
30   New York      37%

The article went on to interview people who had unlisted numbers and
some psychologists to determine why they got unlisted numbers.  It
also went on to explain ANI (and how even unlisted numbers weren't
immune) and how ANI is not Caller*ID.  It also said that it costs an
average of $1 per month to have an unlisted number, and that some
considered it a status symbol.

A SWBell employee listed the three main reasons for unlisted numbers
as "sleep, security, and 'I don't want to be bothered.'"


+ Scott Shaffer @ SW Development @ Compaq Computer Corporation @ Houston, TX +

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

From: Dean Riddlebarger <[e-mail]>
Subject: Very Long Distance Email ... a Question
Date: 14 Jun 90 16:21:00 GMT
Organization: Truevision Inc., Indianapolis, IN


One of our employees is about to embark on a fairly long [roughly six
months] stint in Europe, and I'd like him to be able to stay in touch
with the office through our internal email setup.  Line quality issues
notwithstanding, I suppose that I could simply have him dial into the
server from his foreign location and conduct a standard remote login
session.  But I suspect that there should be a better way to handle
this from a cost and efficiency standpoint.

So, for all in the group who are savvy in international telecom: What
recommendations can you make for this situation?  Should I try to find
a foreign server for him, and forward his mail back and forth?  Should
I investigate one of the commercial mail carriers like attmail, again
with a local forward from our site?  Or is direct dial likely to be an
acceptable alternative given the time-frame and expected volume?

I'll summarize email replies.  Thanks.


<:>   Dean Riddlebarger
<:>   MIS Manager - Truevision, Inc.
<:>   [317] 841-0332
<:>   uucp: uunet!epicb!dean   [e-mail]

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

From: Dannie Gregoire <coplex![e-mail]>
Subject: 800 Service and Their Local Phone Numbers
Date: 14 Jun 90 16:18:29 GMT
Organization: Copper Electronics Inc.; Louisville, Ky


I understand that for each 800 line that exists there is a
corresponding local (7 digit) number for it.  Is this true?  If it is,
can the "local" number be used for incomming local calls without
charge (Normally you cannot call a "local" 800 number)?
Thanx-a-head-a-time.

        \\-------------------\\
         \\  Dannie Gregoire  \\
          \\  (dannie@coplex)  \\
           \\-------------------\\

[Moderator's Note: Many (most?) 800 numbers are translated into local
'regular-style' numbers at the place where they terminate. Whether or
not you can legally dial them via the translated number depends on how
the 800 service is being billed. If the incoming line is to be used
exclusively for 800 calls, then the receiver of the call is billed and
the person who dialed the non-800 version of the number is also
billed. This is against regulations, since a double billing for the
call has resulted. If the 800 number is the type sometimes called
'Hotline', where a local number can be dialed direct or calls to an
800 number are also sent to that line, then dialing the local version
of the number is allowed.  PT]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 09:09:53 CDT
From: Blake Farenthold <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T 'COCOT' Style Payphones


I always figured if anyone hated COCOTS it was AT&T.  Well I found
what I'd call an AT&T COCOT.  The card on the phone said the phone was
OWNED by AT&T it looked like a 'normal' payphone (not one of their
card phones) and took quarters for local calls ... thing is you dial a
number and it locks out the keypad (it really was annoying as the one
call I made on it was to my voice mailbox and I couldn't retreive my
messages).

Guess it makes a lot of sense as you don't normaly need the keypad
after dialing an AT&T call.  I wish I'd had time to play with the
phone to see if it (now illegally) blocked access to other carriers.
Next time I'm in the Officers club at NAS Corpus Christi I'll make
time to fool with the phone.

You guys at AT&T need to clean up your own phones before griping about
other peoples.


UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!blake
ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-party![e-mail]
INET: [e-mail]

Blake Farenthold         | Voice: 800/880-1890     |    MCI: BFARENTHOLD
1200 MBank North         |   Fax: [phone]     |    CIS: 70070,521
Corpus Christi, TX 78471 |   BBS: 512/882-1899     |  GEnie: BLAKE


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

Subject: So Long, LATA?
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 17:28:48 EDT
From: Ken Jongsma <wybbs![e-mail]>


I don't know if anyone else has noticed it, but the term LATA is
rapidly disappearing from use. The local phone books no longer refer
to it, instead using the words "Local Serving Area".

Not that I'm sad to see it go! I always thought it was rather
pretentious.


Ken

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

From: David Lewis <nvuxr![e-mail]>
Subject: Numbering (was Re: My List of North American Area Codes)
Date: 14 Jun 90 16:05:12 GMT
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ


[Inclusion of access codes as parts of phone numbers, etc, deleted]

We could try to use CCITT standard address formats...  (I'm not an
expert, so someone -please- correct me if I mess this up, but...)

CCITT Recommendation E.164 specifies formats for addresses.  I don't
have a copy in front of me (sorry), but I believe the format is (using
my work phone as an example):

    +1.201.758.4099

+    = whatever access code is needed
1    = country code
201  = npa (area) code
758  = office code
4099 = whatever it's called -- line within an exchange

Everything after the country code is specific to the national dialing
plan, but the + and country code are pretty standard.


David G Lewis                    ...!bellcore!nvuxr!deej
    (@ Bellcore Navesink Research & Engineering Center)
            "If this is paradise, I wish I had a lawnmower."

[Moderator's Note: 'whatever it is called' is frequently known as the
suffix.  Readers: Is there an official name for the last four digits?  PT]

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call
Date: 14 Jun 90 17:28:02 GMT
Reply-To: "John Slater <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, mitel!spock![e-mail] (Tom
Gray) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> John Slater <[e-mail].
>sun.com> writes:
>X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 418, Message 6 of 10

>>>In a perfect world I could dial "+44 81 676 XXXX" to reach my number
>>>in London from *anywhere* in the world, including the UK (where +
>>>means 010). Similarly it would be nice to be able to dial 011 1 415
>>>XXX XXXX to reach San Francisco from anywhere in the US.

>>>I was originally going to post this with lots of ":-)", but seriously
>>>though folks, why should it be difficult with modern switches?

>The main problem with this proposal would be the size of the data base
>required inside of each switch. Think of the routing problems which
>would occur when any digit sequence could be used to identify a trunk
>route. Each switch would be required to maintain the telephone number
>of all of the subscribers in the world. Even small CDO's would require
>gigabytes of disk storage.

I don't see why this is the case. Surely all the switch needs to know
is its own country and area codes.

Here's an example. Suppose I dial my home number as 010 44 81 676 0694
from a payphone down the street. As soon as it gets the second 4, the
switch thinks "Ah - 01044 means a call to the UK. But I'm in the UK,
so I'll pretend the caller dialled 0 instead. Now we've got 081-676
XXXX.  But I'm in the 081 area, so I'll pretend the caller didn't dial
the code. (This bit already works - I can dial 081-676 XXXX from said
payphone) So what he/she really wants is 676 XXXX". All other country
codes and area codes get passed on as normal.

All the switch has to do is delay passing control onto an
international switch until it has received sufficient digits to check
that the call really needs it.  Why should it be any more complicated
than that?


John Slater
Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick office

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 11:42:58 edt
From: Bob Goudreau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Uniform International Dialing
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bill Huttig)
writes:

|>    Whats wrong with using the # key... ie.. 00# or a timeout.. The #
|> key is used this way in international calls.

|> [Moderator's Note: Actually, many central offices can do just that
|> right now. Here in Chicago, 00# times out fast for the long distance
|> operator, and PIN# forces a fast time out on credit card calls to the
|> number where the card is assigned.  PT]

Nothing's wrong with it; I'm well aware that it can already be used to
signal number termination.  (As the Moderator points out, this is a
general feature, not just for international calls.)  Remember though,
there's a big difference between *allowing* a certain way of doing
things, and *requiring* that way.  Until POTS (Plain Ole' Telephone
Service) has advanced to the state where pulse dialing is no longer in
use, telcos will still have to provide a way for their non-touch-tone
customers to dial.


Bob Goudreau                [phone]
Data General Corporation
62 Alexander Drive            [e-mail]
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709    ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau
USA

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #434
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07967;
          15 Jun 90 10:43 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13829;
          15 Jun 90 9:09 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab08429;
          15 Jun 90 8:05 CDT
Date:     Fri, 15 Jun 90 7:48:14 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #435
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 15 Jun 90 07:47:11 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 435

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls [Jim Rees]
    Re: Two Cellular Phones, Same Number [John Slater]
    Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers [Tom Perrine]
    Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers [John Brewer]
    Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead? [Kolkka Markku Olavi]
    Re: Subodh's Aunt (Was: Re: Screwy PUC Policies) [Linc Madison]
    Re: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400 [Steven King]
    Re: US Phones in the UK and Vice Versa [Adam J. Ashby]
    Re: My List of World Wide Codes [Linc Madison]
    Re: Canada Direct [Henry Troup]
    Re: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems [Henry Troup]
    Re: Information Needed About New York Teleport [Peter G. Capek]
    Solution Needed: Phones Ring When Dialing [Paolo Prandoni]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 16:10:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John R.
Covert  12-Jun-1990 0932) writes:

> I'm not sure why John Higdon thinks that Caller ID would be more
> effective than other SS7 services in preventing his 3AM phone calls.

Here's my solution.  Back in the days when I still had telephone
service at home, I used to have a single Western Electric mechanical
ringer in the living room, with a switch on it.  I turned it off every
night when I went to bed.  The other twelve phones in the house all
had their ringers disconnected.

The problem with SS7 services is that you have to pay for them.

I'm all in favor of universal free Caller-ID with universal free
Caller-ID block.  (Where "free" means everybody has to pay for it.)

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones, Same Number
Date: 14 Jun 90 16:56:28 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
writes:

>Can anyone tell me how the British card works?  On the French card you
>can see the electrical contacts, but the British one doesn't seem to
>have any.  Is it done electromagnetically?  Or with mirrors?

I used to know this. I seem to remember it's got something to do with
application of heat to the card. The card itself is read magnetically,
but when a particular 10p unit has been used it is disabled either by
a laser or by local heating.

I may be totally wrong. I'm sure someone will correct me if I am.


John Slater
Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office

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

From: Tom Perrine <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers
Date: 14 Jun 90 20:12:31 GMT
Reply-To: Tom Perrine <[e-mail]>
Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 433, Message 1 of 8

>Excerpted from {The Globe and Mail}, Toronto, June 7, 1990

>Bell Cellular has developed a new scrambling service that will allow
>its cellular radio-telephone subscribers to encrypt all their voice
>and data communications.

>The device contains the programs for scrambling and descrambling
>messages.  It is made by Cycomm Corp., a unit of Sonatel
>Telecommunications Corp. of Vancouver, British Columbia.

See below.

>Although Bell Cellular is targetting the defence and national
>security market, the scrambling unit has not yet been certified that
>it meets the rigid Tempest standards set by the U.S. National Security
>Agency. Only equipment that meets the Tempest standards set by the top
>secret communications spy agency can be used by NATO governments to
>communicate classified military and intelligence information.

NSA is the agency charged with (among other things :-) ensuring the
security of U.S. gov't and related communications. No encryption
method, algorithm or device may be used to protect classified
information unless NSA approves it. For example, although NSA and the
government would like US businesses and others to use DES, they don't
approve it for protecting classified information. "Its good enough for
*you*, but not good enough for *us*. Why? We can't tell you." Right.

This approval has almost nothing to do with TEMPEST, which is
effectively a standard regarding the amount and "quality" of emitted
RF that a device processing classified information may emit. TEMPEST
is actually the unclassified code-word for a classified program. The
technical parameters of what actually constitutes "TEMPEST certified"
is apparently classified.

>Bell Cellular is a subsidiary of Montreal-based BCE Mobile
>Communications Inc., which in turn is a subsidiary of BCE Inc.,
>formerly Bell Canada Enterprises.

I find it almost impossible to believe that NSA is going to approve a
box that they didn't design, and which was designed and manufactured
outside the US.

Disclaimer: I've read the _Puzzle Palace_ and thats all I can say :-)


Tom Perrine (tep)                       |Internet: [e-mail]
Logicon                                 |UUCP: nosc!hamachi!tots!tep
Tactical and Training Systems Division  |-or-  sun!suntan!tots!tep
San Diego CA                            |GENIE: T.PERRINE
"Harried: with preschoolers"            |[phone]

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

From: John Brewer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers
Date: 15 Jun 90 01:18:57 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
writes:

>Excerpted from {The Globe and Mail}, Toronto, June 7, 1990

>Bell Cellular has developed a new scrambling service that will allow
>its cellular radio-telephone subscribers to encrypt all their voice
>and data communications.

>The optional service, dubbed Privacy Plus, will be available in
>mid-July and will sell for $89.95 (Canadian) a month.

    Why did I guess that this would not be free?

    The cell folks seem to have neglected to point out the fact
that even though they pushed the ECPA thru Congress, that ANYONE can
easily listen to cellular phone traffic. Now they want substantial
bucks to make it appear secure.

    Anyone want to make any wagers as to how long it takes for
Radio Electronics to start carrying ads and construction articles on
circumventing this encrption scheme? It may take a little longer, but
I can still remember claims of "secure" satellite encryption schemes,
and the radar detector technology seems to be catching up with
"instant-on" radar traps.

    Wouldn't it be easier to tell the public that the mode of
transmission is not secure?

    IMHO.


|John Brewer    WB5OAU           |      [e-mail]  |
|Digital Equipment Corporation   |    [e-mail]    |
|Albuquerque NM                  |      WB5OAU@KN5D              |

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

From: Kolkka Markku Olavi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Reply-To: Kolkka Markku Olavi <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Finland
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 05:59:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> motcid![e-mail] (Gary
Segal) writes:

>As an example of digital cellular done well, I suggest you watch what
>is happening in Europe, with the Pan-Euorpean Digital Cellular
>standard (also called GSM).      ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Actually it's Global System Mobile, but it seems that the US is again
going to isolate themselves from the rest of the world by using a
incompatible nonstandard system.  With GSM, you could have a single
system working anywhere, just like the NMT system works currently in
the Nordic countries.


    Markku Kolkka
    [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 14:48:09 PDT
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Subodh's Aunt (Was: Re: Screwy PUC Policies)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


In article <[e-mail]> it is written:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 430, Message 4 of 13

>This subject comes up all the time.  When I did ESS software the
>practice was to provide TT/DP >hardware< on all lines.  What happened
>when a DP subscriber entered TT instead was controlled in >Software<
>(Parameters).  The choices were (1) Deny service (2) Allow and print a
>message on the Maint TTY or (3) Allow and do nothing.

Even if the line is TT-blocked because his aunt doesn't pay the
$1.20/month, he should've been able to enter a DTMF tone without
problem, after he was connected.  The TT surveillance should apply
only during dialing.

Either the phone wasn't working for TT or the phone company was doing
something illegal, even in California.


Linc Madison   =   [e-mail]

P.S. Personal plea: please include your name and internet address at
the bottom of articles in this newsgroup: the way that my system deals
with a moderated group makes it difficult for me to reply to messages
here without this info (otherwise all my replies go back to Patrick).
That's why the attribution of the quote above is incomplete, also.

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

From: Steven King <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400
Date: 14 Jun 90 21:27:38 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc. - Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Robert M.
Hamer) writes:

>Having recently had a cordless phone die, and after asking the Digest
>what might be the problem, and after having decided that the NiCad
>Battery was the problem, I went looking for a replacement.  It is a
>Panasonic cordless phone, and used a 3.6v 270 mA replacement.  The
>original battery is flat, and consists of three cells, each about the
>size of a very thick quarter, shrink-wrapped together in a pyramid
>fashion.

I had a similar problem with my Uniden phone.  The battery pack
consisted of what sounds like the same pyramid configuration of cells.
I couldn't find a replacement, but I *did* find a ni-cad battery at
Radio Shack that I could modify.  The Radio Shack battery was also
three circular cells, but stacked rather than arranged adjacent to
each other.  I ended up cutting the sheath off the stack of cells and
soldering jumpers across their contacts.  Works great!  Now my only
problem is lots and lots of RF noise around my apartment, but that's
another story...

It strikes me that the Radio Shack battery cost considerably less than
the $12 Robert Hamer reports, but I could be having a memory lapse.


Steve King, Motorola Cellular  (...uunet!motcid!king)

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

From: "Adam J. Ashby" <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Phones in the UK and Vice Versa
Date: 14 Jun 90 21:41:32 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


[e-mail] (Mike Bell) writes:

>[e-mail] (Ole J. Jacobsen) writes:

>>course, I have verified that it works. Using a BT extension socket, I

>pulse dial phones differ (most of the UK is pulse dial only) and US
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Most of the UK is both tone and pulse dialling (tone dialling is
free!)  and is increasingly digital due to aggressive System X and
System Y replacement.  In my opinion, BT offer a far superior
telephone service than I experience here in Illinois, even though they
don't (yet) offer all those wonderfully use(less)(ful) features that
we have here.


Adam

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 14:57:36 PDT
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My List of World Wide Codes
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Linc
Madison) writes:

>Four years ago, my San Jose directory had 3.5 pages of listings for
>country/city codes.  Why chop the list???

Well, the plot thickens.  I just got my new June, 1990, directory the
other day, and they have a much longer list.  Countries returning to
existence (in Pac*Bell's infinite wisdom) include Sweden, Senegal,
Argentina, Fiji, and Tasmania.  There are several more city codes
listed for some of the larger countries.

Go figure.


Linc Madison   =   [e-mail]

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

From: Henry Troup <bnrgate!.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Canada Direct
Date: 14 Jun 90 16:50:28 GMT
Reply-To: Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken
Dykes) writes:

>Well, I keep hearing about USA Direct and wondered why I hadn't heard
>of a similar Canadian service ... Well I just heard of it - not through
>my phone company but through my Royal Bank Visa newsletter!  (If

I, on the other hand, heard of it through an insert in my phone bill
last July - just in time of a very short notice trip to the U.K. Bill
shuffler malfunction? or premature decision that it was junk?


Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions
 ..uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 or  [e-mail]

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

From: Henry Troup <bnrgate!.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Experiences With Spirit and Meridian Phone Systems
Date: 14 Jun 90 17:01:19 GMT
Reply-To: Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd.


Warning: I work for a subsidiary of Northern Telecom, but this is not an
official statement.

One must be careful to qualify which 'Meridian' NT product one is
talking about.  The word 'Meridian' is now applied from the smallest
SL-1 (100 lines ?) to the full blown SL-100 (potentially 100,000
lines).

Norstar is a recent small PBX, very technically advanced, with much
attention to user interface and self-configuration (really!).  It does
voice and data, using an 'ISDN-like' 2B+D channel structure.  I'm
afraid I can't find an office in Iceland.


Henry Troup

BNR owns but does not share my opinions.
 ..uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 or  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 90 21:13:50 EDT
From: "Peter G. Capek" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Needed About New York Teleport


In issue 432 of the Digest, Jane Fraser asks for information about New
York Teleport.

New York Teleport is on Staten Island (an island whose presence
creates the Arthur Kill, receptor of almost daily oil spills).  It is
basically a site with multiple satellite antennas and facilities
(fiber, I think) for getting data to and from other parts of New York,
but primarily the financial district in Manhattan.  I believe the
major partner is the Port of New York Authority.

There are two listings in the Manhattan phone book which seem related:

  Teleport Communications, 5 Teleport Drive, Staten Island   718 983-2000
  Teleport Communications Ny, 2 World Trade Center, NY       718 983-2000

Hope that helps you.  If you find out something interesting, let us know
in the Digest.


Peter Capek
IBM Research -- Yorktown Heights, NY
914-784-5027

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

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 10:01:37 gmt
From: paolo prandoni 274128 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Solution Needed: Phones Ring When Dialing


Here in italy (intentional lowercase) touch tone dialing seems more
than far from being known. So I have a little problem : in different
rooms of my house I have some telephones parallel connected; pulse
dialing causes all the telephones but the one being used to ring in a
practically undistinguishable way from incoming-call ringing. The
problem is a matter of late days, when the phone company changed the
heavy mechanical phones with electronic ones. The old ringers were
actually too heavy to be moved by the low voltage pulses that occour
in dialing. Can anybody give me some advice to avoid this nuisance ?

Thanks in advance,


Paolo Prandoni.
[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #435
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23672;
          16 Jun 90 4:06 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20574;
          16 Jun 90 2:15 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa00767;
          16 Jun 90 1:11 CDT
Date:     Sat, 16 Jun 90 0:14:37 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #436
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 16 Jun 90 00:14:10 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 436

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers [Eric Varsanyi]
    Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers [Max Southall]
    Re: Choosing No Long Distance Carrier (was: I Have no LDC) [Dean Sirakides]
    Re: Interesting Statistics [Edward Greenberg]
    Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call [H. Troup]
    Re: 800 Service and Their Local Phone Numbers [John Stanley]
    Re: Does This Feature Exist in a Telephone? [Roy Smith]
    Re: Using "#" As a Timeout [Carl Moore]
    Identifying Switches [Henry Troup]
    Two NYC Central Offices [Carl Moore]
    Letters On Phone Dials - An Australian Perspective [David E. A. Wilson]
    Answer Call Service and the Secret Service :-) [Rich Zellich]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Eric Varsanyi <boulder!pikes!craycos.com![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers
Date: 15 Jun 90 21:33:16 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Brewer) writes:

>Wouldn't it be easier to tell the public that the mode of
>transmission is not secure?

When I signed up for Cellular One in the Colorado Springs area (Front
Range) they made me initial next to a paragraph in two separate
agreements (one for the service package and one to just protect
themselves apparently) that stated cellular communications were not
secure and 'commercially available scanners' could listen in.

They also mentioned that it was illegal for the person listening to
get any benefit or tell anyone else what they heard.

On another note: This month (my first with them) they changed policies
and now charge from the time you hit SpEND until END. Previously they
started charging when supervision was returned. Their justification
was that 'this is a standrard industry practice'... Is it?


Eric Varsanyi ([e-mail])        Cray Computer Corporation

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

From: Max Southall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 22:35:44 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Tom Perrine <[e-mail]>
writes:

>>Although Bell Cellular is targetting the defence and national
>>security market, the scrambling unit has not yet been certified that
>>it meets the rigid Tempest standards set by the U.S. National Security
>>Agency. Only equipment that meets the Tempest standards set by the top
>>secret communications spy agency can be used by NATO governments to
>>communicate classified military and intelligence information.

>NSA is the agency charged with (among other things :-) ensuring the
>security of U.S. gov't and related communications. No encryption

>I find it almost impossible to believe that NSA is going to approve a
>box that they didn't design, and which was designed and manufactured
>outside the US.

Certain Canadian companies are participating in Tempest, through an
agreement between the NSA and the Canadian Security Establishment.

As well, NSA-sponsored encryption chips are available for design-in
into both U.S. and Canadian projects, producing "STU-III" type
products, which meet the appropriate Canadian and U.S. agency
approvals.

As well as Canada being a NATO partner of the U.S. and America's only
Free Trade partner, the Canadian and U.S. military forces are closely
linked under NORAD command, as well as their foreign policies.

There are also certain close-to-the-vest agreements in other areas ...

(STU-III ??? "Secure Telephone Unit"  ... :-)  )


%% Dru Nelson %% Miami, FL %% Internet:  [e-mail]  %%

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

From: Dean Sirakides <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Choosing No Long Distance Carrier (was: I Have no LDC)
Date: 15 Jun 90 14:09:00 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian
Litzinger) writes:

>Well, the PacBell representative I spoke with disagrees.  He said that
>I must choose a default long distance carrier.  He even showed my the
>form he was filling out, and under long distance carriers was: AT&T,
>MCI, Sprint ... However, None, was nowhere to be found.  There wasn't
>even a blank line or other field.

I've signed up for service through Illinois Bell on two separate
occasions.  The first time was about three years ago. The account rep
asked all the usual questions about features and packages (one of
which was unmeasured service!) and then came to the "time to choose
your default LD carrier".  She claimed AT&T would be the "simple"
choice because the billing would be combined.  In any case, she said I
must choose a carrier.

I've recently (~4 wks) set up service again.  This time when we
reached the LD question I got a different response.  The rep said she
could not sign me up for a carrier. What she did do was read me a list
of the "biggies" and offered me the 800 number of which ever company I
wanted.  Consequently, since I have a hoard of calling cards, I have
no default LD carrier.

P.S. The set up cost me $55 and I was given three available numbers to
choose from (I was told only business lines can request numbers).  I
was also asked during the feature questions "if I had the phones with
the buttons or the dial!!!"


Dean Sirakides              |    Motorola Cellular Group
 ...uunet!motcid!sirakide    |    Arlington Heights, IL
      Of course I speak for myself, not my employer...

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

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 10:05 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Interesting Statistics


Scot Shaffer <cpqhou![e-mail]> writes about the percent of
unlisted residence telephones in various cities.

He goes on to write that people with unlisted numbers were surveyed as
to why they have such numbers.

I want to know how they contacted the holders of unlisted numbers for
the survey :-)

                            -edg

[e-mail]

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

From: Henry Troup <bnrgate!.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call
Date: 15 Jun 90 14:46:38 GMT
Reply-To: Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd.


In article <[e-mail]> "John Slater <[e-mail].
sun.com> writes:

>All the switch has to do is delay passing control onto an
>international switch until it has received sufficient digits to check
>that the call really needs it.  Why should it be any more complicated
>than that?

Eventually, it shouldn't be more complicated than that.  However, as
late as last August, some parts of the U.K. still had routing codes,
not area codes.  A routing code is a 'context-dependent' code: the
London routing code for Dundee, Scotland is 382.  The London routing
code for St. Andrews is 396 (?).  But you dial a totally different
code to call St. Andrews from Dundee.  The Tayside Region phone book
has an amazing number of tables of what to dial from _where_you_are_
to _where_you_want_to_call.

I assume that this means the Scottish switches are old crossbar and
SxS, with no smarts soever to translate anything.


Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions
 ..uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 or  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 09:39:33 EDT
From: John Stanley <nmri!![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Service and Their Local Phone Numbers


Recently, from coplex![e-mail] (Dannie Gregoire):

>I understand that for each 800 line that exists there is a
>corresponding local (7 digit) number for it.  Is this true?  If it is,
>can the "local" number be used for incomming local calls without
>charge (Normally you cannot call a "local" 800 number)?

  There usually is such a number. How it is used depends on the 800
service provider, it seems.

  While we had an 800 number from AT&T, it had a secret local number
that was supposed to be for test purposes only. I was told by the
installer that gave me the number (perhaps not the best source, but A
source) that billing was based on traffic through that number and
calling it locally would cost just like a normal 800 number call. This
was when the incoming line was a dedicated wire just for the 800
number.

  When we moved our 800 service to MCI, they asked us for the number
to have calls come in on. In all other regards, this is a normal line,
with its own number, just like any other line NYTel provides us. If we
wished, we could have our 800 calls come in on our main, published
line, and we could have all our 800 calls hunt up through the sequence
just like other calls. Since we want to have some way of identifying
who is calling in on the 800 number, we have had those calls come in
on a separate number that then hunts to the main number when busy.

  In short, the MCI 800 service can be thought of as: 800 number call
is carried on MCI net to a Syracuse MCI office, MCI office picks up a
phone and dials the Syracuse number we told them to dial, and connects
the 800 call to that. AT&T needed to have a pair in their office to
connect the 800 call to, which NYTel just happened to also assign a
number to, and AT&T asked NYTel for the billing info.

  AT&T may have changed the system in the last two years -- it was
that long ago we used them.

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

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 90 11:33:43 EDT
From: Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Does This Feature Exist in a Telephone?
Organization: Public Health Research Institute, New York City


Darwin C. Weyh writes:

> I'd like to have a speaker phone that she could answer without going
> over to the device.  If it could be voice activated or if I could
> enter a secured code to have the phone answer itself.

    I think our AT&T System-25 can do that.  If you have a HFAI-10
(10-line Hands Free Auto Intercom, I think) on your desk, your
secretary can call you and you can answer without touching the
instrument.  I'm pretty sure this can only be activated from specially
programmed phones (i.e. your secretaries, but not from an outside
line).  I would imagine there are HFAI-5's as well.  I believe (but am
not at all sure about this) that the System-25 instruments are
interchangable with Merlin sets.  This stuff is all intended for small
businesses, and may be out of reasonable price ranges for home use.


Roy Smith,
Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue,
New York, NY 10016
[e-mail] -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy

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

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 9:51:32 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Using "#" As a Timeout


DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN) <[e-mail]> wrote:

> C&P Tel in New Castle, DE (I think...)

C&P does not serve Delaware.  Delaware comes under Diamond State/Bell
of Pa.  C&P serves Md./DC/Va./W.Va.

He also wrote:

> "<alert tones> Your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check
> the number, and dial again. [NPA from where you are calling from]-2T".

 From Delaware, which is area 302, I have gotten area code 215
inserted in messages like this.

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

From: Henry Troup <bnrgate!.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Subject: Identifying Switches
Date: 15 Jun 90 14:30:35 GMT
Reply-To: Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.ca![e-mail]>
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]) (DOUGLAS
SCOTT REUBEN) writes:

>I still can't tell what sort of electronic switch it is just by
>hearing the busy/ring signals (ie, to distinguish between a DMS-100
>and 200, for example),

That's because the DMS-100 and 200 use the same tone generators, etc.
The product line includes 100, 100/200 combined, 200, and access
tandem.  (Plus DMS-250, 300, and MTX).  100 is local, 200 is toll,
essentially. I've never been totally clear on the _hardware_
difference between a 100 and a 200.  I don't think there is any.

Each of the above products is available with two generations of CPU -
NT40 and SuperNode (tm), a 68020/30/40 version.  Then there are the
peripherals - the original series, probably not supported on
SuperNode, and the XPM series, themselves 68020 based, on both NT-40
and SuperNode.

Watch the press for more announcements that will complicate this even
more!


Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions
 ..uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 or  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 17:42:54 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Two NYC Central Offices


In response to a note I saw in TELECOM Digestregarding NPA-xxx-9901 in
NYC, I tried 212-601-9901 and found it was the Kingbridge exchange
with prefixes 601,543,548,549,796,884.

I also tried, in response to same note, 212-578-9901 and got this
list, not necessarily in this order:

578,689,779,545,889,220,251,447,469,458.  (I located 578 as zone 1 in
notes that were printed in 1976, and I see that 779,545,251,447, 469,
and 458 replace what is now in area 718, judging from the zone numbers
in those 1976 notes, which have 220 as zone 3, Bronx.  That leaves 689
and 889 as the only other prefixes in this group in zone 1.)

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

From: David E A Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Letters on Phone Dials - An Australian Perspective
Date: 15 Jun 90 03:48:22 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, University of Wollongong, Australia


In Australia, our Telecom supplied phones do not have letters on the
dial so we do not have companies using words as phone numbers. I
thought that we must never have had letters on our dials. This turns
out to be untrue.

Yesterday I dropped in at the local library and had a look through the
old telephone books (I only looked at 1960's & 70's). Back in the
early 60's we did have letters on our dials - and in a pattern I have
not seen mentioned before. The layout was as follows [1 = 1 pulse, 0 =
10 pulses]:

    1 = A    2 = B    3 = F    4 = J    5 = L
    6 = M    7 = U    8 = W    9 = X    0 = Y

Has this scheme been used anywhere else in the world? Why were these
particular letters chosen?

In the Wollongong exchange district in 1961, only five out of fifteen
exchanges were automatic. The Wollongong exchange had five digit
numbers with the first digit represented by the letter from the above
table.  Other exchanges had either three or five digit numbers for the
automatic exchanges or one to three digit mixed length numbers on the
manual exchanges. Some of the manual exchanges had numbers like 436-D
& 436-U (at a guess a party line) and one had 52-S. My favourite was
the Dunmore exchange - one digit numbers and four subscribers.

By the early 70's the letters had gone and Wollongong was converted to
six digit numbers by about 1973 [we still have six digit numbers but I
have heard we may need to go to seven digits in the not to distant
future].

It is quite astounding to see the growth that has occured in my
lifetime - in 1961 the phone book covered an area now in six books
about twice the size and thickness of the 1961 issue. The biggest
growth is in the Yellow Pages - the 1990 edition has 264 white & 760
yellow pages.

The old books even had instructions on how to dial - a skill some Americans
have lost since the introduction of push button phones a previous poster
noted.


David Wilson    Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong, Australia

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

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 10:59:11 CDT
From: Rich Zellich <[e-mail]>
Subject: Answer Call Service and the Secret Service :-)


Gee, if drug dealers and phone phreaks and computer crackers start
using CO-supported voice mailbox features, do you suppose the Secret
Service will confiscate the CO computers during their raids?  ;-)


[Moderator's Note: Of course not, silly! That's because telcos, like
Compuserve and GEnie -- to name but two -- have high-priced
mouthpieces working for them. Get yourself a good solicitor and you
can do or say what you please also, and be as sassy as you like.  I
mean, don't all BBS operators have high-powered corporate solicitors
in-house, just like IBM, MCI, or Cellular One to protect them when
something goes wrong?  :(    PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #436
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13121;
          16 Jun 90 13:45 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06296;
          16 Jun 90 11:19 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12618;
          16 Jun 90 10:16 CDT
Date:     Sat, 16 Jun 90 9:31:45 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #437
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 16 Jun 90 09:30:49 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 437

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    GSM: Group Special Mobile or Global Standard Mobile? [John R. Covert]
    Rochester Tel to Offer Blocking of Caller ID [Curtis E. Reid]
    Re: Caller*ID Random Thought [Michael Fetzer]
    Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls [Isaac Rabinovitch]
    New York City xxx-9901 Numbers [Douglas Scott Reuben]
    Re: 800 Service and Their Local Phone Numbers [John Higdon]
    Re: Very Long Distance Email ... a Question [Donald E. Kimberlin]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 13:30:30 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  15-Jun-1990 1626" <[e-mail]>
Subject: GSM: Group Special Mobile or Global Standard Mobile?


The Pan-European digital cellular system being planned for
implementation over the next five years has the acronym "GSM".

In Digest V10#435, Kolkka Olavi claims this stands for Global System
Mobile, which is also what I used to think it stood for, but only
because it seemed logical, not because I had ever seen that in print.

In an article I posted recently, I referred to it as Group Special
Mobile, based on an article published in the Swiss PTT's technical
journal which I recently read.

Who's right?  Kolkka or the Swiss PTT?

BTW, both Kolkka and I are not happy with the fact that the U.S. will
not be implementing a compatible digital cellular standard that would
have allowed U.S. <--> Europe roaming.

However, it may be that GSM doesn't have characteristics that the
telcos here think are critical.  Certainly it is not compatible with
AMPS, which would mean that dual-mode phones would be much more
difficult to implement.

It would probably also mean that hybrid systems, part digital and part
analog, could not be operated.  As far as I know, the European PTTs
are not planning any sort of easy phaseover from the existing networks
to GSM.


/john

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

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 15:32 EST
From: "Curtis E. Reid" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rochester Tel to Offer Blocking of Caller ID


Article from DEMOCRAT AND CHRONICLE, Rochester, New York, Friday, June 15,
1990, page 10D:

                 ROCHESTER TEL TO OFFER BLOCKING OF CALLER ID

By Phil Ebersole, Democrat and Chronicle

Rochester Telephone Corp., in an important concession to critics of
its proposed Caller ID service, said it's willing to provide Caller ID
blocking, but only on a per-call basis....

 ....Requiring callers to dial a code to block a call, Rochester Tel
staff members argue, would:

    * Prevent blocking of numbers in emergency calls to fires, police,
ambulance and other emergency services.  Caller ID would be important
if the caller is a child, a non-English speaker or someone with speech
or hearing impairment.

    * Allow people being called to know when a caller is someone
intentionally making an anonymous call, and not just and old friend
with an unlisted number.

Rochester Tel is test-marketing the service in Perinton, currently the
only part of the New York state where the service is available....

 ....Richard Kessel, chairman of the New York Consumer Protection
Board, yesterday asked the Public Service Commission to prohibit
Caller ID except by telephone companies who provide both "general
blocking" and "selective blocking."

With "general blocking," the number never would be revealed except
when calling emergency numbers.  With "selective blocking," callers
could use a dialing code to control when their numbers are
revealed....

 ....Rochester Tel staff, in a position paper dated June 1, said
critics of Caller ID are confused about the meaning of privacy.  It's
the person being called whose privacy is intruded upon, the staff
said....

 ....Research indicates that 65 percent of Rochester Tel's customers a
year receive annoyance calls -- ranging from threats and obscene calls
to children's pranks....

 ....Rochester Tel's proposal is that phone numbers be blocked only if
callers punch *67 on push-button phones or dial 1167 on rotary phones.

New Jersey experienced a 49 percent drop in annoyance calls following
introduction of Caller ID, Rochester Tel staff said....

 ....Another issue for Rochester Tel is cost.  In Perinton, the
company offered both line (general) blocking and per-call (selective)
blocking.  About 525 of the 10,500 Perinton residents asked for
general blocking, and blocked more than 17,000 calls a week.  The rest
 -- 95 percent of Perinton subscribers -- blocked only 10 calls a
week....

 ....Told of Rochester Tel's position, Kessel said he's pleased the
company recognizes the need for some sort of blocking service,
particularly since Rochester Tel is "the guinea pig of New York state"
in testing this service.

He said there's still a need for public hearings on Caller ID to
explore this issue.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Fetzer)
Subject: Re: Caller*ID Random Thought
Date: 15 Jun 90 07:48:14 GMT
Organization: People-Net [pnet12], Del Mar, CA


[Moderator's Note: The original poster suggested using 900-based loop
arounds to avoid detection.  PT]

[poster talks about his method of defeating Caller ID]

I hate to bust your bubble, but they already have 900 services to do
just that.


UUCP: ucsd!serene!pnet12!rider   or   ucsd!mfetzer
ARPA: crash!pnet12![e-mail]
INET: [e-mail]        or   [e-mail]
BITNET:                                fetzerm@sdsc

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

From: Isaac Rabinovitch <claris!netcom![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls
Date: 14 Jun 90 18:32:03 GMT
Organization: Netcom- The Bay Area's Public Access Unix System {408 241-9760}


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John R. Covert)
writes:

>I'm not sure why John Higdon thinks that Caller ID would be more
>effective than other SS7 services in preventing his 3AM phone calls.

>Call Trace would allow him to take legal action against the caller.

Very often, such callers aren't breaking any laws, just being
thoughtless.  There's a certain very popular motel which is
responsible for most of my wrong numbers; it's easy to transform their
number into mine if you reverse two digits and/or confuse a scribbled
seven with a scribble nine.  What's especially vexing is that this
motel (private jacuzzis, oversized beds; you know the kind of place)
attracts some very flaky people who keep dialing my number over and
over, sometimes abusing me for asking them to dial more carefully,
more often hanging up as soon as I answer; in both cases, they often
call me again *immediately*.  I often wish I had some way of
communicating my frustration at these people.

Another time I used to get a lot of calls meant for a Stanford student
who had my number before me.  This guy had quite an enviable social
life, judging from some of the messages left on my answering machine
 -- too bad I couldn't return some of the more interesting calls.

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

Date: 16-JUN-1990 03:39:28.55
From: "DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: New York City xxx-9901 Numbers


In response to Carl Moore's posting about 212/718 (and 516 and lower
914) exchanges "identifying" themselves by dialing xxx-9901...

Try calling 718-855/643/403/(+ others) -9901. It used to say all the
exchanges in the Bridge Street (Brooklyn) 5ESS. Now all it says is
"You have reached the Bridge Street #5 ESS, now including the 403
code...". Great, if I were working for NY Tel I'd really want to know
that it "now" includes the 403 code! What about the other 7
exchanges?!?

Oh, and this only seems to work on NY Tel's NYC Region DMSs and 5ESSs.
If you dial xxx-9901 on older systems (Crossbar, 1/1AESS, Step-by-Step
(are there any left?)), you get a computer telling you the area code
and the exchange you had dialed. (IE, 7-1-8-6-4-3.) Sounds like the
958 ANA (?) voice to me.

In case anyone cares, here are some 99xx "suffixes" that 'work' in NY:

9901- (see above)
9902- sometimes like 9901
9907- 600 ohm terminator (or something like that...it just picks up the
      phone and hangs ... someone told me that 9907/9908 used to be loops).
9908- ?? See above. Loop with 9907 in some cases.
9941- repair office, used in some exchanges (611 in NYC/Long Island and 1-890-
      6611 gets the same thing is Westchester).
9950- Business office in some exchanges
9951-9969- Standard recordings, such as "The call you have made requires
           a 25 cent [10 cent in NY Tel's CT service area] deposit.." Try
           718-520-9960.
9970- Busy (also works in North Jersey, and upstate NY, like Ithaca and 607-
           257 Xbar exchange)
9971- Reorder. More prevalent on the Xbars, but a few older ESSs give a reorder
      on -9971. Also works occasionally in North Jersey (201).

Finally, does anyone know what a "DS-0" switch is? (Try 516-724-9901.)
Is a DS-0 some sort of DMS??

If you are calling long distance, calls to 9901 RECORDINGS (ie, DMS
5ESSs) don't bill/return supervision, while calls to the older Xbars
and 1/1AESSs usually do bill. Of course, you can just use MCI and not
worry about it - they'll bill you in any case! :-)


Doug
[e-mail] / @wesleyan.bitnet
(...and the rest on my LOCAL entourage know how to reach me! :-)  )

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Service and Their Local Phone Numbers
Date: 16 Jun 90 02:21:14 PDT (Sat)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


John Stanley <nmri!![e-mail]> writes:

>   While we had an 800 number from AT&T, it had a secret local number
> that was supposed to be for test purposes only. I was told by the
> installer that gave me the number (perhaps not the best source, but A
> source) that billing was based on traffic through that number and
> calling it locally would cost just like a normal 800 number call.

First off, getting the POTS number for a standard 800 service is no
problem. Your local telco business office will give it to you as well
as AT&T (or whoever your 800 provider is). Calling that number using
the local POTS assignment will not, repeat not, bill as an 800 call.
The calls are ticketed in a number of different ways, none of them
including metering the incoming calls to the POTS.

I have a traditional AT&T 800 number. I know the POTS (Pac*Bell gave
it to me) number. A call directed to the 800 number is billed at one
of four rates, depending on location of the caller and time of day. If
the billing was based on simple usage of the POTS, how would the point
of origin be determined?


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !


[Moderator's Note: Under the now less common billing system where WATS
lines were in 'bands', the incoming local number detirmined which
'band' should have the charge, for the purpose of minutes/hours of
time accumulated on that 'band'. An hour of time on Band 1, for
example, cost less than an hour of time on Band 4. So someone dialing
one of the local numbers would cause the associated WATS 'band' to
register a few minutes of use, despite the fact that the call did not
really get routed in from long distance. Now with virtually everyone
using simply the equivilent of the old Band 5 (national coverage) in a
'Hotline' (as AT&T calls the service) kind of configuration, it no
longer matters. Twenty years ago, breakdown of WATS calls both in and
out by 'band' was very common.  PT]

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

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 8:36:00 CDT
From: Donald E. Kimberlin <[e-mail]>
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
Subject: Re: Very Long Distance Email ... a Question


In Digest Vol.10, Iss.434, Riddlebarger writes:

>One of our employees is about to embark on a fairly long [roughly six
>months] stint in Europe....
>... Should I try to find a foreign server for him, and forward his mail
> back and forth?  Should I investigate one of the commercial mail
> carriers like attmail, again with a local forward from our site?  Or
> is direct dial likely to be an acceptable alternative given the
> time-frame and expected volume?

Anticipating there will be a significant volume to transfer, and that
it will be daily (or perhaps even several times daily), batching the
files will certainly result in the least on-line time. In particular,
you should compress that files to cut that time in about half (at
least for text files and such compressible stuff) ... provided you get
one of the newer compression programs, not the old, original .ARC that
some mini makers now peddle.  Get .PAK or .ZIP, or any other you can
find that uses the Ziv-Lempel compression algorithm.

With that, you can figure the daily minutes of use as half the time
you'd use otherwise..making allowance that your correspondent will
have some time hanging on to get started and wind up with you.  If you
want to use dial-up, be sure to transfer the batched file with a
powerful error-correcting algorithm that "streams," like ZMODEM.

Now, each of the commercial E-Mail carriers has offerings of access
deals back to the States via the national packet network of the
country, but as in telephony, the arangements can be beaurocratic and
sometimes quite expensive.

You can send your correspondent off with a 2400bps "hayes-type" modem,
because its modulation plan is actually CCITT V.26ter, and it will
com- municate either direct to you or to European modems that meet
V.26ter or V.22bis.  These are just the CCITT way of saying "full
duplex 2400 or 1200 bps."

Where the bureaucracy builds is in the electric interface spec to the
local dial-up phone line, and if you get into conversation with the
PTT of the country, objections that the "foreign-made modem" isn't
good enough are (at least until 1992) rather likely. (This despite the
fact that MANY of the modems supplied in Europe are from U.S.
factories, with nothing but a special label that shows the PTT"s
engineers found it OK.)

To attempt an answer to this, MCIMail promotes a Swiss-based device
called the "Worldmodem." It's a VERY expensive piece of hardware that
has agreements for a number of nations and a rather expensive plug-in
you also buy to make it work ... you kind of rent its use in addition
to buying it.  What's nice about it is that the plug-ins are the PTT-
authorized "modular plug" for each nation.  For people traveling from
nation to nation, this is rather nice. Hotels even have them to rent
casually (at a VERY high rate) in some nations.

If you can find a cooperating partner with a local server that's with-
in local flat-rate calling range, then maters might be eased and
cheaper for you to avoid the transatlantic batching.  But if your
European nation is a fully-metered one (like Germany), watch out for
the local phone bill!

Whatever you do, send your person off with a bit of Radio Shack
modular extender receptacles (the kind used to plug two phone cors
together) a couple of spade lug-ended short modular cords and some
alligator clips, plus a couple of screwdrivers.

That way, when and while the bureaucracy is confusing the matter wiht
all sorts of delays to getting in business, your person can indulge in
a little simple "phreaking" that will find you can just clip onto an
analog phone line (Oh, be SURE to dial PULSE only ... no tone
dialing!) and get through till the smoke clears.

For all the great talk promised, many people find some "phreaking" is
needed if you really mean to get through ... at least for a while.

If you can find a local correspondent with a server, they usually can
find someone local who's quite adept at "getting things done," by some
"phreaking" or otherwise.  But send you person hardware-equipped, as
the largest signle problem can be getting the matching U.S. modular
plugs amd cords for the modem connections.  (Sometimes there are minor
advantages if you travel to underdeveloped nations.  There, you just
get a hookup of whatever you brought and you blast away.  Those
nations have neither the people to police nor the office to harass
you.)

If you want to go off using the "prepared packet-access offering" of
one of the U.S. E-Mail carriers, fine, but it risks not getting up as
fast as you're led to believe and costing you quite a bit.  Just like
here, the "advice" of local Telco "experts" `is often confusing and
contradictory ... and almost certainly expensive!

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #437
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23861;
          16 Jun 90 18:48 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa22244;
          16 Jun 90 17:22 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19030;
          16 Jun 90 16:19 CDT
Date:     Sat, 16 Jun 90 16:16:29 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #438
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 16 Jun 90 16:15:56 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 438

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls [John R. Covert]
    Re: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400 [Patricia O'connor]
    Re: Letters on Phone Dials - An Australian Perspective [Isaac Rabinovitch]
    Re: Letters on Phone Dials - An Australian Perspective [Peter da Silva]
    Re: Interesting Statistics [Peter Weiss]
    Re: Information Needed About New York Teleport [Donald E. Kimberlin]
    Re: Answer Call Service and the Secret Service :-) [Marc T. Kaufman]
    How Do I Find Back Issues of the Digest? [Dan Lanciani]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 08:09:01 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  16-Jun-1990 1054" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls


>Can you suggest a way, preferably cost effective, to use Incoming Call
>Block on, say, all but 87 numbers listed in the "business" section of
>the white pages of any medium-sized city?

The basic problem with any sort of denial list is that it is always
only marginally effective.

Caller ID won't help, either.  Even if the CD-ROM telephone directory
were only a dollar-three-ninety-eight, and you hooked your caller ID
box up to your PC and didn't make your phone even ring for any of the
listed numbers, it wouldn't stop the telemarketing calls, since they
don't come from the listed numbers.

Even if you feed the number of each telephone solicitor that calls you
into your PC database, the chances of the next call from that
telephone solicitor coming from the same line, when the solicitor has
anywhere from 10-200 lines, is rather low.

And what if a family member is injured at a store, and the store tries
to call you, and you've decided not to take those calls?

Caller ID, by collecting phone numbers, will only make the
telemarketing problem worse.  The only defense against telemarketers
is to try to get legislation passed which prevents it.  Here in
Massachusetts, we at least don't get any of the automated calls --
every telemarketing call I get asks for me by name.  Oregon requires
telemarketers, even those calling manually, to obey a "no
solicitation" entry in the phone book, and prohibits calls to unlisted
numbers.  Florida has recently started prosecution of an out-of-state
company that made telemarketing calls to Florida.

Until then, you can try to hit them in their pocketbook.  So far I
have only been successful in charging the New York Times $1.25
(through rebate on my subscription) for the actual cost of a call
which was forwarded to my cellular phone.  The next time they won't
get off that easily.  The problem is tougher when you don't have an
account with a company, such as the Middlesex News (see attached
letter).  I'm a member of Private Citizen, and I also am serving the
more annoying telemarketers notice that they must cease and desist:

30 May 1990

Mrs. Paula Bubello
Director of Telemarketing
The Middlesex News
33 New York Avenue
Framingham, Massachusetts  01701

Dear Mrs. Bubello:

In the eleven years I have lived in Acton, I have received numerous
telemarketing calls from the Middlesex News.  Each time I have asked
the telemarketer to please arrange for the Middlesex News to never
call me again.  Yet the calls keep coming.

I pay New England Telephone for residential telephone service for my
own purposes, and I allow my number to be listed so that people who
know me but do not know my number may find it out and call me.  I also
pay New England Telephone for call forwarding service and pay NYNEX
Mobile Communications for mobile telephone service so that I can
receive desired calls when I am not at home.

I do not wish to be called by telemarketers, especially by companies
such as The Middlesex News which continue to call repeatedly after I
have told them to cease and desist.  This letter documents, in
writing, my request for The Middlesex News to permanently remove me
from any and all telemarketing lists, and to never call again.

Should my request be ignored, I am serving notice that I will bill you
for the actual cost of any call forwarding or mobile telephone call
that results when you call my home telephone number.  In addition, I
will bill you a service charge of between $20 and $100 for processing
your call.

Should you fail to pay my bill when rendered, I will consider that
call and any future calls from The Middlesex News to be telephone
harrassment and will take appropriate legal action.

Sincerely,

John R. Covert

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

From: Patricia O'connor <hoptoad!f555.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Patricia.O'connor>
Subject: Re: Replacement Battery for AT&T 4400
Date: 15 Jun 90 10:11:58 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:125/555 - Late Night Software, San Francisco CA


Hi Curt,

        From what I've been able to determine, the 4400 has a battery
pack that is soldered in place (ie not intended to be replaced by end
users).  However, the replacement price is fairly reasonable.  AT&T
will replace the pack for $18.75.  You pay to ship to them.  They pay
return postage.  No RMA number is required.

        There are two centers that do this, one for the East coast and
one for the West.

        In the East, contact:

                CATT
                80 Peilbet District Road
                New Milford, CT  06776
                800-344-6145

        In the West, contact:
                Mann Products
                4344 Lawndale
                Lyons, IL  60534
                800-445-3563

        The downside is that turnaround is about two weeks.

PatiO
MacCircles 1:161/555
Patricia O'connor - via FidoNet node 1:125/777
 UUCP: ...!sun!hoptoad!fidogate!555!Patricia.O'connor
 INTERNET: Patricia.O'[e-mail]

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

From: Isaac Rabinovitch <claris!netcom![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Letters on Phone Dials - An Australian Perspective
Date: 16 Jun 90 16:30:02 GMT
Organization: minimal


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
writes:

>Yesterday I dropped in at the local library and had a look through the
>old telephone books (I only looked at 1960's & 70's). Back in the
>early 60's we did have letters on our dials - and in a pattern I have
>not seen mentioned before. The layout was as follows [1 = 1 pulse, 0 =
>10 pulses]:

>    1 = A    2 = B    3 = F    4 = J    5 = L
>    6 = M    7 = U    8 = W    9 = X    0 = Y

>Has this scheme been used anywhere else in the world? Why were these
>particular letters chosen?

It might help to look at phone numbers in newspaper ads from the
period.  In th US, those letters are a hangover from a time when
exchanges had names rather than numeric prefixes (or, as now, a
"prefix space").  When I was a kid, back in the 50s, the local prefix
was always given as "Valley-2", not "822".  I dimly recall that before
that the prefix was only important to long-distance calls (locals
could get a number just by dialing the last 4 digits), when you would
have to call the operator and say "I want a Valley number."  I *do*
remember the Bell System (remember them?) doing a lot of propaganda to
get people to stop using the exchange names.

That weird configuration (not that both T and E are missing, those
being the most frequent consonant and vowel respectively) suggests to
me that those letters had were *not* meant as abbreviations for
English names.

>In the Wollongong exchange district in 1961, only five out of fifteen
>exchanges were automatic. The Wollongong exchange had five digit
>numbers with the first digit represented by the letter from the above
>table.  Other exchanges had either three or five digit numbers for the
>automatic exchanges or one to three digit mixed length numbers on the
>manual exchanges. Some of the manual exchanges had numbers like 436-D
>& 436-U (at a guess a party line) and one had 52-S.

Here's a guess: at one time Australia allowed phone companies to
compete to provided local service.  The letters were the initials of
the particular phone company.  After they went to a regulated monopoly
system, the old system was kept for a while so people wouldn't have to
change their numbers -- much as New York subway lines are still
identified by the long-defunct private companies that once ran them.

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Letters on Phone Dials - An Australian Perspective
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 17:43:56 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David E A
Wilson) writes:

>     1 = A    2 = B    3 = F    4 = J    5 = L
>     6 = M    7 = U    8 = W    9 = X    0 = Y

I remember that. In Vaucluse our exchange was 37, and a few places
still referred to numbers like "FU-2386". This was dropped when we
went to 3-digit exchanges (by doubling the first digit, I think.
Anyway, we became 337).

This never occurred to me as weird, and I'd completely forgotten about
it until you brought it up.


Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
[phone].
<[e-mail]>

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Saturday, 16 Jun 1990 06:57:56 EDT
From: Peter Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Interesting Statistics


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says:

>I want to know how they contacted the holders of unlisted numbers for
>the survey :-)

I wonder if they got a Reverse Telephone Directory and called all the
numbers of NOT listed?


Peter M. Weiss                   | pmw1@psuvm or @vm.psu.edu
31 Shields Bldg (the AIS people) |
University Park, PA USA 16802    | Disclaimer -* +* applies herein

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

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 8:38:21 CDT
From: Donald E. Kimberlin <[e-mail]>
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
Subject: Re: Information Needed About New York Teleport


Further to Fraser's inquiry and Capek's reply in issue 434:

>In issue 432 of the Digest, Jane Fraser asks for information about New
>York Teleport (Capek writes):

>New York Teleport is on Staten Island...  I believe the major partner
>is the Port of New York Authority.

The situation has become quite complex at Teleport-NY.  It started out
as a neat investment in "telecommunications" by Merrill-Lynch, who
originally built most of the whole shebang.  Then M-L found out that
getting access to Manhattan and customers was darned expensive and not
of the quality expected. (Staten Island is primarily residential and
amazingly "remote" in a telephone network sense from Manhattan, so the
phone network wasn't really built for the demands of business and
things like lots of rented T-1 span lines.)

So, M-L expanded the Teleport charter to renting right-of-way in NYC
subway train tunnels for fiber cable of their own, to provide digital
facilities of top grade.  (I suspect that M-L is one of its own best
clients, of course, and got an immediate demand from themselves.)

Anyhow, the satellite space segment business is a *hard* place to make
a buck, and M-L sold the satellite operating portion to Contel/ASC,
but remained the landlord.  Real estate is business financial types
know how to make a buck from, of course.

And, M-L's Teleport found out there were plenty of bucks to be made on
the fiber they had planted underground ... not just to get to the
Teleport, but around town.  That spurred them on to get into the
"alternate local carrier" business in about twenty major cities around
the nation.  So, you'll see Teleport Communications (the M-L
subsidiary) emerging in those ciities, offering local fiber in the
business area, in competition with Metropolitan Fiber Optics (which
had its start in the abandoned railway tunnels of our kind Moderator's
toddling home town, Chicago), was acquired by Peter Kiewit & Sons, the
contractor that planted many miles of fiber nationwide, and last, but
not least, the local Telco of each city.

Just to have something to watch, Kiewit's MFO is leading efforts to
force local Telcos to interconnect their plant with "Alternative
Access Carriers."  Watch the news on that.  Local Telco monopoly?  Not
for as long as you might think!

Final note: The very *day* that MFO opened up in San Francisco,
PacBell cut its local dedicated circuit rates by 40%.  Local Telco
monopoly, you say?  Only for dial tone ... and maybe not for long there,
either!

In addition to the MFO and Teleport national moves, there are some
local Alternate Access Carriers in cities around the country, keeping
a low profile, but doing their thing quietly.  The Telco response is
typically silent, but construction costs in most cities are really so
ridiculously low for fiber and rights-of-way are *not* that difficult
to find for the knowledgeable that they aren't going away.  Local
Telco monopoly, you say?

Only for dial tone, and maybe not for that long, either!

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

From: "Marc T. Kaufman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Answer Call Service and the Secret Service :-)
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 16:26:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rich
Zellich) writes:

>Gee, if drug dealers and phone phreaks and computer crackers start
>using CO-supported voice mailbox features, do you suppose the Secret
>Service will confiscate the CO computers during their raids?  ;-)

>[Moderator's Note: Of course not, silly! That's because telcos, like
>Compuserve and GEnie -- to name but two -- have high-priced
>mouthpieces working for them.

Actually, I think its more straightforward than that.  While browsing
through my copy of 47 CFR I noticed that telephone and telegraph
companies are required to retain toll records and copies of telegraph
messages for a minimum period of six months, and that there are
established procedures for obtaining those records and messages.

In the case of a private BBS, there is no such requirement (well, that
depends on how you read ECPA), and the only established procedure for
obtaining copies seems to be: confiscate the equipment :-(.  I think
the key here is the fact that telcos are controlled to a large extent
by the FCC, and so can be expected to cooperate.

Even if we can succeed in obtaining a presumption of privacy for
electronic messages, I think we will still have problems -- because of
RICO (all those BBS users in the aggregate become a conspiracy under
the Racketeering law).

It's time to lobby for congressional action -- but I for one am unable
to come up with suitable wording for a proposed law.

Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: What you say about telco record retention and
'expectation of cooperation' is a very good point. So where does that
leave Compuserve, IBM, and other non-telco organizations such as
answering services with voicemail setups, etc?  Why, back with the
high-powered attornies, of course, the kind of people who have as much
dirt on the federal prosecutor and federal judge as the former has on
their hapless client.  PT]

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

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 90 23:20:29 EDT
From: Dan Lanciani <[e-mail]>
Subject: How Do I Find Back Issues of the Digest?


In re: Running Two Phone Lines in One Cable

    I heard that there was a discussion in telecom about this that
I somehow missed.  How can I get the appropriate back issues?


    Dan Lanciani
    ddl@harvard.*

[Moderator's Note: This is typical of requests I receive frequently.
Anyone on the Internet with ftp authorization can 'ftp lcs.mit.edu' to
review the Telecom Archives. After anonymous login, then you must 'cd
telecom-archives'. If you are not on the Internet, then you must use
the Archives mail server instead. Letters would be sent to the address
'[e-mail] (Bitnet users only) or to the address
'[e-mail]' for anyone else. When using this method,
list the FTP commands in upper case down the left margin, followed by
their arguments. For a complete help file on this method, write to the
above address and put the word HELP in upper case at the left margin
of the first line. *No other text on that line or elsewhere*.  You
will get back a comprehensive help file. When it arrives, I suggest
you make your first pull from the Archives the file 'index.to.archives'.

In the meantime, perhaps the authors of the articles in particular
will contact this reader to answer questions.  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #438
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26434;
          17 Jun 90 12:55 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa17721;
          17 Jun 90 11:27 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa16810;
          17 Jun 90 10:23 CDT
Date:     Sun, 17 Jun 90 9:43:01 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #439
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 17 Jun 90 09:42:46 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 439

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Card Mixup [Gregory M. Paris]
    Cellular Phone Billing Practices [Jay Maynard]
    The Survey Results [TELECOM Moderator]
    Letters on Phone Dials Around the World (Was: Australia) [Dik T. Winter]
    Mechanical Hunting Devices [Ernest Billingsley]
    Caller ID and Canada [Marcel D. Mongeon]
    Reference Sources Needed [Tom DeBoni]
    Re: Tollfree Number Serves Continental US and Two Provinces [M. Mongeon]
    Re: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line [R. Kevin Oberman]
    Re: So Long, LATA? [Donald E. Kimberlin]
    Re: So Long, LATA? [David Tamkin]
    Re: RJ45 vs RJ11 [Howard Chu]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 12:35:52 -0400
From: "Gregory M. Paris" <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Card Mixup


An unusual piece of mail arrived at our home yesterday: an AT&T Card.
Not so odd, except that we didn't ask for one (my wife, Esther,
already has an AT&T Card for this number) and that the card has on it
the name of a person we'd never heard of before.

The envelope was addressed to me and inside was a little note saying,
"While in the process of fulfilling your order we experienced a slight
delay!"  It goes on to say that an "update and correction to the
mailing address" was needed.  Lo and behold, when I look at the card
with my name and address on it, I see that it has been corrected by
use of a stick-on mailing label.  Underneath that is the name and
address of the person listed on the card!

I, being afflicted with a mild case of phonaphobia (and laziness),
waited for Esther to get home and take care of the matter.  She called
the given 800 number and pressed a bunch of touch tones, apparently
navigating a menu system, and finally spoke with a human (or
convincing simulacrum).  After several minutes, she was assured that
we are safe from having our account billed by the person listed on the
card and then rang off.

We speculated on how this mixup came to pass; the voice on the phone
had put forth no plausible explanations (or explanations of any kind,
for that matter).  My spouse insisted that it had to be some kind of
typo.  I couldn't imagine how, since my name and address are nothing
like those of other person -- one huge typo, if you ask me.

Perhaps Esther's instincts are better than mine.  She looked up the
other person in the Providence white pages (yes, after eleven months,
NYNEX finally graced us with a copy).  Can you guess?  The other
person's phone number is different from ours by a single digit.


Greg Paris <[e-mail]>
{uiucdcs,uunet}!rayssd!gmp

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

From: Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phone Billing Practices
Reply-To: Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard <[e-mail]>
Organization: Confederate Microsystems, League City, TX
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 19:07:24 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> boulder!pikes!craycos.com!ewv
(Eric Varsanyi) writes:

>On another note: This month (my first with them) they changed policies
>and now charge from the time you hit SpEND until END. Previously they
>started charging when supervision was returned. Their justification
>was that 'this is a standrard industry practice'... Is it?

I suspect that it may become a standard industry practice, but, at
least in Houston, GTE Mobilnet charges from either the time the phone
is answered or the tenth ring (probably == 1 minute) until END.

I can understand why they'd want to charge from off-hook until
on-hook, though, as you're still using a channel during the time the
phone is ringing, and it is a charge for airtime.


Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL
[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 17:06:38 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Survey Results


About a month ago, I posed some survey questions for you. As some
readers pointed out, the results were flawed because of the
methodology, so we started all over again in V 10 #424, June 9.

Now I have the results a second time, and hopefully these will be more
meaningingful. The questions had to do with cracking and phreaking:

1) Have you made one or more phraud phone calls in the past six
months?

2) Have you broken into a computer or gained unlawful access to a
computer in the past six months?

You were asked to flip a coin: One way, answer the above questions
honestly; the other way, toss the coin a second and third time to
detirmine your answers.

If a second a third flip were required, then the questions were given
yes or no answers, depending on the coin toss.

We received about the same number of replies this time as last. 570
this time versus 636 earlier. The responses were different this time,
as to be expected, but the majority were still no-no!  Here is the
breakdown, NOT adjusted for the coin toss -- just the raw data. Apply
your own formulas in interpreting it:

84  (14.7 %) answered YES to both questions. Have cracked, have
             phreaked in the past six months, at least one time.

72  (12.6 %) answered YES they had phreaked, but NO they had not
             cracked in the past six months.

78  (13.7 %) answered NO they had not phreaked, but YES, they had
             cracked in the past six months.

336 (58.9 %) answered NO to both questions. Have not cracked or
             phreaked in the past six months.


So, about 59 % of you don't do these things, and about 41 % of you
indulge occasionally, or more often in one or both activities.

One person wrote me to argue about definitions, such as what did I
mean by 'unlawful access' or 'breaking into a computer'. I put him
down for yes-yes.

All individual responses have been erased from my disks. I no longer
have any record of the individual responses. Thanks to everyone who
participated.


Patrick Townson

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

From: "Dik T. Winter" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Letters on Phone Dials Around the World (Was: Australia)
Date: 16 Jun 90 23:42:22 GMT
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David E A
Wilson) writes:

 > Yesterday I dropped in at the local library and had a look through the
 > old telephone books (I only looked at 1960's & 70's). Back in the
 > early 60's we did have letters on our dials - and in a pattern I have
 > not seen mentioned before. The layout was as follows [1 = 1 pulse, 0 =
 > 10 pulses]:

 >     1 = A    2 = B    3 = F    4 = J    5 = L
 >     6 = M    7 = U    8 = W    9 = X    0 = Y

Perhaps it is time for a retransmission of something I did post a few
years ago (where Australia can now be added):

Digit            1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   0

North America       ABC DEF GHI JKL MNO PRS TUV WXY
UK and France       ABC DEF GHI JKL MN  PRS TUV WXY OQ
Danmark         C   ABD EFG HIK LMN OPR STU VXY (1)
Germany         A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   J   K
Czocheslovakia  A   B   C   F   H   J   K   L   M   R
Sovjet Union    A   V   B   G   D   E   ZH  I   K   L

Notes:
(1)     In Danmark, 9 is associated with a-umlaut and o-bar.
(2)     I have a photograph of an American telephone where 0
        is marked:
                Z
             Operator
                0
(3)     The German telephones skip I, possibly because in older
        times German did not distinguish upper case I and J.
(4)     In the Netherlands the German layout was used.  The reason
        was that German telephones were used, the letters have never
        really been used here.
(5)     In most (all?) European countries the use of letters has
        faded out.
(6)     The Sovjet-Union layout is of course a transcription.


Does anybody know of other layouts?

dik t. winter, cwi, amsterdam, nederland
[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 11:55:53 EDT
From: Ernest Billingsley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mechanical Hunting Devices

        A friend of mine recently brought his BBS online, Comquest
[phone] in Detroit if you're interested. To support this he has
had eight phone lines installed in his home with circular, I assume,
hunting. Now the circular hunting is a feature with a monthly charge
and what he was wondering is there a device he can install in his home
that will forward on busy?

I told him I'd ask in the Digest. After all, what are friends for?


[Moderator's Note: If I understand correctly, your friend wants to do
his own hunting from line to line rather than have the CO do it. I
don't think there is any such thing outside the CO. After all, if the
CO returned a busy signal to the caller, how would that call ever
reach him so that he could forward it to another of his lines? Or am I
missing something here?  PT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marcel D. Mongeon)
Subject: Caller ID and Bell Canada
Date: 17 Jun 90 00:47:07 GMT
Organization: The Joymarmon Group Inc.


Recently, the Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission,
approved the filing by Bell Canada for a Caller ID tariff.  However,
in reading the tariff, there was one disturbing factor, the feature
would *NOT* be available for incoming PBX trunks.

Is there any technical reason for this?  These are normal hunt trunks.
Nothing fancy like DID.

Is there a political reason for this?  My greatest need of Caller ID
is to interface a hotel reservations system with the Caller ID to come
up with the particular callers file and to verify the number given
with the reservation to establish how valid the reservation is.  Not
to make it available on PBX trunks would seem to eliminate the largest
user of the service.


|||  Marcel D. Mongeon
|||  e-mail:    ... (uunet, maccs)!joymrmn!root  or
|||                                joymrmn!marcelm

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom DeBoni)
Subject: Reference Sources Needed
Date: 15 Jun 90 18:43:19 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


I need references.

My colleagues and I have been arguing, and it's clear that even though
we are all reasonably informed and even erudite computerists and
EEers, we really don't have all the facts. What we need is one or more
books that describe in detail (1) the telephone system as it now
stands in North America at least, (2) modem technology and modulation
techniques in use by modems today and in the near future, (3) ISDN and
other future service upgrades and bandwidth expansions planned for
home and commercial use, (4) cellular telephony and radio datacomm
systems in use, and (5) a list OF other references to such stuff as
standards definitions, tutorials and introductory texts, and
industry-specific methods.

A tall order, and any info will be appreciated. Reply to me by email,
and I'll collect and summarize the results to this newsgroup.

Thanks!

Tom DeBoni ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Marcel D. Mongeon)
Subject: Re: Tollfree Number Serves Continental US and Two Provinces
Date: 17 Jun 90 00:39:58 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Marcel D. Mongeon)
Organization: The Joymarmon Group Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (VLD/VMB) writes:

>I have seen a tollfree number listed as working from continental U.S.
>AND from the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec.  (The specific
>number: 800-225-TRIP, for Kentucky travel info.)

Nothing special about this.  There are lots of 800 numbers that cross
the US Canadian border.  Here in Canada, a US 800 number is provided
by dealing with the local member telephone company of Telecom Canada
(Sort of like what ATT used to be in the days of monopolies) who then
deals with ATT.  The number from the states actually comes in on a
separate line but haves the same telephone number.  Also, the US
service can be bought in different bands based on distance from the
US-Canada connection point.

On 800 numbers into the states, a number of companies have made deals
with the Canadian carriers to put through their calls.  MCI and Sprint
are two that I know about.

|||  Marcel D. Mongeon
|||  e-mail:    ... (uunet, maccs)!joymrmn!root  or
|||                                joymrmn!marcelm

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line
Date: 14 Jun 90 19:18:38 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, ssc![e-mail]
(Tad Cook) writes:

> WHAT is Bell Colorado???  I have heard of the old Mountain Bell (now
> US West) but never Bell Colorado.  Is it a non-US firm?

There is no Bell Colorado. the agreement was with US West.

I have heard some reports that it may be killed because the Dept. of
Commerce may block the technology export. Then the Soviets WILL buy
from a non-US firm.

        R. Kevin Oberman
        Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
        Internet: [e-mail]
           [phone]

Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing
and probably don't really know anything useful about anything.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 8:40:00 CDT
From: Donald E. Kimberlin <[e-mail]>
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
Subject: Re: So Long, LATA?


In Digest v10, iss434, Jongsma writes:

>I don't know if anyone else has noticed it, but the term LATA is
>rapidly disappearing from use. The local phone books no longer refer
>to it, instead using the words "Local Serving Area".

>Not that I'm sad to see it go! I always thought it was rather
>pretentious.

Sorry to disappoint you, Ken, but LATA is not going away.  It is and
remains the "official" name of an area that has access points to the
big outside world of interstate common carriers.  The term 'Local
Serving Area" is a subdivision of a LATA, usually caused by the
presence of a "little guy" Independent Telco that gets its connections
to the "outside world" of interstate communications via the nearby
"big guy" (usually Bell) Telco.  The "Local Serving Area" should be
found to be the territory of within which no toll charges are applied
for a "local" rated phone call.

Another case may exist when a LATA crossed a state line (much more
common than some Digest participants seemed to have thought a while
back.  My current example: Mississippi has incursions of LATAs from
other states at 5 points on its boundaries; places where historically
a telephone exchange from a town in the neighboring state had grown
into MS years ago.  Similarly, the Alabama/Georgia border has LATA
incursions across state lines.

So, dislike the term LATA as much as you may, it still exists and is
different than a Local Serving Area.  Sorry!

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

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 90 12:35 EST
From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: So Long, LATA?


Ken Jongsma wrote in volume 10, issue 434:

|I don't know if anyone else has noticed it, but the term LATA is rapidly
|disappearing from use.  The local phone books no longer refer to it,
|instead using the words "Local Serving Area".

Are you sure that's what "local serving area" meant?  Around here
"local serving area" means a single telco's satrapy.

MSA is a synonym for LATA, but I don't remember what it stands for.


David Tamkin  P. O. Box 7002  Des Plaines IL  60018-7002  [phone]
MCI Mail: 426-1818   CIS: 73720,1570   GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN  [phone]

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

From: Howard Chu <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: RJ45 vs RJ11
Organization: University of Michigan Math Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 90 12:50:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
writes:

>Under some circumstances you can run RS-232 type sigs on a
>RJ25C. In fact DEC do I believe, and I have clients that run serial
>printers and serial terminals on RJ25 set ups.

    I think DEC uses these on their LK201 keyboards, to link the
keyboard to the terminal. The Atari Mega-ST uses a similar cable to
link the keyboard to the computer. Both of these keyboards communicate
using RS232 signals. The ST keyboard communicates at 7.8kbps, I don't
know what the LK201 runs at.


Howard Chu @ University of Michigan

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #439
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13265;
          18 Jun 90 10:07 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15264;
          18 Jun 90 8:34 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa29050;
          18 Jun 90 7:29 CDT
Date:     Mon, 18 Jun 90 6:43:02 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #440
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 18 Jun 90 06:42:34 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 440

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Survey Results [David A. Lyons]
    Re: The Survey Results [Peter Weiss]
    Re: The Survey Results [Mark Seiden]
    Re: The Survey Results [David Barts]
    Re: Solution Needed: Phones Ring When Dialing [Julian Macassey]
    Re: GSM: Group Special Mobile or Global Standard Mobile? [Markku Kolkka]
    Re: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line [[e-mail]]
    Re: US Phones in the UK and Vice Versa [John Slater]
    Defeating the 95n Restrictions on PBXs [Steve Huff]
    Number Plea-uhs... [Mark C. Lowe]
    AT&T Telstar Call Control Unit [Arthur J. Riedlinger]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David A. Lyons" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Survey Results
Date: 18 Jun 90 04:25:55 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (TELECOM
Moderator) writes:

>Here is the breakdown, NOT adjusted for the coin toss -- just the raw data.
>Apply your own formulas in interpreting it:

>84  (14.7 %) answered YES to both questions. Have cracked, have
>             phreaked in the past six months, at least one time.
>72  (12.6 %) answered YES they had phreaked, but NO they had not
>             cracked in the past six months.
>78  (13.7 %) answered NO they had not phreaked, but YES, they had
>             cracked in the past six months.
>336 (58.9 %) answered NO to both questions. Have not cracked or
>             phreaked in the past six months.

>So, about 59 % of you don't do these things, and about 41 % of you
>indulge occasionally, or more often in one or both activities.

I don't mean to sound negative, but NO!

I'm no statistician, but I CAN demonstrate that the 59%/41% figure is
a way-wrong interpretation:

For the sake of argument, let's assume all the honest answers are No.
The results we would expect, are 75% No and 25% Yes, for each
question.  That would be 6.3% Yes/Yes, 18.8% Yes/No, 18.8% No/Yes, and
56.2% No/No.  (That's .25*.25, .25*.75, .75*.25, and .75*.75.)

Doesn't resemble 100% No/No much, does it?

So let's actually account for the coin tossing and see what comes out.

Taking your original numbers, and assuming half of the people were
honest and the other half gave coin-toss answers, there should be 285
coin-toss answers randomly distributed through the four possibilities
(Yes/Yes, Yes/No, No/Yes, No/No), or 285/4 = 71.25 random responses.

Cracking + phreaking:         84 - 71 = 13  =  4.5%
Cracking + no phreaking:      78 - 71 = 7   =  2.4%
No cracking + phreaking:      72 - 71 = 1   =  0.4%
No cracking + no phreaking:  336 - 71 = 265 = 92.7%

I conclude that almost 93% of the respondents have not gained unlawful
access to a computer or made a fraudulent phone call in the past six
months.


David A. Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc.      |   DAL Systems
Apple II Developer Technical Support      |   P.O. Box 875
America Online: Dave Lyons                |   Cupertino, CA 95015-0875
GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS         CompuServe: 72177,3233
Internet/BITNET:  [e-mail]    UUCP:  ...!ames!apple!dlyons

My opinions are my own, not Apple's.

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sunday, 17 Jun 1990 16:54:13 EDT
From: Peter Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Survey Results

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (TELECOM
Moderator) says:

>All individual responses have been erased from my disks. I no longer
>have any record of the individual responses.

That's what Ollie North said.  How do you know it is still not readable?


Peter M. Weiss                   | pmw1@psuvm or @vm.psu.edu
31 Shields Bldg (the AIS people) |
University Park, PA USA 16802    | Disclaimer -* +* applies herein


[Moderator's Note: I don't know anything for sure except that I pay my
taxes each year and some day I will die. I erased it here, and even if
it were readable after someone went to the trouble of restoring the
data, what would it prove?  PT]

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jun 90 23:31:25 EDT
From: Mark Seiden <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Survey Results


Perhaps a more interesting question (for your next survey) is whether
people have phreaked/cracked in the last *seven years* (or whatever the
statute of limitations is on such activities)...

Should we draw the conclusion that almost half of us (your readers)
are criminals?

I wonder what productive use can be made of your results?

By the way I would be surprised if there weren't quite a bit of
negative bias in the your results, despite the coin-flip because
anyone with any combination of intelligence and paranoia (most of us,
today) would find it remarkably stupid to provide something written as
probable cause for law enforcement to come a searchin', as they seem
wont to do... ("oh no, officer, the coin just came out that way...")

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jun 90 20:45:25 pdt
From: David Barts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Survey Results


The Moderator writes:

-> We know that as the number of coin tosses increases, the likelyhood is
-> that there will be an even number of heads/tails come up. So, we can
-> take the number of answers received, *assume that half were answering
-> the relevant questions and disgard half the results, evenly from all
-> possible answer groups*, getting some idea of how many of you are
-> naughty, and how many are nice.

-> A better way of handling the survey, aiming for the highest possible
-> number of accurate answers while still allowing a relative anomynity
-> in posting would have been to ask but the first set of questions --
-> the relevant ones -- with the condition that if the coin toss was
-> heads, answer the questions accurately. If the coin toss was tails,
-> then flip the coin twice more: (1) heads/tails = yes/no on phraud calls;
-> then (2) heads/tails = yes/no on computer cracking.  In either event,
-> do not reveal the coin toss -- simply send along your answers.

Bzzzt.  Suppose, for sake of argument, everything happens exactly as
you want it.  You collect all your replies (exactly 50% lies and 50%
true answers), and throw out half of them.  You *still* have 50% lies
and 50% true answers -- your set of answers now consists of 50% of the
of the original answers, and half of them (25% of the original) are
lies, the rest (another 25% of the original) are the truth.

                n!
There are   ----------   ways to pick half the questions, and only
            2 * (n/2)!

one of them has all the right answers (and unless you're psychic you
don't know which set to pick).  Half have more right answers than the
original set and half have less.


David Barts            Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA
[e-mail]        ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb

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

From: Julian Macassey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Solution Needed: Phones Ring When Dialing
Date: 18 Jun 90 03:34:58 GMT
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (paolo
prandoni 274128) writes:

> Here in italy (intentional lowercase) touch tone dialing seems more
> than far from being known. So I have a little problem : in different
> rooms of my house I have some telephones parallel connected; pulse
> dialing causes all the telephones but the one being used to ring in a
> practically undistinguishable way from incoming-call ringing. The
> problem is a matter of late days, when the phone company changed the
> heavy mechanical phones with electronic ones. The old ringers were
> actually too heavy to be moved by the low voltage pulses that occour
> in dialing. Can anybody give me some advice to avoid this nuisance ?

    What you have here is Bell Tap (Bell Tinkle in the UK). First
of all the pulse caused by dialing or flashing the hookswitch often
approaches 300V, the ringing voltage is normally about 90V. The old
ringers (Gong Ringers) were no doubt tuned or wired so as not respond
to dial pulses. I seem to recall, that one Italian solution to bell
tap on gong ringers was to install a diode (1Amp @ 1 KV) to clip the
positive wave of the dial pulse.

    As I recall, Italian phones have hookswitch contacts that
disconnect the ringer when the unit is offhook. So the phone being
dialed will not bell tap. As I also recall, Italy used to have
regulations that prohibited more than one instrument being usable at
one time.

    Crummy ringers will bell tap. The best solution is to build or
buy decent ringers and use those.


Julian Macassey, n6are  [e-mail]  ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian
N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice [phone]


[Moderator's Note: On the subject of 'Bell Tap', I am reminded that
years ago a tavern/lunch counter located next door to one of the
central offices here, which was patronized heavily by telco employees
at lunch and after-hours was called the Bell Tap. It was downtown,
near the Franklin CO. I guess that isn't what you had in mind. :)  PT]

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

From: Kolkka Markku Olavi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GSM: Group Special Mobile or Global Standard Mobile?
Reply-To: Kolkka Markku Olavi <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Finland
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 06:43:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John R.
Covert 15-Jun-1990 1626) writes:

>The Pan-European digital cellular system being planned for
>implementation over the next five years has the acronym "GSM".

>In Digest V10#435, Kolkka Olavi claims this stands for Global System
>Mobile, which is also what I used to think it stood for, but only
>because it seemed logical, not because I had ever seen that in print.

>In an article I posted recently, I referred to it as Group Special
>Mobile, based on an article published in the Swiss PTT's technical
>journal which I recently read.

The story goes like this: The Group Special Mobile (actually the name
is in French, but the initials are same) was formed to create a
standard digital mobile phone system.  At that time nobody bothered to
think what the system would be called, so everybody started referring
to it as the GSM system.  Later somebody noticed that calling a phone
system after the committee isn't really sensible, but the use of the
acronym GSM was so widespread that they kept it but invented a new
"explanation".  Global System Mobile is now the official name of the
phone system being developed by the Group Special Mobile.

>Who's right?  Kolkka or the Swiss PTT?

Both of us.  I think "Global System Mobile" became official only
recently.

PS. My first name is Markku.

    Markku Kolkka
    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 01:47:54 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TSL - Trans-Sovietic Line


The Department of Defense already killed this project. Sorry...  See
article in NY Times for details.


Andrei

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Phones in the UK and Vice Versa
Date: 18 Jun 90 09:30:26 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, motcid![e-mail] (Adam J.
Ashby) writes:

>>[e-mail] (Ole J. Jacobsen) writes:
>>pulse dial phones differ (most of the UK is pulse dial only) and US
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Most of the UK is both tone and pulse dialling (tone dialling is
>free!)  and is increasingly digital due to aggressive System X and
>System Y replacement.

I dispute the word "most", this month at least. It's true that BT is
modernizing the entire network very rapidly, but my guess is that
they're not half-way yet. I'm happy to be corrected on this if anyone
has concrete figures.

Part of the problem is that demand for phone service is growing so
fast (I heard 8 percent per year) that BT is having to take old
Strowger exchanges out of mothballs to keep up.

It's worth noting that three years ago virtually nowhere in the UK had
tone dialling (apart from office PABX systems, and even they had to
pulse to the outside world).


John Slater
Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick office

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

From: "Steve Huff, U. of Kansas, Lawrence" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Defeating the 95n Restrictions on PBXs
Date: 17 Jun 90 14:44:21 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services


Is there any way to defeat the 9nn restriction on some business
telephones?  For example, our AT&T system restricts all calls that
begin with a 95.  Although I agree with the reason (to prevent 900 #s
being dialed), it is expensive when I am forced to use the 800 line
for calling card calls.

Thanks.

Steve Huff
Internet:  [e-mail]      EmCon:   K1TR or KW02
Bitnet:    [e-mail]
UUNet:     uunet!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu![e-mail]
Snail:     P.O. Box 1225, Lawrence, KS  66044-8225

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jun 90 17:52 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Number Plea-uhs...


The other day...

I called the local GTE to get the number disconnected at the old
apartment we just vacated.  I talked to a lady whose phone-side manner
was so mechanical...  so robotical!  SO NON_HUMANICAL!  It was SCARY!

I'm very serious!  She sounded precisely like a recording, only she
was interacting like no recording could.  Adding to the effect is what
I would assume was a VOX headset she was using.  Everytime she talked,
the background noise would kick in, making it sound oddly like many
digitally sampled words strung together into sentences.

Not only did she talk perfectly, but she was perfectly NICE!
Everything was said so ultra-friendly.  Everything was a compliment.
She was amazingly charming.  She was a PROFESSIONAL OPERATOR!

I felt very unusual when I got off the phone, like I had really been
conversing with some beyond-fourth-generation AI program.  It was
sooooo eerie!!

But it gave me a feel for the way it most certainly will be some day.
Can you all just imagine it?  Operators will be androids like
Commander Data, if they even feel the need to give them a human form.

Has this ever happened to you???  TELL US YOUR CYBERNETIC TELEPHONE
EXPERIENCE!

On another note, where did the traditional operator heavy-New England
accent stereotype come from?  I know it's been around longer than Lily
Tomlin.  It's in ALL the movies from the 30's and the 40's and more
recently.  Any clues?

NUMBER PLEA-UHS...

Mark C. Lowe - KB5III

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jun 90 20:49:37 EDT
From: "Arthur J Riedlinger, Iii" <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Telstar Call Control Unit
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


About five years ago I purchased an AT&T Telstar Call Control System,
manufactured by American Bell Consumer Products, and it has been
working perfectly with four regular phones attached to the jacks. I
recently purchased a Northwestern Bell Excursion Sport II cordless
phone and connected into an unused jack. All the regular phones ring
on an incoming call, the cordless base or remote unit do not ring in
the installed jack or when interchanged with other phones, which work
where the cordless unit was installed. The cordless base and remote
both ring when interchanged with a single phone installed in another
residence.

I suspect that the AT&T unit cannot handle the cordless phone but AT&T
does not have any information on the Telstar unit, which has been
discontinued.

I have the owners manual for the Telstar unit, but it doesn't have any
restrictive operating notes. Does anyone have the installation
information or know who I can contact regarding the technical
specifications on this unit?


Art Riedlinger
AT&T Network Cable Systems - Atlanta Works
[phone] (w)
email akguc!ajr3

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #440
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04237;
          19 Jun 90 4:16 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa29090;
          19 Jun 90 2:45 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa05173;
          19 Jun 90 1:41 CDT
Date:     Tue, 19 Jun 90 0:46:08 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #441
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 19 Jun 90 00:45:32 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 441

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    0015 "Faxlink" Service From Australia [Jim Breen]
    MCI Long Distance Service [David Dodell]
    More Eastern European News [Hank Nussbacher]
    Cellular Multiplexing and Cellular Modems [Dannie Gregoire]
    RJ45, RS232, LK201, MMJ - Acronymania [Jerry Leichter]
    Information Needed: Panasonic KT2445BE [Nigel Roberts]
    Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB [David Lewis]
    Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter" [Donald E. Kimberlin]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jim Breen <[e-mail]>
Subject: 0015 "Faxlink" Service From Australia
Organization: Chisholm Institute of Technology, Melb., Australia
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 02:00:18 GMT


Some weeks ago I listed the international access codes from Australia,
and mentioned 0015 for "echo free" (I forget my actual words). A few
people mailed me some questions, so I thought I had better get the
facts straight before I replied.

0015 is the access code for the "Faxlink" service, which is
recommended for people making fax (and presumably data) calls out of
Australia. It is the same price as the normal IDD calls placed using
the 0011 code.

The following information has been supplied by OTC (Overseas
Telecommunications Corporation), Australia's international carrier.

"When dialling 0015, The Faxlink access code, the call will attempt to
access a data grade circuit and avoid DCME (compression equipment) as
a first option. To some destinations, routing is via 64kb channels.
OTC is currently negotiating bi-lateral agreements with various
overseas carriers to handle fax traffic to Australia in a similar
manner."

"If access to 0015 is unavailable, a call will automatically be
redirected to the 0011 selection sequence, utilizing cable and
satellite, both of which have extensive compression equipment.....".

A question for the network: do other countries have a similar service?
If so is it the same price as for IDD calls?


   _______        Jim Breen ([e-mail]) Dept of Robotics &
  /o\----\\     \O         Digital Technology. Chisholm Inst. of Technology
 /RDT\   /|\   \/|   -:O____/  PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia
O-----O        _/_\    /\ /\      (ph) [phone] (fax) [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jun 90 21:00:05 mst
From: David Dodell <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Long Distance Service


Due to some changes in the hospital, there is a good chance we might
be changing our modem phone number to be part of the hospital PBX as a
OPX (Off-Premise Exchange) ... this will save about $35 month
initially in local service, plus we will then have full access to the
capabilities of the hospital switch.  At present, we are running a
foreign exchange line that gives us downtown Phoenix access.

Couple of questions:

(1) The switch is digital ... does this make a difference to high speed
modems?

(2) The hospital has a T-1 circuit for their long distance access to
MCI.  While they are renegotiating new contracts for long distance
carrier, does anyone else use MCI for the modem connects?  We need
something that will handle 19,200 connections (we average 17,000 baud
to the coasts) and I understand this will increase with the V42
upgrade to my dual hst/v32.

(3) The PBX gives us new capabilities, like a voice mail box (I wonder
what the nodelist flag for that one is? <grin>), busy forward, forced
forward (helpful if we crash to forward our mail to someone else),
etc.

Feedback appreciated!

David

          St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona
        uucp: {gatech, ames, rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!ddodell
    Bitnet: ATW1H @ ASUACAD                    FidoNet=> 1:114/15
    Internet: [e-mail]       FAX: [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 15:23:33 P
From: Hank Nussbacher <[e-mail]>
Subject: More Eastern European News


East Germany: Alcatel Sel has signed an agreement with East Germany to
supply 14 System 12s, for 34,000 local lines and a digital exchange
for long distance calling (12,000 lines).

Hungary: At the beginning of 1990, the Hungarian Ministry of
Communications split into 3 organizations: telecommunications, postal
and customer services.  The telecommunications company is now called
B.H.G. and has signed joined agreements with Northern Telecom.  BHG
intends to supply 400,000 lines per year to the public.  Alcatel Sel
has signed an agreement with Videotu, a Hungarian company, creating a
new company called Videoton-Sel Telecommunication and it intends to
supply System 12 switches for 300,000 lines by 1992.  SEL was only
allowed to provide navagational and airport technology to Hungary due
to Cocom regulations.  This has now been changed.  Samsung has also
signed a joint agreement with the Hungarian telecommunications company
Orion.  Depending on the way things progress, Samsung intends to
increase its production in Hungary especially since it has just signed
a agreement with Poland for $50 million.

The current waiting time in Budapest for a phone is thirteen years and
the national average is twelve phone lines per 100 people.

Celluar phones are also coming to East Europe.  A USA company and the
Hungarian Postal organzation have signed an agreement for the
development of a celluar phone network.  It will be analog and run at
450Mhz.  The USA company is a partnership with PCN (Personal
Communication Network), a British consortium.

The recent Cocom meeting in May released 39 different technologies
from being restricted.  Among them are X.25 technology, PBXs using
Signaling System 7, optical cables and lasers.


Hank Nussbacher
Israel

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

From: Dannie Gregoire <coplex![e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Multiplexing and Cellular Modems
Date: 18 Jun 90 14:10:05 GMT
Organization: Copper Electronics Inc.; Louisville, Ky


I recently read that most cellular phone systems are wanting to go
digital in the next year or so.  They expect to be able to multiplex
10 times the number of calls per channel.  My question is, what effect
will this change have on portable data communication equipment.  The
company I work for is possibly looking to become a distributor for
such equipment, and this new development may have an effect on that.

        \\-------------------\\
         \\  Dannie Gregoire  \\
          \\  (dannie@coplex)  \\
           \\-------------------\\

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 12:58:46 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: RJ45, RS232, LK201, MMJ - Acronymania


Howard Chu comments that DEC LK201 keyboards are connected using RS232
over a standard RJ45-style connector.  This is true; as I recall, the
connection runs at 2400 baud.  However, it is worth noting that what
is sent over the line is NOT ASCII codes - keys are identified by a
standard position encoding and there are additional codes as well -
e.g., up-down state encoding.

RJ45 connecters are used, but the keyboard cable is NOT a standard
phone cable.  Standard phone cable doesn't contain any wire - it is
formed from foil.  Keyboard cable is made of real wire and has a
larger effective gauge.  Since the keyboard draws power over the wire
to run its embedded 8051, this is significant - the voltage drop
through standard phone cable may be too large to allow the keyboard to
function reliably.  I've also heard tales that just the wrong
combination of a phone cable and "lucky" circumstances could start a
fire: After a short in the keyboard, because of the higher-resistance
cable just enough current gets drawn to heat things up, not enough to
trigger the protective circuits in the power supply.

Recent LK201's draw much less power use lower-power circuitry and will
probably work with almost any kind of cable.

DEC also uses a scheme called "DECconnect", based on the MMJ, or
Modified Modular Jack.  This has replaced the old 25-pin D connector,
and its many smaller variations, as the standard DEC RS232 (well,
really -422 or something like that these days - the new, improved
version) connector.  The "Modified" part means the shape is different
(the little handle is place assymetrically) so that you can't plug
your terminal into a phone line by accident, or use a telephone cable
to interconnect stuff.

    -- Jerry

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 08:10:59 PDT
From: Nigel Roberts 0860 578600 <"iosg::robertsn"@iosg.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Informantion Needed: Panasonic Model KT2445BE


The time came last week when we just HAD to retire our superannuated
_Binatone_ answering machine. It was one of the first on the market
that could be bought rather than rented. It was so old it had the old
style GPO tip & ring jack plug (It used to cost us 50 pence a year or
something like that to rent the socket) and a Post Office
(pre-B.A.B.T) approval number.  It is still going strong, by the way;
we donated it to a friend.

Its replacement is the all-singing, all dancing, hot&cold running
water Panasonic KT-2445BE (U.K. model). I'm very impressed with it,
and really pleased with its performance. It's got the first effective
speakerphone I've ever used.

But there are a couple of annoying little features :-

    o    That 'beep' every 15 seconds when recording calls.
        From what I remember, U.K. law says you have the right
        to record your own phone calls, and there's nothing
        requiring that beep. How can I switch the damn thing off?

    o    The maximum ring delay is only 4 rings. Anyone know a
        modification to make this 8 rings or so?? (Apart from
        turning the machine off which gives a delay of 20 rings)

    o    The volume of the synthesised voice is a little low on
        the line and on recorded messages. Does anyone know
        how to turn it up (I presume there's a preset pot
        somewhere, but not having a service manual I don't
        want to twiddle around at random.)

Any other users of this or similar machines got any useful hints?

Regards,

Nigel Roberts

Tel: [phone] (home/office)        [phone] (work)
     [phone] (fax)                [phone] (Cellnet)

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

From: David Lewis <nvuxr![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB
Date: 18 Jun 90 14:10:10 GMT
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(John R. Levine) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> you write:

> >> 4) How the local telco got a waiver to give long distance service ...

> >It's not really "Long Distance" service...

> Au contraire, to the best of my knowledge it has never been a local
> call from New Jersey to New York across the Hudson nor from New Jersey
> to Philadelphia across the Delaware...

> My recollection is that the telephone networks across the two rivers
> were such a logistical nightmare that it was technically infeasable to
> partition them and route all the traffic to LD carriers between the
> time the Bell breakup was announced and the time it became effective.

(Note -- even though I work for Bellcore, this post should in no way
be considered to be an "official" interpretation (or even, for that
matter, a legal interpretation) of the MFJ or of the policies or
positions of Bellcore or any of its owners.  I ain't no lawyer.)

The MFJ Court granted a couple of "'limited corridor' exceptions" to
"preserve traditional direct BOC interstate serving arrangements.
These exceptions called for BOC-to-BOC, inter-LATA trunking between
(NYC & North NJ, and South NJ & Philly)"

The way I read this is that NJBell and NYTel on the one hand, and
NJBell and Bell of PA on the other hand, had direct trunking
arrangements which didn't pass through AT&T Long Lines
(pre-divestiture).  At divestiture, it was either technically
infeasible or economically 'not in the public interest' to partition
these between the three BOC in two Regional Companies and AT&T --
like, maybe, the necessary additional facilities to continue providing
the same service would have required a significant investment on the
part of all four companies.  (Opinion only.)

(Direct quotes taken from Bellcore TR-NPL-000275 Issue 1, April 1986,
Notes on the BOC Intra-Lata Networks -- 1986)


David G Lewis                    ...!bellcore!nvuxr!deej
    (@ Bellcore Navesink Research & Engineering Center)
            "If this is paradise, I wish I had a lawnmower."

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 21:58 EST
From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter"
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL


Responding to:  Jim Anderson <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
[e-mail]

Opening the thread, Henry wrote:

>In the next two weeks, Boston Gas Company will be in your neighborhood
>to install a new meter reading system.

Jim responded:

>I  had a tour of E. F. Johnson in Waseca, MN a few weeks ago, and they
>showed me their product that does this.  Apparently, E. F. Johnson is
>one of the major players in this market.  The gentleman giving the
>tour described how this works. (And went on to describe a radio-based
>methodology).

Now comes some mail to TNA from PacBell describing their service
offering to utlity companies via wireline, in a document titled,
"Network Disclosure," Series 2, Issue 6, May 1990," as follows:

     "PACIFIC BELL AUTOMATIC METER READING (AMR)

        "During the fourth quarter 1990, Pacific Bell plans to
introduce Automatic Meter Reading (AMR).

        AMR will allow the subscribing utility company to interrogate
their respective electric, gas or water meters via the existing
telephone network. Accurate readings will be available to the
utilities on an automated or manual basis, depending on the needs of
the utility or the utility's customers.

        The AMR System allows a utility to remotely acquire meter
reading data from its customers using the existing telephone line to
the customer premises.  This wil be done by installing an Access
Control Unit (ACU) in the local telephone central office which will be
connected tothe central office switch via a "no test trunk" unit."
(You old switchmen out there all love this one, don't you?)  "In
addition, a Meter Interface Unit(MIU) must be installed at the
customer premises and an IBM compatible PC based Utility Terminal will
reside at the utility's premises.

        "To read the customer's meter, the UT at the utility office
calls the ACU in the telephone company's central office.  For
security, the ACU then calls the UT back.  Once the appropriate
passwords are exchanged, the ACU is connected to the central office
via the "No Test Trunk."  CAlls are then initiated to the customer's
telephone number and the meter information is collected.  These calls
are done sequentially and only if the subscribers' line is not in use.

        "Pacific Bell will introduce Automatic Meter Reading in the last
quarter of 1990,pending regulatory approval.  The service will be offered
on a per central office basis under tariff/contracts filed with the
California Public Utility Commission, throughout Pacific Bell's service
territory where facilities permit.

        "For additional technical reference material on AMR, Bell is
aware of the following companies who offer interface specifications:

        Cognitronics Corporation
        25 Crescent Street
        Stamford, CT  06906

        Schlumberger Industries
        Information Systems Division
        3155 Northwoods Parkway
        Norcross, GA  30071

        Sparton Technology, Inc.
        4901 Rockaway Blvd.
        Rio Rancho, NM  87124

        Versus Technology, Inc.
        One Electronics Drive
        Trenton, NJ  08619

        "For further information concerning Pacific Bell's AMR
products, please contact:

        Sergio Meza, Marketing Manager, Room 4S050C
        2600 Camino Ramon
        San Ramon, CA  94583
        [phone]"

So, there's the wire-based way.  It raises some questions that
Californians seem to like to worry their PUC about, such as:

   1.)  Who gave PacBell authority to sell use of the line you already
        rent to someone else, with *no* consideration to you?

   2.)  Who gave *anyone* the authority to block your line from
        incoming calls for even an instant, at any time they might want to?

So, how about it Californians?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #441
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06511;
          19 Jun 90 5:22 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20561;
          19 Jun 90 3:48 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab29090;
          19 Jun 90 2:45 CDT
Date:     Tue, 19 Jun 90 2:17:52 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #442
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 19 Jun 90 02:17:12 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 442

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Leonard Rose Update: His Prior Conviction [Ed Krell & TELECOM Moderator]
    Re: The Survey Results [Russ Kepler]
    Re: The Survey Results [Neil Katin]
    Re: The Survey Results [David Tamkin]
    Caller*ID Responses, Again [TELECOM Moderator]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 19 Jun 90 1:43:45 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Leonard Rose Update: His Prior Conviction


Eduardo Krell sent along a recent story from {Unix Today} which had
some interesting revelations and observations in the Len Rose saga.
The entire article was far to long to include here, but I wanted to
share some of the highlights of the report.

According to Rose, the Secret Service agents and Bellcore employees
arrived at about 12:10 PM on February 1 at his home in Middletown, MD.
They brought with them a federal search warrant, and for the next five
hours, according to Rose's story in {Unix Today} he was confined to
his bedroom for questioning, while his wife was held in another room.
Other agents searched the house.

The agents seized enough computers, documents and personal effects -
including Army medals, Sun Rose's personal phone book and sets of keys
to their house - to fill a 14-page list in a pending court case.

According to Leonard Rose, the investigators inflicted unnecessary
damage to the house, damage that he said would have been prevented had
they asked him for help.

Rose claims that instead of asking him to unlock doors or open locked
cabinets, the agents simply smashed the doors or pried off locks with
screwdrivers. He has filed a brief in federal court in Baltimore
accusing the government of "perusing his electronic mail at their
leisure" since the search.

Len Rose's main complaint seems to be that none of the computers or
computer equipment seized has been returned, and that since he uses
these things in his employment he has been tremendously harmed in his
work.  His income has dropped to zero since he can do no work for his
clients.

As as result of his financial straits, he has had to ask the court to
appoint a public defender to represent him.

The {Unix Today} story reported further that several well-known
constitutional attorneys have banded together to review his case and
others related to the crackdown going on at present. This is being
funded by, among others, Lotus 1-2-3 inventor Mitchell Kapor and
Grateful Dead lyricist John Barlow.

Rose pleaded not guilty to federal charges in Baltimore on June 1
accusing him of computer fraud and interstate transportation of stolen
property between May, 1988 and January, 1990. If convicted of all
counts, Rose faces as many as 32 years in prison plus a fine of as
much as $500,000.

Specifically, the government says Rose - using the name Terminus -
took source code for V.3.2, which they contend he obtained without
authorization, and sent a modified copy of it to Craig Neidorf in
Columbia, Mo.

Rose admits he received the source code from an AT&T employee without
authorization and that he did send a copy of it to Neidorf and he said
that notes he wrote on the file before sending it might prove harmful.

"On the first page of the document, Terminus advised Neidorf that the
source code came originally from AT&T 'so it's definitely not
something you wish to get caught with,' " according to the federal
documents.  Rose confirms that he wrote such a note before sending the
document to Missouri.

Rose is also accused of modifying the source code to include a Trojan
Horse intended to secretly capture passwords and log-ins to "deal with
situations where you have a one-shot opportunity for superuser
privileges," according to the federal filing.

Rose again agrees that he did amend the source code with the Trojan
Horse, but maintains that it was not improper. "The only modification
was that it collected passwords and log-in names. So what? I wrote a
Trojan Horse," he said. "I admit it. I sent them a Trojan Horse
program. Does that make me a criminal? They would have already had to
have root privilege. They installed it. If I sold you a gun and you
went out and shot someone, does that make me a murderer?"

Of course, Rose seems to be forgetting that you cannot steal the gun
first, then resell it. That in itself is criminal, regardless of what
the purchaser of the gun does with it later. And yes, in some cases if
you sold someone a gun knowing their intention, then you might well be
charged as an accessory.

David P. King, the Baltimore-based assistant U.S. attorney who is
handling Rose's prosecution, said he believes that Rose put the Trojan
Horse-modified source code into the system of a computer company that
Rose was working for. King would not identify the computer site and
Rose denied the allegation.

One other problem facing Rose is the phone call he made to Rich
Andrews at Jolnet: The call was taped by the Secret Service. In the
call, Rose told Andrews to destroy certain files containing
incriminating evidence. Andrews was, as was first noted here in
TELECOM Digest back in February, working as a government informant
from the beginning.

Leonard Rose is no stranger to the law enforcement community: At the
time I first reported on this case in the Digest in February, I
remarked on a 'deep throat' who had plenty to say, but urged an
independent review prior to any specific allegations. I was urged at
that time to say nothing; and in a phone conversation between Leonard
Rose, David Tamkin and myself several weeks ago, Rose specifically
refused to discuss one other incident of interest. Since {Unix Today}
has detailed it, I might as well also --

Leonard Rose was arrested by county authorities in Sterling, VA for
breaking into a computer repair warehouse there on October 18, 1989.

According to both Rose's and the police account, Rose was arrested
outside of the International Technology Corp. warehouse at 4:40 AM
after having used a crowbar to break in and steal what police
estimated was $10,000 worth of equipment, including a $5,000 laser
printer, an Intel 386 Tempest system and seven hard drives.

According to Rose, who admitted the break-in, and has since pleaded
guilty to grand larceny, all he wanted to do was get equipment which
he said 'already belonged to his company' ... but in fact the
equipment in his possession when he was arrested included stuff which
belonged to the FBI, being stored in the warehouse!

That little caper is probably what brought him to the attention of the
feds in the first place, said {Unix Today}.

It should be remembered that under the Constitution of the United
States, Mr. Rose is considered innocent of the latest charges against
him until/unless his guilt is proven in court. His recent conviction
for grand larcency cannot be used against him in this latest matter.

My thanks to Eduardo Krell of Bell Labs/Murray Hill for suggesting
this article and for providing some of the background from the {Unix
Today} report.


Patrick Townson
   -and-
Eduardo Krell                   AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ
UUCP: {att,decvax,ucbvax}!ulysses!ekrell  Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: Russ Kepler <bbx![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Survey Results
Date: 18 Jun 90 14:52:08 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Russ Kepler)
Organization: BASIS International, Albuquerque NM


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (TELECOM
Moderator) writes:

[survey methodology discussion deleted]

>84  (14.7 %) answered YES to both questions. Have cracked, have
>             phreaked in the past six months, at least one time.

>72  (12.6 %) answered YES they had phreaked, but NO they had not
>             cracked in the past six months.

>78  (13.7 %) answered NO they had not phreaked, but YES, they had
>             cracked in the past six months.

>336 (58.9 %) answered NO to both questions. Have not cracked or
>             phreaked in the past six months.

>So, about 59 % of you don't do these things, and about 41 % of you
>indulge occasionally, or more often in one or both activities.

Uhhh - no.  Try placing the percentages in the same manner as
the questions were posed:

27.3% said that they had cracked in the past 6 months (14.7 y&y + 12.6
y&n).

28.4% said that they had phreaked in the past 6 months (14.7
y&y + 13.7 n&y).

Since the methodology gave a 25% false 'yes' and 25% false 'no' (in
the no answers) rates the 'real' numbers are about (2 * (27.3 - 25)) =
4.6% crackers and (2 * (28.4 - 25) = 6.8% phreakers; applying these
percentages to the numbers implies 26.2 crackers and 38.8 phreakers
(those fractions get pretty messy ;-).  As the sample was fairly small
I wouldn't give the numbers too much credibility.

There's another reason not to give the numbers too much credibility: a
self selected population.  In statistical sampling a self-selected
population has a built in bias, and in this case I would think that
the crackers and phreakers would be more interested in answering the
survey than the population at large.

So the best you can do is say something like: 'Of the
comp.dcom.telecom readers answering the survey about 4.6% were engaged
in cracking activity in the last 6 months and about 6.8% were engaged
in phreaking in the last 6 months.'.

My math isn't good enough (or too little coffee this morning) to
calculate the error % - but I *think* it's along the line of +- 1%.

Jeeze - I hope that a statistician doesn't read this and post some
elementary analysis that blows me away.

>All individual responses have been erased from my disks. I no longer
>have any record of the individual responses. Thanks to everyone who
>participated.

The point of a survey like this is the statistical response 'hiding'
the false answers among the true answers.  As the predictability of
the coin toss increases with the size of the sample so does the
accuracy of the survey increase.  But at no time does the answerer of
the survey need to be overly concerned with the anonymity of the
response; if asked just say it was the coin that phreaked or cracked
;-).


Russ Kepler - Basis Int'l SNAIL: 5901 Jefferson NE,
Albuquerque, NM 87109 UUCP: bbx.basis.com!russ PHONE: [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 09:20:55 PDT
From: Neil Katin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Survey Results


You've probably gotten many comments about this already, but just in
case I happen to be first: The raw data does not support your
conclusion of 41% cracking or phreaking.  Here's why:

Approximately 1/2 your data is "real", and correctly reflects peoples
preferences.  The other 1/2 of the data provides a background level of
noise.  Now, I don't have any statistics books with me, so I won't try
and figure out confidence bounds, but I'ld like to go through a simple
example: assume that there were no respondents who cracked or phreaked
and that you had an infinitely large sample.  What would the
distribution look like?

  50% would be "real" answers of no-no
  12.5% would be "fake" answers in each of the categories (1/4 of 1/2)

This gives samples of 12.5, 12.5, 12.5, and 62.5.

So, the results have 2.2% answering yes to both, 0.1% phreaking only,
and 1.2% cracking.

Of course, the hard part is figuring out whether these percentages are
most likely "real", or part of the background noise.


    Neil Katin
    Amorphous Systems

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 15:08 EST
From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Survey Results

In volume 10, issue 440, David A. Lyons (|) quoted Pat Townson (>):

>Here is the breakdown, NOT adjusted for the coin toss -- just the raw
>data.  Apply your own formulas in interpreting it:

>84  (14.7 %) answered YES/YES.
>72  (12.6 %) answered YES/NO.
>78  (13.7 %) answered NO/YES.
>336 (58.9 %) answered NO/NO.

But despite having said that those were unadjusted and that we should
apply our own formulas, Pat commented:

>So, about 59 % of you don't do these things, and about 41 % of you
>indulge occasionally or more often in one or both activities.

|I'm no statistician, but I CAN demonstrate that the 59%/41% figure is
|a way-wrong interpretation:

|For the sake of argument, let's assume all the honest answers are No.
|The results we would expect, are 75% No and 25% Yes, for each question.

Yes, we would.

|That would be 6.3% Yes/Yes, 18.8% Yes/No, 18.8% No/Yes, and 56.3% No/No.
|(That's .25*.25, .25*.75, .75*.25, and .75*.75.)

No, it wouldn't.

Pat was in error to assume that the coin tosses would be distributed
proportionately to the honest responses.  (Either that or he forgot
about having to adjust them.)  However, David's probabilities assume
independence for the two questions, which we do not have, as a single
coin flip governs whether both will be random or both will be honest.

If all honest answers are No/No, 62.5% of the responses would be
No/No: all the honest ones plus one-fourth of the random ones.
Yes/Yes, Yes/No, and No/Yes would get 12.5% each.  Subtracting one-
eighth of the total number of responses from each group, as David
correctly did later in his submission, would show a distribution of
the 50% of responses that were truthful as 50 No/No and 0 for all
other categories.  Note that applying that method to David's figures
would leave the Yes/Yes group 6.25% in the hole!

|Doesn't resemble 100% No/No much, does it?

No, neither 1/16|3/16|3/16|9/16 as David got nor 1/8|1/8|1/8|5/8 as I
did resembles 0|0|0|1 very much, and indeed some adjustment was
needed.  [David then recomputed Pat's data, properly removing one-
eighth of the sample from each class.  He should have tried it on his
theoretical figures first.]

|I conclude that almost 93% of the respondents have not gained unlawful
|access to a computer or made a fraudulent phone call in the past six
|months.

Yes, that's right, but the example was off.  David's products would
have applied if the instructions had been like this:

1. Flip a coin.  Heads you say whether you've phreaked in the last six
months; tails you flip again and say yes if heads, no if tails.

2. Flip *again*.  Heads you say whether you've kracked in the last six
months; tails you flip again and say yes if heads, no if tails.

Assuming all truthful answers are no, each question should produce 25%
yeses and 75% noes.  Discarding the random portion (1/2) as distrib-
uted over the random answers (1/4|1/4), we get all noes separately for
each of the two questions.  Looking at both questions together would
indeed give 6.25% Yes/Yes, 18.75% each Yes/No and No/Yes, and 56.25%
No/No, but then in tossing out random responses you have to deal with
the 50% of replies that gave one random answer and one honest answer
in either order as well as discarding the 25% that gave two random
answers, and that's just too darn complicated for me.


David Tamkin  P. O. Box 7002  Des Plaines IL  60018-7002  [phone]
MCI Mail: 426-1818   CIS: 73720,1570   GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN  [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 19 Jun 90 0:05:02 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Caller*ID Responses, Again


As to be expected, the latest group of messages on Caller*ID has
generated lots of replies. I've been running a few every day for the
past few days, but now have a backlog of them again.

I will put out a special issue later this week which includes as many
as possible in order to hopefully quiet this topic down once again.
Once it comes out, then please reply to the authors -- not me. Maybe
we can then go a few months more without it occupying so much time and
space.


Patrick Townson

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #442
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22216;
          20 Jun 90 3:19 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19932;
          20 Jun 90 1:55 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa23716;
          20 Jun 90 0:51 CDT
Date:     Wed, 20 Jun 90 0:47:52 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #443
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 20 Jun 90 00:47:08 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 443

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers [Macy Hallock]
    Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead? [Adam J. Ashby]
    Re: Informantion Needed: Panasonic Model KT2445BE [John Slater]
    Re: Identifying Switches [Tom Gray]
    Re: More Eastern European News [Isaac Rabinovitch]
    Re: Number Plea-uhs... [Jon Baker]
    Re: Number Plea-uhs... [C. David Covington]
    Re: Using UK Phones in the US [Peter Thurston]
    Re: Letters on Phone Dials - An Australian Perspective [Jim Breen]
    Re: Letters on Phone Dials Around the World (Was: Australia) [Chris Jones]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: abvax!ncoast!fmsystm![e-mail]
Date: Sun Jun 17 12:58:38 1990
Subject: Re: Bell Cellular to Offer Users Snoop-proof Scramblers
Organization: F M Systems, Inc.  Medina, Ohio USA  [phone]


In article <[e-mail]> Tom Perrine <[e-mail]>
writes about availibility of a DES based scrambling system being made
available in Canada by Bell.

If memory serves, this type of service was (and still may be) offered
in the Washington DC market by the B carrier (wireline).  A Motorola
module, AMPS type operation, was plugged in between your control head
and transciever.  The MTSO (cellular CO) had matching scramblers and
would "de-encrypt" you conversation for use with normal landline
calls.

I think a provision also existed to call landline numbers with the
scrambling left on to allow an end-to-end scrambled call to be set up.
Of course the land line phone had to properly equipped with the right
equipment and key.

This was offered primarily for government types to use, primarily
political and GS types who did not want their conversations
intercepted.  I do not believe the setup was approved for military
use, although it was fairly secure.  Motorola mentioned somethng about
compatibitly with one of the STU type phones being available at some
point, too.

Tempest? You've got to be kidding ... that's a different situation and
application entirely.

It doesn't sound like the Bell Canada setup is compatible with the
above described Motorola setup, but it has a similar flavor.  The
Motorola mobile unit scramblers were not as cheap, either.

Anyone else remember anything about this?  I kinda figured we'd hear
more about this from the cellular carriers as a solution to the
privacy issue.

In article <[e-mail]> Eric Varsanyi writes:

>On another note: This month (my first with them) they changed policies
>and now charge from the time you hit SpEND until END. Previously they
>started charging when supervision was returned. Their justification
>was that 'this is a standrard industry practice'... Is it?

Hmmm ... its not standard, but it's not uncommon, either.

In the Cleveland/Akron/Canton Ohio markets:

GTE Mobilnet (using Motorola EMX MTSO's) charges only for call timing
from receipt of supervision.  Cellular One/CCI Ohio (using Northern
Telecom/ GE MTSO's) charges fron send to end, but only if the call is
answered.

Neither carrier charges for busy/unanswered calls.

I wonder ... did your cellular carrier recently change out their MTSO?

I have been told by a Motorola technical type that the Northern
Telecom/GE MTSO's are unable to charge otherwise unless the receive
all their trunks from the telco in T1 format ... their metallic type
trunk cards are not properly supported in the software to allow more
intelligent billing records.  He also said the same problem existed in
ALL trunkage until a recent software upgrade was made to the Northern
switches.  He also said that Motorola used this info to their
advantage in sales presentations to potential cellular carrier clients
for some time.

I am unable to substantiate this information ... considering the
source, I am not sure if this is accurate. Does anyone else able to
shed light on this rumor?


Macy M. Hallock, Jr.     [e-mail]         uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy
F M Systems, Inc. {uunet|backbone|usenet.ins.cwru.edu}ncoast!fmsystm!macy
150 Highland Drive    Voice: [phone] Ext 251  Fax: [phone]
Medina, Ohio 44256 USA  Cleveland:273-3000 Akron:239-4994 (Dial 251 @ tone)
(PLEASE NOTE:  the system name is "fmsystm" with no "e", *NOT* "fmsystem")

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

From: "Adam J. Ashby" <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is Analog Cellular Dead?
Date: 18 Jun 90 13:48:30 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


[e-mail] (Kolkka Markku Olavi) writes:

>Actually it's Global System Mobile, but it seems that the US is again
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ACTUALLY it is Groupe Speciale Mobile.


Adam

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

From: John Slater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Informantion Needed: Panasonic Model KT2445BE
Date: 19 Jun 90 09:53:35 GMT
Reply-To: John Slater <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, iosg::[e-mail]
(Nigel Roberts 0860 578600) writes:

>water Panasonic KT-2445BE (U.K. model). I'm very impressed with it,

>        From what I remember, U.K. law says you have the right
>        to record your own phone calls, and there's nothing
>        requiring that beep. How can I switch the damn thing off?

>Any other users of this or similar machines got any useful hints?

No hints, just a follow-up question :

I've got a KT-1427, and would very much like to know the answer to
this. Mine is a US model (bought on the Tottenham Court Road, complete
with Big Red Sticker ordering me not to plug it into the pubic
telephone network in the UK), so it's likely that some US readers out
there might know the answer. This may also help Nigel, as the machines
are probably not very different inside.

Thanks in advance.


John Slater
Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick office

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

From: Tom Gray <mitel!spock![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Identifying Switches
Date: 19 Jun 90 12:24:06 GMT
Reply-To: Tom Gray <mitel!healey![e-mail]>
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.
ca![e-mail]> writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 436, Message 9 of 12

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]) (DOUGLAS
>SCOTT REUBEN) writes:

>>I still can't tell what sort of electronic switch it is just by
>>hearing the busy/ring signals (ie, to distinguish between a DMS-100
>>and 200, for example),

>That's because the DMS-100 and 200 use the same tone generators, etc.
>The product line includes 100, 100/200 combined, 200, and access
>tandem.  (Plus DMS-250, 300, and MTX).  100 is local, 200 is toll,
>essentially. I've never been totally clear on the _hardware_
>difference between a 100 and a 200.  I don't think there is any.

When I worked on the original development of DMS, the only difference
between the 100 and 200 was that the 100 had line circuits and the 200
didn't. Both the 100 and 200 used the same sort of tone generators.
Actually these versions of DMS had many many tone generators. There
were tone generators in each trunk module (which comprised 32 trunks)
and in each line bay and in each maintainance module. A large trunk
office would had hundreds if not thousands of tone generators.

The 250 was the same as the 100 and 200. The 300 had the same tone
generaors as the 100 and 200 but was supplied with different PROM data
to provide the different tones required for the gateway switch.

For a little piece of telephone trivia, the PROM loads for the DMS
tones were designated AHU01, AHW01 and AHZ01. Considering the number
of DMS100 family switches sold, the dial tone and audible ringing pcm
codes contained in these PROM's may have been the most heard recording
in the last ten years.

In any event, the precise tone plan must have created the most
commonly heard tones in the history of the world.  The 350/440 dial
tone and 440/480 audible ringing must be heard by more people daily
than any other distinct sounds.  Does anyone out there know the names
of the people who devised these tones. They should be recorded
somewhere.

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

From: Isaac Rabinovitch <claris!netcom![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: More Eastern European News
Date: 19 Jun 90 16:49:11 GMT
Organization: NetCom- The Bay Area's Public Access Unix System {408 249-0290}


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hank Nussbacher) writes:

>The current waiting time in Budapest for a phone is thirteen years and
>the national average is twelve phone lines per 100 people.

Which gives me one last chance to tell this joke: they say that in
Hungary, half the country is waiting for their phones to be installed,
while the other half is waiting for a dial tone.

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

From: Jon Baker <noao!xroads![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Number Plea-uhs...
Date: 20 Jun 90 04:41:52 GMT
Organization: Crossroads, Phoenix, Az


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

> On another note, where did the traditional operator heavy-New England
> accent stereotype come from?  I know it's been around longer than Lily
> Tomlin.  It's in ALL the movies from the 30's and the 40's and more
> recently.  Any clues?
> NUMBER PLEA-UHS...

Can't help you there ... Automatic Electric did away with 'number
plea-uhs' about a hundred years ago.  Took bell until the '50's to do
the same. :-)


\  /  C r o s s r o a d s  C o m m u n i c a t i o n s
 /\   [phone] 300-2400,9600 PEP Baud 24 hrs/day
/  \  hplabs!hp-sdd!crash!xroads!bakerj

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

From: "C. D. Covington" <uafhcx![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Number Plea-uhs...
Date: 19 Jun 90 18:40:01 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

> Has this ever happened to you???  TELL US YOUR CYBERNETIC TELEPHONE
> EXPERIENCE!

     I have been involved in the speech recognition problem for about
ten years.  The first time I spoke something and it came up on the
computer screen, I had exactly the same reaction you describe.  That
was 1980 at Texas Instruments in Dallas for me.  It was really eerie.

     After a while though, you begin to accept it as normal.


C. David Covington (WA5TGF)  [e-mail]     [phone]
Asst Prof, Elec Eng          Univ of Arkansas        Fayetteville, AR 72701

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

From: Peter Thurston <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 20:07:32 BST
Subject: Re: Using UK Phones in the US


John Slater writes:

>>>[e-mail] (Ole J. Jacobsen) writes:
>>>pulse dial phones differ (most of the UK is pulse dial only) and US
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Most of the UK is both tone and pulse dialling (tone dialling is
>>free!)  and is increasingly digital due to aggressive System X and
>>System Y replacement.

>I dispute the word "most", this month at least. It's true that BT is
>modernizing the entire network very rapidly, but my guess is that
>they're not half-way yet. I'm happy to be corrected on this if anyone
>has concrete figures.

I read somewhere the other week that 40% of customers are currently
connected to digital exchanges. That seems a little high, but I could
be wrong. But you don't need to be on a digital exchange to have Tone
dialling. Most TXE4s (SPC reed relay SxS) and similar exchanges have
been upgraded in the last two years. (except the TXE2 in Cottenham
where I live ... sigh). Until recently, a large proportion of
payphones were switched to tone dialling. I say untill recently,
because they have all been switched back to pulse as a quick and dirty
solution to a craze of payphone fraud (dialling with tone pads!).


Peter Thurston

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

From: Jim Breen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Letters on Phone Dials - An Australian Perspective
Organization: Chisholm Institute of Technology, Melb., Australia
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 23:31:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, claris!netcom![e-mail].
nasa.gov (Isaac Rabinovitch) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
> writes:

[ sample of obsolete dial letters deleted]

> >Has this scheme been used anywhere else in the world? Why were these
> >particular letters chosen?

> Here's a guess: at one time Australia allowed phone companies to
> compete to provided local service.  The letters were the initials of
> the particular phone company.  After they went to a regulated monopoly
> system, the old system was kept for a while so people wouldn't have to
> change their numbers -- much as New York subway lines are still
> identified by the long-defunct private companies that once ran them.

I nearly choked on my cornflakes when I read this. Then I read Isaac's
address and realised he probably doesn't know we DON'T HAVE phone
companies in Oz. The telephone service in Australia is provided by a
single nation-wide government utility; the Australian
Telecommunications Commission, which trades under the name "Telecom
Australia".  Before Telecom was formed in 1975, the "service" was
provided by a federal department (the Postmaster General). There were
private companies in the last century, but these had all been rolled
into public utilities by the time the Australian states federated in
1900, well before we got our first automatic exchange.

I believe the old letters on our telephone dials were adopted
unchanged from those used by the British Post Office. Unlike the UK,
where there appeared to be an attempt to use the letters to match the
locality names, here there never seemed to be any mnemonic reason for
the letters. This is probably why they were stopped about 30 years
ago, at the time automatic long-distance dialling was introduced.


   _______        Jim Breen ([e-mail]) Dept of Robotics &
  /o\----\\     \O         Digital Technology. Chisholm Inst. of Technology
 /RDT\   /|\   \/|   -:O____/  PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia
O-----O        _/_\    /\ /\      (ph) [phone] (fax) [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 09:25:49 EDT
From: Chris Jones <ksr![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Letters on Phone Dials Around the World (Was: Australia)
Organization: Kendall Square Research Corp


In article <[e-mail]> Dik T. Winter writes:

>Digit            1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   0
>Sovjet Union     A   V   B   G   D   E   ZH  I   K   L
>Notes:
>(6)     The Sovjet-Union layout is of course a transcription.

Are you sure of this?  The transcription of the first part of the
Cyrillic alphabet is basically as you have above (leaving out the two
letters with diacritical marks), but V and B seem to have been
reversed.


Chris Jones [e-mail] uunet!ksr!clj harvard!ksr!clj

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #443
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24449;
          20 Jun 90 4:24 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab18756;
          20 Jun 90 2:57 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab19932;
          20 Jun 90 1:55 CDT
Date:     Wed, 20 Jun 90 1:43:06 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #444
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 20 Jun 90 01:42:31 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 444

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter" [John Higdon]
    Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter" [Jon Baker]
    AMR Meter Reading, No Test Trunks, and Call Forwarding [John R. Covert]
    Neat Phones! [Macy Hallock]
    US Country Codes For Telex? [Dan Sahlin]
    Info Wanted on TWX and TELEX Protocols [Dave Hammond]
    Legion of Doom and the Secret Service [James Deibele]
    Exchanges Taken Out of Service [David Leibold]
    Junkmailed! [David Tamkin]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter"
Date: 19 Jun 90 03:12:12 PDT (Tue)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


"Donald E. Kimberlin" <[e-mail]> writes:

>    1.)  Who gave PacBell authority to sell use of the line you already
>         rent to someone else, with *no* consideration to you?

Perhaps the consideration will come from some reduced rate. If not,
then as far as I am concerned they can either read the meter the old
fashioned way, or they can install their own line (if they can find a
pair available!).

>    2.)  Who gave *anyone* the authority to block your line from
>         incoming calls for even an instant, at any time they might want to?

How does this gadget know that the incoming call is for it? I'll be
damned if I'm going to have the phone ringing in the middle of the
night, or worse have the phone disabled during some "window" when this
device is supposed to be polled. Or does it call out? Who pays the
local charge? Is it an 800 number?

It might be interesting to get some of the literature from the
companies listed.

> So, how about it Californians?

At first blush, I give it two thumbs down.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !


[Moderator's Note: A self-help, guerilla-warfare (or do you say
gorilla?) solution may be available!  Read John Covert's message later
in this issue for details.   PT]

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

From: Jon Baker <noao!xroads![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter"
Date: 20 Jun 90 04:47:57 GMT
Organization: Crossroads, Phoenix, Az


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Donald E.
Kimberlin) writes:

>    1.)  Who gave PacBell authority to sell use of the line you already
>         rent to someone else, with *no* consideration to you?
>    2.)  Who gave *anyone* the authority to block your line from
>         incoming calls for even an instant, at any time they might want to?

1) They aren't selling use of the line.  They are allowing an incoming
call to the line.

2) The line is not blocked from incoming calls.  Any incoming call, or
an offhook on the line, aborts the call from the utility (which is
retried later).


\  /  C r o s s r o a d s  C o m m u n i c a t i o n s
 /\   [phone] 300-2400,9600 PEP Baud 24 hrs/day
/  \  hplabs!hp-sdd!crash!xroads!bakerj


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

Date: Tue, 19 Jun 90 21:04:49 PDT
From: "John R. Covert  20-Jun-1990 0007" <[e-mail]>
Subject: AMR Meter Reading, No Test Trunks, and Call Forwarding


>The AMR System allows a utility to remotely acquire meter
>reading data from its customers using the existing telephone line to
>the customer premises.  This wil be done by installing an Access
>Control Unit (ACU) in the local telephone central office which will be
>connected to the central office switch via a "no test trunk" unit.

"No test" afficionados will remember an interesting interaction
between "no test" and call forwarding, at least in No 1 and 1A ESS.
When a call is initiated to a number via a "no test" trunk, if the
line is call forwarded, the "no test" trunk will not seize the line;
reorder is returned.  This was intended to tell operators doing busy
verification that busy verification can't currently return information
consistent with dialled calls due to call forwarding.

Of course, operators aren't typically familiar with this, and get
quite upset when they can't get onto a line via busy verification.
Years ago, when IDDD was first made available in Atlanta, some friends
and I spent a few evenings calling up operators and asking for the
codes for places like London, Paris, and smaller cities.  The
operators weren't trained on this, and it would sometimes take quite a
bit of convincing to get them to call the overseas operator for the
information.

This was _really_ early in the IDDD days; even rate and route didn't
have the info yet, and TSPS didn't yet support operator dialling --
all overseas was either direct dialled from No 1 ESS or placed by IOTC
operators.  Of course, the overseas operators were properly trained,
and the local operators were often very upset that the overseas
operators would give us the information after the local operators had
just finished sternly telling us that we couldn't possibly dial the
calls ourselves and that the information we were asking for was
confidential telephone company info.

This made them curious, and since it was late at night, they weren't
very busy or well supervised, and verification wasn't scrambled in
those days.  Soon we started noticing the tell-tale "ta-tic" of the no
test trunk seizing our lines.  We'd talk to the operators; tell them
we knew they were there, flash for add-on, which would momentarily
yank them off the line and then bring them back on with dial tone,
then flash back to our call, and do all sorts of things that further
aroused their curiosity.

Then we told them "we're going to disable your verification trunks for
the next ten minutes while we have a private conversation."  Back then
it was still possible to forward your calls to your own number.  Doing
this left everything normal, except that the no test trunks couldn't
access your line.  Then when we'd drop the call forwarding, we'd end
up with operators from several consoles all on our lines at once.
"Ta-tic, ta-tic, ta-tic."  "Aha, we count three of you there now."
This further confused them, since they were mis-trained to believe
that no one could hear them when they first came on the line with
verification to listen.  Great fun.

BTW, I assume that forwarding to self was disabled when someone with
message rate service got a phone bill after a month of paying message
units for each incoming call!  There may have been fifteen units per
call, since the code in those days counted fifteen times through a
forwarding loop in the same central office and then stopped whereever
it was, which explains why two numbers in the same machine forwarded
to each other would "swap" numbers.

Now, of course, the impact of this on AMR is that if someone goes out
of town and uses call forwarding for a while around meter reading
time, it won't be possible for the no test trunk to get to the meter.
Hmmm.


/john

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

From: abvax!ncoast!fmsystm![e-mail]
Subject: Neat Phones!
Date: Sun Jun 17 16:42:11 1990


Something that Digest readers may appreciate:

Ever seen one of those clear 2500 sets?  You know, the ones the
manufacturers made for display, showed all the guts and looked neat?
Well, finally, there is a REAL 2500 you can buy ... they make a great
conversation piece, too.

ITT/Cortelco (Used to be ITT Cornith, MS works) makes a "2500 Kleer
Fone" (North Supply mat code 472029) wholesale cost is around $30.00.
They also make a clear desk Trendline model, too (North 472086) for a
few dollars more.  Translucent blue and pink housings are also
available.

We use them as gifts to customers who done us a favor ... and have
actually sold a couple, too.  (I wish Cortelco paid me or something
for this plug, but alas!)


Macy M. Hallock, Jr.     [e-mail]         uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy
F M Systems, Inc. {uunet|backbone|usenet.ins.cwru.edu}ncoast!fmsystm!macy
150 Highland Drive    Voice: [phone] Ext 251  Fax: [phone]
Medina, Ohio 44256 USA  Cleveland:273-3000 Akron:239-4994 (Dial 251 @ tone)
(PLEASE NOTE:  the system name is "fmsystm" with no "e", *NOT* "fmsystem")


[Moderator's Note: The Sharper Image catalog has these phones also,
and theirs come with a blue neon tube in the base which either stays lit
at all times and flashes off when the phone rings or stays dark and
flashes on when the phone rings, as you select. They are really very
clever and very beautiful instruments.  PT]

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

From: Dan Sahlin <[e-mail]>
Subject: US Country Codes for Telex?
Organization: SICS, Swedish Inst. of Computer Science
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 90 19:48:25 GMT


As there are several Telex networks in the US, there are several
country codes. In my Telex directory I have -

    Code        Network
    23          CCI, FTCC, Graphnet, ITT, RCA, TRT, WUI
    230         WUTCO
    2306 or 256 Teletex
    25          TWX

The problem is that most Telex numbers are not accompanied by a
network identifier. The operator told me the following rules:

    Ten digit numbers have country code 25
    Numbers starting with an odd digit have country code 230
    Numbers starting with an even digit have country code 23

Can I trust this information, or do you know a better rule?  How do I
recognize a Teletex number, and which one of the two above (2306 or
256) should I chose?  Perhaps these country numbers are only valid
from Sweden.  In Sweden, Teletex numbers have at least seven digits
whereas Telex numbers have at most five digits.  I am curious to know
how to distinguish Teletex/Telex numbers in other countries too.

I in fact have a Teletex connection, but it is quite possible to send
to and from Telex numbers.  Teletex is not a very popular service, at
least not in Sweden, and only ten countries are listed having special
Teletex to Teletex country numbers. (These numbers are quite different
from the Telex to Teletex country number.  For instance the US has
3112.)

I much prefer Telex/Teletex to Fax.  Received messages can be stored
compactly together with other electronic mail.  The format is also
searchable for information, which you really can't say for bitmaps.
For Teletex, subaddressing is possible, so you could have your own
Teletex number (although we have not implemented that here).
Unfortunately, it seems clear that Fax is winning, and maybe we will
stop subscribing to the Teletex service.


/Dan Sahlin

email: [e-mail]
Or better still, answer by Teletex! As far as I know, we have never
received a Teletex from abroad!
Our Teletex number is 2401-812 61 54 SICS     (2401 is the country code)
or if you prefer, our Telex number is 812 61 54 SICS

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

From: Dave Hammond <[e-mail]>
Subject: Info Wanted on TWX and TELEX Protocols
Reply-To: Dave Hammond <[e-mail]>
Organization: ESCC,  New York City
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 02:46:33 GMT


The subject line says it.  We're looking into linking to the serial
port on a Fax machine, whose manual sketchily states that it responds
to TWX and TELEX protocol from the serial port.

Any info would be greatly appreciated.  Please email responses.


Dave Hammond
[e-mail]
uunet!masa.com!marob!daveh

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

From: James Deibele <[e-mail]>
Subject: Legion of Doom and the Secret Service
Date: 19 Jun 90 17:05:50 GMT
Reply-To: James Deibele <[e-mail]>
Organization: TECHbooks, Beaverton Oregon


Interesting paragraph in this week's InfoWorld.  In "Notes from the
Field," Robert X. Cringely's column, he writes:

"Back in February, when AT&T long distance service went down for most
of a day, the company blamed it on a software bug, but it was really a
worm --- sabotage by hackers loosely associated as the Legion of Doom.
Members also lifted UNIX System V.3 source code from Bell Labs and 911
maintenance code from Bellsouth.  But it was disruption of telephone
service that got the Secret Service involved.  Many Unix nodes on the
anarchic Usenet crabgrass network were seized by zealous agents
tracking down mailing lists."


[e-mail]  ...!{tektronix!nosun,uunet}!techbook!jamesd
Public Access UNIX at [phone] (1200/2400) Voice: [phone]
Technical books mailing list --- mail "techbook!tbj-request"


[Moderator's Note: This is just a reminder that if you want in-depth
and detailed messages regarding the Legion of Doom, the crackdown
going on right now and other related information, you should subscribe
to the Computer Underground Digest ... a spin-off mailing list which
frequently gets overflow messages from here on these topics. For more
information or to be added to the mailing list, write to the CuD
Moderators at '[e-mail]'.  PT]

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

From: woody <contact![e-mail]>
Subject: Exchanges Taken Out of Service
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 22:46:27 EDT


In the midst of the vast numbers of nxx prefixes put into service each
year, does anyone have examples of nxx prefixes taken out of service?

The two examples to my knowledge are (519) 873 which used to be Forest
Ontario, which cut over to 786 for some mysterious reason, though in
one year's phone book, numbers from both exchanges were listed.

The other is (819) 484 Purtuniq, in the northern reaches of the
province of Quebec. It appeared that only the Asbestos Corporation, or
something similar, had a telephone on that exchange while it operated.
Then it mysteriously disappeared from the phone book, and from active
service.

Actually, there are likely more examples with respect to just changing
the exchange number over. In the Toronto area, I believe one outlying
exchange had 594 once upon a time then switched to another exchange.
594 today is in Toronto.


[Moderator's Note: David Leibold (woody) has written me to say he is
now compiling and preparing for distribution a complete set of all
area codes and the prefixes assigned to each for the entire United
States. Such a project is of course *huge*, and regretfully the
Telecom Archives doesn't have the space available. When he makes the
formal announcement these are ready, you will be able to order
individual area codes or the entire set from him direct.  PT]

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

From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Junkmailed!
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 13:28:00 CDT


Private Lines, Inc., those scamps who run 1-900-STOPPER and
1-900-RUNWELL for circumventing Caller ID, just sent me an envelope
full of publicity for their service and two wallet cards with
instructions for using it.  Aw, thanks.  You're too kind.

Now I wonder just *where* they got my mailing address.  Could it be
 ... nah.  No one would use Telecom Digest for *that*.

What makes it worse is that the literature acknowledges that one of
the reasons for blocking Caller ID is to stay off a telemarketing list
when you call a business that might maintain one.  Apparently there is
a different mos for mailing addresses.

Anyhow, it included photocopied press clippings, including one from
the New Orleans _Times-Picayune_ from May 23, 1990, that gave the
rates for (900) RUNWELL (for blocking Caller ID on international
calls, a service probably not yet needed) as $5 per *hour*.  Oops.
Typo time in the Big Easy, huh?


David W. Tamkin  [e-mail]  Box xxxx  Des Plaines IL  6001x-xxxx
708 nxx xxxx  312 nxx xxxx  GEnie:D.W.TAMKIN  CIS:73720,1570  MCIMail:426-1818


[Moderator's Note: Watch for a special issue of the Digest to be
transmitted Wednesday night with several messages received in recent
days relating to Caller*ID, pro and con. Obviously we have to get
these things out of our systems from time to time. Heck, I'll even be
expressing *my opinion* on Caller ID as the last word, which I am
accused of getting as often as not!  :)  If you rush something off to
me now, I will try to include it Wednesday night. Keep it short so
that more can be included. Then no more on the subject for at least a
few weeks. Yes, I know, promises, promises!  :)   PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #444
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09580;
          21 Jun 90 1:34 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa17692;
          21 Jun 90 0:06 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa03483;
          20 Jun 90 23:03 CDT
Date:     Wed, 20 Jun 90 22:53:15 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest Special: Caller ID Stuff
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 20 Jun 90 22:51:00 CDT    Special: Caller ID Stuff

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    I Like Caller ID [TELECOM Moderator]
    Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls [Tom Neff]
    Re: Caller ID and Hotel Reservations [Mark Brader]
    Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls [Fred R. Goldstein]
    Re: Caller ID Illegal in PA [Johnny Zweig]
    Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls [Glenn M. Cooley]
    Re: Caller ID and Bell Canada [Jon Baker]
    A Thought About Caller ID [[e-mail]]
    Caller ID and Florida PSC [David Lesher]
    So What Follows Caller ID? [Donald Kimberlin]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 21:28:45 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: I Like Caller ID


People say Caller IO is a bad idea because some callers, like
shelters and undercover police officers need the privacy. I think that
Caller ID should be offered with optional blocking. When blocking of
the number was deliberate (as opposed to offices not yet able to
deliver it), the box should read 'Number Denied'.

People say Caller ID is a bad idea since if you use it to screen
incoming calls, looking for numbers you recognize, you might miss an
important call from someone you know calling from an unfamiliar
location. But Caller ID is *not* intended as a way to screen calls. It
is intended as a way to identify the number of the phone used to call
you in the event you want this information. I'd answer calls
regardless of what number they came from, whether I recognized it or
not. All I want is recourse to that number afterward if desired.

Caller ID is supposed to be inefficient since it does not positively
identify the caller, but merely the phone number used to place the
call.  Since all telephone companies require that the subscriber be
responsible for all use made of his instruments, all I need to know is
the name of the subscriber.  I will deal with that person, and let
them deal with whatever internal problems they have.

Caller ID is disliked because some people say we who have been
victimized do not need to know the actual identity of the caller. We
can use the feature to institute a log record of the call, and let the
telco and police take care of the problem.  The bureaucracy involved
here boggles the mind. Maybe you are willing to let someone annoy you
all weekend until the Annoyance Call Bureau opens on Monday morning,
but I am not.  Furthermore, working out these problems through the
clumsy and sluggish bureaucrats becomes a moot point when you have
Caller ID: a telephone user who knows that his identity is known from
the start of the call rarely is a troublesome caller. The people who
make those calls rely heavily on the anomynity of the phone. Take that
anomynity away, the calls simply won't be made. Consider New Jersey,
where the number of obscene calls has dropped in half.

The telcos never were in the business of selling anomynity ... they
only sell the delivery of messages further than you could deliver
those messages with your voice alone.  Prior to automatic switching of
calls, the operators were able to easily tell who was calling who. The
fact that in the early switching systems the calling number was lost
in the process of moving the call was NOT a feature, it was a sad fact
of life.

Arguments about the commercial mis-use of Caller ID do not impress me,
since ANI has been available for the same mis-use for a long time now.


PT

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

From: Tom Neff <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls
Date: 20 Jun 90 06:48:07 GMT
Reply-To: Tom Neff <[e-mail]>


If you get a lot of nuisance calls because you have a "frequent wrong
number," as in the example of a motel with transposed digits, then
Caller ID still won't help, because a zillion different people will be
the culprits.  You can't sue 'em all.  (You can sue the motel, but
again Caller ID doesn't come into it.)

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

From: Mark Brader <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID and Hotel Reservations
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 1990 12:46:29 -0400


> My greatest need of Caller ID
> is to interface a hotel reservations system with the Caller ID to come
> up with the particular callers file and to verify the number given
> with the reservation to establish how valid the reservation is.

The mind boggles.  If there is one class of people who can be assumed
to be in *different* places at different times, it is hotel users.
Caller ID doesn't ID the caller, only the phone line...


Mark Brader
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto
utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

From: "Fred R. Goldstein" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls
Date: 20 Jun 90 17:49:38 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John R.
Covert) writes...

>Caller ID, by collecting phone numbers, will only make the
>telemarketing problem worse.  The only defense against telemarketers
>is to try to get legislation passed which prevents it.

Without debating the merits of telemarketing (either the obnoxious
automated kind or the arguably less obnoxious human kind), I don't
think that's the primary issue around Caller ID.  While I do see many
benefits to telemarketing users from Caller ID (and which in any case
is already available with 800 service), I receive enough nuisance
calls to make the service seem quite desirable.

Caller ID will be useful to prevent the errant Fido or Fax from
misdialing my number from a data base, hanging up when I don't return
the right tone at 1AM.  It will be useful to prevent recurrences of
the obscene callers who drop in now and again, probably at random.
(Even if they are random, threatening obscene callers -- including the
ones who leave messages on the answering machine -- can be deterred if
the caller ID box keeps records of all callers.)  Call trace won't
work if the obscene caller leaves the message while you're out; Caller
ID will.

Now by way of reportage, here's what the Canadian federal regulators
have ruled with regards to Bell Canada's offering of Caller ID:

  Caller ID may be provided as a tariffed option.

  Call ID blocking will be free to shelters and others with a need.

  Call ID blocking per call is available by going through the operator.
  A charge may be levied for this; Bell Canada has proposed C$.75.  This
  way they don't have to upgrade all exchanges to have selective call
  blocking before offering Caller ID.

I think that's a good compromise.  A cheaper (free?) you-dial-it per
call blocking option would be nice, but it's not possible yet in all
exchanges, and in any case Canada tends to make heavier use of
operators than the US.  Incidentally my source is the June issue of
Telemanagement, published by the Angus Telemanagement Group, Pickering
ON.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
                 or [e-mail]   voice: [phone]
opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission

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

From: Johnny zweig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller*ID Illegal in PA
Organization: IDA, Alexandria, VA
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 90 19:51:25 GMT


My understanding is that the Caller's ID (in the sense of a service
access point (net address) for the particular piece of equipment used
to place a call) will be a standard part of call-setup under ISDN
(telecommers help me on this one!).  So perhaps the ramifications of
these arguments will be severe.  I imagine the signalling system could
be set up to allow virtual addresses so that my ISDN box could connect
to another without knowing which one it "really" is, but it seems like
an extra bit of nonsense and complication.

I see myself in ten years as having a daemon running the background on
my Macintosh IV-zx3000 that checks all the junk (country codes, list
of family and friends' SAP's, emergency service contract providers,
etc.) and puts a dialog box on my screen "Johnny, some jerk from Death
Telemarketing from Hell company is calling, do you wish to (A)ccept
the call, and him/her to (L)eave a message, (R)efuse the call or
something (E)lse?".  I think the set of circumstances where people
legitimately wish to call somewhere anonymously (i.e. calling the rape
hotline, police reporting service, Swaggart ministries donation
line...) and the set of people who will legitimately call me (friends,
emergency personnel, business associates, telemarketers...)  are
disjointed.

And I think I have a right to know who is calling me (just as I can
throw away any mail I get without credible return-addresses if I want
to) before I answer.  Keep in mind that rich corporate executives have
employed Caller*ID for years -- how many times has somebody's
secretary asked you "may I tell him who's calling, please?"  You don't
hear anyone bitching about privacy over that....

With so many important questions relating to privacy and freedom to
act pretty much as you please (flag burning, abortion rights,
drunk-check roadblocks, drug legalization, and many more) it is a
shame that the Fifth Amendment (along with cheesy laws about
electronic surveillance written in the 60's) is being used to support
anything as DUMB as outlawing something handy, straightforward and
benign as Caller*ID.


Johnny Sheesh

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

From: Glenn M Cooley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID and 3AM Phone Calls
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


I'm still waiting for a good reason why I shouldn't be able to have
Caller ID.  I don't see the reasons I hear, like:

>And what if a family member is injured at a store, and the store tries
>to call you, and you've decided not to take those calls?

 ... as coming even close.  (What if the person coming toward you from
behind in a dark alley is trying to return your wallet that fell out
of your pants?  What if ...  What if ...)

When someone comes to my front door, I certainly use the peephole.  If
someone doesn't want me to know their phone number then don't call me.
When you call up the local Pizza shop, or Dry Cleaners, or Realtor, do
you give them a phoney name and phone number so they don't know who
you are.  Then why did you call them in the first place?  Hell,
government and business already have Caller ID, why doesn't this cause
undercover cops to have to use payphones, etc., etc.

As for the thread that since Caller ID can be defeated we should be
forceably prevented from having it, if I don't recognize a phone
number, I don't pick up the phone.  How does a telemarketer get around
that?  Yes, I know, Big Brother could give me a phoney ID but I'll
take my chances -- seat belts don't save you in every crash but you
don't see me arguing that they should be taken out of every car
(except government and business cars of course :-) ).

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

From: Jon Baker <noao!xroads![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID and Bell Canada
Date: 20 Jun 90 04:36:21 GMT
Organization: Crossroads, Phoenix, Az


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marcel D.
Mongeon) writes:

> Recently, the Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission,
> approved the filing by Bell Canada for a Caller ID tariff.  However,
> in reading the tariff, there was one disturbing factor, the feature
> would *NOT* be available for incoming PBX trunks.

> Is there any technical reason for this?  These are normal hunt trunks.
> Nothing fancy like DID.

If the trunks into the PBX are ANI or SS7, the calling number would be
delivered to the PBX, and could be forwarded to the instrument.  Otherwise,
you're left with FSK; which, so far as I know, only works on subscriber
lines, not trunks.


\  /  C r o s s r o a d s  C o m m u n i c a t i o n s
 /\   [phone] 300-2400,9600 PEP Baud 24 hrs/day
/  \  hplabs!hp-sdd!crash!xroads!bakerj

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

Date: 20 Jun 90 12:43:35 EDT (Wednesday)
Subject: A Thought About Caller ID
From: dw <[e-mail]>
Organization: Xerox, Digital Systems Dept, Rochester, NY


I've been thinking about this Caller ID business for some time now,
and it occured to me that there is a flaw in the comparison between
telephone calls and someone knocking on your front door.  In this
comparison, people have justified Caller ID by saying that if someone
knocks at your door, you can look through the window and see who it is
before you decide to answer the door.  Caller ID is suppose to give
people this same capability for telephone calls.

The problem is that you can't always tell who's knocking on your door.
The person may be wearing a mask or other disguise.  This makes them
anominous until you answer the door and sppek with them.  If that's
the case, then you have to decide whether to answer the door without
knowing who is there.  The telephone is the same - the caller is
anomymous until you answer the phone and speak to them.  Caller ID
only informs the callee of the telephone number where the call
originated - it doesn't identify *who* placed the call.  Denying the
caller the capability to block Caller ID is like making a law that
forbids people from knocking on your door while wearing a mask.

Caller ID may be adequate for screening calls, but that's a different
topic.  My point is that comparing Caller ID with answering your front
door is flawed.


/Don

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID and Florida PSC
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 18:09:36 EDT
Reply-To: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers


The Florida PSC did NOT decide on CID last month, and instead delayed
unutil 17 July, I believe.

Meanwhile, The {Miami Herald} reports today (20th) that calls to the
PSC are running four to one against it.


[e-mail]
(305) 255-RTFM
pob 570-335
33257-0335

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 19:05 EST
From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
Subject: So What Follows Caller ID?


        I _must_ bring to this forum an item from National Public
Radio that absolutely cracked me up yesterday.  I hope readers find it
as funny, but can also see its ominous undertones.

        I'm not able to repeat it verbatim, but here is its gist in my
best recall and paraphrase:

        <Following some reportage about the PA court decision banning
Caller ID>: "There's a lighter side to the Caller ID debate, and NPR
had satirist (sorry, I lost the name) compose some thoughts for us."

        <In strident tone of a radio commercial> "And now, your Phone
Company presents a new product ... I.Q. ID!  That's right, no more
risk answering your phone when we present the I.Q., credit rating, SAT
scoreand physical parameters of that person ringing your phone.  For
example....

        <Sound of ringing phone> (feminine voice says> "Hello?"

        <Geeky masculine voice says> "Hello, Darlene?  I kind of got
your number from one of the other guys who said he thought you
wouldn't mind getting a call from me and maybe I could meet you
somewhere Friday evening and I could even bring my pet tortoise
Randall to show you. They're very rare, you know, and mine is a big
one, wieghs 32 pounds now.  I sure hope you'll say yes, because some
of the other guys have bet me you'll say no."

        <Announcer> "Yes, you've all had calls like this. But if you
had Caller I.Q., available _only_ from your Phone Company, you could
just let the phone ring, or let the answering machine take such pesky
calls.  Here's another kind of creep you could avoid with Caller I.Q.:"

        <Sound of phone ringing> <feminine voice> "Hello?"

        <upbeat masculine voice> Why, hello, Darlene.  It's Tom.  You
know, I've been thinking about how interested you were in the upcoming
treaty covering extradition of unwed mothers from Peru as affected by
forward arbitrage on the Portugese Escudo.  Perhaps you've like to
meet for dinner Friday evening and discuss it further."

        <Announcer>  "Well, you know who's going to buy _that_ dinner,
don't you?  But, if you had the Detailed Financial Profile Option of Caller
I.Q., available _only_ from your Phone Company, you'd be able to make some
financial risk decisions on the spot."

        "Yes, that's it, folks ... Caller I.Q. ... an important new
service available only from your Phone company ... the people who
guard your privacy as carefully as we break it!"

        <Musical fanfare>

        Well, I really am sorry I couldn't recall more than this
paraphrase of what was a very funny bit.  But, also, think what it
might mean if, indeed, the Telcos first get Caller ID and then are
permitted to get into the database business.  Just as with so many
actions, we see that classic modus operandi: Getting one item in
state-by-state action, then the other piece by Federal action.  Aren't
we ever going to get wise to this?

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

End of TELECOM Digest Special: Caller ID Stuff
******************************










Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13821;
          21 Jun 90 3:39 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09117;
          21 Jun 90 2:09 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15911;
          21 Jun 90 1:06 CDT
Date:     Thu, 21 Jun 90 0:29:05 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #445
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 21 Jun 90 00:28:44 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 445

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Sverige Direkt [Jody Kravitz]
    Re: AT&T Telstar Call Control Unit [Julian Macassey]
    Re: Exchanges Taken Out of Service [Carl Moore]
    Re: AT&T 'COCOT' Style Payphones [Jody Kravitz]
    Re: Neat Phones! [David E. Bernholdt]
    Re: US/Canada Only One Digit Code? [John Nagle]
    Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB [Donald E. Kimberlin]
    Re: Leonard Rose Update: His Prior Conviction [Jim Thomas]
    Re: Legion of Doom and the Secret Service [Steven W. Bittinger]
    Last Laugh! "Telephone Fishing" [Donald E. Kimberlin]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jody Kravitz <foxtail![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sverige Direkt
Date: 20 Jun 90 04:36:12 GMT
Organization: The Foxtail Group, San Diego, CA


[e-mail] (Dan Sahlin) writes:

>The list of countries and numbers for "Sverige Direkt" are as follows

>    Canada       1800 463 8129
>    USA          1800 345 0046

I couldn't resist trying these numbers.  The Canadian 800 number was
intercepted with "Your call cannot be completed as dialed <pause>
6194T".

The USA number rang with an unfamiliar ringing tone and was answered
by a woman in a language I didn't understand.  "Do you speak English
?" I asked.  "Very bad", she said.  "What country is this ?", I asked.
"Sweden.", she said.  "I'm sorry I bothered you.", I said.

I suspect that the operator was actually in the US.  I wish I could
have had a conversation with her.

Jody

Internet: foxtail![e-mail]
uucp:     ucsd!foxtail!kravitz


[Moderator's Note: The 'unfamiliar ringing tone' was in fact coming to
you from Sweden. Yes, the 800 number was terminating over there.  PT]

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

From: Julian Macassey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Telstar Call Control Unit
Date: 20 Jun 90 05:57:38 GMT
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Arthur J
Riedlinger, Iii) writes:

> About five years ago I purchased an AT&T Telstar Call Control System,
> manufactured by American Bell Consumer Products, and it has been
> working perfectly with four regular phones attached to the jacks.

Note: Four regular phones. REN = 4?

> I recently purchased a Northwestern Bell Excursion Sport II cordless
> phone and connected into an unused jack. All the regular phones ring
> on an incoming call, the cordless base or remote unit do not ring in
> the installed jack or when interchanged with other phones, which work
> where the cordless unit was installed.

    Betya that if you unplugged some of the "four regular phones"
the cordless would ring. Guarantee it will ring if it is the only
phone plugged into the "Call control system", but maybe not. I don't
know what this device is, it could be a euphemism for a PBX. It could
generate its own ring or pass the telco ringing signal.

> The cordless base and remote
> both ring when interchanged with a single phone installed in another
> residence.

> I suspect that the AT&T unit cannot handle the cordless phone but AT&T
> does not have any information on the Telstar unit, which has been
> discontinued.

Yes, you are nearly right.

> I have the owners manual for the Telstar unit, but it doesn't have any
> restrictive operating notes. Does anyone have the installation
> information or know who I can contact regarding the technical
> specifications on this unit?

    Ok, here is the problem as I see it from the information you
have sent me. The ringing voltage is not high enough to trigger the
ringer on the cordless. First of all, if the ringing voltage is telco
generated, the four regular phones (I assume you mean 2500 sets) are
lowering the voltage below the threshold of the cordless unit. AT&T
gong ringers will chime away merrily at 40V. Some crummy "ringers" and
ring detectors go deaf at 80V or so. Removing some of the phones will
raise the voltage and should get the cordless to play. If the ringing
voltage is internally generated in the Telstar unit (Wasn't that a
satellite?), it could be too low to do anything to the cordless.

    You can try asking the cordless importer what the minimum
ringing voltage is. Don't expect an intelligent answer. Changing some
of the components in the cordless ring detector may help.

    This is yet another REN type question, so don't forget folks,
that turning the ringers "off" will not remove the load from the line.
You have to open the unit and physically remove the ringer from the
line.


Julian Macassey, n6are  [e-mail]  ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian
N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 9:50:04 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Exchanges Taken Out of Service


594 used to appear in the Philadelphia phone book in area code 215 for
ConRail (this was c. 1976).  Since then, before the local calls from
Pa. to Del. were changed to eleven digits, 594 has disappeared from
Philadelphia and appeared in Wilmington, Delaware (area 302).  Until
such local call change, Chester Heights (Pa.) had seven digit dialing
to both Philadelphia and Wilmington.

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

From: Jody Kravitz <foxtail![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T 'COCOT' Style Payphones
Date: 20 Jun 90 14:03:46 GMT
Organization: The Foxtail Group, San Diego, CA


[e-mail] (Blake Farenthold) writes:

>I always figured if anyone hated COCOTS it was AT&T.  Well I found
>what I'd call an AT&T COCOT.

I have encountered AT&T "Charge-a-Call" phones at an airport recently
which cut off the keypad only when certain 800 numbers were called.  I
could call my paging service and use the keypad, but the keypad was
turned off when I called U.S. Sprint.  I can't blame them, but I was
very surprised.

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

From: "David E. Bernholdt" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Neat Phones!
Date: 20 Jun 90 16:22:48 GMT
Reply-To: "David E. Bernholdt" <[e-mail]>
Organization: University of Florida Quantum Theory Project


In article <[e-mail]> the Moderator wrote:

>[Moderator's Note: The Sharper Image catalog has these phones also,
>and theirs come with a blue neon tube in the base which either stays lit
>at all times and flashes off when the phone rings or stays dark and
>flashes on when the phone rings, as you select. They are really very
>clever and very beautiful instruments.  PT]

Yeah, I saw one of these at the local ScanDesign (or equivalent) shop.
Neat, but they wanted $250.00 for it!  I'll stick to my Panasonic with
an opaque case...


David Bernholdt            [e-mail]
Quantum Theory Project        [e-mail]
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL  32611        904/392 6365


[Moderator's Note: Well, no one ever accused Sharper Image of selling
inexpensive stuff. My mouth waters when I read their catalog. I wish I
could afford just one or two things from each issue.  PT]

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

From: John Nagle <well![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US/Canada Only One Digit Code?
Date: 20 Jun 90 19:50:16 GMT
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA


     At one time, prior to international direct dialing, Kuwait had a
U.S. area code.

                    JN

[Moderator's Note: You *really* have piqued my curiosity on this one!
Does anyone else know about this? What area code was it? When?   PT]

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 19:05 EST
From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
Subject: Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB


Responding to: David Lewis <nvuxr![e-mail]>

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>(John R. Levine) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> you write:

> >> 4) How the local telco got a waiver to give long distance service ...

> >It's not really "Long Distance" service..."
(material deleted)

Then, Lewis responds:

>The MFJ Court granted a couple of "'limited corridor' exceptions" to
>"preserve traditional direct BOC interstate serving arrangements.
>These exceptions called for BOC-to-BOC, inter-LATA trunking between
>(NYC & North NJ, and South NJ & Philly)"

>The way I read this is that NJBell and NYTel on the one hand, and
>NJBell and Bell of PA on the other hand, had direct trunking
>arrangements which didn't pass through AT&T Long Lines
>(pre-divestiture)....."

In fact, these areas were two places of incursion by NYTel and Bell PA
into territory that ultimately became the Bell Telephone Company of
New Jersey.  I have no direct experience with the South Jersey
territory, but did have some in North Jersey.  There, I recall a
territory described as an arc with a radius of forty miles from some
point on the New Jersey shore of the Hudson River was an area within
which NYTel could still sell things like interstate private line and
Special Services.  The whole matter simply dated back into the mists
of Bell System history from the time before there was a New Jersey
Bell.

I have walked in the streets of Paterson, NJ and seen manhole covers
marked, "New York Bell." this, of course, is plant long since taken
over by NJ Bell, but it is the physical remnants of that history and
time when NYTel ran the phones in northern NJ.

Today, we see it has evolved into a right to sell short-haul toll
under Equal Acess rules.  Regrettably, like so much of telecom
history, it has been euphemized into obscurity by legal language, so
its root gets lost.

I'm sure the same applied to southern NJ with Bell of PA providing the
first Bell phones across the river from Philadelphia.  And, it
wouldn't surprise me to find similar incursions elsewhere ... let's
say perhaps in Kansas City, or East St. Louis, for example.

Perhaps some of our more intrepid readers would engage some vicarious
manhole-cover-reading.  Might be of trivial interest.  How about it?
Any Canadians care to see if there aren't even some NY Tel manhole
covers across the river from Buffalo, dating from the time that was a
rural area?

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

Date: Tue, 19 Jun 90 16:50 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Leonard Rose Update: His Prior Conviction


Pat's recent commentary (TCD #442) about Len Rose's indictment raises
troublesome issues.  Among them are what constitute theft, the
continuing question of the nature of Secret Service investigatory
techniques, and how we talk about all this.

The continued use of the term "theft," although it is generally a
legitimate legal term and one used in the indictments, seems
questionable, because as Judge Nicholas Bua's recent memorandum
indicates, courts have not settled the issue of whether transfer of
electronic impulses when the original property remains in place and
intact is in fact "theft." Further, if Len received the source code
from another, does this constitute theft? If it is "property" which
could be obtained from any Unix user, what, then, is the status of
that property? The problem here is that we are applying conventional
terms that carry considerable emotional, ethical, and other
ideological baggage, to a realm where they may not be approrpriate.

One consequence of the "computer revolution" is that it changes how we
look at things.  Unfortunately, comfortable language may not
adequately or accurately describe what in fact occurs. When we name
something, the thing becomes that name, and we then respond to a label
rather than -- in this case -- to the thing itself. Such structured and
limited conceptualizing feeds the witch hunt mentality in which law
enforcement agents justify their "crackdown" on the computer
underground.

If, as Pat suggests, the Secret Service is taping phone calls, whose
are they taping? Are they taping Pat's, because he is in contact with
suspicious people? Are they reading the mail going in to TELECOM
Digest? Rep. Don Edwards' FOIA request indicates that BBSs are under
surveillance, and some law enforcement types have bragged about their
"sting" operations. Don't the privacy concerns trouble people?

Adducing Len's past behaviors seems a bit disingenuous. While claiming
that it should not be used to convict him, simply raising it in the
manner done provides a way to discredit the "moral character." The
tenor of the commentary seems to be, "Hey, let's not condemn him on
this past act, but gee, look what he did before." To Pat's credit, he
explicitly warns against using Len's past conviction in judging the
present one, but others have not been so cautious.

At stake in the current crackdowns are issues not only of privacy and
First Amendment rights -- not to hack or phreak, but to discuss it in
outlets like Phrack and TELECOM Digest -- but also the direction of
e-mail protections for the coming decades. To use conventional terms
like "theft," "fraud," "conspiracy," and other legal terms as if they
described what actually happening ignores the complexity of the issues
and distorts the changes occuring in communication and the need to
address how *ALL* users can be protected from all predators, whether
these predators hide behind a terminal or a badge.


Jim Thomas, co-moderator Computer underground Digest (TK0JUT2@NIU)

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

From: "Steven W. Bittinger" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Legion of Doom and the Secret Service
Date: 20 Jun 90 23:58:30 GMT


> "Back in February, when AT&T long distance service went down for most
> of a day, the company blamed it on a software bug, but it was really a
> worm --- sabotage by hackers loosely associated as the Legion of Doom.
> Members also lifted UNIX System V.3 source code from Bell Labs and 911
> maintenance code from Bellsouth.  But it was disruption of telephone
> service that got the Secret Service involved.  Many Unix nodes on the
> anarchic Usenet crabgrass network were seized by zealous agents
> tracking down mailing lists."

Interested individuals may want to retrieve a lengthy article
describing the Legion of Doom incident from the CCNEWS archives by
sending a one-line message to [e-mail] wiith the text:
GET UUCP MULLET_K

This article was published in the June 1990 issue of Benchmarks
(Vol.11, No.4), the University of North Texas Computing Centre
Newsletter.


Steven Bittinger          E-mail:  [e-mail]
Computing Centre          Phone:                  (002) 20-2811
University of Tasmania    Fax:                    (002) 23-1772
GPO Box 252C, Hobart       Note: internationally, dial (+61-02)
Tasmania 7001, AUSTRALIA                     instead of (002)

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 19:05 EST
From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
Subject: Last Laugh! "Telephone Fishing"


        While on consulting engagement in rural Mississippi, I've had
the benefit of observing in many places a virtual "modern museum of
Telephony."  In that living museum, one finds many interesting
sidelights that have passed from the scene inmost of the nation.  One,
however, seems to be although _sub_rosa_, still active.

        It seems that much of Mississippi still had manual ringdown
magneto telephone exchanges right up to thirty years ago.  It further
seems that a large number of the magneto telephone sets never really
did get scrapped.  Rather, they are kept at hand whenever one needs to
do some rapid, serious fishing.  At such times, the old magneto
telephone gets taken out in the boat, its wires get dropped over the
side, and its crank gets turned.

        The invariable result: Numerous stunned fish float to the
surface to simply be netted into the boat.  Obviously, the game warden
takes a very dim view of this method, so the technique is not used
publicly.

        And, were a stranger to walk into a sporting goods store to
ask for the apparatus for "telephone fishing," the result would likely
range from a laugh to a disclaimer on the topic.  but, if you roam the
country roads and ask most any "country folks" about it, you'll get at
least a sly wink!

        How about it?  Anyplace else where folks still fish via phone?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #445
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03093;
          22 Jun 90 2:51 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06661;
          22 Jun 90 1:20 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa16056;
          22 Jun 90 0:17 CDT
Date:     Thu, 21 Jun 90 23:28:44 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #446
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 21 Jun 90 23:28:28 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 446

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Sprint Users Now Get Immediate Credit [Press Release via Paul Wilczynski]
    Seeking Recommendations For Modem/Telephone Switcher [T. Govindaraj]
    Motorola Plans Global Cellular Thrust [Chicago Tribune via Steven King]
    On the Trail of the Elusive Octothorpe [Donald E. Kimberlin]
    FCC Surveys AOS Operations [Telephony Magazine via Roger Clark Swann]
    Cocom Deregulations [Hank Nussbacher]
    Just a Data Point For CLASS [Chris Johnson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 04:25 EST
From: Paul Wilczynski <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sprint Users Now Get Immediate Credit


KANSAS CITY, Mo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--US Sprint announced Monday (6/18)
that it now offers callers immediate credit for wrong numbers and
calls experiencing transmission difficulties.

The new service invalidates a recent advertising campaign that touts
AT&T as the only operator services provider to give immediate call
credit.  Prior to offering this service, US Sprint required that
customers call a customer service ``800'' number.  The request was
then processed and a credit was noted on their bill.

``This move separates US Sprint from other long distance providers
because customers will see the actual credit on their bill,'' said Dan
Evanoff, vice president and general manager of Sprint Services.
``Unlike AT&T, we put it in writing.''

US Sprint has stepped ahead of the competition by assuring immediate
call credit even if the customer makes a credit request a day or two
later.  US Sprint customers now may give their information to a Sprint
Services agent and be assured that the credit will appear on a
subsequent bill.  This eliminates the customer inconvenience of
requesting the credit again upon receiving their monthly invoice.

According to Evanoff, research indicates that even though a customer
requests call credit via other operator service providers, if the
request is not within five minutes of the occurrence, the chances that
the credit will appear on the customer's bill is jeopardized.

Established in 1988 to provide operator support for US Sprint
customers, Sprint Services now provides a variety of call assistance
and 900 services to a rapidly growing market.

US Sprint is a unit of United Telecommunications Inc., a diversified
international telecommunications company based in Kansas City, Mo.

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

From: "T. Govindaraj" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Seeking Recommendations For Modem/Telephone Switcher
Date: 20 Jun 90 13:24:09 GMT
Reply-To: "T. Govindaraj" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Center for Human-Machine Systems Research - Georgia Tech


Can some kind soul help me figure out if the phone/fax/modem
switchesreally work to route calls appropriately? I would like to
route calls to a modem (connected to a Sun 3/80 or NeXT) or the
telephone (I don't need a fax; I could use a fax modem with my MacII
if I ever have a need).

If the switches are good and worth, which ones would you recommend?  I
have seen descriptions of a switcher from Acco and some other company.
Also, I assume that the "Rodelvox Faxmate 168vs" from haverhills
(advertised for $79.95 +$4.95 s&h, New Yorker) will work for the
modems too.

I checked several back issues of these newsgroups and did not find a
discussion of this device. If I missed prior discussion and if this is
a repeat request I apologize.

I'll gladly summarize, if you mail suggestions and comments. Thank
you!


T. Govindaraj, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineering
Voice: [phone],  Fax: [phone]
[e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: Steven King <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Motorola Plans Global Cellular Thrust
Date: 20 Jun 90 14:19:53 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc. - Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


This is from the Business section of the {Chicago Tribune}, Wednesday,
June 20, 1990.  I work for Motorola's cellular division, and this is
news to me.  Then again, no one here (in switch software) heard of the
Micro-TACS until the press release last year.  Don't bother to pump me
for information, all I know is what I'm copying from the Trib.  Any
typos are mine.

                     MOTOROLA PLANS GLOBAL CELLULAR THRUST

(by Marianne Taylor)

        Motorola Inc., a leader in the booming cellular telephone
business, is set to announce next week plans to establish the first
global, satellite-based cellular phone system, industry sources said
Tuesday.

        The system, in which Motorola is expected to make at least a
$2 billion initial investment, would require launching a network of
low-orbiting satellites that would extend cellular service to remote
areas of the United States as well as overseas locations.

        The new system would be of use to international travelers and
to people who live in remote areas of the U.S. where it's not
economical to build a sufficient number of the land-based transmitters
that now carry cellular signals to customers in more densely populated
areas.

        Motorola officials were reluctant to discuss details of the
proposed system, but they have scheduled a briefing next week in which
the system is expected to be announced.

        Industry sources said the planned system, which will require
Federal Communications Commission approval, would involve launching 77
small satellites to carry telephone signals around the world.  It
could be operating by the mid-1990s, the sources said.

        In theory, a worldwide communications network based on
satellites has the capacity to reach anyone in the world
instantaneously, one industry source said, adding that such a move
fits with Motorola's plans to aggressively expand in cellular
telephones.

        Other communications companies reportedly are moving quickly
into this area, which is expected to be the next generation of
cellular telephone technology.  Among Motorola's competitors will be
American Telephone & Telegraph Co.  AT&T reportedly has teamed up with
Geostar Corp., a Washington-based satellite communications firm, to
develop a similar system based on different technology, said John
Pemberton, an analyst with Gartner Group Inc.

        Another communication company, part-owned by subsidiaries of
McCaw Cellular Communications Inc. and Hughes Aircraft Corp., already
has been licensed by the FCC to launch and operate a mobile
communications system for the U.S., said Ruth Pritchard-kelly,
spokeswoman for the company, American Mobile Satellite Corp.

        The satellite company said it plans to launch its first
satellite, a geostationary model, in 1993 to provide voice and data
communications to mobile users in the U.S. and 200 miles of its
coastal waters.

        Geostationary satellites cost $50 million to $60 million to
launch, but only two are needed to set up worldwide coverage,
Pemberton said.

        Motorola's platoon of satellites would follow a relatively low
orbit -- 600 to 800 miles above the Earth -- and be much cheaper and
easier to launch than the geostationary satellites, which orbit at
23,000 miles above the Earth, he said.

        The system Motorola is expected to announce next week would be
the first to integrate satellite services and land-based cellular
system, Pemberton said.

        Motorola is finalizing agreements with the companies expected
to launch the satellite system.  Among those that have developed a
moderately priced method of launching such satellites is Washington,
D.C.-based Oribital Sciences Corp., which uses its Pegasus rocket to
launch small payloads into orbit from the wing of an airplane.

        Orbital Sciences can launch a satellite the size of the ones
envisioned for Motorola for $5 million to $6 million each, a company
spokeswoman said.  AT&T is expected to propose using larger, more
expensive satellites.  Officials at Oribital Sciences wouldn't comment
on any venture with Motorola.

        If Motorola is able to develop its system as intended, the
company would move beyond simply manufacturing the equipment used in
cellular phone systems -- the handsets and the switching stations --
to become a cellular telephone operator, Pemberton noted.

        But before any system can be sent into orbit, Motorola must
pass stringent FCC licensing tests.

        Sales of cellular phones and switching equipment represent 10
to 15 percent of Motorola's revenue, industry analysts say, and the
business is expected to grow rapidly.

        Expecting that demand for cellular phones will outstrip its
manufacturing capacity in Arlington Heights, IL, Motorola last year
announced plans to build a $50 million plant in suburban Libertyville.


Steve King, Motorola Cellular  (...uunet!motcid!king)

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 19:05 EST
From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
Subject: On the Trail of the Elusive Octothorpe

        Recent dialog in forii (could that be the plural of "forum?")
on other networks leads me to poll this august assemblage in search of
a lexicographer of telecommunications.

        The subject: Searching for the detail origin and the ultimate
demise of the name "octothorpe" for the <#> character we commonly call
a "number sign."

        What we've found: At the time Bell put a "#" on tone telephone
keypads, it was, to all knowledge, just "there," and available for
non-specified future applications, as was the asterisk <*>. There
_may_ have been a Bell System Technical Journal publication at the
time indicating what possible uses the designers had.  (And some may
recall that early Bell tone keypads didn't have any <*> or <#> keys,
too. They were added early on.)

        The _one_ use of the <#> seems to have been one of Bell self-
interest, assigning the <#> as an End-of-Number delimiter to signal
the electromechanical registers of crossbar exchanges, so they didn't
sit and time out (for some _long_ times) on International DDD calls.
It was the necessary American action, as of course, a great
convenience of the fixed number length here had been to be able to
simply count digits to identify the End of Number.

        But, to our story: At the time the <#> came to public view,
there was some public news that Bell Labs had given the character <#>
a name, "octothorpe," descriptive of its eight points. I have recall
of mentions in newsmagazines of the Time/Newsweeks ilk, crediting the
Labs for giving what had previously no name a proper name.

        The current track has found some folks who worked inside local
switching plant at the time recalling they got Drawing Change Notices
describing the EON modification to crossbar registers (essentially a
wire mod that ran the output of the <#> detector channel to the same
logic point as the digit counters..ain't hardware logic fun?), so
either the proper digit count _or_ the <#> would send the digits off
to translators and markers, releasing the register to serve another
call.  Those Drawing Change Notices told the character had been named
"octothorpe."

        Meantime, a short time later, the public newsmagazines had
follow-up stories that Bell Labs had retracted its claim to inventing
a name for the character; saying that the attribution to Bell Labs was
perhaps a hoax.

        Today, the octothorpe's namer should get credit where due.
Who really _did_ think through the form of the character and come up
with a descriptive name?  Can people in this readership do a text
search of Bell System Tech Journals and Bell Labs Record, etc., of the
1950's-early 1960's and perhaps find some relevant material?  If
there's nothing better, finding the names of suthors who wrote any
pieces using that term should be close to the individual source.

        We should by now have reached a point in time when the Labs
should no longer be embarrassed by what they must once have perceived
as beneath or beyond their function.

        (Items like this should lead us to being able to write more
powerful documentation.  For example, how many people say or write
"slash' and "reverse slash" for the </> and <\> we use some much, when
they really have the proper name "virgule" and "reverse virgule?"
Check it out in your Funk & Wagnalls.)

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

From: Roger Clark Swann <ssc-vax![e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Surveys AOS Operations
Date: 21 Jun 90 06:10:03 GMT
Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics, Seattle WA


[ To most regular readers of TELECOM, the following will be nothing new.
  However, it is good to see some hard facts / numbers on the topic and
  maybe it will point the way to some constructive change. ]

Reprinted from TELEPHONY / June 11, 1990


AOS Firms Violate FCC Guidelines

Many alternative operator srevices (AOS) companies are continuing to
violate Federal Communications Commision guidelines, according to a
nationwide audit recently conducted by the agency. The guidelines were
developed more than a year ago in response to widespread complaint
about AOS firms.

  When the FCC's field operations staff made calls from pay phones
throughout the United States earlier this spring, they discovered
that few AOS companies provided written notices on phones to indicate
that an AOS company was handling the calls. However, the companies did
identify themselves orally almost 90% of the time, the FCC report
said.

  And there are still serious problems with call blocking. About 40%
of the time, callers were unable to get their calls routed through a
selected long distance company, according to the report. Blocking
problems occurred with 10XXX numbers and 950 numbers.

  The FCC is expected to draw up mandatory rules regulating the
industry sometime this year. The guidelines adopted on February 1989
have no legal power and have drawn criticism from Congress and
comsumer groups for that reason.

  The FCC, however, opposes pending congressional bills that would
require rate regulation of AOS providers. The AOS industry says it has
been trying to comply with the guildelines.

(End of article).


    Roger Swann               |    uucp:  uw-beaver!ssc-vax!clark
         @                    |
The Boeing Company            |

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jun 90 10:59:12 P
From: Hank Nussbacher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cocom Deregulations


Many people have asked me about Cocom deregulations and I just got the
June 11th Computerworld (page 123) which has an article about it.  The
new ceiling for free trade of computers is now 275M bit/sec up from
78M bit/sec.  This includes all personal computers up to and including
the 33Mhz 80386.

Licensing consideration will be given to commercial computers up to 1G
bit/sec (this encompasses all computers other than supercomputers and
large mainframes).  Eastern Europe has a higher limit of 2G bit/sec.

Fiber-optic systems are still regulated.  They also mention that the
US Dept of Commerce would block US West's proposal to install the $500
million fiber-optic TSL.


Hank

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

From: Chris Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Just a Data Point For CLASS
Organization: Com Squared Systems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 90 23:37:05 GMT


I had occasion to call U.S. West yesterday to arrange for my telephone
service to move with me.  During my brief chat with their service
representative in Souix Falls, SD (I'm in Minneapolis -- clever
automatic forwarding when the local reps. get too busy), he mentioned
they were trial offering CLASS features to their North Dakota
customers.  (of all places... :-)


   ...Chris Johnson          [e-mail]   ..uunet!bungia!com50!chris
 Com Squared Systems, Inc.   St. Paul, MN USA   [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #446
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07070;
          22 Jun 90 4:58 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04446;
          22 Jun 90 3:24 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa18759;
          22 Jun 90 2:21 CDT
Date:     Fri, 22 Jun 90 1:53:16 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #447
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 22 Jun 90 01:52:08 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 447

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T 'COCOT' Style Payphones [Christopher J. Pikus]
    Re: V & H Coordinates to Latitude and Longitude [Jim Riddle]
    Re: New York City xxx-9901 Numbers [Jack Winslade]
    Re: Uniform International Dialing [Charles Hawkins Mingo]
    Re: Telecom Masters Degree? [Tad Cook]
    Re: Screwy PUC Policies [Tad Cook]
    Re: "Columbo" TV Episode, 6/10/90 [Chris Johnson]
    Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB [Fred R. Goldstein]
    Re: AT&T SelectSaver(TM) Advertising Slime [Lang Zerner]
    Re: Neat Phones! [John Higdon]
    Re: Last Laugh! "Telephone Fishing" [Jim Rees]
    Re: Last Laugh! "Telephone Fishing" [C. Irby]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Christopher J. Pikus" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T 'COCOT' Style Payphones
Date: 22 Jun 90 00:10:53 GMT
Organization: Megatek Corporation, San Diego, Ca.


 From article <[e-mail]>, by foxtail![e-mail]
(Jody Kravitz):

> I have encountered AT&T "Charge-a-Call" phones at an airport recently
> which cut off the keypad only when certain 800 numbers were called.  I
> could call my paging service and use the keypad, but the keypad was
> turned off when I called U.S. Sprint.                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    I thought that this was illegal. I seem to recall hearing that
the Supreme Court decided that while COCOT phones were legal they
could not block access to 800 numbers that access alternate services.
Am I wrong or am I wrong?

Regards,

Christopher J. Pikus,               Megatek Corp.
INTERNET:     [e-mail]      San Diego, CA
UUCP:         ...!uunet!megatek!cjp

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 22:08:29 EDT
From: Jim Riddle <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: V & H Coordinates to Latitude and Longitude
Reply-to: [e-mail]


Vertical/horizontal conversion differs depending on whether you are
just flat-Earthing from a given point or are given Earth-centered
coordinates translated from the lat, long and given radius of the
earth.

I work with all of the stuff all of the time at work, and have several
routines available.  If you would like these, send me netmail at
[e-mail], or if you have direct FidoNet
access, to Jim Riddle at 1:285/27.0 (Inns of Court, Papillion, NE); or
I would suggest that conversions are not that difficult if you want to
look up the topic of spherical coordinates in a good calculus text.


 --- Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.11 r.3
 * Origin: [1:285/27@fidonet] The Inns of Court 402/593-1192 (1:285/27.0)

 --- Through FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390
 [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 22:11:45 EDT
From: Jack Winslade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New York City xxx-9901 Numbers
Reply-to: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha, Ne. 402-896-3537


In a message of <16 Jun 90 15:03:42>, Douglas Scott Reuben writes:

>In case anyone cares, here are some 99xx "suffixes" that 'work' in NY:
>[list deleted]

One you forgot (or maybe doesn't work anymore) is nnx-9900.  In the
early 70's this returned the milliwatt 1004hZ tone.  This used to work
for many of the (then) panel and #1 crossbar offices in Brooklyn.

In addition, nnx-0099 used to return busy tone and there was another
one, not 99xx, that would return a ringing tone (with no line actually
ringing) but I forget that one.

At that time, the nnx-9900 number would supervise upon connection.
The 0099 would not.

It was interesting to note the change in the various tones (dial,
busy, ringing) when the older offices were cut to ESS.

[Warning -- nostalgia alert]

This just reminded me of something.  This was about the time that tone
dialing was becoming available in the NYC area.  They had a big media
thing pointing out the sound of the new dial tone (what is now
standard) which would appear on CO's equipped for tone dialing.  They
even had a number you could dial to hear the new tone.  [exciting,
huh ??  ;-) ]

Good Day!        JSW


[1:285/666@fidonet] DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha (1:285/666)

 --- Through FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390
[e-mail]

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

From: Charles Hawkins Mingo <well![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Uniform International Dialing
Date: 21 Jun 90 23:53:19 GMT
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <[e-mail]>
writes: >

>Are you sure that the "#" is necessary for timeout elimination for the
>LD operator? "00" is unambiguous, in that no additional digits would
>be expected by the switch.

    Actually, "00" is ambiguous in my experience.  At least when
using AT&T Long Distance in Chicago and Washington, "001" is the
prefix for International Credit Card Calls (i.e. calls outside of
North America, Caribbean, etc.).


[Moderator's Note: Are you sure the international operator assisted
code is not '01' ??  That is what we use here.   PT]

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

From: Tad Cook <ssc![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom Masters Degree?
Date: 21 Jun 90 19:07:21 GMT
Organization: very little


In article <[e-mail]>, wybbs![e-mail] (Ken
Jongsma) writes:

> Do you know of a school that offers a Masters Degree in Voice/Data
> Communications? I'm interested in exploring this and would appreciate
> any leads you could provide.

Check the "Directory of Telecommunications Schools and Colleges" in
the TE&M Directory.

Some that come to mind: Annenberg School of Communications at the U of
S. Cal, Arizona State U, U of Colorado...


Tad Cook   Seattle, WA   Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA   Phone: [phone]
MCI Mail: 3288544   Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW
USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad     or, [e-mail]

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

From: Tad Cook <ssc![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Screwy PUC Policies
Date: 21 Jun 90 18:56:55 GMT
Organization: very little


In article <[e-mail]>, mailrus!uflorida!rm1!bapat
(Bapat) writes:

> While visiting my aunt in Alameda, CA, in the metro Bay area (415-865
> exchange) I was surprised to find that I couldn't retrieve messages
> from my answering machine at home. The reason? My aunt's phone
> couldn't send out tones, as Alameda has no touch-tone service! It was
> shocking to know that there still are parts of major metropolitan
> areas which don't have tone yet.

What kind of central office inhibits you from sending DTMF to your
answering machine?  None!

Also, the 415-865 exchange has been a 1AESS for many years now,
offering not only tone dialling, but call-waiting, call transfer,
speed dialing, etc.  I think it has had touchtone service for about
TWO DECADES!

> Suppose it were possible for Pac Bell to upgrade technology and pay
> for it solely on the basis of new, enhanced services offered, i.e.
> without affecting the basic subscription rate for the majority of its
> subscribers - why would that be a problem with the PUC?

It isn't!  This CO was upgraded YEARS ago!  Of course, it's easier to
blame the telco, rather than just call them for info!


Tad Cook  Seattle, WA   Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA   Phone: [phone]
MCI Mail: 3288544  Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW
USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad     or, [e-mail]

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

From: Chris Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Columbo" TV Episode, 6/10/90.
Organization: Com Squared Systems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 90 21:58:30 GMT


I don't know what tests are really used in a courtroom to determine
admissible evidence, but I believe it would be foolish to allow FAX
machine logs.  FAX machines are _user_ programmable devices.

I've even doctored the logs on a FAX machine once to keep nosey
secretaries from knowing what I was doing.  And I was a complete
neophyte at the time -- I just read the little user's reference card,
pushed a few buttons, and bingo, no more trace of my FAX.  I could
alter the date and time just as easily, dial the number myself (in
fact, I did and usually do), and so on.

I suspect very few computer printouts of any kind are admissible
evidence since they are so easily forged.


   ...Chris Johnson          [e-mail]   ..uunet!bungia!com50!chris
 Com Squared Systems, Inc.   St. Paul, MN USA   [phone]

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

From: "Fred R. Goldstein" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10-NYT and 10-NJB
Date: 21 Jun 90 20:01:52 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Donald E.
Kimberlin) writes...

>I have walked in the streets of Paterson, NJ and seen manhole covers
>marked, "New York Bell." this, of course, is plant long since taken
>over by NJ Bell, but it is the physical remnants of that history and
>time when NYTel ran the phones in northern NJ.

While I'm not all that old, I still don't believe that NYT ever "ran
the phones" in NNJ.  New Jersey Bell is an old and venerable company,
formerly the Delaware and Atlantic Telephone Co.  I'd rather suspect
that the manhole covers were simply built for NYT and used by NJB
because they didn't have any handy with their own name on them.  Since
they were both AT&T subs, it's perfectly believable that they'd
"borrow" each others' inventory on occasion.

Incidentally about a decade ago, Bell Labs Record (or whichever one
the glossy non-technical magazine was) had an article about the new
trunk facilities -- "MAT" (Metropolitan Area Trunk) cable -- strung
between Manhattan and Jersey City.  Real high-tech stuff:
Voice-frequency twisted pair, thin gauge, about 3600 pair per tube!
Since the toll offices were only about 3 miles apart, unamplified
twisted pair was cheaper than any sort of mux and performed
adequately.

This must cost them about a penny a minute to use.  The markups are
truly outrageous!


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
                or [e-mail]  voice:  [phone]

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jun 90 13:43:49 PDT
From: Lang Zerner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T SelectSaver(TM) Advertising Slime
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.


In article <[e-mail]> sneaky![e-mail] writes:

>The ad in my mail says "A review of your AT&T Long Distance bill
>indicates that you have the potential to save money by changing to the
>AT&T SelectSaver Plan".

>...call each month in addition to actual use, I would have paid $11.40 in
>SelectSaver bills to date to save about $4.56 on calls, for a net loss
>of $6.84.  And they are strongly implying that they LOOKED at my bills
>and decided I could save money.

I'll see you and raise you...

I got a similar letter stating that, based on a review of my calling
patterns, AT&T in its infinite wisdom had determined that I would be
better off if I took AT&T's Reach Out America calling plan into my
life.  They even went so far as to reassure me that they had not sent
this letter to all AT&T customers, only to those who AT&T had
scientifically determined would save money.

I would not be too incensed by this except for the fact that I have had
the Reach Out America plan in place for almost nine months.  The only
thing I can think is that AT&T is making these mailings based on
reviews of bills sent to AT&T/Universal card accounts without
considering the primary account of the subscriber (if any).  Gordon,
did you recently get a Universal card?

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Neat Phones!
Date: 21 Jun 90 13:13:27 PDT (Thu)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


"David E. Bernholdt" <[e-mail]> writes:

> Yeah, I saw one of these at the local ScanDesign (or equivalent) shop.
> Neat, but they wanted $250.00 for it!  I'll stick to my Panasonic with
> an opaque case...

Watch out when buying "neat" phones. I have the ITT 2500-style clear
phone. It is ITT's standard implemention of the 2500 set, with genuine
"gong" ringer (REN 1.0A), non-smart keypad, and standard network with
carbon transmitter. It cost about $30.

The phones at Sharper Image, and the usual specialty stores have
phones that contain "smart" keypads, that while providing LND, etc.,
also give little short bursts of tone that may even be delayed from
your keypress. Usually the networks are strange and the audio quality
is wierd.

I stay away from most novelty phones because more attention goes into
the novelty and less into the business of being a telephone. It IS
nice once in awhile to find a "real" phone that also happens to have
some novelty to it (without a ripoff price).


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! "Telephone Fishing"
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 90 13:58:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Donald E.
Kimberlin) writes:

>How about it?  Anyplace else where folks still fish via phone?

I would consider that cheating, but when I was a kid we would
sometimes use a telephone magneto to make worms come out of the
ground.  You might call this "telephone-assisted" fishing.

I can remember seeing crank-phones in rural Ontario up until the mid
1960s.  Within the last year I've seen them still in use in parts of
Sumatra.  It seems to be no longer possible to call one of these
phones from the U.S.  At one time the AT&T operator would stay on the
line to the Indonesia operator for however long it took to get
through, then ring you back.  Now if they can't get through in the
first three minutes they give up.

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

From: "[e-mail] (C. Irby" <vaxb.acs.unt.edu![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! "Telephone Fishing"
Date: 21 Jun 90 12:32:03 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]  (Donald E.
Kimberlin) writes:

> ... do some rapid, serious fishing.  At such times, the old magneto
> telephone gets taken out in the boat, its wires get dropped over the
> side, and its crank gets turned.

>         The invariable result: Numerous stunned fish float to the
> surface to simply be netted into the boat.  Obviously, the game warden
> takes a very dim view of this method, so the technique is not used
> publicly.

>         How about it?  Anyplace else where folks still fish via phone?

Well, my maternal grandfather used to have a rig like that...

He said he used it for fishing, but I never saw it used for that.

His favorite gag was to put two wires into a bowl of water, drop a
quarter into the bowl, and say, "You can have it if you can pick it
up..."

Then he'd turn the crank...


C Irby
[e-mail]
ac08@untvax


[Moderator's Note: Does anyone remember the *perfectly awful* scandal
at the Tucker, Arkansas State Penitentiary several years ago when it
was discovered that a method of punishing disobedient inmates involved
the use of the 'Tucker Telephone'?  Alligator clips from the two wires
were attached to uh, very sensitive parts of the human body ... the
Warden would crank away and the inmate would confess to whatever
needed confessing.  In more recent times (1982), a convicted killer of
a police officer here in Chicago is now claiming in federal court that
detectives investigating the case tortured him in the same way. He
says they had him naked, handcuffed to a hot radiator, with a wire
clipped to each earlobe. The cops called it 'shock therapy', and
laughed at the way he would shake his head and jump up and down as
they turned the crank. Police here deny the whole story, of course.  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #447
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17358;
          23 Jun 90 1:11 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa14988;
          22 Jun 90 23:32 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24981;
          22 Jun 90 22:29 CDT
Date:     Fri, 22 Jun 90 21:28:47 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #448
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 22 Jun 90 21:28:36 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 448

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Caller ID Questions (No Debate!) [Travis Lee Winfrey]
    Touchtone Fee Abolished in CA [Lang Zerner]
    800 Surcharge [Paul Schmidt]
    So How Does One Telephone Pitcairn Island? [Doug Blair]
    What is the Purpose of Loops? [Jeff Bilger]
    Update: Alcor Life Extension Email Litigation [H. Keith Henson]
    900 Ways to Ripoff the Poor and Vulnerable [Roy Smith]
    Clever Cleaner [Dolf Grunbauer]
    Canadian Prefixes (was: Exchanges Taken Out of Service) [Carl Moore]
    ERS Service Description and the Neidorf Case [John Nagle]
    Re: Leonard Rose Update: His Prior Conviction [Zev Sero]
    Re: Leonard Rose Update: His Prior Conviction [Peter da Silva]
    Re: So What Follows Caller ID? [Henry Mensch]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 13:00:55 EDT
From: Travis Lee Winfrey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID Questions (No Debate!)


Hi, does anyone know what caller-ID phones are currently or soon to be
on the market?  I'm mostly curious about prices and capabilities.  I'm
not so interested in whiz-bang PC-based programs -- unless those are
the only things available.

Are there phones available or planned that would let me -

 - map a phone number to a name or initials?  555-1234 is displayed as TLW.
 - scroll back last n numbers?
 - easily call back the last number who called me?
 - automatically reject a number?  that is, the unwanted caller would
   not even reach an answering machine.
 - transfer to another line?  (FAX, modem, etc.)

How does Caller ID work with Call Waiting?  Have phreakers figured out
a way to spoof a switch into mislabeling their outgoing calls?  The
Caller ID protocol is a public specification, right?

Are companies anywhere gearing up to use call waiting for telemarketing?
How about 911 centers?

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jun 90 14:45:41 PDT
From: Lang Zerner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Touchtone Fee Abolished in CA
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.


I don't know if anyone has reported this yet, but PacBell has finally
given in to my incessant whining and removed the "value-added" fee for
Touch-Tone service.  I guess they finally caught on to the fact that,
as the designers of Touch-Tone predicted, the necessary telco hardware
is cheaper if people don't use pulse dialing.

Now, if I can just get them to be reasonable about custom numbers
(they charge you every month for a vanity number -- makes about as
much sense as charging for Touch-Tone).

Be seeing you...


Lang Zerner

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jun 90 08:50:24 EDT
From: Paul Schmidt <[e-mail]>
Subject: 800 Surcharge


I probably am asking a question that has been asked many times before:

    I stayed at a hotel recently and received a $.50 surcharge for
phone call to a 800 number.  It was my impression that it was illegal
to charge for 800 calls.  How can they do this?  Does this only apply
to pay phones?


    Paul Schmidt                           UUCP:  rti!olympus!pjs269
    Texas Instruments                      PHONE:  [phone]
    PO Drawer 1255 M/S 3517
    Johnson City, TN 37605-1255


[Moderator's Note: It does *not* apply 'only to payphones', or only to
anything else. It is a dispicable practice which AOS companies get
away with because no one will sue them to make them stop doing it.  PT]

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

Subject: So How Does One Telephone Pitcairn Island?
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 7:52:36 CDT
From: Doug Blair <[e-mail]>


I apologize if this question has already been discussed - a friend
forwarded a copy of a discussion about direct dialable remote places
to me because I have an interest in (and friends on) Pitcairn Island,
which is certainly one of the most isolated population centers of the
planet :-).

Most communication with the 58 residents of Pitcairn is via ham radio.
Most houses have a phone, from which you CAN place international calls
through a radio operator.  There is a regular calling schedule between
Pitcairn and the international operator in Aukland, NZ, twice a day.
No it's not direct dial (no phone numbers on the island) - it's more
like "Cary, I'd like to talk to Brisbane tomorrow" over a cup of tea.

This summer the regular Pitcairn operator(s) and their family will be
visiting my next door neighbor here in Illinois for a few weeks.  Not
too big an event in the world scheme of things, but since Pitcairn is
still adminisitratively part of the United Kingdom the government has
provided a radio operator for the island to accomodate their vacation
plans.


Doug Blair    Obedient Software Corp.
1007 Naperville Rd, Wheaton IL  60187
708-653-5527  [e-mail]

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

From: vaxb.acs.unt.edu![e-mail]
Subject: What is the Purpose of Loops?
Date: 21 Jun 90 03:57:09 GMT


What are the phone companies 'Test Numbers' used for exactly? Also
could someone explain to me what loops are used for?


                 Jeff Bilger
                 IE09@UNT


[Moderator's Note: Loops are used to test circuits from a remote
location. As an example, a tester in Kansas City wants to check a
circuit coming from Chicago. He calls the incoming side of a loop in
Chicago and 'loops-around' to make an outgoing call back to Kansas
City. Other loops may allow a telco employee working outside his/her
regular district to access special codes which only work from one
central office rather than everywhere. As an example, certain loops in
Chicago receive calls on one line, and immediatly grab the outgoing
side and place a call to '611' (repair service). The 611 you get is
obviously not the 611 I get, so if I want to get yours (as a telco
employee authorized to do so), I have to get a line from your central
office. The loop provides this access to dial tone in another office
when it is needed.  PT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Update: Alcor Life Extension Email Litigation
Date: Thu, 21-Jun-90 01:36:42 PDT


Update on the progress in the Alcor/email case as of June, 1990:

by H. Keith Henson

A suit under section 2707 of U.S.C. title 18 (the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act) against a number of individuals in the
Riverside, California Coroner's office, the District Attorney's
office, and the Riverside police department was filed Jan. 11, 1990,
one day short of the statutory limit.  There were fifteen plaintiffs
out of roughly fifty people who had email on the Alcor system.  For
those of you who are not familiar with the case, the coroner removed a
number of computers from Alcor in connection with an investigation
into the cryonic suspension of Dora Kent in December, 1987.

The defendants moved in March for a dismissal of the case, arguing
that 1) the warrant for the computer was enough to take any email
found within it, and 2) that even if the defendants had made
"technical" errors in confiscating the email, they should be protected
because they acted in "good faith."

Our lawyer opposed the motion, arguing that the warrant originally
used was itself defective, even for taking the computers.  This is
something Alcor had never done, because (I think) people can only
object to a warrant after charges have been filed, and for all the
accusations the coroner and DA made in the press (which included
murder, drugs, theft, and building code violations), no charges have
been filed in this case in the last two and a half years.

The federal judge assigned to the case denied the motion after hearing
oral arguments in May.  Based on the comments of the judge from the
bench, it seems that he agrees that the plaintiffs have a case, namely
that taking email requires a warrant for the email, or the persons
doing so will face at least civil liability.

So far the legal bill stands at over $10,000.  Suggestions as to
organizations or individuals who might be interested in helping foot
the bills would be welcome.  (Donations would be returnable if we won
the case and the county has to pay our legal bills as required in
section 2707.)

The text of the legal filings (40k, three files) have been posted to
CuD.  If you can't get CuD, they are available by email from
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: CuD is the Computer Underground Digest, a mailing
list which was started in part with the overflow of messages from here
in TELECOM Digest regards the cracker scene, etc. To subscribe to CuD
or submit articles, write to:  [e-mail].      PT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Subject: 900 Ways to Ripoff the Poor and Vulnerable
Organization: Public Health Research Institute, New York City
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 04:05:30 GMT

    My wife got a solicitation to apply for a credit card today in
the mail.  It has a new obscene twist which I thought would interest
people on this list.  To apply for the card, you call a 900 number and
"To help defray the cost of processing, the charge of 10.00 will be
billed to you at a later date"!  Later in the letter they say "As an
added bonus you will receive a complete rebate for the telephone call
after you are accepted by the bank and receive your credit cards".

    The whole letter is pretty strange.  It's obviously aimed at
people with bad or non-existant credit ratings who can't qualify for
any of the various very good deals currently available on credit
cards.  It's full of phrases like "proud to invite you to join the
thousands of people who [have VISA/MC cards]".  Thousands?  Try
millions (or, more likely, tens, if not hundreds, of millions).
Perhaps the oddest thing is that it is addressed to "Dear Murphy".
Not "Mrs. Murphy" or "Ms. Murphy", or (incorrectly) "Mrs.  Smith" or
(more accurately) "Dr. Murphy"

    I have no idea how legit this is, but the idea of charging
somebody $10 for a phone call to apply for credit (which they very
well may not end up getting) really freaks me out.


Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
[e-mail] -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy


[Moderator's Note: Actually, it is legit, and the cards come from the
American National Bank of New York.  The concept of 'secured VISA
cards' is not new: Bank of Hoven, Hoven, ND and Key Federal Savings
Bank offer them, as do a few other places. Yes, the interest rate is
very high, and the 'application fee' is typically about fifty dollars.
Banks offering 'secured credit cards' require a savings account in
their institution as collateral, with the credit limit on the VISA
typically set at 90 percent of the value of the savings account, which
does draw interest. Getting the application fee via a 900 number is a
new wrinkle, however.

The actual VISA card looks the same as everyone else's; there is no
indication it is based on secured credit.  Under the law, i.e. Federal
Trade Commission, the application fee or 900 phone charge has to be
refunded if you do not receive a card; however 97 percent of all
applicants get one, totally regardless of credit history, provided
they can put up a thousand bucks or so for the savings account, a/k/a
'credit limit'.  PT]

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

Organization: Philips Information Systems, P.O. Box 245,
Subject: Clever Cleaner
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 90 13:27:13 MET
From: Dolf Grunbauer <[e-mail]>


Patrick,

I just read a short article about an office cleaner who used the
telephone to get rich. This particular cleaner was working after the
normal office hours. What he did was opening a special 06 number (like
a commercial 900 number in the USA ) and during his work he would pick
up some phones and dial this number :-)

Needless to say that this man was caught when the company had a closer
look at its telephone bill.


Dolf Grunbauer      Tel: [phone] Internet [e-mail]
Philips Information Systems            UUCP     ...!mcsun!philapd!dolf

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jun 90 11:57:29 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian Prefixes (was: Exchanges Taken Out of Service)


In notes I made based on a 1982 AT&T tape, (519) 873 and 786 were both
Forest, Ontario.

I had never heard of (819) 484 Purtuniq before.

That 1982 tape had 416-594 PALGRAVE, Ontario.  Apparently using that
prefix for Toronto came since then.

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

From: John Nagle <well![e-mail]>
Subject: ERS Service Description and the Neidorf case
Date: 21 Jun 90 06:49:04 GMT


     A technical and administrative description of E911 service can be
found in "The Intelligent Network", by W.D.Ambrosh et. al., Berlin,
Springer-Verlag, 1989, ISBN 3-540-50897-X.  Chapter 9, "ERS Service
Description", may be relevant to the Neidorf case, as it contains an
overview, with considerable detail, of how 911 calls are handled in
existing and proposed systems.  The emphasis is on the latest
ISDN/CCS7 systems, but existing systems are discussed.

     Copies of this book can be obtained from the Stanford University
Bookstore, Palo Alto, California, for $49.50 plus tax.

     More technical details might be obtained from documents cited in
the book as Bellcore specifications.  The one most directly relevant
is "E911 Public Safety Answering Point: Interface between a 1/1A ESS
Centrex Office and Customer Premises Equipment, TA-TSY-000350"

     This information may be of interest to those involved in that case.


John Nagle

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

From: Zev Sero <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Leonard Rose Update: His Prior Conviction
Organization: Burdett, Buckeridge and Young Ltd.
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 01:22:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:

>The continued use of the term "theft," although it is generally a
>legitimate legal term and one used in the indictments, seems
>questionable, because as Judge Nicholas Bua's recent memorandum
>indicates, courts have not settled the issue of whether transfer of
>electronic impulses when the original property remains in place and
>intact is in fact "theft."

Theft is the conversion of property with the intention to permanently
deprive the owner of its use.

Breach of copyright is something entirely different.  It is really
like breaking the Post Office's monopoly.  The legislature has decided
that only the Post Office may deliver letters, and only the author of
an original work of literature may reproduce it.  Just as someone who
delivers letters contrary to the act is breaking the law, but has not
`stolen' anything from the Post Office, so someone who copies a
book/record/program contrary to the act is a lawbreaker, but is not a
thief.

If `borrowing' a car for a joyride is not theft, how can breach of
copyright be theft?

                Zev Sero  -  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Leonard Rose Update: His Prior Conviction
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 15:00:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:

> The continued use of the term "theft," although it is generally a
> legitimate legal term and one used in the indictments, seems
> questionable,

I don't see why. As in a copyright suit, what has been stolen is the
right to control the distribution of the information contained in the
document.  I believe in this case it's a trade-secret issue.

> Jim Thomas, co-moderator Computer underground Digest (TK0JUT2@NIU)

Would it be possible to get this Digest gatewayed to a newsgroup? Or
do you want to retain the right to control its distribution?


Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
[phone].
<[e-mail]>

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jun 90 14:21:04 -0400
From: Henry Mensch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: So What Follows Caller ID?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


"press ONE  for a sales agent
 press TWO  for a support agent
 press ZERO for the attendant
 press STAR if you're tired of waiting and want the recipient's
   phone to burst into flames."


# Henry Mensch    /   <[e-mail]>   /   E40-379 MIT,  Cambridge, MA
# <[e-mail]-relay> / <[e-mail]> / <[e-mail]>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #448
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19037;
          23 Jun 90 2:05 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27877;
          23 Jun 90 0:35 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab14988;
          22 Jun 90 23:32 CDT
Date:     Fri, 22 Jun 90 22:52:39 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #449
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 22 Jun 90 22:51:56 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 449

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Illinois Bell Bribed Chicago Officials, Says Lawsuit [TELECOM Moderator]
    Re: Identifying Switches [Floyd Davidson]
    Re: On the Trail of the Elusive Octothorpe [Kari Hardarson]
    Re: Neat Phones! [Nancy Kinnersley]
    Re: US/Canada Only One Digit Code? [Jeff Carroll]
    Re: Motorola Plans Global Cellular Thrust [Adam J. Ashby]
    Re: AT&T 'COCOT' Style Payphones [Robert E. Zabloudil]
    Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call [D. Lewis]
    Re: Last Laugh! "Telephone Fishing" [John G. DeArmond]
    Reach Out Solicitation [Edward Greenberg]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 22:08:28 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Illinois Bell Bribed Chicago Officials, Says Lawsuit


A suburban Chicago pay telephone company has accused officials of
Illinois Bell of providing trips, tickets to sporting events and other
favors to City of Chicago officials to retain the contract for pay
phone service at our three airports here.

In a racketeering lawsuit filed in federal court in Chicago, October
23, 1989, All-Tone Communications, Inc. accused Illinois Bell and
certain of its officials with providing illegal gratuities to city
employees.

Illinois Bell has retained the contract since 1961 without competitive
bidding according to records filed with the suit.

Recently however, the City of Chicago opened the contract to public
bidding, hoping to increase revenues from the agreement 'by up to 300
percent through better accountability', a spokesman for the city said.

The pay phone concession at our airports here is very lucrative. There
are 1528 payphones at O'Hare, 148 at Midway, and 9 at Meigs Field.
According to the city aviation department, more phone calls are made
daily from O'Hare than from any other single location in the United
States.

Although the suit was filed October 23, 1989 by All-Tone, the lawsuit
subsequently was ordered sealed by U.S. District Judge Milton Shadur
because of the sensitive nature of its claims. That seal, and a gag
order by the judge (an order that the matter cannot be discussed
outside of court) is still in effect.  However, a copy of the
documents to-date was accidentally placed in the public file recently
by an employee of the court.  Lucky you!  :) The judge hasn't told me
to remain silent, nor has the {Chicago Tribune}, which first discussed
the case in its editions of June 21, 1990 been given such an order.

According to the lawsuit, Illinois Bell president Ormand Wade; David
Campbell, the company official in charge of pay phone operations; and
Thomas Quinn, Illinois Bell director of government relations offered
bribes to Robert Threatte, former Deputy Aviation Commissioner for the
City of Chicago, and another city official.

The suit contends that beginning in 1984 and continuing until
recently, Bell offered tickets to baseball and hockey games, meals,
and all-expense paid vacations 'to preserve its exclusive arrangement
with the city ...' The suit also contends that in 1986 and 1987,
Ormand Wade and other Illinois Bell officials 'wined and dined' with
Anthony Gibbs, then an administrative assistant of Mayor Eugene
Sawyer.

Mssrs. Threatte and Gibbs both claim that although they 'met several
times for dinner and drinks with telco officials', they refused to
accept 'special gifts' which were offered to them in exchange for
their assistance in maintaining the pay phone status-quo at the
airport. According to the suit, Illinois Bell told the two 'this sort
of thing is done in private industry all the time...' and that the
telco had 'arrangements like this' for many of their largest private
customers.

All-Tone claims since 1984 they have been 'systematically' shut out of
any consideration for the airport pay phone concession.


Patrick Townson

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

From: Floyd Davidson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Identifying Switches
Organization: Chinet - Chicago Public Access UNIX
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 06:23:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Henry Troup <bnrgate!bwdlh490.bnr.
ca![e-mail]> writes:

>The product line includes 100, 100/200 combined, 200, and access
>tandem.  (Plus DMS-250, 300, and MTX).  100 is local, 200 is toll,
>essentially. I've never been totally clear on the _hardware_
>difference between a 100 and a 200.  I don't think there is any.

A DMS-100 switches lines, a DMS-200 switches trunks, a DMS-100/200
does both.  That is *almost* exactly what was stated above.  The
trunks don't have to be toll or the lines local.

Regardless of my email address, I'm actually in Fairbanks, Alaska
looking at a DMS-100/200 that was converted 3 months ago from a
DMS-100.  We added 1 LTC and 1 LGC (1 1/2 bays).  And did a reload
with a new software package that had line handling added.

I am in no way speaking for Alascom, Inc.


Floyd Davidson

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

From: Kari Hardarson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: On the Trail of the Elusive Octothorpe
Date: 22 Jun 90 13:54:04 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Kari Hardarson)
Organization: University Of North Carolina, Chapel Hill


I thought that the : # sign was called a 'Hash' mark before I came to
the states. Maybe that's British English? Here in the States, a lot of
my colleagues refer to it as the 'Pound sign', something that I can't
understand since the pound sign is distinctly different. In UK-ASCII
tables, the pound sign usually gets placed where the # is in American
ASCII, that may explain something. Incidentally, in my language
(Icelandic) we refer to the sign as 'The mill'. ;


-> Kari Hardarson
217 Jackson Circle
27514 Chapel Hill, NC

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

From: Nancy Kinnersley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Neat Phones!
Date: 22 Jun 90 09:50:56 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services


In article <[e-mail]>, abvax!ncoast!fmsystm!macy writes:

: Ever seen one of those clear 2500 sets?  You know, the ones the
: manufacturers made for display, showed all the guts and looked neat?
: Well, finally, there is a REAL 2500 you can buy ... they make a great
: conversation piece, too.


I mentioned these transparent telephones to my daughter.  "Wow, that's
great!" she says.  "You mean you can see all the gears inside?"


Bill Kinnersley

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

From: Jeff Carroll <bcsaic![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US/Canada Only One Digit Code?
Date: 22 Jun 90 18:16:57 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle


In article <[e-mail]> well![e-mail] (John
Nagle) writes:

>At one time, prior to international direct dialing, Kuwait had a
>U.S. area code.

>[Moderator's Note: You *really* have piqued my curiosity on this one!
>Does anyone else know about this? What area code was it? When?   PT]

    I understand that one of the (multiple) phone systems in Saudi
Arabia is based on the North American digital hierarchy, and that AT&T
has had people operating telecom in that part of the world for years.
Kuwait I have no idea about, but it sounds plausible to me that AT&T
might have (unofficially, of course) assigned an area code to one or
more Middle Eastern countries as an internal convenience.

    This, however, is pure speculation on my part. Anybody know for
sure?


    Jeff Carroll
    [e-mail]

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

From: "Adam J. Ashby" <motcid![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Motorola Plans Global Cellular Thrust
Date: 22 Jun 90 18:28:07 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL


motcid![e-mail] (Steven King) writes:

>Motorola officials were reluctant to discuss details of the
>proposed system, but they have scheduled a briefing next week in which
>the system is expected to be announced.

I saw this on Channel 11 news yesterday (I think), they said that the
briefing would be on Tuesday of next week (26th).


Adam Ashby
([phone]
 ...!uunet!motcid!ashbya

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

From: "Robert E. Zabloudil" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T 'COCOT' Style Payphones
Date: 22 Jun 90 19:27:50 GMT
Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Blake
Farenthold) writes:

>I always figured if anyone hated COCOTS it was AT&T.  Well I found
>what I'd call an AT&T COCOT.  The card on the phone said the phone was
>OWNED by AT&T it looked like a 'normal' payphone (not one of their
>card phones) and took quarters for local calls ... thing is you dial a

They've replaced the payphones here at work with these critters.  The
one Nice Thing about them is the adjustable volume control (maybe...my
wife is hard of hearing, and I need to have her try them out for a
definitive opinion), but I have three gripes:

1.  Upon picking up the receiver, you're greeted with a Fake Dial
Tone.  Yes, you know the phone is working, but they've picked
dissonant tones.  Ouch!

2.  The keypad does not echo the real DTMF back to the customer...just
the same tone mixture for any key pressed.  After you're done, it then
gives you the real dial tone just long enough to make you think
something's wrong before quickly sending the real DTMF along to the
CO.

3.  After the call is connected, it waits about five to seven seconds,
then CUTS OFF YOUR SPEAKER AS IT DROPS THE QUARTER INTO THE BUCKET!
You can imagine the reaction of the party I had called ... they almost
hung up before sound was restored.

Someday I shall try making a three second phone call to see if it's a
real loophole; all in all, I'm not real happy with this vast
improvement in telephony.

Disclaimer: Opinions strictly my own.  Facts in above diatribe are
there by accident only?  :^)


Bob Zabloudil

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

From: David Lewis <nvuxr![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NANP Codes AND I Want to Dial the Area Code on a Local Call
Date: 22 Jun 90 20:57:43 GMT
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ


In article <[e-mail]>, mitel!spock![e-mail] (Tom
Gray) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> John Slater <[e-mail].
> sun.com> writes:
> X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 418, Message 6 of 10

> >>In a perfect world I could dial "+44 81 676 XXXX" to reach my number
> >>in London from *anywhere* in the world, including the UK (where +
> >>means 010). Similarly it would be nice to be able to dial 011 1 415
> >>XXX XXXX to reach San Francisco from anywhere in the US.

> The main problem with this proposal would be the size of the data base
> required inside of each switch. Think of the routing problems which
> would occur when any digit sequence could be used to identify a trunk
> route. Each switch would be required to maintain the telephone number
> of all of the subscribers in the world. Even small CDO's would require
> gigabytes of disk storage.

Not necessarily.  The beauty of a heirarchical numbering plan is that
switches can translate just enough information in the dialed number to
get to a location which is capable of further translation.

For example, in the above example, every switch in the US would not
need to know the location of any number in London, or even that 81 is
the code for London (inner or outer, I forget).  They would only need
to know that 011 means to route to an international carrier point INC
of termination (sorry for the US-specific terminology -- in the US,
local carriers don't transport calls overseas, but transport them to
an international long distance carrier.  The point of termination is
the point at which the call is handed over to the international
carrier.)

That INC would then have to know that 44 is the country code for the
UK, and route to a location in the UK.  The location in the UK would
have to know that 81 or 81.676 is the code for either London or a
certain CO in London, and so on.  So switches in a local carrier need
only to know that 011 is the international access code (and I hope it
is -- my Notes is packed and I don't normally make international
calls...).  INC switches need to know all the country codes, and
tandem switches in a given country need to know the "area codes".
Only the switch serving a given customer needs to know the details of
that customer's exact phone number.

This is analogous to the way it works now, at least in the US.  LECs
recognize inter-LATA calls using three-digit or six-digit translation,
and the IC routes similarly; the terminating LEC, once the call gets
to the terminating End Office, routes to the user.


David G Lewis                    ...!bellcore!nvuxr!deej
    (@ Bellcore Navesink Research & Engineering Center)
            "If this is paradise, I wish I had a lawnmower."

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

From: "John G. DeArmond" <rsiatl![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! "Telephone Fishing"
Date: 22 Jun 90 00:10:28 GMT
Organization: Radiation Systems, Inc. (a thinktank, motorcycle, car
 and gun works facility)


[e-mail] (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes:

>How about it?  Anyplace else where folks still fish via phone?

Well, having more of an RCC than telephone background, I -Uh, I mean,
someone I know (secret service and all, you know.) used to participate
in a variant sport known as "dynamotor fishing".  As might be apparent
from the name, this sport involves the use of a dynamotor from an old
2-way radio.  The bigger the better.  Mine, I mean, my friend's unit
produces almost 700 volts at about 400 ma.  Very nice output.

The electrodes are a couple of stainless steel rods sheathed by
plexiglass sleeves.  The sleeves are adjusted to expose more or less
of the electrodes to the water and are used to apply full load to the
dynamotor.  IN the true spirit of engineering, the fishing unit is
fully instrumented.

This unit is actually classified as a low power unit so its use takes
some skill.  What my friend does is look for fish while wearing
polarized sunglasses.  When a fish is spotted, the electrodes are
lowered into the water on the end of a long fiberglass pole to close
proximity to the fish and then the dynamotor is activated via a foot
switch.

As a side note, a few years ago, I had the opportunity to work with
some TVA marine biologists doing a fish census.  Their shock fishing
rig was in the big leagues.  The basic platform is an aluminum flat-
bottomed boat.  In this boat is a 5 kw gasoline powered generator and a
shock box that generates up to 5 kv at an amp or so.  The boat body,
equipped with a number of stainless steel dangling rods around the
periphery serves as one electrode.  The other electrode is a stainless
steel curtain suspended by a couple of lineman's fuzzsticks that
telescope on a set of rollers.

The biologists dress up like linemen with hot gloves, rubber boots and
mats.  They reel in the fish with a long handled net.  This thing
works across an area about 50 feet in diameter around the curtain in a
cylinder that extends almost to the bottom.  Dozens of fish are
typically harvested in one shock.  The fish are not harmed and are
released after being counted - except for a few unlucky specimens that
are assayed.

All in all, a fine example of applied engineering :-)


John De Armond, WD4OQC
Radiation Systems, Inc.
Atlanta, Ga
{emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd

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

Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 07:49 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Reach Out Solicitation


Last week, I also received a solicitation for Reach-Out America when I
already have it.  In one sense it's true.  If you ran an analysis
against my bill, and you didn't take into account that I HAD
Reach-out, the analysis would indicate that I needed it.

Since I've never applied for/received a Universal Card, I don't think
the two are selected.  Sounds like a programming error to me :-)

I called the ATT people though, to ask if I should have Select-Saver
instead.  She ran it off both ways, told me the differences, in
detail, and suggested that I keep Reach-Out and drop the Calling Card
option.  She also backed up her suggestions with facts, and didn't ask
any silly questions like, "have I given you excellent service?"

Totally non-sleazoid service, if you ask me. (Of course, nobody did :-)

                                -edg

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #449
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07262;
          23 Jun 90 14:09 EDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa23959;
          23 Jun 90 12:41 CDT
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04174;
          23 Jun 90 11:37 CDT
Date:     Sat, 23 Jun 90 11:35:18 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
[To]:     [e-mail]
Subject:  TELECOM Digest V10 #450
BCC:
Message-ID:  <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 23 Jun 90 11:35:18 CDT    Volume 10 : Issue 450

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Serial Line Errors (Summary) [Aloys Roes]
    Manhole Covers (Was: 10-NYT and 10-NJB) [Paul S. Sawyer]
    100 Years Ago [Scientific American via Mark Brader]
    Phone Upgrade Planned For East Germany [Time Magazine via Mark Brader]
    Re: Touchtone Fee Abolished in CA [John Higdon]
    Re: Update: Alcor Life Extension Email Litigation [Jeffri H. Frontz]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Aloys Roes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Serial Line Errors (Summary)
Date: 22 Jun 90 11:16:24 GMT
Organization: Philips Components - SERI, Eindhoven, The Netherlands


A few weeks back I posted a request for help to get problems with
serial lines sorted out. I promised to post a summary. Here it is:

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!umd5.UMD.EDU!schulman  Wed Jun  6 13:19:44 1990
 Marty Schulman

If analog circuits, did the phone company run BERT tests from the DTE
side of each modem through the other end?  That is, was the complete
digital link tested including modems, or just the analog portion?

 --> The lines are digital and the BERT tests were end-to-end

Out of curiosity, what PC test package are you using?

 --> It's a normal MS-DOS PC with our own-written software. It uses a
special 64K serial interface board.

Here's the strangest question: What revision cisco firmware are you
running at each end?  This may not be a phone-related problem, but a
router-related one.  TELECOM Digest readers may doubt that line errors
are in any way related to firmware, but I saw line errors on one side
of a T1 link between ciscos jump dramatically with a firmware upgrade
 - and disappear with installation of a subsequent release.

We are running software version 7.1(10) on one end and 8.0(9) at the
other end. MCI versions are 1.3 and 1.4. But we have swapped boards
and have the same software running on various other routers without
problems.

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!Sun.COM!ckollars  Wed Jun  6 16:25:30 1990
 Organization: Sun Microsystems, Billerica MA   chuck kollars

I'll bet they tested only the portion they're responsible for, which
is the line itself.  If the line is okay, but the device sees errors,
you can conclude that the problem is somewhere in between.  In other
words, the problem is either the modem, or the cable between the modem
and the router.  The modem can probably give you self-diagnostic
information.  For the cable, insert your PC monitor first next to the
modem, then enxt to the router, and see if there are differences.
Likely problems include: a) modem and router are plugged into
different line supply circuits that have slightly different ground
levels; b) the shield in the cable is not connected to ground [look
for jumpers inside the modem and the router]; or c) the cable is too
long or is wrapped around some interfering device like an elevator
motor or a flourescent light.

I'm not sure what the difference is between Frame errors and CRC (FCS)
errors in the serial world.  I do know that in the Ethernet world,
there's no real difference -- it's all just different terminology and
different conventions.  If a packet got garbled, _two_ things are
probably true: 1) the CRC doesn't compute, and 2) the packet doesn't
appear to be a multiple of 8 bits long.  So how do you count the
error?  Well, not everybody answers that question the same way.  What
I do on the Ethernet world is to add up Frame errors and CRC errors
from each device, and compare only the _totals_.

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!relay.EU.net!SNYCENVM.bitnet!RTRN
 Wed Jun 6 20:17:09 1990
 Organization: State University of New York - Central Administration
 Tom Neiss

We, SUNY Central, experienced a similar problem with another vendor.
It boiled down to RS232 levels at the interface.  They supported rs232
with a gender mender cable from v.35(rs423).  Having had experience in
this area I suspected it to be the problem.  The levels of 423 (-5
to+5v was not quite good enough for our rs232 interface, consequently
errors showed up.  Ask cisco what their interface is and if it has
REAL RS232(levels included) support on that interface.  A v.35
interface showed no problems on our equipment.  The vendor did fix
the problem, pronto.

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!cs.arizona.edu!ric  Wed Jun  6 21:07:31 1990
 University of Arizona    Ric Anderson

Find out what baudrate the telecom people tested the line at.  were
having MAJOR problems of the type you described on a line here (about
100 miles of AT&T leased line), and yet the phone folks said the line
was error free.  When I pushed, one tester asked "what rate do you use
the line at?".  When I replied "9600 baud", he said "Oh, we test at
1200, unless otherwise requested!".  When the phone folks re-tested
the line at 9600, they found a defective widget and replaced it.

Moral of the story: Baud rate matters a lot, especially in Bit Error
Rate tests...

 --> We have a 64K digital circuit and I have seen the BERT tests
running at that speed.

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!RELAY.PRIME.COM!ARIEL  Wed Jun  6 22:57:58 1990
 Prime Computer, Inc.  Robert Ullmann

The cisco has a known (to them :-) problem with framing on sync lines.
It is supposed to be less critical at higher speeds. (which is the
opposite of what I would expect; I would expect low speeds to run
fine, and high (> 19.2) to have trouble...)

The work-around is to increase the "transmitter delay".  Try setting
it to 20,000 usec, the problem should go away, but performance will be
affected. Then try decreasing it (to 15,000, then 10,000 and so on) to
find the smallest value that works well.

Yes, this happens on lines that BERT error-free! It seems to be
triggered by large IP datagrams, which become more-data ("M" bit)
sequences transmitted rapidly (on X.25; not sure about what triggers
HDLC only problems).

And complain to cisco; this is their problem (;-)

 --> Tried this. Too bad it does not seem to be our problem.

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!uunet.UU.NET!bnrgate!bcars53!mussar
 Thu Jun  7 02:39:25 1990     BNR Ltd.   Gary Mussar

This kind of stuff can be very tricky to track down. The testing that
your telecom people performed probably only tested to the modem
itself. It may not have tested your cable to the cisco. Some 64K
modems use V.24 interfaces even though V.24 is only specified to 20K.
This 'usually' works if the cables are short, but is very suseptible
to noise. Some 64K modems use V.35 signals, but bring them out on a
DB25 connector.

This looks like a V.24 interface and if plugged into a V.24 interface,
this may even work a little, but not reliably. Another thing to look
at is the clocking signals from the modem and options the modem has
for clocking. Some modems have master/slave settings to determine
which end provides a stable clock and which end should sink to the
clock. Incapatable settings do no always show up in loopback testing
but to in the data stream. (If possible, I like to set my modems to
each provide a stable transmit clock and extract the receive clock
 from the remote data stream).

 --> The BERT tests were done end to end. We swapped modems and cables
at both end. Nothing seems to help here. The clocking should not be a
problem because the the BERT does not give any clock-slips. Maybe we
need to investigate this a bit further since it is an international
link (UK-Netherlands) with 2 PTT's involved.

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!concert.net!sung  Thu Jun  7 13:16:21 1990
 Organization: Center for Communications, MCNC; RTP, NC

We have abandoned bit error measurements in favor of cisco
measurements.  In several cases we had lines that measured very nicely
with BERT but the ciscos absolutely refused to even get started, let
alone run with errors.  I presently have a T1 line running sub speed
for the same reason - at full speed the errors in one direction (only
one, same as your case) are so severe that you can forget TCP
connections.

One factor that seemed to be common was that we could not derive 64k
multiple channels off T1 multiplexers but 56k multiples would work. We
tried several brands of multiplexers and only one would allow the 64k
multiples to work. Even then there are some limitations. I don't
exactly know what the ciscos are sensitive to, as the same lines that
it would not operate over are perfectly adequate for other brands of
equipment. This particular brand of multiplexer we are using happens
to have serrated clock (you get the exact bits/per second requirement
by omitting a certain number of clock pulses per second) so I don't
believe it's bit spacing sensitive.

In several cases where we had either bad performance or worse (one
case was that you could not send large blocks of zeroes) it was purely
an installation problem, i.e. badly terminated connectors, open or
crossed pairs, etc. We have the cisco mci cards for serial ports, and
I have run them at 6 Mb/s so it's definitely not a hardware limit.

--> We don't know what brand of multiplexer the PTT's are using. They
won't how the physical link is established. 64K is the European
standard and we have many of those.

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!cmc.com!lars  Wed Jun 13 04:02:10 1990
 Organization: Rockwell CMC      Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer

A "frame" is HDLC talk for a "Physical Data Unit" (PDU). Each "frame"
carries an IP "datagram" if you use straight HDLC encapsulation.

At the end of the frame is a checksum. The HDLC spec describes this as
Frame Check Sequence (FCS). Most people use the phrase "Cyclical
Redundancy Check" (CRC) about this 16-bit checksum.

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!p1.f22.n491.z5.fidonet.org!Ernie.Bokkelkamp
 EWSD System Design Authority   Ernie Bokkelkamp

 .. writes he has had similar problems on a 19.2 line from
Johannesburg via London to Munich. It appeared to be caused by large
delays in a statistical multiplexer. Only after connecting
test-equipment he could prove that HDLC was retransmitting packets
because of these large delays.

--> what was the test-equipment that you used ?

 From hp4nl.nluug.nl!ucsd.edu!foxtail!kravitz  Tue Jun 19 17:12:19 1990
 Jody

I have seen problems similar to what you are describing that were
caused by the clock leads being wrong.  The test equipment usually has
its own cables and works perfectly.

--> We have to check this.

Thanks to all who responded,

Regards,

Aloys Roes, Philips Components, Building BC-136, |  Tel. : + 31 40 72 30 62
P.O.Box 218, 5600 MD Eindhoven, The Netherlands  |  Email: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: And *thank you* for following up with a summary of
responses to an original article in the Digest -- something that all
too seldom is done.  PT]

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

From: "Paul S. Sawyer" <unhd!unhtel![e-mail]>
Subject: Manhole Covers (was: 10-NYT and 10-NJB)
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 90 15:59:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Donald E.
Kimberlin) writes:

>I have walked in the streets of Paterson, NJ and seen manhole covers
>marked, "New York Bell." this, of course, is plant long since taken
>over by NJ Bell, but it is the physical remnants of that history and
>time when NYTel ran the phones in northern NJ.

>Perhaps some of our more intrepid readers would engage some vicarious
>manhole-cover-reading.  Might be of trivial interest.  How about it?

Throughout our campus, the manhole covers have the Bell logo and say
"Bell System", although we own them and the cables/conduits below....
They were installed in 1985 by the people who USED to be the Bell
System - we figure they were just leftovers.

Has anyone ever noticed non-round manhole covers?  Nashua and Hudson,
N.H.  have TRIANGULAR ones - don't know what service or utility.

By the way, what about a non-sexist term like "utility access cover"?
("person hole" just doesn't make it....  B-)


Paul S. Sawyer              uunet!unh!unhtel!paul     [e-mail]
UNH Telecommunications        attmail!psawyer       [e-mail]
Durham, NH  03824-3523      VOX: [phone]    FAX: [phone]

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

From: Mark Brader <[e-mail]>
Subject: 100 Years Ago
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 1990 07:25:56 -0400


Excerpt from a {Scientific American} of July, 1890, quoted in the
"50 and 100 Years Ago" column of the July, 1990 issue:

 #   A novel telephone station is being introduced in Connecticut.
 #   The instrument cannot be used unless a fee is paid.  If five
 #   cents is dropped in the slot, it strikes a bell of a high
 #   note, once.  A quarter strikes a bell of a lower note, once.
 #   A half dollar strikes that bell twice, while a silver dollar
 #   strikes a very low tone "cathedral gong".

Mark Brader
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto
utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

From: Mark Brader <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Upgrade Planned For East Germany
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 1990 07:41:36 -0400


 From TIME Magazine's special issue (except in the US) on
Germany, June 25, 1990:

 #   ... over time, East Germany could become something of a
 #   technological showcase.  Says Opel management board member
 #   Horst Borghs: "It's the nature of the business.  Your newest
 #   plant is always your best."  Opel's newest will be in Eisenach.

 #   In the same way, East Germany could end up with an enviable
 #   infrastructure, despite today's potholed autobahns, rusting
 #   rail lines, and phone system of sub-Balkan quality.  Lessons
 #   from the haphazard postwar development in the West can be
 #   applied, and new technology, including electronic traffic
 #   guidance, optical fiber and mobile communications, can be
 #   introduced from the start.

 #   Helmut Ricke, head of the West German Telekom, expects to
 #   spend more than $35 billion in East Germany over the
 #   next decade and promises that "by the end of the 1990s
 #   East Germany will have one of the most up-to-date phone
 #   systems in the world."  Good news for the 7 million applicants
 #   waiting for a phone.


Mark Brader
Toronto
utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Touchtone Fee Abolished in CA
Date: 23 Jun 90 00:07:55 PDT (Sat)
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>


Lang Zerner <[e-mail]> writes:

> I don't know if anyone has reported this yet, but PacBell has finally
> given in to my incessant whining and removed the "value-added" fee for
> Touch-Tone service.

Oh? When did they remove it? I'm still paying it, last time I checked.
All I've heard is that Pac*Bell was in the process if inviting
comments on how they could recover the lost revenue as the result of
dropping the charge. By no means is the charge gone.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]
    [e-mail]     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jun 90 09:54:18 EDT
From: Jeffri H Frontz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Update: Alcor Life Extension Email Litigation
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio


In article <[e-mail]> you write:

>So far the legal bill stands at over $10,000.  Suggestions as to
>organizations or individuals who might be interested in helping foot
>the bills would be welcome.  (Donations would be returnable if we won
>the case and the county has to pay our legal bills as required in
>section 2707.)

Assuming this whole operation is legit (I guess if our moderator is
convinced, that's enough for me), where would interested parties send
"interest free loans?"


Jeff Frontz                            Work:  [phone]
AT&T-Bell Labs (CB 1C-356)             Cornet:       353-2797
att!jeff.frontz                        [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: While I have some personal problems with the ethics
and morality of the work being done by Alcor, I am aware of the
legitimacy of their complaint regards destruction of or tampering with
their email. It is a case in many respects similar to the
Phrack/Legion of Doom/Leonard Rose affair: claims of over-zealous
behavior by authorities as part of a criminal investigation. Just as
Len Rose is arguing some side-issues regards his case, so is Alcor
complaining of the treatment given them as part of a criminal
investigation.  Keith Henson's address is [e-mail].  PT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V10 #450
******************************