home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Telecom
/
1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso
/
back.issues
/
1992.volume.12
/
vol12.iss051-100
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1992-02-01
|
921KB
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26011;
20 Jan 92 0:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02710
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 22:53:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01626
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jan 1992 22:53:18 -0600
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 22:53:18 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201200453.AA01626@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #51
TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Jan 92 22:53:04 CST Volume 12 : Issue 51
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Eric Florack)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Tim Gorman)
Re: What Did the Operators Know? (John McHarry)
Re: What Did the Operators Know? (Terry Kennedy)
Re: SWBell vs. Squirrels (Jim Haynes)
Re: MCI Card With Voice Features (S.E. Williams)
Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Bob Clements)
Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations (Stephen Friedl)
Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (David Marks)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 06:09:49 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
> [Moderator's Note: Whatever ... all the rules thus far say pay phones
> should route long distance calls to AT&T which require coins to be
> deposited. Your examples are a little bit silly since 'a call you
> expected to cost $0' would still cost $0 since you would probably just
> hang up the receiver rather than deposit the $4000. Private phones do
> follow the 10xxx instructions given by the caller ... and so do
> genuine telco payphones *except for calls requiring coins*. Eventually
> that will be dealt with also, I suppose. PAT]
Uh huh. And just how fast do you figure that will happen, given that
AT&T (and therefore the BOC's) have a vested interest in keeping the
current situation alive?
I grant you; the solution is not going to be an easy one, in the long
term. (The accounting of an equal access payphone would be a
nightmare, I should think). But in the short term, at least, the local
should be required to inform the user of the payphone, by means of a
sign, or an intercept (and not just the AT&T audible logo) that
non-AT&T service is unavailible at that pay station.
This tangled web, I deem the direct result of allowing AT&T to hold
interest in locals. Until that is changed, we have not broken the
monopoly.
[Moderator's Note: There is very little interest in the local telcos
still held by AT&T, if any. There may still remain a few separations
to be made, and obviously coin service is one of them. But if you
think AT&T *actually wants* coin service, you are mistaken. They don't
want that business, as it is the least profitable for them, but the
trouble is MCI and Sprint don't want it either! See the next message
for more details on this. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: 17 Jan 92 09:51:49 EST
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphone
Several comments have been made about the RBOC's handling of 1+ coin
calls being incorrect and against the intent of equal access.
Our esteemed Moderator is correct. The RBOC's are doing exactly what
Judge Greene has instructed them to do and are therefore meeting the
letter and intent of equal access as defined by the Judge. 1+ coin
calls are to be routed to AT&T, no if's, and's, or but's.
The one big reason for this is that there ARE people out there who do
not have credit cards or even telephones and whose sophistication in
the use of the telephone is sadly lacking. All of their calls are made
by paying for the call at a coin station. If 1+ were to be routed to a
carrier that couldn't handle coin signaling either these people
couldn't make any calls or someone would lose money when the coins
were automatically returned at the end of a call. Routing the calls to
reorder or announcement would also result in people wanting to make
coin sent paid calls being unable to do so.
It should also be pointed out that, in my company at least, we have
offered the carriers the capability of ordering coin signaling since
mid-1990. This would allow coin paid 0+ calling. Not one has taken
advantage of it.
It will soon be a year since we expected the Judge to rule on methods
and procedures to eliminate this default routing of 1+ coin to AT&T. I
was involved in several meetings with the carriers in late 1990 and
they were fighting strenuously against having to handle these calls. I
suspect that is one reason the Judge has postponed his ruling so long.
It may actually turn out to be a permanent default.
Is this against the intent of equal access as it was meant to be (as
opposed to how the Judge defines it)? YOU BET IT IS, at least in my
opinion. It is a prime example of an artificially allocated market. If
1+ calls were routed to reorder or otherwise blocked from non-AT&T
PICed stations, there would certainly soon be a resolution in the
market. Either the premise owners would choose another PIC because of
customer complaints, the carriers would start providing the service,
or nothing at all would happen. This was proposed back in 1990 as part
of some of the RBOC plans for eliminating the 1+ coin default and the
Justice Dept. would not accept it. Partly because of public service
(as discussed above) but also partly because of the tumultuous outcry
from the carriers who were scared it would diminish their 0+ revenues.
Pat's statement about all calls requiring coins are to be routed to
AT&T is not quite accurate. At the time the call is dialed, the
payment method cannot be determined for certain. USUALLY 1+ is
considered coin paid and 0+ is considered alternate billed. This is
not a fixed rule, however. 0+ calls to AT&T or an RBOC can be coin
paid. 1+ dialed calls can be alternate billed (especially if you run
out of money and want to charge the remainder to a credit card).
Tim Gorman - SWBT
------------------------------
From: m21198@mwunix.mitre.org (John McHarry)
Subject: Re: What Did the Operators Know?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: 17 Jan 92 14:35:47 GMT
Toll operators generally had access to a "no test trunk," a type of
test trunk (the 'no' was originally "no." for number). This test
trunk could bridge the line associated with the number dialed on the
trunk and signal the operator if that was, indeed, the line actually
connected. All that was necessary to verify the claimed number was to
dial it up on the no test trunk.
John McHarry (McHarry@MITRE.org)
------------------------------
From: "Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr" <TERRY@spcvxa.spc.edu>
Subject: Re: What Did the Operators Know?
Date: 17 Jan 92 14:52:11 GMT
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
In article <telecom12.44.6@eecs.nwu.edu>, wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL
(Will Martin) writes:
> What I'm wondering about is just how much DID the operators know about
> the calling number when they asked for it.
In general, they knew the exchange the call was coming from, but not
the actual number. If they suspected fraud, they usually had some way
to check things, although possibly just the ability to verify a busy
on the given number.
In the system I am most familiar with (Ringwood, NJ - 201-962) the
switch was manual (ask the operator for Yorktown xxx - yup,
three-digit numbers) through (I believe) 1927. At that point a
"community dial" switch was installed (it is similar to a 700-series
PBX in technology). Calls within the exchange were dialed as
three-digit numbers, while calling "outside" was done via the
operator.
By the 1960's it had grown to 3000-line capacity (in the 4000, 6000,
and 7000 groups). These were the only groups that could be provisioned
on the switch, as the switch had been retrofitted many times to enable
direct dial to the other local exchanges, which consumed the other
digits (only groups that did not match the last digit of an adjacent
exchange could be provisioned -- and yes, that does mean that the
switch discarded the "96" in 962 and the first digit of adjacent
exchanges, using the second digit to determine the trunk group to
route on.
At that point, you could dial 1 + 7D to make a toll call (yes, this
was one of the "1 means toll" systems), or 1 + 10D for a long-distance
call. The operator would come on and ask for your number and then
release the call. By the time this system was in place, the operators
were located in the 831/835/839 exchange and all the information they
received was that the call originated from 962. By the mid-70's, fraud
was a problem and the switch was modified to provide partial
identification. As I recall, the 1000's digit was provided and the
given number was (manually) verified to be an assigned number.
However, there were still large avenues for fraud (some of the
common ones were coin fraud, the dialing of "unusual" numbers (see
below), and boxing.
By the late 70's the switch could not keep up with the population
growth in the area, as well as being a maintenance nighmare and it was
replaced with an ESS. I don't know if it's a 3ESS or a 10A RSS,
though.
["Unusual" numbers: The switch would accept any ten digits dialed
(using a timeout to determine when to proceed). This meant that you
could directly dial the TWX network (x10 area codes), as well as the
exchanges that were used for incoming WATS redirection (which
frequently used "impossible" exchange prefixes like 003), as well as
various internal numbers].
As far as your Centrex goes, it was probably configured to require a
four-digit "project code" so that calls could be billed to an
appropriate customer. Another possibility would be so that people who
frequently roamed around the building (such as supervisors) could get
calls billed to the right extension rather than to the extension they
called from.
Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing
terry@spcvxa.bitnet St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
terry@spcvxa.spc.edu +1 201 915 9381
------------------------------
From: Jim Haynes <haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU>
Subject: Re: SWBell vs. Squirrels
Date: 17 Jan 92 19:52:37 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
Squirrel damage to cable has been going on for as long as there have
been cables, I guess. It used to be a big problem with lead-sheathed
cable; and Bell Labs must have spent a lot of money researching
squirrel deterrents.
In Arkansas I saw plastic strips, inverted V shape, over aerial cables
and was told it was an anti-squirrel measure. (Don't know if it was
meant to make it hard for the bushy tails to get their teeth into the
cable beneath the tent, or if it was to make it hard for them to run
along the cables.)
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet
------------------------------
From: sew7490@ultb.rit.edu (S.E. Williams )
Subject: Re: MCI Card With Voice Features
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 20:10:09 GMT
In article <telecom12.40.14@eecs.nwu.edu> sew7490@ultb.rit.edu (S.E.
Williams) (that's me) writes:
> Earlier today I stupidly caused myself to be put under the suspicion
> of MCI's Fraud Department, and they disconnected my card. When I
And PAT inquired:
> [Moderator's Note: What did you do to get them itchy? Were you hacking
> at something? :) PAT]
Actually, yes. As you may recall, I am working on a term paper about
Network Security. I was trying to determine what MCI would consider
'fraudulent calling'. I discovered that if you call 13 foreign
countries within a ten minute period, without having a single
international call in your dialing history, you may very well be
considered suspicious.
Oh, well. I got the information I wanted, and an MCI rep agreed to be
a source for my report, and I'm getting one of those new cards. I'd
say that I made out very well this time.
By the way, does anyone know if MCI customers with the 'old' cards
will be receiving new ones in the mail, or will they have to call and
ask?
Sean E. Williams sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu
Rochester Institute of Technology Telecommunications Technology (ITFT)
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 11:31:27 -0500
From: clements@BBN.COM
John Higdon writes:
> But where is it written that a business or individual MUST provide an
> anonymous way to reach it or him? Why can I NOT decide that the only
> way to reach me is via a method that reveals the caller's number? The
> caller still has a choice: he can call, or he can not call. No one has
> a god-given right to call me anonymously. That the limitations of
> technology has made this traditionally possible is irrelavent.
Granted. I overstated my position. If the business doesn't want to
take unidentified calls that is and should be its right, as long as it
makes that clear to the potential callers.
> Would you require that I answer the phone with, "I know your number
> now"? By then it is too late.
No, of course not. What a silly strawman.
> Would you require a warning with the advertisement? I don't
> advertise it.
How about a warning if you DO advertise it?
> [T]he burden of educating the public is not and should not be on the
> shoulders of those paying good money for the services.
How about a notification by the telcos and carriers in their phone
books and/or bills? They're the ones doing the delivery and taking
the money.
It isn't that different from 900 numbers, whose operators are now
required to make disclosures. The caller is giving something of some
value to the callee. For some callers the perceived value of
disclosing their phone numbers is negligible; for others it's not.
They should be made aware of the actual situation so they can choose
to call or not.
My point is that the number delivery is a very well-kept secret. It's
in the interest of businesses, telcos and carriers to keep it that
way, and they don't disclose it. It's not in the interest of the
public.
Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com
------------------------------
From: friedl@mtndew.Tustin.CA.US (Stephen Friedl)
Subject: Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations
Date: 17 Jan 92 16:53:28 GMT
Organization: Steve's Personal machine / Tustin, CA
Will Wong writes:
> I would like to get ahold of the CCITT standards and recommendations
> (either through purchasing the books, borrowing, begging, etc.) Does
> anyone have any idea where I can go?
I dunno about borrowing or begging, but for buying a good source is:
Global Engineering Documents
2805 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92714
(800) 854-7179
(714) 261-1455
They stock standards and Recommendations from just about anybody who
is anybody (HUNDREDS of standards bodies), and their products and
services catalog -- available upon request -- gives you an overview of
their offerings. I get my CCITT Recommendations from them.
Their phone order-taking people seem to be pretty good about helping
locate a precise document even if you don't know the exact name, and
they do take credit card orders. They have given me good service on
quite a few occasions. Just a satisfied customer ...
Stephen Friedl Software Consultant Tustin, CA
+1 714 544 6561 uunet!mtndew!friedl
------------------------------
From: tijc02!djm408@uunet.uu.net (David Marks)
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
Organization: Siemens Industrial Automation, Johnson City TN
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 16:08:25 GMT
In <telecom12.36.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, by Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com (Jack
Decker):
> In a message dated 10 Jan 92 17:46:00 GMT, john@zygot.ati.com (John
> Higdon) writes:
>> I am surprised that it has taken this long. Tone signaling is SO
>> superior to rotary that it is nothing short of amazing that it has
>> taken nearly twenty years to become the dominant dialing method.
>> Consider that the CD has been around for about eight years and has all
>> but decimated the LP, which was king for the previous thirty-five years.
> The reason is VERY simple, John. In many areas of the country they
> still charge extra for Touch Tone. In Michigan Bell territory, the
> charge is $2.43 per month for a residence, and $2.50 per month for a
> business. I refuse on principle to pay the phone company $2.43 per
> month to obtain a service that costs them LESS money to provide.
I have the same attitude concerning cost. Why pay the phone company
for something you don't need?
Additionally, you don't need any special equipment to access tone
systems from a pulse line. I have an AT&T 5200 cordless phone. It can
send either tones or pulses. I have it set to pulse for dialing. It
has a TONE button on it that allows you switch to tone in the middle
of a call without changing the dial configuration. So when I call a
service that responds to tones, I press the TONE button and get what I
need. My line responds to pulse dialing but transmits tones to the
called party ok. Of course, if you need tones as part of the dialing
sequence this won't work. However, I have never seen or called such a
number yet.
David J. Marks | UUCP: ...!uunet!tijc02!djm408
Siemens Industrial Automation, Inc. | Internet: djm408%tijc02@uunet.uu.net
P.O. Drawer 1255 |
Johnson City, TN 37605-1255 |
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #51
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29738;
20 Jan 92 2:08 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12363
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 00:20:04 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29029
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 00:19:35 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 00:19:35 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201200619.AA29029@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #52
TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Jan 92 00:19:22 CST Volume 12 : Issue 52
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (Steve Forrette)
Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (Bob Frankston)
Re: Zip + 6? (Gary Morris)
Re: ISDN Question (David E. Martin)
Re: International ANI is Here? (Andrew Klossner)
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Andrew Klossner)
Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain (Marc Wiz)
Re: Customer Account Security (Steve Forrette)
Re: PICs From RBOC Payphones (Steve Forrette)
Re: PICs From RBOC Payphones (Ken Abrams)
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Tony Harminc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Steve_Forrette_ stevef<@wrq.com>
Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up
Date: Fri 17 Jan 1992 15:23 -0500
This is a good point. But the problem is, Lifeline customers are
expected to use the phone in a normal manner these days, so the usage
costs are important. Pacific Bell even has two types of lifeline,
depending on how many calls you make! What started out as a good idea
(giving a dialtone to folks who otherwise couldn't afford it so that
they will be able to call the police, their doctor, etc.) has turned
into much more than that.
------------------------------
From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com
Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up
Date: Fri 17 Jan 1992 15:37 -0500
I do understand the reality of lifeline services, that's why I added
the comment about actually using the line negates my argument. But
there was a serious point in that cellular need not be viewed purely
as an expensive luxury but as a basic service in appropriate
circumstances. The fact that we already have zillions of miles of
copper buried in the ground means that zero-based analysis is not
appropriate but we still must reexamine our assumptions periodically.
------------------------------
From: garym@telesoft.com (Gary Morris)
Subject: Re: Zip + 6?
Reply-To: garym@telesoft.com
Organization: TeleSoft, San Diego, CA, USA
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 21:18:53 GMT
In <telecom12.30.13@eecs.nwu.edu> Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com
writes:
> As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office heard about
> checksums or other techniques to reduce errors?
The modulo 10 check digit in the bar code has already been mentioned
by several readers but no one mentioned that each digit in the barcode
is 5 bits, essential 4 bits plus a check bit. So they can detect an
error on each digit or on the whole zip code. They could even
reconstruct an unreadable digit from the checksum.
Gary Morris Internet: garym@telesoft.com
KK6YB UUCP: ucsd!telesoft!garym
TeleSoft, San Diego, CA Phone: +1 619-457-2700
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 16:30:19 -0600
From: "David E. Martin" <dem@nhmpw0.fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: ISDN Question
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL, USA
In article <telecom12.44.5@eecs.nwu.edu> keith@balrog.dseg.ti.com writes:
> I have only been following USENET for a short time and feel this is
> probably the right place to post this. Please correct me if wrong.
> I am responsible for designing a customer-contractor network for data
> sharing. Our customer (government) has indicated that they are
> getting a Basic Rate Interface (BRI) in the near future. I am
> assuming this is thru FTS-2000. This customer would like us to use
> this as our WAN transport, instead of MILNET whichhe considers to be
> too slow (only 56K vs 2x64).
> Questions:
> Being a commercial entity, not part of FTS-2000, is this possible?
> Can the FTS-2000 BRI interface off network?
I'm not even sure that ISDN is available under FTS-2000 right now, but
if it is: Yes, you can make calls to other ISDN sets (and switched
56/64) nodes across the public network.
> I would like to use a bridge technology, if possible (vs protocol
> routed). What would this type of connection look like to me?
Basic Rate ISDN has three user-available channels, 2B+1D. You can use
the B channel for circuit- or packet-switched data. The D channel can
only be used for packet. Packet data is sent using X.25. With
circuit switched, you get access to a raw bit pipe with HDLC framing.
Assuming you would use CSD, your bridge would have to be able to
handle synchronous communications over a 64Kbps B channel. Since I
don't know of any that do this, you would need an ISDN terminal
adapter (made by Hayes, AT&T, and others) to convert from the B
channel to a synchronous V.35 interface running at 64Kbps.
> What type of interconnect hardware is available for 802.3 -- ISDN?
A company called Digiboard (612-943-9020) is developing an ethernet
(802.3) to ISDN bridge. There are also some companies that make
terminal servers that are working on ISDN connectivity.
> Would I need a BRI to my site, or couldI just get a leased line to my
> nearest central office (FTS or otherwise)?
You would need to get a BRI line installed. If your serving central
office is ISDN capable, and your service provider offers it, it should
be simple to just order a line. If you can't get it out of your CO,
you can investigate expensive solutions like running a T-1 line to an
ISDN capable office or carrier.
> With this type of service, can it be arranged for the computers to
> force a call setup & connect vs 'dedicated' access. How is billing
> handled?
Billing is handled just like a regular call (although the prices may
be much higher). If your software is smart enough it can make and
break the connection as packets need to be sent.
> Thanks alot for any information you can shed. Any good sources for me
> to start boning up on?
William Stallings has a good book on ISDN protocols ("ISDN and
Broadband ISDN, 2nd Ed.", 1992, Macmillan). But for the wild and
woolly world of telecom tariffs and availability, nothing beats
experience.
David E. Martin
National HEPnet Management Phone: +1 708 840-8275
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory FAX: +1 708 840-2783
P.O. Box 500; MS 234; Batavia, IL 60510 USA E-Mail: DEM@FNAL.FNAL.Gov
------------------------------
From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: International ANI is Here?
Date: 18 Jan 92 00:34:56 GMT
Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon
> One problem I can see is people accidentally (or intentionally, for
> that matter!) calling these DID circuits. The subscriber is going to
> get a "call-back" and a US dial tone, even though THEY didn't place
> the call. That could get pretty expensive pretty fast!
Yes. Similarly with cellular phone numbers -- anybody can dial one
and, when the subscriber answers, charge them a billable minute.
(I'll bet there are dissocial phreaks out there who dial every number
in a cellular exchange just to wreak havoc.)
Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com)
(uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)
------------------------------
From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Date: 18 Jan 92 00:43:57 GMT
Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon
> It may slightly increase the importance with which the called party,
> if it's a business, deals with the call. I worked for a company where
> person-to-person calls were announced on the intercom as "David Ash,
> long distance, line 1."
If you want this effect, you can get it without paying
person-to-person rates by impersonating the operator. I once
delighted a college buddy by dialing through the college switchboard
to his dorm room, then impersonating the operator's "collect call from
<name>, will you accept?" For days he begged me to tell him how I
pulled the "scam."
Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com)
(uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 19:27:59
From: marc@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Marc Wiz)
Subject: Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain
edg@netcom.netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) wrote:
> A techie like you should consider wiring three pair to each drop. You
> might also consider wiring the house with another three pair for
> eventual data, or even with a four pair for 10-Base-T ethernet. :-)
> Seriously, if I were wiring a house, I'd wire two four pair circuits
> to each room, down to a central point. I'd terminate them all with
> RJ-45's on both ends. You can run RJ-11 phone circuits on them just
> fine, but can also run RS-232 data, and other twisted pair wiring
> schemes. Your house will (hopefully) stand for 100 years. Wanna bet
> what they'll be using for appliances then?
When I had my house built a year ago I had the electricians wire in
four pair to every room in the house. RG-6 for cable TV to every room
in the house. Two RS-232 runs to the rooms I thought I would need.
And three runs of speaker wire for stereo to various parts of the
house including volume controls in each room. And some plenum grade
coax for ethernet (yes I know I shouldn't have spent the extra $$).
Also I had five conduit runs from my study to the attic for antennas
for ham radio.
And most of this "originates" in the utility closet downstairs.
When describing all this at an Austin user's group meeting I was
asked: "What, no fiber optic?"
Marc Wiz MaBell (512)838-4028
Yes that really is my last name. The views expressed are my own.
marc@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 17:54:36 pst
From: Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com>
Subject: Re: Customer Account Security
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
In article <telecom12.44.2@eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon writes:
> Some time back we brought up the topic of customer account security.
> It seems that some (including I) were annoyed at the ease with which
> unauthorized people were able to get information and even make changes
> on telephone accounts.
> That appears to be a thing of the past. I needed the balance on one of
> my business accounts and was too lazy to go to the mailbox to get the
> bill. (The mailbox is at the post office before you start in on that!)
> I called the business office, gave my name and my company name and
> asked for the balance on the number in question. "I'll have to call
> you back with that information", was the response.
This must have changed VERY recently. About four months ago, I called
Pacific Bell to get my balance. I have a password on my account as
well, with the hopes that it would proctect my account. However, I
was mistaken. After confirming the name on the account (which is in
the directory, and known by everyone who knows me), the rep gave me
the balance without asking for the password. I mentioned that I had
requested a password on my account, and had been told that a permanent
note had been entered on the account screen which said "Give no
information and take no orders without password XXXXXX".
The rep's response to this? "Well, sir, if you call the account
balance giving out information, then I guess I did!" Can you believe
that? Some security.
Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 18:13:04 pst
From: Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com>
Subject: Re: PICs From RBOC Payphones
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
In article <telecom12.43.7@eecs.nwu.edu> it was written:
> I beg to differ. While you are correct, tha they are obeying the
> /letter/ of the law, they aer certainly not following the iNTENT of
> the law. The whole idea of equal access was to allow you to go through
> whatever LD company you choose. /REGARDLESS OF THE POINT OF ORIGIN/.
> While AT&T can be accessed from ANY local's phone, by law, that same
> law does not provide for any LD company being acessed from every
> phone. (Before you start tuning up about 950-xxxx access, allow me to
> remind you that the biggest part of the public does not know about
> 950-xxxx access, and thinks the only way to cross-link to another
> network is 1-0-xxx-0-.)
The point of the original point was for 10xxx+1 calls, not 10xxx+0.
The latter definately DOES work from BOC payphones. Also, I think
that you misunderstand "the law." What it says is that the various
long distance companies must be given "Equal Access" to the BOC's
networks, and not that the carriers utilize this access in an equal
manner.
In the case of sent-paid calls from a BOC payphone, the BOCs have
opened their doors to any carrier who wishes to service this market.
But without exception, the only one that has done so is AT&T. The
problem is that for technical reasons, the long distance carrier must
have a point-of-presence directly with each switch that has coin
phones attached in order to control the coin mechanism. No access
tandems are allowed. Since Sprint, MCI, etc., don't nearly have a POP
in each exchange, it would be probibitively expensive for them to put
this in just to service sent-paid coin calls. This is definitely a
declining market!
The growth in payphone long distance is definitely in calling card or
other alternative billing options, and this is where "the other guys"
have decided to make their investment. And I don't blame them. But
it is wrong to say that AT&T has an unfair advantage because the other
guys choose not to make the investment. However, I know that Pacific
Bell has been testing a scheme which would allow an IXC to give
commands to the serving switch for coin mechanism control. Also, I
would think it would be a lot easier to do this once SS7 connections
between the LEC and IXC become a reality. It would be not difficult
at all to have SS7 packets sent between the originating switch and the
IXC host for coin control.
Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
------------------------------
From: kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams)
Subject: Re: PICs From RBOC Payphones
Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1992 16:26:12 GMT
In article <telecom12.43.7@eecs.nwu.edu> Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.
com writes:
> With all due respect, Pat:
>> [Moderator's Note: It does NOT violate Equal Access. The catch is your
>> 1+ dialing ... at this time the only companies with the ability to
>> collect or refund coins deposited in the phone are the local telco and
>> AT&T. *All* long distance calls from payphones requiring coin deposit
>> are sent to AT&T. Now had you zero-plussed your call, implying you
> I beg to differ. While you are correct, that they are obeying the
> /letter/ of the law, they aer certainly not following the iNTENT of
> the law. The whole idea of equal access was to allow you to go through
> whatever LD company you choose. /REGARDLESS OF THE POINT OF ORIGIN/.
You can beg to differ all you want but Pat is absolutely correct. The
LD carriers are not required by law to handle all types of originating
traffic. Most have chosen not to make the investment in equipment
and/or people to handle "sent paid" coin calls but they DO want a
piece of the operator handled coin business. So there were two basic
choices:
1) Assign PIC XYX to the coin phone and DISABLE 1+ dialing (where the
user expects to put money in the phone) OR
2) Divert the 1+ calls to a carrier that can accept and process the
coin signals.
Nobody liked the first option. The second one was chosen by mutual
agreement of the carriers involved and the RBOCs and our old friend
Judge Green. Like it or not, differ or not, that IS the current law
and it is not a sinister plot of the RBOCs or AT&T.
Ken Abrams nstar!pallas!kabra437
Springfield, IL kabra437@athenanet.com
(voice) 217-753-7965
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 17:43:46 EST
From: Tony Harminc <TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
What bothers me about all this is that it sounds very much as though,
whatever schemes are chosen in various countries, there will still be
at least two completely incompatible systems around. Surely to
goodness the world has enough incompatible stuff -- notably TV
standards, but lots of others too. Is it not reasonable to expect
that I should be able to buy a portable phone here and use it on any
cellular system? Instead, I am stuck in islands of compatibility --
my Canadian phone will work in only the USA, Hong Kong, and a few
other places. Meanwhile a British phone works almost nowhere else but
Britain. Dual standard phones will come along, of course, but will I
really be able to afford (or carry!) a phone that works with AMPS,
North American Digital, GSM, existing British and European analogue
standards, etc.?
Sigh ...
Tony H.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #52
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02944;
20 Jan 92 3:13 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19864
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 01:27:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26230
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 01:26:54 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 01:26:54 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201200726.AA26230@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #53
TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Jan 92 01:26:51 CST Volume 12 : Issue 53
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Jim Hutchison)
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Nigel Allen)
Re: T1 on Fiber Revisited (Macy Hallock)
Re: Need Phone Service (Michael J. Logsdon)
Re: Cellular Rates Go Up (David Leibold)
Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Jack Decker)
Re: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options (Andy Dunn)
Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (Jamie Hanrahan)
Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations (Peter M. Weiss)
Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations (Tom Wardle)
Re: 800 and 900 ANI (Jim Gottlieb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hutch@qualcomm.com (Jim Hutchison)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Organization: Qualcomm Incorporated
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1992 09:56:49 GMT
In <telecom12.39.1@eecs.nwu.edu> meier@Software.Mitel.COM (Rolf
Meier):
> In <telecom12.21.2@eecs.nwu.edu> rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron
> Dippold):
>> Bottom line: We have an officially capacity tested (tests observed by
>> the major companies in the industry) CDMA system in the field that
>> gives a capacity improvement of 10 to 30 times (depending on
>> conditions) over an AMPS system, with better voice quality, better
>> handoffs, and less dropped calls.
> [CDMA sales pitch deleted]
> Readers should be made aware that Qualcomm's CDMA proposal is not
> likely to become a national digital standard for cellular. It will be
> a TDMA system as outlined in IS-54.
Where were you when I bet on the Cubs? Oh well, it was only a dollar. :-)
Seriously, predicting the future gets tricky here. The TIA is looking
at inclusion "wideband" into it's structure. The NAMPS spec is having
work done, although I believe this to be attached to another committee
instead of having it's own.
Various folks have suggested various delivery dates for these
technologies.
The future looks mighty interesting.
> In my personal opinion, Qualcomm's claims are designed more to raise
> the price of Qualcomm shares than actual capacity advantages over
> TDMA.
Irony? A recent false claim of a CDMA lock-out seemingly caused a dip
in the market. It seems that there is a period after an IPO in which
you must be careful in order to not tick-off the SEC. A reporter
spoke to a Hughes Network Systems rep (seemingly) and thought he
printed an unfavorable article. A later article seemed to balance the
picture. Check SD newspaper archives, be amused. As we are both
based in San Diego, is the irony doubled?
Not being a spokesperson for Qualcomm, I hope you do not (and are not)
insinuate such unkind statements regarding my conduct in this forum.
Jim Hutchison {dcdwest,ucbvax}!ucsd!qualcomm!hutch or hutch@qualcomm.com
Disclaimer: I am not an official spokesman for Qualcomm
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 06:01:06 -0500
From: Nigel.Allen@f438.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto
ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (David Ash) writes:
> 2. It may slightly increase the importance with which the called
> party, if it's a business, deals with the call. I worked for a
> company where person-to-person calls were announced on the intercom
> as "David Ash, long distance, line 1". Whether the person paged in
> this manner was more likely to actually take the call is debatable,
> but it might have made a bit of difference.
If you direct-dial a call, you can always tell the receptionist or
secretary "long distance calling for so-and-so". There's no need to
pay the telephone company a few dollars to say that for you!
Nigel Allen - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: Nigel.Allen@f438.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG
[Moderator's Note: What you are paying for is not for the operator to
make an announcement for you, buth rather, your gamble versus telco's
that the called party will not be there or will not accept the call.
Telco gambles he will respond, and in a prompt fashion. A free call
to leave a message for him if you win ... a couple extra dollars in
the cash register for telco if you lose. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 22:42 EST
From: fmsys!macy@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: T1 on Fiber Revisited
Organization: The Matrix
In article <telecom12.32.2@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:
> Putting a single T1 on fiber is a very costly venture.
Hmmmm ... this is not my experience.
At least one company manufactures a T1 to Fiber "modem" just for this
purpose. (Fibermux, I believe) We have used them for networking PBX's
together with fiber links, and these are just used in place of the
usual T1 CSU ... they even have the same connector.
I have not yet been able to get these units in a -48vdc version, they
are powered by a "brick" type power supply (something like 20vac)
I have talked to at least two other vendors who will be making the
same item shortly. Cost is about $1200 each and falling.
Regards,
Macy M Hallock Jr N8OBG 216.725.4764 macy@fmsystm.uucp macy@fmsystm.ncoast.org
[No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 10:19:27 -0500
From: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael J. Logsdon)
Subject: Re: Need Phone Service
Reply-To: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu
Thanks to Moderator Pat Townson and to the nine telecom readers
who responded when I thought Ohio Bell was not acting in good faith
when our building manager was rejected in his request to get phone
service after his roommate ran out on a $200 phone bill (in the
roommate's name).
We did call Ohio PUCO, as suggested by each reply, as everyone
was convinced that Ohio Bell was out of line. The PUCO was very
supportive, and even suggested that Ohio Bell was dead wrong. Ohio
Bell has now recanted. Their new requirement is three forms of proof
that scuzz roommate is not living there.
Honestly, I'm not sure how to accomplis 'proof,' but it is clear
that we are going to win the battle. This has been a very
enlightening exercise; I manage our telecommunications and quietly
read every submission to TELECOM Digest available to me, but I seldom
post. I didn't know where to go with this personnel matter ... I just
deal with switches, wire, and LD vendors. My thanks to everyone. You
DID make the difference.
Mike Logsdon / University School / Cleveland
[Moderator's Note: You are more than welcome, Mike. The intent of this
group, like many on the internet is to amuse, inform, educate and
entertain. I'm glad you are satisfied, at least. :) PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 00:10:18 EST
From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA
Subject: Re: Cellular Rates Go Up
The story regarding Canadian cellular services running their rates up
made reference to a Bell Cellular "Lifeline" grade of service. This
does not appear to be a "lifeline" service in the sense that it would
be known in the U.S. (ie. as a cheaper phone service intended for the
poor, unemployed, etc). In fact, the U.S. "lifeline" services are a
generally unknown concept in Canada. Rather, this appears to be a
brand name or trade name for the cheap class of cell service.
dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 10:39:35 CST
From: Jack Decker <Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com>
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
Recently I sent a message to the Digest on this thread, and Pat (the
Moderator) mentioned that part of my message was lost or damaged on
its way there. Actually, it appears that it arrived mostly intact,
and the only part that didn't get through was my concluding paragraph,
which made the following observation:
What surprises me is the number of otherwise intelligent people who
simply do not realise that the tone/pulse switch can be moved in
mid-call to change the dialing method. Most folks set it in one
position and seem to think that if it's moved too many times, it will
break. A *LOT* of folks never even change it from "pulse" to "tone"
when they first acquire the phone, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE PAYING FOR
TOUCH-TONE SERVICE! I hate to tell you how many phones I've
discovered that were set to "pulse" on a tone-dial line ... I'd flip
the switch and the Touch-Tones would break dial tone (which only
happens here if you are paying for the service) and the phone owner
would admit to not even knowing what that "T/P" switch was for, but
when they ordered service the business office rep asked if they had a
"pushbutton phone", so ... well, you can guess the rest.
Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8
------------------------------
From: amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1992 15:50:24 GMT
In article <telecom12.43.11@eecs.nwu.edu> peter@taronga.com (Peter da
Silva) writes:
> In article <telecom12.22.9@eecs.nwu.edu> DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA writes:
>> * Caller Announce: a voice caller ID service; when a call is answered,
>> the central office will send along a voice callout of the number
>> calling.
> This is cute, but it'll add an extra delay in answering the phone (and
> increase the chance that the guy at the other end will hang up). Since
> they save the last number anyway for call-blocking, why can't they
> make something like this for after the fact (i.e., you dial *something
> and it tells you who last called).
No! The original appeal of all CLID features is twofold:
(1) You can see who's calling, and ignore the call at your option.
(2) You can find out who called if they said something you didn't like,
or didn't find out who they were and needed to contact them, or...
Having to get the number later defeats #1 entirely!
> I wouldn't mind paying a per-call charge for *that*, either. It's not
> like the charge for C-ID delivery, since you have to ask for the
> number each time.
But that's because you only subscribe to purpose (2) above!
Andy Dunn (amdunn@mongrel.uucp) ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn)
------------------------------
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com
Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM
Date: 19 Jan 92 03:07:17 PST
Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
In article <telecom12.45.4@eecs.nwu.edu>, rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes:
> In article <telecom12.36.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, davidb@zeus.ce.washington.
> edu (David W. Barts) writes:
>> This is known as an ALIT (Automatic Line Insulation Test), performed
>> by the phone company in the wee hours of the morning to detect faults
>> in the twisted pair serving your home. ALIT involves placing a DC
>> voltage of about 100v across the pair and measuring the leakage
>> current. This subject has been discussed in this Digest extensively
>> in the past.
> Actually ALIT is an old system, not much used these days. Current
> automated Line test systems typically do the testing at 10V or so.
A friend who used to work for Bell Labs has a different explanation.
He claims that the CO is probing your line to see how many ringer
equivalents are on it, so that the CO will deliver enough current to
ring them on.
It sounds plausible. True or false? If false, where did this story
originate? Perhaps the "adaptive ring current" was a feature that was
proposed but not actually implemented?
Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
Chair, VMS Programming and Internals Working Group, U.S. DECUS VAX Systems SIG
Internet: jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp: ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh
[Moderator's Note: In the olden days, when telco was 'probing your
line to measure ringer current' it was to see how many extensions were
on the line versus what you were paying for. Does anyone remember
those days, when there was such a thing as an 'illegal extension'? PAT]
------------------------------
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sunday, 19 Jan 1992 09:14:01 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations
In article <telecom12.45.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, roscom!monty@uunet.UU.NET
(Monty Solomon) says:
> They are available online via anonymous FTP from bruno.cs.colorado.edu
> and by E-Mail from infosrv@bruno.cs.colorado.edu.
According to the mail and FTP Server at the above site:
The CCITT standards documents are no longer available on this server,
due to an ITU decision. Please send any comments to
standards@digital.resource.org
Pete Weiss (pmw1@psuvm.psu.edu)
------------------------------
From: wardle@hpb.cis.pitt.edu (Tom Wardle)
Subject: Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 92 10:14:40 EST
I went looking for the ccitt texts on Bruno.cs.colorado.edu and found
the following message:
TELEFAX
International Telecommunication Union
Office of the Secretary General
Place des Nations
1211 Geneva 20 - Switzerland
Date: 10-12-91
Fax No. 42455
Dear Mr. Malamud,
Let me congratulate you on the success of the experimental
project making ITU standards available over the Internet. The ITU
Coordination Committee expresses its appreciation for your efforts in
making the ITU standards widely available. This project has
demonstrated the wide Internet accessibility of CCITT texts and the
considerable interest that exists in the Internet community for access
to ITU documents.
This Committee, while considering further actions in this area,
came to the conclusion that the experiment be terminated on 31
December 1991. We would appreciate if you would convey this
information to all those who are operating info-servers with copies of
the ITU standards that ITU's authorization for distribution of this
material ceases after 31 December 1991. In line with your
recommendation, measures are in progress for a similar service to be
made available under ITU auspices, with access by Internet, PSTN,
PSPDN, etc.
As laid down in our fax dated 15 June 1991 (attached enclosure),
we look forward to receiving a final report with statistics on usage,
as well as magnetic tapes with the converted files and software, as
agreed when the project was initiated.
Thank you very much for the effort you and your colleagues at the
University of Colorado have invested in this project. We look forward
to continuous cooperation.
Yours sincerely,
Pekka TARJANNE
Secretary-General
---------------
I just thought this might be of interest.
tom
[Moderator's Note: I wonder what possible objection they had to
leaving them in place on the Internet? PAT]
------------------------------
From: jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Re: 800 and 900 ANI
Date: 19 Jan 92 13:02:46 GMT
Reply-To: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb)
Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
leichter@LRW.COM (Jerry Leichter) writes:
> In the interest of careful reasoning:
> The argument that the 900 provider has the right to know who its
> callers are in order to do billing is only legitimate when it actually
> DOES billing. That is, all this argument requires is that when the
> telco flags a call as uncollectible, it pass along to the 900 provider
> the identifying information it has.
Even if this were true (any information the telco gives the provider
comes months later and after much damage could be done), if we do not
receive calling party information (i.e. ANI), then how would this help
us?
Say we receive notification from our billing agent that a certain
subscriber does not feel our service is worth the cost and refuses to
pay. OK, now we know that 311-555-2368 has refused to pay. But
without ANI, we have no way to block future calls from that
subscriber. And telcos cannot block a single 900 number; it's all or
nothing.
So I feel very strongly that we have a right to know who is calling
before we accept the call. We may not actually mail out our own
bills, but any fraud is deducted right from our bottom line.
If we see that a certain number has made an excessive amount of calls
in a short amount of time, we call them to make sure they plan on
paying.
> A law or regulation should not unduly inconvenience the good because
> some might be bad.
We must pay the transport charges on all calls, regardless of whether
they ever pay us. So the few bad people can actually bankrupt us. We
are the ones extending credit, not the telco. It is us, more than
they, who needs the ANI delivery.
Jim Gottlieb Info Connections, Tokyo, Japan <jimmy@denwa.info.com>
Fax: +81 3 3865 9424 Voice Mail: +81 3 3865 3548
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #53
*****************************
Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13531;
20 Jan 92 21:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14785
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 19:47:09 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14680
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 19:46:46 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 19:46:46 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201210146.AA14680@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #54
TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Jan 92 19:46:38 CST Volume 12 : Issue 54
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Conference: Computer Technologies in Education (David Crookall)
Followup on Phone Director (Brad Houser)
Gotcha! Striking Back with Call Back (Andrew C. Green)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 19:12:03 CST
From: CROOKALL@UA1VM.UA.EDU
Organization: University of Alabama, USA (S+G, IDEALS)
Subject: Conference: Computer Technologies in Education
East-West Conference
on Emerging Computer Technologies in Education
April 6-9, 1992
(originally April 14-17, 1992)
Moscow, USSR
FINAL CALL FOR PAPERS AND CALL FOR POSTERS
==========================================
The aims of the East-West Conference on Emerging Computer Techno-
logies in Education are to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas
between Eastern and Western scientists and to present to the Soviet
educational community the current state-of-the-art on the theory and
practice of using emerging computer-based technology in education.
The Technical Programme will include paper presentations, invited
talks, posters, tutorials and demonstrations. An exhibition of
software products is also anticipated.
The Conference is organised and sponsored by: Association for the
Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), International Centre for
Scientific and Technical Information (ICSTI), and Soviet Association
for Artificial Intelligence (SAAI). The Conference will take place in
the ICSTI Building in Moscow.
Topics of Interest
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The conference is designed to cover the following subfields of
advanced research in the field of computers and education:
- Artificial Intelligence and Education
- Educational Multi-Media and Hyper-Media
- Learning Environments, Microworlds and Simulation
We invite submission of original research/development papers or
review papers on topics in these subfields. We also invite tutorial
papers on topics pertaining to the conference.
Submission of Papers and Posters
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Submissions can be either research/development, review, or
tutorial paper abstracts or research/development poster abstracts.
Authors are requested to submit an extended English abstract (about
500 words) in electronic format (by E-mail or ordinary mail on DOS or
UNIX "tar" diskette) to the Conference Secretary.
Each submission should contain the type of submission, the title,
the name(s) of the author(s), complete address(es), electronic
address(es), keywords and one or more of the conference subjects fol-
lowed by the "500 words" abstract.
All submissions will be reviewed by the international program
committee. Acceptance/rejection of paper submissions will be notified
by January 15. Acceptance/rejection of poster submissions will be
notified by February 10. Poster abstracts submitted before 10-th
January, 1992 will be considered in preference to late proposals.
The authors of accepted paper submissions will receive instruc-
tions concerning the style of presentation of their text (about 5000
words) for publication in the proceedings. The proceedings as well as
the abstracts of accepted posters will be distributed at the confer-
ence. The best papers will be invited to be published in the Journal
of Artificial Intelligence in Education and the Journal of Educational
Multimedia and Hypermedia, pulished by AACE, and Simulation & Gaming:
An International Journal, published by Sage Publications.
Accepted papers are presented in a 20-60 minute lecture-style
format. Poster presenters are provided with poster space and are
required to be available at their poster during designed time (about 2
hours). The authors of the accepted submissions are welcome also to
prepare a video or computer demonstration related with the topic of
presentation.
Important Dates
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Paper Submissions Deadline: December 1, 1991
Poster Submissions Deadline: January 15, 1992
Paper Submissions Acceptance Notification: January 15, 1992
Poster Submissions Acceptance Notification: February 15, 1992
Receipt of Camera-Ready Papers: February 24, 1992
(originally March 1, 1992)
Program Committee Chair
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dmitry Pospelov (SAAI, USSR)
Organizing Committee Chair
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alexander Butrimenko (ICSTI, USSR)
Program Committee:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
KSR Anjaneyulu (India)
David McArthur (USA)
Philip Barker (England)
Ehud Bar-On (Israel)
Ben du Boulay (England)
Peter Brusilovsky (Russia)
Sergey Christochevsky (Russia)
David Crookall (USA)
Alexey Dovgyallo (Ukraine)
Marc Eisenstadt (England)
Monique Grandbastien (France)
Jim Greer (Canada)
Roger Hartley (England)
Stephen Heppel (England)
Marlene Jones (Canada)
Greg Kearsley (USA)
Riichiro Mizoguchi (Japan)
Claus Moebus (Germany)
Leonard Rastrigin (Latvia)
Brian Reiser (USA)
Luigi Sarti (Italy)
Julita Vassileva (Bulgaria)
Boris Velichkovsky (Russia)
Radboud Winkels (The Netherlands)
Beverly Woolf (USA)
Conference Secretary
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peter Brusilovsky (Russia, USSR)
Conference Secretary addresses:
Dr. Peter Brusilovsky
East-West Conference on Emerging Computer Technologies in Education
International Centre for Scientific and Technical Information (ICSTI)
Kuusinen str. 21b, Moscow 125252, USSR
E-mail: eastwest@plb.icsti.su or eastwest%plb.icsti.su@ussr.eu.net
Telex: 411925 MCNTI
FAX: +7 095 943 0089
--------------------------------------------------
Feedback message. Please, fill in and return.
I am interested in: (please check)
Further information on East-West Conference ___
Attending ___
Submitting a paper ___
Submitting a poster ___
Organizing a demonstration ___
Exhibiting ___
My areas of interests are
Artificial Intelligence and Education ___
Educational Multi-Media and Hyper-Media ___
Learning Environments, Microworlds and Simulation ___
David Crookall % Editor: Simulation & Gaming: An International
MA-TESOL Prgrm % Journal (Sage); Dir: Project IDEALS (FIPSE, DoE)
English/Morgan, Univ of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0244, USA.
Phones: 205-348-9494 -9173 (w), 205-752-0690 (h); fax: 205-348-5298.
crookall@ua1vm.bitnet or .ua.edu. For Project IDEALS, contact Asst
Directors: Frannie Goubet fgoubet3@ua1vm, Chet Farmer cfarmer1@ua1vm
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 08:13:08 -0800
From: bhouser@d2com.intel.com
Subject: Followup on Phone Director
I wrote previously:
> I received the Heartland America Catalog last month, and they list a
> product that intrigues me. It says you can add the power of a PBX and
> Voice mail to your existing phone system. It's features include:
> Add up to five inside extensions (on their own loops) to the outside line;
> Works with standard one or two line phones, faxes, modems;
> Needs an answering machine to simulate "voice mail";
> Routes calls (caller enters a number from 1-5);
> Works as an intercom;
> Adds "hold" to any phone.
> Heartland Customer service couldn't help me with my questions, but
> they gave me the name of the manufacturer: Areanex Technology Inc
> (408-257-5880). They have the system (Model ACR105) on that line.
> Areanex calls it the "Phone Director" as the answering machine OGM
> plays the message: "Thank you for calling, press 1 for Joe, 2 for
> Chris, ... or stay on the line to leave a message". If the call is
> not redirected by the caller (or they don't have DTMF) the phone is
> answered by Line 0, which is the answering machine line. Otherwise,
> one of the other lines can be individually rung. (You can still use it
> without the answering machine and telemarketers won't know how to
> reach you, but then neither will your friends for a while.)
> Hold is obtained by hitting #, (## if you made the call) and then an
> extension can be dialed. It answers after one ring, and then the
> caller hears a much different ring.
> I have ordered the product with a 30-day money back guarantee, but I
> will have to wait about another week or so.
> I don't work for either company, but so I don't get asked to send the
> address, here it is:
> Heartland America
> 6978 Shady Oak Rd.
> Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3453
> 1-800-229-2901 Fax: (612)943-4096
> I will post a followup with my impressions after using the device.
Here are my impressions:
The unit is the size of an external modem. It has a DC power input,
where and AC adapter connect, and seven RJ11 jacks. The first one
attaches to the incoming line. The others are numbers line 0 through
5. Line 0 is for the answering machine (OGM = "Press 1 for x, 2 for
..."), and lines one through five are five seperate lines.
It answers the phone after two rings, after which line 0 starts to
ring for however many rings the answering machine is set for. (If
there are no phones anywhere on line 0 you won't hear any ringing
anywhere.) The caller hears sort of a rattle instead of a ring. My
machine answers after two rings, so the caller hears two normal rings,
and then two rattles.
The caller can listen to the message, and learn the extensions, and at
any time during the message the caller can press the number of the
extension desired. (They need not wait to hear any part of the
message, so if they know this, they can hit a number during the
"rattles". If they don't hit a button (or if they have a rotary
phone!) they can leave a message and will not otherwise get through.
While the extension is ringing, the caller hears more rattles instead
of rings. If the extension doesn't answer another extension acts as a
backup (if anyone is interested I can forward the details), but the
caller will eventually end up back on line 0 if they never get through
to another line. (Another interesting feature, if you add 5 to the
extension, you get a different ringing cadence, e.g. six rings line
one for four seconds on one off. This often gets the callee's
attention: "Why did the phone ring like that?")
As an intercom, you pick up any of the phones, hit #, then you hear
the "rattle" tone. You need to wait a second until the rattle stops,
then you can hit any extension, and the ringing sounds like the same
"rattle" an outside caller hears.
What I like about the system:
I can pick up the phone and call the kids upstairs without having to
yell over loud stereos, etc. (Plus a ringing phone is more likely to
get their extension, since it might be for them.)
Even if they are on the phone (which they often are) I can pick it up
and talk to them. If they had their own lines, they would have to
order and pay for call waiting in order to do this.
One can answer any extension from any other, even if it wasn't
ringing.
I don't have to play answering service for the kids, who get ten times
as many calls as my wife (and 50 times as many as myself).
The kids can have their own answering machines if they want. (The 15
year old must have had 50 messages when he was gone for ten days.)
The installation requires careful planning, as you may not want one
extension per phone, but you may want people to be able to call you
from any phone (as an intercom). For example, each of the boys has
their own extension. (1 and 2.) The rest of us are line three:
(kitchen, Master BR, library.) If I want to call the kitchen from the
library, I can't, since they are both on the same line. One way out
is to wire some dummy extensions that you don't tell the outside world
about (4 for Master BR, and 5 for library) and keep a line 3 phone in
the BR and library so you can hear the rings.
If there is a power outage, all phones ring as if they were hooked up
to the telco (assuming the REN's aren't too high.)
What I don't like about the system:
The average person who calls is either confused, or frustrated with
having to deal with the technology. I had the plumber call me at work
and ask for my home phone number again as the number I gave must be a
business.
You have to remember to tell people who don't know you to dial the
right extension when it answers. The 15 year old ordered a $30 pizza,
and gave them the phone number. Making sure it wasn't a prank, they
called back and didn't know what extension to dial. No pizza, until I
called them and asked what's up.
The rotary dial phone user is stuck. As has been pointed out in this
newsgroup, a lot of people have refused to upgrade their phones for
the principal of having to pay for the privilege of saving baby bell
time and money. One of my parents called and left a message "Help! I
don't have a touch tone phone!"
You need to leave a long detailed message in order to explain all the
options and possibilities: "Thank you for calling. If you know the
extension you may dial it at any time, if you want to speak to ... hit
1, (etc.), if you stay on the line you may leave a message ..." You
get the point. Most people don't want to hear all the options, I
would need a five minute OGM. Eventually people get used to it.
One curious thing, my 15 year old said he tried calling collect from
out of town, and the operator told him she could not push 3 to get
through to the "house" extension. I couldn't imagine PAC Bell not
being able to send a DTMF 3, but I was curious, could he have pushed 3
on the pay phone and have it go through? "Just a minute operator, let
me dial that for you!" He says he tried to call, and we aren't sure
whether to believe him or not.
Overall Impression:
I prefer things over the way they were before. There are times when I
think seperate lines would be in order, but then I am reminded of
monthly charges, hookup fees, and the fact that I don't want one for
every room/kid. The phone is used just as much, if not more. If I
need to make a call though, my wife has a seperate business line.
Convincing the people who call me that it is a good thing is sometimes
a challenge. Most people have a hard time figuring out how to leave a
message when there is no answer.
Brad Houser | Deus Ex Intel California Technology Development, RN3-12
408-765-0494 | Machina! 2200 Mission College Blvd.
bhouser@sc9.intel.com Santa Clara, CA 95052-8119
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 16:34:58 CST
From: acg@HERMES.DLOGICS.COM
Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com
Subject: Gotcha! Striking Back with Call Back
The following appeared in Richard Roeper's column in the {Chicago
Sun-Times} on January 15, 1992:
--quote--
19-year-old John Windhorst of Justice [Illinois] pulled a boner that
will be hard to top in the months to come.
Our story begins in October, when Windhorst allegedly broke into
Tiffany Sweeney's Nissan Sentra, which was parked outside her
apartment complex in Justice, and took a cassette player and some
tapes. On Jan. 7, Windhorst returned and allegedly broke into a Chevy
Blazer owned by Tiffany's husband, Tom, this time grabbing a radar
detector, a compact disc player, a Pink Floyd CD and some business
cards that included the Sweeney's home number.
A few hours later, the couple's phone rang and Tiffany Sweeney
answered.
"Thanks for the radio!" a voice chirped.
Click.
This is where telephone technology took over. The Sweeneys have the
phone gimmick known as Automatic Callback, which doesn't reveal a
number a la Caller ID but does dial back the most recent caller. So
as soon as the taunting thief hung up, Tom punched in a code number
and reached the Windhorst family's answering machine -- with a message
that included a telephone number.
Whoops.
"Hey, thanks for the number," Tom said.
At that point, Barney Fife could have tracked down the thief.
Windhorst was arrested Wednesday [January 8th] and has confessed to
the two burglaries, police said. No word yet on whether he's changed
his answering machine message.
--end of quote--
Andrew C. Green (312) 266-4431
Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com
441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473
[Moderator's Note: Gosh, just look at the way those folks violated the
caller's privacy ... the Socially Responsible citizens among us will
probably have a field day with this example of why modern telephone
technology which allows the the called party (of all people, for
gawd's sake!) to know who called is such an evil, bad thing. I mean,
what if everyone started calling back the people who ripped them off
... what would become of our constitution and Bill of Rights? :)
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #54
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15082;
20 Jan 92 22:44 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19618
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 20:21:47 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17988
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 20:21:19 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 20:21:19 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201210221.AA17988@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #55
TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Jan 92 20:20:52 CST Volume 12 : Issue 55
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Computer Networking in Russia (Tom Benson via gerry@vm1.yorku.ca)
Seeking Boston Symposium (David Lin)
Offshore Communications (was Person-to-Person) (Steve McDowell)
Newsletter For 900 Service (Free Sample Available) (Nigel Allen)
Oil Rig Cellular (was Person-to-Person) (Craig Ibbotson)
How Do You Calculate a 32-bit CRC? (Ed Rank via Bill Smith)
Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (David Klur)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 21:39:47 EST
Reply-To: XCUL List <XCUL@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From: GERRY@VM1.YORKU.CA
Subject: Computer Networking in Russia
Here is an interesting item regarding developments in the electronic
mail of Russia and the other CIS countries...
---------Original message---------
-- Email in Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States
(Tom Benson)
Date: 13 January 1991
From: Tom Benson
Subject: Email in Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States
This report is forwarded to xlchc at Mike Cole's suggestion; it was
prepared for another network (CRTNET) but may be of some interest
here. I'd be happy to answer questions or accept corrections.
There's a lot to tell, but I'll try to keep this fairly brief and
invite questions and commentary.
This is an account of a trip on December 13-20, 1991, to Moscow,
Russia, at the request of IREX (the International Research and
Exchanges Board), sponsored by the Carnegie Corporation, and through
the good offices of Mike Cole, University of California at San Diego.
Mike is an authority on Soviet psychology, has long been a leading
figure in international discussions of computer use in the (former)
Soviet Union, and in fact wrote a highly interesting account of
"Computerization in Soviet Education" for CRTNET (CRTNET 16 [26
November 1985]).
I traveled with Peter Olenick, a senior networking specialist
from Princeton University. Our assignment was to assess the current
state of computer communications among social scientists and humanists
in Moscow, with special reference to the Soviet Academy of Sciences
(which transformed itself into the Russian Academy of Sciences the
week we were in Moscow). We were also invited to make recommendations
about priorities for future development.
Our host in Moscow was Dr. Alexandra (Sasha) Belyaeva, a senior
research psychologist at the Institute of Psychology and a principal
developer of electronic mail among academicians in Moscow (in addition
to a long running experiment in international e-mail for
schoolchildren). We were accompanied on most of our site visits, as
well, by one of Alexandra Belyaeva's assistants, Dmitry Mozhaev (Jim).
The research institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences
operate under the authority of the ministry of science of the central
government, and comprise by far the largest network of research
scientists (outside of systems of higher education, which is the U.S.
model) in the world, encompassing disciplines in the natural sciences,
social sciences, and humanities. Despite the years of work of
Alexandra Belyaeva and others, general development of computer
communications is still in an early phase, owing to technical,
economic, political, and cultural considerations.
The current arrangement for the institutes with which Alexandra
Belyaeva is working is that the institute has a microcomputer and a
modem; electronic mail is composed in local mode on the microcomputer,
which then dials RELCOM, a telecommunications agency gradually
evolving from a project based in another institute. The mail is
transferred to RELCOM and any new incoming mail is then sent from
RELCOM to the microcomputer; the connection is then broken. RELCOM
periodically dials up a host computer in Europe and exchanges incoming
and outgoing mail with worldwide networks such as BITNET and the
Internet. RELCOM assesses a user fee for each transmission.
At the Vega Laboratory at the Institute of Psychology, Alexandra
Belyaeva has established a general address -- psy-pub@comlab.msk.su
-- to which electronic mail may be sent to anyone in the Institute
(the addressee's name is used on the "Subject:" line of the mail.
Similar projects are underway, through Alexandra Belyaeva's
initiatives, at a number of other institutes. Here is a short list of
recently connected institutes compiled by Alexandra Belyaeva and
Dmitry Mozhaev:
Institute : The State Historical Public Library
Address : Moscow, 101000, Starosadsky 9
Phone : +7 (095)-928-4341; +7 (095)-921-1707
Postmaster: Galina Zinina
Email : postmaster@shpl.msk.su
Connected : 09.03.91
Institute : Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology
Address : Moscow, 117334, Leninsky pr, 32 A
Phone : +7 (095)-938-1747
Postmaster: Irina Dakhnovskaya
Email : postmaster@iea.msk.su
Connected : 09.22.91
Institute : Institute of State and Law
Address : Moscow, 121019, Znamenka st. 10
Phone : +7 (095)-219-1229
Postmaster: Marina Karelina
Email : postmaster@isl.msk.su
Connected : 11.19.91
Institute : Intstitute of History, Science and Technology
Address : Moscow, 103012, Starobansky st, 1/5
Phone : +7 (095)-928-1029
Postmaster: Dmitry Bayuk
Email : postmaster@ihst.msk.su
Connected : 12.04.91
Institute : Institute of Latin America
Address : Moscow, 113184, Bolshaya Ordynka st, 21
Phone : +7 (095)-231-1322; +7 (095)-231-5127
Postmaster: Igor Arteminkov
Email : postmaster@ila.msk.su
Connected : 12.12.91
Institute : Institute of Slavic and Balkan studies
Address : Moscow, 117334, Leninsky prospect, 32-A
Phone : +7 (095)-938-1780
Postmaster: Andrej Edemsky
Email : postmaster@isb.msk.su
Connected : 13 January 1992
Institute : Institute of Psychology
Address : Moscow, 129366, Yaroslavskaya st, 13
Phone : +7 (095)-283-5140
Postmaster: Roman Tolochkov
Email : psy-pub@comlab.vega.msk.su
Connected : september 1991.
Alexandra Belyaeva has been in contact with 39 Institutes of the
former Soviet Academy of Sciences that operate in human sciences and
humanities -- some changes in structure and number of these Institutes
may be expected with the transfer from the Soviet Academy to the
Russian Academy. Also in Vega's "zone of attention" are other
institutions not directly connected with the Academy of Sciences --
such as libraries, archives, research programs of humanities
complexes, and new educational organizations. We visited, for
example, with Dean Yassen Zassoursky of the Faculty of Journalism of
Moscow State University, and plans are underway to connect the
Institute.
The service connections through RELCOM are a tremendous breakthrough,
as more and more institutes get connected and the international
conversation begins. But there are considerable limitations, still.
Using the e-mail-only dialup system now employed, Russian scholars are
denied access to many online services that depend on synchronous,
online, interactive messaging (or can use such services only by a
comparatively cumbersome e-mail equivalent). The requirement of
paying for each message has a potentially discouraging effect on the
sort of exploration that is required to use e-mail for maximum effect.
The use of a single, centralized microcomputer in a large institute as
the sole machine in communication with the outside world takes
advantage of the rapidity of transmission of e-mail but is very
different from the experience of a scholar who has a microcomputer at
home and office, both with direct and instant access to the
international networks.
Projects are underway to develop Bitnet-style online
communications using mainframes connected by leased lines. Andrej
Mendkovich, of the Institute of Organic Chemistry, Moscow, is director
of SUEARN (the Soviet Union version of EARN -- European Academic
Research Network). SUEARN does have a leased line into EARN, and
plans to connect mainframes at scientific institutes throughout
Russia, but problems with the Russian phone system and limited
financial resources, among other things, have impeded rapid progress.
In addition, there seems to be some tendency within the Soviet
academic community to repeat the pattern familiar in the United States
academic community some years ago: the scientists and engineers who
owned the mainframes did not always see the point of including social
scientists and humanists in their plans.
Whatever the limitations of the current situation, the urgencies
of social and political development make computer communication a
potentially important tool for international conversation and
cooperation. A new democracy is struggling to be born and many
believe that Russian intellectuals, freed from the restraints of past
times and in communication with each other and the West, can play an
important role in the process. Under these circumstances, very rapid
connection of institutes, universities, and similar agencies could
have significant benefits for the peaceful evolution of Russian and
Commonwealth societies.
Tom Benson | INTERNET: t3b@psuvm.psu.edu
Dept. of Speech Communication | BITNET: T3B@PSUVM
Penn State University |
227 Sparks Building | FAX: 814-863-7986
University Park, PA 16802 USA
814-238-5277 (home); 814-865-4201 (office); 814-865-3461 (secretary)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 16:06:02 -0500
From: David Lin <tawei@media-lab.mit.edu>
Subject: Boston Symposium
I heard that there was a symposium in the Boston area from January 22
- 23, 1992. If anyone has any information regarding this, please
contact me.
Thanks,
David
------------------------------
From: mcdowell@exloghou.exlog.com (Steve McDowell)
Subject: Offshore Communications (was Re: Person-to-Person)
Organization: Exploration Logging, Inc.
In message <telecom12.37.1@eecs.nwu.edu> bill@eedsp.gatech.edu writes:
> Aside question: I'm guessing that oil rigs (at least in the Gulf of
> Mexico) use cellular primarily. Is that so? If not, what do they use
> -- radio telephone?
> In any event, my connections have always been full duplex; that's why I
> suspect cellular is the method used.
For several years I provided support for computers running on oil
tankers. The primary mode of communication (until about 1988) was a
service called Marisat. They provide full duplex paths, which were
usually good for 2400baud data connections. The echo usually made
higher data rates unbearable. It sounded like a normal international
call.
In 1988, Exxon started using cellular technology for ships in the Gulf
of Mexico (which is *very* well covered) and the upper East coast
(which was fairly unreliable). As for the rest of the waterways, and
pretty much anything more than 10 miles or so off the coast, marisat
was the way to go -- and it cost about $10/minute. I never used
person-to-person, but it was a direct dial call (Marisat has their own
country code).
If the ship (or rig) is out of cellular range and their marisat can't
connect for whatever reason, there is a service called KHT that
provides single sideband simplex paths...unusable for data, but okay
for talking to someone.
River boats (tugs), and I would imagine rig barges, strictly used
cellular.
Steve McDowell . . . . o o o o o Opinions are
Exlog, Inc. _____ o mine, not my
mcdowell@exlog.com _____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. employers..
[_________]_|__|________)<
ooo ooo 'oo OOOOO oo\_
------------------------------
From: nigel.allen@canrem.uucp (Nigel Allen)
Date: 15 Jan 92 (16:42)
Subject: Newsletter For 900 Service (Free Sample Available)
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto
Reply-to: nigel.allen@canrem.uucp
Audiotex News advertises itself as "the newsletter for anyone who wants
to get ahead or into the 900 industry."
For a free sample issue, call 800-735-3398.
It might even be of interest to people who disapprove of the 900
industry (the majority of TELECOM Digest readers, I suspect).
The number was advertised in TeleProfessional, a trade magazine for
telemarketers.
Canada Remote Systems. Toronto, Ontario NorthAmeriNet Host
------------------------------
From: ibbotson@rtsg.mot.com (Craig Ibbotson)
Subject: Oil Rig Cellular (Was What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?)
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1992 18:28:22 GMT
bill@eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich) writes:
> Aside question: I'm guessing that oil rigs (at least in the Gulf of
> Mexico) use cellular primarily. Is that so? If not, what do they use
> -- radio telephone? I think the switchboard tries radio first and if
> that doesn't work they ring through on cellular. Sometimes the
> switchboard puts me on hold for what seems like quite a while,
> apparently while they make the connection (and the IXC operator stays
> with me -- (s)he's nice like that :-). Do any Digest/c.d.t readers
> call to rigs a lot? That might make for a nice submission here -- Oil
> Rig Telecommunications. In any event, my connections have always been
> full duplex; that's why I suspect cellular is the method used.
Yes, the oil rigs use cellular communication via satellite. One of my
first field trips as a Motorola software engineer was to New Orleans
to oversee the software installation for Petrocomm. Petrocomm
operates a cellular system in the Gulf of Mexico. I believe they had
plans for 27 or so cell sites. They were the beta site for a new
software release, so I was sent to verify it's operation on a live
system.
The cell sites communicate back with the switch via satellite.
Motorola had never done a cellular installation like this before, and
it was interesting to see how it was done. The base sites were built
on land and bolted onto platforms which were predrilled for fitting on
the oil rig. The cell sites themselves only had a few channels, but
that was all they needed. Once all the cell sites were assembled and
bolted to the platform, they were flown out by helicopter to the rigs
and attached to the rigs. We weren't allowed to go out on the rigs
(and being a software person, I had no reason to go on a rig) but I
was always curious to see what the final installation looked like.
It must have been well-planned, because after making some adjustments
for the satellite delay in the cell site maintenance software (located
in the exchange), they were up and running and processing calls. The
exchange was located in a town on the outskirts of New Orleans - I
can't recall the name.
Glad to hear you're a happy customer!
Craig Ibbotson, Motorola, Inc. ...uunet!motcid!ibbotsonc
Cellular Infrastructure Division, Radio Telephone Systems Group
------------------------------
From: bsmith@buengf.bu.edu (Bill Smith)
Subject: How Do You Calculate a 32-bit CRC?
Date: 19 Jan 92 23:24:01 GMT
Reply-To: bsmith@buengf.bu.edu (Bill Smith)
Organization: College of Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
Please reply to erank@winky.ed.ray.com.
If you cannot reach him, then you may send it to me at either
bsmith@buengf.bu.edu or bsmith@bass.bu.edu.
I'm writine test code for the AMD LANCE Ethernet chipset. I need to
calculate the CRC in software so that I can check the hardware CRC
circuitry. The CRC algorithm is the CRC-32 (IEEE 802) algorithm which
uses the following polynomial.
32 26 23 22 16 12 11 10 8 7 5 4 2
X + X + X + X + X + X + X + X + X + X + X + X + X + X + 1
I was hoping to find a 'C' routine that worked like the following:
calc_crc( bufp, bcnt )
char *bufp; /* pointer to data */
int bcnt; /* byte count of data */
{
/* calculate crc */
return crc;
}
Any help would be appreciated.
Ed Rank, erank@winky.ed.ray.com
------------------------------
From: dklur@attmail.com
Subject: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
Date: Thu Jan 16 10:39:00 EST 1992
When I dial a phone number and hear the called party's phone "ring", I
am really hearing tones generated by my local switch, right?
If this is true, then why when I call an international phone number,
do I hear a different kind of ringing than the ringing for a domestic
call?
David Klur dklur@attmail.com
[Moderator's Note: No, you are not necessarily listening to your own
switch. You might be listening to the distant switch. On international
calls where you have heard 'different ringing sounds' you most likely
are listening to the distant switch rather than your own. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #55
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16033;
20 Jan 92 23:17 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22598
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 21:05:46 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21468
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 21:05:08 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 21:05:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201210305.AA21468@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #56
TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Jan 92 21:04:57 CST Volume 12 : Issue 56
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Determining System ID of Current Cellular System (John R. Covert)
Equipment-Rental Rates in Tariffs (Will Martin)
AT&T Advertisement Uses 12-Digit Phone Number (Andrew Klossner)
USTA and USITA (Bud Couch)
*611 and *711 Calls Are Free? (John Gilbert)
Details Wanted on Call Progress Tones (Mike Weal)
Speaker Phone Wanted For a Conference (J. Philip Miller)
Voice/Modem Automatically Switched? (Does it Exist?) (James Barrett)
Wireless LAN System Information Needed (Surgwon Sohn)
Reverse Directory Information (Stewart I. Alpert)
AT&T $20 Cash Offer (Dan Meyer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 11:52:26 PST
From: John R. Covert 15-Jan-1992 1429 <covert@covert.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Determining System ID of Current Cellular System
In an article I wrote yesterday entitled "Motorola Cellular Phone Test
Mode Commands" I asked (among other things) about determining the
system ID of the current cellular system while roaming.
The Moderator added a note:
> Moderator's Note: The way I always tell what system I have roamed
> into is by dialing *711 or *611 and asking. Those calls are free.
Patrick, that certainly never gets you the System ID, and it often
doesn't tell you what system you are in.
When dialing *611 or *711 on the "B" carrier in this area you get a
recording telling you "Thank you for using the NYNEX Mobile Cellular
System; your call cannot be completed as dialed." But that really
doesn't tell you which of NYNEX Mobile's many systems you've just
accessed, especially if you are on the top of a hill between two
different systems.
Dialing *711 on the "A" carrier results in a reorder tone.
Dialing *611 reaches "Cellular One". That sure tells you a lot,
doesn't it? There's Cellular One JHP Partnership, Cellular One McCaw,
Cellular One Southwestern Bell, Cellular One GTE, Cellular One of
Huntsville, etc.
Oh, yes, and Cellular One (Southwestern Bell) in Boston told me today
that they can't tell me what their system ID is. "That's Proprietary
Information," they say. No matter that it is published in books such
as the "Cellular Telephone Directory", assigned by the FCC, and a
matter of public record.
In any case, I think Patrick was suggesting that I call customer
service from the phone. Customer Service is usually 611 on "B"
systems and usually *611 on "A" systems. But it can be "0" in some
systems (such as in the Cantel system throughout Canada or in the
Boatphone systems in the Caribbean).
But in many areas, [*]611 simply translates to a landline telephone
number. For example, 611 on all BellSouth Mobility systems simply
contacts Atlanta. They have no idea there what system you're using to
make the call.
Oh, and 611 isn't always free. I was travelling along I-91 in Vermont
last October and noticed that there was service where there had been
none before. I dialed 611, talked for a few minutes, was cut off,
and then dialed 611 again. A month later, my bill showed a $3.00
daily fee, one $2.75 call, and a second $1.45 call. I had been billed
the daily fee, plus 99 cents a minute, plus a long distance charge
from Clairmont to Lebanon for calling customer service. Total charge:
$7.20 plus tax. Needless to say, I had NYNEX remove the charges.
In addition to the aforementioned problem that customer service often
thinks that the system ID is proprietary, they often know nothing
about what their own service area is and what the service area of
their neighbors are. U.S. Cellular often doesn't even know whether
they are an A or B carrier, since sometimes they are the "A" carrier
in one county and the "B" carrier right in the adjacent county, both
operating off the same switch!
And, of course, many cellular systems have nothing but a recording on
[*]611 outside of "normal business hours."
So, what I'm looking for is a way to actually find out the real system
ID, as oppossed to trusting some human who really has little or no
idea what is going on to guess where I am and think they know what
system ID is in use in that area.
john
[Moderator's Note: Ameritech in Chicago makes a point of advertising
and announcing on the recording that cellular calls to *611 or the
landline version (1-800-221-0994) are always free from cellular. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 9:34:20 CST
From: Will Martin <wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: Equipment-Rental Rates in Tariffs
I was just talking with one of our facilities-management and
equipment-maintenance people here about data networks and equipment,
and the subject of some items the government is renting from the telco
came up. We agreed that any datacomm gear or link that has been in
place and unchanged for more than a couple years is a source of
"gravy" income to the vendor -- not only has the original cost of the
items and the labor to install been completely recouped many times
over, but the progress of the technology in the intervening years has
so far outstripped that in-place equipment that its current
fair-market value is essentially zero. It couldn't be sold today, yet
it is still earning the vendor rental income as if it was something of
current value.
This started me wondering about how those rental rates are set, and if
they are ever revised to reflect a more realistic value of the items
rented. Here in St. Louis, SWBell is the telco, but I'm not sure just
who owns this equipment now; I guess it is AT&T. I suppose the state
PUC [or the FCC? -- see below] approves the initial tariffed rental
rate, but then, over the succeeding years, does anyone ever look at
those rates and revise them downward to reflect the fact that "Model
XYZ" modems of 1978 vintage (for example) are constantly dwindling in
value, and therefore the rates to rent them should be far lower in
later years than the cost when they were new in 1978? [By now, the
telco ought to pay the customer! :-)]
Does the PUC have staff whose job it is to do this, or don't they have
those resources? I get the impression that the PUC concentrates on the
more "glamorous" or at least higher-public-interest subjects like the
rates for individual residence service, or basic business serivce, and
that these thousands of other rates, for specialized equipment few
people recognize and fewer people care about, tend to be
rubber-stamped as "approved" with no examination. Am I right? [I
realize this varies from state to state, so I would expect responses
to reflect netters' experiences in their own states. Or is the AT&T
rental of equipment an FCC-tariffed subject standardized nationwide?]
If watchdogging this equipment-rental rate area isn't being done by
any governmental body, one would think that some consortium of
equipment users or trade association would be interested in doing
this, if they could get the funding. Or perhaps this is what some
telephone-service consultants do? I know several of those are on the
list; perhaps they could comment on the subject.
Regards,
Will wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil OR wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil
------------------------------
From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: AT&T Advertisement Uses 12-Digit Phone Number
Date: 16 Jan 92 18:45:50 GMT
Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon
I just heard this radio ad: AT&T will give a business free
installation when they sell the switch, the terminals, and the wiring.
Call "1 800 222 HOOK UP" for more information.
AT&T can't assign itself a seven-letter mnemonic, but has to add
unused digits to a phone number to make it memorable?
Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com)
(uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)
------------------------------
From: kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net
Subject: USTA and USITA
Organization: Kentrox Industries, Inc.
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 21:20:33 GMT
In article <telecom12.28.4@eecs.nwu.edu> niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david
niebuhr) writes:
> PAT asks:
>> [Moderator's Note: Is the United States Telephone Association the same
>> as (or what used to be called) the United States Independent Telephone
>> Association? (Sometimes known as USITA). ^^^^^^^^^^^ PAT]
> The sponsors were the RBOCs and the United States Telephone
> Association, representing over 1,100 local telcos. I have no idea as
> to whether or not USTA and USITA are the same. Anyone have ideas?
In the beginning ... there was AT&T, owner of all of the various
"Bell" operating companies, and the "independents", companies which
were not owned by AT&T.
To answer your question, yes, USTA (pronounced you-sta) use'ta be
USITA (pronounced you-see-ta). When the baby Bells were cast into the
outer darkness by Judge Greene, USITA decided that since they were no
longer part of AT&T, they would allow them in, and changed the name to
eliminate the "Independent" part. (There was no longer anything to be
"independent" from ... or should that be "from which to be"? :-))
Anybody know whether the two separate "Telephone Pioneers"
organizations merged?
In the days of USITA, most of the bitchin was about Ma Bell, now at
USTA meetings NATA fills the role of the "the people you love to
hate".
Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS applies
------------------------------
From: johng.all_proj@mot.com (John)
Subject: *611 and *711 Calls Are Free?
Organization: Motorola Inc, Land Mobile Products Divsion
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1992 16:54:24 GMT
Pat writes:
> [Moderator's Note: The way I always tell what system I have roamed
> into is by dialing *711 or *611 and asking. Those calls are free. PAT]
-- Supposed to be free. I roamed into a system in South Florida and
made one of those *611/*711 calls. I was charged for daily access and
a couple of minutes airtime for talking to the cellular company's
service rep. The number that appeared on my bill was the number that
*611 translated to. Since I didn't make any toll calls from that
city, I called and complained.They removed the charge. I wonder how
much they make from charging roamers that call those numbers.
Some models of Motorola phones will allow you to display the system
number. My Dynatac 6800XL mobile will do it as a normal user feature.
John Gilbert KA4JMC
Secure and Advanced Conventional Sys Div Astro Systems Development
Motorola Inc, Land Mobile Products Sector Schaumburg, Illinois
johng@ecs.comm.mot.com
------------------------------
Subject: Details Wanted on Call Progress Tones
From: mweal@questor.wimsey.bc.ca (Mike Weal)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 17:01:37 PST
Organization: Questor - Free Internet/Usenet*Vancouver*BC::+1 604 681 0670
I a looking for descriptions of telephone call progress tones (ie dial
tone, busy tone, call waiting, etc). Could someone give these
description and/or the document describing them. Also does anyone
know of a description of similar tones for PBXs and KSUs.
Thanks,
Mike Weal (mweal@questor.wimsey.bc.ca)
The QUESTOR Project: Free Public Access to Usenet & Internet in
Vancouver, BC, Canada. BBS: +1 604 681 0670 FAX: +1 604 682 6659
------------------------------
From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Speaker Phone Wanted For a Conference
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 20:00:35 CST
At the last minute some important members of a meeting will not be
able to attend a small (20 person) meeting. We would like to be able
to include them in the meeting with a phone hookup. Years ago we used
to lease a nice speaker phone from the phone company (prior to
breakup) that had a good quality speaker and microphones that worked
pretty good for this type of setup, but I suspect that there are
better alternatives now.
The meeting will be held in a hotel conference room, probably with
folks sitting around a table and most of the content of the meeting
will be discussion, rather than formal presentations.
Can anyone suggest good equipment for me to purchase (or rent) for
this purpose?
J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617
uunet!wuarchive!wubios!phil - UUCP (314)362-2693(FAX) C90562JM@WUVMD - bitnet
------------------------------
From: barrett@hendrix.gatech.edu (James Barrett)
Subject: Voice/Modem Automatically Switched? (Does it Exist?)
Organization: Georgia Tech College of Computing
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 05:18:03 GMT
I know this isn't likely due to the nature of modem communications,
but is there any way for one phone line to share both voice calls and
a BBS? They make those switches for fax machines, but I don't think
that'll work for modems since the calling modem expects to hear a
modem answer before it'll "speak". Since I really can't afford a
second phone line, is there any hope of me running a BBS (other than
winning a lottery ...)?
Thanks!
James C. Barrett (barrett@cc.gatech.edu)
Georgia Tech College of Computing
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 09:35:50 PST
From: ned@kaerigw.kaeri.re.kr (ned)
Subject: Wireless LAN System Information Needed
I am looking for wireless LAN system. I am very appreciate it if
you send me any info. Thanks in advance,
Surgwon Sohn
Senior Researcher Packet : HL3ANF@HL3ADI.KOR.AS
Nuclear Electronics Department Internet : ned@kaerigw.kaeri.re.kr
Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute Phone : 82-42-820-2931
P.O. Box 7, Taeduk Science Town FAX : 82-42-820-2702
305-606 S. KOREA
------------------------------
From: "Stewart I. Alpert" <stewarta@sco.COM>
Subject: Reverse Directory Information
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 16:19:11 PST
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Can anyone point me towards a source for reverse directory
information? I'd like to find a way to trace a name/address given a
phone number.
Stewart I. Alpert sia@sco.com or
Member of Technical Staff ...!uunet!sco!sia
The Santa Cruz Operation 800-SCO-UNIX or 408-425-7222
400 Encinal Street, Box 1900 FAX: 408-458-4227
Santa Cruz, California 95061 TWX: 910-250-8801 NETOUT UG
[Moderator's Note: In the municipal libraries of most communities, you
will find a 'criss-cross' directory for the town. Many such libraries
take inquiries of the directory through their telephone research
lines. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 18:26:14 CST
From: rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Dan Meyer)
Subject: AT&T $20 Cash Offer
I recieved a check from AT&T in the amount of $20 a little after
Thanksgiving. I read all of the print on the front and the back, and
it said something to the effect that I would be switched to AT&T if I
deposited the check. No problem. I would get switched to AT&T and
then I could contact US West (my local telephone provider) and get
switched back to MCI pronto, getting charged $10 for my trouble, and
coming out $10 ahead in the bank account.
Well, I thought about my little plan for a month, and around New
Year's figured what the heck, and deposited the check. A few weeks
later, my long distance company was AT&T. Time to call US West and
get things fixed up. Tuesday, January 14, the lady at the business
office said that she would forward the problem to repair service and
that I would be switched to MCI by 7 pm the 15th. No such luck.
The morning of the 15, someone from US West called me at work, and
stated that there was no way that they could accomadate me. I figured
I was beating a dead horse talking to them, so rather than waste
everyones time, I would do what the people at US West said I should
do, and called MCI. The people at MCI seem to understand service
better than the people at US West. They re-activated my MCI card (that
got shut off also!) and gave me a $20 credit for switching back to
them from AT&T (we'll have to wait and see if this appears on my MCI
bill!). MCI also said that US West should have been able to take care
of my request, but since US west would not, MCI would.
Today, (Jan 15) my MCI card still does not work. When I complained
to US West that I was still not defaulting to MCI as my 1 plus long
distance carrier, they still maintained that I need to speak with MCI.
I told them that I had, and that I didn't understand why they can't
just do something at my central office. I felt like I was talking to a
telcom illiterate when I tried to explain why they should be able to
switch me back to MCI.
At any rate, the lady at US WEST set up a conference call to MCI and
explained the situation. The man at MCI took care of things, and
explained how 10222 dialing works, and the 1-700-555-4141 number
works, and said that in five business days I should be back to MCI.
We'll see.
Dan Meyer UUCP: {crash tcnet}!orbit!pnet51!rambler
INET: rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org
[Moderator's Note: I don't think you will be switched back. Let us
know how it works out. I think AT&T and MCI now have an agreement with
each other regarding this subject for their mutual benefit. I think
you are stuck with AT&T for some minimum contract period. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #56
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17185;
21 Jan 92 0:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31151
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 22:11:38 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27798
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 22:11:06 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 22:11:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201210411.AA27798@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #57
TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Jan 92 22:11:03 CST Volume 12 : Issue 57
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Southwestern Bell Files For ISDN Offering (Mark Earle)
AT&T Long Distance Rates (Jack Dominey)
CB RFI Prevents Datacomm (mission!randy@uunet.uu.net)
FAX/Phone Auto-Switches for Modem/Phone Use? (Brent Chapman)
ARA Script For Maya V.32 (Jim Kateley)
New FidoNet Cellular Echo/Conference/Newsgroup (Mark Earle)
Locating Unlisted Numbers (Tatsuya Kawasaki)
I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone (Chuck Grandgent)
SONET Question (Bruce Sonnenfeld)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 21:57:51 CST
From: mearle@pro-party.cts.com (Mark Earle)
Subject: Southwestern Bell Files For ISDN Offering
Public Notice
On October 4, 1991 Southwestern Bell Telephone Company
(Southwestern Bell) filed an application with the Public Utility
Commission of Texas (Commission) that proposes a new optional service
called DigiLine(sm) Service. the application was assigned Docket No.
10655.
DigiLine Service uses a 144 Kbps facility, typically divided into
two 65Kpbs B Channels and one 16 Kbps D channel to provide ac-
^
|--Not my typo -- although there probably are some in here!
This is as it appears ... anyhow...
cess to and from the public switched telephone network for circuit-
switched voice communications. DigiLine Service also provides
transmission of circuit-switched data and packet-switched data within
the customers service office area only. this service allows the
simultaneous transmission of voice and data over a single resi dence
or business telephone line from a serving office equipped for DigiLine
Service.
The monthly recurring charges for DigiLine Service consist of
three major rate elements: Basic Interface Facility ($19.00); Basic
Interface Equipment ($12.00); and, an Integrates Services Network
Component for each B Channel (rate varies from $1.90 to $7.25 per B
Channel depending on the customers class of service and location.)
Other charges may also be applicable depending on the options
requested by the customer.
DigiLine Service operates only with compatibly-equipped FCC Part
68 registered equipment. The service will be offered initially in the
following exchanges and within the following serving offices:
Exchange Serving Offices
Dallas Fleetwood, Richardson, Riverside
Austin Fireside
San Antonio Capitol, Medical Center
Houston Clay, Medical Center
DigiLine Service may be furnished in other serving offices in any
of the above exchanges in combination with foreign serving office
charges. In addition, DigiLine Service may be available in other ex-
changes upon a customer's bona fide request. A bona fide request is a
written request for service. Upon receipt of the bona fide request,
Southwestern Bell will conduct an economic analysis to determine the
financial viability of offering the requested service.
Southwestern Bell expects DigiLine Service to generate first-year
revenues of approximately $236,000.
Persons who wish to intervene or otherwise participate in this
docketed proceeding should notify the Commission as soon as pos-
sible, but not later than by February 10, 1992. A request to
intervene, participate, or for further information should be mailed to
the Public Utility Commission of Texas, 7800 Shoal Creek Blvd., Suit
400N, Austin, Texas 78757. further information also may be obtained by
calling the Public Utility Commission Public Information Office at
512-458-0256. the telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) number
is 512-458-0221.
Bell System Logo
Southwestern Bell (heavy letters)
Telephone
----------------
I thought the Digest might find this of interest ...
mearle@pro-party.cts.com (Mark Earle) [WA2MCT/5]
My BBS: (512)-855-7564 Opus 1:160/50.0
CI$ 73117,351 Packet: WA2MCT @ KA5LZG.TX.NA.USA
------------------------------
From: jdominey@bsga05.attmail.com
Date: Fri Jan 17 09:32:04 EST 1992
Subject: AT&T Long Distance Rates
In Digest v12 #37, Steve Forrette (stevef@wrq.com) reported that
someone at AT&T (presumably an operator) had quoted a rate of
$.14/initial minute + $.15/ additional minute for calls between area
codes 206 and 213. Someone goofed. Attached is part of page 56 from
FCC Tariff #1, detailing AT&T's basic long distance rates.
(Note that these rates are not determined by area code pairs, but by
mileage. The mileage is determined by area code + exchange, so the
distance from my office to AT&T HQ in New Jersey is determined by a
measurement between 404-496 [Tucker, GA] and 908-221 [Basking Ridge,
NJ].)
AT&T COMMUNICATIONS TARIFF F.C.C. No. 1
Adm. Rates and Tariffs 38th Revised Page 56
Bridgewater, NJ 08807 Cancels 37th Revised Page 56
Issued: June 28, 1991 Effective: July 1, 1991
3.2.1. Intra-Mainland, Mainland-Alaska and Mainland-Hawaii Service -
Schedule I; Hawaii-Alaska Service - Schedule IA (continued)
L. Intra-Mainland, Mainland-Alaska and Mainland-Hawaii Service Rate
Schedule I - The following rates apply to Dial Station, Customer
Dialed Calling Card Station, Operator Station, Person-to-Person and
Real Time Rated classes of service calls. The rates apply all days of
the week as specified in the Rate Period Chart following. In
addition, Service Charges apply, as indicated.
1. Dial Station
DAY EVENING NIGHT/WEEKEND
EACH EACH EACH
RATE INITIAL ADD'L INITIAL ADD'L INITIAL ADD'L
MILEAGE MINUTE MINUTE MINUTE MINUTE MINUTE MINUTE
1-10 0.1700 Rx 0.1700 0.1200 0.1100 0.1051 0.1051
11-22 0.1800 0.1800 0.1300 0.1300 0.1139 0.1139
23-55 0.1900 0.1900 0.1300 0.1300 0.1208 0.1208
56-124 0.2100 0.2100 0.1450 0.1450 0.1208 0.1208
125-292 0.2100 0.2100 0.1450 0.1450 0.1223 0.1223
293-430 0.2300 0.2300 0.1457 0.1457 0.1256 0.1256
431-925 0.2300 0.2300 0.1495 0.1495 0.1306 0.1306
926-1910 0.2440 Rx 0.2440 Rx 0.1496 0.1496 0.1331 0.1331
1911-3000 0.2459 Rx 0.2459 Rx 0.1496 0.1496 0.1357 0.1357
3001-4250 0.3000 0.2900 0.2077 0.2010 0.1650 0.1650
4251-5750 0.3300 0.3200 0.2211 0.2144 0.1750 0.1750
x Issued on not less than one day's notice under authority of Special
Permission No. 91-545.
Printed in U..S.A.
-----------------------
Additional note: None of the AT&T optional calling plans I know about
offer a lower first-minute rate, either. Some of them have a
30-second initial billing period, but this is almost always exactly
five times the rate for each additional six seconds.
Jack Dominey, AT&T Commercial Marketing, Tucker GA
+1 404 496-6925 AT&T Mail: !dominey or !bsga05!jdominey
------------------------------
From: mission!randy@uunet.uu.net
Subject: CB RFI Prevents Datacomm
Date: Thu Jan 16 18:16:15 1992
I have a friend who lives in a two-apartment building. His upstairs
neighbor has a CB with a linear which amplifies the wattage perhaps
as high as 300 watts. His antenna is on the roof with a rotary. He
seems to be *always* transmitting.
Whever my friend tries to dial in to any computer, he gets so much
garbage on the line that it is unusable, even at 300 baud (although
the interference is less at 300 baud than at 1200).
The CBer refuses to do anything, and my friend is concerned that
pursuing an FCC complaint would make the living situation quite
unpleasant.
If anyone has any suggestions on how my friend can dial out to
computers, please send me email or post to the Digest. Thanks for any
and all help.
[Moderator's Note: The use of a linear amp in the eleven meter (CB)
band is quite illegal. But if the CB'er had any real knowledge of his
rig he'd be able to use that power and clean it up to make the signal
very strong yet *almost* unnoticeable to other non-CB'ers in the area.
Tell your friend to *furtively* stick a pin in the coax cable run to
the roof, or better still just cut the coax to the antenna sometime
while the CB'er is asleep. :) The CB'er will probably assume one of
his on-air enemies did it, assuming your friend has not yet voiced his
complaints. :) PAT]
------------------------------
From: brent@Telebit.COM (Brent Chapman)
Subject: FAX/Phone Auto-Switches For Modem/Phone Use?
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 16:04:45 GMT
How do those FAX/Phone auto-switches that decide how to route an
incoming call work? I know that they answer the call, fake a
continued ring, listen for a couple of seconds for a tone generated by
the calling FAX, then route the call according to whether or not they
hear the tone, but what is the tone? Is it a standard touch-tone
digit?
The reason I ask is that I have an application where I'd like to
connect a modem to one of these boxes, rather than a FAX machine. The
question is, how do I tell the box to switch to the modem when I call
into it?
Anybody know the details, or have any alternative suggestions?
Ideally, people calling the line should have no idea that a modem is
lurking, and should get the answering machine without major delay,
while people calling from a modem should somehow be able to make the
line switch to the modem.
Brent
------------------------------
From: kateley@apple.com (Jim Kateley)
Subject: ARA Script For Maya V.32
Date: 17 Jan 92 17:07:35 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Campbell
Here's an AppleTalk Remote access script for the Maya External Super
Modem V.32/V.42Bis Modem.
Jim Kateley
Apple Computer
Disclaimer: Yep, I do.
---------cut here---------
! "Maya External Super Modem V.32/V.42Bis Modem - 1/14/92" JFK
! Adapted from the 7/29/91 T1600 script that ships with ARA 1.0
! 1/14/92 - JFK First cut
! 1/16/92 - JFK Figured out you have to use \N1 (direct mode) for
! the modem to connect at 2400 baud.
!
@ORIGINATE
@ANSWER
!
! Talk to the modem at 9600 bps.
!
serreset 9600, 0, 8, 1
!
! first recall the factory configuration
!
settries 0
matchclr
@LABEL 1
matchstr 1 3 "OK\13\10"
write "AT&F0\13"
matchread 20
inctries
iftries 2 59
! Modem is not responding, reset and send a break
DTRClear
pause 5
DTRSet
SBreak
jump 1
!
! Next, Set up the configuration: Turn off command echo, no
! DTE flow control, drop connection after losing DTR, and issue
! extended result codes.
! I also turn the speaker down to low volume, since the middle
! volume is so loud! (at least on the modem I have :-)
!
! E0 - Turn command echo off.
! \Q0 - No DTE flow control
! &D3 - DTR on/off resets modem.
! X4 - Issue extended result codes. This will display busy, connect XXX,
! etc. X4 will say "CONNECT XXX" Where XXX is the line speed. We
! need this so we can tell ARA what speed we are communicating
! at (for the serial port speed).
! L1 - Turn Speaker volume down to Low Volume.
!
@LABEL 3
matchclr
matchstr 1 4 "OK\13\10"
write "ATE0\\Q0&D3X4L1\13"
matchread 30
jump 59
!
! Next, disable MNP/error control, set for direct connect modem, and enable
! verbal responses
!
! \N1 - Turn off all error detection/correction (ARA does MNP and
! compression itself. It needs these turned off in the modem).
! Also sets direct mode, which means the DTE speed will match
! whatever the line speed is.
! V1 - Enable verbal responses.
!
@LABEL 4
matchclr
matchstr 1 5 "OK\13\10"
write "AT\\N1V1\13"
matchread 30
jump 59
!
! If speaker on flag is true, jump to label 8. Else turn off the speaker
!
@LABEL 5
ifstr 2 8 "1"
matchstr 1 8 "OK\13\10"
write "ATM0\13"
matchread 30
jump 59
!
! The modem is ready so enable answering, or originate a call
!
@LABEL 8
ifANSWER 30
note "Dialing ^1" 3
write "ATS0=0DT^1\13"
!
@LABEL 9
matchstr 1 11 "CONNECT 1200\13\10"
matchstr 2 12 "CONNECT 2400\13\10"
matchstr 3 13 "CONNECT 4800\13\10"
matchstr 4 14 "CONNECT 9600T\13\10"
matchstr 6 50 "NO CARRIER\13\10"
matchstr 7 50 "ERROR\13\10"
matchstr 8 52 "NO DIALTONE\13\10"
matchstr 9 53 "BUSY\13\10"
matchstr 10 54 "NO ANSWER\13\10"
matchread 700
jump 59
!
@LABEL 11
note "Communicating at 1200 bps." 2
serreset 1200, 0, 8, 1
jump 16
!
@LABEL 12
note "Communicating at 2400 bps." 2
serreset 2400, 0, 8, 1
jump 16
!
@LABEL 13
note "Communicating at 4800 bps." 2
serreset 4800, 0, 8, 1
jump 16
!
@LABEL 14
note "Communicating at 9600 bps." 2
serreset 9600, 0, 8, 1
jump 16
!
@LABEL 16
!
! Turn off hardware handshaking off in the Mac (just to be sure)
!
HSReset 0 0 0 0 0 0
ifANSWER 17
pause 30
@LABEL 17
exit 0
!
! @ANSWER
! Set up the modem to answer
!
@LABEL 30
write "ATS0=1\13"
matchstr 1 31 "OK\13\10"
matchread 30
jump 59
!
@LABEL 31
matchstr 1 32 "RING\13\10"
matchstr 2 11 "CONNECT 1200\13\10"
matchstr 3 12 "CONNECT 2400\13\10"
matchstr 4 13 "CONNECT 4800\13\10"
matchstr 5 14 "CONNECT 9600T\13\10"
matchstr 7 50 "NO CARRIER\13\10"
matchstr 8 50 "ERROR\13\10"
matchstr 9 52 "NO DIALTONE\13\10"
matchstr 10 53 "BUSY\13\10"
matchstr 11 54 "NO ANSWER\13\10"
matchread 700
jump 31
!
@LABEL 32
userhook 1
note "Answering phone..." 2
jump 31
!
! 50: error messages
!
@LABEL 50
exit -6021
!
@LABEL 52
exit -6020
!
@LABEL 53
exit -6022
!
@LABEL 54
exit -6023
!
@LABEL 59
exit -6019
!
! Hang up the modem
!
@HANGUP
@LABEL 60
settries 0
@LABEL 61
write "ATH\13"
matchclr
matchstr 1 63 "OK\13\10"
matchstr 2 63 "NO CARRIER\13\10"
matchstr 3 63 "ERROR\13\10"
matchread 30
inctries
iftries 3 63
! no response, try escape sequence
write "+++"
matchclr
matchstr 1 62 "OK\13\10"
matchread 15
!
! No response from modem, toggle DTR
!
DTRClear
pause 5
DTRSet
jump 61
! Pause 1 second before to ensure we meet the escape time delay
@LABEL 62
pause 10
Flush
write "ATH\13"
matchstr 1 63 "OK\13\10"
matchstr 2 63 "NO CARRIER\13\10"
matchstr 3 63 "ERROR\13\10"
matchread 30
jump 61
!
! Recall factory settings
!
@LABEL 63
matchclr
matchstr 1 64 "OK\13\10"
write "AT&F0\13"
matchread 30
!
! Turn off auto answer
!
! S0=0 - Don't answer the phone if it rings.
!
@LABEL 64
matchclr
matchstr 1 65 "OK\13\10"
write "ATS0=0\13"
matchread 30
!
@LABEL 65
exit 0
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 21:59:22 CST
From: mearle@pro-party.cts.com (Mark Earle)
Subject: New FidoNet Cellular Echo/Conference/Newsgroup
I noticed the other day there is now a CELLULAR echo in the FidoNet
system. I've just started subscribing, so no opinion yet. I thought
other Digest folks might want to know, however.
mearle@pro-party.cts.com (Mark Earle) [WA2MCT/5]
My BBS: (512)-855-7564 Opus 1:160/50.0
CI$ 73117,351 Packet: WA2MCT @ KA5LZG.TX.NA.USA
------------------------------
From: tatsuya@hamblin.math.byu.edu (T. Kawasaki)
Subject: Locating Unlisted Numbers
Organization: Brigham Young University
Date: 15 Jan 92 19:24:21
Some months ago, there was 900 number suggested as a way to find out
an unlisted number. I believe Pat tried, but no answered ... (after 5
o'clock or something.) Does anyone have that number or is there any
way to find out unlisted numbers?
Tatsuya tatsuya@hamblin.math.byu.edu EMT:901006 Ham: N7UQJ
[Moderator's Note: I suppose you could always subscribe to Caller-ID
and then give the person a good, feasable sounding reason for calling
you. :) PAT]
------------------------------
From: chuck@roadrunner.pictel.com (Chuck Grandgent)
Subject: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 13:43:36 EDT
OK, this happens to me enough often enough I'm getting tired of it.
In a hotel last night and get "IntegraTel" as the payphone service
provider. I tried with all my might and couldn't get 1-0-ATT-0 to get
me AT&T. I called my house three times, and the first two times my
audio wasn't getting through ... I'm sure I'll get billed though. And
this has happened before.
Any pointers or tricks on coping with this besides crabbing to the
people at the hotel front desk ?
Anyone know anything about "IntegraTel"? The name sure inspires
confidence ...
Chuck Grandgent, K1OM chuck@pictel.com
PictureTel Corporation Peabody, Massachusetts Voice: 508 977 8314
------------------------------
From: sonnenfe@nosc.mil (Bruce Sonnenfeld)
Subject: SONET Question
Date: 17 Jan 92 19:25:48 GMT
Organization: NRaD, San Diego
I'm trying to find out about the SONET specifications. If you know
anything relating to SONET (have information about standards or know
where to get them, know of any upcoming conferences, etc.) please
send me a note. You can reach me at:
Bruce Sonnenfeld (sonnenfe@cod.nosc.mil)
(619) 259-2750
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #57
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19480;
21 Jan 92 0:53 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03020
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 23:06:43 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04163
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 23:06:12 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 23:06:12 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201210506.AA04163@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #58
TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Jan 92 23:06:10 CST Volume 12 : Issue 58
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Pac Bell Plans 56Kbps Digital Service Everywhere (Cliff Frost)
The Spread of Telepoints (Colum Mylod)
AT&T Video-Phone (Takashi Totsuka)
ISDN For PC? (Ken Hodor)
Germany Update: New City Codes For Former "East Germany" (Juergen Ziegler)
Cellular "Lifeline" Service (David W. Barts)
Motorola Cellular Phone Info Wanted (Michael H. Brand)
Changes With Michigan Bell (Ken Jongsma)
Ameritech Mobile Detailed Billing (Leonard Kleinow)
ITFS Channels for Cities (Jack Powers)
CLID on a PBX (Randall C. Gellens)
Street Address Directory (Kevin Collins)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 09:51:08 -0800
From: cliff@garnet.berkeley.edu (Cliff Frost)
Subject: Pac Bell Plans 56Kbps Digital Service Everywhere
Last Monday Evening I saw a presentation of Multimedia on a Mac which
was ok. The real surprise (for me) was an announcement made by Pac Bell
of plans for a 56 Kbps digital service. I've copied the Press Release
below (typos my fault). I distinctly remember the PR person saying
that the tariff would be very reasonable. ;-)
I spoke with the contact person, Scott Smith, and he didn't have many
technical details. His understanding (and the thrust of the release)
is that this is still going to be a business tariff, and it is
intended to help out those folks who can't get ISDN yet.
I have not been able to get in touch with the Product Manager yet so
I'm not sure just what it means that this service is "compatible" with
ISDN ... still, I bet a 56K digital pipe to one's home is a service a
lot of folks will like if the price ends up being "very reasonable".
Cliff Frost UC Berkeley
Press Release: Pacific Bell Contact: Scott E. Smith (415) 542-0597
San Francisco, January 13, 1992
Pacific Bell announced today plans for a cost-effective new switched
56-kilobit-per-second (Kbps) data service to satisfy demand created by
such growing applications as videoconferencing, local-area-network
(LAN) interconnection and high-quality facsimile.
"There's been an explosion of applications requiring switched,
high-speed data transmissions, not justin our large metropolitan
areas, but throughout the state," said Steven Haggerty, director of
switched-56 development, for Pacific Bell's Data Communications Group.
"The new switched-56 Kbps service will provide a local dial-up
alternative to expensive private lines or modems with low-speed analog
lines. We plan to deploy the new services widely throughout
California to meet the growing demand."
The proposed service, called Switched Digital Service 56 (SDS56), is
compatible with CENTRIX IS (integrated systems), the company's service
based on ISDN technology, and Cenpath, a switched 56 Kbps service
offerec with Centrex. The introduction of SDS56 will make some form
of switched-56 Kbps service available to more than 80 percent of the
company's data customers.
Haggerty emphasized that SDS56 still needs the approval of the
California Public Utilities Commission. Subject to that approval, the
company plans to begin offering the service this spring.
Haggerty said he expects the service to find the greatest demand among
medium to large businesses for such applications as videoconferencing,
Group IV facsimile, telecommuting where technical computer programs
require high speeds, bulk file transfer, medical and other
high-resolution imaging, high-quality digitized audio and LAN
interconnection.
Pacific Bell's Data Communications Group offers products, applications
and services that provide customers a single source for complete
network integration solutions. The company coordinates services that
go beyond its service areas with long-distance carriers selected by
the customer.
Pacific Bell is a subsidiary of Pacific Telesis Group, a diversified
worldwide telecommunications corporation based in San Francisco.
------------------------------
From: cmylod@oracle.nl (Colum Mylod)
Subject: The Spread of Telepoints
Date: 17 Jan 92 17:06:39 GMT
Reply-To: cmylod@oracle.nl (Colum Mylod)
Organization: Oracle Europe, De Meern, The Netherlands
You might remember the novel idea of "telepoints" which started in
Britain a few years ago. These were public places where one wandered
near in order to use a cheapo-version of cellular telephones which
were carried on your person. They combine the disadvantage of public
phones (finding one) with the disadvantage of cellular phones (cost),
but unlike payphones these were available and maybe more hygenic. The
concept has crossed the North Sea as, according to a pamphlet from the
Dutch PTT, "Greenpoints" -- yes, the name is in English, maybe imply-
ing environmental friendliness -- are to spring up around Amsterdam
from February 1992, to spread around the rest of The Netherlands as
fast as they can.
The sting is a charge of 40ct (US 20 cents) per unit, or 2.5 times the
cost of a private phone, twice that of the payphone nearby, 10ct
cheaper than the real cellular item but the latter can receive calls.
The unit the user carries around is named after yours and mine
favourite frog Kermit, has his legs only on the front and is yours for
NLG 5/month (US $2.50). Unless you are a business and want to use it
interally when you get six months free trial.
One sentence caught my eye: "no-one can eavesdrop on your
conversation" thanks to the "digital technique" used [trans]. Oh yeah?
If memory serves, at least one British trader in these has folded due
to massive disinterest from the great public. Are they anywhere else?
Colum Mylod cmylod@nl.oracle.com My opinions all
------------------------------
From: totsuka@cs.stanford.edu (Takashi Totsuka)
Subject: AT&T Video-Phone References Wanted
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford, USA
Date: 17 Jan 92 12:24:55
I heard that AT&T has made a telephone system which can send 128x128
images at 10 frames/sec via ordinary phone line.
Can anybody give me informations or pointers to articles about that
system? Any suggestion is very much appreciated. Thanks.
Takashi Totsuka totsuka@cs.stanford.edu
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
------------------------------
From: khodor@NeXT.COM (Ken Hodor)
Subject: ISDN For PC?
Date: 17 Jan 92 23:10:20 GMT
Does anyone have any pointers to vendors / suppliers of ISDN plug-in
boards or modules for the IBM PC?
Ken Hodor
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 17:30
From: Juergen Ziegler <UK84@DKAUNI2.BITNET>
Subject: Germany Update: New City Codes For Former "East Germany"
Since the German unification there were TWO different country codes in
Germany:
49 for the western portion (Federal Republic of Germany)
37 for the eastern portion (former German Democratic Republic)
Calling from one part to the other required to dial the international
prefix + country code + city-code + number.
This situation will change within the next three months. The new
states will get the area codes in the 03 range, which were not used
until now (exception Berlin, which has 030).
This change will only be effective for calls:
- from "WEST" Germany to "EAST" Germany
- from "EAST" German cities that are served by a digital local/toll-switch
- from abroad (when calling the 49 country code)
So it will also effect all callers from the US and elsewhere.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The "old" city-codes in the 37 country-code will no
longer be valid. Those codes will still work under the 37 country
code, as long as the 37 is still needed for connections from some
eastern countries.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 16:26:18 -0800
From: David W. Barts <davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu>
Subject: Cellular "Lifeline" Service
stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes:
> If people are so bad off that they qualify for government assistance,
> do they really need to be driving on remote country roads? Do they
> need to have the luxury of a car if they need assistance for basic
> things like food and rent? I think not. Will we have a Lifeline rate
> for cable TV next? ...
It depends. Do they live in a remote country area? Is the person
elderly or disabled and therefore incapable of walking to the nearest
town or farmhouse for help?
The problem I see with the concept is that it seems the people who
deserve this service are probably limited in number (someone posted
about a quadriplegic girlfriend who can drive a modified van; this
sounds like a valid use for such a service). The number is certainly
less than those entitled to traditional lifeline service.
So establishing a new class of cellular service (with all the
administrative and bureaucratic overhead this entails) may not be a
cost-effective means of providing cellular service to these people.
It may be cheaper to simply have Medicare pay their monthly cellular
fee (or a fraction thereof).
Also note that the service was being provided in Canada, which has
many more people living in remote areas than the US, so it may make
sense there but not in the US. Also, how many Canadians live in an
area where cellular is the ONLY class of phone service available (i.e.
no wires)?
David Barts N5JRN UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu Seattle, WA 98195
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 21:36:14 -0600
From: "Michael H. Brand" <pl0153@mail.psi.net>
Subject: Motorola Cellular Phone Info Wanted
I just recently purchased a Motorola Cellular Phone, America Series
822, from Sears. This phone is a transportable or bag phone as they
are sometimes called. I want to install this baby in my car, and for a
mere $84.74 Motorola will sell me a mobile install kit. I can come up
with all the things in this kit, from the spares box in the closet.
Does anyone out in TD land have, and would be willing to share, the
pinout for the DB25 connector on the transceiver. In the installation
guide that I have, the wires are color-coded and pinouts are not
given.
I was told by Motorola technical support the cellular phone is a NEW
style phone, and I think they said it was a "Series or Type 3"?
------------------------------
From: jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma)
Subject: Changes With Michigan Bell
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 15:54:34 EST
Well, the new Michigan Bell phone books are out and there are some
interesting changes:
Not mentioned in the phone book, because of the recent change in
Michigan law, is that local unlimited flat rate residential service is
now a phone company option. Michigan Bell is now billing per call for
every call over 400 at 6.2 cents per call. I'm told that the average
residential caller makes 250 calls per month. GTE (so far) is still
offering unlimited service, but that may just be because they haven't
updated their billing software or some of their older switches.
Other changes:
Local customer dialed credit card calls are now timed. In addition to
the .24 surcharge, local calls cost .14 for the first minute and .08
for each additional minute. (And you thought mother was just trying to
be helpful when she put up all those "Out of Change?" cards on all her
coin phones.)
For only $3.50 per month, you can have your residential listing in
BOLD! (Gee, only $42.50 per year. A quick perusal shows that no one
has fallen for this.)
No mention of the new area codes in California or Maryland that went
into effect last year.
Not a change, but the first time I've noticed it: Part of the Ohio
LATA sticks up into Michigan right below Detroit.
The international section still shows East and West Germany. (Gee,
it's only been a year.)
Companies that monitor phone conversations can have a special symbol
placed in the White Pages listing next to their number. Michigan Bell
does this with their numbers.
There is still a large boldface statement stating that the White Pages
listings are copyrighted and all sorts of nasty things will be done to
those that use them without permission.
Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org
Smiths Industries jongsma@esseye.si.com
Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115.1041@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From: kleinow@engin.umich.edu (Leonard Kleinow)
Subject: Ameritech Mobile Detailed Billing
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 09:27:27 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
After receiving my bill from Ameritech Mobile for my cellular phone, I
noticed that they don't itemize the calls to and from your phone.
They just expect you to accept their total figure as accurate. They
regard this as a "detailed billing service" and want $5.00 a month for
it. Obscene. Downright un-American, if you ask me. I'm supposed to pay
$5/month to make sure that no one has "tumbled" a call on my phone or
Ameritech hasn't made an error?
Is this legal? I mean, I wouldn't pay my Visa bill if they said "Oh,
you owe us $45 this month and we're not saying what for."
[Moderator's Note: Ameritech gives billing detail free for two months
on request when a new account is opened so the subscriber can see for
himself whether or not continuing the details is worthwhile. Many or
most of their subscribers use a package plan anyway, with X minutes
for a certain dollar amount per month. In the event of a dispute over
the bill, Ameritech will supply a copy of the bill on request at no
charge a 'reasonable' number of times. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 22:44:22 PST
From: powers@almaden.ibm.com
Subject: ITFS Channels for Cities
I am trying to find out if there are any provisions in the FCC rules
for acquisition of Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS)
channels by municipalities. I don't even know where to start (other
than to call the FCC's main number, which I will do Tuesday).
Any of you gurus out there in Net-Land know a more direct route to
this information?
Jack Powers Cable TV Commissioner
City of Morgan Hill (CA) Phone/FAX 408/779-7472
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 07:54 GMT
From: Randall C Gellens <0005000102@mcimail.com>
Subject: CLID on a PBX
As I understand it, ANI has been around for some time, and delivers
the calling (or billing) number to inter-exchange carriers for all
calls, and end users for 911, 800, and 900 numbers, through
out-of-band signalling, I think.
Calling-Line ID (CLID), on the other hand, delivers the calling number
to end subscribers between the first and second rings.
So, my question is: can PBX systems get CLID, or ANI on normal
(non-911, 800, 900) calls?
Many Thanks,
Randy
------------------------------
From: aspect!kevinc@uunet.uu.net (Kevin Collins)
Subject: Street Address Directory
Date: 17 Jan 92 21:00:45 GMT
Organization: Aspect Telecommunications, San Jose, Ca
I received an insert in my last Pac*Bell bill that included a form to
request that my name by removed from the Street Address Directory. The
insert went on to say that "these directories are used by businesses
and emergency services (fire, police) that may want to contact you,
but don't know your name."
Now I certainly understand why businesses use Reverse Directories, but
the part about emergency services seems a bit far-fetched. Other than
cases I've read about in this Digest where the FD would call somebody
and ask if their neighbor's house was on fire, why in the world would
emergency services need a Reverse Directory? Are there any good
reasons (other than an overwhelming desire to talk with telemarketers
:>) for being listed in a Street Address Directory?
Kevin Collins | My opinions are mine alone.
USENET: ...uunet!aspect!kevinc | GO BEARS! (That's Chicago, not Cal!)
[Moderator's Note: Here are some examples for you: (1) The electric or gas
utility needs to notify everyone in a certain area of an impending
shutdown for maintainence or restoral of service. (2) A crime has
taken place on your block and police wish to contact anyone who may
have been a witness or have information. (3) An emergency evacuation
of your block is required because of a gas leak, as we had here in
Chicago last week. While police and emergency workers go door to door,
others call on the phone. Some non-emergency, yet important reasons
would include (4) a delivery service has sent someone out with a
package. The name is incorrect. He calls his office and asks them to
check the address for similar names. (5) A pizza was ordered or
taxicab service called for. The dispatcher got your name and phone
number wrong. The criss-cross may provide the correct answer. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #58
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23044;
21 Jan 92 2:32 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07802
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 23:59:01 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07935
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jan 1992 23:58:27 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 23:58:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201210558.AA07935@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #59
TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Jan 92 23:55:30 CST Volume 12 : Issue 59
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
v.42/v.42bis (w/ or w/o Send/Receive FAX) Modems For Sale (John Lin)
Experiences With Motorola MVME333-Board For X25 Wanted (Rob Hulsebos)
ISDN Phone Service to Debut in Omaha (Infoworld via Jack Winslade)
Caller ID ChipSet (Brian Cuthie)
BellSouth to Install Micro-Cells (Bill Berbenich)
Long Distance Overload (Los Angeles Times via Randall C. Gellens)
Katie Haffner to be at Boston Computer Society 1-22-92 (Owen M. Hartnett)
The Tropez, Digital Cordless Phone (Newsweek via Dan Boehlke)
Operator-Assist Hand-Off (was Person-to-Person) (Ralph W. Hyre)
Micom Micro4000 DataModem9600 Questions (Josh Brandt)
I Was Charged 64 Cents For 10222-1-713-555-1221 (Richard McCombs)
Incorrect Kabong? (was Multiple Calls on One Access) (Laird P. Broadfield)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John W Lin <jwlin@athena.mit.edu>
Subject: v.42/v.42bis (w/ or w/o Send/Receive FAX) Modems For Sale
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1992 18:54:09 GMT
After the holidays I have extra high speed modems that I don't need --
o They all function over normal telephone lines - they do NOT
require special cabling.
o Maximum data throughput of 38,400 baud (transmit 1 meg of data
in less than five minutes!!).
o MNP level 5, v.32/v.32bis _and_ v.42/v.42bis compatible,
meaning data throughput of up to 38,400 baud (16 times faster
then a regular 2400 baud modem), roughly 19.2k baud on
average.
o Automatically detect and set their baud rate as low as
300 and as high as 300-38400 baud.
o UNOPENED, FACTORY NEW with a manufacturer five year warranty
o One has send/receive FAX capabilities, caller ID and
automatic voice/FAX/modem switching, making it so powerful you'll
probably never need a new modem again.
Don't miss out on this incredible deal -- the modem will easily pay
for itself in long distance phone bill savings plus the invaluable
convenience of speed that rivals local area networks!
v.42/v.42bis Send/Receive FAX modem ........... only $349 OBO
v.42/v.42bis modem ............................ only $299 OBO
Many consider a v.32/v.32bis modem running at $350 a good deal -- now
get over DOUBLE the performance for less money!
Grab hold of technology's frontier -- you're just not going to get
much faster than 38.4k bps over telephone or leased lines.
First come, first served. Limited quantity available, so act now!
Send email to jwlin@athena.mit.edu if interested. Serious inquiries only.
[Moderator's Note: In the past I have made exceptions and run 'for
sale' ads here if the seller was a private party with a telecom
specific item for sale. I've had complaints about this, and have to
stop doing so. In fairness, since this was not announced previously, I
present the one you see here which was in the queue waiting for a few
days, but this has to be it. Sorry. Use the Usenet group for same. PAT]
------------------------------
From: hulsebos@ehviea.ine.philips.nl (rob hulsebos)
Subject: Experiences With Motorola MVME333-Board For X25 Wanted
Date: 17 Jan 92 15:53:07 GMT
Organization: Philips I&E Eindhoven
The subject says it all. Especially performance and ease-of-use
interest me, but other experiences (either + or -) as well.
Rob Hulsebos. (hulsebos@ine.philips.nl)
Philips Industrial Electronics
Pobox 218TQV3, 5600 MD Eindhoven Holland
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 01:01:38 cst
From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade)
Subject: ISDN Phone Service to Debut in Omaha
Reply-To: jsw@drbbs.omahug.org
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha
According to {Infoworld}, US West's 'PC Phone' service will be
initially deployed in Omaha - Council Bluffs, Nebraska [sic].
PC Phone will use ISDN technology will be available to residential and
business customers, will come in analog and digital forms, and will be
accessible to all, regardless of whether they have copper or fiber
connections.
PC Phone service will be marked primarily by value-added distributors
who will bundle the service with the hardware and/or software to make
it useful.
Subscribers will pay $97 per month which includes two voice connec-
tions and one data connection.
According to Bruce Chatterly of US West, the ISDN term will be
dropped. 'People do not know what ISDN is supposed to do, much less
what it is.'
PC Phone will offer an entry into ISDN for those who are unwilling or
unable to spend the funds previously required to take advantage of
ISDN.
Good day. JSW
------------------------------
From: brian@umbc3.umbc.edu (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Caller ID ChipSet
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 22:37:21 GMT
Ok. I know that this question has been beaten to death on this news
group a thousand times, so I appologize for bring it up again. But,
notwithstanding that, could someone please e-mail me the info on the
chip (and it's manufacturer) that does the Caller-ID decoding. I know
that it's simple Bell 202 FSK modem signalling and can be done with an
XR2211 but I'd like to look at the complete one chip solutions.
Thanks in advance,
Brian brian@beerwolf.umbc.edu
------------------------------
Subject: BellSouth to Install Micro-Cells
From: wabwrld!bill@uu.psi.com (Bill Berbenich)
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 92 19:17:22 EST
Organization: Wabworld
Recent news reports and a P.R. release from BellSouth confirm that
that organization will be installing cellular communications
"micro-cells" in two downtown Atlanta structures. The two facilities
named are the soon-to-be-opened Georgia Dome, which will host the 1994
Super Bowl and the Atlanta Falcons home games and which will also
serve as a convention facility during the football off-season, and the
Georgia World Congress Center. The GWCC hosts many large conventions
and events year-round and is adjacent to the Georgia Dome.
The planned micro-cells are being installed to increase cellular
coverage in these two facilities which had previously been virtually
inaccessible to cellular phones. Upon completion of the project,
conventioneers will have clear access to cellular connections from
throughout the respective facilities, which should serve as a positive
promotional item to attract groups to the GWCC and Georgia Dome in the
years to come.
domain - bill@wabwrld.UUCP (Bill Berbenich)
UUCP (on the maps) bangpath - wabwrld!bill
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 03:17 GMT
From: Randall C Gellens <0005000102@mcimail.com>
Subject: Long Distance Overload
From the {Los Angeles Times} Business Section, Sunday, January 19,
1992: "LONG-DISTANCE OVERLOAD:"
In American advertising history, perhaps nothing else compares to the
fiery marketing battles being waged today by the long-distance
carriers. Marketing experts say the strategy has been elevated to
extremely complex -- if not desparate -- levels never seen on Madison
Avenue. "The game is no longer to reach out and touch someone," said
Sam Craig, marketing department chairman at New York University.
"It's to reach out and grab someone."
[N]early $1 billion [was spend on advertising] by the three major
carriers last year. At stake is each carrier's share in the
$56-billion long-distance industry.
Beyond all the industry's name-calling and fact-stretching are three
distinct marketing campaigns that have evolved into something more
akin to the dirtiest of political battles. "It's very much like a
political campaign," said Thomas Messner, founding partner of MCI's
Ney York agency, Messner Vetere Berger Carey Schmetterer. "Except
this campaign never ends."
There are thousands of targeted ways that AT&T, Sprint and MCI
constantly try to cajole new customers ever day. They call consumers
at home. They pester through the mail. They nag incessantly on TV,
in the newspaper and on the sides of buses. And like Army recruiters
searching for enlistees, they try to sign up consumers at shopping
malls.
[A]nalysts say that today all are so similiar in quality and price
that the main thing left to sell is some advertising wizard's image of
what phone companies should be.
"AT&T is the yardstick against which almost everything we do is
measured," said Gerald H. Taylor, president of consumer markets
division at MCI.
AT&T goes to great lengths to find out what makes consumers -- and its
competition-- tick. Almost every major marketing research firm in
America has -- at one time or another -- been retained to do consumer
research for AT&T. AT&T will research such minute items as the color
of the envelopes in which it stuffs its mail promotions and precisely
how many seconds unsuspecting consumers will listen to its commercials.
Some marketing experts content that the overriding purpose of AT&T's
massive marketing campaign is [to] keep consumers guessing. When
consumers are confused they rarely make changes. SO if AT&T can keep
people scratching their heads, consumers might not be so fast to
switch long-distance companies.
Executives from Sprint's San Francisco ad agency, J. Walter Thompson,
were brainstorming one day when a copywriter suddenly suggested the
pin-drop idea. They placed a call to their New York office and asked
one of the creative executives their to simply listen. One executive
in San Francisco took a pin and dropped it on a table next to the
receiver. The listener -- who heard it clearly -- couldn't believe
it was a pin.
So effective was that ad in bolstering Sprint's image that, from a
reliability standpoint, many consumers began considering Sprint on a
par with AT&T.
To fight back, AT&T used every available weapon. By the late 1980's,
AT&T had become the nation's largest telemarketer -- making something
like six million phone calls a month to potential customers.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 92 22:45:32 -0500
From: omh@cs.brown.edu (Owen M. Hartnett)
Subject: Katie Haffner to be at Boston Computer Society 1-22-92
Wednesday, January 22, 7:30 PM, New England Life Hall, 225 Clarendon
St., Boston.
Here is Ms. Hafner's latest communication to us:
"In my speech to BCS, I plan to talk about Cyberpunk, the book I've
written with my husband, John Markoff. The book details the stories of
three computer hackers. Kevin Mitnick is a social outcast and expert
phone phreak and hacker in LA who carried his hacking to the point of
obsession and addiciton. Pengo is a Berliner who, with a group of
friends, penetrated US military computers and sold whatever he could
find to the Soviets. Robert Morris is the Harvard graduate and Cornell
graduate student who released a virus that crippled thousands of
computers on the nationwide Internet. In talking about the stories, I
touch on issues concerning computer ethics and computer crime,
computer viruses, and networking. The speech tends to spark a lot of
questions and an interesting discussion."
Owen Hartnett omh@cs.brown.edu
------------------------------
From: Dan Boehlke <DAN@gacvx2.gac.edu>
Subject: The Tropez, Digital Cordless Phone
Date: 19 Jan 92 23:50:33 -0600
Organization: Gustavus Adolphus College, St. Peter, Minnesota
Greetings,
I was reading the Jan 20, 1992 issue of {Newsweek} tonight and came
across a short article in the Periscope section titled "Talking
Digital".
The article talks about a cordless phone called "The Tropez 900DX"
that was shown at the Las Vegas Consumer Electronics Show. The Tropez
900DX digital cordless phone is makde by VTech Communications of
Beaverton, Ore. It said in the article that is has a range up to 10
times farther than a standard cordless and a scrambler to keep
eavesdroppers from listening in.
I will to call directory assistance to locate a phone number for VTech
Communications. Did anyone get to the Las Vegas Consumer Electronics
Show and see it? Has anyone heard of VTech Communications of
Beaverton, Ore? A phone like this could be very handy in my work.
Dan Boehlke Internet: dan@gac.edu
Campus Network Manager BITNET: dan@gacvax1.bitnet
Gustavus Adolphus College
St. Peter, MN 56082 USA Phone: (507)933-7596
------------------------------
From: rhyre@cinoss1.ATT.COM (Ralph W. Hyre)
Subject: Operator-Assist Hand-Off (was Person-to-Person)
Date: 20 Jan 92 14:26:51 GMT
Reply-To: rhyre@cinoss1.ATT.COM (Ralph W. Hyre)
Organization: AT&T OSS Development, Cincinnati
In article <telecom12.43.10..> John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
writes:
> Having rarely used Person-to-Person, I have a question. Just how long
> will an operator wait for the requested party to come to the phone?
> [Moderator: The rule a few years ago was ... not wait longer than
> three minutes
This may be a moot point, as it appears that the operator is not on
the line for the entire duration of the call.
On my last set of operator-asisted calls (collect from Boston to
Cincinnati over AT&T), I noticed that the operator who collected my
calling instructions was different from the operator who presented the
'collect from Ralph Hyre' message to my recipient. While this
probably optimizes the usage of the operator's time, it startled me to
have the operator change from a female to a male during the course of
the call.
This suggests that a new operator-assisted procedure is in place at
AT&T. Can anyone verify this?
Ralph W. Hyre, Jr.
E-mail: rhyre@cinoss1.att.com Snail: Box 85, Milford OH 45150-0085
Phone: +1 513 629 7288 Radio: N3FGW
------------------------------
From: mute@wpi.WPI.EDU (Existentialist Man!)
Subject: Micom Micro4000 DataModem9600 Questions
Organization: Madman Omar's House of Environmental Variables
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 15:34:05 GMT
I was recently given a Micom Micro4000 Datamodem9600. I have been told
that it is a leased-line modem, and is not usable as a normal
hook-it-up-to-your-computer-and-dial-out-type modem without another
unit. I was also told that Micom has become another company, and is
now known as "Best Computing," or something similar.
Does anyone know what this unit is that is required to use the modem
as a normal modem, and if they are still available? If anyone has one
that is not currently in use, I would also be interested in buying it
for a reasonable price.
Thank you in advance,
Josh Brandt mute@wpi.wpi.edu
------------------------------
Subject: I Was Charged 64 Cents For 10222-1-713-555-1221
From: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs)
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 19:39:39 CST
Organization: The Red Headed League
My grandparents own a motel and I work for them and have a phone in my
apartment connected to the motel PBX and I make mostly data calls and
usually use 10222-1 ... to keep my calls separate. Our 1+ is ATT but
on SDN (I thought that was for big companies, we are a 30 room motel).
0-0 gets an ATT operator, but 1-713-555-1221 says "Your call can not
be completed as dialed FOUR oh FIVE TWO Tee." (405 is the area code
here).
After seeing 1-713-555-1221 posted here I called it and got the above
recording and then tried it with 10228- 10222- 10333- and received the
expected response.
Well we received the bill for on one the MCI pages it has on 12-14 a
call to DIR ASSISTDA 713 555 1221 D (day) 1 (min) .64, I think I had
called it before but this is the first time I have seen it on the
bill.
I'm not too concerned about 64 cents but is this right?
Rick
Internet rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs)
UUCP ...!{site with a smart mailer}!ricksys.lonestar.org!rick
also reachable as Richard McCombs on Fidonet 1:385/6
The Read Headed League Private Waffle Iron Version 1.64 Lawton, OK
------------------------------
From: lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield)
Subject: Incorrect Kabong? (was Multiple Calls on One Access)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 19:43:31 GMT
In <telecom12.39.5@eecs.nwu.edu> stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette)
writes:
>> Still waiting for my Metromedia/ITT calling card ...
> I got mine last week. Pretty normal, except there's one thing I
> noticed: The ka-bong prompt for your calling card number is only a
> decaying dialtone sound -- there's no 50ms of the # tone. At first I
> wondered how many people this would affect that have tone-to-pulse
> converters on their lines that require the # to shut off. Then, I
> realized that the ka-bong sounds only after you key in the desired
> called number after a different prompt tone. Then I got to thinking:
> This is the same procedure that Sprint uses for their FON-cards: the
> first thing you hear is a non-standard tone to prompt you for the
> called number. It's probably not much of an issue these days, but I'd
> imagine that it was a problem with Sprint five or six years ago when
> stuff like tone-to-pulse was still around somewhat.
Wait a minute. Is this going to cause problems with the new "$" dial
modifier on Hayes products? Toby? Can you tell us what the detection
criteria are on that?
(P.S. I thought the bong was a 50ms octothorpe :-) with one of the
DTs decaying in amplitude to 0, not a "decaying dialtone". Isn't this
called out somewhere?)
Laird P. Broadfield
UUCP: {ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
INET: lairdb@crash.cts.com
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #59
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25669;
21 Jan 92 3:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17516
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 01:36:06 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17585
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 01:35:40 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 01:35:40 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201210735.AA17585@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #60
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 01:35:29 CST Volume 12 : Issue 60
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Teletype's Heaviest ASR Set (Jim Haynes)
The Story You've Been Waiting For :-) (Middlesex News via Adam M. Gaffin)
Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (Eric Florack)
Modem and Fax in Japan? (Paul Gateley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim Haynes <haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU>
Subject: Teletype's Heaviest ASR Set
Date: 21 Jan 92 04:00:20 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem starts
to look like a nail."
By the early 1960s the Bell System was well along the way to the goal
of having customers nearly everywhere able to dial their own long
distance calls. This involved both the provision of the necessary
switching and message accounting equipment and the provision of enough
intercity trunk bandwidth so that customers' dialing attempts usually
succeeded. It was time to look for additional applications for the
switched network. Among the results was Teletype's most monumentally
complicated ASR set.
An important business segment for both Bell and Western Union was
private teletypewriter message switching systems. The customers were
government agencies and large corporations. The airlines were big
users of these services, since they have a need to get written
messages around the system faster than airplanes fly. The airline
business also involved a lot of inter-company traffic, since to get
from Point A to Point B might require traveling on two or more
different airlines, complicating the process of making reservations
and selling tickets.
In those pre-computer days messages would be received at a switching
center on a reperforator, a machine that records the message in
punched paper tape. The tape might be torn off at the end of the
message and carried by an operator to a tape reader feeding a line to
the destination, or to another switching center; or there might be
automatic switching from a reader associated with the reperforator to
a second reperforator associated with the reader feeding the outgoing
line. Stations sending or receiving a lot of traffic would have their
own line to the switching center. Other stations would share a
multidrop line as a means of reducing the number of circuits to the
switching center and the amount of equipment in the center.
Multiple address messages were common. For example, a message
concerning a certain airline flight might need to go to all the
airports where that flight stops and to the central dispatch office
and some other points. In some cases the communication company
supplied only the private telegraph lines and the customer supplied
the station and switching equipment. In other cases the communication
company supplied the whole system. Either way these systems were
expensive because all the circuits and switching equipment were
dedicated full-time to the particular customer's use.
AT&T decided to develop an airline communication system that would
make use of the switched network, so as to eliminate the dedicated
switches and lines. The station sets were made by Teletype and were
called "Delta sets" because the customer was to be Delta Air Lines.
As it turned out, Delta didn't buy the service and it was marketed to
United Air Lines instead.
The interface to the telephone network was Data Set 154A1, and
consisted of a 75 baud duplex modem and a tone autodialer. I don't
know whether the autodialer used Touch-Tone frequencies or the key
pulsing frequencies used within the toll plant. The receiving set was
a fairly ordinary Model 28 RO (receive-only) printer operating at 100
wpm using 5-level Baudot code. The transmitting set was something
else again, a Model 28 ASR (automatic send-receive; i.e. punched
paper tape) set with its lower compartment filled with 86 relays, five
stepping switches, and a couple of electronic timers. It weighed
about 450 pounds. Although transmission was by 5-level code the ASR
set punched 8-level tape, the extra holes being used for control
purposes. In fact there was a ninth code bit obtained by nicking the
edge of the tape. Tapes were prepared blind (without printing); the
printer of the ASR set printed messages at the time they were
transmitted.
To prepare a message the operator first pressed the SOM (start of
message) key, which caused a stepping switch to generate the proper
sequence of characters and control punches -- the 1920-1960 version of
a ROM. Next the operator pressed the Local Area or Distant Area
button, according to whether the destination was in the same area code
area as the sender or was in a different area code area. Then the
operator typed in the ten-digit telephone number and a seven-character
mnemonic code for the addressee. Multiple addresses were added by
again pressing Local Area or Distant Area and typing in the number and
mnemonic code. After all addressed were entered the operator pressed
the EOA (end of address) key, which punched another sequence of
characters generated by a stepping switch. The operator would then
type the message text and finally press the EOM (end of message) key
which added a stepping-switch-generated end of message sequence to the
tape.
The operator would then feed out blank tape and start the tape reader.
The reader would search for the SOM sequence, put the autodialer
off-hook, and send the seven or ten digit number to the switching
office, notching the edge of the tape to indicate a calling attempt.
If the call was answered, indicated by a polarity reversal on the loop
from the switching office, the reader would send the mnemonic code to
the receiving set via the modems. The receiving set would recognize
the last two characters of the mnemonic sequence and acknowledge by
sending a pulse back to the sending set. The reader would then skip
forward through any additional addresses and send the EOA sequence,
the message text, and the EOM sequence. The receiving set would send
a pulse back for each character received, so assure the sender that
the circuit was still connected.
After sending the EOM the sender would put the data set on-hook. Then
the reader would zip the tape backward and look for another unused
address. If it found one it would dial the next number and send the
message again, and so on until all the addresses had been used up. At
that point it would advance the tape past the EOM and shoot the tape
out the far side of the reader so that it could not be pulled back to
that message again.
Dialed calls don't always go through, and sometimes they reach wrong
numbers. The sending set would try each number three times, waiting a
preset time for the polarity reversal indicating something had
answered, and then for the pulse in response to the called station
mnemonic, indicating that the thing that answered was a modem and most
likely the intended station. An unsuccessful attempt could also
consist of cessation of the character-by-character acknowledgment
pulses from the receiver before EOM, indicating that the circuit had
been disconnected prematurely. After three unsuccessful attempts the
set would try dialing a number wired into another stepping switch, the
number of an intercept facility which would receive the message and
punch it out and call for an operator to attempt to resolve the
problem. If it failed in six attempts to reach the intercept center
it would give up on that message and sound an alarm locally.
Having to look up and key in telephone numbers was a drag; the private
wire switching systems required only a mnemonic code for each address.
This was mitigated by an optional accessory, the Codomat. The Codomat
was a rotary card file, somewhat similar to a Rolodex, holding up to
1800 cards. A tab on each card was printed with a mnemonic address.
Further down the cards were perforated with the Baudot characters for
the telephone number and mnemonic code, and with the appropriate
control punches. After the set had punched the SOM characters the
operator could rotate the file to the desired card, and swing that
card into a slot.
A crawling-head reader would read the punching in the card, copying it
to the message tape, and then eject the card. The operator could then
select another card or proceed with the message by pressing the EOA
key. Manufacturing and distributing these cards was a non-trivial
problem. They had to be durable. If a telephone number was added or
changed new cards had to be produced and distributed to the field; and
the cards were different for local-area and distant-area stations.
Another optional accessory was a time-of-day clock located within the
Codomat cabinet. This produced a four-digit Baudot coding of the time
of day which was punched into the message tape as part of the EOA
sequence.
Addresses allowed for more complexity than I have mentioned so far. A
destination might be a gateway into another airline's switching
system; or it might be a line with several receiving printers
attached, with a selection code to select which printer(s) was to
print. Codomat cards could contain up to 22 characters of address.
The above pretty well exhausts my knowledge of the Delta/United
equipment and system. Perhaps someone can tell us when the system
went into service and how long it lasted. I also have a vague memory
of some big central-station adjunct, perhaps something to improve
performance on multiple-address messages. By the late 1960s all this
paper tape technology had been swept away by the oncoming tide of
computer-based communication systems; and in the airline business by
computer-based reservation systems which required vastly more
bandwidth (and were worth it). Still, use of the switched network for
non-voice traffic proved to be viable, first for Dial TWX, later with
Bell modems for various applications, and finally (after Carterphone)
with customer-provided modems and autodialers.
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet
[Moderator's Note: Thanks for a really neat article to start this
issue of the Digest! PAT]
------------------------------
From: adamg@world.std.com (Adam M. Gaffin)
Subject: The Story You've Been Waiting For :-)
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 16:38:19 GMT
Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass., 1/20/91, page 3A
Wrong number? A 900 disguised as 800 pits computer users against AT&T.
By Adam Gaffin
NEWS STAFF WRITER
NATICK - A game of numbers has pitted AT&T against several
readers of an online telecommunications newsletter over an unusual
question: When is a toll-free call not really toll free?
In October, one reader of the "Telecom Digest" conference on the
Usenet computer network posted a message about an interesting find:
Dial a certain toll-free 800 number and you would be connected to a
{USA Today} sports line that normally charges 95 cents a minute
through a 900 number.
A number of readers tried the number and found that it worked.
Then the bills came in.
Rob Boudrie of Natick was billed $1.90. He acknowledges calling
the 800 number but says he is upset because the bill said "900." He
says he could not actually call a 900 number because of a "block" he
had earlier asked New England Telephone to put on his line.
"There's the real ethical issue: (the number) was reported
incorrectly on somebody's phone bill," Boudrie said.
"AT&T has tampered with the phone bills -- reporting 800 calls as
900 calls," he said.
"They're charging us for calls we didn't make," said John Levine
of Cambridge, who was billed for about $20 worth of calls.
Boudrie and Levine question why they should be billed for the
AT&T software glitch that allowed the calls to go through in the first
place. Boudrie added the company did give him a credit when he called
to complain.
Rick Brayall, an AT&T spokesman in Boston, acknowledged the
glitch, but said Boudrie and others were part of a small group of
computer hackers trying to stiff the company.
"I hate to use the word `hackers,' but (they were) people who look
for ways to get something for nothing and took advantage of it," he
said.
Neither AT&T nor {USA Today} ever announced or publicized the 800
number, he said. "Someone was doing it illicitly (and it spread)
underground, through word of mouth," he said.
He said he considered Usenet such an underground system, even
though the network connects several hundred thousand people around the
world, largely at universities, high-tech companies and government
agencies -- but also at AT&T.
Boudrie, who works for Encore Computer in Marlboro, said he is no
hacker, and called the company's assertion of theft ridiculous.
He said that when he saw the original message in the Digest, he
could not believe it was for real, because the number it gave -- which
started with 555 -- is normally reserved for directory-assistance
calls.
He said he called the number out of curiosity, heard a recording
about the 95-cent-a-minute charge, listened for a couple of minutes --
and then hung up.
"The universal consensus on Usenet at the time was: hey, it's an
800 call, 800 calls are free," he recalled. At the time, many
speculated that it was a sort of free sample to try to entice people
onto the pay service.
"I figured it was a demo," Levine said.
Not all Telecom Digest readers agreed. Patrick Townsend, its
"moderator" said readers should have known the service was a mistake
and not groused about being billed.
Brayall said the company has not deliberately gone after anybody
to recover the costs of the calls, but said Boudrie's and Levine's
bills, along with those of a number of other Telecom Digest users,
"may reflect the fact that one of our computers recognized there was
no 800 number of that type and instantly converted it to 900."
Adam Gaffin Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass. adamg@world.std.com
Voice: (508) 626-3968. Fred the Middlesex News Computer: (508) 872-8461.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 09:18:32 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!
There's been much in the way of discussion over these last few weeks
and months, about the RBHC's attempting to go to providing, raher than
carrying, information services. I view any such move as dangerous, for
one simple reason:
1: There can be no fairness in service, prices, and quality of service
when the info carrier is also the info provider. Anyone seeking to
provide informational services, when TELCO was doing that would be hit
with price structures that would place the NON-telco info provider
with non-competitive pricing, and therefore make such providing a
non-viable option to business owners who want to get into that area.
I've been seeing several reports of late, that indicate that even
non-profit hobby type BBS's are being harrssed, by RBOC's, with
unrealistic rates, selectively poor line conditions, poor service turn
around, etc.
SWBT in particular, has been pressing for anyone who wants to run data
through their lines to be charged a business rate, and a metered call
system, as opposed to a flat rate.
I find it no chance happening that the companies that are pressing the
hardest to be allowed to be info providers are also the ones making
SysOps lives harder.
It's obvious to this writer that the TELCO's are afraid that folks
won`t want to pay for something that many thousands of BBS operators
are doing for free ...
I therefore suggest that the only way to save BBSing, and many
business interests, is to retain the ban on Telco's providing info
services.
I know this newsgroup is beiong ported to FIDO someplace. Can we get a
FIDO sysop or two to expound on this a bit?
[Moderator's Note: TELECOM Digest is distributed to Fido sites in the
'echomail' (what they call newsgroups) group COMM. PAT]
------------------------------
From: pg0@engr.uark.edu (Paul Gateley)
Subject: Modem and Fax in Japan?
Organization: University of Arkansas
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 02:21:33 GMT
I a posting this question to several different places because I don't
know where to best find someone who can answer it. Please ignore it
if you can't.
I am moving to Japan and want to take my modem and my fax machine
along. Will they work in Japan? I think the voltage is O.K. as most
equipment will tolerate 100v and 50hz, however I seem to remember that
the phone connectors are different. Is this true? Are there
adaptors?
Any help would be appreciated.
The modem is connected to my Mac Classic, not that it matters.
Thanks already!
Paul Gateley
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #60
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27287;
21 Jan 92 4:14 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19132
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 02:13:07 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12546
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 02:12:33 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 02:12:33 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201210812.AA12546@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #61
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 02:12:22 CST Volume 12 : Issue 61
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (David G. Lewis)
Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (John Higdon)
Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu)
Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (David Mulford)
Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Bill Berbenich)
Re: Repeat Dialing Question (Giles D. Malet)
Re: Repeat Dialing Question (Henry Mensch)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (John Rice)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (John Higdon)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Michael Salmon)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Tim Gorman)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Ken Abrams)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Vance Shipley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 17:35:24 GMT
In article <telecom12.46.6@eecs.nwu.edu> strieterd@gtephx.UUCP (Dave
Strieter) writes:
> Several Digest readers have commented that it is cheaper for the telco
> to provide DTMF than rotary pulse dialing, but I fail to understand
> how they come to that conclusion. I can't speak for the 5ESS or
> DMS-100, but on the GTD-5 dial pulses are counted by software which
> monitors the output of an opto-coupler device connected to each line,
> whereas DTMF tones must be decoded by a more-expensive circuit which
> feeds the decoded digits to the software. How does "more expensive" =
> "costs less"?
If I recall correctly (and I don't work in 5E-land or 1A-land, so no
guarantees), the digit receivers on 5Es and 1As are integrated units
that collect either DTMF or DP digits. With DTMF, the address is
typically sent in less than half the time taken to send the same
address with DP. If the receiver holding time is half as long,
(approximately) half as many receivers need to be provided in the
office. Half as many receivers = less cost for the office.
David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories
david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 00:06 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
strieterd@gtephx.UUCP (Dave Strieter) writes:
> Several Digest readers have commented that it is cheaper for the telco
> to provide DTMF than rotary pulse dialing, but I fail to understand
> how they come to that conclusion. I can't speak for the 5ESS or
> DMS-100, but on the GTD-5 dial pulses are counted by software which
> monitors the output of an opto-coupler device connected to each line,
> whereas DTMF tones must be decoded by a more-expensive circuit which
> feeds the decoded digits to the software. How does "more expensive" =
> "costs less"?
This is a very simplistic look at the situation. Shame on you! There
is more to the "costs" factor than the comparison between an
opto-isolator and a couple of ICs (which is all that comprises that
fabulous "more expensive circuit"). You need to consider the length of
time a register/sender is engaged with rotary vs DTMF. The GTD-5, as
well as any other "common services switch" can only count digits on
just so many lines at a time.
Another consideration involves whether you can even buy the switch
with the DTMF receiving circuitry absent. And even if you can, would
you? Unless you are going to price DTMF service so high that you are
guaranteed that no one will buy it, then you have to buy a DTMF-
equipped switch. At that point using pulse dialing does cost more
by tying up the number signaling phase of the call much longer than
does tone signaling.
I think if you weigh all the factors, giving particular consideration
to the aspect of common equipment utilization efficiency, DTMF turns
out to be cheaper for the telcos. The charges imposed by telcos for
this are rooted in pre-divestiture hokum reminiscent of the
"dollar-a-month" charge for extension telephones.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
From: The Unknown User <unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
Date: 20 Jan 92 08:56:52 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Open Access Computing
In article <telecom12.41.7@eecs.nwu.edu> pasik@rtsg.mot.com (John
Pasik) writes:
> I refuse to pay Ma Bell extra per month for a "feature"
> that is now standard on all CO switches (which speeds call routing,
> simplifies call processing, and reduces un-billable call set-up time).
> These are benefits to the phone company as well as I. Why should I
Is the charge named something very strange or included in one
of the other charges?
Or perhaps did Pacific Bell just give up with charging for
touch tone? I remember that some time ago (seven or eight years) we
had no touch tone phones in our house. Everything was pulse (either
actual rotary phones or pushbutton pulse phones). I believe it was on
a modem that I dialed tone one time and it worked (I had been dialing
pulse before that). Do you suppose we were just ripped off for the
touch tone charge for many years and didn't know it? Is it a "negative
option" type deal? (In the dorms this year is the first time I've
ever had a phone in my name ... previously another housemate took care
of it)
Also one of the listings is "Rate Surcharge" with a 12 cent
credit. Where does that come from? (God, I'm learning so much from
this group!)
One last question:
Can I have a phone line where I can make local calls but not
long distance ones, and not have to pay the $3.50/month network access
for interstate calling? For a modem line, that would be unnecessary
(at least for me).
unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu
[God's Note: Thanks for your kind note about the group, Matt. Yes, you
can have a toll-restricted line but you will stll be charged the
network access fee. There is no provision to work around it. PAT]
------------------------------
From: David Mulford <FDN01067@ALF.APPSTATE.EDU>
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
Date: 20 Jan 92 13:13:49 EDT
Organization: Appalachian State University
In article <telecom12.53.6@eecs.nwu.edu>, Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com
(Jack Decker) writes:
> What surprises me is the number of otherwise intelligent people who
> simply do not realise that the tone/pulse switch can be moved in
> mid-call to change the dialing method. Most folks set it in one
> position and seem to think that if it's moved too many times, it will
> break. A *LOT* of folks never even change it from "pulse" to "tone"
> when they first acquire the phone, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE PAYING FOR
> TOUCH-TONE SERVICE! I hate to tell you how many phones I've
> discovered that were set to "pulse" on a tone-dial line ... I'd flip
> the switch and the Touch-Tones would break dial tone (which only
> happens here if you are paying for the service) and the phone owner
> would admit to not even knowing what that "T/P" switch was for, but
> when they ordered service the business office rep asked if they had a
> "pushbutton phone", so ... well, you can guess the rest.
I worked for a small IXC in Charlotte NC as a customer service rep,
and you would not believe how many people (including business
customers) did not know that their phones were switchable from tone to
pulse, or from pulse to tone. Even worse, most of the complaints I
recieved were from people trying to use their calling-cards from a
rotary dial phone, while our DEX-400 switch could only recognize
touch-tone! I was convinced by that two years of experience that most
of the end-users of telephone equipment do not comprehend how the
public network works, and some do not even understand how to
effectively utilize their own telephone. I hope that the advances in
switching technology and ISDN are transparent to the end-users, or
else we are going to have a lot of confused people out there!
<<Dave>>
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 14:22:36 GMT
From: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich)
Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
> Does anyone still make a good, well-built 2500 set with a proper
> handset, a real keypad, and a good, loud *MECHANICAL* ringer?
You can BUY these phones from an AT&T Phone Center (at least _I_ did
about six months ago). They lease all available colors and styles,
but sell a commonly-used subset of phones in some of those colors. I
got a wall mount 2500 set in touchtone. It's built like a brick
outhouse.
You have to ASK to buy one. They don't get advertised. My wall mount
phone was about $50, as I recall.
Bill Berbenich
------------------------------
From: shrdlu!gdm@uunet.uu.net (Giles D Malet)
Subject: Re: Repeat Dialing Question
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 18:07:20 GMT
Reply-To: Giles D Malet <shrdlu!gdm@uunet.uu.net>
In article <telecom12.43.1@eecs.nwu.edu> spencer@phoenix.Princeton.EDU
(S. Spencer Sun) writes:
> On a more or less unrelated subject, I have been told by someone who
> generally knows what he's talking about that when you are auto-dialing
> a number, you are required (by law? telco policy? I have no idea) to
> wait 30 seconds between attempts, ostensibly because if everyone did
> this it would cause great wear and tear. [...]
Something like this is definitely alive and well in the UK. I have
seen various references to a redial limit, but have been unable to pin
much down.
The manual for one of my old UK modems warns that `exceeding the value
4 in register S52 is against Telecom regulations'. This register hold
the number of times that the modem will automagically redial a number
after getting an engaged tone.
Another fancier UK modem I have enforces this, and uses a backing off
algorithm. Get a few engaged signals in a row, and it will suddenly
refuse to dial that number for a couple of *hours*! However, one can
disable the storing of `last numbers dialed', perhaps to stop others
querying the modem to get them, which then disables the blocking
(forgets which numbers it is blocking)!
I have also seen blocking like this in comms software from the UK.
However, in no case have I not been able to bypass the blocking in a
pretty straight forward manner. This makes me think perhaps the
blocking is required for BT approval of equipment, but manufacturers
realise that the `real world' works differently.
I have never heard of anyone getting in trouble for repeat dialing,
and I often left above mentioned S52 set to 60 or so if I was trying
to get onto a busy BBS. No one complained. Perhaps BT only has that
clause so they have a leg to stand on if one does annoy them, but
usually they don't care.
Just a guess.
Giles gdm@shrdlu.UUCP Waterloo, Canada +1 519 725 5720
------------------------------
From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch)
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 13:15:08 -0800
Subject: Re: Repeat Dialing Question
Reply-To: henry@ads.com
> [Moderator's Note: If such a rule were to be enforced, it would be
> quite easy to simply deny dial tone to the caller for thirty seconds
> at a time. That would solve the problem, no? PAT]
No, it wouldn't, since it would deny service to *all* numbers.
(Ideally, you want to deny service to retry attempts over that time
period).
# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / <henry@ads.com>
------------------------------
From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 92 18:36:52 GMT
In article <telecom12.47.14@eecs.nwu.edu>, dunnett@mala.bc.ca (Malcolm
Dunnett) writes:
> As a followup question: Answer supervision seems like a valuable
> feature for a number of reasons. The impression I'm getting is that it
> has been "designed out" of modern CO equipment. Is there a good reason
> for this?
Could be because in Western Electric DTMF phones, the keypad is
polarity sensitive. If the polarity reversal answer supervision was
used with these phones, the Keypad would quit working when the called
party answered, making the phone unusable for "Touch Tone" entry of
digits into follow on services like paging, etc.
John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 92 22:17 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Michael.Bender@Eng.Sun.COM (W7EGX) writes:
> I don't think that there is a technical reason that I can't get
> supervision on every call, and I don't understand why I would have to
> be charged extra for what probably amounts to changing a configuration
> parameter in the software on the switch.
Are you serious? Would you like a full-page list of things you "pay
extra" for that are nothing more than "changing a configuration
parameter in the software on the switch"? In the age of electronic
switches, nothing is hardwired anymore. Features are activated with a
few strokes at a terminal connected to RCMAC.
Why should anyone pay for custom calling? Hell, those features are
turned on with a couple of keystrokes. What a rip!
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
From: etxmesa@eos.ericsson.se (Michael Salmon)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Reply-To: etxmesa@eos.ericsson.se (Michael Salmon)
Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 09:59:27 GMT
In article <telecom12.47.13@eecs.nwu.edu>, andys@ulysses.att.com
writes:
> Wouldn't reverse polarity make it impossible for me to talk to my home
> answering machine and office voice mail from a line-powered phone? As
> I recall, DTMF generators don't work under reverse polarity ...
There isn't a problem if you use a diode bridge.
Michael Salmon Ericsson Telecom AB Stockholm
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 92 10:23:25 EST
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Michael.Bender@Eng.Sun.COM (W7EGX) writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #49:
> I'm in Pac*Bell land (415-863) and I seem to get answer supervision in
> the form of battery reversal on my regular POTS lines for many but not
> all calls.
The only time I have heard of this being a feature is toll diverted
lines. The battery reversal is used to indicate a toll call so the
originating equipment can drop the call if wished.
Should this battery reversal be done with a regular DTMF station set
attached to the line, the dial would be disabled unless a polarity
guard existed in the set. The last time I knew, including polarity
guards in the sets was not standard practice for most set makers.
Tim Gorman - SWBT
* opinions are my own, any resemblence to official policy is coincidence*
------------------------------
From: kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 16:40:39 GMT
In article <telecom12.47.13@eecs.nwu.edu> andys@ulysses.att.com
writes:
>> The PBX isn't the problem here. In North America "modern" CO switches
>> don't pass answer supervision back to the subscriber. (On older
CO switches DO, however, pass answer supervision to PBX trunks (lines)
IF they are properly arranged for PBX service. In my experience, this
means that they are ground start and the answer signal is a line
reversal.
> Wouldn't reverse polarity make it impossible for me to talk to my home
> answering machine and office voice mail from a line-powered phone? As
> I recall, DTMF generators don't work under reverse polarity ...
Most "modern" phone equipment is arranged (by various means) with a
"polarity guard" for the tone dial so that it will work regardless of
line polarity.
Ken Abrams nstar!pallas!kabra437
Springfield, IL kabra437@athenanet.com
(voice) 217-753-7965
------------------------------
From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 19:02:32 GMT
If I remember correctly I ran into some X-bar offices that would
provide a reversal when a call left the local office. This could be
used for a crude form of toll restriction, the pbx would disconnect
the call.
Vance Shipley
vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!vances
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #61
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18957;
21 Jan 92 15:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12576
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 12:27:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10303
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 12:27:02 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 12:27:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201211827.AA10303@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #62
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 12:27:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 62
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Cellular Phone For Quadriplegic (Craig Ibbotson)
Re: What Did the Operators Know? (Dave Levenson)
Re: Phone Number Verification (Michael Rosen)
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Ron Dippold)
Re: Automatic Number Callback (Bruce Albrecht)
Re: *67 Doesn't Work (John Anderson)
Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? (David G. Lewis)
Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit? (David Singer)
Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Hans Mulder)
Wiring Houses (was Two Wires Become Four; GTE Won't Explain) (P. da Silva)
Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain (James Olsen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ibbotson@rtsg.mot.com (Craig Ibbotson)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone For Quadriplegic
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 18:54:55 GMT
weave@chopin.udel.edu (Ken Weaverling) writes:
> We went to a few local cellular phone stores, and didn't get very
> encouraging information. All the phones have push buttons that take a
> bit of effort to push, which is impossible for her to do. I seem to
> remember reading about a "voice activated" phone, but no one around
> here knows about them, and I wonder if it is more of a gimmick than it
> is useful. (For instance, if you have to push a button to "activate"
> the phone, she is out of luck.)
Uniden America's CP1900 cellular phone has an optional feature of
voice-activated dialing and answering. Standard features include
one-touch dialing, hands-free operation, 30 number memory, call
restriction, memory scan and full electronic lock. Sounds like you
want the optional voice activated dialing and answering. No price was
given in the write up I have.
NEC America makes the M3800 phone which features hands-free answering
(auto-answer after two rings) and has an optional automatic call
processor and voice recognition unit. I think this is what you want.
Again, no price given.
Of course, I work for Motorola, and I would hope you would buy a
Motorola phone. I called our sales department (I do not work in the
Subscriber Group, which is responsible for the development and
manufacturing of cellular phones) and the sales rep knew exactly what
you wanted, the Motorola 6800DVC. It features auto-answer and
voice-activated dialing. The price of this phone was lowered just
before Christmas from $2495 to $1995. The sales department here at
Motorola told me that a number of handicapped Motorolans use this
phone and are delighted with its performance. It's made here in
Arlington Heights, IL, and comes with a lifetime guarantee. I was also
told that this mobile unit is one of the best ones made by Motorola.
Regardless of which brand you choose, rest assured that you are
absolutely correct in remembering voice activated phones. If you
can't get any satisfaction with the dealers in your area, send me a
note and I'll give you the number to Motorola's cellular sales office
in Schaumburg, IL.
Craig Ibbotson, Motorola, Inc. ...uunet!motcid!ibbotsonc
Cellular Infrastructure Division, Radio Telephone Systems Group
------------------------------
From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: What Did the Operators Know?
Date: 19 Jan 92 13:50:48 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
In article <telecom12.44.6@eecs.nwu.edu>, wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL
(Will Martin) writes:
> What I'm wondering about is just how much DID the operators know about
> the calling number when they asked for it. Was it possible to lie
> about it...
I remember reading an article in the Bell System Technical Journal
from the late 1960's addressing this issue. A design was proposed for
a special service circuit. As designed, this circuit appeared on the
cord boards and on the early TSPS consoles. It allowed an operator to
key in the number given by a caller. If it was, in fact, the number
the caller was using, it presented an OKAY indication to the operator.
If it was not, an oppoiste indication was posted. The circuit
established a 'no-test' connection (i.e. one that bypassed the busy
status of the called line) and then attempted an inaudible loop-around
between itself and the operator's cord-circuit handling the original
call. If the loopback signal test passed, it indicated that the
operator had connected with the line the caller was calling from.
It could not identify the line, it could only test a given identifi-
cation for correctness.
Does anybody else remember the article? Does anybody know if the
circuit, as described, was ever deployed in the toll network? It
would have been made obsolete by the introduction of ANI circuitry in
most central office types by the mid to late 1970's, so it probably
didn't have much of a 'market window'.
Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
------------------------------
From: Michael.Rosen@samba.acs.unc.edu (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: Phone Number Verification
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 20:19:26 GMT
Well, here's something on the subject from the latest {2600 Magazine},
in the "tidbits" section on page 31:
"Those of you still mourning the loss of the various 800 ANI numbers
can take comfort in a brand new number that's making the rounds. It's
not an 800 number but we're told it doesn't charge. However the
number won't work from payphones. It's 10732-404-988-9664. (You
might have to dial a 1 before the 404.) It will only work with the
10732 carrier access code which is owned by AT&T. And for some
reason, the recording seems to always add the number eight to the
end."
I tried this from my phone here at school. We have some sort of PBX
system where you dial 9 to get out and then your PSC after the phone
number. This ANI number worked for me without the 10732 and with a 1
before it. It added more than an eight to the end though, a whole
series of other numbers which I forget right now.
Mike
------------------------------
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 01:59:59 GMT
mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net writes:
> Would someone like to explain how CDMA works? I understand that it
> spreads the signal across a huge bandwidth in a way that allows the
> receiver to select 1 of N signals ... but how? A CDMA primer, anyone?
Okay, let me explain as much as I can without (a) giving away anything
proprietary, and (b) getting too technical.
First, think of a standard system with frequency multiplexing or time
multiplexing. You know where to find the information by looking at a
specific time or frequency. This is easy to implement, but if
whatever you have allocated that frequency or time slot to doesn't use
all of it, you have wasted capacity. And because you usually need a
"guard" to make sure that slots don't bleed over into each other, you
have built in inefficiency.
(Note: CDMA has been implemented before in bulky and expensive
military systems. However, anything here about CDMA will refer to
Qualcomm's consumer CDMA technology).
CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) is frequency multiplexed in the
sense that one CDMA band takes up a 1.25 MHz frequency band, so that
if you need more CDMA channels you allocate another 1.25 Mhz band.
However, within that band, it's a free for all. All transmissions are
spread and stuffed all across the band, seemingly beyond recovery.
Each transmission is spread across the band by encoding it with a
pseudorandom sequence of ones and zeros that can be calculated from
the absolute system time. Different "channels" are obtained by using
an offset from this sequence.
Now here's the beautiful part. The recieved signal is demodulated
using the same sequence. If you demodulate with one sequence of ones
and zeros, _only_ those signals that have been encoded with that
sequence will fall out. All other signals look just like background
noise. So if you have seven cells near each other, they can all share
the same frequency band. They just use a different offset. When the
mobile powers up it attempts to find a cell at each of the possible
offsets until it finds a transmitting cell. You can get channels
within a cell by offsetting another small "distance" in the sequence.
So the limit to your capacity is a "soft" one. Each new transmitter
adds more "background noise" for other transmissions and makes them
more error prone. You have reached your capacity when you have
reached your limit of acceptable transmission errors. The cell has
all the quality information and can determine when not to allow any
more mobiles on the system. In emergency situations you can always
allow a new mobile on, however, and allow it to transmit with higher
power to ensure it gets through. This makes other calls worse, but in
an emergency situation this should be worth it.
We use some other techniques to channelize and to improve error
correction, but the basic technique is fairly simple: spread the
signal with a unique sequence so that only by demodulating with the
same sequence produces a coherent signal.
I realize I'm being vague. However, patents have been filed, and the
CTIA will be reviewing our CAI (Common Air Interface) spec, which
describes everything in detail (it's the CDMA equivalent of IS-54).
As soon as they get through with it and it is released, everything
will be available in _excruciating_ detail (it makes excellent reading
to put you to sleep).
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 12:31:51 CST
From: bruce@zuhause.MN.ORG (Bruce Albrecht)
Subject: Re: Automatic Number Callback
I don't have it, and I suspect that I couldn't get it anyway, since my
exchange "Can't provide call waiting disable because the equipment
can't provide it", but it would have been useful yesterday. Some girl
left a message on my answering machine to the effect of "You left your
underwear here last night." I think it would have been rather amusing
to freak her out by calling back and telling her I'd be over in a few
minutes to pick it up!
bruce@zuhause.mn.org
------------------------------
From: andrsonj@rtsg.mot.com (John Anderson)
Subject: Re: *67 Doesn't Work
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1992 16:16:43 GMT
kam@dlogics.dlogics.COM (Kevin A. Mitchell) writes:
> Hmmm. I just tried *67 on my phone, and I got "<SIT> We're sorry, your
> call cannot be completed as dialed.
> This is from the 708-452 exchange in the west 'burbs.
FYI, Illinois Bell has an 800 number that they call the Quick Teach
number (1-800-678-9868). It gives information about new services they
offer. One of the services that there is information on is Caller ID.
After listening to the pre-recorded Caller ID message, you can enter
your phone number and find out if/when Caller ID service will be
offered in your area.
John D. Anderson, M.S. |Motorola Inc.
andrsonj@motcid.rtsg.mot.com |1501 W. Shure Drive
uunet!motcid!andrsonj |Arlington Heights, IL 60004
+1-708-632-2103 |Mail Stop: IL27-2243
------------------------------
From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 17:45:00 GMT
In article <telecom12.46.1@eecs.nwu.edu> nelson@sgi.sgi.com writes:
> Our esteemed Moderator writes:
>> [Moderator's Note: ... By 1995 (maybe 1994) new area codes
>> will look like prefixes used to look; that is, they will NOT have zero
>> or one as the second digit. PAT]
> Seems to me that when area codes and exchange numbers cannot be
> distinguished by value (e.g. N0X vs NXX), then the switch must have
> some way of distinguishing them. The only two ways that come to mind
> are the "1 means area code follows" scheme now widely in use, and the
> "timeout after seven digits are dialed" method, which seems fraught
> with peril. I doubt if the timeout method is likely to be adopted.
There's a third way, referred to (by Bellcore) as the "hybrid" method,
which is: If no leading 1 is dialed, the first three digits are an
office code; collect seven digits. If the dialed digits are 1+NXX,
and NXX is an assigned office code in this NPA, then use timeout after
seven digits; if NXX is not an assigned office code, then collect ten.
> So, I conclude that if what PAT wrote is true, then it follows that
> the whole nation must be converted to the "1 means area code follows"
> scheme by "1995 (maybe 1994)".
This (called the "prefix method" by Bellcore) is the recommended
standard dialing procedure. Either the prefix method, the timing
method, or the hybrid method must be implemented by all end offices
before interchangeable NPA codes are implemented.
> Does anyone know if indeed there exists a plan for such a conversion?
> Will 408 (where leading 1 is never required) and 517 (where leading 1
> means toll call -- last time I checked) soon be converting?
The schedule and conversion plans are, I would presume, BOC-specific.
Which means they're presumably out there, but also probably
proprietary ...
David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories
david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning
------------------------------
From: singer@almaden.ibm.com (David Singer)
Subject: Re: Why do Area Codes Always Have 0/1 as the Second Digit?
Reply-To: singer@almaden.ibm.com (David Singer)
Organization: IBM Almaden Research Center
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 20:50:34 -0800
GTE may actually be ahead of PacBell on this one ... in GTE's part of
408, we must dial 1 before an area code, and cannot dial 1 before a
call within the 408 area code.
David Singer -- Internet: singer@almaden.ibm.com BITNET: SINGER at ALMADEN
Voice: (408) 927-2509 Fax: (408) 927-4073
(If I needed a disclaimer, I'd put one here.)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 15:38:16 +0100
From: hansm@cs.kun.nl (Hans Mulder)
Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI
Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
In <telecom12.49.1@eecs.nwu.edu> clements@BBN.COM writes:
> Maybe we need a regulation that requires disclosure of a POTS number,
> with CLID blocking honored, along with every 800 number that is advertised.
But then us Europeans would start calling that number. Obviously, a
company advertising an 800 number wouldn't want to sell to overseas
customers. :-}
Hans Mulder hansm@cs.kun.nl
------------------------------
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Wiring Houses (was Two Wires Become Four; GTE Won't Explain)
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1992 15:13:11 GMT
A while ago (if I'm not out to lunch) there were some queries from
some fellow who was wiring his house and wanted to know what sort of
wire he should pull. Responses ranged from code up to "UTP and
thin wire for every room". Does anyone know what he actually ended up
installing?
Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 10:53:31 EST
From: olsen@masala.LCS.MIT.EDU (James Olsen)
Subject: Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
All the suggestions for stringing {2,3,4}-pair telephone cable in a
new house are quite reasonable, but if I ever build a new house (or
extend an old one), I'm going to provide plastic conduit runs to every
room, all interconnected to a central point. This will accommodate
not only telephone wire, but TV cable, speaker cable, intercom,
computer networks, etc.
The most important point is that it will accomodate the kind of cable
that will be in routine use 10 or 20 years from now, even though we
don't yet know what it will be.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #62
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19945;
21 Jan 92 15:49 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14835
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 13:05:49 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14271
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 13:05:15 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 13:05:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201211905.AA14271@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #63
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 13:05:09 CST Volume 12 : Issue 63
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Andy Sherman)
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Alan M. Gallatin)
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Wm Randolph Franklin)
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Douglas Hedges)
Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI (Peter da Silva)
Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low (Bob Frankston)
Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain (Robert S. Helfman)
Re: Customer Account Security (John Higdon)
Re: Zip + 6? (Linc Madison)
Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (David Niebuhr)
Re: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options (P. da Silva)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: andys@ulysses.att.com
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 12:09:49 EST
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Murray Hill, NJ
In article <telecom12.49.6@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:
> Of course, the other solution is to never accept the p-to-p call and
> simply use it as a cue to call right back (making the call p-to-p
> *AND* collect is a good way to ensure you never have to pay for the
> call!!!)
That, of course, is a fraudulent use of the service. It is certainly
immoral and possibly illegal. Is there any reason why phone companies
owe it to you to act as a free message service?
Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928
READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking!
[Moderator's Note: Since whenever, the phone company has always been
fair game, haven't they? :) PAT]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 12:51:49 EST
From: alan@acpub.duke.edu (Alan M. Gallatin)
In a prior message, andys@ulysses.att.com wrote:
>> Of course, the other solution is to never accept the p-to-p call and
>> simply use it as a cue to call right back (making the call p-to-p
>> *AND* collect is a good way to ensure you never have to pay for the
>> call!!!)
> That, of course, is a fraudulent use of the service. It is certainly
> immoral and possibly illegal. Is there any reason why phone companies
> owe it to you to act as a free message service?
Operator: I have a person-to-person collect call for Joe.
Joe: Yes, this is Joe.
Operator: The call is from Bob Jones. Will you pay for the call?
Joe: No, I refuse the charges.
Joe, Bob and the Operator all now know that Bob wants to speak with
Joe. Where is the fraud???? There is full disclosure of Bob's desire
to speak with Joe, Bob's lack of willingness to pay for the call and
Joe's lack of willingness to accept a collect call. Joe is fully
within his rights to then call Bob back if he so choses.
Fraudulent? Absolutely not, since nothing is being hidden from telco.
Immoral? Again, no, since everything is out in the open.
Illegal? Certainly not; Joe is under no obligation to accept collect calls
and has every right to make any direct dial call he wants.
As long as the phone company offers collect calls, they explicitly
grant the called party the right to proceed as I just illustrated.
Consider the following example:
Jack (who lives in California) calls Jill (in New York) collect on a
weekday afternoon at 4:30pm PST using AT&T. Jill knows that accepting
the charges will cost *HER* a surcharge plus AT&T's daytime rates.
Instead, she would prefer to pay the *NIGHTTIME RATES* that she can
get from dialing direct via MCI PrimeTime (flat rate hours begin at
5pm). Rather than pay $.22+ per minute plus a surcharge, she only
pays $.1083 to another LD company. Yes, a cynic can view this
scenerio as taking advantage of the phone company; however, keep in
mind "I refuse the charges" only menas that "I don't want to accept
the collect call and the charges associated with it" -- It does not
mean, nor does it imply, "I don't want to talk to the calling party."
Finally, does the phone company (any of them) owe it to customers to
act as a free message service? Of course not; but as long as
customers have the legitimate option to refuse charges (which they
should so they don't get stuck paying for calls they don't want), an
announcement of a collect call will continue to serve as a "free
message."
The only potential fraudulent use of the service I can see is:
Operator: "I have a person-to-person call for Joe."
Joe: "I'm sorry but Joe is not here right now."
*THAT* is obvious fraud due to the lie involved to elicit a free message.
Your response is welcome ...
ALAN M. GALLATIN Internet: alan@acpub.duke.edu
Duke University School of Law Home: +1 919 493 8903
------------------------------
From: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin)
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Date: 20 Jan 92 23:42:41 GMT
In article <telecom12.37.3@eecs.nwu.edu> on 14 Jan 92 04:06:39 GMT,
stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes:
> Another antiquated service is third-number billing, although this one
> is still used quite a bit. There are a lot of people who just cannot
> deal with a "newfangled" calling card, and will always place
> occasional away-from-home calls in this manner. Telco will have to
> continue to provide this service despite the fraud that results.
Not in NY! Several years ago, NYNEX claimed that they were starting
to verify all third number billings. So now the only way you can
charge a call to your home number when you're away are 1) use a
calling card, and 2) hope that the burglar at home answers and accepts
the charge.
Wm. Randolph Franklin
Internet: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (or @cs.rpi.edu) Bitnet: Wrfrankl@Rpitsmts
Telephone: (518) 276-6077; Telex: 6716050 RPI TROU; Fax: (518) 276-6261
Paper: ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180
------------------------------
From: hedges@pilot.njin.net (Douglas Hedges)
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Date: 21 Jan 92 15:36:00 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
I never gave any thought to person-to-person until recently. I called
long-distance to speak with our utility company (I'd moved) to arrange
sending the final bill. I dialed direct and got caught in the web of,
"All our customer service reps are busy. Please stay on the line." A
few minutes of this at daytime rates was too expensive. I called an
Operator and she suggested person-to-person as, "I wouldn't be charged
until I was connected with a a customer service rep." She stayed on
the line with me until this happened, 15 minutes later. She couldn't
believe the delay. Plus we had an informative and friendly chat while
waiting. I'm glad they still offer it.
------------------------------
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Please Explain the Difference Between CID and ANI
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 13:57:21 GMT
In article <telecom12.49.1@eecs.nwu.edu> clements@BBN.COM writes:
> Maybe we need a regulation that requires disclosure of a POTS number,
> with CLID blocking honored, along with every 800 number that is
> advertised.
Or, at least, disclosure of a POTS number so that people who can't
call 800 (or have discovered that 800 calls can be retconned into 900
calls) can get through. It'd also be less likely to be busy.
Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1.
------------------------------
From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com
Subject: Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low
Date: Mon 20 Jan 1992 01:14 -0500
After listening to the 800-54-Privacy spiel, I can't help but
wondering whether the newspapers will also want to make sure that the
proposed privacy measures bar their own use of the information from
their 900 number services for marketing purposes. Or maybe they
should be banned from offering communications services? Or from
targeting specific editions? There was some truth in the
800-54-Privacy message, but the aroma of self-interest is rather
intense. The idea of controlling the use of the information rather
than the business wasn't mentioned and there is no hint of
monopolistic threats. Should newspapers be allowed to have cable
franchises?
[Moderator's Note: Let's face it, the newspapers are running scared
and crying sour grapes. The numbers of Americans who read on a daily
basis (anything -- let alone newspapers) has reached an all-time low.
People much prefer looking at the Talking Heads on their television
sets; the men with the fifty dollar hairdoos and the fifty cent
brains. The era of printed news each day in a newspaper will be ending
in a few years. The newspapers know it and will fight any newcomers
encroaching into territory they (the papers) cannot control, TPC being
one. PAT]
------------------------------
From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Two Wires Become Four; and GTE Won't Explain
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 07:34:27 GMT
In article <telecom12.33.9@eecs.nwu.edu> andrew@frip.wv.tek.com
writes:
> I'm building a new house and it's time for me to plan my signal
> wiring. I'm served by GTE Northwest in Tigard Oregon, exchange
> 503-620. I called them and was sent their booklet "Customer Installed
> Premises Wiring Guide." There's a picture of how to wire the
> "customer provided wire junction," where the four conductors in my
> internal wiring attach to four screws. I'm no expert on telecom
> wiring and I thought, once and for all, to find out why I'm supposed
> to run four wires when the telco puts only two into my house.
> The technical issue: the answer I got boils down to redundancy -- if
> one of the two signal conductors breaks in my internal cable, I can
> repair it by selecting one of the two spares. But, if this is the
> case, why are all four connectors brought out to the RJ11 jack? I'd
> be grateful for a technical answer.
If you are bringing only four conductors to each phone jack location,
you're being incredibly short-sighted. Even older homes typically have
six pairs to each jack.
What if you later decide to add a line or two? (Double RJ-11 jacks are
easy to find.) Imagine that your kids grow up to become talky
teen-agers. You decide to put in a line for your modem. You decide to
put a fax in your in-home office. You install an alarm system and need
a line for the digital communicator to call the monitoring service.
The list goes on and on. The expense in doing the wiring is not the
cable itself, it's the labor to bring it from jack to jack. Believe
me, you won't regret putting more pairs in now.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 00:30 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Customer Account Security
Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com> writes:
> This must have changed VERY recently. About four months ago, I called
> Pacific Bell to get my balance.
> The rep's response to this? "Well, sir, if you call the account
> balance giving out information, then I guess I did!" Can you believe
> that? Some security.
In all fairness, I forgot to mention that when all this came down a
couple of years ago, I raised a monumental stink. Someone had
impersonated me and got my private line numbers. Someone else had made
changes on my account. As a result, I was damn mad and highly
motivated.
Recently, someone alerted me that an "angry father" was looking to get
his hands on "whoever is running that damn party line". Seems his
daughter, in sultry voice, was giving her (family) phone number out to
some sex-starved dennisons on my free "party line". Naturally, the
calls coming into his house day and night were fault of the person
running the party line (me).
I called the business office to ask about the security of the info on
that number. I asked, "Would you give someone the billing name on that
number?" "Not on your life", was the answer. So far, I have received
not one call from anyone regarding the "party line". But then, that
account could have a special flag as a result of many such inquiries.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 01:10:21 PST
From: linc@tongue1.Berkeley.EDU (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Zip + 6?
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
garym@telesoft.com (Gary Morris) in <telecom12.52.3@eecs.nwu.edu>:
>> As addresses creep up to 11 digits, has the Post Office heard about
>> checksums or other techniques to reduce errors?
> The modulo 10 check digit in the bar code has already been mentioned
> by several readers but no one mentioned that each digit in the barcode
> is 5 bits, essential 4 bits plus a check bit. So they can detect an
> error on each digit or on the whole zip code. They could even
> reconstruct an unreadable digit from the checksum.
Yes and no. It's not actually four bits plus a checkbit, because it's
not that kind of binary. If you look carefully, you will see that
each digit consists of two tall bars and three short bars. To read a
postal barcode, add the values of the two tall bars together, with the
special caveat that 7+4=0. The values of the bars are, from left to
right, 7-4-2-1-0. Thus, the digits 0-9 are ||::: :::|| ::|:| ::||:
:|::| :|:|: :||::: |:::| |::|: and |:|::, where | is a tall and :
short. Also tack a tall bar on each end of the barcode.
Trivia: what does the acronym POSTNET mean? (POSTal Numeric Encoding
Technique)
Linc Madison = Linc@Tongue1.Berkeley.EDU =
94701-2811 or ||:|:::|::||:::|||::::::||::|:||::|::::||:::|||:::||
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 08:28:18 -0500
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM
In <telecom12.53.8@eecs.nwu.edu> jeh@cmkrnl writes:
> In article <telecom12.45.4@eecs.nwu.edu>, rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes:
>> In article <telecom12.36.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, davidb@zeus.ce.washington.
>> edu (David W. Barts) writes:
>>> This is known as an ALIT (Automatic Line Insulation Test), performed
>>> by the phone company in the wee hours of the morning to detect faults
>>> in the twisted pair serving your home. ALIT involves placing a DC
>>> voltage of about 100v across the pair and measuring the leakage
>>> current. This subject has been discussed in this Digest extensively
>>> in the past.
>> Actually ALIT is an old system, not much used these days. Current
>> automated Line test systems typically do the testing at 10V or so.
> A friend who used to work for Bell Labs has a different explanation.
> He claims that the CO is probing your line to see how many ringer
> equivalents are on it, so that the CO will deliver enough current to
> ring them on.
> [Moderator's Note: In the olden days, when telco was 'probing your
> line to measure ringer current' it was to see how many extensions were
> on the line versus what you were paying for. Does anyone remember
> those days, when there was such a thing as an 'illegal extension'? PAT]
I had what could be called an 'illegal extension' which was my modem.
Sure enough, I received a phone call one day questioning me about it
but as luck would have it I had disconnected it and taken it for
repair.
I explained that there were only two phones in my house and that they
were more than welcome to make any test that they wanted right then
and there and that if they found just the two then they could quit
making a false claim. (No, I didn't use the "I'm not a crook"
phrase :)
The response was "Oh, sorry to bother you, goodbye." End of case.
Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093
------------------------------
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 14:04:12 GMT
In article <telecom12.53.7@eecs.nwu.edu> amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew
M. Dunn) writes:
> In article <telecom12.43.11@eecs.nwu.edu> peter@taronga.com (Peter da
> Silva) writes:
>> they save the last number anyway for call-blocking, why can't they
>> make something like this for after the fact (i.e., you dial *something
>> and it tells you who last called).
> No!
(sigh)
This proposal is *in addition to* Caller-ID. An additional source of
revenue for the phone company, and a lower up-front cost for folks who
don't want to buy a special Caller-ID display unit. I don't think a
per-call charge for C-ID delivery is fair, for example, but a per-call
charge for a service like this definitely is.
Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #63
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21667;
21 Jan 92 16:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18085
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 14:14:17 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19948
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 14:13:47 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 14:13:47 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201212013.AA19948@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #64
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 14:13:33 CST Volume 12 : Issue 64
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Caller-ID Area Code in Toronto (John Macdonald)
Re: Caller-ID Area Code in Toronto (Mark Brader)
Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois (Raymond C. Jender)
Re: Cellular Rates Go Up (Norman Soley)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Eric Florack)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Tim Gorman)
Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations (Harold Hallikainen)
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Jim Hutchison)
Re: Reporter Seeks Information on 800 Billed as 900 (Steven M. Palm)
Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (John Rice)
Re: How Do You Calculate a 32-bit CRC? (Harold Hallikainen)
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (Tony Harminc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: eci386!jmm@uunet.uu.net (John Macdonald)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Area Code in Toronto
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 14:53:43 -0500
In article <telecom12.47.7@eecs.nwu.edu> Bob Miller <bobmiller@trcoa.
enet.dec.com> writes:
> I noticed a change to how Caller-ID is displayed in Toronto 416.787
> exchange. Since the introduction of the service only local calls were
> displayed and did not give an area code, long distance calls displayed
> "LONG DISTANCE". I noticed a call last night that included the area
> code '416-xxx-xxxx'. I have yet to receive a long distance call to
> see how it is displayed.
That may not mean that they are prepared (or even preparing) to offer
display of Caller ID of long distance incoming calls. It just means
that they are preparing now for the upcoming (early 1993?) split of
the 416 area code -- there will be local calls that do not come from
416, but from the split off area code. 416 will be used strictly for
Metropolitan Toronto, the new area code will be used for the rest of
the current area; which will continue to include a large number of
places that are in the local calling area for Toronto (like Pickering,
Mississauga, Markham, Richmod Hill, ...).
John Macdonald jmm@eci386
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 19:34:00 -0500
From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Area Code in Toronto
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
> I noticed a change to how Caller-ID is displayed in Toronto 416.787
> exchange. Since the introduction of the service only local calls were
> displayed and did not give an area code, long distance calls displayed
> "LONG DISTANCE". I noticed a call last night that included the area
> code '416-xxx-xxxx'. I have yet to receive a long distance call to
> see how it is displayed.
Perhaps this is preparation for the split of area code 905 from 416
next year. Since 416 will include Metro Toronto, which is smaller
than the local calling area for Metro Toronto, it follows that calls
between some parts of 905 and any part of 416 will be local.
I got Call Return last May, soon after it was offered in 416-488. The
voice message informing you of the number that last called your line
(which you get before returning a call) has always included the area
code. I find it annoying; I think it should be given only if
different ... especially as it currently couldn't *be* different.
Is this the usual behavior?
Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com
[Moderator's Note: We get no announcement at all of the number we are
returning the call to. That is deemed too close to Caller-ID here. We
dial *69 and it rings ... ask the person answering if you wish to know
what you reached and where. The trade off here is *67 will not block
the number for the purpose of auto call-back as it will for Caller-ID.
That seems to be a reasonable compromise. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 14:53:43 EST
From: rcj1@ihlpf.att.com (Raymond C Jender)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Now Operational in Northern Illinois
Organization: AT&T
In article <telecom12.40.6@eecs.nwu.edu> wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
(David Lesher) writes:
>> Our system uses the standard *67 + number for blocking on a call by
>> call basis as desired. In addition, the subscriber to caller-ID can
>> turn off reception of numbers if desired with *85, and turn on the
>> reception with *65, although I cannot imagine why the person paying to
>> receive the information would want to turn off delivery.
> Why? Because IBT is charging you PER CALL, for getting CNID. This is
> in addition to the monthly charges.
Actually, in my area the price is $6.50 for up to 299 incoming calls
and two cents for each additional incoming call.
[Moderator's Note: Same here. We get 300 calls in the package. PAT]
------------------------------
From: soley@trooa.enet.dec.com (Norman Soley)
Subject: Re: Cellular Rates Go Up
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 20 JAN 92 13:36:27
In article <telecom12.53.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA
writes:
> The story regarding Canadian cellular services running their rates up
> made reference to a Bell Cellular "Lifeline" grade of service. This
> does not appear to be a "lifeline" service in the sense that it would
> be known in the U.S. (ie. as a cheaper phone service intended for the
> poor, unemployed, etc). In fact, the U.S. "lifeline" services are a
> generally unknown concept in Canada. Rather, this appears to be a
> brand name or trade name for the cheap class of cell service.
I think that "lifeline" may have been introduced by the original
poster. Cantel calls this service "Occasional User Plan".
Norman Soley, Specialist, Professional Software Services, ITC District
Digital Equipment of Canada soley@trooa.enet.dec.com
Opinions expressed are mine alone and do not reflect those of Digital
Equipment Corporation or my cat Marge.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 07:19:17 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones:TELECOM Digest V12 #51
> It will soon be a year since we expected the Judge to rule on methods
> and procedures to eliminate this default routing of 1+ coin to AT&T.
According to the paper, the opening arguments are supposed to be
starting on the 22nd of this month. (Hey, that's this Wed!)
A number of people, in private notes to me here and at home, have
noted that part of the problem is that AT&T is supposedly the only
company that's been willing to invest in inter-exhange signalling
equipment, (Which as I gather it would also explain the lack of answer
supervision in a lot of LATA's.) After doing some investigation, I
find this is simply not the case.
The fact of the matter is; that AT&T is currently taking positions
against SWBT, and a few others being allowed to carry inter-LATA
signalling, even inside of their service areas. Others, like US WEST,
have been pressing to consolidate signal traffic to six signal
transfer points. AT&T insists that an STP in every lata is required.
Far be it from me to defend SWBT on ANYTHING, normally, but in this
case, they're right, sort of. While I have a great deal of problems
with the RBHC's dealing in LD services, a ruling here in AT&T's favor
would seem to lay down a precedent in the area of signalling, against
the IDLC's ability to deal with simple call supervision, let alone
coin calls ... as well as cost effective signalling inside of RBHC's
locals. If the ruling comes down here in AT&T's favor, here, it would
seem to require also, that each of the ILDC's also must have an STP in
each LATA. This would prove to be a vast cost advantage to AT&T, since
their signalling is already up and running, and since they have been
very effective at blocking other companies, be they ILDC's or
locals,(RBHC or otherwise) from dealing with STP's in a cost-effective
manner.
> Is this against the intent of equal access as it was meant to be (as
> opposed to how the Judge defines it)? YOU BET IT IS, at least in my
> opinion. It is a prime example of an artificially allocated market. If
> 1+ calls were routed to reorder or otherwise blocked from non-AT&T
> PICed stations, there would certainly soon be a resolution in the
> market. Either the premise owners would choose another PIC because of
> customer complaints, the carriers would start providing the service,
> or nothing at all would happen.
Again, far be it from me to side with SWBT on much of /anything/, but
I agree here, Tim.
We seem to be stuck between a rock and a hard place, on this one.
Either we allow the signalling to be processed by the RBHC's they way
they see fit, or we lose cost effective call signaling on the ILDC's.
Tough choice, but between the two, you /know/ which way I'd go ...
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 92 10:23:43 EST
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: PICs From RBOC Payphones
Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com> writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #52:
> The problem is that for technical reasons, the long distance carrier must
> have a point-of-presence directly with each switch that has coin
> phones attached in order to control the coin mechanism. No access
> tandems are allowed. Since Sprint, MCI, etc., don't nearly have a POP
> in each exchange, it would be probibitively expensive for them to put
> this in just to service sent-paid coin calls. This is definitely a
> declining market!
Not so! As of about 1991, all major networks could be made capable of
sending this traffic to a carrier via an access tandem. This included
the No. 1 ESS. Some switches that could not included the DMS10 and the
No. 2B ESS (although the No. 2 may be fixed by now). This could be
done using either OSS signaling or EAOSS signaling. So even this is
not a reason for the carriers to not offer the service.
As far as I know, there has never been an SS7 signaling standard set
for operator services. BellCore was working on one in 1990, but to my
knowledge it has never been published. It would probably be three to
five years after publication before it could be implemented by the
switch and STP vendors. Anyone have any newer information on this
subject?
Tim Gorman-SWBT
*All opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 14:51:56 -0800
From: hhallika@nike.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
> [Moderator's Note: I wonder what possible objection they had to
> leaving them in place on the Internet? PAT]
They might not want outdated standards out there or to pend
the money to maintain them.
Harold
------------------------------
From: hutch@qualcomm.com (Jim Hutchison)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Organization: Qualcomm Incorporated
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 21:24:43 GMT
In article <telecom12.46.10@eecs.nwu.edu> mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net
writes:
> Would someone like to explain how CDMA works? I understand that it
> spreads the signal across a huge bandwidth in a way that allows the
> receiver to select 1 of N signals ... but how? A CDMA primer, anyone?
CDMA uses spread spectrum, encoding, power control, and a few neat
tricks I'm not sure have been disclosed yet.
In a nutshell:
The transmission is encoded in an identifying fashion
The frames are transmitted
The frames arrive as this big scrambled mush
The received frames are sorted out of the mush by decoding
For more detailed information, contact:
Allen Salmasi
Qualcomm
10555 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, CA 92121-1617
USA
phone: 619/587-1121 email: asalmasi@qualcomm.com
He is a marketing wizard, instead of an engineer, but he has all the
disclosed information within easy reach.
Likewise there have been some IEEE journal articles, try a good library.
Jim Hutchison {dcdwest,ucbvax}!ucsd!qualcomm!hutch or hutch@qualcomm.com
Disclaimer: I am not an official spokesman for Qualcomm
------------------------------
From: "Steven M. Palm" <smp@myamiga.mixcom.com>
Subject: Re: Reporter Seeks Information on 800 Billed as 900
Date: 19 Jan 92 22:19:47 GMT
Organization: Currently Lacking Organization
In <telecom12.48.9@eecs.nwu.edu> Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com writes:
> Nak.
> It's also worth finding out who did NOT get charged. I'm in Eastern
> Mass and have not seen such charges and my default carrier is ATT.
> (Yes, I did try the 800 number).
I tried it one time, for one minute. I received a bill for that. I
suppose I could fight it, since it was a one-time occurance, and I
hung up right after hearing the $0.95/minute charge. But it's hardly
worth it.
smp@myamiga.mixcom.com Steven M. Palm Milwaukee, WI
------------------------------
From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 23:56:13 GMT
> [Moderator's Note: In the olden days, when telco was 'probing your
> line to measure ringer current' it was to see how many extensions were
> on the line versus what you were paying for. Does anyone remember
> those days, when there was such a thing as an 'illegal extension'? PAT]
I remember that Pat. Fortunately it didn't last long (relatively
speaking). Then there was a period where you could add your own
extension, but the RBOCs wanted specifically to know the FCC ID of the
telephone device (to be sure it was a 'legal' phone). Life sure has
changed.
John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com
(708)-940-9000 - (work) (708)-438-7011 - (home)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 22:31:36 -0800
From: hhallika@nike.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: How Do You Calculate a 32-bit CRC?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
See the January 1992 issue of Embedded Systems Programming for
a great article on CRCs. There is a bunch of sample code (in Pascal).
Embedded Systems Programming is published by Miller Freeman
Publications, 600 Harrison Street, San Francisco, CA 94107, phone 415
905 2200.
Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@pan.calpoly.edu
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 23:11:09 EST
From: Tony Harminc <TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
dklur@attmail.com wrote:
> When I dial a phone number and hear the called party's phone "ring", I
> am really hearing tones generated by my local switch, right?
> If this is true, then why when I call an international phone number,
> do I hear a different kind of ringing than the ringing for a domestic
> call?
Generally the ringing tone you hear is generated by the distant CO and
sent back to you on the same voice path that will be used when the
called party answers.
The SS7 signalling system does make provision for the local switch to
generate tones, but there are two reasons this doesn't happen too
often:
1) The chances of the entire connection being SS7 end-to-end are not
yet very high. This is changing.
2) Even if the equipment is capable, it isn't clear what the
advantages are of generating a local (caller's end) ringing tone.
When the called party answers, the voice path has to be connected in a
big hurry to avoid cutting off the first word or two. This means the
"call has been answered" message has to make its way through the
(separate) signalling network back to your CO, the local ringing cut
off, and the voice path connected all in milliseconds. It's possible,
but probably not reliable. Because the timing of the answer is
unpredictable, there is little to be gained by not connecting the
voice path until answer. The reason original suggested for generating
all tones locally is that they can be of the form familiar to the
caller, but I think this is pretty weak these days with most people
being quite familiar with tones from other countries.
Busy signals are another matter, however. It makes great sense to
have the distant end send back a "busy" message without ever setting
up the voice path. Then you can listen to the locally generated busy
signal all day if you like, without occupying a valuable trunk across
town or the world.
I've noticed on calls from here (Toronto) to the UK that in the last
year or so, busy signals are being generated locally. Curiously, at
least part of the voice path seems to get set up (slight background
noise), then there is a click, the noise goes away, and the normal
Canadian busy signal comes on. If it does ring, it's always a UK
ring.
Tony H.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #64
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26002;
21 Jan 92 18:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26419
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 16:42:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25975
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 16:41:57 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 16:41:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201212241.AA25975@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #66
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 16:41:54 CST Volume 12 : Issue 66
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Bob Denny)
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Don Newcomb)
Re: ISDN For PC? (David E. Martin)
Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone (Steven A Rubin)
Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low (Robert L. McMillin)
Re: Germany Update: New City Codes For Former "East Germany" (Carl Moore)
Re: The Spread of Telepoints (Duncan Rogerson)
Re: CLID Chip Set (Don Froula)
Re: Cellular "Lifeline" Service (Tony Harminc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: denny@dakota.alisa.com (Bob Denny)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 17:16:41 GMT
Organization: Alisa Systems, Inc.
In <telecom12.46.10@eecs.nwu.edu> mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net writes:
> Would someone like to explain how CDMA works? I understand that it
> spreads the signal across a huge bandwidth in a way that allows the
> receiver to select 1 of N signals ... but how? A CDMA primer, anyone?
I do not know the details of the specific system being proposed, but I
am familiar with "spread spectrum" systems, of which the proposed
cellular "CDMA" system appears to be one. So I'll take a stab at some
basics in hopes someone else more knowlegable will expand on or
correct ...
First: the "MA" in CDMA stands for "multiple access". There are three
common multiple access schemes: frequency division (FDMA), time
division (TDMA) and code division (CDMA). Frequency division is what's
used now. Each "circuit" gets a slice of bandwidth, a channel. TDMA
uses the concept of chopping up each circuit in time, fast enough so
that the users can't tell, and then interleaving (multiplexing) the
circuits in time. The signals could be either analog or digital. I
have no idea how the proposed TDMA cellular system works, so that's
that.
There are two common forms of CDMA systems: direct-sequence and
frequency-hopping. I will describe the direct-sequence variation. I do
not know which is used by Qualcomm. The principles are the same,
though.
CDMA works by first digitally encoding the audio signal, resulting in
a stream of bits. Various tricks are used to compress the audio so as
to minimize the bit rate at the expense of fidelity.
Next the encoded audio signal is mixed with a pseudo-random bitstream.
This produces a resulting wideband noise-like signal. The pseudo-noise
(PN) sequence is generated with very specific characteristics.It is
the PN sequence that is the "code" that CDMA is named after. Each
circuit is assigned a unique code for generating the PN sequence.
These codes are designed to (a) be very noiselike and (b) to have very
low correlation between the codes.
The signal is reconstructed at the receiving end by mixing the
incoming spread-spectrum signal with an exact duplicate of the PN
sequence used to generate the signal at the sending end. The PN
sequence at the receiving end must be synchronized with that at the
transmitting end (plus any propagation delay), and this is the hardest
part of making a CDMA system work. Simplistically, the receiver's PN
generator is slewed in time slowly across the repetition time of the
PN sequence. At one point, there will be a sharp jump in correlation
between the receiver's PN sequence and the incoming signal.
Now you can see why it is vital that the PN codes be designed to have
very low correlation between them. It is needed to prevent false locks
on other codes. No code family is perfect in this regard. You might
also have noticed that the codes must have low auto-correlation as
well, so that there is only one main correlation peak between the
incoming signal and the local PN generator.
If you aren't confused at this point, great. Now here's why
spread-spectrum is so great. First, the fact that the signal's energy
is spread across a very wide range of frequencies makes it very
resistant to multipath. I won't go into the explanation of why, but
trust me, a properly engineered CDMA system will be virtually immune
to flutter and fading, even in the worst urban high-rise areas.
Secondly, the PN sequence can be generated with an encryption key and
provide a reasonable level of security. I have no idea if the Qualcomm
proposal includes security provisions, though.
Spread-spectrum has been used very successfully (!!) by the military
for field mobile communications, including satellite circuits, for
over twenty years. And we all know how long it takes to convert an
idea into a field ready system for the military. It is a total shame
that cellular technology is soooo far behind. It'll be an an even
greater shame if the second-generation system doesn't use the highly
successful spread-spectrum systems that have been around for over
twenty years.
Robert B. Denny voice: (818) 792-9474
Alisa Systems, Inc. fax: (818) 792-4068
Pasadena, CA (denny@alisa.com, ..uunet!alisa.com!denny)
------------------------------
From: don@q-aais.navo.navy.mil (Don Newcomb)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Date: 21 Jan 92 19:08:03 GMT
Reply-To: don@q-aais.navo.navy.mil (Don Newcomb)
Organization: U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office
In article <telecom12.62.4@eecs.nwu.edu> rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com
(Ron Dippold) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 62, Message 4 of 11
> mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net writes:
>> Would someone like to explain how CDMA works? I understand that it
>> spreads the signal across a huge bandwidth in a way that allows the
>> receiver to select 1 of N signals ... but how? A CDMA primer, anyone?
> Okay, let me explain as much as I can without (a) giving away anything
> proprietary, and (b) getting too technical.
[Stuff deleted]
> Each transmission is spread across the band by encoding it with a
> pseudorandom sequence of ones and zeros that can be calculated from
> the absolute system time. Different "channels" are obtained by using
> an offset from this sequence.
> Now here's the beautiful part. The recieved signal is demodulated
> using the same sequence. If you demodulate with one sequence of ones
> and zeros, _only_ those signals that have been encoded with that
> sequence will fall out. All other signals look just like background
> noise. So if you have seven cells near each other, they can all share
> the same frequency band. They just use a different offset. When the
> mobile powers up it attempts to find a cell at each of the possible
> offsets until it finds a transmitting cell. You can get channels
> within a cell by offsetting another small "distance" in the sequence.
OK. So they are probably using a Linear Maximal Pseudorandom Sequence
to modulate and demodualte the signal. But, doesn't this imply some
rather heavy duty signal processing? Is a matched filter adequate to
demodulate the signal or do they require all sorts of bizarre transforms?
Donald Newcomb newcomb@navo.navy.mil
------------------------------
From: dem%nhmpw2@ames.arc.nasa.gov (David E. Martin)
Subject: Re: ISDN For PC?
Date: 21 Jan 92 18:12:46 GMT
Reply-To: dem@fnal.fnal.gov
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL, USA
> Does anyone have any pointers to vendors / suppliers of ISDN plug-in
> boards or modules for the IBM PC?
Teleos Communications, Inc.
Eatontown, NJ
(201) 389-5700
AT&T Network Systems
Morristown, NJ
"contact your AT&T Sales Representative"
Fujitsu Network Switching of America
San Jose, CA
(408) 954-1088
DGM&S
Mt Laurel, NJ
(609) 866-1212
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc
Atlanta, GA
(404) 840-9200
I bought several of the Hayes PC Adapters and have been pleased with
them and Hayes support.
David E. Martin
National HEPnet Management Phone: +1 708 840-8275
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory FAX: +1 708 840-2783
P.O. Box 500; MS 234; Batavia, IL 60510 USA E-Mail: DEM@FNAL.FNAL.Gov
------------------------------
From: sar1952@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Steven A Rubin)
Subject: Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 21:14:32 GMT
In article <telecom12.57.8@eecs.nwu.edu> chuck@roadrunner.pictel.com
(Chuck Grandgent) writes:
> OK, this happens to me enough often enough I'm getting tired of it.
> In a hotel last night and get "IntegraTel" as the payphone service
> provider. I tried with all my might and couldn't get 1-0-ATT-0 to get
> me AT&T. I called my house three times, and the first two times my
> audio wasn't getting through ... I'm sure I'll get billed though. And
> this has happened before.
This would not happen to be from a hotel on Ft. Lauderdale, would it?
I was in FL at the end of November, and had to make a few calls back
to Pikesville, MD. I attempted to use AT&T as my carrier, but the
phone would not let me! So I called Southern Bell and told the
operator that the payphone I was calling from (Southeast Pay
Telephone) was a noncompliant COCOT, to which she replied that she had
no idea what I was talking about and that she could not do anything
for me, not even connect me to AT&T!!!
Anyway, I just received my phone bill and, lo and behold, Integretel
was the carrier for these calls that cost a bloody forune. A seven
minute call cost $5.57 and a three minute call cost me $4.28! I have
absolutely no intention of paying this much for those calls. I am
willing to pay a worst case scenario AT&T rate ($1.85 for operator
assisstance and 21 cents per minute) as a fair, yet still high, price,
but price gouging I will not put up with. I suggest you not pay these
either. The more folks like us who stand up to these rip off artists,
the more of an impact we will have to getting them to either reform
their rates or go out of business.
I pay less than this to call Israel!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 13:26:30 PST
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Baby Bells Hit New Low
> [Comments about the newspapers' self-serving remarks on 800-54-Privacy
> line deleted] There was some truth in the 800-54-Privacy message, but
> the aroma of self-interest is rather intense....
> [Moderator's Note: Let's face it, the newspapers are running scared
> and crying sour grapes. The numbers of Americans who read on a daily
> basis (anything -- let alone newspapers) has reached an all-time
> low....]
Well, let's not hope that things have gotten so bad that the readers
of TELECOM Digest don't pay attention to it anymore. :-) It's an
unfortunate truth, but those people who DO read will be increasingly
the ones who will get the better jobs, who will vote, and who will
determine the course this country takes. It may be sour grapes from
the papers, but it's also a depressing note for our nation.
Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574
Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
[Moderator's Note: Indeed it is a depressing note. The national trade
group representing publishers and booksellers reported recently the
number of American families purchasing *at least one book* in the past
year had reached an all time low. And if you don't think the
handwriting is on the wall for the newspapers, just consider how many
we have lost in the past twenty years through mergers or cessation of
publication. Do any of our older readers remember when (as one example
and not meant to single them out) {The Christian Science Monitor} was
a full-size paper (not tabloid); published six days per week (not
five); had an average of 60-80 pages in each issue (not ten); was full
of written material by world-renowned columnists (instead of
pictures); was a mandatory 'must subscribe' publication in virtually
every public library in the USA, every high school and college
library, and numerous homes in America? Everyone loved and quoted from
the CSM; other magazines and papers regularly reprinted from it; and
world leaders ranging from Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower,
Margaret Thatcher and others said they read it daily? Yes, Americans
have quit reading ... and we are the worse for it, but little comfort
that is to the newspaper industry. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 12:34:14 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Re: Germany Update: New City Codes For Former "East Germany"
Does "new states" mean the former East Germany?
I take it that the city codes of country code 37 are being replaced by
city codes (in the 03 range) in country code 49; and that the city
codes of country code 37 are not to be used with country code 49
because of duplications.
------------------------------
From: duncan@transition.mhs-relay.ac.uk (Duncan Rogerson)
Subject: Re: The Spread of Telepoints
Reply-To: duncan@mhs.ac.uk (Duncan Rogerson)
Organization: University of London Computer Centre, Networks Group
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 15:03:33 GMT
In article <telecom12.58.2@eecs.nwu.edu> cmylod@oracle.nl (Colum
Mylod) writes:
> If memory serves, at least one British trader in these has folded due
> to massive disinterest from the great public. Are they anywhere else?
I *think* there were about three service providers, each of which
pulled out of the sector due to lack of interest. I think Telepoint,
Zone Phone and Mercury Callpoint were the people involved. Last I
heard, Telepoint were going for a re-launch, although with a modified
system, so that, yes, you guessed it, the handsets used on the old
service can't be used on the new one.
I have one of the old system units at the office, so I can be reached
when I'm not at my desk. It works well, especially considering the
amount of electronically noisy kit I use it around. Ordinary cordless
phones just don't work here.
I doubt I'd have much use for it elsewhere, the battery life is only
three hours, and not being able to receive calls, except from private
base stations your handset is registered with, is a definite minus
point.
I notice they've also started installing points on tube platforms.
Nice idea, I guess, but have you ever tried talking on a payphone on a
tube platform? Trying to speak/hear above the noise of the trains is
nigh on impossible.
Dunc
------------------------------
From: froula@rtsg.mot.com (Don Froula)
Subject: Re: CLID Chip Set
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 16:31:57 GMT
Motorola makes a nice one chip implementation with ring detector and
power-down circuitry. It is the MC145447. Samples are shipping with
the number XC145447 number, indicating the die is a pre-production
version. I have the serial output circuit suggested in the
application note in front of me here, and have been playing with it a
few days. It seems to work very well.
A nice feature is 'raw' data output (with the initial '555555...'
sync sequence), or 'cooked' output, with only validated data
persented.
Also, the part will operate with a 3.59 or 3.6864 MHz crystal or a
455KHz resonator.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 12:42:41 EST
From: Tony Harminc <TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Cellular "Lifeline" Service
David W. Barts <davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu> wrote:
> Also note that the service was being provided in Canada, which has
> many more people living in remote areas than the US, so it may make
> sense there but not in the US. Also, how many Canadians live in an
> area where cellular is the ONLY class of phone service available (i.e.
> no wires)?
Sigh. The typical US idea of Canada creeps in again. Canada does not
have many more people living in remote areas than the US. For a
start, the population of Canada is about a tenth that of the US, so in
absolute terms there are far more Americans in almost any situation
than there are Canadians. More important though, is that Canada is a
more urbanized society than is the US. Many people seem to confuse
the low overall population density of the country with the living
circumstances of the average Canadian. The average Canadian lives in
a city. The average American lives in a medium sized town. Looked at
another way, although there are ten times as many Americans as
Canadians, there are not ten times as many cities.
So the question gets answered the same way: the number of Canadians
living in areas where cellular service is the only phone service is
exceedingly small. The truly remote parts of the country have no
phone service at all (or perhaps HF radio service). There is no point
in setting up a cellular infrastructure where there are no towns, no
roads, and no people.
Tony H.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #66
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27292;
21 Jan 92 19:29 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20394
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 15:45:43 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26686
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 15:45:17 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 15:45:17 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201212145.AA26686@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #65
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 15:45:14 CST Volume 12 : Issue 65
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Barton F. Bruce)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Tom Gray)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Tony Harminc)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Marc T. Kaufman)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Julian Macassey)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Tim Gorman)
Re: Determining System ID of Current Cellular System (Monty Solomon)
Re: Rotary Callers, Go Home! (Bud Couch)
Re: Reverse Phone Numbers (David Niebuhr)
Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone (Barton F. Bruce)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Barton F. Bruce" <Barton.Bruce@camb.com>
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Date: 21 Jan 92 05:04:15 EST
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
In article <telecom12.50.4@eecs.nwu.edu>, dave@westmark.westmark.com
(Dave Levenson) writes:
> In most 'modern' CO switches in use in North America, answer
> supervision is available as an extra-cost tariffed service. Most PBX
> owners don't buy it.
Could you provide some examples of typical offerings? USOC codes?
Any for NET in Mass would be most interesting. I can find NO ONE in NET
(and I mean WAY above the local business office types) that knows of
such a service. The *head* of special assembly services allowed as how
he probably ought to look at the subject yet again.
------------------------------
From: grayt@Software.Mitel.Com (Tom Gray)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 09:50:44 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.
In article <telecom12.61.9@eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.
com> writes:
> Why should anyone pay for custom calling? Hell, those features are
> turned on with a couple of keystrokes. What a rip!
Custom features are turned on by a couple of key strokes. The couple
of key strokes invokes the software which was written to provide the
custom service. This software cost money to write, test and support.
Someone has to pay the switch vendor so that it can pay for the
development of software.
Who better than the users of that software?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 18:48:34 EST
From: Tony Harminc <TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
andys@ulysses.att.com wrote:
>> The PBX isn't the problem here. In North America "modern" CO switches
>> don't pass answer supervision back to the subscriber. (On older
>> switches <step by step/panel> it was sent back to the sub in the form
>> of reversed polarity). This would solve lots of problems with COCOTS,
>> long distance companies, modems, voice forwarding systems and even
>> teleslime automatic calling machines, but alas ...
> Wouldn't reverse polarity make it impossible for me to talk to my home
> answering machine and office voice mail from a line-powered phone? As
> I recall, DTMF generators don't work under reverse polarity ...
True, but for many years now phones have had a diode bridge that makes
polarity questions irrelevant. Phone jacks are often wired backwards
without anyone noticing for years.
Tony H.
------------------------------
From: kaufman@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 21 Jan 92 16:47:45 GMT
71336.1270@CompuServe.COM (tim gorman) writes:
> Should this battery reversal be done with a regular DTMF station set
> attached to the line, the dial would be disabled unless a polarity
> guard existed in the set. The last time I knew, including polarity
> guards in the sets was not standard practice for most set makers.
Only for sets being distributed by phone companies, so they can make
an "incoming calls only" option by reversing tip and ring. EVERY
third party set I have seen on the market has a diode bridge in it
because a non-trivial number of extension cables (like some from Radio
Shack) reverse tip and ring between the plug ends.
Marc Kaufman (kaufman@CS.stanford.edu)
[Moderator's Note: All the 'incoming calls only' lines I've ever seen
were set up so no dial tone was extended to the line. If you went off
hook on one of those lines, all you heard was battery. And the phones
themselves usually have no dial on the front ... just a cover plate
where the dial would go. PAT]
------------------------------
From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Date: 20 Jan 92 14:55:50 GMT
Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A.
In article <telecom12.47.13@eecs.nwu.edu> andys@ulysses.att.com
writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 47, Message 13 of 14
> In article <telecom12.41.1@eecs.nwu.edu> joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe
> Talbot) wrote:
>> The PBX isn't the problem here. In North America "modern" CO switches
>> don't pass answer supervision back to the subscriber. (On older
>> switches <step by step/panel> it was sent back to the sub in the form
>> of reversed polarity).
> Wouldn't reverse polarity make it impossible for me to talk to my home
> answering machine and office voice mail from a line-powered phone? As
> I recall, DTMF generators don't work under reverse polarity ...
DTMF generators will work fine under reverse polarity if they
are not polarity sensitive. Modern 2500 sets, and nearly all DTMF sets
are not polarity sensitive. In "telco speak" (MOTM), this is called
"Polarity Guard". Older 2500 sets that are polarity sensitive can be
retrofitted with "Polarity Guard".
What is "Polarity Guard"? It is a simple diode bridge, after
the hookswitch and before the voltage feed to the DTMF chip or pc
board.
Back in the old days when secondry long distance carriers
required access numbers and ID codes etc, the telco would come out and
retrofit your 2500 sets with Polarity Guard if you complained that the
Touch Tone pad went dead after you had dialed the first number. This
was of course a problem with the polarity reversing after the switch
received acknowledgement that the called party (The LD carrier's
switch) had answered.
In the late seventies and early eighties, many lines were
still switching polarity. Some coin phones were exibiting this
behaviour which made using your telco credit card impossible. But once
the RBOCs twigged to this, things changed.
Also some telcos, if they figured you were using bootlegged
phones and using DTMF without paying for it would reverse the prime
polarity so your DTMF pads would go dead. Flipping the wires at the
protector soon fixed this dastardly deed perpetrated at the CO.
And of course, this leads to what I suppose is an FAQ, "My
Touch Tone phone won't dial". Meaning won't generate tones. Flip the
Tip and Ring leads, either on terminals L1 L2 in the phone or at the
jack flip the red and green wires.
Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jan 92 15:16:38 EST
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #61:
> CO switches DO, however, pass answer supervision to PBX trunks (lines)
> IF they are properly arranged for PBX service. In my experience, this
> means that they are ground start and the answer signal is a line
> reversal.
I'm sorry, but my description of ground-start service includes no
indication of answer supervision.
1. Idle state: Ring=-48v, Tip=floating
2. Station grounds ring. Current flow in ring signals network.
3. Network applies Ground (positive side of battery) to the tip.
4. Station detects ground on the tip as a start dial and goes to loop
supervision mode.
5. Further action is just like a loop start line (i.e. no indication of the
network state at the station).
Again, the only way I know of to get answer supervision is to be
connected to the trunk side of the central office switch via a
DOD-type service. I believe some No. 1A ESS trunks could be set up to
simulate ground start service but I have never actually seen this
done.
Tim Gorman - SWBT
* opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 01:19:12 EST
From: roscom!monty@Think.COM (Monty Solomon)
Subject: Re: Determining System ID of Current Cellular System
John Covert wrote:
> In an article I wrote yesterday entitled "Motorola Cellular Phone Test
> Mode Commands" I asked (among other things) about determining the
> system ID of the current cellular system while roaming.
> Oh, yes, and Cellular One (Southwestern Bell) in Boston told me today
> that they can't tell me what their system ID is. "That's Proprietary
> Information," they say. No matter that it is published in books such
> as the "Cellular Telephone Directory", assigned by the FCC, and a
> matter of public record.
The System ID for Cellular One Boston is 00007. I don't know why they
think it is such a big secret. My phone has no problem telling me
what it is. I haven't tried to determine the SID while roaming.
Monty roscom!monty@bu.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 14:27:20 PST
From: kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net (Bud Couch)
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers, Go Home!
In article <telecom12.46.6@eecs.nwu.edu> strieterd@gtephx.UUCP (Dave
Strieter) writes:
> Several Digest readers have commented that it is cheaper for the telco
> to provide DTMF than rotary pulse dialing, but I fail to understand
> how they come to that conclusion. I can't speak for the 5ESS or
> DMS-100, but on the GTD-5 dial pulses are counted by software which
> monitors the output of an opto-coupler device connected to each line,
> whereas DTMF tones must be decoded by a more-expensive circuit which
> feeds the decoded digits to the software. How does "more expensive" =
> "costs less"?
Simple enough. In the old days it was holding time on the registers;
so that for a given level of service, you needed more registers for DP
than for DTMF. On the GTD-5, it's scan time on the CPU that is saved.
BTW, Dave, when did the -5 start using an opto-coupler for line
current detection? The original design had a rather elegant technique
(patented) that used a miniature relay coil and a Hall device to
supply battery feed and detect current flow. (Sort of like an "A"
relay. :-))
Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS applies
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 06:38:30 -0500
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Reverse Phone Numbers
In <telecom12.56.10@eecs.nwu.edu> Stewarta@sco.COM (Stewart I. Alpert)
writes:
> Can anyone point me towards a source for reverse directory
> information? I'd like to find a way to trace a name/address given a
> phone number.
> [Moderator's Note: In the municipal libraries of most communities, you
> will find a 'criss-cross' directory for the town. Many such libraries
> take inquiries of the directory through their telephone research
> lines. PAT]
This is known as the "Cole's Directory". The difficulty is that what
you see in the regular phone book is what you will see in this one,
just reversed. Unlisted numbers are not listed.
Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093
[Moderator's Note: There are various publishers represented in the
libraries. Haines is quite common in several large cities. But as you
point out, most 'criss-cross' directories simply list what the phone
books lists but organized differently. If your phone is non-pub, it is
unlikely the cross reference directories will have it either. PAT]
------------------------------
From: "Barton F. Bruce" <Barton.Bruce@camb.com>
Subject: Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone
Date: 21 Jan 92 06:40:40 EST
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
In article <telecom12.57.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, chuck@roadrunner.pictel.com
(Chuck Grandgent) writes:
> In a hotel last night and get "IntegraTel" as the payphone service
> provider. I tried with all my might and couldn't get 1-0-ATT-0 to get
> me AT&T. I called my house three times, and the first two times my
> Any pointers or tricks on coping with this besides crabbing to the
> people at the hotel front desk ?
Ask who their carrier is and if 10xxx is available when you book the
room! Then make it quite clear why you are NOT making the reservation.
This is quoting from an AT&T publication for consultants:
"The Commission chose not to order the LECs to offer blocking
and screening features from their central offices. ...
However, the FCC only encouraged the LECs to offer these features."
"There were no guidelines found in the order pertaining to the
enforcement of the unblocking. AT&T believes the FCC will probably
become aware of blocked locations if Operator Service Providers (OSPs)
or end users file complaints as well as through FCC random testing."
"OSPs Must Establish an 800 or 950 Access Number"
"The FCC ordered all OSPs to establish an 800 or 950 access
number within six months. The Commission's action provides consumers
with an alternative means of reaching a prefered carrier at locations
where 10xxx access is temporarily unavailable during the 6-year
transition to full unblocking. The commission concluded that effective
(i.e. targeted) marketing of an 800 or 950 access number could
minimize operating costs by discouraging unnecessary 800 usage where
10XXX is available."
-------
AT&T has chosen to comply by providing an 800, not a 950 number. When
using it, you will have to be patient, because AT&T will ask questions
and WILL BE COLLECTING info on the site! When their database 'knows'
about the site, there will be less delay. You can just BET AT&T makes
sure the FCC is promptly notified! Six months is Feb 9.
The Aug 9, 1991 FCC order required compliance within six months (Fe.b
9, 1992 -- almost here folks!) for equipment that can process 10xxx 0+
while blocking 10xxx 1+. The average modern PBX probably so qualifies.
The switch owner and his vendor decide if they are exempt and then
have another year unless the upgrade costs more than $15/station (ALL
ports count, not just guest phones) to upgrade. If so they can delay
until April 17, 1997 (5 years AFTER April 17, 1992 when all imported
or manufactured equipment MUST support such call processing or lose
certification -- the FCC assumes your non-complying equipment should
be written off by then and MUST then be replaced).
N.B. that if someone decides they are exempt for now, and the FCC
comes in and knows a way *NO MATTER HOW THEY DO IT* that compliance
could have been reached within the guidlines, then that site is in
violation! Teleslimes WATCH-OUT!
------------
"AT&T has developed (at no cost to the LECs) a 1+ split
"keyword central office feature" within 1A, 2B, and 5ESS(r) local
central offices. This new feature option gives LECs the capability to
offer an aggregator call restriction of 10XXX 1+ and 011+ while
allowing 10XXX 0+, 01+, and 1+ calls. AT&T anticipates that this
option will become tariffed and made available by the LECs at a low
cost around March 1992."
------------
'Aggragator' in that context is of course the hotel or university or
prison or nursing home or whatever. Note also that this is all
rush-rush, but still isn't quite in time for the Feb 9 date. So on one
hand prepare for battle, but also realize that folks that are trying
HARD to comply (like my customers!) may be busy waiting for a
screening/blocking service that won't quite be ready in time!
The AT&T 800 number to get to a LD operator I think has been
published, but I don't have it at hand. In any case by Feb 9th it has
to be available to you, and I am sure we will be hearing war stories
about its uses and the ultimate effect right here in C.D.T.
Now if only the FCC had forced making answer supervision available at
a reasonable price ...
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #65
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27783;
21 Jan 92 19:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00498
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 17:43:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03224
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 17:43:06 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 17:43:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201212343.AA03224@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #67
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 17:43:02 CST Volume 12 : Issue 67
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: CB RFI Prevents Datacomm (John A. Limpert)
Re: CB RFI Prevents Datacomm (Bruce Perens)
Re: CB RFI Prevents Datacomm (Jim Graham)
Re: Details Wanted on Call Progress Tones (Eugene R. Schroeder)
Re: AT&T Long Distance Rates (Steve Forrette)
Re: v.42/v.42bis (w/ or w/o Send/Receive FAX) Modems For Sale (M. Kaufman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gronk!johnl@uunet.uu.net (John A. Limpert)
Subject: Re: CB RFI Prevents Datacomm
Organization: BFEC/GSFC
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 15:55:46 GMT
mission!randy@uunet.uu.net writes:
> The CBer refuses to do anything, and my friend is concerned that
> pursuing an FCC complaint would make the living situation quite
> unpleasant.
The CBer may be operating at illegal power levels but the RFI on your
friend's phone line is not caused (in a engineering sense) by the
operation of the transmitter and linear amplifier. Your friend should
talk to the telephone company's service department about adding the
appropriate RFI filters to his phone line.
> [Moderator's Note: The use of a linear amp in the eleven meter (CB)
> band is quite illegal. But if the CB'er had any real knowledge of his
> rig he'd be able to use that power and clean it up to make the signal
> very strong yet *almost* unnoticeable to other non-CB'ers in the area.
You _have_ to explain this, how is this CBer supposed to "clean up"
his signal so that improperly designed and/or installed audio
frequency electronics equipment no longer suffers from interference.
Maybe the CB linear has a spur at 2200 Hz, right ...
I've (legally) operated enough amateur radio equipment to be sick and
tired of hams and CBers getting blamed for every design deficiency of
the crappy consumer electronics equipment that is sold in this
country. RFI problems that are caused by transmitter harmonics and
spurs are relatively rare.
I would advise your friend to inform the local FCC field office about
the CBer using illegal power levels. People like that make it more
difficult for legitimate CB operators to communicate.
> Tell your friend to *furtively* stick a pin in the coax cable run to
> the roof, or better still just cut the coax to the antenna sometime
> while the CB'er is asleep. :) The CB'er will probably assume one of
> his on-air enemies did it, assuming your friend has not yet voiced his
> complaints. :) PAT]
Gee PAT, maybe I should put some sugar in your car's gas tank the next
time you park in the wrong place.
John A. Limpert johnl@gronk.UUCP uunet!n3dmc!gronk!johnl
Code 530.2 Goddard Space Flight Center
[Moderator's Note: If I parked repeatedly in the wrong place after
being warned, and defied the owner of the space to do anything about
it, I'd be hard-pressed to complain about the retaliation I brought on
myself. For information on how to 'clean up his signal', I was going
to print a long dissertation, but then the next message arrived and I
decided he said it as well or better than I ... read on. In my earlier
message I should have also suggested the CB'er could be a good
neighbor by helping the guy downstairs with filtering, etc. PAT]
------------------------------
From: bruce@pixar.com (Bruce Perens)
Subject: Re: CB RFI Prevents Datacomm
Organization: Pixar -- Point Richmond, California
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 20:40:30 GMT
> ...if the CB'er had any real knowledge of his
> rig he'd be able to use that power and clean it up to make the signal
> very strong yet *almost* unnoticeable to other non-CB'ers in the area.
Pat, I think you are confusing two different kinds of interference,
and you've missed a way to eliminate the interference at the receiving
end.
The CBer would be able to make his signal very strong yet unnoticeable
to other radio receivers not tuned to the CB band if he eliminated
"splatter" caused by non-linearity in his so-called "linear"
amplifier. He might also try to attenuate harmonics and eliminate
parasitic oscillation in the amplifier. This would have little effect
on interference with telephones, since they are not very frequency-
selective when it comes to RF :-) .
He might have a harder time eliminating interference with
non-radio-receiver equipment which picks up his AM signal in the
manner of a crystal radio. He could make sure his station is
well-grounded, could correct the SWR and radiation pattern of his
antenna, and fix any feedline problems that make the interference
worse (like pins in the coax that he hasn't noticed). All of this
might not eliminate the strong RF field that is rectified in the
telephone equipment.
Most of this can be eliminated at the receiving end with an RF choke.
I had a similar problem (except my CBer was nicer) and eliminated it
entirely by winding 20 turns of the phone line around a ferrite toroid
at the demarc. Now both of us can have our fun without bothering each
other.
EVERYBODY WITH INTERFERENCE PROBLEMS TO THEIR PHONE OR OTHER AUDIO
EQUIPMENT:
Go to the Radio Shack and buy a few "clamp on RF chokes". These are
ferrite or iron cores that clamp over wires. They work on phone wires,
the phonograph and speaker wires of your stereo, etc. Wind as many
turns as you can of the phone or other wire around one or both sides
of the choke, and clamp it shut. You don't have to break the wire, it
works right through the insulation. It won't bother audio frequencies,
but works well to eliminate radio frequencies. Try one near the
equipment that is interfered with, and at the demarc. On your stereo,
try the speaker wires (they work as antennas and feed RF back into the
set), the cables between the amplifier and various other equipment,
and the power cables.
Remember: when your phone (or modem) picks up interference from a
radio transmitter, it is not the transmitter's problem. A PHONE IS NOT
A RADIO RECEIVER and should not pick up radio signals, no matter how
strong they are. Generally when they do, it is the result the
manufacturers leaving RF bypassing out of the equipment to save 25
cents per unit.
Bruce Perens
------------------------------
From: jim@chi.amoco.com (Jim Graham)
Subject: Re: CB RFI Prevents Datacomm
Reply-To: grahj@gagme.chi.il.us
Organization: Amoco Corporation, Telecommunications Network Design
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 20:03:56 GMT
In article <telecom12.57.3@eecs.nwu.edu> mission!randy@uunet.uu.net
writes:
> [Moderator's Note: The use of a linear amp in the eleven meter (CB)
> band is quite illegal.
Yes it is ... very illegal.
If, on the other hand, the guy is not really a CBer, but is instead an
Amateur Radio operator who may just act like one on the air (they're
around ... they aren't the most popular animal with the rest of the
world, but they do exist), not a CB type, then (depending on the
license class) 300 W may be well within the legal limit.
Now, if this person is in fact a Ham, and refuses to do anything to help,
they deserve absolutely no pity ... and you can disregard most of what
follows ... (any self-respecting Ham would offer assistance to fix RFI
problems they're causing ... period.)
I'm assuming, BTW, that your friend has ASKED for help. Asking the
person to shut their station down isn't the way to do that, either.
Both can co-exist happily with a little bit of effort to block the
interference.
> Tell your friend to *furtively* stick a pin in the coax cable run to
> the roof, or better still just cut the coax to the antenna sometime
> while the CB'er is asleep. :)
Well, before doing that, tell your friend to try protecting the modem
from the interference --- start with the following:
1) Make sure the case is well shielded and GROUNDED. Same goes for
your computer.
2) Use only shielded cables to connect to the PC (ribbon cable is
OUT ... IT VIRTUALLY INVITES RFI.)
3) Go to your local electronics store (or a Radio Shack, if you can't
find better) and get some iron cores designed for eliminating RFI
and (following the directions) wind the power cable for the modem
around the core. Do this for both ends of the power cable (I'm
assuming an external transformer here).
4) While you're at the store, get filters designed for the telephone
line (may well be the same chokes). Install them as per the
directions, too.
5) Make sure the person upstairs has their equipment well grounded,
too. If they don't, that's a sure way to cause problems as well.
All of the hardware for 3 and 4 above should probably cost in the
neighborhood of $10 to $15 (US), and may well eliminate the problem
completely.
If, however, your friend does decide to stick a pin into the coax,
warn him that if the person upstairs is transmitting at the time, he
should wait --- trust me ... I've had RF burns before ... they are
quite painful. They usually seem to produce a very small, very deep
burn that will feel like the affected area is on fire for about a
half-hour. 100 W is enough to do a nice job of it.
BTW, I live in a high-rise apartment, run 100 W with indoor antennas,
and my neighbors have (upon my asking them) told me that they never
have any RFI problems at all. as part of my basic installation, I
installed a low-pass filter (cost about $45) between my rig and the
antenna system. this blocks most of the harmonics that interfere with
other electronic devices, while not degrading my performance on the
air.
I still (sometimes) swamp some of the electronics in my apartment, but
with the antenna sitting right next to them (literally!), that's to be
expected at times. I have more of a problem with the reverse being
true --- my computer interferes with my rig!!!
Feel free to e-mail me at jim@n5ial.chi.il.us if you or your friend
have questions. I'd be happy to try to help. Again, I'm assuming
that your friend has already asked for help (not radio silence)
upstairs, and been told where to go. If they haven't asked for help,
that's the first place to start.
I hope this helps.
Standard disclaimer....Ever since my cat learned to type, there's no
telling whose thoughts these really are...
INTERNET: jim@n5ial.chi.il.us || grahj@gagme.chi.il.us || j.graham@ieee.org
AMATEUR RADIO (packet): TCP/IP: jim@n5ial.ampr.org (44.72.47.193)
AX.25: n5ial@wb9yae (Chicago.IL.US.Earth)
[Moderator's Note: But whether the guy is a Ham or not, that sort of
power in 11-meters is forbidden. And yes, you are correct that a lot
of the guys who used to be in CB decided to start working the Amateur
bands and make a mess of those. Around here, I've heard them go to 40
meters then sit there and tune up without a dummy load, etc. But when
it comes to RF burns -- as much fun as they are! -- nothing beats the
thrill of putting your golden screwdriver in the innards of a linear
amp and poke around having forgotten first to discharge those caps!
Yessiree! I had to get knocked on my keister one time to learn that
lesson. :) PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 16:18:33 EST
From: ers@cblpe.att.com (Eugene R Schroeder)
Subject: Re: Details Wanted on Call Progress Tones
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
In article <telecom12.56.6@eecs.nwu.edu> mweal@questor.wimsey.bc.ca
(Mike Weal) writes:
> I a looking for descriptions of telephone call progress tones (ie dial
> tone, busy tone, call waiting, etc). Could someone give these
> description and/or the document describing them. Also does anyone
> know of a description of similar tones for PBXs and KSUs.
The public network tones are described in the BCR publication "Notes
on the BOC Intra-LATA Networks" TR-NPL-000275, Issue 1, April 1986.
This document provides a lot of nitty-gritty info about the network,
including about 15 pages on call progress tones. Be aware that, as
this document states "There is no specific requirement for any tone."
However, it appears that there is some commonality for tones among the
newer switches.
Gene
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 14:43:25 pst
From: Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T Long Distance Rates
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
In article <telecom12.57.2@eecs.nwu.edu> Jack Dominey writes:
> In Digest v12 #37, Steve Forrette (stevef@wrq.com) reported that
> someone at AT&T (presumably an operator) had quoted a rate of
> $.14/initial minute + $.15/ additional minute for calls between area
> codes 206 and 213. Someone goofed. Attached is part of page 56 from
> FCC Tariff #1, detailing AT&T's basic long distance rates.
> (Note that these rates are not determined by area code pairs, but by
> mileage. The mileage is determined by area code + exchange, so the
> distance from my office to AT&T HQ in New Jersey is determined by a
> measurement between 404-496 [Tucker, GA] and 908-221 [Basking Ridge,
> NJ].)
> Additional note: None of the AT&T optional calling plans I know about
> offer a lower first-minute rate, either. Some of them have a
> 30-second initial billing period, but this is almost always exactly
> five times the rate for each additional six seconds.
Well, I just double-checked with the AT&T operator. I got a quote
from 206-324 to 818-988. The rates her computer gave were:
First Minute Additional Minute
Day 24 25
Evening 15 16
Night 13 14
"Plus the 3% federal tax of course" she was sure to inform me.
Well, there you have it. With the exchange pairs given, I would
assume that you could verify this with your local AT&T operator. I
don't know how to explain the discrepency between the tariff and what
the operator quoted. But I'd be inclined to say that I'd be charged
what the computer thinks the rate is.
A couple of interesting notes:
The reason I gave a vague reference "from 206 to 213" in my original
post was that I had originally called to get a quote for the surcharge
for a "time and charges" call. She asked me where I'd be calling, and
"LA" came off the top of my head. She picked an exchange in 213 at
random, since all calls from here to 213 would be in the same mileage
band anyway. But for the above quote, I specified a specific exchange
so that you can verify it yourself.
The line I was calling from has no special AT&T rate plan. In fact,
it is pre-subsribed to MCI (not my choice, BTW!). She apparantly knew
this was the case, as when I asked for a rate quote, she asked "Are
you an AT&T customer?" I responded "No, but I'll use 10ATT to place
the call." She was satisfied with this response and proceeded to
quote me the rates. I don't know if she knew this because I had
dialed with 10ATT, or if there was an ANI lookup in their database to
determine the PIC (both would yield the same results in most cases of
course).
Jack, I'd be interested in your explanation between the operator-quoted
rates and the tariff you posted.
Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
------------------------------
From: kaufman@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: v.42/v.42bis (w/ or w/o Send/Receive FAX) Modems For Sale
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 21 Jan 92 16:38:18 GMT
jwlin@athena.mit.edu (John W Lin) writes:
> After the holidays I have extra high speed modems that I don't need --
> Grab hold of technology's frontier -- you're just not going to get
> much faster than 38.4k bps over telephone or leased lines.
> [Moderator's Note: In the past I have made exceptions and run 'for
> sale' ads here if the seller was a private party with a telecom
> specific item for sale. I've had complaints about this, and have to
> stop doing so ...
Well, yes, I can see why there are complaints. This ad is a blatant
misrepresentation of the modem's capabilities. The 38KB rate is only
for extremely compressable data -- we don't know (because he didn't
tell us) how fast the modem really is. He says v.32/v.32bis
compatible, but doesn't tell us if this really is a v.32bis (14Kb)
modem. v.42 is an error correction and compression scheme on top of
the modem, and I have seen it advertised as low as 2400 baud -- which,
if data is really compressable, would give you *MAYBE* 9600 bps
effective burst data rates.
And the prices aren't that good, either -- whatever brands they are
(why didn't he tell us -- so we can't compare against retail?).
I agree you should reject this stuff in c.d.t and let it be posted to
misc.forsale or whatever.
Marc Kaufman (kaufman@cs.stanford.edu)
[Moderator's Note: Well there have been instances of things being
relatively technical and odd enough that the 'average' for-sale reader
would not be interested ... and I was willing to help out with that
stuff here; but the complaints were like yours, and also the fact that
many sites reject the 'for-sale' group only to find it showing up
anyway via this group. So, I guess I'll pass on it in the future. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #67
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04571;
21 Jan 92 22:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03537
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 19:32:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07610
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 19:31:57 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 19:31:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201220131.AA07610@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #68
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 19:31:53 CST Volume 12 : Issue 68
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered (Bud Couch)
Help: Multi-line Telephone For The Disabled People (Chun-Sing Chan)
MacNeil/Lehrer Report on Phone System Risks (Randall C. Gellens)
Social Security Administration Phone System (David Niebuhr)
Telecom and the Arts (Will Martin)
Line Tie Devices (Chris Arndt)
International Codes: Can We Compile List (childeja@udavxb.oca.udayton.edu)
Extension to AT&T Card Number Switchover (Rick Wessman)
Re: ISDN For PC? (Ken Hodor)
408 Area Code Question (Carl Moore)
Re: 408 Area Code Question (David Singer)
Switch Programming Errors (Doctor Math)
I Want to Locate Surveillance Magazine (Patrick Fitzgibbons)
900 Number Advertisement (David Niebuhr)
Verifying 800 Numbers For Trouble (Roy Smith)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net ()
Subject: Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: Kentrox Industries, Inc.
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 21:25:43 GMT
In article <telecom12.47.13@eecs.nwu.edu> andys@ulysses.att.com writes:
> Wouldn't reverse polarity make it impossible for me to talk to my home
> answering machine and office voice mail from a line-powered phone? As
> I recall, DTMF generators don't work under reverse polarity ...
It depends on *whose* DTMF generators you are using. :-) AT&T saved a
few cents and simply put a diode in series with the generator to
prevent reverse battery from damaging the electronics. Other
manufacturers (AE in particular) put a diode bridge around the
generator so that the polarity of the office battery was irrelevant.
Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS appli
------------------------------
From: cchan@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Chun-Sing Chan)
Subject: Help: Multi-Line Telephone For the Disabled People
Organization: University of Engineering, College of Engineering
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 01:30:12 GMT
I'm doing a student project to help the disabled people who are
blind to answer a multi-line (four-lines) phone.
I need to have a ringer which can be connected to the
telephone and provide distinctive ringer for each lines.
Does such a device exist?
-OR-
Could anybody tell me the difference between the four ringing
signals such that I can design my own circuit?
Thanks in advance.
Internet: cchan@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 08:46 GMT
From: Randall C Gellens <0005000102@mcimail.com>
Subject: MacNeil/Lehrer Report on Phone System Risks
The MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour for Monday, January 20 contains a report
(about twenty minutes or so in length) on the risks of the phone
system ten years after the breakup. It includes the fire at the
Chicago POP of all three carriers, the power failure in New York, the
spate of software-induced outages, and lots more. Interviewed are
executives from AT&T, MCI, and Sprint (the Sprint and MCI execs say
how scared they were when the New York power failure hit, because if
it could happen to AT&T it could happen to them), workers talking
about staff cutbacks, FCC officials, Congressmen, phone users, and
others. It includes footage of hearings, shots of a 4ESS, fiber
trenching, and horrendous amounts of cable inside a switching center.
If you missed it live, you can order a transcript or a videotape. I
forget the address for transcripts ($4), but the videotape number is
(800ed) 328-PBS-1 (no price mentioned). (I have no connection with
PBS or MacNeil/Lehrer).
Randy
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 10:38:40 -0500
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: Social Security Administration Phone System
1) I recently had a need to contact the Social Security Administration
and found that the 800 number listed in my phone book was
1 + 800-XXX-XXX. When I called the 800 directory information (forgot
the number), I was told to call 800-XXX-XXXX.
Why the discrepancy?
BTW: My area code doesn't require 1+ dialing for anything yet and
probably won't for quite some time or until the switchover to NXX.
2) The recording that I received when I called there was that one
could either press a number for their automated system or stay on line
for a human. The problem was that the system went right to music and
about a minute later another recording came on and said to push 9 for
automated information. Sounds like they are somewhat mixed up.
Dave
[Moderator's Note: Probably the discrepancy in the listing is due to
the fact that the SSA, like most federal agencies is a 'national
account' and someone prepares the listings which are sent out to all
telecos and phone directory publishers. To have the listing indicate
1+ in some cases and not in others would be difficult, so they picked
one way of listing it over another. I doubt most national account
entries are even reviewed at local telco level at all. While you were
waiting on line for a human, the computer which routes the calls must
have come to the conclusion there would be a lengthy delay in
answering your call, and the recorded message option was given to you
so you could possibly get some information rather than receiving
nothing at all. Finding the appropriate level of staffing for inbound
call centers is a difficult project at best. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 8:53:19 CST
From: Will Martin <wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: Telecom and the Arts
Back when I was in college, I used to make little sculptures from the
brightly-colored wire found in 25-pair cable fragments left by
installers. Now, to prove there is nothing new under the sun, I refer
Telecom readers to page 42 of the February 1992 issue of {Bon Appetit}
magazine, at the bottom of the page, where there is a picture of some
strikingly-patterned and strongly-hued baskets with this text:
"We're bowled over by these hand-woven baskets. Made of scrap
telephone wire by Zulu artisans in Natal, South Africa, they're study,
washable, and suitable for serving everything from fruit to bread to
nuts. Prices range from $50 to $300 [!!!!! -WM], depending on the
design and size (they're 6 to 12 inches in diameter). To order,
telephone Susan Irving at 212-239-9719."
I suspect that these are actually sold by their makers for some prices
that are the equivalent of a few cents, and the above outlet is an art
gallery that has pushed the price up to market these as art objects
instead of utilitarian kitchenware, but that's just a guess. Anyway,
they are certainly attractive, and represent the highest form of
recycling -- making something more impressive than the original from
the scraps of the first object or process.
I wonder if the wire these are made out of came originally from the
US? The basket colors sure look familiar to anyone who has ever
handled telco four-wire cable ...
Regards, Will
------------------------------
From: carndt@nike.calpoly.edu (Chris Arndt)
Subject: Line Tie Devices
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 7:20:23 PST
Recently there was a post about modifying the Radio Shack
call-forwarding device to allow remote access to the second line to
dial any number. While I have no experience with this device, I do
have a thought on it, and I know of a unit that will do just this.
Make sure that any modification you do allows for some form of
security. If your mechanism ring-trips and gives dialtone on the
second line, you are leaving yourself open to abuse and large phone
bills. It may not ever happen, but should information on a line tie
like this get out, it will spread like wildfire, and a lot of $$ in
calls can be run up in a short period of time.
Melco makes an RA330 Remote Access Unit that is designed for just this
application. It is used as a dial in access to company PBXs for
employees access WATS lines, voice mailboxes, etc. (Some companies
call it a WATS extender.)
You plug the two lines into the RA330. On receiving a call on the
incoming line, the 330 ring trips and presents dial tone. Punch in one
of ten four digit security codes and you get three short
acknowledgement beeps and dial tone on the second line. DTMF dial
away. #* will reorder dial tone to place multiple calls without having
to dial back in. ## disconnects for good.
The RA330 even has an exclusion jack that other phones using the
second line can plug into. If either the phones or the incoming line
are using the outgoing line, the other is presented with busy signal
if it tries to access the line.
Cool device. I love mine. It costs $550-600, from a Melco distributor.
(I'm in no way associated with Melco, except for owning an RA330.)
[Moderator's Note: But only ten codes of four digits each is no
security! All anyone would have to do is look at one of the units and
note the limited number of combinations ... then call in to your line
and try all ten looking for the one you selected. Now if if you could
set your own four/five digit code with pinwheels on the unit you'd
have a better system. PAT]
------------------------------
From: childeja@UDAVXB.OCA.UDAYTON.EDU
Date: 21 January 1992 16:28 GMT
Subject: International Codes: Can we Compile a List?
Is there a way that one can get a list of international phone codes,
including city codes (preferably just capitals, but if people are
interested, other cities)? If not, can we create one?
Also, has the Commonwealth of Independent States, Latvia, Estonia,
Lithunania, and Georgia received separate codes yet? How were they
sectioned (couldn't) find a better word) when they were back in the
USSR?
[Moderator's Note: We have just what you are looking for in the
Telecom Archives. Carl Moore and David Leibold have compiled a very
extensive list of country/city codes around the world. To get your
copy, use anonymous ftp to log into the archives.
ftp lcs.mit.edu
login anonymous give your.name@your.site.domain as password
cd telecom-archives
(look over the main directory, and pull the indexes while there.)
cd country.codes
That should be a big enough list for you to start with! :) PAT]
------------------------------
From: rwessman@us.oracle.com (Rick Wessman)
Subject: Extension to AT&T Card Number Switchover
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Redwood Shores, CA
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 15:44:08 GMT
After not having received my new card number, I decided to call AT&T.
I was told that the cutover date has been delayed. Unfortunately, I
don't know what the new date is.
I asked the service rep. why I wasn't notified directly about the
switchover, but the rep wouldn't (couldn't) tell me.
I can imagine what other people who did not have net access must think
when they are told by their BOC that their AT&T card is going to
become invalid, without having heard anything from AT&T.
Rick Wessman rwessman@us.oracle.com
------------------------------
From: khodor@NeXT.COM (Ken Hodor)
Subject: Re: ISDN For PC?
Date: 21 Jan 92 23:43:26 GMT
The November 18, 1991 issue of {Network World} has a feature article
titled "ISDN equipment boom gives users more options." This article
has a list of all different vendors of ISDN equipment. The plug in
boards for the IBM PCs are:
$499 AT&T Network Systems product (800) 222-7278
$1395 DigiBoard (612) 943-9020
$995 Hunmat Corp (612) 224-5634
$1495 ICL North America (203) 326-2700
$1695 OST, Inc (703) 817-0400
$1395 Teleos Communications, Inc. (908) 389-5700
There are several other Terminal Adapters available as seperate
standalone units.
Ken_Hodor@next.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 14:02:30 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: 408 Area Code Question
Which part of 408 comes under GTE?
Does the San Jose area have 7D for local/toll within 408, NPA + 7D for
local/toll going outside of 408? (This is what San Francisco and
Oakland, then both in 415, had before 415 got N0X/N1X prefixes.)
------------------------------
Subject: Re: 408 Area Code Question
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 11:10:06 -0800
From: "David Singer" <singer@almaden.ibm.com>
GTE owns Los Gatos, Morgan Hill, and now Gilroy; they may have some
other, smaller towns, but I'm not positive about that.
I don't know how PacBell's 408 dials ... my only phone access there is
behind a Rolm PBX, which makes its own rules! But the phone book (San
Jose/Santa Clara, good through March 1992) says: 7D within area code,
1 + AC + 7D outside.
David
------------------------------
From: drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math)
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 92 21:12:12 EST
Subject: Switch Programming Errors
DREUBEN@EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU (Douglas Scott Reuben) writes:
> - Cable & Wireless has a nationwide 950 number (available in most
> major markets nationwide, I believe it is 950-0223), yet in order to
When I saw this, I considered what great fun it would be to listen to
their carrier identification recording. After dialing 10223 + 1 + 700-
555-4141, I got a very interesting intercept: "The carrier access code
you dialed must be preceded by the digits 9 5 0. Please hang up and
try your call again." Okay, fine ... but dialing 950-0223 got me an
intercept claiming that the number "is not in service". Say what?
Once again, my RBOC isn't doing a very good job.
[Moderator's Note: When I tried 10223-1-700-555-4141 from here in IBT
territory, the response I got was a disembodied voice from the
carrier's switch saying "I'm sorry, your call cannot be processed.
Please dial 1-800-486-8686." PAT]
------------------------------
From: pat@sunyit.edu (Patrick Fitzgibbons)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 17:55:47 -0500
Organization: SUNY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Subject: I Want to Locate Surveillance Magazine
I am interested in finding out if anyone knows who publishes
"Surveillance" Magazine. I understand that they have some interesting
Telecom related articles but I don't know where to find it. Any help
would be appreciated.
Patrick Fitzgibbons
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 08:18:31 -0500
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: 900 Number Advertisement
In a local paper this weekend (a throwaway) there was an ad that said
"Make Money!!!! Have your own 900 number!" The gotcha was that the
number to call was 1-900-XXX-XXXX.
Guess who made the money?
Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093
[Moderator's Note: Its just a new variation on the old scheme which
was around for years telling people how to make money through mail
order by selling lists of names of people interested in mail order,
etc. Nothing changes in these schemes except the technology used to
pull them off. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 92 13:37:27 EST
From: Roy Smith <roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu>
Subject: Verifying 800 Numbers For Trouble
I've been trying to reach a business at their 800 number for
several days and all I get is a busy signal. This morning, I finally
got to wondering if something might be wrong so I asked the operator
to check the number for trouble. I was surprised when she said that
they cannot verify 800 numbers! Why not?
[Moderator's Note: The usual method for verifying whether a number is
working correctly or not is by calling 'inward' in the city where the
number terminates and asking an operator there to use special circuits
to verify the line is in service and has conversation on it. The
operator would need to know *where* -- in what city -- the 800 number
was located, and the 7-D number it translated to in that place or the
circuit number there in order to have some basis for starting the
verification process. There is no central 'inward operator' for 800 as
there is for other area codes; no place to begin searching, at least
from your local operator's position. And the only operators who have
the ability to verify in any event are AT&T operators and local telco
operators. Sprint and MCI cannot get into the AT&T network to call
the various 'inwards' in any event, regardless of area code. On the
other hand, AT&T has no interest in whether or not the 800 numbers of
other carriers are working, and won't waste their time and money
trying to find out ... why should they, since they're making nothing
on the call, the charge for which goes to the original telco and the
800 carrier. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #68
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06057;
21 Jan 92 23:28 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12196
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 20:36:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09183
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jan 1992 20:36:03 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 20:36:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201220236.AA09183@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #69
TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Jan 92 20:35:53 CST Volume 12 : Issue 69
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO (Russ Nelson)
Looking For PC Voice/Modem Card (Gerald E. Riechert)
I Know Who You Are, I Know What You Did (Ron Dippold)
ATT and GTE Long Distance Anecdote (Chris Arndt)
Question Regarding Celluar Phones in the Movie 'Hook' (David B. Whiteman)
Insecure SWBT Billing Information Number (Bob Izenberg)
Information Wanted on Touchtone Response Equipment (Paul N. Hilfinger)
Newspaper Article on 800/900 Mixup (Rob Boudrie)
Tracing Long Distance Calls (Ron Schnell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 09:43:50 EST
From: Russ Nelson <nelson@cheetah.ece.clarkson.edu>
Subject: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO
In my reading of U.S. Patent 4,549,302, and ANSI Standard T.601-1988,
it seems as if the latter requires the use of the former. I have
included the relevent sections below. Obviously, this only applies to
the US market.
I can think of only two reasons why ISDN might not require the Hayes
patent. 1) Because Hayes may give everyone free license to use it for
ISDN (ha!), or 2) Because a judge may decide that it doesn't apply.
The judge might do this because the Hayes patent only claims a method
for switching between two modes, command and data, whereas ISDN uses
the identical method to switch between one test, another test, and
data modes. The principle is the same, and I can't see a judge
disallowing the patent simply because of the number of modes. That
would trivially allow modem implementors to implement a third mode in
their modems and escape paying Hayes' tribute.
ANSI Standard T.601-1988, p. 27 follows. T.601-1991 is actually the
current standard, but I didn't have a copy of it to type in. The
details are the same, perhaps they changed the wording a little.
6.5 NT Maintenance Modes. The NT Quiet mode (QM) functionality within
an NT (or customer equipment containing the NT functionality) will
assure that an NT will not attempt a start-up or will not initiate
transmission during metallic loop tests conducted by the network. The
Insertion Loss Measurement Test (ILMT) will cause a known test signal
to be generated by an NT. This test will be used in network
measurements of DS transmission characteristics and may provide the
ability to determine, from a single-ended test of the metallic loop,
if the loop can support DSL transmission.
6.5.3 NT Quiet Mode and Insertion Loss Measurement Test Trigger Signal.
The NT shall be capable of detecting the following two types of
signals: The NT shall respond to either (1) dc signaling that begins
with a steady current flow (start interval) followed by 6, 8, or 10
puses sent as breaks in the current and ends with steady dc current
flow (stop interval), or (2) ac signaling that begins with no current
flow (start interval, less than 200 uA dc) followed by 6, 8, or 10
half cycles of a 2 to 3 Hz sine wave, and ends with no current flow
(stop interval). When receiving the ac signaling, the NT shall count
each half cyce of the same wave as one pulse.
A valid test trigger signal shall consist of a valid start
interval folowed by either 6, 8, or 10 consecutive pulses followed by
a valid stop interval. Unless an entire trigger sequence consisting
of start interval, puses, and stop interval is received, the NT shall
take no action.
A stop interval may be followed by a start interval without any
intervening breaks. Signals on the loop before the start interval or
after the stop interval shall not affect the NT trigger detection
function.
The start and stop intervals shall be >= 500 ms. The NT shall be
capable of detectinand validating the trigger signa and entering into
the desired state required by the number of pulses transmitted.
A request for the same or a new state shall occur no sooner than 1
second after the beginning of the preceding stop interval. On receipt
of a valid signal the NT shall transition from one state to the
requested state within 500 ms.
U.S. Patent 4,549,302
Date of patent: Oct. 22, 1985
Filed: Oct. 11, 1983
Assignee: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.
Starting at column 5, line 58:
It should be understood that the program included in program ROM
112 of processor 55 includes instructions which are used to control
the mode in which the modem of the preferred embodiment operates. In
particular, two modes of operation of the preferred embodiment are
defined: the command mode; and the transparent mode.
The command mode for the present invention is one in which binary
data coming into RS-232 port 50 is interpreted as instructions to the
modem to perform certain functions. Thus, if a computer is attached
to data port 50, instructions in a predetermined code provided as
input to port 50 will cause the preferred embodiment, under control of
the instructions in program ROM 112, to perform certain functions such
as going off-hook, dialing a particular telephone number, answering a
ringing signal and so forth.
Once a predetermined instruction is provided to data port 50, the
preferred embodiment will switch to the transparent mode in which all
data coming into port 50 is treated as data to be modulated and sent
out in coded form over telephone line 45.
It will be apparent from the foregoing that some arrangement must
be made in which another command may be issued by the device attached
to data port 50 to return the preferred embodiment to the command
mode. In the preferred embodiment, a predetermined sequence of data
bits is the escape command accepted at port 50 to return the preferred
embodiment to the command mode. Since, any predetermined sequence of
bits which is defined as an escape command has a finite probability of
occurring in any file of data being transmitted by the preferred
embodiment, an additional requirement is placed on the signal sequence
which is defined as the escape sequence. The preferred embodiment of
the present invention must epreferred embodimentrience one full second
of no data being provided as input to data port 50, follwoed by the
predetermined escape command, followed by a second full second of no
data in order to interpret that input as the escape sequence.
Thus, even if the file being transmitted from the device attached
to data port 50 out over telephone line 45 includes occurrences of the
escape command string of bits, it is extremely unlikely that any
random occurrence of the escape command would occur unintentionally in
the environment of the entire escape sequence, that is, the escape
command string surrounded by a second of no data on either side.
[Moderator's Note: Very interesting analysis. Would anyone from Hayes
care to comment? What about the folks who developed ISDN? PAT]
------------------------------
From: riechertg@gtephx.UUCP (Gerald E. Riechert)
Subject: Looking For PC Voice/Modem Card
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 17:56:43 GMT
I'm looking for an IBM PC compatable card with the following
characteristics:
- One telephone port that provides:
- dialing
- call progress detection (dial tone, busy, ringback, voice, etc.)
- DTMF digit detection
- ability to play prerecorded digitized speech
- ability to record digitized speech locally
- ability to control the card from from my application program
Also desirable but not necessary is a second phone port that provides
standard modem capabilities.
So far I've gotten information on the Powerline II and BigmOuth Voice
Mail systems. I'm interested in finding out about other available
products. Also welcome is any comments/recommendations from those of
you who have used such a product.
To me, this sounds like the kind of card used in telemarketing
systems. In fact, my application is very similar. However, my
application is not telemarketing related so no flames please.
Jerry Riechert
AG Communication Systems, POB 52179, Phoenix, AZ 85072-2179
voice: (602) 582-7332
UUCP: {ncar!noao!asuvax | uunet!zardoz!hrc}!gtephx!riechertg
Internet: gtephx!riechertg@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
------------------------------
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: I Know Who You Are, I Know What You Did
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 20:29:40 GMT
Has anyone else seen the movie {I Know Who You Are, I Know What You
Did}? The basic plot involves a group of teenagers who call numbers
at random and say the above phrase to anyone who answers. Well, this
being a movie, eventually one of the people they call is a stressed
out killer, who freaks, assuming that they know about the murder. He
tries to keep them talking to find out who they are and what they know
about what he's done. I won't give away any more of the plot.
Anyhow, last night, <Ring>, <Ring>, "Hello?" "I Know Who You Are, I
Know What You Did!" It was a bunch of teenage girls calling around.
Too bad we'll never know if they do hit a psycho killer.
And another consideration: what if the killer had Caller-ID? Anyone
remember that Saturday Night Live commercial?
Time wounds all heels.
[Moderator's Note: Aren't you glad Caller-ID and/or automatic callback
is helping put an end to so much of the nonsense and torment people
have to endure from strangers who call on the phone? I sure am. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 12:47:05 -0800
From: carndt@nike.calpoly.edu (Chris Arndt)
Subject: ATT and GTE Long Distance Anecdote
While we were visiting Hawaii in Octobeqr, I had an interesting
problem with placing a call back to the mainland.
Shortly before we left, my employer switched phone service from a
Dimension PBX to Centrex. As a result, we were assigned a new or
recently added prefix in 805 (781). I tried to call my work answering
machine via ATT from Hawaii and got an intercept message (disconnected
or no longer in service). I tried another work number with the same
result. I tried other 805 prefixes and had no problem. I tried the
main number for my employer and got an architect's office in >818<!
At this point I called the ATT operator, who had all the same results
I did. I could not convince the operator to connect me with an 805
operator. I finally had to call ATT repair service. I filed a problem
report with them, and left a number in Hawaii where I could be
reached.
TWO DAYS later, I had heard nothing from ATT. I called back. The tech
(in Colorado) called me back within a half hour. I explained the
situation to him. He called back in a few hours to say that the
problem was in GTE's switch on the Island, and had been corrected.
I guess that this differs with the way I thought The Phone System
worked. I thought that an 805 call would be sent to 805 for switching,
and not have the opportunity to be aliased to a different AC. I
wonder how often an error like this happens.
(I must say that, after ATT finally started working on the problem,
Clarence, the tech, was most concerned and helpful. He even gave me
his 800 number and extension, so I could call him direct after I tried
to place my call to test the repair.)
[Moderator's Note: Routing tables showing where to send what are
located locally. Your CO does not just send a call off to Hawaii or
California on your say-so. It refers to tables showing how to get
there and via what route, etc. You can erroneously be blocked from
getting somewhere that I can reach, and vice-versa. Look at how long
it takes some telcos to update their switches when there is an area
code split. PAT]
------------------------------
From: dbw@crash.cts.com (David B. Whiteman)
Subject: Question Regarding Cellular Phones in the Movie 'Hook'
Date: Tue Jan 21 13:23:51 1992
One of the side bars in the movie 'Hook' is when Peter Banning uses a
cellular phone while in San Francisco and later hops on to a plane to
London and then receives a phone call on the same phone. Is there
really international roaming service, or am I just reading too much
into the movie?
The phone he used looked much like a Motorola Pocket Commander, and
the name Motorola was clearly visible on the phone, so I doubt one can
say it is a portable Marisat phone.
------------------------------
From: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Insecure SWBT Billing Information Number
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1992 22:29:07 GMT
I just tried Southwestern Bell's over the phone automated account
information system out for the first time. When I weeded through the
choices on the menu, I was asked for the phone number that I was
asking about. I entered my home number and got the current bill
amount. There were no attempts to verify that I was the customer
assigned to the number. While I didn't use any of the other services
available as menu choices, I'd hope that *some* kind of authentication
was done before letting the caller use any of the payment services.
Bob
DOMAIN-WISE: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us BANG-WISE: ...cs.utexas.edu!dogface!bei
------------------------------
From: hilfingr@tully.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul N. Hilfinger)
Subject: Information Wanted on Touchtone Response Equipment
Date: 21 Jan 1992 23:23:52 GMT
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Reply-To: hilfinger@CS.Berkeley.EDU
I would like to know what reasonably-priced equipment/software is
available that is attachable to a Macintosh, IBM PC, or Sun
workstation and allows that computer to receive calls, interpret touch
tones, and make voice responses. Feel free to reply by e-mail,
especially if this is a FAQ.
Paul N. Hilfinger, Associate Professor (510) 642-8401
Computer Science Division Hilfinger@CS.Berkeley.EDU
Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences
University of California Berkeley, CA 94720
------------------------------
From: Rob Boudrie <rboudrie@chpc.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 14:04:37 EST
Subject: Newspaper Article on 800/900 Mixup
There was an interesting article by Adam Gaffin in the 1/20/92
{Middlesex News} titled "Wrong number? A 900 disguised as 800 pits
computer users against AT&T". (I REALLY liked the title). The
article discussed the mixup; quoted myself; John Levine; and our
esteemed Moderator. The report was fairly well balanced, however, it
was replete with unflattering innuendo from Rick Brayall of AT&T.
--------------------
From the article :
Rick Brayall, an AT&T spokesman in Boston, acknowledged the glitch,
but said Boudrie and others were part of a small group of computer
hackers trying to stiff the company. "I hate to use the word
'hackers' but (they were) people who look for ways to get something
for nothing and took advantage of it", he said. "Neither AT&T nor USA
Today ever announced or publicized the 800 number, he said. "Someone
was doing it illicitly (and it spread) underground, through word of
mouth", he said.
He said he considered Usenet such an underground system, even
though the network connects several hundred thousand people around the
world, largely at univerisities, high-tech companies and government
agencies -- but also at AT&T.
Boudrie ... said he is no hacker, and called the company's assertion of
theft ridiculous.
-----------------------
So, the official AT&T position appears to be:
- Usenet is an underground organization
- Calling an 800 number is "hacking" if the number was obtained word
of mouth rather than by advertising
- AT&T Does not owe anyone an apology for reporting phone calls
incorrectly, or billing in a manner contrary to filed tariffs.
I only wish I had rememberd to use terms like "billing in a manner
contrary to their filed tariffs" when talking with Adam Gaffin.
Rob "I'm no hacker" Boudrie rboudrie@wpi.wpi.edu
[Moderator's Note: Adam's excellent story appeared in the Digest
early Tuesday (issue 60). I hope everyone got a chance to read it. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 92 20:06:44 -0500
From: Ron Schnell <ronnie@EDDIE.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Tracing Long Distance Calls
How do the authorities "trace" long distance calls (or can they)?
Assuming, of course, that their incoming line is not an 800 number.
Thanks,
Ron (ronnie@eddie.mit.edu)
[Moderator's Note: All calls can be traced. You are following a pair
of wires from one end to the other. International calls and domestic
long distance calls are the hardest to trace, but it has happened.
Calls between central offices in the same LATA are a little easier to
trace. I recall two international traces which led back to Chicago
and a third trace which was strictly intra-CO here which turned out to
be quite humorous if anyone wishes to hear the sordid details. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #69
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05330;
23 Jan 92 2:17 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23443
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Jan 1992 00:20:25 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17467
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 23 Jan 1992 00:20:12 -0600
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1992 00:20:12 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201230620.AA17467@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #70
TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Jan 92 00:20:03 CST Volume 12 : Issue 70
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Coin-Paid Calls and Carriers (Dave Levenson)
New York Times 01/19/92 "Air Space Subdivision" (Howard Pierpont)
Information on US West BBS Reclassification Wanted (Michael Ho)
Deliberate Delays by Payphone Companies? (Jonathan Bradshaw)
Ideas Wanted For A Small Telephone System (John A. Weeks III)
Re: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options (Mark Brader)
Caller ID in the Golden State (was I Know Who You Are) (Robert L. McMillin)
Telephony Neophyte Seeks Advice (Kevin L. McBride)
MCI Card With Voice Features (Phillip Dampier)
What is My 1+ Carrier? (Brian Oplinger)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Coin-Paid Calls and Carriers
Date: 22 Jan 92 01:19:09 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
Coin-control signals are not available from some inter-exchange
carriers, so AT&T gets all of the sent-paid coin traffic. But it
seems that the local exchange carriers provide billing for a number of
inter-exchange carriers. Why not do the same on coin calls?
When a caller deposits coin to pay for an inter-LATA call, why not let
the LEC collect the coins and pass the value along to the inter-exchange
carrier (less a fee for collection and processing)? How does this
differ from the LEC's who bill for inter-LATA calls dialed by non-coin
subscribers, and then collect payments and forward them to the IEC?
I can write a check to NJ Bell and pay for both my NJ Bell local
service, and my MCI toll service. Somehow part of my payment gets
sent to MCI by NJ Bell. Why can't they do the same with part of my
coin deposit?
Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 15:13:16 PST
From: Howard Pierpont <pierpont@snax.enet.dec.com>
Subject: New York Times 01/19/92 "Air Space Subdivision"
The Federal Communications Commission took the first steps toward
clearing the air for new generations of wireless telephones. The move
may ultimately allow a caller to find individuals anywhere in the
world, no matter how far off the beaten track. The F.C.C proposed
allowing the new technology to use some frequencies now reserved for
police dispatching and utility companies. It also suggested that new
customers could buy out existing frequency owners and underwrite their
costs of moving to new frequencies.
++++++
Sounds like a very robust plan to me. So much for my wireline service;
I can put my office on the road. Who's going to pay for call-forwarding? 8^}
Howard Pierpont
DIGITAL Equipment Corp.
Standard Disclaimer apply.
------------------------------
From: Michael Ho <ho@hoss.unl.edu>
Subject: Information on US West BBS Reclassification Wanted
Organization: A Figment of Your Imagination
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 05:33:31 GMT
Some time ago, c.d.t received several messages from people regarding a
proposed move by US West -- I believe it was in Washington state --
where the old "BBSes pay business rates" controversy brewed again. In
the end, if I recall, a couple of boards (Fido and RIME hubs?) ended
up paying business rates, and the rest stayed residential.
Lincoln Telephone, our beloved independent telephone company in
Lincoln, Nebraska, has informed at least three local sysops that their
lines are to be reclassified as business lines. I'm looking for
relevant information, including the US West case, to figure out where
we stand on the matter. Though I know that what is binding in US West
territory is not binding in Nebraska, a few anecdotes from here and
there can't hurt.
Also, in the course of defending their decision, LT&T mentioned the
"your volume is too high to continue allowing you to pay residential
rates" argument. This was hashed to death in c.d.t a couple of months
ago, and I had it in my kill file. Can anyone give me issue numbers
(via e-mail) so that I can fish the relevant arguments from the
Telecom Archives?
Finally, if anyone can tell me how to find the relevant tariffs for
local phone service (i.e., with whom they're filed, and what I need to
ask for), that information would also be appreciated via e-mail.
Thanks. (The sysops are at a distinct disadvantage because the Public
Service Commission was stripped of its power to regulate telephone
service by the Nebraska Legislature in 1986, and they have refused to
even comment or take arguments in the current dispute.)
Michael Ho | UNTIL JAN. 20, sysmgrs willing: Internet:ho@hoss.unl.edu
------------------------------
From: jbradsha@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Jonathan Bradshaw)
Subject: Deliberate Delays by Payphone Companies?
Date: 21 Jan 92 23:52:40 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
I was recently in Laguardia airport in New York. As it happens I made
two calls back home to South Bend IN using my AT&T calling card. The
first call was from a phone served by AT&T outside the airport. I
dialed my 0+ CARD + NUMBER type routine and got through in seconds. On
my return journey I used a phone inside the airport served by another
company (I saw NYNEX but I think that was for local calls). I dialed
10ATT + 0 + CARD + NUMBER and listened. What I heard was interesting.
I heard my call being re-keyed but it took ONE SECOND for each number
to be transferred. It was like listening to someone dial a phone
number and hold each key down for a second. I was determined to wait
it out and finally heard the touchtones connect for a second time and
went through at normal "AT&T" type speed and I got connected in
seconds once in AT&T circuits.
My question is this, was that a deliberate slowdown of the system to
make people who use the 10 codes stop doing that? It nearly got me to
hang up and go to another phone. I think it's a pretty low down trick
if so.
Jonathan Bradshaw | Whovian | jbradsha@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Primary)
* PURDUE UNIVERSITY * | Trekker | pbradsha@darwin.cc.nd.edu | Prodigy XMSN02B
U93 WNDU-FM South Bend |Red Dwarf|
Forsythe Computers |Blakes 7|
[Moderator's Note: I highly doubt your allegations are correct. It
sounds to me like a dialing machine which was a little sluggish is
all. Try a few other COCOTS with the same type of call and see if you
spot it again ... I rather doubt it. PAT]
------------------------------
From: john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Subject: Ideas Wanted For A Small Telephone System
Date: 22 Jan 92 02:30:58 GMT
Organization: NeWave Communications Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN
My company recently scaled back the size of one of our field offices.
What used to be a 15 person office now only has six people. I plan to
take out their phone system to expand our main office phone system.
What I need is ideas on a simple inexpensive phone system to serve six
people and three or four phone lines with minimal features. It will
need to support hold, and the receptionist will need to be able to
answer all incoming calls. There will be no need for expandability.
What do companies usually use for this size phone system? Especially
companies that have _very_ limited ability to spend cash?
My first idea is to put four seperate phones on the reception desk,
then put a phone on the other five desks with a four to one selector
switch. Intercom could be done using six cheapie wireless intercom
units from Radio Shack. I will adimt that this is a bit tacky,
especially the `manual hold' feature (put someone on hold by setting
the phone on your desk).
john
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 05:49:00 -0500
From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Tests New Forwarding, Voice Caller ID Options
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
> ... why can't they make something like this for after the fact
> (i.e., you dial *something and it tells you who last called).
Here, this is an unadvertised feature of Call Return. I dial *69 and
it says, say, "The last number to call your line was 416-969-5551. To
call this number, enter [sic] '1'. Otherwise, hang up now." In the
ads, though, they don't tell you that you find out what the number is;
they just say you can return the call. I conjecture that they hope to
sell Caller ID hardware to people who would only get Call Return
(which needs no special hardware) if they knew about this behavior.
Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com
[Moderator's Note: We Chicagoans get no such advice. *69 just starts
ringing back the other end. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 07:28:30 PST
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Caller ID in the Golden State (was I Know Who You Are)
Commenting on Ron Dippold's message about teenage prank callers, our
Moderator writes:
> [Moderator's Note: Aren't you glad Caller-ID and/or automatic callback
> is helping put an end to so much of the nonsense and torment people
> have to endure from strangers who call on the phone? I sure am. PAT]
Well, not in California, anyway. In the Wednesday, January 22, 1992
edition of the {Los Angeles Times} page 1 story, "Judge Opposes Plan
to Provide Phone Caller ID", Administrative Law Judge John Lemke
recommended against approval of caller ID. The state Public Utility
Commission "could modify or reject Lemke's proposal, but an
administrative judge's ruling usually has a major influence on the
Commission's final decision. At the earliest", the article continues,
"the PUC could vote on the matter at its Feb. 20 meeting."
It looks like the Luddites won another round, the thick-brows in
question being spearheaded by the so-called consumer group, "Toward
Utility Rate Normalization," or TURN.
A box on the side of this article had some interesting (mis?)information
on Caller-ID, including a definition of Call Return that "Provides the
subscriber with the number of the last caller along with the time and
date and allows him or her to automatically return the call." That
doesn't sound like the way it's worked for some contributors to
TELECOM Digest ... is this just a case of the {Times} not checking
their facts?
Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574
Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
------------------------------
Subject: Telephony Neophyte Seeks Advice
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 12:38:06 EST
From: Kevin L. McBride <klm@gozer.MV.COM>
First things first. I receive this as the comp.dcom.telecom Usenet
newsgroup and there would be some propagation delay involved in
receiving your replies if you answer my questions in this forum.
Also, I suspect that quite a few of you already know this stuff (which
is precisely why I'm asking here) and probably don't want the
repetition cluttering up your mailing list.
For these reasons, I ask that you please respond directly to me via
e-mail. The address is "klm@gozer.mv.com"
We are in the process of expanding our company and we maintain several
"distributed offices" at the homes of company principals. I want to
increase our datacomm capabilities in the near-term in the form of
several new dial-up modem lines, keeping in mind that at some point we
will most likely want 56kb leased lines between these offices.
My home is located in an area with underground cabling and I am almost
certain that there are currently only four wires coming in to the house.
I presently have two phone lines here. One I use as a voice line shared
between residence and business, the other I use for the modem on one
of my in-home workstations to connect my LAN to Usenet.
If it is, in fact, a reality that the phone company is going to have
to do some excavation to run additional lines into the house, and they
are going to charge me through the nose for this, how should I plan
for my future expansion?
I can see my needs increasing this year to upwards of eight dial-up
lines and one or two 56kb leased lines.
I really don't know much about this area of technology and "T1" is a
complete mystery to me. I'm an ethernet weenie.
Any suggestions that you can give me before I pull out my checkbook
would be most appreciated. Are there books I can get that explain all
of this in laymen's terms? Will the phone co. help me out with this?
Will their help really be of help or are they interested only in
selling me the most expensive options?
Thanks in advance.
Kevin L. McBride klm@gozer.mv.com
------------------------------
From: Phillip.Dampier@p0.f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier)
Date: 22 Jan 92 12:22:29
Subject: Re: MCI Card With Voice Features
In a message written by: sew7490@ultb.rit.edu (S.E. Williams):
> By the way, does anyone know if MCI customers with the 'old' cards
> will be receiving new ones in the mail, or will they have to call and
> ask?
When dealing with MCI customer service, you are bound to get a dozen
different answers, but when I asked them the same question, the
consensus view was that we were all going to get new calling cards.
Then the operator wondered what nationality I was because they had my
last name spelled Dampibr instead of Dampier, and what was this
duplicate account I had on one number ... I always fear calling MCI
customer service. :-)
I've also noticed on the new system that when it is at capacity, with
no more cute xylophone bong tones available, an operator will come on
saying "Telecom USA." So, as stated earlier, this "all-new" service
is really something from Telecom USA that MCI picked up.
As a matter of fact, on one of my semi-monthly inquiries with the long
distance companies about rate plans, I was talking with a Telecom USA
operator when the announcement came down they were being sold, because
I could hear the operator next to the my operator utter some
interesting four letter words followed by something like "well, clean
out your desks gang, there goes that job." I doubt they will all get
the boot, but still ...
In related MCI News, they started a new ad campaign for their Friends
and Family program with Monopoly banker clones suggesting that if you
aren't a F&F customer, you might as well throw your money into the
fireplace.
They try to grab you with $20.00 worth of MCI gift certificates. It
turns out that is also intended to pay the telco for the long distance
company switch.
Phillip M. Dampier Rochester, New York phillip@rochgte.fidonet.org
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 15:16:05 EST
From: oplinger@ra.crd.ge.com (Brian Oplinger)
Subject: What is my 1+ Carrier?
Organization: General Electric Corporate R&D Center
I have seen the number 1-700-555-4141 posted many times to this group
as the 'magic number' that one can dial to determine who is the
current (as of that moment) 1+ LD carrier. I have some questions:
1) Is this number 'magic' and as such something the typical person
should not know about.
2) Should the people in customer service know about this number.
3) Why would 900 blocking interfere with being able to dial this
number?
I tried this number and got an intercept recording that the number
could not be completed as dial and to hang up and try again. This is
the same message I get when I call a 900 number (I do have blocking).
What is odd is that the message sounds like it is played on a cassette
that has many drop-outs; the volume and quality change drastically
during this rather short message.
So I called customer service. I was quizzed as to why I would call
this number, and what does it do since the customer service person
never heard of it. After checking for a moment or two I was told the
900 blocking didn't allow call to pre-recorded messages on 900, 976,
or 700. I asked if it was possible to have blocking of only 900 prefix
numbers, and after a longer delay was told no.
brian oplinger@crd.ge.com
<#include standard.disclaimer>
[Moderator's Note: 700 does have some premium services on it operated
by specific carriers, which is why it is frequently unreachable to
people who have 900 blocking on their line. 700 works sort of like a
very carrier-specific 900 service. 700-555-4141 is an exception to
that rule. It is free, and frequently advertised by the carriers as a
way to insure you have been one-plussed to the proper company. It is
not a commonly known number, but it is perfectly 'legal' for use by
any phone subscriber. Illinois Bell bills all premium stuff on a page
entitled '700/900 Services'. I guess there is no way to exempt
555-4141 from the blocking process. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #70
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07220;
23 Jan 92 3:17 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18306
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Jan 1992 01:11:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17321
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 23 Jan 1992 01:11:17 -0600
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1992 01:11:17 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201230711.AA17321@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #71
TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Jan 92 01:10:57 CST Volume 12 : Issue 71
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
AT&T Mail "Enhancements" (Joe Jesson)
Caller ID in California (Orange Country Register via Arthur L. Rubin)
Technically Ignorant Judges (John Higdon)
Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom (Will Martin)
Santa Ana is Requiring Payphones to be COPT (David B. Whiteman)
Information Needed on Hacking/Phreaking (Neil Kruse)
Procomm Plus 2.0 ASPECT Scripting Language (Don A.B. Lindbergh)
Newspaper Readership (John L. Shelton)
Bellcore Basic Researchers Out of Work (Science Magazine via Jim Haynes)
"Slick 96" Information Wanted (Michael H. Brand)
U of Delaware Changes its Numbers (Carl Moore)
Fishers Island, NY (Carl Moore)
International Local Calling (John R. Levine)
Propaganda (Jon Cereghino)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jessonj@nic.cerf.net (Joe Jesson)
Subject: AT&T Mail "Enhancements"
Date: 23 Jan 92 04:27:33 GMT
Organization: CERFnet
The other day I was asked what AT&T Easylink meant by their
"enhancement" statement on some of the AT&T propaganda. After asking
my AT&T account manager, he said he would "look into it" since he had
no idea what the "enhancements" to AT&T Mail really meant.
It seems as if "enhancements" meant pricing changes!
Can this be true?
Joseph E. Jesson Address1: mhs!amoco!joseph_e_jesson@attmail.com
21414 W. Honey Lane Address2: jessonj@cerf.net
Lake Villa, IL, 60046 Address3: jej@chinet.chi.il.us
Telephone: (day) 312-856-3645 (eve) 708-356-6817
------------------------------
From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com
Subject: Caller ID in California
Date: 22 Jan 92 15:28:46 GMT
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc.
Summarized from this morning's (1/22) {Orange County Register}:
Administrative law Judge John Lemke recommeded the PUC reject Caller
ID in California, citing privacy reasons.
Services recommended for approval were:
Call blocking (from specified numbers)
Call return
Call tracing
Priority ringing [I thought we had that in some areas in California]
Repeat dialing (camp-on?)
Select call forwarding (only forwarding calls from certain numbers)
Special call waiting (allows only certain calls to interrupt a
conversation) (proposed by GTE only)
Special call acceptance (reverse of call blocking) (proposed by GTE only)
Arthur L. Rubin
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
[Moderator's Note: John Hidgon responds in the next message. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 21:57 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Technically Ignorant Judges
Administrative Law Judge John Lemke's pronouncement that Californians
should not be permitted to have CNID is just another example of the
hazards of putting technical decisions in the hands of people who have
no understanding of the matters upon which they utter decrees. For
reasons only clear to himself, this ignoramus has declared that the
people of California are not worthy of being offered a service that is
in common use in twenty other states. It can only be hoped that the
baboons that sit on the four occupied PUC seats will surprise us all
and vote contrary to the Judge's drivel.
The other recent example of Judicial Incompetency was displayed during
the rate increase hearings in Victorville. After I had said my piece,
the judge felt moved to "clarify" my remarks concerning the mandatory
entry of a carrier code when selecting an intraLATA carrier other than
Pac*Bell. He carefully pointed out that my criticism of the lack of
"default carriers" was unfounded since anyone could buy a telephone
that could have the desired carrier's code in memory and dial it
automatically. For someone to use this as an example of a level
playing field demonstrates an abysmal lack of understanding of the
issues at hand.
Heaven save us from the bureaucrats.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 15:41:37 CST
From: Will Martin <wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom
In TELECOM Digest V12 #59, our esteemed Moderator writes,
surprisingly:
> [Moderator's Note: In the past I have made exceptions and run 'for
> sale' ads here if the seller was a private party with a telecom
> specific item for sale. I've had complaints about this, and have to
> stop doing so. In fairness, since this was not announced previously, I
> present the one you see here which was in the queue waiting for a few
> days, but this has to be it. Sorry. Use the Usenet group for same. PAT]
I say this is surprsing because of several reasons:
1) Pat has struck me as not being the type to easily roll over and do
what others tell him to. I would have expected him to say "get
stuffed" to any presuming to "instruct" him in what to allow or not
allow in Telecom ... so I wonder about the "have to stop" note above.
Is someone applying some sort of pressure upon you, Pat?
2) "Complaints" from some can be easily countered by praise from
others. Allow me to count this message as one _in_favor_ of
continuing to include "for sale" telecom-related items from
individuals in the TELECOM Digest. Thus this cancels out one of these
fabled "complaints". I encourage others who feel as I do to tell Pat;
I bet all the "complaints" he has so far received will be crossed out
by "aye" votes from others in the readership.
3) I am taken aback by and dislike the reference to using some Usenet
newsgroup in place of putting these items in Telecom. First off,
Telecom was originally and is now primarily a MAILING LIST,
digestified in format. The fact that it is also accessible on a
Usenet newsgroup is a side benefit to those in that community, but it
is NOT the primary or traditional "home" of Telecom. There are many
of us who participate in Telecom who do not have access to these other
Usenet newsgroups, and who resent pointers to them being bandied about
as if they were universally-available resources. There are those of
us who do have some form of Usenet newsgroup access, but who have
neither the time nor the inclination to wade through hundreds of
for-sale postings for an enormous variety of things, yet we would like
to see telecom-related items noted here in Telecom, where they are
appropriate and reach the audience which will appreciate them.
In short, speaking as a charter reader/participant in Telecom, let me
say that I have NO objection to seeing individuals' "for sale" notices
of telecom-related items herein.
Regards, Will
wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil OR wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil
[Moderator's Note: For quite some time a few years ago, TELECOM Digest
was *not* distributed to Usenet. The reasons are not worth going into
right now. Suffice to say there will be some changes before long in
the Digest and comp.dcom.telecom ... there have to be, based on the
huge increase in volume in recent weeks which will apparently be here
to stay. I sorted through over 900 messages last week alone, as should
have been evident by the 200+ messages sent out earlier this week. Don't
bother writing me asking for more details; I don't know the answer
right now, but am meditating in ernest. PAT]
------------------------------
From: dbw@crash.cts.com (David B. Whiteman)
Subject: Santa Ana is Requiring Payphones to be COPT
Date: Wed Jan 22 13:08:33 1992
I just heard on the radio that the City of Santa Ana, California,
(about 10 miles south of Disneyland) is considering forcing businesses
to have COPT instead of Pacific Bell payphones. This is an attempt to
discourage pager use by prostitutes and drug dealers. The police have
been trying to have certain payphones changed to rotary or outgoing
calls only, and they believe the best way to do it is make all outside
payphones COPT. The radio station said that the City of Long Beach
has already done this in the downtown area. I have heard this on both
KNX-AM and KFI-AM.
Also I just was in the downtown area of Long Beach, and sure enough
almost all of the phones were COPT's with little signs showing a pager
and the circle -- slash symbol over it, which I guess is the new
international symbol for no pagers. There were a few GTE payphones
outside, without the blue sign, but they were in a fenced area, and I
think the gate is locked at night.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jan 92 13:03:00 -0800
From: KRUSE_NEIL@tandem.com
Subject: Information Needed on Hacking/Phreaking
I'm a graduate student in Telecommunications Management and I want to
write a term paper about hacking and phreaking of public telephone
networks.
I am interested in the use of social engineering as well as
technological methods used by the "hackers" of the '80s and '90s.
What I need is references; books, archived info, special distribution
lists, newsgroups, personal contacts, whatever. Any ideas for where
and how to obtain info would be greatly appreciated.
Please reply to me directly.
Neil Kruse or KRUSE_NEIL@tandem.com
10501 N. Tantau Ave. Cupertino, CA 95014
------------------------------
From: dabl2@nlm.nih.gov (Don A.B. Lindbergh)
Subject: Procomm Plus 2.0 ASPECT Scripting Language
Organization: National Library of Medicine
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 01:22:35 GMT
I'm using Procomm Plus v 2.0 and want to load a METAKEY file (setup
some character strings in Alt key combinations) in an ASPECT file, so
when I dial an entry with a script attached it will log me on and set
up the Alt key(s) with the strings loaded.
I've tried MLOAD filename.key
KLOAD filename.key
etc
within my autologon script, but no dice, won't compile. I've even
tried these commands by themselves in their own little script, but
nooooooooo ...
What do the XLOAD statements DO anyway and how can I do what I want?
Thanks tons.
Don
------------------------------
From: jshelton@ads.com (John L. Shelton)
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 17:54:27 -0800
Subject: Newspaper Readership
I suspect one reason why local papers are failing (and perhaps why CSM
is winding down) is that there are now several successful national
papers.
Twenty years ago, the NYT was available only in limited locations
within trucking distance of NYC. Or, if you were wealthy, you could
get it next day by air. Now the NYT is available in metro areas
around the country.
The WSJ is now a lot more accessible as well. Of course, USA Today is
taking a toll as well.
John
[Moderator's Note: I maintain the news of the future will come to you
largely from the device you are staring at right now ... PAT]
------------------------------
From: Jim Haynes <haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU>
Subject: Bellcore Basic Researchers Out of Work
Date: 22 Jan 92 23:47:03 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
This is quoted from the 10 January 1992 issue of {Science Magazine},
copyright American Association for the Advancement of Science:
"In another sign that industrial laboratores are retrenching,
Bellcore has begun phasing out its basic research effort and
closing some facilities in New Jersey. According to company
spokeswoman Rose Cofone, Bellcore took steps in December
to "restructure" its 8600-member workforce so as to focus
more intently on applied projects of immediate value to
regional telephone companies, the "baby Bells" that fund
Bellcore's operations. The change at Bellcore have not been
publicly announced, although the Newark _Star-Ledger_ has
reported on the shakeup.
"The news fell especially hard on Bellcore's researchers in
high-temperature superconductivity, who saw their own jobs
eliminated just as other physicists were reporting that they had
hurdled a major barrier to practical uses of these superconduc-
tors ... The 20 to 25 researchers and assistants in Bellcore's
superconductivity laboratory have been told they should look
for work elsewhere in the company - a transition that for many
would mean shifting from basic to applied research. For example,
Jean Marie Tarascon, a French physical chemist and a major
superconductivity researcher in the Bellcore lab, will now be
doing research on batteries, according to the _Star-Ledger_.
"'The superconductor lab is no longer where the emphasis
should be,' Cofone explains. Restructuring is strictly
a business decision, she says -- the lab owners simply weren't
convinced that superconductivity research would help the
bottom line."
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 19:47:30 -0600
From: "Michael H. Brand" <pl0153@mail.psi.net>
Subject: "Slick 96" Information Wanted
"Slick 96" -- what is it?
I am under the impression it is some sort of local PBX or PBX extender
intended for rural customers. This device can support up to 100 pairs,
uses a T1 or part of a T1, eliminating alot of copper back to the
local CO.
Can anyone shed some light on this?
[Moderator's Note: We've had numerous messages on SLC here in the
past. Perhaps someone will send a batch of them to our writer. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 17:52:54 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: U of Delaware Changes Its Numbers
The University of Delaware has changed its phone equipment and also
its phone prefixes. Area code is 302. The new 831 prefix picks up
offices (also the computer dial-in lines) and can be remembered as
UD1. Student residences move to 837 and can be remembered as UDS.
I believe that makes the library's recorded-information line (i.e.
hours of operation) UD1-BOOK (302-831-2665).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 10:06:48 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Fishers Island, NY
Does anyone know what the dialing instructions are for 516-788
exchange on Fishers Island, NY? Despite being in 516, it showed up
with an "operator routing" of 203, and I did figure from other sources
that this island is easier to reach from Connecticut than it is from
Long Island, NY. On Long Island in 516 (notice that Brooklyn and
Queens are on Long Island but are in NYC, area 718) the dialing
instructions are 7D within 516 NPA + 7D to outside of 516.
------------------------------
Subject: International Local Calling
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 23:09:37 EST
From: John R. Levine <johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us>
I was wandering around northern Vermont earlier this week and took a
look at the local phone book while waiting for an operator to answer
on a pay phone. (It's pretty rural up there.)
I noticed that subscribers in Derby Line VT have an unusual feature in
their phone service -- it is a free local call to Rock Island, Quebec.
Derby Line and Rock Island are one town with the border running
through the middle, e.g. in the local opera house the stage is in
Canada and the seats are in the U.S. Apparently there was a
misunderstanding about the location of the border when the town was
built.
Is anyone aware of other cases where it is a local call from one
country to another? I'm pretty sure that happens nowhere else in the
northeast U.S. How about the town in Washington on a peninsula
accessible only from British Columbia? For that matter, there are
places along the Dutch-Belgian border where there are little bits of
one country surrounded by the other. What do they do about phones
there?
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
[Moderator's Note: I think some areas of Detroit are within the local
calling area of Windsor, Ontario. I also think Calexico, CA has local
calling to Mexicali across the border. The little peninsula you noted
in Washington state can be dialed with either area code, and directory
is provided by BC Tel. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 01:41:21 PST
From: cereghin@netcom.netcom.com (Jon Cereghino)
Subject: Propaganda
I heard one of those USTA adverisements on a local radio station
yesterday. It brought to mind a file I found on a local BBS titled,
"How to Detect Propaganda." It goes on to detail propaganda
techniques like "glittering generalities" (we NEED to provide
information services for the virtuous purpose of saving ill children)
and "transfer" (the PRESTIGE of the medical profession is the PRESTIGE
of your RBOC carrying information services).
I thought ethics had left the business world and these guys have
proven I was wrong <guffaw, guffaw>.
My elected representatives are going to get tired of hearing from me
on this issue.
Jon Cereghino Internet: cereghin@netcom.com
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #71
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08609;
23 Jan 92 4:06 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17281
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Jan 1992 02:12:18 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19345
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 23 Jan 1992 02:11:35 -0600
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1992 02:11:35 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201230811.AA19345@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #72
TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Jan 92 02:11:25 CST Volume 12 : Issue 72
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Ron Dippold)
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Robert Denny)
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Phil Karn)
Re: The Spread of Telepoints (Mark Fulk)
Re: The Spread of Telepoints (Brendan Jones)
Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone (Peter da Silva)
Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone (Dick Rawson)
Re: Reverse Directory Information (David E. Sheafer)
Re: MCI Card With Voice Features (Bill Huttig)
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 00:08:18 GMT
don@q-aais.navo.navy.mil (Don Newcomb) writes:
> OK. So they are probably using a Linear Maximal Pseudorandom Sequence
> to modulate and demodualte the signal. But, doesn't this imply some
> rather heavy duty signal processing? Is a matched filter adequate to
We did the prototype system with a whole bunch of DSPs, and the code
is enough to give you nightmares. The current system uses a custom
CDMA ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) to do the
modulation and demodulation. This allows us to do whatever is
necessary to get the best possible signal even with fading, multipath,
and a whole host of other nasty things that happen when you're driving
at 65 MPH through a canyon. A simple filter just would not have been
adequate.
------------------------------
From: denny@dakota.alisa.com (Bob Denny)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 17:28:32 GMT
Organization: Alisa Systems, Inc.
In <telecom12.66.2@eecs.nwu.edu> don@q-aais.navo.navy.mil (Don
Newcomb) writes:
> In article <telecom12.62.4@eecs.nwu.edu> rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com
> (Ron Dippold) writes:
> X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 62, Message 4 of 11
>> mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net writes:
> OK. So they are probably using a Linear Maximal Pseudorandom Sequence
> to modulate and demodualte the signal. But, doesn't this imply some
> rather heavy duty signal processing? Is a matched filter adequate to
> demodulate the signal or do they require all sorts of bizarre transforms?
I have seen surface acoustic wave (SAW) filters used that do the
modulation and demodulation directly. Very low cost and integrated. As
I stated in my previous article, this stuff is not new. It's 25 years
old.
Robert B. Denny voice: (818) 792-9474
Alisa Systems, Inc. fax: (818) 792-4068
Pasadena, CA (denny@alisa.com, ..uunet!alisa.com!denny)
------------------------------
From: karn@Qualcomm.COM (Phil Karn)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Reply-To: karn@chicago.qualcomm.com
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 20:51:42 GMT
In article <telecom12.66.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, denny@dakota.alisa.com (Bob
Denny) writes:
>> Would someone like to explain how CDMA works? I understand that it
>> spreads the signal across a huge bandwidth in a way that allows the
>> receiver to select 1 of N signals ... but how? A CDMA primer, anyone?
> I do not know the details of the specific system being proposed, but I
> am familiar with "spread spectrum" systems, of which the proposed
> cellular "CDMA" system appears to be one. So I'll take a stab at some
> basics in hopes someone else more knowlegable will expand on or
> correct ...
Since I work on the project, I *do* know the details. :-) Many have
already been published; probably the best reference is "On the System
Design Aspects of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) Applied To
Digital Cellular and Personal Communications Networks" by Allen
Salmasi and Klein S. Gilhousen, Proceedings of the 41st IEEE Vehicular
Technology Conference, St Louis MO May 19-22, 1991.
Several other papers on CDMA appeared in the May 1991 issue of IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology (Special Issue on Digital
Cellular Technologies). One is an overview of the generic concepts,
another is an analysis of the CDMA system capacity.
All of the info I'm about to give is described in these papers or in
other public forums, so there's nothing proprietary here.
> There are two common forms of CDMA systems: direct-sequence and
> frequency-hopping. I will describe the direct-sequence variation. I do
> not know which is used by Qualcomm. The principles are the same,
> though.
We use direct-sequence PN spreading at 1.2288 megachips/sec. The
spreading bandwidth is 1.23 MHz at 3dB, and that's also our channel
spacing. For a data rate of 9600 bps, this yields a processing gain of
about 21 dB. There are actually two spreading functions: a "short
code" that is 32768 chips long, and a "long code" 2^42-1 chips long.
Both use the same chip rate. The signal transmitted by the cell site
includes a "pilot" consisting of a carrier spread only by the short
code; this allows the mobile to rapidly acquire it and use it for
system timing. Actual traffic is spread by both the short and long
sequences.
> CDMA works by first digitally encoding the audio signal, resulting in
> a stream of bits. Various tricks are used to compress the audio so as
> to minimize the bit rate at the expense of fidelity.
Actually, I dare say our vocoder sounds pretty good. It runs at a
variable rate (fast when you talk, slow when you stop), and
transmitted power is proportional to this rate. Since power is
capacity in CDMA, this gives us a nice boost in capacity; whenever a
given user isn't talking (about 60-65% of the time, on average), his
capacity share can be taken by some other user who *is* talking.
[reasonably accurate description of spread spectrum omitted]
> If you aren't confused at this point, great. Now here's why
> spread-spectrum is so great. First, the fact that the signal's energy
> is spread across a very wide range of frequencies makes it very
> resistant to multipath. I won't go into the explanation of why, but
> trust me, a properly engineered CDMA system will be virtually immune
> to flutter and fading, even in the worst urban high-rise areas.
Instead of being a nuisance, multipath can actually be a major asset
in a CDMA system. Our receivers actually consist of three independent
spread spectrum receivers in parallel, and these receiver "fingers"
can be independently assigned to different multipath components which
are then combined before detection. This is an extremely effective
technique.
There's a special case of "multipath" in our system called "soft
handoff". If you're in the region midway between two or more cells on
the same frequency, the system sets up a path through them. The
additional cells' signals appear to the mobile just as though they
were additional multipath components from the first cell (actually,
this isn't quite true -- the signals are deliberately offset in time
to avoid possible cross-correlation, but the basic idea is that you
combine the signals from multiple cells just as you would combine
multiple signals from a single cell).
We also use some pretty strong forward error correction (FEC) coding:
rate 1/2 K=9 convolutional coding with Viterbi decoding on the forward
link and rate 1/3 K=9 on the reverse link. This helps us tolerate
errors and lets us operate with a very low average signal-to-noise
ratio (about 7dB). Again, since power is capacity in CDMA, this boosts
our overall capacity.
Another really nice thing about CDMA is that due to the selectivity
provided by the processing gain of spread spectrum, frequencies can be
reused in every cell site. Current FM cellular systems typically are
able to use only 1/7 of the total number of channels in each cell
because of the need to protect their immediate neighboring cells from
interference.
> Secondly, the PN sequence can be generated with an encryption key and
> provide a reasonable level of security. I have no idea if the Qualcomm
> proposal includes security provisions, though.
The PN sequences are generated with linear feedback shift registers.
In article <telecom12.24.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, stevef@wrq.com (Steve
Forrette) writes:
>> What it works out to is that while an analog phone transmits at three
>> watts, and the cell-site power requirements are truly horrible, CDMA
>> phones transmit in the milliwatt range, and the entire cell site
>> transmits with only as much power as a couple of the radios in the
>> analog cell.
> Again, not always. The remote AMPS transmits only at the necessary
> level. In fact, my handheld is always operating in the "milliwatt
> range."
Changing the transmitter power of a mobile in AMPS requires a "blank
and burst" data trasmission from the cell. This is plainly audible to
the user, so you don't want to do it too often. In CDMA, however,
power control is continuous, fast and completely inaudible to the
user.
In article <telecom12.26.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, nagle@netcom.netcom.com
(John Nagle) writes:
>> In the long term, digital phones should be cheaper and lighter,
>> however, as VLSI components are employed.
> In the Motorola MicroTAC, the battery is over half the weight.
> Further VLSI integration won't shrink the package that much.
> Actually, the coils and filters probably weigh more than the
> semiconductors already. Look at the Philips/Signetics chip set, for
> example. It's down to 12 shrink surface-mount packages.
> Progress will have to come from reducing power consumption.
This is truer than you may realize, John. One of CDMA's biggest
advantages is its very low RF power levels. As Ron Dippold mentioned
earlier, we typically see the mobile RF transmitter operating at the
milliwatt (0dBm) level or lower; -10 dBm is quite typical, and I've
seen it as low as -50 dBm (10 nanowatts) when very close to a cell
site.
All this translates directly into longer talk time and/or a smaller
battery for a CDMA portable phone.
Phil
------------------------------
From: fulk@cs.rochester.edu (Mark Fulk)
Subject: Re: The Spread of Telepoints
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 14:17:05 GMT
In article <telecom12.66.7@eecs.nwu.edu> duncan@mhs.ac.uk (Duncan
Rogerson) writes:
> I doubt I'd have much use for it elsewhere, the battery life is only
> three hours, and not being able to receive calls, except from private
> base stations your handset is registered with, is a definite minus
> point.
Wouldn't a telepoint/pager combination address this problem nicely?
Especially if there was a button to dial the number on the pager's
display. It strikes me that the combination could achieve most of the
convenience of cellular phones without a lot of the costs.
Mark A. Fulk Computer Science Department
fulk@cs.rochester.edu University of Rochester
Don't quote needless words -- Strunk Rochester, NY 14627
------------------------------
Subject: Re: The Spread of Telepoints
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 13:11:26 +1000
From: brendan@otc.research.otca.oz.au
cmylod@oracle.nl (Colum Mylod) wrote:
> [re CT2] One sentence caught my eye: "no-one can eavesdrop on your
> conversation" thanks to the "digital technique" used [trans]. Oh yeah?
Well, it would be very difficult to do. You'd have to build yourself
a frequency agile FSK/TDD decoder with CAI protocol recognition. It
took GPT (UK) about five years to develop one, so good luck to you.
Put it this way, a scanner ain't going to help you eavesdrop on a CT2 call.
All you'd hear is FSK noise.
> If memory serves, at least one British trader in these has folded due
> to massive disinterest from the great public. Are they anywhere else?
Yes, a very large system is going in Hong Kong right as we speak, with
three operators. It will be the first *real* test of CT2 due to the
adherence to the Common Air Interface and the very high population
density in Hong Kong. The world is waiting to see what will happen
there.
CT2 folded in the UK due to a number of reasons, including premature
technology launching, proprietary air-interface standards (one handset
wouldn't work on all systems), and poorly targeted marketing (who do
you sell it to?)
(The above are my opinions and not that of my employer)
Brendan Jones ACSnet: brendan@otc.otca.oz.au
R&D Contractor UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan
Services R&D Phone: (02)2873128 Fax: (02)2873299
|||| OTC || Snail: GPO Box 7000, Sydney 2001, AUSTRALIA
------------------------------
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 03:59:02 GMT
In article <telecom12.65.10@eecs.nwu.edu> Barton.Bruce@camb.com
(Barton F. Bruce) writes:
> AT&T has chosen to comply by providing an 800, not a 950 number.
YEAH!
Does this apply to normal businesses or to service industries only?
Does a business that only provides phone service to employees count as
an aggregator?
Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1.
------------------------------
From: drawson@hobbes.Tymnet.COM (Dick Rawson)
Subject: Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone
Date: 22 Jan 92 14:37:34 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)
> AT&T has chosen to comply by providing an 800, not a 950 number. When
> using it, you will have to be patient, because AT&T will ask questions
> and WILL BE COLLECTING info on the site! When their database 'knows'
> about the site, there will be less delay.
I hope so. It sure took minutes, including music on hold and the
questioning. (The front desk told me I could reach AT&T by 8-00,
where 8 is the long-distance access prefix here; maybe there is one
such outgoing trunk, but all I got was fast busy. The PBX and the
COCOTs don't understand 10288; the COCOTs deliver 00 to an AOS. This
is an ITT Sheraton. Do you suppose the AOS is Metromedia/ITT?)
Funny how T1S1 (ISDN Standards) end up with AOS services and COCOTs.
I guess Motel 6 doesn't have conference facilities ...
Dick Rawson
------------------------------
From: David E. Sheafer <nin15b0b@lucy.merrimack.edu>
Reply-To: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu
Subject: Re: Reverse Directory Information
Date: 21 Jan 92 19:24:01 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA
In article <telecom12.56.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, stewarta@sco.COM (Stewart
I. Alpert) writes:
> Can anyone point me towards a source for reverse directory
> information? I'd like to find a way to trace a name/address given a
> phone number.
There is a 900 number that offers this service.
Dial 1-900 884-1212 and enter phone number, and it will return the
name and address that owns the phone number.
Charges are 1.50 first minute, .75 each aditional minute. I have
never used this service myself.
David E. Sheafer
internet: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu or uucp: samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b
GEnie: D.SHEAFER Cleveland Freenet: ap345
------------------------------
From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig)
Subject: Re: MCI Card With Voice Features
Date: 22 Jan 92 02:43:03 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL
In article <telecom12.51.6@eecs.nwu.edu> sew7490@ultb.rit.edu (S.E.
Williams) writes:
> a source for my report, and I'm getting one of those new cards. I'd
While your at it ask for the promo offer of trading in cards from
other IEC's ... trad in up to four old calling card numbers for four
hours of LD on MCI.
> By the way, does anyone know if MCI customers with the 'old' cards
> will be receiving new ones in the mail, or will they have to call and
> ask?
Not sure but this is one of the steps in merging the old TELECOM*USA
and OLD MCI into the 'new' MCI system.
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 17:13 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
Tony Harminc <TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET> writes:
> 2) Even if the equipment is capable, it isn't clear what the
> advantages are of generating a local (caller's end) ringing tone.
There is another problem: advisory recordings. Unless the called
office can signal back to the originating office that the number is
somehow special by being out of service, or changed, or whatever, the
caller would never hear, "The number you have reached ...". These
recordings do not supervise.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #72
*****************************
Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28190;
24 Jan 92 3:18 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00217
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 01:07:33 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10271
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 01:07:19 -0600
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 01:07:19 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201240707.AA10271@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #73
TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Jan 92 01:07:12 CST Volume 12 : Issue 73
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Economics of Special Call Features? (Anthony E. Siegman)
Status of the Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) (Don W. Bacon)
Insert in GTE Bill (David Gast)
Hayes ISDN Adaptor For NeXT: $200 (Bruce Perens)
DTMF Pads and Polarity Reversal (John Gilbert)
Receiver Jamming (John Gilbert)
Michigan Public Service Commission Notice (Jack Decker)
Billing Delay at Start of Call? (Thomas Brown)
New St. Louis White Pages (Will Martin)
Bureaucrats (John W. Shaver)
Re: 408 Area Code Question (John Higdon)
Re: Telecom and the Arts (Howard Gayle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Anthony E. Siegman <siegman@sierra.stanford.edu>
Subject: Economics of Special Call Features?
Organization: Stanford University
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 19:48:15 GMT
Others have already noted that a staff report from the California
PUC has recommended against installing Caller ID on privacy grounds,
but recommends in favor of a list of other features (Call Trace, Call
Block, etc.). This is a staff recommendation; the Commissioners will
make the final decision later.
The story in the {San Jose Mercury} also says, "But without Caller
ID, telephone companies question whether there will be enough demand
for the other features to make them economical."
I'd appreciate hearing informed opinions as to whether this last
assertion is factual or reasonable, or just telco propaganda because
the telcos really want Caller ID.
My (admittedly uninformed) impression is that all these features
are more or less "there", within the capabilities of the electronic
switches and even probably already programmed, so that providing them
mostly amounts to "turning them on". And, once turned on they cost
almost nothing to operate (and presumably generate revenue for the
telco).
Is this reasonably true? Or does it cost a fair amount, in real
terms, to provide these special features? And does the presence or
absence of Caller ID really affect the cost of the other features?
(P.S. I'm only asking about the economics not the politics of
Caller ID here; and I might suggest responses not quote my entire
message, just the last paragraph above.)
------------------------------
From: dwb@pti.UUCP (Don W. Bacon)
Subject: Status of the Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN)
Date: 23 Jan 92 14:46:34 GMT
Organization: Phoenix Telecom, Inc., Rochester, NY
I am researching the capabilities, current status, and opportunities
presented by the Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN). For this
research, I have relied heavily on the recent Bellcore TAs, SRs, and
FAs on the subject. I have also read recent articals in TE&M and
Telephony. I have not, however, had discussions with the industry
(RBOCs or vendors) on the subject.
I am looking for additional information and/or discussions on the AIN.
For example -- what capabilities can be expected, what is being
trialed where, when is AIN/0.1, AIN/1 likely to be deployed, how the
AIN will affect current/new OSSs, what the service creation
environment will be, and similar subjects.
Considering the recent lively discussions on Caller-ID and ANI, I
would imagine that the AIN would also generate a lot of interest.
Thanks for your help.
Don Bacon Phoenix Telecom
Rochester, NY (716)224-2210
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 15:17:40 -0800
From: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast)
Subject: Insert in GTE Bill
GTE, which has recently proposed increasing basic rates by 50% (as
well as other changes) has included a color insert on the GTE West
(Golf) Classic. Tickets cost up to $75.00. Sarcasm mode on, I sure
am glad to see GTE sponsoring golf games. I wonder how much of my
telephone bill goes to sponsor this activity? At the very least, I
wonder about the postage required to send this advertisement out. Who
paid?
David
------------------------------
From: bruce@pixar.com (Bruce Perens)
Subject: Hayes ISDN Adaptor For NeXT: $200
Organization: Pixar -- Point Richmond, California
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1992 20:27:29 GMT
At NeXTWorld, Hayes was showing an ISDN connector for the NeXT
computer. The tiny box made use of the Motorola 56000 DSP that is part
of the NeXT computer, thus the low price. It was on "show special" for
$200. The Hayes ISDN terminal unit for non-NeXT equipment cost $1995.
Bruce Perens
------------------------------
From: johng.all_proj@mot.com (John)
Subject: DTMF Pads and Polarity Reversal
Organization: Motorola Inc, Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1992 00:54:32 GMT
In article <telecom12.68.1@eecs.nwu.edu> kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net
writes:
> It depends on *whose* DTMF generators you are using. :-) AT&T saved a
> few cents and simply put a diode in series with the generator to
> prevent reverse battery from damaging the electronics. Other
> manufacturers (AE in particular) put a diode bridge around the
> generator so that the polarity of the office battery was irrelevant.
This is another case where this "savings" was a "FEATURE." Having the
pad only work with the correct phone line polarity allowed a neat
trick to be done with 1A2 key systems. An individual pair to a
multiline key system phone could be wired with reversed tip and ring.
This would allow dialing restriction to be done on a per-line basis.
This was sometimes used where a station might only be allowed to
answer calls on the outside lines, but still needed to dial out on an
intercom line.
John Gilbert KA4JMC
Secure and Advanced Conventional Sys Div Astro Systems Development
Motorola Inc, Land Mobile Products SectorSchaumburg, Illinois
johng@ecs.comm.mot.com
------------------------------
From: johng.all_proj@mot.com (John)
Subject: Receiver Jamming
Organization: Motorola Inc, Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1992 00:43:58 GMT
This reminds me of a similar solution to a problem my brother had
while in college. The guy in the dorm room next door would often
leave his stereo turned up very loud and then leave the room for hours
on end. When my brother decided that he wanted a little quiet time, he
would tune up his grid-dip oscillator (actually a low power
transmitter) on the radio station that the neighbor had left blasting.
The grid-dip oscillator would capture the frequency with an
unmodulated carrier, and would silence the noise from next door.
John Gilbert KA4JMC
Secure and Advanced Conventional Sys Div Astro Systems Development
Motorola Inc, Land Mobile Products Sector
Schaumburg, Illinois johng@ecs.comm.mot.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 17:20:58 CST
From: Jack Decker <Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com>
Subject: Michigan Public Service Commission notice
Well, I think I've just seen one of the more unusual notices to come
out of our state's Public Service Commission. First, I'll share the
notice with you, and then add a few comments and a request. Here's
the notice:
STATE OF MICHIGAN
BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
* * * * *
In the matter, on the Commission's Own Motion, )
to determine whether coin operated telephones )
direct-inward dialing, and touch-tone service ) Case No. U-10049
are essential to the public health, safety, or )
general welfare and should be regulated under )
the Michigan Telecommunications Act. )
NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT
--------------------------------
Under the provisions of the Michigan Telecommunications Act, 1991
PA 179 (Act 179), the Michigan Public Service Commission is initiating
a proceeding to determine whether coin-operated telephones,
direct-inward dialing, and touch-tone service are essential to the
public health, safety, or general welfare and should be regulated
under Act 179. Act 179 gives the Commission 90 days from January 1,
1992 to determine the appropriate regulation, if any, of these
services.
Interested parties may submit comments in writing to the Michigan
Public Service Commission, P.O. Box 30221, Lansing, Michigan 48909.
Initial comments must be received by February 24, 1992. Peplies to
initial comments must be received by March 4, 1992. All comments
should refer to Case No. U-10049 and should address whether, and how,
coin-operated telephones, direct-inward dialing, and touch-tone
service should be regulated.
[End of notice.]
I suspect that this is worded this way because if the mentioned items
are deemed "essential to the public health, safety, or general
welfare", then the MPSC can exercise greater regulation under the law.
It's obvious that the three areas of inquiry have little to do with
each other (other than being telephone-related), but I can understand
why they'd be asking for comment on coin-operated telephones and
touch-tone service. What puzzles me is the part about direct-inward
dialing ... what is so special about that feature that it would be the
object of specific inquiry?
As for touch-tone service, I suspect that if the comments received are
as expected, this may be a prelude toward the provision of free
Touch-Tone service in Michigan. I would ask Telecom Digest readers if
any of you can state concisely any reasons why Touch-Tone service
might be considered an "essential" service (I can think of one or two,
but would like to see if Telecom Digest readers can come up with
anything original).
Also, I would appreciate if if those of you who live in a state where
Touch-Tone service is provided free of charge would mail me a short
note stating that fact (and giving me the name of the state you live
in). Or, if anyone has a list of states that now require telephone
companies to offer free Touch-Tone, I would very much appreciate it if
you could mail me a copy of that. I just think it would be helpful to
be able to show that a number of states already require telephone
companies to offer free Touch-Tone.
Of course, those of you who receive telephone service in Michigan may
wish to take advantage of your opportunity to comment on this matter.
Thank you in advance for any comments you may offer on this matter.
Jack Decker
Internet address: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com Fidonet address: 1:154/8
------------------------------
From: tbrown@lehi3b15.csee.lehigh.edu (Thomas Brown [901015])
Subject: Billing Delay at Start of Call?
Date: 23 Jan 92 16:20:27 GMT
Organization: CSEE Dept. Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA
AT&T and New Jersey Bell (which may mean that the local switch is the
controlling factor here) used to allow a short period of time at the
beginning of a long-distance call before beginning the billing. This
was to prevent charging customers who were in the process of hanging
up their phone when the called party answered. You could call a
number and not be billed for it if you hung up in the first five
seconds or so after the called party answered. I found this
especially useful when calling numbers answered by a modem -- I could
hang up immediately and not be billed. However, all calls are billed
now -- even if you hang up within a half second of the called party
answering.
Any ideas on this one?
Regards,
Thomas Brown, KA2UGQ BITNET: twb0@lehigh.bitnet
Lehigh University UC Box 855 ARPA: tbrown@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU
Bethlehem, PA 18015 UUCP: ..!uunet!lehigh.bitnet!twb0
(215) 758-0083 AX.25: ka2ugq@ka2ugq.nj.usa.na
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 13:35:18 CST
From: Will Martin <wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: New St. Louis White Pages
The Feb '92 SW Bell St. Louis White Pages are being distributed now,
and I noticed something on my new copy that I thought I'd mention to
the group. The "blue pages" of government listings, which oiginally
were all blue, are now white paper with blue edging. Much easier to
read -- I bet the telco had had complaints from the elderly or people
with marginal vision about the difficulty of reading black print on
blue paper in the previous versions.
I also note that the previous year's bound-in cardboard divider,
separating the residential and government listings from the business
listings, is gone. I wonder if that was just a cost factor, or if
people complained about it -- the way it projected from the book would
make it harder to shelve in some cases.
I know there are some SWBT people reading Telecom, and I have a
question for you: can you provide me a number to call to make a
suggestion about the contents of the "blue pages" listings? I realize
that the listings in the residential and business sections are
dependent on what people pay for, or pay to avoid, but I am under the
impression that the telco provides the "blue pages" listings as a
customer service to people using the phone book, and that the listing
of a government agency therein is up to the telco, not the agency
itself. What I would like to suggest is that the "State" section in
the blue pages include all the various 800 numbers for state agencies
and services. It now does not include the 800 number for the
Department of Natural Resources, for example, and I believe that there
are others left out, too. It would be a good public service to get
them all in there.
Regards, Will
wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil OR wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 14:57:04 MST
From: SMTP@HUACHUCA-EMH7.ARMY.MIL
Subject: Bureaucrats
As a bureaucrat I take offense at John Higdon calling uneducated and
un-informed judges bureaucrats. Some of us Federal Civil Servants are
educated and informed, but it is often the laws which the #$%&@@ in
Congress passed to "protect us" which prevent bureaucrats from being
effective and efficient.
Sorry, but we have a bad enough reputation already.
John W. Shaver
602 538 7622 // DSN 879 7622 // FTS 658 7622
FAX 538 0656 // DSN 879 0656_// FTS 658 0656
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 23:35 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: 408 Area Code Question
Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL> writes:
> Which part of 408 comes under GTE?
The communities of Los Gatos and Morgan Hill are served by GTE. Gilroy
is served by Contel and all the rest (in the San Francisco LATA) is
served by Pac*Bell.
> Does the San Jose area have 7D for local/toll within 408, NPA + 7D for
> local/toll going outside of 408? (This is what San Francisco and
> Oakland, then both in 415, had before 415 got N0X/N1X prefixes.)
All Pac*Bell telephones in the Greater San Jose area use 7D or NPA +
7D for long distance. This includes the communities of San Jose, Santa
Clara, Campbell, Cupertino, Saratoga, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas. In
essence, anything that is a local call within 408 from downtown San
Jose dials long distance without a '1' if it is served by Pac*Bell.
But then "David Singer" <singer@almaden.ibm.com> writes:
> But the phone book (San Jose/Santa Clara, good through March 1992)
says: 7D within area code, 1 + AC + 7D outside.
This is true. But the phone book lies. A '1' is not required from ANY
Pac*Bell phone in the San Jose area. And it never has been required.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 07:27:09 PST
From: howard@hal.com (Howard Gayle)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Arts
Reply-To: howard@hal.com (Howard Gayle)
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc., Campbell, California
In article <telecom12.68.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, wmartin@STL-06SIMA (Will
Martin) writes:
> "We're bowled over by these hand-woven baskets. Made of scrap
> telephone wire by Zulu artisans in Natal, South Africa, they're study,
> washable, and suitable for serving everything from fruit to bread to
> nuts.
When I was with Ericsson Telecom, one of my coworkers told me about
working for Ericsson in South America in the 1950s. One common
problem was for a meter or two of cable to disappear overnight from
the middle of a run. It would usually show up, in recycled form, in
the local market.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #73
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03497;
24 Jan 92 21:19 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12535
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 18:58:12 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01512
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 18:57:48 -0600
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 18:57:48 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201250057.AA01512@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #74
TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Jan 92 18:56:50 CST Volume 12 : Issue 74
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Joe Talbot)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Jack Decker)
Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered (Gordon D. Woods)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Andrew M. Dunn)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Nancy J. Airey)
Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered (Tim Gorman)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Steve Forrette)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (Patton M. Turner)
Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe Talbot)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Date: 22 Jan 92 09:53:30 GMT
Organization: ATI, High desert research center, Victorville, Ca
In article <telecom12.61.12@eecs.nwu.edu>, kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken
Abrams) writes:
> In article <telecom12.47.13@eecs.nwu.edu> andys@ulysses.att.com
> writes:
>> The PBX isn't the problem here. In North America "modern" CO switches
>> don't pass answer supervision back to the subscriber. (On older
> CO switches DO, however, pass answer supervision to PBX trunks (lines)
> IF they are properly arranged for PBX service. In my experience, this
> means that they are ground start and the answer signal is a line
> reversal.
SORRY. That isn't available. I wish it was. Ground start has NOTHING
to do with answer supervision, and a trunk is simply a "designed"
circuit, with special attention paid to transmission levels. Now,
there's something the RBOCs could sell, but that just want to get into
the info business (and be the ONLY ones in the business).
Why is it that the services ONLY the phone company can provide, aren't
interesting enough, or aren't profitable enough for them to want to
provide? Maybe they should sell out to a company that wants to sell
phone service, rather than everything else.
joe@mojave.ati.com
Slow mail: P.O. box 1750, Helendale California 92342
Phone: (619) 243-5500 Fax (619) 952-1030
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 16:49:32 CST
From: Jack Decker <Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com>
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
In message <telecom12.47.13@eecs.nwu.edu> dated 16 Jan 92 15:14:42
GMT, andys@ulysses.att.com writes:
> In article <telecom12.41.1@eecs.nwu.edu> joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe
> Talbot) wrote:
>> The PBX isn't the problem here. In North America "modern" CO switches
>> don't pass answer supervision back to the subscriber. (On older
>> switches <step by step/panel> it was sent back to the sub in the form
>> of reversed polarity). This would solve lots of problems with COCOTS,
>> long distance companies, modems, voice forwarding systems and even
>> teleslime automatic calling machines, but alas ...
> Wouldn't reverse polarity make it impossible for me to talk to my home
> answering machine and office voice mail from a line-powered phone? As
> I recall, DTMF generators don't work under reverse polarity ...
Only the older model touch-tone pads are polarity sensitive. Newer
models will work with either polarity. By the way, this caused a bit
of a problem for Michigan Bell. Seems that some telephone exchanges
would reverse the polarity on coin phone circuits (I have no idea why)
when certain types of calls were made ... unfortunately, that included
zero-plus calls to carriers other than AT&T, and 950 calls! There was
one phone that I came across (at a Target store in Holland, Michigan
if I recall correctly) that was PRESUBSCRIBED to MCI, but when you
dialed a zero-plus call and got the "boing" tone from MCI, you could
not enter your calling card number!
I reported this to repair on several occasions (of course, the repair
service clerk usually acted as though s/he hadn't the foggiest notion
of what I was talking about ... after all, customers aren't supposed
to have any technical knowledge of how the phone system works!) and
finally, after the problem had dragged on for months, I made a list of
about six phones thus affected (in various cities around the state)
and sent it in a letter to the Michigan Public Service Commission,
asking if they could perhaps look into this.
Well! Next thing I know I get in the mail a copy of a Michigan Bell
document detailing a plan to convert coin phones all over the state to
be non-polarity-sensitive, on something like an eight-month timetable!
Evidently this was a non-trivial task for them, affecting far more
than just the few phones I had run into. Of course, this was only
Michigan Bell, so I imagine there's still phones in Michigan (on
independent telco exchanges) where you might run into this problem.
One proposed solution: Let the telcos offer reverse-polarity calling
party control (CPC) on a customer-request basis ... it should be
possible to program a modern digital switch to do it only when
necessary, since it would require some additional programming to offer
the feature in the first place. You could even make it customer
programmable (dial a prefix to turn it off if you are going to need to
use your old 2500 style Touch-Tone phone on the next call, in much the
same way that you can disable call waiting for one call), though
obviously you would NOT want to automatically offer that particular
option on a COCOT line (though even there, I could see where it might
be useful ... if the phone had enough smarts to block CUSTOMER dialing
of the prefix, it could use the "disable for this call" provision when
placing certain "free" calls, such as to the company's coin refund
center).
In summary ... the "ideal" reverse-polarity CPC offering would be:
1) Optional ... placed on a line only at the customer's request, and
2) Optionally blockable on a per-call basis, by dialing a prefix code
prior to dialing the number. If this code were dialed, the polarity
would never reverse, whether the call were completed or not.
I have a feeling that if folks really want this, they should badger
their PSC's for it, since the phone companies probably WON'T offer
this one voluntarily ... it would make COCOT's more reliable and thus
cut into the telco coin phone business. Of course, as the original
message pointed out, CPC has lots of useful applications beyond that
of just COCOT's ... I'd think that just about every telecom manager
could find a way to put it to good use!
Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8
[Moderator's Note: The thing you have to do when you get a dunce
repair clerk is insist on getting the serial number of the trouble
ticket being opened for the occassion. Get a time commitment when the
problem will be corrected, then call at that time, refer to the ticket
and inquire again, preferably from the line on which the work was
requested. If it is not finished, ask 'how much longer will be
required' and date your copy of the trouble ticket ahead ... then just
keep calling each time the ticket expires; keep challenging, asking
for supervisory assistance, etc. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 10:11:55 EST
From: gdw@gummo.att.com (Gordon D Woods)
Subject: Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
From article <telecom12.68.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, by kentrox!bud@uunet.
uu.net:
> It depends on *whose* DTMF generators you are using. :-) AT&T saved a
> few cents and simply put a diode in series with the generator to
> prevent reverse battery from damaging the electronics. Other
> manufacturers (AE in particular) put a diode bridge around the
> generator so that the polarity of the office battery was irrelevant.
I'd like to know the model number of an ATT DTMF phone that has a
single diode in series. I've seen a lot of them (I have a station set
manual.) and have never seen a single diode in series: It's either a
bridge or nothing: the electronics is self protected in 2500 sets and
all more modern sets have bridges.
------------------------------
From: amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 05:26:00 GMT
In article <telecom12.61.8@eecs.nwu.edu> rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes:
> Could be because in Western Electric DTMF phones, the keypad is
> polarity sensitive. If the polarity reversal answer supervision was
> used with these phones, the Keypad would quit working when the called
> party answered, making the phone unusable for "Touch Tone" entry of
> digits into follow on services like paging, etc.
All because Western Electric couldn't add a full-wave bridge rectifier
(a commonly-available part worth around $0.90) before the keypad power
feed.
They should have -- polarity reversals have been the norm for many
years as a method of controlling phones ... especially coin phones.
In article <telecom12.65.2@eecs.nwu.edu> grayt@Software.Mitel.Com (Tom
Gray) writes:
> In article <telecom12.61.9@eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.
> com> writes:
>> Why should anyone pay for custom calling? Hell, those features are
>> turned on with a couple of keystrokes. What a rip!
> Custom features are turned on by a couple of key strokes. The couple
> of key strokes invokes the software which was written to provide the
> custom service. This software cost money to write, test and support.
> Someone has to pay the switch vendor so that it can pay for the
> development of software.
> Who better than the users of that software?
Agreed. But this should be via a monthly charge for the feature,
based on the cost of the software. Often, it's a charge that the telco
marketing folks dream up because the market "will bear it".
And my major complaint is with the mandatory "installation charge".
For features which take a "couple of keystrokes" to turn on, a $30 or
$40 installation charge seems a bit excessive. They don't even have
to _visit_ the site. Which is what they claim the installation fee is
for.
Oh well.
Andy Dunn (amdunn@mongrel.uucp) ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 09:25:01 EST
From: jean@hrcca.att.com (Nancy J Airey)
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
In article <telecom12.65.2@eecs.nwu.edu> grayt@Software.Mitel.Com (Tom
Gray) writes:
> In article <telecom12.61.9@eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.
> com> writes:
>> Why should anyone pay for custom calling? Hell, those features are
>> turned on with a couple of keystrokes. What a rip!
> This software cost money to write, test and support.
> Someone has to pay the switch vendor so that it can pay for the
> development of software.
Exactly right. Additionally, many features require additional
resources on the local switch. Automatic callback and automatic
recall require additional memory blocks for *each* customer who
subscribes to the service. Calling "lists" for call acceptance,
denial, or other special treatment require additional memory and
announcement circuits. You also impact real time usage on the
processor involved whenever the listing feature is used. Even good
old call waiting means that a network resource is tied up until the
call is disconnected. True, not all features have major impacts, but
most have some impact. A heavy load of custom calling features can
also impact the job of the switch administrator who has to monitor the
office to be sure that everything is balanced (ie: did the traffic and
equipment engineer allow for the real-world load?) And if things are
not in balance, then the maintenance engineer has to "fix" it.
att!hrcca!jean
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jan 92 14:13:48 EST
From: 71336.1270@CompuServe.COM
Subject: Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered
In article <telecom12.47.13@eecs.nwu.edu> andys@ulysses.att.com writes:
>> Wouldn't reverse polarity make it impossible for me to talk to my home
>> answering machine and office voice mail from a line-powered phone? As
>> I recall, DTMF generators don't work under reverse polarity ...
> It depends on *whose* DTMF generators you are using. :-) AT&T saved a
> few cents and simply put a diode in series with the generator to
> prevent reverse battery from damaging the electronics. Other
> manufacturers (AE in particular) put a diode bridge around the
> generator so that the polarity of the office battery was irrelevant.
Mr. Couch, I just picked your message out to reply to, I hope you
don't mind.
I think AT&T may have had another reason than cost for not putting in
a polarity guard. If I remember correctly, original operator system
specs (TSPS vintage, say early 1970s) required being able to disable
tone dials when connected to an operator. This eventually changed to
being able to disable only tone dials on coin stations but by then the
station manufacturing specs had probably changed. I don't know what
AT&T does now on sets they manufacture themselves.
Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 19:36:55 pst
From: Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com>
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
In article <telecom12.65.6@eecs.nwu.edu> Tim Gorman writes:
> Again, the only way I know of to get answer supervision is to be
> connected to the trunk side of the central office switch via a
> DOD-type service. I believe some No. 1A ESS trunks could be set up to
> simulate ground start service but I have never actually seen this
> done.
Pacific Bell has an option that provides for battery reversal on
loop-start analog lines. It is available only on the DMS-100, and
requires a special line card designed for this purpose. At least this
was the story I heard from my Pacific Bell engineer friend as of a
year or so ago.
Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 13:33:16 CST
From: Patton M. Turner <pturner@eng.auburn.edu>
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
Tony Harminc <TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET> writes:
> True, but for many years now phones have had a diode bridge that makes
> polarity questions irrelevant. Phone jacks are often wired backwards
> without anyone noticing for years.
If the polarity LED on my test set is right probally 20% of subscriber
loops in Alabama are reversed at one point, this includes my apartment
and at least two campus phone lines.
Marc T. Kaufman writes:
> because a non-trivial number of extension cables (like some from Radio
> Shack) reverse tip and ring between the plug ends.
All telcom RJ-11/14/25 cables are supposed to be cross-pinned (pin 1
to pin 6, 2 to 5, 3 to 4). Any couplers, unigender T's , etc are also
cross-pinned. Data cables are, on the other hand, straight pinned (ie
pin 1 to pin 1). If the two ever mix you have a problem. Luckly most
CPE equipiment is not polarity sensititive.
Pat Turner pturner@eng.auburn.edu KB4GRZ @ K4RY.AL.USA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 17:28 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Determining if a Call Was Answered
grayt@Software.Mitel.Com (Tom Gray) writes:
> In article <telecom12.61.9@eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.
> com> writes:
>> Why should anyone pay for custom calling? Hell, those features are
>> turned on with a couple of keystrokes. What a rip!
> This software cost money to write, test and support.
> Someone has to pay the switch vendor so that it can pay for the
> development of software.
I would have thought that the sarcasm in my post about
"keystroke-activated features" would have dripped out of anyone's
terminal. But a number of email correspondents and this reader
apparently missed my irony.
I was incredulous that someone would actually believe that the cost of
a feature (originally the ability to detect answer supervision) should
somehow be based on the ease of which it is turned on or off.
Please, I write software for a living. I do not need to be lectured on
how much effort goes into "writing features". Obviously, an implied
smiley is insufficient. Last time I was to the point and straight-
forward in a post refuting someone, I was taken apart as being too
sarcastic and insensitive. Now when I am unabashedly sarcastic, I am
accused of being stupid :-) :-) :-)
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #74
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04511;
24 Jan 92 21:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07948
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 19:35:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09757
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 19:34:56 -0600
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 19:34:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201250134.AA09757@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #75
TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Jan 92 19:34:51 CST Volume 12 : Issue 75
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (John Higdon)
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (Peter da Silva)
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (Bob Miller)
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (Dave Levenson)
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (Alan L. Varney)
Re: Rotary Callers, Go Home! (Gordon D. Woods)
Re: Rotary Callers, Go Home! (Alan L. Varney)
Re: MCI Card With Voice Features (Bill Huttig)
Re: AT&T Video-Phone References Wanted (Peter da Silva)
Re: Reverse Directory Information (David E. Sheafer)
Re: Zip + 6? (Bob Frankston)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 17:13 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
Tony Harminc <TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET> writes:
> 2) Even if the equipment is capable, it isn't clear what the
> advantages are of generating a local (caller's end) ringing tone.
There is another problem: advisory recordings. Unless the called
office can signal back to the originating office that the number is
somehow special by being out of service, or changed, or whatever, the
caller would never hear, "The number you have reached ...". These
recordings do not supervise.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 12:48:51 GMT
If this was the case (that the ring signal was generated by the remote
CO) then you would expect the rings to be in sync (I heard three rings
would imply they heard three rings). This hasn't been the case in my
experience.
Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 07:03:44 PST
From: Bob Miller <miller@trcp39.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET (Tony Harminc) wrote:
> When the called party answers, the voice path has to be connected in a
> big hurry to avoid cutting off the first word or two.
Is this not an opportunity for a technology solution: If the voice
(what do you mean FAX or MODEM?) is digitized, could it not be stored
and forwareded when the circuit is established? The few seconds delay
could easily be caught up removing the natural silent pauses in a
voice call, as is currently done in the fast replay mode of most
voice-mail systems.
Bob Miller - Digital Equipment of Canada Ltd.
------------------------------
From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
Date: 23 Jan 92 00:11:07 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
In article <telecom12.64.12@eecs.nwu.edu>, TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET (Tony
Harminc) writes:
> The SS7 signalling system does make provision for the local switch to
> generate tones, but there are two reasons this doesn't happen too
> often:
> 2) Even if the equipment is capable, it isn't clear what the
> advantages are of generating a local (caller's end) ringing tone.
> When the called party answers, the voice path has to be connected in a
> big hurry to avoid cutting off the first word or two. This...
There may, in fact, be an advantage to using a local call-progress
tone even for ringing calls. If there are a large number of calls
being set up, only a fraction of them will ever be answered. I don't
know the statistics here, but I'm sure someone at the telco does. If
right now we are setting up 100 call attempts between this CO and that
one, and if we know that about half of them will be answered, then we
don't need to allocate 100 voice trunks. We need to allocate 50 voice
trunks, or perhaps 75 of them, to allow for a statistical aberration.
We provide a locally-generated audible ring signal, and we ring the
far end. When someone at the far end answers, we physically connect
one of the 75 allocated trunks.
How does this help? It means that a trunk group may be sized a little
smaller for a given traffic load. There is a cost savings here.
How does it hurt? It means that the signalling channel and the
switches at both ends need to be fast, or that a speech channel may
not exist at the moment the called end goes off-hook. But there is
already a delay at that point -- perhaps a half-second or so -- while
ring-trip is detected and the ringing generator is disconnected, and
the ringback tone is disconnected, and the talkers are connected ...
The only thing that changes is where this activity takes place.
Does anybody know if the telcos do this today?
Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 10:46:39 CST
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
Organization: AT&T Network Systems
In article <telecom12.64.12@eecs.nwu.edu> TONY@MCGILL1.BITNET (Tony
Harminc) writes:
> dklur@attmail.com wrote:
>> When I dial a phone number and hear the called party's phone "ring",
>> I am really hearing tones generated by my local switch, right?
> Generally the ringing tone you hear is generated by the distant CO and
> sent back to you on the same voice path that will be used when the
> called party answers.
> The SS7 signalling system does make provision for the local switch to
> generate tones,
The SS7 protocol for trunk signaling doesn't have a means of
telling the originating (or an intermediate) switch to provide Audible
Ring. An exception is ISDN-to-ISDN connections (SS7 does provide
transport of the end-to-end message indicating call progress), where
audible tones are avoided where possible. SS7 typically generates
tones or announcements at the local originating CO (or an intermediate
Tandem) only at the END of a call, simultaneously releasing the
outgoing trunk. Note that there are weird exceptions, but they all
involve cases where the terminating station is no longer capable of
answering the call.
> but there are two reasons this doesn't happen too often:
> 1) The chances of the entire connection being SS7 end-to-end are not
> yet very high. This is changing.
Depends on where you are -- as examples that aren't revealing
anything new, New Jersey Bell is about 100% SS7 for normal intra-LATA
calls, the Atlanta LATA (or is it the Atlanta free calling area?:-) )
is mostly SS7. Except for Illinois Bell, most places that are
offering CLASS over the whole LATA are primarily SS7. (IBT has
pockets of old offices they feel are un-economical to upgrade). The
difference is noticeable when you go to an MF-only area after using
SS7 for a while. Canada and elsewhere have their own reasons for
deploying SS7 with different schedules.
> 2) Even if the equipment is capable, it isn't clear what the
> advantages are of generating a local (caller's end) ringing tone.
I agree with the (deleted) reason for ALWAYS providing audible at
the distant CO (or PBX, etc): cut-through requirements. Also, there
is a matter of engineering audible tone circuits in the originating
office separately from engineering power ringing circuits. How do you
anticipate the number of originating calls needing "local" audible vs.
those receiving "far-end" audible??
John Higdon (john@zygot.ati.com) also wrote (in a later article):
> There is another problem: advisory recordings. Unless the called
> office can signal back to the originating office that the number is
> somehow special by being out of service, or changed, or whatever, the
> caller would never hear, "The number you have reached ...". These
> recordings do not supervise.
Even if the originating office DID provide "local" audible, it would
only do so if the distant office told it to do so. SS7 does provide
several cases where the distant office can indicate call failure
conditions to the originating office, and those release the trunk
connections. "No Circuit", "No Route to Destination" and others are
typically handled this way. INTERCEPT is still treated locally
because (in most cases) only the INTERCEPT system (AIS, etc.) knows
the correct announcement (reason) for the condition. But lack of
supervision on such recordings/tones, or on operator access for that
matter, is NOT preventing audible ringing from being done "locally" --
there are just other reasons for not doing it.
> Busy signals are another matter, however. It makes great sense to
> have the distant end send back a "busy" message without ever setting
> up the voice path. Then you can listen to the locally generated busy
> signal all day if you like, without occupying a valuable trunk across
> town or the world.
(There are some who think this isn't entirely a GOOD THING.)
> I've noticed on calls from here (Toronto) to the UK that in the last
> year or so, busy signals are being generated locally. Curiously, at
> least part of the voice path seems to get set up (slight background
> noise), then there is a click, the noise goes away, and the normal
> Canadian busy signal comes on.
The voice path is partially set up at the same time the SS7
signaling message is sent to the next office in the call path. The
indication to release the connection and provide "busy" tone may reach
the originating CO several tenths of a second later. If you get
clicks on local calls, they will probably be there for the "distant
busy" case also.
Al Varney -- NOT speaking officially or unofficially for AT&T
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 09:56:50 EST
From: gdw@gummo.att.com (Gordon D Woods)
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers, Go Home!
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
In article <telecom12.65.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, by kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.
net (Bud Couch) writes:
> In article <telecom12.46.6@eecs.nwu.edu> strieterd@gtephx.UUCP (Dave
> Strieter) writes:
>> Several Digest readers have commented that it is cheaper for the telco
>> to provide DTMF than rotary pulse dialing, but I fail to understand
>> how they come to that conclusion. I can't speak for the 5ESS or
>> DMS-100, but on the GTD-5 dial pulses are counted by software which
>> monitors the output of an opto-coupler device connected to each line,
>> whereas DTMF tones must be decoded by a more-expensive circuit which
>> feeds the decoded digits to the software. How does "more expensive" =
>> "costs less"?
As a digital loop carrier (DLC) designer, I can say that extra
circuitry must be added to individual line channel units just to
support pulse dialing. Some of the items include: more sophisticated
loop current detectors to avoid pulse distortion (Plain off hook is
relatively easy.), pulse correction circuits, and fast response
signaling bits in the PCM bitstream (The effective bandwidth of the
signalling channel could be reduced if we didn't have pulse dialing).
Modern DLCs will do digit collection in the remote terminal under
Bellcore's new TR303 and adding digit collection registers at a remote
site is very expensive so holding time is important.
In the exchange plant, much of the same circuitry must be added to,
admittedly ancient, analog trunk interfaces. The complex DX signalling
arrangement was invented just to handle dial pulse distortion over
long copper pairs.
There's pulse loop repeating (PLR) signalling to transfer dial pulses
to PBXs for rotary dial into a PBX. What a nightmare!
They should charge for rotary NOT tone dialing.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 17:17:14 CST
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers, Go Home!
Organization: AT&T Network Systems
In article <telecom12.65.8@eecs.nwu.edu> kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net (Bud
Couch) writes:
> In article <telecom12.46.6@eecs.nwu.edu> strieterd@gtephx.UUCP (Dave
> Strieter) writes:
>> ... whereas DTMF tones must be decoded by a more-expensive circuit
>> which feeds the decoded digits to the software. How does "more
>> expensive" = "costs less"?
> Simple enough. In the old days it was holding time on the registers;
> so that for a given level of service, you needed more registers for DP
> than for DTMF. On the GTD-5, it's scan time on the CPU that is saved.
You're correct, but don't forget that while the switch is scanning
for the DTMF tones, it must ALSO be scanning for dial pulse. (At least
until the first digit is received). Every DTMF receiver must also be
equipped with all the dial pulse circuits, scan points, etc. So the
DTMF receiver is at least as expensive as dial pulse, and until the
first digit is received, the CPU must expend MORE cycles for DTMF than
for dial pulse.
And as for other features being "free" to the TELCo ("because
they're already in a Modern Switch"), note that most features cost CPU
cycles, memory, memory backup, as well as the "extra cost" from the
switch vendor. A feature that consumes 100 bytes/line on 80K lines
takes up 8M bytes; multiply that by 5-10 features and we're talking a
lot of memory.
And in some switches, feature "penetration" beyond some percentage
of anticipated lines/numbers would reduce the number of customers
capable of existing on the switch. This could cause 80K-line COs to
be split into two 40K-line COs, at increased trunking, administrative
and maintenance costs. Someone has to pay for all this, no?
Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems
(AT&T is not responsible for any opinions expressed above.)
------------------------------
From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig)
Subject: Re: MCI Card With Voice Features
Date: 22 Jan 92 02:43:03 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL
In article <telecom12.51.6@eecs.nwu.edu> sew7490@ultb.rit.edu (S.E.
Williams) writes:
> a source for my report, and I'm getting one of those new cards. I'd
While your at it ask for the promo offer of trading in cards from
other IEC's ... trade in up to four old calling card numbers for four
hours of LD on MCI.
> By the way, does anyone know if MCI customers with the 'old' cards
> will be receiving new ones in the mail, or will they have to call and
> ask?
Not sure but this is one of the steps in merging the old TELECOM*USA
and OLD MCI into the 'new' MCI system.
Bill
------------------------------
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: AT&T Video-Phone References Wanted
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 04:03:05 GMT
In article <telecom12.58.3@eecs.nwu.edu> totsuka@cs.stanford.edu
(Takashi Totsuka) writes:
> I heard that AT&T has made a telephone system which can send 128x128
> images at 10 frames/sec via ordinary phone line.
128 * 128 * 10
163840 Kbps
That's some compression scheme, since it's about five times the
maximum data rate of a shannon modem, and nearly ten times the data
rate of the best real modem I know of. Even at 1 bit per pixel. If
it's greyscale that's even worse. I hate to think of the quality of
the received image.
Yeh, what he said.
Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS. +1 713 568 0480|1032 2400/n/8/1.
------------------------------
From: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu (David E. Sheafer)
Subject: Re: Reverse Directory Information
Date: 21 Jan 92 19:24:01 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA
In article <telecom12.56.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, stewarta@sco.COM (Stewart
I. Alpert) writes:
> Can anyone point me towards a source for reverse directory
> information? I'd like to find a way to trace a name/address given a
> phone number.
There is a 900 number which offers this service.
Dial 1-900 884-1212 and enter phone number, and it will return the
name and address that owns the phone number.
Charges are 1.50 1st minute, .75 each additional minute. I have never
used this service myself.
David E. Sheafer
internet: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu or uucp: samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b
GEnie: D.SHEAFER Cleveland Freenet: ap345
------------------------------
From: <Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com>
Subject: Re: Zip + 6?
Date: Tue 21 Jan 1992 12:14 -0500
I've resisted the urge to respond, but I feel I must point at that the
check digit in the barcode is utterly irrelevent. It is no more
significant to me, as a user, than the fact that the computers they
use (might) have ECC (Error Correcting Codes). It means is that if I
transpose two digits in the PO Box number, then the letter will wind
up in the wrong place, just more reliably.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #75
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05510;
24 Jan 92 22:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11117
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 20:13:52 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12747
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 20:13:35 -0600
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 20:13:35 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201250213.AA12747@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #76
TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Jan 92 20:13:23 CST Volume 12 : Issue 76
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Cellular Prices Go Up (David E. A. Wilson)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (David G. Lewis)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Tim Gorman)
Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone (Randal L. Schwartz)
Re: Changes With Michigan Bell (Marc Unangst)
Re: Line Tie Devices (Chris Arndt)
Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (Jim Gottlieb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David E A Wilson <david@cs.uow.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Cellular Prices Go Up
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 01:02:23 GMT
stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes:
> The concept of a "low volume" user is something I'd definately agree
> with. In fact, I think it would be in the cellular companies' best
> interest to provide this. Since maintaining the account in the
> computer costs virtually nothing to provide, even a $5 or $10 a month
> charge is almost all profit. And I think they would get a lot of
> people to sign up for this if they offered it.
Here in Australia we have such a Cellular Plan/Tariff. If you make no
calls and only answer the mobile phone during off peak hours you can
have a mobile phone for only $155/annum ($200 for the first year). It
appears that if you have plan 20 or 10 it is possible for both parties
to be charged for a call to the mobile phone.
1) Common Charges:
Connection: $45
Dept of Transport & Communications Licence Fee: $35/annum
Reconnection after non-payment of bill: $30
Temporary disconnection at customer request: $20
Charges involving customer option changes: $15
Itemised statement of call charges: No charge
Statement of itemised IDD or diversion: No charge
2) Charges for calls from a mobile phone:
(first 30 seconds/additional 30 seconds)
Plan Name Access Peak Off Peak
<=165km >165km <=165km >165km
Standard $40/month 29c/19c 40c/30c 14.5c/9.5c 20c/15c
130 $130/month 250min/mon 158min/mon 500min/mon 316min/mon
free free free free
or any combination of above. Additional minutes
charged at Standard rate.
80 $80/month 150min/mon 95 min/mon 300min/mon 190min/mon
@ 10c/min @ 15.8c/min @ 5c/min @7.9c/min
or any combination of above. Additional minutes
charged at Standard rate.
20 $20/month 58c/38c 80c/60c 29c/19c 40c/30c
Calls to the mobile phone are charged to the
mobile phone at Standard Rate.
10 $10/month 87c/57c 120c/90c 14.5c/9.5c 20c/15c
Calls to the mobile phone are charged to the
mobile phone at TWICE Standard Rate during
peak hours, no charge during off peak hours.
3) Charges for calls to a mobile phone (from non-mobile phone):
Distance Peak charge Off peak
<=165km 24c/37sec (~39c/min) std STD discounts
>165km 24c/23.6sec (~61c/min) std STD discounts
4) IDD, 008, 0055 & Operator assisted calls
These are charged at public network rates plus a MobileNet surcharge
of 20c for the first 30 sec and 10c for each additional 30 sec (off
peak half this rate).
David Wilson (042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au
------------------------------
From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 01:25:20 GMT
In article <telecom12.64.5@eecs.nwu.edu> Eric_Florack.Wbst311@
xerox.com writes:
> A number of people, in private notes to me here and at home, have
> noted that part of the problem is that AT&T is supposedly the only
> company that's been willing to invest in inter-exhange signalling
> equipment
(ahem) Feature Group D trunks incorporate interexchange signaling
equipment; the original reference was to LATA access to provide
coin-sent-paid call handling, which is a very specialized subset of
interexchange signaling.
> The fact of the matter is; that AT&T is currently taking positions
> against SWBT, and a few others being allowed to carry inter-LATA
> signalling, even inside of their service areas. Others, like US WEST,
> have been pressing to consolidate signal traffic to six signal
> transfer points. AT&T insists that an STP in every LATA is required.
The issue you're referring to here, if I read what you've said right,
consists of one or more rulings of one or more bodies regarding SS7
signaling interconnection -- which is another, currently very
specialized subset of interexchange signaling. Let's try to not
confuse the two issues.
Fact 1: The current ruling is that interexchange carriers which wish
to interconnect with LECs in a given LATA must have a signaling point
of presence in that LATA connected to a LEC signaling point in that
LATA. I don't recall offhand just *who's* ruling that is; I've
misplaced the scorecard I use to keep track of all the regulatory
players. I do recall it directly affects SWBT, and don't recall the
effect on other LECs. This, to my tired memory, implies it may be a
Texas or Missouri PSC ruling, but I wouldn't come close to swearing to
it.
Fact 2: In at least some states, LECs are permitted to carry signaling
traffic across LATA boundaries, *provided the bearer facilities that
are being signaled do not cross LATA boundaries.* Concrete example:
NJBell has an STP in Freehold. Freehold is in the North New Jersey
LATA. The Freehold STP is permitted to carry signaling traffic
between two COs in the South New Jersey LATA (I don't know if that's
the name; whatever LATA is down around Cape May). There *are* no NJB
facilities between South and North Jersey LATAs, so signaling is moot;
since South to North Jersey would be an Inter-LATA call, the call must
be carried via an IXC, and any facilities crossing LATA boundaries
would be owned by the IXC and therefore signaled by the IXC.
The accepted interpretation of Fact 1 is that, if the method of SS7
interconnection is quad D-links between STP pairs, then yes, two STPs
would be required by every LEC and every IXC in every LATA where SS7
interconnection is offered/purchased. If the method of SS7
interconnection is dual A-links from the EAEO or AT to the IXC STP,
than the IXC would be required to have two STPs in every LATA.
Similarly, if it's dual A-links to the LEC STP, the LEC would be
required to have two STPs in every LATA.
I am not in a position (either professionally, personally, morally,
ethically, legally, or otherwise) to represent, state, comment on, or
otherwise make any reference to AT&T's position before various
regulatory agencies and courts; however, I would like to see us at
least argue about the same question ...
> If the ruling comes down here in AT&T's favor, here, it would
> seem to require also, that each of the ILDC's also must have an STP in
> each LATA.
As I said above, the current ruling implies that every IXC and LEC,
including AT&T, would have to have an STP pair in every LATA to get
SS7 signaling interconnection via quad D-links.
> This would prove to be a vast cost advantage to AT&T, since
> their signalling is already up and running
"Up and running" is a very vague term; MCI, US Sprint, and NJ Bell
also have SS7 "up and running". Yes, AT&T has SS7 on line; Yes, AT&T
has STPs deployed; no, AT&T does not have STP pairs in each and every
LATA in the US. How many STP pairs we have and where they are is
probably proprietary information; suffice to say it's more than one
and less than 237 or however many LATAs there are ...
> and since they have been very effective at blocking other companies,
> be they ILDC's or locals,(RBHC or otherwise) from dealing with STP's
> in a cost-effective manner.
I don't understand this comment at all. You're obviously not
referring to the price of the No.2STP, since I don't think anyone but
us buys it. What control does AT&T have over the deployment of MCI's,
US Sprint's, or LEC X's STPs?
Anyway, this thread originally dealt with 1 + CSP calls, and SS7
interconnection (as Tim Gorman noted) is pretty much totally unrelated
to 1 + CSP signaling. If we're discussing the willingness of IXCs
other than AT&T to handle 1 + CSP calls, let's not get tied up into a
discussion of the legal and regulatory ramifications of various
rulings on SS7 interconnection. If we want to discuss the legal and
regulatory aspects of SS7 interconnection, I'll politely bow out
because I've probably already said enough to get myself a nastygram
from the AT&T regulatory folks ...
Denying I know anything about regulatory aspects of all the stuff I
come in contact with, I remain ...
David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories
david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jan 92 14:13:33 EST
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphone
Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #64:
> The fact of the matter is; that AT&T is currently taking positions
> against SWBT, and a few others being allowed to carry inter-LATA
> signalling, even inside of their service areas. Others, like US WEST,
> have been pressing to consolidate signal traffic to six signal
> transfer points. AT&T insists that an STP in every lata is required.
I'm not sure, but we may be talking about two different subjects here.
Most of the 1+ coin arguments were made in late 1990/early 1991.
Extending coin signaling capabilities to the carriers doesn't involve
carrying signaling information across LATA boundaries.
I suspect what is being addressed in Mr. Florack's message is SS7
network interconnect arrangements between the carriers and the RBOCs.
Since operator services are not yet SS7 compatible (if operator
functionality is to be maintained end-to-end anyway), they would not
be impacted.
On the matter of SS7, the requirement for the RBOC's to have an STP in
every LATA would not require the carriers to have one per LATA. They
would merely have to have a signaling point of presence in each LATA.
From the "SPOP" (is that a valid acronym?) they could haul the
interconnecting B or D links to a single STP located some distance
away. I am sure there is a distance limitation due to phase jitter,
delay, and other impairments, but I don't know what it is. This would
be a network limitation anyway, not an implementation limitation.
Other than this I am not informed enough yet to address the various
issues concerning signal interfaces per LATA versus signal interfaces
per network.
tim
------------------------------
From: merlyn@iWarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Subject: Re: I Couldn't Get AT&T From Payphone
Reply-To: merlyn@iWarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge; netaccess via Intel, Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 01:58:44 GMT
In article <telecom12.65.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, Barton.Bruce@camb (Barton
F. Bruce) writes:
> AT&T has chosen to comply by providing an 800, not a 950 number.
> When using it, you will have to be patient, because AT&T will ask
> questions and WILL BE COLLECTING info on the site! When their database
> 'knows' about the site, there will be less delay. You can just BET
> AT&T makes sure the FCC is promptly notified! Six months is Feb 9.
Hmm. Even if the "site" is "any customer served by GTE-northwest?".
That's a pretty big site.
For those of you not aware of it, GTE in this area *still* does not
offer 10XXX access from *home* phones. Maybe in 2051, or something
like that. :-)
But, it's nice to know that I soon will be able to select AT&T from my
home phone, even if it is at calling card rates (ugh).
"Not all access is equal access".
Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III
merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn
------------------------------
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Changes With Michigan Bell
Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 04:49:38 GMT
In article <telecom12.58.8@eecs.nwu.edu> jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken
Jongsma) writes:
> now a phone company option. Michigan Bell is now billing per call for
> every call over 400 at 6.2 cents per call. I'm told that the average
This is, as far as I know, not true -- yet. I called Michigan Bell
just a couple days ago (their "Home Service" number) and asked what
the procedure was for obtaining a non-profit exemption. The Michigan
Bell representative replied that the bill had been recalled by the PSC
for review, and would not be going into effect for at least another
couple months -- and when it did, information would be enclosed with
the bill regarding how to obtain exemptions.
Now, this sounded a bit fishy to me, so I called back 15 minutes later
and got a different person, who gave the same information. So, for
the moment, I'm willing to believe it ... I guess I'll find out for
sure when my bill comes for this month, since mudos makes over 2000
calls per month.
Marc Unangst mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us ...!sharkey!mudos!mju
------------------------------
From: carndt@nike.calpoly.edu (Chris Arndt)
Subject: Re: Line Tie Devices
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 21:07:09 PST
Well, shoot. I said ...
... good stuff by me deleted ...
> You plug the two lines into the RA330. On receiving a call on the
> incoming line, the 330 ring trips and presents dial tone. Punch in one
> of ten four digit security codes and you get three short
> acknowledgement beeps and dial tone on the second line. DTMF dial
> away. #* will reorder dial tone to place multiple calls without having
> to dial back in. ## disconnects for good.
... and then after some more deleted stuff, Pat said ...
> [Moderator's Note: But only ten codes of four digits each is no
> security! All anyone would have to do is look at one of the units and
> note the limited number of combinations ... then call in to your line
> and try all ten looking for the one you selected. Now if if you could
> set your own four/five digit code with pinwheels on the unit you'd
> have a better system. PAT]
I skipped a lot of features of the Melco RA330 in my attempt at
brevity.
To clarify, the RA330 also has a programming jack that accepts a
standard DTMF phone. Thru that jack, you can program the ten security
codes, and ten programmers codes. This allows a certain amount of
flexibility and convenience. In the event one of the users quits, or
is fired, or the code gets out, you only have to change one number ,
and not inconvenience the other users. Some quick math will show that
there is a total of 10,000 possible security codes.
It has 45 minutes of memory backup for power fail, and a reset and
default button to restore factory settings if no one knows the current
codes.
Along with the disconnect (##) and reorder (#*) codes, #0 does a hook
flash on the accessed line. There is also a service observation jack
if this is used in that type of setting.
There are six LED indicators to show line and unit status, and a
build- out circuit for the rare instance of 'singing' or feedback
between lines.
Sorry I didn't say all this before.
Chris
[Moderator's Note: In other words, there can be up to ten active
security codes of four digits each at any given time ... that is a bit
different than I thought ... and better security. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 14:40 JST
From: jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!
Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
Eric Florack writes:
> 1: There can be no fairness in service, prices, and quality of service
> when the info carrier is also the info provider. Anyone seeking to
> provide informational services, when TELCO was doing that would be hit
> with price structures that would place the NON-telco info provider
> with non-competitive pricing, and therefore make such providing a
> non-viable option to business owners who want to get into that area.
A friend who runs a voice-mail service has similar problems now that
Pac*Bell runs their own voice mail. P*B has even now assigned all
voice mail companies to a special business office division, and then
announced that they were removing most of the staff from that office
because they "predict falling demand". That business office is now so
understaffed that it can take quite a while just to get a callback
from a representative to take an order.
Jim Gottlieb Info Connections, Tokyo, Japan
<jimmy@denwa.info.com> Fax: +81 3 3865 9424
Voice Mail: +81 3 3865 3548
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #76
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07792;
24 Jan 92 23:44 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17955
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 21:37:13 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19340
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 21:36:38 -0600
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 21:36:38 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201250336.AA19340@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #77
TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Jan 92 21:36:34 CST Volume 12 : Issue 77
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: *611 and *711 Calls Are Free (Doctor Math)
Re: AT&T $20 Cash Offer (Dan Meyer)
Re: AT&T $20 Cash Offer (John A. Weeks III)
Re: AT&T Long Distance Rates (Jack Dominey)
Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (Paul Selig, Jr.)
Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (Jack Decker)
Re: MacNeil/Lehrer Report on Phone System Risks (Dennis Blyth)
Re: MacNeil/Lehrer Report on Phone System Risks (Phillip Dampier)
Re: MacNeil/Lehrer Report on Phone System Risks (Tom Streeter)
ATT and GTE Long Distance Anecdote (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math)
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 01:11:16 EST
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department
Subject: Re: *611 and *711 Calls Are Free?
johng.all_proj@mot.com (John) writes:
> Some models of Motorola phones will allow you to display the system
> number. My Dynatac 6800XL mobile will do it as a normal user feature.
Does the phone have to be activated for this to work? It seems like if
someone wants to program their own phone and they need the SID, they
would have to get it without the phone being activated.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 18:42:25 CST
From: rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Dan Meyer)
Subject: Re: AT&T $20 Cash Offer
Hello again,
Today, I recieved my current MCI bill. This prompted me to check and
see who my LD carrier was. It is (as of 1/21/92) MCI. I also used my
MCI card over the weekend, so that is fine now also.
The question, however, remains -- why is it that US West cannot
process my personal request to change LD carriers?
I also got a note from AT&T today telling me how nice it was of me to
take them up on their offer.
Dan Meyer
UUCP: {crash tcnet}!orbit!pnet51!rambler
INET: rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org
[Moderator's Note: See the next message. I think the reason they WOULD
NOT (rather than could not) change you is because of your signed
agreement with AT&T -- the valid contract you entered. PAT]
------------------------------
From: plains!umn-cs!kksys!wd0gol!newave!john (John A. Weeks III)
Subject: Re: AT&T $20 Cash Offer
Date: 22 Jan 92 03:09:59 GMT
Reply-To: plains!umn-cs!wd0gol!newave!john (John A. Weeks III)
Organization: NeWave Communications Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN
In article <telecom12.56.11@eecs.nwu.edu> rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org
(Dan Meyer) writes:
> Well, I thought about my little plan for a month, and around New
> Year's figured what the heck, and deposited the check. A few weeks
> later, my long distance company was AT&T. Time to call US West and
> get things fixed up. Tuesday, January 14, the lady at the business
> office said that she would forward the problem to repair service and
> that I would be switched to MCI by 7 pm the 15th. No such luck.
> The morning of the 15, someone from US West called me at work, and
> stated that there was no way that they could accomadate me.
I had nearly the same thing happen with the same parties involved. I
had the MCI Northwest Airlines calling plan where you get frequent
flyer points for each long distance call. I was slammed in by ATT in
March. I called MCI, and was connected back to MCI. I was then
slammed again in April by ATT.
After calling both MCI and USWest for about three months, MCI gave up
and issued me a $30 "gift" credit for my trouble and said that there
was probably no way that I could have my MCI service restored because
USWest was unable to honor MCI's or my request to have my MCI service
restored. At one point, USWest said I was listed as an MCI customer,
yet I was still getting billed by ATT, and 1-700-555-1212 still
reported me as being connected to ATT.
I was getting eight to ten calls per week over the course of four
months from ATT asking me to switch before I was slammed. I have not
received a single call from ATT since I was slammed, in fact, I have
not recevied _any_ calls from long distance companies since I was last
slammed by ATT.
One thoery that I have heard is that USWest refuses to honor long
distance service changes for six months if you have changed "too many
times" in too short a period of time. (Just a rumor ...)
John A. Weeks III (612) 942-6969 john@newave.mn.org
NeWave Communications, Ltd. ...uunet!tcnet!newave!john
[Moderator's Note: The way I heard the rumor was that the local telcos
and the long distance carriers have gotten their act together a little
better and are somewhat coordinated now to avoid the problems with
slamming by carriers and fraud by potential customers which had been
so prevalent in the past. I do know AT&T and MCI had a summit on this
very topic the last time they resolved out of court one of their
numerous suits against each other. PAT]
------------------------------
From: jdominey@bsga05.attmail.com
Date: Wed Jan 22 09:27:13 EST 1992
Subject: Correction - Re: AT&T Long Distance Rates
The tariff page I sent to the Digest a few days ago, quoting AT&T's
standard long distance rates, is OUT OF DATE.
The revisions that have gone through since then are not large, but the
rates now in effect are not exactly what I posted.
My thanks to Steve Forrette, whose response led me to investigate
further and discover my error. His posting of rates quoted by AT&T
operators IS correct, and I believe I can explain why.
For example, Steve pointed out in Digest #67 that the AT&T operator
quoted the following rates for a call from Seattle (206-324) to Van
Nuys CA (818-988)
First minute additional minutes
Day $.24 $.25
Eve $.15 $.16
N/W $.13 $.14
In an earlier message, I had posted a page from AT&T's FCC Tariff #1,
showing different numbers (particularly $.1496/$.1496 for the evening
segment).
After confirming with an operator the rates Steve was quoted, I began
investigating further.
Item #1. The tariff page I posted, dated July 1, 1991, is out of
date. The current date is either December, 1991 or January, 1992.
Item #2. Checking a different, more up-to-date system produced the
following rates for the call Steve and I inquired about:
First minute additional minutes
Day $.2460 $.2460
Eve $.1520 $.1520
N/W $.1331 $.1331
Item #3. I confirmed with an operator that the system their system
provides only the two-digit numbers that Steve and I got.
My speculation: The rate-quote system is deliberately programmed to
round *down* the first minute and round *up* additional minutes. The
one-minute rounding may be per tariff; I haven't been able to locate
it. Rounding up for additional minutes is probably a "safety"
measure. It ensures that the customer will never be billed *more*
than the expected amount, and will often be billed less. (I am trying
to find someone who can confirm this. No luck just yet.)
I will submit the most recent tariffed rates as soon as I can grab an
electronic copy.
Thanks again to Steve Forrette, for prodding me to set this matter
straight, and also to Pat and the Digest audience for your patience.
Jack Dominey, AT&T Commercial Marketing, Tucker GA
+1 404 496-6925 AT&T Mail: !dominey or !bsga05!jdominey
------------------------------
From: selig@gwm.serenity.org
Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM
Organization: Serenity, Inc., Dayton, Ohio
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1992 03:59:09 GMT
> [Moderator's Note: In the olden days, when telco was 'probing your
> line to measure ringer current' it was to see how many extensions were
> on the line versus what you were paying for. Does anyone remember
> those days, when there was such a thing as an 'illegal extension'? PAT]
This reminds me of a funny story of my youth. I grew up in Cleveland,
OH, in an Ohio Bell exchange, and my father had a rotary set
"illegally connected" to our line. It was well hidden in our
basement, behind the furnace, and was usually disconnected at night.
Somehow, the telco found out about it and paid a visit to our house
demanding to know about the "illegal telephone device". Of course, my
father denied having anything connected to the line. When the telco
representative demanded to know where the set was, I chimed in "But
Daddy, you have the extra phone hidden in the basement behind the
furnace!!!" I got this "shut up, kid" look from my dad, and a smile
from the telco representative. I don't know what charges or penalties
were incurred because of this incident. I think this was around 1971,
when I was about four years old.
Paul Selig, Jr. selig@gwm.serenity.org
Serenity, Inc. ...!uunet!dayvb!udcps3!gwm!selig
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 17:20:35 CST
From: Jack Decker <Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com>
Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM
I also recall that it was fairly common knowledge even among the
non-technically-minded that if you disconnected the ringer in an
extension phone, the phone company couldn't tell it was there.
When I was a teenager (around 1970) the word got around somehow that I
knew how to hook up and/or fix phones, and I was actually surprised to
find how many people in our neighborhood had "illegal" extensions
connected to their lines. For some reason older Automatic Electric
phones seemed to be the instrument of choice, which was fortunate
because at the time A-E would send free technical notes (including
schematics) on their phones to anyone who knew where to write,
provided you knew the document number to ask for.
Of course, the technically-minded upon us would buy surplus phones
from places like Olsen Electronics (now defunct) or Surplus Center
(out of Lincoln, Nebraska). I discovered a good source, Bohnsack
Equipment Company in Germantown, New York. I don't know if any of
these places are still in business, though I suspect the latter two
may be. The surplus phones were of various makes and conditions ... a
friend of mine got one from Olsen and complained that it must have
come out of someone's barn because the mouthpiece smelled like horse
manure! Anyway, I can't think of a single friend from high school
that did NOT have an extension phone (that the phone company didn't
know about) in either their room or their basement, or both (no, I
didn't hook them up for them, most managed to figure it out on their
own. Of course, I ran with a pretty technically-literate crowd!).
One trick that some of the techie types used to use was to disconnect
the bell in the phone, but then hang a NE-2H neon lamp (with suitable
resistor) across the line, and rig it up so that the neon light
triggered a photocell/relay combination, which would in turn provide
power to a bell, buzzer, chime or whatever. Of course, the neon
lamp/resistor combination drew so little current (in comparison to a
phone ringer) that it was virtually undetectable to phone company
testing equipment (it would have been like trying to detect a drop of
water added to a swimming pool).
I think that at some point even the phone company must have realized
that charging for extensions was a losing battle ... if the phone
company actually managed to discover such an extension, folks would
deny it (and maybe disconnect it for a week or two), or just outright
refuse to pay. Of course the company COULD legally disconnect the
phone service of those with "illegal" extensions, and often threatened
to, but in actual practice rarely did (in the case of residential
users, anyway).
Anyway, your comment brought a touch of nostalgia ... those were the
days! :-)
Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8
------------------------------
From: Dennis Blyth <dblyth@oatseu.daytonoh.ncr.com>
Subject: Re: MacNeil/Lehrer Report on Phone System Risks
Date: 22 Jan 92 14:34:42 GMT
Reply-To: Dennis Blyth <dblyth@oatseu.daytonoh.ncr.com>
Organization: Europe Group Dayton
[Previous post provided description of the tv news report on phone
system risks on MacNeil/Lehrer Report on PBS.]
Observation: the MacNeil/Lehrer Report on PBS is funded in part (large
part, IMHO) by AT&T.
Dennis.Blyth@daytonoh.ncr.com
Warning: I do have an some interest in AT&T! (1) AT&T owns NCR (2) My
daughter's 'college fund' has some AT&T stock (3) It is an 'American'
company, and all of us USA citizens have an interest in seeing our
firms successfully compete in the world market!
------------------------------
From: Phillip.Dampier@p0.f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier)
Date: 22 Jan 92 13:10:23
Subject: Re: MacNeil/Lehrer Report on Phone System Risks
In a message written by 0005000102@mcimail.com (Randall C Gellens):
> If you missed it live, you can order a transcript or a videotape. I
> forget the address for transcripts ($4), but the videotape number is
> (800) 328-PBS-1 (no price mentioned). (I have no connection with
> PBS or MacNeil/Lehrer).
Prices for video transcripts are $29.95, quite steep in my opinion.
Apparently most of these transcripts on video end up being sold to
these "think tanks" and other interest groups, and I'm sure PBS gains
some financial benefits from the arrangement to help pay for the
programming.
Written transcripts are available from Strictly Business, P.O. Box
12803, Overland Park, KS 66212 (913) 649-6381. Prices are $23.00 for
fax transcripts sent within ten minutes of your call, $7.00 for the
first mailed transcript, $4.00 each additional. They take phone orders
with all the major credit cards.
Of course, beyond the pledges I sent PBS, I have no affiliation with
them or Strictly Business.
Phillip M. Dampier Rochester, New York phillip@rochgte.fidonet.org
------------------------------
From: streeter@cs.unca.edu (Tom Streeter)
Subject: Re: MacNeil/Lehrer Report on Phone System Risks
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 20:36:12 GMT
In article <telecom12.68.3@eecs.nwu.edu> 0005000102@mcimail.com
(Randall C Gellens) writes:
> The MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour for Monday, January 20 contains a report
> (about twenty minutes or so in length) on the risks of the phone
> system ten years after the breakup. It includes the fire at the
> Chicago POP of all three carriers, the power failure in New York, the
> spate of software-induced outages, and lots more. Interviewed are
> executives from AT&T, MCI, and Sprint (the Sprint and MCI execs say
> how scared they were when the New York power failure hit, because if
> it could happen to AT&T it could happen to them), workers talking
> about staff cutbacks, FCC officials, Congressmen, phone users, and
> others. It includes footage of hearings, shots of a 4ESS, fiber
> trenching, and horrendous amounts of cable inside a switching center.
What I found interesting in this report was the ommission of the fact
that the power failure in the New York CO was not unexpected. The
report implied that the power failure was of the garden variety and
that an improbable series of events caused the system breakdown.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the CO asked to switch to
internal power by Con Edison? If I'm remembering the chain of events
correctly, it gives the story a different flavor: AT&T knows a power
failure is going to occur, but procedures and equipment don't work as
they should. Don't misunderstand me, I'm not trying to suggest that
the story should try to make AT&T look particularly bad or anything,
but it seems that if they're going to tell the story, they should tell
the whole story. This is one of those things that make you wonder ...
(Gee, AT&T is a *huge* underwriter of MacNeil/Lehrer) ... nah, the
world doesn't work that way ... does it?
Tom Streeter | streeter@cs.unca.edu
Dept. of Mass Communication | 704-251-6227
University of North Carolina at Asheville | Opinions expressed here are
Asheville, NC 28804 | mine alone.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 10:37:40 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Re: ATT and GTE Long Distance Anecdote
The Moderator notes sometime problems in reaching a new area code. Is
that why 301/410 permissive dialing is so long (one year)? (In
301/410 split, Baltimore, which is big enough to make the distinction
between city and suburban exchange, is getting the new area code
because the DC area takes precedence w/r to keeping the old one.)
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #77
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08536;
25 Jan 92 0:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21719
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 22:10:44 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04079
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 22:10:18 -0600
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 22:10:18 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201250410.AA04079@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #78
TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Jan 92 22:10:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 78
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO (Toby Nixon)
Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO (Marvin Sirbu via Andy Sherman)
Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO (Dave Platt)
Re: Hayes Announces ISDN Extender for NeXT Computers (Toby Nixon)
Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations (Toby Nixon)
Re: Mu-law, A-law (Charles Hoequist)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Toby Nixon <tnixon@hayes.com>
Subject: Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO
Date: 22 Jan 92 18:11:46 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA
In article <telecom12.69.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, nelson@cheetah.ece.clarkson.
edu (Russ Nelson) writes:
> In my reading of U.S. Patent 4,549,302, and ANSI Standard T.601-1988,
> it seems as if the latter requires the use of the former.
> [Moderator's Note: Very interesting analysis. Would anyone from Hayes
> care to comment? What about the folks who developed ISDN? PAT]
I'm from Hayes, but I wouldn't care to comment, since matters
pertaining to the Heatherington patent are in litigation. I have sent
a copy of this message to Hayes' legal department, and will pass along
any public response that they offer.
Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404
P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15
USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com
------------------------------
From: andys@ulysses.att.com (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 10:41:47 EST
A colleague of mine dug this off of the tcp-isdn mailing list in
response to the Telecom posting about ISDN and the Hayes patent. I've
deleted his characterization of the original post ...
Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928
READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking!
---------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 12:12:39 -0500 (EST)
From: Marvin Sirbu <ms6b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
To: tcp-isdn@list.prime.com
Subject: Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO.
The signalling scheme used by ISDN NT equipment to change modes -- a
break in the DC current -- is similar to how rotary dial telephones
signal a switch that they are dialing a number. This technique is
thus more than 70 years old, and is certainly not covered by the Hayes
patent.
The key feature of the Hayes patent is not that modes are changed --
signals have been doing that for years (e.g. off-hook vs on-hook);
rather it is the encoding of the signal and the method for
distinguishing the escape sequence from data. ANSI 601 does not use
anything like the Hayes method for recognizing an escape sequence.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 11:09:04 PST
From: dplatt@ntg.com (Dave Platt)
Subject: Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO
Organization: New Technologies Group, Inc. Palo Alto CA
In article <telecom12.69.1@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:
> In my reading of U.S. Patent 4,549,302, and ANSI Standard T.601-1988,
> it seems as if the latter requires the use of the former. I have
> included the relevent sections below. Obviously, this only applies to
> the US market.
> I can think of only two reasons why ISDN might not require the Hayes
> patent. 1) Because Hayes may give everyone free license to use it for
> ISDN (ha!), or 2) Because a judge may decide that it doesn't apply.
> The judge might do this because the Hayes patent only claims a method
> for switching between two modes, command and data, whereas ISDN uses
> the identical method to switch between one test, another test, and
> data modes. The principle is the same, and I can't see a judge
> disallowing the patent simply because of the number of modes. That
> would trivially allow modem implementors to implement a third mode in
> their modems and escape paying Hayes' tribute.
Here's my hunch, based on my admittedly-limited knowledge of patent
law, and doubtless somewhat oversimplified. It's semi-informed
speculation on my part, but is based on conversations I've had with
patent lawyers over the past few years.
The claims in a patent can be read in either of two ways: broadly or
narrowly. A narrow reading covers only those very specific
applications that are claimed. A broad reading covers the specific
applications that are claimed, as well as others which fall under the
same "umbrella". In general, you will find broad readings used when a
truly-novel technology is introduced, and narrow readings used when an
established technology is applied to a different sort of problem than
had been covered by previous patents (or by public-domain use of the
technology or technique).
It isn't always easy to tell, just by looking at a patent's wording,
whether a broad or narrow reading of its claims is what's appropriate.
One must also look at related patents, and the acknowledged "state of
the art" at the time that the patent research was performed. A patent
claim may be approved on a narrow-reading basis, if the examiner finds
that related patents or public-domain technique prevents a broader
reading of the claim.
Here's the crucial issue: both the validity of a patent claim, and its
coverage, _must_ flow from the same reading of the claim. That is: if
you must read a claim narrowly in order to avoid infringing on other
patents, or in order to avoid having the claim invalidated by prior
public art, then you must read the claim narrowly when you try to see
whether new inventions or techniques infringe upon it.
People have reported (in this Digest and elsewhere) that the use of a
pause/escape/pause sequence to change modes was in use in telecom
applications well before the Heathrington patent was awarded. I
believe that the specific report I've heard involved an ARPANET TIP or
some similar terminal-server -- perhaps someone else can cite the
specific systems which used the technique.
This may be the way in which ISDN avoids use of the Hayes patent. If
the pause/escape-sequence/pause technique was in use before
Heathrington, then the claims in the Heathrington patent would have to
be read narrowly ... they would be read as applying _specifically_ to
a modem. This specific application of the technique could very well
have been novel at the time it was applied. [Whether it is
"nonobvious" is subject to debate ... the patent examiner apparently
felt that it was.]
If the claims were to be read more broadly ... as applying to any form
of telecom equipment or interface ... then they would be rendered
invalid by the existence of prior art. Hence, in order to survive,
they must be read narrowly, and they must be applied on that basis.
Since an ISDN interface isn't a modem in the usual sense of the word,
the Heathrington patent would not apply. Modem manufacturers could
not escape the Heathrington patent by adding a third mode, because the
patent would probably still apply ... it involves switching modes on
modems, and could be read broadly enough to apply to a three-mode
modem as well as a two-mode modem.
Dave Platt VOICE: (415) 813-8917
Domain: dplatt@ntg.com UUCP: ...apple!ntg!dplatt
USNAIL: New Technologies Group Inc. 2468 Embarcardero Way, Palo Alto CA 94303
------------------------------
From: Toby Nixon <tnixon@hayes.com>
Subject: Re: Hayes announces ISDN Extender for NeXT Computers
Date: 24 Jan 92 17:44:24 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA
The following is a news release concerning a product which allows NeXT
computers to be connected to ISDN networks and also provides a
digitized interface to analog telephone networks for voice, data, and
fax applications. It is posted for information only and should not be
construed as an advertisement or offer to sell. I apologize in
advance to those who dislike the tone of the typical high-tech company
press release!
Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404
P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15
USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com
HAYES MICROCOMPUTER PRODUCTS, INC.
P.O. Box 105203
Atlanta, Georgia 30348
404/840-9200
Fax 404/441-1238 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Angie Ciarloni/Peggy Ballard H-0392+++AT
HAYES ANNOUNCES HAYES ISDN EXTENDER
- - - - - -
Hayes - NeXT Strategic Relationship results in
Low-cost ISDN Connectivity for NeXT Computer
ATLANTA, GA, 22 January 1992 -- Hayes Microcomputer Products,
Inc. today announced Hayes ISDN Extender, the first telecommunications
network interface module that provides ISDN Basic Rate Access as well
as analog telephone line connectivity to NeXT computers. This product
is the result of the Hayes and NeXT strategic relationship committed
to the promotion of ISDN and to providing low-cost, powerful
connectivity to NeXT users worldwide. Hayes has also expanded its
ISDN Developer Program to include support for the ISDN Extender for
NeXT computers.
Hayes ISDN Extender provides an 8-pin modular connector to an
ISDN Basic Rate line and a 6-pin modular RJ11 connector to an analog
telephone line. When used in conjunction with NeXTstep Release 3.0
and application software, the Extender can be used for remote LAN
connections, as well as high-speed, digitized voice, data, fax modem,
and multimedia applications. Hayes ISDN Extender takes advantage of
the NeXTstep object-oriented application development environment,
powerful CPU, and DSP port to provide analog telephone network and
ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) connectivity.
"We see customer applications, such as remote LAN connectivity
and evolving multimedia applications, driving the need for the higher
speed transmission of ISDN," said Hayes President Dennis C. Hayes.
"Therefore, Hayes ISDN Extender for NeXT computers with Release 3.0 is
a logical and powerful combination. This is the first tangible result
from our strategic relationship with NeXT and when Steve and I get
together we have no shortage of good ideas. We are very pleased to be
working with a company that shares our vision of global connectivity
and ISDN."
"Dennis and I have worked together over the years to bring
technology that has changed the way people work," said NeXT Chairman
and CEO Steve Jobs. "And, with this announcement, we are continuing
our tradition. This hardware/software solution gives our customers a
low-cost, yet very flexible, solution for ISDN connectivity."
Hayes ISDN Developer Program is designed to provide qualified
third party developers with the support and information they need to
develop high-quality applications for ISDN, and to complement the NeXT
developer support program for the PhoneKit API. The program includes
special product purchase programs as well as access to Hayes Developer
Verification and Test Lab, located at Hayes ISDN Technologies in San
Francisco, CA. Developers can also use the ISDN applications
development laboratory, located in Beeston, Nottingham, England, that
was established as a joint effort by Hayes and GPT, Britain's leading
telecommunications systems supplier.
Hayes ISDN Extender will be available throughout the United
States and Canada in April 1992 for an estimated retail price of
US$349 and CN$499. The product will be distributed through
Value-added Resellers and Dealers who sell NeXT computers as well as
Hayes Customer Service. In addition, Hayes anticipates availability
of Hayes ISDN Extender in the global marketplace, including France,
Germany and Japan as country approvals are obtained and NeXT system
software is prepared for support.
Hayes ISDN Extender carries a two year limited performance
warranty and is backed by the same level of quality support as Hayes
modems. Applications consultants and technical support engineers are
available through Hayes Customer Service in the U.S. at 404/441-1617
and in Canada at 416/283-2672. Unlimited, free technical assistance
is available electronically through "Online with Hayes," an electronic
Bulletin Board System, at 404/HI MODEM or 800/US HAYES, as well as
Hayes Forums on CompuServe and GEnie information services.
NeXT Computer, Inc. designs, manufactures and markets
professional workstations based on the pioneering NeXTstep
object-oriented system software. NeXT computers are used to develop
mission-critical custom applications and to run these applications
alongside breaktrough productivity applications. NeXT is
headquartered at 900 Chesapeake Drive, Redwood City, California,
94063. For further information, customers and potential customers are
encouraged to call 800-TRY-NeXT.
Best known as the leader in microcomputer modems, Hayes
develops, supplies and supports computer communications equipment and
software for personal computer and computer communications networks.
The company distributes its products through an international network
of authorized distributors, dealers, mass merchants and original
equipment manufacturers.
------------------------------
From: Toby Nixon <tnixon@hayes.com>
Subject: Re: CCITT Standards and Recommendations
Date: 22 Jan 92 18:02:24 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA
In article <telecom12.53.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, wardle@hpb.cis.pitt.edu
(Tom Wardle) writes:
> I went looking for the ccitt texts on Bruno.cs.colorado.edu and found
> the following message:
> This Committee, while considering further actions in this area,
> came to the conclusion that the experiment be terminated on 31
> December 1991.
> [Moderator's Note: I wonder what possible objection they had to
> leaving them in place on the Internet? PAT]
I would have thought that was obvious. The ITU makes a considerable
portion of its annual revenue from sales of documents. If people can
ftp the documents free of charge, it leaves a large hole in the ITU
budget. I expect that if they do go back online somehow, it will be
with some kind of charging system in place. There was a significant
faction within the ITU opposed to this project in the first place, for
just this reason; I suspect that revenue figures proved them right,
resulting in the termination of the experiment.
Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404
P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15
USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jan 92 10:12:00 EST
From: Charles (C.A.) Hoequist <HOEQUIST@BNR.CA>
Subject: Re: Mu-law, A-law
Cliff Koch writes:
[ Good point about why having compression at all ... ]
> So the A/D conversion on a linear scale is a 13 bit number (12 bits
> plus sign).
Nah, that would be too easy. The CCITT coding standard (fascicle
III.4, Recommendation G.711, from the 1988 session, published Geneva
1989, for the librarians among us :) say that mu-law uses a 14-bit
value (13+sign) and A-law uses a 13-bit value (12+sign).
When I first saw that, I thought I was misunderstanding someone's
bureaucratic English, but no: there are tables in the CCITT book, and
by heaven A-law allows linear input in the range +- 4096, while mu-law
allows it in the range +- 8159! Anyone who can explain why this is so,
please do.
Another point needing explanation: the same document states in regard
to A-law, "The character signals [the coded 8-bit values] are obtained
by inverting the even bits of the signals of column 6 [where the coded
values corresponding to linear values are given]. Now what is the
point of inverting bits 0,2,4 and 6??
And things of the sort Bud Couch reports are not part of the past.
There still seem to be different ideas of just how to run up codecs:
I'm currently juggling mu-law/linear schemes from three sources, and
there are at least two different mappings at work here.
Charles Hoequist |Internet: hoequist@bnr.ca
BNR Inc. | 919-991-8642
PO Box 13478, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3478
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #78
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09764;
25 Jan 92 1:04 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12091
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 23:05:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23734
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 24 Jan 1992 23:05:01 -0600
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 23:05:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201250505.AA23734@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #79
TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Jan 92 23:04:56 CST Volume 12 : Issue 79
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (Leonard Erickson)
Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (Joshua Lee)
Re: Info services? Keep Them Banned! (Eric Florack)
Re: Economics of Special Call Features? (David G. Lewis)
Re: Economics of Special Call Features? (Alan L. Varney)
Re: Economics of Special Call Features? (Tim Gorman)
Re: Economics of Special Call Features? (Andy Sherman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Jan 92 11:40:40 EST
From: Leonard Erickson <70524.2603@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!
I'm one of the Fido Sysops that Eric Florack would like to hear from.
I also happen to live in one of the areas where an RBOC is trying to
get BBS equated to "business".
So far it doesn't look good. We started out with a poor test case (the
BBS in question did have some business like aspects). I've got a
summary of the hearing on file. I'll upload it if anyone is
interested.
There *is* one "bright spot". We have US West *on record* as stating
that it costs more to provide measured service than it does to provide
"flat rate" service! That may come back to haunt the RBOCs in other
areas ...
------------------------------
From: ukelele!jlee@uunet.uu.net (Joshua Lee)
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!
Organization: GAU Technologies, Fairfax County, VA
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1992 12:52:29 GMT
Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com writes:
> I've been seeing several reports of late, that indicate that even
> non-profit hobby type BBS's are being harrssed, by RBOC's, with
The C&P RBOC tried imposing business rates on all BBSs inside of
Virginia Beach, Virginia all of which were free BBSs. When they had a
meeting though, 200 sysops and users from the VA Tidewater area showed
up. They slammed the wrong people, since they were all networked
togeather mostly. :-)
> SWBT in particular, has been pressing for anyone who wants to run data
SWB appears more rabid about imposing extra rates, primarily because
of their existing investment strategies aimed towards information
terminal services. Bell Atlantic (C&P) backed down rather quickly,
primarily because they had tried some ventures in ITS, and failed. The
move to charge measured business rates to free BBSs was essentially a
copycat measure.
> I find it no chance happening that the companies that are pressing the
> hardest to be allowed to be info providers are also the ones making
> SysOps lives harder.
It's exactly those companies that are investing in info provision that
are doing this. (RBOCs are *already* allowed to provide data due to
recent court decisions, and pending non-passage of HR 3515, will be
able to charge additional terminal information service rates above the
usual business tarrif, stipulated as "at cost". (Whatever the phoneco
would have to pay to do the same services theoretically, of course,
the reality is a new rate above the business tariff for BBSs.)
> won`t want to pay for something that many thousands of BBS operators
> are doing for free ...
SWB has publically stated their feelings about "unfair free
competition".
> business interests, is to retain the ban on Telco's providing info
> services.
Which may occur if HR 3515 gains passage in a slighly modified form
(to remove yet another loophole which would legislate utility
regulation (!) for ITS.)
> I know this newsgroup is beiong ported to FIDO someplace. Can we get a
> FIDO sysop or two to expound on this a bit?
Got one here, sysop of f542.n109.z1.fidonet.org (1:109/542)
> [Moderator's Note: TELECOM Digest is distributed to Fido sites in the
> 'echomail' (what they call newsgroups) group COMM. PAT]
COMM is an entirely different thing Pat, and doesn't have any
relationship to TELECOM Digest, which is not formally distributed by
the FidoNet backbone. c.d.t of course is available via gateways either
through the mailing list or as a newsgroup translated to FTS-0004/FTS-0001
format.
FCC is an echo where many of the readers of TELECOM Digest would feel
at home. As well as the PHONE echo, also gated through the RIME BBS
network, the latter is usually heavily phone company engineer shop
talk.
COMM more fills the role of comp.dcom.modems, most of what we're
discussing here isn't on topic there, since it's more focused on
computer and BBS communications.
ArfaNet: Joshua.Lee@f542.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joshua Lee on 1:109/542)
uucp: ...!{uunet,rutgers,ames}!mimsy!prometheus!ukelele!jlee
[Moderator's Note: Another Fido reader mentioned the same thing and I
stand corrected. When the Digest first started going to Fido a couple
years ago, *some* -- not all -- messages were distributed in COMM. I
am told the entire Digest now goes there in UUCP-TEL. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 07:52:20 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!
Bob_Frankston@frankston.std.com in v12#63:
> ... whether the newspapers will also want to make sure that the
> proposed privacy measures bar their own use of the information from
> their 900 number services for marketing purposes. Or maybe they
> should be banned from offering communications services? Or from
> targeting specific editions? There was some truth in the
> 800-54-Privacy message, but the aroma of self-interest is rather
> intense. The idea of controlling the use of the information rather
> than the business wasn't mentioned and there is no hint of
> monopolistic threats. Should newspapers be allowed to have cable
> franchises?
One major difference: While in many cases they may be a monoploy in
the market, they are not so because of some governmental regulation.
*Whereas the local telco is*. Therefore, any comparison between them
and the newspapers as far as info systems falls to the ground at that
point.
[Moderator's Note: Neither is AT&T a monopoly due to government
regulation any longer. So here is the question back to you: Should
AT&T be allowed to operate an information or cable system? I say they
should be allowed to do so since the government took away their
special status several years ago. PAT]
------------------------------
From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Economics of Special Call Features?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 17:44:02 GMT
In article <telecom12.73.1@eecs.nwu.edu> siegman@sierra.stanford.edu
(Anthony E. Siegman) writes:
> My (admittedly uninformed) impression is that all these features
> are more or less "there", within the capabilities of the electronic
> switches and even probably already programmed, so that providing them
> mostly amounts to "turning them on". And, once turned on they cost
> almost nothing to operate (and presumably generate revenue for the
> telco).
> Is this reasonably true? Or does it cost a fair amount, in real
> terms, to provide these special features? And does the presence
> absence of Caller ID really affect the cost of the other features?
"Turning on" a feature in a CO switch is not exactly flipping a switch.
From the technical side, it involves deploying the necessary
operations support systems to support the service, training the
technicians who maintain the switches, building the necessary
translations for the subscribers, and so on.
Perhaps more importantly from the economic side, it involves paying a
software right-to-use fee to the manufacturer. This is basically the
software object code license that permits the operator of the switch
to use the particular feature software.
If the telco expects that the lion's share of revenue for the various
CLASS(SM) features will come from one individual service (e.g. Caller
ID), and the operational, OSS, and RTU cost of deployment is reduced
only slightly by not deploying this particular service (because the
service support mechanisms for all the other features must still be
deployed and the RTU for the feature package must be paid, if it's
"bundled", or the RTUs for the various features are roughly
equivalent), then the revenue expectation of the telco might not be
high enough to cover the expected cost of deployment.
Round up the usual disclaimers: This message is not meant to imply any
specifics with regard to the cost of deployment of any features or the
RTU charged by any manufacturers for particular features. In other
words, this is merely conjecture about how the statement by the telco
in question could, theoretically, be derived ...
David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories
david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 13:58:43 CST
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Economics of Special Call Features?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems
In article <telecom12.73.1@eecs.nwu.edu> siegman@sierra.stanford.edu
(Anthony E. Siegman) writes:
> The story in the {San Jose Mercury} also says, "But without Caller
> ID, telephone companies question whether there will be enough demand
> for the other features to make them economical."
> My (admittedly uninformed) impression is that all these features
> are more or less "there", within the capabilities of the electronic
> switches and even probably already programmed, so that providing them
> mostly amounts to "turning them on". And, once turned on they cost
> almost nothing to operate (and presumably generate revenue for the
> telco).
One could argue that Lotus (some version) is already programmed
and just needs a disk or two to "turn it on" in my PC -- which should
cost almost nothing. But see below ...
> Is this reasonably true? Or does it cost a fair amount, in real
> terms, to provide these special features? And does the presence or
> absence of Caller ID really affect the cost of the other features?
Switch features are not usually cheap, and there are certainly
ongoing costs associated with operating and maintaining CLASS and SS7
networks. The vendors (I work for one) charge real money for each
feature's software, and also for the ongoing, high-quality support
they offer -- but I think you miss the real argument here. In general
terms, it's a problem in estimating customer demand at various price
levels, vs. the cost of installing AND MAINTAINING the hardware/
software for the new features (and cost of capital, alternative
investments, etc.).
As a TOTALLY MADE-UP example, let's assume the Telco marketing
folks say we have the following options (at a given feature price):
1000s of lines CLASS feature Total Costs
that subscribe revenue for features
-------------- -------------- -----------
No CID 20K $1B $1.5B
With CID 40K $2B $1.8B
THESE NUMBERS ARE TOTAL FICTION -- THEY ARE TO HELP EXPLAIN THE
STATEMENT IN THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE.
So the real question is, does Caller ID make enough money together
with the other features to help fund the large, up-front costs
associated with deploying CLASS. In my example above, CLASS without
CID looses money. Of course, I could change the feature prices to
overcome the loss, but then I get fewer lines using the features (and
less revenue).
Without seeing the marketing study(s), one cannot tell where the real
break-points are in various feature/price offerings. But it is
certainly POSSIBLE that CLASS without CID loses money, and adding CID
makes money. Many of the CLASS features share the use of an SS7
"infra-structure", which is expensive to provide AND has some costs to
operate and maintain. I feel it is unlikely that any one CLASS
feature can justify the entire expense of SS7.
Al Varney -- above is not necessarily the opinion of AT&T
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 92 10:28:53 EST
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Economics of Special Call Features
Anthony E. Siegman <siegman@sierra.stanford.edu> writes in TELECOM
Digest V12 #73:
> Is this reasonably true? Or does it cost a fair amount, in real
> terms, to provide these special features? And does the presence or
> absence of Caller ID really affect the cost of the other features?
With the exception of Recall, I am not sure I see where any
dependencies might exist. With Recall, it might be nice to have the
originating number to know if you really want to call back, but if you
have the number why bother paying for Recall? You could just dial it
yourself and save the money. So you might even say that CLID would
have a supressing impact on Callback.
For Selective Call Rejection/Distinctive Ringing/Callback (callback is
redialing a busy nbr vs recall which is returning an incoming call) I
just don't see the tie-in to CLID.
These features are not included in any switch type I know of as part
of a switch vendors "standard" software package. These features are
added to a switch by installing a separate, usually costly, software
feature package. This many times also requires adding additional
memory and perhaps common equipment to the switch to handle the
features. So it may cost quite a bit to add the features.
Now, having said that, I must also say I am not a "rate-shop" person
:->, so I really don't feel prepared to get into an argument as to
whether the rates being charged are compensatory or not. I can state
that there is a growing philosophical difference about whether rates
for vertical services should be set to maximize telephone company
profits or should be set to maximize social benefits. Which side you
come down on of this difference probably depends on your position in
the market (e.g. informed-consumer, uninformed-consumer, telephone
company, regulator, etc.).
Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*
------------------------------
From: andys@ulysses.att.com
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 08:54:10 EST
Subject: Re: Economics of Special Call Features?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Murray Hill, NJ
In article <telecom12.73.1@eecs.nwu.edu> Anthony E. Siegman writes:
> My (admittedly uninformed) impression is that all these features
> are more or less "there", within the capabilities of the electronic
> switches and even probably already programmed, so that providing them
> mostly amounts to "turning them on". And, once turned on they cost
> almost nothing to operate (and presumably generate revenue for the
> telco).
> Is this reasonably true? Or does it cost a fair amount, in real
> terms, to provide these special features? And does the presence or
> absence of Caller ID really affect the cost of the other features?
The exact packaging of features for switching software will vary from
manufacturer to manufacturer, but a general rule is "there is no free
lunch". The software to enable CLASS features has cost the
manufacturerers money to develop, and will continue to cost them money
for enhancement and maintenance. If a manufacturer includes CLASS by
default in a new generic (release) of the switch software, it must
recover that and other costs in what gets charged for the update (and
uses the presence of new features as a selling point for the update).
If CLASS features are sold as a separate package, then those costs are
recovered from the selling price of the package.
In either case, the operating company must pay real money to make the
switch capable of providing CLASS services. Note that while SS7 is
necessary to support CLASS, it is not necessary to have CLASS services
in a fully functioning SS7 office. Therefore CLASS features do not
come "free" if you put an office on an SS7 signaling network.
I don't have any facts on the argument that CLASS features without
CNID is a losing proposition. However I am sure it will be a whole
lot less profitable, which may be enough disincentive to offering such
a program. The services that are charged per call are probably very
low volume; the ability to sell a bulk per-line service that carries a
monthly charge can act as an insurance policy against per-call service
volumes that are low enough to make the software purchase a loser.
This is nothing like the current situation for DTMF.
Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928
READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking!
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #79
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12789;
25 Jan 92 20:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20539
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Jan 1992 19:01:09 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18834
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 25 Jan 1992 19:00:55 -0600
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1992 19:00:55 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201260100.AA18834@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #80
TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jan 92 19:00:57 CST Volume 12 : Issue 80
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Help: Multi-Line Telephone For the Disabled People (Martin McCormick)
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Steve Forrette)
Re: 800 and 900 ANI (David Ptasnik)
Re: Equipment-Rental Rates in Tariffs (Fred R. Goldstein)
Re: CID/ANI Blocking (David Ptasnik)
Verifying 800 Numbers For Trouble (Tim Gorman)
Determining SID (was *611 and *711 Calls Are Free?) (Craig R. Watkins)
Egg On My Face (Richard McCombs)
REN = 0.0 (was Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM) (Craig R. Watkins)
Price Rounding (was AT&T Long Distance Rates) (John R. Levine)
Sample Motorola CLID Chip Wanted (David Nyarko)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Help: Multi-Line Telephone For the Disabled People
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 21:50:29 -0600
From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu
In a recent posting, the topic of making it possible for blind people
to use multiline telephones was discussed. Fortunately, there has
been a family of devices called light probes around since the late
50's which pretty well solves this problem.
A light probe is a simple RC-timed audio oscillator in which the
resistive component is a photo cell. A light probe consists of the
photo cell, a sounder like a small speaker or portable radio earphone,
the oscillator circuit and a battery. The photo cell can be one of
many types, but the lead sulphide type is a really good choice since
it varies from Megohms in darkness to a few hundred ohms in moderate
light. The oscillator circuit can be as simple as one unijunction
transistor or can be a timer IC such as the NE555 configured as an
astable multivibrator.
The idea is that changes in light intensity are heard as changes
in pitch. The brighter the light, the higher the tone. A user holds
the photo cell over the LED's or lighted buttons on the telephone and
listens to the sound. A steady buzz indicates a line in use. A buzz
with momentary drops in pitch indicate a line on hold, and a pulsating
buzz indicates a ringing line. So much for the old days. Modern
business phone systems like the Ericsson MD110 here at Oklahoma State
present a whole new range of challenges. The MD110 is a primarily
digital PBX with many of the features of ISDN such as caller ID and a
multiplexed data channel.
While it is possible for a blind person to make and receive calls from
one of these phones in a fairly normal way, all of the display
information is presently not accessible. One solution I have thought
of, but have not yet tried is to build an inductive coupler which
could receive enough signal leakage from the telephone base or its
cord to decode the data frames, thereby making it possible to receive
and decode any part of the signal. While there are technical problems
to overcome such as knowing the total data rate on an Ericcson pair,
the inductive coupler, while complicating things should make it
possible to honestly claim that the interface does not pose any threat
to the integrity of the phone system.
Martin McCormick WB5AGZ O.S.U. Computer Center
Data Communications Group Stillwater, OK
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 20:05:29 pst
From: Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com>
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
In article <telecom12.63.3@eecs.nwu.edu> Wm. Randolph Franklin writes:
> In article <telecom12.37.3@eecs.nwu.edu> on 14 Jan 92 04:06:39 GMT,
> stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes:
>> Another antiquated service is third-number billing, although this one
>> is still used quite a bit. There are a lot of people who just cannot
>> deal with a "newfangled" calling card, and will always place
>> occasional away-from-home calls in this manner. Telco will have to
>> continue to provide this service despite the fraud that results.
> Not in NY! Several years ago, NYNEX claimed that they were starting
> to verify all third number billings. So now the only way you can
> charge a call to your home number when you're away are 1) use a
> calling card, and 2) hope that the burglar at home answers and accepts
> the charge.
I think this happens only if you are calling from a payphone (LEC or
COCOT). Otherwise, they can always go back and bill the calling line
for the charge if it is ever disputed by the third number. And of
course, the calling number will be responsible for the bill, even if a
phriend, guest of the business, or whatever, placed the call, as we
all know that the subscriber is responsible for all calls placed from
their line, now don't we? :-)
Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
------------------------------
From: David Ptasnik <davep@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: 800 and 900 ANI
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 20:12:24 PDT
jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) wrote:
> Say we receive notification from our billing agent that a certain
> subscriber does not feel our service is worth the cost and refuses to
> pay. OK, now we know that 311-555-2368 has refused to pay. But
> without ANI, we have no way to block future calls from that
> subscriber. And telcos cannot block a single 900 number; it's all or
> nothing.
If you receive a call from a person who has "BLOCKED" ANI you have the
option of rejecting that call without answering or paying for it. If
you choose to answer and pay for the call, you could then give the
caller the option of using a credit card to pay for your services.
Include the price of the call in the bill.
> So I feel very strongly that we have a right to know who is calling
> before we accept the call. We may not actually mail out our own
> bills, but any fraud is deducted right from our bottom line.
You should have the option of choosing whether or not to answer the
call if the caller is exercising his "right" to privacy. Do not force
me to send my unlisted number, and I won't force you to answer the
call. Both sides protect their "rights".
Dave davep@u.washington.edu
------------------------------
From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Equipment-Rental Rates in Tariffs
Date: 23 Jan 92 04:10:13 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
In article <telecom12.56.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL
(Will Martin) writes ...
(about how equipment rentals are set or tariffed)
As of 1983, NO terminal gear may be tariffed. NO state may regulate
it in any US state. AT&T may charge whatever they want. No recourse.
Period. Pay up or shut up or give it back, that's the law! Thus
spake the FCC.
Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com
or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274
Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.
[Moderator's Note: Fred, wasn't there (isn't there) an exception to
this in the case of customers who had certain types of specialized
service prior to divestiture which became grandfathered on D-day? For
example, an apartment building wanting 'front door security phone'
service now has to get it from a private vendor; but if you got this
service in the very early eighties from Illinois Bell, it involved
both 'terminal gear' (i.e. the door phone, door latching mechanism and
relays on the customer's premises) as well as equipment in the central
office to send the signals to the individual phones in the building.
The various components could not be separated, but were leased as a
package. I think IBT still maintains it for the few customers who were
grandfathered, and I think a tariff spells out the costs, etc. I'll
grant you what exceptions there are, if any, are few. PAT]
------------------------------
From: David Ptasnik <davep@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: CID/ANI Blocking
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 20:25:43 PDT
andrew@herald.USask.ca (Derek Andrew) writes:
>> They should have the option of refusing the call if you chose not to
>> identify yourself. They might want to take the call, and give the
>> caller the option of billing to a credit card, but they could know in
>> advance whether the ANI was being blocked from the calling party.
> The do have the option of accepting your call if you do not want to be
> identified. If you go to a pay phone, your call will be rejected! If
> they want to accept your call anyway, they could provide an 800
> number. The funny thing here is if you are going to provide a credit
> card number, then you are identifying yourself all over again.
I may wish to provide my name, but not the number from which I am
calling. The 900 service provider may not want to have an 800 and a
900 number, and may be willing to let me bill the service to a credit
card as a customer service. Not sending the ANI data to a 900
provider is no big deal, as long as they have the option of rejecting
the call.
David G. Lewis correctly pointed out that I cannot block ANI from my
home, it is my desire to block it's transmission to the party I am
calling. I think that allays most of the technical objection.
Dave davep@u.washington.edu
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jan 92 12:50:55 EST
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Verifying 800 Numbers For Trouble
In TELECOM Digest V12 #68 the Moderator writes in response to Roy
Smith <roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu>:
> verification process. There is no central 'inward' operator for 800 as
> there is for other area codes; no place to begin searching, at least
> from your local operator's position. And the only operators who have
> the ability to verify in any event are AT&T operators and local telco
> operators. Sprint and MCI cannot get into the AT&T network to call
> the various inwards in any event, regardless of area code. On the
I was interested in this topic so I requested some clarification on
verification processes from my brother who has worked in operator
services for a number of years. Following is his reply:
==========================
In Southwestern Bell territory AT&T no longer has DIRECT access to the
RBOC's verification network. The only way to verify or interrupt a
line is to have the RBOC operator perform the task. This is to insure
security and was done to meet legal requirements.
Verifications and interrupts are done by contacting the RBOC operator
via 'inward'. This is usually done by sending the designated RBOC
LATA Tandem switch the "univeral inward code" of 121 which then
connects the call to an RBOC operator serving that LATA.
This can be done by any carrier that has purchased and installed
trunks to that LATA switch. The AT&T network DOES NOT HAVE TO BE USED
to obtain access to an RBOC's inward operator. The carrier must
develop and install the necessary routing in their network to allow
their operators access to the LATA tandems everywhere in the US. The
carrier's operators must also have the information needed to route the
call through their network to the RBOC's LATA tandems. This has been
done in the past by AT&T by using a dialing pattern of NPA-TTC-121,
where TTC is the Terminating Toll Center code. The TTC codes are
administered by Bellcore along with NPA and NXX assignments. However,
other carriers do not have to use this method as long as they can
deliver the digits '121' to the correct LATA Tandem.
Most carriers and Alternate Operator Service Providers have not
deployed this capability. This is their choice and not the fault of
AT&T or the RBOC's.
The RBOC's verification network has been developed to work only with
lines in local central offices. It will not work with trunk side
circuits to PBX's, ACD's, etc. Also many 800 numbers are terminated
with direct circuits from a carrier to the customer's premise,
bypassing the RBOC's network. The RBOC has no way to verify these
circuits. The carriers will have to develop a method to do this.
Lastly, with the enhanced routing capabilites being deployed where
calls to the same 800 number can be routed to different answering
locations depending on the point of origin, time of day, etc. there is
no way for an RBOC operator to determine where any given 800 call may
have been sent.
I hope this clears up the situation a little.
Jim Gorman
========================
Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*
------------------------------
From: "Craig R. Watkins" <CRW@ICF.HRB.COM>
Subject: Determining SID (was *611 and *711 Calls Are Free?)
Date: 25 Jan 92 10:22:35 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.
In article <telecom12.77.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor
Math) writes:
> johng.all_proj@mot.com (John) writes:
>> Some models of Motorola phones will allow you to display the system
>> number. My Dynatac 6800XL mobile will do it as a normal user feature.
> Does the phone have to be activated for this to work?
No, it shouldn't.
> It seems like if someone wants to program their own phone and they
> need the SID, they would have to get it without the phone being
> activated.
You should be able to program in any old SID. Turn on the phone and
check your received SID. You should make sure you have an odd SID if
you are using the A side and an even SID if you are using B. Of
course, you also have to assume that you are indeed receiving the
correct system.
Craig R. Watkins Internet: crw@icf.hrb.com
HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311
------------------------------
Subject: Egg On My Face
From: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs)
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 92 05:39:16 CST
Organization: The Red Headed League
After further thought I remember calling Directory Assistance for
Houston (713). One thing that's kind of strange is the number on the
bill is 713 555 1221 instead of 713 555 1212.
By the way, if anyone responded to my earlier message and wondered why
I didn't reply, for some reason I've been getting very little news for
the last week, and it's still eratic, so if anyone has anything to say
to me you should Email me as I may not see your replies in c.d.t.
Internet: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org
Fidonet: Richard McCombs on 1:385/6
------------------------------
From: "Craig R. Watkins" <CRW@ICF.HRB.COM>
Subject: REN = 0.0 (was Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM)
Date: 25 Jan 92 10:51:44 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.
In article <telecom12.77.6@eecs.nwu.edu>, Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com
(Jack Decker) writes:
> One trick that some of the techie types used to use was to disconnect
> the bell in the phone, but then hang a NE-2H neon lamp (with suitable
> resistor) across the line, and rig it up so that the neon light
> triggered a photocell/relay combination, which would in turn provide
> power to a bell, buzzer, chime or whatever.
That "suitable resistor" of course is a very key point. Once in my
very young years I hooked up a neon which lit a CdS cell which turned
on a simple audio oscillator (an "electronic ringer" was quite the
novelty in those years). However, in wiring, I forgot the resistor.
What would happen, of course, is the neon lamp would "answer" and
"hang up" the phone each time a call came in before my beeper would
start or any of the mechanical ringers would sound. After I figured
out what was going on, I was just hoping that I wasn't dropping cards
at the CO making it look like I had a Black Box on the line! (I had
remembered what happened when one speeds up their rotary dials to 20
pps and the telco comes to "fix the phone.")
> Of course, the neon lamp/resistor combination drew so little current
> (in comparison to a phone ringer) that it was virtually undetectable
> to phone company testing equipment (it would have been like trying to
> detect a drop of water added to a swimming pool).
Another method was to change the capacitor across the A & F network
terminals for one half the value. The phone might not ring as loud,
but you could put two on for "the price of one."
Craig R. Watkins Internet: crw@icf.hrb.com
HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311
------------------------------
Subject: Price Rounding (was AT&T Long Distance Rates)
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 25 Jan 92 11:57:49 EST (Sat)
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)
In article <telecom12.77.4@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:
> My speculation: The rate-quote system is deliberately programmed to
> round *down* the first minute and round *up* additional minutes.
I can confirm that Sprint does the same thing. A lot of my calls cost
0.125 per minute. The one minute calls cost 12 cents, the two minute
calls cost 25. This is a pleasant change from the "round up" rule we
have come to expect from most other businesses.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
------------------------------
From: nyarko@ee.ualberta.ca (David Nyarko)
Subject: Sample Motorola CLID Chip Wanted
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1992 18:02:48 GMT
I would like to know how to obtain a sample of the Motorola CLID chip
together with any application notes. Is there a 1-800 number one can
call?
David email address: nyarko@bode.ee.ualberta.ca
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #80
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17201;
25 Jan 92 23:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24496
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Jan 1992 21:35:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23803
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 25 Jan 1992 21:35:16 -0600
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1992 21:35:16 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201260335.AA23803@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #81
TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jan 92 21:35:13 CST Volume 12 : Issue 81
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Caller ID: Input Needed for Windows Based Program (hh2@prism.gatech.edu)
IRS Experiments with Filing by Phone (Randall C. Gellens)
Foiling Drug Dealers Use of Payphones (Derek Andrew)
What is a Linebacker? (Susan B. Huntsman)
Help Needed With Tricky Phone Interface Device (Dave Mc Mahan)
Telemarketing Advocacy (Larry Rachman)
European Phone Jacks - Help Needed (Mark Gold)
California Class Services (Arnette P. Baker)
Re: Phone Company Humor (Gregg E. Woodcock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hh2@prism.gatech.edu (HAAS)
Subject: Caller ID: Input Needed for Windows Based Program
Date: 23 Jan 92 14:42:19 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute
I've written a Windows based caller-ID program that I plan to offer as
shareware, but I need some info on RS-232 CID devices other than the
one I have, and info on messages other than OUTSIDE call.
Here's the problems:
1.) My Caller-ID device is the MTE Classmate Model 10. I would like
for someone to E-mail me the output from other CID devices so that I
can support the other data formats.
2.) My area does not offer CID signal blocking. As a matter of fact,
the ONLY message I have EVER gotten (other than receiving a number)
is, for example: 01/23 10:34 OUTSIDE call. I need to know what other
messages can appear so that I can accommodate them.
3.) Has anyone used the $298.00 commercial program? What are it's
features; did you like it; and comments?
Also, any suggestions would be appreciated and considered. For
instance, some devices indicate a ring (though I don't know how). Do
you think it worthwhile to write the number of rings to the log file?
What do you feel a program like this would be worth? (I think we ALL
agree that $300 is far to much.)
Here's a brief description of what I have so far:
I already support a small database for NAME, NUMBER and COMMENTS. The
The program stays as an icon and pops up with the name, etc. when the
phone rings. If the number is unknown, you can make a new entry then.
After 60 seconds the form disappears. A second form is a scroll window
with a call log. All data can be saved to file. I'm working on an
autodialer for automatic redial of last number; and hopefully ANY
number in the present call log. The pop-up data form doubles as a
program for data entry, manual search, and browse.
Any responses will be appreciated.
hh
[Moderator's Note: Here in Chicago we get PRIVATE, OUTSIDE, and MESSAGE
as well as the time of day and date. MESSAGE only works if you also
are on telco's voicemail service. A call which gets transferred to
voicemail will cause that indicator to come on *if* the person leaves
a message once connected. We also get ERROR, which occurs if the
number was somehow lost or garbled in transmission to your display. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 07:15 GMT
From: Randall C Gellens <0005000102@mcimail.com>
Subject: IRS Experiments With Filing by Phone
In Wednesday's {Los Angeles Times} (Business Section) is a story about
an IRS experiment which permits taxpayers to file by phone, dialing a
number and keying in the figures (such as W-2 income amounts) which
they would normally fill out on a form. The experiment, using 24-hour
800-numbers, cost the IRS $600,000, but eliminates the enormous extra
paperwork which results from filing errors (about 16% of returns).
The IRS is considering expanding the experiment outside the current
Ohio area, but hasn't decided on which states. It is expected to be
nationwide within five years.
------------------------------
From: andrew@jester.USask.ca (Derek Andrew)
Subject: Foiling Drug Dealers Use of Payphones
Reply-To: andrew@jester.USask.ca
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 00:21:19 -0700
In Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Canada, the people's telephone company,
SaskTel, has somehow configured all the payphones in town (at least
all the ones that I tried) so they will not accept calls!
I asked my contacts within the phone company why this was done. I was
told that it was in response to mall owners requests to prevent the
kids that hang out in malls from receiving calls and tying up the
phones. I doubt this explanation since you also cannot dial payphones
located in booths on street corners located away from malls.
I suspect it is actually a method to prevent drug dealers and buyers
from using payphones to arrange drug deals.
Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0
Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808, 52 11 23N 106 48 48W
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 08:05:52 -0700
From: nha2308@dsachg1.dsac.dla.mil (Susan B Huntsman )
Subject: What is a Linebacker?
What is a Linebacker?
It was listed in the optional portion of my phone bill. Any help
would be appreciated.
Susan Huntsman nha2308@dsachg1.dsac.dla.mil
[Moderator's Note: Telco fixes the wires and equipment up to the
'demarc' (or place where the wires enter your home) for free. If you
want work on the wires inside your home or the instruments, telco will
charge you extra .. quite a lot extra, in fact. $17 per quarter-hour
with a 30 minute minimum is typical. To lease a phone temporarily
while your phone is being repaired also costs money. So, many telcos
offer "Linebacker" (or some variation on the name) as an insurance
policy covering these additional phone-related expenses. The rate is
typically in the $4-5 per month range. For this, you get free repair
of inside wiring, and free use of an instrument for some period of
time while your own instrument is being repaired. Like any insurance
policy, telco is gambling you won't use it, and you are gambling that
you will. In the thirty-plus years I've had phone service, I have
never had my inside wiring or phones go out of order to a point I was
unable to repair it myself. "Linebacker" might be a good deal for
someone who was really ignorant about telephones; but even then I
doubt it. The problem with "Linebacker" is that telco is a victim of
its own quality service for a century ... PAT]
------------------------------
From: mcmahan@netcom.netcom.com (Dave Mc Mahan)
Subject: Help Needed With Tricky Phone Interface Device
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 16:48:34 GMT
Organization: Dave McMahan @ NetCom Services
Dear NetLand,
I have a rather interesting problem which you may be able to help me on.
We are in the process of making a medical device for at-home patient
monitoring. To make things easy for the patient, we need to add a
DTMF decoder to the box. The box also has a 2400 baud data modem in
it, which is used for sending telemetry data that is collected.
The normal scenario for use is:
Patient or doctor initiates a phone call. After some voice
communication, the doctor sends a series of DTMF tones over the line
and causes the box to switch out the patient phone and enable the
modem. Data is transferred over the modem and then a data command is
sent (via the modem) that causes the modem to stop and resume voice
contact once again. The voice/data/voice switch can occur many times
in a conversation.
The problem I have is:
When the box is turned on, it needs to be able to listen to the phone
line for DTMF tones. If I use parts I know of, the only way to do
this is to have the box take the phone off-hook and listen. If the
box takes the phone off-hook, the patient can't make or receive any
calls. Our patients aren't very smart and may not realize that they
must turn on the box _after_ a call is placed and must turn off the
box at the end of the conversation to regain control of the phone
line. If they leave the box on, it must still listen for DTMF tones
and must therefore be off-hook and inhibiting any calls.
My possible solutions are:
I can solve the problem one of two ways. I can make the DTMF tone
decoder in the box listen to the phone without taking it off-hook.
Doing this requires the DTMF interface to the phone line to be
compliant with all federal and phone company regulations governing the
use of such a device. I have not been able to find any qualified
Direct Access Arraingments (DAA) that will not seize the line and
still let me listen for DTMF tones. What I'm looking for is basically
a phone tap or 'bug'.
The second method involves monitoring the patient phone. For many
reasons, we have put a requirement on the box. The requirement is
that the patient phone must be plugged into our box and our box is
plugged into the wall jack. This allows us to kill the patient phone
during data communication. If I could somehow monitor the patient
phone and know when it is off-hook, I could then know when to take the
DTMF decoder off-hook and listen for tones. When the patient hangs up
the attached phone, the box would be smart enough to detect this and
put the DTMF decoder on-hook as well. Incoming and outgoing calls
could then be made normally, since the DTMF decoder would not be
off-hook except when the patient phone is off-hook. Are there any
qualified line current sensing chips or devices that could provide
some kind of signal when current flows to an attached phone?
I need help from you for:
I have not been able to find an off-the-shelf solution to either of
these two problems. I am using pre-qualified modems and other
hardware that allows me to not have to go through the FCC (and later,
European phone regulatory agencies) to qualify my device. If I whip
up some either of my two solutions listed above, I can't find any
qualified parts that will allow me to avoid the FCC certification
process. What can you suggest that is already qualified?
I am looking for either an off-hook detection device that can send a
signal to the box when the patient phone goes off-hook or a device
that can monitor the audio content of a phone line without making the
phone go off-hook. Either solution can be made to work, as long as I
can find qualified parts to use. Either solution would have to be
fairly small (about two square inches, preferably less) so I can mount
it in the box. I am also cost-sensitive on this item. I would like
to spend less than $30 for the parts (in quantities of 100 or more)
for this. If you have a solution that is not FCC pre-qualified or is
more costly, I'd still like to hear about it. As long as the solution
you propose is meant to be qualified, I could still use it if I have
to go through the certification process. Right now, I'm looking for
any ideas and part sources that could do the job.
Please e-mail all your responses to me. I am posting this to several
newsgroups and don't read all of them continuously. Please mail all
your responses to:
Dave McMahan mcmahan@netcom.com {apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!mcmahan
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 92 11:37:54 EST
From: Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Telemarketing Advocacy
This one should really cause a flame war.
The quote below is from the book "Successful Cold Call Selling", by
Lee Boyan. If you have any complaints, don't send them to me; I'm just
the messenger (but I thought you'd enjoy the message :-).
If you use the telephone to contact prospects, bear in mind that
the telephone is not a private network. It is a public utility! A
listed phone number invites you to access that number. Anyone who
wishes to deny such an invitation can get an unlisted number.
Suppose we had a dictator who declared, "Henceforth all surgery
will be prohibited." Those who needed surgery would be in
trouble. And maybe the rest of us would worry that someday we
would need it. But otherwise life would go on much the same. Now
suppose we had a dictator who declared, "All selling will be
prohibited." Everybody's lifestyle would come to a screeching
halt. Who is more important, doctors or salespeople?
Larry Rachman, WA2BUX 74066.2004@compuserve.com
Don't blame me!
------------------------------
From: gold@ilp.mit.edu
Subject: European Phone Jacks - Help Needed
Organization: MIT Industrial Liaison Program
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 17:07:41 GMT
I need help with telecommunication adapters for European
countries. In our department, there are several people that travel to
Europe regularly to conduct business. We give them a laptop (which
has a 2400 baud modem).
They generally use the laptop to type documents. However, now
they are wanting to dial-in remotely to our computers in Boston. That
would be no problem, except for the fact that, as I've been told, the
little "clip-in" connectors that run from the modem to the phone jack
outlet on the wall are different in Europe. Apparently, not only are
the phone jack outlets different in Europe, but I've been told that
each European country has a different type of connector.
Are there adaptors for the phone cable such that we could run
our phone cable from the modem, through the adaptor, and plug that
adaptor into the wall in a European country. I would prefer to buy an
adaptor that is compatible with phone jack outlets in several (if not
all) European countries (kind of like a Swiss Army Knife).
If anyone out there knows of a company (preferably in the
U.S.) that sells such an adpater please E-mail me directly, as I do
not check all of the newsgroups that I am posting this to. If you
know of a better place to ask this question, please let me know.
Thanks in advance for any assistance.
Mark D. Gold Massachusetts Institute of Technology
gold@ilp.mit.edu Industrial Liaison Program
(617) 253-0430 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 12:14:53 -0600
From: ihlpf!kityss (Arnette P Baker)
Subject: Re: California Class Services
In Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 70, Message 7 of 10 Robert L.
McMillin writes:
> A box on the side of this article had some interesting (mis?)information
> on Caller-ID, including a definition of Call Return that "Provides the
> subscriber with the number of the last caller along with the time and
> date and allows him or her to automatically return the call." That
> doesn't sound like the way it's worked for some contributors to
> TELECOM Digest ... is this just a case of the {Times} not checking
> their facts?
Both Robert and someone from Canada mentioned in the last couple of
days this "Two Level Activation" version of Call Return (Automatic
Callback). This version of the feature provides the date and time of
your last incoming call, along with the calling number if it is not
"private" (blocked). This activation sequence is the recommended
Bellcore method of operation for Call Return. I do not know of any
current US offering of Call Return that utilizes this version.
However, since I believe that this is the default mode of operation on
Northern Telecom switches, it is probably widely used in Canada.
The Two Level activation of Automatic Callback is available on the
AT&T switches as an optional mode of operation. I had heard, and
obviously from Robert's article this is correct, that the California
telcos would be offering this version of Call Return -- provided they
ever get tariff approval.
Two other interesting notes on the California Class filings/rulings.
I thought the privacy issue would not be as big a deal in California,
since the state legislature had already passed a law mandating
per-call blocking for Caller-ID in the state. I was surprised to see
that GTE had two CLASS features listed in their filings that PacTel
did not (Selective Call Acceptance and Selective Call Waiting) -- about
1.5 to 2 years ago some judge supposedly ruled that the two Telcos had
to provide equal offerings of these features.
Arnette Baker ihlpf!kityss
Disclaimer: I don't think AT&T even knows I exist, let alone allow
me to speak for them.
------------------------------
From: "Gregg E. Woodcock" <woodcock@utdallas.edu>
Subject: Re: Phone Company Humor
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 10:04:39 -0600
I recently had an humorous dialog with a Southwestern Bell employee
while trying to track down a company in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area who
will accept phone books to be recycled. I had called all the
recycling centers in the area and they suggested I go to the source
(GTE and SWB) and ask them. So I called up SWB Yellow Pages division
and asked if they accepted the old Yellow Pages since the new ones
were being distributed or if they knew of anyone that did. His reply
was ...
<snicker>
<snicker>
<snicker>
"No, but have you tried looking in the Yellow Pages?"
BTW, I never did find anybody who will recycle them.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #81
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21331;
26 Jan 92 1:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27815
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 00:07:15 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11866
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 00:07:00 -0600
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 00:07:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201260607.AA11866@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: Tracing Phone Calls, Then and Now
Several readers responded to my inquiry 'anyone interested in tracing
of calls' with a request for some case histories. So, here they are.
Tracing calls is the process of following a pair of wires from one end
to the other ....
Okay, that is a bit of an oversimplification, but that is really what
the process is about. With the new stuff in central offices today, the
process is quite a bit easier, at least within the same office, since
a computer terminal tells in a second who is connected to whom. In
years past, it was necessary for one or more technicians to physically
examine the connections to find out what was going on, and if at any
point the connection dropped off before the trace was finished, then
all was lost. The modern system, by virtue of it being so *quick* --
a matter of typing a couple commands in at the terminal -- make traces
which begin and end in the same office very trivial.
Consider an old movie, circa 1950's where the bad guy has been
taunting the police, giving them clues about murders which have been
committed. At one point, he senses the police in the background are
whispering among themselves about 'getting a trace from the phone
company', and he tells them,
"Go ahead and order a trace. You call the operator. She will call the
wire chief and tell him. He will call switchroom and tell the guys
there. Then those guys will go in the frames and look and look and
look and look ... maybe for ten or fifteen minutes. Then, they'll find
I am not even in the same central office as yourself, and they'll call
over to that office and tell the guys there where to pick up the
trace, and those guys will go in their frames and keep looking. Oh, I
guess I will talk to you for another half-hour if I feel like it.
Traces don't worry me any ..."
Of course, he was correct. If the initial results of a trace showed
the connection came from another office, all the 'guys' could do would
be to call their counterparts in the distant office and tell them of
the trace in progress which was leaving their office on trunk XXX. The
distant office would find that trunk XXX out of office Z came into
them on a certain pair ... and they'd pick up the connection at
that point and literally search all over the place, through the mounds
of spaghetti-like wire, hoping to find where it terminated before the
calling party disconnected, or as they would say, 'the tandem
collapsed'. It would take the first office (the one originating the
trace, where the aggrieved subscriber was receiving the call) several
minutes to reach the conclusion the call was going to the other
office. Depending on the bureaucracy (the tech would tell his
supervisor; his supervisor would call his counterpart in the other
office; that supervisor would tell a tech in that office; the search
would begin over there), another 10-15 minutes would easily pass. The
obscene caller who made short, five minute calls to various victims
day after day would as a rule never get caught.
With long distance calls, it was considerably more difficult from the
point of view of someone coordinating the trace. A call might go from
the aggrieved subscriber's office to a toll center and the toll center
found they were giving it to some distant city. A call to the people
in charge in the distant city would send someone looking to find out
what local office *in that city* was involved; then that final office
would have to trace it down to a given line. 45 minutes between the
time the complaint was registered and something definitive was learned
was not uncommon.
The end result of a trace all to often was a bunch of guys hurrying
around trying to find out what was connected where only to hear the
(as one fellow described it once to me) "the sickening sound of the
connection coming down, just a minute or two before we would have
gotten to that point ..."
But everyone would just look at each other, shrug their shoulders and
say maybe next time we'll catch him ...
Traces from a Bell System company to an independent were technically
possible, just as traces to/from a foreign telephone administration
were technically possible. It was the paperwork and the time consuming
business of getting someone at that end started which caused the
biggest delays.
Now of course not only does the tech's terminal tell what is going on
in the office with a couple keystrokes, as often as not getting the
same information from a distant central office is just as easy. There
is no longer any need to chase down wires and connections as in the
past. Yes, that exists a little, in older offices, but by and large,
calls between central offices in a large city like Chicago can be
traced in seconds. Add to this the recent features available to
subsribers of Caller-ID, Return Last Call, etc and anyone inclined to
make anonymous, harassing calls should really think twice.
There still exists a delay and difficulty (not insurmountable) in
tracing long distance calls due to the presence of various other
carriers which did not previously exist. When AT&T and the local Bells
were all in the same family, they cooperated without question. Now
things are a little different, although the security departments of
the various carriers do cooperate with one another when a situation
arises which affects them all. They will cooperate in traces when
asked, but again the paperwork and bureacracy (exactly who reports to
who in which office? who do we call there for assistance?) takes up
the time. More concise logs are kept than before however, so
eventually things work out ... if anyone wants to bother. If a trace
is worth the trouble, everyone gets together and does it.
Some case histories:
Case # 1: The Queen is Threatened
In the mid-1960's, a situation arose where Queen Elizabeth's staff was
receiving anonymous, harassing calls on a daily or sometimes twice
daily basis. These calls made threats against the Queen; made lewd
suggestions regarding Her Majesty, and were simply put, an annoyance.
At some point, security officers at Buckingham Palace grew tired of
the games and enlisted the help of British Telecom to resolve the
problem.
BT prepared themselves for the trace by monitoring the phone lines
into Buckingham Palace at the time of day when the calls normally
arrived, about 2:00 AM daily. They fully expected it would be simple
enough, with advance notice such as this to backtrack to the offender
in no time at all. Of course, they *assumed* the call was from the UK.
It was only after spotting two such calls they found the calls were
actually coming from the United States! The calls rarely lasted more
than five minutes, so by keeping track of where they lost the first
call, they were able to advance that much further when the next one
came in.
When it was known the calls were coming via AT&T from (what was then)
the international calling center at White Plains, NY a call was placed
to AT&T security at White Plains alerting them. By the third or fourth
call, AT&T security was able to detirmine White Plains was getting the
call from the main toll center in Chicago. A couple more connections
by the obscene caller enabled security people in Chicago to trace the
call to a phone office here called 'Chicago-Superior', and a
technician at the Superior CO (where it was only about 8 PM) needed
only a single call (the caller was getting brazen, hanging on the line
for ten or fifteen minutes at a time) to find the trunk from AT&T long
lines coming to his office was connected out to ... presto!
WHItehall-4-6211, the switchboard number at the Lawson YMCA.
Now bear in mind, the caller by this point had been calling once or
twice a night, maybe three times for the past two weeks at least. He
grew careless thinking he would never get caught. The Lawson YMCA
had a very busy (especially in the evening) four position 'cord board'
serving the several hundred residence extension phones in the
building. (Lawson is a 21 story building with about 700 rooms rented
to transients).
Security officers from Illinois Bell paid a visit to the Chief
Operator at Lawson, served her with the proper papers and told her
they'd be looking for 'certain types of long distance calls' from her
swithboard billing records. A review of the toll tickets for a few
days located a certain resident calling London nightly ...
The operators on the 3-11 shift were warned to 'keep your traps shut
... don't tip him off, or you will get in trouble also.' Since a
couple of the operators lived in the building, ate in the same
cafeteria, played in the same gymnasium, etc it was assumed someone
would screw things up, thus the warning. A tap was installed on the
switchboard extension to that particular room, and when the call was
made that evening, two IBT security guys along with a Lawson security
officer jumped on the elevator and went right to the door of the room.
Bang! Bang! Bang! Open the door! They caught him with the phone off
hook, had a tape recording of the call downstairs at the switchboard
and an operator who testified she recalled making the connection. As
it turned out, the Queen's representative in Chicago decided against
pressing charges when a psychiatric examination of the offender showed
he was mentally ill. Lawson YMCA gave him his eviction papers a day or
two later, however.
Case # 2: A FAX machine runs amok.
Three years ago, the First National Bank of Chicago had a fax machine
which was somehow misprogrammed. It was *supposed* to call a branch of
the bank in Berlin, Germany at the close of business here each day and
transmit certain information to the branch office. Something to do
with the branch bank's balance here, currency rates, who knows ... but
some silly person at the bank had it programmed to the private
residence phone of someone in Hamburg instead ...
So about 2 AM daily in Hamburg, a private family would be awakened
from sleep to a ringing phone, and silence ... and like all fax
machines, it had a 'feature' which would redial numbers which did not
respond (with carrier tone) every five or ten minutes up to a dozen
times. Ergo, from 2 to 4 AM, at five to ten minute intervals the poor
family would be called to the phone and hear only silence. We with
some telephone sophistication would probably be angry, but not
frightened by this ... but an average person, awakened repeatedly at
night for several nights in a row would have good reason to become
paranoid. The family requested help from Bundespost, and after awhile
the trace led back to the USA once again. AT&T ran it down as far as
Illinois Bell's Franklin CO. IBT easily traced it to the bank, but
then the fun began:
An IBT rep tried to contact someone at the bank, and got a royal
runaround. It seems no one knew where that precise machine was located
(all the IBT rep had was the phone number); and no one knew who would
be in charge of programming the speed dial buttons, etc. Finally
someone was located who agreed to 'take care of it' ... but instead,
nothing was done and the calls went out again that night and the night
following. IBT got another complaint from Bundespost about it.
IBT tried calling the VP-Telecommunications for First National Bank
and got a run around from some clerk. Finally a technician went to the
bank with instructions to cut the service -- disconnect the pair and
wait until *they* got a complaint. Eventually someone at the bank got
smart and cured it. And would you believe when the bank was reviewing
the phone bill for that fax machine a month or two later, they saw
something like three or four hundred one minute calls to Germany to a
number they did not recognize and they called IBT to complain and get
credit for calls 'that AT&T must have screwed up on'. :)
The truth, they say, is stranger than fiction.
Case # 3: Dirty Old Man Gets Off With '611' Repair Clerk
Back to about 1965 for awhile: The Chicago-Wabash phone office was an
ancient old stepping switch serving the south end of the downtown
area. While active and busy during the weekday, it was a slow office
on Saturday night with all the lawyers and stockbrokers gone for the
night ... so slow in fact that the only employees on duty were a clerk
to answer '611' and do other things in her spare time, which was
plentiful, and a single technician to look after whatever came up.
They usually sat there and played cards.
But they always had one gentleman caller good for a laugh. For several
weeks in a row, at precisely 6:00 PM on Saturday night, the repair
clerk would receive a call on 611. He somehow had the impression that
since he was not charged for calls to 611, the calls could probably
not be traced either. So he'd dial, she'd answer, and he'd respond
with his sweet comments and suggestions ... a real odd bird is the way
they thought of him. She'd hang up and he might call back once or
twice, or maybe not ... until the next Saturday night.
The office was so slow on Saturday night they knew when a call came in
at 6:00 PM it had to be him, and it got to where they would joke about
it, the tech looking at his watch and saying to the clerk, "say, it is
about time for your friend to call ..." and they'd laugh.
One night John (the tech) was feeling especially good and he said to
the clerk, "tonight, let's catch that bum. Here's how we will do it:
When he calls in, I want you in your best recorded announcement voice
to answer like this:
"The number for Repair Service has been changed. The new
new number is 230. Please hang up and dial 230. There is
no charge for calls to Repair Service."
Well, sure enough, 6:00 PM rolls around and 611 starts buzzing ...
"Hurry up! Your boyfriend is on the line. Remember what I told you!"
<click>
"The number for Repair Service has been changed. The new
number is 230. Please hang up and dial 230. There is no
charge for calls to Repair Service." <click>
Sure enough, he fell for it ...
Seconds later, the test board buzzes with a call on '230'.
"Get over here and answer, I'll be on the line also ... "
(clerk answers at the test board)
"Repair Service, may I help you?"
(the DOM starts his spiel, even filthier than usual).
John is listening on a headset ... reaches out and flips a key
forward on the test board ...
"You son of a bitch! We caught you at last! ha ha haha ha"
The DOM, startled, clicks off.
John tells more:
"I left the cord up, and the key forward which kept him locked up in
the frames. His line would not disconnect that way. I pulled the
ringing key a few times, but of course he would not answer. I rang a
couple short rings, then a few long ones, then short, etc. For about a
minute I just pulled the key and gave him a good long ring that lasted
about a minute. I guess I kept ringing him like this with odd little
rings for about 20 minutes. Finally he picked up the phone."
(DOM) "Hello?" A meek, questioning voice as if to say, what do you
want of me?
(John) "Say you! Give me your telephone number."
Click.
More rings ... finally the DOM answers again. After some prodding he
gave a phone number.
(John) "Well good of you to finally tell me, but you know, I'm not
sure if I believe you or not ... so, tell you what I am going to do.
Its time for my dinner. I'm going to leave you up in the frames while
I go eat. When I get back, I'll go in the frames and look for myself,
and make sure the number you gave me is correct."
John went out, came back about 30 minutes later and went looking. It
turned out the guy had told the truth.
I asked him what they did next.
(John) "We told the Business Office about it on Monday. They didn't do
anything except slap his wrist and tell him not to make calls like
that again. I don't know if he did or not, but we never heard from him
again."
Case # 4: Hotel switchboard clerk is a world-wide fraud caller.
Finally, there was the switchboard operator at the Palmer House Hotel
in the early sixties who made the news here when he 'accidentally
overheard' a hotel guest pass his AT&T card number to the long
distance operator ... and proceeded to run up several hundred
dollars in calls over a month's time until the card got on the hot
list at every AT&T long distance operator position in the world. He
was actually in the process of making yet another call from the
payphone at Walgreen's Drug Store when an operator tricked him into
hanging around while she 'kept trying to get a circuit to complete his
call' while an IBT security officer was enroute. The {Chicago Tribune}
ran a blurb about it the next day which was the first time I recall
ever seeing anything in the paper about phreaking. The newspaper item
said the chap almost had a bowel movement when the security guys
rapped on the window of the payphone booth.
--------------------
But those days are long gone ... at least for the majority of calls
these days which can be traced almost as fast as they can be placed.
Patrick Townson
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24497;
26 Jan 92 2:57 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25527
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 01:08:51 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30063
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 01:08:35 -0600
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 01:08:35 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201260708.AA30063@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #82
TELECOM Digest Sun, 26 Jan 92 01:08:14 CST Volume 12 : Issue 82
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Larry Lippman, R.I.P. (Steve Elias)
Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage? (Sean Williams)
Question on New York Telephone's Service Capabilites (Scott Barman)
Telecom Jobs For '92 Grads? (Neil Kruse)
Speakerhpone Connection (Mike Miller)
US West Position in Oregon BBS Case (Peter Marshall)
The Hazards of Making Unauthorized Calls at Work [humor] (Richard Kulawiec)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Larry Lippman, R.I.P.
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 13:50:06 PST
From: Steve Elias <eli@cisco.com>
[Moderator's Note: Steve Elias passed along this sad message from
Marvin Minsky. I've not had an opportunity to confirm this, but
wanted to get the information out as soon as possible. Long time
Digest readers will remember Larry quite well and his many very
interesting articles here. PAT]
From: minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky)
Subject: In Memoriam: Larry Lippman
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1992 04:43:38 GMT
I regret to tell you that Larry Lippman suddenly passed away. (Heart
attack, no warning whatever.)
I never met him myself, but I tremendously appreciated his thoughts
and ideas on this network. It meant a lot to me -- and I'm sure to
hundreds of you, as well -- to feel that if I had any question at all,
about the most exotic chemical (or electronic) issues -- I would
always know a resource to try. Just type a little note, with no
effort, and get a wise reply the next day.
And then no words from him for such a long time that I could not
resist breaking the rules -- as in "True Names" -- of invading another
person's private life. His wife Cindy told me what had happened, and
that he was only 42, and went to college at the age of 12 (as you
might have guessed) and a few things like that.
It isn't fair.
Marvin Minsky
Steve Elias, eli@cisco.com 617 932 5598
[Moderator's Note: We shall miss him. I spoke to him only about two
months ago for two hours one evening on the phone. PAT]
------------------------------
From: sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu (S.E. Williams )
Subject: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage?
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 16:13:54 EST
From several articles in rec.arts.movies:
> Yes. Stone's movie [JFK] claims that the phone service was
> deliberatly put out of commission at 12:34 in D.C the day of the
> assassination to hinder communications. Prime Time Live last night
> pointed this lie out to
...
> So the biggest factual flaw Donaldson could EXTRACT from the Stone
> interview was that people disagree as to what phones were
> working in Washington. I am willing to accept that Stone
> may be wrong on this point.
Does anyone here know in, in fact, telephone service in Washington DC
was out during the Kennedy assasination? Certainly, someone must have
been around to know for sure ...
Sean
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 15:27:01 EST
From: scott@asd.com (Scott Barman)
Subject: Question on New York Telephone's Service Capabilites
I was interested in looking into some option for my home phone. Items
like Caller-ID, Last Call Redial, the service where one has two
numbers on one line (the name will come back to me after I mail this
:-), etc. I called NY Telephone asking about these services and was
told that only the multi-number option was available.
A few days later I was kvetchin' (for a change :-) about the public
utilites on Long Island when the person who I was kvetching to started
telling me why NY Tel can't offer those services. He was telling me
about how technologically behind most of the COs on Long Island are
and that NY Tel would have to do a major overhaul and replace switches
to provide some of these new services.
Is there any truth to this? When I tried to call NY Telephone to ask
for myself, I was transfered until I got the PR department and they
told me all sorts of wonderful things about New York Telephone
(surprise! :-). Having gotten no answers I put the question to the
TELECOM Digest readers: is New York Telephone this bad off?
scott barman scott@asd.com
(I can barely speak for myself, you expect me to speak for my employer??)
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 92 11:27:00 -0800
From: KRUSE_NEIL@tandem.com
Subject: Telecom Jobs For '92 Grads?
What are the job opportunities for someone with a MS in
Telecommunications Management? I have been working in data
communications for the last six years and I am to graduate this
spring. I have had classes in: Telecom Mgt, Advanced Data Comm,
Networks and Switching Systems, Legal and Regulatory Issues, Telecomm
and its Impact on Society, Data Comm Systems, Transmission Systems,
System Management, Systems Security, LANs. I have maintained a 3.80
GPA through out the MS program.
With talk at my present company about layoffs, what am I qualified to
in the telecom world? I started the MS program just for fun, with
little knowledge of what it takes to be marketable in the telecom
area.
So, come on you seasoned professionals, how about some advice on what
it takes to make it in Telecommunications? Do the graduates of '92
have any hope? Where do you see the growth areas? What about working
overseas? Is additional education necessary? I welcome your
responses.
Neil Kruse KRUSE_NEIL@tandem.com
10501 N. Tantau Ave Cupertino, CA 95014
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 20:51 GMT
From: Mike Miller <0004330819@mcimail.com>
Subject: Speakerphone Connection
I have a 107 type speakerphone, the old W.E. style. Can anyone tell
me how to wire this thing up as a monitoring device, instead of using
a buttset.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 08:05:06 -0800
From: peterm@rwing.UUCP (Peter Marshall)
Subject: US West Position in Oregon BBS Case
With an opening brief by sysop-complainant Tony Wagner due 3/3, the
initial US West brief in this Oregon PUC formal complaint case(UC
205)was filed 1/14/92. The following is from this US West brief:
... USWC ... requests this Commission to determine that (1) Mr.
Wagner's BBS service is "not obviously confined to domestic use" of
USWC's network as ... in the company's tariff, and (2) USWC may bill
Mr. Wagner at its business rates for ... lines used in connection with
his BBS services ...
USWC's Tariffs Require that BBS Operators be Charged Business Rates
... Business rates apply at ... residence locations ... whose use ...
is obviously not confined to domestic use ...
This case is one of first impression in Oregon. The issue ... has been
raised in other jurisdictions, but apparently has never been decided
upon by other state commissions ...
USWC's witness testified:
What is anticipated by the company in the term domestic use is that
the use be confined to the subscriber, his immediate family and
members of his household. In other words, a domestic setting ...
Mr. Wagner's active solicitation[of users]is clearly more akin to
business rather than domestic use ... Finally, shareware ... is
available on most BBSs ... Carrying products that people may purchase
is much more similar to business than to domestic use. Whether or not
users actually purchase sharewre appears irrelevant ...
Mr. Wagner provides a service ... he advertises as openly available
... receives and transmits voluminous calls and messages in which he
takes no personal interest and which would be impossible for him to
read ... carries programmers who advertise shareware; and ... admits
there is no effective way to police whether "millions of users" are
offering services for money ...
Mr. Wagner states his case for residence rates by arguing that he does
not profit by or charge users for his services. That may be true, but
one can think of any number of entities properly charged business
rates ... who can make that claim ... It is the nature of Mr.
Wagner's operation as a service advertised and provided to others,
involving information in which he takes no personal interest,
transmitted for others' benefit, that takes his activity out of any
rational definition of domestic use.
Mr. Wagner's Position Undercuts the PUC's Obligation to Set Rates
Based Partially on Network Use ... The voluminous amount of
information ... is clearly not contemplated. Residence rates are ...
an improper vehicle for recovering the costs associated with Mr.
Wagner's use of the network.
Billing BBS Lines at Business Rates Promotes the Goal of Universal
Service ... To promote the goal, basic residence service is billed at
artificially low levels and subsidized by other services ... There is
no evidence that the Legislature intended that BBS service providers
should have their hobby subsidized by other ratepayers. By charging
Mr. Wagner business rates, moreover, USWC enhances its ability to
provide service to true residential users regardless of income level.
Oregon law mandates providing universal access ... with some
correlation between the amount of expected use and the prices to be
charged. Residential rates are set with the ordinary household in
mind, and cover the expected domestic use of that household ... not
... to cover transmission of information ... that is not for the
customer's own benefit.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 22:56:23 EST
From: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Richard Kulawiec)
Subject: The Hazards of Making Unauthorized Calls at Work [humor]
This excerpt from the transcript of a Michigan court case came to me
via a friend at the EPA. The only term that might need explaining is
"NCP", which stands for "national contingency plan".
Rsk
----------
United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Southern
Division
Frank J. Kelly, ex rel, State of Michigan and Michigan Department of
Natural Resources, plaintiffs,
vs.
E.I DuPont De Nemours and Company, Browning-Ferris Industries of Ohio and
Michigan, Inc., and Andrew Stevens.
Civil Action No. 90CV72028DT, Judge Rosen, Volume II
Continuing deposition of GARY HOFFMASTER, a witness called by
Defendant Browning-Ferris Industries, taken before Tamara Staley
Heckaman, Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public, at 4572
South Hagadorn, Suite 1E, East Lansing, Michigan, on Thursday,
December 20, 1990, noticed for the hour of 10:00 a.m.
BY MR. BECK:
Q. Mr. Hoffmaster, I want to go back for just a minute to a few of
the costs on the site. Before I do that I want to establish a
little bit of groundwork. Were the project manager responsible
for the conduct of the RI/FS at this site?
A. Yes, I was the project manager for the conduct of the RI/FS at
Stevens.
Q. That puts you as the person in charge for Michigan DNR of the
specific activity?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you have some familiarity with the national contingency plan
at that time?
A. Yes, some overall familiarity, yes.
Q. Can you explain what the national contingency plan is?
A. Basically it's a document that outlines the responsibilities
and the roles of the Superfund law, CERCLA.
Q. Are you familiar with the phrase consistent with the NCP or
not -- inconsistent with the NCP?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you contemplate the possibility of cost recovery for the
Stevens Landfill expenses at the time RI/FS was going on?
A. Yes.
Q. Was there an attempt on your part to determine that Michigan
DNR would, in fact, incur expenses consistent with the NCP --
A. Yes, I believe so.
Q. -- to facilitate cost recovery?
A. Yes, I believe so.
Q. Going back to Exhibit 12, the category of expenses, I just want
to get down to a couple specific expenses. You've told us that
Exhibit 12 lists, at least up to the time of its preparation, those
expenses for which the State of Michigan is now suing DuPont and
BFI of Ohio and Michigan; is that right?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. One of the categories of expenses that our clients are being sued
for is this miscellaneous expenses category; is that right?
A. Yes, I believe so.
Q. And within that miscellaneous expenses category, Exhibit 16,
those are what the expenses are, that is right?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. So if it's on Exhibit 16 it translates onto Exhibit 12 and it's
part of what we're being sued for?
A. Yes, I believe so.
Q. I want to identify a couple specific things that are on
Exhibit 16, if I could. I'll just mark these. I'm going to
do these together.
(Whereupon Defendant's Deposition Exhibits 24 through 27
marked for identification.)
BY MR BECK:
Q. Mr. Hoffmaster, can you tell me what Exhibits 24, 25, 26, and
27 now are?
A. They appear to be phone bills, phone bill costs incurred from
the Stevens Landfill project, and as the account number appears
it appears that these are costs associated with the RI/FS work
done at Stevens.
Q. So Exhibits 24, 25, 26, and 27 are copies of the actual phone
bills for the trailer at the landfill together with the vouchers
for their payment?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. And these appear to be genuine copies?
A. Yes, they do.
Q. Okay. And the expenses that are set out in these phone bills and
paid through these vouchers are part of the expenses for which the
State of Michigan is suing DuPont and Browning-Ferris Industries
of Ohio and Michigan?
A. Yes, I believe so.
Q. Just to try to determine what some of these expenses are for,
do you see on Exhibit 24 on the fourth page there's some long
distance communications.
A. Yes.
Q. Are you able to identify what any of those numbers are for?
A. I know what the first two numbers -- well, the first number is an
office call back to -- 8166 is my secretary's phone number in Lansing.
Q. Okay. What about these numbers to this 900 exchange, are you able
to identify those?
A. I'm not aware of what the 900 numbers would be to.
Q. These phone call were made in October of 1986; is that correct?
A. That appears to be such, yes.
Q. Let me mark as an exhibit and hand you a magazine which is now
marked as Exhibit 28.
(Whereupon Defendant's Deposition Exhibit 28 marked
for identification.)
BY MR BECK:
Q. Does that appear to be a copy of the October 1986 issue
of Penthouse magazine?
A. It says October 1986, yes.
Q. Can you turn in the inside back cover a couple of pages and
see if there are some phone numbers listed? Right here.
A. Yes, there are several phone numbers listed.
Q. And do you find that any of the phone numbers that are listed
on the inside of the October 1986 issue of Penthouse are some of
the same phone numbers that appear on this bill for the expenses
that you're suing -- that the state is suing BFI of Ohio and
Michigan to recover?
A. That appears to be some of the same numbers, yes.
Q. One of the numbers is 1-900-410-9999; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you tell me what Penthouse says you get when you call
1-900-410-9999?
A. I can't tell you, no.
Q. Does it say, Intimate sexual pleasure of Emmanuelle X?
A. Yes.
Q. The next number is 1-900-410-7000; is that right?
A. yes.
MR. FIRESTONE: Can we go off the record?
MR. BECK: In a few minutes. I want to go ahead and get these on
the record.
MR. FIRESTONE: I just meant -- I think the state would be willing to
stipulate that these costs would not be consistent with the NCP, if
that will speed things up and prevent us from having to leaf through
Penthouse after Penthouse.
MR. BECK: There's only one Penthouse.
BY MR. BECK:
Q. Let's just go ahead and describe what some of these numbers
are for. There is a call on this bill that our clients are being
sued for to 1-900-410-7777?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. And what does Penthouse say that's for?
A. The caption reads, Hypatia Lee -- Sizzling, sultry sex star
of the silver screen.
Q. And 1-900-410-7000, what's that?
A. It says, caption reads, Secret sex techniques - Advice on
how to fulfill your ultimate sexuality.
Q. And then there's one for 1-900-410-3000. Can you tell
us what that call is for according to Penthouse?
A. According to this it says, Forbidden fantasies of Alexis C -
a seductive nymph.
Q. I trust, sir, that you will agree that the, Forbidden fantasies
of Alexis C - a seductive nymph, were probably not consistent
with the NCP?
A. I would not think they would be, no.
MR. BECK: Your witness.
MR. FIRESTONE: Actually I believe it's my witness.
MR. BECK: You can have the witness.
(end of excerpt)
-------------------
rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu Cardiothoracic Imaging Research Center
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #82
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26280;
26 Jan 92 3:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15417
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 01:55:17 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10004
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 01:55:03 -0600
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 01:55:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201260755.AA10004@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #83
TELECOM Digest Sun, 26 Jan 92 01:55:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 83
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Administrivia: Huge Backlog of Messages (TELECOM Moderator)
Hayes Announces Optima 24 and Price Reduction on Optima 96 (Toby Nixon)
Service Record of LD Telecoms (Stan Brown)
Phone Sex Companies Using Clever New Lures (Press-Enterprise; S. Lichter)
Looking for IBM Datacom Consultant (Dan Joffe)
Call Waiting and Voice Mail (P. J. Holsberg)
Annoying Pac*Bell Inside Wire Repair Brochure (Linc Madison)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 01:24:25 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom>
Subject: Administrivia: Huge Backlog of Messages
The past two weeks have seen a huge increase in traffic here, with
over 900 messages last week alone, of which you saw about 200. I had
the incoming queue completely cleaned out as of last Wednesday, and
what greeted me Thursday morning? Merely another 116 messages.
The auto ACK message which goes out on receipt of submissions here
states that only a limited number of messages can be posted. It does
no favors for any of us to be flooded with fifteen issues of the
Digest in one day as happened last Tuesday in an effort to catch up.
And to me, 'catch up' means trying to squeeze in even a third or so of
the mail received. The auto ACK also notes that priority is given to
new, original articles rather than REplies on existing threads, and so
for a few days at least, I won't be running REplies unless they are
quite exceptional and say something of interest to all.
You should also note that the queue was cleaned out forcibly tonight
of over 200 REply messages ... I guess I am a victim of my own success
here with this Digest, and I apologize to all whose messages will not
be included, but my resources here are becoming strained with this
Digest also. Let's see if things slow down a little in the week
ahead.
PAT
------------------------------
From: Toby Nixon <tnixon@hayes.com>
Subject: Hayes Announces Optima 24 and Price Reduction on Optima 96
Date: 24 Jan 92 17:43:17 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA
The following is a news release concerning the introduction of the
Hayes Optima 24 modem, and price reduction on the Optima 96. It is
posted for information only and should not be construed as an
advertisement or offer to sell. I apologize in advance to those who
dislike the tone of the typical high-tech company press release.
Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404
P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15
USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com
-----------------
HAYES MICROCOMPUTER PRODUCTS, INC.
P.O. Box 105203
Atlanta, Georgia 30348
404/840-9200
Fax 404/441-1238 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Angie Ciarloni/Peggy Ballard H-0292
HAYES ANNOUNCES OPTIMA 24
- - - -
Lowers Price on OPTIMA 96 By Approximately 20%
ATLANTA, GA, 20 January 1992 -- Hayes Microcomputer Products,
Inc. today announced immediate availability of Smartmodem OPTIMA 2400
(OPTIMA 24), a cost-effective solution for business and personal
communications that provides CCITT V.42 error-control and V.42 bis data
compression for data throughput up to 9600 bps. Hayes also lowered the
price of Smartmodem OPTIMA 9600 (OPTIMA 96), a CCITT V.32 modem, by
approximately 20 percent.
OPTIMA 24 supports CCITT V.22 bis (2400 bps), CCITT V.22 (1200
bps), as well as industry standards 103 (300 bps) and 212A (1200 bps).
OPTIMA 24 communicates asynchronously and synchronously, as well as
supports Hayes AutoSync, a standard Smartmodem feature that allows the
modem to communicate both asynchronously and synchronously, without using
an SDLC card.
While Hayes does not publish an estimated retail price for
OPTIMA products, both OPTIMA 24 and OPTIMA 96 are available to the
distribution channel at an aggressive price that encourages a market
price well below that of competitive products. The current advertised
price range of OPTIMA 24 is $149 to $199, while the current advertised
price range of OPTIMA 96 is $349 to $429. Prices may vary based on
the level of value-added service a reseller provides to their
customers.
"At Hayes, we believe we should be our own best competitor.
With OPTIMA 24, we reinforce our commitment to providing the latest
technology to all sectors of the communications market," said Hayes
President Dennis C. Hayes. "If you liked the price of OPTIMA 96 in
1991, you'll love the price of both OPTIMA 96 and OPTIMA 24 in 1992.
OPTIMA 24 offers a perfect migration for companies that have
standardized on Smartmodem 2400 and now want data compression and
error-control."
OPTIMA 24 and OPTIMA 96 come bundled with Smartcom EZ
communications software and a special $35 upgrade offer for Smartcom
Exec as well as valuable information services coupons.
Smartcom EZ is a simple-to-use communications software program
that enables users to access PCs and on-line or BBS services. Smartcom
EZ provides easy-to-follow menus and phone book entries to store
frequently called numbers, keyboard macros, extensive on-line help
screens and Autotype, which enables users to transfer text files
effortlessly. Furthermore, the XMODEM protocol allows users to send
or receive data files error-free between locations.
Both OPTIMA 24 and OPTIMA 96 are available in the U.S. and
Canada, and carry a two year limited performance warranty. While
OPTIMA 96 is currently available throughout Latin America, Hayes
anticipates the approval and availability of OPTIMA 24 in Latin
America over the next few months. Europe and Asia availability will
follow as product approvals are received.
Best known as the leader in microcomputer modems, Hayes
develops, supplies and supports computer communications equipment and
software for personal computer and computer communications networks.
The company distributes its products through an international network
of authorized distributors, dealers, mass merchants and original
equipment manufacturers.
------------------------------
From: brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan Brown)
Subject: Service Record of LD Telecoms
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 8:02:45 EST
Today's (24 January) {Wall Street Journal} carries a long analysis
piece on the effects of AT&T's cost cutting on its customer service.
Buried in the article are some interesting statistics from the New
York Public Service Commission.
NYPSC figures for complaints per 100,000 customers
in 1991 in 1990
AT&T .29 .25
MCI 1.82 3.1 [second decimal not given]
Sprint 1.18 2.04
The article is worth looking up and reading for those interested in
the business end of the teleocm industry. There are some fascinating
tidbits in it. For instance, the article quotes a business in
Columbus Ohio that bought an "expensive maintenance contract" from
AT&T. When they called for service, AT&T "subcontracted another
company that didn't know what it was doing." The article said "AT&T
hadn't any specific comment" on this and other complaints, but quoted
Jerre Stead, president of A&T& Business Communcations Systems: "We're
not doing any outside contracting of consequence [except] in some
remote areas of the country." I don't have population statistics to
hand, but I believe Columbus is now the most populous city in the
state; it's certainly in the top three and has been for many years.
Hardly a "remote area".
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA brown@ncoast.org
------------------------------
From: /PN=GLORIA.C.VALLE/O=GTE/PRMD=GTEMAIL/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Date: 25 Jan 92 21:16 UT
Subject: Phone Sex Companies Using Clever New Lures
From {The Riverside Press-Enterprise}, Riverside, California 01/25/92
You pay for the thrills.
Especially if you want to talk about sex on the telephone. As
telephone systems get more sophisticated, businesses that charge
thrill-seeking callers for access to "adult" party liners are thinking
of clever new ways to lure customers.
Debra Wood of Hemet found that out recently when a mysterious $5.00
collect charge appeared on her GTE telephone bill. She hadn't accepted
a collect call.
But Wood's 13 year-old son who is so embarrassed he doesn't want his
name used said he had called an 800 telephone number. Since such calls
are toll-free, Wood was puzzled. "I couldn't understand why I was
charged at collect call rates for an 800 number call."
After some investigation, Wood found that. although that initial
call is tool-free, the only way to get tapped into the sex talk is to
hang up, then accept the charges for a return call, which is billed at
$1 or more per minute.
During the short recorded message reached though the 800 number, a
sultry sexy voice asking if he wants to hear more, what 13-year-old
boy is going to hang up."
And just telling an underage caller to hangup isn't enough under
federal law, said Robert Spangler of the Federal Communications
Commission, which regulates interstate telephone services. Spangler
said, while most adult content phone services operate within the law,
there has been a proliferation of those that attempt to trick
unsuspecting callers into paying for calls.
Legitimate phone services attempt to screen out underage callers by
billing to a credit card, requiring customers to sign up for services
in advance or scrambling their signals, he said.
" The big question when it comes to children is whether the (call)
is obscene or idecent." Spangler explained. "The law prohibits
transmission of obscene or indecent material to children or non
consenting adults. Even if they include information in the tease (the
initial 800 call) that is indecent, they could be prosecuted. Just
telling minors to hang up is not a defense to prosecution."
There have been a recent flurry of complaints to the California
Public Utilities Commission, which regulates telephone services within
the state," she said. "Our gut feeling is this is a new effort to
get people to pay for calls" without realizing it.
Because PDQ Phone, the company that placed the collect call accepted
by Debra Wood's son, is located in Cambridge, Mass., Herbert said it
is not subject to California laws governing such calls. "We run into a
lot of dead ends" in investigating complaints about out-of-state
companies, she said.
In response to questions about the company and the party line calls
PDQ, employee named Alex, who refused to give his last name, declined
comment. A recorded message at another phone number said the company
provides "teleconferencing" service and does not place unsolicited
collect calls. The tape also said the company will block its calls
from a partivular phone number without charge.
Dan Smith, a spokesperson for GTE, said a phone service could make
money by placing the collect calls through an alternative operator
service, charging a multiple of the AT&T rates, then splitting the
difference with the operator service.
Smith said using collect calls may be an attempt to get around the
state and federal regulations that govern 900-number calls. He said
GTE has supported legislation that puts restrictions on adult-content
calls. The company also has won a court decision upholding its right
to refuse to bill for such calls, he said.
--------
Steven H. Lichter GTE Calif. COEI
------------------------------
From: joffe@pilot.njin.net (Dan Joffe)
Subject: Looking for IBM Datacom Consultant
Date: 26 Jan 92 03:53:40 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
We are looking for someone to consult who is quite familiar with
switched and dedicated communications in an IBM environment. Should
be knowledgeable of comm-hdwe and software (e.g. sysgens) for
mainframes, front end processors, communication controllers, cluster
controllers, terminals. Special concentration on comm hardware,
operating in Netview environment. Familiarity with IBM 5822 helpful,
also SNBU.
------------------------------
From: pjh@mccc.edu (P. J. Holsberg)
Subject: Call Waiting and Voice Mail
Organization: The College on the Other Side of U. S. 1
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 03:55:14 GMT
My wife just arranged to have call waiting and voice mail services
added to the phone line she uses for business. The rep told her that
she had to key *70 before each call if she wanted incoming calls to be
transferred to the voice mailbox (if she didn't pick up on them).
She asked if there was some way to program the system to make the
transfer automatic, and he said that there was not. A colleague of my
wife -- who lives in the same town -- has this automatic switching and
-- get this -- doesn't pay the 50 cent premium that the PC charges for
the ability to do the *70!!
How can I get to a rep who knows??
Thanks,
Prof. Peter J. Holsberg Mercer County Community College
Voice: 609-586-4800 Engineering Technology, Computers and Math
FAX: 609-586-6944 1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690
Internet: pjh@mccc.edu Trenton Computer Festival: April 11-12, 1992
[Moderator's Note: There is no way to make it automatic since your
wife has call-waiting and telco will not take it upon themselves to
decide which calls ought to go to voicemail and which ought to be sent
through on call-waiting. If your wife wants all calls arriving to go
to voicemail when the line is in use then the thing to do is not have
call-waiting on the line. By having that option (call-waiting), telco
has to let her decide what she wants done each time, which is why *70
exists on a call by call basis. The rep was 100% correct. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 92 23:10:41 PST
From: linc@tongue1.Berkeley.EDU (Linc Madison)
Subject: Annoying Pac*Bell Inside Wire Repair Brochure
I got an insert in my Pac*Bell bill today, telling me about changes in
the Inside Wire Repair Services (no cute "Service Mark" here),
effective 3/1/92. Brief summary:
Current system:
Residence: $0.50/month if you subscribe, or else flat $65 per visit, but
with a special $35 flat fee for Customer-Provided Equipment
(CPE) Trouble Isolation.
Small business: $1.00/month, or else $65 first hour/ $90 maximum,
same $35 flat fee for CPE Trouble Isolation (?)
New charges, effective 3/1/92:
Residence: $0.60/month, or $45/first 15 minutes, $16 each addl. 15 min.
Small business: $1.00/month, or $55/$16 first/addl. 15 minutes
Now for the REALLY ANNOYING stuff. They're trying to pass this off as
a benefit to the customers!! Assuming you don't pay the monthly
charge, and you call for service that turns out to be a problem with
your CPE, you no longer pay a flat fee of $35!! Instead, you pay a
minimum of $45 with no upper limit! How is this an improvement??
Here are some snippets from their actual text:
"We're adding something new to our repair services. In the past, when
a Pacific Bell technician came to your home or small business
(generally 1 or 2 lines) and found the problem to be in your telephone
equipment, we charged you $35 for what we call "trouble isolation,"
even though we couldn't fix your telephone equipment. This trouble
isolation is now part of Pacific Bell's Inside Wire Repair Services."
*NOW WE'LL ISOLATE THE TROUBLE...*
Whether you choose the "Per Visit" IWRS, or you have Pacific Bell's
"Per Month" IWR Plan, we will isolate your telephone equipment
trouble. If the problem is with the equipment, YOU WILL STILL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR GETTING IT FIXED. - - - - - - - - - - - -
Maybe I'm misreading it, but it sure sounds to me like they're going
to charge me AT LEAST $45 for CPE-TI, instead of the old flat fee of
$35, and telling me that this is a "new service" they're offering me.
Of course, the day I let Pac Bell *touch* my inside wires ...
Linc Madison Linc@Tongue1.Berkeley.EDU
[Moderator's Note: See also the message in an issue of the Digest
Saturday evening entitled "What is a Linebacker?". I think most of
those programs are a ripoff. Inside wires rarely go out of order, and
when they do are easy to fix for most people. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #83
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26500;
26 Jan 92 22:17 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18086
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 20:34:10 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06517
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 20:33:54 -0600
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 20:33:54 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201270233.AA06517@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #84
TELECOM Digest Sun, 26 Jan 92 20:33:51 CST Volume 12 : Issue 84
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage? (David Lesher)
Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage? (Stan Krieger)
Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage? (Eric W. Douglas)
Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage? (Daniel Linder)
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (Jack Winslade)
Re: Reverse Directory Information (Dave Levenson)
Re: What is a Linebacker? (Ken Emery)
Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO (Andy Sherman)
Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (Harold Hallikainen)
Re: Ideas Wanted For A Small Telephone System (Harold Hallikainen)
Dial 1-900-THE-POPE (Stan Brown)
Seeking Yearly Fee Cellular Service (Brad Yearwood)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu>
Subject: Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage?
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 11:36:02 EST
Reply-To: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex
> Does anyone here know in, in fact, telephone service in Washington DC
> was out during the Kennedy assasination? Certainly, someone must have
> been around to know for sure ...
There were problems earlier than that. Several years ago, in the
background side of a story about FTS-2000, {The Washington Post}
discussed the history of FTS.
Seems it came about because during the Cuban Missile Crisis, everyone
was attempting to places calls and at a crucial juncture, JFK could
not get a dial tone!
Now, we've seen the same type of call flood much more recently -- just
go back and review the c.d.t. Archives in the time immediately after
the Word Series earthquake.
wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
[Moderator's Note: I think you meant the WORLD series earthquake. A
'word series' is what I've been having here for a couple weeks now,
complete with flood, etc. :) Yesterday I said 'no more reply messages
for awhile' ... then today I receive zilch new articles and a train
load full of REplies ... so I guess I'll do replies tonight, but if
Monday brings lots of new material, I'll cut off replies again. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 13:56:01 EST
From: stank@cbnewsl.att.com
Subject: Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage?
Organization: Summit NJ
>> Yes. Stone's movie [JFK] claims that the phone service was
>> deliberatly put out of commission at 12:34 in D.C the day of the
>> assassination to hinder communications. Prime Time Live last night
>> pointed this lie out to ...
>> So the biggest factual flaw Donaldson could EXTRACT from the Stone
>> interview was that people disagree as to what phones were
>> working in Washington. I am willing to accept that Stone
>> may be wrong on this point.
> Does anyone here know in, in fact, telephone service in Washington DC
> was out during the Kennedy assasination? Certainly, someone must have
> been around to know for sure ...
I'll answer it this way. With the non-stop TV coverage from Friday
afternoon until after his funeral on Monday, if there was a phone
outage in Washington, DC, it would've been mentioned somewhere along
the line. Nothing about such an outage was ever said on the air at
all, and I was just about glued to a TV set the entire weekend (I was
16 at the time).
Stan Krieger All opinions, advice, or suggestions, even
AT&T UNIX System Laboratories if related to my employment, are my own.
Summit, NJ smk@usl.com
[Moderator's Note: I had a two-part documentary show to be aired about
that time on local TV here which was pre-empted by the JFK thing, and
never was used. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 13:08:38 PST
From: ericd@caticsuf.CSUFresno.EDU (Eric W. Douglas)
Subject: Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage?
sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu (S.E. Williams) writes:
>> Yes. Stone's movie [JFK] claims that the phone service was
>> deliberatly put out of commission at 12:34 in D.C the day of the
>> assassination to hinder communications. Prime Time Live last night
> Does anyone here know in, in fact, telephone service in Washington DC
> was out during the Kennedy assasination? Certainly, someone must have
>been around to know for sure ...
Well I wasn't around (or even born yet :)), but I was watching
NightLine a couple of weeks ago when Sam Donaldson brought up this
same point in an interview with Stone. Donaldson said he himself was
in D.C. at that very time, and made a number of phone calls within the
city, and out of the city. Stone's answer, (paraphrased) was something
like "Well, I did add some things to make the movie flow better".
(again, paraphrased)
Eric W. Douglas Technojock +1 209 897 5785
I'net: ericd@caticsuf.csufresno.edu ericd@csufres.csufresno.edu
AppleLink: STUDIO.D Compuserve: 76170,1472 AOL: EWDOUGLAS
------------------------------
From: dlinder@cse.unl.edu (Daniel Linder)
Subject: Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage?
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 00:06:20 GMT
sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu (S.E. Williams) writes:
> From several articles in rec.arts.movies:
>> Yes. Stone's movie [JFK] claims that the phone service was
>> deliberatly put out of commission at 12:34 in D.C the day of the
>> assassination to hinder communications. Prime Time Live last night
>> pointed this lie out to
>> So the biggest factual flaw Donaldson could EXTRACT from the Stone
>> interview was that people disagree as to what phones were
>> working in Washington. I am willing to accept that Stone
>> may be wrong on this point.
> Does anyone here know in, in fact, telephone service in Washington DC
> was out during the Kennedy assasination? Certainly, someone must have
> been around to know for sure ...
(To start out, I am only 21, so I sure was not using the phone when
Kennedy was shot =) )
Maybe the people who say the phones were out in D.C. were not really
able to call anywhere because so many other people were trying to call
everyone else. I'd assume that the pentagon and nearly every other
government official had some way of making sure that they had a line
or two open for their own private emergency use. Sound plausible?
Dan (Computer Engineering -- not Bell Telephone Engineering ...)
linder@raven.unl.edu University of Nebraska - Lincoln
[Moderator's Note: I do recall the phones here in Chicago were jammed
up all Friday afternoon, with delays of up to five minutes getting
dial tone. Maybe that is what happened in DC also. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 12:04:02 cst
From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
Reply-To: jack.winslade@drbbs.omahug.org
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha
Tony's comments reminded me of something that happened once that I
never did quite figure out. That one evening in 1977 (I think) when
they had the blackout in the NYC area, right after I heard the news
bulletin that all of NYC was dark I tried to call my brother in NYC
from Omaha. His line was busy (the old loud BAAAAAAA - BAAAAAAA -
BAAAAAAA - BAAAAAAA busy signal that was/is used on most of the
electromechanical offices) so I repeated the attempt every so often
until I got through.
Every few times I tried, the distant busy signal would shortly be
replaced by what appeared to be a local busy signal (I was on a #1 ESS
at the time). When this would happen, the busy tones were surrounded
by loud clicks that sounded somewhat like supervision from the far end
or maybe even battery reversal. ({click}BAAAAAAA{click} -
{click}-BAAAAAAA - {click} - {click}BAAAAAAA{click} - THUNK - Beeeeee
- Beeeeee - Beeeee - Beeeeee ...) I made a mental note of it and told
it to one of my phone friends (he didn't really know for sure) and I
kind of forgot about it until now.
My question is ... are there/were there provisions for cutting off a
remote busy tone and replacing it with a local busy tone, particularly
in conditions of high trunk usage ?? I am assuming that everything
from Norway to White Plains was saturated that night and there >would<
be a good reason to free up trunk space ASAP.
This was far before SS7. The circuits then were always the old hissy
analog type and I definitely heard the hiss drop off when the remote
busy tone was replaced with the (local, I guess) ESS type busy tone.
At the time, when a call to NYC from Omaha supervised, there was a
definite click -- more like a CLUNK actually ;-) when the far and was
answered. Were they perhaps quickly turning on and off supervision to
singal to the near end that it should take over the busy signal on its
own??
Comments, anyone ??
Good day.
JSW (jsw@drbbs.omahug.org)
Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.5 DRBBS, Omaha.
------------------------------
From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Reverse Directory Information
Date: 26 Jan 92 06:26:16 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
In article <telecom12.72.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, nin15b0b@lucy.merrimack.edu
(David E. Sheafer) writes:
> Dial 1-900 884-1212 and enter phone number, and it will return the
> name and address that owns the phone number.
> Charges are 1.50 first minute, .75 each aditional minute. I have
> never used this service myself.
I tried this 'service' today. A number on my Caller*ID display looked
curiously familiar ... so I decided to have them look it up. I dialed
the number listed above. After the recording that identifies the
service provider and the rates, it prompted me to dial 1 to use the
service. At that point, it told me to wait for an operator to answer.
Then I heard ring-no-answer for a whole minute. I assume that this
exercise will cost me the advertised $1.50. I know that I received
nothing of value.
Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
[Moderator's Note: That is precisely the result I had a couple days
ago. I applaud them for their courteous opening message, but what
happened to the operator who was supposed to answer? PAT]
------------------------------
From: ken@mizar.tcs.com (Ken Emery)
Subject: Re: What is a Linebacker?
Organization: Teknekron Communications Inc.
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 09:02:21 GMT
In article <telecom12.81.4@eecs.nwu.edu> nha2308@dsachg1.dsac.dla.mil
(Susan B Huntsman) writes:
> What is a Linebacker? It was listed in the optional portion of my
> phone bill. Any help would be appreciated.
> [Moderator's Note: Telco fixes the wires and equipment up to the
> 'demarc' (or place where the wires enter your home) for free. If you
> want work on the wires inside your home or the instruments, telco will
> charge you extra ... quite a lot extra, in fact. $17 per quarter-hour
Here in Pac-Bell land they now want $45 for the first 15 minutes and
$16 for each additional 15 minutes.
[Moderator's Note: IBT also seems to have a fairly liberal interp-
retation of 'demarc' where mutliple-dwelling places are concerned, and
usually handles repairs at their expense up to the actual front door
of your apartment rather than the basement box in a large building. PAT]
------------------------------
From: andys@ulysses.att.com (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 13:11:42 EST
> [ This is referring to a description of how a pulse phone signals
> the CO ] They why is the same technique <pause> <pattern of bits>
> <pause> patented when used in a modem?
It is a totally different signalling technique. With the ordinary CO
switch, DC is the carrier, on which voice is modulated. The
signalling method is to interrupt the carrier. The Heatherington
patent covers how to separate elements of the same data stream into
things to be modulated onto the carrier and commands to control the
equipment.
> As another correspondent wrote, it all depends on whether Hayes
> patent is interpreted broadly or narrowly, and HOW narrowly. If it's
> interpreted to apply only to modems, then the AT command set may be
> freely usable by manufacturers of ISDN adapters.
I thought the AT command set not part of the claims anyway, that it is
the command escape that was covered. Toby?
Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928
READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking!
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 12:52:50 -0800
From: hhallika@nike.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
> FCC is an echo where many of the readers of TELECOM Digest would
> feel at home. As well as the PHONE echo, also gated through the RIME
> BBS network, the latter is usually heavily phone company engineer shop
> talk.
Is there some way those of us without access to Fido can
get a copy of echoes off Fido? Perhaps thru a mailing list?
Harold
[Moderator's Note: Actually, 'not having access to Fido' is sort of a
strange thing to hear. In virtually every community with at least a
few BBS's running, there will be at least one Fido. Are you certain
none of the BBS lines in your town are running Fido, Opus, or TBBS?
Those types are able to use the the Fido mail and echoes. How many
Fido sites are there in the USA now? Thousands probably. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 10:30:18 -0800
From: hhallika@nike.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Ideas Wanted For A Small Telephone System
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
> What I need is ideas on a simple inexpensive phone system to serve
> six people and three or four phone lines with minimal features. It
> will need to support hold, and the receptionist will need to be able
> to answer all incoming calls. There will be no need for
> expandability.
> What do companies usually use for this size phone system? Especially
> companies that have _very_ limited ability to spend cash?
Staying right on top of modern technology, we're using a good
ol' 1A2 key system. We've got two lines, expandable to five (or four
with intercom, though we just yell across the shop). We've got seven
extensions on it. We put it in about 15 years ago and have never had
a failure (not even a light bulb). Old technology, but it still works
great! We do not have a ring generator, so we wired the ringer in
each phone to a different line. This also allows the system to work
when the electric company (or the control unit) dies.
Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@pan.calpoly.edu
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI
------------------------------
From: brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan Brown)
Subject: Dial 1-900-THE-POPE
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 8:00:26 EST
Today's (24 January) {Wall Street Journal} reports that "Global
Telecom Ltd., a start-up in Ventura [CA], this week began offering"
1-900-740-POPE. Callers will hear John Paul II delivering his daily
message in English, transmitted to Global by Vatican Radio. The
messages are the actual voice of the Pope, not a translator.
The calls average two minutes and cost $1.95 a minute. AT&T carries
the service and takes a 40% cut. Global Telecom takes 25%, and the
remainder goes to the Vatican.
Kenneth McEldowney, president of the Consumer Federation of America,
was quoted as saying "900-number lines are generally not successful"
"unless a great deal of money is spent" to promote them.
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA brown@ncoast.org
------------------------------
From: optilink!brad@uunet.uu.net (Brad Yearwood)
Subject: Seeking Yearly Fee Cellular Service
Date: 27 Jan 92 01:20:34 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA
A few months ago, I received a bag-type cellular phone as a gift from
a relative. I have no regular need for cellular phone service, but
see where it could be very nice for highway emergency use. I've seen
two or three situations in the past couple of months where it could
have been useful in speedy reporting of accidents, hazards, or malice.
What I'm looking for is a cellular company which offers a yearly, not
monthly service fee. High air time fees are fine, but I don't want to
hassle with yet another monthly payment if I haven't actually used the
phone.
Does anyone know of a company offering this type of service?
Brad Yearwood {uunet, pyramid}!optilink!brad Petaluma, CA
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #84
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27529;
26 Jan 92 22:57 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03512
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 21:11:10 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11450
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 26 Jan 1992 21:10:39 -0600
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 21:10:39 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201270310.AA11450@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #85
TELECOM Digest Sun, 26 Jan 92 21:10:29 CST Volume 12 : Issue 85
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Michigan Bell Rate Increases (Ken Jongsma)
Phone/Fax/Modem Switching: HELP! Foley
Re: International Local Calling (Jack Decker)
Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities (David Niebuhr)
Re: The Spread of Telepoints (Thomas Farmer)
Re: REN = 0.0 (was Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02) (Mark Cheeseman)
Re: Help: Multi-Line Telephone For the Disabled People (David G. Lewis)
Re: European Phone Jacks - Help Needed (Julian Macassey)
Re: US West Position in Oregon BBS Case (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Michigan Bell Rate Increases
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 92 9:53:16 EST
From: Ken Jongsma <wybbs!ken@sharkey.cc.umich.edu>
As some of you may recall, Michigan Bell was given a great deal of
freedom to set prices without PUC review in exchange for partially
freezing local rates and eliminating unlimited service.
In this morning's paper, there was a legal notice that shows the
beginning results of this new law. As of Feb 1:
Was Now
Operated Assisted Calls .97 1.65
Collect Calls .97 1.65
Time & Charges .97 1.65
Third Party Billing .97 1.65
Credit Card Surcharge .24/.37 .65
Person to Person 1.58 3.00
Busy Verify 1.40
Busy Interrupt .97 2.80
As you can see, Michigan Bell has effectively doubled the price of
nearly all operated assisted services. Shades of deregulated cable TV,
eh?
Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org
Smiths Industries jongsma@benzie.si.com
Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115.1041@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From: Ciaran Foley <cfoley@Bonnie.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Subject: Phone/Fax/Modem Switching: HELP!
Date: 26 Jan 92 18:52:59 GMT
I'm getting a second line put in, and would like to make this
a dedicated data line. One problem: I'm not sure whether I can screen
the types of calls I require to be screened. I believe someone already
posted a similar question, however, my situation tends to be somewhat
different (hardware-wise at least) ...
Ok, here's my expected setup:
2400 baud modem / Fax received/send
answering machine
Now, since the fax machine is on the same card, so I am
unsure as to how to split the modem answering from the fax.
Ideally, I'd like to have the answering machine take messages,
to have a bbs running and to have fax recieving software
running in the background above the bbs.
It's a great deal, I know. Is it possible?
University of California @ Irvine
cfoley@bonnie.ics.uci.edu Ciaran Foley
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 92 14:02:20 CST
From: Jack Decker <Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com>
Subject: Re: International Local Calling
In message <telecom12.71.13@eecs.nwu.edu>, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us
(John R. Levine) writes:
> Is anyone aware of other cases where it is a local call from one
> country to another? I'm pretty sure that happens nowhere else in the
> northeast U.S. How about the town in Washington on a peninsula
> accessible only from British Columbia?
When I was in Vancouver back in the early '80's, Point Roberts
Washington was a local call from Vancouver ... matter of fact, they
were served by BC Tel and you had to use the B.C. area code (604) to
reach there ... BUT I think that may have changed since the AT&T
breakup. It would be very interesting to know just how service is
being provided to that community today.
Other international toll-free calling points that I'm aware of are
Baudette, Minnesota and Rainy River, Ontario; and Sweetgrass, Montana
and Coutts, Alberta. There may be others along the northern border,
but those are the only ones I'm aware of.
(You know you're a phone freak when one of your dream vacations would
be to travel the length of the U.S. - Canada border, checking out the
cross-border calling arrangements in each town you come to!) :-)
As for Pat's speculation:
> [Moderator's Note: I think some areas of Detroit are within the local
> calling area of Windsor, Ontario. I also think Calexico, CA has local
> calling to Mexicali across the border.
I don't know anything about Mexico, but I can assure you that there is
no free calling from ANYWHERE in Michigan to an adjacent border point
in Canada. I live in a place where there surely should be: Sault Ste.
Marie (as you may know, there's a Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan and a
Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, and they are separated by the St. Mary's
River). At one point Bell Canada wanted to provide free cross-border
calling here, and Michigan Bell nixed the plan entirely. But then,
Michigan Bell would take away ALL free calling if the state PSC would
let them!
Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8
[Moderator's Note: A reply from John Covert which got shoved aside in
the backlog a couple days ago also corrected me on the Detroit/Windsor
scene. He said there was no toll-free calling there. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 08:09:30 -0500
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities
In <telecom12.82.3@eecs.nwu.edu> scott@asd.com (Scott Barman) writes:
> I was interested in looking into some option for my home phone. Items
> like Caller-ID, Last Call Redial, the service where one has two
> numbers on one line (the name will come back to me after I mail this
> :-), etc. I called NY Telephone asking about these services and was
> told that only the multi-number option was available.
> A few days later I was kvetchin' (for a change :-) about the public
> utilites on Long Island when the person who I was kvetching to started
> telling me why NY Tel can't offer those services. He was telling me
> about how technologically behind most of the COs on Long Island are
> and that NY Tel would have to do a major overhaul and replace switches
> to provide some of these new services.
As a resident of Long Island I can attest that NYTel is so screwed up
it is less than pathetic. The equipment is a disaster area and the
wires are just now being replaced, slowly.
It sometimes takes weeks to get something done, such as installing a
second line, as I did recently.
The business offices are not able to give a straight answer to
anything but keep referring the caller to some other area.
For an advanced telco, try Rochester Tel & Tel. Forget NYTel. CLASS
service is probably years away due to the stupid Public (read Utility)
Service Commission, a messed up governor and the legislature.
Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093
------------------------------
From: tfarmer@cavebbs.gen.nz (Thomas Farmer)
Subject: Re: The Spread of Telepoints
Organization: The Cave MegaBBS, Public Access Usenet, Wellington, NZ
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 07:39:11 GMT
In article <telecom12.72.5@eecs.nwu.edu> brendan@otc.research.otca.
oz.au writes:
> cmylod@oracle.nl (Colum Mylod) wrote:
>> If memory serves, at least one British trader in these has folded due
>> to massive disinterest from the great public. Are they anywhere else?
> Yes, a very large system is going in Hong Kong right as we speak, with
> three operators. It will be the first *real* test of CT2 due to the
> adherence to the Common Air Interface and the very high population
> density in Hong Kong. The world is waiting to see what will happen
> there.
There was also a trial in Wellington, New Zealand. NZ Telecom were
evaluating it and even though the evaluation period is over, they
still don't know whether that are going to put them up for general
release.
I have one, but never use it. Card phones are generally just as easy.
I have the GPT model which is not very good - the Motorola one I saw
at a product clinic looked a *lot* nicer ...
Cave MegaBBS Datamark International Limited
tfarmer@cavebbs.gen.nz tfarmer@datamark.co.nz
Phone +64-4-499-3832 Phone +64-4-233-8186
------------------------------
From: ycomputr@runx.oz.au (Mark Cheeseman)
Subject: Re: REN = 0.0 (was Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM)
Organization: Your Computer Magazine, Sydney, Australia
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 09:30:29 GMT
In article <telecom12.80.9@eecs.nwu.edu> CRW@ICF.HRB.COM (Craig R.
Watkins) writes:
> Another method was to change the capacitor across the A & F network
> terminals for one half the value. The phone might not ring as loud,
> but you could put two on for "the price of one."
Back in the dim, dark days here in Oz (which ended somewhat more
recently than they did in the US), there was a similar trick, which
involved disconnecting the internal capacitor between the line and
ringer, and connecting it behind the first wall socket. Electrically,
it was in the same place, since the junction between the cap and
ringer was connected to a spare pin on the six pin phone plug used
'round here -- the pin to which the capacitor is connected at the
socket.
The same cap was removed from any other phones on the line (by
removing a convenient link inside the instrument). All phones then get
their ring current through this common capacitor -- I gather that it
was by measuring this capacitance that Telecom (our government PTT)
checked on the number of phones on the line.
Mark Cheeseman, Technical Editor, Your Computer. ycomputr@runxtsa.runx.oz.au
packet: vk2xgk@vk2op.nsw.oz.oc [This space intentionally blank]
Phn: +61 2 693 4143 Fax: +61 2 693 9720 Fido: 3:712/505.15@fidonet.org
------------------------------
From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Help: Multi-Line Telephone For the Disabled People
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 15:41:19 GMT
In article <telecom12.80.1@eecs.nwu.edu> martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.
edu writes:
[deleted discussion of light probes for key telephones]
> Modern business phone systems like the Ericsson MD110 here at
> Oklahoma State present a whole new range of challenges. The MD110 is
> a primarily digital PBX with many of the features of ISDN such as
> Caller ID and a multiplexed data channel.
[deleted discussion of inductive-coupling the digital subscriber line and
decoding the data stream]
Another possibility is to investigate if Ericsson offers a PC card
"terminal", ideally with driver software and an API, for their version
of the digital line off the PBX. I know there are various
manufacturers who offer this type of product for "real" ISDN (q.v. the
recent list of ISDN PC card vendors). This would handle the gruntwork
of low-level decoding and present you with a clean set of messages
that you could handle in whatever way you find appropriate.
In fact, I could see a (granted, small niche) market develop (once
ISDN is more widespread, that is) for products that would provide
terminals customized to various types of impairments. Since the
signaling traffic is all out of band messages, you could interpret
such messages as "turn display lamp two on" to beep a particular tone,
say "lamp two is now on", or whatever you want ...
David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories
david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning
------------------------------
From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: European Phone Jacks - Help Needed
Date: 26 Jan 92 17:57:36 GMT
Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A.
In article <telecom12.81.7@eecs.nwu.edu> gold@ilp.mit.edu writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 81, Message 7 of 9
> I need help with telecommunication adapters for European
> countries. In our department, there are several people that travel to
> Europe regularly to conduct business. We give them a laptop (which
> has a 2400 baud modem).
> Apparently, not only are the phone jack outlets different in Europe,
> but I've been told that each European country has a different type of
> connector.
> Are there adaptors for the phone cable such that we could run
> our phone cable from the modem, through the adaptor, and plug that
> adaptor into the wall in a European country. I would prefer to buy an
> adaptor that is compatible with phone jack outlets in several (if not
> all) European countries (kind of like a Swiss Army Knife).
This is really an FAQ, I even discussed this with someone only
yesterday. Maybe I should make a "Traveller's Modem Kit" (MOTM) and
sell it for a few bucks and retire. But here is the "Radio Shack
Solution". You can make a universal adapter from parts at your local
Radio Shack.
Here is what you need: A line cord with a modular plug on one
end and spade lugs on the other. A pair of aligator (crocodile) clips.
A small phillips and flat blade screwdriver to open foreign jacks and
loosen screws.
The parts list and Radio Shack part numbers are below:
Line cord 25-Ft Modular-to-Spade 279-364
or
Line cord 12-Ft Modular-to-Spade 279-310
Aligator Clips with screw terminals 270-347
Phillps/Flat Screwdriver 64-1950
These part numbers are suggestions. Parts may be purchased at
most electronics stores, even some supermarkets. Total cost should be
no more than $12.00
How to use:
Locate a wall socket or junction block. Open it up. There will
be two wires that carry the phone signals. There may be other wires in
the plug - you won't need them. Locate the two you need, they will
have about 48V DC on them, or will give you dialtone when a phone or
off hook modem is connected across them. Having located the wires
needed, either un-screw the terminals holding the wire down and slip
the line cord spade lugs under and tighten, or attach the aligator
clips to the line cord and clip on the terminals.
So there you have it, a modem/phone connector that works
anywhere in the world -- even U.S. hotels with no modular plugs in the
guest's rooms.
Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 14:49 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: US West Position in Oregon BBS Case
peterm@rwing.UUCP (Peter Marshall) writes:
> Mr. Wagner's Position Undercuts the PUC's Obligation to Set Rates
> Based Partially on Network Use ... The voluminous amount of
> information ... is clearly not contemplated. Residence rates are ...
> an improper vehicle for recovering the costs associated with Mr.
> Wagner's use of the network.
And just what are those costs (of providing delivery of mostly
off-peak calls to his lines)? This presupposes subscription to the
assertion that traffic on existing, otherwise idle, facilities
directly costs the utility. Furthermore, there is no acknowledgement
of the fact that the ORIGINATORS of those calls are paying for them,
increasing revenue to the telco.
> There is no evidence that the Legislature intended that BBS service
> providers should have their hobby subsidized by other ratepayers. By
> charging Mr. Wagner business rates, moreover, USWC enhances its
> ability to provide service to true residential users regardless of
> income level.
This is pure Oscar Meyer meat product. Traffic on those lines costs
the telco nothing. BBSes are called off-peak. Bona fide business users
are the ones who strain the network during peak hours; it is on that
basis that peak capacity is calculated. By charging Mr. Wagner
business rates, USWC enhances something all right: it enhances its
ability to offer the same services for money that Mr. Wagner offers
for free by making him go away.
> Oregon law mandates providing universal access ... with some
> correlation between the amount of expected use and the prices to be
> charged. Residential rates are set with the ordinary household in
> mind, and cover the expected domestic use of that household ... not
> ... to cover transmission of information ... that is not for the
> customer's own benefit.
This is even more nonsense. If quantity is the issue, then how about
specifying quantity in the documents. "Expected use", "reasonable",
"ordinary", are meaningless terms in the enforcement of a contract. If
USWC is claiming a "quantity" issue here, then let us see some
figures. What the hell is "domestic" use? If I call my boss to
discuss some contracts, would USWC insist that my line is now used for
"business"? I personally know of some households that have numerous
lines occupied by teen-agers every evening. Why should those without
children subsidize those who do? How about giving THEM business
service? What is the difference? (Hint: In the case of Mr. Wagner
there is some exchange of meaningful communication.)
And what about a home UUCP site that happens to occasionally carry
pass-through mail?
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #85
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23196;
28 Jan 92 0:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19064
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 27 Jan 1992 22:26:12 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01423
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 27 Jan 1992 22:25:54 -0600
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 22:25:54 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201280425.AA01423@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #86
TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Jan 92 22:25:49 CST Volume 12 : Issue 86
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Operator Management in DA (Andrew Halperin)
Cincinnati Bell Wrinkles (was AT&T Card Number Switchover) (Ralph W. Hyre)
Background Regarding 206 Dialing Change (Scott Mah via David Ptasnik)
Switched 384 kbps Service (Dan Joffe)
Cell Phone Service and Pricing Options in SoCal (Kevin A. Munday)
End of Permissive Dialing to 510 Area Code (R. Kevin Oberman)
Posting Choices: Telecom-priv or Telecom (Dennis G. Rears)
Where is the Telecom FAQ? (dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: afh@cci632.cci.com (Andrew Halperin)
Subject: Operator Management in DA
Organization: Computer Consoles Incorporated
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 19:30:32 GMT
I know this may be a odd group to post this to, but I feel this is the
most relevant one. I am looking for information pertaining to operator
services management over the course of telephony history. Information
of how operators were and are monitored and trained to perform the way
they do and did.
Recently there was a book published called "Voice with a Smile" that
told about operators and their adventures with customers. I would
like information more along the lines of how technology has impacted
the ability of operators accurately and speedily return information.
From peg boards to electronic DA. If you have any information or know
of any published books or contacts I would be extremely interested.
Please e-mail me.
Andrew F. Halperin E-mail: afh@sun111.cci.com
Computer Consoles Incorporated Phone: (716) 482-5000 ext. 2848
Central Reference Systems CRS Lab (716) 654-2711
[Moderator's Note: My neighbor for many years was a lady who retired
from Illinois Bell as an operator after 40 years of service about
1970. She was the first union steward for operators in Chicago back in
the 1930's. In those days (1930's) the supervisors used to tell the
other operators to avoid her because she was considered a 'troublemaker'
for signing up operators with the union. Her co-workers would laugh at
her when she asked them to sign up, saying stuff like, "Nah ... you'll
never organize Bell ... no one will ever organize here." They were
afraid to sign the union card because they feared retaliation by the
management. And the supervisors and chief operators were *tough* old
biddies who had come up through the ranks the hard way themselves;
production standards (number of calls handled per shift) were very
high; pay was mediocre at best; and it was all manual switching, or
moving your arms rapidly the entire shift. The young ladies working in
Traffic today have no idea how easy the job is by comparison. PAT]
------------------------------
From: rhyre@cinoss1.ATT.COM (Ralph W. Hyre)
Subject: Cincinnati Bell Wrinkles (was AT&T Card Number Switchover)
Date: 27 Jan 92 23:16:16 GMT
Reply-To: rhyre@cinoss1.ATT.COM (Ralph W. Hyre)
Organization: AT&T OSS Development, Cincinnati
As usual, AT&T card matters are slightly confusing in Cincinnati Bell
country.
Cincinnati Bell was unaffected by divestiture, and they still issue
AT&T cards, as AT&T's agent in this area of the country. (There is no
CBT 'LEC' card.)
(Their long-distance service is even more bizarre -- I believe they
resell AT&T capacity, but user access for the travel feature is via
950 and 800 number. [this will be the subject of another post.])
A recent complaint by Sprint resulted in Cincinnati Bell customers
being allowed to charge non-AT&T calls to their (presumably Cincinnati
Bell-issued) AT&T calling cards. (AT&T vigorously protested because
it entailed allowing other carriers access to the card number database.)
[source: CBT TeleNews letter.]
Here's the scoop on Cincinnati Bell treatment of AT&T cards: The rep
told me that I could continue to use my 'old' AT&T cards until I moved
or otherwise changed my billing address, at which time I would have to
obtain and use the 'random-digit' cards.
I didn't mention that I already had an AT&T-issued card obtained
directly from AT&T. I may try some experiments this weekend to find
out what I can do.
This must be a billing nightmare for somebody. And I doubt that
anybody has a broad enough picture of the arrangements to understand
all the issues.
[Disclaimer: the above is gleaned from publicly available documents
and converstations with Cincinnati Bell service reps. No information
from within AT&T has been used, even if I had access to any :-)] --
Ralph W. Hyre, Jr.
E-mail: rhyre@cinoss1.att.com Snail: Box 85, Milford OH 45150-0085
Phone: +1 513 629 7288 Radio: N3FGW
------------------------------
From: David Ptasnik <davep@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Background Regarding 206 Dialing Change
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 17:29:12 PDT
Our network manager sent the following explanation out to Computing
and Communications, here at the University of Washington. I liked
Scott's explanation quite a bit, and decided to share it with the
c.d.t readers. If you have any comments or questions about the post,
please send them to me, and I will forward them to Scott.
Dave davep@u.washington.edu
********* Text of forwarded message ********
For your information ...
Why did U S WEST (and other telephone companies) introduce 1 + 206 +
number for long distance calls?
Western Washington has been growing steadily during the past few
years. New technologies have increased demand for telephone numbers.
Fax machines, cellular phones, paging services, custom ringing, and
business telephone systems have all required new numbers.
Traditional office codes (commonly referred to as the prefix -- or
first three digits of a telephone number) take the form NNX (where N
is any digit 2-9 and X is any digit 0-9). These numbers differed from
area codes which always had the second digit as 0 or 1 (such as 206).
Within any area code, there are 640 traditional prefixes possible. In
Western Washington, there are only 12 vacant prefixes remaining. Most
of these remaining prefixes end in a 9 or 0 (such as 240) which make
them incompatible with large business dialing plans utilizing five
digit internal dialing (such as the UW).
To meet the demand for new telephone numbers, and consequently, new
prefixes, U S WEST needed to begin using interchangeable prefixes.
Interchangeable prefixes take the form NXX (where N is any digit 2-9
and X is any digit 0-9). Now the prefix can look like an area code.
For example, your home phone number might be 706-1234. By allowing
the middle digit to be a 0 or 1, there are an additional 160 possible
combinations for new prefixes. U S WEST hopes that this additional
capacity will provide relief for the immediate scarcity of new
telephone numbers.
With interchangeable prefixes, the network must now be able to
determine calls "within" an area code and long distance calls
"outside" an area code. Two approaches are available. The first
option is to require 1 + area code + number for all long distance
calls OUTSIDE your home area code, and only seven-digits for calls
WITHIN your home area code (both local and long distance). The second
option is to require 1 + area code + number for ALL long distance
calls, including long distance calls WITHIN your home area code.
Local calls would remain seven-digits. U S WEST chose the latter.
In Washington State, it is viewed as in the "public interest" to
preserve the 1+ signifying a long distance call. Therefore, U S WEST
and other Washington telephone companies agreed that it would not be
acceptable to allow seven-digit dialing for long distance calls within
206. Individuals unfamiliar with the local calling area may
mistakenly dial a seven-digit number that is actually "long distance."
Effective January 12, long distance calls to numbers within the 206
area code must now be dialed as 1 + 206 + number. This allows the
switching equipment to recognize the new interchangeable codes as an
"prefix" when dialed without a 1 (such as a local call to 706-1234) or
when it is dialed after 1 + 206 (such as a long distance call to
1-206-706-1234). In addition, calls dialed in the form 1-706-number
will be routed as a long distance call to another area code (where 706
is the area code).
Why not introduce a new area code? The scarcity of telephone numbers
is a North American problem. Many areas are facing the same problem
as Western Washington. As a result, we're also quickly running out of
available area codes. There are less than six new area codes
available. Before an area can qualify to receive a new area code, it
must first utilize interchangeable prefixes. This provides the most
efficient use of the few remaining area codes until a major nationwide
change can occur.
The answer to the lack of numbers is coming in 1995. The concept of
interchangeable office codes (prefixes) will be extended to area
codes. Beginning in 1995, "area codes" which traditionally have a 0
or 1 in the middle digit will now resemble traditional prefixes. A
new area code for Western Washington could be 881. The introduction
of interchangeable area codes will provide 640 potential new area
codes in the future. Also starting in 1995, only 1 + area code +
number will used for long distance calls outside of the area. New
standards will eliminate the 1 + number dialing pattern (that's when
Eastern Washington will begin dialing 1 + 509 + number for long
distance calls within their area code 509).
Confusing? In Western Washington: dial the seven-digit number for
local calls and 1 + area code + number for long distance calls. The
actual numbers dialed may be confusing at first, but if you follow
these two rules you'll get to the right place.
One implication for Computing & Communications is that telephone and
computer systems will need to be reprogrammed to accommodate the new
dialing plan and traditional data entry edits will need to be changed
in applications with a telephone number field.
Scott Mah, Telecom Network Services 1-15-92
------------------------------
From: joffe@pilot.njin.net (Dan Joffe)
Subject: Switched 384 kbps Service
Date: 28 Jan 92 02:26:59 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Right up front ... my interest in the matter ... I work for a company
that produces a terminal interface adapter for Switched 384 kbps
service.
AT&T has offered for about a year now a switched data service based on
the primary rate interface (PRI) for ISDN. The physical interface is
a T1 line. Over this, they provide switched 56, 64, and 384 kbps
service. Just send a few information elements down the D-channel to
the network, and you'll have your switched 384 connection set up in
under three seconds.
So far, most of the people who have bought the service are folks like
American Express. They're just interested in it for the calling line
identification in the D channel which allows them to more efficiently
serve their customers. The other large applications which were
envisioned, video conferences and tying bridges and routers with
bandwidth on demand, never seem to have materialized.
The question is ... why? Is it because no one knows about the
service? Is it because of the cost of T1 access? Is it because 56
kbps is fast enough for most people? Is it because the D-channel
charge is $400 per month? Is it because inverse multiplexers can do
the job without the overhead of ISDN?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 10:31 PT
From: "Kevin M." <MUNDAY@DPD.COM>
Subject: Cell Phone Service and Pricing Options in SoCal
Having achieved as much upward mobility as I can stand for the nonce,
I'm finally in the market for cellular phone service. Given that I'm
in that hotbed of telecommunication (chaos) known as Southern
California, I was hoping that I could get some shopping advice from
the members of the group who spend their time in the same collection
of hydrocarbon fumes I do.
I'm interested in the best combo of service + phone + price I can get,
subject to the following:
I'm likely to use the system for > five minutes a day for outgoing
calls (emergency calls, directions, movie times, traffic problems, etc
... as opposed to power scheduling, drive-by meetings, sales calls,
et.al ...), and generally about the same for incoming calls emergency
availability ...).
The system should be relatively man-portable (a bag phone is OK), and
car-friendly (I've got a chicken band (CB) radio that's on
quick-disconnect external power + antenna with a battery pack for
mobile use, and would like to be able to do the same with a phone to
allow for transport and use away from the car).
My general need for coverage is for Orange/Riverside/LA/San Bernardino
Metro county areas, with regular roaming to San Diego, and less
regular to Phoenix/Tucson and Higdonland (South/Mid - Bay area).
Please respond by e-mail, and I'd be happy to post a summary.
Kevin A. Munday @ DPD, Inc. INTERNET: munday@dpd.com
------------------------------
From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov
Subject: End of Permissive Dialing to 510 Area Code
Date: 27 Jan 92 16:17:13 GMT
Effective today, January 27, dialing numbers in the 510 NPA using the
old 415 will no longer be completed. 510 became operational last
September by dividing 415 at San Francisco Bay. All of the old 415
west of the bay remains 415 and all east of the bay is now 510. (That
includes both my home and work numbers.) From the start of 510 until
today, calls to the East Bay could be placed using either 415 or 510.
But, as of today calls to the East Bay must use 510 or they will
receive an intercept message.
I wonder how many private switches still don't know about 510?
R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: oberman1@llnl.gov (510) 422-6955
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: Mon, 27 Jan 92 17:52:25 EST
From: "Dennis G. Rears (FSAC)" <drears@pica.army.mil>
Subject: Posting Choices: Telecom-priv or Telecom
I have moderated the Telecom-priv list for over a year now. The
list started out as an offshoot of the TELECOM Digest due to the
overwhelming submissions about Caller-ID. There are about 500 readers
to this forum. The Telecom-priv Digest is a moderated mailing list
dedicated to dealing with telecom privacy issues. Eventually it will
deal other aspects of how technology affects privacy.
I have received private email from a few individuals requesting that
I talk to Pat about some items that appear in the TELECOM Digest that
they feel should not be there but should be in this forum instead. I
agree with them. I believe that any posts dealing with telecom
privacy rightly belong here and really should not go to the TELECOM
Digest. I believe this for two reasons: this forum (telecom-priv) was
set up for it and the readership is now big enough to support it, and
(2) TELECOM Digest is overwhelmed with submissions; this will enable
both forum to continue to put out high quality and high signal to
noise ratio forums.
I ask all readers of telecom-priv and telecom to post items that
deal with telecom privacy (actually any items dealing with the effect
of technology on privacy) exclusively to telecom-priv@pica.army.mil.
Those items really should now only go to the TELECOM digest if
technical issues are involved or asked for. I ask Pat to forward
without inclusion in the TELECOM Digest items of that nature.
Subscription requests should go to telecom-priv-request@pica.army.mil.
It normally takes up to five days for drop/add requests. Currently
submissions and administrative requests are not ACKed. This will
change shortly.
Dennis
[Moderator's Note: I concur. I don't mind Caller-ID things here which
are news worthy, but the endless string of REplies which always
follows bogs things down here quite a bit. When possible, use the other
forum for Caller-ID and privacy articles, as Dennis has suggested. PAT]
------------------------------
From: dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu
Subject: Where is the Telecom FAQ?
Organization: Hampshire College
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 20:08:26 GMT
Dear Moderator:
Didn't you say something about a new updated FAQ? Was it ever posted?
Is it archived at an ftp site somewhere?
Thanks.
dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu
[Moderator's Note: The latest version is posted in the Telecom
Archives under the name 'frequent.asked.questions'. The Archives is
available using anonymous ftp via lcs.mit.edu. Once connected you
must then 'cd telecom-archives'. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #86
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25045;
28 Jan 92 1:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01331
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 27 Jan 1992 23:41:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21378
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 27 Jan 1992 23:41:01 -0600
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 23:41:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201280541.AA21378@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #87
TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Jan 92 11:40:40 CST Volume 12 : Issue 87
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Calling ATT From a COPT (David B. Whiteman)
Slamming With a New Twist (David B. Whiteman)
Getting the Most For Your Installation Dollar (Doctor Math)
Point Roberts, WA (Carl Moore)
Wilmington (Del.) Directory (Carl Moore)
Yet One More Colored Box (was European Phone Jacks) (Maxime Taksar)
Availability of TELECOM Digest on Fidonet (Charlie Mingo)
Switch Programming Errors (Doctor Math)
Re: Telephony Neophyte Seeks Advice (Harold Hallikainen)
Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage? (Phillip J. Birmingham)
Re: IRS Experiments With Filing by Phone (Barry Margolin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: dbw@crash.cts.com (David B. Whiteman)
Subject: Calling ATT From a COPT
Date: Mon Jan 27 15:36:29 1992
Note: COPT is an abbreviation for a Customer Owned Pay Telephone,
which is a telephone not owned by the local phone company.
There was a representative for some consumer group on a radio show
last night. The topics included COPT and dialing long distance
companies. Apparently some COPT's (as has been well discussed in this
forum) block access to ATT. In addition some COPT's do not forward
10288 directly to ATT. Instead they play the "bong" and hope you dial
a credit card number. They then complete the phone call on their own
network. If you use a credit card that has your own phone number on
it they simply charge it to that phone number -- if your credit card
number does not have your phone number an operator comes on the line
and asks for the phone number that the credit card is linked to.
According to them, COPT's are not required to offer access to ATT or
any other long distance companies until 3/1/92. After that date they
only have to offer AT&T access if you ask for it e.g. if you dial
102880 then wait for an operator and then ask for an AT&T operator;
you can't assume an operator is an AT&T operator unless she says she
is an AT&T operator. You can't assume a "bong" is an AT&T bong unless
you hear the "Thank you for using AT&T message."; regardless if you
dial 10288 first.
They also said the other sure way of getting AT&T from a COPT, or a
hotel phone for that matter is to dial 1 800 CALL ATT, which is their
new 800 number for completing calling card phone calls. If the phone
you are calling from does not allow 800 numbers, then you can call
collect 816 654 6000, and they will help you complete the call on the
AT&T network.
The group on the radio was not affiliated with AT&T, and in fact they
were recommending using other long distance companies unless you are
forced to place a call from a COPT.
[Moderator's Note: COPT is a relatively new term in this group, I
think. COCOT seems to be the term of choice by many/most readers.
Regards the 816-654-8000 number, I wonder what sort of humongous
collect charges AT&T will get on that line, considering all the COCOT
phones and hotel PBXs which will force users to call it by denial of
10288, refusing manual requests for an AT&T operator, denial of 800
connections, etc. I wonder how AT&T could possibly hope to make any
profit from long distance calls they handle routed to them through the
816 'call collect' number; or the 800 number for that matter. PAT]
------------------------------
From: dbw@crash.cts.com (David B. Whiteman)
Subject: Slamming With a New Twist
Date: Mon Jan 27 16:08:31 1992
Three months ago I was slammed by MCI. Since my phone autodials the
10XXX for my long distance company automatically (I have learned that
from reading this Digest) I thought the only problem would be getting
the $5 charge assess by Pac Bell taken off. That was easy. MCI
however charges me $5/month for subscribing to their PrimeTime plan,
which they refuse to take off my bill -- each month they say that they
will do it, but nothing happens. Pac Bell refuses to let me dispute
the charge -- they either direct me to call MCI, or if I complain
loudly I get connected to a supervisor who connects me directly to an
MCI operator who promises to take the charge off and stop the charges
with the Pac Bell operator on the line, and then does nothing.
Furthermore, and I don't know if this is related to the slamming or
not, recently I needed a city code for Japan which was not listed in
the phone book. Dialing 102880 I was given the country code for
Japan, and some cities that are listed without any problem, but when I
asked for the unlisted cities I was told that since I dialled 102880
instead of 00 I would be charged $1.25.
I did not know there was such a charge for codes, and I thought there
was no difference between dialing 10288 0 or 00 if I were an AT&T
customer. Anyway if MCI had not slammed me I would not have been
assessed the $1.25 charge. Actually the charge was not assessed for
another reason: the city I was looking up (Hakone) apparently is a
nickname for a listed city. Given that information AT&T reversed the
$1.25 charge. I think the demarcation occurs when one operator has to
access the AT&T International operator, because he was the one that
knew that Hakone was a nickname for the listed city -- the other
operator then told me there was no $1.25 charge.
[Moderator's Note: The reason there are now charges for obtaining
international directory assistance is the same reason several years
ago we started getting charged for calls to 555-1212. AT&T was
providing all directory service for free, so MCI and Sprint were
telling people to get the information free from AT&T and then use MCI
or Sprint to place the actual call. AT&T got tired of providing free
directory service for the other long distance carriers who were too
cheap to start their own such arrangements. So now we all have to pay
more for our phone service in order for Bill McGowan to maintain the
lifestyle to which he has grown accustomed. PAT]
------------------------------
From: drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math)
Subject: Getting the Most For Your Installation Dollar
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 21:37:29 EST
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department
amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn) writes:
> And my major complaint is with the mandatory "installation charge".
> For features which take a "couple of keystrokes" to turn on, a $30 or
> $40 installation charge seems a bit excessive. They don't even have
> to _visit_ the site. Which is what they claim the installation fee is
> for.
Since you have to pay this charge anyway, get your money's worth. I did.
My installation charges came to $87; for that, I got:
o TWO installers, ALL AFTERNOON (wow!)
o A brand-new SIX PAIR drop (ooh!)
o A brand-new SIX PAIR Network Interface (aah!)
They even let me hook up the drain wire for the foil shields on my
six- pair internal wire to the ground on their side of the network
interface. Sure, $87 is a little high, but I don't feel TOO ripped
off. :-)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 10:18:26 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Point Roberts, WA
The 1982 tape I got some data from had Point Roberts (Washington
state) in the 206 area with operator routine via 604. I don't know
about 604 area code, however.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 14:05:33 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Wilmington (Del.) Directory
I have received the latest directory for Wilmington, Delaware. It's
dated Jan. 1992 thru Dec. 1992. The call guide is not quite up to
date regarding area codes.
The area-code map does show 410 in Md. and 908 in NJ, but not 310 or
510 in California. 706 in Georgia and 210 in Texas are not mentioned
at all (I know they are not in use yet, but 706 is to be fully cut
over by end of 1992). And there are two other references to area 301
which will be obsolete:
1. Federal Bureau of Investigation, on the 265 prefix in Woodlawn,
Md. (suburb of Baltimore)
2. A map showing New Castle County prefixes, plus the nearby ones
which are in some calling areas; one of those nearby prefixes
is Warwick, Md. (755, still displaying area code 301).
(410 is to be fully cut over by end of 1992.)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 02:49:16 -0800
From: mmt@latour.berkeley.edu (Maxime Taksar)
Subject: Yet One More Colored Box (was European Phone Jacks)
In article <telecom12.85.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil
(Julian Macassey) writes:
> This is really an FAQ, I even discussed this with someone only
> yesterday. Maybe I should make a "Traveller's Modem Kit" (MOTM) and
> sell it for a few bucks and retire. But here is the "Radio Shack
> Solution". You can make a universal adapter from parts at your local
> Radio Shack.
> So there you have it, a modem/phone connector that works
> anywhere in the world -- even U.S. hotels with no modular plugs in the
> guest's rooms.
I thought I'd mention that this sort of device is also known as a
'beige box'. It had been more commonly known as 'the box that will
turn a regular phone into a butt set'. I'll leave figuring out why
such a device can be considered an ETF (electronic toll fraud) device
as an excercise to the reader.
Several years ago, on some of the shadier BBSs in the area, 'beige
boxing' was still quite an activity. I'm sure such things as ISDN
will put *this* rather annoying practice out of business (as are locks
on utility closets).
Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS mmt@Berkeley.EDU
------------------------------
From: Charlie.Mingo@p0.f70.n109.z1.FidoNet.Org (Charlie Mingo)
Date: 27 Jan 92 03:23:25
Subject: Availability of TELECOM Digest on Fidonet
> Moderator's Note: Another Fido reader mentioned the same thing and I
> stand corrected. When the Digest first started going to Fido a couple
> years ago, *some* -- not all -- messages were distributed in COMM. I
> am told the entire Digest now goes there in UUCP-TEL. PAT]
There is no "backboned" (nationally distributed) Fido echo
containing the TELECOM Digest. What happens is that a number of Fido
hubs in various parts of the country have gateways to Usenet, and a
certain number of Usenet newsgroups are distributed locally, under
whatever name the local sysop chooses. Distribution is usually
restricted, because the gateway sysop has to pay for the Usenet
connection in the first place, and there is an attempt made to recover
the cost from systems carrying the Usenet echos.
Thus, in the Washington, DC area, the TELECOM Digest is distributed
in a local echo called COMP.DCOM.TELECOM (we find it less confusing to
use the Usenet names). Fifty miles away in Baltimore, the Digest
might be available under another name, or not available at all.
By way of contrast, FCC and COMM are backboned Fido echos,
available throughout North America at no charge under those names. I
suspect there would be a lot of resistance to carrying the TELECOM
Digest as a Fido echo, as (i) it is very heavy volume by Fido
standards, and (ii) it is already nationally distributed by another
network.
All transmission charges in Fidonet are paid for out of the sysops'
own pocket, and the connect charges to a local usenet system are
usually less than the $6/hour for interstate long distance.
------------------------------
From: drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math)
Subject: Switch Programming Errors
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 20:31:24 EST
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department
drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math) writes:
> DREUBEN@EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU (Douglas Scott Reuben) writes:
>> - Cable & Wireless has a nationwide 950 number (available in most
>> major markets nationwide, I believe it is 950-0223), yet in order to
> When I saw this, I considered what great fun it would be to listen to
> their carrier identification recording. After dialing 10223 + 1 + 700-
> 555-4141, I got a very interesting intercept: "The carrier access code
> you dialed must be preceded by the digits 9 5 0. Please hang up and
> try your call again." Okay, fine ... but dialing 950-0223 got me an
> intercept claiming that the number "is not in service". Say what?
Several discussions with various Indiana Bell representatives has
yielded the following answer: My switch has FGB (NOT FGD), and C&W
thus does not offer service to my area for that reason. Which means
that I CANNOT get service from C&W. Period. I have my choice of the
"big three", some outfit from Texas calling themselves DCI, and
possibly a few other small carriers who have decided to risk offering
service to an FGB-compatible switch. Apparently "equal access" means
that you have your choice of carriers that have chosen to serve your
area and does not guarantee you access to the carrier of your choice.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 11:06:37 -0800
From: hhallika@nike.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Telephony Neophyte Seeks Advice
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
> We are in the process of expanding our company and we maintain several
> "distributed offices" at the homes of company principals. I want to
> increase our datacomm capabilities in the near-term in the form of
> several new dial-up modem lines, keeping in mind that at some point we
> will most likely want 56kb leased lines between these offices.
The "56 kb leased lines" reminds me of "3002 local area data
channels". Since these are often just a twisted pair and telcos can
get ISDN to do more than 64 kbps in each direction over a twisted pair
(for some limited distance), can we just order a twisted pair? Does
anyone have a list of all the different kinds of switched and
nonswitched analog and digital circuits available?
> My home is located in an area with underground cabling and I am almost
> certain that there are currently only four wires coming in to the house.
> I presently have two phone lines here. One I use as a voice line shared
> between residence and business, the other I use for the modem on one
> of my in-home workstations to connect my LAN to Usenet.
> If it is, in fact, a reality that the phone company is going to have
> to do some excavation to run additional lines into the house, and they
> are going to charge me through the nose for this, how should I plan
> for my future expansion?
In these situations (actually, when putting anything
underground or inside walls), I like to just put in a piece of plastic
conduit. You can change your mind later or replace failed cable (like
after a lightning strike) without having to dig up the neighborhood.
I've done this in building several radio station transmitter sites.
For an AM directional station, we put three conduits to each tower.
One carries a transmission line to drive the tower; another carries AC
for tower lighting, driving RF contactors, etc.; the third carries
monitor and control cables (including coax for tower current phase
monitoring and a 25 pair cable for RF contactor control and status
monitoring, telephones, etc.).
Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@pan.calpoly.edu
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI
------------------------------
From: birmingh@fnalf.fnal.gov
Subject: Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage?
Date: 27 Jan 92 02:25:43 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
In article <telecom12.82.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu
(S.E. Williams) writes:
> Does anyone here know in, in fact, telephone service in Washington DC
> was out during the Kennedy assasination? Certainly, someone must have
> been around to know for sure ...
I was approximately negative two years old at the time of the
assassination, but I did see the Oliver Stone interview (so I guess
I'm an expert :^).) Sam Donaldson states that he made several calls
into Washington DC at that time. So, we can say that not all telephone
service was out, but that maybe some of it was. Donaldson said that
there was so much incoming phone traffic after the assassination that
lines were clogged in some instances. This makes sense to me.
Phillip J. Birmingham birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov
------------------------------
From: news@Think.COM
Subject: Re: IRS Experiments With Filing by Phone
Date: 27 Jan 1992 01:38:04 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
I saw a report on this on CNN this weekend. Currently it can only be
used for filing 1040EZ forms, and I can't imagine it ever being
expanded beyond 1040A (and I find even that pretty unlikely).
Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp.
barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #87
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27119;
28 Jan 92 2:29 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04085
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 00:43:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11618
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 00:43:11 -0600
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 00:43:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201280643.AA11618@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #88
TELECOM Digest Mon, 28 Jan 92 00:43:07 CST Volume 12 : Issue 88
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Michigan Bell Rate Increases (John Higdon)
Re: 408 Area Code Question (Brian Litzinger)
Re: Tracing Calls, Then and Now (Don Phillips)
Re: European Phone Jacks - Help Needed (Julian Macassey)
Re: Mu-law, A-law (Tom Gray)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Eric Florack)
Re: Info Services: Keep Them Banned! (Eric Florack)
Re: Sample Motorola CLID Chip Wanted (Bernard Rupe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 22:20 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Michigan Bell Rate Increases
Ken Jongsma <wybbs!ken@sharkey.cc.umich.edu> writes:
> As some of you may recall, Michigan Bell was given a great deal of
> freedom to set prices without PUC review in exchange for partially
> freezing local rates and eliminating unlimited service.
[followed by examples of doubling the operator-assisted rates]
These "let us do anything we want and we promise to freeze residential
rates" are a deal with the devil (so to speak). The first wave
involves jacking up the price of little-used services. Then come the
business services. And finally, in a year or two when everyone has
forgotten about the original deal, the telco moans about how residence
is priced WAY BELOW cost and how it must be adjusted so that the telco
can remain competitive. (Sound familiar, Californians?)
The final result is that prices go up at least as high as they would
have otherwise, residence included. How soon we forget that part of
the Great Giveaway of 1989 was the "freezing" of residential rates. In
case you blinked, Pac*Bell has a 50% residential rate increase before
the CPUC. That is rate freezing?
Playing rate games with the telcos is akin to buying a car. To keep
you from actually getting a clear picture, the salesman will shift
from the value of your trade-in to the monthly payment to the interest
rate and then to your "rebate". The telco will tell you that it is
graciously providing residential service below cost by screwing
business and then out of the other side of its mouth whine that it
must jack up residence rates to remain competitive so that it can
continue to woo businesses so that the residential rate can remain
low.
It is pointless to argue from any standpoint related to "costs". The
telco will slice it differently depending upon the audience. Since the
telco does all the accounting (without much scrutiny), only it knows
what is really happening. In essence, (in the words of the old-time TV
show "Outer Limits") it controls the horizontal and it controls the
vertical. It makes the image blurry or sharp depending upon its needs.
Indeed, I know for a fact that Pac*Bell's rate applications are much
more a reflection of what direction the executives wish to take the
company than they are a mitgation of the costs described in the
motion.
> As you can see, Michigan Bell has effectively doubled the price of
> nearly all operated assisted services. Shades of deregulated cable TV,
> eh?
You got that right. The only thing standing between us and telephone
costs run wild is the PUC or its equivalent. Telephone service and
CATV are "cost declining" industries. As the number of subscribers
increase, the cost per subscriber decreases. In addition, technical
and labor costs have sharply declined for the telcos from many fronts.
The plant is easier to install, automation has taken over many
personnel positions, and maintenance is far less costly.
Considering that almost everything Pacific Telesis has touched in its
lifetime has turned to stone, how do you suppose that it has had
nothing but financial banner years since its creation? Could it be
that li'l ole telco that they regularly jack up customer rates on
while operating costs come down? Oh, that we could all be so cursed
having to run a utility "in the public interest"!
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
From: brian@apt.bungi.com (Brian Litzinger)
Subject: Re: 408 Area Code Question
Organization: NoOrg
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 06:57:44 GMT
In article <telecom12.73.11@eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon <john@zygot.
ati.com> writes:
> Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL> writes:
>> Which part of 408 comes under GTE?
> The communities of Los Gatos and Morgan Hill are served by GTE. Gilroy
> is served by Contel and all the rest (in the San Francisco LATA) is
> served by Pac*Bell.
I live in Los Gatos, in the 408 area code, and am served by Pac*Bell.
So are my neighbors. Some of Los Gatos is served by Pac*Bell and some
by GTE.
brian@apt.bungi.com
------------------------------
From: Don Phillips <don@blkhole.resun.com>
Subject: Re: Tracing Calls, Then and Now
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1992 21:07:28 GMT
Organization: Research Unlimited, Escondido, CA
Thanks for the stories, Pat!
They reminded me of an experience that I'd had within the last year or
so with one of the "alternative" LD carriers that involved "tracing" a
call. I may not recall the details exactly, but here is the jist of
what happened.
I was having difficulty trying to establish a modem connection to the
UK via this carrier. If the UK modem was set to answer on the first
ring, I would hear ringing, followed by "fast busy" (re-order?) on my
end. The UK modem would answer and get dial tone. The number of
rings detected before answer would have to be increased to four before
it would work. This made the local connections fail, probably due to
timeouts before negotiating carrier. In the UK, you can't set the
timeout above 60 due to local laws (?) After playing around with all
of the settings that we could think of, I finally on a whim, decided
to try using AT&T to make the call. Sure enough, with the modem set
to answer on the first ring, the call went through first time, every
time.
I called the carrier to turn in a trouble report. The first two
operators that I talked to replied with "we don't guarantee our voice
circuits for modem connections". I said "That's OK. I make between
$800 to $1200 in calls per month using your services. I can fix my
problem by converting to AT&T. I'm sure that they will be happy to
receive the revenue."
Two supervisors later, I finally got the number for their networking
group. After explaining the problem, and duplicating it on the spot,
the representative asked what number the call had been placed from and
noted the time. I asked her if she needed the number called, to which
she replied "No. We can trace the problem down given this
information." The implication to me was that international calls can
be traced without prior setup by mearly knowing the originating number
and time that the call was placed. This implies the existence of
records of the switch traffic, doesn't it? If they have this
information, it shouldn't be too difficult to perform the trace in the
reverse direction, long after the call has been completed.
Oh, yes! The trouble ticket resolution! When she called me back to
close the ticket, she said that "the technicians were unable to locate
any trouble with the calls." The calls "magically" started working at
that point and I haven't had any trouble since. I suppose that they
either found a programming error in one of the switches, or changed
the routing to avoid the switch that was causing the problem.
Don Phillips don@blkhole.resun.com or don%blkhole.resun.com@nosc.mil
Research Unlimited or ...!ncr-sd!blkhole!don
Escondido, Calif. My opinions are just that, and no more.
------------------------------
Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com
Subject: Re: European Phone Jacks - Help Needed
Date: 27 Jan 92 05:55:32 PST (Mon)
From: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey)
On Jan 27 at 0:21, pturner@eng.auburn.edu (Patton M. Turner) writes:
> Julian Macassey suggests using a modular to gator clip cheater cord
> to attach US phones to European and hotel phone jacks.
> BEWARE: A few years ago I did this to connect a FAX machine to a
> hotel phone so I could have an engineer FAX me some as-built plans
> for an OSP construction job. (I had only been given the origional
> prints). Anyway, I was caught by a maid doing this. The hotel
> security officer came up to my room and didn't like what he saw, so
> he called the police.
Yes, I am aware of the dangers, they are worse in foreign
countries where the telco is the Government and the Goernment puts
people in prison for thinking the wrong way. But I was just trying to
explain how to do it. I usually hide my handiwork when I do this
stuff.
Also, many hotels in the U.S. run an alarm circuit through the
second pair and if you disconnect them by removing the phone, or
unscrewing them, security will magically arrive, or you will be billed
for the phone when you check out.
Yours,
Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495
[Moderator's Note: I had a copy of the message Pat Turner sent to you
and was going to use it here, but it somehow got away from me. His
experience apparently was quite bad, with hotel security calling the
local police, and the police finding a lot of telecom equipment he was
using in a construction job quite legally. Apparently there were a lot
of questions asked and he came under much suspicion. If he will resend
the article to me I'll be glad to use it here. PAT]
------------------------------
From: grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray)
Subject: Re: Mu-law, A-law
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 08:29:03 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.
In article <telecom12.78.6@eecs.nwu.edu> HOEQUIST@BNR.CA (C.A.)
writes:
> Cliff Koch writes:
>> So the A/D conversion on a linear scale is a 13 bit number (12 bits
>> plus sign).
> Nah, that would be too easy. The CCITT coding standard (fascicle
> III.4, Recommendation G.711, from the 1988 session, published Geneva
> 1989, for the librarians among us :) say that mu-law uses a 14-bit
> value (13+sign) and A-law uses a 13-bit value (12+sign).
This is the representation of the scales in analog units. There are
indeed about 4000 for A law and 8000 for mu law.
The reason for this is the analog scaling used for the codes. To keep
the SNR constant, both codes scale the size of the encoding unit as
the signal gets larger. Thus a very small signal is encoded using a
very small encoding unit while a large signal is encoded using a
larger unit.
To make this simple, the scale is divided into eight chords. For mu
law the encoding unit doubles in each chord. Thus the encoding unit
for the chord around zero is 128 times smaller than the chord used to
encode the maximum valued signals.
A law is similar but was developed at an earlier time than mu law. It
was decided that it was too difficult and costly to encode the
smallest scale for A law. Thus the first two chords have the the same
step size in A law and the largerst encoding usit is 64 times the
smallest.
This is the reason that there is a difference in the number of bits in
the linear scale for the two systems.
Both systems are satisfactory with mu law providing 6db better
quantizing noise for low level signals.
> When I first saw that, I thought I was misunderstanding someone's
> bureaucratic English, but no: there are tables in the CCITT book, and
> by heaven A-law allows linear input in the range +- 4096, while mu-law
> allows it in the range +- 8159! Anyone who can explain why this is so,
> please do.
As always, the difference reflects sound engineering judgment given
the technology available when each code was devised.
> Another point needing explanation: the same document states in regard
> to A-law, "The character signals [the coded 8-bit values] are obtained
> by inverting the even bits of the signals of column 6 [where the coded
> values corresponding to linear values are given]. Now what is the
> point of inverting bits 0,2,4 and 6??
This is called ADI (alternate digit inversion). It is used for zero
code suppression.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 07:55:54 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) in V12 #76:
> Fact 1: The current ruling is that interexchange carriers which wish
> to interconnect with LECs in a given LATA must have a signaling point
> of presence in that LATA connected to a LEC signaling point in that
> LATA. I don't recall offhand just *who's* ruling that is; I've
> misplaced the scorecard I use to keep track of all the regulatory
> players. I do recall it directly affects SWBT, and don't recall the
> effect on other LECs. This, to my tired memory, implies it may be a
> Texas or Missouri PSC ruling, but I wouldn't come close to swearing to
> it.
It was, to my memory as well, and would seem to serve as a basis for
future rulings ... all of which would now fall in AT&T's favor, since
they were busy establishing such equipment while pressing for just
such a ruling.
>> If the ruling comes down here in AT&T's favor, here, it would seem
>> to require also, that each of the ILDC's also must have an STP in each
>> LATA.
> As I said above, the current ruling implies that every IXC and LEC,
> including AT&T, would have to have an STP pair in every LATA to get
> SS7 signaling interconnection via quad D-links.
And since AT&T already has such equipment up and running in very
nearly the manner demanded by the ruling, we now understand why they
are pressing so hard for keeping it ... it places them in great
advantage ... because while I agree with you that:
> AT&T does not have STP pairs in each and every LATA in the US. How
> many STP pairs we have and where they are is probably proprietary
> information; suffice to say it's more than one and less than 237 or
> however many LATAs there are.
It is certainly far more than the rest of the industry. Moral: You
want to win the game? Make sure you are the one that sets the rules.
>> and since they have been very effective at blocking other companies,
>> be they ILDC's or locals,(RBHC or otherwise) from dealing with STP's
>> in a cost-effective manner.
> I don't understand this comment at all. You're obviously not
> referring to the price of the No.2STP, since I don't think anyone but
> us buys it.
I was talking about the placement of like equipment, not that specific
type.
> What control does AT&T have over the deployment of MCI's, US
> Sprint's, or LEC X's STPs?
Same control as any other comapny that finds it hard to compete on a
fair basis ... the courts.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 08:28:01 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: Re: Info Services: Keep Them Banned!
> [Moderator's Note: Neither is AT&T a monopoly due to government
> regulation any longer. So here is the question back to you: Should
> AT&T be allowed to operate an information or cable system? I say they
> should be allowed to do so since the government took away their
> special status several years ago. PAT]
I disagree , first of all, with your premise that AT&T is no longer a
monopoly. While their special status, as you put it has been reduced
it's monopolistic attitude and practices are far from having been
eliminated.
But the question was, as I understood it, for or against LEC's dealing
in cable or what have you. That, I have great objection to. My
objection is somewhat less on your question of AT&T, since there is
(at least /some/) competition.
------------------------------
From: rupe@rtsg.mot.com (Bernard Rupe)
Subject: Re: Sample Motorola CLID Chip Wanted
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 15:32:06 GMT
nyarko@ee.ualberta.ca (David Nyarko) writes:
> I would like to know how to obtain a sample of the Motorola CLID chip
> together with any application notes. Is there a 1-800 number one can
> call?
The Motorola Semiconductor sales & product information number is 800 521 6274.
Bernie Rupe 1501 W. Shure Drive Room 1315
Motorola, Inc. Arlington Heights, IL 60004
Cellular Infrastructure Group +1 708 632 2814 rupe@rtsg.mot.com
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #88
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07749;
28 Jan 92 6:32 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22569
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 04:40:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28393
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 04:40:04 -0600
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 04:40:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201281040.AA28393@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #89
TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Jan 92 04:40:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 89
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO (Ken Emery)
Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO (Toby Nixon)
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (TSgt.` Keith Fichtemaier)
Re: Foiling Drug Dealers Use of Payphones (Robert S. Helfman)
Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (Mark Slagle)
Re: Michigan Public Service Commission Notice (Fred R. Goldstein)
Re: What is a Linebacker? (Dell H. Ellison)
Re: Speakerphone Connection (Macy Hallock)
AT&T Credit Card Numbers (Chris Schmandt)
Most expensive 900 call? (Robert J Woodhead)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ken@mizar.tcs.com (Ken Emery)
Subject: Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO
Organization: Teknekron Communications Inc.
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 03:26:30 GMT
In article <telecom12.84.8@eecs.nwu.edu> andys@ulysses.att.com (Andy
Sherman) writes:
>> [ This is referring to a description of how a pulse phone signals
>> the CO ] They why is the same technique <pause> <pattern of bits>
>> <pause> patented when used in a modem?
> It is a totally different signalling technique. With the ordinary CO
> switch, DC is the carrier, on which voice is modulated. The
> signalling method is to interrupt the carrier. The Heatherington
> patent covers how to separate elements of the same data stream into
> things to be modulated onto the carrier and commands to control the
> equipment.
>> As another correspondent wrote, it all depends on whether Hayes
>> patent is interpreted broadly or narrowly, and HOW narrowly. If it's
>> interpreted to apply only to modems, then the AT command set may be
>> freely usable by manufacturers of ISDN adapters.
> I thought the AT command set not part of the claims anyway, that it is
> the command escape that was covered. Toby?
Having done a microcontroller for a modem we had to examine the
Heatherington patent. It only covers the sequence used to place the
modem in command mode from data mode. This means from accepting data
(such as interactive or file transfer) and then switching to a mode
(command or AT) where data from the local terminal is interpreted as
commands to configure the modem. The sequence covered in the patent
is space (no data for one second) +++ space (no data for one second.
The "A" is used to determine the speed at which chatacters are being
sent (auto bauding) and the "T" is used to figure out the parity.
Note: The are other combinations besides "AT" which would work to
detect the speed at which characters are being sent to the modem. The
trick is to have the first character (the "A" in this case) have at
least four zero bits in row. In this way it is not possible for the
modem to misdetect the speed at which characters are being sent.
If there is enough interest I can go into more detail about how this
is done.
Bye,
ken emery internet: ken@tcs.com
------------------------------
From: Toby Nixon <tnixon@hayes.com>
Subject: Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO
Date: 28 Jan 92 01:17:06 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA
In article <telecom12.84.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, andys@ulysses.att.com (Andy
Sherman) writes:
>> As another correspondent wrote, it all depends on whether Hayes
>> patent is interpreted broadly or narrowly, and HOW narrowly. If it's
>> interpreted to apply only to modems, then the AT command set may be
>> freely usable by manufacturers of ISDN adapters.
> I thought the AT command set not part of the claims anyway, that it is
> the command escape that was covered. Toby?
The Heatherington patent on "modem with improved escape sequence"
applies specifically to the <pause> +++ <pause> and not to any other
part of the command set. Really, it applies to the <pause>s; the
"+++" by itself was first patented by Eaton (Bizcomp), but this was
found to be invalid due to prior art.
Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404
P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15
USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com
------------------------------
From: kfichtem@wrdis01.af.mil (TSgt Keith Fichtemaier)
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Date: 27 Jan 92 18:02:20 GMT
Years ago, I cancelled my MCI card over a billing dispute and since
have not had any card. This past summer while on vacation, I needed
to make some calls from a payphone and bill them to my home phone
number. I dialed 0-number and got "bong A T and T". The operator,
while courteous, absolutely refused to connect me unless there was
someone at my home to verify the charge.
I fumed for a few moments, then dialed 10222-0-number and got an MCI
operator. He too was courteous, but said without someone at my home
... I told him I had an answering machine with my voice on it he could
use as verification. He persisted, but I could tell I was was having
an effect. I mentioned I was an MCI dial 1 customer and finding it
harder and harder to resist all those calls from AT&T. That did it.
He listened to my answering machine, said it sounded like me, and
connected me. I had no troubles with the other few calls I had to
make, even with other operators.
Keith Fichtemaier
------------------------------
From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Foiling Drug Dealers Use of Payphones
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 20:56:12 GMT
In article <telecom12.81.3@eecs.nwu.edu> andrew@jester.USask.ca
writes:
> In Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Canada, the people's telephone company,
> SaskTel, has somehow configured all the payphones in town (at least
> all the ones that I tried) so they will not accept calls!
> I asked my contacts within the phone company why this was done. I was
> told that it was in response to mall owners requests to prevent the
> kids that hang out in malls from receiving calls and tying up the
> phones. I doubt this explanation since you also cannot dial payphones
> located in booths on street corners located away from malls.
> I suspect it is actually a method to prevent drug dealers and buyers
> from using payphones to arrange drug deals.
This is commonly done here in Los Angeles. Many pay phones are marked
with a notice "Outgoing Calls Only". It is usually done specifically
when small-time street dealers start using the phones to receive
orders. It has been done on request of the owners of the property
where the phone is located; sometimes the police have made the request
themselves. Sometimes, the phone company will make only one of the
phones in a cluster of three or four be usable for incoming calls.
That way, everyone else can still make their regular outgoing calls
while the dealer will have to use just one phone.
------------------------------
From: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com (Mark Slagle)
Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM
Reply-To: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co., Sunnyvale, Ca.
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 23:07:05 GMT
Of course you could always disconnect the bells from one of the units
in the main household to compensate for an illicit installation in a
remote area. That way, for example, if you were paying for service in
the kitchen and living room you could disconnect the ringer on one of
them and still hear the other while having a phone with bell in the
basement/laundry/garage or such. This was, I believe, a common
practice.
Mark PO Box 61059
slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com Sunnyvale, CA 94088
408-756-0895 USA
------------------------------
From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Michigan Public Service Commission Notice
Date: 27 Jan 92 22:26:45 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
In article <telecom12.73.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com
(Jack Decker) writes ...
> Under the provisions of the Michigan Telecommunications Act, 1991
> PA 179 (Act 179), the Michigan Public Service Commission is initiating
> a proceeding to determine whether coin-operated telephones,
> direct-inward dialing, and touch-tone service are essential to the
> public health, safety, or general welfare and should be regulated
> under Act 179. Act 179 gives the Commission 90 days from January 1,
> 1992 to determine the appropriate regulation, if any, of these
> services.
> ...I can understand why they'd be asking for comment on
> coin-operated telephones and touch-tone service. What puzzles me is
> the part about direct-inward dialing ... what is so special about that
> feature that it would be the object of specific inquiry?
Both touch-tone and DID are monopoly services adjunct to the monopoly
provision of local exchange service. Thus the usual theory of
regulation, that there is no competition, applies to both. So an RBOC
free of regulation can use "profit maximization" for pricing.
In the case of touch-tone, I'd expect _higher_, not lower, prices to
accrue from deregulation. After all, it's "free money", and most
people buy it anyway. DID is more serious: It's vital to most modern
business telecomm. We don't hire banks of operators to answer
incoming calls any more. But DID is an inherent and bundled feature
of Centrex. Raise the price of DID to a PBX and Centrex looks better.
That's a reason why a telco might gouge. Centrex is competitive, but
DID -- the alternative -- is not.
Michigan business telephone users should be on the alert!
Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com
or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274
Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.
------------------------------
From: ellisond@rtsg.mot.com (Dell H. Ellison)
Subject: Re: What is a Linebacker?
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 17:30:19 GMT
> [Moderator's Note: IBT also seems to have a fairly liberal interp-
> retation of 'demarc' where mutliple-dwelling places are concerned, and
> usually handles repairs at their expense up to the actual front door
> of your apartment rather than the basement box in a large building. PAT]
However, wouldn't you think that the apartment owners are responsible
for repairs of wiring inside your apartment?
Dell H. Ellison ...!uunet!mcdchg!motcid!ellisond Motorola, Inc.
[Moderator's Note: Not really, since if the apartment is leased, then
it really is no longer under the control of the owner, but rather,
that of the 'temporary owner'. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 92 10:55 EST
From: fmsys!macy@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: Speakerphone Connection
Organization: The Matrix
[A request is made for information on connecting a 107 speakerphone.]
An old 107A WE Spokesman or a ITT 107A Orator, I presume? These are a
one way audio amplifier/speaker. The intended use was to let others
in the room hear a telephone conversation conducted with the normal
handset.
The WE unit uses a decent transformer for isolation/audio coupling,
the ITT uses caps. The WE is the better (heavier ...) unit. Every
telecom professional dealing in analog line troubleshooting has one of
these lying around that is setup for line monitoring ... great for
waiting for the intermittent line problem to show up once again.
The easiest way to set one up for monitoring:
There are four terminals, usually connected to a fourwire
basecord:
Green - Audio Tip
Red - Audio Ring
Black - 18VAC Power
Yellow- 18VAC Power
Use a small 12VAC to 20VAC transformer for power. DC is OK, too.
These were intended to be connected to a telephone set direct,
normally accross the reciver element directly, to control local
sidetone and feedback.
To use as a phone line monitor, attached directly accross the phone
line:
Connect a paper, non polar .47 to 2.0 mf capacitor in series with each
side of the audio, be sure they are at least 150 volt rated to be able
to withstand ring voltages. These are usually yellow and cylindrical
... and Radio Shack does not carry them. Best found at surplus
electronics stores and hamfests for around $1.00 each.
(Radio Shack may have some other type of non-polar crossover type
capacitor, but the voltage rating is not high enough to withstand
ringing. Another solution is to use series connected ceramic caps,
with the polarity of one reversed ...)
Some people connect a 2.2kohm .5 watt resistor in series with each cap
to minimize audio loss:
Bad ascii drawing follows:
Tip ---- Resistor --- Cap --- Green to 107A
Ring --- Resistor --- Cap --- Red to 107A
Its possible to use only one set of components on only one side of the
line and get good results. Since I was always taught to use balanced
audio when I worked for the Phone Company I use two sets ...
With a little work, you can put the extra components inside the case,
then strip back some insulation on the base cord, put small alligator
clips on the Red/Green and you have an audio monitor test set for your
phone system.
BTW, I often see 107's at hamfests for around $5-7. They are
available new from ITT/Cortelco for around $30. Radio Shack's general
purpose battery powered audio amplifier (in a gray palm size case) can
be adapted for phone line montoring in much the same way, but you need
not use resistor/caps on both sides of the input.
Works great ... until your sister finds out you are listening to her
calls ... (that's what I first used them for back in '67) Now I only
use 107's for more honorable pursuits ... I are a telecom engineering
professional [grin] ...
I'm also proud to say I still use that first 107 from back in '67 to
this day ... guess that makes me a cheap telecom professional, too.
Regards,
]Macy M Hallock Jr N8OBG 216.725.4764 macy@fmsystm.uucp macy@fmsystm.ncoast.org
[No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you]
------------------------------
From: geek@media.mit.edu (Chris Schmandt)
Subject: AT&T Credit Card Numbers
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 05:06:05 GMT
Recent postings have again gotten me confused. Can someone enlighten
me?
(I use AT&T for long distance service). Many months ago I got a new
AT&T card with the random digits. I soon realized I had no interest
in learning yet another number, so switched back to the old number. I
use the new card in some card reader phones. Only under great duress
will I place a non-AT&T long distance call.
I've thrown away several mailings from NETel about how I can get an
NETel card which preserves my phone-number based card. It seems I
don't need it, right?
So have I missed something? I presumed that AT&T switched numbers
either because the MFJ said they had to or they wanted to sheild their
card database from alternate carriers, but they can still bill to the
old number. My card calls still appear itemized under AT&T on my
bill, but I would not care if they appeared (at the same rates!) under
the NETel part of my bill.
So is the LEC just trying to get me to use their card to get a cut on
the LD revenue? Or will I find one day that my old number no longer
works on AT&T?
Thanks, chris
------------------------------
From: trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Most Expensive 900 Call?
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 06:00:57 GMT
Whilst paging through the back of the latest issue of SPY magazine
I came across the following classified:
LIVE PSYCHICS
Brilliant,
well known
psychics are
now available
to speak with
you privately
1 ON 1
Call 24 Hours
All Calls
Confidential!
1-900-820-2468
ADULTS ONLY (fine print) Only $2.50/.5 min.
^
|
Note strategic placement of decimal point
That's right, this line charges $300 per hour! Personally, I'd
only pay $300 an hour if I could speak to DEAD Psychics, but...
Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #89
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09200;
28 Jan 92 7:16 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29011
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 05:25:33 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31716
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 05:25:15 -0600
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 05:25:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201281125.AA31716@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #90
TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Jan 92 05:25:06 CST Volume 12 : Issue 90
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing (John Rice)
Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Colin Plumb)
Re: Call Waiting and Voice Mail (Pete Holsberg)
Re: Digital Cellular Telephony (Phil Karn)
Re: Slamming With a New Twist (Michael Ho)
Re: Dial 1-900-THE-POPE (Barton F. Bruce)
Re: 408 Area Code Question (John Higdon)
510 Cutover Not Yet Done (Linc Madison)
Telco Sexual Discrimination (Ron Dippold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Subject: Re: Listening to the Called Phone Ringing
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 14:50:38 GMT
In article <telecom12.84.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, Jack.Winslade@ivgate.
omahug.org (Jack Winslade) writes:
> Tony's comments reminded me of something that happened once that I
> never did quite figure out. That one evening in 1977 (I think) when
> they had the blackout in the NYC area, right after I heard the news
> bulletin that all of NYC was dark I tried to call my brother in NYC
> from Omaha. His line was busy (the old loud BAAAAAAA - BAAAAAAA -
> BAAAAAAA - BAAAAAAA busy signal that was/is used on most of the
> electromechanical offices) so I repeated the attempt every so often
> until I got through.
There may be some confusion here regarding what constitutes a
"busy" signal. In most cases, "subscriber busy" (60IPM) is generated
in the terminating C.O. It may or may not be in synch with the ringing
sent to the terminating phone.
There is another type of busy "trunk busy" (120IPM) which may be
generated either in the local exchange, or in an intermediate toll
switch, depending on where the trunk congestion occurs. In the case of
the NYC blackout, probably most toll calls placed to NYC were
experiencing "trunk busy" as incoming toll circuits to NYC were
overloaded for most of that evening and into the next morning.
John Rice K9IJ rice@ttd.teradyne.com
------------------------------
From: colin@array.uucp (Colin Plumb)
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1992 17:17:27 -0500
Organization: Array Systems Computing, Inc., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA
In article <telecom12.46.6@eecs.nwu.edu> strieterd@gtephx.UUCP (Dave
Strieter) writes:
> Several Digest readers have commented that it is cheaper for the telco
> to provide DTMF than rotary pulse dialing, but I fail to understand
> how they come to that conclusion. I can't speak for the 5ESS or
> DMS-100, but on the GTD-5 dial pulses are counted by software which
> monitors the output of an opto-coupler device connected to each line,
> whereas DTMF tones must be decoded by a more-expensive circuit which
> feeds the decoded digits to the software. How does "more expensive" =
> "costs less"?
My understanding was that, when one goes off hook, one is connected to
a thing called an "originating register" which generates dial tone,
detects pulses/tones, and accumulates the number. And I understood
that every OR made in the last N years has accepted both, and so the
fact that tones resulted in faster dialing and thus made less use of
this piece of hardware allowed the telco to have fewer in the switch
-- making savings. (As well as tying up other parts of the switching
matrix less during the non-billable dialing period, but I don't know
how worthwhile that is.)
Now, if the GTD-5 can generate dial tone and silence cheaply (pretty
easy with digital switching -- everybody's codec gets the same bits),
and polls the off-hook detector fast enough it can track dialing, and
buffers to hold half-dialed numbers aren't expensive (with memory
prices these days, I doubt it), then I guess it *is* cheaper. Well,
all I can say is, good work!
Colin
------------------------------
From: pjh@mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg)
Subject: Re: Call Waiting and Voice Mail
Organization: The College On The Other Side Of Route One
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 03:29:15 GMT
In article <telecom12.83.6@eecs.nwu.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (P. J. Holsberg)
writes:
> My wife just arranged to have call waiting and voice mail services
> added to the phone line she uses for business. The rep told her that
> she had to key *70 before each call if she wanted incoming calls to be
> transferred to the voice mailbox (if she didn't pick up on them).
> She asked if there was some way to program the system to make the
> transfer automatic, and he said that there was not. A colleague of my
> wife -- who lives in the same town -- has this automatic switching and
> -- get this -- doesn't pay the 50 cent premium that the PC charges for
> the ability to do the *70!!
> [Moderator's Note: There is no way to make it automatic since your
> wife has call-waiting and telco will not take it upon themselves to
> decide which calls ought to go to voicemail and which ought to be sent
> through on call-waiting. If your wife wants all calls arriving to go
> to voicemail when the line is in use then the thing to do is not have
> call-waiting on the line. By having that option (call-waiting), telco
> has to let her decide what she wants done each time, which is why *70
> exists on a call by call basis. The rep was 100% correct. PAT]
That means that when someone calls and one of us answers, there is no
way to enable "redirection," right? I think the answer is to dump call
waiting and find a device that will flash a lamp if there are messages
in the voice mailbox.
Prof. Peter J. Holsberg Mercer County Community College
Voice: 609-586-4800 Engineering Technology, Computers and Math
FAX: 609-586-6944 1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690
Internet: pjh@mccc.edu Trenton Computer Festival: April 11-12, 1992
[Moderator's Note: The 'stutter dial-tone' which is present after a
message is left in voicemail is the indicator, but of course you have
to go off hook and listen for it, an extra step that a message waiting
lamp would indicate if it worked that way in residential service; but
I don't think it does anywhere without some modifications not part of
the standard voicemail package from telco. What you term 'redirection'
is not possible; once the call has been answered, there is no way to,
for example, flash the hook and send it on to voicemail. Even though
voicemail is set up to 'forward on busy', your line is never truly
busy when call-waiting is on the line, unless call-waiting has been
disabled on a call-by-call basis with *70. PAT]
------------------------------
From: karn@chicago.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Telephony
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 03:51:45 GMT
I just found another published reference on the Qualcomm CDMA system.
It's called "Mobile Power Control for CDMA" by Klein S. Gilhousen, and
it appears in the January 1992 issue of Communications magazine.
It describes the mobile's power control system in pretty good detail.
There are two components, open loop and closed loop, with the former
doing most of the work. The mobile simply varies its reverse link
transmitter power in inverse proportion to the total energy received
on the forward link. The nominal transmit power in dBm is -73dBm^2
minus the received power in dBm. ("Reverse link" == mobile-to-cell,
"forward link" == cell-to-mobile.) Various constants are added to the
nominal -73 dBm^2 figure for each cell to account for differing cell
transmit powers, etc.
Multipath fading tends to be very frequency selective, so in a
narrowband system like TDMA or AMPS it's quite common to be in a
complete null on, say, the reverse link frequency while you're hearing
the forward link just fine. (It's easy to see this frequency-selective
phenomena on on a spectrum analyzer when you ride around town -- you
see little comb notch filters running around the spectrum.) But CDMA
is a broadband system, so it's quite rare for multipath to take out an
entire 1.25 MHz signal. So the forward and reverse links are much more
closely correlated in CDMA than they are in a narrowband system like
TDMA or AMPS. This is what makes open loop power control so highly
effective in CDMA, but not TDMA or AMPS.
But even in CDMA you sometimes have assymetrical paths; e.g., the
noise level at the mobile might be different than at the cell, or
despite the wide signal, there might be a multipath fade that affects
one link more than the other. By itself, open loop power control
brings the reverse link to within about 6 dB of the desired level at
the cell, but this isn't good enough.
Finer control is achieved with a closed-loop mechanism whereby the
cell site measures the signal-to-noise ratio of the mobile and tells
it (via a bit inserted into the forward data link) to adjust power up
or down. It does this at 1.25 ms intervals (800 Hz); each step is
nominally 0.5 dB, so the closed loop mechanism can slew at +/- 400
dB/sec. When the desired power is achieved, the closed loop bit stream
simply consists of alternating 0 and 1 bits. I.e., it's just "delta
modulation". The total closed-loop correction is typically limited to
+/- 24 dB.
The power control bits are sent by simply "puncturing" the forward
data stream, i.e., sending a power control bit in place of the
original data bit. The user data stream is not signficantly affected,
however, because it has already been interleaved and convolutionally
encoded; the Viterbi decoder at the receiver can easily regenerate the
original data stream without additional errors.
Using delta-modulation for the power control bits has a nice side
benefit: resistance to errors. The power control bits cannot be error
protected along with the user data because the extra delay would be
intolerable. But due to the inherent robustness of the delta-modulated
control loop, even a high error rate in the power control bits simply
causes the loop to take a little longer to arrive at the correct power
level. In actual field tests, the average difference between actual
and desired SNR at the cell site was essentially zero, with a standard
deviation of about 1.5 dB.
All in all, the CDMA power control scheme is simple, elegant and quite
effective, as shown in our recent field tests. In the beginning, all
of CDMA's critics seemed to go right for the power control issue, but
no longer ...
Phil
------------------------------
From: ho@hoss.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...)
Subject: Re: Slamming With a New Twist
Organization: A Figment of Your Imagination
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 06:15:37 GMT
dbw@crash.cts.com (David B. Whiteman) writes:
> Furthermore, and I don't know if this is related to the slamming or
> not, recently I needed a city code for Japan which was not listed in
> the phone book. ... [AT&T charges $1.25, then relents]
> [Moderator's Note: The reason there are now charges for obtaining
> international directory assistance is the same reason several years
> ago we started getting charged for calls to 555-1212. ...
Call me crazy, but I see Mr. Whiteman's request as analogous to a
request for an area code, not directory assistance.
If I want to know the number for Mr. X in Benkelman, Nebraska, I call
555-1212 in his area code, and get charged 60 cents. But if I didn't
know his area code in the first place, I call the operator and ask,
and (presumably) get charged nothing.
Seems to me that charging $1.25 to find out that the city code for
Hopfsenburg is 283 would be similar to charging 30 cents to find out
that Benkelman's area code is 308 ... and at the moment, I know of no
carrier that assesses such a charge.
Michael Ho | UNTIL JAN. 20, sysmgrs willing: Internet:ho@hoss.unl.edu
[Moderator's Note: The difference may be if some foreign town is
located in the international routing tables available here, or if the
operator must call the 'inward operator' in the other country to ask
for advice on some obscure village or town not otherwise listed in the
tables here. There are quite a few of those. PAT]
------------------------------
From: bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce)
Subject: Re: Dial 1-900-THE-POPE
Date: 28 Jan 92 01:44:40 EST
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
In article <telecom12.84.11@eecs.nwu.edu>, brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan
Brown) writes:
> 1-900-740-POPE. Callers will hear John Paul II delivering his daily
> message in English, transmitted to Global by Vatican Radio. The
> messages are the actual voice of the Pope, not a translator.
One then wonders what the Vatican's position would be on someone
recording and replaying such messages. Would a church claim copyright
protection? If so, what would one think of such a church?
What if such replayings were charged for (without paying the church
another cent)?
[Moderator's Note: The church might not care, but whatever
organization is being paid by the church to produce the 900 program
might not like it if part of their payment comes from commissions on
the calls to the 900 number. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 01:46 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: 408 Area Code Question
brian@apt.bungi.com (Brian Litzinger) writes:
> I live in Los Gatos, in the 408 area code, and am served by Pac*Bell.
> So are my neighbors. Some of Los Gatos is served by Pac*Bell and some
> by GTE.
In the world of telephony, when we speak of cities we are usually
referring to "exchange names". The town of Los Gatos is surrounded by
the communities of Saratoga, Campbell, and San Jose -- three "Pac*Bell"
areas. City and town borders rarely follow exchange boundaries
exactly, so while you may live in the town limits of Los Gatos, you
can also be served out of a neighboring town's central office. If you
have Pac*Bell as your LEC, then this is exactly what is happening.
There are three central offices in Los Gatos, all GTE. Some residents
near Monte Sereno are served out of the Campbell office (which is in
reality the San Jose "ALpine" CO). Others, near highway 17 are served
out of Campbell (the San Jose "ANdrews" CO -- the very one I have
learned to love and hate!). And still other Los Gatos residents in the
Blossom Hill area are served out of that same "ANdrews" CO but with a
San Jose number (like mine).
So you see, while in non-telco reality Los Gatos is served by GTE and
Pac*Bell, for official reference it is a GTE area. Los Angeles, on the
other hand, is indeed served by both GTE and Pac*Bell. Both companies
have prefixes that are called "Los Angeles". However in your case, if
someone calls you from out of the local area, "Los Gatos" does not
show up on the caller's bill. Rather it will be probably Campbell or
San Jose, possibly Saratoga.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 00:23:42 PST
From: linc@tongue1.Berkeley.EDU (Linc Madison)
Subject: 510 Cutover Not Yet Done
According to Pacific Bell, effective at 2:00 AM, Monday, January 27,
calls across the San Francisco Bay dialed without the area code should
not complete. However, calls from my phone here (510-540) into San
Francisco (415-255 and 415-285) still complete without complaint as of
12:30 a.m. on Tuesday, January 28th, dialing only the seven-digit
number.
I'm right here in the thick of the split, but it isn't activated yet
on my switch!
Linc Madison == Linc@Tongue1.Berkeley.EDU
------------------------------
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Telco Sexual Discrimination
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 08:35:30 GMT
Okay, this isn't as serious as the subject sounds, but it's quite
amusing, and demonstrates some of the "perils" of 900 numbers.
From {Time}, Feb 3, 1992
"Falsetto Advertising"
Sweet-voiced "Raven," a Cherokee Irishwoman, was such a hit with
callers to a Nevada romance line that one man phoned 26 times in a
single day; three sent love letters, and a caller from West Virginia
proposed marriage. Most of her fans conjured a mental image of a
temptress with long, silky hair, a fantasy figure and a gift for
off-color gab. But Raven's real talent, it turns out, was for
mimicry. The voice belongs to Darryl Malone, a 165-lb. National
Guardsman, husband and father of four children who is now suing
Northwest Nevada Telco for, of all things, sex discrimination.
Malone claims that because he is a man he has been passed over for
raises and promotions during his eight months on the job. Last week
the Nevada Equal Rights Commission, in a joint filing with the federal
Equal Opportunity Commission, held a fact-finding session on the case
and is likely to make a recommendation next month ...
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #90
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11720;
28 Jan 92 22:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30577
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 19:41:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26970
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 19:41:18 -0600
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 19:41:18 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201290141.AA26970@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #91
TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Jan 92 19:41:12 CST Volume 12 : Issue 91
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Bob Covington via Leonard Erickson)
Mobidem Net (Ericsson Corporate Relations)
Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number (William R. Mark)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 28 Jan 92 11:31:54 EST
From: Leonard Erickson <70524.2603@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
(Forwarded from Fidonet echo PNB-BELL)
Message #1241 "PNB.Bell"
Date: 29-Dec-91 10:53
This was posted by Bob Covington who was there:
NOTES ON PUC HEARING (Wagner vs. US West) - 12/10/91
REFERENCES:
ORS 759.210
Rules and Regulations Section 12 (Tariff Agreement)
Schedule 1-A
US West Interogatory Document
In attendance:
13 Portland Sysops
2 Salem Sysops
-Bob Covington
-Jeff Heistand
3 US West Representatives
-Mr. Holmes, Attorney
-Jeff Pennington, Regulatory Manager/PUC Laison
Points raised by US West:
1. First Choice BBS has 618 users. Sysop does not personally
participate in all conferences (500+) nor read all messages, nor
correspond with all users. BBS is open to "all comers" and therefore
isn't for personal use or interest of the subscriber.
2. US West views BBS's as "Bulletin Board Services" and refers to
users as "customers."
3. Whether a BBS charges a subscription/membership fee or takes
donations isn't an issue for US West. A BBS is not residential under
the Tariff section saying "... or use of the service is not obviously
limited to domestic use." "Domestic use" may involve phone subscriber
and household members only. Allowing the public to use a BBS is
therefore not interpreted as "domestic use."
4. Residential rates are insufficient to recover costs of service.
Domestic rates are subsidized by 44% in an attempt to comply with
legislation calling for "universal service" (ie: access to phone
service to all citizens). Business rates are adjusted to recover full
costs of service. Residential rates (both measured and flat rate) are
discounted 44%.
5. BBS calling patterns meet the definitions for that associated with
business use. Rates are set based on volume, whether calls originate
or terminate at "premise" (phone location), and other factors. High
volumes of calls cost US West more to service than residential use.
Business rates are charged to United Way, Boy Scouts, churches and
others for similar non-residential use.
6. Asking for residential rates for a BBS is "asking all subscribers
to subsidize your hobby." It is unfair to ask "full cost recovery"
subscribers to subsizide residential BBS's.
7. End users (those calling BBS's with modems) are making personal
calls and are not affected by US West's position on BBS use. Calls
originate from the subscriber's phone when a BBS is called. But calls
terminate at the BBS phone. The number of terminating calls is a key
factor in determining rate charged.
8. Higher usage means higher costs for US West. Measured service
costs US West more to maintain than flat-rate service, due to the cost
of call counting equipment and billing on a per call basis.
9. BBS's "go beyond the definition of immediate household use."
They provide a service to the public at large without any
attendance or involvement of the [phone] subscriber.
10. US West does not see a need to establish other subscriber billing
levels since BBS use is clearly non-residential. Although they do
have a rate higher than residential but lower than business called
"Teen Link" which provides enhanced phone services.
11. Service costs decrease up to the previous number of installed
lines. The number of lines included in a "drop" is determined by
demographics, intended use, expected growth and other factors. Older
neighborhoods tend to have only two lines laid ... while newer larger
complexes have five lines standard. Once capacity is reached, US
West's costs increase to provide more lines, and at residential rates
these costs are not recoverable.
12. US West does not keep records of calls for flat-rate subscribers,
but does for metered-rate subscribers.
13. "BBS use is a new issue with US West." And they intend to make
adjustments to those subscribers pending the outcome of this case.
New subscriber installations for BBS use at this time are now charged
non-residential rates automatically if they are aware of such use.
14. BBS's provide an opportunity for business transactions through
"For Sale" conferences, or in messages. Unless sysops read all
messages and have policies prohibiting any advertising, marketing or
sales activities online ... then there is no guarantee that business
isn't being conducted.
15. If a caller is confronted with the name of the BBS rather than a
person's voice, then residential use is suspect. A BBS name, for this
purpose, is the same as a business name.
16. There is no truth in the idea that US West is trying to put BBS's
"out of business" or that they are in competition with any proposed
services they may offer. US West is interested in not allowing
residential BBS's to be subsidized when their use is non-residential.
Questions Raised by Hearings Officer:
1. Is the phone answered by person or by machine?
2. Does any advertising, small business marketing, or sales activity
ever take place on the BBS? (excepting the equivalent of "Nickle
Ads")
3. Are any fees of any kind collected? Are any donations or other
income received in connection with BBS operation?
4. Are business contacts or referrals ever made in relation to
operation of the BBS? Is there any contact with customers or
potential customers on the BBS?
5. Do shareware files downloaded from a BBS require payment? Are
shareware files on the BBS written by "amateurs" in their spare time,
or by professionals?
6. Do any of the echo conferences include advertisements for products
for sale, or does any ordering of products take place?
Timeline/Follow-ups:
Hearings Officer ordered transcript. Will be available in 3-4 weeks.
PUC staff will research whether any previous decision relating to this
case are on file.
Opening Briefs due no later than 1/14/91.
US West final written comments due by 1/24/91.
Additional public comment accepted for 30 days from date of hearing.
By Bob Covington
------------------------
And here is a post by Bob listing the part of the tariff agreement
which US West is basing their claims and case on:
On August 22, 1987, the following section of "Rule and Regulation 12"
applying to US West's Business and Residence Service was adopted as
PUC Order No. 5:
A. GENERAL
The applicability of business and residence rates is governed by
the actual or obvious use made of the service. The use which is
to be made of the service will be ascertained from the applicant
at the time of application for service.
1. Business rates apply at the folowing locations:
A. In offices, stores, factories and all other places
of a strictly business nature.
B. In boarding houses and rooming houses whith more than
five rooms available for rent (except as noted under 2.)
colleges, clubs, lodges, schools, libraries, churches,
lobbies and halls of hotels, apartment buildings,
hospitals, and private and public institutions.
C. At any location when the listing of "office" is provided
or when any title indicating a trade, occupation or
profession is listed (except as modified under the
directory listing schedule) and at any location
classified under 2., regardless of the form of listing
when extension service is provided to a place not a
part of a domestic establishment.
D. At residence locations when the customer has no regular
business telephone service and the use of the service by
himself, members of his household, or his guests is for
the purpose of conducting a business, trade, or
profession, or whose use of the service is obviously not
confined to domestic use.
E. In general, at any place where the substantial use of the
service is occupational rather than domestic.
2. Residence rates apply in locations where customers reside
and whose substantial use of the service is domestic and not
for purposes of conducting business.
3. If it is found that a customer is using residence service
for business purposes, the Company will require the customer
to take business service, except in cases where the customer
use of the service is primarily for social or domestic
purposes. Customers moved from residential to business
service will be notified by the Company of their right of
appeal with the Public Utility Commission of Oregon.
Aside from the sexist language in Section D ("himself," "his"), US
West is clearly focusing (in this case at least) on proving that
because a sysop does not personally know, or have contact with all
callers to his/her BBS, that it is not "domestic use." And that it is
the electronic equivalent of the types of locations mentioned under
Section C if the BBS provides public access.
Of course, my reading of these same sections clearly tells me that a
residential BBS does NOT fall under any stretch of the "business"
definitions herein.
Just wanted to get these online for those interested.
Hope this helps anyone.
* Origin: 1:105/605
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 15:13 +0100
From: ERICSSON CORPORATE RELATIONS <lme.lmedistr@memo.ericsson.se>
Subject: Mobidem Net
PRESS RELEASE
1992-01-28
ERICSSON GE UNVEILS WORLD'S FIRST MASS MARKET PORTABLE WIRELESS MODEM
Ericsson GE today unveiled the Mobidem, the world's first mass market
portable wireless modem. The Mobidem provides two-way wireless data
communications connectivity for palmtop, notebook, and laptop
computers as well as industrial handheld terminals. Utilizing Mobitex
wireless data networks operated by RAM Mobile Data USA Limited
Partnership and Rogers Cantel in Canada, the Mobidem supports
automatic nationwide roaming for PC users that travel around town or
across the country.
Weighing less than one pound and housed in rugged plastic with
flexible, fold-down antenna, the Mobidem has a list price of $ 1,795.
It is the first in a series of Ericsson GE portable wireless modems
and components that promise to revolutionize the personal computer
communications industry. Ericsson GE has received FCC type approval
for the Mobidem and is planning to begin initial shipments by the end
of the first quarter. Volume production will commence during the
second quarter.
Applications include: wireless E-mail, acknowledgment paging,
dispatch, and sales force management as well as other mobile messaging
and wireless data communications."
Small, lightweight, and durable, the Mobidem can be connected to any
PC that has an RS-232 serial port. Operating at a data transmission
speed of 8 kbps, the Mobidem offers data rates comparable to leading
wireline modems without forcing the out-of-office user to search for a
telephone line and RJ-11 jack. In addition, the Mobidem acts like a
pager by constantly scanning the network for incoming messages which
can be stored in its internal buffer even when the connected PC is
turned off.
Mobitex is a mobile data network designed to provide automatic
nationwide roaming using packet switched wireless technology. With
packet switching, a few seconds is ample time to transmit or receive a
message, eliminating problems associated with intermittent fading or
unexpected disconnections. Mobitex networks are operating in the
United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, and
Norway. RAM Mobile Data, which recently announced the formation of a
joint venture with BellSouth, owns and operates the Mobitex network in
the US and the UK.
RAM Mobile Data's aggressive network deployment plans underlie the
overall growth of the business. "We are providing service in 30 major
metropolitan areas today, including New York, Chicago, Los Angeles,
San Francisco, Washington DC, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Orlando, and
Boston and will provide service in 100 markets, comprising hundreds of
cities and towns, within the first half of 1993. Network coverage will
continue to expand aggressively thereafter," said Carl Aron, CEO of
RAM Mobile Data.
The Mobidem will be sold through several distribution channels
including direct sales to Fortune 1000 companies, Value Added
Resellers (VAR's), and as the market matures, computer dealers and
mass merchandisers. Bundled products will also be telemarketed by
Ericsson GE. The first bundled offering is a personal wireless E-mail
package call Viking Express. Viking Express was developed for use with
the HP 95LX palmtop computer and the RadioMail gateway, provided by
Anterior Technology of Menlo Park, CA. The RadioMail gateway provides
comprehensive interconnection of the RAM Mobile Data Network to most
public as well as private LAN based E-mail systems such as the
Internet, ATTMail, and Lotus cc:Mail.
For additional Viking Express product information, call 1-800-223-6366.
According to Bill Frezza at Ericsson GE Mobile Communications Wireless
Computing Division: "Our long term goal is nothing short of putting an
antenna on every laptop."
For additional Mobidem product information, call 201-265-6600.
Mobidem is a trademark of Ericsson GE.
RadioMail is a trademark of Anterior Technology.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:
Kathy Egan, Director of Press Relations, The Ericson Corporation
Tel. +1 212 685-4030
Ken Ryan, Corporate Relations, Ericsson
e-mail lme.lmekr@memo.ericsson.se
------------------------------
From: billmark@pygmy.owlnet.rice.edu (William R. Mark)
Subject: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number
Organization: Rice University
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 23:18:04 GMT
Today (1/28) I received a "sweepstakes award notification" form,
which told me to call *TOLL-FREE* 1-800-422-2313 "To claim your
prize". (Careful reading of the fine print convinced me that my prize
would probably be two $200 "Savings Certificates").
I called the number, and was told that I could claim my prize by
mail (it gave the address, etc.), or by staying on the line. The
recording said that if I stayed on the line, I would be billed $3.xx
(I think it was $3.85, but I can't remember for sure) per minute for
the remainder of the call. It said to press "1" to continue.
Since I had suspected some sort of trick like this, I was calling
from a pay phone. I pressed "1". The recording asked me to enter my
"Award #" (I made a "mistake" in one digit), then my phone number (I
entered the payphone number), then my zip code (I again made a
one-digit "mistake"). The computer at the other end didn't seem to be
checking any of my entries in real-time, because it happily told me
that I had indeed won two $200 savings certificates, which could be
applied toward merchandise purchaced from a catalog which would be
sent to me along with the savings certificates.
The "billable" portion of the call probably lasted two to three
minutes, yielding a charge of between $7 and $11.
I dialed the AT&T operator to find out more about this scheme.
The operator transfered my call to the residential customer business
office. The person I talked to there didn't know much at first, but
put me on hold while he talked to someone else.
When he came back on line, he had quite a bit of useful
information. He said that the 800 number *was* an AT&T 800 number,
and that they used their "switch" (he seemed unfamiliar with this
term) to change the call from an 800 call to a 900 call. He thought
that the 900 portion of the call was also an AT&T number. He said
that I had been smart to make the call from a payphone.
He said that they had gotten a lot of complaints about this
number, and that they were considering termination of the company's
800 service. He mentioned something about having talked to the better
business bureau, and he said that what the company was doing *was*
legal.
I said that I didn't think that this sort of deception using an
AT&T 800 number was in the best interests of AT&T, and he agreed.
Does anyone know if this sort of thing really is legal? Coming
on the heels of the {USA Today} fiasco, it seems to be a growing
problem.
Incidentally, I only have the word of the AT&T person I talked to
that the billing is done via a 900 number. I suppose it would be
possible to do the billing directly (via mail) using the "Award #" and
zip code information entered via touch-tones. I don't think that this
is how it works though.
Bill Mark billmark@owlnet.rice.edu
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #91
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14859;
28 Jan 92 23:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19445
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 21:13:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19871
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 21:13:05 -0600
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 21:13:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201290313.AA19871@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #92
TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Jan 92 21:12:58 CST Volume 12 : Issue 92
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Modem Tutorial File in Archives (TELECOM Moderator)
Federal Agents Raid WCFL; Station Forced Off Air (TELECOM Moderator)
Part 68 Help Needed! (Larry Rachman)
DC PUC Rules on C & P (Guy J. Sherr)
Two-Way Wireless Electronic-Mail Introduced (Geoff Goodfellow)
Schematic Needed for Null Modem Cable (Michael Connell)
800's From Canada (Bob Makowski)
Exchange Boundaries (David Niebuhr)
Re: Background Regarding 206 Dialing Change (Carl Moore)
Re: Switch Programming Errors (David G. Lewis)
Re: Calling ATT From a COPT (Howard Pierpont)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 05:55:34 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
Subject: Modem Tutorial File in Archives
A new file in the Telecom Archives entitled 'modem.tutorial' was
donated by Kenneth B. Kirksey <kkirksey@eng.auburn.edu>. This file was
adapted from an article in {America Online} written by Patrick Chen.
It is a very detailed analysis of the various types of modems
available today; how to use them and how they differ from one another.
Pick up your copy on your next visit to the archives, which are
accessible using anonymous ftp.
ftp lcs.mit.edu
login anonymous give username@site.name as password
cd telecom-archives
Thanks, Ken!
PAT
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 20:51:52 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
Subject: Federal Agents Raid WCFL; Station Silenced, Forced Off Air
In an unusual move by the Federal Communications Commission, a far
southwest suburban radio station in the Chicago area has been forced
off the air by the FCC which alleges illegal activity at the station.
WCFL-FM (104.7), a station licensed in Morris, IL with no connection
to the station using the same call letters in Chicago several years ago
was silenced by FCC officials who raided the station accompanied by
members of the United States Marshall's Office on Friday, January 24.
Prompted by complaints from other broadcasters in the Chicago area, an
FCC field inspection team on January 16 found WCFL was beaming its
signal at more than twice its authorized power of 11,000 watts, and
was using a nondirectional rather than directional antenna as called
for in its license to operate.
The effect of the violations was to broacast a more powerful signal
toward Chicago and elsewhere, and "to increase the likelyhood of
interference with other stations," acccording to Dan Emrick, chief of
investigations for the FCC's office in Chicago.
The FCC had cited the station for similar offenses in 1990, and fined
the owners $3000. Emrick said there was no record of payment.
Tim Spires is the General Manager of WCFL, and an officer of the
parent company 'MM Group' which is based in Ohio. Neither Mr. Spires
nor other officials of 'MM Group' would make any response to the FCC
action which forced the station off the air at 1:00 PM last Friday.
Emrick said federal officers entered the station shortly before 1:00
PM and served the appropriate legal papers on employees on duty. FCC
staffers then siezed the broadcasting studio and transmitting
equipment. After giving the obligatory sign off message and station
identification over the air, power was killed to the transmitter.
Employees were ordered to leave the premises, which was closed with a
US Marshall's Seal.
Emrick went on to say the station would not be allowed to return to
the air until the station settles its account with the FCC and
completes construction of a directional antenna. At that point, the
station would be permitted to operate 'in probation' while the
Commission did further technical inspections, and the probation status
would continue for an unspecified period of time afterward.
A press release was finally issued by the 'MM Group' yesterday which
said in part that WCFL " ... went off the air voluntarily in order to
install a new antenna; bring their transmitter into compliance with
FCC regulations and 'better serve their listening area.'
PAT
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jan 92 13:47:40 EST
From: Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Part 68 Help!
I have an aquaintance who is developing a product that will be
attached to the telephone line, and will therefore require testing and
certification under FCC Rules part 68. Like most garage operations,
they're undercapitalized, and need to defer their certification for at
least several months.
I suggested they tell their customers that it is "... designed to
comply with part 68, but not yet certified, and it may be connected to
private PBXs, or to a phone line only with the explicit permission of
the phone company." Such a claim would be truthful, and not
misleading. Of course, most people will just plug it into their RJ-11
and be done with it. The product is a small volume, high ticket item
with a technically sophisticated user base.
There are bound to be some users who for various reasons choose to be
completely legal. 12 years ago, they could have bought an 'STP'
adaptor, which was certified on one side, and nobody cared what was
connected to the other.
I'm looking for a contemporary equivalent. What I *don't* want is
private email from people who have two STPs in their basement and
would be glad to send them to me. What I'm also not looking for is any
of the modules that can be soldered to a circuit card and provide a
line level to phone line interface.
What I am looking for is a box that will connect to a phone line, a
phone-type device, and presumably a power supply, and behave like it
isn't there. If this can be ordered directly from the manufacturer by
my friend's customer, so much the better. If not, my friend would
probably be willing to become a reseller to service his customers.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Larry Rachman, WA2BUX 74066.2004@compuserve.com FAX: 516-234-7170
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 18:27 GMT
From: "Guy J. Sherr" <0004322955@mcimail.com>
Subject: DC PUC Rules on C&P
This morning on my way to work, as usual, I listened to the local,
all-news station (WTOP). At one point, I distinctly heard a short
report of C&P asking the PUC for a 21% increase in rates (this would
have affected users living inside DC; no one in Maryland or Virginia
or West Virginia).
Instead, the report stated, the PUC rejected the request from C&P and
then made them GIVE an 8% rate decrease.
*oops*
Guy Sherr Systems Manager
!disclaimer! my ears are full of wax, too.
------------------------------
Subject: Two-Way Wireless Electronic-Mail Introduced
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 11:41:53 PST
From: eoff Goodfellow <geoff@fernwood.mpk.ca.us>
ANTERIOR TECHNOLOGY INTRODUCES FIRST TWO-WAY WIRELESS ELECTRONIC
MAIL SERVICE
MENLO PARK, CALIF. (Jan 28) - Anterior Technology today introduced
two-way RadioMail(TM), a wireless electronic mail gateway service that
for the first time provides users of portable computers with access to
public and private e-mail systems and online information services.
"Portable computers cut the first wire -- the power cord. RadioMail
cuts the telephone wire, the one remaining wire tying users to their
desks," stated Geoffrey S. Goodfellow, President and CEO of Anterior
Technology. "RadioMail makes `anywhere, anytime' computing a reality."
Two-way RadioMail will first be available on the Hewlett-Packard 95LX
palmtop, using the Mobidem wireless radio modem from Ericsson GE and
the RAM Mobile Data USA Limited Partnership nationwide "packet"
data-radio network. One-way RadioMail delivery of e-mail using
alpha-numeric paging technology has been available since October, 1991.
"With RadioMail, portable computer users can send and receive e-mail
messages whether they're in the boardroom, out in the field, or even
on the beach," said Goodfellow. "RadioMail makes true remote wireless
communications possible, completely freeing users from their desks."
The Anterior RadioMail gateway service provides wireless users
seamless integration with existing "wired" e-mail systems and operates
over both standard dial-up phone lines and wide area network services.
Portable computer users equipped with a wireless two-way radio modem,
such as Ericsson GE's Mobidem, will be assigned a "Radio Mailbox(TM)"
address. Users will be able to send and receive messages from local
and wide area e-mail networks such as ATTMail, CompuServe, the TCP/IP
Internet, UUCP/USENET, and LAN-base corporate e-mail systems such as
Lotus cc:Mail.
Mitchell D. Kapor, founder of Lotus Development Corporation, On
Technology, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and an early user of
RadioMail's wireless e-mail services, stated, "When I'm away from a
deskbound computer, RadioMail lets me see if something urgent is
happening so I can take action before I get back to my office."
RadioMail is being introduced at COMNET in Washington D.C., and is one
of the top five featured new products at DEMO '92, a computer industry
product review and demonstration show in Palm Springs, California.
Commercial two-way RadioMail service will be inaugurated in March when
initial deliveries of the Ericsson GE Mobidem are available.
Anterior Technology is a communications and information services
distribution company that has been providing electronic mail
connectivity and information distribution services since 1988. In
addition to RadioMail, Anterior offers AgentSee(TM), a wireless news
wire headline service to paging carriers and turnkey communication
services for Internet, UNIX UUCP, and Lotus cc:Mail sites.
CONTACT: Anterior Technology, Menlo Park
415/328-5615
e-mail: info @ radiomail.net
------------------------------
From: mconnell@mcs213k.cs.umr.edu (Michael Connell)
Subject: Schematic Needed for Null Modem Cable
Date: 28 Jan 92 19:56:27 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla
Help!!!!!!
I'm looking for someone that knows how to make a null modem cable for
an IBM PC 9-pin and 25-pin Null Modem Cable. I need a 9 pin to 9 pin
and a 25 pin to 25 pin. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
E-mail to the address below. Thanks in advance.
Michael J. Connell at The University of Misosuri--Rolla
Mailing address : P.O. Box I
Rolla, MO 65401-7017
e-Mail to: mconnell@cs.umr.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 14:30:24 PST
From: mak@tgivan.wimsey.bc.ca (Bob Makowski)
Subject: 800's From Canada
Six months ago, an article posted a phone number for surrgating 800
access when the numbers are U.S. scoped only.
In other words, could someone mail me the number which will allow me
to dail U.S. 800 numbers that I can't reach from Canada. If I remember
correctly, I could charge the service to some credit card and it was a
212 or 213 area code.
Thanks in advance,
Mak
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 12:55:05 -0500
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: Exchange Boundaries
What with the recent comments concerning which CO serves which
community, I think I might be able to muddy the waters a bit but yet
at the same time clarify a few things.
John Higdon gave a very good reply to a reader who was curious about
who provided what service in the South Bay area. The main difference
is that we are stuck with NY Tel. Rochester Tel would be superior, in
fact I'd even go with GTE.
Here on Long Island, there is the community of Medford that is served
by several COs. On the Southwest end, it is served by the Patchogue
CO (516-475/289/654/758/447/687); on the northern end it is served by
the Selden CO (516-732/736/696/698); on the East end by the Yaphank CO
(516-924/345/292/341). There are other examples but I chose this one
due to its geographical size.
The clue is that Medford does not have a CO but its geographical area
extends to the neighboring areas which have the different exchanges
and the COs are all within some distinct mileage difference between
them.
Therefore, it isn't uncommon to find two CO numbers in adjacent stores
in a shopping center or at adjacent homes. I have the feeling that
this is more the rule than the exception especially since the mid to
late 70's.
Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093
[Moderator's Note: I can tell you the boundary line between Illinois
Bell and Centel (and in addition, the boundary between 312/708 on the
far northwest side of Chicago -- both telcos have exchanges in both
area codes) is very blurred and ragged in places. The dividing line
for both telco and area code sometimes cuts through the yard between
houses on the same block, down the alley, and on some occassions, even
at an intersection of two streets, where 312 is on two corners and 708
is on the other two corners, with Centel getting one corner and IBT
getting the other three, etc. In at least once instance, Centel and
IBT both have service on the same block *on the same side of the
street*. For a challenge, get a very detailed street map of the
northwest side of Chicago and try -- just try! -- to follow the city
limits of Chicago and the suburbs it touches, all of which get 708
while the city is in 312. There are various unincorporated areas (part
of no city or town) scattered around there, some of which are 312 and
some of which are 708. One of the unincorporated areas is now trying
to incorporate as a village (apparently to keep Chicago from gobbling
it up), and if it succeeds, the little village of a few thousand
people will have two telcos, two area codes and two postal zip codes
all within its boundaries! PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 9:23:57 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Re: Background Regarding 206 Dialing Change
This is the first time that I have seen (aside from my own writing on
this topic) notice of dialing instruction change due only to the
upcoming NXX area codes. (I.e., you have now said that in 1995, long
distance within 509 will become 1 + 509 + number.)
But why do you mention 881 as a possible area code? That is a very
long way off. According to earlier notes sent to telecom, the first
batch of NNX area codes will be of form NN0; in fact, 260 was at the
top of that list, as I recall, and if you need an NN0 area code in
Washington state, you obviously would be getting something other than
260 (it would be next door to 206).
------------------------------
From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Switch Programming Errors
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 14:08:56 GMT
In article <telecom12.87.8@eecs.nwu.edu> drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor
Math) writes:
> Apparently "equal access" means that you have your choice of
> carriers that have chosen to serve your area and does not guarantee
> you access to the carrier of your choice.
Exactly. It means that all interexchange carriers shall have "equal
access" to the local exchange networks, as opposed to the Dark Ages
Before Divestiture when access offered to "OCCs" (Other Common
Carriers, and isn't that a leading term?) was most certainly
"unequal".
No interexchange carrier is *required* to offer service to any
location anywhere in the country, except for AT&T; since AT&T is the
"dominant carrier" in the eyes of the FCC, it is also the "carrier of
last resort". That means even if no one else wants to offer service
to a given location, AT&T is obligated to string enough trunks in to
handle the traffic.
Hey, Universal Service, you know?
David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories
david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej ISDN Evolution Planning
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 07:39:20 PST
From: pierpont@snax.enet.dec.com
Subject: Re: Calling ATT From a COPT
In Telecom Volume 12 : Issue 87 dbw@crash.cts.com (David B. Whiteman)
wrote about calling via AT&T from a COPT. The TELECOM Moderator noted:
> [Moderator's Note: COPT is a relatively new term in this group, I
> think. COCOT seems to be the term of choice by many/most readers.
> Regards the 816-654-8000 number, I wonder what sort of humongous
> collect charges AT&T will get on that line, considering all the COCOT
> phones and hotel PBXs which will force users to call it by denial of
> 10288, refusing manual requests for an AT&T operator, denial of 800
> connections, etc. I wonder how AT&T could possibly hope to make any
> profit from long distance calls they handle routed to them through the
> 816 'call collect' number; or the 800 number for that matter. PAT]
Is the idea to make a profit from using the 800 or collect numbers or
is it to create a database of numbers to "go after" when 'everyone'
must be compliant?
Seems like a very inexpensive way to collect data on non-complying
systems.
Maybe this should be named "cheap research"?
Howard Pierpont Standard disclaimers apply.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #92
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15724;
28 Jan 92 23:53 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05806
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 21:49:04 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20274
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 28 Jan 1992 21:48:48 -0600
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 21:48:48 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201290348.AA20274@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #93
TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Jan 92 21:48:42 CST Volume 12 : Issue 93
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Andy Sherman)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Eric Florack)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Alan L. Varney)
Re: Calling ATT From a COPT (Ed Greenberg)
Re: Point Roberts, WA (Roger Theriault)
Re: Hayes ISDN Adaptor For NeXT: $200 (Morris Meyer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: andys@ulysses.att.com
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 11:06:01 EST
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Murray Hill, NJ
In article <telecom12.88.6@eecs.nwu.edu> Eric Florak writes:
> deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) in V12 #76:
>> Fact 1: The current ruling is that interexchange carriers which wish
>> to interconnect with LECs in a given LATA must have a signaling point
>> of presence in that LATA connected to a LEC signaling point in that
>> LATA. I don't recall offhand just *who's* ruling that is; I've
>> misplaced the scorecard I use to keep track of all the regulatory
>> players. I do recall it directly affects SWBT, and don't recall the
>> effect on other LECs. This, to my tired memory, implies it may be a
>> Texas or Missouri PSC ruling, but I wouldn't come close to swearing to
>> it.
> It was, to my memory as well, and would seem to serve as a basis for
> future rulings ... all of which would now fall in AT&T's favor, since
> they were busy establishing such equipment while pressing for just
> such a ruling.
Oh horse pucky. AT&T was busy establishing a lot of STP pairs to run
the bloody long distance network. What AT&T seems to stand accused of
here is making a substantial capital investment in its own business.
Your argument seems to be that if the OCCs are cheap that somebody
should shackle AT&T as well. It is amazing. In some quarters AT&T is
faulted for spending too little on the reliability of the network, yet
Mr. Florak thinks that building a lot of STP pairs is predatory
behavior.
>> AT&T does not have STP pairs in each and every LATA in the US. How
>> many STP pairs we have and where they are is probably proprietary
>> information; suffice to say it's more than one and less than 237 or
>> however many LATAs there are.
> It is certainly far more than the rest of the industry. Moral: You
> want to win the game? Make sure you are the one that sets the rules.
Also make sure you are the one willing to invest capital in
infrastructure. AT&T spent billions of dollars (just look at the
record of accounting charges for digitizing the network) over the past
few years to upgrade its network. Yes, that's a lot of capital to
spend, and you have to be fairly big to raise it. But providing
nationwide interexchange service is a big, serious business. It is
just not possible to provide that service on a shoestring. Will
customers be served if somebody buys Mr. Florak's conspiracy theories
and forces lower quality on the entire industry, AT&T included, to
protect players who want to get into business on the cheap? If other
carriers prefer to spend their money on lawsuits that is their
business, but trunks, switches, and STPs move phone calls, not
lawsuits.
>> What control does AT&T have over the deployment of MCI's, US
>> Sprint's, or LEC X's STPs?
> Same control as any other comapny that finds it hard to compete on a
> fair basis ... the courts.
This is a very bizarre comment, given the record in the industry over
who initiates lawsuits. Example: any time AT&T attempts to meet price
competition, (which would seem to me to fall within the definition of
a fair marketplace) somebody (often another three-letter player) goes
to court or the FCC to keep AT&T's rates up. This is competing on a
fair basis?
I see little evidence that the industry is all that concerned with
fair competition in the complete range of services. Cream-skimming
seems to be a common mode of operation in this business: grab the high
margin business, and leave the less profitable services for somebody
else to provide. Example: Mr. Florak has complained before that some
massive conspiracy is responsible for the fact that AT&T is the only
IXC that handles sent-paid calls from coin phones. Yet no other
carrier has complained about this. None of the many lawsuits and
regulatory filings initiated by other carriers have complained about
this. There is no evidence that any other carrier *WANTS* that
business; maybe it's because the margins are low and the investment in
infrastructure is high.
If the curren technical requirements were the result of a conspiracy,
as opposed what is necessary to do the job, and this was such a
profitable segment of the business, don't you think that somebody
would be suing to get it? They've not been gun-shy in the past.
Needless to say, the above diatribes are mine, not AT&T's. (Or am I
just another cog in the RBOC/AT&T/FCC conspiracy? :^) )
Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928
READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 08:32:13 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
> Your argument seems to be that if the OCCs are cheap that somebody
> should shackle AT&T as well. It is amazing. In some quarters AT&T is
> faulted for spending too little on the reliability of the network, yet
> Mr. Florak thinks that building a lot of STP pairs is predatory
> behavior.
Perhaps my position on this will be made more clear to you by means
of a private response I sent to another AT&T person today:
Are you going to tell me that the 60 year or so head-start on the rest
of the industry is not soley responsible for AT&T's domination of the
market today? And who GAVE them that head start?
Put another way: I've found out that my kid can win at the soap-box
derby ... all I have to do is push him with my car at about 90mph up
to the edge of the track, and stop /real fast/.
In much the same way, AT&T is now using the momentum built up during
the monoply that was supported by the government.
> Unlike, say, New Jersey Bell, where the state mandates that the only
> company permitted to carry local message telephone traffic is New
> Jersey Bell, and any other company doing so is acting contrary to
> state regulation. *That* is a "monopoly due to government
> regulation".
Here, we agree; this is much the same situation as pre-divestiture
days, and should be changed. However, there will stil be a problem;
the Established LEC's will have a massive head-start, and the legal
eagles to hold onto that position for some years, with these tools
alone. How long do you suppose it would take to set up an independant
network in a local? Decades?
See what I'm driving at? How to make it a truly level field? The
currently established giants, both LEC's and AT&T have a head start.
Moreover, they have the legal funds needed to keep things this way.
I submit that any regulation that does not recognize and deal with
this as a major concern is leaning in the established company's favor.
[Moderator's Note: You keep talking about head starts and government
supported monopolies. Is it AT&T's fault that Alex Bell invented the
telephone in 1877? Should they have sat around waiting a hundred
years to see if maybe some other competitors would want to start on an
even keel with them? Contrary to being a 'government supported'
monopoly, the government's early actions were intervention to prevent
AT&T from getting larger. In exchange, the government gave Ma Bell
some privileges. Things worked out the way they worked out; that is
all. There was no government conspiracy with AT&T for sixty or eighty
years to prevent the possibility of competition. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 16:48:47 CST
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
Organization: AT&T Network Systems
In article <telecom12.88.6@eecs.nwu.edu> Eric_Florack.Wbst311@
xerox.com writes:
> deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) in V12 #76:
>> Fact 1: The current ruling is that interexchange carriers which wish
>> to interconnect with LECs in a given LATA must have a signaling point
>> of presence in that LATA connected to a LEC signaling point in that
>> LATA.
> It was, to my memory as well, and would seem to serve as a basis for
> future rulings ... all of which would now fall in AT&T's favor, since
> they were busy establishing such equipment while pressing for just
> such a ruling.
>> As I said above, the current ruling implies that every IXC and LEC,
>> including AT&T, would have to have an STP pair in every LATA to get
>> SS7 signaling interconnection via quad D-links.
I DISAGREE with this assesment. If every IXC needs an STP pair in
every LATA, the STP business would be booming!! The ruling has no
REQUIREMENT for IXCs STPs, only for a signaling point of presence
(let's use SPOP) and a requirement that signaling traffic for the LATA
must enter and leave the LATA via that SPOP. A SPOP is just a
connection point that divides each signaling link -- it is NOT an STP.
This SPOP connection point is essentially the same type of
requirement placed on MF trunks today -- the LECs switches must route
calls from a LATA through 1 (or more) Points of Presence. The IXCs
must route traffic to the LATA through those same POPs. In the
multi-POP cases, the LEC can place added restrictions on which POP
supports specific NPA-NXX lines.
Note that there is no requirement for each IXC to have a SWITCH for
each LATA -- the requirements is just on where the LATA appears as a
connection point to the IXCs. In theory, an IXC only needs a single
Trunk Group into each LATA, and only needs as many Trunks in that
Group as it has concurrent callers. In theory, an IXC could get by
with a single switch to support the entire country, so long as it had
Trunks to each served LATA.
So why is the SS7 ruling a problem? It's just that the protocol
was primarily designed around the CCITT version, where the idea of
dividing up a country into competing territories for telephone service
was not a concern. The SS7 protocol today is a slightly-warped kind
of "destination routing", in that messages are forwarded within the
SS7 network without regard to where they came from (neither sender
address nor incoming link affects the routing). Because of this, it
is not possible with today's protocol to have a single LEC STP pair
route messages over different links to the IXCs STP -- messages that
originated in two different LATAs, but destined for the IXC switch
would use the same set of links to reach the IXC.
One way to insure the routing occurs via the proper SPOP is to have
a different LEC STP pair in each LATA, in the same way (most) LATAs
have their own Access Tandem switches. Lots of alternatives were
examined by Bellcore and the T1S1 standards body, but they all
involved major changes to the protocol. In my opinion, by the time
large-scale deployment of such changes could occur, it is likely the
signaling load on the LEC STPs (and other issues) would require an STP
pair in most LATAs.
But the LEC STP-pair-per-LATA "solution" does not place any
requirement on an IXC to have an STP-pair-per-LATA -- only a set of
signaling links per LATA are needed. {This is the "Quad D-Link"
mentioned by David above.} In fact, there are third-party companies
that are willing to serve as an SS7 network for IXCs, so an IXC has no
need to even own an STP. So it would appear that an IXC could own as
little as one SS7-capable Switch and be in the SS7 market.
> And since AT&T already has such equipment up and running in very
> nearly the manner demanded by the ruling, we now understand why they
> are pressing so hard for keeping it ... it places them in great
> advantage ... because while I agree with you that:
All major IXCs have STPs and have SS7 deployed. What manner of
deployment advantage does AT&T have here?
Again, the number of AT&T (or other IXC) STPs is NOT AN ISSUE.
It's one of whether or not SS7 signaling from multiple LATAs can can
be mixed over the same set of links. There are good arguments for
both cases, and "the Judge" is the one who has to take all the
arguments into consideration and decide.
> [What control does AT&T exercise over company's STP deployment?]
> Same control as any other company that finds it hard to compete on a
> fair basis ... the courts.
I guess I don't understand where "fairness" enters the picture --
if there is no requirement for an IXC to have lots of STPs (or any at
all), how does the LEC requirement hurt other IXCs? Or is the
complaint really an LEC cost issue? How does the cost of LEC STPs
help AT&T or hinder its IXC competitors? Or how would having the LECs
have fewer STPs be an advantage to other IXCs?
Al Varney -- the above is not necessarily the viewpoint of AT&T,
nor of any of it's other employees. But I did feel
the need to clear up the "STP-per-LATA for every IXC"
statements in this thread.
------------------------------
From: edg@netcom.netcom.com (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Calling ATT From a COPT
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 16:57:39 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Moderator notes:
> connections, etc. I wonder how AT&T could possibly hope to make any
> profit from long distance calls they handle routed to them through the
> 816 'call collect' number; or the 800 number for that matter. PAT]
They lose a little on each one, and make it up on volume. :-)
Actually, even if they lose money on the call, they keep a customer
satisfied, and accumulate a datapoint of one more phone in violation
that can be shut down and/or used as a statistic in regulatory cases.
It should be interesting to see how soon the OCC's learn not to carry
that particular collect call.
Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com
P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)
[Moderator's Note: They don't 'lose a little on each call', they lose
a lot! If they pay an AOS 30-50 cents per minute for the collect
connection and charge their customer 12-20 cents per minute on the
outgoing call, they'll get killed. The rates for the 800 line are not
much better. Maybe they'll take the caller's number and have an
operator call back. Of course not all COCOTS take incoming calls. PAT]
------------------------------
From: theriaul@mdd.comm.mot.com (Roger Theriault)
Subject: Re: Point Roberts, WA
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1992 16:26:28 GMT
cmoore@BRL.MIL (VLD/VMB) writes:
> The 1982 tape I got some data from had Point Roberts (Washington
> state) in the 206 area with operator routine via 604. I don't know
> about 604 area code, however.
Point Roberts is a small chunk of land that hangs south of the 49th
parallel just south of Vancouver, B.C.
British Columbia is the 604 area code.
In order to drive to Point Roberts from any part of Washington State,
you have to drive into Canada first, then drive about 20 miles, then
cross the border in the town of Tsawwassen over to Point Roberts.
Since it's so convenient to Canada, no wonder the phone lines head
north.
I'm sure someone else can say more about the (likely) interesting
history of this telephone exchange which, I believe, was served until
just recently by BC Tel.
Roger Theriault theriaul@mdd.comm.mot.com
{uw-beaver,uunet}!van-bc!mdivax1!theriaul +1 604 241 6421
I am not a spokesman for Motorola or anyone else besides myself.
------------------------------
From: mmeyer@NeXT.COM (Morris Meyer)
Subject: Re: Hayes ISDN Adaptor For NeXT: $200
Date: 28 Jan 92 18:00:00 GMT
Reply-To: mmeyer@NeXT.COM (Morris Meyer)
Bruce Perens writes:
> At NeXTWorld, Hayes was showing an ISDN connector for the NeXT
> computer. The tiny box made use of the Motorola 56000 DSP that is part
> of the NeXT computer, thus the low price. It was on "show special" for
> $200. The Hayes ISDN terminal unit for non-NeXT equipment cost $1995.
Hey Bruce!
For more infomation, please see the Hayes Press Annoucement that I
just posted to comp.newprod.
Morris Meyer ISDN Project Leader
NeXT Software mmeyer@next.com
[Moderator's Note: We printed the same press release here about a week
ago also. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #93
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21049;
29 Jan 92 2:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03786
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 29 Jan 1992 00:44:43 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07957
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 29 Jan 1992 00:44:29 -0600
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 00:44:29 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201290644.AA07957@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #94
TELECOM Digest Wed, 29 Jan 92 00:44:26 CST Volume 12 : Issue 94
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number (Joe Konstan)
Re: Metro One Has Follow-Me w/o Their Knowing It (Dave Levenson)
Re: Larry Lippman: In Memoriam (Barry Ornitz)
Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage? (Steve Chafe)
Re: AT&T Credit Card Numbers (Howard Pierpont)
Re: Where Can One *Buy* the White Pages? (Dave Levenson)
Re: Motorola Cellular Phone Test Mode Commands (Dave Levenson)
International Information (was Slamming With a New Twist) (John R. Levine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 20:15:21 PST
From: konstan@elmer-fudd.cs.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan)
Subject: Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number
[William R. Mark writes about another 800 number that bills as a 900
number and his conversation with the AT&T operator.]
Since I'm a graduate student with lots of better things to do, I
obviously had to spend some time following up on this. I called the
number (800) 422-2313 and heard the same message (I didn't go so far
as to agree to be billed) and then called the AT&T operator to see how
far I could get.
The operator (Linda at Santa Rosa) immediately knew about the problem
and was quite sympathetic. She verified that 900 blocking did not
prevent these calls from going through and added that in the past
there were problems with companies claiming that there weren't even
recordings, just bills. After telling me that she personally had
experienced problems with calls of this nature, and mentioning that
there were special programs (I assume training programs) at AT&T to
deal with the {USA Today} case, she consulted with her supervisor and
called the Business Office (staying on the line with me) to find out
how to lodge a complaint.
While we were waiting for a customer service rep (interesting that the
operator didn't have a faster route in) we continued to discuss this
and apparently this is a BIG DEAL. There have been a lot of
complaints about this especially from businesses that normally block
900 and 976 calls. When I pointed out how many years of marketing 800
service this would be undoing, she agreed pointing out that even now
she has callers who think that calls to 800 numbers have to be placed
collect (!).
When we finally got through (about a one or two minute wait) the
customer service rep again confirmed that this was true and went off
to get information for filing complaints. They should be sent (as a
paper letter) to:
Mr. Gregory J Vogt, Chief
Informal Complaints and Inquiries Bureau
Enforcement Division Common Carrier Bureau
Federal Communications Commission
2025 M St. NW Room 6206
Washington, DC 20554
(whew!, and she read that all over the phone!)
I then wanted to get a few of these facts clear. First, she stated
quite clearly that no 800 call would result in a bill unless there was
a recording to that effect. Second, I asked whether this was "an AT&T
exclusive" or whether she knew of other long distance or local phone
companies that were doing this. She was not aware one way or the
other. Finally, I asked about billing (and specifically how these
would be billed) and she acknowledged that some had been billed as 900
numbers and indicated that AT&T would remove charges for any calls
such as these if the customer was not aware of the charge or if the
customer did not dial the number on the bill. When I pressed her on
whether that meant that these would automatically be reversed if they
were not billed as 800-numbers, she merely repeated her earlier
statement.
As a final measure, I chacked a local phone book (Oakland White Pages,
Pac Bell) and sure enough, in big print on page A33 it indicates that
long distance calls can be made without charge when calling an 800
number. This is in a section on long distance calling within the
service area, though it also indicates 800-555-1212 as a way of
finding these 800 numbers.
I spoke with a Pac Bell operator who was unaware of such things and
referred me to the business office (closed as of this writing).
From here:
I'd like just a little more information. Specifically, does anyone
know whether other long distance or local carriers offer this
"service?" Also, does anyone have access to a tariff on billing (that
might deal with the 900-part) or on 800 service?
I'll also call the Pac Bell business office to see if I can get any
information.
Then (and within a week, if I can't get any of the information) I'll
send off a letter to the FCC. I encourage all of you to do likewise
(I'm assuming even pro-900 people consider this a bit too far). I'd
be happy to post a copy of the letter to the Digest if people would
find it useful (I trust that Pat will filter out "yes it is useful/no
it isn't" messages and let me know if there is interest) though I'd
suggest personalizing the letter to get the biggest effect.
Any other ideas?
Joe Konstan konstan@cs.berkeley.edu
[Moderator's Note: Readers can write direct to Joe at the above
address and let him know if a copy of the letter would be of value;
I'll take his decision on it later if he sends it in. I've had a
couple people already -- in the short time this thread has been around
-- make nefarious suggestions to me such as call the above number
from your favorite COCOT or the Genuine BOCOT at your bus stop, etc,
and after punching the '1' just leave the receiver off hook letting it
time out how many ever minutes later. Now *that* would send a bunch
of uncollectibles back to the nasty proprietor of this nasty service,
wouldn't it! :) The reason I do not recommend this is because if
COCOTS get a lot of 800 abuse as a result of this scam, first thing
you know they (the COCOTS) will quit handling 800 calls also. :( PAT]
------------------------------
From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Metro One Has Follow-Me w/o Their Knowing It
Date: 28 Jan 92 21:19:34 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
In article <telecom12.34.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu
(Gabe M Wiener) writes:
> ... Metro One (they're calling themselves Cellular One this week) has
> never announced Follow Me beyond the NYC tri-state area, and when I
> called customer service they flatly denied that Follow Me was
> installed, yet two people managed to reach me in Springfield by
> dialing my NY number.
For the last two years, Cellular One of New York (nee MetroOne) has
advertised the 'Five State Connection' which is a fancy name for
follow-me roaming and hand-offs throughout an area that extends from
Wilmington, DE, to Hartford, CT. This seems to include portions of
Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut -- five
states. Apparently, the advertisements did not reach you or the
customer service rep who answered your call. I have routinely
received calls when roaming in the Philadelphia and Wilmington areas,
so I'm not surprised that it also works to the north.
Springfield, MA? That's beyond the coverage advertised, but not so
far as to be unexpected.
Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
------------------------------
Reply-To: ornitz@kodak.com
From: ornitz@kodak.kodak.com (Barry Ornitz)
Subject: Re: Larry Lippman: In Memoriam
Organization: Eastman Kodak Company, Eastman Chemical Company Research Labs
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 23:43:05 GMT
In article <1992Jan23.210137.25339@news.media.mit.edu> minsky@media.
mit.edu (Marvin Minsky) writes:
> I regret to tell you that Larry Lippman suddenly passed away. (Heart
> attack, no warning whatever.)
I too would like to say a few words about Larry ...
I have noted that some of the posts following the thread of the death
of Larry have deteriorated into jokes about email. At first I was a
little offended, but then I thought back over the years I had known
Larry and concluded that with his excellent sense of humor he would
have enjoyed them. As far as email is concerned, Larry has probably
already rigged a UUCP feed direct to heaven!
I was fortunate to have known Larry for several years both
professionally and personally. As we both had backgrounds in
chemistry (ChE for me), electronics, and instrumentation, it was
natural for us to meet on the Net. Our email messages eventually grew
into occasional telephone calls. I found Larry to be witty, extremely
intelligent, and a warm, caring person. He also liked cats! (But I
used to kid him that I was owned by more cats than he was.)
Larry's knowledge was practical as well as theoretical. His postings
were gems: concise, accurate, and easy to understand. I think he did
more than anyone else in the early days of the sci.chem newsgroup to
keep the group active and interesting. You could also see Larry's
wisdom scattered in a number of other groups too. (I added the
telecom group to this posting because of his frequent posts about
telephone systems.) He also was known to slip in some good natured
humor into his posts.
I will remember Larry's serious posts on chemical and laboratory
safety; but I also remember his suggestion to me that we gold-plate
Hubbell twist-lock power connectors and sell them to the
wreck.audio.phreaks as $500 speaker connectors for the "golden-eared".
I will always cherish the telephone call from him as he was still
laughing over my posting on monomethyl,lirpanoic butyrate as an
improved snake oil for CD coating.
I hope the USENET community will reflect on how Larry Lippman helped
many readers over the years. As far as the jokes go, I know Larry
will be laughing!
If anyone is seriously thinking of taking up a collection for a
scholarship in Larry's name, I will be proud to contribute.
Barry L. Ornitz ornitz@kodak.com
[Moderator's Note: Not many people here are aware that it was
complaints by Larry which led to the Nynex purchasing scandal a few
years ago. His company was one which got shafted by Nynex in the deal
where they were purchasing things at inflated prices from themselves.
When {Newsday} first broke the story, Larry was mentioned as one of
the people who instigated the investigation. He called me on the
phone several times last summer inviting me to come and visit him at
his home in Rochester, NY but I had to decline because of the problem
I was having with my foot at the time. I'm sorry now I did not take
him up on his offer. He was in the process of dismantling the local
Western Union office after WUTCO had abandoned it and turned it over
to him to get rid of. (Literally! They walked out and left everything
in place, hiring Larry and a friend of his to dismantle it all and get
rid of it.) PAT]
------------------------------
From: chafe@ucdavis.edu (Steve Chafe)
Subject: Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage?
Date: 29 Jan 92 00:01:49 GMT
Reply-To: chafe@ucdavis.edu (Steve Chafe)
Organization: University of California, Davis
A phone outage at the time sounds completely plausable to me given
that on old switches, large groups of lines would have to be turned
off in order to keep the switch from damaging itself in ultra-high
traffic situations. The question I would like to ask is did the
outage occur prior to the assasination by a few seconds or minutes???
[Moderator's Note: I don't think it happened *prior* to the
assassination at all. I think 'it' (some form of phone office
congestion probably) happened a few minutes afterward, as occurred all
over the USA and much of the world that day. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 07:33:52 PST
From: pierpont@snax.enet.dec.com
Subject: Re: AT&T Credit Card Numbers
In Telecom Volume 12 : Issue 89 From: geek@media.mit.edu (Chris
Schmandt) writes:
> My card calls still appear itemized under AT&T on my bill, but I
> would not care if they appeared (at the same rates!) under the NETel
> part of my bill.
I have the same deal with SNET. My "old" card was issued both by SNET
[one colored card] and shortly there after by AT&T [A different card].
Both with the same number. AT&T has since sent me the new non-phone
number tied card. All calls to the old card number are listed in the
SNET section of the bill as carried by AT&T.
SNET has sent many mailings saying that the "old" card is still good.
AT&T sent mailing to offer 10% discounts if I use the new AT&T card.
The discount is not good if you already subscribe to ROA or some other
such plan, according to the mailing. Now I will have to learn to
rememeber the AT&T card number to get the discount.
> So is the LEC just trying to get me to use their card to get a cut on
> the LD revenue? Or will I find one day that my old number no longer
> works on AT&T?
Yes, Yes......
Howard Pierpont All standard disclaimers
------------------------------
From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Where Can One *Buy* the White Pages?
Date: 28 Jan 92 21:21:49 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
In article <telecom12.34.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, gil@limbic.ssdl.com (Gil
Kloepfer Jr.) writes:
> My neighbor is looking to find a source for the entire US white pages
> directory in machine-readable form.
NYNEX offers the USA white pages on a stack of CD roms. The price is
well into five figures per annum, and I think it is updated monthly.
Regional subsets are available at lower prices.
Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
------------------------------
From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phone Test Mode Commands
Date: 28 Jan 92 21:27:13 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
In article <telecom12.34.11@eecs.nwu.edu>, covert@covert.enet.dec.com
(John R. Covert) writes:
> if you enter an unfamiliar area it would be nice to be able to find
> out the system ID without trying all the possibilities.
> [Moderator's Note: The way I always tell what system I have roamed
> into is by dialing *711 or *611 and asking. Those calls are free. PAT]
In the New York City area, *711 on any system gets a recording giving
the name (but not the SID) of the responding system. I think this is
a free call.
Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
------------------------------
Subject: International Information (was Slamming With a New Twist)
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 28 Jan 92 11:00:33 EST (Tue)
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)
> Furthermore, and I don't know if this is related to the slamming or
> not, recently I needed a city code for Japan which was not listed in
> the phone book. Dialing 102880 I was given the country code for
> Japan, [and some city codes and they charged me for it.]
Next time, call 1 800 874 4000 which is AT&T's international
information center. They give international rates and dialing
instructions for free. For example, I called them to find out how
much it costs to call an Inmarisat phone -- $10.00 per minute. Sprint
is a relative bargain at $9.99.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #94
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14185;
30 Jan 92 3:17 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03330
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Jan 1992 01:19:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19568
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 30 Jan 1992 01:19:05 -0600
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 01:19:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201300719.AA19568@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #95
TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Jan 92 01:18:58 CST Volume 12 : Issue 95
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services (WSJ via Stan Brown)
France's Minitel Service (Der Standard via Wolf Paul)
India Discovers Telecommunications (Der Standard via Wolf Paul)
AT&T Announcement: Unblocking (Andy Sherman)
Conduit in Your House (was Two Wires Become Four) (Todd Inch)
No Supervison on 900 Call (Bill Kessler)
Help Needed With Integrated Voice Power 4 (Rob Sturgill)
NXX to CLLI Conversion Tables Wanted (polari!brianc@sumax.seattleu.edu)
5ESS (R) Sold in Japan (AT&T News Briefs via Andy Sherman)
Phone Number Parser Wanted (Edward C. Bennett)
Centel For Sale (David Brightbill)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan Brown)
Subject: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 14:49:06 EST
Quotes are from the newspaper article cited below.
A 1989 U.S.law requires that sexually explicit message services be
available only to individuals who file written requests with the
telephone company. The law says that if a phone company acts as a
billing agent for companies that offer sexually explicit messages, the
phone company must prevent access to those services from any phone
where the subscriber has not requested them in writing.
The aim of the law is to protect minors from "indecent" messages. It
seems not to apply if the services bill customers directly, rather
than having the phone company handle the bills. 900 services that are
not sexually explicit are also not affected.
When the law was passed, commercial "dial-a-porn providers" sued,
claiming that the law was unconstitutional. A federal district court
in New York issued an injunction against enforcement of the law.
(This is why currently we can all reach porno lines unless we've
requested blocking.)
In July 1991, the federal appeals court at New York overturned the
district court's order. Yesterday (Monday, 27 Jan), the Supreme Court
announced that it would not review the appeals court's finding.
Effectively, this clears the way for nationwide enforcement of the
law.*
Obviously, the "purveyors of dial-a-porn" are not happy about this.
they "contend that the cumbersome process of collecting written
requests from customers may drive them out of business."
Case: Dial Information Services Corp of New York v Barr
The above information is condensed from an article in {The Wall Street
Journal} of Tuesday 28 Jan. The article didn't mention any deadline
for phone companies to be in compliance.
*Technically, the decision is binding only in the judicial circuit
where the appeals court has jurisdiction. If the appeals court in
another circuit rules the law unconstitutional, then the Supreme Court
will have to make a decision. But by declining to review the
decision, the Justices sent a pretty clear signal that they considered
the law constitutional. Therefore it's unlikely that another appeals
court would find the law unconstitutional, since it would expect to be
reversed on appeal.
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA brown@ncoast.org
------------------------------
From: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul)
Subject: France's Minitel Service
Reply-To: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 14:18:24 GMT
The following appeared in Vienna's {Der Standard} on 92/01/19.
In its tenth year of existence the French videotext system "Minitel"
is breaking all records: six million of the small beige boxes are in
use today, five million calls are logged every day.
Both fans and foes of the system admit that Minitel has changed the
life of the French in a major way.
Minitel is being used today about equally for private and professional
purposes, with professional use increasing and home use stagnating.
The main reason for Minitel's success is the fact that the terminals
are distributed without charge, and that there are no fixed charges
associated with the service. Connect time costs between $0.06 and
$0.2.
The system first gained popularity because of the "Messageries roses",
programs for anonymous sex conversations on the screen and all kinds
of partner matching and swapping. Paradoxically, this feature of
Minitel had been sponsored by the conservative French Senate, which
had suggested programs which would facilitate the "cohabitation" of
the French. The resulting services sported names like "Ulla",
"Natacha", "Domina", or "Gay", and claimed 20 percent of all calls.
Since 1987 this trend has turned around. Many employers who faced
increasing phone bills requested France Telecom to block access to
"adults only" services from their phone lines. A law suit involving
five "messageries" which were shown to engage in child prostitution
and the corruption of minors hurt the industry's reputation. Today,
the "messageries roses" have dropped to four percent of calls to
Minitel.
Other services are gaining in importance. Electronic Phone Directory,
Daily News, Stock Exchange News, Traffic News, Tele-Shopping, Ticket
Reservation, Health Tips, Leisure News, Private Mail or Professional
Exchange - Minitel has become a major part of French life. Opponents
who criticize the "minitol" (= little jail) for the antisocial effect
it has are in the minority.
Even though business is going well for Telecom France as well as for
the private service providers, the French government is not satisfied
yet. They want to export the system. The first fat fish on their hook
is the American phone company, US West, which signed a contract last
October.
At the same time, Telecom France is constantly improving the service
at home: soon it will be possible to pay bills via Minitel and a
separately available credit card reader. Later this year, a field test
for Graphics Minitel (with 64 gray levels) will be started, which will
offer visual services. A portable Minitel terminal has also been
announced.
[Addition by Wolf Paul: Similar services in Germany and Austria,
called "BTX (Bildschirm-Text)" are gaining popularity, although they
are not nearly as popular or widespread as Minitel in France.
Actually, there are gateways, and an Austrian BTX user can access most
of the base-charge Minitel services, as well as German, Luxembourguis,
and Swiss services.]
Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center wnp@rcvie.co.at
Alcatel-Elin Research Center +43-1-391621-122 (w)
Ruthnergasse 1-7 +43-1-391452 (fax)
A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe +43-1-2246913 (h)
------------------------------
From: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul)
Subject: India Discovers Telecommunications
Reply-To: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 14:29:58 GMT
The following summarizes an AFP (Agence France Presses) release which
appeared in Vienna's "Der Standard" on 92/01/29:
Telecom giants Siemens, AT&T, Alcatel, Fujitsu and Ericsson are now
carrying their battle for market share to the Indian subcontinent.
After years of stagnation in the state-owned Indian telephone
industry, the government has now opened the market to international
competition.
Almost immediately the French Alcatel Group joined with the Indian
Modi Group to manufacture digital switching equipment. Fujitsu has
joined with the Punjabi government, and AT&T is negotiating with the
Indian Tata-Telecom group about similar projects. Siemens is
interested in a joint venture with Webel Telematics, which is
producing Telex and Fax equipment with the support of the West Bengali
government. Motorola and Ericsson have opened a business in New Delhi
and are looking for marketin partners for cellular phones.
According to National Telcom of India 7.5 million new subscriber lines
were installed between 1985 and 1990, but there are twice as many
applications.
Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center wnp@rcvie.co.at
Alcatel-Elin Research Center +43-1-391621-122 (w)
Ruthnergasse 1-7 +43-1-391452 (fax)
A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe +43-1-2246913 (h)
------------------------------
From: andys@ulysses.att.com (Andy Sherman)
Subject: AT&T Announcement: Unblocking
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 18:32:31 EST
AT&T today announced a program that will make it easier for consumers
to reach the long-distance company of their choice when they call from
phones in hotel, college, university and hospital rooms. Under this
offer, which expires July 31, 1992, AT&T will provide up to $1,000 per
site to help these organizations unblock so-called "10XXX access
codes." These are five-digit prefixes callers use to reach their
preferred long-distance company when making calls while away from home
using a phone not subscribed to that company. They punch in the
prefix -- for example, "10ATT" -- before dialing "0," followed by an
area code and number. Millions of these phones do not enable
consumers to reach their preferred long-distance company, a problem
known as blocking.
Consumer problems with blocking were a major source of complaints to
the FCC in 1991. This prompted the Commission last year to order the
unblocking of all pay phones and in-room phones. In addition to
financial help, AT&T will provide general information on technical
solutions that should permit these organizations to meet their
unblocking responsibilities. The company also is sponsoring seminars
to explain the FCC's unblocking order and discuss the variety of
unblocking solutions available. Organizations interested in the
program can get more information by calling the AT&T Unblocking
Assistance Center, toll-free, on 1-800-UNBLOCK (862-5625) between 9
a.m. and 9 p.m. EST., Monday through Friday.
Note that all of the major IXC's (who have been bitten by the AOS
phenomenon) will ultimately benefit from this program. I'm sure
*somebody* will find a way to put a negative spin on this.
Maybe the unblocking order will level the playing field so that honest
AOS vendors (like Jim Allard claimed he was) might actually be able to
stay in business. Or maybe people will stop viewing the telephone as
an independent profit center and start charging towel fees instead. :^)
Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928
READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking!
------------------------------
From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch)
Subject: Conduit in Your House (was Two Wires Become Four)
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 20:31:11 GMT
In article <telecom12.62.11@eecs.nwu.edu> olsen@masala.LCS.MIT.EDU
(James Olsen) writes:
> All the suggestions for stringing {2,3,4}-pair telephone cable in a
> new house are quite reasonable, but if I ever build a new house (or
> extend an old one), I'm going to provide plastic conduit runs to every
> room, all interconnected to a central point. This will accommodate
> not only telephone wire, but TV cable, speaker cable, intercom,
> computer networks, etc.
> The most important point is that it will accomodate the kind of cable
> that will be in routine use 10 or 20 years from now, even though we
> don't yet know what it will be.
Very true. However, conduit is neither cheap nor easy to install
compared with cable, especially unshielded twisted pair.
I'm hoping/anticipating that most future technologies will be
compatible with unsheilded twisted pair since there already exists so
much of it in commercial/office buildings and since "The Phone
Company" is pretty much stuck with it considering their investment
alongside the roads.
Ethernet is one example of a technology which I believe is migrating
away from coax and toward UTP.
This won't, of course, help you CB'ers and hams who have antennas to
drive or those of us who insist on having CATV in every room (well
maybe not the bathrooms.) But pulling in CATV coax along with your
X-pair UTP is pretty trivial and still much cheaper and easier than
conduit. (I have a limited techno-budget.)
------------------------------
From: inhydra!kessler@inuxy.att.com
Date: 29 Jan 92 08:49:06 EST (Wed)
Subject: No Supervison on 900 Call
Observations on the 900-884-1212 Reverse Directory number:
1. A telephone number that has been in the book for about ten years
was not in the database. I guess the database needs some improvements.
2. I called the service from an ISDN set. The service answers with
information about the rates followed by a request to touch tone a "1".
After dialing a "1" I received ring back for about ten seconds
followed by an attendant.
What was interesting is that call supervision didn't occur until after
I dialed a "1" and the person answered. (The call timer on my ISDN
set didn't start until the person answered.)
This is the first time I have made a call with two-way audio without
supervision. Is this a new service that some 900 numbers support?
How is it implemented? I thought fraud protection prevented two-way
audio until the called party answers.
Bill Kessler inuxy!kessler
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 08:22:55 CST
From: sturgill@comm.mot.com (Rob Sturgill)
Subject: Help Needed With Integrated Voice Power 4
I recently purchased a surplus IBM-PC compatible telecommunications
board labeled 'Integrated Voice Power 4' which includes a DSP32C and
several DAA's. I have several ideas for resurrecting this board to
use it for either a phone interface or as a fast floating point
coprocessor. Can anyone point me in the direction of literature/
specs/original purpose of this device?
Any help greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Robert M. Sturgill Motorola Inc.
sturgill@comm.mot.com Shared Systems Division
phone: (708) 576-4726 1301 E. Algonquin Rd. IL02-4420
fax: (708) 576-6150 Schaumburg Illinois 60196
------------------------------
From: polari!brianc@sumax.seattleu.edu
Subject: NXX to CLLI Conversion Tables Wanted
Organization: Unix Security Newsletter
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 05:44:49 GMT
I was wondering if anyone had a list of NXX to CLLI codes or CLLI to
NXX codes list for Washington State, or may a list of NPA+NXX to CLLI
or the other way around.
Thanks,
Brian
------------------------------
From: andys@ulysses.att.com (Andy Sherman)
Subject: 5ESS (R) Sold in Japan
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 13:55:54 EST
AT&T NEWS BRIEFS
Wednesday, January 29, 1992
5ESS TO JAPAN -- AT&T Japan has supplied a switching system for
Japanese mobile phone company Nippon Idou Tsushin, its first such
order in the Japanese market, an AT&T spokesman said. AT&T supplied
one 5ESS system. ... "We see this order as our entry into the growing
Japanese telecommunications market," the spokesman said. ... Reuters,
1/28.
--------
Hmm, maybe American switches will sell better than American cars over
there ...
(R) 5ESS is a registered trademark of AT&T
Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928
READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking!
------------------------------
From: "Edward C. Bennett" <edward@TWG.COM>
Subject: Phone Number Parser Wanted
Date: 30 Jan 92 00:48:52 GMT
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Palo Alto, CA
Does anyone know where I can get a routine that can parse a phone
number? I've got some software that dials a modem and I'd like it to
be able to analyze the number before dialing.
If I can't find a canned routine and I have to roll my own, where can
I find the official syntax of a phone number? Is there such a thing?
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Edward C. Bennett edward@twg.com
The Wollongong Group (415) 962-7252
1129 San Antonio Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 11:02:48 -0500
From: David Brightbill <djb@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
Subject: Centel For Sale
There was a short item on the local (Tallahassee, Florida) news the
other night to the effect that Centel is for sale. I have no clue as
to whether they are dumping their Florida operations to raise cash or
if the entire company is on the block.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #95
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15734;
30 Jan 92 3:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25500
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Jan 1992 01:47:29 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17867
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 30 Jan 1992 01:47:12 -0600
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 01:47:12 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201300747.AA17867@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #96
TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Jan 92 01:47:07 CST Volume 12 : Issue 96
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Call Waiting and Voice Mail (Pete Holsberg)
Re: Call Waiting and Voice Mail (Steve Forrette)
Re: Call Waiting and Voice Mail (Mickey Ferguson)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (John Higdon)
Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Eric Florack)
Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (Joshua Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: pjh@mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg)
Subject: Re: Call Waiting and Voice Mail
Organization: The College On The Other Side Of Route One
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 15:15:55 GMT
In article <telecom12.90.3@eecs.nwu.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg)
writes:
> That means that when someone calls and one of us answers, there is no
> way to enable "redirection," right? I think the answer is to dump call
> waiting and find a device that will flash a lamp if there are messages
> in the voice mailbox.
> [Moderator's Note: The 'stutter dial-tone' which is present after a
> message is left in voicemail is the indicator, but of course you have
> to go off hook and listen for it, an extra step that a message waiting
> lamp would indicate if it worked that way in residential service; but
> I don't think it does anywhere without some modifications not part of
> the standard voicemail package from telco. What you term 'redirection'
> is not possible; once the call has been answered, there is no way to,
> for example, flash the hook and send it on to voicemail. Even though
> voicemail is set up to 'forward on busy', your line is never truly
> busy when call-waiting is on the line, unless call-waiting has been
> disabled on a call-by-call basis with *70. PAT]
Sorry; I didn't make myself clear. We have decided to junk call
waiting and keep voice mail.
What I would like to find is some kind of device that would attach to
the phone to flash an LED when there is a message in the voice
mailbox. Possibilities that occur to me are (1) a device that would
periodically (perhaps) take the phone off hook and check for the
presence of the "stutter dial tone" and (2) one that be like the
device that deaf people use, except that the light would continue to
flash after the ringing stopped. Do such things -- or perhaps better
ones -- exist?
Prof. Peter J. Holsberg Mercer County Community College
Voice: 609-586-4800 Engineering Technology, Computers and Math
FAX: 609-586-6944 1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690
Internet: pjh@mccc.edu Trenton Computer Festival: April 11-12, 1992
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 15:19:58 pst
From: Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com>
Subject: Re: Call Waiting and Voice Mail
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Presumably, telco voicemail is implemented by using the no-answer
transfer and busy transfer custom calling features already in the
switch software, with them pre-programmed to divert to the telco
voicemail system. So, this is a question as to whether you can have
no-answer transfer work concurrently with call waiting. Here are my
experiences with this configuration:
I had this working on a US West 1AESS in Seattle a couple of years
ago. If a second call came in on the first line and I got the
call-waiting beep, and I chose not to flash to answer the call, it
would no-answer transfer to the second line in the same way it did if
the first line was originally idle and was then ringing when the call
came in.
When I moved back into Pacific Bell land and tried to order this
configuration, I was told that "the equipment can't do this." Further
investigation revealed that my new exchange was also a 1AESS. At this
point I challenged the business office with my prior experiences, and
it turns out that there is a specific tariff provision inserted by
Pacific Bell that says that if a line has call waiting, it cannot have
no-answer transfer or busy transfer.
So, it can be that your telco just chooses not to offer no-answer
transfer in conjunction with call waiting for whatever reason. Also,
the original poster mentioned having to pay 50 cents per month extra
for cancel call waiting. This sounds like a GTE trick, and if this is
indeed his telco, perhaps he is served by a GTD-5 that really can't do
this.
Here's my question: Why would Pacific Bell specifically prohibit
ordering busy and/or no-answer transfer in conjunction with call
waiting when the equipment can definately handle this? Here I was
trying to order several features, and was told that they would not
allow this. Why?
Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
[Moderator's Note: That's a good point, and my similar experience here
prompted the answer I gave Holsberg. I let an incoming call via
call-waiting ring for a long time; it never did move on to voice mail,
so I assume IBT can't/won't do it either. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 92 10:47:47 PST
From: mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com (Mickey Ferguson)
Subject: Re: Call Waiting and Voice Mail
Organization: Rolm Systems
In article <telecom12.83.6@eecs.nwu.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (P. J. Holsberg)
writes:
> My wife just arranged to have call waiting and voice mail services
> added to the phone line she uses for business. The rep told her that
> she had to key *70 before each call if she wanted incoming calls to be
> transferred to the voice mailbox (if she didn't pick up on them).
> She asked if there was some way to program the system to make the
> transfer automatic, and he said that there was not. A colleague of my
> wife -- who lives in the same town -- has this automatic switching and
> -- get this -- doesn't pay the 50 cent premium that the PC charges for
> the ability to do the *70!!
If I understand the way telco voice mail works, it will answer
incoming calls when the phone is not answered (call this
ring-no-answer). Let's say that a call comes in, the phone is busy
and goes along the path for call waiting, the caller hears ringing and
the callee receives regular indication that there is a call waiting.
If the callee doesn't respond to the call waiting signal, won't the
call eventually hit ring-no-answer condition and forward to voice
mail? Right or wrong?
Mickey Ferguson Rolm Systems mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com
[Moderator's Note: Yes and no. See earlier messages today. I guess it
depends on how telco has it configured. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 00:04 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com writes:
> I submit that any regulation that does not recognize and deal with
> this as a major concern is leaning in the established company's favor.
But using legislation to artificially "level the playing field" brings
its own set of problems. I am a supporter of divestiture, but only a
fool would argue that what preceded it was a total failure. In the
long run, it may turn out that there simply is not room for a
multiplicity of players.
There are far too many upstarts in this industry that seem to feel
that divestiture is a license to parlay a minimal capital investment
into untold wealth. Not true. As has been pointed out, it takes
manpower, equipment, and a lot of saavy to deliver telecommunications
product.
This brings to mind what I have come to call "value diminished"
services. In the past, the "telephone company" delivered coin-paid
services directly to the public via its own equipment under its own
control. The COCOT industry, unable to install and maintain its own
network, began reselling this service to the public. Since the whole
show operates on a slim margin anyway, the COCOT people felt that it
would be necessary to charge unreasonably high prices for its service.
In the same stroke, it removed one of the essentials of divestiture:
competition. Unlike the telco product, COCOTs usually PREVENT the
customer from making a choice of long distance carrier. The calls cost
more, the DTMF pads frequently quit working during the course of the
call, and the sleazeball IEC reduces voices to mush. If this is not
diminished value, I do not know what is.
What is the answer? There is no real way to level the playing field
here. The LEC owns and operates the switches that in turn control and
facilitate the traditional coin phone. Using computerized "smart
phones" is the telephonic equivalent of a hack. It, at best,
approximates the tried and true performance that we expected for many
decades. Even if the COCOT operator struck a deal with the telco to
use standard pay phones, the LEC will always control the switch.
You cannot reverse one hundred years by tweaking regulations. Any
attempt to do so in the IXC arena will almost certainly result in
"value diminished" long distance services. The OCCs simply do not have
the infrastructure of AT&T. No amount of legal field leveling will
create that infrastructure. As Andy Sherman pointed out, it is this
equipment and manpower that actually carries the calls. Artificially
hamstringing AT&T, or forcing it to charge artificially high rates is
not in the best interest of the consumer.
While you may argue that such practices are necessary to "help" the
competition get started and then further argue that competition is
inherently beneficial, history disagrees. The temptation in any
enterprize is to go after the most profitable, first and formost. I
even do this in my consulting business. I am not interested in people
who need ten stations and some 1A2 terminal equipment. I'll leave that
to others who are much hungrier. And likewise, the upstart OCC will
simply use any playing field "help" to go after the profit centers.
Look at coin service. No one but AT&T offers it; and no one else seems
to care. The means to provide it by any carrier willing to make a
certain investment are available. But the margins are slim. Any bets
when MCI or Sprint begin coin-paid long distance service anywhere?
Yes, every service an IXC provides comes as a result of heavy
investment. And yes, AT&T usually already has this equipment in place.
But divestiture was not meant to be a quick, easy way for AT&T
competitiors to make a killing. It was supposed to provide more
services at lower cost than would supposedly have been available
otherwise. In this regard, divestiture has been a success in many
areas. But it may be many years before the AT&T competitiors have
sufficient infrastructure in place to create a naturally level playing
field.
In light of the consequences of regulatory quick-fixes, I am willing
to wait for the natural processes to take effect. The line goes, "AT&T
couldn't sell drugs at a Grateful Dead concert". At the moment, it has
an "in place" advantage that benefits the company greatly. But over
time that will change. Or maybe AT&T will surprise us all and wake up
and smell the coffee and keep ahead of the upstarts. But let the
market determine these things. The consumer will benefit along the
road and in the end.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 06:55:11 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
> You keep talking about head starts and government supported
> monopolies. Is it AT&T's fault that Alex Bell invented the telephone
> in 1877? Should they have sat around waiting a hundred years to see
> if maybe some other competitors would want to start on an even keel
> with them?
First off, look into your history, Pat, and you'll see that there were
several comapnies that popped up during the early days of the
telephone ... all (well, OK, most ...) of which got snapped up, at a
rate that would make even the most ardent capitalist cringe. If we
were not dealing with what was to becme utility status ... this
wouldn't have created problems.
> Contrary to being a 'government supported' monopoly, the
> government's early actions were intervention to prevent AT&T from
> getting larger. In exchange, the government gave Ma Bell some
> privileges. Things worked out the way they worked out; that is all.
> There was no government conspiracy with AT&T for sixty or eighty years
> to prevent the possibility of competition.
I say again: any regulation that does not recognize and deal with the
historical domination as a major concern is leaning in the established
company's favor. That there was no conspiracy (I agree, btw) does not
make the governmental inaction any less supportive, or any less their
fault.
I'm going to jump on a slight tangent, here as a thought has occurred:
(Lessee, here; how do I say this?) Perhaps what's complicating
matters, here, (and the discussion, thereby) is the perception of the
telephone as a public utility, as power and water and sewer.
Is that perception is outdated? The phone has, in recent years become
more a comodity than a utility. This change started happening 30 years
or so ago, when competitors came on the field. However; this change
from one status to the other is not complete, nor, I think, will it be
in our lifetime. And it is this being in the 'grey area' that causes
some problems in defining how to deal with questions such as are under
discussion here.
I guess the central question, the one on which all other the other
answers we've been kicking around will be based, is: How are we going
to deal with the phone? Will it be a utility forever, and (at least
partially) exempt from fullly open markets, and under the direction of
the government, or will it go to a fully open market situation?
Frankly, I don't think it can go fully in either direction. To allow
both competition, and connectivity, the government is going to have to
remain involved; AT&T and the Bells have been throwing up roadblocks
to the goal of full conectivity if that connectivity involves other
players including each other, of late. These monopolistic practices
must end, if we are to achieve a balance for any length of time.
Just kinda thinking aloud, here.
------------------------------
From: ukelele!jlee@uunet.uu.net (Joshua Lee)
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!
Organization: GAU Technologies, Fairfax County, VA
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 00:06:59 GMT
hhallika@nike.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes:
>> FCC is an echo where many of the readers of TELECOM Digest would
>> feel at home. As well as the PHONE echo, also gated through the RIME
> Is there some way those of us without access to Fido can
> [Moderator's Note: Actually, 'not having access to Fido' is sort of a
> strange thing to hear. In virtually every community with at least a
Yes it is. :-)
> few BBS's running, there will be at least one Fido. Are you certain
> none of the BBS lines in your town are running Fido, Opus, or TBBS?
Actually, more types of BBSs than those can run it, most major brands
can, and there's several other Fido native BBSs such as QBBS, RA and
Maximus, and there are lots of RBBS, PC-Board, Wildcat!, etc BBSs ...
Many areas don't even run the "Traditional" original base of the
Fidonet capable software. If he can e-mail me his city, and surrounding
locally dialable environs, I could probably send him several nodes he
could call. He'd be suprised as to what's in his own backyard, and if
they're running bulk user mail ("offline readers") he could read it
very efficiently.
Disclaimer: I have no financial connections with Fidonet, it's free. :-)
> Those types are able to use the the Fido mail and echoes. How many
> Fido sites are there in the USA now? Thousands probably. PAT]
There are 14,000 worldwide, only approximately 60% though are in the
US and Canada. If he has a high speed modem and there aren't somehow >
10 in his area (there's 130 here!) then he can call over 40% of them
with it, and that includes the ones in other countries in the stats,
it's probably over half high speed in the US. (Unfortunatly, not me)
The Fidonet backbone itself averages over 60 megs 'o mail today, most
Usenet newsgroups subjectively have lower traffic than Fidonet. Keep
in mind that the above 14,000 figure is discrete sites, and that
figure is 50% more than last year, and shows no signs of the growth
slowing.
The threat to BBSs by telcos is real, and will effect the ability of
people to have access to information and data (especially if
decentralized) greatly.
ArfaNet: Joshua.Lee@f542.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joshua Lee on 1:109/542)
uucp: ...!{uunet,rutgers,ames}!mimsy!prometheus!ukelele!jlee
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #96
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17980;
30 Jan 92 4:39 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27533
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Jan 1992 02:39:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12043
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 30 Jan 1992 02:39:17 -0600
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 02:39:17 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201300839.AA12043@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #97
TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Jan 92 02:39:10 CST Volume 12 : Issue 97
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Question on NT Speakerphone (Joe Abernathy)
Telecom Directories (Nigel Allen)
900 Number From Payphone (Jeff Garber)
Pager Vibrate Mode Motor (Matt Yoder)
Re: 800's From Canada (Mark C. Henderson)
Re: Point Roberts, WA (John Eaton)
Re: International Information (Monty Solomon)
Re: Larry Lippman: In Memoriam (Jim Haynes)
Re: AT&T Credit Card Numbers (Kenny Wickstrom)
Re: AT&T Video-Phone References Wanted (Jim Hutchison)
Re: Annoying Pac*Bell Inside Wire Repair Brochure (Ron Heiby)
Re: 408 Area Code Question (Doctor Math)
Re: Mobidem Net (Doctor Math)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 13:00:54 CST
From: chron!magic322!edtjda@uunet.UU.NET (Joe Abernathy)
Subject: Question on NT Speakerphone
Gentle Readers --
I would like to seek your advice on the installation of a speakerphone
built by Northern Telecom. It's one of the older, bulky, wedge-shaped
executive phones, but the speakerphone attachment is so noise-free I
hate to part with the phone.
The phone has three sections: the cradle; an autodialer unit; and the
speakerphone unit. The cradle phone and autodialer already are
working.
The phone requires a six-line wire, but it wasn't clear to the phone
tech who installed the jack what the extra wires should be used for.
Red and green are now being used for the dial tone in the cradle, and
a transformer is plugged into the autodialer unit, although it is not
hooked up to the outlet in any fashion.
It's been a couple of years since the phone was fully hooked up, but
I'm thinking that I recall having to use two transformers with all
three pieces of the phone plugged in. So is it possible that all I
need to do is hook up a second transformer to the blue and white pair,
or perhaps the yellow and black?
All suggestions gratefully accepted.
Regards,
Joe Abernathy edtjda@chron.com
------------------------------
From: nigel.allen@canrem.uucp (Nigel Allen)
Date: 30 Jan 92 (02:16)
Subject: Telecom Directories
If you are a a telecommunications consultant or equipment manufacturer
or distributor, you may find it useful to advertise or request a free
basic listing in two annual directories published by telephone
industry magazines.
To request a questionnaire so that your company can be listed free of
charge in the {Telephone Engineer & Management Directory}, write to:
Lynne Coder
TE&M Directory
1 East First Street
Duluth, Minnesota 55802
telephone (218) 723-9552
For information on {Telephony's Buyers' Guide}, write to:
Telephony's Buyers' Guide
55 East Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-4188
I think it is just a special issue of {Telephony} magazine.
Consultants may also want to be listed free of charge in the
{Consultants and Consulting Organizations Directory}. To request a
questionnaire for that directory, write to:
Consultants and Consulting Organizations Directory
P.O. Box 6789
Silver Spring, Maryland 20916
telephone (301) 871-5280 (voice or fax)
The {Telecommunications Directory} (formerly the {Telecommunications
Systems and Services Directory}) published by Gale Research Inc. is
another good directory for consultants and service providers (but not
manufacturers) to be listed in free of charge. However, it is only
published every two years or so, and I don't think they'll start work
on the next edition for several months. If you want to be listed,
contact them in writing rather than by phone, and they'll send you a
questionnaire when the new questionnaires become available. The
address is:
Telecommunications Directory
Gale Research Inc.
835 Penobscot Building
Detroit, Michigan 48226-4094
telephone (313) 961-2242
Your local library may have some or all of these directories. Looking
at the directories at a library will give you a better idea of whether
it would be worthwhile to buy your own copy.
Canada Remote Systems. Toronto, Ontario NorthAmeriNet Host
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 04:51 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com>
Subject: 900 Number From Payphone
I just saw a news story (on channel 9, KCAL, Los Angeles) about a 13
year old girl who was killed after meeting someone she met off of a
900 number party line. The story then showed a shot of a payphone and
said that this is where she made all the calls from to the 900 number.
I thought you could not access a 900 number from a payphone (unless it
was a poorly programmed COCOT) ...
Jeff Garber <507-5968@mci.com>
My opinions are just that
[Moderator's Note: Well, you can't access 900/976 from Illinois Bell
payphones, that's for sure. Maybe the phone shown on the television
was a 'poorly programmed COCOT' ... then again, maybe its ratings time
for television news shows and the talking heads at channel 9 were all
in a dither looking for something scandalous. PAT]
------------------------------
From: Matt Yoder <yoder@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Pager Vibrate Mode Motor
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 22:28:10 MST
Does anyone know how I can acquire the small motor for the Motorola
BPR 2000 pager unit that allows it to vibrate, and, if possible, a
diagram for insertion of said motor? The BPR 2000 is the tremendous
pager that looks like some sort of evil growth ...
I'd appreciate E-mail to one of the addresses below, since I tend to
skim this group very lightly, but posting here will probably be seen
by me also.
Thanx,
Matt Yoder yoder@ucsu.colorado.edu yoder@refuge.colorado.edu
yoder@boulder.colorado.edu (303) 441-8029 Pager (303) 786-2840 Voice
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 17:45:23 -0500
From: "Mark C. Henderson" <mch@west.sq.com>
Subject: Re: 800's From Canada
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Surrey, British Columbia, CANADA
In article <telecom12.92.7@eecs.nwu.edu> mak@tgivan.wimsey.bc.ca (Bob
Makowski) writes:
> Six months ago, an article posted a phone number for surrgating 800
> access when the numbers are U.S. scoped only.
One possibility is to get an account with CAMNET. In addition to
providing discount telephone service within Canada and between Canada
and the U.S. (calls originate in Canada), they provide access to U.S.
800 numbers from Canada for C$0.30/minute regardless of rate period.
They apparently have local access numbers in a number of larger
Canadian cities. It works just like alternative long distance carriers
used to work in the U.S. (I remember having this arrangement with
American Network when I lived in Eugene, OR), you dial a local access
number, enter an access code and the area code and phone number you
want to call.
I have no connection with CAMNET other than as a satisfied customer.
Mark C. Henderson, SoftQuad Inc, 321-9801 King George Hwy, Surrey, BC V3T 5H5
Internet: mch@sq.com, markh@wimsey.bc.ca UUCP: {sq,van-bc}!sqwest!mch
Telephone: +1 604 585 1999
------------------------------
From: johne@hp-vcd.vcd.hp.com (John Eaton)
Subject: Re: Point Roberts, WA
Date: 29 Jan 92 15:53:17 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Vancouver, WA, USA
> The 1982 tape I got some data from had Point Roberts (Washington
> state) in the 206 area with operator routine via 604. I don't know
> about 604 area code, however.
Looking at the map will explain that unusual situation. Point Roberts
is on the tip of a British Columbia penninsula that juts below the
49th parallel and is therefore part of the US of A. All land routes
into Point Roberts go across Canadian lands. It was probably cheaper to
connect to Canadian utilities rather than run a submarine cable under
Puget Sound.
John Eaton !hp-vcd!johne
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 03:36:54 EST
From: roscom!monty@Think.COM (Monty Solomon)
Subject: Re: International Information
> Next time, call 1 800 874 4000 which is AT&T's international
> information center. They give international rates and dialing
> instructions for free.
You can also call them collect at 412 553 7458 when overseas.
Monty roscom!monty@think.com
------------------------------
From: Jim Haynes <haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Larry Lippman: In Memoriam
Date: 30 Jan 92 05:49:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
> He was in the process of dismantling the local Western Union office
> after WUTCO had abandoned it and turned it over to him to get rid of.
> (Literally! They walked out and left everything in place, hiring Larry
> and a friend of his to dismantle it all and get rid of it.) PAT]
Oooh! Wish I had known about that while he was still living, as I
have quite an interest in WU historical things and would have had a
lot of questions he could probably have answered based on seeing the
stuff first hand.
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet
[Moderator's Note: Larry sent me a videotape he took of their facility
on the sixth floor of some office building downtown. Rack after rack
after row after row of test positions, circuits, you-name-it. The
offices in the same facility were abandoned with the papers left on
the desk and in the filing cabinets, just the way someone leaves their
office on Friday afternoon for the weekend. In the kitchen area they
used as a 'break room' the coffee pot was still sitting there, as was
the refrigerator and stove. Meters, test equipment, six button phones,
technical manuals, a basement full of TWX machines and every spare
part you can imagine. Personnel records, company memos, everything. A
complete WUTCO central office. Abandoned. WUTCO closed that office in
the process of consolidating what is left of their pitiful business
and hired Larry to clean it out. I was shocked by the video he sent
me; I guess everyone was laid off the same day. No one came back to
work there the next day. I get very sad thinking about the slow death
of WUTCO, and I know Larry did also. PAT]
------------------------------
From: wickstrom@ttd.teradyne.com
Subject: Re: AT&T Credit Card Numbers
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 03:16:10 GMT
In article <telecom12.89.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, geek@media.mit.edu (Chris
Schmandt) writes:
> Recent postings have again gotten me confused. Can someone enlighten
> me?
> (I use AT&T for long distance service). Many months ago I got a new
> AT&T card with the random digits. I soon realized I had no interest
> in learning yet another number, so switched back to the old number. I
> use the new card in some card reader phones. Only under great duress
> will I place a non-AT&T long distance call.
I got the same announcement from AT&T. Then Ameritech Complete Card
was being advertised. I liked some of the features, especially the
part where they give me back 10% of calls charged to my AT&T calling
card placed on the AT&T network and it is free. So I inquired some
more and found that the calling card number that they put into effect
is my home phone number plus a PIN of my choice.
I am thinking that in Ameritech anyway, they told the operating
companies not to use the home phone number so that they can promote
this FEATURE in the Ameritech Complete Card package. I haven't been
able to get anyone to verify this.
Kenny
------------------------------
From: hutch@qualcomm.com (Jim Hutchison)
Subject: Re: AT&T Video-Phone References Wanted
Organization: Qualcomm Incorporated
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 20:38:45 GMT
In <telecom12.75.9@eecs.nwu.edu> peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
writes:
> In <telecom12.58.3@eecs.nwu.edu> totsuka@cs.stanford.edu (Takashi
> Totsuka) writes:
>> I heard that AT&T has made a telephone system which can send 128x128
>> images at 10 frames/sec via ordinary phone line.
> 128 * 128 * 10 [...] 163840 Kbps
> That's some compression scheme, since it's about five times the
> maximum data rate of a shannon modem, and nearly ten times the data
> rate of the best real modem I know of. Even at 1 bit per pixel. If
> it's greyscale that's even worse. I hate to think of the quality of
> the received image.
If this is viewed as compression over time, with a slowly changing
image, the rate can be significantly lower. Without a rate-of-change
on the image, it is not possible to adequately judge the quality of
the hearsay information.
Current videophones give you a nice "vapor-trail" if the speaker waves
their arms quickly (Wow, was that an acid flashback? %-), but work
adequately for drawings on a pen board.
Jim Hutchison {dcdwest,ucbvax}!ucsd!qualcomm!hutch or hutch@qualcomm.com
Disclaimer: I am not an official spokesman for Qualcomm
------------------------------
From: heiby@mcdchg.chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby)
Subject: Re: Annoying Pac*Bell Inside Wire Repair Brochure
Date: 29 Jan 92 23:07:49 GMT
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL
> [Moderator's Note: See also the message in an issue of the Digest
> Saturday evening entitled "What is a Linebacker?". I think most of
> those programs are a ripoff. Inside wires rarely go out of order, and
> when they do are easy to fix for most people. PAT]
I used to think the same thing. When I moved into my current home, I
went ahead and ordered the Linebacker service, just in case there was
some problem with the wiring. I figured that after I checked
everything out, I'd cancel the service. As it turned out, I didn't
have dial tone on one jack. That wasn't worrying me too much, since
we had no immediate plans to put a phone there.
Then, one day I started noticing some pretty bad noise on one of my
lines. I called IL Bell and the technician spent something like an
hour at my house tracing things down. (If my lines had had one of
those newer demark boxes with the modular jacks, some of this time
would have been saved.) It turned out that the noise was being put
onto that line by a modem I have on my other line. Replacing the
four-wire modular cable to the modem with a two-wire solved the
problem. (I had taken things off the affected line one at a time, to
try to isolate the problem before calling "repair". It never occurred
to me that the fault would be on my other line.) I fully expected to
have to pay for the service call, since the problem was in my modem.
But, the tech said that since I had the Linebacker service, the call
was free. I guess that paid for about twenty years of Linebacker!
While he was out, I had the technician fix the other jack. I also
suggested that he install demark boxes while he was out. He said that
he would have, except that it was a very busy evening. All no extra
charge.
Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com Moderator: comp.newprod
------------------------------
From: drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math)
Subject: Re: 408 Area Code Question
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 21:20:13 EST
brian@apt.bungi.com (Brian Litzinger) writes:
> In article <telecom12.73.11@eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon <john@zygot.
> ati.com> writes:
>> Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL> writes:
>>> Which part of 408 comes under GTE?
>> The communities of Los Gatos and Morgan Hill are served by GTE. Gilroy
>> is served by Contel and all the rest (in the San Francisco LATA) is
>> served by Pac*Bell.
> I live in Los Gatos, in the 408 area code, and am served by Pac*Bell.
> So are my neighbors. Some of Los Gatos is served by Pac*Bell and some
> by GTE.
Ahhh ... but which CABLE company do you have? This is probably a
better yardstick of which community you really reside in. I lived in a
house where the SJ/LosGatos border was along the back fence (we were
on the Los Gatos side). We had a different cable company than our
neighbors, and both of us were served (sic) by GTE. This was before
the "local" calling area had been extended to 12+ miles, so virtually
every call I made was subject to ridiculous rates. GTE-land begins
west of Union and south of Los-Gatos-Almaden; east of Union it begins
south of Blossom Hill. I think. As you can see, some of the portion
east of Union and north of Blossom Hill is technically Los Gatos while
not being served by GTE. You get the picture.
------------------------------
From: drmath@viking.rn.com (Doctor Math)
Subject: Re: Mobidem Net
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 21:50:53 EST
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department
lme.lmedistr@memo.ericsson.se (ERICSSON CORPORATE RELATIONS) writes:
> Weighing less than one pound and housed in rugged plastic with
> flexible, fold-down antenna, the Mobidem has a list price of $ 1,795.
> According to Bill Frezza at Ericsson GE Mobile Communications Wireless
> Computing Division: "Our long term goal is nothing short of putting an
> antenna on every laptop."
An honorable goal, to be sure, but they're certainly not going to do
it at THAT price! I can't even afford that kind of money for a nice
'386 box!
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #97
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05211;
31 Jan 92 2:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18021
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 31 Jan 1992 00:26:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07070
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 31 Jan 1992 00:26:14 -0600
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 00:26:14 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201310626.AA07070@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #98
TELECOM Digest Fri, 31 Jan 92 00:26:00 CST Volume 12 : Issue 98
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Calling ATT From a COPT (Lars Poulsen)
Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM (Ed Hew)
Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person? (Ed Hew)
Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO (Martin Harriss)
Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage? (Dave Levenson)
Re: 5ESS Sold in Japan (Ronald Oakes)
Re: Background Regarding 206 Dialing Change (Carl Moore)
Re: Centel For Sale (Mark Fulk)
Re: Centel For Sale (Bernard Rupe)
Re: IRS Experiments With Filing by Phone (Steven King)
Re: Technically Ignorant Judges (Dan Wilson)
Re: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom (Todd Inch)
Line Interface Wanted (Will Wong)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Calling ATT From a COPT
Organization: CMC (a Rockwell Company), Santa Barbara, California, USA
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 08:20:25 GMT
In article <telecom12.87.1@eecs.nwu.edu> dbw@crash.cts.com (David B.
Whiteman) writes:
> They also said the other sure way of getting AT&T from a COPT, or a
> hotel phone for that matter is to dial 1 800 CALL ATT, which is their
> new 800 number for completing calling card phone calls. If the phone
> you are calling from does not allow 800 numbers, then you can call
> collect 816 654 6000, and they will help you complete the call on the
> AT&T network.
> [Moderator's Note:
> I wonder what sort of humongous collect charges AT&T will get on
> 816-654-8000], considering all the COCOT phones and hotel PBXs
> which will force users to call it by denial of 10288, refusing
> manual requests for an AT&T operator, denial of 800 connections, etc.
> I wonder how AT&T could possibly hope to make any profit from long
> distance calls they handle routed to them through the 816 'call
> collect' number; or the 800 number for that matter. PAT]
The point of these numbers is not really to pick up those calls and
get a few pennies for each. (Especially since the collect calls will
be delivered by some AOS at the AOS' rates. The point is for AT&T's
legal department to sue the pants off COCOT operators that violate the
FCC rules. As has been previously described in this newsgroup, each
call to the number results in a report being taken, describing the
location and equipment found in violation. I am glad to see this.
Until now, these operators have been ripping off the public; mostly
because they could get away with it, and because if they didn't, there
would be no profit in that business. I predict a fast demise of
AOS/COCOT operators.
Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer CMC Rockwell lars@CMC.COM
------------------------------
From: eah@xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew)
Subject: Re: Phone Belltap Every Morning at 12:02 AM
Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 07:54:48 GMT
> [Moderator's Note: In the olden days, when telco was 'probing your
> line to measure ringer current' it was to see how many extensions were
> on the line versus what you were paying for. Does anyone remember
> those days, when there was such a thing as an 'illegal extension'? PAT]
Back around '66 a good friend had wired his phone to light a
flashlight bulb inside a cannibalized ball-point pen instead of
ringing the bell, as the bulb had a relatively negligible load.
Ed. A. Hew, <edhew@xenitec.on.ca> ...!uunet!watmath!xenitec!eah
XeniTec Consulting Services, Kitchener ON, Canada 01+519+570-9848
------------------------------
From: eah@xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew)
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of Person-to-Person?
Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 07:46:22 GMT
In article <telecom12.63.4@eecs.nwu.edu> hedges@pilot.njin.net
(Douglas Hedges) writes:
> I called long-distance to speak with our utility company (I'd moved)
> to arrange sending the final bill. I dialed direct and got caught in
> the web of, "All our customer service reps are busy. Please stay on
> the line." A few minutes of this at daytime rates was too expensive.
> I called an Operator and she suggested person-to-person as, "I
> wouldn't be charged until I was connected with a a customer service
> rep."
Bell Canada has an even simpler method. They accept collect calls to
their business offices. After all, it's in their interest that you do
business with them.
Ed. A. Hew, <edhew@xenitec.on.ca> ...!uunet!watmath!xenitec!eah
XeniTec Consulting Services, Kitchener ON, Canada 01+519+570-9848
------------------------------
From: martin@bdsgate.com (Martin Harriss)
Subject: Re: ISDN Uses Hayes Patent, IMHO
Reply-To: bdsgate!martin@uunet.uu.net (Martin Harriss)
Organization: Beechwood Data Systems
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 14:35:43 GMT
In article <telecom12.69.1@eecs.nwu.edu> nelson@cheetah.ece.
clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) writes:
> 6.5.3 NT Quiet Mode and Insertion Loss Measurement Test Trigger Signal.
> The NT shall be capable of detecting the following two types of
> signals: The NT shall respond to either (1) dc signaling that begins
> with a steady current flow (start interval) followed by 6, 8, or 10
> pulses sent as breaks in the current and ends with steady dc current
> flow (stop interval), or (2) ac signaling that begins with no current
> flow (start interval, less than 200 uA dc) followed by 6, 8, or 10
> half cycles of a 2 to 3 Hz sine wave, and ends with no current flow
> (stop interval). When receiving the ac signaling, the NT shall count
> each half cycle of the same wave as one pulse.
Doesn't this sound like dial pulses? Breaks in the DC current with a
specified minimum interdigit pause; I wonder if dial pulses violate
the Hayes patent :)
Martin Harriss uunet!bdsgate!martin
------------------------------
From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Stone's JFK ... Phone Outage?
Date: 30 Jan 92 13:41:02 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
>> Does anyone here know in, in fact, telephone service in Washington DC
>> was out during the Kennedy assasination? Certainly, someone must have
>> been around to know for sure ...
I lived in the Washington DC area in 1963. Local telephone service
where I lived was provided by a then state-of-the-art 5-crossbar
switch. At times of severe weather, disasters, or presidential
assassinations (I only remember one of the latter!) the local switch
would go into a load-shedding mode. This meant that for periods of
fifteen minutes at a time, there was no dial tone.
I have since read about the 5-crossbar switch. It had an overload
control mode where blocks of a few thousand lines could be denied
originating service for periods of 15 - 60 minutes at a time, with
these 'dead zones' cycling slowly through most of the lines served by
a given switch. A group of high-priority subscriber lines were never
denied service. These were generally assigned to public emergency
services and government offices.
As I recall, overload control was applied in our local area for
several periods of several hours each during the afternoon of the
assassination and over the next day or so. This didn't seem unusual
at the time. It used to happen routinely when there was a snow storm
in that town.
Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
------------------------------
From: oakes@maize.rtsg.mot.com (Ronald Oakes)
Subject: Re: 5ESS Sold in Japan
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 12:34:35 CST
In article <telecom12.95.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, andys@ulysses.att.com (Andy
Sherman) writes:
> 5ESS TO JAPAN -- AT&T Japan has supplied a switching system for
> Japanese mobile phone company Nippon Idou Tsushin, its first such
> order in the Japanese market, an AT&T spokesman said.
Motorola has a well established base of switches, and cell site
equipment in Japan. I believe they had installed their system before
I started working here in 1989.
So I thinks Andy's comment about switches selling better than cars in
Japan may be true.
Ronald B. Oakes Motorola Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 14:05:21 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Re: Background Regarding 206 Dialing Change
Afterthought: Notice the remark "Why not introduce a new area code?".
Splits done since 1980 without the use of N0X/N1X prefixes were:
714/619 California (and I still see no N0X/N1X despite the gobbling
up of 909 so that 714 can split again!?)
713/409 Texas (but 713 will shortly have to accommodate N0X/N1X)
617/508 Massachusetts
303/719 Colorado
305/407 Florida
The first area to get N0X/N1X was 213 in California in 1973; 213 has
had to split twice since then. In July 1973, the {New York Times}
commented that this was an alternative, in a big metropolitan area, to
introducing a new area code.
------------------------------
From: fulk@cs.rochester.edu (Mark Fulk)
Subject: Re: Centel For Sale
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 15:34:55 GMT
In article <telecom12.95.11@eecs.nwu.edu> djb@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (David
Brightbill) writes about an announced Centel purchase, unsure if the
whole company or just the Florida operations are being bought.
They were probably just selling their Florida operations. I spent a
summer in Fort Walton Beach a few years ago, and I remember Centel
service being lousy. Last March I was flying home from Chicago; the
person next to me turned out to be the president of Rochester Tel's
phone service. He was just returning from the purchase of Centel's
Iowa operations.
Touching, in a way; here he'd just spent tens of millions of other
people's dollars, and he was riding in coach with his briefcase in his
lap.
Mark A. Fulk Computer Science Department
fulk@cs.rochester.edu University of Rochester
Omit needless words -- Strunk Rochester, NY 14627
------------------------------
From: rupe@rtsg.mot.com (Bernard Rupe)
Subject: Re: Centel For Sale
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 16:01:58 GMT
djb@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (David Brightbill) writes:
> There was a short item on the local (Tallahassee, Florida) news the
> other night to the effect that Centel is for sale. I have no clue as
> to whether they are dumping their Florida operations to raise cash or
> if the entire company is on the block.
An announcement was made last week (with the support of the Board of
Directors) stating, essentially, that the company will be exploring
all alternatives, including selling of the entire corporation, to
maximize shareholder benefit. The stock jumped $9 that day :).
Bernie Rupe 1501 W. Shure Drive Room 1315
Motorola, Inc. Arlington Heights, IL 60004
Cellular Infrastructure Group +1 708 632 2814
rupe@rtsg.mot.com
------------------------------
From: king@rtsg.mot.com (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: IRS Experiments With Filing by Phone
Reply-To: king@rtsg.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, RTSG
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 16:24:02 GMT
0005000102@mcimail.com (Randall C Gellens) scribes:
> In Wednesday's {Los Angeles Times} (Business Section) is a story about
> an IRS experiment which permits taxpayers to file by phone, dialing a
> number and keying in the figures (such as W-2 income amounts) which
> they would normally fill out on a form.
Gee, I'm surprised that this service isn't restricted to "authorized
preparers" the way the IRS's file-by-computer service is.
Steven King, Motorola Cellular (king@rtsg.mot.com)
------------------------------
From: dcw@myrias.ab.ca (Dan Wilson)
Subject: Re: Technically Ignorant Judges
Organization: d c wilson associates
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 11:27:19 -0700
From article <telecom12.71.3@eecs.nwu.edu>, by john@zygot.ati.com
(John Higdon):
> Administrative Law Judge John Lemke's pronouncement that Californians
> should not be permitted to have CNID is just another example of the
> hazards of putting technical decisions in the hands of people who have
> no understanding of the matters upon which they utter decrees. For
> reasons only clear to himself, this ignoramus has declared that the
> people of California are not worthy of being offered a service that is
> in common use in twenty other states. It can only be hoped that the
> baboons that sit on the four occupied PUC seats will surprise us all
> and vote contrary to the Judge's drivel.
Speaking as a fellow ignoramus ...
From what the posting says, the Judge was interested in issues of
privacy. What does this have to do with a technical decision?
Nothing. Just because technology makes it possible to do something,
doesn't mean it is a good thing. (I realize that this is heresy, but I
can take the heat.) Was there anything written by the Judge on the
decision? Were there circumstances in which he would be moved to
recommend?
I must admit that my objection to CNID relates only to its use by
non-residential customers. I certainly don't object to CNID use by
individuals in their homes. Nor would I object to general CNID if the
operating companies provided, free of charge, to all of its customers
the ability block CNID on a call to a non-residential customer. Of
course, then it would never sell to businesses.
> The other recent example of Judicial Incompetency was displayed during
> the rate increase hearings in Victorville. After I had said my piece,
> the judge felt moved to "clarify" my remarks concerning the mandatory
> entry of a carrier code when selecting an intraLATA carrier other than
> Pac*Bell. He carefully pointed out that my criticism of the lack of
> "default carriers" was unfounded since anyone could buy a telephone
> that could have the desired carrier's code in memory and dial it
> automatically. For someone to use this as an example of a level
> playing field demonstrates an abysmal lack of understanding of the
> issues at hand.
Perhaps, but given your comments above and obvious bias, I would like
to read the transcript. (And yes, I know that is a gratuitous and
un-called-for remark)
> Heaven save us from the bureaucrats.
And the techno-freaks.
Dan Wilson email: dcw@myrias.ab.ca
d c wilson associates voice: +1 403 482 1353
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada fax: +1 403 482 1353
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 13:45 PST
From: toddi@hindmost.mav.com (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom
I would like to see TELECOM related For Sale/Wanted articles in the
Digest, but not datacomm stuff, especially common modems.
Particularly, I'm interested in voice datacomm equipment that doesn't
seem to have a more appropriate place anywhere on Usenet. I think
most/many readers can find a more appropriate place for the datacomm
stuff, although I realize that sometimes the data/voice telecom line
can be thin.
------------------------------
From: wwong@wimsey.bc.ca (Will Wong)
Subject: Line Interface Wanted
Organization: BC News and Mail
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 01:24:07 GMT
Hi netters,
I'm building a radio modem for telecommunication links and I need an
interface that can handle both an office line and an subscriber line.
In other words, it has to be able to operate as FXO and FXS. I'm
looking for either a chip that can handle most of the BORSCHT and more
functions or a board that can interface with the phone line (both two
and four wire).
Can anyone give me some hint?
Thanks in advance!
Will
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #98
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28672;
31 Jan 92 13:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21654
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 31 Jan 1992 08:09:09 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13383
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 31 Jan 1992 08:08:40 -0600
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 08:08:40 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199201311408.AA13383@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #99
TELECOM Digest Fri, 31 Jan 92 08:08:15 CST Volume 12 : Issue 99
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
Re: 900 Number From Payphone (Joe Konstan)
Re: 900 Number From Payphone (Carl Moore)
Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number (Ken Weaverling)
800 Billed as 900 (TELECOM Moderator)
How Does 800-422-2313 Appear on Phone Bill (Carl Moore)
Re: No Supervison on 900 Call (Andy Sherman)
On Having a Level Playing Field (Eric Florack)
Canadian Telco Alliance: Stentor (David Leibold)
CDMA Impact on Cellular Software (Mitsutaka Ito)
AT&T Credit For a Poor Connection (Alec Isaacson)
Re: 408 Area Code Question (Alan Millar)
Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator (Mike Collinson)
Telecom Article in Smithsonian Magazine (Monty Solomon)
Texas Universal Service Fund Surcharge Announcement (Bob Izenberg)
Windsor, Ontario Routing (was Point Roberts, Wa.) (David Niebuhr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 12:27:59 PST
From: konstan@elmer-fudd.cs.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan)
Subject: Re: 900 Number From Payphone
Jeff Garber writes:
[news story omitted]
> I thought you could not access a 900 number from a payphone (unless it
> was a poorly programmed COCOT) ...
Here in Pac Bell land (415/510) it appears that you can make calls to
Pac Bell 900 numbers (apparently including the prefix 505 which I
believe is for adult voice services, or some other phone sex
euphamism) on a calling card (LEC or AT&T at last check) but cannot
call nationwide (IEC-run) 900 numbers in any form from payphones. So,
if the girl was calling a Pac Bell 900-number and had a calling card
she certainly could have placed the call from a payphone. I don't
think there is any way to place coin-paid 900 calls and I don't know
what GTE does.
Joe Konstan konstan@cs.berkeley.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 10:30:34 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Re: 900 Number From Payphone
I heard something long ago about taking precautions when meeting
someone off a telephone service such as this. But what would a
13-year-old be doing this for? Usually, there's a minimum age of 18
for such services.
------------------------------
From: weave@ravel.udel.edu (Ken Weaverling)
Subject: Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number
Date: 30 Jan 92 17:25:54 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware
In article <telecom12.94.1@eecs.nwu.edu> the Moderator writes
regarding making the chargable 800 call from a COCOT:
> The reason I do not recommend this is because if
> COCOTS get a lot of 800 abuse as a result of this scam, first thing
> you know they (the COCOTS) will quit handling 800 calls also. :( PAT]
But, but, but ... if the charge appears on the COCOT owner's bill as a
900 number, the owner won't have a clue that it originated as an 800
number. Then perhaps the owner will shoot the COCOT manufacturer
and/or provider for a programming error that let a 900 number go out
on his pay phone! :-)
Ken Weaverling weave@brahms.udel.edu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 09:38 EST
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
Subject: 800 Calls Billed as 900
Some recent inquiries lead me to believe that apparently this 800->900
switch is a service provided by AT&T (I called them at 800-222-0300 to
complain and found this out). Now, as telecom readers are going to
see immediately, this can wreak havoc on payphones, hotel phones,
college PBX's, and 900/976 blocking, as the number the call is being
billed to is not the number that was dialed.
If you don't like this service offering from AT&T then maybe the
person to complain to about it is attmail!reallen. It appears the
intent is to provide a way to get around 900 blocking, which has
apparently become extremely common. You might want to inquire why the
company would come up with such a scheme as this.
PAT
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 10:58:22 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: How Does 800-422-2313 Appear on Phone Bill?
In the recent item on 800-422-2313, which is the subject of complaints
about billing as a 900 number, how does it appear on a phone bill when
it is billed as a 900 number? I.e., what appears for number and place
called?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 08:12:23 EST
From: andys@ulysses.att.com (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: No Supervison on 900 Call
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Murray Hill, NJ
In article <telecom12.95.6@eecs.nwu.edu> Bill Kessler writes:
> This is the first time I have made a call with two-way audio without
> supervision. Is this a new service that some 900 numbers support?
> How is it implemented? I thought fraud protection prevented two-way
> audio until the called party answers.
900-884-xxxx is carried by AT&T. There is an 800 (and presumably 900)
service of AT&T that implements some interactive call routing in the
network. You dial the number, listen to an announcement, and press a
menu selection. Calls through this services don't supervise until
they are routed. Since this is implemented in the network, there is
no voice path between the caller and the 800/900 customer prior to
supervision.
Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928
READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 08:30:45 PST
From: Eric_Florack.Wbst311@xerox.com
Subject: On Having a Level Playing Field
John Higdon in V12#96:
> But using legislation to artificially "level the playing field"
> brings its own set of problems. I am a supporter of divestiture, but
> only a fool would argue that what preceded it was a total failure.
Certainly true ... in the short term, at the least it worked out fine.
And, for what it's worth to you, John, I'm one of the last ones you'll
see calling for government involvement in ANYTHING, be it
communications, healthcare, what have you. But in this case, I'm
afraid Pandora's box has already been opened. I most certainly do NOT
agree, though with:
> it may turn out that there simply is not room for a multiplicity of
> players.
> Unlike the telco product, COCOTs usually PREVENT the customer from
> making a choice of long distance carrier. The calls cost more, the
> DTMF pads frequently quit working during the course of the call, and
> the sleazeball IEC reduces voices to mush. If this is not diminished
> value, I do not know what is.
Gee, isn't that how we got ON this merry-go-round ... ie: why can't I
make coin calls via someone other than AT&T? ... now you're talking
about the payback tactics ... and then there's the hotel I stayed at
recently that wouldn't allow me to 1-0-xxx away from AT&T ... (sigh)
> What is the answer? There is no real way to level the playing field
> here. The LEC owns and operates the switches that in turn control and
> facilitate the traditional coin phone. Using computerized "smart
> phones" is the telephonic equivalent of a hack. It, at best,
> approximates the tried and true performance that we expected for many
> decades. Even if the COCOT operator struck a deal with the telco to
> use standard pay phones, the LEC will always control the switch.
The answer here is simple, and yet astoundingly complex, all at once:
Competition at the LEC level.
> The line goes, "AT&T couldn't sell drugs at a Grateful Dead
> concert". At the moment, it has an "in place" advantage that benefits
> the company greatly. But over time that will change. Or maybe AT&T
> will surprise us all and wake up and smell the coffee and keep ahead
> of the upstarts.
I rather doubt it. As I've said of the automakers in another
discussion: You cannot spend much time in /inovation/, if you're
spending all of your time in /litigation/.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 19:52:53 EST
From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA
Subject: Canadian Telco Alliance: Stentor
{The Toronto Star} reports on the formation of Stentor, a business
alliance intended to counter increasingly competitive forces in the
Canadian telecommunications industry. The intent is to develop
improved, more consistent service primarily to business interests (ie.
the big corporate accounts). National service standards and
negotiation with international companies on behalf of Canadian
business clients are also mentioned as aims of Stentor (which is Greek
for "loud voice").
Stentor is in effect a reorganisation of the Telecom Canada group.
They will face the growth of long distance resellers and the
possibility of competing with Unitel for domestic long distance (the
decision on that is still forthcoming, perhaps within a few months).
Even a Fidonet BBS hub in the Toronto area is now taking advantage of
a reseller and saving some cash over Bell Canada's service, so the
competition is growing even in the smaller markets.
dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca
------------------------------
From: ito@nttslb.ntt.jp (Mitsutaka Ito)
Subject: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 13:03:30 +0900
I would like to know CDMA technology impacts on base-station
software and mobile unit software. I will appreciate any information
on this topics. Thank you in advance.
Mitsutaka Ito
Company/Country: NTT/Japan
Address: 1-9-1 Kohnan Minato-ku Tokyo 108 Japan
E-mail: ito@nttslb.ntt.jp
Tel: +81-3-3740-5715
Fax: +81-3-3740-5740
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 00:13:02 EST
From: Alec Isaacson <AI4CPHYW@MIAMIU.BITNET>
Subject: AT&T Credit For a Poor Connection
I called someone in Maryland this evening (301 area code) and as the
conversation went on, the line quality began to deteriorate. Line
quality finally got so bad that I had to hang up and call again. After
the call, I dialed an AT&T operator to let them know that the line
quality wasn't as good as they usually provided (AT&T is my 1+ LD
service). Not only did they _volunteer_ to refund my money for the
"poor quality" call, they also are going to refund my money for the
"good quality" call (all I wanted to do was tell them the line quality
was poor). I knew I picked AT&T as my LD provider for a reason. :)
BTW: I am not affiliated with AT&T, other than as a satisfied
customer.
Alec D. Isaacson AI4CPHYW @ miamiu.acs.muohio.edu
isaacson @ rogue.acs.muohio.edu (NeXt Mail) Miami University, Oxford, OH
------------------------------
From: amillar@netcom.netcom.com (Alan Millar)
Subject: Re: 408 Area Code Question
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 08:27:02 GMT
Organization: The Bolis Group, San Jose, CA
And John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com> didst rise up and spake forth:
>> But the phone book (San Jose/Santa Clara, good through March 1992)
>> says: 7D within area code, 1 + AC + 7D outside.
> This is true. But the phone book lies. A '1' is not required from ANY
> Pac*Bell phone in the San Jose area. And it never has been required.
Well, I wouldn't exactly call it lying. Until a couple of years ago
it wasn't even allowed. Now you can dial with or without. And it was
only a few years ago that it became required it the rest of the Bay
Area. I imagine it's in the book because it will become required at
some point soon.
Alan Millar Home: alan@bolis.sf-bay.org or amillar@netcom.COM
Work: amillar@spacss.sf.ca.us
------------------------------
From: mike@bs2.mt.nec.co.jp (Mike Collinson)
Subject: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator
Date: 31 Jan 92 21:57:37 GMT
Organization: NEC Corporation.
I am seeking a simple low-cost black box for home use for
connecting modem to modem or modem to fax machine and letting then
think they were on a real phone line. The only optional bell or
whistle would be the ability to simulate a noisy line in some way.
Before building such a thing I wonder what is on the market.
Though there was a discussion on advanced equipment I have
never seen anything on the basics and have no idea what is offered, by
whom and how much. Any contacts for sellers in the U.S. would be
gratefully appreciated. I have heard of a comapny called AEA
Electronics but have no contact address or fax number.
Mike Collinson NEC Corporation
EMail: mike@uxp.bs2.mt.nec.co.jp Daito Tamachi Building
FAX: +81 3-3456-5764 14-22, Shibaura 4-Chome,
Tel: +81 3-3456-7451 Minato-ku, Tokyo 108, JAPAN
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 04:23:11 EST
From: roscom!monty@Think.COM (Monty Solomon)
Subject: Telecom Article in Smithsonian Magazine
There is a somewhat interesting article about telecom in the February
1992 issue of Smithsonian magazine.
Monty roscom!monty@think.com
------------------------------
From: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Texas Universal Service Fund Surcharge Announcement
Organization: The Fortress of Ultimate Dorkiness
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 11:10:17 GMT
My January phone bill from Southwestern Bell contained an explanation
of what they call the Universal Service Fund Surcharge. The text that
follows is the complete text from the bill, translated to mixed upper
and lower case. (The SWBT announcement is all in upper case.)
Universal Service Fund Surcharge
On the detail of charges page of your telephone bill you will find a
surcharge titled Universal Service Fund Surcharge. This surcharge is
to cover the cost of providing Relay Texas Service. Relay Texas is a
statewide service that operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week
allowing telephone calls, through the use of special operators,
between people who are deaf, hard of hearing or speech impaired and
those who can hear or speak. Through this service, Texans who are
hearing and non-hearing for the first time have the opportunity to
communicate with each other via the telephone without the need for
both parties to have special text telephones. Individuals and
businesses across Texas can now reach and be reached via telephone by
an estimated 750,000 individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or
speech impaired who could previously communicate only with other text
telephone users. For more details about Relay Texas, consult the
customer guide section of your Southwestern Bell Telephone White Pages
directory or contact Relay Texas customer service at 800-676-3777.
Relay Texas was authorized by the Texas Legislature in 1989 and is
administered by the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC). Relay
Texas is operated by Sprint Services. The Americans Disability Act
(ADA), which was signed into law on July 26, 1990, requires all states
to provide relay service. Both the state and federal law provide for
recovery of relay service cost from all telephone subscribers. This
surcharge represents the costs assessed to Southwestern Bell from May,
1990 to October, 1991 for operation of Relay Texas. The surcharge
will be billed once each year. The January, 1992 surcharge amount is
thirty-four cents ($.34) per customer access line.
I'm of two minds on this surcharge. Until proven otherwise, I'll
believe that's it's doing someone some good. I suspect, however, that
I'm paying for a service that I will never use. While the amount is
so small that I'll pay it and never miss it, taking that 34 cents from
all Texas SWBT customers adds up to a fair chunk of change. The flyer
itself doesn't tell enough about the service to gauge the service's
value. I'll call the 800 number (and hope that it's not a 900 number
in disguise :-) to hear what they say.
Bob
DOMAIN-WISE: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us BANG-WISE: ...cs.utexas.edu!dogface!bei
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 06:42:22 -0500
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: Windsor, Ontario Routing (was Point Roberts, Wa.)
The recent articles about the geographical location of Port Roberts,
Wa. and where it receives its telephone service from got me to
looking at my road atlas.
Winsdor, Ontario is both South and East of Detroit; therefore, where
does Windsor get its routing from, Detroit or from some point in
Canada?
Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #99
*****************************
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17583;
1 Feb 92 15:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19320
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 1 Feb 1992 13:44:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01857
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 1 Feb 1992 13:44:03 -0600
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1992 13:44:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199202011944.AA01857@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: 800 OCN List
Here is an updated listing of the prefixes used with 800 toll free
service prepared for us by Bill Huttig <wah@zach.fit.edu>. This list
shows which carrier handles calls placed to 800-xxx numbers. Choice of
carrier routing on calls to 800-xxx numbers cannot be overridden with
10xxx routing. It should also be noted as in the past here that on
calls to 800 numbers, the called party either immediatly in some
instances or on a delayed basis receives a record of numbers which
called. This identification of the calling party cannot be overridden
with *67 or the 'line-blocking' associated with Caller-ID.
202 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
212 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
213 9348 CINCINNATI BELL TELEPHONE
220 ATZ ATX-COMMUNICATIONS
221 ATX AT&T-C
222 ATX AT&T-C
223 ATX AT&T-C
224 LDL LONG DISTANCE FOR LESS
225 ATX AT&T-C
226 ATL ATC
227 ATX AT&T-C
228 ATX AT&T-C
229 TDX CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
230 NTK NETWORK TELEMANAGEMENT SERVICES
231 ATX AT&T-C
232 ATX AT&T-C
233 ATX AT&T-C
234 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
235 ATX AT&T-C
236 SCH SCHNEIDER COMMUNICATIONS
237 ATX AT&T-C
238 ATX AT&T-C
239 DLT DELTA COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
240 SIR SOUTHERN INTEREXCHANGE SERVICES
241 ATX AT&T-C
242 ATX AT&T-C
243 ATX AT&T-C
244 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
245 ATX AT&T-C
246 9553 SOUTHWESTERN BELL
247 ATX AT&T-C
248 ATX AT&T-C
249 LWC LASSMAN-WEBER COMMUNICATIONS
251 ATX AT&T-C
252 ATX AT&T-C
253 ATX AT&T-C
254 TTU TOTAL-TEL USA
255 ATX AT&T-C
256 LSI LONG DISTANCE SAVERS
257 ATX AT&T-C
258 ATX AT&T-C
259 LSI LONG DISTANCE SAVERS
260 COK COM-LINK21
261 SCH SCHNEIDER COMMUNICATIONS
262 ATX AT&T-C
263 CAN TELCOM CANADA
264 LDD LDDS COMMUNICATIONS
265 CAN TELCOM CANADA
266 CSY COM SYSTEMS
267 CAN TELCOM CANADA
268 CAN TELCOM CANADA
269 FDG FIRST DIGITAL NETWORK
270 CRZ CLEARTEL COMMUNICATIONS
271 TRA3 TRAFFIC ROUTING ADMINISTRATION 3
272 ATX AT&T-C
273 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
274 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
275 ITT MTD/UNITED STATES TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS
276 ONE ONE CALL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
277 SNT MCI / TDD / SOUTHERNNET, INC.
279 MAL MIDAMERICAN
280 ADG ADVANTAGE NETWORK, INC.
282 ATX AT&T-C
283 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
284 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
286 9147 SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE
287 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
288 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
289 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
292 ATX AT&T-C
293 PRO PROTO-COL
294 FDC AFFORD A CALL
295 ACT ACC LONG DISTANCE CORPORATION
296 LDW LONG DISTANCE SERVICE, INC.
297 ARE AMERICAN EXPRESS TRS
298 CNO COMTEL OF NEW ORLEANS
299 ATL ATC
302 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
312 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
320 CQD CONQUEST LONG DISTANCE CORPORATION
321 ATX AT&T-C
322 ATX AT&T-C
323 ATX AT&T-C
324 HNI HOUSTON NETWORKM INC./VXVY TELECOM, INC.
325 ATX AT&T-C
326 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
327 ATX AT&T-C
328 ATX AT&T-C
329 ATL ATC
330 ATL ATC
331 ATX AT&T-C
332 ATX AT&T-C
333 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
334 ATX AT&T-C
335 SCH SCHNEIDER COMMUNICATIONS
336 ATX AT&T-C
337 FDR FIRST DATA RESOURCES
338 ATX AT&T-C
339 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
340 FFM FIRST FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
341 ATX AT&T-C
342 ATX AT&T-C
343 ATX AT&T-C
344 ATX AT&T-C
345 ATX AT&T-C
346 ATX AT&T-C
347 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
348 ATX AT&T-C
349 DCT DIRECT COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
350 CSY COM SYSTEMS
351 ATX AT&T-C
352 ATX AT&T-C
353 SCH SCHNEIDER COMMUNICATIONS
354 ATX AT&T-C
355 ATZ ATX-COMMUNICATIONS
356 ATX AT&T-C
357 CNZ CAM-NET SYSTEMS-INC.
358 ATX AT&T-C
359 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
360 CWV ????????????????????????????????????????
361 CAN TELCOM CANADA
362 ATX AT&T-C
363 CAN TELCOM CANADA
364 HNI HOUSTON NETWORKM INC./VXVY TELECOM, INC.
365 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
366 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
367 ATX AT&T-C
368 ATX AT&T-C
369 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
370 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
372 ATX AT&T-C
373 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
374 ITG INTERNATIONAL TELECHARGE, INC.
375 TNO ATC CIGNAL COMMUNICATIONS
375 ATL ATC
376 ECR ECONO-CALL LONG DISTANCE
377 GTS TELENET COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
378 NTP NATIONAL TELEPHONE COMPANY
379 EMI EASTERN MICROWAVE
381 LMI LONG DISTANCE OF MICHIGAN
382 ATX AT&T-C
383 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
384 FDT FRIEND TECHNOLOGIES
385 CAB HEDGES COMMUNICATIONS /COM CABLE LAYING
386 TBQ TELECABLE CORPORATION
387 CAN TELCOM CANADA
388 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
390 EBR ECONO-CALL
392 ATX AT&T-C
393 EXF PIONEER TELEPHONE /EXECULINES OF FLORIDA
394 TDX CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
395 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
396 BOA BANK OF AMERICA
397 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
399 ARZ AMERICALL CORPORATION (CA)
402 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
412 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
420 TGR TMC OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
421 ATX AT&T-C
422 ATX AT&T-C
423 ATX AT&T-C
424 ATX AT&T-C
425 TTH TELE TECH, INC.
426 ATX AT&T-C
427 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
428 ATX AT&T-C
429 TRF T-TEL
431 ATX AT&T-C
432 ATX AT&T-C
433 ATX AT&T-C
434 AGN AMERIGON
435 ATX AT&T-C
436 IDN INDIANA SWITCH, INC.
437 ATX AT&T-C
438 ATX AT&T-C
439 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
440 TXN TEX-NET
441 ATX AT&T-C
442 ATX AT&T-C
443 ATX AT&T-C
444 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
445 ATX AT&T-C
446 ATX AT&T-C
447 ATX AT&T-C
448 ATX AT&T-C
449 UTD UNITED TELCO / TELAMAR
450 USL US LINK LONG DISTANCE
451 ATX AT&T-C
452 ATX AT&T-C
453 ATX AT&T-C
454 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
455 LDG LDD, INC.
456 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
457 ATX AT&T-C
458 ATX AT&T-C
459 9631 NORTHWEST BELL
460 NTX NATIONAL TELEPHONE EXCHANGE
461 CAN TELCOM CANADA
462 ATX AT&T-C
463 CAN TELCOM CANADA
464 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
465 CAN TELCOM CANADA
466 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
467 LDD LDDS COMMUNICATIONS
468 ATX AT&T-C
469 IAS IOWA NETWORK SERVICES
471 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
472 ATX AT&T-C
473 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
474 32V1 VIRGIN ISLAND TELEPHONE
475 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
476 SNT MCI / TDD / SOUTHERNNET, INC.
477 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
478 AAM ALASCOM
479 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
481 1186 GTE/NORTH
482 ATX AT&T-C
483 0328 GTE/FLORIDA
484 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
485 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
486 TDX CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
487 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
488 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
489 LDD LDDS COMMUNICATIONS
492 ATX AT&T-C
493 IPC INTERNATION PACIFIC
494 NWR NETWORK TELEPHONE SERVICE
495 JNT J-NET COMMUNICATIONS
496 TRA3 TRAFFIC ROUTING ADMINISTRATION 3
502 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
512 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
520 PCD PENTAGON COMPUTER DATA, LTD.
521 ATX AT&T-C
522 ATX AT&T-C
523 ATX AT&T-C
524 ATX AT&T-C
525 ATX AT&T-C
526 ATX AT&T-C
527 ATX AT&T-C
528 ATX AT&T-C
529 MIT MIDCO COMMUNICATIONS
530 VRT VARTEC NATIONAL, INC.
531 ATX AT&T-C
532 ATX AT&T-C
533 ATX AT&T-C
534 TRA3 TRAFFIC ROUTING ADMINISTRATION 3
535 ATX AT&T-C
536 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
537 ATX AT&T-C
538 ATX AT&T-C
539 FNE FIRST PHONE
540 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
541 ATX AT&T-C
542 ATX AT&T-C
543 ATX AT&T-C
544 ATX AT&T-C
545 ATX AT&T-C
546 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
547 ATX AT&T-C
548 ATX AT&T-C
549 CBU CALL AMERICA
550 CMA CALL-AMERICA
551 ATX AT&T-C
552 ATX AT&T-C
553 ATX AT&T-C
554 ATX AT&T-C
555 ATX AT&T-C
556 ATX AT&T-C
557 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
558 ATX AT&T-C
561 CAN TELCOM CANADA
562 ATX AT&T-C
563 CAN TELCOM CANADA
564 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
565 CAN TELCOM CANADA
566 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
567 CAN TELCOM CANADA
568 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
569 TEN TELESPHERE NETWORK
572 ATX AT&T-C
574 AMM ACCESS LONG DISTANCE
575 AOI UNITED COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
577 GTS TELENET COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
579 LNS LINTEL SYSTEMS
580 WES WESTEL
582 ATX AT&T-C
583 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
584 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
586 ATC ACTION TELECOM COMPANY
587 LTQ LONG DISTANCE FOR LESS
588 ATC ACTION TELECOM COMPANY
589 LGT LITEL
592 ATX AT&T-C
593 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
594 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
595 32P1 PUERTO RICO TELEPHONE
596 TOI TELECOM "OPTIONS" PLUS, INC.
599 LDM LONG DISTANCE MANAGEMENT
602 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
612 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
621 ATX AT&T-C
622 ATX AT&T-C
623 TRA3 TRAFFIC ROUTING ADMINISTRATION 3
624 ATX AT&T-C
625 NLD NATIONAL DATA CORP
626 ATX AT&T-C
627 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
628 ATX AT&T-C
629 2284 BEEHIVE TELEPHONE
631 ATX AT&T-C
632 ATX AT&T-C
633 ATX AT&T-C
634 ATX AT&T-C
635 ATX AT&T-C
636 CQU CONQUEST COMMUNICATION CORPORATION
637 ATX AT&T-C
638 ATX AT&T-C
639 BUR BURLINGTON TEL
640 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
641 ATX AT&T-C
642 ATX AT&T-C
643 ATX AT&T-C
644 CMA CALL-AMERICA
645 ATX AT&T-C
646 UTT UNION TELEPHONE COMPANY
647 ATX AT&T-C
648 ATX AT&T-C
649 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
652 ATX AT&T-C
654 ATX AT&T-C
655 ESM EXECULINE OF SACRAMENTO, INC.
656 AVX AMVOX
657 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
658 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
659 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
660 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
661 CAN TELCOM CANADA
662 ATX AT&T-C
663 CAN TELCOM CANADA
664 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
665 CAN TELCOM CANADA
666 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
667 CAN TELCOM CANADA
668 CAN TELCOM CANADA
669 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
672 ATX AT&T-C
673 SNT MCI / TDD / SOUTHERNNET, INC.
674 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
675 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
676 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
677 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
678 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
679 VOB TRANS-NET, INC.
680 2408 PACIFIC TELCOM
682 ATX AT&T-C
683 MTD METROMEDIA LONG DISTANCE
684 NTQ NORTHERN TELECOM, INC.
685 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
686 LGT LITEL
687 NTS NTS COMMUNICATIONS
688 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
689 NWS NORTHWEST TELCO
691 32D1 DOMIN REPUBLIC TELEPHONE
692 ATX AT&T-C
693 JJJ TRI-J
694 TZC TELESCAN
695 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
696 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
698 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
699 PLG PILGRIM TELEPHONE CO.
702 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
712 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
720 TGN TELEMANAGEMENT CONSULT'T CORP
721 FLX FLEX COMMUNICATIONS
722 ATX AT&T-C
723 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
724 RTC RCI CORPORATION
725 ATL ATC
726 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
727 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
728 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
729 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
732 ATX AT&T-C
733 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
734 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
735 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
736 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
737 MEC MERCURY, INC.
738 MEC MERCURY, INC.
741 ATL ATC
742 ATX AT&T-C
743 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
744 TRA3 TRAFFIC ROUTING ADMINISTRATION 3
745 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
746 FTC FTC COMMUNICATIONS, INCORPORATION
747 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
748 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
749 ATL ATC
752 ATX AT&T-C
753 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
754 TSH TEL-SHARE
755 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
756 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
757 TID TMC OF SOUTH CENTRAL INDIANA
759 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
761 ACX ALTERNATE COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY
762 ATX AT&T-C
763 TON TOUCH & SAVE
764 AAM ALASCOM
765 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
766 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
767 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
768 SNT MCI / TDD / SOUTHERNNET, INC.
770 3300 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
771 SNT MCI / TDD / SOUTHERNNET, INC.
772 ATX AT&T-C
773 CUX COMPU-TEL INC.
774 TTQ TTE OF CHARLESTON
776 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
777 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
778 EDS ELECTRONIC DATA SYSTEMS CORPORATION
779 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
780 SNT MCI / TDD / SOUTHERNNET, INC.
782 ATX AT&T-C
783 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
784 ALG AMERICAN LONG LINE
785 SNH SUNSHINE TELEPHONE CO.
786 0341 UNITED/FLORIDA
787 MAD MID ATLANTIC TELECOM
788 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
789 TMU TEL-AMERICA, INC.
792 ATX AT&T-C
794 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
797 TAM TMC OF SOUTH CENTRAL INDIANA
798 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
800 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
802 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
807 NTI NETWORK TELECOMMUNICATIONS
808 AAX AMERITECH AUDIOTEX SERVICES
812 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
821 ATX AT&T-C
822 ATX AT&T-C
823 THA TOUCH AMERICA
824 ATX AT&T-C
825 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
826 ATX AT&T-C
827 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
828 ATX AT&T-C
829 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
831 ATX AT&T-C
832 ATX AT&T-C
833 ATX AT&T-C
834 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
835 ATX AT&T-C
836 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
837 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
838 0567 UNITED/INT MN
839 VST STAR-LINE
841 ATX AT&T-C
842 ATX AT&T-C
843 ATX AT&T-C
844 LDD LDDS COMMUNICATIONS
845 ATX AT&T-C
846 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
847 ATX AT&T-C
848 ATX AT&T-C
849 BTM BUSINESS TELECOM, INC.
850 TKC TK COMMUNICATIONS
851 ATX AT&T-C
852 ATX AT&T-C
853 UTY UNIVERSAL COMMUNICATIONS
854 ATX AT&T-C
855 ATX AT&T-C
857 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
858 ATX AT&T-C
860 VNS VIRTUAL NETWORK
862 ATX AT&T-C
863 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
864 TEN TELESPHERE NETWORK
865 3100 HAWAIIAN TELEPHONE
866 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
867 RBL VORTEL
868 SNT MCI / TDD / SOUTHERNNET, INC.
869 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
871 TXL DIGITAL NETWORK, INC.
872 ATX AT&T-C
873 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
874 ATX AT&T-C
875 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
876 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
877 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
878 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
879 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
880 NTV NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS
881 NTV NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS
882 ATX AT&T-C
883 TDX CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
884 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
885 SDY TELVUE,CORP
886 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
887 ETS EASTERN TELEPHONE SYSTEMS, INC.
888 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
889 2408 PACIFIC TELCOM
890 ATZ ATX-COMMUNICATIONS
891 TVT TMC COMMUNICATIONS
892 ATX AT&T-C
896 TXN TEX-NET
898 CGI COMMUNICATIONS GROUP OF JACKSON
899 TDX CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
902 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
908 AAX AMERITECH AUDIOTEX SERVICES
912 RCCP RADIO COMMON CARRIER PAGING
922 ATX AT&T-C
923 ALN ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
924 NASC 800 NUMBER SERVICE & ASSIGNMENT CENTER
925 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
926 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
927 UTC US TELCOM, INC./US SPRINT
928 ALU AMERICALL SYSTEMS - LOUISIANNA
932 ATX AT&T-C
933 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
934 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
936 RBW R-COMM
937 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
939 TZX TELENATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS
940 TSF ATC / SOUTH TEL
942 ATX AT&T-C
943 AUU AUS, INC.
944 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
945 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
946 API PHONE ONE - AMERICAN PIONEER TELEPHONE
947 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
948 PHX PHOENIX NETWORK
950 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
951 BML PHONE AMERICA
952 ATX AT&T-C
955 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
960 CNO COMTEL OF NEW ORLEANS
962 ATX AT&T-C
963 SOC STATE OF CALIFORNIA
964 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
965 TLX TMC OF LEXINGTON
966 TDX CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
967 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
968 TED TELEDIAL AMERICA
969 TDX CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
972 ATX AT&T-C
980 VLW VALU-LINE OF LONGVIEW, INC.
981 32P1 PUERTO RICO TELEPHONE
982 ATX AT&T-C
983 WUT WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO.
986 WUT WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO.
987 BTL BITTEL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
988 TDD MCI / TELECONNECT
989 TDX CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
990 FEB FEB CORPORATION
992 ATX AT&T-C
993 LKS ????????????????????????????????????????
996 VOA VALU-LINE
999 MCI MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21405;
1 Feb 92 17:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31859
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 1 Feb 1992 14:39:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07215
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 1 Feb 1992 14:39:10 -0600
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1992 14:39:10 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199202012039.AA07215@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: Forty Years Ago in the Telegraph Company
Here's a piece too large for the Digest which I found quite
interesting and thought you might like it also.
PAT
From: Jim Haynes <haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU>
Subject: Forty Years Ago in the Telegraph Company
Date: 31 Jan 92 07:07:29 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
This is a review of the October, 1951 issue of {Western Union Technical
Review}. I don't think the articles are interesting enough to warrant
typing in in full, and anyway there are lots of schematic diagrams
that would be lost in ASCII; but this will give a certain flavor of
what seemed important a mere 40 years ago.
I. Electronic Regeneration of Teleprinter Signals
H. F. Wilder
First the theory of an electromechanical regenerative repeater for
start-stop signals is presented. It uses separate faceplate-type
rotary distributors for sending and receiving, and relays for storing
the bits. Storing is accomplished through the "side-stable" feature
of polar relays. That is, the relays can be adjusted so that the
armature remains, held by the permanent magnetic field, either marking
or spacing when there is no current in the winding.
Then the electronic repeater is presented. This seems really weird.
Instead of stepping pulses through a shift register, or something like
that, it uses a seven-stage L-C delay line to time the pulses. An
inductance of 72 henrys per section with a capacitance of 6.7
microfarads produces a delay of 22 milliseconds per section.
(About three years later I was trying to build an electronic receiving
distributor based on vacuum tube one-shots for timing. It never
worked.)
II. Switching to Canada at Gateway Cities
G. G. Light
"Approximately 7,000 of the telegraph messages originating daily
throughout the country are destined for Canada." These go via Western
Union gateway offices in Boston, Syracuse, Detroit, and Portland,
Oregon to corresponding gateway cities (not named) in Canada. What
complicates the picture is that Canada has two telegraph companies,
Canadian Pacific and Canadian National.
"In accordance with a negotiated agreement, the Western Union
maintains a definite ratio in transmitting messages to the two
Canadian telegraph companies. At the present time the ratio is 1 to
3, one message being transmitted to Canadian Pacific for each three
transmitted to Canadian National."
Some messages are considered exclusive, either because only one
Canadian company services the destination, or because the sender has
specified which company is to be used. Messages which could be
handled by either company are non-exclusive. Both kinds of messages
are counted for the fixed-ratio agreement; so the non-exclusive
messages have to be routed in a way to maintain the fixed ratio.
Certain kinds of messages are not counted in the routing quota: RQs
(requests for confirmation), BQs (replies to RQs), service notes, and
in general messages connected with the business of handling messages
among the telegraph companies.
In earlier times messages were manually handled at the gateway cities,
so the ratio was maintained by keeping tally sheets manually. When
automatic switching was introduced in the U.S. it was unable to deal
with the complexity of routing. Besides the fixed ratio, and the need
to determine which messages are to be counted, there are voluminous
routing charts to be consulted to know which company can handle
messages for each of all the possible Canadian destinations.
Therefore, Canada-bound messages are punched into tape at secondary
switching positions where operators determine the routing. An
illustration shows a panel with ten pushbuttons, two each for CPR
Montreal, CNT Montreal, CNT Toronto, CNT St. Johns, and CNT Halifax.
Five of the buttons route messages that are counted for the ratio; and
the other five route messages that are not to be counted. Above the
pushbuttons are a pair of lamps, one for CPR and one for CNT, to
designate where the next non-exclusive message should be sent.
The lamps are controlled by an electromechanical counter, having add
and subtract magnets to step it in opposite directions. A cam on the
shaft lights the CPR routing lamp when the pointer is to the right of
zero, or the CNT lamp when the pointer is at zero or to the left of
zero. A message sent to CPR steps the counter to the left. A message
sent to CNT steps a stepping switch; every third step of the stepping
switch steps the counter to the right. Thus the counter counts
messages in the required ratio. Tally counters count the number of
RQ, BQ, etc. messages sent to each company, so that these can be
subtracted from the total number of messages sent to each company to
determine the number of revenue messages.
III. Foot-Operated Printer
R. Steeneck
A product for which the design engineer hopes the demand will be very
small indeed.
The printer was developed at the request of a victim of amytrophic
lateral sclerosis (popularly known as Lou Gehrig's disease, for the
baseball star crippled and killed by it). The patient was unable to
speak or use his hands, but retained some slight control of the
movement of his feet. He communicated the idea of a printer to his
sister; the method was for her to recite the letters of the alphabet
until he indicated that the desired letter had been reached, and so
on. (seems like it would have been more efficient for her to recite
etaoin shrdlu ... than in alphabetical order) A long search led them
to Western Union, where the engineers realized that an old stock
ticker would fill the bill, since it could be arranged to step along
character by character until the desired character was in position to
be printed. Trouble was, the man couldn't see which character was
about to be printed, so the engineers arranged a simple projector that
would show the letters on a little screen. It was all controlled by a
single foot-operated switch. Pressing the pedal started stepping the
ticker at about two characters per second; releasing the pedal caused
the character to be printed.
IV. Maintenance of a Radio Relay System
G. B. Woodman
Western Union had started putting in a microwave system, which at the
time ran from New York to Pittsburgh with intermediate terminals at
Washington and Philadelphia. The FCC required continuous maintenance
coverage at the terminals, but allowed the relay stations to be
unattended. For access to the relay stations they tried several kinds
of vehicles. One pictured looks like an Army Jeep with the body
extended to the rear, is used for the more difficult to reach sites,
has a winch and some provision for clearing roads that are not
snowplowed by public agencies. For other sites an ordinary delivery
sedan is suitable. A maintainer visits each station about once a week
and makes routine tests and measurements. The system operates in the
3900-4200 mHz range. It has a circular topology, so that if any one
relay station fails traffic can be routed around it in the other
direction. A fault tone system is used to locate faults. Each
terminal can send a number of tones down the beam. Each relay station
detects a different one of these tones and responds back to the
terminal, so the maintainer at a terminal can see how far down the
path he can signal successfully. The power system consists of
commercial power with a backup engine generator. 120 volt storage
batteries are charged from either of these and can run vibrator
DC-to-AC inverters to power the radio equipment while switching
between commercial power and generator.
V. Inventory System Using Digital Computer Techniques
E. L. Schmidt and J. J. Connolly (Teleregister Corporation)
Teleregister was affiliated with Western Union in some way. The
system described here was said to have been in successful operation
for over four years, which takes it back pretty early into the history
of digital computers. This was a special-purpose wired-program
computer with over 1500 vacuum tubes, a clock frequency of 20 kHz, and
using magnetic drums for storage. It was designed to keep inventory
on 10,000 units (part numbers) and a count of from 0 to 100 of each
unit. Counts were stored in binary, 7 bits plus parity. The "units"
could be grouped in groups of up to eight. (I don't completely
understand this; perhaps the idea is that the same part number might
be stocked in any of up to eight store rooms and you need to check
them all.)
There is a picture of the user terminal, with in typical late '40s
industrial design is all curvy. The shape suggests a shoe or ski
boot, with buttons and lights on top of the foot and a place to insert
a metal code card at the leg. (Or maybe you would say it looks a
little bit like a typewriter, only much narrower.) A cable comes out
to a MS connector (World War II aircraft-type) that must have 50 pins
or more. The code cards, called "selection plates" have codes notched
into two edges. They can be inserted four ways (either of two edges
up, and facing either way), and a shutter allows two choices for each
of these; so it says eight groups of up to eight units each may be
selected with each plate.
There are four operations possible from the terminal:
Check Availability (but don't alter inventory)
Issued (subtract from inventory)
Received (add to inventory)
Received Restricted (add to inventory, but only if current inventory
is nonzero. If current inventory is zero there may be back orders
that need to be filled before received items are added to inventory.)
There is a photograph of the arithmetic unit chassis, showing an array
of 5 x 10 sockets of 11 pins each, to hold pluggable units. Along one
edge there are some holes which appear to contain BNC connectors; the
other edge has big Cinch-Jones connectors of various number of pins.
Another photograph shows two pluggable units, each with an 11-pin plug
at the bottom, a printed circuit in the middle, and four miniature
tubes on top.
A block diagram shows the magnetic drum and arithmetic units,
duplicated for reliability, 'master seeker' equipment, terminals for
the local users, a master control terminal, and leased circuits
connecting to remote terminals. (This isn't the first computer to
have remote terminals; I believe that honor goes to one of the Bell
Labs relay computers, the pre-1940 complex number calculator that
operated with Teletype terminals. It may be the first electronic
computer to have remote terminals.)
"Local and remote keyset positions time share connections to the
computer and magnetic storage under control of seeker equipment.
Access time varies from 0.100 to 2.0 seconds, dependent on the number
of storage units involved and the type or order received from the
keyset."
(I took a flight out of La Guardia in the mid-1960s and recall that
the airline (American?) was using one of these systems for
reservations. I suppose at that time the computer-based Sabre system
was under development and near deployment.)
VI. Vacuum Tube Reliability
F. H. Cusack
The trend in electronics has been toward smaller and smaller vacuum
tubes, leading the way to lower costs. Quite recently there have been
signs of a reverse trend, emphasizing reliability over cost, driven by
industrial and military needs. "Industrial users ... have sometimes
asked what could be done to make tubes as rugged and unchanging as a
crowbar." Tube manufactures have been slow to respond because the
majority of the market is for low-cost tubes.
"Today a [!] vacuum tube repeater lies on the bed of the ocean, some
200 miles from the shore, where it enables a Western Union
transatlantic cable to be operated at three times its normal message
capacity."
The equipment designer can do a lot to achieve reliability by
operating tubes well below their ratings and designing so that
variations in characteristics over life have little effect on overall
performance of the equipment. There are things the end user can do,
too. One of these might be periodic testing to try to replace tubes
before they fail in service. Statistical studies show that the life
curve for a group of tubes tends to follow an exponential law. (graph
on semi-log paper; x-axis is linear with time in service, y-axis is
log with percent surviving, the plot after an excess of initial
failures is nearly a straight line) After a certain interval 10% have
failed, after another interval 10% of the survivors have failed,
leaving 81% in operation, etc. Hence the manufacturer of tubes can
infer life expectancy as soon as the slope of the line is clearly
established, rather than waiting a long time for life tests.
"Evidently it would be futile to attempt to insure continuity of
operation by taking tubes out of service at the end of a specified
period and substituting new ones. If the failure rate is independent
of age, a tube removed while it is still good has the same probably
future life as a renewal tube. In fact, the usual increased rate of
early-life failure signifies that the new tube is more likely to fail
than the old one! This prediction has been confirmed repeatedly by
operating experience with large electronic devices, where a wholesale
replacement of tubes has invariably been followed by a marked increase
in the failure rate."
There is a discussion of different causes of failures, defects and
deterioration. The former is more responsible for the earlier
failures, and the latter comes into play with increased time in
service. Periodic testing and replacement of those showing excessive
deterioration can help to forestall service failures, thought it will
result in the rejection of many tubes before the end of their
usefulness.
Talks about maintenance practice developed for a computer containing
about 18,000 tubes (which can only have been ENIAC). Tubes are burned
in for 50 hours and then tested before being used in the machine.
Thereafter they are not tested individually; rather the machine is run
with voltages and clock frequency varied. Still, it is too time
consuming to isolate failures to a single tube; so they are replaced
in groups of up to eleven. The tubes taken out are then tested and
the good ones returned to service.
There are about 200,000 tubes in Western Union, mostly in carrier
telegraph equipment. Describes testing programs applied before tubes
are put into service, and those that experience has developed for
tubes in service.
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet
[Moderator's Note: Thanks very much for taking the time to type in
this lengthy article, Jim. I have two questions for the group: Exactly
when, if it can be pinned down to a certain time, did Western Union
start to die? Was it the introduction of fax and easy to send email
which cut into the heart of WU's business? Was it the growth of
services like Federal Express?
My other question concerns AT&T: Forty years ago, no one thought WU
would ever die. We assumed it would always be around. In that same
era, we always assumed 'The Telephone Company' would always be around
as the Bell System. Do you think over the next half-century we will
see AT&T become as weak and ineffectual as WU is today? That is, will
new technologies come along which render AT&T to nothing more than an
interesting bit of nostalgia from the twentieth century? PAT]
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21546;
1 Feb 92 17:37 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02301
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 1 Feb 1992 15:54:12 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25811
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 1 Feb 1992 15:53:56 -0600
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1992 15:53:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
Message-Id: <199202012153.AA25811@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #100
TELECOM Digest Sat, 1 Feb 92 15:53:54 CST Volume 12 : Issue 100
Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
In Memory of Larry Lippman (William Hawkins)
States With Relay Services (Joshua E. Muskovitz)
Nerd Stumps Editors (Leslie J. Somos)
New Jersey Cellular: Is A Better Than B? (Michael Scott Baldwin)
AT&T's Universal Card as a Phone Card (Bill Huttig)
Czech Connection to American BBS (Richard Budd)
PacBell Message Center Info Request (David Potter)
News Ratings (was 900 Number From Payphone) (Bill Huttig)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 23:40:03 CST
From: bill@rosevax.rosemount.com (William Hawkins)
Subject: In Memory of Larry Lippman
Pat,
This is just a note to say that there is an article in sci.misc from
my collection of Larry's articles. It shows something about his early
years, without referring to soap. It has the same subject as this
mail. Well, rather than have you search for it, I'll append it:
From: larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman)
Subject: Re: _The Boy Electrician_ (was Homemade Valves...)
Summary: Classic hobbyist and experimenter books!
Date: 2 Aug 90 03:45:08 GMT
Organization: Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, NY
commgrp@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (BACS Data Communications Group) writes:
>> I seem to recall reading "The Boy Electrician" by the same author many
>> years ago. It had lots of plans for spark coils and tesla coils, told
>> how to use X-ray tubes :-O, etc.
I have a 1929 edition and the x-ray tube experiments are a
classic! As if one could today go into Radio Shack and buy an x-ray
tube. :-) The x-ray tube was powered by a spark coil. Needless to
say, the, uh, "radiation safety" practices in this book leave a bit to
be desired.
Another classic in the book is how to build a wireless
telegraphy installation using a spark gap transmitter.
>> This was one of the all time great books in my opinion. What a
>> book! ...
This is also one of my favorite antique books!
> This is indeed a classic! It was among the precious few technical
> books in my highschool library, and was instrumental (no pun intended)
> in making my career.
>
> _The Boy Electrician_ by Alfred P. Morgan. Lothrop, Lee &
> Shepherd Co. Copyright 1913, 1929, 1940, 1948. 7th printing
> 1957.
>
> Does anyone know its history after 1957? Is this delightful book
> still available? Was the titled changed to appease feminists? :-)
I checked "Books in Print" and it is not there. However,
there is an entry for Alfred Morgan:
"Adventures in Electrochemistry" 1977 ed
"The First Book of Radio & Electronics for Boys and Girls" 1977 ed
"The Boy's Second Book of Radio & Electronics" 1977 ed
"First Chemistry Book for Boys and Girls" 1977 ed
"Pet Book for Boys and Girls" 1949 ed
"How to Use Tools" 1955 ed
I suspect the 1977 books must have been revised by someone
else since Mr. Morgan would have been pretty old by then!
> There was a companion volume, _The Boy Mechanic_, which I have never
> seen.
That book is also fascinating! I have a 1952 edition that I
got as a kid (yes, I know that I have just dated myself :-) )
According to the copyright page, it had editions in 1913, 1915, 1919,
1925, 1940, 1945 and 1952. I wish I had an older edition, since I
suspect that it would be even more interesting.
Here are a few topics covered in the "Boy Mechanic":
* "Build Your Own RELAYS"
Describes how to build thermal relays using resistance wire which
pulls a spring contact and allows it to close when the wire gets
hot and elongates. There is a complete table of resistance wire
lengths and gauges to provide relays of varying "sensitivity". I
use this term rather loosely because even the most sensitive model
consumed 25 watts!
* "Mousetrap Supplies `Firepower' for Simple Toy Cannon"
[quoted] "In assembling this toy cannon, which uses shells cut
from wooden dowels, you won't have to worry about fitting a
trigger and spring mechanism, as firepower is provided by an
ordinary mousetrap."
* "Colorful Cigarette Tray of Metal and Plastic"
* "Wheelbarrow Ash Tray is Novel Addition to the Den"
The projects are obviously before the Surgeon General established
findings on smoking and health. :-)
* "Keyboard Art"
A description of what would later be known as "line printer art"
performed by hand on an old typewriter.
* "Quonset Hut for Your Dog"
Lots of dog house and dog bed projects, but no mention of cats;
so you *know* the book is old. :-)
There is a section called "The Boy Scientist" which has
various projects and "home laboratory" suggestions like:
* "To prevent test tubes or any other glassware from shattering
during an experiment, coat outside of the glass with a thick
layer of modeling clay or putty."
* "To ignite chemicals from a safe distance, use a steel-wool
filament wound across bared wires of a lamp cord. Hold wires
apart with putty."
You won't see *that* one in a contemporary book! :-)
* "Sure Sounds Like Bill"
Complete plans for a manual telephone system, including how to
*wind* the induction coil!
* "Fun with Dry Ice"
Some of these experiments are not exactly safe. Like generating
and forming solid sulfur dioxide. Or placing dry ice and water
in bottle to generate CO2 under pressure.
* "Fun with Common Gases"
How about "flaming soap bubbles" and creating a "sun" by burning
*phosphorous* in oxygen?
* "It's Fun to MOUNT BIRDS"
* "Mounting the Fish You Catch"
Do-it-yourself after-dinner kitchen-table taxidermy.
The "Boy Mechanic" was published by Popular Mechanics
magazine, and has no individual author or editor.
Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?"
[ I deleted the paths and phone numbers. They won't reach him now.]
Ah, Larry, we hardly knew ye ...
bill@bert.rosemount.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 10:46:40 EST
From: "Joshua E. Muskovitz" <rocker@vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: States with Relay Services
My girlfriend is writing her thesis on people who are deaf, so here's
my two cents ...
Just last week, I received a relay call from someone at a School for
the Deaf that my girlfriend wants to use in a study. The call went
something like this:
Hello?
This is the NY Relay Service. Are you familiar with relay services?
Yes.
I have so-and-so calling for so-and-so.
She's not here. Can I take a message?
Hang on, I'll ask. <sound of typing in background> Sure. Are you ready?
Yes.
<reads the message coming in from caller>
Thanks. I'll tell her.
<end of conversation>
All in all, a very efficient (considering the circumstances) means of
communication. I'm not sure who pays the toll charges and such for LD
calls. What all of us who are paying these type of surcharges have to
keep in mind is that, until recently, what most of us would consider a
public utility was denied to those who could not hear and/or speak.
This kind of service gives everyone connectivity, not just deaf
callers, but also deaf receivers. The service works in both directions.
On a similar note, I've started to see TDD payphones pop up
(occasionally) in NY. I haven't tried one yet, but they seem to be
pretty cool.
------------------------------
From: ah739@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Leslie J. Somos)
Subject: Nerd Stumps Editors
Reply-To: ah739@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Leslie J. Somos)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 16:51:27 GMT
(Do not send replies to me ah739, these are not my questions.)
The following is from {EDN Magazine}, in a feature called Ask EDN, on
page 43 of the 20JAN1992 issue.
Begin quote:
Nerd stumps editors
-------------------
Since you answer "nagging questions", here are several real naggers.
What's worse, I get the idea that I'm supposed to know the answers
because they're so obvious, but no one seens to know what the numbers
are or where to look.
1. Devices connected to the dial-up telephone network are specified
as to their "ringer equivalency", an indication that the load is the
same as that many bells. Should the load be an impedance, probably
all real, at a particular frequency (such as 8 kOhm ad 40Hz) or an RLC
combination for the frequency-selective ringing (not used on single-
party lines) like 10,000Ohm and 20uF at 5Hz.
2. Telecommunications devices for the deaf have been around for a
long time and operate half duplex (one transmits at a time, both ends
receive at all times) through the phone lines. The code used is
Baudot (although now they sometimes also use ASCII). But what are the
mark and space tone frequencies? How do these devices compare to a
300-baud asynchronous modem, which uses two frequency pairs? What is
the bit rate? The phone-company people who deal with the stuff don't
know and can't tell me who to ask. I'd like to make my computer and
modem operate this way, and I'm sure others who either are hearing
impaired or communicate with those who are would too.
3. What is the carrier deviation for transmission of a satellite-
relayed television signal? Since the television waveform is
asymmetrical, what is the position of blanking with regard to the band
edges of the channel? Does white cause a positive deviation of the
carrier frequency or a negative one?
Since I am a nerd (a term that, as far as I'm concerned, isn't
negative but simply informational), I worry about these questions
while trying to get to sleep nights, so any information you could
provide would be appreciated.
James Rieger
Telemetry Div
Naval Weapons Center
China Lake, CA
We hate to shake your faith in us, but the EDN editors are stumped and
believe that the answers to your three questions are lost in the mists
of time. Ask EDN urges any reader who has any information at all
about the topics keeping Mr. Rieger up nights to contact us at once.
(boilerplate:)
Ask EDN solves nagging design problems and answers difficult questions.
Address your letters to Ask EDN, 275 Washington St, Newton, MA 02158.
FAX (617)558-4470; MCI: EDNBOS. Or send us a letter on EDN's
bulletin-board system at (617) 558-4241: From the Main System Menu,
enter SS/ASK_EDN and select W to write us a letter.
end quote (typos all mine)
Note -- MCI: EDNBOS
Have fun, fellas.
Leslie J. Somos ah739@cleveland.freenet.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 13:59:27 EST
From: mike@post.att.com (Michael Scott Baldwin)
Subject: New Jersey Cellular: Is A Better Than B?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
I currently have Bell Atlantic (aka Nynex) cellular service (B) in
northern New Jersey, but am getting progressively fed up with the
service and am considering switching to Cellular One (A). If other
readers have opinions on which is better, please let me know. Here
are some of my reasons:
B costs more than A;
B has poorer coverage, especially in nw NJ;
B doesn't even have follow-me-roaming;
B doesn't let me call npa 809 directly (!);
B has no roamer agreements at all in Puerto Rico;
B started charging me for enhanced services (call wait, etc);
A is on McCaw's national network (?) which is better than FMR:
no need to register with *18 (once per day!);
pay home airtime rates;
however, only in a few areas right now (FL, CA, OR, WA).
The B facts I am sure of, but I don't know about the A ones; after
all, I got them from a Cellular One rep. Is everything they say true?
If the national network thing works as I was told, it sure beats FMR.
Do all (or most of) the A carriers allow direct-dial calls while
roaming? How often do you have to register or use a credit card?
Also, if you're *not* in one of their nation-net areas, apparently you
have no option but to use the local roam number for incoming calls.
The rep told me they expect to have many more areas online during this
year, but who knows? B told me 1.5 years ago that FMR would be here
"any day now".
BTW, I think most of my frustation is at Nynex, which has some
incestuous relationship with Bell Atlantic here. *Every other* Bell
Atlantic area *does* have FMR and cheap prices (well, that's changing
in MD/DC ...) and much better coverage. Sigh.
I'd appreciate any info or advice!
michael.scott.baldwin@att.com at&t bell laboratories
tel: +1 201 539 7850 murray hill, nj 07974 fax: +1 908 582 1740
------------------------------
From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig)
Subject: AT&T's Universal Card as a Phone Card
Date: 31 Jan 92 19:31:23 GMT
Reply-To: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig)
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL
When AT&T introduced the Universal Card there was a discussion about
using the card in 'swipe phone' and that the Visa/MasterCard number
would be read instead of the phone one. Well, I talked to a AT&T UC
rep the other day and they found a way (three or so months ago) to
record both credit card number and calling card number on the same
strip so that the card reader phones will work. This leads me to the
question of what number is actually recorded. Also what is recorded on
the regular AT&T card. The US version of the calling card number with
PIN, or the international number? If they just record the US version
on the card when you change your PIN you would need to have the cards
replaced.
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 17:06:18 EST
From: "Richard Budd" <RCBUDD@RHQVM19.VNET.IBM.COM>
Subject: Czech Connection to American BBS
I have been setting up an electronic link on BITNET between a
gymnasium in Prague, Czechoslovakia and a high school outside of
Poughkeepsie, NY. With the cooperation of Marist College and the
Czech Academy of Sciences, two addresses on BITNET/EARN were
established permitting the two secondary schools to communicate with
each other.
The American high school has a BBS on FIDONET that a retired teacher
administers for students. We wonder if it is possible for the
students in Prague to access the BBS by dialing through the Marist
address. It would be prohibitively expensive for the Prague gymnasium
to dial the BBS directly, but there would be no charge to the
gymnasium if their students can access the BBS through a message to
the Marist address, since a telephone call between Poughkeepsie and
Marlboro, NY,where the BBS and high school are located, is local.
There probably is a simple solution to the problem that escapes me.
The BBS sysops who read the Digest may have the answer.
Send responses to me at either my BITNET or Internet addresses. I
will certainly summarize the progress of this US-CSFR link for TELECOM
Digest. If PAT wants this copied to TELECOM, that would be fine also.
Richard Budd Internet: rcbudd@rhqvm19.vnet.ibm.com
VM Systems Programmer Bitnet: klub@maristb.bitnet
IBM - Sterling Forest Phone: (914) 759-3746
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 15:41 PT
From: David Potter <POTTER@DPD.COM>
Subject: PacBell Message Center Info Request
I am interested in any information -- good or bad (especially bad) --
anyone might have regarding the Mesage Center service offered by
Pacific Bell. I am considering subscribing, but have heard a few
things that make me think that there is more to the service than at
first glance.
Please send email directly to me and I will summarize if there is
enough interest.
Thanks in advance.
David Potter Voice: (714) 974-1515
Data Processing Design UUCP: lawnet!dpdvax!potter
Yorba Linda, CA Internet: potter@dpd.com
------------------------------
From: wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig)
Subject: News Ratings (was 900 Number From Payphone)
Date: 31 Jan 92 19:25:37 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL
> [Moderator's Note: Well, you can't access 900/976 from Illinois Bell
> payphones, that's for sure. Maybe the phone shown on the television
> was a 'poorly programmed COCOT' ... then again, maybe its ratings time
> for television news shows and the talking heads at channel 9 were all
> in a dither looking for something scandalous. PAT]
On last night's news on of the local stations carried a story on a 'NEW
pager scam' they said that people accross the country were getting
page with a NY number 212 540 xxxx (several different xxxx's) and that
if you called the number you would be billed $55. From what I know
this call is imposible from anyplace but NY. It doesn't complete from
FL.
Bill
[Moderator's Note: You should see how many copies of this 'warning' I
receive here at the Digest every week. Not a week goes by without two
or three articles from well-meaning people who want to warn everyone
about the scam ... I call it the 'scam that never was' since at its
peak when it was first started it would only work in New York. It
never would work elsewhere, and the people in New York have grown
tired of hearing about it. :) PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V12 #100
******************************